Dubbelosix

See, this is were there are disagreements. I noted the other day, that pentaquarks were theoretically suggested only after the discovery of the quark. The discovery of the quark was what founded the standard model - and of course - predictions are made. I also made clear, predictions and extensions like the Pentaquark are added upon their discovery, but by definition, these additions to an otherwise, preliminary sketch of reality. As you said, this is not true patch work. Physics has a remarkable ability to predict beyond its own current model. It happens all the time.

Yes that's right. This is extra baryonic matter which has never been detected. I don't know about you, but I have been keeping an eye on these kinds of developments. With much larger and more accurate mapping of the universe, we will not I predict only find the universe a much larger place, but probably has more mass than has been accounted for. A good example of how difficult this is can be demonstrated with the following article, which until recently, the Milky was hiding hundreds of galaxies. http://sciencevibe.com/2016/02/10/milky-way-surprise-its-been-hiding-hundreds-of-unseen-galaxies/

Yes people tend to call any model we end up with, the standard model. I don't deny this. I like constructive criticism. I have had plenty of that from others posters.

Oh, I do. I just didn't find it funny at all.

You mistake what I mean, I normally do not, means in most cases I won't. Your's my friend, is not that exception. But hey, no one knows.

You have a massive ego with little vocabulary, strange. Do you want to bang your hands against your chest and make sure the rest of us know you are here?

How do you make extensions to a standard model, without making it something it isn't, as in to mean, it is no longer actually the standard model? Really ... why are you acting so ... retarded, when I am sure you are not? The standard model, means the original model we started with. Anything added to it since, have/has been by definition, extensions that have made them beyond the standard model. So many years have past, I have done much reading, I take my physics seriously.. and so, I tend to take great time with people. You have been the biggest disappointment, I cannot tolerate you any more.

Nothing in science is certain. A good scientist always measures things by error. Nothing in reality is, scientifically-speaking within the conducts of the scientific methodology, 100% certain. The only thing that follows apparent deterministic laws, are those which follow classical laws. That should not be taken to mean, that the universe should be or has to be intrinsically indeterministic at the fundamental level. I don't believe it is.

Just a quote from wiki ''Physics beyond the Standard Model (BSM) refers to the theoretical developments needed to explain the deficiencies of the Standard Model, such as the origin of mass, the strong CP problem, neutrino oscillations, matter–antimatter asymmetry, and the nature of dark matter and dark energy.[1] Another problem lies within the mathematical framework of the Standard Model itself—the Standard Model is inconsistent with that of general relativity, to the point that one or both theories break down under certain conditions (for example within known spacetime singularities like the Big Bang and black hole event horizons). Theories that lie beyond the Standard Model include various extensions of the standard model through supersymmetry, such as the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) and Next-to-Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (NMSSM), or entirely novel explanations, such as string theory, M-theory, and extra dimensions. As these theories tend to reproduce the entirety of current phenomena, the question of which theory is the right one, or at least the "best step" towards a Theory of Everything, can only be settled via experiments, and is one of the most active areas of research in both theoretical and experimental physics.'' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_beyond_the_Standard_Model so; This isn't about what is possible - the standard model is about extensions to an otherwise, preliminary sketch work of reality. Why won't you just give it a break? Why won't you accept, I just don't want to deal with you? By the way, you keep quoting the Gell-Mann thing in the 1970's. The standard model was in fact formulated within those years, but depended on the existence of quarks, not so much the existence of exotic forms of matter, which a Pentaquark belongs in. ''One week ago, an international team of scientists announced that they had discovered the pentaquark, an exotic, short-lived chunk of matter that had long eluded researchers. Its serendipitous discovery fills in one of the remaining gaps in the Standard Model, the prevailing but incomplete theory of particle physics, and it potentially points the way to weird “subatomic molecules” and other exotic forms of matter.'' https://www.insidescience.org/news/party-five-physicists-discover-long-sought-‘pentaquark’-stroke-luck Notice, this is about ''filling in gaps...'' a silly way of saying really, we are adding extensions to a standard model.

No it wasn't, where was the Pentaquark required within the standard model? You are actually a dishonest person in my opinion. You do not openly admit the standard model uses parameters only required in theory. The idea a Pentaquark could even exist in nature was for many years, a speculation and at best considered beyond the standard model physics. This is why I don't want to commune with you. You act dishonestly, even if you don't mean it. Aside from your arrogant nature I experienced when I came here, you have given me no reason to think you ''want to learn'' where you as you claim ''might have it wrong.'' You are, a waste of my time. And this last bit, you know at least because I am sure you are doing it intentionally. I am not silly either, so don't think I am not quick on the uptake.

Since my head is figuratively fried from another poster here, asking silly questions, I will come back to this later since there is depth.

I did, I gave you one example, what part of this don't you understand, I don't care of you. Since I came here, you challenged me (on anything that was within your capacity) and done so in annoying way. Stop replying to me, I don't care about you. Go about your business, if the place puts up with you, so be it - But I do not need to.

I have told you I have given up on you, I already expressed elsewhere (you and I) are entirely on different pages. It is my choice, to ignore you from now on.

I give up, I explained in a post way back that I know of many within the last several years. I really do give up with you. This time, I mean it.. You are actually just trying to waste my time, I have met the likes of you before... quite a few times in fact. I am no stranger to it all.

The standard model was created many decades ago, since then there have been many extensions. I am not getting into this again with you, seriously, I will uphold my offer of ignoring you if you are going to focus on silly questions, just don't have time for this.

Strange asked a similar question.. take discrepancy to mean that anyone who holds the standard model, which was made many decades ago, holds true today, isn't itself a true statement.

mmm.. I'll tell you what, we'll meet again in another topic and see how things are another day. Right now, I resign.

You can believe what you want of course. No one can take that away from you.

Just reading that first paragraph, we're not even on the same page, don't take offence, but I stay away from people who might be causing me trouble. Not saying you are, but we are not even on the same page.

I didn't say you were, and if you found me simplistic in my answer I am sorry, I am not here to offend anyone. There is no multiverse... scientists right now are now questioning things like inflation, only because it is leading to crazy megaverses, as Susskind calls them. Though it seems like Susskind is open to the idea, I have had him quote he tends to think the universe is a holograph, but he is a bold thinker anyway. The general feeling with some good scientists is something is definitely wrong with theories that cannot be falsified: Take to date, this is after the discovery of possible cosmic bruising... it just doesn't ring true and where do you go from there? To me, defence of multiverse will shade into the likes of those who defended anti-Darwinism,

Lovely... If you didn't start the topic, I eventually would have started the topic against. I will add something as soon as I can, I take my time, not because I have it though lol Ok just read some of it... oh dear... I read middle earth, had a mind-shock, saw the eye of Sauron only once.

If you are though, don't be ashamed to admit it, I am sure Ivy doesn't mean to cause offence.

The error bars attempt to be the reasonable solution. No one doubts they exist, its the models we use and the methods we calculate them within a final combination of how we understand them, as the final wedding cake. Science is fucking complicated, mind my french

Predicting something outside the standard model that somehow ''shouldn't exist in nature,'' is nonsense, do we agree, or are you promoting this? 'However, there is absolutely nothing observed that is outside of the standard model and nothing that has caused the standard model to be revised since'' Nonsense, let me just get that out there... I won't reply to everything ... I just won't put that time in. I will get straight to the point though: You just agreed that any additional feature is beyond the standard model, I know quite a few. If you are calling me a liar, then do so, don't beat about the bush.

Hey, you should write up about how the vacuum relates to idea's about the classical spacetime and the quantum spacetime. For instance, how does the classical spacetime diverge from the quantum? One feature is the presence of vacuum fluctuations. It's nice to see someone creative, even though I haven't read it all. The classical vacuum is also known as a Newtonian vacuum and differs because in the ground state a Newtonian vacuum is a pure vacuum with a zero expectation value - while in quantum mechanics, it is not zero!