Jump to content

Electrons smaller than protons, but have equivalent charge


Buych778

Recommended Posts

 

By physical radius, I mean it's physical size, which would probably be best to measure in mass. So therefore, the electron has about 1/1836 mass of a proton, not it's charge radius. Correct?

 

Yes, the electron has about 1/1836 mass of a proton

 

Mass is not radius, or size. Mass is mass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We keep trying to penetrate into the scheme of things. Layer after layer. We go from elements, to atoms. Then to the atomic nucleus. Where we find protons and neutrons. From them, we deduce even smaller components - the quarks. And quarks may be composed of yet smaller bits - prions, preons, or strings, or whatever.name we give them.

 

It seems like peeling layers off an infinite onion. However deep we go, we can reach no ultimate centre, no final truth.

 

At least, that's how modern Physics looks. All these particles! Such as "Higg's bosons" (in several varieties apparently) , And "quarks" in three different colours, "red ", "green" and "blue". Not to mention "up", "down", and "top" & "bottom". And "flavours".

 

Doesn't all this strike anyone as slightly insane? Can the Universe really be that complicated? It reminds me of the Ancient Greek conception of the Solar System. Where every planetary orbit was supposed to be composed of a set of "epicycles". The epicycles were invented to explain why the planets move in elliptical orbits, instead of perfect circles. Circularity could be maintained, by supposing each simple elliptical orbit, to be composed of a complex set of multiple, interlocking, circular motions - the "epicycles". Which were purely imaginary.

 

All this is, of course, well known to students of Astronomical history - apologies for restating the obvious! But it does seem to sound a warning note. Are we sure that some "particles", like quarks, aren't equally imaginary?

 

Just on a personal note, I think electrons are actually real. Quarks might not be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

 

At least, that's how modern Physics looks. All these particles!

 

When I was young, it was even more complicated. There just seemed to be a random zoo of dozens (hundreds?) of different particles.

 

Since then, the discovery of quarks has simplified things enormously introducing a systematic pattern to the fundamental particles.

 

However, there are people investigating whether these are truly fundamental. There are many attempts to define all particles (including quarks, electrons and in some cases bosons) in terms of smaller particles. Currently, none of these models work or have supporting evidence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.