FA+
Shop
1291
Views
Views
101
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Artwork (Traditional) / Fanart
Species Mouse
Size 426 x 700
File Size 109.5 kB
Report this content
More from Nezuya
"Why the local gauge interactions SU(3)subC X SU(2)subL X U(1)subY, and why 3 families of quarks and leptons? Moreover, why does one family consist of the states [Q, u^c, d^c; L, e^c] transforming as [(3, 2, 1/3), (3, 1, -4/3), (3, 1, 2/3); (1, 2, -1), (1, 1, 2)], where Q = (u, d), and L = (v, e) are SU(2)subL doublets, and u^c, d^c, e^c are charge conjugate SU(2)subL singlet fields with the U(1)subY quantum numbers given? Most importantly, why am I in my skivvies?"
(drawn last year but not scanned for some reason)
(drawn last year but not scanned for some reason)
Category Artwork (Traditional) / Fanart
Species Mouse
Size 426 x 700px
File Size 109.5 kB
There may be more than 3 families of quarks and leptons. There has been a search from another quark, though so far without success. I've wondered about this myself -- why do there need to be electrons, muons and pions ... and if there are, then why not more? That's one of the biggest problems with the Standard Model at present. Supersymmetry may or may not explain what we know about the quantum world, but it doesn't tell us why the quantum world is what it is, or what makes it so. As usual, we're back to square one, trying to figure out what the fundamental order of reality really is.
There may be more than three families of phases of matter, but the observations of the ratios of hydrogen, deuterium, and helium generated from the big bang nucleosynthesis fairly conclusively show only three. People consider invoking the anthropic principle a cop-out but the standard model explains why we need protons, electrons, etc. What it does not explain is for example the ratio of masses between the electron and the proton. Which are crucial to many decimal places and only currently based on measurement, not the theory.
Then there is weird stuff, like the chirality (handedness) of the weak force, such as in the decay of B-mesons. It is intuitive that there be symmetries for CPT (charge, parity, and time), but why would only the weak nuclear force violate CP symmetry? And now that I have mentioned CP in this thread, I'm going to admire Gadget in her undies. MWAH! Goodnight everybody! :o)
Then there is weird stuff, like the chirality (handedness) of the weak force, such as in the decay of B-mesons. It is intuitive that there be symmetries for CPT (charge, parity, and time), but why would only the weak nuclear force violate CP symmetry? And now that I have mentioned CP in this thread, I'm going to admire Gadget in her undies. MWAH! Goodnight everybody! :o)
Comments