Timeline for Can a positron decay without encountering an electron?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 26, 2016 at 19:37 | comment | added | Paganini | @dmckee: done, I changed decay for interaction. | |
| Feb 26, 2016 at 19:35 | history | edited | Paganini | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 42 characters in body
|
| Feb 22, 2016 at 14:43 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | As long as this post is using the word "decay" to describe these reaction it is contributing to the misunderstanding of the OP and other reader that come along. Don't encourage this kind of misunderstanding, correct it. | |
| Sep 11, 2015 at 14:38 | comment | added | Paganini | @annav: Strictly speaking, I agree with you but the formulation of the question mentions the electron-positron annihilation as a decay. So it was not clear whether MAXIMILLION wanted to know if a positron can disappear by interacting with something else than en electron or if he just asked why the positron was a stable particle. BTW, I used the word decay with double quotes suggesting an abuse of language. | |
| Sep 11, 2015 at 13:12 | comment | added | anna v | These are interactions, not decays. It is wrong to mix up vocabularies. annihilation is an alternate term for the disappearance of a positron. not decay | |
| Sep 11, 2015 at 9:43 | history | answered | Paganini | CC BY-SA 3.0 |