Timeline for Could the particles of the standard model be states of a smaller set of particles?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 14, 2022 at 17:10 | comment | added | user338734 | +1, it does not address my specific question, but it made me think differently about the question itself | |
| Oct 12, 2022 at 15:02 | comment | added | Sam Playle | While the space of gauge bosons will have the same dimension after unification, with enhanced symmetry it's no longer possible to distinguish states: we have separate names for the electroweak bosons because they have different properties, but it's fundamentally impossible to tell the difference between two gluons. There's no experiment that will tell the difference between a red-antigreen gluon and a green-antiblue one. The colours are just summation indices for calculating amplitudes. It's reasonable to say there's one type of gluon, and it has an SU(3) symmetry. | |
| Oct 12, 2022 at 14:37 | comment | added | Sam Playle | In string phenomenology, all different types of particle are states of a single type of object (a superstring). You can recover SUGRA, MSSM, GUTs, gauge theories etc. as limits of such a theory (this is a mathematical proposition independent of whether string theory describes reality) | |
| Oct 12, 2022 at 11:40 | comment | added | PM 2Ring | @ACuriousMind Ok, your point 2 is certainly valid. An example of what I meant is if the neutrino & electron are actually the same particle, but the electron acquires charge (and more mass) due to momentum in the Kaluza-Klein compact dimension. | |
| Oct 12, 2022 at 11:22 | comment | added | ACuriousMind♦ | @PM2Ring 1. I don't know what that is supposed to mean, if not that they are composite states of a smaller set of elementary particles. 2. The OP explicitly draws an analogy to the particle zoo being explained via quarks (and that explanation is precisely that all the particles in the zoo were composites of the quarks), so it does mention/ask about composites, even if the post doesn't use that exact word. | |
| Oct 12, 2022 at 11:09 | comment | added | PM 2Ring | @ACuriousMind The OP doesn't mention composites. It asks if the SM particles could be states of a smaller set. | |
| Oct 12, 2022 at 10:56 | comment | added | ACuriousMind♦ | I don't understand how this is supposed to relate to the question: GUT theories do not represent the current particles as composites of a smaller set of particles. For instance: the photon, W- and Z- bosons are elementary particles both in the "non-unified" phase of broken electroweak symmetry and the unified phase of unbroken electroweak symmetry. | |
| Oct 12, 2022 at 10:27 | history | answered | Sam Playle | CC BY-SA 4.0 |