1

Topic: The device of the elementary particles

We take electron and positron annihilation. On an output there are photons - a net energy. About what it speaks? Photons are a basis of these elementary particles. We consider annihilation of an electron and a positron of high energies. On an output arise , including  - neutrons, protons. It besides says that all elementary particles as a matter of fact represent varieties of uniform essence. The same photons, finally. Personally my perception of the elementary particles, on fingers, as fireball. The strong discharge, arises a situation when the strong change of electric field creates strong magnetic which retains plasma currents in which support a magnetic field. There is a stable structure, processes in which long time retain it in a stable state. Probably at high concentration in one point from a photon there is a similar stable structure - the elementary particles. There is a question further - whether reverse process is possible? Origin of particles from photons. I suspect that the period of the early Universe just and had suitable conditions - high density of energy led to origin of the elementary particles which we know. Possibly, which we know particles are only one of possible dial-ups. This dial-up in the conditions of our Universe can be stable, and alternative dial-ups were unstable. Here write about creation similarity of a new particle from three photons nobody: http://sci-dig.ru/physics/zaputannyie-f … myi-sveta/ That think? Ourselves can create new elementary particles in the future?

2

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> we Take electron and positron annihilation. On an output there are photons - a net energy. About what it speaks? Photons are a basis of these elementary particles. At once an error. Annihilation is a conversion of a matter, only photons there are not formed.

3

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> That think? Ourselves can create new elementary particles in the future? We think that "C the model" predicted all these particles and it is not visible  behind its limits yet. It would be interesting to learn about a dark matter more, but here a zero while.

4

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> That think? Ourselves can create new elementary particles in the future? Stable particles? And so already and the meson atoms created that.

5

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> there is a question Further - whether reverse process is possible? Origin of particles from photons. It is not simply possible, and all particles are always and everywhere. Energy in this place for their appearance is necessary only. As though all in the opposite direction - the world consists not of particles with the accumulated energy, and on the contrary - the world is energy, in places of concentration because of it there are "particles". Such more generalized "the Sea of Dirac".

6

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S>> we Take electron and positron annihilation. On an output there are photons - a net energy. About what it speaks? Photons are a basis of these elementary particles. N> at once an error. Annihilation is a conversion of a matter, only photons there are not formed. Your error. At low energies of a facing electron and a positron annihilation response gives two or three photons in ending state.

7

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> we Take electron and positron annihilation. On an output there are photons - a net energy. About what it speaks? Photons are a basis of these elementary particles. Strings!

8

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, GarryIV, you wrote: GIV> Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S>> That think? Ourselves can create new elementary particles in the future? GIV> we think that "C the model" predicted all these particles and it is not visible  behind its limits yet. The unreasonable statement. And it is invented by you. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0 … 0%BB%D0%B8 from key "the Standard model depends on 19 numerical parameters. Their values are known from experiment, but the origin of values is not known. Some theorists tried to find communication between various parameters, for example between masses of particles in different generations." . In general these of 19 parameters create the infinite set of variations of standard model. And if to consider that "According to Standard model of a neutrino are  particles. Nevertheless, experiments with  oscillations showed that neutrinoes have mass. Mass members for a neutrino can be added to Standard model manually, but it leads to new theoretical problems. (For example, mass members should be extremely small)." That it is possible to come easily to that SM a good piece. But to state that it full and final I would not become.

9

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> Your error. S> at low energies of a facing electron and a positron annihilation response gives two or three photons in ending state. Vicks it is not necessary. Annihilation of an electron and a positron results from electromagnetic interaction. As a result of electron and positron annihilation the virtual photon is born. The formed virtual photon can give birth to any particles which are capable to be formed with energy to the smaller or equal total of energies of an electron and a positron. In particular as a result e+e - annihilations can be born steams of muons  +  - and steam quark-antikvarkovaja qantiq.

10

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, _ilya _, you wrote: __> Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S>> there is a question Further - whether reverse process is possible? Origin of particles from photons. __> it is not simply possible, and all particles are always and everywhere. Energy in this place for their appearance is necessary only. As though all in the opposite direction - the world consists not of particles with the accumulated energy, and on the contrary - the world is energy, in places of concentration because of it there are "particles". Such more generalized "the Sea of Dirac". These places of concentration are stable, corpuscular effects pass. The water molecule already behaves exceptional as a particle.

11

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S>> Your error. S>> at low energies of a facing electron and a positron annihilation response gives two or three photons in ending state. N> Vicks it is not necessary. N> N> annihilation of an electron and a positron results from electromagnetic interaction. As a result of electron and positron annihilation the virtual photon is born. The formed virtual photon can give birth to any particles which are capable to be formed with energy to the smaller or equal total of energies of an electron and a positron. In particular as a result e+e - annihilations can be born steams of muons  +  - and steam quark-antikvarkovaja qantiq. It is accepted to give links. https://www.booksite.ru/fulltext/1/001/008/060/314.htm your case - private.

12

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> These places of concentration are stable, corpuscular effects pass. The water molecule already behaves exceptional as a particle. Yes, it does not contradict that a field stablly in the same place. Particles as are not present those, it is simple displays weeding. If it not vacuum, and "particles" it is possible to create vacuum from energy as though there are no particles, them only invented easier to explain was. https://chrdk.ru/news/fiziki-zapustili- … -novgorode P.S. Clearly that particles and antiparticles are always and everywhere - the sea of Dirac. That physically proved energy in this point is necessary. That from anything by means of energy to produce particles and antiparticles - energy and naturally magnet to divide flows is necessary - experiences on it work (for the charged particles... And how to produce from energy not charged pair and to divide  still probably did not invent. Unless she  scatters - on accelerators is such).

13

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S>>> That think? Ourselves can create new elementary particles in the future? GIV>> we think that "C the model" predicted all these particles and it is not visible  behind its limits yet. S> SM a good piece. But to state that it full and final I would not become. It it is obvious not full and not final. But nevertheless all known particles to it are predicted. It is more less clear that should be  other particles,  there, particles of a dark matter both  and  but while about them of it plainly it is not known.

14

Re: The device of the elementary particles

AI can solve these questions only. For the answer to them computing power outside of a human brain is necessary. As with chess - the computer of any beats it. Well certainly the question that such AI, it will be AI which physical tasks solves or only the tool without reason. Well if it turns out to make the tool. Certain. It is necessary for us most of all actually. More than the meeting with aliens, the most important discovery of mankind will be AI invention.

15

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> That think? Ourselves can create new elementary particles in the future? And scientists of all of it do not know that Probably, such analogy is pertinent: at any level the particle is similar to the cellular automatic machine. It can be or stable (self-supported as much as long) or unstable - breaking up for any amount of clock periods. Who knows, what particles will manage to be created on high energies, while unattainable for our accelerators? Here two ways: or a method scientific  on colliders, or understanding of the mechanisms underlying these "automatic machines". Then probably it will be possible to count and find all stable decisions in the theory, and then and to receive them on accelerators.

16

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, GarryIV, you wrote: GIV> Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S>>>> That think? Ourselves can create new elementary particles in the future? GIV>>> we think that "C the model" predicted all these particles and it is not visible  behind its limits yet. S>> SM a good piece. But to state that it full and final I would not become. GIV> it it is obvious not full and not final. But nevertheless all known particles to it are predicted. It is more less clear that should be  other particles,  there, particles of a dark matter both  and  but while about them of it plainly it is not known. Wait. What means "are predicted"? Generally that is correct to tell, are systematized. The second - 19 numerical parameters of SM who told that they can be only such (with what them measured). Can be at other density of space or still that, the dial-up can be another. And the SM does not eliminate possibility existence of new particles.

17

Re: The device of the elementary particles

N> Strings! At them already 70 as the mathematics does not converge to what

18

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> Wait. What means "are predicted"? S> Generally that is correct to tell, are systematized. There is no SM made enough predictions which afterwards have been checked up experimentally. S> the second - 19 numerical parameters of SM who told that they can be only such (with what them measured). S> Can be at other density of space or still that, the dial-up can be another. This adjustment of parameters is pleasant to nobody. And what to do that? There are any ideas at theorists but experiments while find nothing. S> and the SM does not eliminate possibility existence of new particles. Certainly does not eliminate. I and wrote above.

19

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, anonymouse2, you wrote: A> it is possible, such analogy is pertinent: at any level the particle is similar to the cellular automatic machine. It can be or stable (self-supported as much as long) or unstable - breaking up for any amount of clock periods. Who knows, what particles will manage to be created on high energies, while unattainable for our accelerators? Space rays permanently bombard atmosphere with vb, unattainable for the colliders allocated on planets. On October, 15th, 1991 the sky over the State of Utah the particle which has received a title "Oh-My-God" with energy 320  (10^18 ) - that is cut through 200 J. https://www.nkj.ru/archive/articles/14771/ but as a result of these showers of anything exotic it is not formed.

20

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> we Take electron and positron annihilation. On an output there are photons - a net energy. In SM there is no "net energy", there are drives of different fields. A field of photons only one of many, nothing especial. S> about what it speaks? Photons are a basis of these elementary particles. This very naive classical ("") thinking. With the same success it is possible to tell that photons consist of electrons, positrons, quarks,  Higgsa and all remaining. And practically all "consists" of everything since it is unimportant that with what to push together if appropriate fields interact, always there will be a probability of a birth of particles, and further already on what energies suffices. If energy only on photons suffices - there will be photons. If suffices on any muons either  quarks or Z-bozony, there will be they, with the probabilities. If only conservation laws were observed - energies, pulse, a spin and some more. S> there is a question Further - whether reverse process is possible? Origin of particles from photons. Certainly. It is predicted and calculated for a long time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwinger_limit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_creation S> I suspect that the period of the early Universe just and had suitable conditions - high density of energy led to origin of the elementary particles which we know. Yes, so in textbooks also it is told. S> it is probable, which we know particles are only one of possible dial-ups. This dial-up in the conditions of our Universe can be stable, and alternative dial-ups were unstable. Yes, it is close to idea of "landscape" which normally figures in the theory of strings, but it makes sense and without strings. And is even closer to a subject of spontaneous violation of symmetry: For example, if initially field of Higgsa had  value properties of particles were strongly others, but this state is unstable - a minimum of potential at Higgsa not in zero, here it in this minimum of potential and rolled down, to nonzero value of the field, as gave masses to a heap of other particles. And there is an idea that it not a global minimum so can and once again , again strongly changing properties of all particles, as a matter of fact quickly destroying the Universe as we know it and transforming in perfect another. S> that think? Ourselves can create new elementary particles in the future? On accelerators same many years also are taken. Lately, truth, see all the same dial-up, new fundamental for a long time did not see. And composite it is possible to do still for a long time, there as in Lego, open space for creativity big.

21

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Thanks! It was necessary to me to study is better on older years Quanta I and did not master. And now after the lapse of 15 years something the subject  again began to interest. Physicists.

22

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, koenig, you wrote: K> at them already 70 as the mathematics does not converge to what 1. Not so: at them the mathematics uses not exact, but numerical methods because of excessive complexity of the first. 2. Does not converge to what is before the second superstring revolution. Then it turned out to unite all separate theories in one.

23

Re: The device of the elementary particles

N> 1. Not so: at them the mathematics uses not exact, but numerical methods because of excessive complexity of the first. N> 2. Does not converge to what is before the second superstring revolution. Then it turned out to unite all separate theories in one. I, probably, passed. At them the standard model as consequence of the string theory unambiguously turned out at last?

24

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, koenig, you wrote: K> I, probably, passed. At them the standard model as consequence of the string theory unambiguously turned out at last? Here it I too did not see. But the theory of strings (M-theory) unlike standard model can consistently explain an initiating state of the Universe and like as its outputs converge dataful events about horizon of black holes. Also she explains, instead of simply fixes, why the elementary particles are found out such and so much. However, I here the layman, formation at me not physical, but reading of books under the theory of strings not the systematic. I am afraid to tell lies.

25

Re: The device of the elementary particles

Hello, sharpcoder, you wrote: S> And now after the lapse of 15 years something the subject  again began to interest. Physicists. You think that could reach level of understanding D. Mon simply being interested on older years