Protons and B-mesons challenge the Standard model.

"Quark and gluons inside a proton. Two up quarts, one down quark, gluons holding them together. Credit: Brookhaven National Laboratory." (ScitechDaily, Science Made Simple: What Are Protons?)

Proton: the particle that cannot decay. 

The thing that makes protons so interesting is that they cannot decay. Or nobody saw that protons can decay. The complex inner structure of a proton is the reason why it exists longer than a neutron. The energy can travel to those pockets when it travels down quark to two up quarks. And that shares energy flow into the larger area than in neutrons. In neutrons, two down quarks transmit energy into one up quark. 

That thing means that the up quark turns into the antenna that transmits energy into one point. And that energy breaks the shell of the neutron. The energy jumps from the quantum field between those three quarks and pushes them away. 

The proton involves a more complex structure that can pull more energy into it than a neutron that has only three quarks. There are also antimatter-matter particle pairs in neutrons. There is some other particle between those particle pairs. And that denies the annihilation. But if something pulls the quantum field fast enough out that makes space between those particles. 

Then those particle-antiparticle pairs could annihilate and that shockwave can destroy the proton. But as we know, nobody saw that happen. The fact is that the proton's internal structures expand when the proton expands. And that means the lifetime of the proton is very long. The proton is a particle that challenges the standard model. 

Another thing that can challenge the standard model is B-meson. 

Could there be some small, yet unknown hadron? Protons and neutrons are both hadrons. Their lifetime is different. The neutron decays in 15 seconds and the proton can last as long as the universe is. There is one interesting question: can hadrons form internal structures? Or can hadrons be inside other hadrons? The mesons are hadrons like protons and neutrons. 

"In particle physics, a meson is a type of hadronic subatomic particle composed of an equal number of quarks and antiquarks, usually one of each, bound together by the strong interaction. Because mesons are composed of quark sub-particles, they have a meaningful physical size, a diameter of roughly one femtometre (10−15 m), which is about 0.6 times the size of a proton or neutron. All mesons are unstable, with the longest-lived lasting for only a few tenths of a nanosecond. Heavier mesons decay into lighter mesons and ultimately into stable electrons, neutrinos, and photons. (Wikipedia, mesons)

"In particle physics, a hadron is a composite subatomic particle made of two or more quarks held together by a strong interaction. They are analogous to molecules, which are held together by the electric force. Most of the mass of ordinary matter comes from two hadrons: the proton and the neutron, while most of the mass of the protons and neutrons is in turn due to the binding energy of their constituent quarks, due to the strong force." (Wikipedia, Hadron)

Normal particles decay into the same particles. Or there is a certain cycle. Or some other dominating actor like spin or energy level determines how those particles decay. And their decay productions. 

W-bosons can decay to a lepton and antilepton (one of them charged and another neutral)[d] or to a quark and antiquark of complementary types (with opposite electric charges ⁠±+1/3 and ⁠∓+2/3⁠). Those bosons are the transmitters of the weak nuclear force. (Wikipedia, W, and Z bosons)

As the authors of a brand new paper, published in late November of 2024 in Physical Review Letters, note, all of the decays that involve B-mesons decaying to either:

two pions,

two kaons,

or one pion and one kaon,

(Big Think, How B-mesons are threatening to break the Standard Model)

Kaons and pions are hadrons as well as protons and neutrons. The main question is: do those hadrons (muon and pion) form after the decay of the B-meson? Or do the bonds inside the B-meson cut in different places during the decay process because of some asymmetry? But is that asymmetry in energy or materials? 

"B mesons are an important probe for exploring quantum chromodynamics. They consist of an antibottom quark paired with an up, down, or strange quark. B mesons decay via multiple pathways, several of which result in the production of π 𝜋 and K mesons. Measuring these rare branching fractions. Set limits on new particles." (https://physics.aps.org/articles/v17/s142)

The problem is that B-meson is not an elementary particle. The non-elementary particle should decay through particles that form it So the problem is that there should be something wrong if the decay productions are always different. In the case of B-mesons, the decay is similar to W-boson decay. And that thing means. That the B-meson acts like an elementary particle. There are theories that it's possible. That the hadrons can form internal structures. 

The protons and neutrons are both hadrons. Hadrons are subatomic non-elementary particles. They act like elementary particles. There is a possibility, that some of those particles that we see as elementary are the hadron inside other hadron. And that means the standard model is the thing, that requires some actions like updating. 

https://bigthink.com/hard-science/will-protons-last-forever-why-scientists-are-searching-for-signs-of-decay/

https://physics.aps.org/articles/v17/s142

https://www.quantamagazine.org/inside-the-proton-the-most-complicated-thing-imaginable-20221019/

https://scitechdaily.com/cracking-the-proton-code-unveiling-the-secrets-of-the-universes-building-blocks/

https://scitechdaily.com/ghostly-neutrinos-provide-groundbreaking-new-way-to-investigate-the-structure-of-protons/

https://scitechdaily.com/science-made-simple-what-are-protons/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_meson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadron

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W_and_Z_bosons#W_bosons_2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model

A small piece of writing about the Higgs boson and its strange qualities

 

 

 

Is the spin of the Higgs boson equal to zero really or virtually? 

When particle accelerators are uncovering the Higgs' boson. They don't create it. They are releasing it by removing wave movement from around that boson. 

There is the possibility that Higgs's spin of Higgs's boson is virtually equal to zero. One version of that idea is that the Higgs's boson is in the extremely large quantum field. 

That means that the quantum field just slides over the other quantum fields. Or the spin of that particle is so high that we cannot recognize the changes in the wave movement. 

Theoretically, particles are like yarn balls. The particle is wave movement, turned to a ball-shaped form. There is "hair" on that particle. And when that "hair" is touching the outside quantum field it would slow its spin. During that moment the particle sends wave movement. 

If there is no hair on that particle it would not be slowing. And that means it would not send wave movement or the wave movement is straight or monotonic like some "OOOO". So we cannot detect that wave movement because it's monotonic. Changes in the particle's spin speed are the thing that causes the wave movement that sends wave movement and turns the particle detectable. 

Another version is that the particle's spin is extremely high that its hair makes the electromagnetic vacuum around it. That thing causes the phenomenon, where the particle has two quantum fields. The outer and inner quantum fields. 

If the quantum field is too large, the wave movement from the inner quantum field disappears. Or the observers cannot separate it from the shaking or waving of the larger quantum field.  If the quantum field of the small particle is too large it collapses. Because the energy from outside pushes it to a smaller size. 

Why Higgs' boson is so dangerous?

Higgs' boson is the only known scalar boson. The spin of those bosons equals zero. That means there is no side-moving wave movement. And that means the Higgs' boson is extremely hard to see. There is the possibility that Higgs' boson involves in all other particles. So if some kind of energy load is coming through the Higgs' boson that causes the phenomenon where the energy load that comes from Higgs' boson is ripping all other Higgs' bosons into pieces. 

That thing will erase all material from the space. The term scalar boson means that they are like the nucleus of all (or almost all) other elementary particles. And the other particles are the superstring, wave movement (or information) that is accumulated at the surface of those bosons. And the hypothetical graviton particle is the tensor inside Higgs' boson. 

But there is another possibility that can explain the strange behavior of the Higgs' boson. The spin of the particle can equal virtually zero. That thing means that the particle is smooth, as I wrote many times. The idea of the virtually zero spin means that there is no interaction or changes in the energy level of the quantum field that surrounds the Higgs' boson. 

The term "spin" doesn't only mean that the particle is rotating. That term can also mean the interaction between the particle and quantum fields around it. If there is hair on the particle, that hair causes changes in the quantum field around the particle. If the spin of the particle is very high we cannot detect the changes in energy level in the quantum field of the particle. 

Or actually, the hair must be high enough that it can come out from the particle's quantum field. The hair of the particles is sending radiation to the particle's quantum bubble. And that causes interaction between the outside quantum field. The thunder that makes it possible to see particles are coming from the particle's quantum field and outside quantum field interaction. 

So if the hair of the particle is inside the particle's quantum field its quantum field is smooth. That means the interaction between particles and outside quantum fields is like interaction with smooth surfaces. So the interaction is silent. If the Higgs' boson is released from other elementary particles. It hovers in the extremely large quantum field. That quantum field makes it impossible that the hair of the particle cannot reach the edge of its quantum field. 

And if the only thing that sends some kind of wave movement or chancing wave moment is only the nucleus of that Higgs' boson. That thing means that this radiation resonates only with other Higgs's bosons or the interaction happens only between other nucleuses Higgs' bosons. But that interaction requires that the Higgs' boson is released from its core. And it would very fast collect superstrings around it and form the new particle. So, that means Higgs' boson is in all other particles but only the highest energy levels can release it by removing superstrings around it. 

See also:

Higgs boson

Scalar boson

Standard model of physics

https://miraclesofthequantumworld.blogspot.com/

Why connecting quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity is so difficult?

Is there some particle that is orbiting electrons missing? Do electrons have an orbiting particle? Or why we cannot connect the theory of relativity to quantum mechanics?

When we are trying to connect the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics, we are facing some problems. There seems something that is missing in the atoms. Is there some unknown force that is causing the thin that the theory of relativity is not able to connect with quantum mechanics? Or is there something that causes the effect that the quantum mechanics differs from the theory of relativity? 

The thing that makes building the completed model of the universe so difficult is that the gravitation seems to affect oppositely than other forces or interactions. When other forces or interactions are pushing things away from each other. 

Gravitation acts another way. Gravitation is making the objects fall unlike things like electromagnetism which has a push and pull effect. The gravitation has only a one-way effect. 

Could the sub-electron, or the particle that orbits electrons possible? We don't know if there are some sub-structures in the atom that we don't know. 

But when an electron changes its trajectory it releases a photon. So could the source of that photon some, yet unknown particle that orbits the electron. 

That photon is the particle form, not wave movement. And that thing causes an interesting question. Is it possible that the electron has the companion particle? The extremely small-sized particle that is orbiting electrons could be possible. 

The electrons have an extremely small size. And that hypothetical sub-electron would have more extremely smaller size and mass. If that particle will exist. It would be the most revolutionary thing in the history of physics. 

The wormhole inside the laser ray can be a suitable tool for making quantum computers. 

There is one way to make the wormhole or the channel that removes the quantum fields from the limited range. The idea is that if inside the laser ray will put the particle is put the practice that thing forms a shadow or otherways saying, short-range synthetic wormhole. The electromagnetic wave movement will close the particle in it. 

And also the particle denies that the laser ray cannot travel through it. That thing forms the channel where is no wave movement, because laser rays will protect it against the outcoming effects. And that thing makes it possible to make the superposition between two photons inside that channel. 

That kind of thing can make also it possible that the exhaust gases of the futuristic spacecraft can travel faster than the speed of light. 

That thing can be the system where an electron will be put in the laser ray. When a laser ray covers the electron there is a shadow where are no quantum fields at that point. That allows the photon can travels faster than it travels outside that channel. 

If the particle is used to make a shadow has a larger size than the electron. That thing makes it possible that the electron can reach the same speed as the photon. Because there is no quantum field in that shadow that is slowing the speed of electrons. And that thing makes the new type of rocket engines possible. 

Fundamental interactions

Quantum mechanics

The standard model of physics

Theory of relativity

Wormholes

https://miraclesofthequantumworld.blogspot.com/

Does the dark matter has a particle form at all?

Dark matter means the mystery gravitational effect. The thing that forms this effect can be the material. Which elementary particles have a different size than the elementary particles of visible material have. 

That thing means that the wave movement that those particles are sending has the wavelength that makes it invisible. Another version of dark matter is that thing has no particle form at all. That means dark matter is the wave movement called dark energy. 

Image 2 is the neutron. The gluons jump between quarks. Neutron is formed of two down quarks and one up quarks and gluons. The image could portray a proton. Because it has a similar internal structure with a neutron. But the proton is formed by one down quark and two up quarks and gluons. 

The wavelength that those quantum tornadoes or rotating quantum channels are sending. Would be different than other particles sending. That thing makes the wave movement invisible. And maybe axions are hiding in those quantum tunnels. There is the possibility that there is a quantum vacuum in those tunnels. And that means outcoming energy pushes those quarks to one entirety. 

Image 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron

The mass of hypothetical axion-particles could tell the form of the dark matter. The thing is that the cosmology is that the dark energy is one of the mysteries that can solve another mystery. The mysteries of the dark universe is the thing that can solve where the material came from. 

The name axion of that theoretical particle is coming to an idea that the form of that thing could be elongated. Theories are telling that material is formed in wave-particle duality. That was caused by the mysterious event called  Big Bang. The question about the Big Bang is interesting. Was that thing released only energy that impacted with wave movement that already exists? And that impact caused the wave-particle duality that formed the visible universe. 

The thing is that dark matter is the mysterious gravitational effect. That means that there is the possibility that dark matter has not necessarily have a particular form. The dark energy or a dark wave movement that affects some extremely small particles can cause mysterious gravitational effects. That wave movement can affect the gluons and make them heavier or put them to a higher energy level than they should. 

The form of Dark matter is interesting. And maybe quite soon the researchers can answer two questions.

1) Is dark matter similar material with the visible material? That means the dark matter could turn to wave movement and otherwise. But if dark energy is the same thing as dark matter. That means the dark energy could create the gravitational effect. 

So that means the dark matter would not necessarily have the particle form. The dark wave movement that affects the gluons or some superstrings could cause the mysterious gravitational effect called "dark matter". 

2) And can the dark matter form atoms or molecules? Like visible material? The galaxies where is no dark matter is an interesting detail. 

That tells that dark matter can form the structures like visible material. But are those dark matter structures some kind of clouds of nebulas formed of dark matter? Or is there some kind of more complicated structures that are formed of dark matter? 

The weakness in the Big Bang theory is that it doesn't answer where the thing that exploded came from? 

The Big Bang theory is always the solution for the origin of the material. But where did the material or wave movement  Big Bang released come from? The moment of the Big Bang is point zero in the universe's history. But what happened in the point minus one (-1)? 

There was something that released the material to the universe. Or is it so? If we think that dark matter is the dominating form of material. There is a possibility that the crossing wave movement turned the dark matter into visible material. 

So if the dark matter is similar material with the visible material. The answer for the Big Bang can cause because of the wave-particle duality. But getting acceptance of this theory dark matter should have a similar particle form with the visible material. 

There is the possibility that the wave-particle duality forms when the quantum fields of the particles will touch each other. That thing can cause quantum friction or quantum spark. That thing will turn the quantum field or the superstring that forms that quantum field turns to a roll or yarn ball-shaped structure.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory

https://thoughtsaboutsuperpositions.blogspot.com/

Beyond the standard model and curving spacetime

  

 Beyond the standard model and curving spacetime 

Image 1:

The splitting photon along with the Muon G-2 anomaly caused a situation. Re-estimation of the entire standard model of particle physics is needed. The question is that what if the photon is not an elementary particle? The photon or every other elementary particle can be superpositioned. But they cannot split in two. What if the photon is some kind of meson? And that thing causes another thought. What if there are some other particles like quarks that involve other particles. 

The thing is that we should look for the particles that are connecting the photons. Like gluons are connecting quarks. So is the particle that makes photon stay in one piece some very small and very energetic particle that looks like gluon. The splitting photons are giving a tip that the Majorana-particle exists. 

But could that mysterious "Majorana Particle" or "Majorana fermion" actually be a hadronic boson? Could it be possible that some Fermions are bosons? 

And could that "Majorana Boson" be the graviton. Graviton is the hypothetical transportation particle that transports gravitation. So if the graviton is the thing that keeps the photon together. It should be a very small, and at the same time high energetic particle. 

The thing that photons are splitting means they cannot be elementary particles. The elementary particles are not splitting. The term elementary particle means that there are no other particles in it. But if even a photon is not an elementary particle. That means that there might be some other particles that are just believed to be elementary particles. But they involve something smaller particles. 

So could there be other yet unknown particles inside quarks and even gluons? Or is it possible that we don't know any real elementary particles? There is predicted an exotic six-quark particle by using supercomputers. But is it possible that there are super protons or super neutrons where are seven or more quarks? But are there sub-structures also in the quarks? understanding the interactions of particles and gravitation are required for making TOE(Theory of Everything). 

Image 2: 

x-x-x-x-x--x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-

Is gravitation some kind of superposition?

The main question about gravitation is could the graviton exist? And the second thing is is it pulling or pushing force? And one of the questions is: could the gravitation be some kind of superposition effect. The idea is that the hypothetical gravitons are forming the strings between each other. And those strings are pulling or pushing the gravitons to each other. That graviton-connected string starts travel from the higher energetic object to the lower energetic object. 

Then those strings which are are wave-movement or energy start to pull those gravitons together. So the gravitation would be the wave movement that travels from the higher energetic area to the lower energetic area. Like all other forms of energy. The question is: does the gravitation travel the opposite way against the flow of those hypothetical gravitational strings. 

x-x-x-x-x--x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-

Image 3: 

Curvature of spacetime

Measurements of the curving spacetime are the thing that is used to confirm Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. There have not been found errors. And that is the evidence of the extraordinary well-documented theory. The Theory of Special Relativity is the thing that can use in a straight universe. But the Theory of General Relativity is suitable for curving spacetime. 

When we are thinking about the curvature of spacetime in the 3D environment we must realize the thing that the curving spacetime is curving all around the object. So the rubber levels and iron balls are not helping us in modeling that phenomenon. 

When we are thinking that curving space around the massive object has the ball form. We should think that space is getting shorter in that area. The thing is that modeling the curvature in a 3D environment is very difficult. So when the object is curving spacetime we should think that there is a ball-looking pit in the spacetime. So the curvature of spacetime around the 3D object is more like a tunnel than the pit.

The Brane theory is one of the things that can model the curving spacetime in a 3D environment. The branes or layers are surrounding the gravitational center at a 360 degrees angle. And those layers are also surrounding the central object of gravitation from all directions. That theory is created for modeling the gravitation effect. But the problem is that researchers can just model the gravitational interaction between one layer and the gravitational center. 

The problem is that there might be one common gravitational center in the area. But there are also sub-centers. As an example, Sagittarius A is the gravitational center of the Milky Way but the local gravitational center in our solar system is the Sun. And if we increase accuracy the Earth is the gravitational center for the moon etc. 

The problem is that the gravitational center is not only a black hole or some other most massive object in the area. Every single object is turning gravitational center if we are using high-enough resolution. If we are using high enough accuracy.

Even a single electron is turning to a gravitational center if the zoom is high enough. And the gravitation is interaction. That means there is no straight universe at all. If we use high-enough resolution. And at that point, I must say that every gravitational center is acting the same way. But the pit that the gravitation is making is always depending on how powerful gravitation is. The black holes are extreme objects, but also other objects are curving spacetime. 

The gravitational interaction curves spacetime also around other objects than just the gravitational center. 

Above is the image of the curvature spacetime. There are three objects the Sun, the moon, and Earth. The gravitation of the Sun pulls Earth to the Sun. But the centripetal force keeps it at the trajectory. And then the moon is also pushing energy to the Earth. 

When the moon is orbiting the Earth. The direction of its gravitation effect changes. When the Moon is at the side of the Sun it pulls Earth stronger than when it's at another side. Also, the side-movement is chancing the energy transportation. 

And then that thing is pumping energy to the Earth. But the thing that makes energy transportation and modeling difficult is that gravitation and energy transportation is interaction. This means that energy travels also from Earth to the Moon. 

Also, things like gravitational waves are the thing that transmits energy. Maybe gravitational waves have no big effect in large systems. But they can affect microgravitational systems. And if the gravitational waves affect billions of years. They might cause some even large-scale effects.

Sources:

https://muon-g-2.fnal.gov/

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2301876-photons-could-be-split-in-two-to-create-a-weird-new-form-of-light/

https://phys.org/news/2021-12-exotic-six-quark-particle-supercomputers.html

https://scitechdaily.com/split-photons-new-research-predicts-the-existence-of-a-previously-unimaginable-particle/

https://www.techexplorist.com/new-groundbreaking-technique-reveals-new-details-long-theorized-fifth-force-nature/41165/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curved_space

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graviton

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majorana_fermion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagittarius_A*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subatomic_particle

https://www.zmescience.com/science/physicists-claim-that-a-photon-can-be-split-into-halves/

Image 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime

Image 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model

Image 3: https://forum.babylonjs.com/t/general-relativity-simulation-of-spacetime-curvature-due-to-mass/10731

https://thoughtsaboutsuperpositions.blogspot.com/