Physicists Discover 'Doubly Strange' Particle

hermanntrude

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jun 23, 2006
7,267
118
63
45
Newfoundland!
ScienceDaily (Sep. 4, 2008) — Physicists of the DZero experiment at the U.S. Department of Energy's Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory have discovered a new particle made of three quarks, the Omega-sub-b (Ωb).


Once produced, the decay of the Omega-sub-b (Ωb) proceeds like fireworks. The particle travels about a millimeter before it disintegrates into two intermediate particles called J/Psi (J/ψ) and Omega-minus (Ω-). The J/Psi then promptly decays into a pair of muons. The Omega-minus baryon, on the other hand, can travel several centimeters before decaying into yet another unstable particle called a Lambda (Λ) baryon along with a long-lived particle called kaon (K). The Lambda baryon, which has no electric charge, also can travel several centimeters prior to decaying into a proton (p) and a pion (π). (Credit: DZero collaboration)

The particle contains two strange quarks and a bottom quark (s-s-b). It is an exotic relative of the much more common proton and weighs about six times the proton mass.

The discovery of the doubly strange particle brings scientists a step closer to understanding exactly how quarks form matter and to completing the "periodic table of baryons." Baryons (derived from the Greek word "barys," meaning "heavy") are particles that contain three quarks, the basic building blocks of matter. The proton comprises two up quarks and a down quark (u-u-d).

Combing through almost 100 trillion collision events produced by the Tevatron particle collider at Fermilab, the DZero collaboration found 18 incidents in which the particles emerging from a proton-antiproton collision revealed the distinctive signature of the Omega-sub-b. Once produced, the Omega-sub-b travels about a millimeter before it disintegrates into lighter particles. Its decay, mediated by the weak force, occurs in about a trillionth of a second.

Theorists predicted the mass of the Omega-sub-b baryon to be in the range of 5.9 to 6.1 GeV/c2. The DZero collaboration measured its mass to be 6.165 ± 0.016 GeV/c2. The particle has the same electric charge as an electron and has spin J=1/2.

The Omega-sub-b is the latest and most exotic discovery of a new type of baryon containing a bottom quark at the Tevatron particle collider at Fermilab. Its discovery follows the observation of the Cascade-b-minus baryon (Ξb-), first observed by the DZero experiment in 2007, and two types of Sigma-sub-b baryons (Σb), discovered by the CDF experiment at Fermilab in 2006.

"The observation of the doubly strange b baryon is yet another triumph of the quark model," said DZero cospokesperson Dmitri Denisov, of Fermilab. "Our measurement of its mass, production and decay properties will help to better understand the strong force that binds quarks together."

According to the quark model, invented in 1961 by theorists Murray Gell-Mann and Yuval Ne'eman as well as George Zweig, the four quarks up, down, strange and bottom can be arranged to form 20 different spin-1/2 baryons. Scientists now have observed 13 of these combinations.

"The measurement of the mass of the Omega-sub-b provides a great test of computer calculations using lattice quantum chromodynamics," said Fermilab theorist Andreas Kronfeld. "The discovery of this particle is an example of all the wonderful results pouring out of accelerator laboratories over the past few years."

The Omega-sub-b is a relative of the famous and "even stranger" Omega-minus, which is made of three strange quarks (s-s-s).

"After the discovery of the Omega-minus, people started to accept that quarks really exist," said DZero co-spokesperson Darien Wood, of Northeastern University. "Its discovery, made with a bubble chamber at Brookhaven National Laboratory in 1964, is the textbook example of the predictive power of the quark model."

source
 

hermanntrude

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jun 23, 2006
7,267
118
63
45
Newfoundland!
i dont claim to completely understand this but i am fascinated in the "periodic table of baryons". i'm going to do some research on that when i get the time
 

hermanntrude

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jun 23, 2006
7,267
118
63
45
Newfoundland!
i love the names of the quarks. Someone was very inventive with those.

I remember in one of Terry pratchett's books, the elementary particles of magic had flavours like quarks, and one of them was "sex appeal"
 

hermanntrude

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jun 23, 2006
7,267
118
63
45
Newfoundland!
Terry Prachett, that's revealing. How many fundemental particles are there now anyway?

i'm not really sure what constitutes a fundamental particle...

OK here's what some research got me:

from wikipedia:

In particle physics, an elementary particle or fundamental particle is a particle not known to have substructure; that is, it is not known to be made up of smaller particles. If an elementary particle truly has no substructure, then it is one of the basic building blocks of the universe from which all other particles are made. In the Standard Model, the quarks, leptons, and gauge bosons are elementary particles.[1][2]

as far as i can tell, there are 16 types of elementary particle... here's a table of them...

 

hermanntrude

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jun 23, 2006
7,267
118
63
45
Newfoundland!
the theory is still very much just a theory. And that table seems incomplete... it doesn't include the Higg's boson which may or may not exist, and it doesn't incluide the graviton, which may or may not exist. The trouble is that if they don't exist, the theory upon which that table is based cannot be true.

That's what I got from the article anyway... i might be wrong
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
As far as I can determine from my reading, there is very little chance then of that little table being expanded in any meaningful way because I'm pretty much convinced that the graviton is pure science fiction.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
It's all science fiction until it becomes science fact. Well maybe not fiction per se, but there are reasons that astrophysicists and the like have posited the existence of such things.

If you can observe that the energy of a system (consisting of a pulsar and companion star for instance) decreases over a period of time, and that decrease is consistent with predictions made using GR, then it's valid to think there may be gravitons, as in the gravity is radiated in distinct quanta.

There's no direct evidence though, and to be sure, it will win a Nobel should someone or some group of people find this evidence.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Maybe General Reletivity needs to be relegated to the corner for a bit while the electric and plasma models are examined seriously without the poopooing of intrenched interests.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Well, general relativity has passed many tests. Can you list the tests that either electric or plasma models have passed? You can't relegate GR to the corner while investigating some competing theory, because as I said already, a number of tests have been passed by GR, and the predictions made by GR have so far been confirmed by observations. Some predictions aren't possible to test for yet, and that's a result of the limits of measuring things with acceptable levels of uncertainty, and other technological bottle-necks. That and some things just take time :D
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Well, general relativity has passed many tests. Can you list the tests that either electric or plasma models have passed? You can't relegate GR to the corner while investigating some competing theory, because as I said already, a number of tests have been passed by GR, and the predictions made by GR have so far been confirmed by observations. Some predictions aren't possible to test for yet, and that's a result of the limits of measuring things with acceptable levels of uncertainty, and other technological bottle-necks. That and some things just take time :D
Yes I can and if you wait just a bit I'll go get the info and meet you back here.

Aug 28, 2008
The Pioneer Anomaly

Scientists have found a small but significant deceleration in the Pioneer spacecraft as it makes its way through interstellar space. What could be slowing it down?

For the last three years, NASA analysts have reported a slow but steady "tug" on the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft as they head outward in opposite directions from the sun. Based on the gravity-only model of the universe under which observational research is constrained, the research team has no explanation for what has been termed the "Pioneer Anomaly."
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/arch08/080828pioneer.htm
:smile:
 
Last edited:

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
That:
a) Is not a test of either plasma or electric models and
b) Does not disprove general relativity
 

Scott Free

House Member
May 9, 2007
3,893
46
48
BC
Trying to figure anything out with colliders is like trying to figure out how cars work by crashing them together. Out pops a seat and a steering wheel - now what?
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
No but it makes for good conversation. I wonder what could be dragging on those hulls in the void.

Maybe gravitons, or spacetrons, or gluons or some other kind of ____on that we as of yet can't measure?:lol:

Space isn't homogenous, and it's far from void.
 

hermanntrude

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jun 23, 2006
7,267
118
63
45
Newfoundland!
Trying to figure anything out with colliders is like trying to figure out how cars work by crashing them together. Out pops a seat and a steering wheel - now what?

not entirely true. Collisions between particles are very different to collisions between cars. Particles are very nearly point-masses, and very nearly incompressible, so you don't have the issue that you have with the car, which is that some components will be compressed into the wreck and not be ejected. Along with that, of course, is the fact that you definitely won't find a wrench small enough to take apart a proton.

I see your point, it is a fairly brutal and primitive method to divine the contents of these particles, but without it we wouldn't have discovered the muon, the gluon and the six types of quark. There may be more we can discover in the same manner
 

hermanntrude

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jun 23, 2006
7,267
118
63
45
Newfoundland!
Maybe gravitons, or spacetrons, or gluons or some other kind of ____on that we as of yet can't measure?:lol:

Space isn't homogenous, and it's far from void.

the universe is full of everything and nothing. Very little everything and more nothing than you can imagine.