But what if quarks aren't fundamental particles? What if they're made of smaller particles...

are you a moron?
show me where and when the LHC has proven quarks to not exist

I predicted it by sniffing and licking my dog's ass.
I'd gladly let you do the same, but for some reason it escaped.

retarded inbred shithead can't even fucking read

i agree with QCD btw, you moron

I'm another user agreeing with you lol

this was attacking the dude who suggested quarks weren't real

> But what if quarks aren't fundamental particles? What if they're made of smaller particles?

This is not a new idea, and there are lots of limits set on compositness of quarks and leptons.

pdg.lbl.gov/2017/listings/rpp2017-list-quark-lepton-compositeness.pdf

> For instance is it not true energy (rays, photons) can be combined to form matter(quarks, electrons, neutrons, protons)? Therefore is it not that a quark is a composite of of photons?

No, none of that is true. Energy is a property, not a substance.

Thanks for posting guys! Really got me thinking further about my ideas for what quarks might be. I will ponder this fruther and maybe post back.

>top
>bottom
kek

my first thought when I saw the image.

Attached: 1520708321393.jpg (1280x721, 122K)

Not a new idea.
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrap_model
posited that there was no hierarchy. Anything could be built out of anything else, like a snake swallowing its tail.
"Nuclear democracy". No particles are "more fundamental" than others.
Fell out of favor because quarks made more sense and made better predictions.
Still up in the air as to whether quarks are "at the bottom". Disagreement between String Theorists and Non-String Theorists with no experiments (yet) which disprove one side or the other.

kek

It's "truth" and "beauty"

interesting ideas in this thread

What if a Veeky Forums thread theorized correctly on the secrets of the universe? kek that would be the biggest thing to happen on Veeky Forums and we might even get recognized by the scientific literature. Imagine if the fundamental particles of the universe were called 'anonyms', 'anons' or something like that? Let's do it! All theoretical physicists get in this thread, we could use your help!

There would necessarily need to be a lower cap on the amount of particles within particles within particles (etc) question because of the quantization of the smallest units of length and time.

There are three properties of particles (charge, mass, and spin), so I'd like to think that there is one particle that can represent all non-quanta iterations of mass, and all quanta iterations of charge and spin.

For example, a photon has zero rest mass, but a group of photons moving around spherically will attain some mass by e=mc^2, and thus could explain all non-quanta iterations of mass. Obviously that couldn't continue to explain spin and charge, so if one fundamental particle is the case, it's not something like this.

I'm sure there's already some model that's accomplished this though, but I have no idea how to search for it.

Can someone please link to a model like this?

>journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.23.930
LOL
everyone one looks at is filled with massive uncertainty, errors, adjustments, data massaging, and complete "we give up" but will ignore it

>right from your link - took me 2 seconds to see it .. this is why nothing is settled even today

Attached: quarks and errors up the ass.png (820x796, 348K)

yep, what if .. because nowadays the lies are so abundant and the fudging has "revealed" entire new money sucking "disciplines" filled with fantasy and bullshit, but it makes great news stories
" Jul 14, 2017 - The Standard Model fits the quantum world beautifully, but it can't explain gravity, dark matter or dark energy; High energy particle accelerators ..."...

LOL it's all a joke, a god damned joke

>error margins disprove science

go back to thumping the bible, jesusfag

lmao must have hit a nerve
>claims it not settled
raging atheist (pic related)curls into a ball and screams christcuck

Attached: gibs you white sheeeitt.png (393x365, 147K)

>For example, a photon has zero rest mass
a photon is never at rest
LOL
fuck yeah baby- we need that calc value tho !

>i have no argument

higgy wiggy diggly diggy... bs is biggy !

Attached: higgs boson bullshit.png (1287x938, 953K)

jesus freak is an argument breaker ?

Higgs boson's mass is 4.20 e-31 by my calculations which I won't show because we can just be in consensus about it LOL I fucking love science my nibba

Attached: b7d.jpg (727x727, 45K)

537 million 423 thousand 872 antimatter quarks make up the higgs boson Creation particle!

Attached: higgs boson fraud kaku cuck.png (1458x662, 365K)

What the fuck are these so called CERN "scientists" doing? youtube.com/watch?v=zW5gklIKcDg

it was bullshit from the word go bro, only retards bought the koolaid and sucked it down pretending they were scientifically literate

" Mads Tourdal Frandsen, an associate professor in the University of Southern Denmark’s Center for Cosmology and Particle Physics Phenomenology and a member of the team, said in a written statement. “It is true that the Higgs particle can explain the data but there can be other explanations.”

The new research seems to piggyback on previous research suggesting that the Higgs boson is actually made up of smaller particles, UPI reported.

CERN’s data simply isn’t precise enough to prove the particle discovered was the Higgs boson, Frandsen said. And he’s not the only physicist to acknowledge the ambiguity in the data. "

NO SHIT SHERLOCK JUST WATCH THE LYING DIRECTOR AT CERN TRYING TO EDGE HIS COLLEAGUES INTO ANNOUNCING - FUNDING WAS RUNNING SHORT

Molech needs some happy time too

see:
>master data fudgers combine becoming largest sheep herd in the world

Mads is a well known shitposter

lmao - there is the equivalent of their work - that's how much of a god damned joke it is
ROFL
you can't make this shit up, and if you did, no one here screaming science would believe you - they wouldn't fucking believe it HHAHHAHAHA

lmao
>i see his face !
>bow you bitch
>bow to your master!

Attached: higgs Molech bozos.png (1279x1175, 2.64M)

the real top and bottom quark

Attached: c6ba922b4b521bf84169a46f0fd7ea54.11.jpg (352x198, 22K)

yes, the real

Attached: higgs sex orgy 4 elite.png (1906x930, 2.18M)

Attached: 21st.png (1281x715, 1.22M)

Are you retarded? It has zero rest mass even if it's never at rest. "Rest mass" is what you say when you are talking about relativity because as things move they have this thing called kinetic energy, which adds to their mass via e=mc^2.

A photon only has (negligible) mass because it's motion. If it were to stop, it would have no mass.

>If it were to stop
the dumbass never got the point

>my ASS umption is true even though it never happens and I can never prove it
>muh science ! "you @$%#$%#$%$#%$!"

THE FUCKTARDS OF THE WORLD

Attached: higgy wiggly diggy do.jpg (660x439, 95K)

note fellow travelers, how the proton and the neutron are the lightest (!)
the explanation is followed by the dubious exclamation point which in quantum speak is the impossible made possible...
............
" For the still-heavier three-quark baryons, the quark patterns predict 40 baryons containing combinations of all six quarks. Of these, the proton and neutron are the least massive! "

Of course they are, while 38 other predicted heavier "objects" have "20 identified" and 16 yet to "be discovered"

These very special little cuddled phantoms exist only in the mind of the whack job adherent, but never mind, protons and neutrons are just so silly and such lightweights...

LOL! gravity probe-b the time dragging effect....
" On 9 February 2007, it was announced that a number of unexpected signals had been received and that these would need to be separated out before final results could be released. In April it was announced that the spin axes of the gyroscopes were affected by torque, in a manner that varied over time, requiring further analysis to allow the results to be corrected for this source of error. Consequently, the date for the final release of data was pushed back several times. In the data for the frame-dragging results presented at the April 2007 meeting of the American Physical Society, the random errors were much larger than the theoretical expected value and scattered on both the positive and negative sides of a null result, therefore causing skepticism as to whether any useful data could be extracted in the future to test this effect.

OH BUT WAIT A FEW YEARS AND GET SOME DATA MASSAGING GOING! BY THE TIME IT DOESN'T MATTER WE CAN CLAIM SUCCESS !

" The Stanford-based analysis group and NASA announced on 4 May 2011 that the data from GP-B indeed confirms the two predictions of Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity.[33] The findings were published in the journal Physical Review Letters.[8] The prospects for further experimental measurement of frame-dragging after GP-B were commented on in the journal Europhysics Letters.[34] "

WOW WHAT GREAT GOLD NUGGET FROM FAILURE ! IT'S ALL TRUE ! IT'S ALL TRUE ! THE COWBOYS HAVE WON THE COWBOYS TAKE THE SUPERBOWL !

BEHOLD ! WHAT WAS ONCE DEAD, IS ALIVE AGAIN ! PRAISE NOBEL COMMITTEE ! PRAISE THE HOLY NOBEL COUNCIL !!!

Attached: GRAVITY B FAILURE REVIVED AFTER DEATH.jpg (1000x650, 226K)

FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED

Attached: HIGGS IS A JOKE.png (864x593, 48K)

>what is statistics

dumbass jesusfag

thank you good sir, you made me kek

>you think this is a joke?
quora.com/What-happens-when-you-pull-apart-a-pair-of-two-quarks

their data errors due to faulty gyroscopes fell outside any variation of the theory, no analysis statistical or otherwise can extract data that says anything
not even christ can get an answer from it you idiot
>ANOTHER SCIENCE FLUNKIE OPENS THE BIG BABBLING STUPID HOLE

ASEXUAL HOMO DUALITY PRODUCTION !
>a never ending supply from nothing !

Attached: QUERKY QUACKING QUEER QUARKS.jpg (640x600, 13K)

It was enough to get funds for a better machine, the first quarks were found 5 years later.
This 1969 test is now considered the first confirmed sign that protons have an inner structure.

>I'm too dumb to understand physics so physics must be fake

Attached: hx4Prda[1].jpg (228x221, 5K)

you're an idiot