It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What is the Strong force that keeps the quarks together? What is it?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
Since reading this article - - - - - - www.physorg.com...

I was thinking, since quarks exist in a soup of other quarks, anti quarks and gluons, in a proton or neutron. What is the Strong force? I have no idea what it is. Like is it some kind of magnetism?




posted on May, 4 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   
i personaly beleive in the electromagnetic universe. Reality is fractaly structured dense plasma. Time has a relation to plasma density i think.... so things on a smaller quantum scale are under somesort of time compression.

But this is just me spitting out bs because no one else was posting.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Hasn’t the electric universe been debunk because of the CMB radiation? There are also a few other I think, not sure if I am right though.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   
It's the same force as we would perceive gravity on macroscale. And gravity is nothing more but attraction.

The rules are the same on micro and macro scale. Probably our universe is microuniverse to someone else as our atoms (and electrons and all other particles) are microcosmos to us. It's the same physics all over.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Think of it as tiny little whirlpools at the centers of subatomic particles that "pull" the particles toward their centers along an internal dimensional axis. Kind of like a tiny black hole, except leading into a different dimension other than the three or four we're familiar with. The size and weight of the particle can then be seen as a kind of event horizon that plugs the hole with physical material at a particular range away from what would be a kind of inverse infinity.

These whirlpools (dimensional warps) also reach out beyond the physical limits of the particle, and attract other particles -- that each have their own little whirlpools. And it just so happens that the tug of these whirlpools along that internal axis is stronger than the repellent force between the two like particles, so two protons can be held together even though they would ordinarily be pushed apart.

There's also some help stabilizing the arrangement from the orbiting electrons, but most of the work is done by the axial spacewarp.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Inertia is the resistance of any physical object to a change in its state of motion. It is represented numerically by an object's mass. The principle of inertia is one of the fundamental principles of classical physics which are used to describe the motion of matter and how it is affected by applied forces...
my two cents


[edit on 5/4/10 by Ophiuchus 13]



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by valhala
It's the same force as we would perceive gravity on macroscale. And gravity is nothing more but attraction.

The rules are the same on micro and macro scale. Probably our universe is microuniverse to someone else as our atoms (and electrons and all other particles) are microcosmos to us. It's the same physics all over.



Not quite. Gravity obeys the "inverse square" law. It gets weaker with distance. The strong force gets stronger. Think of a rubber band. As you stretch it, the force on your fingers gets stronger.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   
That's a very easy question to answer if you believe in God. HE holds it all together, all of it. I invite you to read this short article:
www.bibleartbooks.com...

[edit on 4-5-2010 by The Patriot]



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


It's as simple as I wrote before. The laws of physics are the same on every scale. Atoms (and particles whitin) has to obey same rules as does planets.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue Shift
 


Close, but the obvious answer is right in front of you. What does the atomic symbol look like, you have orbiting protons and neutrons, this orbiting is like our planet to the sun, our moon to the earth, now just go smaller in scale. This is what Einstien missed. He was thinking too deeply about the unification theory and that it must be complex. Not true. It is very simple.

With the orbiting protons and neutrons, the quarks within, orbit the core, creating electro-magnetic forces, because they are so small the space is very tight and they travel extremely fast, thus creating a strong force. Protons are what bind matter together, these protons go from one atom to the next like square dancers, constantly keeping the matter together, now let's heat the matter up and get those protons really moving and they will seperate. You can see this in molten metal when it becomes liquid.

If you think about it, when you freeze things in liquid nitrogen, you slow down the protons ability to move, when you do this the matter becomes weak, take it out of the liquid and drop it. It shatters because the protons no longer can hold it together. They lost their ability to exchange between atoms to hold the matter together.

I really can not put it any more simple terms than that, but this is just my theory.

Many will disagree, and that's good, at least they are thinking, using their brains.

I did study sub-atomic particle physics for a few years but quit because the professor kept getting on my case and telling me I was wrong. I think he was jealous.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by daddio
I really can not put it any more simple terms than that, but this is just my theory.


I still think that there's a multi-dimensional component to all the forces. This can be expressed somewhat mathematically, but is very difficult to envision for more than a few seconds. It's hard to imagine field forces defined by vortexes looking like ice cream cones zipping off into (and out of) odd dimensional infinities.

This is a simple explanation, too. Or it would be if we had an intuitive notion and perception of more than four dimensions.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by valhala
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


It's as simple as I wrote before. The laws of physics are the same on every scale. Atoms (and particles whitin) has to obey same rules as does planets.


The strong force is NOT, I repeat NOT, just gravity on a smaller scale. Protons are subject to an electrostatic repulsion force, quantified as F=qsub1*qsub2/4piesub0gamma^2. That is a great deal stronger than gravity, which has a force F=msub1*msub2/d^2. If that were not true,the elements in the periodic table would not be so generally stable.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by The Patriot
 


What if we would rather believe in science?



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:18 PM
link   
You need to investigate quantum chromodynamics. That is where you will find the actual information your looking for.

The strong force is not like gravity. It is a short range force and subject to uncertainty.

Put as simply as possible the strong interaction is the attraction of quarks with different color charge.

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.encyclopedia.com...





[edit on 4-5-2010 by constantwonder]



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Maddogkull
 


An amazing theory that explains all the fundamental forces in a simple way is WSM theory. www.spaceandmotion.com...

The strong force is explained by electrons being the fundamental particle that all others are composed of( Electrons are nothing more than spherical standing waves in the fabric of space) each electron has out going wave that interacts with the out going waves of other electrons or other particles. wave mixing and interference patterns result in the natural forces.

For a better understanding
You must start with spherical standing waves:
www.glafreniere.com...

Then the electron:
www.glafreniere.com...

Quarks explained:
www.glafreniere.com...

Engineers in silicon valley have been adopting this model because it better predicts actions at the nano scale than Maxwell's equations.

Engineers are quick to pick up on any new science that helps them solve an engineering problem. Unfortunately Scholars are a little more hard headed and don't want to give up their old paradigms.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:17 PM
link   
Here is an image that has been captured of an electron:

blogearth.wordpress.com...






WSM theory makes more sense.

[edit on 4-5-2010 by ParaShredder]

[edit on 4-5-2010 by ParaShredder]



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by constantwonder
 


What do you think of Daddio's theory?

"With the orbiting protons and neutrons, the quarks within, orbit the core, creating electro-magnetic forces, because they are so small the space is very tight and they travel extremely fast, thus creating a strong force. Protons are what bind matter together, these protons go from one atom to the next like square dancers, constantly keeping the matter together, now let's heat the matter up and get those protons really moving and they will seperate. You can see this in molten metal when it becomes liquid." ??

How the quarks actually create the strong force, because there moving at an extremely fast speed.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maddogkull
reply to post by constantwonder
 


What do you think of Daddio's theory?

"With the orbiting protons and neutrons, the quarks within, orbit the core, creating electro-magnetic forces, because they are so small the space is very tight and they travel extremely fast, thus creating a strong force. Protons are what bind matter together, these protons go from one atom to the next like square dancers, constantly keeping the matter together, now let's heat the matter up and get those protons really moving and they will seperate. You can see this in molten metal when it becomes liquid." ??

How the quarks actually create the strong force, because there moving at an extremely fast speed.


To answer your question, not much. It is a version of the old obsolete "solar system" model of the atom, which had a nucleus, made up of nucleons (Protons and neutrons), each in turn composed of three quarks for each nucleon, and electrons in a kind of planetary "orbit" around the nucleus. We now know that the electrons actually exist in a sort of cloud around the nucleus, not in any fixed orbits but at fixed energy states described by discrete quantum numbers as described by Wolfgang Pauli.
No on e in any experiment has ever seen a quark "orbiting" anything, much less some undefined "core." Separating a proton from the nucleus doesn't give you molten metal. It gives you a radioactive decay and a new element. Molten metal requires energy to cause a phase change and overcome the crystal lattice binding energy




top topics



 
2

log in

join