Talk:Flavour (particle physics)

message: I've discovered two articles on flavour - a stub and a medium sized article.
I've merged the articles. SpNeo 08:13, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two articles 

message: Could someone please explain why there are no Up quark or Down quark flavor quantum numbers, while there are ones like strangeness and bottomness?
scienceman 21:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They'd be redundant.  Once you know the charge of a baryon or meson, and how many charm/strange/bottom quarks it contains, the choice of up and down quarks is unambigous. -- SCZenz 22:30, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

text: There is; it's called isospin. -- Xerxes 15:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Up/down 

message: flavour?!  Who said that ye could corrupt Latin?  That "word" has nothing to do with English.  It is not English, American or British, and has never been; it is a Latin-muttish abomination.  Did Gell-Mann use flavour?  Do mest of "particle physicists" (also muttish—should be particular fusicists) use flavour?  Is sciense drivene by Francish awk?  The English word is whiffred, or whiffer, or whiffur.  Yeir grammar is a sham. -lysdexia 00:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not see how your comment helps fix this article in any way, shape, or form. In fact, I'm not sure you even meant us to understand it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:22, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: They were clearly saying that the article shouldn't be spelled "flavour", and that it should be renamed, and I agree. Bumblebritches57 (talk) 01:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "flavour" 

message: The weak hypercharge assignments for charged leptons and neutrinos are incorrect.  The weak hypercharge for left handed leptons is Y = 2(q - T_3) = -1, this doublet including both 1 charged lepton (with charge q = -1 and weak isospin T_3 = -1/2) and 1 neutrino (with charge q = 0 and weak isospin T_3 = 1/2). - bapowellphysics 13:26 June 2007
:This is correct, as can be easily seen from the formula for weak hypercharge. For some reason bapowellphysics hasn't made the appropriate correction in the article, so i did and also added a reference. shame this had to wait for two years to be corrected. --B2NVB2 (talk) 12:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  weak hypercharge 

message: Isn't the strangeness of the strange quark -1? And similarly for the bottom quark?
Andrewgdotcom 17:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yes the article is talking about the antiquarks which have strangeness/bottomness of +1 Murdochious (talk) 20:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strangeness (and Bottomness) 

message: The article states that the baryon number for quarks is 1/2, surely its 1/3? seems as 3 quarks make a baryon. Murdochious (talk) 14:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baryon number 

message: The use of flavor with this meaning seems to have been inspired by MIT hacker slang.  So I think this article should be moved to the American spelling. I apologize for opening this can of worms again, but I think this is a relevant point which wasn't addressed before. -- A r m y 1 9 8 7 ! ! !  15:20, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hacker slang has no bearing on anything. Flavour was used first, and stayed as flavour since the creation of the article. I see no reason to kick the bee's nest.Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 04:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yet British "slang" is perfectly fine? The article should be renamed, it wouldn't "kick the bee's nest" if people wouldn't oppose the change, it's really not a big deal. Bumblebritches57 (talk) 01:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we use the American spelling? 

message: the lead says that flavour is a gauged symmetry of the electroweak theory. This is complete nonsense, as should be clear to anyone with the slightest understanding of the topic. I'll delete it but I suspect that the whole article needs a radical revision... Cheers Ptrslv72 (talk) 19:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  A gauged symmetry??? 

message: I can't say I've ever seen it put like this. I've only ever seen bottomness denoted as a B with a tilde (~) over it to distinguish it from the baryon number. Is there any particular reason for it being written like this here or should it be changed?
Tresiden (talk) 18:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bottomness

message: Despite containing a definition section the article does not appear to give a clear definition of what flavour is. If it does, it needs to be dumbed down a bit. The statement "This is an example of a flavour symmetry" is not helpful unless you know already what a flavour symmetry is. The article needs pedagogical improvement. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition

message: User:Michael C Price keeps reverting the overlinking fixes WP:REPEATLINK. This is a pretty clear style issue. Is there some reason this particular article needs overlinking? Bhny (talk) 14:59, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlinking 

message: This article and others explains that strangeness was suggested as a concept to explain the rate of decay of particles, but I couldn't see any details on how it was measured and/or guessed for observed particles. There must be a definition which is not in terms of the numbers of strange and antistrange quarks, as the concept was introduced before these quarks were postulated. Count Truthstein (talk) 21:51, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Measurement of strangeness etc. 

message: Just think that people might be misled to think that Flavour is talking about the taste of the particle. Something should be included about etymology of the word 129.180.175.166 (talk) 06:14, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It's highly unlikely that the sort of people who would read a particle physics article would also be the sort of people who'd think that anything so small could have any flavor. An etymology section would be helpful regardless, though. AutisticCatnip (talk) 03:59, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misnomer (incorrect name) - etymology? 

message: Flavor symmetry links to this article, but I can't find a good explanation here of Flavor SU(2) symmetry, Flavor SU(3) symmetry, Flavor SU(4) symmetry, or Flavor SU(6) symmetry.  IMO, this needs to be spelled out.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.247.173.205 (talk) 13:30, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flavor symmetry 

message: Early in this article, the phrase "five flavour quantum numbers" occurs,
and it is followed by a note "which?". The five flavour quantum numbers
are listed about a page later under "quarks".
I'm not sure how to go from there. Should "which?" be removed, 
or is there some way to point where to look.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:4E01:8F9E:DCF2:3886:D1C5:2F3B (talk) 22:44, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Five Flavour Quantum Numbers 

message: Flavor transmutation should probably redirect here. 75.139.254.117 (talk) 04:48, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flavor transmutation 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Flavour (particle physics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110831014543/http://theta13.lbl.gov/neutrino_book_pdfs/04_03_Neutrino_Masses.pdf to http://theta13.lbl.gov/neutrino_book_pdfs/04_03_Neutrino_Masses.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:32, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified