Talk:Particle physics/Archive 1

message: Scott 00:18, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A proton is definitely a particle in physics. Do you mean something else by the question? --physicsdavid 00:22, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Ahhh... This is about the deletion of the Spallation Neutron Source..?  That's a bit more complicated.  An experiment done with particles need not be particle physics, and the line between nuclear physics and particle physics is notoriously hard to draw.  (Even for funding agencies!  The United States Department of Energy inexplicably counts neutrino experiments as nuclear, and requires them to be funded from a different source!)  I think the SNS is probably more nuclear than particle, because it has no applications to investigating fundamental physics. -- SCZenz 00:36, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way, the United States Department of Energy does fund neutrino physics, including at Fermilab --physicsdavid 01:33, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, yes.  But it comes from their nuclear division, rather than their particle division, or something like that. Ask the people I work for, not me..!  :P -- SCZenz 01:40, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Neutrino physics is funded through the DOE Office of Science in both their High Energy Physics (HEP) program and their Nuclear Physics (NP) program. (I work in the HEP part.) I think this just reinforces your earlier point that the line between nuclear and particle physics is "notoriously hard to draw." -- physicsdavid 17:21, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Um, I didn't understand that last entry... Anyway. I removed the SNS link because it's more like nuclear physics what they're going to do there. It has more to do with the energies than with the type of particles, and there are nuclear physics experiments that have electron beams for example. At higher energy one looks at smaller things. SNS has lower energy and is designed to look at the nuclear forces (between nuclei/nucleons). But maybe there should be something about this in the article... --RE 01:01, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  The difference between particle and nuclear would probably be a  good thing to add, yes. -- SCZenz 01:07, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Is a proton a physics particle?

message: Sorry, in my comment for that removal I should have written see Wikipedia:Reliable sources.  You might also look at Wikipedia:No original research. -- SCZenz 22:42, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of links to new physics theory 

message: when someone clicks on the "particle adventure" link it takes one to the credits page (????!!!!!!!)
Hopefully someone could fix that 69.22.224.249 23:55, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thanks for pointing it out. - mako 00:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to website wrong? 

message: Should the list of collaborations be alphabetical? If so, Fermilab should be somewhere in the middle. Masud 20:16, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alphabetical list of collaborations? 

message: I proposed to create the article "Timeline of particle physics", as Timeline of cosmology or Timeline of particle physics technology. Lseixas 23:39, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Timeline of particle physics

message: It might be of interest to put some classics and intro level publications on the subject. --IsleScapeTalk 17:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publications in partcle physics 

message: This article is devoted to collider experiments, but other kinds of experiments are surely part of particle physics, too:  double-beta decay, searches for dark matter, neutrino oscillation experiments, etc.  Don't we need to add a section on that?
SchmittM 02:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-accelerator physics? 

message: The articles lists non-zero neutrino masses as evidence for physics beyond the standard model.  How about the existence of dark matter and the baryon asymmetry?  Neither of these can be explained in the Standard Model and there is absolutely no doubt about the empirical facts...
SchmittM 02:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Both of the issues you mention come from astronomical observations. They are evidence that we should find physics beyond the Standard Model, but particle physics hasn't been able to observe dark matter or the full cause of the baryon asymmetry yet. Josh Thompson 07:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  evidence for physics beyond the standard model 

message: At the moment there's an external link to SPIRES-HEP. Should we get rid of this and make it a wikilink, since SPIRES has its own wiki article? Josh Thompson 07:45, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: SPIRES

message: It would be good to show a scale on the the 'STAR explosion' image. Duncan.france (talk) 07:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Scale of the 'STAR explosion' image

message: Do we really need the public policy section? To my knowledge, particle physics isn't very controversial. If it is a serious issue, the public policy section should be moved to Particle accelerator. I'd vote to just remove it though. --Voidxor (talk) 16:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Public policy

message: High energy particle redirects here but this articles does not describe a high energy particle. I see a def here of:
*high-energy particle (hī′en′ər jē)- an atomic or subatomic particle with energy greater than 100 MeV
Needs a description or maybe the redirect should be taken down in lieu of article if this is enough of an encyclopedic "thing". Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 16:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: High energy particle

message: Leptons
Electron, Tau, Muon, Electron Neutrino, Tau Neutrino, Muon Neutrino
Quarks
Up Quark, Down Quark, Top Quark, Bottom Quark, Charm Quark, Strange Quark
Bosons – Elementary
Photon, W Weak Force, Z Weak Force, Higgs Boson, Gluon, Graviton
Does anyone dispute above heiarchy? I have postulated this structure from researching wiki and trying to find a graphical representation of it. I got nowhere so I decided to make one. I'm making a graphic using Adobe Illustrator CS4, comming soon.
DarrenHensley (talk) 00:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Families 

message: '''
Molecules are composed of the following:
Atoms bound by Valence in Space
'''
The molecule is listed in the category of composite particles in the "List of Particles", everything except elemental particles are composites right? It just seems wrong to have a cetegory called composite... Comments?
DarrenHensley (talk) 01:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Molecule 

message: Fundamental or Elementary Particles are composed of the following families:
Leptons, Quarks, Elementary Bosons, Composite Bosons(Mesons)
What's it going to be, Fundamental, or Elementary?  Make up my mind, elementary particles conflicts with elementary bosons, composite bosons are mesons, so stop calling them composite bosons. Comments?
DarrenHensley (talk) 01:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elementary Particles 

message: Beginning with the molecule and working to elemental particles(see the standard model), there are 4 levels or states of matter:
Molecules, Atoms, Subatomic Particles, Elementary Particles
Lists correspond to each:
Molecules = List of compounds 
Atoms = The Periodic Table of the Elements
Sub-Atomic Particles = Nucleons
Elementary Particles = The Standard Model
'''
Anything larger than molecules belongs in another article, right?
The "List of particles" table of contents is confusing, it has a category of composite particles that includes all particles as well as elementary particles. Elementary particles are not composite, right? 
Here is the image of the tree structure I want to include:  DarrenHensley (talk) 08:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heiarchy of particles or matter 

message: '''
Atoms are composed of the following:
Protons, Neutrons, and Electrons
'''
There is no list of composite nucleons, why not? Protons are composites, Neutrons are composites, according to wikipedia electrons can also be composite, I do not agree, and electron is an elemental and is commonly massless, right?
DarrenHensley (talk) 01:19, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atom 

message: '''
Sub-Atomic Particles (AKA Groups)are composed of elemntary particles, and they are assembled into groups as follows:
Anyons and Hadrons
Anyons are composed of families as follows:
Fermions and Bosons
Hadrons are composed of families as follows:
Baryons, Mesons, and Exotic Mesons (Tetraquark)
That's where you need a chart to organize these entities into their discrete families and subordinate entity descriptions that organizes this information. See Particle physics.WFPM (talk) 16:47, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sub-Atomic Particles 

message: The article claims "The field is also called high energy physics, because many elementary particles do not occur under ambient conditions on Earth. They can only be created artificially during high energy collisions with other particles in particle accelerators." But in cosmic rays are particles of much higher energies than what can be produced on earth. High energies are necessary to observe this processes in particle accelerators. This high energies are necessary for two reasons:Lexikon der Physik: in sechs Baenden /Ulrich Kilian /Christine Weber [Red.]. Heidelberg : Spektrum, Akad.Verlag
#One needs high energies to probe the smallest elementary particles with radiation of the smallest possible wavelength
#Many of the elementary particles have high masses, therefore for their examination high energies are needed
     
Const.S (talk) 21:47, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: High Energy physics

message: Inspired by the edit by 128.62.92.218, I starting rewriting the history section. Hopefully people are ok with what I have done. There is a lot of later history that could be added, although the section should be kept from getting too long. Josh Thompson 07:17, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The history section as it is now was disturbing me immediately when I read through the article. One could start with a short side remark to the ancient idea of an atom, but modern particle physics should start with the discovery of the electron. Further it has to include the discovery of the muon, as first discovered particle which doesn't constitute in ordinary matter. So I vote to go back to the history section of this version Const.S (talk) 07:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewriting the History section

message: Since PEP-II is no longer active, it seems to me that SLAC should be removed from the list of "major" experimental particle physics laboratories. SLAC certainly supports a lot of experimental particle physics world wide, but in my opinion that doesn't make it a a major international laboratory in particle physics (as opposed to, say, synchrotron science). Are there any objections to removing it from the list? SarahLawrence Scott (talk) 02:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Hearing no objection, I've made the deletion. SarahLawrence Scott (talk) 17:49, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the same would be valid for DESY, wouldn't it? --Rclsa (talk) 17:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  SLAC 

message: There's A.Schwazernegger in the History section. I think it's not related to Particle Physics, but i rather someone with more knowledge to correct it.
161.142.139.54 (talk) 06:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  A.Schwazernegger 

message: Under the section "Practical Applications" is the following text:
"This technology is also used in the superconducting of wires and cables. This is used for Magnetic Resonance Imaging magnets and ultimately the World Wide Web."
The logical connection to the World Wide Web is not clear to me (a non specialist reader).  Is it possible to expand that or to place a link to more information?
--Emmenjay (talk) 15:36, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This whole section needs rewriting, as it is currently just a rewording of a single source (http://www.fnal.gov/pub/science/benefits/). The original source wasn't that great and the rewording has introduced a number of errors and inaccuracies. CodeTheorist (talk) 16:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Practical Applications