Talk:List of baryons

message: Let's get to work folks.Headbomb (talk) 17:47, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Let's bring this to Featured List/Article status

message: *Add references for section on Isospin and quark content. (Moved the section to [Isospin]) Headbomb
*Decide what stays here and what goes on the baryon page. (I think we chopped enough fat) Headbomb
*Possible diagram update/removal. (Diagrams were integrated in overview text). Headbomb
*List the remainder of the baryons you can make from six quarks, possibly excluding the t-quark because they do not hadronize  (Did not list baryons containing t quarks). Headbomb
*Add some well-known resonances. Wing gundam
:*(Decided to remove the resonances from here and expand the Sigma, Xi... pages to contain them instead. Headbomb (talk · contribs) 02:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: List of suggested improvements that remains to be done (or to be thrown away)

message: Bold means currently not in the list. Blanks could be particles, or could be forbidden states. x are forbidden states.
See Rules for making baryons - Take 3 down this page.
Particles and Isospins
Makeup	Isospin 0  	Isospin 1/2	Isospin 1	Isospin 3/2
uuu   	x          	x          	x        	Delta++
uud   	x          	Proton     	x        	Delta+
uus   	x          	x          	Sigma+   	x
uuc   	x          	x          	Sigma C++	x
uub   	x          	x          	Sigma B+ 	x
uut   	x          	x          	Sigma T++	x
udd   	x          	Neutron    	x        	Delta0
uds   	Lambda0    	x          	Sigma0   	x
udc   	Lamba C+   	x          	Sigma C+ 	x
udb   	Lambda B0  	x          	Sigma B0 	x
udt   	Lambda T+  	x          	Sigma T+ 	x
uss   	x          	Xi0        	x        	x
usc   	x          	Xi C+      	x        	x
usb   	x          	Xi B0      	x        	x
ust   	x          	Xi T+      	x        	x
ucc   	x          	Xi CC++    	x        	x
ucb   	x          	Xi CB+     	x        	x
uct   	x          	Xi CT++    	x        	x
ubb   	x          	Xi BB0     	x        	x
ubt   	x          	Xi BT+     	x        	x
utt   	x          	Xi TT++    	x        	x
ddd   	x          	x          	x        	Delta-
dds   	x          	x          	Sigma-   	x
ddc   	x          	x          	Sigma C0 	x
ddb   	x          	x          	Sigma B- 	x
ddt   	x          	x          	Sigma T0 	x
dss   	x          	Xi-        	x        	x
dsc   	x          	Xi C0      	x        	x
dsb   	x          	Xi B-      	x        	x
dst   	x          	Xi T0      	x        	x
dcc   	x          	Xi CC+     	x        	x
dcb   	x          	Xi CB0     	x        	x
dct   	x          	Xi CT+     	x        	x
dbb   	x          	Xi BB-     	x        	x
dbt   	x          	X BT0      	x        	x
dtt   	x          	Xi TT+     	x        	x
sss   	Omega-     	x          	x        	x
ssc   	Omega C0   	x          	x        	x
ssb   	Omega B-   	x          	x        	x
sst   	Omega T0   	x          	x        	x
scc   	Omega CC+  	x          	x        	x
scb   	Omega CB0  	x          	x        	x
sct   	Omega CT+  	x          	x        	x
sbb   	Omega BB-  	x          	x        	x
sbt   	Omega BT0  	x          	x        	x
stt   	Omega TT+  	x          	x        	x
ccc   	Omega CCC++	x          	x        	x
ccb   	Omega CCB+ 	x          	x        	x
cct   	Omega CCT++	x          	x        	x
cbb   	Omega CBB0 	x          	x        	x
cbt   	Omega CBT+ 	x          	x        	x
ctt   	Omega CTT++	x          	x        	x
bbb   	Omega BBB- 	x          	x        	x
bbt   	Omega BBT0 	x          	x        	x
btt   	Omega BTT+ 	x          	x        	x
ttt   	Omega TTT++	x          	x        	x
Created by Headbomb (talk) 17:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: All bold entries contain top, they won't form, so there shouldn't be anything left. --mfb (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: List Progress Overview

message: Isospin: Definition the greatest value of |Iz| within a group of specific non u and d quark content and of specific spin state.
Example 1: Baryons of spin 1/2 and with a single bottom quark as non-u/d quark content. There are three particle in this group, uub (Iz=1), udb (Iz = 0), ddb (Iz = -1). The greatest |Iz| is 1, and thus these three particles have isospin 1. Isospin 1 particles containing a bottom and a mix of two u or d quark content are bottom Sigmas.
Example 2: Baryons of spin 1/2 with no non-u/d quarks. There are two particle in this group, uud (Iz=1/2), udd (Iz = -1/2). The greatest |Iz| is 1/2, and thus these two particles have isospin 1/2. Isospin 1/2 particles made of a mixture of three u or d quarks are nucleons.
Example 3: Baryons of spin 3/2 with no non-u/d quarks. There are four particle in this group, uuu (Iz=3/2),  uud (Iz=1/2), udd (Iz = -1/2), ddd (Iz=-3/2). The greatest |Iz| is 3/2, and thus these four particles have isospin 3/2. Isospin 3/2 particles made of a mixture of three u or d quarks are Deltas.
Still can't figure out the Lambdas. Headbomb (ταλκ · κοντριβς) 23:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really. I agree that there is something different about the lambda, since it has a different mass, and different decay products. What I'm asking is why does it exist in the first place? Why are there two uds in spin j=1/2+ states, but not two uud in spin j=1/2+ state? Headbomb (ταλκ · κοντριβς) 23:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Yeah, it didn't really belong here and it's a good addition to the isospin page. Headbomb (ταλκ · κοντριβς) 23:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Take 4 

message: Alright, I decided I'd give a shot at writing wave functions. Since the color charge is always anti-symmetric under interchange of any two quarks, then the non-color part of the wave function needs to be symmetric. I got this for the uds decuplet. + means spin 1/2, - means spin -1/2.
====Decuplet====
|\Delta^{++}\rangle=|uuu^{\frac{3}{2}}\rangle=|u+\rangle |u+\rangle |u+\rangle 
|\Delta^{+}\rangle=|uud^{\frac{3}{2}}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(|u+\rangle |u+\rangle |d+\rangle+|u+\rangle |d+\rangle |u+\rangle+|d+\rangle |u+\rangle |u+\rangle) 
|\Delta^{0}\rangle=|udd^{\frac{3}{2}}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(|u+\rangle |d+\rangle |d+\rangle+|d+\rangle |u+\rangle |d+\rangle+|d+\rangle |d+\rangle |u+\rangle) 
|\Delta^{-}\rangle=|ddd^{\frac{3}{2}}\rangle=|d+\rangle |d+\rangle |d+\rangle 
|\Sigma^{*+}\rangle=|uus^{\frac{3}{2}}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(|u+\rangle |u+\rangle |s+\rangle+|u+\rangle |s+\rangle |u+\rangle+|s+\rangle |u+\rangle |u+\rangle) 
|\Sigma^{*0}\rangle=|uds^{\frac{3}{2}}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(|u+\rangle |d+\rangle |s+\rangle+|u+\rangle |s+\rangle |d+\rangle+|d+\rangle |u+\rangle |s+\rangle+|d+\rangle |s+\rangle |u+\rangle+|s+\rangle |u+\rangle |d+\rangle+|s+\rangle |d+\rangle |u+\rangle) 
|\Sigma^{*-}\rangle=|dds^{\frac{3}{2}}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(|d+\rangle |d+\rangle |s+\rangle+|s+\rangle |d+\rangle |s+\rangle+|s+\rangle |d+\rangle |d+\rangle) 
|\Xi^{*0}\rangle=|uss^{\frac{3}{2}}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(|u+\rangle |s+\rangle |s+\rangle+|s+\rangle |u+\rangle |s+\rangle+|s+\rangle |s+\rangle |u+\rangle) 
|\Xi^{*-}\rangle=|dss^{\frac{3}{2}}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(|d+\rangle |s+\rangle |s+\rangle+|s+\rangle |d+\rangle |s+\rangle+|s+\rangle |s+\rangle |d+\rangle) 
|\Omega^{-}\rangle=|sss^{\frac{3}{2}}\rangle=|s+\rangle |s+\rangle |s+\rangle 
====Octet====
For the octet it is trickier, I got to this, but I'm not confident I got the right wavefunctions, especially for the Lambda0/Sigma0 or if I assigned the correct wavefunctions to the correct particle (I got inspired from this image ).
Also I don't quite understand how you'd tell the excited state from the fundamental state by looking at the ± sign. I also noticed that there were other particles with a ± in the wavefunction, would I be correct in saying that the  is to the  in the uds octet what the  is to the  in the usc octet?
|p^{+}\rangle =|uud^{\frac{1}{2}}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}(|u+\rangle |u+\rangle |d-\rangle+|u+\rangle |u-\rangle |d+\rangle+|u-\rangle |u+\rangle |d+\rangle+|u+\rangle |d+\rangle |u-\rangle+|u+\rangle |d-\rangle |u+\rangle+|u-\rangle |d+\rangle |u+\rangle+|d+\rangle |u+\rangle |u-\rangle+|d+\rangle |u-\rangle |u+\rangle+|d-\rangle |u+\rangle |u+\rangle)
or more concisely 
 |p^{+}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}} \begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |u\rangle |d\rangle, & |u\rangle |d\rangle |u\rangle, & |d\rangle |u\rangle |u\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
 |n^{+}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |d\rangle |d\rangle, & |u\rangle |d\rangle |d\rangle, & |d\rangle |d\rangle |u\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Sigma^{+}\rangle= \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |u\rangle |s\rangle, & |u\rangle |s\rangle |u\rangle, & |s\rangle |u\rangle |u\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Sigma^{0}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{18}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |d\rangle |s\rangle, & |u\rangle |s\rangle |d\rangle, & |d\rangle |u\rangle |s\rangle, & |d\rangle |s\rangle |u\rangle, & |s\rangle |u\rangle |d\rangle, & |s\rangle |d\rangle |u\rangle  \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
 & ? & \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Lambda^{0}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{18}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |d\rangle |s\rangle, & |u\rangle |s\rangle |d\rangle, & |d\rangle |u\rangle |s\rangle, & |d\rangle |s\rangle |u\rangle, & |s\rangle |u\rangle |d\rangle, & |s\rangle |d\rangle |u\rangle  \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
 & ? & \\
1 & 1 & 1\\
1 & 1 & 1\\
-1 & -1 & -1\\
-1 & -1 & -1\\
1 & 1 & 1\\
-1 & -1 & -1\\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Sigma^{-}\rangle= \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|d\rangle |d\rangle |s\rangle, & |d\rangle |s\rangle |d\rangle, & |d\rangle |d\rangle |s\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Xi^{0}\rangle= \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |s\rangle |s\rangle, & |s\rangle |u\rangle |s\rangle, & |s\rangle |s\rangle |u\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Xi^{-}\rangle= \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|d\rangle |s\rangle |s\rangle, & |s\rangle |d\rangle |s\rangle, & |s\rangle |s\rangle |d\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
You're gaining on it!
I like your decuplet wave functions (there is a typo on the sigma-star-minus (it is dds) line that needs fixing and also the cascade*-).
So far I don't like your octet wave functions. Starting with the proton, these are all mixtures of mixed symmetry spin and mixed symmetry isospin (or flavour if you prefer) states.  These mixed symmetry states come about naturally when combining the quarks.
For example the mixed symmetry (symmetric for 1-2 interchange) isospin state  1/SQRT(6)(2ddu-udd-dud)   joins the mixed symmetry spin -- and then you combine the mixed assymetric parts and finally join them all together into a proton to get...
proton = 1/SQRT(18)   { 2(u+u+d-) + 2(d-u+u+) + 2(u+d-u+) - (u+u-d+) - (d+u-u+) - (u+d+u-) - (u-u+d+) - (d+u+u-) - (u-d+u+)  }
Then you can use ladder operators to get the other states in the octet (TEDIOUS!)
(sorry about the formatting)  --Vectorboson (talk) 21:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The proton wavefunction, above, is truly, badly, magnificently, off. The correct form is given in the proton article. Why don't you just copy them off a mainstream standard text? Many  have it: Lichtenberg, Riazudin-Fayazuddin, Greiner-Mueller, etc. Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 22:54, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Baryon wavefunctions

message: For the octet it is trickier, I got to this, but I'm not confident I got the right wavefunctions, especially for the Lambda0/Sigma0 or if I assigned the correct wavefunctions to the correct particle (I got inspired from this image ).
Also I don't quite understand how you'd tell the excited state from the fundamental state by looking at the ± sign. I also noticed that there were other particles with a ± in the wavefunction, would I be correct in saying that the  is to the  in the uds octet what the  is to the  in the usc octet?
|p^{+}\rangle =|uud^{\frac{1}{2}}\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}(|u+\rangle |u+\rangle |d-\rangle+|u+\rangle |u-\rangle |d+\rangle+|u-\rangle |u+\rangle |d+\rangle+|u+\rangle |d+\rangle |u-\rangle+|u+\rangle |d-\rangle |u+\rangle+|u-\rangle |d+\rangle |u+\rangle+|d+\rangle |u+\rangle |u-\rangle+|d+\rangle |u-\rangle |u+\rangle+|d-\rangle |u+\rangle |u+\rangle)
or more concisely 
 |p^{+}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}} \begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |u\rangle |d\rangle, & |u\rangle |d\rangle |u\rangle, & |d\rangle |u\rangle |u\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
 |n^{+}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |d\rangle |d\rangle, & |u\rangle |d\rangle |d\rangle, & |d\rangle |d\rangle |u\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Sigma^{+}\rangle= \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |u\rangle |s\rangle, & |u\rangle |s\rangle |u\rangle, & |s\rangle |u\rangle |u\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Sigma^{0}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{18}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |d\rangle |s\rangle, & |u\rangle |s\rangle |d\rangle, & |d\rangle |u\rangle |s\rangle, & |d\rangle |s\rangle |u\rangle, & |s\rangle |u\rangle |d\rangle, & |s\rangle |d\rangle |u\rangle  \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
 & ? & \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Lambda^{0}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{18}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |d\rangle |s\rangle, & |u\rangle |s\rangle |d\rangle, & |d\rangle |u\rangle |s\rangle, & |d\rangle |s\rangle |u\rangle, & |s\rangle |u\rangle |d\rangle, & |s\rangle |d\rangle |u\rangle  \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
 & ? & \\
1 & 1 & 1\\
1 & 1 & 1\\
-1 & -1 & -1\\
-1 & -1 & -1\\
1 & 1 & 1\\
-1 & -1 & -1\\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Sigma^{-}\rangle= \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|d\rangle |d\rangle |s\rangle, & |d\rangle |s\rangle |d\rangle, & |d\rangle |d\rangle |s\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Xi^{0}\rangle= \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|u\rangle |s\rangle |s\rangle, & |s\rangle |u\rangle |s\rangle, & |s\rangle |s\rangle |u\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
|\Xi^{-}\rangle= \frac{1}{\sqrt{9}}
\begin{pmatrix}
|d\rangle |s\rangle |s\rangle, & |s\rangle |d\rangle |s\rangle, & |s\rangle |s\rangle |d\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
|+\rangle |+\rangle |-\rangle \\ |+\rangle |-\rangle |+\rangle \\ |-\rangle |+\rangle |+\rangle \\
\end{pmatrix} 
You're gaining on it!
I like your decuplet wave functions (there is a typo on the sigma-star-minus (it is dds) line that needs fixing and also the cascade*-).
So far I don't like your octet wave functions. Starting with the proton, these are all mixtures of mixed symmetry spin and mixed symmetry isospin (or flavour if you prefer) states.  These mixed symmetry states come about naturally when combining the quarks.
For example the mixed symmetry (symmetric for 1-2 interchange) isospin state  1/SQRT(6)(2ddu-udd-dud)   joins the mixed symmetry spin -- and then you combine the mixed assymetric parts and finally join them all together into a proton to get...
proton = 1/SQRT(18)   { 2(u+u+d-) + 2(d-u+u+) + 2(u+d-u+) - (u+u-d+) - (d+u-u+) - (u+d+u-) - (u-u+d+) - (d+u+u-) - (u-d+u+)  }
Then you can use ladder operators to get the other states in the octet (TEDIOUS!)
(sorry about the formatting)  --Vectorboson (talk) 21:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The proton wavefunction, above, is truly, badly, magnificently, off. The correct form is given in the proton article. Why don't you just copy them off a mainstream standard text? Many  have it: Lichtenberg, Riazudin-Fayazuddin, Greiner-Mueller, etc. Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 22:54, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Octet

message: Can you tell me what footnote "a"  means (about precision in mass units vs. MeV) please?--Vectorboson (talk) 22:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Footnote [a]

message: "This is not always the case, as with Ξ0c (J=1/2) and Ξ0c (J=1/2), where the J=1/2 state is marked by Ξ′0c, the prime in this case also indicating a resonance, but of the same spin."
Is that sentence really what is meant? Or is this better?
"This is not always the case, as with  (J=1/2) and  (J=1/2), where the prime indicates a resonance, but of the same spin."Headbomb (talk) 04:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Resonance

message: I'm preparing to add a separate column for isospin, if there are no objections. I'm also going to list the mass after every particle's symbol which requires it, per PDG guidelines. I also strongly recommend against listing high energy resonances of baryons, say, for the Sigma0 J=1/2 and Sigma0 J=3/2, as in fact there exist numerous other values of J, even if they do not exist in any pyramid-like table.  68.10.32.199 (talk) 17:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest we include all baryons with 3 or 4 star status in the PDG, since this is the definitive source for information like this.  That would mean lots of Ns, Δs, Λs and Σs, but none of the double and triple charm and bottom states that have not been observed.Mjamja (talk) 13:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You understand that the majority of these are isomers, right? i.e. theyre not actual "distinct" baryons. though difficult to describe, they're basically energized variants of their ground states. Don't think of these resonances as separate baryons; rather, imagine them as 'energized variations' of a representative particle.If we are attempting to make a list of baryons, which has the potential to become grossly over-complicated by including minor variations of almost every entry, and terribly confusing to anyone who isn't an expert on particle physics, I think it would be better to include only the aforementioned representative particle, although a few exceptions are necessary:From the article, "Recursively, for each baryon group (Nucleon, Delta, Sigma, etc) and for each possible quark content structure possible within the group, data for the ground resonance state of the arrangement has been included. ... Currently, certain other well known resonances, namely those populating the decuplet of the primary SU(3) and the 20-plets of the SU(4) groups, are included below."Wing gundam (talk) 07:02, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

text: According to Isospin#SU(2), "... isospin is described by two numbers, I, the total isospin, and I3, the component of the spin vector in a given direction.  The proton and neutron both have I=1/2, as they belong to the doublet. The proton has I3=+1/2 or 'isospin-up' and the neutron has I3=−1/2 or 'isospin-down'.". Please make clear in each instance in the article where you mention isospin whether you are talking about the total isospin or the component. JRSpriggs (talk) 14:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isospin, decay mode, resonance listings 

message: I wondered if the J given was spin or rather total angular momentum. Upon browsing the PDG archives, I found particles with J=5/2 and J=7/2, which to my understanding would be impossible to achieve by spin alone (three quarks, so spin can be at most 3/2). Someone edited it to total angular moment a while ago, but I changed it because the particle were given in their fundamental state (aka J=S+L where L = 0). Should we keep J ( equal to S+L) or change it to S? Headbomb (ταλκ · κοντριβς) 02:31, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Spin vs. Total angular momentum

message: Yes, they decay strongly, so their masses should be in the names. However, resonances are often grouped together, and for the name an approximate of the average mass value is chosen. They will probably end up as being (5810), but as of now the values that goes in the brackets hasn't been decided and I would really be surprised if these two particles ended as (5808) and (5815).Headbomb (ταλκ · κοντριβς) 14:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Name of bottom Sigmas

message: I think it would be a good idea if we could fit something like theses diagram somewhere in the article
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/physics/discoveries/images/Baryon%20Chart_MR.jpg </br>
http://www.regenerating-universe.org/images/Baryon.gif </br>
Headbomb (talk) 18:03, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Diagram Updates

message: Anyone know how to fix this??
Headbomb (ταλκ · κοντριβς) 21:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Node-count limit exceeded

message: Why are there empty table cells? Are these values that are known, but haven't been filled in yet, or values that haven't been measured yet, or values that can't be measured? Mike Peel (talk) 21:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How about we fill them in with "Unknown" for now, then? Or alternatively, a dash (—)? When I was getting List of space telescopes to featured list status, empty boxes were one of the things that were identified as an issue. Mike Peel (talk) 07:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Empty table cells 

message: The article states:
:It comes in increments of 1⁄2 ℏ. The ℏ is often dropped because it is the "fundamental" unit of spin, much like the e is often dropped when speaking of the charge of particles since e is the "fundamental" unit of charge.
The comparison to e is highly misleading. The h-bar can be "dropped" by simply defining it to be one (using units where it is exactly equal to one -- and these are the units used almost universally in particle physics. See Geometrized unit system and natural units)  By contrast, e is only "dropped" when you're slightly tipsy and sharing a beer with friends. e is equal to 1 over sqrt(137), the fine structure constant, and can never be defined to be one.  Its ommited only to save space in some table, where an asterisk/footnote explains that its been omitted. linas (talk) 01:18, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, please link h-bar to Plank's constant. linas (talk) 01:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  h-bar 

message: Thanks to all who helped! Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 13:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured list has been achieved! 

message: Many of the particles didn't have their lifetimes listed, so I "extracted them" using 
:\tau = \frac{h}{2\pi\Gamma}
And uncertainties with
:{\Delta \tau} = \frac{h}{2\pi\Gamma^2} \Delta \Gamma
as the PDG did for Browman 74 in . Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 04:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this is correct and uncontroversial. I just made it so that a link to decay width or resonance width will go to a page explaining this. --Steve (talk) 18:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lifetimes 

message: Hi, sorry if this has been discussed but I'm not exactly a particle expert. I came across this article awhile ago  and was browsing this page to see any mention of it.
Is there anything in this article about this already? I'm hesitant to edit the page because of my ignorance of the topic. Perhaps someone who is a little more experienced in this could shed some light on it, and maybe even include this in the main article? -- Chupon (talk) 15:47, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See Y(4140). It's a kind of meson (possibly a tetraquark or two regular mesons bunched up together, see  for an analysis of the possible options). Still thanks for the interest/pointing it out.Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 16:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New untheorized particle? 

message: The 2010 PDG values are out. I've updated the list accordingly. I'll do list of mesons later on this week. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 22:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  2010 update 

message: List is nowhere near complete. See http://pdg.lbl.gov/2010/tables/rpp2010-qtab-baryons.pdf for starters. Mollwollfumble (talk) 19:23, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Have added a new table, which includes about 100 other Baryons that had previously been missed. Mollwollfumble (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 04:10, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Again no it's not incomplete, these are resonances of already mentioned baryons. I'm not sure these are good additions to the list. Several of these entries are unreliable and unconfirmed, etc... Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 04:41, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  List is massively incomplete 

message: Are any changes to this article called for because of the observation of a new particle, the neutral Xi-sub-b (Ξb0)? See http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110720162045.htm -- Jo3sampl (talk) 16:16, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd wait for something more than a press release only citing an arXiv preprint, but let's hear other people's opinions too. ― A. di M.​plé​dréachtaí 16:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Xi-sub-b 

message: Shouldn't the charmed chi prime isospin value be zero rather than 1/2? Ohwilleke (talk) 22:55, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's a Xi, it's isospin 1/2 (charmed Xi prime = quark content either usc or dsc). Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 23:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charmed Chi prime isospin I value in table seems to be wrong 

message: The lists of baryons appear not to be accessible to blind people, but I don't know enough about baryons to fix them (the tables, not the baryons).
J P = 1⁄2+ baryons table:
Some items have both the 1/2 and the plus sign in red, some have just the plus sign in red. Do the ones that have just the plus sign in red have the part not in red established? Or is it a markup error?
Text color is not accessible to blind people, so a symbol needs to be added, such as a ‡. If J and P are independent of one another, then if both were red, then the symbol would need to be added to each. But if it was a markup error, then only one symbol is needed.
If it was a markup error, then we don't even need the J P column to contain 1/2+. We just need it to contain a Y for established or N for not established, since the entire table is of J P = 1/2+ baryons.
The same thing goes for the JP = 3⁄2+ baryons table.
Until those symbols are added, these tables are not accessible to blind people.
The names of the baryons do not appear sufficient to this non-scientist. There are several cases where two or three baryons appear to share a name. Why is the + or 0 or - not part of the name to distinguish them?
Baryon resonance particles:
Are all particles in the same table row related, with the particle in the first column the "master" particle that describes the table? Or are the columns side-by-side to save space? If the latter, then the table is not accessible, and there needs to be some other way to achieve such a layout than putting unrelated particles into the same table row.
The marking of non-established JP values solely with red text is unambiguously not accessible, so I am adding the  template to this page. 
Wikipedia accessibility guidelines can be found at WP:ACCESSIBILITY.
Thisisnotatest (talk) 08:04, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be happy to make the accessibility improvements if someone would answer my questions so that I don't change the meaning of this page. Thisisnotatest (talk) 05:01, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accessibility of lists of baryons 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of baryons. 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/20080228011850/http://filer.case.edu/sjr16/advanced/extras_particlephys.html to http://filer.case.edu/sjr16/advanced/extras_particlephys.html
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) 14:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I suggest removing the mass and lifetime from the table. One experiment claimed that it had found the particle, with properties largely different from predictions. Several other experiments didn't find anything like the claimed properties. Now LHCb measured ccu, with a mass that makes the ccd claim even less plausible. The LHCb paper serves as reference that the older claims from SELEX are very unlikely. --mfb (talk) 00:29, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Did that. The discovery claim is still accessible via the footnote. --mfb (talk) 12:15, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  double charmed Xi ccd 

message: What's going on with the templates on this page? Are they massively screwed up and half of them only show as links for anyone else? It's hard to believe no one would at least be distracted by the huge barnstar at the top of the page, is it my browser screwing something up and hitting some sort of limit for rendering templates, or is that an issue with the page no one's bothered fixing because of how huge the tables are? --Jessietail (talk) 11:05, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded - too many templates on the page. This looks like a recent development, so I wonder what changed. We can probably replace all instances of Template:Subatomic particle, that should help a lot. --mfb (talk) 11:47, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that template is doing too much work. See sub-templates. A module containing all the data is needed. I could fix that later but I'm a bit busy now. Johnuniq (talk) 09:45, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed the problem using Module:Particles. I'll document what it does a little later although the change I made should be reasonably clear. It has to use the somewhat ugly #invoke because using a template to call the module would double the expansion size. Before my edit, the post‐expand include size was 2,097,152 bytes which is the limit. After that limit is reached all further templates fail. After my edit, the expand size was 1,415,550 bytes. I only changed some of the  templates and will do more later. Johnuniq (talk) 00:45, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I finished replacing the  templates. The expand size is now 559,986 bytes. That means the article is displayed correctly and editing it will be faster. Johnuniq (talk) 04:22, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Templates