Tachyon- Faster than Light Particle Exist in Our Universe or an Imaginary Mathematical Particle
http://www.openscienceonline.com/journal/archive?journalId=703
Authors are
http://www.openscienceonline.com/journal/archive?journalId=703
Authors are
* Mr. Rupak Bhattacharya-Bsc(calcutta. University ) Msc math(Jadavpur University), of Residance 7/51purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist.- 24 Parganas(north), Kol-110,West Bengal,India**Professor (Dr.) Pranab kumar Bhattacharya- MD (calcuuta.University), FICPath(India) WBMES, Professor and Head of Pathology, School of Tropical MedicineKolkata- 108 CR avenue Kolkata-70073West Bengal, India ** Miss Upasana Bhattacharya- Student, Mahamayatala, Garia,
kolkata-84, only daughter of Prof.P.K Bhattacharya,* Mr.Ritwik Bhattacharya B.com(Calcutta .Univ), *Miss Rupsa
Bhattacharya of Residence 7/51 Purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist.- 24 parganas(north) ,
Kolkata-110,WestBengal, India **** Mrs. Dalia Mukherjee BA(honours) Calcutta University of Residence Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north),
West Bengal, India**** Miss Oaindrila Mukherjee- Bsc ( HM)IGNOU Student ,****
Miss Aiyshi Mukherjee of
Residance Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north), West Bengal, India; Mr
Hindole Chakravorty of 7/51 Purbapalli
Po-Sodepur Dist 24 parganas(north) Kolkata-110
Particle Physics and the mysteries of the early Universe
Over 13 billion years ago, the Big Bang moment ( Planck’s moment or Plancks Time ) gave birth
to our observable Universe, creating
space, time, energy and matter. To understand the laws of the universe,
particle physicists wanted to recreate conditions of less of billionth of a second after the Big Bang moment and that
could be can be done by accelerator. There are many such accelerators. One of
such was Large Hadron collider or LHC. At LHC,
particles were smashing almost at near speed of Light(c) following Einstein
Theory E=mc2 and Protons
smashing together can produce all sorts of particles, seen in the earliest
moments of the universe i. e E = hn where h = Plank constant Particle-wave
equivalence. Proton is in particle
physics also nothing but hadrons. Protons when
accelerated by 7 trillion volts, travel at 0.999999991 speed of light and smashed
together 600 million times/sec will produce tremendous energy
[TOTAL ENERGY STORED in LHC
superconducting magnets is : 10 GJ i. e
[350 m J stored energy means 10000 tons of snow, sliding down 100 meter]and there to be required many
magnets cooled to 1.9 K, colder than
outer space
About particles and Sub atomic particles creation
and our universe _:
| For the longest time as history records,
science has held that all matter is composed of fundamental building blocks.
Even though they could not see it physically , the ancient Greeks for example
presumed that a stone could be ground up into finer and finer grains until it
reached single indivisible points of matter which they called it átomos,
meaning “un-cuttable”. Their suspicions proved later correct, as some
two-and-a-half-thousand years later, scientists in the early 20th
century discovered that indivisible unit and named it” the atom”. This naming
turned out to be rather premature as
it was later found that these atoms
could be further broken into smaller particles, namely the protons, neutrons
and electrons. But that was not the end of the tale. Over the following
decades next particle accelerator experiments revealed there to be large
number of, what were labeled, sub-atomic particles. This gave birth to a new
branch of science called it “Particle
physics”. As time passed and more and more particles were discovered, it
became then clear that something was a miss with these ‘fundamental’ units of
our universe. Their numbers ran into tens then to over a hundred. Could
nature be so complicated? A study of their properties and interactions led to
the idea that many of these were made up of still smaller units. This led to
the discovery of six types of quarks particles and anti quarks, which are
said to compose protons, neutrons and other particles like W bosons, Muons,
Tau particles Z particles, Neutrinos, pions, poseelectrons, gluons gravitons,
higgs particles etc. While it is true that a large number of particles might pose a philosophical problem, a more fundamental problem must be the way in which they are said to interact. In the world of particle physics, matter is constantly flashing in and out of existence as new particles are created and destroyed. And while this process may seem strange, it is stranger still that many of these interactions appear to occur without regard to mass conservation. Let we take muons is for example. What are these Muons?_: Muons are charged particles that are primarily generated as a result of cosmic bombardment in the upper atmosphere of the earth. They are mostly negatively charged and can be thought of as heavy but unstable electrons. Muons have a short half-life of 2.2 microseconds, after which they decay into an electron and a couple of neutrinos. The decay process of muons can be like this and there is a muon neutrinos:  This reaction is however known to all and it obeys the charge conservation rule in that both muon and electron have an equal negative charge while the neutrinos are neutral. But a muon is 206 times heavier rest mass than an electron is and the neutrinos was considered weigh almost nothing (or next to nothing but it has mass what ever neglizable, it carries also a mass of 17,000 electron volts (kev ).] The question is where did all that mass go? According to most modern physics theory , mass must either be conserved or converted to an equivalent amount of energy, determined via the E=mc2 equation. This energy must be released in the form of electromagnetic radiation, i.e. as photons. But there is no evidences found in the standard texts that photons are released during this process of above equations. Actually to us, the above equations is incomplete before the present authors here because there should also be a W– boson particle involved there. This W– particle weighs in at 157 thousand times heavier than an electron and quickly flashes in-and-out of existence while creating the electron and one of the neutrinos. Here again is another apparent violation of mass conservation, and a huge one at that! But since it quickly disappears, we could give it the benefit of doubt and say that it causes no overall conservation problem. One possibility for mass conservation may have to do with neutrino momentum. we shall discuss this further on. Pions The next question has to do with where muons come from. Muons come from a pion decay, which in turn are generated from high-energy proton collisions in the upper atmosphere. The pion to muon conversion process looks like this:  Again there is a temporary intermediate W particle involved which we have not shown in above equation. The pion again has a mass of 273 electrons which is only slightly above the muon (at 206) and there are no photons in our sight. Hence again we have a mass conservation problem, albeit only minor. Ignoring the various neutrinos then, the complete process goes something like this:  Notice here something a miss? That’s right: the positive proton yields a negative pion! This is surely impossible to you according to charge conservation rules. Now to be fair, the interaction is not stated in full like this. Various literatures on the subject discuss the pion/muon and muon/electron decays separately and each decay process shown preserves charge correctly. But when it comes to the full process the present modern literature search becomes somewhat vague, particularly in regard to the pion’s charge. When a cosmic ray proton impacts atomic nuclei of air atoms in the upper atmosphere, pions are created. These decay within a relatively short distance (meters) into muons (the pion's preferred decay product), and neutrinos. The above excerpt does not say what charge these pions have except they are somehow created from protons. Since protons are positive this indicates the created pions must also be positive, in which case they could not decay into negative muons. The webpage from SLAC helps clear this up when it says In cosmic ray showers, both muons and antimuons are produced about equally. That’s good. With equal amounts of muons (negative) and anti muons (positive), charge is conserved. But where went than all these anti muons? If they are produced in equal numbers and have equal half-lives, we should observe them equally at sea level. Instead the literature indicates a vast abundance of muons only. An explanation of pion/muon conversions-: The above raises many questions to us!. Does the cosmic proton convert directly to pions? or does it create the pions as part of a collision, while preserving its own existence? And what happened to all that mass? Did the mighty cosmic proton convert itself to a puny electron without releasing the required amount of radiation to account for mass difference? Given the laws of uncertainty principal over the charge conservation problem in pion creation, it is understandable that the available literature is somewhat vague on details. However we authors believe there is a better explanation for the above reactions that not only preserves charge and mass, but also does away with these mysterious particle disappearance and creation-out-of-nothing conjectures. Start with the proton., A proton is believed to be made up of two up-quarks (positive) and one down-quark (negative). Is it possible that these quarks are rather really the pions and muons we observe? I.e., is the negative muon really a down-quark and the positive pion an up-quark? According to scientists, protons are essentially unbreakable and quarks can never be seen on their own. But this seems unlikely. If a proton is made of several parts, and you hit it hard enough, e.g. in a high-energy cosmic collisions, then surely those parts would separate. Scientists have declared that quarks have fractional charges” colors” and, given that we’ve never seen a fractional charge, we’ve obviously never seen a broken proton. This idea of fractional charges was initially introduced to explain the composition of the neutron purely in terms of quarks. But as pointed out in the previously, neutrons can be more easily explained in terms of a proton joined to an electron. Could it be that quarks in fact have unit charges and have been hiding in plain sight all along? With this idea in mind, let us assume that our proton has just smashed into some part of the atmosphere, e.g. a nitrogen nucleus, and has split into three quarks: two positive and one negative. What now? . There it was postulated than an electron and positron can overlap, creating an effectively invisible composite particle, which may be called a poseltron. Could a similar event be happening here? The positive quarks are surrounded by electrons. They could quickly absorb one each and become an ‘invisible’ neutral particle. The pions have apparently decayed! But the down-quark is negative and cannot absorb electrons so it continues down. This is the muon we see. What will happen to it – will it absorb a positron and also disappear? Perhaps, but this is unlikely because there are few positrons to be had; they’ve already been absorbed by available electrons and become poseltrons. Here’s instead what happens. The high-velocity muon collides with a poseltron. This causes the electron-positron pair to split. The positron is absorbed into the muon and the electron is ejected. The muon ‘decayed’ into an electron. Of course the muon is still there but as it’s now overlapping a positron, it forms a particle of neutral charge and can no longer be seen. Here’s the full process in picture form [ Figure-1]  As can be seen, no fundamental particles have been created or destroyed, while charge and mass are conserved throughout. Some points on pion/muon lifespan and mass -:The pion has a much shorter lifespan than a muon: about 85 times shorter (0.026 vs. 2.2 microseconds). Based on the above, that’s to be expected. Electrons are everywhere and will quickly be absorbed by a pion. But poseltrons and positrons are rare. Hence a pion will only last a few hundred metres before being absorbed, whereas a muon can often make it all the way to sea level. If a muon is really a down quark this means a down-quark weighs around 206 electron masses, i.e. about one ninth of a proton. Since there are also two up-quarks in a proton this means that an up-quark should weigh (1836-206)/2 = 815 electron masses. There’s a problem here because a pion reportedly weighs only 273 electron masses. So either I’m way out on the assumptions or there’s something fishy about the way a pion’s mass is measured.
Neutrinos _:Now some discussion needs to be made about these ghost particles “ Neutrinos” because
we have ignored them in the above interactions. Neutrinos are neutral
particles emitted during certain decay processes such as neutron decay and
the pion and muon decays described above.. The existence of neutrinos
particle was first postulated by
Wolfgang Pauli NL in 1930s to explain why electrons when leaving a
nucleus in the form of beta radiation move more slowly than it is expected. They were later observed/confirmed
in bubble chamber experiments. There
are broadly three (3) species of ‘Neutrinos”. I) Electron neutrinos 2) Muon neutrinos 3)
tat neutrinos. During first
half of twentieth century, physicists were convinced that all stars including
our Sun, shines by converting, deep in its interior, hydrogen into helium.
According to this theory, 4 hydrogen nuclei called protons (p) are changed
in solar interior into a helium
nucleus (4He), two anti-electrons (e+),
positively charged electrons), and two elusive and very mysterious ghostly particles called
neutrinos
 . This process of nuclear conversion,
believed to be responsible for sunshine and therefore for all life on this
planet The Earth. The conversion process, which involves many different
nuclear reactions, can be written schematically as: 4p→4He
+2e+ +2ve ----[1] as Bhattacharya Rupak wrote once it i.e ,two neutrinos produced each time as
the fusion reaction (1) within star.
Since four protons are heavier than a helium nucleus, two positive electrons
and two neutrinos, reaction (1) releases a lot of energy to Sun, that
ultimately reaches earth as sunlight. The reaction occurs very
frequently. Neutrinos escape easily from Sun and their energy does not appear as
solar heat or sunlight in earth. Sometimes neutrinos are produced with relatively
low energies and Sun gets lot of heat. Sometimes neutrinos are produced with
higher energies and Sun gets less energy. Neutrinos usually have zero electric charge, interact
very rarely with matter, and – according to the particle physics very high
standard level textbook version of the standard model of particle physics
– they are mass less. About 1000
billion neutrinos from Sun pass through your thumbnail every seconds, but you
do not feel them because, they interact so rarely and so weakly with matter.
Neutrinos are practically indestructible; almost nothing happens to them. For
every hundred billion solar neutrinos passing through Earth every seconds,
only about one interacts at all with stuff of which Earth is made. Because
they interact so rarely, neutrinos can escape easily from solar interior,
where they are created and bring direct information about solar fusion
reactions to us on Earth. There are three known types of neutrinos already
told. Nuclear fusion in Sun produces only neutrinos that are associated with
electrons, the so-called electron neutrinos . The two
other types of neutrinos, muon neutrinos  and tau neutrinos  , are produced,
for example, in laboratory accelerators or in exploding stars, together with
heavier versions of the electron, the particles muon  and tau  . But there were some missing
neutrinos too. All accepted models in cosmology & in particle
physics however accept that neutrinos are mass less or so. But the idea that neutrinos might
have mass also was of about 40 years old. The successful unification of the
weak and electromagnetic force field implied that there should be as many as
kinds of neutrinos, as there are different kinds of electron like particles.
There is till no confirmed mass evidences that neutrinos have a non zero mass
(Bhattacharjee Rupak and Bhattacharya Pranab Kumar )- The heaviest neutrinos in Gev temperature
ranges from
í to r electron volts. But the scientists
found that this wooly mammoth allegedly carries also a mass of 17,000 electron
volts (kev). By Radioactive beta decay process- a process in which an
unstable nucleus in radioactive
isotopes emits both an electron and a neutrino, of decay of electrons. Rupak & I recorded the energy of decay
electrons by sending them into a crystal where they knock other electrons
creating a current that provided a measure of energy where a big 17Kev
regularly appeared, taken from the energy of a few electrons. The energy was
then obvious 17 Kev neutrinos and 1% of their emitted neutrinos belonged to
heavy neutrinos. Neutrinos can pass
through entire Earth almost near or at speed of
light without leaving a trace and it is immune to many of forces that bind
matter including electromagnetic forces.
But obviously faster than speed of light? So! They have almost never been observed
outside the controlled environment of big accelerator laboratories of USA & CERN
in Europe. Neutrinos are even more
common in universe then photons (light particles), only because
probably Big Bang left a sea of very
low energy neutrinos that permeated every corner of this Cosmos. In 30th
march 2006 from the US laboratory “ Fermi lab” reported first result from a
neutrinos experiment Called “MINOS”( Main injector neutrino Oscillation
search) in Soudan mine at a depth of 776 meter in minnestoa 732 Km away. The
MINOs experiment showed that there is a short fall in the number of muon
neutrinos ,if they are detected a long distance away from their point of
production, may be called “Missing Neutrinos”- as we told earlier, some
neutrinos were missing . Solar
neutrinos actually have a multiple personality disorder. They are created as
electron neutrinos in Sun, but on way
to Earth, they change their type. For neutrinos, the
origin of personality disorder is a quantum mechanical process, called
"neutrino oscillations .Lower energy solar neutrinos switch from
electron neutrino to another type as they travel in vacuum from Sun to Earth.
The process can go back and forth between different types. The number of
personality changes, or oscillations, depends however upon neutrino energy.
At higher neutrino energies, process of oscillation is enhanced by
interactions with electrons in Sun or in
Earth. Stas Mikheyev, Alexei Smirnov, and Lincoln Wolfenstein first
proposed that interactions with electrons in Sun could exacerbate personality
disorder of neutrinos, i.e., the presence of matter could cause the neutrinos
to oscillate more vigorously between different types. The standard model of
particle physics assumes that neutrinos are mass less. What we authors could
never follow .In order for neutrino oscillations to occur, some neutrinos
must have masses- some may not have mass. Therefore, the standard model of
particle physics must be revised.
Neutrinos are elementary particles where all neutral counterparts of
charged leptons namely the electrons, the muons and ţ leptons all
of which take participation in the weak interactions. Determination of
neutrinos particles still remain notoriously difficult from the point of view
of experiments and got challenges in the particle physics of highest depth
research. At this moment, there is no information of even values of their
individual masses. We authors however proposed their value as m1<3ev;ml<190Kev;
mj<18.2 Mev may be the mass of different muon nutrinos numbers.
It is worth noted that direct detection of VĴ was reported in 2006
for the first time only from Fermi laboratories USA. The presence of neutrino
oscillation in 2006 march experiment by Fermilab .Direct Observation of NUTAU
E872 [DONUT] experiment
implies existence of distant & non vanishing mass for neutrinos flavors.
So neutrinos must have a non-zero mass. For electron neutrinos the mass is 10-6ev.
A mass in excess of 1ev would then be significant since neutrinos would then
contribute mass than stars ( Stars like sun) to the mass density of universe. The universe would be then closed
if mass of neutrinos would be between
25 and 100 eV. So 1) “Electron Neutrinos” had amass of 20ev, 2)”Muon
neutrinos” had a mass of 0.5Mev and 3) Tat neutrinos” had a mass of 250 Mev. Electron neutrinos constituted about a third of
the total number of neutrinos. Most of neutrinos produced in interior of Sun, all of which are electron neutrinos
when they are produced, are changed into muon and tau neutrinos by time they reach Earth. In QCD, studies
suggest that primordial universe was dominated by neutrinos of non-zero mass
rather then by quarks with it’s colour. A natural scale then emerged
determined by maximum distance neutrinos that could stream freely as universe expanded, before neutrinos slowed
down on account of their mass below the scale of super cluster i.e. galaxies
formation. In this neutrinos theory then no pre- existing fluctuation then
survived and the first structure then collapsed and formed galaxies.
That a neutral particle could be observed
however comes as a startling claim. By any interpretation of Coulomb’s or
Maxwell’s laws, a purely neutral particle (i.e. containing no charges) could
not apply any force on a charged particle, nor could it be affected by a
static or electromagnetic field. An answer to this may be that they can be
observed when impacting another particle directly. The below image shows the
bubble chamber experiment in which a neutrino was first detected [3]. Figure-2 The accepted interpretation of this is: (1) a neutrino came in from the right (it can’t be seen due to having no charge). (2) It hits a proton. (3) A positive pion is produced and curves downward. (4) A negative lighter muon is also produced and moves quickly to the left, curving weakly upward. (5) The original heavier proton survives; it moves slowly and curves downward. According to the standard particle physics model, when oppositely charged particles ( they are called antiparticles) meet with a particle they must annihilate into radiations and energy . Apparently the rules are different for neutral particles; namely that they should bounce off other particles like billiard balls, and this requires sub-atomic particles be slightly elastic. Assuming this is true, how can we calculate the degree of elastic bounce? In any classical situation this would be easily solved in terms of momentum and energy conservation. Knowing the momentum requires knowing the mass and this is a problem because neutrinos are commonly assumed to have none. Special relativity theory tells us that particles having zero mass, such as photons when at motion, must travel at light speed. This is due to the relativistic rest mass formula, which says an object’s mass increases toward infinity as it reaches nears light speed. For an object of non-zero rest mass this puts the brakes on acceleration and keeps v below c. But for an object with zero rest mass the acceleration can only stop when the particle hits light speed, at which point the object gains a non-zero relativistic mass. What will this mass be? To determine this we can use the Lorentz Transform equation:  Where m0 is the rest mass. In mathematical terms, when zero is divided by zero is called an indeterminate, meaning that it can have any real-number value, or even an infinite one. Calculating momentum requires multiplying this indeterminate mass by velocity, in this case c, which of course just gives us another indeterminate. This is not helpful! But could a neutrino particle with indeterminate mass/momentum account for the mysteries it is said to solve, such as muon/electron mass-loss and the collision in the above image? After all, if it’s indeterminate then we can assign any value we want to it, right? Perhaps, but we’d be hard-pressed to explain why identical objects moving at the same velocity have different relativistic masses. After all, the speed of light is a universal constant; not a universal variable. So if neutrinos don’t account for the above collision what does? Here’s our interpretation. The invisible particle coming from the right (1) is actually a positive pion and negative muon overlapping (similar to the poseltron concept). It strikes the proton (2) and this causes the pion and muon to break apart and become visible. The three particles, pion, muon and proton are then scattered. A far more interesting aspect of this image arises from measuring the extent of scattering. A simple pixel measurement shows the length of each track to be:
In the muon’s case, it ended up off screen so we can only calculate a ratio of 442/72 = 6.1, which is understandably less than the real muon/proton ratio (about 9) because the track must be longer. But seeing as the muon’s mass has already been determined in other experiments by comparing its particle tracks to electrons, we can accept their stated mass as being 206 electrons. Neutral composite particles _:This description of a pion-muon particle (which struck the proton in the above image) as well as the poseltron spoken about in the earlier gives rise to the possibility that there are many neutral composite particles in existence. Here are some charged particles we commonly know of:
A Bold Hypothesis _: In the above description of muon to electron conversion, the muon decayed when it met a poseltron. This caused the electron and positron to separate, followed by the muon absorbing the positron and ejecting the electron. Here is a diagram showing a break-down of events:  The electron and positron are pictured smaller than the muon because they are lighter. If we assume sub-atomic particles to be made of a similar material of uniform density, this would make the muon/electron diameter ratio proportional to the cube-root of their mass ratio: in this case making the muon about 6 times larger as shown. The idea that there should be direct correlation between mass and size seems quite logical and this is probably how most would view sub-atomic particles. But this view alas creates a problem for the electron-positron separation shown above. If the electron was much smaller than the muon its charge density would be much higher. Hence the muon would be unable to force the electron and positron to separate because the electron would be using a much higher percentage of its charge to attract and hold the positron. The only way the above could work is for the muon and electron to be very similar in size. Based on this reasoning we’d like to make a bold hypothesis: All fundamental (indivisible) sub-atomic particles are identical in size. They vary only in mass and charge. If this is true, everything from an electron to a top quark has the same diameter but different densities. This may turn out to be true only for certain types of particles such as those in the pion/muon/electron interactions. But if this principle can be extended to all particles, it would allow for a much broader range of interactions. Hence many composite particles could be again composed from further small numbers of fundamental sub - particles |
arge Hadron Collider-: it is 27 km ring constructed under ground at
French-Swiss Boarder. It can accelerates 2800 bunches,1011
protons per bunch, at 7 TeV . Protons smashing
together can produce all sorts of particles, seen in the earliest moments of
the Universe. Protons, if and when accelerated by 7 trillion volts and if travel at 0.999999991 speed of light and
smash together 600 million times/sec. Now
in the Universe matter is two types called Fermions and Bosons. With
the word “Bosons” there are two names Prof. Albert Einstein- who is a NOBEL
Laureate & he nomenclature first the particle as “Photon” and “Late Prof. S N. Bose”-whose name Prof. Albert
Einstein included for the same Photon
particle as “Boson”. Other group of particles are “Fermions” - as per name
of Enrico. Fermi-NOBEL Laureate and “Leptons”
and these are Quarks, Gluons, Z, W, g, λ and many such particles in Quantum
fields( scalar fields) and Higgs particle that gave mass to
Fermions & leptons [ late Professor
SN BOSE had nothing contribution on Fermions or
with Leptons]. Ordinary matter [baryons which is about 4% of observable universe
matter including dark matter and 73% of
universe is consisted with Dark energy
whose composition we do not know yet . Ordinary Baryons (matter) is
made of Fermions, held together by bosons .Photons and gluons are ripples
in the (EM, strong) fields - quantum fields. Z, W particles are for : Weak
force carriers .Overall there are so far
theoretically, 6 quarks particles [ and they are up, down, strange, charm
,bottom], and 6 Leptons[ne, nm,
nt, e,t,m] , 4 force carriers
particles [w, z,g, λ ]. There must be so something (new
particle) in the Universe that actually gives
rest mass to all particles. And there
must be a mass less particle where that particle fused or absorbed to give the
rest mass. Mass is really a
measure of how difficult it is to accelerate an object (F=ma). A mass less
particle must not have a spin. In standard Model the W bosons are mass less
at very high temperature ( at very high speed of C) above the scale of symmetry
breaking and two of the four higg’s particle at symmetry breaking are also
considered as mass less and charged particles. And when symmetry is broken they
get absorbed in massive Ws Higgs field : particle mass is a measure of the resistance to movements through Higgs field. This finding of higgs particle is so interesting events and chances were very rare: 1 in 100,000,000,000 (1 followed by 11 zeros) Equivalent to looking for one particular grain in is 2.5 million kg of rice. Higgs events are also very rare Equal quantities of Matter and Anti-matter should have been produced in the Big Bang, then annihilated each other leaving just radiationSuper-symmetry :- it means symmetry between types of particles. Every observed particle has a super-partner, just too (1000 times) massive to have been already seen Super symmetry particles are S quarks, S gravitino, S leptons ,Photinos, Gluons, Wino, zino, Higgsino
How the particles are captured? World’s most massive “onion” structure to capture the particles is ATLAS ATLAS Control Room, first beams, 20 November 2009
1)
Energy is converted
into many quarks, anti-quarks and gluons. 2)
QGP lasts for about 10-22 seconds
3) Then thousands of particles are produced The Standard “Big Bang” Model successfully
could described all of the elementary particles in the particle physics, we
know to exist in mathematically at least how they
interact with one another.
2) The Standard Model could however never answered me nor my youngest brother Mr.Rupak Bhattacharya(2) one
most basic question : “Why do most of
these elementary particles have masses?” and “where from the mass
actually came? And Does any particles exist that moves faster then speed
of Light (FTL Particles)? ” Without
mass, our universe would be a very different place than this one- we think it
so . For example, let we consider a very much hypothetical situation, that if
the electron or proton had no mass at all, then there would be no formation of atoms at all. Hence there
would be no formation of ordinary matter ( we call ordinary matter as hadrons)
as we know it, --there would be then no chemistry, no sea, no rocks, no
asteroids No sun, No planets--- then no
biology, no people, no reptiles, no
trees, no animals, no flowers, no biological substances even no unicellular
organism like protozoa, amoeba or virus nor even DNA structure in this planet the
Earth. There would be no planets at all. No sun, No Stars, No Galaxies. In
addition, look at our Sun shines in the blue sky. My thanks to a delicate interplay among the
fundamental forces of Nature, which would be completely upset, if some of those
force particles did not have large masses? At first sight the concept of mass
seems not to fit into the Standard Model of particle physics. Two of the forces
the model was then described – 1) The
electromagnetism and 2) the weak nuclear force – and they can be elementary
particles must be mass less or zero rest mass and some thing gave them mass and
before time of nuclueosynthesis the particle that was created to gave mass as per professor Peter W Higgs -is Higgs
particle and these Higgs particles may
be many. The Scalar field in which mass
was created is now called Higgs field.
Professor Peter W Higgs gave that concept in 1964. So there was search for
Higgs particle in LHC. It was a
search for the standard model Higgs particle was presented in the four-Lepton
decay modes in LHC of CERN. Upper limits at 95% confidence level excluded the
Higgs mass ranges 134–158GeV, 180–305GeV, and 340–465GeV. A major fraction of
the explored mass range was thus
excluded at 95% CL and the exclusion limits extended beyond the sensitivity of
previous collide experiments. Excesses of events were observed at the low end
of the explored mass range, around masses of 119 and 126GeV, and at high mass
around 320GeV. These excesses, although not statistically significant, make the
observed limits weaker than expected in the absence of a signal. At low mass,
only the region 114.4 < mH < 134GeV remained consistent with the
expectation for the standard model Higgs boson productions, described by a single theory, that of the
electroweak force. Scientists have subjected the electroweak theory to many
experimental tests, which it has passed with flying colours. However, According
to these authors, the basic equations of
that theory seem to require that all . major
breakthrough in particle physics came in the 1970s when theoretical physicists
did first realize that there are very close ties between two of the four
fundamental forces – namely, the weak force and the electromagnetic force after
Professor Abdus Salam the Nobel Laureate in physics of Pakistan. The two forces
can be described within the same theory, which forms the basis of the Standard
Big Bang Model. This ‘unification’ implied that electricity, magnetism, light
and some types of radioactivity are all manifestations of a single underlying
force called, unsurprisingly, the electroweak force. But in order for this
unification, to work out mathematically, it requires that the force-carrying
particles must have no rest mass . We
know from experiments and our knowledge, that this is not true, So Prof. Peter
Higgs in UK, Mr. Rupak Bhattacharya of
7/51 purbapalli Sodepur,West Bengal-Kol-110 ,
one of authors of this article, individually suggested a solution to
solve this conundrum. What they suggested was that all particles that moment
must had no mass [ were of zero rest mass particles] just after the Big Bang
moment. As the Universe cooled and the temperature fell below a critical value,
an invisible force field called the ‘Higgs field’ was formed together with the
associated ‘zero mass particle’. The field prevailed throughout the cosmos: any
particles that interact with it are given a mass via the Higgs particle or
Rupak Particle. The more they interacted, the heavier they become, whereas
particles that never interact are left with no mass at all. The zero rest
mass particles or the Higgs particles,
up to this day, is nothing more than just a theoretical imaginary entity that stems only from particle
physics'
Standard Model. Still, many of the particles that mankind has so
far discovered, and in fact, many of the principles that had been proven by
experimental data, started out as predictions from mathematical solutions, as
for example like quarks . The ‘unification theory’ implied that
electricity, magnetism, light and some types of radioactivity are all
manifestations of a single underlying force called, unsurprisingly, the
electroweak force and to find out the laws of our universe. But in order for
this unification to work mathematically, it requires that the force-carrying
particles must have no mass. We know from our experiments that this notion is
not true, Finding zero rest mass particle and Higgs Particle would give an
insight into why particles have certain mass, and help to develop subsequent
physics
As, according to Professor Mery Gelman,- a Nobel laureate
in physics, the earliest particles in our universe were quarks and anti-quarks.
The gospel of Big Bang is then supposed to have been explosion from zero volume
at zero time of a corpuscle containing
the cosmic soup of these quarks and anti quarks particles , where in the corpuscle energy
were equivalent to mass and radiation
and flash. The particles and their anti particles were there in constant annihilation
and went into radiation and flash. What
we authors wanted to mean that at about trillion and trillion degrees of temperature
of cosmic soup (about 1015K) the
elementary particles and radiation was
just interchangeable. In the primordial fireball or in cosmic soup, the
particles and antiparticles were being in constant annihilation and were again
created although the total energy of combined radiation and matter of the soup
was constant.
Any powerful particle
accelerator of today has probably two main purposes. One purpose is the
production of new and newer particles sub-particles and the other is scattering
of those particles (in 3-D space). Particle scattering is a method of
determining what sub atomic (constituent) particles look like and their
properties. It is using the collision of energized particles to give a
"snapshot" or clear "picture" of the particle being
studied, whether a proton, electron, quarks, sub-quarks or a whole bunch of
other interesting particles. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which was built
at the European Centre for Nuclear Research (CERN) near Geneva, Switzerland,
using a 27-kilometre underground ring. The LHC will whizz protons, which are
far heavier particles than electrons, to energies of up to 14 trillion electron
volts. One of its primary goals will be the search for the Standard Model (SM)
Higgs particle. The main SM Higgs boson production mechanism at the LHC will be
then by gluon-gluon fusion, while the qq!qqH process, or Vector Boson Fusion
(VBF), will account for about 20% of the total cross section. Next-to-leading
order (NLO) corrections are of major relevance in particular for the
gluon-gluon fusion production, with K-factors ranging from 1.7 to 2.0. A review
of Higgs production cross sections can be found in. The particle identified in the title is the zero
mass particles, and the particle that gave mass in Higgs Field. Professor Peter Higgs actually joked that
Lederman originally wished to label this particle as "the goddamn particle
or god’s Particle.
[A diagram summarizing the tree-level interactions between elementary
particles described in the Standard Model]
The Higgs particles could be as light as
78 GeV without however being detected at LEP, while detection
at the LHC is extremely challenging one the present authors thinks
so. However many of the super- and global symmetry partners of the
standard model particles should be easily observable at the LHC.
Furthermore, the LHC should be able to observe a “wrong” Higgs that
is a 300–400 GeV heavy Higgs-like particle with suppressed
couplings to W and Z that by itself does not account
for electroweak precision observables and the unitarily of WW
scatteing. At the same time, the true Higgs may be deeply buried in
the QCD background. Hopes of finding the boson are pinned on two
massive detectors at the LHC: the ATLAS or A Toroidal LHC apparatus and the CMS
or Compact Muon Solenoid. These two detectors have the same goals but their
designs are radically dissimilar.Professor Stephen Hawking had a bet in 2008
for 100 dollars (70 euros) that a mega-experiment this week will not find an
elusive particle seen as a holy grail of cosmic science. Rather the experiment
could discover super partners, particles that would be "super symmetric
partners" to particles already known about. Their existence would be a
however key confirmation of string theory, and they could make up the
mysterious dark matter that holds galaxies together. Prof. Hawkings told in
2008 in a meeting with BBC.
In 2013 Professor Peter W Higgs has been
awarded Nobel prize for the SM Higgs along with Professor but the question
remains yet how the Higgs interacts with
standard-model fermions: entities such as electrons, muons and quarks that have
an intrinsic angular momentum, or 'spin', of ½ in quantum units. The
probability of an interaction with each particle is supposed to be proportional
to its mass — not least because, in the standard model, interaction with the
Higgs is what creates the mass.
Is
there really Zero Rest mass particles possible at all? What is then Rest mass? In Universe, while matter creation, theories
should assume zero rest mass entities (fields). From those zero rest mass entities ,massive particles were
created as perturbations in a single fundamental field. And How the rest mass
originated What were these Zero mass particles then ? Electron? Higg’s Particle
? Photon? Boson? Gluons? One of the consequences
of Eisenstein’s special theory of relativity is that mass of an object
increases with its velocity relative to the observer; it has the usual mass
that we are familiar with. This is called the rest mass of the object. As the
speed of the object is increase the inertial
mass of the object also increases. For speed significantly less than the speed
of light the increase of mass is nearly imperceptible, but as the speed of
light is approached, the mass starts to increases very rapidly towards
infinity. Theoretically the mass would become infinite if the object could be
accelerated all the way to the speed of light[c]. However because of
acceleration of an object in response to
a given force is inversely proportional
to its inertial mass , as the speed of light is approached the force is
required actually to reach the speed of the light also become infinite. It is impossible for a particle with mass to
reach the speed of light. At Fermilab, for example, when protons were
accelerated near close to the speed of light, and it takes a huge amount of
energy. The rest mass did not change
- however by definition, it is the mass,
or equivalent energy, of a particle while
at REST. The total energy is the particle's
rest mass energy plus it’s kinetic energy. Einstein discovered that the total
energy of a particle moving at speeds close to the speed of light (relativistic
speeds) is given as mc2/((1-(v2/c2)1/2).
The total energy - rest energy plus kinetic energy - changes, and that is what
you, as an "external observer" of a relativistic particle, can
measure. You can only measure rest mass if you are at rest relative to the
particle. A particle with non-zero rest-mass cannot be accelerated to the speed
of light. Put in other terms, the energy of a moving particle with rest-mass m
equals E=(r-1)mc2, where the factor r=1/sqrt(1-(v/c)2),
with v the speed of the particle and c the speed of light. You can use this
formula in an Excel sheet to try different values of rest-mass m and speed v.
This equation tells you that you need an infinite amount of energy to
accelerate a particle to (exactly) the
speed of light, however, you can always take it to, say 99.99999% the speed of
light with a finite (but huge) amount of energy. In the world of particle physics, a mass less particle is any particle
whose invariant rest mass is zero and in
spin Zero. Currently, the only known mass less particles are gauge bosons ( the
Spin is not however Zero for gauge bosons ): the photon particles (carrier of
electromagnetism) and the gluon particles (carrier of the strong force) and
Higgs particle. However, gluons are never observed
as free particles, since they are confined within hadrons. Neutrinos were
considered as mass less but Neutrinos later found to have zero rest mass. The
behavior of mass less particles is understood by virtue of special relativity.
For example, these particles must always move at the speed of light(c ). In
this context, they are sometimes may be called as luxons
to distinguish them from bradyons. Mass less particles are known to experience
the same gravitational acceleration as other particles (which provides
empirical evidence for the equivalence principle) because they do have
relativistic mass, which is what acts as the gravity charge. Thus,
perpendicular components of forces acting on mass less particles simply change
their direction of motion, the angle change in radians being GM/rc2
with gravitational lensing, a result predicted by general relativity. The
component of force parallel to the motion still affects the particle, but by
changing the frequency rather than the speed. This is because the momentum of a
mass less particle depends only on frequency and direction (compare with the
momentum of low speed massive objects, which depends on mass, speed, and
direction). Mass less particles move in straight lines in space-time, called
geodesics, and gravitational lensing relies on space-time curvature.
Gluon-gluon interaction is a little different: they exert forces on each other
but, because the acceleration is parallel to the line connecting them (albeit
not at simultaneous moments), the acceleration will be zero unless the gluons
move in a direction perpendicular to the line connecting them (so that velocity
is perpendicular to acceleration).
What most
physicists call mass (or "rest mass" if they want to be specific) is the absolute value of the
four-momentum, which is independent of reference frame. For things traveling at
speed is c, this was considered by Einstein as “zero mass” as “Photons”. So if
Photons travel at speed c (which, by the
way, is not necessary for relativity to work; "the speed of light" is
a misnomer), then they have only zero rest mass. But Photon
particle bends when it travel near a massive stellar mass say a massive
star by its gravity and if photon
particle does not have the mass how gravity pull photons towards another
massive body?
A photon
may be described by the equations E ɤ
=h v ɤ , p ɤ =h/ λ ɤ and E ɤ=p
ɤ c where h corresponds
with Planck's constant, E ɤ and p
ɤ are
the energy and momentum of the photon, v ɤ and p ɤ
are its frequency and wavelength, and c is the speed of light. In
addition, the rest-mass of a photon is near equal to zero but not exactly the
zero . The latter property has been a significant point of ɤ because application of de Broglie's electron relation to a photon yields that Planck's constant or
the frequency of a photon must be near equal to zero while the above equation
states that a photon's energy is different from zero. And what
is when the particle is in Intertia i. e I want to say “Zero Rest mass particles”
in super cooled state of the universe . Can any particle have Zero
mass when its Spin is Zero. We're so
used to talking about rest mass, and we people sometimes forget about the very basic
properties of the Lorentz group. The
photon doesn't really have a rest-mass,( i. e in intertia photon can not stay at all but boson can stay in interia
in form of Boson condensates ) since, strictly speaking, the Lorentz group is
non-compact and does not contain the transformation required to take one into
the "rest frame of a photon." While we can take limiting processes to
somewhat make sense of talking about a photon's zero rest-mass, this is not a
well-defined transformation in the Lorentz group so far we know. Rather, the
only way to talk about the inertia of a particle traveling at speed “ c “ is to
determine the 4-momentum in a physical frame of reference (v <c)., This gives the photon a finite, non-zero
mass for every physical frame of reference. We think it so. Not to
mention that when you consider General Relativistic effects, you really start
to see how it is energy-density and density of energy flow which determine the
inertial properties of particles and fields. This is what John Wheeler called
the Geometrodynamic Steering Principle as identifying the determiners of
inertia. Photons have a very small mass what ever small it is, and
hence move strictly less than "the speed of light" - 'c', there's
just no evidence that they don't, and on the contrary, plenty of reason to believe
they do.
Then is
there at all Possible existence of
faster-than-light(FTL) phenomena for highly accelerated elementary particles (Tachyons)-:
The possible existence of faster-than-light(FTL) particles, which are still forbidden by the known laws of physics,
have been studied by many physicists. But the existence of such particles has
not been confirmed yet by any experiments.
This article will show you that faster-than-light phenomena may be
permitted for highly accelerated elementary particles, if they have very small
mass compared to that of the electron. It is a
well known fact that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.
At best, a mass less particle travels at the speed of light. But is this
really true? In 1962, Bilaniuk, Deshpande, and Sudarshan, Am. J. Phys. 30, 718 (1962), said "No!
It is not Possible" . Let us say
please you draw a graph, with momentum (p) on the x-axis, and energy (E) on the y-axis.
Then draw the "light cone", two lines with the equations E = ±p.
This divides our 1+1 dimensional space-time into two regions. Above and
below are the "Time like" quadrants, and to the left and right are
the "Space like" quadrants. Now the fundamental fact of relativity we
know is that
E² − p²
= m²
Where E is an object's energy, p is its momentum, and m is its rest mass, which we'll just
call 'mass'. In case you're wondering, we are working in units where c=1.
For any non-zero value of m, this is a hyperbola
with branches in the time like regions. It passes through the point (p
,E) = (0 ,m), where the particle is at rest. Any particle
with mass m is constrained to move on the upper
branch of this hyperbola. (Otherwise, it is "off shell", a term
you hear in association with virtual particles — but that's another
topic.) For mass less particles, E² = p²,
and then particles moves on the light-cone. These two cases were given
the names tardyon (or bradyon in more modern usage) and luxon, for "slow
particle" and "light particle". Tachyon is the name given
here to the supposed "fastest particle" which would move with v > c. Tachyons were first
introduced into physics by Gerald Feinberg, in his seminal paper "On the
possibility of faster-than-light particles" Published in journal Physics Review [Phys. Rev. 159,
1089—1105 (1967)]. A tachyon is a type of theoretical particle, with the
unusual property that it moves faster than the speed of light (FTL). The word
"Tachyon", was based on the
Greek for "swift." & Tachyon
have 'imaginary' zero rest mass. The
theory of relativity predicts that a particle can never be accelerated to a
speed faster than the speed of light, but physicists have long known that (in
theory, at least) it would be possible for particles to move faster than the speed
of light, as long as they don't have to accelerate to get there. Tachyons,
which always move this fast, are sometimes hypothesized in physics theories to
serve some useful purposes. Tachyons have never been found in experiments as
real particles traveling through the vacuum, but is predicted
theoretically that tachyon-like objects may exist as faster-than-light 'quasi particles'
moving through laser-like medias. (That is, they exist as particle-like
excitations, similar to other quasi particles called phonons and polaritons
that are found in solids. 'Laser-like media' is a technical term referring to
those media that have inverted atomic populations, the conditions prevailing
inside a laser. There are strong scientific reasons to believe that such quasi particles
really exist, because Maxwell's equations, when coupled to inverted atomic
media, lead inexorably to tachyon-like solutions.
Now another familiar relativistic equation is
E = m[ 1−(v/c)²]−½.
Tachyons
(if at
all they exist in the universe ) must have v > c. This means that E is here imaginary ! Well, what
if we take the rest mass m,
and take it to be imaginary? Then E is negative real, and E²
− p² = m² < 0. Or, p²
− E² = M², where M is real. This is a hyperbola
with branches in the space like region of space time. The energy and
momentum of a tachyon must satisfy this relation. You can now deduce many
interesting properties of tachyons. For example, they accelerate (p goes
up) if they lose energy (E goes
down). Furthermore, a zero-energy tachyon is "transcendent", or
moves infinitely fast. This has profound consequences. For example,
let's say that there were electrically charged tachyons. Since they would
move faster than the speed of light in the vacuum, they should produce “Cherenkov radiation”. This would lower their energy, causing them to
accelerate more! In other words, charged tachyons would probably lead to a runaway
reaction releasing an arbitrarily large amount of energy. This suggests
that coming up with a sensible theory of anything except free (non interacting) tachyons is likely to be difficult.
Heuristically, the problem is that we can get spontaneous creation of
tachyon-anti tachyon pairs, then do a runaway reaction, making the vacuum unstable. To
treat this precisely requires quantum field theory, which gets
complicated. It is not easy to summarize results here. However, one
reasonably modern reference is Tachyons, Monopoles, and Related
Topics, E. Recami, ed. (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978). However,
tachyons are not entirely invisible. You can imagine that you might
produce them in some exotic nuclear reaction. If they are charged, you
could "see" them by detecting the Cherenkov light they produce as
they speed away faster and faster.
Such experiments have been done but, so far, no tachyons have been found.
Even neutral tachyons can scatter off normal matter with experimentally
observable consequences. Again, no such tachyons have been found.How about using tachyons to transmit information faster than the speed of light, in violation of Special Relativity? It's worth noting that when one considers the relativistic quantum mechanics of tachyons, the question of whether they "really" go faster than the speed of light becomes much more touchy! In this framework, tachyons are waves that satisfy a wave equation. Let's treat free tachyons of spin zero, for simplicity. We'll set c = 1 to keep things less messy. The wave function of a single such tachyon can be expected to satisfy the usual equation for spin-zero particles, the Klein-Gordon equation:
(□ + m²) φ = 0
where
□ is the D'Alembertian, which in 3+1
dimensions is just
□ = ∂²/∂t² − ∂²/∂x²
− ∂²/∂y² − ∂²/∂z².
The
difference with tachyons is that m² is negative,
and so m is imaginary.To simplify the math a bit, let's work in 1+1 dimensions with co-ordinates x and t, so that
□ = ∂²/∂t² − ∂²/∂x².
Everything
we'll say generalizes to the real-world 3+1-dimensional case. Now,
regardless of m, any solution is a
linear combination, or superposition, of solutions of the form
Φ (t ,x) = exp (−I Et + I p
x)
where E²
− p² = m². When m²
is negative there are two essentially different cases. Either | p | ≥ | E |, in which case E is real and we get solutions that look
like waves whose crests move along at the rate | p/E | ≥ 1, i.e., no slower than the speed
of light. Or | p | < | E |, in which case E is imaginary and we get solutions that
look like waves that amplify exponentially as time passes!We can decide as we please whether or not we want to consider the second type of solution. They seem weird, but then the whole business is weird, after all.
(1) If we do permit the second type of solution, we can solve the Klein-Gordon equation with any reasonable initial data — that is, any reasonable values of φ and its first time derivative at t = 0. (For the precise definition of "reasonable", consult your local mathematician.) This is typical of wave equations. And, also typical of wave equations, we can prove the following thing: if the solution φ and its time derivative are zero outside the interval [−L, L] when t = 0, they will be zero outside the interval [−L− | t |, L + | t |] at any time t. In other words, localized disturbances do not spread with speed faster than the speed of light! This seems to go against our notion that tachyons move faster than the speed of light, but it's a mathematical fact, known as "unit propagation velocity".
(2) If we don't permit the second sort of solution, we can't solve the Klein-Gordon equation for all reasonable initial data, but only for initial data whose Fourier transforms vanish in the interval [−| m |, | m |]. By the Paley-Wiener theorem this has an odd consequence: it becomes impossible to solve the equation for initial data that vanish outside some interval [−L, L]! In other words, we can no longer "localize" our tachyon in any bounded region in the first place, so it becomes impossible to decide whether or not there is "unit propagation velocity" in the precise sense of part (1). Of course, the crests of the waves exp(−iEt + ipx) move faster than the speed of light, but these waves were never localized in the first place! The bottom line is that you can't use tachyons to send information faster than the speed of light from one place to another. Doing so would require creating a message encoded some way in a localized tachyon field, and sending it off at superluminal speed toward the intended receiver. But as we have seen you can't have it both ways: localized tachyon disturbances are subluminal and superluminal disturbances are nonlocal The energy potential of a Tachyon particle -according to Japanese scientist- features several millions of joules per centimeter cube and exhibiting a junction potential of some 800 millions of volts (1000 times more than sun). Tachyon-Energy is for free. Tachyon-Energy is limitless available. Tachyon-Energy is ubiquitary, in other words, accessible to all nations. Tachyon-Energy can be produced extremely polycentric: on any desired place on earth, on any desired quantity, without deficiency. The wavelength of Tachyons is approximate 10 to the power of 23. Tachyon-Energy does not lead to environmental pollution as no radioactive material, nor toxic waste nor are other toxins involved. There are different ways to use Tachyon-Energy: hereinafter we shall present some of them.
Possible Application of Tachyons - I
Through direct use of „gravity-storms“ via space-quantum-streams. These type of application suits for transforming the force of gravity into electrical energy: as a substitute for the common nuclear power plants, coal-fired power plants, oil-fired heating systems, car engines, etc. etc.
Possible Application – II Time machine and Time Travels in future
.Possible Application - III
By vacuum-field technology. This type of technology bases on the theory that two opposite energy waves “neutralize” themselves. In such a vacuum-field molecular structures can be transformed from chaotic ones into harmonical ones. This phenomena is also known as negative entropy order neg-entropie.
By the help of this technology appropriate material qualifies as “antennas” for Tachyon particles. So far we are quite successful using parts of this technology in combination with pure crystalline silicon and some noble metals. Science confirms that Tachyon Energy features anti-entropic properties; an inverse effect to chaos, confusion and decay.
Entropy is the definition for the chaos within a system: the bigger the entropy is, the bigger the confusion is. Natural living organisms show tendential anti-entropic behavior, in other words, the intuitively try to diminish any kind of confusion (chaos). Studies prove that imbalance within the energy-fields of beings will -sooner or later- manifest on a material level as ageing , tension, pain and illness. The anti-entropic effects of Tachyon Energy helps to balance the subtle energy fields in our physic body. The health implications could be named as holistic use of this type of energy: interactions in between mental and physical aspects are directly affected .Latest studies proves that the subtle energy fields in our physical body are balanced with Tachyons: an optimization of our homeostasis is achieved. Homeostasis stands for self-regulating functions assuring the maintenance and continuity of a specific system. Homeostasis is the property of a system that regulates its internal environment and tends to maintain a stable, constant condition of properties such as temperature.
One can communicate by a telephone faster then light may be called Tachyon telephone!
Tachyons can be source for energy in space ship
Conclusion
Question
remain still whether there is really any particle that moves faster then speed of
photon particles [ light particles?] We authors
here consider it may be possible through another particle called
“Tachyons Particles”, detected in 1974 by Roger Clay and Ohilip crouch of
Adelaide University in Australia. What
were Tachyon particles? Of course the
Super string theories that evolved from spinning string theories, that
incorporated supper symmetry and had no Tachyonic ground states. Tachyons are
still mathematical quirk of mathematicians with no physical meanings. Can these
tachyons be the missing Neutrinos particles with real zero rest mass as
found in OPERA Experiment ?
However Einstein’s equation E=mc2 shows “that nothing in this
observable universe, can cross the speed of
photons [ light particles]”. But tachyons have probably that
curious property of going faster then speed of light, as the particle mast
loose energy ,unlike other ordinary particles. It is still probably unknown,
whether within relativity theory (E=mc2]
solutions of Einstein, permit also two families of particles to exist -1) which
always have a speed less than light and 2)
other which always have speed greater than the light. If it permits the second one, then the later
particle must be tachyons or a kind of neutrinos whom we do not know yet or
called “missing neutrinos with zero rest mass”. If tachyons really exist then
many of our normal physical laws, laws of this universe are to be reversed.
The standard description of two families of
particles allowed by Einstein equations follows from the requirement that the
total energy of a particle is given by a formula ----à M0 C2
(1-(v/c)2)1/2. The key point being that taking the
square root (half Power) introduces two families of solutions. For zero
velocity, of course the expression reduces to mc2. Square root of negative numbers although allows
mathematically do not have physical significance and obvious interpretations of
this expression to give real total energies is the term (1-(v/c)2, must therefore be
positive or at least zero so that “v” is always less than or equal to “c” and
particles can never travel faster than
light. But there may be other ways to think also. Possibility with, imaginary mass (where I is the square
root of -1). In that case the situation will be reversed and in order to obtain
a real energy, we must take another square root of a negative number in order
that the imaginary . “I”s multiply out to-1. In other words for imaginary masses,
“v” must exceed “c”, so that (i-v/c)2)
is always negative. This is the origin of Tachyon.
But
suppose, we allow “v” to exceed “c” while maintain the real mass “m”. Now we
are taken into very strong realms-the imaginary part of space time. Might we
consider a tachyon particle with imaginary mass moving through the real part of
space time at a speed greater than that of light. Tachyons can then provide the
link between past and future and Future time travel
The OPERA experiment (The
OPERA collaboration 2011) reported a neutrinos particle beam traveling faster
than light. The experiment measured the distributions of neutrinos time
emission/detection over a baseline from the CERN to the Gran Sasso (CNGS) site.
Data are collected within runs lasting for several months1.
In these data, the neutrino beam time of flight (TOF) turns out to be
~60 ns shorter than that calculated by taking the speed of light in
vacuum.
References
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon[2] http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/cosmicrays/cratmos.html
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:First_neutrino_observation.jpg
4] http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/tachyons.html
5] Bilaniuk, Deshpande and Sudarshan American j Physics 30;78;1962
6] Gerald Feinberg “on the Possibility of faster than Light particles “ Physics Rev 159;1089-1105;1967
7]Tachyons is an mathematical Imaginary particle that may move faster then Photons (Light particles) in the universe and yet to be discovered as comments in the Science Blogs.com
http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2011/09/24/faster-than-a-speeding-photon/#comment-43250
Corresponding author of this article is
Professor(Dr.) Pranab kumar Bhattacharya-MD(Calcutta.University ), FIC Path(India) WBMES, Professor and Head ofPathology, School of Tropical Medicine Kolkata; 108, ChittaRanjan Avenue Kolkata- 700073; West Bengal ; India Email profpkb@yahoo.co.in ; Mobile +919231510435; Fax-nil
No comments:
Post a Comment