Part one of a four part series on the fundamental forces (or interactions) of physics begins with the strong force or strong interaction - which on the small scale holds quarks together to form protons, neutrons and other hadron particles.
Like SciShow on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/scishow
Follow SciShow on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/scishow
So something he didn't mention that helped me understand 'color' in this context, color (kind of) is to the strong force what charge is in the electromagnetic force. While electromagnetism has two poles, "north" and "south", color has three, a 'red' pole, a 'blue' pole, and a 'green' pole. That's why they use those terms, it has nothing to do with their actual color, just how the three possible states interact.
(If I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me. I'm still learning, too.)
I've heard that Quarks move very fast in gluons field fluctuation (where did I heard that oh I guess it was the veritasium video) how does that work? How can I relate this with the so called colour changing effect of quarks by gluons?
What I wanna know is, where did quarks come from?
Did they exist before atoms existed in the very short period right after the big bang? Did they combine to become atoms at the beginning of the universe or did they exist already paired up in 3 quarks within atoms at the beginning of the universe?
If quarks are a fundamental particle that creates matter, are there anti-quarks that exists for anti-matter?
An article that I stumbled upon said that Hadrons aren't made up of only 3 Quarks, but rather a buttload of them. That the number and type of charges that determine their type comes from having at least one more than the other. Like, say, 50 negatively-charged quarks and 51 positively-charged Quarks make a Proton, as apposed to only 1 negative and 2 positive, overall.
Alright as I understand so far it should be possible for say a hydrogen atom to be made up of a nucleus of one quark with two Charming and one weird with an electron shell made also with too weird quarks. Standing result being a four more massive version of hydrogen correct?
Although not a physicist, I'd like to suggest that your explanation of the strong force may be incomplete and possibly in error. Imagine this: The "Strong force" is the same as gravity. How could that be? I suggest that gravity and the strong force are proportional to the amount of mass and the rate of SPIN of the mass, which creates the attraction. I propose that protons are spinning at an exceedingly high rate in the nucleus, which causes attraction. Any two objects having mass and spin will be attracted to each other proportional to their mass and spin. That applies for protons as well as the earth, with huge mass that spins and attracts other mass objects. AND as you say, the force is only powerful as mostly a surface force. This is my observation.
While interesting, the problem with this theory is that gravity just isn't that strong. The miniscule amount of mass that the quarks have is not enough to create a gravitational force to keep them together in the hadrons. Quantum chromodynamics is the best way to understand how we are kept together.
Ohkay so quarks usually are in pair of three and are stable because of strong field and its force carriers gluon ,now if the any one quark goes out of colour in which the baryon losses its stabilty and gluons stabilises it,isnt it possible that it will be converted into mesons if one quark losses it's connection to other two quarks ? and also i know that the examples of baryon types of hadron are proton and neutron itself but what are the examples of meson types of hadron ?
In your introduction you said that the strong force not only HOLDS THE ATOM'S NUCLEUS togather but Also the hadrons from busting apart... now i know that force that works on individual hadron is colour forces and the one who works on nucleaus is stong force.... so what is the diffrence between strong force and nuclear force?
So, in theory, if a quark were to somehow fall out of its bond via the gluon, perhaps after a collision in the LHC, could the quark which held the gluon at that very moment reattach to two other quarks and thus create a new particle? Also, would that create a particle identical to its previous bond?
During the coldwar nuclear physicist harnessed the power of spitting atom by shooting an alpha particle in U-28 and the reaction from the shooting particle would cause the Uranium to explode and cause other explosions around it. I believe that was called nuclear fission. Now my question is, does a nuclear reaction still affect the strong for of an atom ? and can all nuclear fission be strong force strong force fission but not all strong force fissions are nuclear fissions? 🤔🤔🤔
Isn't it important to say that fundamental particles like quarks can't be broken down any further _as of now_ or _as far as we know_? I'm not a physicist, but I've heard many people say that it's possible that these particles are made up of even more fundamental particles.
I watched this video in order to get some info on interaction and help me understand atomic decay and whats actually inside the hadron etc... I though i understood until the comment section was all like "speed of light (C) is basically TIME itself. So the quarks would not even realise that anything has happened because anything that moves at C - Time stops" and " the gluon isn't really "moving" in the perspective of the quarks. They are more like, instantaneously teleporting?" and I was like WHOAH OK IM TOO DEEP IN THE INTERNET SOMEONE HOIST ME OUT- I DONT NEED ANOTHER NIGHT OF EXISTENTIAL QUESTIONING OK.
Its 4 in the afternoon. Please send help.
Im not a university student i promise.
If a black hole is like a magnet and has a strong-force and is collecting particles and energy can it multiply the energy put in to it and generate more energy that make it put out more mass then it has taken in and make a new universe?
Please complete the question and redefine it if some thing is missing.
Physics question: what would happen if enough electrons were introduced to override the strong force. Basically, could electromagnetic force be stronger than the strong force. If it did could it split the atom?
Any particles that we observe are color-neutral, while both gluons and quarks carry a color charge. If you try to get a quark or a gluon away from the hadron, its energy will increase so much that it will form a quark-antiquark pair. (This occurs in particle accelerators during high-energy collisions of particles, and is responsible for the creation of "jets" - groups of particles travelling roughly in the same direction after the collision.)
+OldDrunkBastard In no way I was implying that I am an authority. However, I do study physics quite in depth, I just had a brain fry. No worries though, thanks for the correction. I hate giving out false information.
If I interpreted my readings correctly, the Strong Force is so strong that attempting to pull apart two quarks (and thus resist the Strong Force) requires so much energy that, at a certain distance, two new quarks will pop into existence to make two smaller "tubes" rather than the longer one. I guess it requires *so much* energy that you eventually equal the energy of two new quarks and the energy literally converts into mass because THAT would be a lower-energy state than the gluon tube getting longer.
It's there only one gluon in each nucleon? If "yes", wouldn't that mean that the time the gluon travels from one Quark to another the nucleon is actually not white in charge. Which would be half the time.
No, that's not how it work. A gluon carries a color charge; in particular, a color and an anti-color. For example, a red quark emits a red-antigreen gluon, which is absorbed by a green quark which becomes red. So overall, the particle is still color-neutral.
You can't really say that a proton contains a single (or three, or a hundred, etc.) gluon; quantum mechanics doesn't work that way. It isn't even entirely accurate to say that it contains three quarks! The best thing you can say is that at any given time it contains three quarks, and it also contains (or may contain, or there's a certain probability that it contains, or it doesn't really contain but the particle behaves as if it did contain) an arbitrary amount of gluons and quark-antiquark pairs. (Yes, I am being deliberately vague. In quantum physics you can't say: "This is precisely what happens"; instead, it deals with probabilities and wave functions. I didn't actually study quantum physics, but I have read a bit about it in popular-science books and on the Internet; I understand it well enough to be able to say that I don't really understand it at all. :-)
You say that they are yanked back with enormous force. Do we know an equation that describes how much force that is? So, for instance, a rubber band pulls with a force proportional to the distance that it has been stretched (multiplied by some spring constant.)
Many thanks, Hank!
At 01:39 you say "protons and neutrons can only contain one quark of each color at any given moment", but color changing shows at 02:11 all three quarks as green and after that most of the time after gluon changes color of one quark two quarks have the same color at the same time while gluon is "in transit" in the animation.
Does gluon just change quark colors fast enough or color change happens for all quarks at the same time? Or something else entirely happens? :)
I have a few questions. How does the gluon "know" where to go (i.e. where the other quarks are)? Also, when the gluon is travelling between the quarks, wouldn't there be a tiny amount of time when the proton/neutron isn't colour-neutral? Is this allowed and if so, why? Finally, how do gluons relate to the force between the quarks? Do the gluons apply their force when they arrive at the quark? When they leave a quark? When they're travelling between quarks?
That does make some sense though. Any interaction between gluons would have to happen at the speed of light or slower, and presumably this would even include colour force. If the colour force interaction is happening at light speed, and the gluons are also moving at light speed, than everything would sinc up.
Remember that, at the quantum level, particles--especially massless ones--aren't strictly "objects" in the sense that we usually think about objects. Photons, for example, are the force-carriers for the Electromagnetic force, and famously act as both a particle and a wave simultaneously. Gluons are similar in that their "motion" doesn't exactly follow conventional ideas of motion and representing them as a small orb floating around between quarks is probably a just a visual convenience.
So, basically, I don't really have an answer for "why do these things happen" because there's no rule at the quantum level that they *can't* happen--rather, that these things happening *are* the rules. I don't know the answer and I don't know whether the scientific community has a solid answer at all; but I do know that things are screwy enough at that scale that the best approach to gain an understanding of the current model is to go ahead and assume that "normal" physics doesn't apply at all. And, like with representing gluons as little orbs, a lot of visual representations are just visual conveniences to communicate a general idea rather than actually describe the physical process.
The class of drugs that Levitra, Viagra, Stendra, and Cialis belong to are called PDE5 inhibitors. They work by relaxing tight blood vessels, allowing more blood to surge into the penis and cause an erection, says Gregory Bales, M.D., an associate professor of urology at the University of Chicago.
The little pills do the trick for more than two-thirds of men with Viagra protects the heart (ED). They also work for guys who simply need them for a short time to get their “confidence back,” says Michael Eisenberg, M.D., director of male reproductive medicine and surgery at Stanford University.