• Best of luck to the class of 2024 for their HSC exams. You got this!
    Let us know your thoughts on the HSC exams here
  • YOU can help the next generation of students in the community!
    Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
MedVision ad

standard model of mattrer (1 Viewer)

Doogsy

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2004
Messages
76
How much detail do we need to go into when discussing the standard model of matter. obviusoly you need to mention leptons and quarks (as it says in the dotpoint) I mean, its the standard model of matter for crying out load, you could write a thesis on it.

(PS dont you think its weird that the only dotpoint in this whole topic that even mentions quarks is this very last one. Its like the syllabus writers thought, oh damn, we didnt ask them about quarks, lets just throw this dot point in)
 

CrashOveride

Active Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
1,488
Location
Havana
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2006
Doogsy said:
How much detail do we need to go into when discussing the standard model of matter. obviusoly you need to mention leptons and quarks (as it says in the dotpoint) I mean, its the standard model of matter for crying out load, you could write a thesis on it.

(PS dont you think its weird that the only dotpoint in this whole topic that even mentions quarks is this very last one. Its like the syllabus writers thought, oh damn, we didnt ask them about quarks, lets just throw this dot point in)
Yes it's a very open dot point.
 

Rakija

Elite Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2003
Messages
15
Location
Chatswood
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Identify the main features of the standard model: Boson, Leptons, Quarks etc
What are its problems? eg (gravity not included)
What can it explain? (Strong Nuclear forces etc)
How reliable is it? (The discovery of the quark is more like an educated guess and with more PROBING we might have to alter the standard model)
 

shazzam

acta est fabula
Joined
Feb 4, 2004
Messages
260
Gender
Female
HSC
2004
Doogsy said:
(PS dont you think its weird that the only dotpoint in this whole topic that even mentions quarks is this very last one. Its like the syllabus writers thought, oh damn, we didnt ask them about quarks, lets just throw this dot point in)
The first dot point (well more like the 4th but still) in this option is about quanta and the last one is about quarks, so it's literally from quanta TO quarks. Hmm that might not make sense, eh, they probably just wanted the alliteration to make the topic sound...tasteful
 

Xayma

Lacking creativity
Joined
Sep 6, 2003
Messages
5,953
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
I think it is more referred to particle physics time wise from quanta (the beginning of the quantum model etc) to the stage of quarks, you could increase it to further on but it is still just an extension of the standard model concerning pentaquarks etc.
 

pc_wizz

ρ s y c н o ρ α τ н ™
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Messages
345
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
can someone answer the question plz? ... =/

i still duno how to write a decent answer about the standard model
 

Constip8edSkunk

Joga Bonito
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Messages
2,397
Location
Maroubra
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
as some1 had said, really open dot point. it really depends on the question asked, ie. what is it looking for, and the mark attached.

basically to cover the dot point...
outline the standard model, and give descriptions of its features... ie. the 1,2,3rd gen quarks/leptons, barions,mesons,bosons,etc etc, what each does, how is it partitioned, fermion or not blah blah blah

describe how the standard model helps in modern phys... and limitations....link to the 2 other previous dot pts in the section
 

ematouk

New Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2004
Messages
20
OK, i know how frustrating it is not to get an answer so I'll tell you - none of these other guys wants to help anyone else. (selfish)

the syllabus only requires you to know the particles that make up the standard model of matter, the reason for the standard model of matter, the force carriers (bosons) and how they interact for the ultimate aim to develop the theory of 'everything'.

Here is a sample answer I'll make up on the spot right now to a question I am making up right now to see if I can help you with this:

Discuss the standard model of matter with reference to its components and features. (7 marks)

The standard model of matter is composed of two fundamental particles known as quarks and leptons which compose all matter aswell as a third class of force carriers known as bosons. All matter exists in 3 generations of particles being the first generation, second generation and third generation particles by which the last two will always decay to form first generation particles. Quarks are composed of 6 different flavours: up and down(1st generation); top and bottom(2nd generation); charmed and strange (3rd generation). Leptons also have 6 colour charges being electrons (1st generation), muon (2nd generation) and tau (3rd generation) each with its own neutrino form. Each Lepton and Quark also contains its own anti-matter equivalent being rarer in number.

The standard model of matter is composed of 3 main fundamental forces being the strong nuclear force, the electroweak (composed of the electromagnetic and nuclear weak) and the gravitational force respectively in order of decreasing strength. The boson which holds quarks together to form nucleons are gluons allows 3 quarks to come to together to form a proton (uud) and a neutron (udd) due to strong nuclear interactions. The residual strong interactions then allow nucleons to hold together to form a nucleus of an atom.

The electroweak force being the balance between the colour charge of leptons and the nucleon number allow for a stable attraction of electron orbit around a nucleus. The boson for leptons is known as the photon which has allowed seperate atoms to bond and interact to form the matter we see aswell as gives atoms their seperate physical and chemical properties.

The gravitational force is the weakest force of them all which exists between all mass carrying matter by which works on the hypothesised boson the 'graviton'. This force is known as the 'macroforce' by which despite its weakness, has allowed galaxies to accrete aswell as planets and stars to form.

The main reason for the existance of the standard model of matter is to explain why the world behaves the way it does. This seeks to explain the behaviour from the components of atoms to the rapidly expanding universe. The standard model of matter is essentially 1 step closer to the goal of the 'theory of everything'.
 

ematouk

New Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2004
Messages
20
Whoops forgot to include it. Thanks for reminding me.

The model pertains to benefits of being able to explain the experimental results which were previously unachievable by previous models such as explaining the Zeeman effect, hyperfine splitting of spectral lines, relative intensity of spectral lines and it was able to explain the spectral absorption and emission spectra of elements larger then hydrogen. This model was also able to explain the 'missing energy' in beta decay aswell as the reasons behind superconductive properties below critical temperature. This model, however, has its negatives as the quarks have not been proven as they have never been found in isolation, but hypothesised based on experimental results. Also this model can not explain why there is essentially more matter then antimatter since the big bang within the universe.

(insert this paragraph as the 2nd last paragraph in my response)
 

Xayma

Lacking creativity
Joined
Sep 6, 2003
Messages
5,953
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
ematouk said:
This model, however, has its negatives as the quarks have not been proven as they have never been found in isolation, but hypothesised based on experimental results. Also this model can not explain why there is essentially more matter then antimatter since the big bang within the universe.

(insert this paragraph as the 2nd last paragraph in my response)
The 1990 Nobel Prize was awarded for the first evidence of quarks inside a nucleus being point like particles inside protons and neutrons.

Then electron and neutrino scattering on protons and neutrinos and their relative deflections gave evidence that they have the fractional charges.
THE ELUSIVE QUARK

Ever since the modern era of atomic theory began in the 18th century, researchers have been unearthing clues about tinier and tinier constituents of the atom.

By the 1960s, technology such as high-energy particle accelerators and bubble chambers, which enabled scientists to observe particle collisions in great detail, helped unearth dozens of new particles.

Nobel laureate Murray Gell-Mann's "eightfold way" theory, also proposed by Yuval Ne'eman, brought order to the chaos created by the discovery of some 100 particles. Then he and (independently) George Zweig found that this successful classification scheme implied that all of those particles, including the neutron and proton, are composed of fundamental building blocks that Gell-Mann named "quarks."

The hunt was on. Scientists searched for them at acclerators, looked in seawater, air, cosmic rays and in the Earth. Not a quark was found. Even Gell-Mann admitted it was difficult to believe in quarks, and wrote that even if quarks were not real, they were still a useful mathematical tool.

Professor Friedman, the late Professor Henry Kendall of MIT, Professor Richard Taylor of the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) and a team of researchers from MIT and SLAC performed a series of electron-scattering experiments over seven years that provided the first direct evidence that there are point-like objects inside the proton.

But these objects were smaller than could be measured, and still there was disagreement. Sure, there were things inside protons, but were they quarks?

The comparison of electrons and neutrinos scattering off these point-like particles unequivocally demonstrated that these particles have the fractional charges assigned to quarks. The physics community was finally forced by inescapable and compelling evidence to accept quarks.

There are six kinds of quarks: up, down, strange, charm, bottom and top. All decay into up and down quarks, and these comprise matter as we know it.
I would also be careful of saying leptons have colours. They live in generations and come in 6 varities.

Quarks have colours which colour charge binding them together is the cause of the strong nuclear effect.

And dont say we dont want to help anyone else, there are many other threads on this exact same topic. I could type out every answer for them, however, where would anyone learn from that, if I give them information (which I have already done in other threads, they can piece together the remainder)

ematouk said:
The standard model of matter is composed of two fundamental particles known as quarks and leptons which compose all matter aswell as a third class of force carriers known as bosons.
That bit is ambigious, it makes it seem like quarks and leptons make up bosons, and they don't always.

A better way to say it would be "The standard model of matter divides matter into three main groups, leptons which are thought to be fundamental particles, Hadrons (particles which experience the strong nuclear force), composed of quarks another fundamental particle and Force Carriers (Bosons)" (To go through the differences is really outside the syllabus and I wouldn't do it unless you had enough time)
 
Last edited:

senso

Left BOS 11/04
Joined
Nov 29, 2003
Messages
207
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
it depends on the amount of marks the quesion is worth.
Start with quarks and leptons then move from there depending on how many marks (and hence lines) is needed
 

kooltrainer

New Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2006
Messages
659
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
Limitations of standard model of matter:
1) It is incompatible with Einsteins theory of relativity( dunno why, but thats what it says)

2)Cant explain why theres strictly 6 leptons and 6 quarks...

Anymore u pplz like to add?
 

samwell

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
400
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
The Bograt said:
Is basically the only question we can get on this "Discuss the standard model of matter"
that would take ages to write and talk about. soo dont think they would bring the standard model.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top