Re: quark theory response
Gpiano99@aol.com
Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:16:20 EDT
HOLD ON!
My error... i didn't mean to varify that quarks can actually be seen with
photons and electrons...( the bounceing of particles to figure out their
excistance has been used with alpha particles). Sorry about that
missinformation I'm glad you caught that! I was only validating the way
quarks have been discovered considering there image and model of todays quark
THEORY.
I was saying electron microscope images are just bounced back images
just in better detail same with your eyes dilling with photons bounce back
and thats what gives you the image in your mind. All alpha particles do is
bounce off but since these things are so small we can't diagram the bounces
ourself so we use computers. Same as using an electron telescope to view
viruses. The difference is the pictures of quarks are not imaged in enough
detail.
Most of you seem to lead that quarks are just a waist of time... true
to most of us. They are just too small and in order to do anything with them
you have to have access to huge acceleraters. I understand why most of us
think quarks are to small to worry about. But as for me... the smaller the
easeir it is to look at the world the way it really is. I'm more interested
in how quarks interact to creat what atoms do... not really minipulating them
which is impossible at the moment. I think quark particles hold the key to
fussion and understanding it without haveing to use gravity to creat it like
the sun. I'm interested in how bosons (photons etc.) interact with matter
since quarks are closer to the size of these bosons and leptons (electrons).
Remember electrons haven't realy been seen or photons (electromagnetic
force) but we know they're there. Again I apologize for any missinformation
I have caused. A DEFINATE BLUNDER!
Jeremy Lynn Mumme