Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Science

Physicists Discover "Doubly Strange" Particle 260

Tsalg writes "Physicists have discovered a new particle made of three quarks, the Omega-sub-b. The particle contains two strange quarks and a bottom quark (s-s-b). It is an exotic relative of the much more common proton and weighs about six times the proton mass. This is probably one of the last noticeable sub-atomic discoveries made somewhere else than at CERN since LHC is about to start the hunt for the Higgs particle that remains elusive even for the experiment that just discovered the Omega-sub-b."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Physicists Discover "Doubly Strange" Particle

Comments Filter:
  • Excuse Me? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 04, 2008 @09:32AM (#24872643)

    This is probably one of the last noticeable sub-atomic discoveries made somewhere else than at CERN since LHC is about to start the hunt for the Higgs particle that remains elusive even for the experiment that just discovered the Omega-sub-b.

    How can you be so sure? It's not like CERN lays claim to all the greatest physicists in the world. Am I the only one that is a bit wary of all the eggs in one basket?

  • by LotsOfPhil ( 982823 ) on Thursday September 04, 2008 @09:41AM (#24872751)
    Hmm, I think that this is only a relative of the proton in that it too is a baryon (3 quarks). A proton is up-up-down, and this is strange-strange-bottom.
    The charge on the new one is -1, the charge on a proton is +1.
  • by eln ( 21727 ) on Thursday September 04, 2008 @09:50AM (#24872851)

    No no, if they were just making things up to try to get more grants, they would have said they found a new particle made of vibrating strings.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 04, 2008 @09:52AM (#24872875)

    instead of the "not CERN" reference.

  • by chefmayhem ( 1357519 ) on Thursday September 04, 2008 @09:55AM (#24872903)
    I worked at Fermilab last summer. This sort of thing isn't made up. The data they used is not public, but it would be too massive to look through anyway. It takes dozens of scientists years to find the signal from the background. They do publish papers with a summary of the evidence, however. It'd be tough to follow if you're not a particle physicist, but it's never too late to learn something new :-)
  • by Candid88 ( 1292486 ) on Thursday September 04, 2008 @10:23AM (#24873227)

    "with the exception of the Apollo Project"

    Parts of the Apollo projects were put back several time, not to mention ending up costing around double the original estimate despite consisting of less missions than originally planned (cost overruns are almost always closely related to time overruns).

    That's just the nature of big projects (of all types). Nothing specific to do with publicly funded ones, all really big projects commonly take longer than expected. The difference with publicly funded ones is that we all tend to have access to those estimates; whereas private companies tend to just say "it will be done when it's ready" (whilst internally, the estimates are getting put back further and further).

  • Re:Lamen (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Keith_Beef ( 166050 ) on Thursday September 04, 2008 @10:39AM (#24873475)

    Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadrons [wikipedia.org]

    Note that the mass of a hadron has very little to do with the mass of its valence quarks; rather, due to mass-energy equivalence, most of the mass comes from the large amount of energy associated with the strong nuclear force.

    To me, this seems to mean that you do not simply sum the masses of the quarks that make up the hadron (a baryon being a kind of hadron).

    The image of a proton given in Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Quark_structure_proton.svg) represents the three quarks in a triangle. OK, so this is simply a convenient representation, but it may help to think of the masses of the quarks as being vector forces. E.g., 10GeV in one direction + 5GeV in the opposite direction would give a net result of 5GeV, and not 15GeV.

    Of course, IANAPP either, and my example is contrived as a metaphor.

    K.

  • by perspectival ( 906492 ) <zabinac AT nc DOT rr DOT com> on Thursday September 04, 2008 @10:56AM (#24873823)

    This is probably one of the last noticeable sub-atomic discoveries made somewhere else than at CERN since LHC is about to start the hunt for the Higgs particle that remains elusive even for the experiment that just discovered the Omega-sub-b.."

    In actual English--with tenses--as it used to be used (which is now, as is evident, archaic):

    "This recent discovery [of the Omega-sub-b particle] will probably be the last *notable* subatomic discovery made before the Large Hadron Collider at CERN begins to operate, which is scheduled to happen in October of this year. The LHC will be used to hunt for the Higgs Boson, which has thus far remained undetectable, even by experiments such as this one, which managed to find the Omega-sub-b particle."

    * The author's clever-at-first-glance use of the adjective "noticeable" fails because it applies to "discoveries," and discoveries rarely go unnoticed, unlike grammar.

Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money bags. -- Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"

Working...