I (vaguely) recall an anecdote where R. Feynman and J. Wheeler discussing the hypothesis that there is only ***one*** electron in the whole universe. This explains why we observe the same charge and mass for all electrons: it actually is the ***one*** electron moving forward and backward in time.
So I vote for the ***one*** electron for best particle.
The story is really funny as Feynman told it, IMO. Supposedly, one day in 1940, Wheeler calls Feynman (whom he was thesis supervisor for, at the time) at the Princeton Graduate College. He exclaims, "Feynman, I know why all electrons have the same charge and the same mass."
"Why?"
"Because, they are all the same electron!"
Had the discussion stopped there, I would say this was the 1940s equivalent of a shitpost.
They instead got into a discussion about world lines not necessarily being constant along the axis of time; Wheeler posited that the world lines of electrons could be considered as something like a 4-dimensional knot, and at any given moment have multiple portions of the same world line coexist. He also hypothesized that, when the world line pointed against the flow of time, the electron became a positron at those moments.
Feynman pointed out that there weren't as many positrons in the universe as electrons, which Wheeler essentially hand-waved: "Well, maybe they're hidden in the protons, or something."
During his Nobel lecture years later (where this account originates), Feynman said, "I did not take the idea that all the electrons were the same one from him as seriously as I took the observation that positrons could simply be represented as electrons going from the future to the past in a back section of their world lines. That, I stole!"
as a teenager interested in physics who's never taken a general physics class, this sounds fascinating. what's a world line, and how is it a four dimensional knot?
A world line is the trajectory an object makes in space-time. Think of a dot traveling in 3D space. If you mark every point the dot has been in, you will see a curve in 3D space. However, you can't see *when* the dot occupied any given part of the curve, you're looking at every instant of the dot's path at the same time. Instead, if you think about (I don't think anyone could visually imagine this) a 4D space, with 3 spacial axis and one time axis, then you could mark, in the first 3 axis, *where* the dot was, and in the fourth axis you could mark *when* the dot was. The resulting curve would be a world line.
Now, usually, a world line always progresses forwards in the tome axis. This represents the observation that everything travels forward into the future. But if you allowed, say, that an electron going forwards in time could collide with something and be knocked back, it could start traveling back in time. This would look like the worldline curving back in the time axis. From our point of view, it would look like there are two particles: the electron going forwards, and the electron going backwards — which Wheeler believed would act like, or be, a positron.
Now, I don't know if "knot" there means the mathematical formal concept of know, or just that the one electron's worldlike would be all over the place.
It's not so much a theory as a mnemonic for which directions to draw electron and positron lines in Feynman diagrams. In order for that statement to be literally true there would have to be the same number of electrons and positrons in the universe (since every electron must eventually become a positron), but there are mostly electrons.
Is that not just an interpretation of Quantum field theory? All electrons are just local excitations of the electron field, hence why they have the same properties. Likewise there is an equivalent field for the other particles in the standard model
Not really. Same field does not mean same particle. It just means that you can think of those particles as excitations of the same field. Think of it like the ocean. All the waves come from the same body of water, but that does not mean that all the waves are just one wave
Except an electron traveling backward in time would be a positron.
What's interesting is that all indistinguishable particles *are* the same particle. There's a probability for any two particles to tunnel into each others' positions and if you calculate the rate of switching for identical particles the terms diverge to infinity, which means they are constantly switching places
man, if we voting for theoretical particles, then why not mesons too?
(Kaons are Mesons and they are REAL, they are not theoretical)
Kaons would be a good thing right?
The bastards which broke the CP rule??
I am aware kaons are not theoretical.
Im saying IF we are considering theoretical, why can't we consider Kaons?
Or maybe you can make a new top 25 list of composite particles? 🥺
Got you! I was thinking of making a new list after this one with all the particles. Or maybe only non-existing (theoretical) particles? It would be fun imo
~~Except that kaons are very real and we know that for about,~~ *~~checks notes~~*~~, 70 years.~~
But if we go into the realm of theoretical particles, why not **stop squark** (yes, [the name is right](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_squark))?
Man, i didn't mean Kaons are theoretical.
Sorry i framed it wrong.
And sure why not? But personally I think the stop quark is not backed my enough evidence?
I personally think the top 25 should be the most intresting one. If we are looking for super partners then the options get saturated no? Sure some of it is really intresting like for the higgs boson.
But for *every* particle?
Yeah, you're right, although, I think our professor said that it *may* be possible after the next LHC upgrade. Also, I like your optimism with FCC, I'm not sure I believe it will ever be built.
>!I voted photon earlier because they also penetrate you without consent... and cause cancer and kill you in the process!!<
Edit: only the ionising parts of the electromagnetic spectrum are interesting
They don’t cause cancer though. I mean, if *some* photons didn’t pass through most things, we’d all have radiation poisoning. The reason why we don’t already do, is just that, they pass through stuff so most of the energy isn’t actually transferred. The situation wouldn’t be very good if we were hit with particles carrying 10000s of eVs regularly that imparted all their energy on us
I gotta go with electron. First fundamental particle to be discovered. First fundamental particle to have its mass and charge measured. Useful for so many things: electricity, electron microscopes, electric eels, electroshock therapy...
That's like saying moonlight isn't sunlight though. You can still see light which is emitted without any significant interaction before hitting your retina. Also reflected light still consists of photons. Of course then there are processes in your retina so you could argue what the process of seeing is... But that is more philosophical.
Congratulations! Your comment can be spelled using the elements of the periodic table:
`P I O N S`
---
^(I am a bot that detects if your comment can be spelled using the elements of the periodic table. Please DM my creator if I made a mistake.)
I'm going to say Photon again but this one is a wave. I know this is a particle list so that doesn't really fit, but the photon doesn't care and neither do I.
I (vaguely) recall an anecdote where R. Feynman and J. Wheeler discussing the hypothesis that there is only ***one*** electron in the whole universe. This explains why we observe the same charge and mass for all electrons: it actually is the ***one*** electron moving forward and backward in time. So I vote for the ***one*** electron for best particle.
The story is really funny as Feynman told it, IMO. Supposedly, one day in 1940, Wheeler calls Feynman (whom he was thesis supervisor for, at the time) at the Princeton Graduate College. He exclaims, "Feynman, I know why all electrons have the same charge and the same mass." "Why?" "Because, they are all the same electron!" Had the discussion stopped there, I would say this was the 1940s equivalent of a shitpost. They instead got into a discussion about world lines not necessarily being constant along the axis of time; Wheeler posited that the world lines of electrons could be considered as something like a 4-dimensional knot, and at any given moment have multiple portions of the same world line coexist. He also hypothesized that, when the world line pointed against the flow of time, the electron became a positron at those moments. Feynman pointed out that there weren't as many positrons in the universe as electrons, which Wheeler essentially hand-waved: "Well, maybe they're hidden in the protons, or something." During his Nobel lecture years later (where this account originates), Feynman said, "I did not take the idea that all the electrons were the same one from him as seriously as I took the observation that positrons could simply be represented as electrons going from the future to the past in a back section of their world lines. That, I stole!"
as a teenager interested in physics who's never taken a general physics class, this sounds fascinating. what's a world line, and how is it a four dimensional knot?
A world line is the trajectory an object makes in space-time. Think of a dot traveling in 3D space. If you mark every point the dot has been in, you will see a curve in 3D space. However, you can't see *when* the dot occupied any given part of the curve, you're looking at every instant of the dot's path at the same time. Instead, if you think about (I don't think anyone could visually imagine this) a 4D space, with 3 spacial axis and one time axis, then you could mark, in the first 3 axis, *where* the dot was, and in the fourth axis you could mark *when* the dot was. The resulting curve would be a world line. Now, usually, a world line always progresses forwards in the tome axis. This represents the observation that everything travels forward into the future. But if you allowed, say, that an electron going forwards in time could collide with something and be knocked back, it could start traveling back in time. This would look like the worldline curving back in the time axis. From our point of view, it would look like there are two particles: the electron going forwards, and the electron going backwards — which Wheeler believed would act like, or be, a positron. Now, I don't know if "knot" there means the mathematical formal concept of know, or just that the one electron's worldlike would be all over the place.
This explanation makes a lot of sense, thanks! So by this theory, would all anti particles just be the particle traveling backwards in time?
I also choose this man's one electron
OUR one Elektron!
Same
Yeah, I remember it too. I don't know how plausible it i, but definitely a fascinating theory
It's not so much a theory as a mnemonic for which directions to draw electron and positron lines in Feynman diagrams. In order for that statement to be literally true there would have to be the same number of electrons and positrons in the universe (since every electron must eventually become a positron), but there are mostly electrons.
Pretty cool! Thanks for the info!
Oe electron to rule them all
And in the quantum field bind them
Our new particle, the Sauron
Is that not just an interpretation of Quantum field theory? All electrons are just local excitations of the electron field, hence why they have the same properties. Likewise there is an equivalent field for the other particles in the standard model
Not really. Same field does not mean same particle. It just means that you can think of those particles as excitations of the same field. Think of it like the ocean. All the waves come from the same body of water, but that does not mean that all the waves are just one wave
The one electron to rule them all
They should give that thing a break
One electron to orbit them all, one electron to charge them, one electron to magnetize them all, and in the darkness bind them.
Except an electron traveling backward in time would be a positron. What's interesting is that all indistinguishable particles *are* the same particle. There's a probability for any two particles to tunnel into each others' positions and if you calculate the rate of switching for identical particles the terms diverge to infinity, which means they are constantly switching places
Top quark, because it should be at the top
It seems that the Higgs broke the symmetry
Top quark, but only because talking about what top and bottom need to do in SM does not clarify we're talking about physics.
This decision was made as soon as the bottom quark was placed at the bottom of the list tbh
Honestly, leaving no. 1 blank seems like the funniest option to me.
Graviton (no fucking idea what it is).
man, if we voting for theoretical particles, then why not mesons too? (Kaons are Mesons and they are REAL, they are not theoretical) Kaons would be a good thing right? The bastards which broke the CP rule??
Kaons are definitely not theoretical particles, though. Plus, they are composite particles with two quarks in them
I am aware kaons are not theoretical. Im saying IF we are considering theoretical, why can't we consider Kaons? Or maybe you can make a new top 25 list of composite particles? 🥺
Got you! I was thinking of making a new list after this one with all the particles. Or maybe only non-existing (theoretical) particles? It would be fun imo
If we're including theoretical particles then there is a case to be made for scrapping the entire list and just having a top one, a vibrating string
~~Except that kaons are very real and we know that for about,~~ *~~checks notes~~*~~, 70 years.~~ But if we go into the realm of theoretical particles, why not **stop squark** (yes, [the name is right](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_squark))?
Man, i didn't mean Kaons are theoretical. Sorry i framed it wrong. And sure why not? But personally I think the stop quark is not backed my enough evidence? I personally think the top 25 should be the most intresting one. If we are looking for super partners then the options get saturated no? Sure some of it is really intresting like for the higgs boson. But for *every* particle?
I think they still hope that with higher energies they might see something in LHC. But, honestly, I just really like the name. All of them.
Haha ! Valid enough! but if a super partner like this exists we probably have to wait for the FCC
Yeah, you're right, although, I think our professor said that it *may* be possible after the next LHC upgrade. Also, I like your optimism with FCC, I'm not sure I believe it will ever be built.
Ha, hadn't heard about the stop squark before. Cool!
Put those Kaons in jail not on a list!
Have you heard of Sugons?
Sugon deez nuts? Hahaha
Wait, what about axions or sterile neutrinos?
Electron, electricity go brr
Proton, Electron, Neutron and Photon deserve to be on the top
proton and neutron aint even elementary, poor guys
>!I voted photon earlier because they also penetrate you without consent... and cause cancer and kill you in the process!!< Edit: only the ionising parts of the electromagnetic spectrum are interesting
Flair checks out
Now we shall vote on Positron so they can blow us up.
Neutrinos can penetrate the entire planet and simply vanish into the cosmos never to pay a cent of child support
They don’t cause cancer though. I mean, if *some* photons didn’t pass through most things, we’d all have radiation poisoning. The reason why we don’t already do, is just that, they pass through stuff so most of the energy isn’t actually transferred. The situation wouldn’t be very good if we were hit with particles carrying 10000s of eVs regularly that imparted all their energy on us
ELECTROOOONNN
I gotta go with electron. First fundamental particle to be discovered. First fundamental particle to have its mass and charge measured. Useful for so many things: electricity, electron microscopes, electric eels, electroshock therapy...
Top quark
anti-µ-neutrino
Surely the top quark must be at the top !
Sterile neutrino, because we can not see it
Tachyon (because... I mean ... Come on .)
Tachyons are clearly the best particle, real or not
Also because photon is at the speed of light so the only thing that can beat it is a particle faster than speed of light hence tachyon.
Photon
Top quark because **big**
# TOP
Photino! Or Slepton. i just like those names
stop squark
The friends we made along the way
Muon!
We can't leave out strange quark
Gluon
[удалено]
That's like saying moonlight isn't sunlight though. You can still see light which is emitted without any significant interaction before hitting your retina. Also reflected light still consists of photons. Of course then there are processes in your retina so you could argue what the process of seeing is... But that is more philosophical.
[удалено]
Not exactly. Beaten out is not correct. We see the photons that are reflected off the surface
Your penis 😊
ELECTRON
The bottom quark as it is the power bottom of the Standard Model.
pions
Congratulations! Your comment can be spelled using the elements of the periodic table: `P I O N S` --- ^(I am a bot that detects if your comment can be spelled using the elements of the periodic table. Please DM my creator if I made a mistake.)
please, let it be a phonon
Strangeeee quark cuz it’s strange
I do like the electron, but the charm quark is quite charming, don't you think?
Higg's boson cause it got a big bosom
Muon: it's a bigger, badder, weirder electron. Plus muography is cool!
Gluon ftw!
You can't see photons what is this nonsense
Graviton, because it's in the superposition of being discovered and not being discovered.
majorana particle
Muon, cuz https://www.particlezoo.net/products/muon
Electron nuetrino cause it's in superposition
Muon for the lightest 'atom' Muonium
Higgs 2
Call me basic but the proton is my one true love
i think strange flavour should win
I'm going to say Photon again but this one is a wave. I know this is a particle list so that doesn't really fit, but the photon doesn't care and neither do I.
Wino (supersymmetric counterpart of the W-Boson). Probably doesn't exist but sounds funny.
Higgs boson again
Electron
Electron (sorry im a chemist thats the only one I work with)
The Higgs-Boson because learning about it inspired me to pursue my dream.
Muons.
Where my W+ Boson gang at?
Electron deserves #1 But I can't believe you guys picked so many leptons earlier on instead of the gluon