# K meson rebuffs physicists



## Brian G Turner (Mar 28, 2004)

*Theory of matter may need rethink*

*Particle physicists have seen a rare happening that may force a rethink of current theories of sub-atomic matter. *

After watching more than seven trillion disintegrations of the kaon particle they have seen three peculiar events when they expected to see just one. 

At present physicists at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in the US do not know if this is a fluke or points the way to a deeper theory of matter. The research has been submitted to the Journal Physical Review Letters. 


More: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3564273.stm


----------



## Michael (May 20, 2004)

Now this is more like it!  No need to present incoherent philosophical arguments (as I often do), just swapping info about physics.  That's interesting--I'll check out the site.  Do you watch the Science Channel (I love that stuff).


----------



## Brian G Turner (May 20, 2004)

I'm afraid I don't have cable or satellite - but I do get a reserved copy of New Scientist from the Newsagents every Thursday. 

 My big interest in physics is actually via high-particle physics. That's what happens when your science teacher of 8 years gives you a book to read on the nature of quarks and matter. 

 (actually, I think I've forgotten to give it back - 16 years overdue!!)


----------



## Michael (May 20, 2004)

I read Michio Kaku's _Hyperspace_ and Hawkin's _A Brief History_, but neither one got too detailed about quarks and such.  I just learned a little more recently from a web site called "The Particle Adventure."  Even that is rather simplified, I expect, but informative enough for a beginner like me.

Can't remember the show, but I saw something recently that briefly discussed the search for the Higgs-boson--that was interesting.  I'd like to learn more about the theory.  Of course, I want it it expressed as plainly as possible.  Michio Kaku, I think, did a great job.  I read his book after reading Hawking's and he cleared up a lot of what I couldn't follow.  Hawking's writing seemed obscure to me, but Michio expressed _Hawking's_ theory much more clearly for me than Hawking did!

Incidentally, _Hyperspace_ is a long overdue library book (although not nearly as overdue as yours)!


----------



## Brian G Turner (May 20, 2004)

Just remembered the title: "The Cosmic Onion" by Frank Close. 

 It was one of those that tried to relay the ideas without _too_ much maths. This was apparent by the fact that quarks were represented in diagrams as "gnomes". 

 But it was a pretty thorough exploration of high-energy particle physics - and did become a bit thick to read later on, especially when discussing strange and charm attributes, as I remember.


----------



## Michael (May 20, 2004)

Cool.  Thanks again, Brian--I'm going to look it up.  I've learned a lot from you in past couple of days!


----------



## Lacedaemonian (May 20, 2004)

I would love to make a comment, but I can't.  Have you read Dan Brown's Angels & Demons?  It is a work of fiction based heavily on facts.  I think that you physics loving creeps would love it!  Sub atomic particles, the Vatican, the Illuminati, art, iconography and a tale of high suspense.

I hope that you can find it in your sweet natured hearts to forgive me for writing a book review in the science and nature forum.


----------



## Michael (May 20, 2004)

Creeps?  Sheesh, and I thought "geek" was a bad word!  Still, you're right, lace--it does sound interesting me. (And I do tend to be a bit creepy at times anyway).


----------



## Lacedaemonian (May 20, 2004)

'Nerd' and 'Geek' have become so common, it's cool.  The invention of new tags is a must.


----------



## dwndrgn (May 20, 2004)

Here I am to completely derail the thread...

I've always liked to use the word goober instead of geek or nerd.  Or just plain, goob.


----------



## Lacedaemonian (May 20, 2004)

I've never heard of Goober.  It sounds good.  So we have Goober and Creep, it's a start.

Sorry Brian.


----------



## Brian G Turner (May 20, 2004)

I actually thought a "goober" was something you spat out of your mouth!


----------



## Lacedaemonian (May 21, 2004)

Gob of spit.  He gobbed on me.  Is there a link Brian?  'Creep' satisfies my needs.


----------



## Brian G Turner (May 21, 2004)

Gob gobbed goober - all looks pretty linked to me.


----------



## Jayaprakash Satyamurthy (May 21, 2004)

Well I always thought a booger was a gob of snot...not sure what a goober is though. 

Maybe it's a kaon particle with negative spin?


----------



## Brian G Turner (May 21, 2004)

I think you're right - on both counts!


----------

