Quote:
Originally Posted by Profpat  Through mathematical equations it became obvious that the way we had previously thought of particles as "points" or "little balls" of energy was inaccurate. These tiny bits of matter actually behaved more like wiggling, vibrating strings. Strings are so small that Brian Greene, a physicist and proponent, explains that if a single atom were the size of our solar system, a string would only be the size of a tree. Yet strings make up all matter from the quantum level up. |
Hi Profpat and Dippy
Yes, the concept of a point particle is purely mathematical and has no place in the real word. This is why physics has branched off into string theory as a means to get rid of the infinites that plagued the previous model.
As far as the current discussion is concerned, I feel that the much of the problem is semantic - use of the word 'particle' to fit too many different roles. In my definition a particle is a defined entity which has been observed or postulated to exist in the real world if only momentarily. This covers all of those listed in the standard model. In my world these particles consist of string in various combinations, which explains their varied properties. Thus string itself is not a particle - just the constituent stuff that goes to make up matter and it exists in all three spatial dimensions.
regards
Felix