You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: What is the standard model?
Right from the first sentence? can you elaborate and give one or two examples about what is wrong in this presentation?
Right from the first sentence? can you elaborate and give one or two examples about what is wrong in this presentation?
Hi Jako,
Sure. I can point to you my old posts here, here and there for more details. It is self advertising which I don't like... but well...
Now your explicit demand:
The Standard Model is not a collection of all what we know about quantum mechanics. The Standard Model is a quantum field theory, which is not quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is a branch of physics by itself. It applies to quantum computers, condensed matter systems, etc... Quantum field theory of course needs quantum mechanics, but is different. I will avoid any technical details. I guess the examples above are sufficient, aren't there?
There are not 17 different particles in the Standard Model but 29 different ones (if you allow me to speak in terms of particles).
Stating that the Higgs boson was predicted by the Standard Model does not have any meaning at all.
'Many more are predicted like the particle that carries the gravitational force' is just wrong. There is no such a prediction in the Standard Model
The way matter is discussed is super sloppy.
We have learned a lot about the Higgs boson (I wrote to very long posts about that). Saying the opposite is an insult to my experimentalist colleagues.
etc., but I stop here.
If one of my students would introduce me the Standard Model like this, he would have failed the course. I like people popularizing what I work on, but then they should do more than summarizing wikipedia.
For more information, you can also ask me directly on the steemit chat (in #science for instance). I will be more than happy to participate to a live discussion.