particles
author: m concoyle
A model of particles is useful to nuclear reaction models, but not useful in regard to either describing material interactions or, subsequently, in regard to describing the stable properties of material systems, eg the spectra of general nuclei. The media and highpositioned administrators are able to destroy knowledge, and this is done for corporate interests, while the professional experts actually do the damage, since they were guided by the propagandaeducation system into participating in a process of narrowing the reach of knowledge.

People who are placed in subservient social roles, ie the public, insist on the truth which comes from authority... , to which they believe they serve (they internalize the authority which they are forced to serve)... , be addressed to their satisfaction, ie the ideas expressed need to be consistent with the authority to which they (the public) are forced to follow.
Thus, one must deal with particlephysics in regard to the particles themselves (and the math theories [quantitative containment structures] within which they are interpreted).
However, the dogma of particles has to do with the relation which the probability of particlecollisions have in regard to nuclear reaction rates for systems transitioning, "within a chaotic state, which exists between two different, but relatively stable states," and the real issue is that "neither of these two relatively stable states have valid measurable descriptions," ie the math containment constructs do not really apply to the world's observed properties.
Properties of (highenergy) particlecollisions are not even remotely related to properties of stability, but rather are believed to identify a stable pattern (which is random) associated to all types of particlecollisions, upon which to place a probability based descriptive context of material interactions (based on random particlecollisions, so that these particlecollisions have a fixed set of possible outcomes).
But since the stable states of fundamental physical systems are not defined, such a description as particlephysics, which is based on indefinable randomness, cannot have any relation in regard to "using the random properties (structures) of particlephysics" to identify stable patterns, which are observed in the world. That is, the program of particlephysics has failed, eg it has failed to identify the stable spectral structures which are observed in general nuclear systems. But the propaganda system makes sure that the public is unaware of these failures.
Why does propaganda work?
Propaganda works because the instruments (the media) through which ideas are expressed in the US society are owned and controlled by "the owners of society," and thus the voice is the sole voice of authority which expresses the interests of "the owners of society" to the public, and the method of repetition of the same ideas is the central technique used within this propaganda system. However, because the US public has been forced by the extreme violence of both the justice system and the governing system to become wageslaves, the US public is also easy to manipulate by means of behavior modification, ie incentives and hidden coercive acts.
This extreme violence is similar to the violent actions used by the Puritans against the native peoples around the Massachusetts area in the 1600's, where their extreme violence was justified based on an arbitrary belief system (which excluded other ideas), eg the Quakers lived in relative peace with the native people in Pennsylvania in the 1600's.
Orthodoxy
Particlephysics comes out of regular quantum physics,
where regular quantum physics is about finding the spectra of a quantumsystem, which is assumed to be composed on very small components, wherein these components possess random spatialspectralparticle event properties (associated to measuring and wavefunction (or system) collapse of a global function to a local event).
That is, quantum systems are modeled as a "functionspace and set of operator" pair, where a (the) set of local Hermitian operators (Hermitian so that the energywaveequation is unitary invariant) is to be "found," which allow for a spectral representation of the quantum system, ie diagonalize the functionspace.
Unfortunately, for real (general) systems, this can never be done, wherein the math context stays noncommutative.
Particlephysics is about quantum interactions of (what are assumed to be) quantum components, and it is based on addingon a (new) unitary, nonlinear, connection term to the energy operator, which now models the changes of internal particlestate properties of the interacting particles during a collisioninteraction (or during a virtual fieldparticle exchange, and subsequent change in a particle's internal state, during a particleinteraction) and this requires that one add onto the (spectral) wavefunction an internal particlestate vector structure, in a similar way in which the Dirac operator "adds onto a quantum wavefunction" the vector of spinstates.
The big contrast
Classical physics
is about the local linear properties of motion related to a mass's spatial position which are related to a local forcefield caused by the geometry and motions of the material geometry (both mass and chargeandcurrent) surrounding the moving mass. This law applies to a wide range of systems so as to provide sufficiently accurate descriptions of system properties, and this, in turn, can be related to a wide range of practical creative uses. It is a descriptive context which begins locally and (when solvable) finds global solution functions, ie it increases one's information about the system's properties.
Particlephysics
The particleinteraction descriptive context is based within the wavefunction of a quantum system, and is about the internal particleproperties of: charge, flavor, color (analogous to the property of mass in the classical description) related to one another (in regard to particular energy levels) by virtual energy transfers (by fieldparticles), where internal particlestates are transformed, and this is caused by the energytransfer, so that all of the possible particlechanges and energy transfers together perturb the internal particlestate structure of the quantum system's wavefunction, so as to adjust the energyspectral properties of a quantum system's wavefunction.
However, the descriptive context is, itself, deformed by the highvalue of the localenergies of the interactions, so that the values upon which the description is based are distorted, and thus it is supposed that a readjustment to the quantitative structure of the containment set must be done, ie the results of the perturbation must be renormalized.
(even if one allows for renormalization, which, in fact, means the quantitative construct has no validity)
There is still the problem that there are virtually no real quantum systems... ,
(other than the Hatom) (where real quantum systems have many(butfew)bodies [most often charged bodies] which form into a stable system)
... , whose energywavefunctions are at all close to the observed properties of a general physical system.
Thus, a perturbed wavefunction (given an internalparticlestate structure) is not relevant.
Thus, it is a description which does not have a wide range of sufficiently accurate descriptions, and it is veryvery limited in regard to practical creative usefulness.
However it is a descriptive structure which is related to large amounts of, essentially, useless technical literature.
Furthermore, this internalparticlestate and fieldparticletransfer context of particlephysics is best suited for determining crosssectional properties of the elementary particles, so as to be able to determine collision rates (or collision probabilities) for elementaryparticles in nuclear reactions.
Orthodoxy
Particlephysics is about the patterns of particles usually found in highenergy particlecollision experiments. These particle properties are, in turn, related to nonlinear operators. Fundamentally, these ideas emerged from the Dirac operator, which identified (whose interpretation was used to identify) both the opposite metricspace states of matter and antimatter, as well as the spinrotation states of material particles.
New
The new, highdimensional macroscopic and microscopic, ideas, concerning discrete hyperbolic shapes, have matter and antimatter as fundamental, in regard to the physical properties associated to the metricspaces themselves, and a set of different metricspaces to properly contain the different physical properties, and a subsequent need to identify an oppositestate (or opposite metricspace property) within each type of metricspace, while the spinrotation is a spinrotation of metricspace states, which are present in stable constructs of systemcomponents, but in such stable components these opposite states stay in a permanent orthogonal relation to one another, and spinrotate so as to be relevant only in a locally symmetric manner, ie in regard to dynamical changes within a greater context of a orbit defining metricspace shape, which determines the orbits of (lowerdimensional) condensed material components.
Either the local symmetry of opposite displacements, or the orthogonal oppositestate relations on stable shapes, only exist in stable components associated to the spinrotation of these opposite metricspace states ie the opposite states are mixed in discrete intervals to allow local opposite dynamic changes, but the nature of the "real" state of the metricspace is maintained within the component, or within the physical system.
Orthodoxy
Particlephysics is based on extending the idea of spin particlestates to general internal particlestates, where the internal particlestates include antiparticles, and the particles also possess spin properties.
New
In the new ideas, there are stable components, which are, in fact, stable metricspaces, and these components do interact with one another in the characteristic types of dynamical patterns (or secondorder (partial) differential equations of simple dynamical systems) of:
1. elliptic (stable orbits),
2. parabolic (free, angular momentum [and this would be the context of quantum energywaves but this is no longer necessary]), and
3. hyperbolic (collisions),
as well as
4. in regard to hyperbolic (and mechanical) waveequations.
Note: For components, which are most often chargeneutral, the interaction is most often collisions, while elliptic orbits are associated with angular momentum properties, where angular momentum can couple to either a distance structure or to a containment space.
Orthodoxy
The approximate structure of particlephysics is that spin distinguishes
material (Fermions)
from fields (Bosons),
where spin is incorporated into the Dirac operator,
while the internal particlestates are incorporated into a nonlinear unitary connection term of the waveoperator for quantum interactions... , in regard to the energy operator (or set of operators) which is (are) supposed to identify the spectral structure of the (a ) quantumsystem... , where the nonlinear connection term transforms between particlestates when collisions (or energy transfers) occur.
These collisionrelated transformations of the connection term are the, so called, (particle) symmetries of the system of colliding particles which possess internal particlestate vectorstructures. These symmetries are lowdimensional unitary transformations.
The standard model divides the particles into "distinguishable particle types" associated to
U(1) x SU(2) x SU(3),
1. where supposedly SU(2)particles interact with both the charges of U(1) and the quarks of SU(3),
2. while SU(3) is about how quarks build other particles, eg protons neutrons (and many more), plus all the antiparticles of this type,
3. while the electron is mostly related to the neutrino and their antiparticles of SU(2),
4. and, where electrons must be able to interact with the photons of U(1) etc.
This context describes a few particle interactions, which may (or may not) be related to particle or nuclei disintegrations,
and
the authors of this descriptive context, claim it to be related to three or four very precise measurements of stable states of electrons and the Hatom,
... ., but the calculations of spectra of: general atoms, nuclei, molecules, crystals, etc, are not sufficiently accurate so as to claim that these local models about particlephysics have any relation to the observed stable properties of general material systems, eg the stable states, which characterize the beginning and ending physical states of a nuclear explosion, while the probabilities of particlecollisions are (only) related to the rates of nuclear reactions and subsequent explosion sizes.
Orthodoxy
The particlephysicists often say that the standard model accounts for all the data that is seen in the lab, by this they really mean that it accounts for a great deal of the data which comes from particleaccelerator experiments, but that data, other than being useful for determining particle crosssections (rates of nuclear reactions), has no relation to valid descriptions of the stable properties possessed by fundamental physical systems of: nuclei, general atoms, molecules crystals, etc.
Social comment
That is, they ignore the fact that the stable states of material systems, which are so prevalent a part of material system structure, all go without valid measurable descriptions, or their descriptive contexts are not even considered.
This seems to imply that this is a professional community of a set of overly obsessive types of people who are separated from reality
This type of social construct, isolating and protecting obsessive people who command intellectual discourse about science within society, can only be related to the nonstop repetition and great authority associated to the propaganda system, and that the personal who are picked to work on these narrow problems are people who rely most on a picture of the world which is not full of "a general world reality," but rather hold in their minds a distorted world picture, which can be a reality which results from participating in "narrowing competitions" based on authoritative dogmas and associated memorized models of "reality."
The context of orthodoxy is questioned
Many of the elementaryparticles observed in highenergy particlecollisions in particle accelerators are unstable, with particlelives which are only smallfractions of seconds, while ontheotherhand the electron and the proton are relatively stable material components, yet they also seem to need some further stable context.
What is that further context of stability? ie a stable context is defined by the stable shapes contained in stable metricspaces. These stable shapes are the substructures to which stable charges are related. (see below)
Orthodoxy
What characterizes particlephysics theories?
They are about collisions (or closeby energy transfers between elementaryparticle which are assumed to be the components of which quantum systems are composed) represented as invariance's, where the invariance is a unitary invariance (the system's overall energy is supposed to remain invariant in a unitaryinvariant transformation).
Note: Quantum representations of quantumsystems are about "operators acting on function spaces" the local operators, which are Hermitian are, in turn, related to operators which are unitary, and these unitary operators are energyinvariant operators,
ie particlephysics is a model of particlecollisions which are energy invariant,
ie the pattern is the pattern of conservation of energy which is consistent with the descriptive context wherein the functionspace is made into a "Hermitian space," upon which act local Hermitian operators, in turn, related to (global) unitary operators, eg the energy equation (which has unitary invariance).
However, renormalization assumes that energy is locally changed (ie does not stay in equilibrium) so that only after the perturbation process is complete does the system (miraculously) comes back to a state of energyconservation.
That is, the mathematical containment context becomes completely invalid until after the interaction process is complete.
So, why even have a myth of mathematical containment?
The descriptive structure as a math structure is a fraud.
Yet it is complicated, so as to filterout people looking at these systems from a rational pointofview, and it forms the dogma of professional physics journals.
Orthodoxy (reiterate)
To summarize particlephysics findings:
Particlephysics is based on material particles, and field particles (causing [during a particlecollision] internal particlestate changes and energy changes),
and all the associated antiparticles.
There are the particletypes of... :
1. charge,
2. flavor,
3. families (where, apparently, these lepton families, associated to flavors, are energy hierarchies), and
4. color (quarks)
... , are all particlestate types which are related to symmetries or unitary changes in these types of particle states.
(these particletype symmetries [or local unitary matrix transformations of internal particlestates, caused by their collisions with field particles]) are associated to internal particlestates of:
(1) electromagnetism (charge, U(1)) (where the particlestate change is either energychange or spatialdisplacements) [this is an extremely limited model for describing electromagnetic properties],
(2) electronnucleon (flavor, SU(2)) [this is supposed to model certain types of nuclear decay processes], and
(3) pure nucleon (gluons, SU(3)) [and energyhierarchies of nucleon particles], this pattern deals only with creating nucleons, but it is claimed to also be related to the so called strong nuclear force, but it provides no valid models of nuclei and their associated stable spectral properties.)
where each particletype is associated to particular types of fieldparticles (where the fieldparticles "cause" the changes in internalstates),
The fieldparticles are:
Photons (related to charge),
(Weird) Field particles (W(+),W(),Z(0)) (associated to flavors)
Gluons (associated to color),
and where the fieldparticles of the colorsymmetries also have color themselves (and thus they have an associated set of color symmetries associated with the coloredgluons)
Particlecollisions (or almost collisions) take place wherein (virtual) fieldparticles are (miraculously) transferred between the materialparticles (even though the model is based at a single point in space) and the internal particlestates of the material particles are transformed, so that these "energy transforms" and "changes of particlestates" affect the internal particlestate structure of the quantum system's wavefunction so that the energy of the quantumsystem (associated to the wavefunction) is perturbed by this process, and when the math containment structure is ignored so as to allow for a math method of renormalization to take place which then allows the "perturbed and renormalized" quantumsystem to be energetically consistent with the observed values of the system's spectra (sometimes to 16significant digits). This method is claimed to be significant since it has been applied to three or four such quantumsystems which do possess a wavefunction which is already close to the observed spectral values of the system. This is not widely applicable, nor is it of any practical value, other than being related to particlecollision crosssections (ie probabilities of particlecollisions) related to nuclear reactions. Ie the weapons industry is determining the structure of physics.
Orthodoxy
There is also the, so called, scalarparticle with zerospin, the Higg's particle, which is supposed to give the property of mass to the particles (this is caused by a degree4 polynomial, ie a scalarfunction, with obvious symmetries about zero), the solutions to the Higg's mechanism, is claimed to possess mass, but apparently, the symmetries of the particle interactions of (regular) particlephysics equations have zero mass (or some such fanciful model of: charge, flavor, and color), inventing scalar fields to artificially change the position of zero, where apparently, mass has lost its relation to "changes in motion," since the descriptive context of particlephysics is supposed to be about energy.
But the formula,
mass= energy,
Apparently, does not work,
thus the need for a scalar field. (does one detect more epicycle structures)
That is, there is an epicycle structure (and a deception) at every turn in quantumphysics and particlephysics.
Note: The acquisition of mass by "charged" components is related to resonances between hyperbolic space and Euclidean space, and this would instantaneously occur for each period of a spinrotation of metricspace state. Thus, this could be modeled as a collision event, and thus could also be associated to an apparent constant, H, ie "charge" = H x mass, defined between hyperbolic and Euclidean spaces (where "charge" in case of a particular highenergy Higg'sparticle might be "color," where "color" would be associated to an unstable discrete hyperbolic shape within the 3space the colorcomponent has entered in its decay process. That is, flavor and color are unstable 2 and 3dimensional componentshapes, of the equivalent of charge, which are transitioning [or decaying] within the particular 3space subspace of our material3space.).
Commentary
None of these quantum interaction models provide any added ability to enhance (or understand) the quantum waveequation model, and whereas the quantum waveequation fails to provide valid models (to sufficient precision) of the very stable properties of: nuclei, atoms, molecules, and crystals. That is, this descriptive structure is a failure.
Furthermore, a probability model of a system with many, but few, components has virtually no "informational relation" to practical usefulness of such a probability based precise descriptive model (or structure). Yet these systems are very stable, which implies that they are formed under controllable conditions.
It is a particlestate context of local symmetry within which the equations of material interactions in quantum systems are to be described, but in quantuminteractions materialinteractions are not about local measures (in turn, related to a global solution function), but rather they are an artificial process which conserves energy in a nonlocal, discrete [but distant] change (or virtual fieldBoson exchange), but the fieldBosons are basically nonlinear adjustments to the (energy) spectral properties of a wavefunction.
However, if one desires to have quantitative consistency in a math description then the local measures (in a math containment context) for a measurable description need to be linear. The interpretations and models of quantum interactions are such that they assure the fundamental stability of quantum systems will not have a valid description.
Comment
It is surprising that the unstable particle products of particlecollisions in particleaccelerators do so closely follow a unitary pattern of particlecompositions.
New interpretations of the particlephysics Orthodoxy
The descriptive context of particlephysics still leaves indescribable the properties of
"original stable state"
and
"final stable state"
... , adding no useful information to this more pressing descriptive context.
What can be taken from this unitary context of unstable particles, with internal particlestates, is that the context should be unitary, and that since most of these particles are unstable, though some are stable... , namely, the electron and (in all likelihood the) proton
... , that is, there is a good possibility that the model of unstable "particles" in 3dimensions are unstable componentshapes which are unitary, composed of opposite states which might be associated to higherdimensional energetic properties but which are unstable after the particlecollision, ie not in resonance with the containment space's finite spectra.
Thus, these can be unstable:
3dimensional components (shapes),
2dimensional components (or 2dimensional faces of unstable 3shapes), and
1dimensional components (shapes).
These (various dimension, 1, 2, or 3dimensional) component shapes are unstable, since they are not in resonance with the containing space's finite spectral set which defines the stable patterns within the highdimension containing hyperbolic metricspace, but these unstable (inertial component shapes) do seem to descend from higherdimensional (stable) structures, apparently the stable shapes are decomposed during the collision.
An inertial shape (stable or unstable), which is 3dimensions or less, will be related to the type
SU(3) or SU(2) or U(1)
... , fiber groups, defined on complex coordinate spaces of:
C(3,0), or C(2,0), or C,
and where the real shapes would be related to
SO(3), or SO(2),
fiber groups on real spaces:
R(3,0), or R(2,0).
Thus, the unstable inertial remnants... , of what were stable shapes, which have been decomposed by a (highenergy) collision... , would be unstable shapes, within the (unstable) geometricpatterns defined by SU(3), or SU(2)... , or SO(3), or SO(2), etc.
That is, in 3space these unitary (or the "real" metricinvariant) fiber groups would be related to the natural patterns of disintegration for unstable shapes which are contained within 3space.
That is, the fixed set of particlecollision patterns, seen as data in particleaccelerators, is the natural lowdimension decay structure of unstable shapes. It is not related to an interaction process other than these unstable patterns briefly existing in an unstable context of transition characterized by the random collisions of components, either stable or unstable components.
New
The new descriptive context agrees with particlephysics that the description is unitary, due to metricspace containing opposite metricspace states, these opposite states are related to spin properties of material components, and that the containment space is an 11dimensional hyperbolic metricspace, but that such an 11dimensional hyperbolic metricspace can be related to other such 11dimensional hyperbolic metricspaces, and that the stable properties of "material" which are contained in each such a space must be in resonance (and in the correct dimension) with the finite spectral set defined by the metricspace subspacepartition of each of the overall containing 11dimensional hyperbolic metricspaces.
In the new descriptive structure there is a new context for angular momentum.
That is, angular momentum is defined on the various toral components of the stable shapes, which are allowed by the containment set (where the highdimension containment set defines a finite set of stable spectrageometric measures, to which the existing stable shapes must be in resonance), and on possible links, defined by angular momentum.
Links
There are unbounded stable discrete hyperbolic shapes, which exist on all dimensional levels, and these unbounded shapes are associated to stable material components, ie stable discrete hyperbolic shapes defined by their being resonant with the finite spectra of the various subspaces of the containing space [which is partitioned by (into) a finite set of stable discrete hyperbolic shapes of all the dimensional levels of the overall containment set].
On the other hand the 2, 3, and 4dimensions are relevant to the descriptions of "material" components contained in hyperbolic 3space, where these stable shapes are also related to both bounded and unbounded, or semiunbounded, discrete hyperbolic shapes, where an example of a semiunbounded shape would be the neutrinoelectron structure of an atom's (2dimensional) charged components (which is also called an electroncloud of an atom, eg for an atom the nuclei are bounded shapes while the electronclouds are semiunbounded), so that all "material" systems are linked to an infiniteboundary of the overall highdimension containing space. Thus, one can think of angular momentum as a controlled (or controllable) link between the many different 11dimensional hyperbolic containing metricspaces, by means of such unbounded and associated bounded (angular momentum) links (between 11dimensional hyperbolic metricspaces).
Thus, one can consider a "possible consciousness" for people (or their realm off creative intent) would be to examine the different creative structures of these different universes, where the individual 11dimensional containment sets for the different universes (or perhaps different galaxies) might be perceived as intricate bubbles of different types of perceptions, through which we can control our journey, since we are in touch with the infinite reaches of these types of separate existences. (see below for a highdimensional model of lifeforms, eg models which allow all lifeforms to possess a mind)
Is this the true context within which the human lifeforce is to develop knowledge and intend creative
expansion of such a context?
** Though charge is likely not a 1dimensional construct, but rather a set of charged 1flows which fit into a 2dimensional discrete hyperbolic shape, so as to allow spinrotations of opposite pairs of timestates.
Ontheotherhand mass (or inertia) can be 1dimensional, a circle, since a circle's center is a distinguished point, in regard to position in space, for translations or rotations, but any point on the circle could be a distinguished point for rotations, or a pair of opposite points, a diameter, or two pairs of opposite points so that each diameter is orthogonal to the other diameter, and furthermore, the orthogonal pair identify the circle's center. Thus, such an orthogonal pair represent both rotation frames (rotating stars) and translation frames (fixed stars).
So that, the circle and its center can be mapped into one another so as to represent the map between translational and rotational frames of the circle on the plane.
That is, the different 11dimensional "bubbles of hyperbolic metricspaces," ... .
... ., between which human life might be able to use (travel between [or link between] with intended purpose) if one's higherdimensional structure is understood and/or perceived,
... ., seem to depend on sets of 2planes which can carry the essential inertial orbitalstructure of various bounded regions of 11space wherein the pairs of opposite states on inertia (matter and antimatter) which can be defined for each of these particular regions sliced by 2planes which determine the organization of inertial properties of the region (or for these particular bounded regions). These sets of 2dimensional regions are bounded since inertia is defined in relation to only the bounded shapes of discrete Euclidean shapes, and Euclidean space is the space of position and spatial displacement, ie Euclidean space is the space in which inertial properties are contained. That is, these sets of 2dimensional regions could be used to map the different 11dimensional "bubbles of hyperbolic metricspaces."
There are natural stable shapes, those of odddimension (3,5,7,9) and with an oddgenus (where genus is the number of holes in the shape, eg the torus has onehole, or a genus of one, ie the genus is the number of toral components of a discrete hyperbolic shape) which when fully occupied by its orbital charged flows are charge imbalanced and thus would begin to oscillate, and thus generate their own energy. This would be a simple model of life.
Thus such a shape which possesses a higherdimension could cause the lower dimensional components to, in turn, possess an order which can be controlled by the higherdimensional shape, through angular momentum states (properties).
Down in 3dimensions this control by a higherdimensional structure could be the complicated microscopicandmacroscopic structure of life, which appears to be run by complicated molecular transformations.
This is simply about assuming that stable shapes determine the underlying order and stability which is observed, and the fact that these stable shapes (mathematically) have a dimensional structure associated to themselves.
However, according to the currently accepted laws of physics both the stable properties of quantum systems and the stable control which is possessed by life are unexplained (or unexplainable).
The patterns of stable physical systems are unexplainable within the current dogmas about the material world, since the current dogma is based on the dimensionallyconfining idea of materialism, and within such a confinement, descriptions seem to be based on indefinable randomness and nonlinear systems (or patterns) defined on a (quantitative or coordinate) set which assumed to be a continuum.
Such patterns are fleeting and unstable, though the decay times can, sometimes, be of relatively long duration.
Suppose human life is associated to a 9dimensional shape of an oddgenus, then such a shape is an unbounded shape (noted by Coxeter), and thus it could well be relatable to many such 11dimensional hyperbolic metricspaces (why should an unbounded 9dimensional stable shape, generating its own energy, be confined to any particular unbounded 11dimensional containing space?) wherein the living system's lower dimensional (material) structure may be quite different (in the new containment structure), and thus the living system's perceptions and interactions could also be quite different within other 11dimensional containing spaces.
Note: The authors of M GellMann (at least his "quark and the jaguar" book) and Y Manin, are a very small handful of authors who can provide clear descriptions of the essential models of particle physics. S Weinberg is mostly confusing, but he does emphasize the properties of equations in his popular works, which GellMann does not do. Yet, GellMann goes through the details of particlephysics; internalparticlestates and their relation to matrices, and their relation to fieldparticles, in about 10pages, which are easy to read.

contribute to this article
contribute to this article
add comment to discussion

Take Care,
Tracy