Jump to content

Talk:Quark model

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 79.209.51.114 (talk) at 12:59, 29 December 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconPhysics C‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Naming...

Hey there. Working over in Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles. Would you say that Gell-Mann/Nishima Law could or should be redirected to this article? jengod 16:14, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not currently treated by this article. You might try redirecting it to hypercharge. -- Xerxes 16:39, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted vandalism unnoticed for more than a year

I've just reverted a sneaky piece of vandalism unnoticed for more than a year (introduced [1], reverted [2]). So much for Wikipedia reliability. 131.111.8.104 13:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction too technical

Hi all. I find the intro. paragraph in this article way to technical for the casual wikipedia reader who is not a particle physicist. I myself have a PhD in astrophysics and took one grad level class in particles, and have a little trouble with it esp. the Poincare group reference and number of symbols and terms introduced all at once. It seem best if the entire first paragraph could be understood by an ordinary reader who has visited some of the pages linked to (eg "quarks"). So one thought would be to move the Poincare, etc. discussion to a later paragraph. In any case I'd like to include a clarifying sentence, perhaps after the first sentence:

"In physics, the quark model is a classification scheme for hadrons in terms of their valence quarks, i.e., the quarks (and antiquarks) which give rise to the quantum numbers of the hadrons. "

like:

"Simply put, the quark model shows how quarks make up larger particles. For example the proton and neutron (and other baryons ) are made up of three quarks, while mesons are made up of two"

Any objections? Substar (talk) 14:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)substar[reply]

What is a quark?

Can you tell me what a quark is, in terms of how this is actually used? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AtomicKiwi (talkcontribs) 09:26, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user is a sock puppet of permanently blocked account IrishChemistPride.—RJH (talk) 15:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]