The coolest little particles in nature. Prologue

What is the smallest known particle? They are currently considered the smallest particles in the Universe. The smallest particle in the Universe is the Planck particle black hole(Planck Black Hole), which so far exists only in theory. The Planck black hole is the smallest of all black holes (due to the discreteness of the mass spectrum) and is a kind of boundary object. But, the smallest particle has also been discovered in the Universe, which is now being carefully studied.

The highest point of Russia is located in the Caucasus. Then mesons became the smallest particles, then bosons. This particle is classified as a black hole because its gravitational radius is greater than or equal to the wavelength. Of all the existing black holes, Planck's is the smallest.

And they are formed, as is commonly believed, as a result nuclear reactions. Despite this hypothetical existence of this smallest particle in the Universe, its practical discovery in the future is quite possible. It was for its discovery that an installation was created that only the laziest inhabitant on Earth has not heard of - the Large Hadron Collider. Higgs boson at the moment smallest particle of those whose existence has been practically proven.

And if particles had no mass, the universe could not exist. Not a single substance could be formed in it. Despite the practically proven existence of this particle, the Higgs boson, practical applications for it have not yet been invented. Our world is huge and something interesting, something unusual and fascinating happens in it every day. Stay with us and learn every day about the most interesting facts from all over the world, oh unusual people or things, about the creations of nature or man.

An elementary particle is a particle without an internal structure, that is, not containing other particles [approx. 1]. Elementary particles- fundamental objects of quantum field theory. They can be classified by spin: fermions have half-integer spin, and bosons have full spin. The Standard Model of particle physics is a theory that describes the properties and interactions of elementary particles.

They are classified by their participation in the strong interaction. Hadrons are defined as strongly interacting composite particles. See also parton (particle). These include the pion, kaon, J/ψ meson, and many other types of mesons. Nuclear reactions and radioactive decay can transform one nuclide into another.

An atom consists of a small, heavy, positively charged nucleus surrounded by a relatively large, light cloud of electrons. There are also short-lived exotic atoms in which the role of the nucleus (a positively charged particle) is played by a positron (positronium) or a positive muon (muonium).

Unfortunately, it has not yet been possible to somehow register them, and they exist only in theory. And although experiments have been proposed today to detect black holes, the possibility of their implementation faces a significant problem. On the contrary, small things may go unnoticed, although this does not make them any less important. The Haraguan sphero (Sphaerodactylus ariasae) is the smallest reptile in the world. Its length is only 16-18 mm and its weight is 0.2 grams.

The smallest things in the world

The smallest single-stranded DNA virus is porcine circovirus. Over the last century, science has made huge strides towards understanding the vastness of the Universe and its microscopic building materials.

At one time, the smallest particle was considered to be an atom. Then scientists discovered the proton, neutron and electron. Now we know that by smashing particles together (as in the Large Hadron Collider), they can be broken down into even more particles, such as quarks, leptons and even antimatter. The problem is only in determining what is less. So some particles have no mass, some have negative mass. The solution to this question is the same as dividing by zero, that is, it is impossible.

Do you think there is something in this?, namely: The smallest Higgs particle.

And although such strings do not have physical parameters, the human tendency to justify everything leads us to the conclusion that these are the smallest objects in the Universe. Astronomy and telescopes → Question and answer from an astronomer and astrophysics → What do you think is there in this?, namely...

The smallest virus

The fact is that to synthesize such particles it is necessary to achieve an energy of 1026 electron volts in an accelerator, which is technically impossible. The mass of such particles is on the order of 0.00001 grams, and the radius is 1/1034 meters. The wavelength of such a black hole is comparable to the size of its gravitational radius.

Where is Earth located in the universe? What was in the universe before the big bang? What happened before the formation of the Universe? How old is the universe? As it turned out, this was not the only ammunition in the 13-year-old boy’s collection.” The structure of such particles is critically minimal - they have almost no mass and no atomic charge at all, since the nucleus is too small. There are numbers that are so incredibly, incredibly large that it would take the entire universe to even write them down.

The smallest objects visible to the naked eye

Google was born in 1920 as a way to get kids interested in big numbers. This is a number, according to Milton, in which the first place is 1, and then as many zeros as you could write before you got tired. If we talk about the largest significant number, there is a reasonable argument that this really means that we need to find the largest number with a value that actually exists in the world.

Thus, the mass of the Sun in tons will be less than in pounds. The largest number with any real world application - or in this case real world application - is probably one of the latest estimates of the number of universes in the multiverse. This number is so large that the human brain will literally not be able to perceive all these different universes, since the brain is only capable of approximately configurations.

Here's a collection of the world's smallest things, ranging from tiny toys, miniature animals and people to a hypothetical subatomic particle. Atoms are the smallest particles into which matter can be divided by chemical reactions. The world's smallest teapot was created by famous ceramicist Wu Ruishen and it weighs only 1.4 grams. In 2004, Rumaisa Rahman became the smallest newborn child.

In physics, elementary particles were physical objects on the scale of the atomic nucleus that cannot be divided into their component parts. However, today, scientists have managed to split some of them. The structure and properties of these tiny objects are studied by particle physics.

The smallest particles that make up all matter have been known since ancient times. However, the founders of the so-called “atomism” are considered to be the philosopher Ancient Greece Leucippus and his more famous student, Democritus. It is assumed that the latter coined the term “atom”. From the ancient Greek “atomos” is translated as “indivisible”, which determines the views of ancient philosophers.

Later it became known that the atom can still be divided into two physical objects - the nucleus and the electron. The latter subsequently became the first elementary particle, when in 1897 the Englishman Joseph Thomson conducted an experiment with cathode rays and discovered that they were a stream of identical particles with the same mass and charge.

In parallel with Thomson's work, Henri Becquerel, who studies X-ray radiation, conducts experiments with uranium and discovers new look radiation. In 1898, a French pair of physicists, Marie and Pierre Curie, study various radioactive substances, discovering the same thing radioactive radiation. It will later be determined that it consists of alpha (2 protons and 2 neutrons) and beta particles (electrons), and Becquerel and Curie will receive Nobel Prize. While conducting her research with elements such as uranium, radium and polonium, Marie Sklodowska-Curie did not take any safety measures, including not even using gloves. As a result, in 1934 she was overtaken by leukemia. In memory of the achievements of the great scientist, the element discovered by the Curie couple, polonium, was named in honor of Mary’s homeland - Polonia, from Latin - Poland.

Photo from the V Solvay Congress 1927. Try to find all the scientists from this article in this photo.

Since 1905, Albert Einstein has devoted his publications to the imperfection of the wave theory of light, the postulates of which were at odds with the results of experiments. Which subsequently led the outstanding physicist to the idea of ​​a “light quantum” - a portion of light. Later, in 1926, it was named “photon”, translated from the Greek “phos” (“light”), by the American physical chemist Gilbert N. Lewis.

In 1913, Ernest Rutherford, a British physicist, based on the results of experiments already carried out at that time, noted that the masses of many nuclei chemical elements are multiples of the mass of the hydrogen nucleus. Therefore, he assumed that the hydrogen nucleus is a component of the nuclei of other elements. In his experiment, Rutherford irradiated a nitrogen atom with alpha particles, which as a result emitted a certain particle, named by Ernest as a “proton”, from the other Greek “protos” (first, main). Later it was experimentally confirmed that the proton is a hydrogen nucleus.

Obviously, the proton is not the only one component nuclei of chemical elements. This idea is led by the fact that two protons in the nucleus would repel each other, and the atom would instantly disintegrate. Therefore, Rutherford hypothesized the presence of another particle, which has a mass equal to the mass of a proton, but is uncharged. Some experiments by scientists on the interaction of radioactive and lighter elements led them to the discovery of another new radiation. In 1932, James Chadwick determined that it consists of those very neutral particles that he called neutrons.

Thus, the most famous particles were discovered: photon, electron, proton and neutron.

Further, the discovery of new subnuclear objects became an increasingly frequent event, and at the moment about 350 particles are known, which are generally considered “elementary”. Those of them that have not yet been split are considered structureless and are called “fundamental.”

What is spin?

Before moving forward with further innovations in the field of physics, the characteristics of all particles must be determined. The most well-known, apart from mass and electric charge, also includes spin. This quantity is otherwise called “intrinsic angular momentum” and is in no way related to the movement of the subnuclear object as a whole. Scientists were able to detect particles with spin 0, ½, 1, 3/2 and 2. To visualize, albeit simplified, spin as a property of an object, consider the following example.

Let an object have a spin equal to 1. Then such an object, when rotated 360 degrees, will return to its original position. On a plane, this object can be a pencil, which, after a 360-degree turn, will end up in its original position. In the case of zero spin, no matter how the object rotates, it will always look the same, for example, a single-color ball.

For a ½ spin, you will need an object that retains its appearance when rotated 180 degrees. It can be the same pencil, only sharpened symmetrically on both sides. A spin of 2 will require the shape to be maintained when rotated 720 degrees, and a spin of 3/2 will require 540.

This characteristic is very important for particle physics.

Standard Model of Particles and Interactions

Having an impressive set of micro-objects that make up the world around us, scientists decided to structure them, and this is how a well-known theoretical structure called the “Standard Model” was formed. She describes three interactions and 61 particles using 17 fundamental ones, some of which she predicted long before the discovery.

The three interactions are:

• Electromagnetic. It occurs between electrically charged particles. In a simple case, known from school, oppositely charged objects attract, and similarly charged objects repel. This happens through the so-called carrier of electromagnetic interaction - the photon.
• Strong, otherwise known as nuclear interaction. As the name implies, its action extends to objects of the order of the atomic nucleus; it is responsible for the attraction of protons, neutrons and other particles also consisting of quarks. The strong interaction is carried by gluons.
• Weak. Effective at distances a thousand smaller than the size of the core. Leptons and quarks, as well as their antiparticles, take part in this interaction. Moreover, in the case of weak interaction, they can transform into each other. The carriers are the W+, W− and Z0 bosons.

So the Standard Model was formed as follows. It includes six quarks, from which all hadrons (particles subject to strong interaction) are composed:

• Upper(u);
• Enchanted (c);
• true(t);
• Lower (d);
• Strange(s);
• Adorable (b).

It is clear that physicists have plenty of epithets. The other 6 particles are leptons. These are fundamental particles with spin ½ that do not participate in the strong interaction.

• Electron;
• Electron neutrino;
• Muon;
• Muon neutrino;
• Tau lepton;
• Tau neutrino.

And the third group of the Standard Model are gauge bosons, which have a spin equal to 1 and are represented as carriers of interactions:

• Gluon – strong;
• Photon – electromagnetic;
• Z-boson - weak;
• The W boson is weak.

These also include the recently discovered spin-0 particle, which, simply put, imparts inert mass to all other subnuclear objects.

As a result, according to the Standard Model, our world looks like this: all matter consists of 6 quarks, forming hadrons, and 6 leptons; all these particles can participate in three interactions, the carriers of which are gauge bosons.

Disadvantages of the Standard Model

However, even before the discovery of the Higgs boson, the last particle predicted by the Standard Model, scientists had gone beyond its limits. A striking example there is a so-called “gravitational interaction”, which is on par with others today. Presumably, its carrier is a particle with spin 2, which has no mass, and which physicists have not yet been able to detect - the “graviton”.

Moreover, the Standard Model describes 61 particles, and today more than 350 particles are already known to humanity. This means that the work of theoretical physicists is not over.

Particle classification

To make their life easier, physicists have grouped all particles depending on their structural features and other characteristics. Classification is based on the following criteria:

• Life time.
  1. Stable. These include proton and antiproton, electron and positron, photon, and graviton. The existence of stable particles is not limited by time, as long as they are in free state, i.e. don't interact with anything.
  2. Unstable. All other particles after some time disintegrate into their component parts, which is why they are called unstable. For example, a muon lives only 2.2 microseconds, and a proton - 2.9 10 * 29 years, after which it can decay into a positron and a neutral pion.
• Weight.
  1. Massless elementary particles, of which there are only three: photon, gluon and graviton.
  2. Massive particles are all the rest.
• Spin meaning.
  1. Whole spin, incl. zero, have particles called bosons.
  2. Particles with half-integer spin are fermions.
• Participation in interactions.
  1. Hadrons (structural particles) are subnuclear objects that take part in all four types of interactions. It was mentioned earlier that they are composed of quarks. Hadrons are divided into two subtypes: mesons (integer spin, bosons) and baryons (half-integer spin, fermions).
  2. Fundamental (structureless particles). These include leptons, quarks and gauge bosons (read earlier - “Standard Model..”).

Having familiarized yourself with the classification of all particles, you can, for example, accurately determine some of them. So the neutron is a fermion, a hadron, or rather a baryon, and a nucleon, that is, it has a half-integer spin, consists of quarks and participates in 4 interactions. Nucleon is common name for protons and neutrons.

• It is interesting that opponents of the atomism of Democritus, who predicted the existence of atoms, stated that any substance in the world is divided indefinitely. To some extent, they may turn out to be right, since scientists have already managed to divide the atom into a nucleus and an electron, the nucleus into a proton and a neutron, and these, in turn, into quarks.
• Democritus assumed that atoms have a clear geometric shape, and therefore the “sharp” atoms of fire burn, the rough atoms of solids are firmly held together by their protrusions, and the smooth atoms of water slip during interaction, otherwise they flow.
• Joseph Thomson compiled his own model of the atom, which he saw as a positively charged body into which electrons seemed to be “stuck.” His model was called the “Plum pudding model.”
• Quarks got their name thanks to the American physicist Murray Gell-Mann. The scientist wanted to use a word similar to the sound of a duck quack (kwork). But in James Joyce's novel Finnegans Wake he encountered the word “quark” in the line “Three quarks for Mr. Mark!”, the meaning of which is not precisely defined and it is possible that Joyce used it simply for rhyme. Murray decided to call the particles this word, since at that time only three quarks were known.
• Although photons, particles of light, are massless, near a black hole they appear to change their trajectory as they are attracted to it by gravitational forces. In fact, a supermassive body bends space-time, which is why any particles, including those without mass, change their trajectory towards the black hole (see).
• The Large Hadron Collider is “hadronic” precisely because it collides two directed beams of hadrons, particles with dimensions on the order of an atomic nucleus that participate in all interactions.

What do we know about particles smaller than an atom? And what is the smallest particle in the Universe?

The world around us... Who among us has not admired his enchanting beauty? Its bottomless night sky, strewn with billions of twinkling mysterious stars and the warmth of its gentle sunlight. Emerald fields and forests, stormy rivers and vast expanses of sea. The sparkling peaks of majestic mountains and luscious alpine meadows. Morning dew and nightingale trill at dawn. A fragrant rose and the quiet murmur of a stream. A blazing sunset and the gentle rustle of a birch grove...

Is it possible to think of anything more beautiful than the world around us?! More powerful and impressive? And, at the same time, more fragile and tender? All this is the world where we breathe, love, rejoice, rejoice, suffer and are sad... All this is our world. The world in which we live, which we feel, which we see and which we at least somehow understand.

However, it is much more diverse and complex than it might seem at first glance. We know that lush meadows would not have appeared without the fantastic riot of an endless dance of flexible green blades of grass, lush trees dressed in an emerald robe - without a great many leaves on their branches, and golden beaches - without numerous sparkling grains of sand crunching under bare feet in the summer rays. gentle sun. The big always consists of the small. Small - from even smaller. And there is probably no limit to this sequence.

Therefore, blades of grass and grains of sand, in turn, consist of molecules that are formed from atoms. Atoms, as is known, contain elementary particles - electrons, protons and neutrons. But they are also not considered to be the final authority. Modern science claims that protons and neutrons, for example, consist of hypothetical energy bunches - quarks. There is an assumption that there is an even smaller particle - a preon, still invisible, unknown, but assumed.

The world of molecules, atoms, electrons, protons, neutrons, photons, etc. usually called microcosm. He is the basis macrocosm- the human world and quantities commensurate with it on our planet and megaworld- the world of stars, galaxies, the Universe and Space. All these worlds are interconnected and do not exist one without the other.

We already got acquainted with the megaworld in the report on our first expedition “Breath of the Universe. First Journey" and we already have an idea of ​​distant galaxies and the Universe. On that perilous journey, we discovered the world of dark matter and dark energy, plumbed the depths of black holes, reached the peaks of brilliant quasars, and miraculously escaped the Big Bang and no less the Big Crunch. The universe appeared before us in all its beauty and grandeur. During our journey, we realized that stars and galaxies did not appear on their own, but were painstakingly, over billions of years, formed from particles and atoms.

It is particles and atoms that make up the entire world around us. It is they, in their countless and diverse combinations, that can appear before us, either in the form of a beautiful Dutch rose, or in the form of a harsh heap of Tibetan rocks. Everything we see consists of these mysterious representatives of the mysterious microworld. Why “mysterious” and why “mysterious”? Because humanity, unfortunately, still knows very, very little about this world and its representatives.

Modern science about the microcosm cannot be imagined without mentioning the electron, proton or neutron. In any reference material on physics or chemistry, we will find their mass accurate to the ninth decimal place, their electric charge, lifetime, etc. For example, according to these reference books, an electron has a mass of 9.10938291(40) x 10 -31 kg, an electric charge of minus 1.602176565(35) x 10 -19 C, a lifetime of infinity or at least 4.6 x 10 26 years (Wikipedia).

The accuracy of determining the parameters of the electron is impressive, and pride in the scientific achievements of civilization fills our hearts! True, at the same time some doubts creep in, which, no matter how hard you try, you can’t quite get rid of. Determining the mass of an electron equal to one billion - billion - billionth of a kilogram, and even weighing it to the ninth decimal place, is, I believe, not at all an easy matter, just like measuring the lifetime of an electron at 4,600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 000 years.

Moreover, no one has ever seen this very electron. The most modern microscopes allow you to see only the electron cloud around the nucleus of an atom, within which, as scientists believe, the electron moves at enormous speed (Fig. 1). We do not yet know exactly the size of the electron, nor its shape, nor the speed of its rotation. In reality, we know very little about the electron, as well as about the proton and neutron. We can only speculate and guess. Unfortunately, today this is all we can do.

Rice. 1. Photograph of electron clouds taken by physicists at the Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology in September 2009

But an electron or a proton are the smallest elementary particles that make up an atom of any substance. And if our technical means of studying the microworld do not yet allow us to see particles and atoms, maybe we’ll start with something else O greater and more known? For example, from a molecule! It consists of atoms. A molecule is a larger and more understandable object, which is likely to be studied more deeply.

Unfortunately, I have to disappoint you again. Molecules are understandable to us only on paper in the form of abstract formulas and drawings of their supposed structure. We also cannot yet obtain a clear image of a molecule with pronounced bonds between atoms.

In August 2009, using atomic force microscopy technology, European researchers for the first time managed to image the structure of a fairly large pentacene molecule (C 22 H 14). The most modern technology made it possible to discern only five rings that determine the structure of this hydrocarbon, as well as spots of individual carbon and hydrogen atoms (Fig. 2). And that’s all we can do for now...

Rice. 2. Structural representation of the pentacene molecule (top)

and her photo (below)

On the one hand, the photographs obtained allow us to assert that the path chosen by chemist scientists, describing the composition and structure of molecules, is no longer subject to doubt, but, on the other hand, we can only guess about

How, after all, does the connection of atoms in a molecule and elementary particles in an atom occur? Why are these atomic and molecular bonds stable? How are they formed, what forces support them? What do an electron, proton or neutron look like? What is their structure? What is an atomic nucleus? How do a proton and a neutron coexist in the same space and why do they reject an electron from it?

There are a lot of questions of this kind. Answers too. True, many answers are based only on assumptions that give rise to new questions.

My first attempts to penetrate the secrets of the microworld came across a rather superficial presentation by modern science of much fundamental knowledge about the structure of objects in the microworld, the principles of their functioning, the systems of their interconnections and relationships. It turned out that humanity still does not clearly understand how the nucleus of an atom and its constituent particles - electrons, protons and neutrons - are structured. We have only a general idea of ​​what actually happens during the fission of an atomic nucleus, what events can occur during the long course of this process.

The study of nuclear reactions was limited to observing processes and establishing certain cause-and-effect relationships derived experimentally. Researchers have learned to determine only behavior of certain particles under one or another influence. That's it! Without understanding their structure, without revealing the mechanisms of interaction! Only behavior! Based on this behavior, the dependencies of certain parameters were determined and, for greater importance, these experimental data were put into multi-level mathematical formulas. That's the whole theory!

Unfortunately, this was enough to bravely begin construction. nuclear power plants, various accelerators, colliders and the creation of nuclear bombs. Having received primary knowledge about nuclear processes, humanity immediately entered into an unprecedented race for the possession of powerful energy under its control.

The number of countries armed with nuclear potential grew by leaps and bounds. Nuclear missiles in huge numbers glanced menacingly towards their unfriendly neighbors. Nuclear power plants began to appear, continuously producing cheap electrical energy. Huge amounts of money were spent on nuclear development of more and more new designs. Science, trying to look inside the atomic nucleus, intensively built ultra-modern particle accelerators.

However, the matter did not reach the structure of the atom and its nucleus. The passion for searching for more and more new particles and the pursuit of Nobel regalia has pushed into the background a deep study of the structure of the atomic nucleus and the particles included in it.

But superficial knowledge about nuclear processes immediately manifested itself negatively during operation nuclear reactors and provoked in a number of situations the occurrence of spontaneous nuclear chain reactions.

This list shows the dates and locations of spontaneous nuclear reactions:

08/21/1945. USA, Los Alamos National Laboratory.

05/21/1946. USA, Los Alamos National Laboratory.

03/15/1953. USSR, Chelyabinsk-65, PA "Mayak".

04/21/1953. USSR, Chelyabinsk-65, PA "Mayak".

06/16/1958. USA, Oak Ridge, Radiochemical Plant Y-12.

10/15/1958. Yugoslavia, B. Kidrich Institute.

12/30/1958. USA, Los Alamos National Laboratory.

01/03/1963. USSR, Tomsk-7, Siberian Chemical Plant.

07/23/1964. USA, Woodreaver, Radiochemical Plant.

12/30/1965 Belgium, Mol.

03/05/1968. USSR, Chelyabinsk-70, VNIITF.

12/10/1968. USSR, Chelyabinsk-65, PA "Mayak".

05/26/1971. USSR, Moscow, Institute of Atomic Energy.

12/13/1978. USSR, Tomsk-7, Siberian Chemical Plant.

09/23/1983. Argentina, RA-2 reactor.

05/15/1997. Russia, Novosibirsk, chemical concentrates plant.

06/17/1997. Russia, Sarov, VNIIEF.

09/30/1999. Japan, Tokaimura, Nuclear Fuel Plant.

To this list must be added numerous accidents involving air and submarine carriers. nuclear weapons, incidents at nuclear fuel cycle enterprises, emergencies at nuclear power plants, emergency situations during testing of nuclear and thermonuclear bombs. The tragedies of Chernobyl and Fukushima will forever remain in our memory. Behind these disasters and emergency situations, thousands dead people. And this makes you think very seriously.

Just the thought of operating nuclear power plants, which can instantly turn the whole world into a continuous radioactive zone, is terrifying. Unfortunately, these fears are well founded. First of all, the fact that the creators of nuclear reactors in their work used not fundamental knowledge, but a statement of certain mathematical dependencies and behavior of particles, on the basis of which a dangerous nuclear structure was built. For scientists, nuclear reactions are still a kind of “black box” that works, subject to certain actions and requirements.

However, if something begins to happen in this “box” and this “something” is not described in the instructions and goes beyond the scope of the acquired knowledge, then we, apart from our own heroism and non-intellectual work, cannot oppose anything to the unfolding nuclear disaster. Masses of people are forced to simply humbly await the impending danger, prepare for terrible and incomprehensible consequences, moving to a distance that is safe, in their opinion. Nuclear specialists in most cases just shrug their shoulders, praying and waiting for help from higher powers.

Japanese nuclear scientists, armed with the most modern technology, still cannot curb the long-de-energized nuclear power plant in Fukushima. They can only state that on October 18, 2013, the level of radiation in groundwater exceeded the norm by more than 2,500 times. After a day the level radioactive substances in water increased almost 12,000 times! Why?! Japanese specialists cannot yet answer this question or stop these processes.

The risk of creating an atomic bomb was somehow justified. The tense military-political situation on the planet required unprecedented measures of defense and attack from the warring countries. Submitting to the situation, nuclear researchers took risks without delving into the intricacies of the structure and functioning of elementary particles and atomic nuclei.

However, in peacetime, the construction of nuclear power plants and colliders of all types had to begin only on condition, What Science has completely understood the structure of the atomic nucleus, the electron, the neutron, the proton, and their relationships. Moreover, at nuclear power plants the nuclear reaction must be strictly controlled. But you can really and effectively manage only what you know thoroughly. Especially if it concerns the most powerful type of energy today, which is not at all easy to curb. This, of course, does not happen. Not only during the construction of nuclear power plants.

Currently, in Russia, China, the USA and Europe there are 6 different colliders - powerful accelerators of counter flows of particles that accelerate them to enormous speed, giving the particles high kinetic energy to then push them against each other. The purpose of the collision is to study the products of the collision of particles in the hope that in the process of their decay it will be possible to see something new and hitherto unknown.

It is clear that researchers are very interested to see what will come of all this. Particle collision rates and scientific research are increasing, but knowledge of the structure of what collides is already for many, many years remain at the same level. There are still no substantiated forecasts about the results of planned studies, and there cannot be. Not by chance. We understand perfectly well that scientific forecasting is possible only if we have accurate and verified knowledge of at least the details of the predicted process. Modern science does not yet have such knowledge about elementary particles. In this case, it can be assumed that the main principle existing methods research becomes the position: “Let’s try to do it and see what happens.” Unfortunately.

Therefore, it is quite natural that today issues related to the dangers of experiments are being discussed more and more often. It’s not even a matter of the possibility of microscopic black holes arising during experiments, which, growing, can devour our planet. I don’t really believe in such a possibility, at least at today’s level and stage of my intellectual development.

But there is a deeper and more real danger. For example, in the Large Hadron Collider, streams of protons or lead ions collide in various configurations. It would seem, what kind of threat can come from a microscopic particle, and even underground, in a tunnel encased in powerful metal and concrete protection? A particle weighing 1,672,621,777(74) x 10 -27 kg and a solid, multi-ton, more than 26-kilometer tunnel in the thickness of heavy soil are clearly incomparable categories.

However, the threat exists. When conducting experiments, it is likely that an uncontrolled release of a huge amount of energy will occur, which will appear not only as a result of the rupture of intranuclear forces, but also the energy located inside protons or lead ions. Nuclear explosion of a modern ballistic missile, based on the release of the intranuclear energy of an atom, will seem no worse than a New Year's cracker in comparison with the powerful energy that can be released during the destruction of elementary particles. Quite unexpectedly, we can let the fairy genie out of the bottle. But not that flexible, good-natured and jack-of-all-trades who only listens and obeys, but an uncontrollable, all-powerful and ruthless monster who knows no mercy and mercy. And it will not be fabulous, but quite real.

But the worst thing is that, just like in a nuclear bomb, a chain reaction can begin in a collider, releasing more and more portions of energy and destroying all other elementary particles. At the same time, it does not matter at all what they will consist of - metal tunnel structures, concrete walls or rocks. Energy will be released everywhere, tearing apart everything that is connected not only with our civilization, but with the entire planet. In an instant, only pitiful, shapeless shreds may remain of our sweet blue beauty, scattering across the great and vast expanses of the Universe.

This is, of course, a terrible, but very real scenario, and many Europeans today understand this very well and actively oppose dangerous unpredictable experiments, demanding to ensure the safety of the planet and civilization. Each time these speeches are more and more organized and increase internal concern about the current situation.

I am not against experiments, because I understand perfectly well that the path to new knowledge is always thorny and difficult. It is almost impossible to overcome it without experimentation. However, I am deeply convinced that every experiment should be carried out only if it is safe for people and the environment. Today we have no confidence in such security. No, because there is no knowledge about those particles with which we are already experimenting today.

The situation turned out to be much more alarming than I had previously imagined. Seriously worried, I plunged headlong into the world of knowledge about the microcosm. I admit, this did not give me much pleasure, since in the developed theories of the microworld it was difficult to grasp a clear relationship between natural phenomena and the conclusions on which some scientists were based, using the theoretical principles of quantum physics, quantum mechanics and the theory of elementary particles as a research apparatus.

Imagine my amazement when I suddenly discovered that knowledge about the microworld is based more on assumptions that do not have clear logical justifications. Having saturated mathematical models with certain conventions in the form of Planck’s constant with a constant exceeding thirty zeros after the decimal point, various prohibitions and postulates, theorists, however, described in sufficient detail and accurately A Are there practical situations that answer the question: “What will happen if...?” However, the main question: “Why is this happening?”, unfortunately, remained unanswered.

It seemed to me that understanding the boundless Universe and its very distant galaxies, spread over fantastically vast distances, is much more difficult than finding a path of knowledge to what, in fact, “lies under our feet.” Based on the foundation of your average and higher education, I sincerely believed that our civilization no longer has questions about the structure of the atom and its nucleus, or about elementary particles and their structure, or about the forces that hold the electron in orbit and maintain a stable connection between protons and neutrons in the nucleus of the atom.

Until that moment, I had not had to study the basics of quantum physics, but I was confident and naively assumed that this new physics was what would really lead us out of the darkness of misunderstanding of the microworld.

But, to my deep chagrin, I was mistaken. Modern quantum physics, the physics of the atomic nucleus and elementary particles, and the entire physics of the microworld, in my opinion, are not just in a deplorable state. They have been stuck for a long time in an intellectual dead end, which cannot allow them to develop and improve, moving along the path of knowledge of the atom and elementary particles.

Researchers of the microworld, strictly limited by the established unshakable opinions of the great theorists of the 19th and 20th centuries, have not dared for more than a hundred years to return to their roots and once again begin the difficult path of research into the depths of our surrounding world. My very critical view of current situation around the study of the microworld is far from the only one. Many progressive researchers and theorists have more than once expressed their point of view regarding the problems that arise in the course of understanding the fundamentals of the theory of the atomic nucleus and elementary particles, quantum physics and quantum mechanics.

An analysis of modern theoretical quantum physics allows us to draw a definite conclusion that the essence of the theory lies in the mathematical representation of certain average values ​​of particles and atoms, based on indicators of certain mechanistic statistics. The main thing in the theory is not the study of elementary particles, their structure, their connections and interactions in the manifestation of certain natural phenomena, but simplified probabilistic mathematical models based on dependencies obtained during experiments.

Unfortunately, here, as well as during the development of the theory of relativity, the derived mathematical dependencies were put in first place, which overshadowed the nature of the phenomena, their interrelationships and the causes of their occurrence.

The study of the structure of elementary particles was limited to the assumption of the presence of three hypothetical quarks in protons and neutrons, the varieties of which, as this theoretical assumption developed, changed from two, then three, four, six, twelve... Science simply adjusted to the results of experiments, forced to invent new elements whose existence still not proven. Here we can hear about preons and gravitons that have not yet been found. You can be sure that the number of hypothetical particles will continue to grow as the science of the microworld goes deeper and deeper into a dead end.

Lack of understanding physical processes, occurring inside elementary particles and atomic nuclei, the mechanism of interaction of systems and elements of the microworld brought into the arena of modern science hypothetical elements - carriers of interaction - such as gauge and vector bosons, gluons, virtual photons. They are the ones who top the list of entities responsible for the processes of interaction of some particles with others. And it doesn’t matter that even their indirect signs have not been detected. It is important that they can at least somehow be held responsible for the fact that the nucleus of an atom does not fall apart into its components, that the Moon does not fall on the Earth, that electrons still rotate in their orbit, and that the planet’s magnetic field still protects us from cosmic influences .

All this made me sad, because the more I delved into the theories of the microworld, the more my understanding of the dead-end development of the most important component of the theory of the structure of the world grew. The position of today's science about the microcosm is not accidental, but natural. The fact is that the foundations of quantum physics were laid by Nobel Prize winners Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Erwin Schrödinger, Wolfgang Pauli and Paul Dirac in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Physicists at that time had only the results of some initial experiments aimed at studying atoms and elementary particles. However, it must be admitted that these studies were carried out on imperfect equipment corresponding to that time, and the experimental database was only just beginning to be filled.

Therefore, it is not surprising that classical physics could not always answer the numerous questions that arose during the study of the microworld. Therefore, at the beginning of the twentieth century, the scientific world started talking about the crisis of physics and the need for revolutionary changes in the system of microworld research. This situation definitely pushed progressive theoretical scientists to search for new ways and new methods of understanding the microworld.

The problem, we must pay tribute, was not in the outdated provisions of classical physics, but in an insufficiently developed technical base, which at that time, quite understandably, could not provide the necessary research results and provide food for deeper theoretical developments. The gap needed to be filled. And it was filled. A new theory - quantum physics, based primarily on probabilistic mathematical representations. There was nothing wrong with this, except that, at the same time, they forgot philosophy and broke away from the real world.

Classical ideas about the atom, electron, proton, neutron, etc. were replaced by their probabilistic models, which corresponded to a certain level of scientific development and even made it possible to solve very complex applied engineering problems. The lack of the necessary technical base and some successes in the theoretical and experimental representation of the elements and systems of the microworld created the conditions for a certain cooling of the scientific world towards a deep study of the structure of elementary particles, atoms and their nuclei. Moreover, the crisis in the physics of the microworld seemed to have been extinguished, a revolution had occurred. The scientific community eagerly rushed to study quantum physics, without bothering to understand the basics of elementary and fundamental particles.

Naturally, this state of modern science about the microworld could not help but excite me, and I immediately began to prepare for a new expedition, for a new journey. To a journey into the microworld. We have already made a similar trip. This was the first journey into the world of galaxies, stars and quasars, into the world of dark matter and dark energy, into the world where our Universe is born and lives a full life. In his report “Breath of the Universe. Journey one“We tried to understand the structure of the Universe and the processes that occur in it.

Realizing that the second journey would also not be easy and would require billions of trillions of times to reduce the scale of space in which I would have to study the world around me, I began to prepare to penetrate not only into the structure of an atom or molecule, but also into the depths of the electron and proton, neutron and photon, and in volumes millions of times smaller than the volumes of these particles. This required special training, new knowledge and advanced equipment.

The upcoming journey involved starting from the very beginning of the creation of our world, and it was this beginning that was the most dangerous and with the most unpredictable outcome. But it depended on our expedition whether we would find a way out of the current situation in the science of the microcosm or whether we would remain balancing on the shaky rope bridge of modern nuclear energy, subjecting ourselves every second to mortal danger life and existence of civilization on the planet.

The thing is that in order to know the initial results of our research, it was necessary to get to the black hole of the Universe and, neglecting the sense of self-preservation, rush into the burning hell of the universal tunnel. Only there, in conditions of ultra-high temperatures and fantastic pressure, carefully moving in rapidly rotating flows of material particles, could we see how the annihilation of particles and antiparticles occurs and how the great and powerful ancestor of all things - Ether - is reborn, understand all the processes taking place, including the formation of particles , atoms and molecules.

Believe me, there are not many daredevils on Earth who can decide to do this. Moreover, the result is not guaranteed by anyone and no one is ready to take responsibility for the successful outcome of this journey. During the existence of civilization, no one has even visited the black hole of the galaxy, but here - UNIVERSE! Everything here is grown-up, grandiose and cosmically scaled. No joke here. Here in an instant they can turn human body into a microscopic hot energy clot or scatter it across the endless cold expanses of space without the right of restoration and reunification. This is the Universe! Huge and majestic, cold and hot, endless and mysterious...

Therefore, inviting everyone to join our expedition, I have to warn that if anyone has doubts, it is not too late to refuse. Any reasons are accepted. We are fully aware of the magnitude of the danger, but we are ready to courageously confront it at all costs! We are preparing to dive into the depths of the Universe.

It is clear that protecting yourself and staying alive while plunging into a red-hot universal tunnel filled with powerful explosions and nuclear reactions is far from easy, and our equipment must correspond to the conditions in which we will have to work. Therefore, it is imperative to prepare the best equipment and carefully consider the equipment for all participants in this dangerous expedition.

First of all, on our second trip we will take what allowed us to overcome a very difficult path across the expanses of the Universe when we were working on the report on our expedition “Breath of the Universe. The first journey." Of course it is laws of the world. Without their use, our first journey could hardly have ended successfully. It was the laws that made it possible to find the right path among the accumulation of incomprehensible phenomena and the dubious conclusions of researchers to explain them.

If you remember law of balance of opposites, predetermining that in the world any manifestation of reality, any system has its opposite essence and is or strives to be in balance with it, allowed us to understand and accept the presence in the world around us, in addition to ordinary energy, also of dark energy, and also, in addition to ordinary matter, dark matter. The law of balance of opposites made it possible to assume that the world not only consists of ether, but also ether consists of two types of it - positive and negative.

Law of Universal Interconnection, implying a stable, repeating connection between all objects, processes and systems in the Universe, regardless of their scale, and law of hierarchy, ordering the levels of any system in the Universe from lowest to highest, made it possible to build a logical “ladder of beings” from ether, particles, atoms, substances, stars and galaxies to the Universe. And, then, find ways to transform an incredibly huge number of galaxies, stars, planets and other material objects, first into particles, and then into streams of hot ether.

We found confirmation of these views in action. law of development, which determines the evolutionary movement in all spheres of the world around us. Through the analysis of the action of these laws, we came to a description of the form and understanding of the structure of the Universe, we learned the evolution of galaxies, and saw the mechanisms of the formation of particles and atoms, stars and planets. It became completely clear to us how the big is formed from the small, and the small from the big.

Only understanding law of continuity of motion, which interprets the objective necessity of the process of constant movement in space for all objects and systems without exception, allowed us to realize the rotation of the core of the Universe and galaxies around the universal tunnel.

The laws of the structure of the world were a kind of map of our journey, which helped us move along the route and overcome its most difficult sections and obstacles encountered on the way to understanding the world. Therefore, the laws of the structure of the world will be the most important attribute of our equipment on this journey into the depths of the Universe.

The second important condition for the success of penetrating into the depths of the Universe will, of course, be experimental results scientists they carried out for more than a hundred years, and all stock of knowledge and information about phenomena microworld accumulated by modern science. During our first trip, we became convinced that many natural phenomena can be interpreted in different ways and completely opposite conclusions drawn.

Incorrect conclusions, supported by cumbersome mathematical formulas, as a rule, lead science into a dead end and do not provide necessary development. They lay the foundation for further erroneous thinking, which, in turn, shapes the theoretical positions of the erroneous theories being developed. It's not about formulas. Formulas can be absolutely correct. But the decisions of researchers about how and along what path to advance may not be entirely correct.

The situation can be compared with the desire to get from Paris to the airport named after Charles De Gaulle along two roads. The first is the shortest, which can take no more than half an hour, using only a car, and the second is exactly the opposite, around the world by car, ship, special equipment, boats, dog sleds across France, the Atlantic, South America, Antarctica, Pacific Ocean, the Arctic and finally through north-east France straight to the airport. Both roads will lead us from one point to the same place. But over what time and with what effort? Yes, and maintaining accuracy and reaching your destination during a long and difficult journey is very problematic. Therefore, not only the process of movement is important, but also the choice of the right path.

On our journey, just like in the first expedition, we will try to take a slightly different look at the conclusions about the microworld that have already been made and accepted by the entire scientific world. First of all, in relation to the knowledge gained from the study of elementary particles, nuclear reactions and existing interactions. It is quite possible that as a result of our immersion into the depths of the Universe, the electron will appear before us not as a structureless particle, but as some more complex object of the microworld, and the nucleus of the atom will reveal its diverse structure, living its own unusual and active life.

Let's not forget to take logic with us. She allowed us to find our way in the most difficult places our last trip. Logics was a kind of compass indicating the direction the right way on a journey through the vastness of the Universe. It is clear that even now we cannot do without it.

However, logic alone will clearly not be enough. On this expedition we cannot do without intuition. Intuition will allow us to find something that we cannot even guess about yet, and where no one has looked for anything before us. It is intuition that is our wonderful assistant, to whose voice we will listen carefully. Intuition will force us to move, regardless of rain and cold, snow and frost, without firm hope and clear information, but it is precisely this that will allow us to achieve our goal contrary to all the rules and guidelines to which all of humanity has become accustomed since school.

Finally, we can't go anywhere without our unbridled imagination. Imagination- this is the knowledge tool we need, which will allow us, without the most modern microscopes, to see what is much smaller than the smallest particles already discovered or only assumed by researchers. Imagination will demonstrate to us all the processes occurring in the black hole and in the universal tunnel, provide the mechanisms of occurrence gravitational forces during the formation of particles and atoms, it will guide you through the galleries of the atomic nucleus and give you the opportunity to make an exciting flight on a light rotating electron around the solid, but clumsy company of protons and neutrons in the atomic nucleus.

Unfortunately, we won’t be able to take anything else on this journey into the depths of the Universe - there is very little space and we have to limit ourselves even to the most necessary things. But that can't stop us! The goal is clear to us! The depths of the Universe await us!

Neutrinos, an incredibly tiny particle in the universe, have fascinated scientists for nearly a century. More Nobel Prizes have been awarded for research on neutrinos than for work on any other particle, and huge installations are being built to study it with the budget of small states. Alexander Nozik, a senior researcher at the Institute of Nuclear Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences, a teacher at MIPT and a participant in the “Troitsk nu-mass” experiment to search for the neutrino mass, tells how to study it, but most importantly, how to catch it in the first place.

The mystery of the stolen energy

The history of neutrino research can be read like a fascinating detective story. This particle has tested the deductive abilities of scientists more than once: not every riddle could be solved immediately, and some have not yet been solved. Let's start with the history of the discovery. Radioactive decays various kinds began to be studied back in late XIX century, and it is not surprising that in the 1920s, scientists had in their arsenal instruments not only to record the decay itself, but also to measure the energy of the escaping particles, albeit not particularly accurate by today's standards. As the accuracy of the instruments increased, so did the joy of scientists and the bewilderment associated, among other things, with beta decay, in which an electron flies out of a radioactive nucleus, and the nucleus itself changes its charge. This decay is called two-particle, since it produces two particles - a new nucleus and an electron. Any high school student will explain that it is possible to accurately determine the energy and momentum of fragments in such a decay using conservation laws and knowing the masses of these fragments. In other words, the energy of, for example, an electron will always be the same in any decay of the nucleus of a certain element. In practice, a completely different picture was observed. The electron energy not only was not fixed, but was also spread out into a continuous spectrum down to zero, which baffled scientists. This can only happen if someone steals energy from beta decay. But there seems to be no one to steal it.

Over time, the instruments became more and more accurate, and soon the possibility of attributing such an anomaly to an equipment error disappeared. Thus a mystery arose. In search of its solution, scientists have expressed various, even completely absurd by today's standards, assumptions. Niels Bohr himself, for example, made a serious statement that conservation laws do not apply in the world of elementary particles. Wolfgang Pauli saved the day in 1930. He was unable to attend the physics conference in Tübingen and, unable to participate remotely, sent a letter which he asked to be read. Here are excerpts from it:

“Dear radioactive ladies and gentlemen. I ask you to listen with attention at the most convenient moment to the messenger who delivered this letter. He will tell you that I have found an excellent remedy for the law of conservation and correct statistics. It lies in the possibility of the existence of electrically neutral particles... The continuity of the B-spectrum will become clear if we assume that during B-decay, such a “neutron” is emitted along with each electron, and the sum of the energies of the “neutron” and electron is constant...”

At the end of the letter there were the following lines:

“If you don't take risks, you won't win. The gravity of the situation when considering the continuous B-spectrum becomes especially clear after the words of Prof. Debye, who said to me with regret: “Oh, it’s better not to think of all this ... as new taxes.” Therefore, it is necessary to seriously discuss each path to salvation. So, dear radioactive people, put this to the test and judge.”

Later, Pauli himself expressed fears that, although his idea saved the physics of the microworld, the new particle would never be discovered experimentally. They say that he even argued with his colleagues that if the particle existed, it would not be possible to detect it during their lifetime. Over the next few years, Enrico Fermi developed a theory of beta decay involving a particle he called the neutrino, which agreed brilliantly with experiment. After this, no one had any doubt that the hypothetical particle actually existed. In 1956, two years before Pauli's death, neutrinos were experimentally discovered in reverse beta decay by the team of Frederick Reines and Clyde Cowan (Reines received the Nobel Prize for this).

The Case of the Missing Solar Neutrinos

As soon as it became clear that neutrinos, although complex, could still be detected, scientists began trying to catch neutrinos extraterrestrial origin. Their most obvious source is the Sun. Nuclear reactions constantly occur in it, and it can be calculated that about 90 billion solar neutrinos per second pass through every square centimeter of the earth's surface.

At that moment the most effective method catching solar neutrinos was a radiochemical method. Its essence is this: a solar neutrino arrives on Earth, interacts with the nucleus; the result is, say, a 37Ar nucleus and an electron (this is exactly the reaction that was used in the experiment of Raymond Davis, for which he was later given the Nobel Prize). After this, by counting the number of argon atoms, we can say how many neutrinos interacted in the detector volume during the exposure. In practice, of course, everything is not so simple. You must understand that you need to count single argon atoms in a target weighing hundreds of tons. The mass ratio is approximately the same as between the mass of an ant and the mass of the Earth. It was then that it was discovered that ⅔ of solar neutrinos had been stolen (the measured flux was three times less than predicted).

Of course, suspicion first fell on the Sun itself. After all, we can judge his inner life only by indirect signs. It is not known how neutrinos are created on it, and it is even possible that all models of the Sun are wrong. Quite a lot of different hypotheses were discussed, but in the end scientists began to lean toward the idea that it was not the Sun, but the cunning nature of the neutrinos themselves.

A small historical digression: in the period between the experimental discovery of neutrinos and experiments on the study of solar neutrinos, several more occurred interesting discoveries. First, antineutrinos were discovered and it was proven that neutrinos and antineutrinos participate in interactions differently. Moreover, all neutrinos in all interactions are always left-handed (the projection of the spin on the direction of motion is negative), and all antineutrinos are right-handed. Not only is this property observed among all elementary particles only in neutrinos, it also indirectly indicates that our Universe is, in principle, not symmetrical. Secondly, it was discovered that each charged lepton (electron, muon and tau lepton) has its own type, or flavor, of neutrino. Moreover, neutrinos of each type interact only with their lepton.

Let's return to our solar problem. Back in the 50s of the 20th century, it was suggested that the leptonic flavor (a type of neutrino) does not have to be conserved. That is, if an electron neutrino was born in one reaction, then on the way to another reaction the neutrino can change clothes and run as a muon. This could explain the lack of solar neutrinos in radiochemical experiments that are sensitive only to electron neutrinos. This hypothesis was brilliantly confirmed by measurements of the solar neutrino flux in the SNO and Kamiokande large water target scintillation experiments (for which another Nobel Prize was recently awarded). In these experiments, it is no longer inverse beta decay that is being studied, but the neutrino scattering reaction, which can occur not only with electron, but also with muon neutrinos. When, instead of the flux of electron neutrinos, they began to measure the total flux of all types of neutrinos, the results perfectly confirmed the transition of neutrinos from one type to another, or neutrino oscillations.

Assault on the Standard Model

The discovery of neutrino oscillations, having solved one problem, created several new ones. The point is that since the time of Pauli, neutrinos have been considered massless particles like photons, and this suited everyone. Attempts to measure the mass of neutrinos continued, but without much enthusiasm. Oscillations changed everything, since mass, however small, is required for their existence. The discovery of mass in neutrinos, of course, delighted experimenters, but puzzled theorists. First, massive neutrinos do not fit into the Standard Model of particle physics, which scientists have been building since the beginning of the 20th century. Secondly, the same mysterious left-handedness of neutrinos and right-handedness of antineutrinos is well explained only, again, for massless particles. If there is mass, left-handed neutrinos should, with some probability, turn into right-handed ones, that is, into antiparticles, violating the seemingly immutable law of conservation of the lepton number, or even turn into some kind of neutrinos that do not participate in the interaction. Today, such hypothetical particles are commonly called sterile neutrinos.

Neutrino detector "Super Kamiokande" © Kamioka Observatory, ICRR (Institute for Cosmic Ray Research), The University of Tokyo

Of course, the experimental search for the neutrino mass immediately resumed sharply. But the question immediately arose: how to measure the mass of something that cannot be caught? There is only one answer: do not catch neutrinos at all. Today, two directions are most actively being developed - the direct search for the mass of neutrinos in beta decay and the observation of neutrinoless double beta decay. In the first case, the idea is very simple. The nucleus decays with electron and neutrino radiation. It is not possible to catch a neutrino, but it is possible to catch and measure an electron with very high accuracy. The electron spectrum also carries information about the neutrino mass. Such an experiment is one of the most difficult in particle physics, but its undoubted advantage is that it is based on basic principles conservation of energy and momentum and its result depends on little. Currently, the best limit on neutrino mass is about 2 eV. This is 250 thousand times less than that of an electron. That is, the mass itself was not found, but was only limited by the upper frame.

With double beta decay, things are more complicated. If we assume that a neutrino turns into an antineutrino during a spin flip (this model is called after the Italian physicist Ettore Majorana), then a process is possible when two beta decays occur simultaneously in the nucleus, but the neutrinos do not fly out, but are reduced. The probability of such a process is related to the neutrino mass. The upper limits in such experiments are better - 0.2 – 0.4 eV - but depend on the physical model.

The problem of massive neutrinos has not yet been solved. The Higgs theory cannot explain such small masses. It requires significant complication or the use of some more cunning laws according to which neutrinos interact with the rest of the world. Physicists involved in neutrino research are often asked the question: “How can neutrino research help the average person? What financial or other benefit can be derived from this particle? Physicists shrug their shoulders. And they really don't know it. Once upon a time, the study of semiconductor diodes was purely fundamental physics, without any practical application. The difference is that the technologies that are being developed to create modern experiments in neutrino physics are widely used in industry now, so every penny invested in this area pays off fairly quickly. Currently, several experiments are being carried out around the world, the scale of which is comparable to the scale of the Large Hadron Collider; these experiments are aimed exclusively at studying the properties of neutrinos. It is unknown in which of them it will be possible to open a new page in physics, but it will definitely be opened.

The world and science never stand still. Just recently, physics textbooks confidently wrote that the electron is the smallest particle. Then mesons became the smallest particles, then bosons. And now science has discovered a new the smallest particle in the universe- Planck black hole. True, it is still open only in theory. This particle is classified as a black hole because its gravitational radius is greater than or equal to the wavelength. Of all the existing black holes, Planck's is the smallest.

The lifetime of these particles is too short to make their practical detection possible. At least for now. And they are formed, as is commonly believed, as a result of nuclear reactions. But it is not only the lifetime of Planck black holes that prevents their detection. Now, unfortunately, this is impossible from a technical point of view. In order to synthesize Planck black holes, an energy accelerator of more than a thousand electron volts is needed.

Video:

Despite the hypothetical existence of this smallest particle in the Universe, its practical discovery in the future is quite possible. After all, not so long ago, the legendary Higgs boson could not be discovered either. It was for its discovery that an installation was created that only the laziest inhabitant on Earth has not heard of - the Large Hadron Collider. The scientists' confidence in the success of these studies helped achieve a sensational result. The Higgs boson is currently the smallest particle whose existence has been practically proven. Its discovery is very important for science; it allowed all particles to acquire mass. And if particles had no mass, the universe could not exist. Not a single substance could be formed in it.

Despite the practically proven existence of this particle, the Higgs boson, practical applications for it have not yet been invented. For now this is just theoretical knowledge. But in the future everything is possible. Not all discoveries in the field of physics immediately had practical application. Nobody knows what will happen in a hundred years. After all, as mentioned earlier, the world and science never stand still.