Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cosmicforce who wrote (30084)	9/28/2001 3:09:15 PM
From: gao seng	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

The decays neutron -> proton + electron (+ antineutrino, btw) proton -> neutron + positron (+ neutrino, btw) do NOT logically imply either that the neutron "is made of" (i.e. contains) a proton and an electron or the reverse, i.e. that the proton contains a neutron and a positron. [ Nitroglycerin decays into water, carbon dioxide and diatomic nitrogen, but does not _contain_ those entities as such. ] All you can say about the decays neutron -> proton + electron + antineutrino proton -> neutron + positron + neutrino is that, given certain reasonable assumptions about conservation, * a neutron and a (proton + electron + antineutrino) are made of the same things, and * a proton and a (neutron + positron + neutrino) are made of the same things. [ Nitroglycerin does not _contain_ water, carbon dioxide and diatomic nitrogen. Nitroglycerin and (water + carbon dioxide and nitrogen) are made of the same things, i.e. C, H, N and O atoms.] And, indeed, given that protons and neutrons are made of combinations of up and down quarks and given that particle-antiparticle pairs can be created out of energy, that is the case.