How do you understand the neutron lifetime difference between tropped p and bottle n?

Dear experts in Standard Model,

I am currently modeling free neutrons as a compound particle consisted of a proton and an electron. One of the first theoretical predictions is the free neutron decay energy of 0.78 MeV.

I do not know the details of Standard Model, can experts in this field please help me find the papers that handles the decay energy using the Standard Model? It will be even better if the binding energy of deuterium is also calculated.

Your help is highly appreciated.

Best regards,

Hong Du

Quantum physics is a highly muddled system of systems. Nevertheless, is it possible to enumerate the major flaws and minor ones in quantum physics, with sufficient justification? It would be good to connect them if one can categorize them into major and minor flaws.

In my current work on the theory of hyperbolic functions, I, as a completely extraneous observer of the turbulent debates relating to the subtlest intricacies of the Special Theory of Relativity (SRT), have drawn attention to the fact that hyperbolic functions are most used not in constructing bridges, aqueduct arches or describing complex cases of X-ray diffraction, but in those sections of the SRT that are related to the name of Professor Minkowski. Since my personal interest in SRT is essentially limited to the correct application of hyperbolic functions when describing moving physical realities, I would be grateful to the experts in the field of SRT for the most concise explanation of the deep essence of the theory of space-time patterns of surrounding me reality.

Naturally, my question in no way implies the translation into human language of the lecture of the Creator of the Theory, the honour of acquaintance with which in 1907 belongs to the academic/medical community of the city of Cologne and its surroundings. My level of development and my agreeableness have ensured that I not only managed to read independently the text underlying the concept of « Minkowski four-dimensional continuum », but also to formulate my question as follows:

Which of the options I propose is the most concise (i.e. non-emotional-linguistic) explanation of the essence of Minkowski’s theory:

1. The consequence of any relative movement of massive physical objects is that we are all bound to suffer the same fate as the dinosaurs and mammoths, i.e. extinction.

2. Understanding/describing the spatial movements of physical objects described by a^2-b^2=const type mathematical expression implies acquiring practical skills of constructing second-order curves called «hyperbolas».

3. All of us, including those who are in a state of careless ignorance, are compelled to exist in curved space.

4. Everything in our lives is relative, and only the interval between physical events is constant.

5. The products of the form ct (or zct), where c is the speed of light and z is some dimensionless mathematical quantity/number symbolizes not a segment of three-dimensional space, but a time interval (or time?) t between uniquely defined events.

6. The electromagnetic radiation generated by a moving massive object always propagates in a direction orthogonal to the velocity vector of the moving object.

Of course, I will be grateful for any adjustments to my options, or expert’s own formulations that have either eluded my attention or whose substance is far beyond my level of mathematical or general development.

Most respectfully

Sergey Sheludko

Dear all,

What is your opinion about the following point?

The second postulate of special relativity is "light is always propagated with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body."

This is in perfect agreement with Maxwell's equations and with any propagation of waves in a medium. Thus, if one works with Maxwell's equations, this postulate is not needed.

However, the transformations invented by Voigt in 1887 and adopted by Lorentz impose implicitly the speed of propagation of electromagnetic waves to be constant (absolute) for all observers.

What is your choice?:

1) Speed of light is independent of the speed of the source, only

2) Speed of light is constant for all observers

3) "The velocity of light is not independent of the velocity of the source, the velocity of light is not constant for all observers.", Daniele Sasso

Please explain. Thank you very much.

Can someone please help how to write Klein-Gordan equation for massless particles and also its action or Euler–Lagrange equation for massless particles?

1. Relativists have tried to exorcise the paradox by all means ("acceleration" and others), but their arguments are obviously bad.

2. There is no universal (Newton's) time in the theory of relativity. There is your time at your place and my time at your place; there is your time at my place and my time at my place, and so forth. There is no one Time; hence, the debate about who is "younger" and who is "older" is baseless and incoherent. I consider the entire discourse about the relativity of time meaningless and useless; but a discourse about twins paradox is especially bad.