RE: Scrutinizing a dark top model with colliders, cosmology and astrophysics
Why do I always start your post by looking for that something "stupid" which may be hidden somewhere on the post? :)
Because this is a funny game? :D
Out of curiosity, is there a reason for the quark which is the heaviest subatomic particle to be the top quark? Shouldn't quantum gravity make it the bottom quark?
First of all, the top quark is the heaviest because nature has decided... We don't know why the masses of the quark are what they are. They are proposals trying to explain the patterns, but so far these are all hypothetical.
Quantum gravity has in contrast nothing to do here, as gravity is not included in the Standard Model. For the moment, there is no satisfactory theory unifying all 4 fundamental interactions in a unique framework. I have however not understood the reason of your question. Why would quantum gravity make the bottom quark heavier?
Oh, I was playing around with the idea of the larger the object, the higher the gravitational attraction between them. So I thought the heavier particle would be the one at the bottom. There is a lot of assumptions going on in my head when I asked the question :)
The names have nothing to do with the size. All those guys are elementary particles at the end of the day. without any substructure. The bottom quark is in fact the next-to-heaviest.
That explains it then. Thanks a lot.
You are welcome then! :)
Very clear here
Thanks! :)