![quark matter 2017 brian cole quark matter 2017 brian cole](https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S037026931730059X-gr002.jpg)
However, there is no proof that differences in behaviors must be caused by undiscovered particles. This is pure speculation based on the fact that many discoveries involved more fundamental particles. The statement is that if there is a difference in how things are behaving then there must be another particle responsible. There’s a fundamental logical flaw in the thinking of these scientists (I wish scientists had rigorous logic training in school). Based on such a fake time, special relativity is wrong. Therefore, relativistic time defined by Lorentz Transformation is not our physical time but a fake time. It is wrong to claim that special relativity tells us that a traveling twin would become younger than the earth bound twin because, even in special relativity, the biological age of the twin is not a simple record of pure time but the aging result which is the product of time and aging rate, invariant of Lorentz Transformation as proved above, and thus the same as the biological age of the earth bound twin. That is, clock time is invariant of Lorentz Transformation, absolute and independent of reference frames in special relativity. In special relativity, when observed from a stationary frame, relativistic time of a moving frame does become shorter t’ = t/γ but the relativistic frequency of a clock on the moving frame becomes faster f’ = γf to make the product of relativistic time and relativistic frequency unchanged compared with that of the stationary clock: T’ = t’f’/k = (t/γ)(γf)/k = tf/k = T. The number of cycles is the product of time and frequency (i.e. T = tf/k where t is time of the reference frame, f is the frequency of the clock in that reference frame and k is a calibration constant). Actually, every physical clock records the number of cycles of a periodical process and uses this number to indirectly calculate the elapsed physical time (i.e. there does not exist such an ideal clock that can directly record time without the help of a physical process. The effect of time can never be shown without the help of a status changing rate i.e. All the changes of the statuses of physical processes are the products of time and changing rates. We know time is a concept abstracted from the status changes of physical processes such as the change of the view angle of the sun, the increase of the height of a tree, the distance that a car has driven, the biological age of a person, the number of cycles of a clock, etc. No matter whether the current result of this experiment is true or not, Standard Model is definitely wrong because its theoretical base, Einstein’s special relativity is wrong, which introduces a fake time through Lorentz Transformation to replace our physical time measured with physical clocks. Bradley et al., 22 March 2021, High Energy Physics – Experiment. Reference: “Test of lepton universality in beauty-quark decays” by LHCb collaboration: R.
#Quark matter 2017 brian cole upgrade#
The LHCb experiment is expected to start collecting new data next year, following an upgrade to the detector.
![quark matter 2017 brian cole quark matter 2017 brian cole](https://www.rollingstone.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/curb-your-enthusiasm-punisher-stranger-things-fall-tv-preview-420160d5-c21d-407f-af84-4e04f2f73512.jpg)
It is now for the LHCb collaboration to further verify their results by collating and analyzing more data, to see if the evidence for some new phenomena remains. “While we have to wait for confirmation of these results, I hope that we might one day look back on in this as a turning point, where we started to answer to some of these fundamental questions.” Michael McCann, who also played a leading role in the Imperial team, said: “We know there must be new particles out there to discover because our current understanding of the Universe falls short in so many ways – we do not know what 95% of the Universe is made of, or why there is such a large imbalance between matter and anti-matter, nor do we understand the patterns in the properties of the particles that we do know about. “We know there must be new particles out there to discover because our current understanding of the Universe falls short in so many ways.” - Dr.