OPINIONS are quarks+leptons the smallest

whats youe OPINION are quarks+leptons the smallest particals?

i that knowone knows for sure but do you THINK they are the smallest particals (without going into strings)??

i think yes because they are so much smaller than hadrons that are only made from 2/3 quarks.

units of momentum are the smallest particles

EVERY PARTICLE IS COMPOSED OF SMALLER PARTICLES, IT GOES ON FOREVER

THERE IS NO WAY TO GET OUR INSTRUMENTS PRECISE ENOUGH TO FIND INFINITELY SMALL PARTICLES

lol at retard grammar.

anyways, i believe that all Elementary particles (quarks, electron, leptons, units of momentum, ect) are the same size, which is infinitely small. they don't actually even have size, just coordinates.

the thing that we call "size" with these particles is the point where the NEGATIVE GRAVITY FIELD (or similiar rejecting force) of the particle starts to increase rapidly.

you understand what i mean?

i mean that there is no solid barrier around the particle, just an increasing force of rejection. i believe that two particles can be brought infinetily close to each other with enough force.

>>4
i believe that all Elementary particles (quarks, electron, leptons, units of momentum, ect) are the same size, which is infinitely small.
lol, you believe wrong

>>4
Fail for cargo cult science.

>>5
>>6

:(
i never actually read about this or heard about this in school, so it's all my own guessing.

But has it really been proven that my theory is either false or true?

>>7
Infinity is a mathematical concept, it has no grounding in the physical world.

>>7
Demented fuckwad, if there is no proof for something to begin with, there is no reason to assume it is true.

I think this is an important question deserving of this bulletin board.

Personally I think they are distinct numbers and that people who think they are equal are just sloppy and incompetent!

What do you think /sci/?

>>10
No, this is a stupid question.  They are equal in theory because 2.999... has an infinite number of 9's, so it is infinitely close to 3.  In reality, nothing can possess a characteristic with an infinite amount of complexity, such as a radius of 2.9999... meters.  The reason this shit gets asked here over and over is because there are a lot of retards here who don't seem to understand basic calculus.

>>4
Why do you "believe" this seemingly random concoction of nonsense without any sort of evidence for it? You just made this up and now you believe it? Good fucking work Gene Ray. Go be religious.

If you want a real answer to your question, notions of particle size and location arise due to the interference pattern formed from their composite waves. If you add two sine waves of different frequency together, you get beats; as you add more and more overtones, you get an interference pattern with essentially one large beat in the middle, which we view as a particle. Size and position are defined in terms of the interference pattern, and so they do not have the same strict meaning as size and position in ordinary geometry. This is the nature of the uncertainty principle and other such wave phenomena.