Talk:Strange matter
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ] |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics. |
|
Help with this template Please rate this article, and then leave comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify its strengths and weaknesses. |
|
I have undone most of Dan Gluck's changes to the 1st para. However, the point about strange matter occurring in various points is an important one, so I added text to make that point. For the rest, (1) strange matter is no more hypothetical than any other kind of quark matter. (2) In Dan Gluck's version the contrast between strange and non-strange quark matter has been lost. (3) The extra description of nuclear matter is a distraction: this is not an article about nuclear matter. (4) Strange stars are not analogous to neutron stars. Neutron stars are gravitationally bound, whereas strange stars are self-bound. Dark Formal 00:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Negative charged strangelets
The article says that stranglets repel from the nucleus because they are positively charged but I've been pointed at http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0512112 by a few people in discussion about CERN and destroying the Earth via black holes or stranglets. That paper says that the cascade effect wouldn't happen so the Earth wouldn't be turned into a giant stranglet soup but it would seem some strangelets are possibly attracted to the nucleus. AlphaNumeric 16:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, some models predict that strangelets of certain masses might be negatively charged. I rewrote that section to make this clearer. The main reason for not worrying about such a disaster is that if it could happen it already would have (from cosmic rays hitting the moon, for example). I tried to make this clearer also. But I'm open to suggestions for further changes... Dark Formal 23:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed Merge
I have proposed merging Strangelet into this article. Squideshi 03:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
It is true that the strangelet article is currently languishing because I haven't had the time to develop it properly, but strange matter and strangelets are two different things, just as nuclear matter and nuclei are two different things. Even though a nucleus is made of nuclear matter, it is natural to have separate articles because nuclear matter is a bulk phenomenon, whose thermodynamic limit (large volume, zero charge density) can be taken, whereas a nucleus is a finite chunk, with strong surface effects, and can have non-zero charge density. Exactly the same considerations apply to strangelets vs strange matter.
Again, I admit that right now the strangelet article is so stub-like that it doesn't look as if it deserves a separate existence. I will try to expand it and improve it over the next few weeks, and we'll see if you still then want to merge it then. If you want to join in this process I would be delighted. Dark Formal 14:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
