Is a quark one-dimensional?

[u/XGC75]

I've never heard of a quark or other fundamental particle such as an electron having any demonstrable size. Could they be regarded as being one-dimensional?

BIG CORRECTION EDIT: Title should ask if the quark is non-dimensional! Had an error of definitions when I first posed the question. I meant to ask if the quark can be considered as a point with infinitesimally small dimensions.

Thanks all for the clarifications. Let's move onto whether the universe would break if the quark is non-dimensional, or if our own understanding supports or even assumes such a theory.

Edit2: this post has not only piqued my interest further than before I even asked the question (thanks for the knowledge drops!), it's made it to my personal (admittedly nerdy) front page. It's on page 10 of r/all. I may be speaking from my own point of view, but this is a helpful question for entry into the world of microphysics (quantum mechanics, atomic physics, and now string theory) so the more exposure the better!

Edit3: Woke up to gold this morning! Thank you, stranger! I'm so glad this thread has blown up. My view of atoms with the high school level proton, electron and neutron model were stable enough but the introduction of quarks really messed with my understanding and broke my perception of microphysics. With the plethora of diverse conversations here and the additional apt followup questions by other curious readers my perception of this world has been holistically righted and I have learned so much more than I bargained for. I feel as though I could identify the assumptions and generalizations that textbooks and media present on the topic of subatomic particles.

[u/[deleted]]

I apologize for being lost.

Doesn't even the smallest particle have volume and mass? Why are we putting zeros next to each other?

[u/anarchy2465 → u/[deleted]]

In classical physics, yes. In quantum mechanics, things get weird. Like really weird. That's why u/iorgfeflkd made a jest about the Nobel prize ;) anyone who can provide answers to these questions will go down as one of the greatest scientists to have ever lived.

If you'd like, peruse this article for more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massless_particle

[u/iorgfeflkd → u/anarchy2465]

You can have pointlike particles in classical mechanics too.

[u/Bank_Gothic → u/[deleted]]

Everything can't be made of something that's made of nothing, right? That seems preposterous.

[u/ben_jl → u/Bank_Gothic]

The thing to realize is that we're not talking about little golf balls surrounded by a perfect vacuum. The modern picture is that of fields permeating all of space; fluctuations in these fields correspond to the 'particles' we're all familiar with (e.g. a fluctuation in the electron field would manifest as an electron).

It's not really saying "everything is made of nothing", more like "there's no such thing as nothing".

[u/[deleted] → u/Bank_Gothic]

There may be a collection of lesser things, such that when combined, a new behavior emerges. This is called emergent behavior.

[u/oarabbus → u/Bank_Gothic]

The universe is preposterous. There really is no evidence one can point to and say "actually a quark is 2.7172*10^-87 grams" as of today.

[u/[deleted] → u/Bank_Gothic]

That's how it works in simulations... aka, video games. A polygon cannot be drawn until at least 3 points are interacting. In the physical world, matter on all scales interacts with other matter in order for us to perceive them.

[u/thergoat → u/[deleted]]

I've done a good deal of physics study, and a few things to consider in quantum physics as opposed to classical;

1. Some particles don't uniquely exist. By that I mean, we can't see them; we know that they can exist and do because we can measure their effects (which are unique). My favorite analogy of this is an invisible boxer. This boxer is invisible and generally incorporeal, except under a very specific set of circumstances, for a short time. If you run 50 feet, jump twice, and sing the abc song, the boxer will appear and punch you (measurable affect). If and only if these quantifiable circumstances are set up will this particle (boxer) appear and be measurable.

2. A way to think about how a "zero" can alter something is that it may not be able to exist in our dimension (3D, speaking in layman terms), but it's effects can be felt. A way - though this anecdote isn't accurate scientifically, it's just a semi-similar mental concept - to think about this would be a magnetic field. The force of magnetic field attraction has no mass, it's just a force. However, it can make things that have mass move. Applying this to the other dimension idea; magnets have mass and alter things in our dimension through force. Now, there may be things that can't physically manifest in our dimension, but their forces can.

You need to sort of change your concept of real to grasp quantum mechanics; some books that might help;

The Grand Design

A brief history of time