1,792
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 3:
Line 3: − + − http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3687+ +
I couldn't find anyone contradicting basic quark theory
: Who are the quark skeptics? I never heard of any serious dispute about the theory of quarks. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 13:48, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
: Who are the quark skeptics? I never heard of any serious dispute about the theory of quarks. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 13:48, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
:: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-1753(198106)72%3A2%3C216%3ATHOTQ%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J
:: [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-1753(198106)72%3A2%3C216%3ATHOTQ%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J] [http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3687]
::: I couldn't find anyone contradicting basic quark theory. A 1981 paper seemed to want to address some philosophical issues, I'm not sure. The 2003 story said that some observation was 10% different from what was expected, but no one is doubting quarks. Quark theory is rock solid science. (So is most of evolution, but that is for another page.) [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 23:58, 28 March 2007 (EDT)