MPJ

Don't take this title too seriously. It's wrong on multiple levels. Grammatically and scientifically. Nonetheless, it fits perfectly for this post. As for grammar amiss, I used the Latin root word 'Gravis' which means heavy, and it is actually the perfect adjective for gravity as we perceive it here on Earth. As for the scientific issue, the rest of the title might be all wrong. If we glimpse into the features of the three main natural forces of the universe, it is obvious that they work in more or less the same fashion—they use carriers or elementary particles to mediate the force through the force field. Photon is one of them, and it carries electromagnetism, while strong and weak forces in the nucleus, respectively, are mediated by gluons and w/z bosons and they are all confirmed in experiments. Gravitons are supposed to be the same thing as gravitation force, but they are never found and confirmed either directly or consequently. Ever since Einstein, we have had se...

In the last post of Beth's Q&A ,we tried to understand four basic forces and their corresponding particle carriers, or bosons. With almost certain discovery of the Higgs boson, physicists completed the search for this last mystery of the standard model, and we now know how larger particles get their mass and how they interact with each other. Now is the time to bring this story up one level and write about chemical elements representing basic 'Lego' blocks of almost everything in the universe we currently comprehend. Hmm, everything but mysterious dark matter, which we still don't have a clue what it's made of. Every now and again in media (mostly internet), we can read about how we all are made out of stars and other violent events in the universe dating back in time even so far in the past to the Big Bang itself. Following some of these articles, Beth posted another idea for the thread, and I am paraphrasing her thoughts: "I keep reading we are mad...