ive heard that theres another subatomic particles called graviton. what is graviton really is?
79989
Still more theory than fact.\nIt is responsible for the force of gravity.
704188
Quantum Physics is the Science and Study of Atomic Particles, the most basic of which is the Electron, the Proton and the Neutron, and the futher study of the constituent parts of those particles, Quarks, Muons, Gluons, etc etc etc.\n\nThe Standard Model is the best way to learn these particles. There is (apparently) no rhyme or reason as to the why's and wherefor's of the Standard Model - meaning that nobody knows WHY the weights are what they are, nobody knows why the numbers shake out the way they do and the particles organize themselves the way they do - this is one of the last great mysteries of Physics that modern M-Theory (String or SuperString Theory) is attempting to answer.\n\nHere's a good link or three\n\nOf them all, I would recommend the Wiki as a great place to start... Take notes, it's fairly complex, you can do it!
908545
Tiny particles called gluons.
106790
< quark >   \n \nAny of a group of six elementary particles having electric charges of a magnitude one-third or two-thirds that of the electron, regarded as constituents of all hadrons.\n\nIn particle physics, quarks are subatomic particles thought to be elemental and indivisible. They are one of the two kinds of spin-? fermions (the other being the leptons). Objects made up of quarks are known as hadrons; well known examples are protons and neutrons.
326942
Positron.  Same mass as electron but +1e charge.  And it is never refered to as an "anti electron".  Its name is positron.  Thats just as silly as calling it "positive electron".
1179398
That is a very good question. We currently do not know definitively the answer to this question. Thousands of years ago, the Greeks believed that all matter were composed of some indivisble units called "atoms". This was irrefutably proven by Einstein at the turn of the 20th century (and he received a Nobel Prize for it). However, as we probe further, we discovered that even atoms has internal structure: protons, neutrons and electrons. For awhile we thought that was it, but then later we found that protons and neutrons were also made of more fundamental particles called quarks (now confirmed by experiements).\n\nSo is this it? Quarks is the final indivisible unit? It turns out that it is most likely not the case. The reason is not that we have discovered anything smaller than quarks. The reason is because our 2 current theories of the physical world, quantum mechanics and theory of general relativity, are not compatible with each other. What this means is that these 2 theories are not completely correct. They are good for most situations, but they can not explain objects like black holes or explain the big bang (the beginning of the universe). There are other things that these 2 theories can't explain, but I won't go into that right now.\n\nThese serious flaws has been the mother of all physics problems for the most of the 20th century. The Holy Grail of modern physics is to find a single theory that can combine the 2 theories together and explain all physical phenonmenons. So far we have one candidate: Superstring Theory.\n\nSo in our effort to solve this problem, we created String Theory, which tells us that quarks are not the fundamental building blocks of matter, but tiny filaments of vibrating energy called Strings. They are much much smaller than quarks. Quarks are estimated to be about to 10^-16 centimeters, but strings are around 10^-33 centimeters. So is this it? We really don't know for sure, but all the signs points to a yes (I won't explain why here because it's too long and it wasn't your question.).\n\nSo does this imply that matter/energy always existed? The answer is NO. because the universe is about 14 billion years old. That's how long anything has existed, including all the matter and energy.
375283
The quark hasn't yet been split, so noone knows what they are made of. It is possible that quarks aren't made of smaller particles.
14731
Photons, gluons, gravitons and Z are neutral and elementary so they are their own anti-particles.\n\nThe W+ and W-, the weak force carriers, are charged and are anti-particles.  W+ and W- can annihilate each other.
443153
In physics, the graviton is a hypothetical elementary particle that transmits the force of gravity in most quantum gravity systems. In order to do this, one theory posits that gravitons have to be always-attractive (gravity never pushes), work over any distance (gravity is universal) and come in unlimited numbers (to provide high strengths near stars). In quantum theory, these requirements define an even-spin (spin 2 in this case) boson with a rest mass of zero.
95898
The most fundamental particles known to exist at the moment are quarks and leptons. Quarks are the things the make up the pieces of the nucleus in an atom and leptons include things like electrons.\n\nWithin a nucleus you will have heard of Protons and Neutrons ro collectively Nucleons. Well a quark is a sub unit of one of these so called "Nucleons". There are three quarks to every nucleon. There are many types of quark and these create many types of particles, most of which are extremely shortlived. You can learn more about the world of Particle Physics in the Particle Physics Adventure.\n\nhttp://particleadventure.org/particleadventure/
453117
How can you have something if nothings there? Atoms are made up or protons, neutrons, and quarks which are the basic building blocks of matter. Well at least until someone discovers there made up of something else lol!
367288
Yes.\nStuff that make up the protons and neutrons.\nAnd stuff that make up the stuff that make up the protons and neutrons.\nAnd ..................it goes on and on, but we humans do not know where it ends, or even if it does end, there are only theories about it.
62030
Protons and neutrons.
833894
On a subatomic level, forces involve the exchange of mediating particles.  In the case of the electromagnetic and gravitational forces, those particles do not carry electric charge, or any other quantum numbers, besides spin.  Therefore, releasing them and absorbing them does not alter the identity of a particle, although its energy and momentum are changed.  \n\nThe weak force is more complicated, however.  There are two types of mediating particles. One type (the W particles) carries electric charge.  In order to release or absorb a W particle, a subatomic particle must change its electric charge (and therefore its identity) in order for charge to be conserved.\n\nThis is essentially why beta decay happens.  A neutron produces a negatively charged W particle, and changes into a proton.  The W particle itself decays into an electron and a neutrino.  \n\nThe second decay, (of the mediating particle) is not possible with gravitational or electromagnetic forces, because their mediating particles are massless, and travel at the speed of light. (The rules of special relativity forbid light speed objects from decaying.)
606473
Quite frankly, we don't know. Like listed above, there is a variety of smaller particles that we have been able to smash an atom into. However, each time we build a bigger smasher, we get new particles. The thought is that there is a fundamental particle that is no longer divisible, but I don't think science has commited to it yet.
401428
Basically no. The idea behind subatomic physics is that when things get stuck together, you have to put energy into them to split them apart. (just like "real" physics). The tighter they are stuck together, they more energy it takes to split them apart. And the smaller they are, the tighter they are stuck together.\n\nQuarks are stuck together into subatomic particles so tightly that we need to build even bigger more powerful "atom smashers" to bust them loose; big "racetracks" miles across where the electrons can wind up faster and faster until they get released at the target. Costs a LOT to build. Until then, they're just a theoretical toy.\n\nAs for 'colors', that's just a name they made up to classify them by, doesn't apply to anything real. Same as the properties they call 'strangeness' or 'charm'.
205616
The Begy atomic model. It eliminates the nedd for the quite unbelievable strong and weak nuclear forces. It also defines gravity as a force acting upon the universe rather than from within it. This reduces the forces in this universe to just one the electromagnetic force. Is this a unified field theory?\n\nWeb search, "Begy atomic model"