Why do subatomic particles occur in such uniform types?
446869
Good question. There really is no good answer except to say that the basic equations of physics have a lot of symmetry. To get that symmetry requires there to be only a handfull of truly elementary particles. The Big Bang has nothing to do with this. It wasn't an explosion in the conventional sense and didn't 'break up' matter into the fundamental particles. It's more like the fundamental particles 'condensed' out of the vacuum.
129718
its due to their spin, and actually protons are composed of quarks (which due to their spin properties give it a positive charge).\n\nYou can do a search on quarks and learn more about sub-atomic particles
383428
It's an interesting idea, but subatomic particles that do not have electrons are also affected by time dilation (cosmic rays for instance).  And electrons do not literally spin around a nucleus (as far as we can tell) there is a potential for it to be anywhere in a give shell at any given time.
1118486
Suppose a charged particle moves at a more or less constant velocity v1 followed by a finite time interval t of acceleration resulting in a new velocity v2. The radiation emitted always spans a large range of frequencies which (as a rough approximation) goes from frequencies of about 0 to 1/t, dropping to zero at frequencies much higher than 1/t.\n\nFor the acceleration events in your examples: For an electron passing through a sharp local magetic field, t ~ a/v where a is the size of the region with the magnetic field and v the electron velocity. For a collision with a nucleus or other charged particle t ~ b/v where b is the impact parameter (the closest distance between the straight line trajectory of the electron and the particle it's colliding with).\n\nFor purposes of order of magnitude calculations, the total energy per frequency interval radiated by a particle with charge e (in gaussian cgs units) is roughly:\n\nd Energy/d omega  ~ e^2 * |v2-v1|^2/c^3\n\nfor frequencies in the region 0 < omega < 1/t.\n\nThere is never one single frequency emitted except when there's a sustained pure sinusoidal varying current as in a radio antenna. Of course atomic and nuclear transitions produce photons with precise frequencies (wavelengths) but those are not really the result of accelerating charges in the usual sense.
298477
neutrons\n\nIsotopes have to have the same numbers of protons\nor they'd be different elements.  Since the\nelectrons match up with the protons, the electron\ncount is consistent too.
475479
here's my guess --\nthat these particles are somehow "connected" . that they do not violate casuality (this one is proveable) or locality....somehow.
920787
What you're asking about are called "virtual particles" which are constantly and spontaneously generated in the near-vacuum of space. It's a quantum mechanical effect that occurs at spatial sizes smaller than about 1.6^ minus 35 meters (..some 10^ 20 times smaller than a proton) It's there that space becomes a kind of seething foam filled with energy. Virtual particles are formed in pairs, each the anti-particle of the other so that they almost instantaneously self-annihilate.\n\nThis website provides more on this subject ==>http://www.sciam.com/askexpert_question.cfm?articleID=0004D0F8-772A-1526-B72A83414B7F0000
774392
Several reasons:\n1) Fundamental research like nuclear particle physics almost always leads to applications that are useful in everyday life. Subatomic physics research brought us: particle detectors used in medical applications, nuclear energy, the world wide web, .....\n2) Money invested in subatomic physics is money that benefits the economy in indirect ways. A  Swiss study of a few years ago showed that for every Swiss Franc invested in CERN, resulted in 7 ChF added to the GDP\n3) Curiosity: we humans like to know how things work.
278891
The concepts that we cling to suggest that protons and electrons are particles that occupy a finite POINT in space. The truth is that this is a good picture to use to fit the kind of world we see outside the atom. But in fact we only know that the effects of electrons appear to come from one location, and that location (of the effects) seems to change with time. Therefore we say the particle (electron) moved.\n\n Regarding the nucleus and the protons and neutrons, it is difficult to picture stationary objects packed so closely together, particularly since the protons are repulsive to each other and since strange events periodically erupt from within most of them - sort of analogous to groups of people from opposing schools required to mingle at a party, but never allowed to group together with their friends. Occasionally a fight breaks out and someboby is pitched out the side door or window. Again at the site we identify with the particle, all we know is that there are electric and magnetic field characteristics emanating from the "site" where we say the particle resides. If the essence of the fields move, we say the particle moved.\n\nSo what is an electron? All we know is that there is an electric and magnetic field disturbance together with a phenomenon we call mass (gravitational emanations), that changes in location with time. That there is a central location for the emanations allows us to specify a spatial position for the particle.
360394
A more generic term for the components of an atom is "sub-atomic particles."  I think that's the answer you're looking for.
715843
B: Some mass is converted into energy in order to split the unstable nucleus into two, smaller, stable ones.\n\nC: Their nuclei are too big to remain in one lump of mass. Particles (alpha, beta, gamma, etc) start shooting off in all directions, to bring the nucleus down to a smaler size. It's all about the smaller size.\nAlso, no atom can have more than one nuclues, because then it would be two atoms. More or less elctrons make an atom into a charged ion, not an isotope. Neutrons are what make isotopes.
168218
Atoms are combinations of protons and neutrons with electrons flying around. They form the basic "elements" of matter.\n\nThe nucleus of an atom has protons and neutrons (except for hydrogen which has one proton). There are about the same number of protons and neutrons in each nucleus, although for larger nuclei (like uranium) there are more neutrons.\n\nAll of these particles have a variety of specific characteristics. For example an electron has a negative charge and a proton has a positive charge, while the neutron is neutral. The charge of the proton and electron are identical except for the sign.\n\nProtons and neutrons are both made of quarks. A proton has two "up" quarks and one "down" quark, while the neutron has two "down" quarks and one "up" quark. (The up and down are just names for these two types of quark, there is no physical significance to the name. They could have selected \nChocolate and Vanilla instead.)\n\nProtons and neutrons are almost always described as being composed of three quarks, but there are also gluons running around. Gluons are the particles which control the interaction of quarks within a proton or neutron. They carry the force that binds the three quarks together to form the larger particle.\n\nSo a proton or neutron has three quarks and a cloud of gluons.\n\n(Just as an aside: If one combines a proton and an electron and a neutrino you will get a neutron, but, in the oddness of quantum physics that doesn't mean a neutron is made of these little guys.)\n\nElectrons on the other hand seem to have no consituents, at least down to the level that has been probed with modern instruments.
1114892
Most likely lost from both S and P subshells but two electrons parked in a D or F subshell associated with one main quantum number lower. Ions want to achieve a noble gas configuration, which means no or all electrons of the same main quantum number S and P orbitals filled.
912086
(m)\n\nMatter which consists of antiparticles, elementary particles of ordinary matter, such as protons and electrons, but have an opposite electrical charge. For example, an antiproton has a negative charge while a proton has a positive charge. When a particle of matter and a particle of antimatter come into contact with each other they are destroyed, releasing energy.
341412
There are some theories that suggest that quarks and leptons are composed of smaller "fundamental" particles known as Preons or Rishons (depending on the theory you read). The rishon theory nicely shows why electrons and quarks always have a charge that's a multiple of e/3 by having the same rishons or antirishons inside them.\n\nAlso they have a hypercolour property similar to the colour property of quarks that explains why the particles we see (leptons or confined quarks) always have an integer multiple of e charge.\n\nThese theories also have downsides too, such as Heisenbergs uncertainty principle stating that a particle that small must have a large amount of energy, which is more than the mass of an electron!
113847
These particles include atomic constituents such as electrons, protons, and neutrons (protons and neutrons are actually composite particles, made up of quarks), as well as other particles such as photons and neutrinos which are produced copiously in the sun. However, most of the particles that have been discovered and studied are not encountered under normal earth conditions; they are produced in cosmic rays and during scattering processes in particle accelerators.
815589
it is very simple, the shells, subshells actually represent energy levels in the atoms. it is just like big building having different storeys and them again the rooms. You can compare storeys as shells, and individual apartments as subshells and the rooms in each apartment as orbitals where we the electrons are revolving