Particle Physics and the mysteries of the early Universe
|For the longest time as history records,
science has held that all matter is composed of fundamental building blocks.
Even though they could not see it physically , the ancient Greeks for example
presumed that a stone could be ground up into finer and finer grains until it
reached single indivisible points of matter which they called it átomos,
meaning “un-cuttable”. Their suspicions proved later correct, as some
two-and-a-half-thousand years later, scientists in the early 20th
century discovered that indivisible unit and named it” the atom”. This naming
turned out to be rather premature as
it was later found that these atoms
could be further broken into smaller particles, namely the protons, neutrons
and electrons. But that was not the end of the tale. Over the following
decades next particle accelerator experiments revealed there to be large
number of, what were labeled, sub-atomic particles. This gave birth to a new
branch of science called it “Particle
physics”. As time passed and more and more particles were discovered, it
became then clear that something was a miss with these ‘fundamental’ units of
our universe. Their numbers ran into tens then to over a hundred. Could
nature be so complicated? A study of their properties and interactions led to
the idea that many of these were made up of still smaller units. This led to
the discovery of six types of quarks particles and anti quarks, which are
said to compose protons, neutrons and other particles like W bosons, Muons,
Tau particles Z particles, Neutrinos, pions, poseelectrons, gluons gravitons,
higgs particles etc.
While it is true that a large number of particles might pose a philosophical problem, a more fundamental problem must be the way in which they are said to interact. In the world of particle physics, matter is constantly flashing in and out of existence as new particles are created and destroyed. And while this process may seem strange, it is stranger still that many of these interactions appear to occur without regard to mass conservation. Let we take muons is for example. What are these Muons?_: Muons are charged particles that are primarily generated as a result of cosmic bombardment in the upper atmosphere of the earth. They are mostly negatively charged and can be thought of as heavy but unstable electrons. Muons have a short half-life of 2.2 microseconds, after which they decay into an electron and a couple of neutrinos. The decay process of muons can be like this and there is a muon neutrinos:
This reaction is however known to all and it obeys the charge conservation rule in that both muon and electron have an equal negative charge while the neutrinos are neutral. But a muon is 206 times heavier rest mass than an electron is and the neutrinos was considered weigh almost nothing (or next to nothing but it has mass what ever neglizable, it carries also a mass of 17,000 electron volts (kev ).] The question is where did all that mass go? According to most modern physics theory , mass must either be conserved or converted to an equivalent amount of energy, determined via the E=mc2 equation. This energy must be released in the form of electromagnetic radiation, i.e. as photons. But there is no evidences found in the standard texts that photons are released during this process of above equations.
Actually to us, the above equations is incomplete before the present authors here because there should also be a W– boson particle involved there. This W– particle weighs in at 157 thousand times heavier than an electron and quickly flashes in-and-out of existence while creating the electron and one of the neutrinos. Here again is another apparent violation of mass conservation, and a huge one at that! But since it quickly disappears, we could give it the benefit of doubt and say that it causes no overall conservation problem. One possibility for mass conservation may have to do with neutrino momentum. we shall discuss this further on.
The next question has to do with where muons come from. Muons come from a pion decay, which in turn are generated from high-energy proton collisions in the upper atmosphere. The pion to muon conversion process looks like this:
Again there is a temporary intermediate W particle involved which we have not shown in above equation. The pion again has a mass of 273 electrons which is only slightly above the muon (at 206) and there are no photons in our sight. Hence again we have a mass conservation problem, albeit only minor. Ignoring the various neutrinos then, the complete process goes something like this:
Notice here something a miss? That’s right: the positive proton yields a negative pion! This is surely impossible to you according to charge conservation rules. Now to be fair, the interaction is not stated in full like this. Various literatures on the subject discuss the pion/muon and muon/electron decays separately and each decay process shown preserves charge correctly. But when it comes to the full process the present modern literature search becomes somewhat vague, particularly in regard to the pion’s charge. When a cosmic ray proton impacts atomic nuclei of air atoms in the upper atmosphere, pions are created. These decay within a relatively short distance (meters) into muons (the pion's preferred decay product), and neutrinos.
The above excerpt does not say what charge these pions have except they are somehow created from protons. Since protons are positive this indicates the created pions must also be positive, in which case they could not decay into negative muons. The webpage from SLAC helps clear this up when it says
In cosmic ray showers, both muons and antimuons are produced about equally.
That’s good. With equal amounts of muons (negative) and anti muons (positive), charge is conserved. But where went than all these anti muons? If they are produced in equal numbers and have equal half-lives, we should observe them equally at sea level. Instead the literature indicates a vast abundance of muons only. An explanation of pion/muon conversions-: The above raises many questions to us!. Does the cosmic proton convert directly to pions? or does it create the pions as part of a collision, while preserving its own existence? And what happened to all that mass? Did the mighty cosmic proton convert itself to a puny electron without releasing the required amount of radiation to account for mass difference?
Given the laws of uncertainty principal over the charge conservation problem in pion creation, it is understandable that the available literature is somewhat vague on details. However we authors believe there is a better explanation for the above reactions that not only preserves charge and mass, but also does away with these mysterious particle disappearance and creation-out-of-nothing conjectures.
Start with the proton., A proton is believed to be made up of two up-quarks (positive) and one down-quark (negative). Is it possible that these quarks are rather really the pions and muons we observe? I.e., is the negative muon really a down-quark and the positive pion an up-quark?
According to scientists, protons are essentially unbreakable and quarks can never be seen on their own. But this seems unlikely. If a proton is made of several parts, and you hit it hard enough, e.g. in a high-energy cosmic collisions, then surely those parts would separate. Scientists have declared that quarks have fractional charges” colors” and, given that we’ve never seen a fractional charge, we’ve obviously never seen a broken proton. This idea of fractional charges was initially introduced to explain the composition of the neutron purely in terms of quarks. But as pointed out in the previously, neutrons can be more easily explained in terms of a proton joined to an electron. Could it be that quarks in fact have unit charges and have been hiding in plain sight all along?
With this idea in mind, let us assume that our proton has just smashed into some part of the atmosphere, e.g. a nitrogen nucleus, and has split into three quarks: two positive and one negative. What now? . There it was postulated than an electron and positron can overlap, creating an effectively invisible composite particle, which may be called a poseltron. Could a similar event be happening here? The positive quarks are surrounded by electrons. They could quickly absorb one each and become an ‘invisible’ neutral particle. The pions have apparently decayed!
But the down-quark is negative and cannot absorb electrons so it continues down. This is the muon we see. What will happen to it – will it absorb a positron and also disappear? Perhaps, but this is unlikely because there are few positrons to be had; they’ve already been absorbed by available electrons and become poseltrons. Here’s instead what happens. The high-velocity muon collides with a poseltron. This causes the electron-positron pair to split. The positron is absorbed into the muon and the electron is ejected. The muon ‘decayed’ into an electron. Of course the muon is still there but as it’s now overlapping a positron, it forms a particle of neutral charge and can no longer be seen.
Here’s the full process in picture form [ Figure-1]
As can be seen, no fundamental particles have been created or destroyed, while charge and mass are conserved throughout.
Some points on pion/muon lifespan and mass -:The pion has a much shorter lifespan than a muon: about 85 times shorter (0.026 vs. 2.2 microseconds). Based on the above, that’s to be expected. Electrons are everywhere and will quickly be absorbed by a pion. But poseltrons and positrons are rare. Hence a pion will only last a few hundred metres before being absorbed, whereas a muon can often make it all the way to sea level. If a muon is really a down quark this means a down-quark weighs around 206 electron masses, i.e. about one ninth of a proton. Since there are also two up-quarks in a proton this means that an up-quark should weigh (1836-206)/2 = 815 electron masses. There’s a problem here because a pion reportedly weighs only 273 electron masses. So either I’m way out on the assumptions or there’s something fishy about the way a pion’s mass is measured.
Neutrinos _:Now some discussion needs to be made about these ghost particles “ Neutrinos” because we have ignored them in the above interactions. Neutrinos are neutral particles emitted during certain decay processes such as neutron decay and the pion and muon decays described above.. The existence of neutrinos particle was first postulated by Wolfgang Pauli NL in 1930s to explain why electrons when leaving a nucleus in the form of beta radiation move more slowly than it is expected. They were later observed/confirmed in bubble chamber experiments. There are broadly three (3) species of ‘Neutrinos”. I) Electron neutrinos 2) Muon neutrinos 3) tat neutrinos. During first half of twentieth century, physicists were convinced that all stars including our Sun, shines by converting, deep in its interior, hydrogen into helium. According to this theory, 4 hydrogen nuclei called protons (p) are changed in solar interior into a helium nucleus (4He), two anti-electrons (e+), positively charged electrons), and two elusive and very mysterious ghostly particles called neutrinos . This process of nuclear conversion, believed to be responsible for sunshine and therefore for all life on this planet The Earth. The conversion process, which involves many different nuclear reactions, can be written schematically as: 4p→4He +2e+ +2ve ---- as Bhattacharya Rupak wrote once it i.e ,two neutrinos produced each time as the fusion reaction (1) within star. Since four protons are heavier than a helium nucleus, two positive electrons and two neutrinos, reaction (1) releases a lot of energy to Sun, that ultimately reaches earth as sunlight. The reaction occurs very frequently. Neutrinos escape easily from Sun and their energy does not appear as solar heat or sunlight in earth. Sometimes neutrinos are produced with relatively low energies and Sun gets lot of heat. Sometimes neutrinos are produced with higher energies and Sun gets less energy. Neutrinos usually have zero electric charge, interact very rarely with matter, and – according to the particle physics very high standard level textbook version of the standard model of particle physics – they are mass less. About 1000 billion neutrinos from Sun pass through your thumbnail every seconds, but you do not feel them because, they interact so rarely and so weakly with matter. Neutrinos are practically indestructible; almost nothing happens to them. For every hundred billion solar neutrinos passing through Earth every seconds, only about one interacts at all with stuff of which Earth is made. Because they interact so rarely, neutrinos can escape easily from solar interior, where they are created and bring direct information about solar fusion reactions to us on Earth. There are three known types of neutrinos already told. Nuclear fusion in Sun produces only neutrinos that are associated with electrons, the so-called electron neutrinos . The two other types of neutrinos, muon neutrinos and tau neutrinos , are produced, for example, in laboratory accelerators or in exploding stars, together with heavier versions of the electron, the particles muon and tau . But there were some missing neutrinos too. All accepted models in cosmology & in particle physics however accept that neutrinos are mass less or so. But the idea that neutrinos might have mass also was of about 40 years old. The successful unification of the weak and electromagnetic force field implied that there should be as many as kinds of neutrinos, as there are different kinds of electron like particles. There is till no confirmed mass evidences that neutrinos have a non zero mass (Bhattacharjee Rupak and Bhattacharya Pranab Kumar )- The heaviest neutrinos in Gev temperature ranges from
í to r electron volts. But the scientists found that this wooly mammoth allegedly carries also a mass of 17,000 electron volts (kev). By Radioactive beta decay process- a process in which an unstable nucleus in radioactive isotopes emits both an electron and a neutrino, of decay of electrons. Rupak & I recorded the energy of decay electrons by sending them into a crystal where they knock other electrons creating a current that provided a measure of energy where a big 17Kev regularly appeared, taken from the energy of a few electrons. The energy was then obvious 17 Kev neutrinos and 1% of their emitted neutrinos belonged to heavy neutrinos. Neutrinos can pass through entire Earth almost near or at speed of light without leaving a trace and it is immune to many of forces that bind matter including electromagnetic forces. But obviously faster than speed of light? So! They have almost never been observed outside the controlled environment of big accelerator laboratories of USA & CERN in Europe. Neutrinos are even more common in universe then photons (light particles), only because probably Big Bang left a sea of very low energy neutrinos that permeated every corner of this Cosmos. In 30th march 2006 from the US laboratory “ Fermi lab” reported first result from a neutrinos experiment Called “MINOS”( Main injector neutrino Oscillation search) in Soudan mine at a depth of 776 meter in minnestoa 732 Km away. The MINOs experiment showed that there is a short fall in the number of muon neutrinos ,if they are detected a long distance away from their point of production, may be called “Missing Neutrinos”- as we told earlier, some neutrinos were missing . Solar neutrinos actually have a multiple personality disorder. They are created as electron neutrinos in Sun, but on way to Earth, they change their type. For neutrinos, the origin of personality disorder is a quantum mechanical process, called "neutrino oscillations .Lower energy solar neutrinos switch from electron neutrino to another type as they travel in vacuum from Sun to Earth. The process can go back and forth between different types. The number of personality changes, or oscillations, depends however upon neutrino energy. At higher neutrino energies, process of oscillation is enhanced by interactions with electrons in Sun or in Earth. Stas Mikheyev, Alexei Smirnov, and Lincoln Wolfenstein first proposed that interactions with electrons in Sun could exacerbate personality disorder of neutrinos, i.e., the presence of matter could cause the neutrinos to oscillate more vigorously between different types. The standard model of particle physics assumes that neutrinos are mass less. What we authors could never follow .In order for neutrino oscillations to occur, some neutrinos must have masses- some may not have mass. Therefore, the standard model of particle physics must be revised. Neutrinos are elementary particles where all neutral counterparts of charged leptons namely the electrons, the muons and ţ leptons all of which take participation in the weak interactions. Determination of neutrinos particles still remain notoriously difficult from the point of view of experiments and got challenges in the particle physics of highest depth research. At this moment, there is no information of even values of their individual masses. We authors however proposed their value as m1<3ev;ml<190Kev; mj<18.2 Mev may be the mass of different muon nutrinos numbers. It is worth noted that direct detection of VĴ was reported in 2006 for the first time only from Fermi laboratories USA. The presence of neutrino oscillation in 2006 march experiment by Fermilab .Direct Observation of NUTAU E872 [DONUT] experiment implies existence of distant & non vanishing mass for neutrinos flavors. So neutrinos must have a non-zero mass. For electron neutrinos the mass is 10-6ev. A mass in excess of 1ev would then be significant since neutrinos would then contribute mass than stars ( Stars like sun) to the mass density of universe. The universe would be then closed if mass of neutrinos would be between 25 and 100 eV. So 1) “Electron Neutrinos” had amass of 20ev, 2)”Muon neutrinos” had a mass of 0.5Mev and 3) Tat neutrinos” had a mass of 250 Mev. Electron neutrinos constituted about a third of the total number of neutrinos. Most of neutrinos produced in interior of Sun, all of which are electron neutrinos when they are produced, are changed into muon and tau neutrinos by time they reach Earth. In QCD, studies suggest that primordial universe was dominated by neutrinos of non-zero mass rather then by quarks with it’s colour. A natural scale then emerged determined by maximum distance neutrinos that could stream freely as universe expanded, before neutrinos slowed down on account of their mass below the scale of super cluster i.e. galaxies formation. In this neutrinos theory then no pre- existing fluctuation then survived and the first structure then collapsed and formed galaxies.That a neutral particle could be observed however comes as a startling claim. By any interpretation of Coulomb’s or Maxwell’s laws, a purely neutral particle (i.e. containing no charges) could not apply any force on a charged particle, nor could it be affected by a static or electromagnetic field. An answer to this may be that they can be observed when impacting another particle directly. The below image shows the bubble chamber experiment in which a neutrino was first detected .
The accepted interpretation of this is: (1) a neutrino came in from the right (it can’t be seen due to having no charge). (2) It hits a proton. (3) A positive pion is produced and curves downward. (4) A negative lighter muon is also produced and moves quickly to the left, curving weakly upward. (5) The original heavier proton survives; it moves slowly and curves downward.
According to the standard particle physics model, when oppositely charged particles ( they are called antiparticles) meet with a particle they must annihilate into radiations and energy . Apparently the rules are different for neutral particles; namely that they should bounce off other particles like billiard balls, and this requires sub-atomic particles be slightly elastic. Assuming this is true, how can we calculate the degree of elastic bounce? In any classical situation this would be easily solved in terms of momentum and energy conservation. Knowing the momentum requires knowing the mass and this is a problem because neutrinos are commonly assumed to have none.
Special relativity theory tells us that particles having zero mass, such as photons when at motion, must travel at light speed. This is due to the relativistic rest mass formula, which says an object’s mass increases toward infinity as it reaches nears light speed. For an object of non-zero rest mass this puts the brakes on acceleration and keeps v below c. But for an object with zero rest mass the acceleration can only stop when the particle hits light speed, at which point the object gains a non-zero relativistic mass. What will this mass be? To determine this we can use the Lorentz Transform equation:
Where m0 is the rest mass.
In mathematical terms, when zero is divided by zero is called an indeterminate, meaning that it can have any real-number value, or even an infinite one. Calculating momentum requires multiplying this indeterminate mass by velocity, in this case c, which of course just gives us another indeterminate. This is not helpful! But could a neutrino particle with indeterminate mass/momentum account for the mysteries it is said to solve, such as muon/electron mass-loss and the collision in the above image? After all, if it’s indeterminate then we can assign any value we want to it, right? Perhaps, but we’d be hard-pressed to explain why identical objects moving at the same velocity have different relativistic masses. After all, the speed of light is a universal constant; not a universal variable.
So if neutrinos don’t account for the above collision what does? Here’s our interpretation. The invisible particle coming from the right (1) is actually a positive pion and negative muon overlapping (similar to the poseltron concept). It strikes the proton (2) and this causes the pion and muon to break apart and become visible. The three particles, pion, muon and proton are then scattered.
A far more interesting aspect of this image arises from measuring the extent of scattering. A simple pixel measurement shows the length of each track to be:
In the muon’s case, it ended up off screen so we can only calculate a ratio of 442/72 = 6.1, which is understandably less than the real muon/proton ratio (about 9) because the track must be longer. But seeing as the muon’s mass has already been determined in other experiments by comparing its particle tracks to electrons, we can accept their stated mass as being 206 electrons.
Neutral composite particles _:This description of a pion-muon particle (which struck the proton in the above image) as well as the poseltron spoken about in the earlier gives rise to the possibility that there are many neutral composite particles in existence. Here are some charged particles we commonly know of:
A Bold Hypothesis _: In the above description of muon to electron conversion, the muon decayed when it met a poseltron. This caused the electron and positron to separate, followed by the muon absorbing the positron and ejecting the electron. Here is a diagram showing a break-down of events:
The electron and positron are pictured smaller than the muon because they are lighter. If we assume sub-atomic particles to be made of a similar material of uniform density, this would make the muon/electron diameter ratio proportional to the cube-root of their mass ratio: in this case making the muon about 6 times larger as shown.
The idea that there should be direct correlation between mass and size seems quite logical and this is probably how most would view sub-atomic particles. But this view alas creates a problem for the electron-positron separation shown above. If the electron was much smaller than the muon its charge density would be much higher. Hence the muon would be unable to force the electron and positron to separate because the electron would be using a much higher percentage of its charge to attract and hold the positron. The only way the above could work is for the muon and electron to be very similar in size.
Based on this reasoning we’d like to make a bold hypothesis:
All fundamental (indivisible) sub-atomic particles are identical in size. They vary only in mass and charge.
If this is true, everything from an electron to a top quark has the same diameter but different densities. This may turn out to be true only for certain types of particles such as those in the pion/muon/electron interactions. But if this principle can be extended to all particles, it would allow for a much broader range of interactions. Hence many composite particles could be again composed from further small numbers of fundamental sub - particles
Higgs field : particle mass is a measure of the resistance to movements through Higgs field. This finding of higgs particle is so interesting events and chances were very rare: 1 in 100,000,000,000 (1 followed by 11 zeros) Equivalent to looking for one particular grain in is 2.5 million kg of rice. Higgs events are also very rare Equal quantities of Matter and Anti-matter should have been produced in the Big Bang, then annihilated each other leaving just radiationSuper-symmetry :- it means symmetry between types of particles. Every observed particle has a super-partner, just too (1000 times) massive to have been already seen Super symmetry particles are S quarks, S gravitino, S leptons ,Photinos, Gluons, Wino, zino, Higgsino
How the particles are captured? World’s most massive “onion” structure to capture the particles is ATLAS ATLAS Control Room, first beams, 20 November 2009
How about using tachyons to transmit information faster than the speed of light, in violation of Special Relativity? It's worth noting that when one considers the relativistic quantum mechanics of tachyons, the question of whether they "really" go faster than the speed of light becomes much more touchy! In this framework, tachyons are waves that satisfy a wave equation. Let's treat free tachyons of spin zero, for simplicity. We'll set c = 1 to keep things less messy. The wave function of a single such tachyon can be expected to satisfy the usual equation for spin-zero particles, the Klein-Gordon equation:
To simplify the math a bit, let's work in 1+1 dimensions with co-ordinates x and t, so that
We can decide as we please whether or not we want to consider the second type of solution. They seem weird, but then the whole business is weird, after all.
(1) If we do permit the second type of solution, we can solve the Klein-Gordon equation with any reasonable initial data — that is, any reasonable values of φ and its first time derivative at t = 0. (For the precise definition of "reasonable", consult your local mathematician.) This is typical of wave equations. And, also typical of wave equations, we can prove the following thing: if the solution φ and its time derivative are zero outside the interval [−L, L] when t = 0, they will be zero outside the interval [−L− | t |, L + | t |] at any time t. In other words, localized disturbances do not spread with speed faster than the speed of light! This seems to go against our notion that tachyons move faster than the speed of light, but it's a mathematical fact, known as "unit propagation velocity".
(2) If we don't permit the second sort of solution, we can't solve the Klein-Gordon equation for all reasonable initial data, but only for initial data whose Fourier transforms vanish in the interval [−| m |, | m |]. By the Paley-Wiener theorem this has an odd consequence: it becomes impossible to solve the equation for initial data that vanish outside some interval [−L, L]! In other words, we can no longer "localize" our tachyon in any bounded region in the first place, so it becomes impossible to decide whether or not there is "unit propagation velocity" in the precise sense of part (1). Of course, the crests of the waves exp(−iEt + ipx) move faster than the speed of light, but these waves were never localized in the first place! The bottom line is that you can't use tachyons to send information faster than the speed of light from one place to another. Doing so would require creating a message encoded some way in a localized tachyon field, and sending it off at superluminal speed toward the intended receiver. But as we have seen you can't have it both ways: localized tachyon disturbances are subluminal and superluminal disturbances are nonlocal The energy potential of a Tachyon particle -according to Japanese scientist- features several millions of joules per centimeter cube and exhibiting a junction potential of some 800 millions of volts (1000 times more than sun). Tachyon-Energy is for free. Tachyon-Energy is limitless available. Tachyon-Energy is ubiquitary, in other words, accessible to all nations. Tachyon-Energy can be produced extremely polycentric: on any desired place on earth, on any desired quantity, without deficiency. The wavelength of Tachyons is approximate 10 to the power of 23. Tachyon-Energy does not lead to environmental pollution as no radioactive material, nor toxic waste nor are other toxins involved. There are different ways to use Tachyon-Energy: hereinafter we shall present some of them.
Possible Application of Tachyons - I
Through direct use of „gravity-storms“ via space-quantum-streams. These type of application suits for transforming the force of gravity into electrical energy: as a substitute for the common nuclear power plants, coal-fired power plants, oil-fired heating systems, car engines, etc. etc.
Possible Application – II Time machine and Time Travels in future
.Possible Application - III
By vacuum-field technology. This type of technology bases on the theory that two opposite energy waves “neutralize” themselves. In such a vacuum-field molecular structures can be transformed from chaotic ones into harmonical ones. This phenomena is also known as negative entropy order neg-entropie.
By the help of this technology appropriate material qualifies as “antennas” for Tachyon particles. So far we are quite successful using parts of this technology in combination with pure crystalline silicon and some noble metals. Science confirms that Tachyon Energy features anti-entropic properties; an inverse effect to chaos, confusion and decay.
Entropy is the definition for the chaos within a system: the bigger the entropy is, the bigger the confusion is. Natural living organisms show tendential anti-entropic behavior, in other words, the intuitively try to diminish any kind of confusion (chaos). Studies prove that imbalance within the energy-fields of beings will -sooner or later- manifest on a material level as ageing , tension, pain and illness. The anti-entropic effects of Tachyon Energy helps to balance the subtle energy fields in our physic body. The health implications could be named as holistic use of this type of energy: interactions in between mental and physical aspects are directly affected .Latest studies proves that the subtle energy fields in our physical body are balanced with Tachyons: an optimization of our homeostasis is achieved. Homeostasis stands for self-regulating functions assuring the maintenance and continuity of a specific system. Homeostasis is the property of a system that regulates its internal environment and tends to maintain a stable, constant condition of properties such as temperature.
One can communicate by a telephone faster then light may be called Tachyon telephone!
Tachyons can be source for energy in space ship
5] Bilaniuk, Deshpande and Sudarshan American j Physics 30;78;1962
6] Gerald Feinberg “on the Possibility of faster than Light particles “ Physics Rev 159;1089-1105;1967
7]Tachyons is an mathematical Imaginary particle that may move faster then Photons (Light particles) in the universe and yet to be discovered as comments in the Science Blogs.com