Several users on this forum, one in particular, Sandokhan, uses a great amount of ‘data’ that masquerades as science. Rather than trying to deal with all the various terms he miss uses invents, for this thread we pick just one term he constantly misuses: subquarks.
The person in question uses this term over and over in his posts as though these things are actually real.
So what is a subquark? Who and where were they discovered?
Firstly sudquarks, or preons have NEVER been discovered. The only place they could have been discovered is either at CERN or some other large scale particle accelerator. To date no discovery of a subquark has ever been made.
Preons or subqurks were just and are just hypothetical and have never been detected by any experiment and remain just an idea that became popular 30 years ago and has since fallen out of favour among those who work in the field of exotic sub atomic particles. Do a search on subquarks and most of the papers on the subject will have been produced in the 1980s. CERN and what has been discovered about the sub atomic world science has put paid to the idea of a subquark existing.
CERN regularly puts out press releases like this one when new particles may have been discovered:
https://home.cern/news/news/physics/lhcb-experiment-discovers-two-perhaps-three-new-particleshttps://home.cern/news/news/accelerators/discovery-new-class-particles-lhcCERN or any other high energy facility has never discovered subquarks, they are not, as far as we currently know real, anyone who imagines they are real are wrong as no hard evidence currently exists in that no experiment ever carried out points to their existance.
Why people like Sandokhan constantly use them in his elaborate pseudoscience posts as though they are real just illustrates how far of the mark and pseudoscientific all his posts are.
Let’s be clear subquarks, as far as is know do NOT exist, have never been detected by any experiment ever carried out. Using them as though they exist in any argument at a stroke renders that argument null and void.
Wikipedia gives a list of all known and theorised particles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_particlesPreons were suggested as subparticles of quarks and leptons, but modern collider experiments have all but ruled out their existence.
Science currently says preons or subquarks do not exist, so why does Sandokhan keep refering to them as though they do?