Quark (English: quark ) Japanese: クォーク Korean: ? Greek: Quark Hebrew: Quark Russian: Кварковые Thai: Arabic: ? Introduction (A proton and an antiproton collide at high energy, creating a pair of nearly free quarks.) In 1964, the American physicists Murray Gell-Mann and G. Zweig each independently proposed that the neutron, proton, a class of hadrons, is composed of a more fundamental unit, the quark. They have a fractional charge, which is 2/3 or -1/3 times the elementary charge, and a spin of 1/2.
Editorial origin of the name
The word quark was taken by Gell-Mann from the phrase "Three quarks for Muster (Mark)" in James Joyce's novel Finnegans Wake. Mark". This is simply a reference to the fact that there are three quarks in a proton. Also quarks have a number of meanings in the book, one of which is the call of a seabird. He thought it suited his original peculiar idea that "elementary particles are not elementary, and elementary charges are not integers", but he also pointed out that it was just a joke, a revolt against pretentious scientific language. Also, it may have been motivated by his love of birds.
Edited definition of quark
All neutrons are made up of three quarks, and antineutrons are made up of three corresponding antiquarks, such as the proton, the neutron. The proton is made up of two up quarks and one down quark, and the neutron is made up of two down quarks and one up quark.
Edited Properties
Charge
Quarks have a charge value of ?1?3 or +2?3 times the fractional-elementary charge, depending on flavor. The top, charm and top quarks (these three are called "up quarks") have a charge of +2?3, while the bottom, odd and bottom quarks (these three are called "down quarks") have a charge of ?1?3. Antiquarks have the opposite charge of their counterpart quarks; the top antiquark has a charge of ? 2?3, while the down-type antiquark has a charge of +1?3. Since the charge of a hadron is the sum of the charges of the quarks that make it up, all hadrons have integer charges: a combination of three quarks (a baryon), three antiquarks (an antibaryon), or a quark with an antiquark (a meson) all add up to integer charge values. For example, the hadrons, neutrons, and protons that make up the nucleus of an atom have charges of 0 and +1, respectively; the neutron consists of two down quarks and one up quark, while the proton consists of two up quarks and one down quark.
Spin
Spin is an intrinsic property of elementary particles, and its orientation is an important degree of freedom. When visualized, it is sometimes seen as an object rotating along its own central axis (hence the name "spin"), but since scientists believe that elementary particles should be point particles, this view is somewhat misleading. Spin can be represented by a vector, the length of which can be measured by the approximate Planck constant ? to measure it. When measuring quarks, measuring the vector component of the spin on any axis results in +? /2 or ? /2; thus the quark is a spin 1?2 particle. The components of spin along an axis (conventionally the z-axis) are generally represented by an up-arrow ↑ for +1?2 and a down-arrow ↑ for ?1?2, followed by the flavor symbol. For example, an up quark with a spin of +1?2 may be written as u↑.
Weak interactions
Quarks can only be converted from one flavor to another through weak interactions, which are one of the four fundamental interactions of particle physics. Any top-type quark (up, charm and top quarks) can be changed into a bottom-type quark (down, odd and bottom quarks) and vice versa by absorbing or releasing a W boson. This flavor-changing mechanism is what leads to the radioactive process of β-decay, in which a neutron (n) "splits" into a proton (p), an electron (e), and an anti-electron neutrino (νe) (see the figure on the right). At the onset of β-decay, the down quark within the neutron (udd), after releasing an imaginary W boson, then decays into an up quark, whereupon the neutron becomes a proton (uud). The W boson then decays into a one-electron and an anti-electron neutrino. n → p + e- + νe (β-decay, baryon tagging)
udd → uud + e- + νe (β-decay, quark tagging)
Beta decay and its inverse, the "inverse β-process," are routinely used in medical science, e.g., in positron emission computed tomography. Both processes also have applications in high-energy experiments, such as neutrino detection.
The figure shows the strength of the weak interactions between the six quarks. The "shades" of the lines are determined by the elements of the CKM matrix. Although the process of flavor change is the same for all quarks, each quark is biased toward becoming another quark of the same generation as itself. This relative tendency of all flavor changes is described by a mathematical table called the Kabibeau-Kobayashi-Ikawa matrix (CKM matrix).The approximate magnitude of all the values within the CKM matrix is as follows:
Where Vij represents the probability of a quark flavor i becoming a quark flavor j (and vice versa). The leptons (the particles to the right of the W boson in the β-decay above) also have an equivalent weak interaction matrix called the Pontikov-Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata matrix (PMNS matrix).The PMNS matrix and the CKM matrix together are able to describe all flavor variations, but the relationship between the two is not clear.
Strong interactions and color charge
Quarks have a property called "color charge". There are three types of color charge***, which can be arbitrarily labeled "blue", "green" and "red", and each has its corresponding anti-color charge - "anti-blue", "anti-blue", and "red" - which can be labeled "blue", "green" and "red". Each color charge has its corresponding anticolor charge - "anti-blue", "anti-green" and "anti-red". Each quark carries a color and each antiquark carries an anticolor. The system governing the attraction and repulsion of quarks is responsible for various combinations of the three colors, called the strong interaction, which is transmitted by a canonical boson called a gluon; gluons are discussed in more detail below. The theory that describes the strong interaction is called quantum chromodynamics (QCD). A quark with a certain color charge can generate a bound system with an antiquark with a corresponding antichromatic charge; three (ant)quarks with different (ant)color charges, that is, one for each of the three colors, can similarly be bound together. Two mutually attractive quarks will reach color neutrality: a quark with color charge ξ, plus an antiquark with color charge ?ξ, bind with zero color charge (or "white" color) and become a meson. As with the superposition of colors in elementary optics, the combination of three quarks with different color charges or three such antiquarks gives the same "white" color charge, making a baryon or antibaryon. In modern particle physics, particle interactions are linked by a spatial symmetry group called canonical symmetry (see canonical field theory). The color charge SU(3) (generally abbreviated as SU(3)c) is the canonical symmetry of the quark color charge and the defining symmetry of quantum chromodynamics. The laws of physics are independent of the orientation of space (e.g., x, y, and z), and remain unchanged even if the coordinate axes are rotated to a new direction, as does the physics of quantum chromodynamics, which is independent of the orientation of three-dimensional color space, whose three directions are blue, red, and green.The color change of SU(3)c corresponds to the "rotation" of color space (mathematically, the color space is "rotated"). corresponding to the "rotation" of the color space (mathematically, the color space is a complex space). Each quark flavor, f, has three subcategories fB, fG and fR below it, corresponding to the three quark colors blue, green and red, forming a triplet: a quantum field with three components in one strand, and obeying the fundamental representation of SU(3)c in the transformation. At this time SU(3)c should be localized, a requirement that, in other words, allows the transformation to vary with space as well as time, so that this local representation determines the nature of the strong interactions, especially the point that there are eight force-carrying gluons.
Mass
When referring to quark mass, two terms need to be used: the "net quark mass", which is the mass of the quarks themselves, and the "group quark mass", which is the mass of the net quarks plus the mass of the gluon field around them. mass of the gluon field. The values of these two masses are generally very different. Most of the mass in a hadron belongs to the gluons that hold the quarks together, not to the quarks themselves. Even though gluons have zero intrinsic mass, they possess energy - more accurately, the quantum chromodynamic binding energy (QCBE) - which is what provides the hadron with so much of its mass (see mass in special relativity). For example, a proton has a mass of about 938 MeV/c2, where the three valence quarks have roughly only 11 MeV/c2; most of the rest of the mass can be attributed to the QCBE of the gluon. The Standard Model assumes that the mass of all elementary particles comes from the Higgs mechanism, which has something to do with the undiscovered Higgs boson. The top quark has a large mass, one top quark is about as heavy as a gold nucleus (~171 GeV/c2), and by studying why top quarks are so massive, physicists hope to find out more about the origin of the mass of quarks, as well as that of other elementary particles.
List of properties
The following table summarizes the key properties of the six quarks. Each quark flavor has its own set of flavor quantum numbers (isospin (I3), charm number (C), singular number (S), top number (T), and bottom number (B′)), which represent some of the properties of the quark system and the hadron. Since baryons consist of three quarks, all quarks have a baryon number (B) of +1/3. In the case of antiquarks, the charge (Q) and other flavor quantum numbers (B, I3, C, S, T and B′) are all one plus or minus sign different from the quarks'. The mass and total angular momentum (J; equal to the spin of a point particle) do not change sign with antiparticles. 3 ?1?2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Anti-bottom d
Second generation
Charm c 1,270+70?90 1?2 +1?3 +2?3 0 +1 0 0 0 0 0 Anti charm c
Charismatic s 101+29?21 1?2 +1?3 ?1?3 0 0 ?1 0 0 0 Anti charismatic s
Third generation
Top t 172,000±900 ±1,300 1?2 +1?3 +2?3 0 0 0 0 +1 0 0 Anti-top t
Bottom b 4,190+180?60 1?2 +1?3 -1?3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ?1 Anti-bottom b
J= Total angular momentum, B= Baryon number, Q= Charge, I3 = Parity Spin, C= Charm, S= Singularity, T= Tops, and B′ = Bottom number. * Markers like 4,190+180?60 represent measurement uncertainties. In the case of top quarks, the first uncertainty is random in nature and the second is systematic. Note: Each flavor of quark has red, green and blue color versions, but all three versions are the same for the properties listed in the table above, so they are not listed.
Editing Discovery Research
Five quarks other than the top quark have been discovered experimentally, and Chinese scientist Ding Zhaozhong was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for his discovery of the charm quark (also known as the J-particle), the three-color quark diagram
. One of the main focuses of high-energy particle physicists in the last decade has been the top quark (t). The discovery of the sixth "top quark" in 1994, believed to be the last, has given scientists a complete picture of quarks, which will help them study how the universe evolved in less than a second at the beginning of the Big Bang, when the initial heat of the Big Bang created top quark particles. The study shows that some stars may become "quark stars" at the end of their evolution. As the star shrinks against its own gravity, the density increases and quarks are pushed out, and eventually a star the size of the Sun may shrink to only seven or eight kilometers in size, but still shine. Quark theory holds that quarks are all imprisoned inside particles and that there are no individual quarks. Some people have based their objections on this, arguing that quarks are not real. However almost all predictions made by quark theory fit well with experimental measurements, so most researchers believe quark theory is correct. In 1997, Russian physicist Dyakonov and others predicted the existence of a particle consisting of five quarks, with a mass 50% larger than that of a hydrogen atom, and in 2001, Japanese physicists found evidence of the existence of a pentaquark particle when they bombarded a piece of plastic with gamma rays at the SP Ring-8 gas pedal. It was subsequently confirmed by physicists at the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Laboratory in the United States and the Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics in Moscow. This pentaquark particle is made up of 2 up quarks, 2 down quarks and an anti strange quark, and it does not violate the standard model of particle physics. This is the first time a particle consisting of more than three quarks has been found. The researchers believe that this particle may be only the first member of the "pentaquark" family of particles to be discovered, and that there may also be particles composed of four or six quarks. One by one, nine experimental groups*** have claimed to have found evidence of the penta-quark. But in other higher energy experimental groups and their data, including the ZEUS experiment using lepton colliders such as DESY in Germany, and the two major B meson factories, Belle at KEK in Japan and BaBar at SLAC in the U.S.A., as well as the CDF and D? experiments at Fermilab in the U.S.A., which use hadron colliders, there is no evidence for the existence of penta-quarks. Therefore, the existence of the so-called penta-quark particle is still a highly controversial topic. At the same time, Spring 8 is also planning to enhance its performance by radiating light 10 times stronger than the current one, and obtaining a larger amount of experimental data for statistical confirmation. Right now, mankind is only boldly hypothesizing and scientifically seeking evidence that quarks are a possible hypothesis to explain some phenomena that are currently unexplained by mankind, but mankind has not been able to find direct evidence for the existence of quarks. Quarks
On December 2, 1996, Science and Technology Daily published Professor Cui Junda's rebuttal to Academician He Joma's article, "Compound Space-Time Theory is Not a Sick Science". In the article, Cui further pointed out that "not all in the physics community recognize the existence of quarks. Dissenting views have existed as early as the 1970s. Our physicist Zhu Hongyuan and Nobel Prize winner Heidelberg, the founder of quantum mechanics, both thought that if quarks really existed, they should have been found long ago, given that so many physicists around the world had spent so much effort searching for quarks. It is of course wrong for this scientist to deny that quarks exist, as the statement "If quarks really existed, they would have been found long ago" is obviously a fallacy, just like saying "If cancer really existed, it would have been cured long ago". In short, science is not about falsehoods and emotions. Quarks can't be proven to exist directly, nor can they be proven (even indirectly) not to exist, it's just a hypothesis at this point.
Editing the process of discovery
Near the end of the 19th century, Marie Curie opened the door to the atom, proving that it is not the smallest particle of matter. Soon scientists discovered two subatomic particles: the electron and the proton.In 1932, James Chadwick discovered the neutron, and this time scientists again thought they had discovered the smallest particle. With the invention of particle gas pedals in the mid-1930s, scientists were able to break neutrons into protons and protons into heavier nuclei to see what the collisions could produce. in the 1950s, Donald Glaser invented the "bubble chamber," which accelerated subatomic particles to near the speed of light and then threw them out of the air. Donald Glaser invented the "bubble chamber" in the 1950s, in which subatomic particles were accelerated to near the speed of light and then thrown out into a low-pressure bubble chamber filled with hydrogen gas. When these particles collide with a proton (the nucleus of a hydrogen atom), the proton splits into a strange new group of particles. Each of these particles leaves behind an extremely tiny bubble as they diffuse from the point of collision, exposing them. Scientists can't see the particles themselves, but they can see the trail of these bubbles. The variety and number of these tiny trails (each indicating the brief presence of a previously unknown particle) on the bubble chamber images both amazed and baffled scientists. They could not even guess what these subatomic particles actually were. Murray Gellman, born in Manhattan in 1929, was a bona fide child prodigy: at age 3, he could mentally compute large numbers father of quarks Gellman
multiplication; at age 7, he won spelling competitions against 12-year-olds; and at age 8, his intellect rivaled that of most college students. However, in school he was bored, fidgety, and suffered from acute writer's block. Although completing essays and research project reports was easy for him, he rarely accomplished them. Nonetheless, he managed to graduate from Yale as an undergraduate and went on to work at MIT, the University of Chicago (for Fermi), and Princeton (for Oppenheimer.) At age 24, he decided to focus on the strange particles in bubble chamber images. With bubble chamber images, scientists could estimate the size, charge, direction of motion, and speed of each particle, but could not identify them. By 1958, nearly 100 names were used to identify and describe these new particles detected. Murray Gellman believed that if several basic concepts about nature were applied, it might be possible to figure out these particles. He starts by assuming that nature is simple and symmetrical. He also assumed that like all other matter and forces in nature, these subatomic particles were conserved (i.e., mass, energy, and charge were not lost in collisions, but preserved). Using these theories as a guide, the structure of matter as we know it to this day
Gellman set out to categorize and simplify the reactions that occur when a proton splits. He coined a new measure called "strangeness". This term he introduced from quantum physics. Strangeness can be measured in the quantum state of each particle. He also hypothesized that strangeness was preserved in every reaction. Gellman found that he could establish simple reaction patterns for proton splitting or synthesis. But several of the patterns did not seem to follow conservation laws. Then he realized that if protons and neutrons were not solid matter, but made up of three smaller particles, then he could make all collision reactions follow simple conservation laws. After two years of work, Gell-Mann proved that these smaller particles must exist in protons and neutrons. He named it "k-works", later abbreviated to "kworks". Shortly thereafter, he read the phrase "three quarks" in a work by James Joyce and renamed the new particle quark. Jerome Friedman and Henry Kendall of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Richard Taylor of the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) are credited with the development of the then state-of-the-art two-kilometer electron linear gas pedal (ELL) at Stanford from 1967 to 1973 using the quark. Richard Taylor (RichardTaylor), won the 1990 Nobel Prize in Physics for a series of pioneering experimental work on the deep inelastic scattering of electrons by protons and neutrons at Stanford between 1967 and 1973, using the then state-of-the-art two-kilometer electron linear gas pedal. This showed that the existence of quarks was finally recognized scientifically. The Canadian Taylor received his B.Sc. in 1950, his M.Sc. in 1952, his Ph.D. in 1962 at Stanford, and became an associate professor at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in 1968, rising to the rank of professor in 1970. American Friedman received his B.S. in 1950, M.S. in 1953, and Ph.D. in 1956 from the University of Chicago. He came to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology as an associate professor in 1960, was promoted to professor in 1967, and served as chairman of the physics department at the institute from 1983-1988. Kendall, an American, received his bachelor's degree from Amherst College in 1950, his Ph.D. in physics from MIT in 1954, and two years later became an associate professor at Stanford, and a professor at MIT in 1967． The experiments performed at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center are similar to those performed by E. Rutherford to verify the nuclear model of the atom. Just as Rutherford predicted the existence of a nucleus in the atom due to the observation of large numbers of alpha particles scattered at large angles, the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center confirmed the existence of a point-like component in the structure of the nucleus, which is now understood to be a quark, by the unexpected large number of electrons scattered at large angles. The existence of quarks was predicted by M. Gell-Mann in 1964, and at the same time independently by G. Zweig of the California Institute of Technology (Caltech). Before the experiments at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center - MIT, no one had been able to come up with convincing kinetic experiments to confirm the existence of quarks in protons and neutrons. In fact, the role of quarks in hadron theory was unclear to theorists at that time. As C. Jarlskog said when introducing the winners to the King of Sweden at the Nobel ceremony, "The quark hypothesis was not the only hypothesis at that time. There was, for example, a model called 'nuclear democracy' which argued that no particle could be called a fundamental unit, that all particles were equally fundamental and constituted each other." In 1962 Stanford began construction of a large linear gas pedal with an energy of 10-20 GeV, which, after a series of improvements, could reach 50 GeV. Two years later, W. Panofsky, director of the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, was supported by several young physicists who had ****ed with him when he was director of the Stanford Laboratory for High Energy Physics. Director of the Stanford Laboratory for High Energy Physics, Taylor was one of them, and served as the leader of an experimental group. He was soon joined by Friedman and Kendall, then on the faculty of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), who had been doing electron scattering experiments at the 5 GeV Cambridge Electron Accelerator, a cyclotron with a limited capacity. But at Stanford there would be a 20 GeV gas pedal that could produce "absolutely strong" beams, high current densities, and external beams. A team from the California Institute of Technology has also joined the collaboration, and their main task is to compare electron-proton scattering with positron-proton scattering. A large team of scientists from the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the California Institute of Technology (this team is called Group A). They decided to build two spectrometers, a large-acceptance spectrometer at 8 GeV and a small-acceptance spectrometer at 20 GeV. The new design of the spectrometers differed from the earlier spectrometers in that they were focused horizontally in a straight line at one point, rather than point by point as in the old equipment. This new design allows the scattering angle to spread out horizontally and the momentum to spread out vertically. Momentum could be measured to 0.1% and scattering angle to an accuracy of 0.3 milliradians. At that time, the mainstream of physics believed that protons had no point-like structure, so they expected the scattering cross section to decrease rapidly with q2 (q is the four-dimensional momentum imparted to the nucleon). In other words, they expected that large-angle scattering would be rare, and the experiments turned out to be unexpectedly large. In their experiments, they used a variety of theoretical assumptions to estimate the count rate, none of which included histone particles. One of these assumptions used the structure function observed in elastic scattering, but the experimental results differed from the theoretical calculations by one to two orders of magnitude. This is an amazing discovery, and one wonders what it means. No one in the world (including the inventor of quarks and the entire theoretical community) said specifically and definitively, "You go look for quarks, I believe they are in the nucleus." In this context, J. Biorken, a theorist at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, came up with the idea of calibration irrelevance. While still a graduate student at Stanford, he completed a study of inelastic scattering kinematics with L. Hand. When Bjorken returned to Stanford in February 1965, he was naturally drawn to the subject of electrons by his environment. He remembered that in 1961 at the Stanford colloquium, listening to Schiff (L-Schiff) said that inelastic scattering is the study of the instantaneous charge distribution in the proton, the theory explains how the inelastic scattering of electrons gives the momentum distribution of neutrons and protons in the nucleus. At that time, Gell-Mann introduced flow algebra into field theory, discarding some of the errors in field theory while maintaining the convective relations of flow algebra. S. Adler derived the summation rules for neutrino reactions by means of a fixed field flow algebra. Bjorken spent two years studying high-energy electron and neutrino scattering using flow algebra in order to calculate the integral of the structure function over the entire summation rule and to find the shape and size of the structure function. The structure functions W1 and W2 are in general functions of two variables. These two variables are the square of the four-dimensional momentum transfer q2 and the energy transfer v. Bjorken then argues that the structure function W2 depends only on the acausal ratio ω = 2Mv/q2 (M denotes the mass of the proton) of these variables, i.e., vW2 = F(ω), which is Bjorken's scalar irrelevance. In arriving at scalar irrelevance, he used many parallel methods, the most ponderous of which is the point structure. The summation rules of the flow algebra imply pointwise structure, but do not require it. However, Bjorken naturally derived the scalar irrelevance of the structure function from this implication, combined with some other notions of strong interactions that make the summation rule converge, such as the Regi pole. When calibrated irrelevance was proposed, many people were not convinced. As Friedman said: "These ideas were put forward, we do not completely confirm. He was a young man and we felt that his ideas were amazing. We didn't expect to see point structures, and what he was saying was just a lot of nonsense." In late 1967 and early 1968, experimental data on deep inelastic scattering had begun to accumulate. When Kendall showed Bjorken the new analysis of the data, Bjorken suggested that the data be analyzed in terms of a scale-independent variable, ω. Following the old method of plotting, Kendall said, "The data are so scattered that they cover the coordinate paper like a chicken's paw prints. When the data were processed by Bjorken's method (vW2 vs. ω), they were brought together in a powerful way. I remember how Balmé felt at the time when he discovered his empirical relation - the wavelengths of the hydrogen spectrum were fitted with absolute precision." In August 1968, at the 14th International Conference on High Energy Physics, Friedman reported the first results, and Pannowski, as the leader of the conference, was hesitant to raise the possibility of a point-like structure of the nucleus. Once data on 6° and 10° scattering were collected from the 20 GeV spectrometer, Group A proceeded to do 18°, 26° and 34° scattering with the 8 GeV spectrometer. Based on these data it was found that the second structure function W1 is also a function of a single variable ω, i.e., obeys Bj?rken scale-independence. The results of all these analyses remain correct until today, and even after more accurate radiative corrections, the difference in the results is not greater than 1%. Since 1970, experimenters have performed similar scattering experiments with neutrons, in which they alternated between hydrogen (protons) and deuterium (neutrons) for one hour each in order to minimize systematic errors. As early as 1968, R. Feinman of the California Institute of Technology had already thought that the hadron is composed of smaller "partons". When he visited the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in August of the same year, he saw data on inelastic scattering and the Bjorken scale dependence. Feinman believed that the partons were in the high-energy relativistic nucleus, which meant that the structure function was correlated with the momentum distribution of the partons. This is a simple kinetic model, another way of saying the Bjorken view. Feinman's work greatly stimulated theoretical work, and several new theories appeared. After C. Gllan and D. Gross derived a close correlation between the ratio R of W1 and W2 and the parton spin, the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center - Massachusetts Institute of Technology Erdmann's requirements for quarks, thus eliminating other assumptions. Analysis of the neutron data clearly showed that the neutron yields were different from the proton yields, which further disproved the other theoretical assumptions. A year later, inelastic scattering of neutrinos in the heavy bubble chamber at CERN provided a powerful extension of the experimental results at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. In order to take into account the difference between electromagnetic interactions between quarks and weak current interactions between neutrinos, the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center pair was brought into full conformity with the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center data. Later muon deep inelastic scattering, electron-positron collisions, proton-antiproton collisions, and hadron injection all show quark-quark interactions. All of them provided strong evidence for the quark structure of the hadron. It took years for the physics community to accept quarks, mainly due to the contradiction between the point-like structure of quarks and their strong confinement in hadrons. As J?rskog said at the Nobel Prize ceremony, quark theory does not explain the experimental results completely and uniquely, and the experiment that won the Nobel Prize showed that the proton also contains an electrically neutral structure, which was soon discovered to be the "gluon". Among protons and other particles, gluons glue quarks together. 1973 saw the independent discovery of the asymptotically free theory of non-abelian canonical fields by Gross, F. Wilczek and H. D. Politzer. This theory states that if the interactions between quarks are induced by color-canonical gluons, the couplings between quarks weaken logarithmically at short distances. This theory (later called quantum chromodynamics) easily explains all the experimental results at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. In addition, the opposite of asymptotic freedom, the increase in the strength of the coupling at long distances (called infrared slavery) accounts for the mechanism of quark confinement. The father of quarks, Gell-Mann, said in 1972 at the 16th International Conference on High Energy Physics, "Theory does not require that quarks be truly measurable in the laboratory; at this point like magnetic monopoles, they can exist in the imagination." In summary, electron inelastic scattering experiments at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center showed the point-like behavior of quarks, which is the experimental basis for quantum chromodynamics. The canonical theory of weak unification was obtained independently by Weinberg and Salam in 1967, while in 1970, in order to introduce the weak action of quarks into the model, Grashow et al. improved the method used in the classical four-Fermi weak action introduced by Kabibe, by introducing charm quarks, which were proved to be needed in 1974. in 1973, the Japanese physicists Makoto Kobayashi, Kobayashi, and Ikawa were able to show that the weak action of quarks is a necessary component of quantum chromodynamics. In 1973 the Japanese physicists Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa introduced the third generation of quarks to explain the destruction of the time inversion in the weak interaction, which was experimentally confirmed, and won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2007.