What do you think about the Stardard Model of Physics? Everyone please come in and discuss?

Question

I've been told that the Standard Model accurately describes all of the fundamental forces except for gravity, but there is a lot of flaw within the theory, right? For example, one of the fundamental particle, neutrino, has mass, but it travels faster than the speed of light, which is impossible according to Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity. Also, if the Standard Model believes in supersymmetry, and all the particles we know have a symmetrical part to it, (electron - positron) could there possibly be an anti-universe that exist? Please discuss and post your thoughts

Sorry, correction on question: The Standard Model of particle physics assumes that neutrinos are massless, although adding massive neutrinos to the basic framework is not difficult. Indeed, the experimentally established phenomenon of neutrino oscillation requires neutrinos to have non-zero masses.

but it does travel at the speed of light, which is impossible for a non-zero mass particle

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

Answer 1

Hi. The Standard Model correctly predicts everything we observe in the universe. The statement about the neutrino is incorrect. It may have a tiny amount of mass (or not) but it obeys the light-speed limit. The neutrino telescopes you may have read about use the fact that the speed of light in water is LESS than in a vacuum, so a neutrino that hits a sub-atomic particle emits a particular blue radiation for an instant while it slows down.

The matter/anti-matter question is more subtle. You can have a whole galaxy (or a section of the universe) comprised of anti-matter and it would LOOK the same. It is only when particle/anti-particle pairs contact each other that they self annihilate. (Weird because, as I understand it, the only difference is electric charge. Electric charge must have some pretty powerful influence on sub-atomic particles!)

Answer 2

The neutrino has mass and travels faster than light?

Cite some sources for this because sounds like bull doo doo

Answer 3

It's a goodie but an oldie. Now, like a hermetic foil seal on a container of yogurt, little parts of it are being pulled up. Either the whole thing will fly off and there will be yogurt everywhere, or it'll be repaired with some reinforcements, but will never look the same again.

Answer 4

I think the FTL "particle" you reference is called a "tachyon"
and not a neutrino ...

that being said, the "Standard Model" of physics is fine
for 98% of science-observations.

for anyone involved in the other 2%, "adjustments in paradigm" make life easier ... but are NOT needed for almost everybody on earth ... tho it makes neat speculation-parties I suppose. ...

Answer 5

its a model that has not being proven yet and cannot be proven. According to the definition of pseudo science it would fall under that category.
The assumptions are really a very speculative.