cogzoid
Posts: 234
Joined: Sep. 2005
|
| Quote | | Sloppy wording on my part, yes. |
It's not just sloppy wording. It's incorrect language. And it speaks volumes.
| Quote | | Gee, I've really been misinformed: |
Nope, you just are unable to read. I didn't say that quarks are unrelated to a particle's structure (a completely different point). I said that there is no "requisite quark structure" for one to be able to "hold" something (apparently you disagree). Unfortunately, your source says nothing about this, but offers great definitions for your future discourse. And you demonstrate that you still fail to understand the (important!) subtleties. And do you still have to rely on tired sarcasm? *sigh*
| Quote | | leptons or heavier particles (for the most part, at least. Neutrinos are an exception) |
And just so no one reading this gets confused: Neutrinos ARE leptons. I don't know why Paley seems to imply otherwise (more sloppiness?).
-Dan
|
