You're correct in saying that a black hole is the force that is holding the protons together. A very very small black hole, of course. Since a black hole has a massive gravitational pull of the sort that can trap light it can also keep positively charged particles together. The misconception is that black holes are thought to solely exist as super dense and super massive dead stars. This can lead to the obvious confusion in how such an object can fit inside the nucleus of an atom.
@TheMaskTV The standard model is thus: Molecule->atom->proton->U & D Quarks Molecule->atom->Neutron->U & D Quarks Molecule->atom->electon The electrons and quarks are leptons and are classed as elementary particles as they cannot be broken down any further, and there is no evidence to suggest that they should. String theory may be the answer, but all particles are limited to the Plank scale anyway, at least in our 3 spacial dimensions.
Interestingly, from the relation |F|= m1.m2.c^3/h and masses (m1,m2) equal to 1/3 of the proton we get the force |F|=(5.56x10^-28)^2*(3x10^8)^3/(6.626x10^-34)=12598.7 N. This value is already comparable to a nuclear force of 10000 N [otherwise c=299,792,458 m/s is only valid in a vacuum, in a material environment its velocity can be (and is) smaller]. Assuming that the three points on have the same mass m[kg] and are uniformly distributed on the circle, the cosine component of the force is |F|=(m).(m+m).c^3/h.cos60°, i.e. still |F|=m.m.c^3/h. It is also interesting that the constant c^3/h appears in the neutrino oscillations and also in the entropy of black holes.
@user-ky5dy5hl4d All the fundamental forces must interact with each other with a certain efficiency, which will be zero everywhere but in the region where the particle is with a certain probability.This is just another way of describing the same problem.
@bigmangiff E=mc^2, mass is energy, energy is mass. The binding energy per nucleon change in a nuclear reaction, known as the mass defect, is what causes such great releases of energy in an atomic bomb.
Is there any theory wich states that every atom is a black hole -ish vortex and that the proton and neutron are held together by the strong force actually being similar to a vortex force negatively charged. Also the electron dowsnt go in the center because the vortex is negatively charged but stiull the protons in the middle atract it enough to orbit it?
Gravity is determined by mass and density (I refer to density for space time curvature). Currently accepted theories only consider the four fundamental forces, that is, the strong, weak, gravity and electrostatic. This has been researched fairly thoroughly. The grand unified theories suggested at the beginning of time and space, the four forces I've just referred to, were unified. It's been suggested they've since deviated from each other. Read Michio Kaku's 'Parallel Worlds' for more info
Brian, I can't help but to describe radionics where the atom as a ten dimensional structure of mass and light. A structure where the interactions between mass and light is fastest at 500 M m/s in the strong force and slowest in the electromagnetic force at 300 M m/ s meaning the light streams vary in shape and velocity amongst the forces and the velocity differences are between c1 and c2. The charged particles go about there business while they push and pull and the fastest interaction of the strong force is the gravitational attraction. The anti-matter particles love to participate because not only is there signal entanglement, for life we have two of everything for sensors; two directional polarizations wound up in three forces of ten dimensional atoms.
not a gamma ray. Photons. Photons are given the greek letter "gamma", but Gamma rays as we know them are any photon within a certain frequency range. Think of how a fluorescent light works - using mercury to create UV rays, Phosphor coating to convert the UV into visible light which exits the bulb. UV and visible light are all photons - all electromagnetic waves are photons of a certain frequency, but we think of them as both particle and wave depending on the use - wave-particle duality
So after doing some adding of fractions, I was able to show with math why a Neutron has no charge & why a Proton has a positive charge of 1. An Up Quark = 2/3 A Down Quark = -1/3 A Proton has 2 Up Quarks & 1 Down Quark. (2/3)+(2/3)+(-1/3)=1 A Neutron has 1 Up Quark & 2 Down Quarks. (2/3)+(-1/3)+(-1/3)=0 ***Its interesting to note that the neutral charge goes to the more massive, Neutron. & the positive charge goes to the less massive Proton. ******I am not sure, but perhaps the difference in mass between the Neutron & the Proton equals the mass of the Electron?? But electrons aren't made of quarks because they are carriers of Electromagnetic influence rather than Weak Nuclear influence.......so how does the Electron actually get its negative charge, without being made of Quarks???
@jinxedmodder I wonder what the geography is of the pronunciation "bee-ta". Rutherford used this pronunciation too. English? British? Welsh, too? Irish, we know. Rutherford was a New Zealander of Scots parents.
@ iamaloserandisuck In a Hydrogen atom the strong force is only responsible for keeping the quakrs together inside of the proton, it's the electromagnetic force that keeps the electrons in orbit about the proton. As there is only one proton, there is no repulsion.
Thank you, This is a Very high level of information made simple for the non scientifically trained or educated people. Thank you very much for your well presented, well researched, hard work.
Could it not be possible that protons and neutrons don't sit side by side but are concentric ? No need for strong force. Week force - compton effect, photons that hit nucleus knocking beta particles out ?
So if a Neutron is made of 2 Down Quarks & 1 Up Quark.....& a Proton is made of 2 Up Quarks & 1 Down Quark..........then is it possible to use the Weak Nuclear Force to change a Proton into a Neutron?
A positron (antielectron) and a neutrino is made when a pronto turns into a neutron. A neutrino has a nonzero mass and has no charge. The positron conserves the charge of the proton.
There is no reason to suggest this. Quantum mechanics predicted most of the particles we now know, which is why particle accelerators were built to find them. It's one of the main reasons that the LHC was built to search for the Higgs Boson that is predicted by the theory. The same theory does not predict that any other particle should exist beyond the Quark/electron/neutrino etc Given how much is known, I am inclined to believe that there is nothing smaller.
The strong force is actually a very very small black hole. A black hole as we know has enormous gravitational pull. This kind of force is adequate in keeping the positively charged protons together. Black holes don't solely exist as super massive dead stars. This kind of picture of the atom is simpler and more elegant. No need to invent a new kind of force and manipulate the equations to make it work. BTW, we live inside a black hole. Which is why outer space is black. Simply put, anyway.
Best I could describe in 500 characters. I just read it myself. Not too clear. Sorry about that. You check out Nassim Haramein's take on the strong force though. It's very interesting. Search "Nassim Haramein 17/45". It's a long presentation cut into 45 parts. But just watch part 17 and a bit of 18 to see his theory on the strong force.
0:39 It's called time... and because time is connected to an initial (true) inertial frame of reference equal to one IFR wait state where time is conserved because E=T, and time is created by Mass oscillation powered by it's own inherent Quantum gravity that's oscillation phase of force is opposite to Universal gravity, the *4 equal oscillation phases* of the atom which includes the 4th "missing" graviton phase misnamed the "hole" shown opposite the electron (showing space is the force carrier of gravity and Universal gravity is caused by the oscillation subtrahend of the EM wave exactly as we observe it happen as points of observation increase exponentially) required for Mass to have a 4th oscillation phase to oscillate in space relative to time, the 4 phases are locked firmly in place. To say you can move one proton phase to another by "repulsion" is to say you can change time and the space connected to it to change the past which is fixed. The graviton phase of oscillation gives time a 2nd reverse phase arrow which due to weak force asymmetry and time dilation maintaining energy a constant exposed by the fine structure constant ( e{a}/t=E ) these positions are subject to the illusion they do change location just as the Sun rotates around the Earth or so it seems until you look closer. Time is the strong force and it needs the other three phases of force that hold E to create it. The 4 forces are Mass oscillation phase related so time holds the protons in place. The force of time is powerful and creates all 4 forces. The 3 particle generations etc. come about because there are three frames of observation within an oscillation cycle: bottom. top, and the average middle view in-between where we observe wave forms from.
A proton cannot decay into a neutron, but it can "capture" an electron, when it then turns into a neutron and a neutrino. Neutrons do decay though, into a proton, electron, and antineutrino.
@WhitePeppah Because gravity is horrifically weak. If you know the equation F=GM1M2/r^2, you'd see that the force between two such small particles is so minute when compared to the electrostatic force. Therefore, gravity cannot overcome the electrostatic force at a sub atomic level, and hence, is not related to the strong nuclear force. At this point in time... Let's not get into grand unified theories..
a simple answer is we dont know .. we dont really know what fundamental particles are made of ...we think their strings ...wich are the same thing that space itself is made of ...or in string theory their called "branes" ...and branes can come in any dimension from 0 to 11 ....and all branes and strings emit gravitons... now what are all of theese made from ...fluctuations of energy ..whats that made of? we dont know ...its made from ...nothing:D
a neutron weighs the same as a proton. and protons dont decay into neutrons - its impossible the theory of proton decay predicts that it would form a neutral pion (the majority of the mass) and a positron (the charge). Even this is only a theory for now though. A proton won't decay because it is the most stable particle of all. Neutrons decay easily when they are released as Beta decay from a heavy nuclii
quarks arent leptons only electrons are leptons .. quarks are simply fermions or ordinary matter ... the 6 quarks + 6 leptons (electron, muon, tau, and 3 neutrinos) + 4 boson groups , photons, W Z and gluons. thats the standard model
We do not fall off Earth because of gravity and since we have mass gravity is coupled to mass so everything that has mass is attracted to other massive objects including people to planets that being Earth in our case. Other scientific theories and discoveries will come in time with a rational logical conclusion that does not appeal to any intelligence will come in time.
@sidewaysfcs0718 Sounds about right up untill the part about, it's made from nothing. I don't even think we know that. Do we? And who is the we anyway? lol
If you don't think that you can be able to see such a virus. Then it must be where you haven't looked. Even so, if you still can't see it, then why not place a beacon(a substance that will bond to the glycoprotein molecules)on the glycoproteins of the virus. I wish I knew someone with some C++ skills that I can trust to work on a project with concerning this issue so we can engineer something that will do exactly what I am talking about. Viruses are like nagging stickers that need to be plucked.
So, in simple terms, you talk to the atom rather than breaking it! Why bring on the heat. Just have a cool conversation. It's the 21st.er century, is it not?
the outer is the source not theinner just trust me. factor that in for everything and it all makes sense. think about it. think the universe like a hologram a human would look out and be blinded by the outer wall and the sun would help light things around us my girl is deaf and if i stand in front of the sun shhe cant see my lips so think the original light source as the darkness of space we need stars to see around us like a hologram we are blinded by the spotlight that created us
No, the person was making a Christian religious point by using the date of the myth of Christ (2,000 years ago). Science is a body of empirical, theoretical, and practical knowledge about the natural world. This has been undertaken by humans before 2,000 years ago. The fact that I get neg views for stating this fact is disturbing.
"Science involves all the how answers. Faith deals with all the why answers and would point to God writing the laws of physics." Assuming there is a why question! And actually science does answer why questions. Why does the sun rise in the sky in the morning? Why don't we fall off the Earth? Before we knew these whys people would say its because of God or Gods. Give it time and we will know the whys you refer to.
For a mention of God I think that it would be at the scales of the planck time and space and involving parallel universes or multiple dimensions. Coloured gluons are what 'sticks' protons and neutrons together 2 up quarks and a down quark make a proton. Neutrons on the other hand are made of 2 down quarks and an up quark. Science involves all the how answers. Faith deals with all the why answers and would point to God writing the laws of physics.
You're correct in saying that a black hole is the force that is holding the protons together. A very very small black hole, of course. Since a black hole has a massive gravitational pull of the sort that can trap light it can also keep positively charged particles together.
The misconception is that black holes are thought to solely exist as super dense and super massive dead stars. This can lead to the obvious confusion in how such an object can fit inside the nucleus of an atom.
@TheMaskTV
The standard model is thus:
Molecule->atom->proton->U & D Quarks
Molecule->atom->Neutron->U & D Quarks
Molecule->atom->electon
The electrons and quarks are leptons and are classed as elementary particles as they cannot be broken down any further, and there is no evidence to suggest that they should. String theory may be the answer, but all particles are limited to the Plank scale anyway, at least in our 3 spacial dimensions.
Interestingly, from the relation |F|= m1.m2.c^3/h and masses (m1,m2) equal to 1/3 of the proton we get the force |F|=(5.56x10^-28)^2*(3x10^8)^3/(6.626x10^-34)=12598.7 N. This value is already comparable to a nuclear force of 10000 N [otherwise c=299,792,458 m/s is only valid in a vacuum, in a material environment its velocity can be (and is) smaller]. Assuming that the three points on have the same mass m[kg] and are uniformly distributed on the circle, the cosine component of the force is |F|=(m).(m+m).c^3/h.cos60°, i.e. still |F|=m.m.c^3/h. It is also interesting that the constant c^3/h appears in the neutrino oscillations and also in the entropy of black holes.
@user-ky5dy5hl4d All the fundamental forces must interact with each other with a certain efficiency, which will be zero everywhere but in the region where the particle is with a certain probability.This is just another way of describing the same problem.
@WhitePeppah Also, the EM spectrum is essentially the frequency range of the Electrostatic force. It isn't related to the gravitational force.
The box of nuclear cannot be sqeezed becauese it will create
Mass×÷@,^2four 1too
@bigmangiff E=mc^2, mass is energy, energy is mass. The binding energy per nucleon change in a nuclear reaction, known as the mass defect, is what causes such great releases of energy in an atomic bomb.
Is there any theory wich states that every atom is a black hole -ish vortex and that the proton and neutron are held together by the strong force actually being similar to a vortex force negatively charged. Also the electron dowsnt go in the center because the vortex is negatively charged but stiull the protons in the middle atract it enough to orbit it?
The force is strong with this one
Gravity is determined by mass and density (I refer to density for space time curvature). Currently accepted theories only consider the four fundamental forces, that is, the strong, weak, gravity and electrostatic. This has been researched fairly thoroughly.
The grand unified theories suggested at the beginning of time and space, the four forces I've just referred to, were unified. It's been suggested they've since deviated from each other. Read Michio Kaku's 'Parallel Worlds' for more info
Brian, I can't help but to describe radionics where the atom as a ten dimensional structure of mass and light. A structure where the interactions between mass and light is fastest at 500 M m/s in the strong force and slowest in the electromagnetic force at 300 M m/ s meaning the light streams vary in shape and velocity amongst the forces and the velocity differences are between c1 and c2. The charged particles go about there business while they push and pull and the fastest interaction of the strong force is the gravitational attraction. The anti-matter particles love to participate because not only is there signal entanglement, for life we have two of everything for sensors; two directional polarizations wound up in three forces of ten dimensional atoms.
Are you referring to the schwarzchild proton?
What about hydrogen? Since it has only one proton it wouldn't explode if it weren't for the strong force right?
not a gamma ray. Photons. Photons are given the greek letter "gamma", but Gamma rays as we know them are any photon within a certain frequency range.
Think of how a fluorescent light works - using mercury to create UV rays, Phosphor coating to convert the UV into visible light which exits the bulb.
UV and visible light are all photons - all electromagnetic waves are photons of a certain frequency, but we think of them as both particle and wave depending on the use - wave-particle duality
So after doing some adding of fractions, I was able to show with math why a Neutron has no charge & why a Proton has a positive charge of 1.
An Up Quark = 2/3
A Down Quark = -1/3
A Proton has 2 Up Quarks & 1 Down Quark.
(2/3)+(2/3)+(-1/3)=1
A Neutron has 1 Up Quark & 2 Down Quarks.
(2/3)+(-1/3)+(-1/3)=0
***Its interesting to note that the neutral charge goes to the more massive, Neutron.
& the positive charge goes to the less massive Proton.
******I am not sure, but perhaps the difference in mass between the Neutron & the Proton equals the mass of the Electron??
But electrons aren't made of quarks because they are carriers of Electromagnetic influence rather than Weak Nuclear influence.......so how does the Electron actually get its negative charge, without being made of Quarks???
@jinxedmodder I wonder what the geography is of the pronunciation "bee-ta". Rutherford used this pronunciation too. English? British? Welsh, too? Irish, we know. Rutherford was a New Zealander of Scots parents.
Charge is made of virtual photons (bosons) which transmit the force of electromagnetism.
@ iamaloserandisuck In a Hydrogen atom the strong force is only responsible for keeping the quakrs together inside of the proton, it's the electromagnetic force that keeps the electrons in orbit about the proton. As there is only one proton, there is no repulsion.
Thank you, This is a Very high level of information made simple for the non scientifically trained or educated people. Thank you very much for your well presented, well researched, hard work.
Where is he now?
what happened to his show... wonders of the universe...
Could it not be possible that protons and neutrons don't sit side by side but are concentric ? No need for strong force.
Week force - compton effect, photons that hit nucleus knocking beta particles out ?
@nurbsenvi
lucky us younglings the "learning"scale is not linear
So if a Neutron is made of 2 Down Quarks & 1 Up Quark.....& a Proton is made of 2 Up Quarks & 1 Down Quark..........then is it possible to use the Weak Nuclear Force to change a Proton into a Neutron?
Yes, that happens as well.
A positron (antielectron) and a neutrino is made when a pronto turns into a neutron.
A neutrino has a nonzero mass and has no charge.
The positron conserves the charge of the proton.
@nurbsenvi Where do you get 2000 years? As far as I know humans have been around far longer than that!
@nurbsenvi Considering the vastness of the universe I think that is a pretty outstanding feat!
That was absolutely priceless. Thank you for that.
@ TheMaskTV, what exaclty do you mean? The atom has already been split!!!
2:22
The strong force being the strongest and carried by coloured gluons whilst the weak being the second weakest coupled to W+, W- and Z0 bosons
@Geodynamo1939 I believe all British descendent nations (except America) pronounce it that way.
There is no reason to suggest this. Quantum mechanics predicted most of the particles we now know, which is why particle accelerators were built to find them. It's one of the main reasons that the LHC was built to search for the Higgs Boson that is predicted by the theory. The same theory does not predict that any other particle should exist beyond the Quark/electron/neutrino etc Given how much is known, I am inclined to believe that there is nothing smaller.
The strong force is actually a very very small black hole. A black hole as we know has enormous gravitational pull. This kind of force is adequate in keeping the positively charged protons together. Black holes don't solely exist as super massive dead stars. This kind of picture of the atom is simpler and more elegant. No need to invent a new kind of force and manipulate the equations to make it work. BTW, we live inside a black hole. Which is why outer space is black. Simply put, anyway.
Best I could describe in 500 characters. I just read it myself. Not too clear. Sorry about that.
You check out Nassim Haramein's take on the strong force though. It's very interesting. Search "Nassim Haramein 17/45". It's a long presentation cut into 45 parts. But just watch part 17 and a bit of 18 to see his theory on the strong force.
Lol Professor Cox workin out in the gym, breakin a mental sweat
0:39 It's called time... and because time is connected to an initial (true) inertial frame of reference equal to one IFR wait state where time is conserved because E=T, and time is created by Mass oscillation powered by it's own inherent Quantum gravity that's oscillation phase of force is opposite to Universal gravity, the *4 equal oscillation phases* of the atom which includes the 4th "missing" graviton phase misnamed the "hole" shown opposite the electron (showing space is the force carrier of gravity and Universal gravity is caused by the oscillation subtrahend of the EM wave exactly as we observe it happen as points of observation increase exponentially) required for Mass to have a 4th oscillation phase to oscillate in space relative to time, the 4 phases are locked firmly in place. To say you can move one proton phase to another by "repulsion" is to say you can change time and the space connected to it to change the past which is fixed. The graviton phase of oscillation gives time a 2nd reverse phase arrow which due to weak force asymmetry and time dilation maintaining energy a constant exposed by the fine structure constant ( e{a}/t=E ) these positions are subject to the illusion they do change location just as the Sun rotates around the Earth or so it seems until you look closer. Time is the strong force and it needs the other three phases of force that hold E to create it. The 4 forces are Mass oscillation phase related so time holds the protons in place. The force of time is powerful and creates all 4 forces. The 3 particle generations etc. come about because there are three frames of observation within an oscillation cycle: bottom. top, and the average middle view in-between where we observe wave forms from.
@nurbsenvi but most of that was understood from about newton's time. so about 400 yrs
The quarks inside might not be inclined to stick around.
A proton cannot decay into a neutron, but it can "capture" an electron, when it then turns into a neutron and a neutrino. Neutrons do decay though, into a proton, electron, and antineutrino.
WHY IT STRUCK
@WhitePeppah Because gravity is horrifically weak. If you know the equation F=GM1M2/r^2, you'd see that the force between two such small particles is so minute when compared to the electrostatic force. Therefore, gravity cannot overcome the electrostatic force at a sub atomic level, and hence, is not related to the strong nuclear force. At this point in time... Let's not get into grand unified theories..
a simple answer is
we dont know ..
we dont really know what fundamental particles are made of ...we think their strings ...wich are the same thing that space itself is made of ...or in string theory their called "branes" ...and branes can come in any dimension from 0 to 11 ....and all branes and strings emit gravitons...
now what are all of theese made from ...fluctuations of energy ..whats that made of? we dont know ...its made from ...nothing:D
@nurbsenvi no, more like it took the universe 13.7 billion years to understand 5-6% of itself if we are the first
a neutron weighs the same as a proton.
and protons dont decay into neutrons - its impossible
the theory of proton decay predicts that it would form a neutral pion (the majority of the mass) and a positron (the charge). Even this is only a theory for now though.
A proton won't decay because it is the most stable particle of all. Neutrons decay easily when they are released as Beta decay from a heavy nuclii
0.46 The Strong Force is definitely gonna be that guys wrestling name.
Why does he say beeta instead of beta?
Brian Cox
quarks arent leptons
only electrons are leptons ..
quarks are simply fermions or ordinary matter ...
the 6 quarks + 6 leptons (electron, muon, tau, and 3 neutrinos) + 4 boson groups , photons, W Z and gluons.
thats the standard model
Weak force and spin are probably one of the most difficult things to explain to someone who doesn't understand physics.
so that's what the strong force is, thanks
0:18
We do not fall off Earth because of gravity and since we have mass gravity is coupled to mass so everything that has mass is attracted to other massive objects including people to planets that being Earth in our case. Other scientific theories and discoveries will come in time with a rational logical conclusion that does not appeal to any intelligence will come in time.
@sidewaysfcs0718
Sounds about right up untill the part about, it's made from nothing.
I don't even think we know that. Do we?
And who is the we anyway? lol
@nurbsenvi more way more
no prob u r much smarter than me i applaud u for getting that
2000 years = ridiculously brief period of time
5-6% of observble universe = an unconceivably large portion of our world
@sidewaysfcs0718 Yes you are correct, I dont even remeber writing that but maybe I was drunk, thanks again.
If you don't think that you can be able to see such a virus. Then it must be where you haven't looked. Even so, if you still can't see it, then why not place a beacon(a substance that will bond to the glycoprotein molecules)on the glycoproteins of the virus. I wish I knew someone with some C++ skills that I can trust to work on a project with concerning this issue so we can engineer something that will do exactly what I am talking about. Viruses are like nagging stickers that need to be plucked.
So it took us nearly 2000 years to understand 5~6% of the observable world...
@MrDgaf12345 we havent existed for even 0.1% of that time
what?
@amixer24 you are* not your. Yeah that proves your point again.
black holes aren't forces
I wasn't trying to make a religious point. I am just trying to interpret what he is saying.
So, in simple terms, you talk to the atom rather than breaking it! Why bring on the heat. Just have a cool conversation. It's the 21st.er century, is it not?
We aren't greeks, add more greek letters if you think it allows better pronunciation.
the outer is the source not theinner just trust me. factor that in for everything and it all makes sense. think about it. think the universe like a hologram a human would look out and be blinded by the outer wall and the sun would help light things around us my girl is deaf and if i stand in front of the sun shhe cant see my lips so think the original light source as the darkness of space we need stars to see around us like a hologram we are blinded by the spotlight that created us
pretty much ....
"What did you do at the gym today, love?"
press 6 repatedly and reply to me what it looks like
CC transcribe audio Wins here Try it You will not stop laughing
Because that is how the Greeks say it.
Americans say nearly every English word wrong as well as the Greek alphabet.
@nurbsenvi yeah but don't forget we've been 200 years free from slavery of religion that lasted more than a millenium
bee-ta radiation.
:)
No, the person was making a Christian religious point by using the date of the myth of Christ (2,000 years ago). Science is a body of empirical, theoretical, and practical knowledge about the natural world. This has been undertaken by humans before 2,000 years ago. The fact that I get neg views for stating this fact is disturbing.
Science hasn't, I think that is what he means.
"Science involves all the how answers. Faith deals with all the why answers and would point to God writing the laws of physics."
Assuming there is a why question!
And actually science does answer why questions. Why does the sun rise in the sky in the morning? Why don't we fall off the Earth? Before we knew these whys people would say its because of God or Gods.
Give it time and we will know the whys you refer to.
that chick on the right is back...
Are you some religious fundamentalist? Modern Humans have been on earth for 200,000 years!
hehehe nerd wars
For a mention of God I think that it would be at the scales of the planck time and space and involving parallel universes or multiple dimensions. Coloured gluons are what 'sticks'
protons and neutrons together 2 up quarks and a down quark make a proton. Neutrons on the other hand are made of 2 down quarks and an up quark.
Science involves all the how answers. Faith deals with all the why answers and would point to God writing the laws of physics.