

The mystery of particle generations - dnetesn
http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/august-2015/the-mystery-of-particle-generations

======
pI9hiWNsu2
I don't think a discussion of particle generations is complete without a
mention of the Koide formula:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koide_formula](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koide_formula)

Essentially, if you take the square roots the electron, muon and tau masses
(let's call them e/m/t), you can calculate (e²+m²+t²)/(e+m+t)², which turns
out to be around 0.6667. It may even be exactly 2/3.

If the masses were equal, it would be 1/3, and if one of the masses were much
larger than the others, it would approach 1. So it's not just interesting that
it seems to be a simple fraction, it's also right in the middle of the two
extremes.

Of course, according to modern physics the masses arise through very
complicated interactions, so most physicists dismiss the formula as a
coincidence.

------
rwallace
What I find surprising is that the number of generations is fixed. When I
first read about particle generations, my reaction was 'oh yeah, it's
obviously the same particles in some higher energy state, so it should keep
going up indefinitely.' But no, it stops at three generations? I have no idea
why that would happen.

~~~
nsns
But don't all _essential_ components of nature seem random/unexplainable from
our point of view?

While we can codify their behavior and interrelations via some theory, it
never actually explains why they are _so_ and _there_ in the first place.

~~~
krastanov
I believe that you would enjoy reading "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of
Mathematics in the Natural Sciences". It is a short essay that deals (but does
not answer) the question of why "some theory" that "never actually explains
why" seems to still work?

[https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.htm...](https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html)

------
rndn
Could this be related to our 3 dimensions of space?

