Fair enough, obviously these symmetries were trying
to tell us something about the composition of hadrons. What?
Well, needless to say, Gell-Mann did not immediately
come up with a simple nuts-and-bolts assembly manual;
instead, they developed an abstract mathematical description
called analogous to the description of spin
for electrons,
. [If you're interested, the
acronym stands for Simple Unitary group of order 2 or 3.]
I won't attempt to elaborate, but you can see why something
like this was needed - as for the
component of
spin, the projections of the three
operators
along God-only-knows what axes in God-only-knows what
dimensions
cannot have a continuum of possible values but only a fixed
number of discrete or quantized values.
What is actually refers to is totally unknown.
Or, more properly, it refers to just what it says; if that
means nothing to us, well, that's just because our empirical
personal experience of the space of
is so limited
that we don't relate to it very well. What do "normal"
space and time actually refer to?
Anyway, someone inevitably formulated a simpler instruction manual
for assembling hadrons. This was to give the requisite properties
to three (there are more now, but hold off on that) really
fundamental component particles called
"quarks."
All mesons are composed of a quark-antiquark pair
whereas baryons are composed of three quarks
held together by a "superstrong" force mediated by
a new type of intermediary called "gluons" (g)
[more cuteness, but who can argue...].
Table:
The known (or suspected) "generations" of quarks.
Figure:
Upper left: the three lowest-mass quarks.
Lower left: the corresponding antiquarks.
Right: the spin- baryons.