Is the set of possible elementary particle types equal to the set of all combinations of their properties? [closed]

Question

I'm playing around with a mnemonic system for a fantasy language I'm working on, for remembering the properties of elementary particles. Each letter represents a unique sound.

• i
• a
• u

These 3 are the "colors" of quantum particles (quarks).

• s
• z

These 2 are whether it is a color or anticolor (its color "direction").

So you can do:

• si (color, red 1)
• za (anticolor, green 2)

Then:

• g (up)
• d (charm)
• b (top)
• p (bottom)
• t (strange)
• k (down)

These 6 are the quark flavors, and same pattern for leptons.

• m (+)
• n (-)
• q (neutral)

These 3 are the 3 electric charge possibilities.

• y (integer)
• w (half-integer)

The 2 spin classes, for if it is integer or half-integer spin.

• e (position 1)
• o (position 2)

The number of spins of its spin type.

So for 3/2 spin, that is half-integer spin, position 2, so it would be:

• wo

Then there is:

• f (-1)
• v (1)

This is if it has negative parity.

• l (2/3 spin)
• r (1/3 spin)

Then if it is anti particle, it is given one of these -s:

• x (particle)
• j (antiparticle)

Question

Would all of the particles then be the set of all combinations of these properties? Or is it somehow less than or more than that exactly?

• xgsiqwov: x particle, g up, s color, i red, q neutral, wo 3/2 spin, v normal parity
• jgsiqwov (antiparticle, with same remaining features)
• xksiqwov: same, but k down
• jksiqwov: antiparticle, k down
• xkqwov: k down, no color so it's not a quark
• jkqwov: antiparticle, k down, no color so it's not a quark
• etc.

I'm trying to use my own learning style to memorize a way to think about the elementary particles, like those listed in places like this:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_baryons
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mesons

I guess my example of xgsiqwov would just be one type of quark, but then 3 of those of all types could combine to form baryons, and other higher-order particles, etc.. Does that sound about right?

Answer 1

You seem to be asking whether the properties you've listed allows one to uniquely identify a particle. The answer is no, because:

• There are combinations of these properties that don't exists. For example, there's no such thing as an up quark with negative charge that's a particle (as opposed to an antiparticle.) So any combination involving a color, g, n, and x corresponds to a particle that doesn't exist.

• There are some colorless mesons that have the same charge, spin, and parity. For example, the neutral pion and the eta meson have no charge, spin 0, and odd parity.

Also, to the best of my knowledge "2/3 spin" and "1/3 spin" don't exist for fundamental particles. (They might be possible in anyon systems but I'm far from an expert on those, and in any event those are collective quasiparticle phenomena in condensed-matter systems rather than fundamental particles.)