Sry, I am not a physicists at all and therefore my question may sound stupid or pointless to you. (My most intense contact with physics was physical chemistry, so quite a big leap to your presented work here.)
Although two different quarks would have been enough,...
In which sense would two quarks be enough to constitute matter? Would really only two quarks allow to define properties of our surroundings like they are right now, or would two would be enough do define 'some kind of matter' but with different distinct properties?
I hope, I was able to express my question understandably!
Best,
mountain.phil28
There is no pointless question. Only pointless answers :)
Maybe the best way to answer your question is to point to this link. I guess you will get all answers in there (if not, please come back to me).
Cheers!
Thanks for the response and link!
My pleasure!