Strangeness was introduced by Murray Gell-Mann, Abraham Pais, Tadao Nakano and Kazuhiko Nishijima to explain the fact that certain particles, such as the kaons or the hyperons Σ and Λ, were created easily in particle collisions, yet decayed much more slowly than expected for their large masses and large production cross sections. Noting that collisions seemed to always produce pairs of these particles, it was postulated that a new conserved quantity, dubbed "strangeness", was preserved during their creation, but not conserved in their decay.
Strangeness is conceived as an existential phenomenon, by which a perception is antithetical facing the perceptions hitherto, and incomparable as well concerning the present imaginations. In order to perceive strangeness, it requires to face an interpersonal encounter. It is the essence of strangeness that the encounter, which usually compensates the lack of experiences, is not compensated in a perception as strangeness. Strangeness as a perception does not compensate the lack of experiences by means of the present imaginations. Strangeness is not conceivable out of its own. Strangeness requires the precondition of active daring towards an interpersonal encounter, which promotes the appearance of the absolutely unexpected in form of an intrusion. Such as a psychic achievement of separation. This will be illustrated by the incestuous coping of the hero, as a typical involvement in strangeness. Finally perversion will be mentioned, as an absolute impairment concerning the perception of strangeness. Two case-reports are presented.
You can see us avoiding blowing the budget in Rust with many of our syntactic choices. We chose to stick with curly braces, for example, because one of our major target audiences, systems programmers, is currently using a curly brace language. Instead, we spend this strangeness budget on our major, core feature: ownership and borrowing.
Beauty always has an element of strangeness. I do not mean a deliberate cold form of strangeness, for in that case it would be a monstrous thing that had jumped the rails of life. But I do mean that it always contains a certain degree of strangeness, of simple, unintended, unconscious strangeness, and that this form of strangeness is what gives it the right to be called beauty. It is its hallmark, its special characteristic. Reverse the proposition and try to imagine a commonplace beauty! And how could this necessary, incompressible, infinitely varied strangeness, dependent upon environment, climate, habits, upon race, religion and the temperament of the artist, ever be controlled, amended, corrected by utopian rules, excogitated in some little temple or other of learning somewhere on the planet, without mortal danger to art itself? This element of strangeness which constitutes and defines individuality, without which there is no beauty, plays in art (and may the precision of this comparison excuse its triviality) the role of taste or flavouring in cookery; if the individual usefulness or the degree of nutritious value they contain be excepted, viands differ from each other only by the idea they reveal to the tongue.
I have been trying to find an explanation for the strange quarks negative strangeness value, I understand the term strangeness predates the quark model, but I'm unsure if terminology carry over is the reason for the naming convention.
Apparently, it is also convention to give quantum numbers a positive or negative value depending on the charge of the particle. Does the strange quark's negative charge give it a negative strangeness?
Having this in mind, a subnuclear physics reason can be that the Gell-Mann & Nishijima formula that relates electric charge $Q$, strong isospin $I_3$, barionic number $B$ and strangeness $S$ (the sum of these two and all other quark numbers is called strong hypercharge, $Y$) states:$$ Q = \fracB+S2 + I_3 $$Because of this, reminding that the charge of quark strange is $-\frac13$ we obtain the correct solution if we put $I_3 = 0$, $B = \frac13$ and $S = -1$. 041b061a72