Strong Force alternative theory besides gluon

[striecx]

Hi I am just a newb with interest in physics.

Maybe someone can help me out:

Is there any theory that explains the strong force or bonding together of protons and neutrons in the center of the atom with a vortex in the center of the atom similar to a black holes vortex. And theorizes that this is what actually holds protons and neutrons together instead of gluons.

Because I just don´t think a Gluon explains this strong force satisfactorily despite the experiments where they saw behavior which can only be explained by the gluon.
The gluon itself has never been observed or has it?

 

[Vanadium 50]

No, there is no such theory.

"I just don´t think a Gluon explains this strong force satisfactorily despite the experiments where they saw behavior which can only be explained by the gluon" is not a very scientific position.

 

[Bill_K]

striecx, Direct evidence for the existence of quarks and gluons comes from the appearance of hadronic jets in high energy collisions. That is, the particles that emerge from the collision are not just randomly spread out, but sometimes appear focused in narrow bundles.

For example, in a collision between e⁺ and e^- a virtual photon is created, which then decays in various ways. It may decay into a quark and antiquark pair, each of which subsequently decays further, radiating a shower of hadrons all heading in one direction. A two-jet event like this is very distinctive, and is an indication that quarks are not just mathematical inventions but have a genuine existence.

What about gluons? Sometimes the collision will produce three jets, indicating a decay into quark, antiquark and gluon.

 

[humanino]

Sometimes the collision will produce three jets, indicating a decay into quark, antiquark and gluon.

and to continue, sometimes it will produce 4, sometimes 5, sometimes more, and all those events come with different probabilities, and they come with correlated angular distributions... By using this sort of data, very rich datasets, we can fit the N in a(n unbroken) gauge theory based on SU(N) and we find N=3. Now mind you, this is very, very non-trivial for fitting a single parameter (plus an energy scale). If one would in addition take into account all the other kinds of evidence we have for SU(3) to be the underlying gauge theory describing the strong interaction, then one would realize that there is a very long path for the "newb" before they can search for alternative theories.

However, I hope the "newb" are not discouraged by this observation. I think they should be excited and motivated instead. My personal perspective is that learning such new and incredibly weird theories, while we know they did pass all the tests of decades under the scrutiny of literally tens of thousands of scientists, is much more exciting than coming up with free-lunch weird theories out of nowhere. Because for two things, it is very hard to come up with a consistent theory which is nearly as weird as QCD, and there is a lot of material available to explore how weird it really is.

 

[humanino]

This is lecture is now almost 10 years old. There is a lot of more recent data, but I think the material already included in here may help newcomers in the field appreciate the amount of experimental data suggesting SU(3) and the difficulty of the task in reproducing the successes
QCD Phenomenology
(the pdf version was scattered with wrong characters along the text)

Some of the key papers cited in the above lecture, freely available :

• The Scale Dependence of the Hadron Multiplicity in Quark and Gluon Jets and a Precise Determination of $C_{A}/C_{F}$ (DELPHI)
  
• http://ccdb4fs.kek.jp/cgi-bin/img_index?200001019
  
• http://ccdb4fs.kek.jp/cgi-bin/img_index?9508185
  
• Angular Distribution of Particle Flows and Perturbative QCD Predictions
  
• http://ccdb4fs.kek.jp/cgi-bin/img_index?8708105

 

[striecx]

Thanks for the responses and the links, very helpful to understanding gluons existence