A Beginner Physics Guide to Baryon Particles

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

This thread discusses baryon particles, focusing on their properties, classifications, and the implications of quantum mechanics in their behavior. The conversation includes references to theoretical frameworks, experimental observations, and historical context within particle physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express appreciation for an article on baryons but suggest that it could benefit from additional comments regarding heavy flavors and the existence of more baryonic states.
  • There is a discussion about the classification of baryons, with one participant noting that the article mentions "18 baryons," while the particle data booklet lists many more, which are considered excited states.
  • One participant describes the proton as a superposition of quark states, drawing parallels to molecular bonding, and seeks clarification on the implications of superposition in quantum mechanics.
  • Another participant questions the relevance of the decuplet of baryons, noting its instability and the existence of one stable member that complicates the classification of baryons.
  • There are inquiries about the internal excitation modes of various baryons and how they relate to the stability and classification of baryonic states.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the classification and stability of baryons, particularly regarding the relevance of the decuplet and the interpretation of excited states. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on specific definitions and assumptions about baryon states and classifications, which are not universally agreed upon. The discussion includes unresolved questions about the internal structure and excitation modes of baryons.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying particle physics, quantum mechanics, and the historical development of theories related to baryons and their classifications.

PeroK
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
2025 Award
Messages
29,617
Reaction score
21,427
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: Terrakron, vanhees71, Marshall2389 and 16 others
Physics news on Phys.org
A very nice article and I enjoyed reading it a lot.
I'd just have one minor comment: I would not write sentences like
The purpose of this Insight was to explain, as simply as possible, the existence of precisely eighteen baryons,...
without any further comment on heavy flavors. I could imagine that a statement like this might be a bit confusing for somebody who does not know particle physics very well and later stumbles over a list of baryons.
I mean, I know what you did there, and why you considered only the three light quarks that lead to the SU(3)_flavor of the eightfoldway, but I would just suggest to add one small comment or footnote at the very end about the existence of heavy flavors and additional baryonic states that come with them.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Juan Garcia Velayos, kith and nrqed
Great Insights article!

Maybe somebody might wonder why there are only "18 baryons" as you state at the end of the article, but the particle data booklet lists a plethora of baryons (also within the light baryons of course). The answer is of course that all these are excited states of the ones listed in your article and that lattice QCD even seems to find more such states than listed (particularly in those with strangeness).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby, PeroK and (deleted member)
And that is a proton in a nutshell! It’s a particular superposition of (antisymmetric) quark flavor and (antisymmetric) spin 1/2 states, which combine to produce a completely symmetric overall state called the proton.

@PeroK Can you elaborate on this? What does it mean for the proton to actually be a superposition of other states? I'm reminded of my chemistry class where we talked about a particular bonding arrangement to be a combination of three bonds. One would expect this molecule to have a 1/3 chance of being in each one of these bonds, and that it would be forced to be in one bond at a time. But that wasn't the case. Instead it was, in some respect, in all three bonds at the same time. I suppose the proton is something like that?
 
Drakkith said:
@PeroK Can you elaborate on this? What does it mean for the proton to actually be a superposition of other states? I'm reminded of my chemistry class where we talked about a particular bonding arrangement to be a combination of three bonds. One would expect this molecule to have a 1/3 chance of being in each one of these bonds, and that it would be forced to be in one bond at a time. But that wasn't the case. Instead it was, in some respect, in all three bonds at the same time. I suppose the proton is something like that?
Yes, that's the general idea. Superposition is fundamental to QM. Suppose you have two particles that each can be in one of two states. Let's call these states ##\psi_a## and ##\psi_b##. Classically, if the two particles were bound together, then there would be four definite, distinct possibilities:
$$\psi_a \psi_a, \ \psi_a \psi_b, \ \psi_b \psi_a, \ \psi_b\psi_b$$
You could always look into the system and see definitely what state each of the two particles is in.

In QM, however, in addition you can have any linear combination of these basis states. The system could, for example, be in the state:
$$\frac 1 {\sqrt 2} (\psi_a \psi_b + \psi_b \psi_a)$$
If we look at this system the particles are always in different states but there is an equal probability that the first particle will be found in state ##\psi_a## and the second in state ##\psi_b## and vice versa. The critical thing is that it's not that we didn't know which particle was in which state, the particles are simply not in definite one-particle states until you measure them. This is fundamental to QM.

The interesting thing, which we saw in my article, is that the concept of superpositions creates a much richer physics (and chemistry!). If we were limited to the four definite basis states, then there would be nothing like the variety we see in elementary particle physics and chemistry.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71, Drakkith, sysprog and 1 other person
I spun off several posts which weren't related to the article.

If you have questions about quantum physics in general, or about certain topics, feel free to create a new thread. Thank you.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Motore and PeroK
For people who are interested in the history surrounding this (and more), there's a nice writeup on a not very technical level in the beginning of Griffiths' "Introduction to Elementary Particles".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71, sysprog and Greg Bernhardt
The baryons in the decuplet are even less stable than those in the octet, again explaining that their fleeting existence is only confirmed by specialized experiments to create them for a few instants before they decay.

Source https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/a-beginners-guide-to-baryons/
The problem with this is that:
1) why then is the decuplet even relevant and how does it form a "set of 18 particles"?
2) there actually is one, but precisely one, important decuplet member which is actually more stable than one of the octet. Which is why there is a set of 8 particles but they are not octet!
Observation: why is this thread in "Quantum physics", not "Particle physics"?

There is also a large number of resonances outside the set of 18.
Looking at just the flavourless baryons, the spectrum starts:
N(940) 1/2+****
Δ(1232) 3/2+****
N(1440) 1/2+****
N(1520) 3/2-****
N(1535) 1/2-****
Δ(1600) 3/2+****
Δ(1620) 1/2-****
N(1650) 1/2-****
N(1675) 5/2-****
N(1680) 5/2+****
Δ(1700) 3/2-****
N(1700) 3/2-***
N(1710) 1/2+****
N(1720) 3/2+****

All except N(940) decay strongly. Δ(1232) is about 120 MeV wide.
Just what makes Δ(1232) a set with N(940), rather than just one of the many excited states?

There are several modes a bound system of three fermions could be excited. They might undergo radial oscillations, or orbital movement. One possible excitation mode is spin alignment. 3 spin 1/2 fermions might combine to have spins aligned to total 3/2 spin, or one with opposite spin with total 1/2. Turns out that for quarks that are not all the same flavour, the 3/2 state is highly excited.
It is supposed that N(940) and Δ(1232) have no internal excitations other than the spin alignment of Δ(1232). Are the internal excitation modes of all the other low-lying well-known resonances, from N(1440) to N(1720), known?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K