Are Results from Inelastic Particle Collisions Reproducible?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Illusionology
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inelastic Particle
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the reproducibility of results from inelastic particle collisions, particularly in the context of detecting quarks and the implications for atomic structure. Participants explore the predictability of outcomes in experiments involving particle scattering, comparing them to historical experiments like Rutherford's scattering.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether results from inelastic particle collisions are reproducible and if they yield consistent outcomes, similar to Rutherford's scattering.
  • One participant asserts that results can be predicted and reproduced, referencing a specific thesis and figures that illustrate the relationship between theory and measurement.
  • Another participant notes that while QCD theory predicts the shape of curves in experimental results, it does not predict their magnitude, which is fitted to experimental data.
  • Concerns are raised about the accuracy of visual representations of atomic structure based on electron scattering, with one participant arguing that the common depiction is incorrect due to the fluctuating nature of the negative charge cloud and the conditions of electron scattering.
  • A historical context is provided regarding the original experiments conducted by notable physicists in the 1970s, focusing on inelastic scattering of electrons on a liquid hydrogen target.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the reproducibility of results and the accuracy of atomic models based on scattering experiments. No consensus is reached regarding the correctness of the visual representations of atomic structure or the predictability of inelastic collision outcomes.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the predictive power of QCD theory concerning the magnitude of experimental results and the assumptions underlying visual representations of atomic structure.

Illusionology
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
with this technique that has been used to detect quarks, are the results reproducable every time? or are there different results which indicate the hadron has quarks that move inside?
with rutherfords scattering, generally every 8000 alpha particles deflect in random directions. these results can be predicted + reproduced. Is it the same with inelastic particle collision experiments? I am thinking it has to be right?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


is this an accurate picture of the inside of the atom when the electron scattering results are taken into account?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In Fig. 1.3, QCD theory predicts the shape of each curve, but not the magnitude, which is fit to the experiments.
 
Illusionology said:


is this an accurate picture of the inside of the atom when the electron scattering results are taken into account?


This URL refers to a "gluon" video.

The atomic youtube URL is the following: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bQQPK-QaHI&feature=channel

The answer to your question is NO, it is not the right picture of the inside of an atom.
First of all, the negative charge cloud "fluctuates" instead of being a standing wave pulsation. Secondly, the incident electron does not sufficiently approach the positive charge cloud in this video, so such a scattering is probably the elastic Rutherford one, without exciting the atom by transferring a sufficiently large momentum to the nucleus.

You can find the positive charge atomic form-factors and curves in my popular article "Atom as a "Dressed" Nucleus", (http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.2635), I attach it to my letter. There you will find the right atomic form-factors as well as the deep inelastic atomic cross sections.

Bob.
 

Attachments

Last edited by a moderator:
The original experiments were done by Jerry Friedman (MIT), Henry Kendall (MIT), and Richard Taylor (SLAC) (And Marty Breidenbach, student) circa 1970 using inelastic scattering of electrons (I think 40 GeV) on a liquid hydrogen target with a big spectrometer to measure both the scattering angle and the energy loss.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K