Can Binding Energy Be Removed to Separate Quarks?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the concept of quark separation and the possibility of removing binding energy to achieve this. Participants explore both the technological and theoretical aspects of quark interactions, particularly in relation to the strong force and the nature of quarks.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that quarks cannot be separated due to the strong force, which increases with distance, and question the feasibility of removing binding energy.
  • One participant suggests that to reduce the strong force, quarks must not be in their ground state, proposing that increasing their velocity could lead to weaker binding.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of quarks having fractional charges and the implications of this on their confinement, with some arguing that fractional charges have never been observed as fundamental particles.
  • Participants mention that the existence of quarks was proposed to explain experimental results from electron-proton scattering, which showed unexpected high-energy electron scattering patterns.
  • Group theory and the Dirac quantization theorem are referenced as theoretical frameworks that support the existence of quarks and their fractional charges.
  • There is a debate regarding the historical context of quark theory, with references to Murray Gell-Mann's contributions and the evolution of belief in quarks as real particles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the possibility of separating quarks and the implications of fractional charges. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the nature of quarks and their interactions.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of quark interactions and the limitations of current understanding, particularly regarding the strong force and the nature of confinement. There are unresolved questions about the historical development of quark theory and the implications of experimental findings.

losang
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
I am aware that quarks can not be separated due to the strong force growing with distance. My question is, instead of pulling them apart can you "remove" the energy between them and therefore separate them. There are two ways I have thought about this. One, the technological question of can you remove the binding energy and second is it theoretically possible.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is not pracically possible, how would you remove the force field? Well the force field is just interacting with particles carrying the strong (colour) force. So in order to remove the field quanta (the gluons) you must use strongly interacting particles, witch in their own turn carries a force field.. and so on..
have you studied elementary particle physics at college?
 
losang said:
I am aware that quarks can not be separated due to the strong force growing with distance. My question is, instead of pulling them apart can you "remove" the energy between them and therefore separate them. There are two ways I have thought about this. One, the technological question of can you remove the binding energy and second is it theoretically possible.

No you cannot since the force field is an inherent quark property (just like you cannot remove the electrical charge from electrons). To reduce the strong force between quarks, you got to make sure they are not in the ground state because the strong force is "strongest" at that energy level. So, intuitively, you might want to speed up those quarks. High velocity quarks are less tightly bound !

marlon
 
Last edited:
Also remember that quarks have a nature of partial charge, 1/3, 2/3, -1/3, -2/3 (Double check the charge states). And much like a monopole, a particle with a partial charge has never been observed in nature. We see quarks always together to either form one of three charge states, 1, -1, 0.

As Marlon said, try speeding them up, that is part of the hope for the LHC.

CraigD, AMInstP
www.cymek.com
 
CraigD said:
Also remember that quarks have a nature of partial charge, 1/3, 2/3, -1/3, -2/3 (Double check the charge states). And much like a monopole, a particle with a partial charge has never been observed in nature. We see quarks always together to either form one of three charge states, 1, -1, 0.

As Marlon said, try speeding them up, that is part of the hope for the LHC.

CraigD, AMInstP
www.cymek.com
Great answers from everyone. Thank you. Related to CraigD's post. What is the reasoning behind there being three quarks with fracitonal charges that can not be separated as opposed to a single particle with unit charge?
 
losang said:
Great answers from everyone. Thank you. Related to CraigD's post. What is the reasoning behind there being three quarks with fracitonal charges that can not be separated as opposed to a single particle with unit charge?
The argument is that fractional electrical charges must somehow be confined anyway because they have never been observed. It is quite a bold point of view. Confinement having something to do with the electroweak sector !? I totally disagree.

FYI fractional electrical charge carriers have been observed. Not as fundamental particles however.
 
humanino said:
The argument is that fractional electrical charges must somehow be confined anyway because they have never been observed. It is quite a bold point of view. Confinement having something to do with the electroweak sector !? I totally disagree.

FYI fractional electrical charge carriers have been observed. Not as fundamental particles however.
Yes but why were fractional charges proposed in the first place?
 
losang said:
Yes but why were fractional charges proposed in the first place?

One way to explain this is using group theory. The equations (ie Lagrangian) describing quark interactions need to respect certain symmetries, eg rotational symmetry. To respect this demand, the quark wavefunctions need to behave in a certain way under these spatial rotations. If you elaborate on this, you can prove that quarks need to have certain values for spin, angular momentum and electrical/color charge.

Another way to explain this is the Dirac quantisation theorem that follows from the Dual Abelian Higgs model : to product of electrical charge e and magnetic charge g is constant and equal to [tex]2 \pi n[/tex] (n is an integer). So the existence of a magnetic monopole leads to the quatisation of electrical charge.

marlon
 
marlon said:
One way to explain this is using group theory. The equations (ie Lagrangian) describing quark interactions need to respect certain symmetries, eg rotational symmetry.
marlon
OK, but the question still stands. Why were quarks proposed in the first place.
 
  • #10
losang said:
OK, but the question still stands. Why were quarks proposed in the first place.

No that's a different question with respect to "why fractional charges".

Experimentally quarks were discovered in the late 60ties and early 70ties by scientists doing electron-proton scattering experiments at SLAC. High energy electrons were scattered off protons/neutrons. The results showed more electrons bouncing back with high energy at large angles than could be explained if protons and neutrons were uniform spheres of matter.

http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/nobel/1990nobel.html

If you are looking for a theoretical introduction of quarks, you want to look for the eightfold of Murray Gell Mann.

marlon
 
  • #11
losang said:
OK, but the question still stands. Why were quarks proposed in the first place.
Marlon gave you very accurate responses and references. I will just add one thing. It is not a straightforward issue :smile: Marlon mentionned group theory. Indeed, Murray Gell-Mann introduced "quarks" to classify the observed hadronic spectra and make predictions for mass ratios, magnetic moments etc... But he himself did not believe at that time that quarks were real particles ! Only once scaling was observed at SLAC, people started to believe in Feynman's partons (hadronic constituents, quarks and gluons namely) and only even later were Feynman's partons identified as Gell Mann's quarks !
 
  • #12
marlon said:
No that's a different question with respect to "why fractional charges".

Experimentally quarks were discovered in the late 60ties and early 70ties by scientists doing electron-proton scattering experiments at SLAC. High energy electrons were scattered off protons/neutrons. The results showed more electrons bouncing back with high energy at large angles than could be explained if protons and neutrons were uniform spheres of matter.

http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/nobel/1990nobel.html

If you are looking for a theoretical introduction of quarks, you want to look for the eightfold of Murray Gell Mann.

marlon
Good point. I had the question in my mind but it didn't come out very clear. This sounds very similar to how it was show that the plum pudding model was incorrect.
 

Similar threads

Graduate Color confinement in high-energy quark knockout
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad How Does Binding Energy Relate to Nucleon Distance in Atomic Nuclei?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
High School Nuclear Binding Energy: Is my understanding correct?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Binding energy, fusion and fission
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Undergrad What would a hypothetical quark-quark collision yield?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Undergrad Separation energy of nucleons and Coulomb barrier
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Electron - Up Quark Interactions
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Undergrad Question about gluons and nucleon binding
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School What is binding energy and how does it hold nuclei together?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Is my understanding of nuclear fusion and binding energy correct?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K