Can Electrons Be Decomposed Further Than Their Known Particle State?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter 0402458
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electrons
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the nature of electrons, specifically whether they are fundamental particles or if they can be decomposed into smaller constituents, similar to protons and neutrons. Participants explore theoretical implications, experimental evidence, and related concepts such as wave-particle duality and the FHQ effect.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that electrons are elementary particles based on leading theories and experimental evidence.
  • Others introduce the idea of the FHQ effect, suggesting the possibility of smaller particles making up electrons, although this concept is not widely understood or accepted.
  • One participant discusses the relationship between the electron's mass and energy scales in quantum electrodynamics, suggesting that if electrons were composite, experiments would have revealed this at energies corresponding to the electron's mass.
  • Another participant questions the nature of the signatures that would indicate an electron's composite nature in experiments.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that electrons are considered fundamental based on current experimental evidence, but there is uncertainty regarding the implications of the FHQ effect and the potential for new physics. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the possibility of electrons being composite.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to theoretical frameworks and experimental results that may depend on specific conditions or interpretations, such as the energy scales relevant to electron behavior and the nature of signatures in particle collisions.

0402458
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Are electrons "basic" particles? Or can they be broken down just like protons and neutrons?

Would their wave nature have anything to do with this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
According to the leading theories the electrons are elementary particles (i.e not composite), and I believe that every experiment suggest that they are indeed elementary particles.

Wave nature of matter is due to de Broglie's fundamental law, that says that every object has wave nature according to: [tex]\lambda = \dfrac{h}{p}[/tex].
 
I had heard something about a so-called FHQ effect...whichc I do not really understand.

It was supposed to have to with smaller particles making up electrons.

Any info on that?
 
nope, don't know nada about that FHQ, where did you heard about it?
 
Not super credible but you never know...
http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/1090/Are-Electrons-Made-of-Smaller-Particles
 
This is an interesting question. I think that the correct answer is that the electron being fundamental is consistent with every experiment that we know.

I think I can do a bit better, though. Typically, theorists are pretty good at the art of dimensional analysis. Basically, every problem sets a typical scale for itself. The best example is quantum electrodynamics. It has only one scale---the mass of the electron. Because E = mc^2, this sets an energy where QED effects become important. If you work through the numbers, you find that this scale is the Compton wavelength of the electron (NOT a coincidence). So you have to start worrying about calculating QED effects at the Compton wavelength of the electron, which is 10 or so times smaller than the Bohr radius. This is exactly why you can use old-fashioned non-relativistic quantum mechanics and get good results out of the Bohr model.

So, in some sense, the most natural place for new physics to take over is at a energy that the problem itself dictates. So if the electron was composite, we would have expected to find out that it was composite when doing experiments at an energy set by the electron's mass. And we've been doing those experiments for quite some time.

The same is true for the proton---when we start doing experiments at energies on the order of the proton's mass, we find out very quickly that the proton is composite.

So saying that the elctron is fundamental is a pretty good guess---there would have to be some pretty tricky new physics that we have missed. But, of course, anything IS possible.
 
I'm not sure where you were going with that...I won't pretend to be an expert at this either.
 
Well, typically the dimensionful parameter sets a scale for new physics. In nuclear physics it is the proton mass. So, when we collide protons with energies around 1 GeV, we get signatures that are consistent with the proton being composite.

Likewise, if the electron were composite, we would expect that electron collisions at an energy of around 1 MeV would SHOW us signatures that were consistent with the electron being composite. Because we haven't seen such behavior, we believe that the electron is fundamental.
 
What is this signature like?
 

Similar threads

Graduate Why do the proton and electron have equal and opposite electric charge?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
Undergrad Can proton/neutron decay be avoided in some conditions?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
High School Can a hypothetical atom be made out of positrons and electrons ?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Undergrad Quasi-Elastic Scattering Peak-Shift
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Undergrad How Does Beta Decay Relate to the Role of W Bosons in Weak Nuclear Force?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
High School What happens during electron capture physically?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
Graduate Fast electrons passing a beam of slow electrons at a right angle
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
High School Has anyone ever been able to measure Electron size?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
High School Beta Plus Decay: What's Left for the Electron?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Graduate Energy needed to convert a bound proton to a neutron?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K