Charge of down, up , electron; (-1/3, 2/3, -1)*3 more natural?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the proposed charge values for down quarks, up quarks, and electrons, specifically considering the representation of these charges as (-1/3, 2/3, -1)*3 or -1, 2, -3. Participants explore the relationship between electric charge and momentum within a theoretical framework, questioning the naturalness of defining the electron's charge as -3.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests defining the charges of down quarks, up quarks, and electrons as (-1/3, 2/3, -1)*3, leading to a charge of -1 for the down quark, 2 for the up quark, and -3 for the electron, questioning if this definition is more natural.
  • Another participant argues that an electron charge of 1 is more convenient for practical applications, particularly in chemistry, where protons and electrons are more commonly dealt with than quarks.
  • A different participant challenges the idea that charge is related to momentum, noting that in quantum mechanics, momentum has a commutator while charge does not.
  • One participant references a friend's interest in 5-D relativity as a basis for their belief in the connection between charge and momentum, though this is met with skepticism regarding the validity of the reference provided.
  • Another participant emphasizes the need for proper citation of references, advocating for peer-reviewed publications over preprints.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between charge and momentum, with some supporting the proposed charge definitions while others contest the underlying assumptions. There is no consensus on the naturalness of the electron's charge being defined as -3.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of the relationship between charge and momentum, with unresolved questions regarding the implications of their proposed definitions and the validity of references cited.

Spinnor
Gold Member
Messages
2,231
Reaction score
419
Let us define the charge of the down-quark, up-quark, and electron as

(-1/3, 2/3, -1)*3 or -1, 2, -3.

Let momentum in some closed one dimensional space be equated with electric charge. If momentum goes as n/wavelength where n = 1,2,3,..., the down quark has a charge of -1, wavelength equal the the "length", L, of the closed space. The up quark has two units of charge, twice as much momentum as the down quark, wavelength equal to L/2. The electron has three units of charge, wavelength equal to L/3.

Electron charge defined as -3 more natural?

Thank you for any thoughts.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Spinnor said:
Let us define the charge of the down-quark, up-quark, and electron as

(-1/3, 2/3, -1)*3 or -1, 2, -3.

Let momentum in some closed one dimensional space be equated with electric charge. If momentum goes as n/wavelength where n = 1,2,3,..., the down quark has a charge of -1, wavelength equal the the "length", L, of the closed space. The up quark has two units of charge, twice as much momentum as the down quark, wavelength equal to L/2. The electron has three units of charge, wavelength equal to L/3.

Electron charge defined as -3 more natural?

Thank you for any thoughts.
If we could start from scratch your idea would probably prevail, but it is far too late to change.

On a completely different subject, look at the layout of the letters on your keyboard (QWERTY). It was designed originally (to be inefficient) to prevent typist from jamming mechanical typewriters. Many have advovated a more efficient modern design. It won't happen.
 
An electron charge of 1 is easily the most convenient for the most people. There are a lot more people dealing with protons and electrons, atoms and molecules than there are dealing with quarks directly. All of chemistry, to begin with...
 
Spinnor said:
Let us define the charge of the down-quark, up-quark, and electron as

(-1/3, 2/3, -1)*3 or -1, 2, -3.

Let momentum in some closed one dimensional space be equated with electric charge. If momentum goes as n/wavelength where n = 1,2,3,..., the down quark has a charge of -1, wavelength equal the the "length", L, of the closed space. .


What makes you believe that charge has anything to do with momentum?

In addition, in QM, momentum has a commutator where as charge does not.
 
Spinnor said:
enotstrebor said:
What makes you believe that charge has anything to do with momentum?


Something I thought a friend told me who was interested in 5-D relativity.

See:

http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+carey+briggs/0/1/0/all/0/1

This is not a valid way of citing a reference. Please cite the EXACT paper. And since this is still QM and not particle physics/string, we strongly prefer peer-reviewed publication and not just a preprint on ArXiv.

Zz.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K