Charge radius of a proton as a function of its mass

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between the charge radius of a proton and its mass, specifically exploring whether this relationship can be analytically derived from established physics principles. The inquiry includes the use of fundamental constants such as the Planck length and Planck mass, and seeks to understand the implications of this relationship within the context of quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a formula relating the charge radius of a proton to fundamental constants and expresses a desire to understand if this relationship can be analytically deduced.
  • Another participant notes that in natural units, the equation simplifies to a form that suggests a proportionality, which is expected from the uncertainty principle.
  • A subsequent participant requests clarification on how the proportionality arises from the uncertainty relation and inquires about the analytic expression for the proportionality factor.
  • Further elaboration indicates that confining a particle within a certain size leads to momentum uncertainty, suggesting a relationship between distance and energy scales in quantum mechanics.
  • It is mentioned that deriving the proton mass analytically is complex and may not yield a straightforward prediction.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and interpretation regarding the relationship and its derivation. There is no consensus on whether the relationship is a trivial equality or if it holds deeper significance, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the analytic prediction of the proton mass.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in deriving the proton mass analytically and acknowledges the complexity of the strong interaction, which is not fully accounted for in the arguments presented.

Cyril
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello !

I would like to know if the following relation, which numerically holds true according to the data available on wikipedia, can be analytically deduced from the current standard physics and model of a proton:

R = 4 x L x ( M / m )
=4 x 1.61619997e−35 x 2.1765113e−8 / 1.67262177774e−27 = 8.412368e-16 m which is correct according to wikipedia.
With R = charge radius of a proton, L = Planck length, M = Planck mass, m = Proton mass

As this relation is very simple and as it only uses fundamental constants such as Planck length and Planck mass, I would expect this relation to be found easily, maybe "by definition" or trivial equality. But I can't find this equality on the web in any standard physics document.

Can you tell me how to prove this? Is it a trivial equality?
(Please note I am not a physicist, but I have a scientific background)

Thank you very much!
Cyril
 
Physics news on Phys.org
$$L\cdot M = \frac{\hbar}{c}$$
In natural units, your equation just reads R=4/m. The proportionality is expected from the uncertainty relation.
The proton charge radius measurements show a discrepancy of ~5% between regular and muonic hydrogen, that is not sufficient to see if the prefactor might be just a coincidence or something with a deeper meaning.
 
Thank you very much for your answer mfb.

Could you detail a bit more how the proportionality is expected from the uncertainty relation?
If it is expected, what is the analytic expression of the proportionality factor?
 
If you want to confine something within a box of size 2r, its position uncertainty is smaller than r, which means its momentum uncertainty has to be larger than ##\frac{\hbar}{2r}##. For r=0.8fm, this leads to ~117 MeV/c. That means the quarks are highly relativistic, and E≈pc, so the quarks have to be quite high-energetic.
This is a heuristic argument, it is one-dimensional and it does not take the strong interaction into account, but it shows the general idea. Distance and energy scales are always related in quantum mechanics.
I don't think there is an analytic prediction. Calculating the proton mass from scratch is very tricky even with numerical methods.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K