Compositeness Limits -- Have We Reached Rock Bottom?

In summary, the 2017 Review has strong lower limits for the mass scales of possible quark and lepton compositeness.
  • #1
lpetrich
988
178
Particle Data Group - 2017 Review has some strong lower limits for the mass scales of possible quark and lepton compositeness, or at least the compositeness of the easier-to-study ones, like up and down quarks and also electrons. The limits are well into the TeV range, though they are somewhat model-dependent.

This means that electrons, up quarks, and down quarks do not start to disintegrate even after applying energies a million times their rest masses.

Here are the maximum ratios of disintegration energy to rest mass for entities previously discovered to have been composite:
  • Atoms: 10^(-8) (ionization of hydrogen atoms)
  • Nuclei: 10^(-3) (dissociation of deuterons)
  • Hadrons: 1 (deep inelastic scattering off of nucleons)
That makes it very difficult for Standard-Model elementary fermions to be composite: they are much less massive than their compositeness energy scales.

But there is a theoretical analogy: light mesons, like pions. Their mass is roughly sqrt(mq*mc) where mq is the quarks' average mass and mc = QCD energy scale. For mq << mc, m(meson) << mc also. So if the electron has a compositeness scale of about 1 TeV, then the electron's constituents would have to have masses around 1 eV.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Pions are special because they are goldstones. That means there is an inexact symmetry that is driving their masses near zero. (If the symmetry were exact, they would be massless)
 
  • Like
Likes arivero
  • #3
Vanadium 50 said:
Pions are special because they are goldstones. That means there is an inexact symmetry that is driving their masses near zero. (If the symmetry were exact, they would be massless)
So in the scenario that I'd mentioned, the Standard Model's leptons and quarks are all pseudo-Goldstone particles, like the pion.
 
  • #4
That's starting to sound like a personal theory. So far as I know, this is impossible without supersymmetry and virtually impossible with it.
 
  • #5
Vanadium 50 said:
That's starting to sound like a personal theory. So far as I know, this is impossible without supersymmetry and virtually impossible with it.
Looks like that mechanism cannot work. So it'll be very hard for electrons and up and down quarks to be composite.
 

1. What are compositeness limits?

Compositeness limits refer to the boundaries or thresholds at which particles are no longer considered to be elementary, but rather made up of smaller, more fundamental particles.

2. How are compositeness limits measured?

Compositeness limits are measured through high-energy experiments, such as colliding particles at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). By observing the behavior and interactions of particles at increasingly higher energies, scientists can determine whether they are composed of smaller building blocks or are truly elementary.

3. How do compositeness limits relate to the Standard Model of particle physics?

The Standard Model predicts the existence of elementary particles, but it does not rule out the possibility of compositeness. Therefore, finding evidence for compositeness would challenge and potentially expand our understanding of the Standard Model.

4. Have we reached the compositeness limits of all known particles?

No, we have not reached the compositeness limits of all known particles. While the Standard Model has been successful in predicting and describing the behavior of many particles, there are still unanswered questions and potential for further discoveries of compositeness limits.

5. What implications do compositeness limits have on our understanding of the universe?

Finding evidence for compositeness would have significant implications for our understanding of the fundamental building blocks of the universe. It could potentially lead to the discovery of new particles and interactions, and reshape our understanding of the fundamental forces of nature.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top