Dirac's Argument and Charge Quantization in Composite Particles

  • Thread starter Thread starter stevendaryl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quarks
Click For Summary
Dirac's argument suggests that the existence of a magnetic monopole leads to the quantization of electric charge, implying that all charges must be integer multiples of a minimum charge, Q_0. The discussion raises the question of whether composite particles, like protons, must have a total charge that is a multiple of Q_0 or if each constituent particle must adhere to this rule. It is proposed that while quarks have fractional charges, the overall charge of composite particles remains an integer multiple of the electron's charge. A paper referenced indicates that the existence of magnetic monopoles complicates the situation, as they must also carry color-magnetic charge, affecting the behavior of quarks and their fractional charges. Ultimately, the conclusion is that isolated fractional charges cannot exist alongside monopoles with Dirac's magnetic charge, unless an unknown long-range field couples them.
stevendaryl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
8,943
Reaction score
2,954
Dirac gave an argument once upon a time showing that quantization of angular momentum together with the presumed existence of a magnetic monopole implies quantization of charge. If there is, anywhere in the universe, a magnetic monopole of magnetic charge Q_m, then the only possible values for the electric charge of a particle are:

Q_e = \dfrac{n \hbar}{Q_m}

(or something like that). So there is some smallest charge, Q_0, and every other charge must be an integer multiple of that.

My question is how this applies to composite particles such as the proton. Let's assume (contrary to any evidence) that there is a magnetic monopole, so by Dirac's argument, charge is quantized.

If you have a composite particle made up of smaller particles, is it that the total charge must be a multiple of Q_0, or must every constituent particle be a multiple of that minimum charge? More specifically, is it possible that the minimum charge is the charge on the electron, rather than the charge on the quark (which is 1/3 or 2/3 the electron's charge).

I'm guessing the latter, but I don't know whether Dirac's argument depends on the field of the electric charges being long-range (the electric field due to quark charge isn't, since quarks always appear in combinations with integral charge).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Unless the quarks in a proton are all at the same point in space, result applies to quarks.
 
I agree with clem: all charges are integer multiples of some minimum charge, with the quarks currently being the smallest experimentally known. I don't think confinement arguments change this, since the argument proceeds identically for any U(1) charge coupled to electromagnetism.
 
I found a paper that discusses how Dirac's argument applies to quarks, but the conclusion is more complicated than yes/no.

The correct conclusion, then, if quarks are confined, is not that the minimal magnetic charge is g_D, but rather that the monopole carrying magnetic charge g_D must also carry a color-magnetic charge. The color­ magnetic field of the monopole becomes screened by nonperturbative strong-interaction effects at distances greater than 10^{-13} cm. We also conclude that there cannot exist both isolated fractional electric charges and monopoles with the Dirac magnetic charge, unless there is some other (as yet unknown) long-range field that couples to both the monopoles and the fractional electric charges.

I don't understand the paper, exactly, but the author does seem to be saying that the existence of the magnetic monopole only implies that there can't be isolated fractional charges. The emphasis on "isolated" is in the original. But his argument introduces the complication of magnetic color charge.

http://www.theory.caltech.edu/~preskill/pubs/preskill-1984-monopoles.pdf
 
Wow, interesting paper (as usual from Preskill). If I understand it correctly, the point seems to be that the QCD gauge field also contributes a phase when a quark is transported around a magnetic charge, so that quarks actually introduce a new quantization condition which mixes up fractional electric charges with color charges. So all deconfined particles are integer multiples of the electric charge, but particles with non-neutral color charges can exist in multiples of the quark charge. Similar arguments apply to fractional and integer charged magnetic monopoles.
 
I am slowly going through the book 'What Is a Quantum Field Theory?' by Michel Talagrand. I came across the following quote: One does not" prove” the basic principles of Quantum Mechanics. The ultimate test for a model is the agreement of its predictions with experiments. Although it may seem trite, it does fit in with my modelling view of QM. The more I think about it, the more I believe it could be saying something quite profound. For example, precisely what is the justification of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K