How much of a hydrogen atom's mass is due to the mass of fundamental particles?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mass composition of a hydrogen atom, specifically the contribution of fundamental particles versus the energy associated with their interactions and fields. Participants explore theoretical aspects of mass-energy equivalence and the implications of particle interactions.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant queries how much mass remains in a hydrogen atom after subtracting the kinetic and potential energies of its fundamental particles, suggesting a focus on the conversion of energy forms.
  • Another participant provides a breakdown of the mass of a hydrogen atom, attributing 1% of its mass to fundamental particles and 99% to fields and forces, particularly the strong force.
  • A participant questions the boundary between fields and particles, suggesting that including gluons would increase the percentage attributed to particles.
  • One participant clarifies their perspective on the distinction between fermions and bosons in relation to the original question about potential energy.
  • Several participants express curiosity about the nature of energy and mass, discussing the conversion of energy forms and the implications of energy conservation in physical systems.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on how to categorize mass contributions from fundamental particles versus fields, indicating that there is no consensus on the exact percentage of mass attributable to fundamental particles. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of energy transformations and the definitions of mass in various contexts.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the ambiguity in defining the boundary between particles and fields, which may affect the calculations and interpretations of mass contributions. There are also unresolved assumptions regarding the treatment of energy forms in the context of mass.

Runner 1
Messages
100
Reaction score
0
If one were to subtract the kinetic energies of all fundamental particles within hydrogen, as well as all of the potential energy of all bound states between these particles, how much mass (as a percentage of the total) would remain? Ignore the kinetic energy due to the hydrogen's speed.And while I'm at it, isn't it weird that fundamental particles can be converted into the motion of another particle? For instance, an electron can be annihilated with a positron, producing photons which can in turn be absorbed by the electrons in another atom, promoting them to a higher state. In effect, one electron has been turned into the motion of a different electron!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A 1H atom (938.738 MeV/c²) is composed of 1 electron (0.510999 MeV/c²) 2 up quarks (2.2 MeV/c²) and 1 down quark (5.0 MeV/c²). So the mass of all of the fundamental particles is 9.9 MeV/c² (1% of total) and the remaining 928.9 MeV/c² (99% of total) is contained in the fields etc (predominantly the strong force).
 
Doesn't it kind of depend on where you draw the line between field and particle? For example if you considered gluons to be component particles then the total would be higher then 1%.
 
Yes, I was drawing the line between fermions and bosons. Since the OP specifically mentioned the PE of the bound states I figured that was the line he wanted drawn.
 
Okay, thanks for the reply! That's very interesting.
 
Runner 1 said:
And while I'm at it, isn't it weird that fundamental particles can be converted into the motion of another particle? For instance, an electron can be annihilated with a positron, producing photons which can in turn be absorbed by the electrons in another atom, promoting them to a higher state. In effect, one electron has been turned into the motion of a different electron!

It's simply the conversion of energy between different forms: rest-energy [itex]E_0 = m_0 c^2[/itex] (where [itex]m_0[/itex] is rest-mass) on the one hand and kinetic energy on the other.
 
jtbell said:
It's simply the conversion of energy between different forms: rest-energy [itex]E_0 = m_0 c^2[/itex] (where [itex]m_0[/itex] is rest-mass) on the one hand and kinetic energy on the other.

Yeah, I still think it's weird haha.
 
Interesting.

So when the sun shines on me, I am experiencing 100% energy, but when I hoist a glass of water, I am not hoisting 100% mass.

Wonder what 100% mass mass (if you catch my drift) would be like?
 
Haha not really. Energy is basically a numerical value that can be calculated from a system that is conserved through time despite any transformations of the system.

If you shine light into a box with perfect mirrors and weigh the box, it will weigh more than if you weighed just the box alone.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K