A Is a Hadron a Quasiparticle in Condensed Matter Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Demystifier
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether hadrons, such as protons and neutrons, can be classified as quasiparticles within the framework of condensed matter physics. Participants argue that hadrons are bound states of quarks and gluons, but differ from traditional quasiparticles, which require a macroscopic amount of substance for statistical mechanics to apply. The conversation highlights the importance of a many-body background for defining quasiparticles, with references to phonons and their emergence in solid lattices. There is also a debate about the nature of interactions in quantum field theory (QFT), with some asserting that QFT is an effective theory rather than a fundamental one. Ultimately, the discussion seeks to clarify the conceptual differences and similarities between high-energy and condensed matter physics regarding quasiparticles and bound states.
  • #31
A. Neumaier said:
But physics is about predictive formalisms, not about profound truths. The latter are reserved for the informal interpretation of the formalism.
To defend 't Hooft I would say that physics is not only about predictive formalism, but also about ideas that justify that formalism. Indeed, the 't Hooft lectures on QFT (as pretty much any other QFT textbook) starts with some heuristic ideas and ends up with some predictive formalism.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Demystifier said:
To defend 't Hooft I would say that physics is not only about predictive formalism, but also about ideas that justify that formalism. Indeed, the 't Hooft lectures on QFT (as pretty much any other QFT textbook) starts with some heuristic ideas and ends up with some predictive formalism.
Sure, lots of heuristics precedes the formulation of a working model.

The point that I had wanted to make is that atyy's initial quote in post #25 was taken out of context and doesn't make the standard model ''condensed matter in spirit" - it only creates an informal bridge between the two.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
A. Neumaier said:
The point that I had wanted to make is that your initial quote in post #25 was taken out of context and doesn't make the standard model ''condensed matter in spirit" - it only creates an informal bridge between the two.
That post was written by atyy, not me. I agree that it only makes an informal bridge.
 
  • #34
Demystifier said:
That post was written by atyy, not me. I agree that it only makes an informal bridge.
corrected.
 

Similar threads

I Entropic Tension Cosmology (ETC) 1.0
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
A How can quarks exist if they are confined?
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
9K
I What happens to a gluon that does not have enough energy to hadronize?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
A Color confinement in high-energy quark knockout
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
A Quantum Field theory vs. many-body Quantum Mechanics
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
I Why do quarks prefer to live on top of fluctuating gluon fields?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
I New Naming Rules for Exotic Hadrons at the LHC: LHCb Collaboration Paper (2022)
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
A Fermions, Monopoles & Quantum Hall: New Advances
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
I Particles of matter as Bosons?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Moving from nursing to physics
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K