Is Electron Mass Increased by Electromagnetic Coupling Like by Higgs Coupling?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around whether electromagnetic coupling affects the mass of an electron similarly to how the Higgs field does. Participants explore the implications of these couplings in the context of quantum electrodynamics (QED) and the nature of mass in particle physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the mass of the electron could be expressed as a sum of contributions from the Higgs field and the electromagnetic field, questioning if similar "flipping" behavior occurs during interactions with photons.
  • Another participant points out a crucial difference between the electromagnetic field, which is a vector field, and the Higgs field, which is a Lorentz scalar, emphasizing that the reference frame affects the electromagnetic potential.
  • A third participant clarifies that in the massless case, left-handed and right-handed fermions are independent, and the introduction of a mass term couples them without any time dependence, challenging the notion of repeated "flipping."
  • One participant asserts that QED increases the electron mass infinitely and discusses the implications of QED screening, suggesting that the bare mass of the electron is infinite and that QED may not be predictive for masses.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of mass and the effects of electromagnetic coupling versus Higgs coupling. There is no consensus on whether the mechanisms are analogous or how they fundamentally differ.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in the predictive power of QED regarding mass and the implications of reference frame dependence in the context of electromagnetic fields.

johne1618
Messages
368
Reaction score
0
Would electromagnetic coupling between an electron with charge e and an electromagnetic field with scalar potential V_em add to its mass in the same way as its coupling to the scalar Higgs field?

i.e.

mass_electron = g V_Higgs + e V_em

Somewhere I got the picture that a left-handed massless electron state is flipped to a right-handed one and vice-versa each time it interacts with the Higgs field. The electron mass/energy is then given by hbar times the frequency of this flipping. I don't know if this is right. If it is then perhaps the same flipping behaviour (excuse my language!) can occur due to interactions with photons in an electromagnetic field.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
johne1618 said:
Would electromagnetic coupling between an electron with charge e and an electromagnetic field with scalar potential V_em add to its mass in the same way as its coupling to the scalar Higgs field?

i.e.

mass_electron = g V_Higgs + e V_em

There's a crucial difference.

The electromagnetic field A^\mu is a vector field and V_em is the time component
of this vector. The value of V_em is different in different reference frames.

The Higgs field however is (must be) a true Lorentz scalar and its value is the
same in all reference frames.


Hans.
 
johne1618, Regarding the flipping.. in the massless case, right-handed and left-handed fermions are completely independent of each other. But if a mass term is present in the Lagrangian it couples them together: L = m (eLeR + eReL). This is true regardless of whether the mass comes from the Higgs field or is put in by hand. You shouldn't think of this as a repeated "flipping".. there is no time dependence involved.
 
Yes QED increases the electron mass. Infinitely in fact, the bare mass of the electron is infinite, and QED screening gives an infinite subtraction to it, given an electron mass of ∞-∞ = anything finite. QED isn't very predictive for masses. But QED doesn't work for a massless electron, and doesn't work for energies above a certain point. I think this is saying that deep down a (3d space + 1 time) universal with QM and a phase at every point in space is not in fact a possible complete theory of a universe, somewhere some else has to be
added to make a fully viable theory.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
21K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K