Mass of the proton with massless quarks?

In summary: Therefore, in summary, the usual lore from chiral perturbation theory is that the mass of the pion is proportional to the sum of the up and down masses, and will approach zero when these masses are zero. However, for the proton, chiral perturbation theory tells us that in the limit of vanishing quark masses, the nucleon mass will decrease to 870 MeV. This is different from the pion because the pion is a quasi-Goldstone boson for chiral symmetry and will be completely massless in the limit of exactly broken chiral symmetry. On the other hand, the nucleon (and therefore the proton) acquires a mass in this situation. The reason for this is that chiral
  • #1
arivero
Gold Member
3,429
140
A usual lore from chiral perturbation theory is that the mass of the pion is proportional to the sum of the up and down masses, and then it is going to be zero when such masses are zero.

Now, for the proton, I notice the following remark from Chris Quigg
Chiral perturbation theory tells us that in the limit of vanishing quark masses the nucleon mass would decrease to 870 MeV

Why is it different of the pion?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I am not really sure, but I think the point is that the pion is a quasi-Goldstone boson for the chiral symmetry. It means that in the limit of exactly broken chiral symmetry (i.e. the mass quark vanishes) it should be completely massless. On the other hand, in this situation the nucleons (and so the protons) acquire a mass.
Again, I am not really sure.
 
  • #3
Perhaps the question is, why the chiral expansion of the nucleon has a constant term while the pion hasn't?

It is a little bit as the expansions of cos(x) and sin(x), but in this later case we know that one of the expansions must be even and the other must be odd, so it is crystal-clear.
 
  • #4
There's no reason for the nucleon to be massless at zero quark mass. In general, we should expect hadrons to have masses of order the characteristic scale of QCD; call it ~1 GeV.

The thing that needs explaining is why the pion is massless at zero quark mass. That happens because of chiral symmetry and Goldstone's theorem, as Einj said.
 
  • #5
The_Duck said:
The thing that needs explaining is why the pion is massless at zero quark mass. That happens because of chiral symmetry and Goldstone's theorem, as Einj said.

This also puzzles me... What happens here in chiral symmetry breaking is that chiral SU(2)RxSU(2)L breaks down spontaneusly via quark condensates, a condensation which should happen for any quark mass smaller than one hundred MeV, and then the pion mass should be zero if the surviving SU(2) vector part, aka Isospin, were exact. But this is true always that the mass of up is equal to the mass of down, so the mass of pion should depend of the mass difference between up and down, not of the mass average.

Of course chiral symmetry is also explicitly broken because of the quark masses, but I fail to see how this mechanism compete with the condensation.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
arivero said:
the pion mass should be zero if the surviving SU(2) vector part, aka Isospin, were exact.

Why do you say this? You get exactly massless particles when you spontaneously break an exact symmetry--that is, the pions should be massless only if the original *axial* symmetry was exact.
 
  • #7
The_Duck said:
Why do you say this? You get exactly massless particles when you spontaneously break an exact symmetry--that is, the pions should be massless only if the original *axial* symmetry was exact.

Well, but condensation always happen, so there is always an spontaneus breaking; it is only that we are spontaneusly breaking an approximate symmetry, and I wonder how much of this approximation is hidden under the carpet of the breaking scale. What I was thinking is, there are two sources of failure in the masslessness of the pion:

- First, the up and down are not massless. But they are light respect to the QCD chiral scale, which is about 100 MeV.

- Second, the up and down have not the same mass. So the SU(2)_V symmetri is approximate too.

I was thinking which could be the relative contribution of each source to the mass of the pion, and wondering if the second one could be relevant too, or even more relevant.

For instance, imagine the up is massless. Then, should we have an exact chiral U(1)L x U(1)R and a massless neutral pion, with massive charged pions due to the breaking of SU(2)_V?
 
Last edited:
  • #8
As said the mass scale of the nucleon is rather natural (~ 1GeV) whereas the nearly massless pions are explained via the Goldstone mechanism. It is interesting to see what happens w/o spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking. So let's look at the eta prime meson (η') meson which is the flavor-singulet of the SU(3) generated by Isospin and Strangeness.

The eta meson is a Goldstone boson with mass 548 MeV (rather large compared to pions Due to the mass of the strange quark) whereas the eta prime is NOT a Goldstone boson b/c the singulet U(1) symmetry is not broken via the Goldstone mechanism but via the axial anomaly. Therefore the eta prime has a mass of 958 MeV which is rather close to the nucleon mass.
 
  • #9
Ok, it seems that I was mixing the pseudoscalars such as the pion with the scalar from Vafa-Witten theorem. See eg 9.4 of hep-ph/9911532v2

[tex]m_\chi^2 f_\chi^2= (m_d-m_u) (\langle \bar \psi_u \psi_u \rangle -\langle \bar \psi_d \psi_d \rangle )[/tex]
 

1. What is the mass of the proton with massless quarks?

The mass of the proton with massless quarks is approximately 938.27 MeV/c². This value is based on the current understanding of the Standard Model of particle physics.

2. Why are quarks considered to be massless?

Quarks are considered to be massless because they have a very small mass compared to other subatomic particles. In fact, the mass of a quark is so small that it is often considered to be negligible in calculations and experiments.

3. How do we know that quarks have mass?

Although quarks are considered to be massless, they do have a small mass. This has been observed through experiments such as the Large Hadron Collider, where the energy of collisions can be used to calculate the mass of particles involved, including quarks.

4. Can the mass of the proton change if the quarks are massless?

The mass of the proton is determined by the combined masses of its constituent particles, including quarks. While the mass of a quark is considered to be negligible, it is not exactly zero. Therefore, any changes in the mass of quarks could potentially affect the overall mass of the proton.

5. Are there any theories that suggest quarks may not be massless?

There are theories that suggest that quarks may not be massless, such as the Higgs mechanism. The Higgs mechanism proposes that particles acquire mass through interactions with the Higgs field. However, this theory is still being studied and has not been definitively proven.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
13
Views
4K
Back
Top