I New QCD Parameter Determinations

Click For Summary
New research papers provide precise measurements of quark masses and the strong force coupling constant using renormalization group summed perturbation theory (RGSPT). The determined values for α(s), m_b, m_c, m_s, m_d, and m_u are presented alongside previous estimates from the Particle Data Group and the Flavor Lattice Averaging Group. The discussion highlights that the strange quark mass exhibits greater tension with prior estimates, potentially due to RGSPT's insufficient consideration of non-perturbative effects. Participants also discuss formatting choices for presenting values, with some preferring visual distinctions to enhance readability. Overall, the thread emphasizes the importance of these new determinations in the context of existing data.
ohwilleke
Gold Member
Messages
2,650
Reaction score
1,609
TL;DR
A pair of new papers make precision determinations of the quark masses and the strong force coupling constant using the renormalization group summed perturbation theory (RGSPT). The values are close to previous estimates, but there is some tension in the strange quark mass determination.
A pair of new papers (here and here) make precision determinations of the quark masses and the strong force coupling constant using the renormalization group summed perturbation theory (RGSPT). For comparison purposes, I have followed each value with the Particle Data Group (PDG) value, and then the 2021 Flavor Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG) value.

α(s)(n(f)=5)(M(Z)) = 0.1171(7)
<----> 0.1179(9) <----> 0.1184(8).

m_b(MS mass pole mass) = 4174.3(9.5) MeV
<----> 4180-20+30 MeV <----> 4203(11) MeV

m_c(MS mass pole mass) = 1281.1(3.8) MeV
<----> 1270(20) MeV <----> 1278(13) MeV

m_s(2 GeV) = 104.34-4.21+4.23 MeV
<----> 93.4-3.4+8.6 MeV <----> 93.44(68) MeV

m_d(2 GeV) = 4.21-0.45+0.48 MeV
<----> 4.67-0.17+0.48 MeV <----> 4.70(5) MeV

m_u(2 GeV) = 2.00-0.40+0.33 MeV
<----> 2.16-0.26+0.49 MeV <----> 2.14(8) MeV

Can anyone explain, at an educated layman's "intermediate" level, why the strange quark mass value in this method has more tension than the other parameters do with previously estimated values?

My gut intuition is that the tension is due to insufficient consideration of non-perturbative effects by RGSPT, which turns out to be maximal for the strange quark, but I don't have a well substantiated basis for that hypothesis.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
what does

<---->mean?
 
malawi_glenn said:
what does

<---->mean?
I'm merely using it as a way to visually distinguish between the values from each of the three sources for each parameter, while connecting all three values to the definition of the parameter described (which would ideally all appear on the same line).

If you use of comma or semi-colon, they tend to visually blend into each other to my tired middle aged bifocal wearing eyes.

If you you separate lines for each entry, it gets harder to read the post as a whole, since it has six more lines.
 
tableworksfinetoo
the<---->isgarbage

personallyIthink
thelackof
## \LaTeX ##formationis

evenmore
hurtfulto

eyes
 
  • Haha
Likes ohwilleke and Vanadium 50
Thread 'Some confusion with the Binding Energy graph of atoms'
My question is about the following graph: I keep on reading that fusing atoms up until Fe-56 doesn’t cost energy and only releases binding energy. However, I understood that fusing atoms also require energy to overcome the positive charges of the protons. Where does that energy go after fusion? Does it go into the mass of the newly fused atom, escape as heat or is the released binding energy shown in the graph actually the net energy after subtracting the required fusion energy? I...

Similar threads