Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

QG plasma and gamma ray bursters

  1. Aug 19, 2004 #1
    Would a quark-gluon plasma reflect x rays and gamma rays
    and would such a plasma exist in gamma ray bursters and black holes?
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 20, 2004 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    No. Quark-gluon transactions only occur in the domain of the strong nuclear force. It is mathematically impossible for them to interact beyond a very short distance.
  4. Aug 20, 2004 #3
    Um... I'm pretty sure quarks interact via the EM force as well as the strong force. So it is possible they can reflect some type of EM waves. Whether it will be x-rays or gamma rays I don't know.
  5. Aug 20, 2004 #4
    I was wondering if a short gamma ray burst could be attributed to a quark-gluon plasma forming briefly and then reflecting light towards earth - especially if a concave cavity of some kind formed in an exploding star.
  6. Aug 22, 2004 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    No way. EM does not interact with the strong force.
  7. Aug 22, 2004 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That is unlikely. The mechanism for forming a concave reflective cavity is not possible under current theory. It requires a 'gravity burst' of some form. If you think about it, you will realize that has many other observable consequences.
  8. Aug 22, 2004 #7
    Its not interacting with the strong force, quarks contain an electric charge and therefore will interact via the EM force.
  9. Aug 22, 2004 #8
    Just waiting to see who wins the debate :smile:
  10. Aug 23, 2004 #9


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It is impossible for a quark to carry an electrical charge. It can only carry a 1/3 charge potential.
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2004
  11. Aug 23, 2004 #10


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    1) The quarks carry electric charge, the same kind of electric charge that the electron carries, but different in quantity. Quarks are affected by the EM force.

    2) Some quanrks carry a charge 1/3 that of the electron, and others carry a charge of 2/3 that of the electron. Antiquarks of course carry negatives of these.

    3) Quarks also carry color charges of the strong force.
  12. Aug 23, 2004 #11
    That is unlikely. The mechanism for forming a concave reflective cavity is not possible under current theory.


    What if a supernovae explosion impacted on another star nearby?
  13. Aug 23, 2004 #12
    There is a picture for that Kurious? :smile:
  14. Aug 23, 2004 #13
    Do binary stars ever become supernovae simultaneously?
  15. Aug 23, 2004 #14
    That's a interesting question.

    I can't help but think of Taylor and Hulse, and then wonder.
  16. Aug 23, 2004 #15


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    This will happen quite often (most stars are in binary systems, not alone like the Sun). IIRC, it's been modelled in some detail; the answer is 'it depends' :wink: Sufficiently far away, the other star merely suffers a severe case of sunburn; closer it depends on how dense the star is - a red giant will have a considerable part of its atmosphere ripped away; a white dwarf will merely suffer a gentle, warm breeze (though the total matter dumped onto it may lead to some interesting fireworks).

    In all cases, the sudden change in the mass of the SN will result in a quite different orbit for the pair :smile:
  17. Aug 24, 2004 #16


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I very well may have this all wrong, so please feel free to set me straight. My comments were founded on the premise EM interactions are transacted solely through photon exchanges. Quarks in unbound states [which can only exist under quark-gluon plasma conditions] cannot absorb or produce photons, only gluons.
  18. Aug 24, 2004 #17
    For me the constant reminder is how we see http://wc0.worldcrossing.com/WebX?14@84.E3fWccciAdj.21@.1ddf905d/0 [Broken] and given the first expalnation really helped. Two posts follow in above link that are really good to look at.

    Now if you wanted to understand the standard model better, how could we have extended our view? Phase transitions from the early universe?

    So we learn to map this?

    [URL="https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=201464&postcount=2]The quantum numbers of fundamental particles are:

    1. Spin, which is intrinsic angular momentum.

    2. Electric charge, which determines how particles couple to EM fields.

    3. Color, which determines how particles couple to gluon fields.

    4. Flavor (including isospin up/down, strangeness, charm, bottomness and topness), which determines how particles couple to massive vector boson fields.

    5. Lepton number (and also electron number, muon number, and tauon number)--which are conserved for some reason unbeknownst to us at this time.

    6. Baryon number--Also conserved for some unknown reason.

    7. Parity--Which describes how a particle transforms under spatial reflection.

    8. C-Parity--Which describes how a particle transforms under charge conjugation.

    Another one that could be added is "T-Parity" (if I may coin a term), which describes how particles transform under time reversal. However, this is usually not listed in the Particle Data Group because the product PCT (Parity, Charge Conjugation, and Time Reversal, respectively) is conserved under any circumstance, so specifying P and C automatically determines T.[/URL]

    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  19. Aug 25, 2004 #18


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Question remains. Do quarks interact via EM transactions? If they do, I have quantum physics all wrong. Explicitly, do photon exchanges occur between quarks? I think not. Do gluons have 'closet' photon transactions? I doubt that. I am, however, willing to learn. If so, how do how quarks exchange fractional charges. QCD color change dynamics are not relevant to the issue.

    This is not an argument with SA: He is fundamentally sound in what he said. I am only arguing the point based on the original question. If you assume a quark-gluon 'soup' you must also assume the burden of predicting the accompanying interactions. I admit it is much easier to object than demonstrate any evidence of workable models.
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2004
  20. Aug 25, 2004 #19
    Just wondering if this plate would be a valid way in which to further image what you are saying?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook