Understanding the Differences Between Particles and Antiparticles

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the differences between particles and their corresponding antiparticles, focusing on their properties, such as charge and quantum numbers. Participants explore theoretical aspects and conceptual clarifications regarding these properties.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the primary difference between a particle and its antiparticle is the electric charge, which has opposite signs.
  • Others argue that quantum numbers, in addition to electric charge, also have opposite signs, though there is confusion about the significance of these quantum numbers.
  • A participant mentions that uncharged particles, such as neutrons or neutrinos, can have antiparticles, raising questions about the nature of zero charge.
  • Some participants discuss the role of various quantum numbers, such as weak hypercharge and color charge, noting that they also have opposite signs for particles and antiparticles.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the intrinsic nature of certain quantum numbers, suggesting they are conventional and not fundamental properties.
  • There is a debate about the conservation of quantum numbers in different interactions, with some arguing that certain quantities are only approximately conserved.
  • A later reply questions the distinction between conserved and non-conserved quantities, seeking clarification on their significance in physical theories.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the significance of quantum numbers or the nature of conservation in interactions. Multiple competing views remain regarding the properties that define particles and antiparticles.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions about the definitions and roles of various quantum numbers, as well as the implications of conservation laws in different interactions.

ShayanJ
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
605
I've been trying to understand the exact differences of a particle and its corresponding antiparticle.I know maybe the best way is via checking that the two particles annihilate each other when came to contact or not.But I'm talking about their properties now.
In some places,it is written that only the electric charge has opposite sign.
In some other places,its written that,in addition to electric charge,quantum numbers also have opposite sign.
I have two questions
1-Can we include other charges too?
2-Quantum numbers don't seem so intrinsic to a particle.So its just confusing for me that they are used to tell the difference between a particle and its antiparticle.How would you explain it?
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jedishrfu said:
all properties are the same except for charge"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-particles

I assume you're referring to:

"the same mass m
the same spin state J
opposite electric charges q and -q."

This is accurate, but I think some of the OP's confusion comes from the fact that "quantum number" is not one property but refers to a group of properties that are conserved in a quantum system. See the chart at the bottom of this page for a more complete table: http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Antiparticle.html
 
Uncharged particles may have antiparticles - neutrons or neutrinos.
 
mathman said:
Uncharged particles may have antiparticles - neutrons or neutrinos.

Yes, but +0 is the same as -0.
 
bossman27 said:
Yes, but +0 is the same as -0.
I think that is mathman's point: Those antiparticles are different from the particles, even if they have the same charge of 0.

The weak hypercharge and the color charge have the opposite sign, too. And all those quantum numbers related to quark types (isospin, strangeness etc.) have a different sign as well.
 
I can't accept quantities like strangeness or lepton number or such things as properties of a particle.I mean,they are,but they're just conventional things.You may tell "hey,they're conserved" But in fact they're just approximately conserved and not conserved at all in weak interactions.So I may as well define "shyaness"(:biggrin:) as \frac{1}{2}(n_u+n_s).Therefore,From the list that bossman27 suggested(thanks bossman27),I just choose electric charge,z-component of isospin and parity.
And I should tell I agree with mfb since if you search about color charge,you'll probably encounter words like anticolor,antired,antigreen and antiblue.Also gluons are said to have a color and an anticolor simultaneously.I just wonder why hypercharge and color charge are not mentioned anywhere.
Thanks all guys
 
Well, strangeness is conserved in the strong interaction, and the weak interaction is weak. Shyaness is conserved in the strong interaction as well, but it can be derived from strangeness and "upness" (which is usually expressed via isospin).
 
Can't I define shyaness as sth that is not conserved?
I think such a thing can be found.
If it can be,how will you explain that the conserved thing is a parameter of nature and the non-conserved one,is not?I mean,what's their difference?
Is it just that its realized one combination is conserved and so they say its good or there are other reasons too?
 
  • #10
?
The conservation of some numbers in some interactions is an experimental result. Our theories are developed to reflect those observations.
 
  • #11
Oh...Of course you're right
I think I said that in a state of confusion!
Thanks
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K