What Is the Origin of Charge in Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter np4349
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charge
np4349
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I'm just wondering, and unable to find the answer anywhere on the web

where does charge come from?

is it just a property and not even a "thing" and therefore can't be determined the source of something else. so does charge come from mass? ie gravitational pull
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Charge doesn't "come" from anything, to our knowledge. But charge is a lot like mass - in fact i think that's probably the best way to think about it.
It seems to be just an innate property of things in the universe; either they have charge (and some amount of it) or they don't. One of the big questions in theoretical physics is "where do things like mass and charge come from?"
 
It may be helpful to consider that particles are condensations in an underlying quantum field. Once you have embraced that, the charge and spin of particles can be seen as permissible states (or possible states) of these condensations. We should not have to question why every single electron or every single proton manages to assume a particular charge, though it would be very enlightening to learn how/why the quantum field constrains the values of those charges...
 
Generally, charge can be defined as something that is conserved. According to Noether's theorem, it may be associated to a particular symmetry. In the case of electric charge, it follows from the symmetry action when the wavefunction/field is muliptlied by a complex phase e^{i \varphi}, and is sometimes known as a U(1) charge.
 
lbrits said:
Generally, charge can be defined as something that is conserved. According to Noether's theorem, it may be associated to a particular symmetry. In the case of electric charge, it follows from the symmetry action when the wavefunction/field is muliptlied by a complex phase e^{i \varphi}, and is sometimes known as a U(1) charge.

According to Wikipedia:

In quantum mechanics, a phase factor is a complex coefficient eiθ that multiplies a ket or bra . It does not, in itself, have any physical meaning, since the introduction of a phase factor does not change the expectation values of a Hermitian operator. [1]

^ Messiah (1999, p. 296)
 
This thread is three years old.
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top