Undergrad What makes up the bare mass of elementary particles?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the nature of the bare mass and invariant mass of elementary particles, such as electrons, quarks, and neutrinos. It highlights that current theories suggest these particles are best described as quantum fields, which may not satisfy all inquiries into their composition. The difference between bare mass and invariant mass is clarified, with invariant mass being measurable and bare mass serving as a theoretical construct from renormalization. String theory is mentioned as a challenge to understanding these concepts. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the complexities of defining the fundamental properties of elementary particles.
timmdeeg
Gold Member
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
359
TL;DR
Is it possible to describe in simple language what elementary particles like electrons, quarks or neutrinos having no inner structure do consist of?
And as an aside what is the difference between bare mass and invariant mass of such particles?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
string theory is regarded as a challenge to this quest ion. I don’t know it is the right way or not.
 
timmdeeg said:
Is it possible to describe in simple language what elementary particles like electrons, quarks or neutrinos having no inner structure do consist of?
Not if "they are quantum fields" isn't sufficient for you. That is the only answer that our current theories give.

timmdeeg said:
And as an aside what is the difference between bare mass and invariant mass of such particles?
The invariant mass is what we actually measure. The bare mass is a theoretical artifact that comes in as part of renormalization.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, topsquark and timmdeeg
Thanks!
 
I am slowly going through the book 'What Is a Quantum Field Theory?' by Michel Talagrand. I came across the following quote: One does not" prove” the basic principles of Quantum Mechanics. The ultimate test for a model is the agreement of its predictions with experiments. Although it may seem trite, it does fit in with my modelling view of QM. The more I think about it, the more I believe it could be saying something quite profound. For example, precisely what is the justification of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
681
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K