What Role Did Electrons and Positrons Play in the Early Universe?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter narrator
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mass
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the role of electrons and positrons in the early universe, exploring their significance, mass properties, and the processes that may have led to the formation of matter. Participants delve into concepts related to particle physics and cosmology, including charge conservation and the creation of particles from energy.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that electrons and positrons were a dominant part of the early universe, referencing the lepton epoch.
  • There is a discussion about whether electrons and positrons became massive through some early process, with a claim that particles with mass can be created from energy according to E=mc².
  • Questions arise regarding the balance of electrons, protons, and neutrons, with mentions of charge conservation and examples of particle mixtures that maintain zero total charge.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the nature of photons, questioning whether they have zero mass or an insignificantly small mass.
  • One participant wonders if the creation of mass from energy involves quantum processes, while another asserts it is a classical phenomenon.
  • There is a mention of annihilation processes and the implications of lepton dominance on the creation of other particles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying degrees of certainty regarding the concepts discussed, with some agreeing on the role of charge conservation while others question its implications. The discussion remains unresolved on several points, particularly regarding the processes involved in mass creation and the nature of photons.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on specific definitions and interpretations of particle interactions, and there are unresolved questions about the mechanisms of particle creation and annihilation in the early universe.

narrator
Messages
241
Reaction score
17
I've been reading about the early universe (The book: The First Three Minutes) and it prompted a few questions:

Is it right that a dominant part of the early universe was electrons and positrons?

Given that electrons and positrons were a big part of the early universe, was there some early process whereby they ended up becoming masses (or just the positrons did)? I'm trying to understand how the balance in numbers of electrons, protons and neutrons came about.

I find it difficult to get my head around a particle having no mass (photons). Is it that their mass is so insignificantly small, compared to protons and neutrons, that their mass has no measurable effect? Or is it that they actually do have zero mass?

Edited to correct something I misread. Apologies.
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
narrator said:
Is it right that a dominant part of the early universe was electrons and positrons?
I think that's right: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lepton_epoch

narrator said:
Given that electrons and positrons were a big part of the early universe, was there some early process whereby they ended up becoming masses (or just the positrons did)?
Electrons and positrons do have mass. Particles with mass can be created out of pure energy: E=mc2.

narrator said:
I'm trying to understand how the balance in numbers of electrons, protons and neutrons came about.
The universe has zero total charge, and charge is conserved. One example of a mixture of particles that has zero total charge is a mixture of electrons, positrons, neutrinos, and photons (as in the lepton epoch). Another example is a mixture of protons, neutrons, electrons, neutrinos, and photons (the part of today's mix that we understand well). Mix #1 existed at early times because the temperature was high enough to produce electron-positron pairs spontaneously.

narrator said:
I find it difficult to get my head around a particle having no mass (photons). Is it that their mass is so insignificantly small, compared to protons and neutrons, that their mass has no measurable effect? Or is it that they actually do have zero mass?
Empirically, we can set a very low limit on their mass:
R.S. Lakes, "Experimental limits on the photon mass and cosmic magnetic vector potential", Physical Review Letters 80 (1998) 1826, http://silver.neep.wisc.edu/~lakes/mu.html
Note that massless particles still gravitate, basically because their energy is equivalent to some mass by E=mc2. There was an era when gravity in our universe was mainly due to photons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation-Dominated_Era

-Ben
 
Thanks Ben, thanks for your comprehensive reply. :)

bcrowell said:
The universe has zero total charge, and charge is conserved.

Do we know this for certain? My memory of chemistry is that unstable chemicals change often because of movement of uneven charges. (I recall some man made chemicals were difficult to maintain for this reason.) Could it be that the BB had some provocation from such an imbalance?

bcrowell said:
Particles with mass can be created out of pure energy: E=mc2.

I've often wondered about this process. Is it quantum machinery that does this? (Trying to form a picture in my mind of how it might happen - energy pushing quantum particles together or some such.)

bcrowell said:

I noted from the link in that article to Leptons, this quote: "Charged leptons can combine with other particles to form various composite particles such as atoms and positronium."

Which made me wonder. If Leptons were the dominant species, then there were fewer "other particles" at that time. Which means more "other particles" must have been created by the process you mentioned, mass out of energy. Is that right? Was that the annihilation process?
 
narrator said:
Do we know this for certain? My memory of chemistry is that unstable chemicals change often because of movement of uneven charges. (I recall some man made chemicals were difficult to maintain for this reason.) Could it be that the BB had some provocation from such an imbalance?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_conservation

narrator said:
I've often wondered about this process. Is it quantum machinery that does this?
No, it's a purely classical (i.e., non-quantum mechanical) fact.

narrator said:
Which made me wonder. If Leptons were the dominant species, then there were fewer "other particles" at that time. Which means more "other particles" must have been created by the process you mentioned, mass out of energy. Is that right? Was that the annihilation process?
The main change has not been that leptons and antileptons have been annihilated with each other.

The questions you're asking make me think you could get a lot out of reading The First Three Minutes.

-Ben
 
bcrowell said:
The questions you're asking make me think you could get a lot out of reading The First Three Minutes.

hehe.. I'm reading it, a dozen pages at a time.. but you're right
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 85 ·
3
Replies
85
Views
13K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K