Tagged: The strong interaction Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • richardmitnick 8:48 am on January 5, 2020 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Immortal quantum particles", , , , , , Quantum mechanical wave-particle duality, , Technische Universität München, The strong interaction   

    From Technische Universität München: “Immortal quantum particles” 

    Techniche Universitat Munchen

    From Technische Universität München


    Strong quantum interactions prevent quasiparticles from decay. Image: K. Verresen / TUM

    Oscillating Quasiparticles: the cycle of decay and rebirth

    Immortal quantum particles

    Decay is relentless in the macroscopic world: broken objects do not fit themselves back together again. However, other laws are valid in the quantum world: new research [Nature Physics] shows that so-called quasiparticles can decay and reorganize themselves again and are thus become virtually immortal. These are good prospects for the development of durable data memories.

    As the saying goes, nothing lasts forever. The laws of physics confirm this: on our planet, all processes increase entropy, thus molecular disorder. For example, a broken glass would never put itself back together again.

    Theoretical physicists at the Technische Universität München (TUM) and the Max Planck Institute for the Physics of Complex Systems have discovered that things which seem inconceivable in the everyday world are possible on a microscopic level.


    “Until now, the assumption was that quasiparticles in interacting quantum systems decay after a certain time. We now know that the opposite is the case: strong interactions can even stop decay entirely,” explains Frank Pollmann, Professor for Theoretical Solid-State Physics at the TUM. Collective lattice vibrations in crystals, so-called phonons, are one example of such quasiparticles.

    The concept of quasiparticles was coined by the physicist and Nobel prize winner Lev Davidovich Landau. He used it to describe collective states of lots of particles or rather their interactions due to electrical or magnetic forces. Due to this interaction, several particles act like one single one.

    Numeric methods open up new perspectives

    Up until now, it wasn’t known in detail which processes influence the fate of these quasiparticles in interacting systems,” says Pollmann. “It is only now that we possess numerical methods with which we can calculate complex interactions as well as computers with a performance which is high enough to solve these equations.”

    “The result of the elaborate simulation: admittedly, quasiparticles do decay, however new, identical particle entities emerge from the debris,” says the lead author, Ruben Verresen. “If this decay proceeds very quickly, an inverse reaction will occur after a certain time and the debris will converge again. This process can recur endlessly and a sustained oscillation between decay and rebirth emerges.”

    From a physical point of view, this oscillation is a wave which is transformed into matter, which, according to quantum mechanical wave-particle duality, is possible. Therefore, the immortal quasiparticles do not transgress the second law of thermodynamics. Their entropy remains constant, decay has been stopped.

    The reality check

    The discovery also explains phenomena which were baffling until now. Experimental physicists had measured that the magnetic compound Ba3CoSb2O9 is astonishingly stable. Magnetic quasiparticles, magnons, are responsible for it. Other quasiparticles, rotons, ensure that helium which is a gas on the earth’s surface becomes a liquid at absolute zero which can flow unrestricted.

    “Our work is purely basic research,“ emphasizes Pollmann. However, it is perfectly possible that one day the results will even allow for applications, for example the construction of durable data memories for future quantum computers.

    See the full article here .


    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    Techniche Universitat Munchin Campus

    Techniche Universitat Munchin is one of Europe’s top universities. It is committed to excellence in research and teaching, interdisciplinary education and the active promotion of promising young scientists. The university also forges strong links with companies and scientific institutions across the world. TUM was one of the first universities in Germany to be named a University of Excellence. Moreover, TUM regularly ranks among the best European universities in international rankings.

  • richardmitnick 11:26 am on May 5, 2019 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: 'Where Does A Proton’s Mass Come From?', 99.8% of the proton’s mass comes from gluons, , Antiquarks, Asymptotic freedom: the particles that mediate this force are known as gluons., , , , , , , , , , The production of Higgs bosons is dominated by gluon-gluon collisions at the LHC, The strong interaction, The strong interaction is the most powerful interaction in the entire known Universe.   

    From Ethan Siegel: “Ask Ethan: ‘Where Does A Proton’s Mass Come From?'” 

    From Ethan Siegel
    May 4, 2019

    The three valence quarks of a proton contribute to its spin, but so do the gluons, sea quarks and antiquarks, and orbital angular momentum as well. The electrostatic repulsion and the attractive strong nuclear force, in tandem, are what give the proton its size, and the properties of quark mixing are required to explain the suite of free and composite particles in our Universe. (APS/ALAN STONEBRAKER)

    The whole should equal the sum of its parts, but doesn’t. Here’s why.

    The whole is equal to the sum of its constituent parts. That’s how everything works, from galaxies to planets to cities to molecules to atoms. If you take all the components of any system and look at them individually, you can clearly see how they all fit together to add up to the entire system, with nothing missing and nothing left over. The total amount you have is equal to the amounts of all the different parts of it added together.

    So why isn’t that the case for the proton? It’s made of three quarks, but if you add up the quark masses, they not only don’t equal the proton’s mass, they don’t come close. This is the puzzle that Barry Duffey wants us to address, asking:

    “What’s happening inside protons? Why does [its] mass so greatly exceed the combined masses of its constituent quarks and gluons?”

    In order to find out, we have to take a deep look inside.

    The composition of the human body, by atomic number and by mass. The whole of our bodies is equal to the sum of its parts, until you get down to an extremely fundamental level. At that point, we can see that we’re actually more than the sum of our constituent components. (ED UTHMAN, M.D., VIA WEB2.AIRMAIL.NET/UTHMAN (L); WIKIMEDIA COMMONS USER ZHAOCAROL (R))

    There’s a hint that comes just from looking at your own body. If you were to divide yourself up into smaller and smaller bits, you’d find — in terms of mass — the whole was equal to the sum of its parts. Your body’s bones, fat, muscles and organs sum up to an entire human being. Breaking those down further, into cells, still allows you to add them up and recover the same mass you have today.

    Cells can be divided into organelles, organelles are composed of individual molecules, molecules are made of atoms; at each stage, the mass of the whole is no different than that of its parts. But when you break atoms into protons, neutrons and electrons, something interesting happens. At that level, there’s a tiny but noticeable discrepancy: the individual protons, neutrons and electrons are off by right around 1% from an entire human. The difference is real.

    From macroscopic scales down to subatomic ones, the sizes of the fundamental particles play only a small role in determining the sizes of composite structures. Whether the building blocks are truly fundamental and/or point-like particles is still not known. (MAGDALENA KOWALSKA / CERN / ISOLDE TEAM)


    Like all known organisms, human beings are carbon-based life forms. Carbon atoms are made up of six protons and six neutrons, but if you look at the mass of a carbon atom, it’s approximately 0.8% lighter than the sum of the individual component particles that make it up. The culprit here is nuclear binding energy; when you have atomic nuclei bound together, their total mass is smaller than the mass of the protons and neutrons that comprise them.

    The way carbon is formed is through the nuclear fusion of hydrogen into helium and then helium into carbon; the energy released is what powers most types of stars in both their normal and red giant phases. That “lost mass” is where the energy powering stars comes from, thanks to Einstein’s E = mc². As stars burn through their fuel, they produce more tightly-bound nuclei, releasing the energy difference as radiation.

    In between the 2nd and 3rd brightest stars of the constellation Lyra, the blue giant stars Sheliak and Sulafat, the Ring Nebula shines prominently in the night skies. Throughout all phases of a star’s life, including the giant phase, nuclear fusion powers them, with the nuclei becoming more tightly bound and the energy emitted as radiation coming from the transformation of mass into energy via E = mc². (NASA, ESA, DIGITIZED SKY SURVEY 2)

    NASA/ESA Hubble Telescope

    ESO Online Digitized Sky Survey Telescopes

    Caltech Palomar Samuel Oschin 48 inch Telescope, located in San Diego County, California, United States, altitude 1,712 m (5,617 ft)

    Australian Astronomical Observatory, Siding Spring Observatory, near Coonabarabran, New South Wales, Australia, 1.2m UK Schmidt Telescope, Altitude 1,165 m (3,822 ft)

    From http://archive.eso.org/dss/dss

    This is how most types of binding energy work: the reason it’s harder to pull apart multiple things that are bound together is because they released energy when they were joined, and you have to put energy in to free them again. That’s why it’s such a puzzling fact that when you take a look at the particles that make up the proton — the up, up, and down quarks at the heart of them — their combined masses are only 0.2% of the mass of the proton as a whole. But the puzzle has a solution that’s rooted in the nature of the strong force itself.

    The way quarks bind into protons is fundamentally different from all the other forces and interactions we know of. Instead of the force getting stronger when objects get closer, like the gravitational, electric, or magnetic forces, the attractive force goes down to zero when quarks get arbitrarily close. And instead of the force getting weaker when objects get farther away, the force pulling quarks back together gets stronger the farther away they get.

    The internal structure of a proton, with quarks, gluons, and quark spin shown. The nuclear force acts like a spring, with negligible force when unstretched but large, attractive forces when stretched to large distances. (BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY)

    This property of the strong nuclear force is known as asymptotic freedom, and the particles that mediate this force are known as gluons. Somehow, the energy binding the proton together, responsible for the other 99.8% of the proton’s mass, comes from these gluons. The whole of matter, somehow, weighs much, much more than the sum of its parts.

    This might sound like an impossibility at first, as the gluons themselves are massless particles. But you can think of the forces they give rise to as springs: asymptoting to zero when the springs are unstretched, but becoming very large the greater the amount of stretching. In fact, the amount of energy between two quarks whose distance gets too large can become so great that it’s as though additional quark/antiquark pairs exist inside the proton: sea quarks.

    When two protons collide, it isn’t just the quarks making them up that can collide, but the sea quarks, gluons, and beyond that, field interactions. All can provide insights into the spin of the individual components, and allow us to create potentially new particles if high enough energies and luminosities are reached. (CERN / CMS COLLABORATION)

    Those of you familiar with quantum field theory might have the urge to dismiss the gluons and the sea quarks as just being virtual particles: calculational tools used to arrive at the right result. But that’s not true at all, and we’ve demonstrated that with high-energy collisions between either two protons or a proton and another particle, like an electron or photon.

    The collisions performed at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN are perhaps the greatest test of all for the internal structure of the proton. When two protons collide at these ultra-high energies, most of them simply pass by one another, failing to interact. But when two internal, point-like particles collide, we can reconstruct exactly what it was that smashed together by looking at the debris that comes out.

    A Higgs boson event as seen in the Compact Muon Solenoid detector at the Large Hadron Collider. This spectacular collision is 15 orders of magnitude below the Planck energy, but it’s the precision measurements of the detector that allow us to reconstruct what happened back at (and near) the collision point. Theoretically, the Higgs gives mass to the fundamental particles; however, the proton’s mass is not due to the mass of the quarks and gluons that compose it. (CERN / CMS COLLABORATION)

    Under 10% of the collisions occur between two quarks; the overwhelming majority are gluon-gluon collisions, with quark-gluon collisions making up the remainder. Moreover, not every quark-quark collision in protons occurs between either up or down quarks; sometimes a heavier quark is involved.

    Although it might make us uncomfortable, these experiments teach us an important lesson: the particles that we use to model the internal structure of protons are real. In fact, the discovery of the Higgs boson itself was only possible because of this, as the production of Higgs bosons is dominated by gluon-gluon collisions at the LHC. If all we had were the three valence quarks to rely on, we would have seen different rates of production of the Higgs than we did.

    Before the mass of the Higgs boson was known, we could still calculate the expected production rates of Higgs bosons from proton-proton collisions at the LHC. The top channel is clearly production by gluon-gluon collisions. I (E. Siegel) have added the yellow highlighted region to indicate where the Higgs boson was discovered. (CMS COLLABORATION (DORIGO, TOMMASO FOR THE COLLABORATION) ARXIV:0910.3489)

    As always, though, there’s still plenty more to learn. We presently have a solid model of the average gluon density inside a proton, but if we want to know where the gluons are actually more likely to be located, that requires more experimental data, as well as better models to compare the data against. Recent advances by theorists Björn Schenke and Heikki Mäntysaari may be able to provide those much needed models. As Mäntysaari detailed:

    “It is very accurately known how large the average gluon density is inside a proton. What is not known is exactly where the gluons are located inside the proton. We model the gluons as located around the three [valence] quarks. Then we control the amount of fluctuations represented in the model by setting how large the gluon clouds are, and how far apart they are from each other. […] The more fluctuations we have, the more likely this process [producing a J/ψ meson] is to happen.”

    A schematic of the world’s first electron-ion collider (EIC). Adding an electron ring (red) to the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven would create the eRHIC: a proposed deep inelastic scattering experiment that could improve our knowledge of the internal structure of the proton significantly. (BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY-CAD ERHIC GROUP)

    The combination of this new theoretical model and the ever-improving LHC data will better enable scientists to understand the internal, fundamental structure of protons, neutrons and nuclei in general, and hence to understand where the mass of the known objects in the Universe comes from. From an experimental point of view, the greatest boon would be a next-generation electron-ion collider, which would enable us to perform deep inelastic scattering experiments to reveal the internal makeup of these particles as never before.

    But there’s another theoretical approach that can take us even farther into the realm of understanding where the proton’s mass comes from: Lattice QCD.

    A better understanding of the internal structure of a proton, including how the “sea” quarks and gluons are distributed, has been achieved through both experimental improvements and new theoretical developments in tandem. (BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY)

    The difficult part with the quantum field theory that describes the strong force — quantum chromodynamics (QCD) — is that the standard approach we take to doing calculations is no good. Typically, we’d look at the effects of particle couplings: the charged quarks exchange a gluon and that mediates the force. They could exchange gluons in a way that creates a particle-antiparticle pair or an additional gluon, and that should be a correction to a simple one-gluon exchange. They could create additional pairs or gluons, which would be higher-order corrections.

    We call this approach taking a perturbative expansion in quantum field theory, with the idea that calculating higher and higher-order contributions will give us a more accurate result.

    Today, Feynman diagrams are used in calculating every fundamental interaction spanning the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces, including in high-energy and low-temperature/condensed conditions. But this approach, which relies on a perturbative expansion, is only of limited utility for the strong interactions, as this approach diverges, rather than converges, when you add more and more loops for QCD.(DE CARVALHO, VANUILDO S. ET AL. NUCL.PHYS. B875 (2013) 738–756)

    Richard Feynman © Open University

    But this approach, which works so well for quantum electrodynamics (QED), fails spectacularly for QCD. The strong force works differently, and so these corrections get very large very quickly. Adding more terms, instead of converging towards the correct answer, diverges and takes you away from it. Fortunately, there is another way to approach the problem: non-perturbatively, using a technique called Lattice QCD.

    By treating space and time as a grid (or lattice of points) rather than a continuum, where the lattice is arbitrarily large and the spacing is arbitrarily small, you overcome this problem in a clever way. Whereas in standard, perturbative QCD, the continuous nature of space means that you lose the ability to calculate interaction strengths at small distances, the lattice approach means there’s a cutoff at the size of the lattice spacing. Quarks exist at the intersections of grid lines; gluons exist along the links connecting grid points.

    As your computing power increases, you can make the lattice spacing smaller, which improves your calculational accuracy. Over the past three decades, this technique has led to an explosion of solid predictions, including the masses of light nuclei and the reaction rates of fusion under specific temperature and energy conditions. The mass of the proton, from first principles, can now be theoretically predicted to within 2%.

    As computational power and Lattice QCD techniques have improved over time, so has the accuracy to which various quantities about the proton, such as its component spin contributions, can be computed. By reducing the lattice spacing size, which can be done simply by raising the computational power employed, we can better predict the mass of not only the proton, but of all the baryons and mesons. (LABORATOIRE DE PHYSIQUE DE CLERMONT / ETM COLLABORATION)

    It’s true that the individual quarks, whose masses are determined by their coupling to the Higgs boson, cannot even account for 1% of the mass of the proton. Rather, it’s the strong force, described by the interactions between quarks and the gluons that mediate them, that are responsible for practically all of it.

    The strong nuclear force is the most powerful interaction in the entire known Universe. When you go inside a particle like the proton, it’s so powerful that it — not the mass of the proton’s constituent particles — is primarily responsible for the total energy (and therefore mass) of the normal matter in our Universe. Quarks may be point-like, but the proton is huge by comparison: 8.4 × 10^-16 m in diameter. Confining its component particles, which the binding energy of the strong force does, is what’s responsible for 99.8% of the proton’s mass.

    See the full article here .


    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    “Starts With A Bang! is a blog/video blog about cosmology, physics, astronomy, and anything else I find interesting enough to write about. I am a firm believer that the highest good in life is learning, and the greatest evil is willful ignorance. The goal of everything on this site is to help inform you about our world, how we came to be here, and to understand how it all works. As I write these pages for you, I hope to not only explain to you what we know, think, and believe, but how we know it, and why we draw the conclusions we do. It is my hope that you find this interesting, informative, and accessible,” says Ethan

  • richardmitnick 2:27 pm on May 4, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Gluonic Excitations Experiment, Investigating the quark structure of the atom's nucleus, , The strong interaction   

    From JLab: “First Result from Jefferson Lab’s Upgraded CEBAF Opens Door to Exploring the Universal Glue” 

    Jefferson Laboratory

    May 3, 2017
    Kandice Carter

    Jefferson Lab’s Experimental Hall D.

    An experiment designed to detail the inner workings of the strong force inside matter reports its first data.

    The first experimental result has been published from the newly upgraded Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility (CEBAF) at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility. The result demonstrates the feasibility of detecting a potential new form of matter to study why quarks are never found in isolation.

    The 12 GeV CEBAF Upgrade is a $338 million, multi-year project to triple CEBAF’s original operational energy for investigating the quark structure of the atom’s nucleus. The majority of the upgrade is complete and will be finishing up in 2017.

    Scientists have been rigorously commissioning the experimental equipment to prepare for a new era of nuclear physics experiments. These activities have already led to the first scientific result, which comes from the Gluonic Excitations Experiment. GlueX conducts studies of the strong force, which glues matter together, through searches for hybrid mesons.

    According to Curtis Meyer, a professor of physics at Carnegie Mellon University and spokesperson for the GlueX experiment at Jefferson Lab, these hybrid mesons are built of the same stuff as ordinary protons and neutrons, which are quarks bound together by the “glue” of the strong force. But unlike ordinary mesons, the glue in hybrid mesons behaves differently.

    “The basic idea is that a meson is a quark and antiquark bound together, and our understanding is that the glue holds those together. And that glue manifests itself as a field between the quarks. A hybrid meson is one with that strong gluonic field being excited,” Meyer explains.

    He says that producing these hybrid mesons allows nuclear physicists to study particles in which the strong gluonic field is contributing directly to their properties. The hybrid mesons may ultimately provide a window into how subatomic particles are built by the strong force, as well as “quark confinement” – why no quark has ever been found alone.

    “We hope to show that this “excited” gluonic field is an important constituent of matter. That’s something that has not been observed in anything that we’ve seen so far. So, in some sense, it’s a new type of hadronic matter that has not been observed,” he says.

    In this first result, data were collected over a two-week period following equipment commissioning in the spring of 2016. The experiment produced two ordinary mesons called the neutral pion and the eta, and the production mechanisms of these two particles were carefully studied.

    The experiment takes advantage of the full-energy, 12 GeV electron beam produced by the CEBAF accelerator and delivered into the new Experimental Hall D complex. There, the 12 GeV beam is converted into a first-of-its-kind 9 GeV photon beam.

    “The photons go through our liquid hydrogen target. Some of them will interact with a proton in that target, something is exchanged between the photon and the proton, and something is kicked out – a meson,” Meyer explains. “This publication looked at some of the simplest mesons you could kick out. But it’s the same, basic production mechanism that most of our reactions will follow.”

    The result was published as a Rapid Communication in the April issue of Physical Review C. It demonstrated that the linear polarization of the photon beam provides important information by ruling out possible meson production mechanisms.

    “It’s not so much that the particles we created were interesting, but how they were produced: Learning what reactions were important in making them,” Meyer says.

    The next step for the collaboration is further analysis of data already collected and preparations for the next experimental run in the fall.

    “I’m sure that we’ve produced hybrid mesons already, we just don’t have enough data to start looking for them yet,” Meyer says. “There are a number of steps that we’re going through in terms of understanding the detector and our analysis. We’re doing the groundwork now, so that we’ll have confidence that we understand things well enough that we can validate results we’ll be getting in the future.”

    “This new experimental facility – Hall D – was built by dedicated efforts of the Jefferson Lab staff and the GlueX collaboration,” says Eugene Chudakov, Hall D group leader. “It is nice to see that all of the equipment, including complex particle detectors, is operating as planned, and the exciting scientific program has successfully begun.”

    The 12 GeV CEBAF Upgrade project is in its last phase of work and is scheduled for completion in September. Other major experimental thrusts for the upgraded CEBAF include research that will enable the first snapshots of the 3D structure of protons and neutrons, detailed explorations of the internal dynamics and quark-gluon structure of nuclei, and tests of fundamental theories of matter.

    See the full article here .

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    STEM Icon

    Stem Education Coalition

    Jefferson Science Associates, LLC, a joint venture of the Southeastern Universities Research Association, Inc. and PAE Applied Technologies, manages and operates the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, or Jefferson Lab, for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science.

    Jefferson Lab is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy. DOE’s Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States, and is working to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For more information, visit science.energy.gov.
    JLab campus

Compose new post
Next post/Next comment
Previous post/Previous comment
Show/Hide comments
Go to top
Go to login
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
%d bloggers like this: