Re: Is QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) Infallible?
From: FrediFizzx (fredifizzx_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 01/27/05
- Next message: bryant_j_j_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Quantum Mechanics according to Mark Mccutcheon"
- Previous message: What_is_Qi: "Re: Quantum Mechanics according to Mark Mccutcheon"
- In reply to: Franz Heymann: "Re: Is QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) Infallible?"
- Next in thread: Franz Heymann: "Re: Is QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) Infallible?"
- Reply: Franz Heymann: "Re: Is QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) Infallible?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 23:50:59 -0800
"Franz Heymann" <notfranz.heymann@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:ct9vgl$h5k$8@hercules.btinternet.com...
|
| "FrediFizzx" <fredifizzx@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:35q869F4pfcs5U1@individual.net...
| > "Creighton Hogg" <wchogg@hep.wisc.edu> wrote in message
| >
| news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0501261147450.29380-100000@erodium.hep.wisc.edu...
| > |
| > |
| > | On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
| > |
| > | > Franz Heymann wrote:
| > | >
| > | > [snip]
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > > The mass of a quark as quoted is its CM energy *inside the
| > proton*,
| > | > > under conditions of asymptotic freedom.
| > | > > The mass of a *free* quark is a meaingless concept, since it
| does
| > not
| > | > > exist.
| > | >
| > | > Yes, clear so far.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > > In units of c=1, the mass of the proton is its cm energy,
| which
| > | > > consists of the sum of the energies of the quarks. Each of
| these
| > | > > energies is larger than its mass, because each is in motion.
| > | >
| > | > So you want to say that every quark in a proton has a gamma
| > | > factor of around 100?
| > |
| > | Well I believe that most of the invariant mass for hadrons comes
| from
| > the
| > | gluons, not the quarks. Perhaps that helps it make more sense.
| > | Hrmm, I'm pretty sure some lattice QCD people try to predict
| hadron
| > masses
| > | given quark masses as inputs. Maybe an arxiv search would be
| helpful
| > at
| > | this point.
| >
| > For the proton, it is actually about 50-50, I believe. I recall
| seeing
| > a figure of something like 54 percent of the proton's momentum is
| due to
| > the quarks.
|
| But we are talking about energy, not momentum
Well, shouldn't that correlate to energy somewhat? But Griffiths does claim
the "effective" mass of the up and down to be ~ 363 MeV/c^2 in baryons.
Hmm... That doesn't seem to be right.
FrediFizzx
- Next message: bryant_j_j_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Quantum Mechanics according to Mark Mccutcheon"
- Previous message: What_is_Qi: "Re: Quantum Mechanics according to Mark Mccutcheon"
- In reply to: Franz Heymann: "Re: Is QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) Infallible?"
- Next in thread: Franz Heymann: "Re: Is QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) Infallible?"
- Reply: Franz Heymann: "Re: Is QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) Infallible?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|