Are All Electrons Truly Identical?

  • I
  • Thread starter Sciencelad2798
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Electrons
In summary: This is the field that particles like electrons interact with. It's not like there is some physical entity that is made up of electrons. Instead, it's more like there is a set of rules that govern how these particles interact with one another.When you shake an electron field, the electrons are randomly flying around. But because they all have the same mass and charge, they tend to gravitate towards the center of the field. This is why you can pick up an electron with relative ease.On a more fundamental level, there exists what we call an 'electron field' (really, it's a combination... more on that later). This is the field that particles like electrons interact with. It's not like there
  • #1
Sciencelad2798
46
2
TL;DR Summary
If so how, and why?
I'm just confused on whether not all electrons are identical and if they are, how they are.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yes, they are
Same mass, same charge, same spin, same magnetic moment, all of their properties are the same.
 
  • Informative
Likes symbolipoint
  • #3
Henryk said:
Yes, they are
Same mass, same charge, same spin, same magnetic moment, all of their properties are the same.
How is it possible theyre all identical though?
 
  • Skeptical
Likes symbolipoint
  • #4
This question makes no sense to me. Why would being the same be impossible? Why would being different be impossible? What does sameness have to do with possibility?

I just don’t see any connection at all between the two concepts
 
Last edited:
  • Skeptical
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and symbolipoint
  • #5
Sciencelad2798 said:
Summary:: If so how, and why?

I'm just confused on whether not all electrons are identical and if they are, how they are.
BECAUSE THEY LIKE THAT!Good luck with the question. One images no progress will be made in the discussion. The physicists can check some properties; maybe they know all the possible properties, and maybe they as yet do not. For now, just accept that all electrons are identical.
 
  • #6
I just can't resist this:

What one electron said to another electron - "Stay away from me! I can't tolerate you crowding my space!"
 
  • Haha
Likes jedishrfu, anorlunda and Hamiltonian
  • #7
Sciencelad2798 said:
Are all electrons identical?
Yes.
You see an electron in many different places, at many different times.
How do you know there is more than one electron ?
If you cannot tell the difference between two electrons, how can they not be identical ?
 
  • #8
I think the problem is to use of the word "identical". One should rather use "indistinguishable". Besides this linguistic quibble the question is definitely in the wrong forum, because it's a specific quantum-theoritical issue. In classical physics point particles are always distinguishable by their trajectories in phase space, and if it comes to statistical mechanics this apparently obvious property is a problem rather than a feature. It's one of the first examples in the history of science, which indicated that incompleteness of the classical description of matter!
 
  • Like
Likes hmmm27, dextercioby, nasu and 4 others
  • #9
Sciencelad2798 said:
How is it possible theyre all identical though?
Because they are fundamental particles. They have no internal structure.
 
  • Wow
Likes symbolipoint
  • #10
I think the problem is to use of the word "identical". One should rather use "indistinguishable". Besides this linguistic quibble the question is definitely in the wrong forum, because it's a specific quantum-theoritical issue. In classical physics point particles are always distinguishable by their trajectories in phase space.
 
  • Like
Likes hutchphd, anorlunda, PeroK and 1 other person
  • #11
Sciencelad2798 said:
How is it possible theyre all identical though?
Put a dozen electrons in a dozen different boxes, each labeled 1 through 12. Then get a bigger box and empty all the smaller boxes into it. Now close the box and shake it around. Then open it, reach in, and grab an electron. You will not be able to tell which box the electron originally came from because there is no way to distinguish it from its brothers and sisters. It has the same mass, charge, spin, and other observable properties. That's what we mean when we say that they are identical.
 
  • Like
Likes symbolipoint and vanhees71
  • #12
Drakkith said:
Put a dozen electrons in a dozen different boxes, each labeled 1 through 12. Then get a bigger box and empty all the smaller boxes into it. Now close the box and shake it around. Then open it, reach in, and grab an electron. You will not be able to tell which box the electron originally came from because there is no way to distinguish it from its brothers and sisters. It has the same mass, charge, spin, and other observable properties. That's what we mean when we say that they are identical.
I'm still kinda confused on why they're all indistinguishable. Like I still don't get how it's possible for all electrons to have the same exact mass
 
  • #13
Sciencelad2798 said:
Like I still don't get how it's possible for all electrons to have the same exact mass
You still have not explained why you think the concept of electrons being the same is at all related to their possibility of existing. Why should being identical or being non-identical have anything to do with they possibility or impossibility of their existence.

They are completely independent concepts that have no bearing on each other as far as I can see. What connection do you see?
 
  • Like
Likes nasu and vanhees71
  • #14
Dale said:
You still have not explained why you think the concept of electrons being the same is at all related to their possibility of existing. Why should being identical or being non-identical have anything to do with they possibility or impossibility of their existence.

They are completely independent concepts that have no bearing on each other as far as I can see. What connection do you see?
I guess I think that the fact they're all identical, shows some fine tuning in the universe
 
  • Skeptical
Likes PeroK
  • #15
Sciencelad2798 said:
I'm still kinda confused on why they're all indistinguishable. Like I still don't get how it's possible for all electrons to have the same exact mass
On a more fundamental level, there exists what we call an 'electron field' (really, it's a combination of 4 fields that are intimately related). What we observe as an electron is either an excitation of the field or just some interaction of this field that affects our measurement devices in some way.

Then the properties of these electrons can have two sources, is that property arising by the particular form of the excitation? Or is it arising due to fundamental properties of the field?
The first kind of properties are, of course, exclusive to each 'individual electron', such properties may be the position of the electron, the velocity of the electron or its energy.
The second kind of properties, because are properties of the field itself and doesn't depend on the details of the excitation, must be shared for any excitation, i.e must be exactly the same for all the electrons. Examples of such properties are spin, charge and, as you may guess, mass.

So, in short, all electrons have the same mass (and other properties like charge, etc) and we call them indistinguishable because they are just manifestations of the same fundamental object, the field.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, gentzen, PeterDonis and 1 other person
  • #16
Gaussian97 said:
On a more fundamental level, there exists what we call an 'electron field' (really, it's a combination of 4 fields that are intimately related). What we observe as an electron is either an excitation of the field or just some interaction of this field that affects our measurement devices in some way.

Then the properties of these electrons can have two sources, is that property arising by the particular form of the excitation? Or is it arising due to fundamental properties of the field?
The first kind of properties are, of course, exclusive to each 'individual electron', such properties may be the position of the electron, the velocity of the electron or its energy.
The second kind of properties, because are properties of the field itself and doesn't depend on the details of the excitation, must be shared for any excitation, i.e must be exactly the same for all the electrons. Examples of such properties are spin, charge and, as you may guess, mass.

So, in short, all electrons have the same mass (and other properties like charge, etc) and we call them indistinguishable because they are just manifestations of the same fundamental object, the field.
Ah that makes sense, thank you
 
  • #17
Sciencelad2798 said:
I guess I think that the fact they're all identical, shows some fine tuning in the universe
That is an unjustified conclusion, but even if you think something required fine tuning what would be impossible with a fine tuned universe?

The point is that it is clearly possible since we observe the fact. So any thought that you have that makes it impossible is clearly incorrect. Such a thought is contradicted by observation.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, hutchphd and nasu
  • #18
Dale said:
This question makes no sense to me. Why would being the same be impossible? Why would being different be impossible? What does sameness have to do with possibility?
I think in classical mechanics the notion of identical particles is fraught. The question naturally arises "how much identical ?" The identity of a particle is in principle capable of ascertainment from careful historical tracing of that particle. In QM the answer is more clear cut.

And (for the OP) neither forms an existence proof for an almighty being.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, vanhees71 and Dale
  • #20
hutchphd said:
I think in classical mechanics the notion of identical particles is fraught.
Indeed. And we already know electrons are not classical particles anyway, and the question of why all electrons are identical requires quantum mechanics to answer (more precisely, quantum field theory, per the answer @Gaussian97 gave in post #15) . Hence, I have moved this thread to the quantum physics forum.
 
  • Like
Likes hutchphd and vanhees71
  • #21
Baluncore said:
You see an electron in many different places, at many different times.
How do you know there is more than one electron ?
This is a different question from the OP's question. Saying that all electrons are identical is not the same as saying there is only one of them. The latter is a much stronger claim (and one which no physicist thinks is true--the one historical attempt at such a theory, based on a speculation by Wheeler, did not work out).
 
  • #22
That's why I said above "identical" is not a good name for the discussed issue. It's better to call it indistinguishability.

The modern approach to the description of (elementary) particles is relativistic quantum field theory and the use of symmetry principles, which finally lead to the Standard Model of particle physics.

One starts with the Poincare symmetry of the relativistic spacetime model, Minkowski space and the fundamental principles of quantum theory (QT), according to which Lie symmetries are represented by unitary ray representations of the corresponding symmetry group. In the case of the Poincare group all irreducible ray representations can be lifted to unitary irreducible representations of the covering group, where the Lorentz subgroup of the Poincare group is substituted by ##\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})##.

The classification of these representations together with the demand to have "microcausality", i.e., that the operators that represent local observables commute at space-like separated arguments, leads to representations which physically either represent massive or massless "particles". The mass squared is a Casimir operator of the Poincare group, leading to the energy-momentum relation, ##p_{\mu} p^{\mu}=m^2 c^2##.

The massive representations are further characterized by the spin of the corresponding field, which takes the values ##0,1/2,1,3/2,\ldots##. It tells you the representation of rotations (and angular momentum as it's generators) in the rest frame of the particle. One should note that it is convenient and standard convention to represent all quantities that refer to intrinsic properties of a massive particle (i.e., not referring to the state of motion like energy, momentum) in the rest frame of this particle.

The massive representations are also characterized by a "spin", but there's of course no rest frame, and the only way to define the intrinsic spin-like properties of massless particles is to look at the helicity, i.e., the projection of the angular momentum to the direction of the momentum of the massless particle (which cannot be "at rest", because it moves with the speed of light wrt. any inertial reference frame). These can always take only two values ##\pm s## (with ##s \in \{0,1/2,1,3/2,\ldots \}##).

Further it is clear that particles can only be distinguished by their intrinsic properties. In our yet pretty rough characterization by the irreducible representations of the Poincare group that's just mass and spin. In general it's impossible to distinguish individual particles by trajectories in phase space as in classical physics, due to the Heisenberg uncertainty relation between position and momentum (for massive particles; massless particles don't even admit the definition of a proper position observable at all, at least if they have ##s \geq 1##). In 3 (or more) spatial dimensions this leaves only the possibility of particles to be either fermions or bosons, i.e., two many-body states where only two indistinguishable are interchanged are in fact the same state, and the corresponding state vector either stays the same (bosons) or is multiplied by (-1) (fermions), i.e., the states are either symmetric (bosons) or antisymmetric (fermions) under exchange of any pair of indistiguishable particle.

Together with the microcausality condition of relativistic QFT and the demand that the energy should be bounded from below, so that a stable ground state exists, one concludes that (a) for each particle there's always a corresponding antiparticle of the same mass (it can also be that particle and antiparticle are the same particle, which is then called a "strictly neutral particle", as becomes clear as soon as one considers interactions), and (b) particles with integer spin must be bosons; particles with half-integer sspin must be fermions.

Of course, the classification of the particles must be extended concerning the various charges which describe which interactions each particle participates in, and this leads to all the charges of the standard model (color for the strong interaction, flavor and electric charge (or hypercharge) for the electroweak interaction), but that doesn't change the fundamental point of the indistinguishability, it just adds "intrinsic quantum numbers" that make the different particle sorts distinguishable, but if two particles carry the same intrinsic quantum numbers, they are indistinguishable, i.e., they are either bosons or fermions, characterized by the behavior of their many-body state vectors under exchange of two indistinguishable particles (either symmetric for bosons or antisymmetric for fermions).
 
  • #23
Sciencelad2798 said:
Summary:: If so how, and why?

I'm just confused on whether not all electrons are identical and if they are, how they are.
Mostly. Electrons can differ in parity, location, and momentum.
 
  • #24
Sciencelad2798 said:
Why are the charges of protons and electrons even?
Because that's how things work out in the Standard Model of particle physics.
 
  • #25
PeterDonis said:
Because that's how things work out in the Standard Model of particle physics.
I know this is theoretical, but that's quite the coincidence, no?
 
  • #27
Sciencelad2798 said:
I know this is theoretical, but that's quite the coincidence, no?
No.

Your question has been answered. Thread closed.
 
  • Sad
Likes vanhees71

FAQ: Are All Electrons Truly Identical?

Are all electrons identical?

Yes, according to the Standard Model of particle physics, all electrons are identical in terms of their physical properties such as mass, charge, and spin. This means that any two electrons in the universe are indistinguishable from each other.

How do we know that all electrons are identical?

Scientists have conducted numerous experiments that consistently show that electrons have the same physical properties. Additionally, the theory of quantum mechanics, which has been extensively tested and proven, also predicts that all electrons are identical.

Are there any exceptions to the rule that all electrons are identical?

There are some theories that suggest the existence of particles called "sterile neutrinos" which could potentially have different properties from regular electrons. However, these theories have not been confirmed and the concept of identical electrons remains widely accepted in the scientific community.

Can we ever observe the individual properties of an electron?

No, due to the principle of quantum indistinguishability, it is impossible to observe the individual properties of an electron. This means that we can only measure the collective properties of a group of electrons, rather than the properties of individual electrons.

Why is it important to understand that all electrons are identical?

Understanding the identical nature of electrons is crucial in many areas of science, particularly in the fields of quantum mechanics and particle physics. It allows us to make accurate predictions and calculations, and has led to many advancements in technology such as transistors and computer chips.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
170
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
36
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Back
Top