- #71
mormonator_rm
- 184
- 1
First of all, reply to turin;
A meson and a baryon will each be color-white, and hence no direct strong force attraction between them if they happen to separate slightly. The moment the meson is emitted, its constituent quarks fall outside of the range of free gluons from the baryon. Only the gluons between the constituents of the meson will affect the structure of the meson at that point, as far as strong potential is concerned.
The actual emmission of the meson is most likely just the reaction of a baryon to its close proximity to another baryon (like an electron emiting a photon in response to the proximity of another electron), or if decay is involved it is linked to the weak force rather than the strong force.
Thankyou to jcsd for elaborating on QFD as a QFT.
*I just saw your new message post, and you are totally correct about your last comment; the mesons do act very much in the same way between baryons as photons act between charged particles. I think you are beginning to get a clearer idea of the concept. Just one thing to keep in mind; the x^2 potential is between quarks within composite baryons and mesons, not between baryons and other baryons or mesons (and by the way, x^2 is only an educated approximation at this time, we do not know for sure the exact form).
Now, to NEOclassic;
jcsd is correct about the SM view of neutrinos. For one, if neutrinos and antineutrinos were self-conjugates, like photons, there would be a violation of lepton number conservation in many well-known interactions that follow the principle; that is, unless the lepton number of a neutrino can be arbitrarily assigned, and thus a neutrino of L = -1 and a neutrino of L = 1 can be produced as a pair(hence a reason for calling some neutrinos and some antineutrinos). This definition, however, would intrinsically define them as non-self-conjugate antiparticles, as electrons and positrons have opposite lepton numbers as well (in addition to opposite charge). If we consider electrons to have an isospin of -1/2 and a lepton number of -1, then their charge could be described as;
Q = I~3 + L/2
which equals one for the positron, -1 for the electron, if we are able to use the convention where the sign of L is the same as the sign of Q in charged leptons. The neutrinos, to conserve quantum numbers, must then be assigned the opposite isospins, so that Q = 0 for both neutrino and antineutrino. This puts neutrinos in isospin doublets with their associated leptons. This doublet form for the leptons is exactly how they are represented in the SM.
In conclusion, I would say that the opposite lepton numbers required for neutrinos and antineutrinos is sufficient to define them as not being self-conjugates, if the current SM is accurate with regard to the isospin doublet structure of quarks and leptons.
A meson and a baryon will each be color-white, and hence no direct strong force attraction between them if they happen to separate slightly. The moment the meson is emitted, its constituent quarks fall outside of the range of free gluons from the baryon. Only the gluons between the constituents of the meson will affect the structure of the meson at that point, as far as strong potential is concerned.
The actual emmission of the meson is most likely just the reaction of a baryon to its close proximity to another baryon (like an electron emiting a photon in response to the proximity of another electron), or if decay is involved it is linked to the weak force rather than the strong force.
Thankyou to jcsd for elaborating on QFD as a QFT.
*I just saw your new message post, and you are totally correct about your last comment; the mesons do act very much in the same way between baryons as photons act between charged particles. I think you are beginning to get a clearer idea of the concept. Just one thing to keep in mind; the x^2 potential is between quarks within composite baryons and mesons, not between baryons and other baryons or mesons (and by the way, x^2 is only an educated approximation at this time, we do not know for sure the exact form).
Now, to NEOclassic;
jcsd is correct about the SM view of neutrinos. For one, if neutrinos and antineutrinos were self-conjugates, like photons, there would be a violation of lepton number conservation in many well-known interactions that follow the principle; that is, unless the lepton number of a neutrino can be arbitrarily assigned, and thus a neutrino of L = -1 and a neutrino of L = 1 can be produced as a pair(hence a reason for calling some neutrinos and some antineutrinos). This definition, however, would intrinsically define them as non-self-conjugate antiparticles, as electrons and positrons have opposite lepton numbers as well (in addition to opposite charge). If we consider electrons to have an isospin of -1/2 and a lepton number of -1, then their charge could be described as;
Q = I~3 + L/2
which equals one for the positron, -1 for the electron, if we are able to use the convention where the sign of L is the same as the sign of Q in charged leptons. The neutrinos, to conserve quantum numbers, must then be assigned the opposite isospins, so that Q = 0 for both neutrino and antineutrino. This puts neutrinos in isospin doublets with their associated leptons. This doublet form for the leptons is exactly how they are represented in the SM.
In conclusion, I would say that the opposite lepton numbers required for neutrinos and antineutrinos is sufficient to define them as not being self-conjugates, if the current SM is accurate with regard to the isospin doublet structure of quarks and leptons.
Last edited: