The Incredible Shrinking Proton

[pgp_protector]

Stumbled Upon this

The Incredible Shrinking Proton - Science News

Physicists are already doing experiments with the hope of resolving the discrepancy, and theorists may have to revisit their numbers.

“Either one of the experiments is wrong, or the calculations are wrong,” says Pohl. “If it turns out that none of these is wrong, then one has to, maybe at some point in the far future, declare that QED is wrong, which would be really interesting. But we are not that far yet.”

 

[Cabal]

Yikes! Eeenteresting. Must try and dig up the papers on this.

 

[TemperateSeaIsland]

They say that the muon interacts with the proton, could this be having an effect on the proton?

 

[Cabal]

They say that the muon interacts with the proton, could this be having an effect on the proton?

I'm trying to think of a mechanism by which a proton could actively shrink.

It would have to involve the quarks rearranging, no? But muons are leptons, and this is an electromagnetic interaction, so I can't see how this could induce a strong-force response. The charge is the same, and muons are point particles, so it can't be an electromagnetic force effect.

I'm also curious as to how exactly they measure the width of these things using the lazor.

 

[Michael]

They say that the muon interacts with the proton, could this be having an effect on the proton?

I think only a published paper might explain their methodology but that's a very valid question IMO as well.

 

[shinbits]

what does the acronymn "QED" in the quote stand for?

 

[Cabal]

what does the acronymn "QED" in the quote stand for?

Quantum electrodynamics.

I.e. the electromagnetic field is discrete, not continuous.

 

[Michael]

I'm trying to think of a mechanism by which a proton could actively shrink.

It would have to involve the quarks rearranging, no? But muons are leptons, and this is an electromagnetic interaction, so I can't see how this could induce a strong-force response. The charge is the same, and muons are point particles, so it can't be an electromagnetic force effect.

I'm also curious as to how exactly they measure the width of these things using the lazor.

I wouldn't necessarily rule out an EM force effect, particularly considering the size of the muon in relationship to the electron. It could be that the charge of a close muon causes the proton to shrink or expand depending on the scenario in question. I do find it to be a fascinating puzzle, but I wouldn't jump to any conclusions just yet.

 

[Cabal]

I wouldn't necessarily rule out an EM force effect, particularly considering the size of the muon in relationship to the electron.

The mass is different, sure. The size is not, or at least not on any currently appreciable scale for this scenario.

It could be that the charge of a close muon causes the proton to shrink or expand depending on the scenario in question. I do find it to be a fascinating puzzle, but I wouldn't jump to any conclusions just yet.

Some brief ponderings:

So the Bohr radius is proportional to mass^-1. That means the muon will be in an orbit 200 times closer to the proton than an electron would be. So that means the Coulomb interaction will be 40,000 times stronger....right?

I guess for a real idea of how this could affect the proton however is how strong the strong interaction is by comparison, and that I don't know off the top of my head.

Edit: And for the life of me I can't figure out how the proton would get smaller by electromagnetic interaction with the muon given that more of the proton's quarks are positive than negative, and with four times as much charge.

 

[Cabal]

Also, if it's purely electromagnetic, then wouldn't any change in charge distribution affect the proton size? Wouldn't Rydberg hydrogen atoms have different sized protons?

(Apologies, I may have OD'd on coffee in the last couple of days)

 

[Cabal]

The proton shrinks in size : Nature News

More coming, trying to find the actual paper with my college access

 

[Vatis]

What have we here? A new flaw in the atheistic denialist pseudo-science! This of course proves creationism and young earth creation.
But seriousely, I have no idea why this is. I think we can rule out the EMF and the gravitational force, since these are both by some magnitudes weaker than the strong force which holds together the quarks. However what might have screwed up the measurements is that since the muon is a lot heavier and closer to the proton it will have it's on "orbit" due to the gravity.
I know this might not seem completely logical but QED sometimes work counterintuitive.

PS: QED is a pretty inconvenient abbreviation for "quantum electro dynamics" since it's already short for "quod erat demonstrandum"

 

[Vatis]

So the Bohr radius is proportional to mass^-1. That means the muon will be in an orbit 200 times closer to the proton than an electron would be. So that means the Coulomb interaction will be 40,000 times stronger....right?

Basically correct but some factors are missing, namely the gravitational force and the centrifugal force.

 

[Cabal]

What have we here? A new flaw in the atheistic denialist pseudo-science! This of course proves creationism and young earth creation.
But seriousely, I have no idea why this is. I think we can rule out the EMF and the gravitational force, since these are both by some magnitudes weaker than the strong force which holds together the quarks. However what might have screwed up the measurements is that since the muon is a lot heavier and closer to the proton it will have it's on "orbit" due to the gravity.
I know this might not seem completely logical but QED sometimes work counterintuitive.

Does gravity figure into QED? I would have though not seeing as it's even weaker than the electromagnetic force, and if that doesn't cause particle sizes to change I can't see how gravitation will.

PS: QED is a pretty inconvenient abbreviation for "quantum electro dynamics" since it's already short for "quod erat demonstrandum"

QFT is also inconvenient, as it's quantum field theory and "quoted for truth".

And "quite flipping true."

 

[Vatis]

Does gravity figure into QED? I would have though not seeing as it's even weaker than the electromagnetic force, and if that doesn't cause particle sizes to change I can't see how gravitation will.

I'm pretty sure there is a gravitational interaction between subatomic particles, but you are right it's pretty weak compared to the EM. What I was trying to say is that the two forces add up, and with radii in that magnitude gravity actually does have a considerable effect.

 

[Cabal]

Basically correct but some factors are missing, namely the gravitational force and the centrifugal force.

Gravity will only be 200 times stronger, although given that gravity isn't even factored into the Bohr model I doubt this will make a significant difference anyway. The muon might be 200 times as heavy as an electron but that's still only a mass of 10^-29 kg we're talking about.

And I don't know about centrifugal force, but the Bohr model is derived from centripetal forces anyway.

 

[ArnautDaniel]

Quantum electrodynamics.

I.e. the electromagnetic field is discrete, not continuous.

There's no such thing as a "discrete field".

A quantum field is like a random field (so you have some kind of probability distribution over possible fields) but generalized to satisify a kind of quantum theory.

 

[Cabal]

There's no such thing as a "discrete field".

A quantum field is like a random field (so you have some kind of probability distribution over possible fields) but generalized to satisify quantum theory.

In the sense that the field is mediated via quanta, I don't see why discrete shouldn't suffice as a description. It just usually refers to that.

 

[Vatis]

And I don't know about centrifugal force, but the Bohr model is derived from centripetal forces anyway.

Well this might be outdated but in school I was taught that the centripetal force prevents the electron from falling to the nucleus. Here I have to say, I don't know if this applies to the orbital model, but with Bohr's model you'll probably need centripetal forces.

 

[Cabal]

Well this might be outdated but in school I was taught that the centripetal force prevents the electron from falling to the nucleus. Here I have to say, I don't know if this applies to the orbital model, but with Bohr's model you'll probably need centripetal forces.

No, you're right about the models it applies to - pretty sure the Bohr model derivation starts off by equating the Coulomb force to the centripetal force. The objection to the centripetal force argument of the Bohr model was that the electrons are being accelerated in an arc, so they would spiral into the nucleus, emitting radiation as they go. The uncertainty principle is what results in orbitals.

To be honest, I'm fairly sure the Bohr model is not a good idea to use for analysing QED models just thought it would be interesting to compare the magnitudes of the forces.