Affirming a physical mechanism for the production of possible intrinsic charm in the proton
v. 4. n. 13
This is an emphasis of the previous Letter * because of the theoretical, experimental and analytical indirectness, and complexity that led to the assertion of charm quarks in the proton, considering a recent formal paper. ** It is useful to begin by critiquing the following rather conventional quote from an article that refers to this formal paper:
"In quantum physics, particles don’t take on a definite state until they’re measured — they are instead described by probabilities. If protons contain intrinsic charm, there’d be a small probability to find within a proton not only two up quarks and a down quark, but also a charm quark and antiquark. Since protons aren’t well-defined collections of individual particles, a?proton’s mass?isn’t a simple sum of its parts (SN: 11/26/18). The small probability means that the full mass of the charm quark and antiquark isn’t added to the proton’s heft, explaining how the proton may contain particles heavier than itself." ***
Does this really explain how the proton may contain particles heavier than itself? There is also a small probability of finding a third-generation quark pair, and just about anything else. Also, time is not considered in this quote, that is, do the three valence quarks exist at the same time as the two charm quarks? Or do the three valence quarks disappear, their mass/energy supplementing charm momentarily? "Probability" alone seems too flexible and convenient a notion for a satisfying physical explanation of what is actually happening in the proton. Precisely how is probability involved?
Earlier, it was discussed how photons were probabilistic because of a gravity mechanism, ? and that quantum mechanics generally is probabilistic because virtual particles have a range of energies, and, particularly regarding light, energy that might be transferred from virtual-to-virtual particle which also accounts for causality. ?? Any explanation involving "probability" should be qualified in each case, and not employed as a blanket explanation. While the valence quarks in the proton were recently treated as a gravitational 3-bodied problem, consider the simplified 2-bodied case where relativistic effects are more easily demonstrated in the cover image.
Given suitable dimensions and masses, there would be a marked relativistic mass/energy increase in the lower position in this image, which may be sufficient to produce a charm quark pair for a short time. Probability is identified in such a case as the time the observation is taken.
In this view the charm quarks do not exist at all in the proton until generated by suitable mutual light quark orbital spin conditions, implying simultaneous presence of three quarks OR five quarks.
It was shown that the strong force at quark level in such spin terms is given by
Fg,1 = 0.021 (c^17 h A^2 / G^5)^1/6
领英推荐
where A～10^-14 m/s^2, derived earlier as the acceleration of the local galactic supercluster.???? While at the quark level instead of the orbital level, this might serve as a quantitative prediction of the physical mechanism for the intermittent generation of charm quarks within the proton (as a variation of the cover image -- random or periodic gravitational 3-body problem in 3-dimensional rather than the 2-dimensional space of all existing periodic solutions).
* An explanation for possible charm quarks in the proton by solutions to the 3-body problem | LinkedIn
??? DOI:?10.13140/RG.2.2.20258.35524
Cover image caption: A two-body gravitational periodic solution indicating higher relative velocity when particles are closer.