Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Tommaso Dorigo | October 9th 2009 04:13 PM | 17 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More A Quantum Diaries Survivor articles

All

About Tommaso Dorigo

I am an experimental particle physicist working with the CMS experiment at CERN and the CDF experiment at Fermilab. In my spare time I play chess, abuse the piano, and aim my dobson telescope at... Full Bio

Carl Brannen is well known to the regulars of this blog. He is an independent researcher and my favourite non-professional theorist, because he gives me the hope that brilliant minds, who were diverted from the natural path of doing basic research, may return to it for good. And Carl provides us with another important proof: that institutionalized science does sometimes listen to the voice of those who have something to say regardless of who signs their monthly paycheck. It may give them a hard time getting their papers published, though.
Carl has recently won a honorable mention for a paper on gravitation, but he has new ideas -some good, some bad, but all intriguing- all over the board of fundamental physics. He accepted my invitation to tell us about some of his ideas on fermion generations below. Enjoy !

Isidor Rabi is famous for asking the question “Who ordered that?” in response to the discovery of the muon, a heavy version of the electron. Later another charged lepton, the tau, was discovered so now there are a total of three particles that act alike, the electron, the muon, and the tau. The other elementary particles with spin = 1/2, the quarks and neutrinos are also duplicated in three versions. Probably thinking about sex, the physicists call these versions “generations”. Among the elementary particles, only those with spin-1/2 appear in generations. Why is that? My new paper attempts to answer Rabi’s question.



Our experiments are restricted to very low energies compared to the Planck energy; perhaps spin-1/2 at much higher energies than we can experiment with behaves differently. This post gives an undergraduate level introduction to a paper that proposes this as an explanation for the generations. We will begin by discussing classical measurements of position and spin, and then move on to the quantum case.


Measuring a beam of bullets


Consider the dual-barrel Vulcord Semi-Gatling gun. This is a two-barreled high speed rifle. It’s unique in that the two barrels have opposite barrel twists. Consequently, the stream of bullets produced by the gun come in two varieties, half the bullets have right handed spin and half have left handed spin. In addition, the gun has a rotational randomizing function which causes the bullets to have random offsets as they leave the gun and which randomizes the left handed and right handed bullets. So the bullet stream, call it the “bullet beam”, consists of bullets with two random characteristics, their offset position in the beam, and their spin. A drawing may assist:

Vulcord gun

Vulcord gun


For simplicity, we’re assuming that all the bullets move in parallel, and we’re only going to take into account only one position coordinate, the z-distance. So the bullets have just two characteristics, position and spin. If the gun is fired for long enough, the different offsets of the bullets leave tracks (particle tracks) that are parallel and randomly distributed. We’ll use two colors, red and green, to distinguish right and left handed bullet tracks, respectively. And for printing, we’ll make the right handed tracks dotted. A drawing of just a few tracks:



Random classical bullets from Vulcord gun

Random classical bullets from Vulcord gun


To measure the positions of the bullets in the beam, we insert a barrier that stops all but a small portion of the bullet beam. The barrier is “classical” in that it does not modify the characteristics of the bullets that get past it. Thus the effect of two barriers is the same as one:


Measuring bullet positions with a barrier

Measuring bullet positions with a barrier


We can also measure the spins of the bullets in the beam. To do this, we use a special sort of bullet sorter, a “Stern-Gerlach” sorter. It acts by deflecting the right handed bullets down, into a “beam stop”. Thus only the left handed bullets stay in the beam. And just like with classical position measurements, repeating this measurement has the same effect as doing it once:


vulspin1



Measuring a beam of electrons


Now we will consider a beam of electrons. We will still measure the position of an electron in a similar fashion to the classical measurement of the beam of bullets. But instead of measuring the spin of the bullet, we will measure the spin (in the z direction) of the electron. Measurements of electron spin give either +h-bar/2 or -h-bar/2 so this is in analogy to the two possible spins of the bullets.


So long as our measurements are sufficiently inaccurate, we will obtain results analogous to the classical results. That is, repeated measurements of position and spin will give unchanged results. But this changes as we increase the sharpness with which we measure position. When the slit in our position measuring block approaches the length of the de Broglie wavelength of the electrons, the electrons will be scattered by the slit. And then, repeated measurements of position no longer give the same result as a single measurement. This behavior is can be ascribed to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Position measurements cause changes to the electron’s behavior that alters the result of a second measurement of position:



elecposns


With the way this material has been introduced here, it’s natural to expect that sufficiently accurate measurements of spin should also result in modifications of the electron’s behavior in such a way as to change the result of a second measurement. That’s not how standard physics predicts but it is what is proposed in this paper: At sufficiently small time intervals, measurements of spin act like measurements of position and cause scattering.


Spin as an emergent property


To put meat on the bones of the above discussion, we have to find a way of writing the stable, long term spin in terms of the unstable, short term spin. The paper does this by using Feynman’s path integral formulation of quantum mechanics to compute propagators. Mathematically, propagators are “Green’s functions”, functions which when found, allows differential equations to be easily solved.



In the path integral formulation, we compute “probability amplitudes” between an initial state (initial condition) and a final state (condition) by considering all possible paths between the states. The initial condition might be how the experimenter prepares the particle while the final state might be a place where a particle detector looks for the particle. The paper shows how to obtain stable, long term spin path integrals in terms of the unstable, short term spin path integrals. This is done by writing the long term propagators in terms of short term propagators.


Orthogonality and Superselection Sectors


The calculation ends up with three orthogonal long term propagators. A familiar example of orthogonal states are the spin-up electron and the spin-down electron. These are the same particle but are sufficiently distinct that they are not the same state. For example, a spin-up and a spin-down electron can exist in the same state (other than spin); the Pauli exclusion principle does not require them to have orthogonal wave functions. Thus the two electrons in the ground state of the helium atom are both in 1s wave functions.



The spin-up and spin-down wave functions are a complete basis for spin-1/2. This means that we can arrange for spin in any direction by taking linear superpositions of the spin-up and spin-down states. Linear superposition does not apply to all possible wave functions in quantum mechanics. Instead, it is restricted to “superselection sectors.” An example of an illegal linear superposition would be one mixing an electron with a photon.


This sort of behavior is mirrored in the elementary particle generations; linear superpositions of different generation fermions are created in weak interactions. These mix the generations according to the experimentally determined CKM and PMNS matrices. Consequently a natural way of obtaining the generation structure of the elementary fermions is to describe the different generations as orthogonal propagators; just as with spin-up and spin-down, linear superposition is implied and therefore mixing occurs.



More Information


The concept of measurement apparatus that only allow one spin state to pass is due to Julian Schwinger, who created an elegant description of quantum mechanics now called “Schwinger’s measurement algebra”. You can buy his introduction to quantum mechanics book on Amazon, “Quantum Kinematics and Dynamics” right now at the bargain price of $39.89. Or you can read the two papers he published that describe the theory, “The Algebra of Microscopic Measurement” and the following paper, “The Geometry of Quantum States”.



An excellent non mathematical introduction to path integrals for electrons and photons is the short popular book by Richard Feynman, “QED The Strange Theory of Light and Matter” now available at Amazon for $3.98; every graduate student in physics should have this book. An introductory textbook to path integrals for elementary particle theory is “Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell” by Anthony Zee. And a good book that discusses superselection sectors is PCT, Spin and Statistics, and all that, by Raymond F. Streater and Arthur S. Wightman.



Comments

Hi Carl,
the most bestest awesomest part of your paper is when you correctly get the masses of particles to absurd precision. But, you were not clear with that in your post! Not even that you could get any masses. I am disappointed with the post, given that your paper results are so preposterously awesome up to the point that I find it hard to believe...


Danierl,

The Koide mass equation has been known for 27 years and is mentioned in the literature 100s of times. The neutrino mass equation has been mentioned maybe 3 or 4 times. The only mass formula this paper gives that is not already in the literature is that of heavy quarkonium. The mass fit for heavy quarkonium is amazingly good as you can verify by writing a simulation.

Carl, even though it is mentioned hundreds of times, it is something incomparable more obscure than any of the concepts you provided a link to. It would be fair if you spent some time trying to explain that on this post, or at least giving some links to it.
The sensation I have it is that if scientific curiosity is a baby, you made a pull out method on me...


Daniel, Ah I see what you mean. I wrote the post intending it to be a layman's guide to why one should think that spin might have a different behavior at short times than we're used to. The first consequence is an explanation for what generations are and I thought that would be enough. As it is, for a post without equations, it can't even derive the fact that there are three generations.

The hadron mass equations are a cool side effect, but they are just a side effect. They're the natural result of assuming that the generations arise dynamically; when you do that, you naturally have to assume that there will be consequences among other dynamically determined particles that can form linear superpositions and the hadron resonances are a great example of this. But it's bad enough to have to define "generations" in a paper for laymen, do I really want to go to explaining "hadron resonance?" I figured the post was already long enough.

I wrote another paper devoted to this problem alone, that is, the classification of the hadron resonances according to generations: Koide mass equations for hadrons.. Since it discusses all the hadrons, it's twice the length of the spin path integral paper. It was sort of rejected at Phys Math Central in that I quit arguing with the referee who pointed out that the paper didn't connect with standard physics. I had to agree with him. So I wrote the spin path integral paper partly as a way of connecting with standard elementary particle theory.

Alright, but I guess that you really should really try hard to explain in layman terms how generations automatically arise since it is the most relevant result that you found out that can change the world. Tommaso does that for Feynman diagrams, for example, and many others. I guess you can figure out a way to do that with minimal mathematics. You have a practical mind of an engineer. You can do that.
So, after this paper is accepted, you will that other again, right?


Daniel, yes I expect to see the hadron paper published eventually. And there's one on applications of the discrete Fourier transform to 3x3 matrices of amplitudes written with Marni Sheppeard, and giving a new parameterization for the mixing matrices, that I expect to see published.

One of the reasons I left academia 25 years ago was that I really hate writing papers. But I'm going to try to crank out another dozen or so over the next year and get some sort of job in academia. I'm basically getting too old to climb around industrial machinery. (The old photo Tommaso selected is a self portrait taken from 20 meters up in a distillation tower.) I've been considering something indoors and safe like teaching high school mathematics.

Carl, have you ever considered applying to USPTO? Working in a patent office is a smooth experience and gives you atmosphere to think about ideas. Well, that's how I feel working at my country's patent office.

Daniel, that was very funny, especially since I had to read the second sentence to figure out that you're talking about Einstein. Until then I was thinking about how much it costs to apply for patents, LOL.

Well, almost. I was rather talking about me. I work at a patent office! (my section trademarks)

The wave field is rotated hbar value. The wave packet also rotated with this value.

Carl,
What does it mean to say the electron has spin up or down and the quantum of angular momentum of that spin is h-bar/2? The Bohr model is two equations with two unknowns. One equation is setting the centripetal force on the electron equal to the electrostatic attractive force to the proton, mv^2/R = e^2/4πεR^2. The second equation is Bohr’s famous quantization equation, mvR = nh-bar where n is a positive integer, or iω = nh-bar, in angular quantities where i is the moment of inertia, i = mR^2. If the electron in the Bohr model n = 1 quantum state has the quantity h-bar of angular momentum, well that is a lot of angular momentum for the electron, what with having 13.6eV of kinetic energy. If a free electron is very small, a point-like object, than it would be spinning very fast indeed to have quantum of angular momentum h-bar/2. Is anything actually spinning? What precisely is spin? Does it have any literal meaning? How should we think about spin physically?

David,

Re "what precisely is spin", Einstein's famous quote was that "You know, it would be sufficient to really understand the electron." I hope my paper contributes to this understanding.

The modern approach to elementary particles takes everything as due to symmetry. Spin-1/2 is one of the irreducible representations (the smallest one) of a Lie Algebra that is associated with the symmetry possessed by spacetime. For most people, this is enough; you begin with a simple symmetry and from it you derive the equations of motion (which are useful for calculations). I believe in the reverse; the foundations of physics should be simple equations of motion; from them you can derive the symmetries (which are useful for calculation).

Thanks Carl and Tommaso. OT, but I liked the headline for the Discover interview with Roger Penrose: Roger Penrose Says Physics Is Wrong, From String Theory to Quantum Mechanics.

New support from arXiv!

One of the unique features of this paper's analysis of heavy quarkonium is that that it claims that the six states in each of the Upsilon and J/psi are not radial excitations, but instead are color excitations. In the longer paper, which this is intended to support, I claim that there are no radial excitations in any of the hadrons.

Now a pair of papers by MIT mathematician Tamar Friedmann has appeared on arXiv also claiming that there are no radial excitations in the hadrons. I think he has more convincing arguments than mine. See the following papers:

No Radial Excitations in Low Energy QCD. I. Diquarks and Classification of Mesons
http://arxiv.org/abs/0910.2229

No Radial Excitations in Low Energy QCD. II. The Shrinking Radius of Hadrons
http://arxiv.org/abs/0910.2231

Carl, did you included the triplet ("0", pi-, D-,) in the search for Koideish hadrons?

Alejandro, no I only assumed three states were a triplet if they shared quantum numbers to the extent that they can form a linear superposition. And in addition, I assumed that they would have the same angular momentum. What's the triplet ("0", pi-, D-,)?

Carl, it is the "triplet" you get when you restore flavour symmetry in the "down" sector, ie you put the same mass for down, strange and bottom. If you do it straightforwardly you get three mesons going to the mass of pi-, three others going to the mass of D-. I expect that some linear combination will produce two mesons in each value of the triplet.

About Friedmann: note that he also tells about the "unbinding" of the top quark!

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.