Banner
    Why Quarks Come In Three Colours And Have Fractional Charge
    By Tommaso Dorigo | September 11th 2012 02:36 PM | 18 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Tommaso

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

    View Tommaso's Profile
    It sometimes happens that my comments in the threads of my own blog get long and detailed (do not take this as me boasting about anything - it is just a fact). When that happens, I reason that they deserve to be promoted to a post by themselves, because threads are read by way fewer readers, and some of them might thus lose some interesting bit.

    Because of the above I am (re)posting the text below, which explains some "a priori" reasons why quarks come with fractional electric charges in multiples of one third, why the sum of charges of fermions in one family nullify, and why our universe chose to have quarks of three colours. Beware, some non-trivial concepts of quantum field theory are needed, but I will try to make this as painless as possible (but not more).

    Anomaly cancellation

    If you take an electron, a neutrino, three up quarks, and three down quarks (you take three quarks of each kind because they come in three different colours, and quantum field theory sees as distinct entities, so you should too) you realize that the sum of their charges is zero. This is a convenient thing, but it is not by chance that it arises in our universe.

    It is a thing called "anomaly cancellation" what forces the sum of charges of each fermion family to nullify. In general, the word "anomaly" has a different meaning in this blog, but I am an experimentalist after all. For a theorist, an anomaly is a loss of symmetry of a classical theory when the theory is quantized. It comes about from quantum effects that give a non-null contribution to the divergence of a conserved current.

    Here I should open a long parenthesis where I would explain conserved currents, Noether's theorem, and the connections to the symmetry of a theory. I think there are better places where you may learn these things, so I just claim that it is not crucial that you fully understand these concepts to get to the bottom of this post and get a kick out of it.

    If gauge currents -mediated by the photon, the W, and the Z- are anomalous we lose a property of the theory described by "Ward identities", and that is bad because upon Ward identities is based the renormalizability of the theory. A renormalizable theory is necessary to make sense of it and allow us to work out results; a non-renormalizable theory requires an infinite number of parameters, corresponding to arbitrary cut-offs we must impose on the momentum circulating in virtual loops of particles. It was 't Hooft who showed that local gauge theories are renormalizable, making them an instant hit for particle theorists at the start of the seventies.

    So the standard model, the theory we all know and love, is only renormalizable if the triangular diagrams that couple an axial current to two vector currents cancel their contribution all together. An example of such diagrams is shown on the right, where an axial-vector current couples to the third component of weak isospin of the fermion in the triangular fermion loop from the left, and two vector currents couple to the electric charge of the fermion on the right. Note that if these diagrams cancel at lowest order, they will do so at every order and the theory remains renormalizable.

    The beautiful cancellation of triangle anomaly comes about because we find that there is cancelation of these contributions family by family [where we are considering all fermions of a family as the combinations like (u,d,ν,e), (c,s,ν,μ), etcetera] if the triangle diagrams with one incoming axial current (which brings in a I_3,A factor of the fermion in the loop) and the two vector currents (which have two factors proportional to the fermion charges Q, since the amplitude of the photon-fermion coupling is proportional to the charge) overall cancel.
    We need to have in other words: Σ [I_3,A * Q^2] = 0, where Σ denotes the sum over members of one family. With an electron, three up, and three down quarks, we find:

    (I_3,A)_e * Q_e^2 + N_c * [ (I_3,A)_u * (Q_u)^2 + (I_3,A)_d * (Q_d)^2 ]

    (where I hope symbols are understandable: N_c is the number of colours of quarks, I_3,A are the third component of weak isospins, and Q are the electric charges). This becomes:

     -1/2 * (-1)^2 + 3*[1/2*(2/3)^2 -1/2*(-1/3)^2] = 0.

    So anomalies do cancel ! Also please note that if the up and down charges were f and 1-f, with f different from 2/3 (say in a different universe), the equality would be lost !

    On the number of colours of QCD

    Actually there is an even funnier circumstance concerning the above equation. If we take it but keep it generalized it by substituting N_c to the number "3" multiplying the square bracket above, we can couple that equation with the condition that Q_u - Q_d = 1, a condition which depends on the group structure of SU(2)xU(1), and which is independent on N_c. If we do that we find that

    N_c = 1/(1+2Q_d)

    which implies that if we want baryons with integer charge and three quarks, we are forced to choose an universe with quarks having fractional charge, and three colours!

    If we chose instead N_c=1, we would get by force Q_d=0, Q_u=1, and there is no strong force with anti-screening, no antisymmetry of the colour part of the wavefunction. Hard to imagine such a world ! If, on the other hand, we were to pick N_c=2, we would get Q_d=-1/2, Q_u=1/2 and we do not have 3-quark states in our world.

    I believe the above conditions do not "explain" the group structure of QCD and N_c=3, but they do indicate that such is the simplest condition to have baryonic matter in the universe. Interesting, ain't it ?

    Comments

    Halliday
    Tommaso:

    Thanks for expanding this into this article.

    By the way, your equation ((I3,A)e * (Qe)2 + Nc * [ (I3,A)u * (Qu)2 + (I3,A)d * (Qd)2 ], where I have taken the liberty to use sub- and super- scripts) explicitly assumes a zero charge for the neutrino.  Of course, the electric charge of the neutrino is the other free (electric) "charge" parameter of U(1)×SU(2)×SU(3).  (Of course, SU(3) requires Nc to be 0, 1, 3, 8, ..., depending upon representation, of course.  Furthermore, just as Qu - Qd = 1 is "a condition which depends on the group structure of SU(2)xU(1), and which is independent on Nc", so is Qν - Qe = 1, of course.)

    David

    To my opinion 126 Higgs just pseudoscalar meson with phenomenon 18 degrees
    18x7=126
    18x8=144
    18x9=162
    18x10=180
    18x11=198
    18x12=216
    18x13=234

    Tommaso:

    I massively appreciate your effort to communicate physics to the wider world. I can only follow about 10% of what you write, but that is my failing and not yours, as I'm not a physicist by any definition of the word.

    Having said all of that, this particular paragraph of yours made me laugh for its quality obfuscation/jargonification:

    "If we chose instead N_c=1, we would get by force Q_d=0, Q_u=1, and there is no strong force with anti-screening, no antisymmetry of the colour part of the wavefunction. Hard to imagine such a world !"

    Love it, but don't understand it! And keep writing about it.

    I heartily agree.

    vongehr
    This is "a priori"?!? What or who wants integer charges and thus picks a universe? All this can be explained easily. It seems the message you unconsciously desire is that you are smarter than the mere mob can grasp anyway, and on top also morally elevated because you still care about them. There is a famous quote that goes somewhat like this:
    If you cannot explain it clearly, you don't understand it.
    > If you cannot explain it clearly, you don't understand it.

    Genau - das solltest vor allem Du beherzigen!

    Cheers

    I really don't get the impression that Tommaso unconsciously desires to be elevated over anyone, or has any moral superiority issues.

    I work in the field of software and information security. It's just as filled with jargon, complexity and maths as physics, and just as hard to explain cutting edge research in lay terms.

    In any case, I value his efforts to communicate, which are clearly not targetted at someone at my level of physics. Nevertheless, I gain enough insight from reading him that I usually read everything he writes.

    Sascha - I do find your tone to be quite confrontational. I think this often gets in the way of getting your own points across. Can you develop your point about "what or who wants integer charges and thus picks a universe" a bit further...?

    dorigo
    Thanks to Matt and Acleron for their support. Matt, Sascha is confrontational because he has an inferiority complex. I hope he works hard at his own science and popularization efforts, so that one day he will feel he exists regardless of his interaction with massive bodies, like a grown up Higgs boson.

    Cheers,
    T.
    UvaE
    Although the tone of his remark was rude, he is not confrontational because of an inferiority complex.  
    brilliant

    If you cannot explain it clearly, you don't understand it.
    I can try
    Higgs 125 just pseudoscalar meson
    I am agree with John Moffat
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.6015

    No broken symmetry,only resonase
    other resonances you can read from above listing

    Does the triangle anomaly problem only occur for interacting point particles, requiring the generation charge sum to be zero, or does having fundamental leptons and quarks being multidimensional (I.e. not point particles) eliminate the problem and allow the number of quark families to be different from the number of lepton families?

    dorigo
    Dear Frank,
    thanks for your question, but I am afraid I do not know the answer. Maybe some readers here do, though.
    Cheers,
    T.
    Amir D. Aczel
    Tommaso, Thank you for taking time from your busy schedule at the conference to write this. It's very interesting. Of course, science is what we want--and explanations such as these. Maybe in the future similar arguments can be found for the masses, coupling constants, and other parameters, so that a multiverse would be unnecessary? I realize I am preaching to the converted (since you brought up religion before!) and that it was your colleague--not you--who favors the multiverse. Many thanks, again!! 
    Amir D. Aczel
    As a former theorist turned quant, I enjoy coming to your blog from time to time to read about the efforts experimentalists are making. I find your discussions on experimental results very interesting.

    However, on this issue, why there are three colors of quarks, your explanation misses the mark. Your explanation is a bit of a tautology. In fact, we have no idea why there are three colors of quarks. Let me explain.

    As I am sure you are aware, all the particles of the Standard Model belong to a representation of the gauge group under which they transform. We have a redundancy in the description of the physics, and that redundancy comes out as a the gauge bosons that give us the fundamental forces. The force carriers must sit in the adjoint representation of the gauge group. That is why there are 8 gluons (the adjoint rep of SU(3) is 8 dimensional) and why there are three force carriers for the weak force (the adjoint rep of SU(2) is 3 dimensional). We have no choice with the force carriers.

    Now, the matter representations are completely an empirical question. We cannot appeal to the symmetries of the low energy theory to tell us what representation nature will choose for matter. The fermions of the Standard Model belong to the fundamental representation of the gauge group under which they transform (unless they are blind to the interaction, in which case they transform as a singlet). Why nature picks the fundamental representation, we don't know. Nature could have pick the adjoint representation for the quarks, in which case there would by 8 types, not 3. We don't know why nature picked the fundamental representation for the left handed leptons, they sit in an SU(2) doublet. We don't know why nature picked the fundamental representation for the Higgs scalar - the apparent implication of the recent LHC results and electroweak precision tests.

    Your anomaly cancellation argument is a bit of a side show. Anomaly cancellation is a group theoretic issue. Since the Standard Model is chiral, the SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) triangle diagrams will not cancel unless we choose the matter content correctly. Once we chose the fundamental representations for the fermions, the anomaly cancellation determines hypercharge (provided we have complete generations) - remember, the Standard Model by itself doesn't guarantee charge quantization. Fortunately, with the Standard Model fermions in the fundamental representations, the hypercharge assignments that cancels the anomaly is empirically consistent with nature. But that doesn't tell us why nature picked the fundamental representations for matter - we could also cancel the anomaly for a Standard Model with all fermions in the adjoint representation, but of course this wouldn't match empirical observation.

    More fundamentally, why nature picked such a bizarre looking product gauge group for the low energy theory, let alone the matter representations, if still a mystery.

    Cheers,
    IR

    dorigo
    Thanks for your message IS, I need to think on your point of view - I am not a theorist and I often find it useful to go back to the books...
    Cheers,
    T.
    fundamentally

    In presenting an alternative explanation for color charges, I might endanger boring you again with the Hilbert Book Model. If you feel that way about the HBM, then please skip this comment.
    The HBM uses quantum state functions that are quaternionic probability amplitude distributions (QPAD's) rather than complex probability amplitude distributions (CPAD's). Continuous quaternionic distributions exist in eight symmetry variants (sign flavors).
    In the HBM elementary particles are constituted by coupling two QPAD's that are sign flavors of the same base QPAD. It means that 64 combinations are possible. However, coupling to the same sign flavor makes the coupling strength zero. This results in QPAD's that are zero or that oscillate. With other words these QPAD's are waves. In the HBM eight different waves exist. They make up the photons and the gluons. The other combinations correspond to massive particles.
    Free fermions appear to be constituted from a quantum state function and a QPAD with isotropic symmetry. For free electrons and positrons both QPAD's are isotropic. They are each other's conjugate.

    Quaternionic conjugation transfers an isotropic symmetry into another isotropic symmetry. A reflection turns an isotropic symmetry into an anisotropic symmetry. Three independent reflections exist. They correspond to rgb colors and anti-colors. In the HBM the electric charge depends on the number (and direction) of imaginary base vectors in the two QPAD's that point in different directions. In this investigation the sign flavor of the parameter space of the distribution is taken as a reference. The parameter space is supposed to have an isotropic symmetry.

    With other words color charge is related to independent reflections or equivalently to independent anisometries. Since there are three independent directions there are three independent reflections. Two isotropic conditions exist: directed inside and directed outside. Starting from an isotropic condition six colors are possible that correspond to anisotropic symmetry. The isotropic symmetries correspond to the neutral colors black and white.

    According to this scheme quarks and gluons have color. Electrons are white. Positrons are black.
    Many particles are anisotropic as well, but the corresponding color charge does not show in their behavior.

    Despite the fact that the HBM does not recognize generations, it has far more particles than the Standard Model.

    See: http://www.scitech.nl/English/Science/EssentialsOfTheHilbertBookModel.pdf or more elaborate:
    http://www.scitech.nl/English/Science/FeaturesOfTheHBM.pdf
     



     

    If you think, think twice