The reality behind ''charge''

[Pratt]

What is actually meant by the ''charge'' of a particle??Why we interpret it by ''positive'' and ''negative''?In 2-d vector view,it can be meant as direction,but if we consider a multidimensional view, then is there any existance of other kind of charges??

[Mr Skeptic]

Electric charges cancel out like positive and negative numbers do when added together. But there's not really any way to say which charge "should" be positive and which negative, in fact many people think it should be the other way around because the way we have it now electrical diagrams look weird.

[Pratt]

Actually what I mean to ask is, how come we hold a orthodox viewpoint of ''charge'' of a particle??What does the ''charge'' actually mean??What kind of property is it associated with??

Edited January 11, 2011 by Pratt

[swansont]

It has to do with the electromagnetic interaction. Things that possess charge interact via that force and things that lack charge do not. The charges come in two types, which we call + and -. Like charges repel, and opposite charges attract.

[chinmayrshah]

Generally, what we were and are taught is that the charge is an intrinsic quantity and cannot be defined as such. Sometimes mass and matter were confused. But many theories tell that charges can be defined as the emission of certain particles in Quantum Mechanics. I cannot remember the exact name of theory or particles but yes the theory is getting momentum.

[alpha2cen]

One of the important property is same charge matters repel each other and different charge matters attract each other. If there were not this particle property in the Universe, more fine Universe would not exist. The property that same charge matters repel each other is more important because without this property only huge matter might exist in the Universe.

Why do same charge particles repel each other? It is related to electromagnetic property.

After Big bang electromagnetic force field and electron are created. Recently we can make particles and anti-particles by using energy. But till now we have not found any other particles larger than proton or neutron without very short life time particles.

Edited January 13, 2011 by alpha2cen

[FX]

This page should clear everything up.

 

http://amasci.com/elect/charge1.html

 

[lemur]

I always thought that same-charge repulsion should be expressed in some way in the modeling of electrons around the nucleus, but I haven't seen that yet in QP, though my knowledge is admittedly superficial. Same-charge repulsion seems to be responsible for the volume of atoms insofar as the electron clouds resist interpenetration. Electrostatic attraction between the electrons and the protons of the nucleus also seem to be responsible for the localization of electrons within the volume of the atom. If electrostatic force was less, for example, I would expect atoms to be much larger or not occur at all. Non-magnetic matter seems to be the result of unharmonized charge within a material (but this may just be my opinion). Magnetism seems to be the result of harmonizing negative charge away from positive charge in numerous atoms simultaneously. My sense, though it may be incorrect, is that non-magnetic materials are neutralized by dispersing their electrostatic charge equally in all directions (if someone has a reason this is incorrect, please explain).

[steevey]

What is actually meant by the ''charge'' of a particle??Why we interpret it by ''positive'' and ''negative''?In 2-d vector view,it can be meant as direction,but if we consider a multidimensional view, then is there any existance of other kind of charges??

 

No one knows for sure what causes charge, but the leading theory on why the 4 forces occur is because they are being carried by particles called Gauge Bosons. Gauge Bosons are given off by all particles in the forms mathematical points or spheres. They come in different versions, some with mass, and some without mass which is why some forces can go on for greater distances than others. The way to describe how they are emitted is an analogy in which the Gauge Boson is tied to a rubber band which snaps back to the parent particle it was emitted from, but can also be captured by other particles.

Edited January 17, 2011 by steevey