Protons and Neutrons

[Pugdaddy]

Is it agreed among physicists that the proton is not really made up of just 2 up quarks and 1 down quark? It is really made up of an unknown but extremely large number of up, down, charmed and strange quarks, plus gluons and that on average there are two extra up quarks and a down quark? Does this account for all the particle that are produces when they are collided at the LHC.

[mathematic]

A proton by itself consists of 2 up and 1 down quarks. In the collider, the protons are going at high speed (extra energy), so that lots of stuff results from the energy to mass conversion resulting from the collision of protons.

[MigL]

Protons and neutrons have been shown to act like 'bags' containing three particles in scattering experiments.

The masses of the individual quarks account for only a couple of percent of the proton's or neutron's mass, the rest can be thought of as binding energy. Recall how much energy must be supplied to separate quarks ( actually impossible, you just generate more pairs ), all this 'extra' mass-energy is available to create all sorts of particles in collisions.

[Enthalpy]

Consist of three quarks and gluons.

 

The additional particles observed in a collision at the LHC are created from the kinetic energy.

[alpha2cen]

This is a proton-proton collision model.

[ajb]

You are right that the neutron and proton are not simply made of three quarks and some gluons. Really the nucleons are a "boiling pot" of particles coming in and out of existence; this is what quantum field theory tells us.

 

Overall we have what looks like three quarks bound together.

 

Anyway, you should not think of the particles that emerge from collider experiments as already being present in the initial particles. What is present is the energy to create such particles.

[IM Egdall]

You are right that the neutron and proton are not simply made of three quarks and some gluons. Really the nucleons are a "boiling pot" of particles coming in and out of existence; this is what quantum field theory tells us.

 

Overall we have what looks like three quarks bound together.

 

Anyway, you should not think of the particles that emerge from collider experiments as already being present in the initial particles. What is present is the energy to create such particles.

 

Is this "boiling pot" of particles coming in and out of existence in neutrons and protons the so-called virtual particles that come in and out of existence in the vacuum of empty space?

[ajb]

Is this "boiling pot" of particles coming in and out of existence in neutrons and protons the so-called virtual particles that come in and out of existence in the vacuum of empty space?

 

Yes, there us plenty of space in a nucleon for this. A basic question could be how many gluons are "inside" a proton?

[derek w]

Yes, there us plenty of space in a nucleon for this. A basic question could be how many gluons are "inside" a proton?

 

 

Question?Should I be thinking of gluons as particles or as a field of virtual particles.

 

Inputting energy by trying to pull the quarks apart,results in the gluon creating new particles.

Edited November 18, 2012 by derek w

[ajb]

Question?Should I be thinking of gluons as particles or as a field of virtual particles.

 

In this context they are not asymptotically free, so they are virtual.

[alpha2cen]

Anyway, you should not think of the particles that emerge from collider experiments as already being present in the initial particles. What is present is the energy to create such particles.

How do we know anti-proton have this component? Have we done the same experiment about anti-protons? Does it only come from our calculation or imagination?

 

[derek w]

I don't think there are anti-gluons,like photons gluons are their own anti-particle.

[alpha2cen]

Have we done a gravity test about the anti-hydrogen molecules?

This is a modified Figure.

Unclear components are eliminated.

Edited December 7, 2012 by alpha2cen

[ajb]

How do we know anti-proton have this component? Have we done the same experiment about anti-protons? Does it only come from our calculation or imagination?

 

 

 

I think that the structure of antiprotons has also been probed in deep inelactic scattering experiments. You will have to hunt for details yourself.