Re: Question About Charged Particles.

[Jack Uretsky <jlu@HEP.ANL.GOV>]

On Sun, 8 Apr 2001, John S. Denker wrote:

> At 08:43 AM 4/8/01 -0500, Jack Uretsky wrote:
> >  I never said that the question is trivial - I said that
> > it strikes me as a non-question because the answer depends upon the model
> > that one chooses.
>
> OK, the answer to this question is model-dependent.
>
> Now, is that the only objection to the question?
>   -- If that is not the only objection, would somebody please clarify what
> the other objections might be?
>   -- If that is the only objection, then the converse of Jack's statement
> must apply:  If we knew what model to choose, then the alleged
> "non-question" would suddenly become a valid question.

OK, let's look again at the original posting so that we don't get lost in
generalities:

> Dear List Members:
>         A question came up on another list concerning the possibility of
> a
> charged particle having a zero rest mass. It would seem that this would
> be
> impossible for several reasons, the most obvious being, that there is an
> electromagnetic mass associated with a charged particle.  Also Gluons
> are
> believed to have zero rest mass even though they carry a color charge,
plus
> neutrinos carry a weak charge and were once thought to be massless.
Therefore
> is the answer to this question conditioned on the range of the force
> involved? Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Bob Zannelli
>
> PS Most theories beyond the standard model treats all particles as if
> they
> had zero rest mass.  In fact it is the Higgs field breaking Chiral
> Symmetry
> that gives particles of the standard model their rest mass. Can this be
> reconciled with the above?

        1. Now tell me first, what is meant by "possibility"?  Are we
asking whether I can formulate a theory with zero rest-mass charged particles?
Or is the question whether it would be nonsensical to look for such things
in nature?
        2. The question seems to be based upon an erroneous assumption,
that there is an "electromagnetic mass...".  As I tried to get Zanelli to
discover, that assumption doesn't work in perturbative QED.
        3. The question seems to me to imply a paradox.  The supposed
paradox disappears when one drops the erroneous assumption.
        4. The last question "can this be reconciled" seems to be whether
the Higgs mechanism violates some fundamental principle.  If the answer
were known to be "yes", then that fact would be widely known.
                                Regards,
                                        Jack



--
Franz Kafka's novels and novella's are so Kafkaesque that one has to
wonder at the enormity of coincidence required to have produced a writer
named Kafka to write them.
                        Greg Nagan from "The Metamorphosis" in
                     <The 5-MINUTE ILIAD and Other Classics>