Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New features!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

123 submissions , 104 unreviewed
3,547 questions , 1,198 unanswered
4,552 answers , 19,366 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
411 active unimported users
More ...

Is there any relation between weak and strong fields, similar to electric and magnetic fields?

+ 2 like - 0 dislike
57 views

Is it possible to unify the strong, weak, electric and magnetic field just by Maxwellian type equations? (Maxwell by adding a small change - unified electric and magnetic field, then Einstein's equations - use it to create special and general theory of relativity, now maybe all we need is a little more change to unify all fields,) When $B$ and $E$ are known magnetic and electric fields, then $W$ and $S$ are weak and strong fields, what are their units?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-24 03:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user unifiedator
asked Jun 18, 2013 in Theoretical Physics by unifiedator (10 points) [ no revision ]
I dont understand your question, Perhaps you are referring to the standard model.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-24 03:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user Prathyush
You've got some catching up to do! Look up "Yang-Mills Theory". From Wiki: Yang–Mills theory seeks to describe the behavior of elementary particles using these non-Abelian Lie groups and is at the core of the unification of the Weak and Electromagnetic force (i.e. U(1) × SU(2)) as well as Quantum Chromodynamics, the theory of the Strong force (based on SU(3)). Thus it forms the basis of our current understanding of particle physics, the Standard Model.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-24 03:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user Alfred Centauri
What do you mean by "strong field" and "weak field" ...? This question looks very confused to me.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-24 03:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dilaton
What Alfred Centauri said. The weak and strong theories are generalisations of ordinary electromagnetism. So for the strong force their are chromo-electric and chromo-magnetic fields (actually eight of each) and for the weak force there are weak-electric and weak-magnetic fields (actually three of each). These follow a close analogy to ordinary E&M (although the theories are much more complicated). It is less common to work with the electric & magnetic fields than the vector potentials for technical reasons, but they exist.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-24 03:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user Michael Brown

2 Answers

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

I'm guessing at what you're asking - ignore this answer if I've misunderstood you.

Maxwell's equations describe the classical behaviour of electromagnetism. They can only do this because the EM forces are long range so at macroscopic distances they behave classically. By contrast, the weak and strong forces are short range and cease to act over anything like the classical limit of distance. There is no classical approximation to describe the weak and strong forces, so there is no analogy to Maxwell's equation.

Above the electroweak transition the electroweak force will become long range. Whether there is some classical limit in the spirit of the Maxwell's equations is a good question and I don't know the answer. I would guess that there is no such limit for the strong force even about the EW transition because the force will still be confined.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-24 03:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user John Rennie
answered Jun 19, 2013 by John Rennie (470 points) [ no revision ]
At high enough temperature and energy density, the strong force stops confining. This plays a role in the standard stories of the early universe.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-24 03:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user user1504
Ah yes, as in the quark gluon plasma. I bet there's still no (useful) classic long distance description though.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-24 03:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user John Rennie
+ 0 like - 0 dislike

Depends on what you mean by "unify" If you just mean "describe", then it's simple. We have the Standard Model with it's exceedingly simple Lagrangian Density formed by adding Yang - Mills & Dirac fields to Klein - Gordon fields.

$${\mathcal L} = - {1 \over 4}{F^{\mu\nu }}{F_{\mu \nu }} + i\overline \psi \not\nabla \psi + \overline \psi \phi \psi + \mbox{h.c.} + {\left| {\nabla \phi } \right|^2} - V(\phi ) $$

Here, it is easy to identify the Yang Mills field for gluons et al, the Dirac Fields for the quwarks et al, the Klein - Gordon for the Higgs, a scalar field.

If you mean "unify" in the sense of grand unification and such, then it's a bit more complicated.

Grand Unification

Refers to the unification (meaning: having a simple group as the gauge group, as opposed to the Standard Model whose gauge group is $SU(3)\times SU(2)\times U(1)$; yet describe the Standard Model, since it's experimentally verified to a pretty high degree).

Examples include

Theories of Everything

Better than GUTs; unify (quantised) gravity too. Examples include .

answered Sep 17, 2013 by dimension10 (1,950 points) [ revision history ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysic$\varnothing$Overflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...