Yang–Mills and Mass Gap

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Thales, Nov 29, 2017.

  1. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    In particle photon, E-field and M-field are sine waves which are symmetrical relative to its line of propagation.


    If the symmetry is broken, the two particles are asymmetrical.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    You have just proven you have utterly no idea what you are talking about. First of all, that's indeed exactly not the symmetry meant in the term symmetry breaking. More importantly, photons are the result of symmetry breaking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_symmetry_breaking#Higgs_mechanism
    Remember that Higgs mechanism you mentioned? Well, there is it.

    So, according to you photons are both symmetrical (because their EM waves are) and asymmetrical (because they are the result of symmetry breaking). You, sir, are being silly.

    (See above.)
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    Ok. Here \(r=\frac{2c}{\pi f} \)
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    Can you please re-post the entire derivation, but with this fix? Where did the error come from? Which formulae are affected?
     
  8. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    Can you quote the statement, where it is mentioned E-M waves generate from symmetry breaking. I am not able to find that line.
     
  9. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    For c and f, you put the same unit of time and put numerical value of f as 1.
     
  10. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    Funny, I thought you were an expert in these things, throwing terms around like you did?

    But I'll point it out to your explicitly:
    Remember that the electromagnetic force is what gives rise to photons.

    Oh look, it says it explicitly! Photons are the result of symmetry breaking!
     
  11. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    This is nonsensical: frequency can't always have the numerical value of one. Take two objects. One rotates twice as fast as the other. Let's say one makes a full rotation once an hour, the other twice an hour. Yet, both have a \(f\) of \(1\). Question: What is the used unit of time?
     
  12. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    In pair production also you get photon particles along with massive particles.
     
  13. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    True, but that has nothing to do with symmetry breaking, so I don't know why you are bringing that up?
     
  14. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    I am talking about minimum frequency.
     
  15. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    So in Higgs mechanism also you can get photon.
     
  16. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    You were talking about "cycles" (which you haven't defined), and minimum mass generation (which you haven't defined). Then you were talking about pair production, confused that with symmetry breaking, mixed up different types of symmetries, and now you're jumping back to the incoherent idea of a "minimum frequency". Care to actually explain any of it?

    Sure, but that doesn't mean the two processes are the same. You do understand that there can be multiple ways to get to the same point, right?
     
  17. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    Mass generation basically is symmetry breaking.
     
  18. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,583
    Source please.
     

Share This Page