Category: matter

At Last, Physicists Understand Where Matter&rs…

At Last, Physicists Understand Where Matter’s Mass Comes From

“The way quarks bind into protons is fundamentally different from all the other forces and interactions we know of. Instead of the force getting stronger when objects get closer — like the gravitational, electric or magnetic forces — the attractive force goes down to zero when quarks get arbitrarily close. And instead of the force getting weaker when objects get farther away, the force pulling quarks back together gets stronger the farther away they get.

This property of the strong nuclear force is known as asymptotic freedom, and the particles that mediate this force are known as gluons. Somehow, the energy binding the proton together, the other 99.8% of the proton’s mass, comes from these gluons.”

Matter seems pretty straightforward to understand. Take whatever system you want to understand, break it up into its constituents, and see how they bind together. You’d assume, for good reason, that the whole would equal the sum of its parts. Split apart a cell into its molecules, and the molecules add up to the same mass as the cell. Split up molecules into atoms, or atoms into nuclei and electrons, and the masses remain equal. But go inside an atomic nucleus, to the quarks and gluons, and suddenly you find that over 99% of the mass is missing. The discovery of QCD, our theory of the strong interactions, provided a solution to the puzzle, but for decades, calculating the masses in a predictive way was impossible. Thanks to supercomputer advances, though, and the technique of Lattice QCD, we’re finally beginning to truly understand where the mass of matter comes from.

Come get the scoop, and then tune in to a live-blog of a public lecture at 7 PM ET / 4 PM PT today to get the even deeper story!

What Was It Like When The Universe First Creat…

What Was It Like When The Universe First Created More Matter Than Antimatter?

“This is only one of three known, viable scenarios that could lead to the matter-rich Universe we inhabit today, with the other two involving new neutrino physics or new physics at the electroweak scale, respectively. Yet in all cases, it’s the out-of-equilibrium nature of the early Universe, which creates everything allowable at high energies and then cools to an unstable state, which enables the creation of more matter than antimatter. We can start with a completely symmetric Universe in an extremely hot state, and just by cooling and expanding, wind up with one that becomes matter-dominated. The Universe didn’t need to be born with an excess of matter over antimatter; the Big Bang can spontaneously make one from nothing. The only open question, exactly, is how.”

One of the biggest unsolved questions in physics today is how the Universe came to be filled with matter and not antimatter. After all, the laws of physics are completely matter-antimatter symmetric, and yet when we look at what we have today, every planet, star, and galaxy is made of matter and not antimatter. How did it come to be this way? The young, hot, but rapidly expanding-and-cooling Universe gives us all the ingredients we need for this to occur. We are certain of the exact mechanism, but theoretically, there are some enticing possibilities. Here’s a walk through one of those scenarios in great detail, but expressed so simply that even someone with no physics knowledge can follow it.

Here’s what the Universe was like when it was matter-antimatter symmetric, along with how it could have become matter-rich without breaking the laws of physics.

Ask Ethan: What’s So ‘Anti’ …

Ask Ethan: What’s So ‘Anti’ About Antimatter?

“On a fundamental level, what is the difference between matter and its counterpart antimatter? Is there some sort of intrinsic property that causes a particle to be matter or antimatter? Is there some intrinsic property (like spin) that distinguishes quarks and antiquarks? What what puts the ‘anti’ in anti matter?”

Every particle that exists has an antiparticle counterpart, with some particles behaving as their own antiparticles. Every time a particle collides with its antiparticle, it can annihilate away into pure energy; every time two particles collide with enough free energy, they can create particle/antiparticle pairs. But the key is that there are a whole slew of quantum numbers that must be conserved, and conserving energy is just the start of the story. Not every particle is matter; not every antiparticle is antimatter. Only fermions can have that designation. In fact, every fermion is a matter particle, and every anti-fermion is an antimatter particle, while the bosons, regardless of their other properties, are neither matter nor antimatter. Why is that? Because there are only two quantum numbers that are relevant to the question of whether you’re matter or not: baryon number and lepton number.

How do these come together to put the “matter” in normal matter, and the “anti” in antimatter? Find out on this edition of Ask Ethan!

How Did The Matter In Our Universe Arise From …

How Did The Matter In Our Universe Arise From Nothing?

“[Y]ou can start with a completely symmetric Universe, one that obeys all the known laws of physics and that spontaneously creates matter-and-antimatter only in equal-and-opposite pairs, and wind up with an excess of matter over antimatter in the end. We have multiple possible pathways to success, but it’s very likely that nature only needed one of them to give us our Universe.

The fact that we exist and are made of matter is indisputable; the question of why our Universe contains something (matter) instead of nothing (from an equal mix of matter and antimatter) is one that must have an answer. This century, advances in precision electroweak testing, collider technology, and experiments probing particle physics beyond the Standard Model may reveal exactly how it happened. And when it does, one of the greatest mysteries in all of existence will finally have a solution.”

On one hand, we have all the stars, galaxies, gas, plasma, and the great cosmic web, all made out of matter and not antimatter. On the other hand, we have the laws of physics, which are almost completely symmetric between matter and antimatter, so much so that we’ve never created or observed more matter than antimatter in any reaction throughout human history. Yet somehow, such a reaction must have occurred, since the Universe exists as we see it: made of matter. So how did it get to be this way? How did a completely symmetric, early Universe give rise to a matter-dominated existence, complete with two trillion galaxies, each containing billions of stars? Believe it or not, we’re closer than ever before to answering this question, and the 21st century is poised to be the one where the answer to this existential question goes from speculative to solid.

Come learn the science behind why we live in a matter-rich Universe instead of a matter/antimatter symmetric one!

The Youngest, Most Massive Black Hole Is A Puz…

The Youngest, Most Massive Black Hole Is A Puzzle For Astronomy

“Recently, a new black hole, J1342+0928, was discovered to originate from 13.1 billion years ago: when the Universe was 690 million years old, just 5% of its current age.

It has a mass of 800 million Suns, an exceedingly high figure for such early times.

Even if this black hole formed from the very first stars, it would have to accrete matter and grow at the maximum rate possible — the Eddington limit — to reach this size so rapidly.

Fortunately, there are other ways to grow a supermassive black hole.”

We did it! We found our most massive, most distant quasar of all-time, telling us we’ve got a supermassive black hole that’s 800 million times as massive as our Sun when the Universe was just 5% of its current age. Even factoring in all we know about the formation and growth of black holes, from the early Universe and throughout all of time, we expect that there will only be around 20 black holes this large existing this early. Are there going to be more? Will we have to revise our current theories of cosmology and structure formation? Or is this simply an indication that we’re beginning to discover the brightest, most massive objects that are out there at any distance at all? As always, more and better data will decide, but here’s what we know so far. 

Come get the full story, and some spectacular visuals (and video!) on today’s Mostly Mute Monday.

How Neutrinos Could Solve The Three Greatest O…

How Neutrinos Could Solve The Three Greatest Open Questions In Physics

“Perhaps ironically, the greatest advance in particle physics — a great leap forward beyond the Standard Model — might not come from our greatest experiments and detectors at high-energies, but from a humble, patient look for an ultra-rare decay. We’ve constrained neutrinoless double beta decay to have a lifetime of more than 2 × 1025 years, but the next decade or two of experiments should measure this decay if it exists. So far, neutrinos are the only hint of particle physics beyond the Standard Model. If neutrinoless double beta decay turns out to be real, it might be the future of fundamental physics. It could solve the biggest cosmic questions plaguing humanity today. Our only choice is to look. If nature is kind to us, the future won’t be supersymmetry, extra dimensions, or string theory. We just might have a neutrino revolution on our hands.”

When we look at the Standard Model of particle physics, there’s a big problem that leaps out at us right away: it works well. It works so practically perfectly well that it leaves us very little room for solving some of the problems we have in the Universe: problems like dark matter, dark energy, and the origin of matter. The only hint we have that the Standard Model isn’t fully correct comes from our observations of neutrinos: they have very tiny masses, and they oscillate from one flavor into another. Furthermore, they only come in one chirality: neutrinos are always left-handed and anti-neutrinos are always right-handed. This could be explained if neutrinos weren’t normal (Dirac) fermions like the other Standard Model particles, but were their own antiparticles, and behaved as Majorana fermions. If this scenario is true, it could not only solve the dark matter, dark energy, and matter/antimatter asymmetry problems all at once, but there’s an experimental signature we can look for.

That experiment is running right now! While the LHC is all the rage as far as looking for new physics goes, neutrinoless double beta decay just might bring about the future of fundamental physics.

A single sheet of GrapheneThis is the image of a single sheet of…

A single sheet of Graphene

This is the image of a single sheet of Graphene taken with a transmission electron microscope. Glorified in the image are the individual carbon atoms (yellow) on the honeycomb lattice.

For reference: The thickness of single layer graphene is ~0.345 nm !

Credit: Image courtesy of DOE/Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Missing Matter Found, But Doesn’t Dent Dark Matter “But…

Missing Matter Found, But Doesn’t Dent Dark Matter

“But this doesn’t eliminate the need for dark matter; it doesn’t touch that undiscovered 27% of matter in the Universe, not in the slightest. It’s another piece of that 5% that we know is out there, that we’re struggling to put together. It’s just protons, neutrons, and electrons, existing in about six times the abundance within these filaments as compared to the cosmic average. The fact that this filamentary structure contains normal matter at all is further evidence for dark matter, since without it there’d be no gravitationally overdense regions to hold the extra normal matter in place. In this case, the WHIM traces the dark matter, further confirming what we know must be out there.”

It’s no secret that if we look at the matter we see in the Universe, the story doesn’t add up. On all scales, from individual galaxies to pairs, groups and clusters of galaxies, all the way up to the large-scale structure of the Universe, the matter we see is insufficient to explain the structures we get. There has to be more matter, both normal (atom-based) matter and dark (non-interacting) matter, to make our theory and predictions match. In a wonderful new pair of papers, two independent teams have detected the warm-hot intergalactic medium along the large-scale structure filaments in the Universe. With six times the normal matter density, this accounts for a significant fraction of the missing normal matter in the Universe! It’s estimated that 50-90% of the baryons in the Universe are part of the WHIM, and this could be the first step towards detecting them. But it doesn’t touch or change the dark matter at all; we still need it and still don’t have it.

What’s the full story on the discovery of the missing matter? Find out over at Starts With A Bang on Forbes!

Ask Ethan: If Matter Is Made Of Point Particles, Why Does…

Ask Ethan: If Matter Is Made Of Point Particles, Why Does Everything Have A Size?

“Many sources state that quarks are point particles… so one would think that objects composed of them — in this instance, neutrons — would also be points. Is my logic flawed? Or would they be bound to each other in such a way that they would cause the resulting neutron to have angular size?”

When we consider things like molecules, atoms, or even protons and neutrons, they all have finite, measurable sizes. Yet the fundamental particles that they’re made out of, like quarks, electrons, and gluons, are all inherently points, with no physical size to them at all. Why, then, does every composite particle not only have a size, but some of them, like atoms, grow to be relatively huge almost immediately, even with only a few fundamental particles involved? It’s due to three factors that all work together: forces, the quantum properties of the particles themselves, and energy. Since the strong and electromagnetic forces work against each other, quarks and gluons can form finite-sized protons; protons and neutrons assemble into nuclei larger than the protons and neutrons combined would make; electrons, with their low mass and high zero-point energy, orbit around nuclei only at great (relative) distances.

Matter doesn’t need to be made of finite-sized particles to wind up creating the macroscopic Universe we know and love. Find out how on this week’s Ask Ethan!

Ask Ethan: Do Black Holes Grow Faster Than They…

Ask Ethan: Do Black Holes Grow Faster Than They Evaporate?

“Wondering why black holes wouldn’t be growing faster than they can evaporate due to [Hawking] radiation. If particle pairs are erupting everywhere in space, including inside [black hole] event horizons, and not all of them are annihilating one another shortly thereafter, why doesn’t a [black hole] slowly swell due to surviving particles that don’t get annihilated?”

So, you’ve got a black hole in the Universe, and you want to know what happens next. The space around it is curved due to the presence of the central mass, with greater curvature occurring closer to the center. There’s an event horizon, a location from which light cannot escape. And there’s the quantum nature of the Universe, which means that the zero-point-energy of empty space has a positive value: it’s greater than zero. Put them together, and you get some interesting consequences. One of these is Hawking radiation, where radiation is created and moves away from the black hole’s center. It occurs at a specific rate that’s dependent on the black hole’s mass. But another is black hole growth from the mass and energy that falls through the event horizon, causing that black hole to grow. At the present time, realistic black holes are all growing faster than they’re decaying, but that won’t be the case for always.

Eventually, all black holes will decay away. Come find out the story on when evaporation will win out on this week’s Ask Ethan!