The earliest efforts to
understand the interaction potential between nucleons
followed Yukawa
by working in terms of meson exchange. In other words
the various mesons were considered the bosons of the
strong interaction. The nucleon-nucleon
interaction displays obvious physical analogies to the atom-atom
interaction! Alas, as time went on it was found that the
nucleon-nucleon interaction depends on everything it
could possibly depend upon... in other words, it is as
complex as is physically possible! As a
result, workers in medium-energy nuclear physics tended
to work directly with a parametrized nucleon-nucleon
scattering amplitude, fitted to cross section data as a
function of center-of-momentum energy. |
The big problem with this
approach to the nucleon-nucleon interaction is that the
potential energy turns out to depend on absolutely
everything it could possibly depend upon! Things
quickly get insanely complex. Efforts to find a
simpler version of the interaction, based for example on
QCD, have not been inspirational. |
The tensor term breaks rotational symmetry! |
Left: symmetric: TE, S = 1, T = 0 (d) and SE, S = 0, T = 1. Right: antisymmetric: SO, S = 0, T = 0, and TO, S = 1, T = 1. |
Glueballs, predicted "bound" states consisting only of gluons, have been predicted using approximations to the Standard Model, but have never been observed. If they existed they would be very massive and have an extremely short lifetime.
In QCD, the gauge theory of strong
interactions, the lowest mass quarks are nearly massless and
an approximate chiral symmetry is present. In this case the
left- and right-handed quarks are interchangeable in bound
states of mesons and baryons, so an exact chiral symmetry of
the quarks would imply "parity doubling", and every state
should appear in a pair of equal mass particles, called
"parity partners". A 0+ meson would therefore
have the same mass as a parity partner 0- meson.
This suggested the use of the same mathematical apparatus as
used in the Higgs case, to deal with this chiral symmetry
breaking.
|
Asymptotic freedom in QCD was discovered in 1973 by David Gross and Frank Wilczek, and independently by David Politzer in the same year. Quarks inside the baryons behave as if they were free particles, momentum eigenstates. Qualitatively, the closer you get to a quark, the fewer gluons are near it. Yet the binding energy of a quark in a baryon or meson is infinite. Note that it is essentially impossible to have a "free gluon." Gluons only exist as virtual particles, never real. Attempts to knock out quarks or gluons from a proton using very high energy electrons result in "jets" of hadrons... the quarks and gluons cease to exist as such, as they leave the proton interior.
The big problem with QCD is that exact formal solutions to the equations are impossible. There are of course many suggested approximations, for various applications, but the most generally accurate approach has proven over the years to be lattice gauge theory, a purely numerical method having its origins in condensed matter physics. We will discuss it later.
Largely ignored by textbooks, there have been a
huge number of different so-called “bag models,” of the
nucleon and its excited states, proposed since the 1970s. All
the models confine three free valence quarks inside a
surface or spherical box of some kind, with various
different boundary conditions at, and couplings to, the
surface. People are still working on various complex bag
systems, but it is hard to see how any real basic physical
insight can result, although various basic symmetry principles
can be applied in creating a bag system. All bag models
stem from a very simple model originally suggested by
Bogoliubov in 1967. Research using bag models continues
even today (2022), with the latest wrinkles being chiral bag
models, and bag models for mesons.
The so-called Standard Model consists of Quantum Chromodynamics, the theory of the strong interaction, and the Electroweak Theory, the theory of electromagnetic and weak processes. No flaw in the model has yet shown up; experimental results support the Standard Model to high precision. However, one obvious problem is that it contains 26 parameters that must be put in "by hand," based on experimental results, with no justification from some deeper theory. Parameters of the Standard Model.