Proton mass increase

The place to discuss particle physics
Post Reply
ferar
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 2:44 am

Proton mass increase

Post by ferar » Sat Jun 04, 2011 3:29 am

AFAIK when particles accelerate, their mass increase.
Do you know how many times proton mass is increased at the LHC at 3.5 TeV?
Do only the mass increase or also the size of the proton increase as well?
If yes, does it means that at higher energies (7 TeV) collision ratio should increase by the size increase?

Thanks very much.

zaim
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 7:11 pm

Re: Proton mass increase

Post by zaim » Sat Jun 04, 2011 5:45 am


ferar
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 2:44 am

Re: Proton mass increase

Post by ferar » Sat Jun 04, 2011 3:08 pm

Thanks very much Zaim. But regarding the last questions, do the size (diameter) increase with the relativistic mass increase?
Thanks!

User avatar
Bornerdogge
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:03 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Proton mass increase

Post by Bornerdogge » Sun Jun 05, 2011 12:17 pm

It it not quite correct to say the proton mass has increased... Special relativity modifies Newton's law F=ma, and in this particular case it is as if the proton mass had increased by the relativistic factor gamma. But the proton itself has not become "bigger"...

Kasuha
Posts: 570
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Proton mass increase

Post by Kasuha » Sun Jun 05, 2011 3:56 pm

The way I am imagining it (I may be wrong) the mass of the proton does not really increase, what continues increasing proportionally to added energy is the proton "inertia". It's just the classic view on inertia being proportional to speed rather than energy that we need to say it's mass that increases.
The truth however is, the proton scattering radius does change with energy, too. That's what the TOTEM experiment was measuring but the change sure isn't proportional to the increased mass.

User avatar
photino
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:28 am

Re: Proton mass increase

Post by photino » Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:51 am

Mass in relativistic physics can mean one of two things: the rest mass (the mass of the particle when it is not moving) and the relativistic mass (inertial mass). The relativistic mass grows as the speed of the particle increases, and is the mass you would measure for the particle as it zips past. It's only the rest mass that is an intrinsic property of the particle, as the relativistic mass depends on the speed of the observer relative to the particle. When the particle is at rest, the two kinds of mass coincide - and this remains a pretty good approximation unless you are moving at some significant fraction of the speed of light.

While protons don't get "bigger" as they get heavier, they do deform due to Lorentz contraction. At the LHC, they will basically look like pancakes from the point of view of the experiments. (Of course "look like" has to be taken with a large pinch of salt as we are talking about subatomic particles, but the effect is noticeable...) This is not a consequence of the increased relativistic mass, rather both the Lorentz contraction and the relativistic mass are a consequence of the fact that you are looking at an object moving very close to the speed of light.

adam_jeff
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 3:07 pm

Re: Proton mass increase

Post by adam_jeff » Mon Jun 06, 2011 3:27 pm

Photino is correct. I'll just add that the Lorentz contraction affects only the length in the direction of movement. So the photons get shorter (in the direction of travel) but keep the same diamater (in the perpendicular directions). Thus they do indeed end up looking like pancakes. But since their cross-sectional area hasn't changed, the collision rate remains the same.

ferar
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 2:44 am

Re: Proton mass increase

Post by ferar » Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:37 am

Thanks very much for the detailed answer. Really appreciate it, it is a very interesting (and sometimes confusing) topic for me (no physics beyond high school). It is much clear now.

Post Reply