How does the fundamental property such as charge arise in the elementary particles like electrons

[saadsalman37]

How does the fundamental property such as charge arise in the elementary particles like electrons? And What is the secret of the existence of three elementary particles [1] electron, proton, neutron) no more and no less?
[1: Moderator action: removed hidden link to foreign web site]

 

[FvM]

Your question refers to state of scientific knowledge in the first half of 20th century. These days, physicists know a large zoo of elementary particles. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particle

 

[BradtheRad]

charge

We still don't understand how static charge arises from an abundance or shortage of electrons.

Nor do we understand how spinning or traveling electrons produce a magnetic field.

Nor how either of the above produce physical forces of attraction and repulsion.

Researchers would love to develop a theory that explains these phenomena as well as gravitational force, electromagnetic waves, photons, and how all of these interact.

 

[c_mitra]

How does the fundamental property such as charge arise in the elementary particles like electrons

It is something like the chicken and the egg.

Electric charge gives rise to an electric field. This is a force field, because the presence of the field is felt by an electric charge.

An unit electric charge is the result of the quantization of the electric field. In essence, the smallest amount of electric charge is the electronic charge- you cannot have charge smaller than that. This includes both positive and negative charges.

Basically the Coulomb force, interaction between electric charges, belongs a general theory of electromagnetic interactions. There are other interactions, viz, strong, weak and gravitational forces (or fields). Physicists believe that ALL these interactions comes from a single source but the development of the unified theory is still a work in progress.

Most successful has been the string theory but if you are interested you need to explore elsewhere.

 

[zenerbjt]

Well all those things electrons, protons neutrons are just postulates that help physicists devise a model and give themselves results of behaviour that correspond to the actual seen behaviour....so its all just a made up model..........at the end of the day, if you design a working radio using the model, then you dont even care that the model was stricltly correct or not.........it helped you design your radio and now you get rich selling it.

Its like low frequency electrical theory such as ohms law, kirchoffs law etc is not strictly correct.....really maxwells equations are more accurate, but who wants to use maxwells when the easy model works to the point its required to work.

 

[c_mitra]

Well all those things electrons, protons neutrons are just postulates that help physicists devise a model...

They are not postulates, they are real objects. They have mass, charge and all properties common to physical objects.

Its like low frequency electrical theory such as ohms law, kirchoffs law etc is not strictly correct

Why do you think so? It is not possible to understand Maxwells equations without having a good grasp of the basics.

 

[Dominik Przyborowski]

There are other interactions, viz, strong, weak and gravitational forces (or fields). Physicists believe that ALL these interactions comes from a single source but the development of the unified theory is still a work in progress.

This is a whish of some of the physicists, however first step of unification (SUSY) which was wished to be seen in LHCb experiment has not been observed. Also, discussion whether proper direction has been chosen is hot.

Most successful has been the string theory but if you are interested you need to explore elsewhere.

String theory is buetyful, the equations looks really nice and would explain someyhing. Unfortunately, paper is patient and can keep any written word for long time. Reality is not. String theory is a very weak theory (from methodology point of view), had a lot of issues (like tachions) - solved, it's true - but no success and no perspectives. But maybe I am too harsh for it and at some day it will change.

Its like low frequency electrical theory such as ohms law, kirchoffs law etc is not strictly correct.....really maxwells equations are more accurate, but who wants to use maxwells when the easy model works to the point its required to work.

I am sorry but it seems you don't know what do you state's.
Kirchoffs law, even Ohms law are strictly bounded to Maxwell laws. Moreover, Kirchoff laws are the principles of optics.

 

[zenerbjt]

I am sorry but it seems you don't know what do you state's.
Kirchoffs law, even Ohms law are strictly bounded to Maxwell laws. Moreover, Kirchoff laws are the principles of optics

When i was at University doing EE....the Microwave and RF lecturer came to speak to us at the end of year 2...he told us "everything we told you so far is a lie".......and that really its maxwells equations that need to be used. The Kirchoffs law etc is all part of the "low frequency approximation".

When you do microwave circuits, you have to look into the E and B fields............but you dont bother with the fields at low frequency....but really you should, because the field analysis gives a more accurate result.................but the "low frequency approximation" is good enough so we forget it and avoid using maxwells equations all the time when frequency is low.

The proof of it is in the charging of a capacitor and the storage of energy in the capacitor......you can proove that the capacitor is actually not charged by charge flowing through the wires.....its actually charged by the fields which exists on the surface of the conductors which lead to the capacitor.