Some phenomena are successfully explained by QCD. Let us point out the most famous of them, which are considered as proof to the veracity of the QCD Theory.
Confinement and Asymptotic freedom
When protons are bombarded with high energy electron beams, two seemingly contradicting phenomena occur. On one hand, the quarks inside the proton seem free, i.e., their binding energy is very small compared to the energy of a highly energetic incident electron. One could therefore reasonably assume that if the incident electron’s energy is high enough, it could tear the quark off the proton. But experiments show that it is not possible to tear a single quark off the proton, even with highly energetic beams.
Both these phenomena, the asymptotic freedom and Confinement, are accounted for by QCD: the attraction force between quarks increases as they move away from one another. This idea explains both phenomena, but attributed to the Strong Interaction a characteristic which is opposite to what is known about basic natural laws of other forces. The question here is whether QCD’s explanation is the only possible one.
The phenomenon of the quark’s relative freedom with regard to the incident particle is known from the atomic model under the name of “The Compton Scattering”, which occurs when a high energy photon hits an atomic electron. The question is why is it impossible to tear the quark off the proton, whereas in the atom, a highly energetic photon is capable of tearing an electron off (i.e. to ionize the atom).
The explanation suggested by Comay is based on well-known phenomena. It is established that when energetic electron beams hit the proton, nearly all the collisions are inelastic, that is, creating new particles.
It is also well established that when a particle meets its antiparticle, they annihilate one another and release energy in an amount equal to the sum of their masses. More precisely, this energy released is equal to the sum of the particle masses at the time of annihilation, which can be larger than their rest mass if they have kinetic energy, or smaller than their rest mass if they have binding energy.
The reverse process takes place in a similar way. In certain circumstances, a highly energetic particle can lead to the creation of a pair of particle- antiparticle, reducing the original particle’s energy by the amount of the energy of the newly created system. In the case of the proton, a meson is usually produces, i.e., a bound pair of quark-antiquark.
Pair creation and annihilation is a well known phenomenon in Physics. In the case of the electron – positron pair, the binding energy is very low compared to their mass, and the pair creation results in the outcome of free electron and positron. For quarks, binding energy is very high and consumes most of its self-mass, leading to the production of bound pairs, i.e. mesons.
What is going on inside a proton bombarded by electrons? When the quark gets hit and acquires a lot of energy, the interaction usually yields mesons composed of a quark-antiquark pair, reducing the energy of the target quark. If a single quark could be torn off the proton, its energy would most likely be in the order of thousands of MeV. But for the production of a meson, 140 MeV are enough. Therefore, the target quark ends up losing its energy into pair creation, rather than escape the proton. When a quark-antiquark pair is created, the energetic quark can associate to the antiquark of the pair. Furthermore, we know that the proton contains quark-antiquark pairs, which means that a quark hit by an electron can annex an antiquark, become a meson and get freely out of the proton.
This means that it is much easier for a single quark to create particle pairs by joining an antiquark in its vicinity within the proton, than to overcome the huge potential barrier created by the core’s attractive monopole field and escape the proton.
These phenomena can therefore be understood without QCD’s explanation of the asymptotic freedom and confinement, not to mention QCD’s rather artificial explanation (called “cutoff”) for the fact that “confinement” has to cease at a certain distance from the proton center.
The advantage of Comay’s explanation – why mesons are not confined in protons
QCD does not really provide a clear explanation why mesons created in energetic collisions can overcome “confinement” and exit the proton. The forces described by QCD should confine the newly created mesons to remain inside the proton. As far as we know, this question has never been discussed.
Comay’s explanation of this phenomenon is simple: mesons have a quark and an antiquark, each with an opposite magnetic charge, and therefore their total charge is zero. Since the Strong Interaction is a magnetic monopole force, it doesn’t attract a neutral pair that has a null magnetic charge and the meson is free to get out of the proton.
The three jets experiment
An interesting experiment of colliding high energy electron-positron beams was conducted at the PETRA labs. The collisions occasionally lead to the annihilation of these particles, producing a large amount of energy, which often prompts the creation of a new particle-antiparticle pair moving in opposite directions. This new pair can sometimes be a muon- antimuon pair, but sometimes a pair of quark- antiquark is created. Both the quark and the antiquark create particle jets, because of the action of the Strong Interaction on the quarks. QCD scientists predicted that occasionally 3 jets could be created, the third jet originating from a gluon. And indeed, these collisions did occasionally result in 3 particle jets .
Before we go on and see how this phenomenon is consistent with Comay’s model, we would like to draw the reader’s attention to the following point: in the literature, the fact that three-jet collisions are experimentally observed is considered as a major proof for the existence of gluons . Since gluons do not exist as free particles, the only experimental evidence for their existence is necessarily indirect. Do the three jets created in an electron – positron collision constitute a sufficient and satisfactory proof for the existence of gluons, along with the entire QCD theory and its fantastic hypothesis? Do these experimental findings provide a good enough argument for the acceptance of QCD’s long series of contradictions, some of which are discussed in the present website?
There is a well-known process in Electromagnetism called “The Bremsstrahlung Radiation”, referring to the emission of photons during the interaction between electric charges. The Bremsstrahlung related to electric charges is relatively weak because it is proportional to the sixth power of the charge. (According to the unit system commonly used for calculations, the square of the electric charge is equal to 1/137). In general, QCD can be described as a hybrid of Electromagnetism and a highly complicated mathematical structure. QCD’s gluon, among others, is conceived as analog to the photon in Electromagnetism. QCD scientists have therefore transposed the Bremsstrahlung idea onto the QCD framework and used it to predict gluons emission.
On the other hand, the Bremsstrahlung effect does apply to Comay’s model. This process leads to the emission of an energetic photon, because the quarks are magnetic monopoles, the square of their magnetic charge is some 100 times stronger than the electric charge. Therefore, a magnetic monopole related Bremsstrahlung may take place, in a total analogy to the electric charge process in which a photon is emitted. Due to the larger elementary monopole unit, the photons are emitted with a much higher probability.
And this is the advantage of Comay’s explanation: it’s been known for over 50 years that energetic photons are involved in Strong Interactions – as we well remember from that inadequate explanation of the VMD theory. It is precisely these energetic photons that generate the third particle jet in the PETRA experiment.
Obviously, this result flows naturally from what is already known: the original Bremsstrahlung referred to photons, and we’re dealing with photons here too; the original phenomenon is based on electric charge equations, and here we’re talking about quarks which are magnetic monopoles, fulfilling equations which are analogous to Electromagnetism. In addition, energetic photons have been known since long to be involved in Strong Interactions, and therefore explaining this phenomenon does not require any new assumptions.
Some several independent Physics works associated to QCD have won Comay’s esteem, like for example Richard Feynmann’s and James Bjorken’s works, which lead to the 1969 SLAC experiments and provided additional proof for the existence of quarks that Comay considers as a good work with a major historical significance. As a matter of fact, the hadronic structure Comay proposes is founded on such quarks. Comay also considered the Drell-Yan process, sometimes attributed to QCD, as a good piece of work.
In order to invite physicists to draw their conclusions about the parts of QCD challenged by Comay’s model, here is a condensate of the basic principles underlying both models:
QCD is a physical theory derived from the QCD Lagrangian density. It is a (very complicated) extension of the Electromagnetic Theory to the Yang-Mills SU(3) group. Comay’s theory, on the other hand, suggests a dual structure of the Electromagnetic Theory, with magnetic monopoles (of a relatively large elementary unit charge) as charges. The system obeys to the Regular Charge- Monopole Theory and is derived from a Regular Lagrangian density[3,4].