Strangelet

A strangelet is a hypothetical particle consisting of a bound state of roughly equal numbers of up, down, and strange quarks. Its size would be a minimum of a few femtometers across (with the mass of a light nucleus). Once the size becomes macroscopic (on the order of metres across), such an object is usually called a quark star or "strange star" rather than a strangelet. An equivalent description is that a strangelet is a small fragment of strange matter. The term "strangelet" originates with Edward Farhi and R. L. Jaffe.[1] Strangelets have been suggested as a dark matter candidate.[2]

Theoretical possibility

Strange matter hypothesis

The known particles with strange quarks are unstable because the strange quark is heavier than the up and down quarks, so strange particles, such as the Lambda particle, which contains an up, down, and strange quark, always lose their strangeness, by decaying via the weak interaction to lighter particles containing only up and down quarks. But states with a larger number of quarks might not suffer from this instability. This is the "strange matter hypothesis" of Bodmer [3] and Witten.[2] According to this hypothesis, when a large enough number of quarks are collected together, the lowest energy state is one which has roughly equal numbers of up, down, and strange quarks, namely a strangelet. This stability would occur because of the Pauli exclusion principle; having three types of quarks, rather than two as in normal nuclear matter, allows more quarks to be placed in lower energy levels.

Relationship with nuclei

A nucleus is a collection of a large number of up and down quarks, confined into triplets (neutrons and protons). According to the strange matter hypothesis, strangelets are more stable than nuclei, so nuclei are expected to decay into strangelets. But this process may be extremely slow because there is a large energy barrier to overcome: as the weak interaction starts making a nucleus into a strangelet, the first few strange quarks form strange baryons, such as the Lambda, which are heavy. Only if many conversions occur almost simultaneously will the number of strange quarks reach the critical proportion required to achieve a lower energy state. This is very unlikely to happen, so even if the strange matter hypothesis were correct, nuclei would never be seen to decay to strangelets because their lifetime would be longer than the age of the universe.

Size

The stability of strangelets depends on their size. This is because of (a) surface tension at the interface between quark matter and vacuum (which affects small strangelets more than big ones), and (b) screening of charges, which allows small strangelets to be charged, with a neutralizing cloud of electrons/positrons around them, but requires large strangelets, like any large piece of matter, to be electrically neutral in their interior. The charge screening distance tends to be of the order of a few femtometers, so only the outer few femtometers of a strangelet can carry charge.[4]

The surface tension of strange matter is unknown. If it is smaller than a critical value (a few MeV per square femtometer[5]) then large strangelets are unstable and will tend to fission into smaller strangelets (strange stars would still be stabilized by gravity). If it is larger than the critical value, then strangelets become more stable as they get bigger.

Natural or artificial occurrence

Although nuclei do not decay to strangelets, there are other ways to create strangelets, so if the strange matter hypothesis is correct there should be strangelets in the universe. There are at least three ways they might be created in nature:

These scenarios offer possibilities for observing strangelets. If there are strangelets flying around the universe, then occasionally a strangelet should hit Earth, where it would appear as an exotic type of cosmic ray. If strangelets can be produced in high energy collisions, then we might make them at heavy-ion colliders.

Accelerator production

At heavy ion accelerators like the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC), nuclei are collided at relativistic speeds, creating strange and antistrange quarks which could conceivably lead to strangelet production. The experimental signature of a strangelet would be its very high ratio of mass to charge, which would cause its trajectory in a magnetic field to be very nearly, but not quite, straight. The STAR collaboration has searched for strangelets produced at the RHIC,[7] but none were found. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is even less likely to produce strangelets,[8] but searches are planned[9] for the LHC ALICE detector.

Space-based detection

The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS), an instrument which is mounted on the International Space Station, could detect strangelets.[10]

Possible seismic detection

In May 2002, a group of researchers at Southern Methodist University reported the possibility that strangelets may have been responsible for seismic events recorded on October 22 and November 24 in 1993.[11] The authors later retracted their claim, after finding that the clock of one of the seismic stations had a large error during the relevant period.[12]

It has been suggested that the International Monitoring System being set up to verify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) after entry into force may be useful as a sort of "strangelet observatory" using the entire Earth as its detector. The IMS will be designed to detect anomalous seismic disturbances down to 1 kiloton of TNT (4.2 TJ) energy release or less, and could be able to track strangelets passing through Earth in real time if properly exploited.

Impacts on Solar System bodies

It has been suggested that strangelets of subplanetary i.e. heavy metorite mass, would puncture planets and other solar system objects, leading to impact (exit) craters which show characteristic features.[13]

Dangers

If the strange matter hypothesis is correct and its surface tension is larger than the aforementioned critical value, then a larger strangelet would be more stable than a smaller one. One speculation that has resulted from the idea is that a strangelet coming into contact with a lump of ordinary matter could convert the ordinary matter to strange matter.[14][15] This "ice-nine"-like disaster scenario is as follows: one strangelet hits a nucleus, catalyzing its immediate conversion to strange matter. This liberates energy, producing a larger, more stable strangelet, which in turn hits another nucleus, catalyzing its conversion to strange matter. In the end, all the nuclei of all the atoms of Earth are converted, and Earth is reduced to a hot, large lump of strange matter.

This is not a concern for strangelets in cosmic rays because they are produced far from Earth and have had time to decay to their ground state, which is predicted by most models to be positively charged, so they are electrostatically repelled by nuclei, and would rarely merge with them.[16][17] But high-energy collisions could produce negatively charged strangelet states which live long enough to interact with the nuclei of ordinary matter.[18]

The danger of catalyzed conversion by strangelets produced in heavy-ion colliders has received some media attention,[19][20] and concerns of this type were raised[14][21] at the commencement of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) experiment at Brookhaven, which could potentially have created strangelets. A detailed analysis[15] concluded that the RHIC collisions were comparable to ones which naturally occur as cosmic rays traverse the solar system, so we would already have seen such a disaster if it were possible. RHIC has been operating since 2000 without incident. Similar concerns have been raised about the operation of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN[22] but such fears are dismissed as far-fetched by scientists.[22][23][24]

In the case of a neutron star, the conversion scenario seems much more plausible. A neutron star is in a sense a giant nucleus (20 km across), held together by gravity, but it is electrically neutral and so does not electrostatically repel strangelets. If a strangelet hit a neutron star, it could convert a small region of it, and that region would grow to consume the entire star, creating a quark star.[25]

Debate about the strange matter hypothesis

The strange matter hypothesis remains unproven. No direct search for strangelets in cosmic rays or particle accelerators has seen a strangelet (see references in earlier sections). If any of the objects we call neutron stars could be shown to have a surface made of strange matter, this would indicate that strange matter is stable at zero pressure, which would vindicate the strange matter hypothesis. But there is no strong evidence for strange matter surfaces on neutron stars (see below).

Another argument against the hypothesis is that if it were true, all neutron stars should be made of strange matter, and otherwise none should be.[26] Even if there were only a few strange stars initially, violent events such as collisions would soon create many strangelets flying around the universe. Because one strangelet will convert a neutron star to strange matter, by now all neutron stars would have been converted. This argument is still debated,[27][28][29][30] but if it is correct then showing that one neutron star has a conventional nuclear matter crust would disprove the strange matter hypothesis.

Because of its importance for the strange matter hypothesis, there is an ongoing effort to determine whether the surfaces of neutron stars are made of strange matter or nuclear matter. The evidence currently favors nuclear matter. This comes from the phenomenology of X-ray bursts, which is well-explained in terms of a nuclear matter crust,[31] and from measurement of seismic vibrations in magnetars.[32]

In fiction

See also

References

  1. ↑ E. Farhi and R. Jaffe, "Strange Matter", Phys. Rev. D30, 2379 (1984)
  2. 1 2 E. Witten, "Cosmic Separation Of Phases" Phys. Rev. D30, 272 (1984)
  3. ↑ A. Bodmer "Collapsed Nuclei" Phys. Rev. D4, 1601 (1971)
  4. ↑ H. Heiselberg, "Screening in quark droplets", Phys. Rev. D48, 1418 (1993)
  5. ↑ M. Alford, K. Rajagopal, S. Reddy, A. Steiner, "The Stability of Strange Star Crusts and Strangelets", Phys. Rev. D73 114016 (2006) arXiv:hep-ph/0604134
  6. ↑ Shibaji Banerjee, Sanjay K. Ghosh, Sibaji Raha, and Debapriyo Syam, "Can Cosmic Strangelets Reach the Earth?", Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1384 – Published 14 August 2000, http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0006286
  7. ↑ STAR Collaboration, "Strangelet search at RHIC", arXiv:nucl-ex/0511047
  8. ↑ Ellis J, Giudice G, Mangano ML, Tkachev I, Wiedemann U (LHC Safety Assessment Group) (5 September 2008). "Review of the Safety of LHC Collisions" (PDF, 586 KiB). ''Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics. 35, 115004 (18pp). doi:10.1088/0954-3899/35/11/115004. arXiv:0806.3414. CERN record.
  9. ↑ A. Angelis et al., "Model of Centauro and strangelet production in heavy ion collisions", Phys. Atom. Nucl. 67:396-405 (2004) arXiv:nucl-th/0301003
  10. ↑ J. Sandweiss, "Overview of strangelet searches and Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer: When will we stop searching?" J. Phys. G30:S51-S59 (2004)
  11. ↑ D. Anderson et al., "Two seismic events with the properties for the passage of strange quark matter through the earth" arXiv:astro-ph/0205089
  12. ↑ E.T. Herrin et al., "Seismic Search for Strange Quark Nuggets"
  13. ↑ Lance Labun, Jeremey Birrell, Johann Rafelski, "Solar System Signatures of Impacts by Compact Ultra Dense Objects",arXiv:1104.4572
  14. 1 2 A. Dar, A. De Rujula, U. Heinz, "Will relativistic heavy ion colliders destroy our planet?", Phys. Lett. B470:142-148 (1999) arXiv:hep-ph/9910471
  15. 1 2 W. Busza, R. Jaffe, J. Sandweiss, F. Wilczek, "Review of speculative 'disaster scenarios' at RHIC", Rev. Mod. Phys.72:1125-1140 (2000) arXiv:hep-ph/9910333
  16. ↑ J. Madsen, "Intermediate mass strangelets are positively charged", Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 4687-4690 (2000) arXiv:hep-ph/0008217
  17. ↑ J. Madsen "Strangelets in Cosmic Rays", for Proceedings of 11th Marcel Grossmann Meeting, Germany, Jul 2006, arXiv:astro-ph/0612784
  18. ↑ J. Schaffner-Bielich, C. Greiner, A. Diener, H. Stoecker, "Detectability of strange matter in heavy ion experiments", Phys. Rev. C55:3038-3046 (1997), arXiv:nucl-th/9611052
  19. ↑ New Scientist, 28 August 1999: "A Black Hole Ate My Planet"
  20. ↑ Horizon: End Days, an episode of the BBC television series Horizon
  21. ↑ W. Wagner, "Black holes at Brookhaven?" and reply by F. Wilzcek, Letters to the Editor, Scientific American July 1999
  22. 1 2 Dennis Overbye, Asking a Judge to Save the World, and Maybe a Whole Lot More, NY Times, 29 March 2008
  23. ↑ "Safety at the LHC".
  24. ↑ J. Blaizot et al., "Study of Potentially Dangerous Events During Heavy-Ion Collisions at the LHC", CERN library record CERN Yellow Reports Server (PDF)
  25. ↑ Alcock, Charles; Farhi, Edward & Olinto, Angela (1986). "Strange stars". Astrophys. J. 310: 261. Bibcode:1986ApJ...310..261A. doi:10.1086/164679.
  26. ↑ J. Friedman and R. Caldwell, "Evidence against a strange ground state for baryons", Phys. Lett. B264, 143-148 (1991)
  27. ↑ J. Madsen, "Strangelets as cosmic rays beyond the GZK-cutoff", Phys. Rev. Lett. 90:121102 (2003) arXiv:stro-ph/0211597
  28. ↑ S. Balberg, "Comment on 'strangelets as cosmic rays beyond the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin cutoff'", Phys. Rev. Lett. 92:119001 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0403503
  29. ↑ J. Madsen, "Reply to Comment on Strangelets as Cosmic Rays beyond the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin Cutoff", Phys. Rev.Lett. 92:119002 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0403515
  30. ↑ J. Madsen, "Strangelet propagation and cosmic ray flux",Phys. Rev. D71, 014026 (2005) arXiv:astro-ph/0411538
  31. ↑ A. Heger, A. Cumming, D. Galloway, S. Woosley, "Models of Type I X-ray Bursts from GS 1826-24: A Probe of rp-Process Hydrogen Burning", arXiv:0711.1195
  32. ↑ A. Watts and S. Reddy, "Magnetar oscillations pose challenges for strange stars", MNRAS, 379, L63 (2007) arXiv:astro-ph/0609364
  33. ↑ Odyssey 5: Trouble with Harry, an episode of the Canadian science fiction television series Odyssey 5 by Manny Coto (2002)

Further reading

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Thursday, March 31, 2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.