Electric Charges of Positrons and Antiprotons
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
VOLUME 69, NUMBER 4 PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 27 JULY 1992 Electric Charges of Positrons and Antiprotons R. J. Hughes University of California, Physics DitisionL, os Alamos IVational Laboratory, Los Alamos, IVew Mexico 87545 B. I. Deutch Institute of Physics and Astronomy, University of Aarhus, DK 8000-Aarhus C, Denmark (Received 4 May 1992) Tests of the electric charges carried by the positron and antiproton are derived from recent measure- ments of the cyclotron frequencies of these particles, and from the spectroscopy of exotic atoms in which they are constituents. PACS numbers: 14.60.Cd, 11.30.Er, 14.20.Dh, 36.10.—k There has recently been considerable interest in high- a diA'erence between the magnitudes of the charges car- precision tests of the equality of particle and antiparticle ried by protons and electrons as small as one part in 10 masses that is required by CPT symmetry [1,21. A could account for the expansion of the Universe [13]. method that has been applied to electrons and positrons This idea led to further experimental tests, and the equal- [3] and protons and antiprotons [1] utilizes the cyclotron ity of the unit of charge on the electron and the proton frequency, co q8/trt, of a particle of mass m and charge has now been tested to very high precision [14]. For in- q in a magnetic field 8. Indeed, comparisons of the cyclo- stance, Marinelli and Morpurgo quote the limit [15] tron frequencies of electrons and protons (or ions that ~ (0.8 + 0.8) x 10 'e . (2) contain these particles as constituents) in the same mag- Aq, ~ netic field are regarded as tests of the particles' mass ra- The neutron had not been discovered at the time of tios, because there is independent inforination that the Einstein's original suggestion, and Piccard and Kessler's magnitudes of the electron and proton charges are equal. result did not constrain the neutron's charge. Therefore, However, there are no analogous tests for the charges there remained a possibility that because a rotating of electrons and positrons or protons and antiprotons. charged body has a magnetic dipole moment [16], the Therefore, cyclotron frequency comparisons for these magnetic fields of the Sun and planets could be explained particle-antiparticle pairs should strictly be regarded as with a nonzero neutron charge [17]. Likewise, the expan- comparisons of the particles' charge-to-mass ratios [4,5], sion of the Universe could be accounted for by a neutron unless the additional assumptions of either charge quanti- charge instead of an electron-proton charge difference zation or CPT symmetry for particle-antiparticle charges [18]. However, there is now a high-precision test of the are made. These assumptions involve concepts that are as neutrality of the neutron [19], fundamental as the equality of particle and antiparticle — masses and hence deserve their own independent tests. In q„=( 1.5 ~ 2.2) x10 e, this Letter we shall derive tests of the positron and an- which rules out these explanations. tiproton charges combining precision measurements of by There are also tests of the neutrality of the electron an- their frequencies with spectroscopic measure- cyclotron tineutrino [19] ments on positronium and antiprotonic atoms. Then we shall discuss how these tests could be improved with ex- q„- = (1.4+ 1.4) x 10 e, (4) periments on antihydrogen. We start by reviewing the 2-eV existing experimental tests of charge quantization. and for photons [20] The notion that electric charge is quantized (in units of (5) e), which dates back to the last century [6-8] can be ac- commodated in Kaluza-Klein theories [9], theories with that were derived under the assumption of charge conser- magnetic monopoles [10], and grand unified theories vation, which has itself been the subject of experimental [11]. But in 1924 Einstein suggested that a small dif- and theoretical attention [21]. [Experimental tests of ference in the charges carried by the proton and electron charge conservation, which are limited to strong con- could account for the magnetic fields of the Sun and straints on a few forbidden reactions [21], can be viewed Earth [12]. This suggestion led to the first experimental as tests of gauge invariance [22-24], because current test of the neutrality of matter by Piccard and Kessler nonconservation is inconsistent with the (gauge-invari- [12]. Then in 1959 it was suggested that, because the ant) Maxwell's equations, 8„F"'=j', but on the other electromagnetic interaction between an electron and a hand, can be consistent with the Proca equation, B„F"' proton is so much stronger than the gravitational one, +m~2'= j', in which the potentials attain physical significance. 2 ] electric e 2 ~Planck a —10+ 39 Another challenge to the notion of charge quantization gravitational 6m~m, m~m, has come from recent discussion of the possibility of "mil- 578 1992 The American Physical Society VOLUME 69, NUMBER 4 PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 27 JULY 1992 licharged particles" (q —10 e) [25], which could pro- 3 e Ree ee vide an expl'anation of the orthopositronium lifetime puz- R;, =0, (io) 2 zle [26]. The existence of such particles is poorly con- strained experimentally. for the charge ratio, where e; is the positron charge. For From this brief survey it is clear that there are fun- clarity, we assume to a first approximation that the damentally important cosmological, metrological, and charge ratio is approximately equal to 1, e;/e =1+e;, and field-theoretical reasons to test the charges of elementary so obtain an equation for the charge equality: particles. Therefore, it is quite unsatisfactory that there = —, are no tests of the charges on the positron or antiproton, e; (Aro;, +25R;,), particularly because without such tests the CPT symme- where we have used R;, =I+hR;, and co,—,=l+hco;„ of particle and antiparticle charges remains untested. try with AR;, and Aro;, small. Separate tests of the charges and masses of positrons Now we may use the experimental results for the ratio can be obtained combining measure- and antiprotons by of electron and positron cyclotron frequencies [3]: ments of their cyclotron frequencies with additional ex- perimental data that have a different functional depen- N;, = 1 ~ 1.3 && 10 (12) dence on their charges and masses, such as the Rydberg and the ratio of the Rydbergs in positronium and hydro- for exotic atoms that have the antiparticle as a constitu- gen [28]: ent. To see this, suppose that we are concerned with a m and e and a second particle ' particle of mass ~ charge ~, I&R;,1&4&&10 (90%CI. ). (i3) of m2 and (opposite) charge e2. The cyclotron frequen- We conclude that cies (in SI units) of the particles in a magnetic field of strength B are given by e;/e = I +4&10 (i4) in the fre- ro; e;8/m;, i =1,2, (6) Improvements the precision of cyclotron quency comparison to the level of one part in 10" have whereas the Rydberg of the hydrogenic atom formed been suggested [29], and the ultimate precision on mea- from the bound state of the pair would be surements of the IS-2S interval in positronium (from which the Rydberg for positronium can be deduced) is R2~ =pe~e~/8eoch (7) also 1 part in 10" [30]. Therefore we can anticipate an where p =m~m2/(m~+m2) is the reduced mass of the improvement of this test of the electron-positron charge pair. (We have assumed that the charges are unaltered equality by roughly 3 orders of magnitude, and hence the by being bound into an atomic state. ) For instance, par- equality of their masses could be tested with comparable ticles I and 2 might be an electron and a positron, in precision by comparison of their cyclotron frequencies. which case the exotic atom would be positronium, or a For the case in which particle 1 is a proton and particle proton and an antiproton where the atom would be the 2 an antiproton we have [1] proton-antiproton bound state, unaffected strong in- by =1 ~4x 1Q (is) teraction effects, or a positron and an antiproton, in which case the atom would be antihydrogen, etc. The cy- and we shall assume that the uncertainty of 5&&10 clotron frequencies can now be used to eliminate the par- quoted on the antiproton mass measured from the spec- ticles' masses from the Rydberg. troscopy of antiprotonic atoms [31]" reflects the uncertain- We next introduce the cyclotron frequency ratio ty in the "antiprotonic Rydberg, R~ . We can derive an equation for the ratio of the charge of the antiproton, e-, N2 m] e2 N2~ = to the electron's charge, e, N~ e~ m2 3 e& — e& and the ratio of Rydberg values 1 me R- N- + =Q, (i6) e 2 m ~p ~~ e 2 2 R2i 2p e&e2 R2)—: (9) and hence, putting ez/e = I+ ez, we find the equation R /2 m, e4 ' e~= —, (hro- +2AR- ), (17) where e is the electron or proton charge, m, is the elec- for the uncertainty in the antiproton's relative tron mass, and R =m, e /8eoch is the Rydberg of the = charge = hydrogen atom for infinite proton mass, which has recent- to the electron's, where co~~ 1+hco~~ and R~~ (1 ly been measured to a precision of 1.7 parts in 10' [27] +AR~~)mz/m, . The error here is clearly dominated by (limited by the existing optical frequency standard). the antiprotonic Rydberg, and we find For the case where particle 1 is an electron and particle e~/e = 1 ~ 2 x 10 2 is a positron we can eliminate their mass ratio between Eqs.