Misplaced Pages

Strangelet: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:40, 1 September 2007 editOS2Warp (talk | contribs)2,054 editsm References: + pt:Strangelet← Previous edit Latest revision as of 22:05, 3 October 2024 edit undo89.105.16.222 (talk) Undid revision 1248268757 by 2001:B011:12:909D:ADD3:479C:2369:D8B6 (talk)Tag: Undo 
(536 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Type of hypothetical particle}}
A '''strangelet''' or "strange nugget" is a hypothetical object, consisting of a bound state of roughly equal numbers of ], ], and ] ]s. The size could be anything from a few ] across (with the mass of a light nucleus) to something much larger. Once the size becomes macrosopic (of order meters across), such an object is usually called a ] or "strange star" rather than a strangelet. An equivalent description is that a strangelet is a small fragment of ]. Strangelets have been suggested as a ] candidate <ref name='Witten'/>.
{{About|the hypothetical particle|the album|Strangelet (album)}}
A '''strangelet''' (pronounced {{IPAc-en|ˈ|s|t|ɹ|eɪ|n|dʒ|.|l|ɪ|t}}) is a ] consisting of a ] of roughly equal numbers of ], ], and ] ]s. An equivalent description is that a strangelet is a small fragment of ], small enough to be considered a ]. The size of an object composed of strange matter could, theoretically, range from a few ] across (with the mass of a light nucleus) to arbitrarily large. Once the size becomes macroscopic (on the order of metres across), such an object is usually called a ]. The term "strangelet" originates with ] and ] in 1984. It has been theorized that strangelets can convert matter to strange matter on contact.<ref name = 'Farhi and Jaffe'>{{Cite journal|doi=10.1103/PhysRevD.30.2379|title=Strange matter|journal=Physical Review D|volume=30|issue=11|pages=2379–2390|year=1984|last1=Farhi|first1=Edward|last2=Jaffe|first2=R. L.|bibcode=1984PhRvD..30.2379F}}</ref> Strangelets have also been suggested as a ] candidate.<ref name="Witten">{{Cite journal|doi=10.1103/PhysRevD.30.272|title=Cosmic separation of phases|journal=Physical Review D|volume=30|issue=2|pages=272–285|year=1984|last1=Witten|first1=Edward|bibcode=1984PhRvD..30..272W}}</ref>


==Theoretical possibility of strangelets== == Theoretical possibility ==


===The strange matter hypothesis=== === Strange matter hypothesis ===
The known particles with strange quarks are unstable. Because the strange quark is heavier than the up and down quarks, it can ], via the ], into an up quark. Consequently, particles containing strange quarks, such as the ], always lose their ], by decaying into lighter particles containing only up and down quarks.


However, condensed states with a larger number of quarks might not suffer from this instability. That possible stability against decay is the "''strange matter hypothesis''", proposed separately by ]<ref>{{cite journal |last=Bodmer |first=A.R. |date=1971-09-15 |df=dmy-all |title=Collapsed Nuclei |journal=Physical Review D |volume=4 |issue=6 |pages=1601–1606 |doi=10.1103/PhysRevD.4.1601 |bibcode=1971PhRvD...4.1601B}}</ref> and ].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Witten |first=Edward |date=1984-07-15 |df=dmy-all |title=Cosmic separation of phases |journal=Physical Review D |volume=30 |issue=2|pages=272–285 |doi=10.1103/PhysRevD.30.272 |bibcode=1984PhRvD..30..272W}}</ref> According to this hypothesis, when a large enough number of quarks are concentrated 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 ]; having three types of quarks, rather than two as in normal nuclear matter, allows more quarks to be placed in lower energy levels.
The main question about strangelets concerns their stability. The strange quark is heavier than the up and down quarks, so the known particles containing strange quarks (such as the ], which contains an up, down, and strange quark) always lose their strangeness, decaying, via the ] to lighter particles containing only up and down quarks. However this might cease to be true for states with a sufficiently large number of quarks. This is the "strange matter hypothesis" of Bodmer <ref>A. Bodmer "Collapsed Nuclei" </ref> and Witten <ref name='Witten'>E. Witten, "Cosmic Separation Of Phases" </ref>. According to this hypothesis, when you collect a large enough number of quarks together, the lowest energy state is one that has roughly equal numbers of up, down, and strange quarks, namely a strangelet.


===Strangelets vs nuclei=== === Relationship with nuclei ===
A nucleus is a collection of a number of up and down quarks (in some nuclei a fairly large number), confined into triplets (]s and ]s). 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.<ref name=saga>{{cite journal |last1=Norbeck |first1=E. |last2=Onel |first2=Y. |title=The strangelet saga |date=2011 |journal=] |volume=316 |issue=1 |pages=012034–2 |doi=10.1088/1742-6596/316/1/012034|bibcode=2011JPhCS.316a2034N |doi-access=free }}</ref>


=== Size ===
At first glance, the strange matter hypothesis seems to have been experimentally ruled out, since we already know what you get when you collect a large number of quarks together: a nucleus, which consists of only up and down quarks, confined into triplets (neutrons and protons). If strangelets were more stable than nuclei, wouldn't nuclei quickly decay into strangelets? Actually, this need not be a quick process. There is a large barrier because if the weak interaction starts trying to make a nucleus into a strangelet, the first few strange quarks will just form strange baryons, such as the Lambda, which are heavy. Only if a large number of conversions occur 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: their lifetime would be longer than the age of the universe.
The stability of strangelets depends on their size, because of
*] at the interface between quark matter and vacuum (which affects small strangelets more than big ones). The surface tension of strange matter is unknown. If it is smaller than a critical value (a few MeV per square femtometer<ref name='screen'>{{cite journal|arxiv=hep-ph/0604134|bibcode=2006PhRvD..73k4016A|title=Stability of strange star crusts and strangelets|journal=Physical Review D|volume=73|issue=11|pages=114016|last1=Alford|first1=Mark G.|last2=Rajagopal|first2=Krishna|last3=Reddy|first3=Sanjay|last4=Steiner|first4=Andrew W.|year=2006|doi=10.1103/PhysRevD.73.114016|s2cid=35951483}}</ref>) 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.
*screening{{clarify|date=August 2024}} 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.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.1103/PhysRevD.48.1418|pmid=10016374|title=Screening in quark droplets|journal=Physical Review D|volume=48|issue=3|pages=1418–1423|year=1993|last1=Heiselberg|first1=H.|bibcode=1993PhRvD..48.1418H}}</ref>


== Natural or artificial occurrence ==
==Occurrence in nature==
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:


* Cosmogonically, i.e. in the early universe when the ] confinement phase transition occurred. It is possible that strangelets were created along with the neutrons and protons that form ordinary matter.
Even though nuclei do not decay to strangelets, there are other ways to make strangelets, so if strange matter hypothesis is correct there should be strangelets in the universe. There are two ways they could be created:
* High-energy processes. The universe is full of very high-energy particles (]s). It is possible that when these collide with each other or with neutron stars they may provide enough energy to overcome the energy barrier and create strangelets from nuclear matter. Some identified exotic cosmic ray events, such as "]"—''i.e.,'' those with very low charge-to-mass ratios (as the ''s''-quark itself possesses charge commensurate with the more-familiar ''d''-quark, but is much more massive)—could have already registered strangelets.<ref>{{cite journal|arxiv=hep-ph/0006286|bibcode=2000PhRvL..85.1384B|title=Can Cosmic Strangelets Reach the Earth?|journal=Physical Review Letters|volume=85|issue=7|pages=1384–1387|last1=Banerjee|first1=Shibaji|last2=Ghosh|first2=Sanjay K.|last3=Raha|first3=Sibaji|last4=Syam|first4=Debapriyo|year=2000|doi=10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.1384|pmid=10970510|s2cid=27542402}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Rybczynski |first1=M. |last2=Wlodarczyk |first2=Z. |last3=Wilk |first3=G. |date=2002 |title=Can cosmic rays provide sign of strangelets? |journal=Acta Physica Polonia B |volume=33 |issue=1 |pages=277–296 |arxiv=hep-ph/0109225 |bibcode=2002AcPPB..33..277R}}</ref>
* Cosmic ray impacts. In addition to head-on collisions of cosmic rays, ]s impacting on ] may create strangelets.


These scenarios offer possibilities for observing strangelets. If strangelets can be produced in high-energy collisions, then they might be produced by heavy-ion colliders. Similarly, if there are strangelets flying around the universe, then occasionally a strangelet should hit Earth, where it may appear as an exotic type of cosmic ray; alternatively, a stable strangelet could end up incorporated into the bulk of the Earth's matter, acquiring an electron shell proportional to its charge and hence appearing as an anomalously heavy isotope of the appropriate element—though searches for such anomalous "isotopes" have, so far, been unsuccessful.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lu |first1=Z.-T. |last2=Holt |first2=R. J. |last3=Mueller |first3=P. |last4=O'Connor |first4=T. P. |last5=Schiffer |first5=J. P. |last6=Wang |first6=L.-B. |date=May 2005 |title=Searches for Stable Strangelets in Ordinary Matter: Overview and a Recent Example |journal=Nuclear Physics A |volume=754 |pages=361–368 |doi=10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.01.038|arxiv=nucl-ex/0402015 |bibcode=2005NuPhA.754..361L }}</ref>
* Cosmologically, i.e. in the early universe when the QCD confinement phase transition occurred. It is possible that strangelets were created along with the neutrons and protons that form ordinary matter.
* High energy processes. The universe is full of very high energy particles (]s). It is possible that when these collide with each other or with neutron stars they might provide enough energy to overcome the energy barrier and create strangelets from nuclear matter.


=== Accelerator production ===
Both these scenarios offer possibilities for observing strangelets. If there are strangelets flying around the universe, then occasionally a strangelet should hit the planet Earth, where it would appear as an exotic type of cosmic ray, and we should be able to observe them. If they can be produced in high energy collisions, then we might make them at heavy-ion colliders.
At heavy ion accelerators like the ] (RHIC), nuclei are collided at relativistic speeds, creating strange and antistrange quarks that 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 ] has searched for strangelets produced at the RHIC,<ref>{{cite journal|arxiv= nucl-ex/0511047|bibcode= 2007PhRvC..76a1901A|title= Strangelet search in Au+Au collisions at s<sub>NN</sub>=200 GeV|journal= Physical Review C|volume= 76|issue= 1|pages= 011901|last1= Abelev|first1= B. I.|last2= Aggarwal|first2= M. M.|last3= Ahammed|first3= Z.|last4= Anderson|first4= B. D.|last5= Arkhipkin|first5= D.|last6= Averichev|first6= G. S.|last7= Bai|first7= Y.|last8= Balewski|first8= J.|last9= Barannikova|first9= O.|last10= Barnby|first10= L. S.|last11= Baudot|first11= J.|last12= Baumgart|first12= S.|last13= Belaga|first13= V. V.|last14= Bellingeri-Laurikainen|first14= A.|last15= Bellwied|first15= R.|last16= Benedosso|first16= F.|last17= Betts|first17= R. R.|last18= Bhardwaj|first18= S.|last19= Bhasin|first19= A.|last20= Bhati|first20= A. K.|last21= Bichsel|first21= H.|last22= Bielcik|first22= J.|last23= Bielcikova|first23= J.|last24= Bland|first24= L. C.|last25= Blyth|first25= S. -L.|last26= Bombara|first26= M.|last27= Bonner|first27= B. E.|last28= Botje|first28= M.|last29= Bouchet|first29= J.|last30= Brandin|first30= A. V.|display-authors= 29|year= 2007|doi= 10.1103/PhysRevC.76.011901|s2cid= 119498771}}</ref> but none were found. The ] (LHC) is even less likely to produce strangelets,<ref name="LSAGreport">{{cite journal|at=115004 (18pp)|doi=10.1088/0954-3899/35/11/115004|arxiv=0806.3414|title=Review of the safety of LHC collisions|journal=Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics|volume=35|issue=11|year=2008|last1=Ellis|first1=John|last2=Giudice|first2=Gian|last3=Mangano|first3=Michelangelo|last4=Tkachev|first4=Igor|last5=Wiedemann|first5=Urs|bibcode=2008JPhG...35k5004E|author6=LHC Safety Assessment Group|s2cid=53370175}} {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180928123118/http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1111112?ln=fr |date=2018-09-28 }}.</ref> but searches are planned<ref>{{cite journal|arxiv=nucl-th/0301003|bibcode=2004PAN....67..396S|title=Model for describing the production of Centauro events and strangelets in heavy-ion collisions|journal=Physics of Atomic Nuclei|volume=67|issue=2|pages=396–405|last1=Sadovsky|first1=S. A.|last2=Kharlov|first2=Yu. V.|last3=Angelis|first3=A. L. S.|last4=Gładysz-Dziaduš|first4=E.|last5=Korotkikh|first5=V. L.|last6=Mavromanolakis|first6=G.|last7=Panagiotou|first7=A. D.|year=2004|doi=10.1134/1.1648929|s2cid=117706766}}</ref> for the LHC ] detector.


=== Space-based detection ===
===Accelerator production===
The ] (AMS), an instrument that is mounted on the ], could detect strangelets.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.1088/0954-3899/30/1/004|title=Overview of strangelet searches and Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer: When will we stop searching?|journal=Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics|volume=30|issue=1|pages=S51–S59|year=2004|last1=Sandweiss|first1=J.|bibcode=2004JPhG...30S..51S}}</ref>
The STAR collaboration has searched for strangelets produced at the ] <ref>STAR Collaboration, "Strangelet search at RHIC", </ref>.


===Space-based detection=== === Possible seismic detection ===
In May 2002, a group of researchers at ] reported the possibility that strangelets may have been responsible for seismic events recorded on October 22 and November 24 in 1993.<ref>{{cite journal|arxiv=astro-ph/0205089|bibcode=2003BuSSA..93.2363A|title=Unexplained Sets of Seismographic Station Reports and a Set Consistent with a Quark Nugget Passage|journal=The Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America|volume=93|issue=6|pages=2363–2374|last1=Anderson|first1=D. P.|last2=Rajagopal|first2=Krishna|last3=Reddy|first3=Sanjay|last4=Steiner|first4=Andrew|year=2003|doi=10.1785/0120020138|s2cid=43388747}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite journal|arxiv=astro-ph/0505584|bibcode=2006PhRvD..73d3511H|title=Seismic search for strange quark nuggets|journal=Physical Review D|volume=73|issue=4|pages=043511|last1=Herrin|first1=Eugene T.|last2=Rosenbaum|first2=Doris C.|last3=Teplitz|first3=Vigdor L.|last4=Steiner|first4=Andrew|year=2006|doi=10.1103/PhysRevD.73.043511|s2cid=119368573}}</ref>
The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS), an instrument that is planned to be mounted on the ], could detect strangelets <ref>J. Sandweiss, "Overview of strangelet searches and Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer: When will we stop searching?" </ref>.


It has been suggested that the ] be set up to verify the ] (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 {{convert|1|ktonTNT|lk=on}} energy release or less, and could be able to track strangelets passing through Earth in real time if properly exploited.
===Possible seismic observation===


=== Impacts on Solar System bodies ===
In May ], a group of researchers at ] reported the possibility that strangelets may have been responsible for two seismic events recorded on ] and ] in ] <ref>D. Anderson et al, "Two seismic events with the properties for the passage of strange quark matter through the earth" </ref>. Most seismologists, however, consider the events to be normal deep earthquakes.
It has been suggested that strangelets of subplanetary (i.e. heavy meteorite) mass would puncture planets and other Solar System objects, leading to impact craters which show characteristic features.<ref>{{cite journal|arxiv=1104.4572|url=http://inspirehep.net/record/897105|bibcode=2011arXiv1104.4572R|title=Compact Ultra Dense Matter Impactors|journal=Physical Review Letters|volume=110|issue=11|pages=111102|last1=Rafelski|first1=Johann|last2=Labun|first2=Lance|last3=Birrell|first3=Jeremiah|last4=Steiner|first4=Andrew|year=2013|doi=10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.111102|pmid=25166521|s2cid=28532909|access-date=2011-11-13|archive-date=2022-03-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220322135859/https://inspirehep.net/literature/897105|url-status=live}}</ref>


== Potential propagation ==
===IMS Strangelet 'observatory'===
If the strange matter hypothesis is correct, and if a stable negatively-charged strangelet with a surface tension larger than the aforementioned critical value exists, 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 over time convert the ordinary matter to strange matter.<ref name='DDH' /><ref name='BJSW' /><!-- original suggestion may have been Glashow and De Rujula in Nature-->


This is not a concern for strangelets in ] because they are produced far from Earth and have had time to decay to their ], which is predicted by most models to be positively charged, so they are ] repelled by nuclei, and would rarely merge with them.<ref>{{cite journal|arxiv=hep-ph/0008217|bibcode=2000PhRvL..85.4687M|title=Intermediate Mass Strangelets are Positively Charged|journal=Physical Review Letters|volume=85|issue=22|pages=4687–4690|last1=Madsen|first1=Jes|last2=Rajagopal|first2=Krishna|last3=Reddy|first3=Sanjay|last4=Steiner|first4=Andrew|year=2000|doi=10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.4687|pmid=11082627|s2cid=44845761}}</ref><ref>{{cite arXiv|eprint=astro-ph/0612784|title=Strangelets in Cosmic Rays|last1=Madsen|first1=Jes|last2=Rajagopal|first2=Krishna|last3=Reddy|first3=Sanjay|last4=Steiner|first4=Andrew|year=2006}}</ref> On the other hand, high-energy collisions could produce negatively charged strangelet states, which could live long enough to interact with the nuclei of ].<ref>{{cite journal|arxiv=nucl-th/9611052|bibcode=1997PhRvC..55.3038S|title=Detectability of strange matter in heavy ion experiments|journal=Physical Review C|volume=55|issue=6|pages=3038–3046|last1=Schaffner-Bielich|first1=Jürgen|last2=Greiner|first2=Carsten|last3=Diener|first3=Alexander|last4=Stöcker|first4=Horst|year=1997|doi=10.1103/PhysRevC.55.3038|s2cid=12781374}}</ref>
It has been suggested that the ] being set up to verify the ] (CTBT) 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's equivalent energy release or less, and could be able to track strangelets passing through Earth in real time if properly exploited.


The danger of catalyzed conversion by strangelets produced in ] has received some media attention,<ref>{{cite journal|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190322083449/https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16322014-700-a-black-hole-ate-my-planet/|archive-date=22 March 2019|url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16322014-700-a-black-hole-ate-my-planet/|journal=New Scientist|author=Robert Matthews|date=28 August 1999|title=A Black Hole Ate My Planet|access-date=25 April 2019|url-status=live}} <!-- ORIGINALLY: http://www.kressworks.com/Science/A_black_hole_ate_my_planet.htm --></ref><ref>], an episode of the ] ] ]</ref> and concerns of this type were raised<ref name='DDH'>{{cite journal|arxiv=hep-ph/9910471|bibcode=1999PhLB..470..142D|title=Will relativistic heavy-ion colliders destroy our planet?|journal=Physics Letters B|volume=470|issue=1–4|pages=142–148|last1=Dar|first1=A.|last2=De Rujula|first2=A.|last3=Heinz|first3=Ulrich|last4=Steiner|first4=Andrew|year=1999|doi=10.1016/S0370-2693(99)01307-6|s2cid=17837332}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|jstor=26058304|title=Black Holes at Brookhaven?|journal=Scientific American|volume=281|issue=1|pages=8|last1=Wagner|first1=Walter L.|year=1999}}</ref> at the commencement of the ] experiment at ], which could potentially have created strangelets. A detailed analysis<ref name='BJSW'>{{cite journal|arxiv=hep-ph/9910333|bibcode=2000RvMP...72.1125J|title=Review of speculative ''disaster scenarios'' at RHIC|journal=Reviews of Modern Physics|volume=72|issue=4|pages=1125–1140|last1=Jaffe|first1=R. L.|last2=Busza|first2=W.|last3=Wilczek|first3=F.|last4=Sandweiss|first4=J.|year=2000|doi=10.1103/RevModPhys.72.1125|s2cid=444580}}</ref> concluded that the RHIC collisions were comparable to ones which naturally occur as cosmic rays traverse the ], 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 ] at ]<ref name="NYT">{{cite news|author=Dennis Overbye|title=Asking a Judge to Save the World, and Maybe a Whole Lot More|newspaper=New York Times|date=29 March 2008|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/29/science/29collider.html?ref=us|access-date=23 February 2017|archive-date=28 December 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171228112253/http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/29/science/29collider.html?ref=us|url-status=live}}</ref> but such fears are dismissed as far-fetched by scientists.<ref name='NYT' /><ref>{{cite web|url=http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/en/LHC/Safety-en.html|title=Safety at the LHC|access-date=2008-06-11|archive-date=2008-05-13|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080513222235/http://public.web.cern.ch/PUBLIC/en/LHC/Safety-en.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>J. Blaizot ''et al.'', "Study of Potentially Dangerous Events During Heavy-Ion Collisions at the LHC", {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190402072042/http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search?sysno=002372601cer |date=2019-04-02 }} </ref>
==Danger of strangelets: catalyzed conversion to strange matter==


In the case of a ], the conversion scenario may be more plausible. A neutron star is in a sense a giant nucleus (20&nbsp;km across), held together by ], but it is electrically neutral and would not electrostatically repel strangelets. If a strangelet hit a neutron star, it might catalyze quarks near its surface to form into more strange matter, potentially continuing until the entire star became a ].<ref>{{cite journal|name-list-style=amp|journal=Astrophysical Journal|volume=310|page=261|date=1986|doi=10.1086/164679|title=Strange stars|last1=Alcock|first1=Charles|last2=Farhi|first2=Edward|last3=Olinto|first3=Angela|bibcode = 1986ApJ...310..261A }}</ref>
If the strange matter hypothesis is correct then when a strangelet from space hits the Earth (or any other lump of ordinary matter) it could convert it to strange matter. The disaster scenario is this: one strangelet hits a nucleus, catalyzing its immediate conversion to strange matter. This liberates energy, and sends pieces (more strangelets) flying in all directions. These merge with other nuclei and convert them, leading to a chain reaction, at the end of which all the nuclei of all the atoms have been converted, and Earth has been reduced to a hot cloud of strangelets.


== Debate about the strange matter hypothesis ==
The general belief is that this would not happen, because most models predict that strangelets, like nuclei, are positively charged, so they are electrostatically repelled by nuclei, and would rarely merge with them.<ref>J. Madsen, "Intermediate mass strangelets are positively charged" </ref>
The strange matter hypothesis remains unproven. No direct search for strangelets in cosmic rays or ] has yet confirmed a strangelet. If any of the objects such as neutron stars could be shown to have a surface made of strange matter, this would indicate that strange matter is stable at zero ], which would vindicate the strange matter hypothesis. However, there is no strong evidence for strange matter surfaces on neutron stars.
However, the idea has received some media attention <ref>New Scientist, 28 August 1999: "A Black Hole Ate My Planet" </ref>, <ref>], an episode of the ] television series ]</ref>, and concerns of this type were raised at the commencement of the ] (RHIC) experiment at Brookhaven, which could potentially have created strangelets. A detailed analysis <ref>W. Busza, R. Jaffe, J. Sandweiss, F. Wilczek, "Review of speculative 'disaster scenarios' at RHIC", </ref> concluded that the RHIC collisions were comparable to ones that naturally occur as cosmic rays traverse the solar system, so we would already have seen such a disaster if it were possible.


Another argument against the hypothesis is that if it were true, essentially all neutron stars should be made of strange matter, and otherwise none should be.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/0370-2693(91)90718-6 |bibcode=1991PhLB..264..143C |title=Evidence against a strange ground state for baryons |journal=Physics Letters B |volume=264 |issue=1–2 |pages=143–148 |year=1991 |last1=Caldwell |first1=R.R. |last2=Friedman |first2=John L.}}</ref> Even if there were only a few strange stars initially, violent events such as collisions would soon create many fragments of strange matter flying around the universe. Because collision with a single strangelet would convert a neutron star to strange matter, all but a few of the most recently formed neutron stars should by now have already been converted to strange matter.
In the case of a neutron star, however, the conversion scenario seems much more plausible. A neutron star is in a sense one giant (20 km across) nucleus, held together by gravity. 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.<ref>C. Alcock, E. Farhi and A. Olinto, "Strange stars", Astrophys. Journal 310, 261 (1986)</ref>


This argument is still debated,<ref>{{cite journal |arxiv=astro-ph/0211597 |last1=Alford |first1=Mark G. |title=Strangelets as Cosmic Rays beyond the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin Cutoff |journal=Physical Review Letters |volume=90 |issue=12 |pages=121102 |last2=Rajagopal |first2=Krishna |last3=Reddy |first3=Sanjay |last4=Steiner |first4=Andrew |year=2003 |doi=10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.121102 |pmid=12688863 |bibcode=2003PhRvL..90l1102M|s2cid=118913495 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |arxiv=astro-ph/0403503 |bibcode=2004PhRvL..92k9001B |title=Comment on ''Strangelets as Cosmic Rays beyond the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin Cutoff'' |journal=Physical Review Letters |volume=92 |issue=11 |pages=119001 |last1=Balberg |first1=Shmuel |last2=Rajagopal |first2=Krishna |last3=Reddy |first3=Sanjay |last4=Steiner|first4=Andrew |year=2004 |doi=10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.119001 |pmid=15089181|s2cid=35971928 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |arxiv=astro-ph/0403515 |doi=10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.119002 |title=Madsen Replies |journal=Physical Review Letters |volume=92 |issue=11 |page=119002 |year=2004 |last1=Madsen |first1=Jes |last2=Rajagopal |first2=Krishna |last3=Reddy |first3=Sanjay |last4=Steiner |first4=Andrew |bibcode=2004PhRvL..92k9002M|s2cid=26518446 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |arxiv=astro-ph/0411538 |bibcode=2005PhRvD..71a4026M |title=Strangelet propagation and cosmic ray flux |journal=Physical Review D |volume=71 |issue=1 |page=014026 |last1=Madsen |first1=Jes |year=2005 |doi=10.1103/PhysRevD.71.014026|s2cid=119485839 }}</ref> but if it is correct then showing that one old neutron star has a conventional nuclear matter crust would disprove the strange matter hypothesis.
==Is the "strange matter hypothesis" true?==


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 ]. The evidence currently favors nuclear matter. This comes from the ] of ]s, which is well explained in terms of a nuclear matter crust,<ref>{{cite journal |arxiv=0711.1195 |bibcode=2007ApJ...671L.141H |title=Models of type&nbsp;I X-ray bursts from GS&nbsp;1826-24: A probe of rp-process hydrogen burning |journal=The Astrophysical Journal |volume=671 |issue=2 |pages=L141 |last1=Heger |first1=Alexander |last2=Cumming |first2=Andrew |last3=Galloway |first3=Duncan K.|last4=Woosley |first4=Stanford E. |year=2007 |doi=10.1086/525522|s2cid=14986572 }}</ref> and from measurement of seismic vibrations in ]s.<ref>{{cite journal |arxiv=astro-ph/0609364 |bibcode=2007MNRAS.379L..63W |title=Magnetar oscillations pose challenges for strange stars |journal=Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society |volume=379 |issue=1 |pages=L63 |last1=Watts |first1=Anna L. |last2=Reddy |first2=Sanjay |year=2007 |doi=10.1111/j.1745-3933.2007.00336.x|doi-access=free |s2cid=14055493 }}</ref>
The strange matter hypothesis is generally regarded as a radical idea. Because one strangelet can convert a neutron star to a strange star, it seems likely that if the strange matter hypothesis were correct, <em>all</em> the objects we observe as neutron stars would actually have to be strange stars. But there is good evidence that at least some of them are not strange stars, and have fairly thick crusts of nuclear matter. There is an ongoing debate among experts on this question. <ref>J. Madsen, "Strangelets as cosmic rays beyond the GZK-cutoff", </ref> <ref>S. Balberg, "Comment on 'strangelets as cosmic rays beyond the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin cutoff'", </ref> <ref>J. Madsen, "Reply to Comment on Strangelets as Cosmic Rays beyond the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin Cutoff", </ref> <ref>J. Madsen, "Strangelet propagation and cosmic ray flux" </ref>


== Strangelets in Fiction == == In fiction ==
* An episode of '']'' featured an attempt to destroy the planet by intentionally creating negatively charged strangelets in a ].<ref>'']: {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190930015717/https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0664394/ |date=2019-09-30 }}'', an episode of the Canadian science fiction television series ''Odyssey 5'' by Manny Coto (2002)</ref>
* The ] ] '']'' features a scenario where a particle accelerator in ] explodes, creating a strangelet and starting a catastrophic chain reaction which destroys Earth.
* The story ''A Matter most Strange'' in the collection '']'' by ] deals with the making of a strangelet in a ].
* '']'', published in 2010 and written by ], deals with an alien machine that creates strangelets. The machine's strangelets impact the Earth and Moon and pass through.
* The novel ''Phobos'', published in 2011 and written by ] as the third and final part of his ''Domain'' trilogy, presents a fictional story where strangelets are unintentionally created at the ] and escape from it to destroy the Earth.
* In the 1992 black-comedy novel ''Humans'' by ], an irritated God sends an angel to Earth to bring about ] by means of using a strangelet created in a particle accelerator to convert the Earth into a quark star.
* In the 2010 film '']'', a strangelet approaches the Earth from space.
* In the novel '']'' by ] and the rest of the trilogy, strangelets are mostly used as weapons, but during an early project to ] Mars, one was used to convert ] into an additional "sun".


== See also ==
An episode of ] featured an attempt to destroy the planet by intentionally creating strangelets in a ].
* ]
* ]
* ]


== Further reading ==
The ] ] ] features a scenario where a ] based particle accelerator explodes, starting a catastrophic chain reaction that destroys Earth.
* {{cite web|url=http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~jholden/strange/strange.html|title=The Story of Strangelets|last=Holden|first=Joshua|date=May 17, 1998|publisher=]|access-date=2010-04-01|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100107024303/http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~jholden/strange/strange.html|archive-date=January 7, 2010|url-status=dead|df=mdy-all}}
* {{cite journal|author1=Fridolin Weber|title=Strange Quark Matter and Compact Stars|year=2005|doi=10.1016/j.ppnp.2004.07.001|journal=Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics|volume=54|issue=1|pages=193–288|arxiv=astro-ph/0407155|bibcode = 2005PrPNP..54..193W |s2cid=15002134}}
* {{cite book|author1=Jes Madsen|title=Hadrons in Dense Matter and Hadrosynthesis|year=1999|doi=10.1007/BFb0107314|chapter=Physics and astrophysics of strange quark matter|series=Lecture Notes in Physics|isbn=978-3-540-65209-0|volume=516|pages=162–203|arxiv=astro-ph/9809032|s2cid=16566509}}


== References ==
<!--
{{Reflist|30em}}
==Further reading==
* J. Madsen, "Physics and astrophysics of strange quark matter"
-->


== External links == == External links ==
* {{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_8yK2kmxoo |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211215/p_8yK2kmxoo |archive-date=2021-12-15 |url-status=live|title=The Most Dangerous Stuff in the Universe – Strange Stars Explained|work=]|date=14 April 2019|via=]|format=Video|access-date=15 April 2019}}{{cbignore}}
{{Global catastrophic risks}}
{{Stellar core collapse}}


]
*
]

]
==References==
]

]
<references/>
]

]

]
]
]
]
] ]
] ]
]
]


] ]
]

Latest revision as of 22:05, 3 October 2024

Type of hypothetical particle This article is about the hypothetical particle. For the album, see Strangelet (album).

A strangelet (pronounced /ˈstreɪndʒ.lɪt/) is a hypothetical particle consisting of a bound state of roughly equal numbers of up, down, and strange quarks. An equivalent description is that a strangelet is a small fragment of strange matter, small enough to be considered a particle. The size of an object composed of strange matter could, theoretically, range from a few femtometers across (with the mass of a light nucleus) to arbitrarily large. Once the size becomes macroscopic (on the order of metres across), such an object is usually called a strange star. The term "strangelet" originates with Edward Farhi and Robert Jaffe in 1984. It has been theorized that strangelets can convert matter to strange matter on contact. Strangelets have also been suggested as a dark matter candidate.

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, it can spontaneously decay, via the weak interaction, into an up quark. Consequently, particles containing strange quarks, such as the lambda particle, always lose their strangeness, by decaying into lighter particles containing only up and down quarks.

However, condensed states with a larger number of quarks might not suffer from this instability. That possible stability against decay is the "strange matter hypothesis", proposed separately by Arnold Bodmer and Edward Witten. According to this hypothesis, when a large enough number of quarks are concentrated 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 number of up and down quarks (in some nuclei a fairly large number), 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, because of

  • surface tension at the interface between quark matter and vacuum (which affects small strangelets more than big ones). The surface tension of strange matter is unknown. If it is smaller than a critical value (a few MeV per square femtometer) 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.
  • 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.

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:

  • Cosmogonically, i.e. in the early universe when the QCD confinement phase transition occurred. It is possible that strangelets were created along with the neutrons and protons that form ordinary matter.
  • High-energy processes. The universe is full of very high-energy particles (cosmic rays). It is possible that when these collide with each other or with neutron stars they may provide enough energy to overcome the energy barrier and create strangelets from nuclear matter. Some identified exotic cosmic ray events, such as "Price's event"—i.e., those with very low charge-to-mass ratios (as the s-quark itself possesses charge commensurate with the more-familiar d-quark, but is much more massive)—could have already registered strangelets.
  • Cosmic ray impacts. In addition to head-on collisions of cosmic rays, ultra high energy cosmic rays impacting on Earth's atmosphere may create strangelets.

These scenarios offer possibilities for observing strangelets. If strangelets can be produced in high-energy collisions, then they might be produced by heavy-ion colliders. Similarly, if there are strangelets flying around the universe, then occasionally a strangelet should hit Earth, where it may appear as an exotic type of cosmic ray; alternatively, a stable strangelet could end up incorporated into the bulk of the Earth's matter, acquiring an electron shell proportional to its charge and hence appearing as an anomalously heavy isotope of the appropriate element—though searches for such anomalous "isotopes" have, so far, been unsuccessful.

Accelerator production

At heavy ion accelerators like the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC), nuclei are collided at relativistic speeds, creating strange and antistrange quarks that 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, but none were found. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is even less likely to produce strangelets, but searches are planned for the LHC ALICE detector.

Space-based detection

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

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. 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.

It has been suggested that the International Monitoring System be 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 meteorite) mass would puncture planets and other Solar System objects, leading to impact craters which show characteristic features.

Potential propagation

If the strange matter hypothesis is correct, and if a stable negatively-charged strangelet with a surface tension larger than the aforementioned critical value exists, 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 over time convert the ordinary matter to 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. On the other hand, high-energy collisions could produce negatively charged strangelet states, which could live long enough to interact with the nuclei of ordinary matter.

The danger of catalyzed conversion by strangelets produced in heavy-ion colliders has received some media attention, and concerns of this type were raised at the commencement of the RHIC experiment at Brookhaven, which could potentially have created strangelets. A detailed analysis 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 LHC at CERN but such fears are dismissed as far-fetched by scientists.

In the case of a neutron star, the conversion scenario may be 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 would not electrostatically repel strangelets. If a strangelet hit a neutron star, it might catalyze quarks near its surface to form into more strange matter, potentially continuing until the entire star became a strange star.

Debate about the strange matter hypothesis

The strange matter hypothesis remains unproven. No direct search for strangelets in cosmic rays or particle accelerators has yet confirmed a strangelet. If any of the objects such as 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. However, there is no strong evidence for strange matter surfaces on neutron stars.

Another argument against the hypothesis is that if it were true, essentially all neutron stars should be made of strange matter, and otherwise none should be. Even if there were only a few strange stars initially, violent events such as collisions would soon create many fragments of strange matter flying around the universe. Because collision with a single strangelet would convert a neutron star to strange matter, all but a few of the most recently formed neutron stars should by now have already been converted to strange matter.

This argument is still debated, but if it is correct then showing that one old 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, and from measurement of seismic vibrations in magnetars.

In fiction

  • An episode of Odyssey 5 featured an attempt to destroy the planet by intentionally creating negatively charged strangelets in a particle accelerator.
  • The BBC docudrama End Day features a scenario where a particle accelerator in New York City explodes, creating a strangelet and starting a catastrophic chain reaction which destroys Earth.
  • The story A Matter most Strange in the collection Indistinguishable from Magic by Robert L. Forward deals with the making of a strangelet in a particle accelerator.
  • Impact, published in 2010 and written by Douglas Preston, deals with an alien machine that creates strangelets. The machine's strangelets impact the Earth and Moon and pass through.
  • The novel Phobos, published in 2011 and written by Steve Alten as the third and final part of his Domain trilogy, presents a fictional story where strangelets are unintentionally created at the LHC and escape from it to destroy the Earth.
  • In the 1992 black-comedy novel Humans by Donald E. Westlake, an irritated God sends an angel to Earth to bring about Armageddon by means of using a strangelet created in a particle accelerator to convert the Earth into a quark star.
  • In the 2010 film Quantum Apocalypse, a strangelet approaches the Earth from space.
  • In the novel The Quantum Thief by Hannu Rajaniemi and the rest of the trilogy, strangelets are mostly used as weapons, but during an early project to terraform Mars, one was used to convert Phobos into an additional "sun".

See also

Further reading

References

  1. Farhi, Edward; Jaffe, R. L. (1984). "Strange matter". Physical Review D. 30 (11): 2379–2390. Bibcode:1984PhRvD..30.2379F. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.30.2379.
  2. Witten, Edward (1984). "Cosmic separation of phases". Physical Review D. 30 (2): 272–285. Bibcode:1984PhRvD..30..272W. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.30.272.
  3. Bodmer, A.R. (15 September 1971). "Collapsed Nuclei". Physical Review D. 4 (6): 1601–1606. Bibcode:1971PhRvD...4.1601B. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.4.1601.
  4. Witten, Edward (15 July 1984). "Cosmic separation of phases". Physical Review D. 30 (2): 272–285. Bibcode:1984PhRvD..30..272W. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.30.272.
  5. Norbeck, E.; Onel, Y. (2011). "The strangelet saga". Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 316 (1): 012034–2. Bibcode:2011JPhCS.316a2034N. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/316/1/012034.
  6. Alford, Mark G.; Rajagopal, Krishna; Reddy, Sanjay; Steiner, Andrew W. (2006). "Stability of strange star crusts and strangelets". Physical Review D. 73 (11): 114016. arXiv:hep-ph/0604134. Bibcode:2006PhRvD..73k4016A. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.114016. S2CID 35951483.
  7. Heiselberg, H. (1993). "Screening in quark droplets". Physical Review D. 48 (3): 1418–1423. Bibcode:1993PhRvD..48.1418H. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.48.1418. PMID 10016374.
  8. Banerjee, Shibaji; Ghosh, Sanjay K.; Raha, Sibaji; Syam, Debapriyo (2000). "Can Cosmic Strangelets Reach the Earth?". Physical Review Letters. 85 (7): 1384–1387. arXiv:hep-ph/0006286. Bibcode:2000PhRvL..85.1384B. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.1384. PMID 10970510. S2CID 27542402.
  9. Rybczynski, M.; Wlodarczyk, Z.; Wilk, G. (2002). "Can cosmic rays provide sign of strangelets?". Acta Physica Polonia B. 33 (1): 277–296. arXiv:hep-ph/0109225. Bibcode:2002AcPPB..33..277R.
  10. Lu, Z.-T.; Holt, R. J.; Mueller, P.; O'Connor, T. P.; Schiffer, J. P.; Wang, L.-B. (May 2005). "Searches for Stable Strangelets in Ordinary Matter: Overview and a Recent Example". Nuclear Physics A. 754: 361–368. arXiv:nucl-ex/0402015. Bibcode:2005NuPhA.754..361L. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.01.038.
  11. Abelev, B. I.; Aggarwal, M. M.; Ahammed, Z.; Anderson, B. D.; Arkhipkin, D.; Averichev, G. S.; Bai, Y.; Balewski, J.; Barannikova, O.; Barnby, L. S.; Baudot, J.; Baumgart, S.; Belaga, V. V.; Bellingeri-Laurikainen, A.; Bellwied, R.; Benedosso, F.; Betts, R. R.; Bhardwaj, S.; Bhasin, A.; Bhati, A. K.; Bichsel, H.; Bielcik, J.; Bielcikova, J.; Bland, L. C.; Blyth, S. -L.; Bombara, M.; Bonner, B. E.; Botje, M.; Bouchet, J.; et al. (2007). "Strangelet search in Au+Au collisions at sNN=200 GeV". Physical Review C. 76 (1): 011901. arXiv:nucl-ex/0511047. Bibcode:2007PhRvC..76a1901A. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.76.011901. S2CID 119498771.
  12. Ellis, John; Giudice, Gian; Mangano, Michelangelo; Tkachev, Igor; Wiedemann, Urs; LHC Safety Assessment Group (2008). "Review of the safety of LHC collisions". Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics. 35 (11). 115004 (18pp). arXiv:0806.3414. Bibcode:2008JPhG...35k5004E. doi:10.1088/0954-3899/35/11/115004. S2CID 53370175. CERN record Archived 2018-09-28 at the Wayback Machine.
  13. Sadovsky, S. A.; Kharlov, Yu. V.; Angelis, A. L. S.; Gładysz-Dziaduš, E.; Korotkikh, V. L.; Mavromanolakis, G.; Panagiotou, A. D. (2004). "Model for describing the production of Centauro events and strangelets in heavy-ion collisions". Physics of Atomic Nuclei. 67 (2): 396–405. arXiv:nucl-th/0301003. Bibcode:2004PAN....67..396S. doi:10.1134/1.1648929. S2CID 117706766.
  14. Sandweiss, J. (2004). "Overview of strangelet searches and Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer: When will we stop searching?". Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics. 30 (1): S51 – S59. Bibcode:2004JPhG...30S..51S. doi:10.1088/0954-3899/30/1/004.
  15. Anderson, D. P.; Rajagopal, Krishna; Reddy, Sanjay; Steiner, Andrew (2003). "Unexplained Sets of Seismographic Station Reports and a Set Consistent with a Quark Nugget Passage". The Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. 93 (6): 2363–2374. arXiv:astro-ph/0205089. Bibcode:2003BuSSA..93.2363A. doi:10.1785/0120020138. S2CID 43388747.
  16. Herrin, Eugene T.; Rosenbaum, Doris C.; Teplitz, Vigdor L.; Steiner, Andrew (2006). "Seismic search for strange quark nuggets". Physical Review D. 73 (4): 043511. arXiv:astro-ph/0505584. Bibcode:2006PhRvD..73d3511H. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.043511. S2CID 119368573.
  17. Rafelski, Johann; Labun, Lance; Birrell, Jeremiah; Steiner, Andrew (2013). "Compact Ultra Dense Matter Impactors". Physical Review Letters. 110 (11): 111102. arXiv:1104.4572. Bibcode:2011arXiv1104.4572R. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.111102. PMID 25166521. S2CID 28532909. Archived from the original on 2022-03-22. Retrieved 2011-11-13.
  18. ^ Dar, A.; De Rujula, A.; Heinz, Ulrich; Steiner, Andrew (1999). "Will relativistic heavy-ion colliders destroy our planet?". Physics Letters B. 470 (1–4): 142–148. arXiv:hep-ph/9910471. Bibcode:1999PhLB..470..142D. doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(99)01307-6. S2CID 17837332.
  19. ^ Jaffe, R. L.; Busza, W.; Wilczek, F.; Sandweiss, J. (2000). "Review of speculative disaster scenarios at RHIC". Reviews of Modern Physics. 72 (4): 1125–1140. arXiv:hep-ph/9910333. Bibcode:2000RvMP...72.1125J. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.72.1125. S2CID 444580.
  20. Madsen, Jes; Rajagopal, Krishna; Reddy, Sanjay; Steiner, Andrew (2000). "Intermediate Mass Strangelets are Positively Charged". Physical Review Letters. 85 (22): 4687–4690. arXiv:hep-ph/0008217. Bibcode:2000PhRvL..85.4687M. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.4687. PMID 11082627. S2CID 44845761.
  21. Madsen, Jes; Rajagopal, Krishna; Reddy, Sanjay; Steiner, Andrew (2006). "Strangelets in Cosmic Rays". arXiv:astro-ph/0612784.
  22. Schaffner-Bielich, Jürgen; Greiner, Carsten; Diener, Alexander; Stöcker, Horst (1997). "Detectability of strange matter in heavy ion experiments". Physical Review C. 55 (6): 3038–3046. arXiv:nucl-th/9611052. Bibcode:1997PhRvC..55.3038S. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.55.3038. S2CID 12781374.
  23. Robert Matthews (28 August 1999). "A Black Hole Ate My Planet". New Scientist. Archived from the original on 22 March 2019. Retrieved 25 April 2019.
  24. Horizon: End Days, an episode of the BBC television series Horizon
  25. Wagner, Walter L. (1999). "Black Holes at Brookhaven?". Scientific American. 281 (1): 8. JSTOR 26058304.
  26. ^ Dennis Overbye (29 March 2008). "Asking a Judge to Save the World, and Maybe a Whole Lot More". New York Times. Archived from the original on 28 December 2017. Retrieved 23 February 2017.
  27. "Safety at the LHC". Archived from the original on 2008-05-13. Retrieved 2008-06-11.
  28. J. Blaizot et al., "Study of Potentially Dangerous Events During Heavy-Ion Collisions at the LHC", CERN library record Archived 2019-04-02 at the Wayback Machine CERN Yellow Reports Server (PDF)
  29. Alcock, Charles; Farhi, Edward & Olinto, Angela (1986). "Strange stars". Astrophysical Journal. 310: 261. Bibcode:1986ApJ...310..261A. doi:10.1086/164679.
  30. Caldwell, R.R.; Friedman, John L. (1991). "Evidence against a strange ground state for baryons". Physics Letters B. 264 (1–2): 143–148. Bibcode:1991PhLB..264..143C. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(91)90718-6.
  31. Alford, Mark G.; Rajagopal, Krishna; Reddy, Sanjay; Steiner, Andrew (2003). "Strangelets as Cosmic Rays beyond the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin Cutoff". Physical Review Letters. 90 (12): 121102. arXiv:astro-ph/0211597. Bibcode:2003PhRvL..90l1102M. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.121102. PMID 12688863. S2CID 118913495.
  32. Balberg, Shmuel; Rajagopal, Krishna; Reddy, Sanjay; Steiner, Andrew (2004). "Comment on Strangelets as Cosmic Rays beyond the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin Cutoff". Physical Review Letters. 92 (11): 119001. arXiv:astro-ph/0403503. Bibcode:2004PhRvL..92k9001B. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.119001. PMID 15089181. S2CID 35971928.
  33. Madsen, Jes; Rajagopal, Krishna; Reddy, Sanjay; Steiner, Andrew (2004). "Madsen Replies". Physical Review Letters. 92 (11): 119002. arXiv:astro-ph/0403515. Bibcode:2004PhRvL..92k9002M. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.119002. S2CID 26518446.
  34. Madsen, Jes (2005). "Strangelet propagation and cosmic ray flux". Physical Review D. 71 (1): 014026. arXiv:astro-ph/0411538. Bibcode:2005PhRvD..71a4026M. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.014026. S2CID 119485839.
  35. Heger, Alexander; Cumming, Andrew; Galloway, Duncan K.; Woosley, Stanford E. (2007). "Models of type I X-ray bursts from GS 1826-24: A probe of rp-process hydrogen burning". The Astrophysical Journal. 671 (2): L141. arXiv:0711.1195. Bibcode:2007ApJ...671L.141H. doi:10.1086/525522. S2CID 14986572.
  36. Watts, Anna L.; Reddy, Sanjay (2007). "Magnetar oscillations pose challenges for strange stars". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 379 (1): L63. arXiv:astro-ph/0609364. Bibcode:2007MNRAS.379L..63W. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2007.00336.x. S2CID 14055493.
  37. Odyssey 5: Trouble with Harry Archived 2019-09-30 at the Wayback Machine, an episode of the Canadian science fiction television series Odyssey 5 by Manny Coto (2002)

External links

Global catastrophic risks
Technological
Sociological
Ecological
Climate change
Earth Overshoot Day
Biological
Extinction
Others
Astronomical
Eschatological
Others
Fictional
Organizations
General
Stellar core collapse
Stars
Stellar processes
Collapse
Supernovae
Compact and
exotic objects
Particles, forces,
and interactions
Quantum theory
Degenerate matter
Related topics
Categories: