1 Quarks, Gluons and QCD
1.1 Brief History
The quark model was independently proposed by theoretical/mathematical physicists (Nobel
Laureate) Murray Gell–Mann and George Zweig in 1964. However, there was little experimental
evidence for the physical reality of quarks until 1968, when electron–proton scattering experiments
indicated that the electrons were scattering off three point–like constituents ‘inside’ the
proton.
Gell–Mann ‘borrowed’ the word quark from James Joyce’s book “Finnegans Wake”:
“Three quarks for Muster Mark!
Sure he has not got much of a bark
And sure any he has it’s all beside the mark.”
By 1995, when the top quark was detected in high–energy experiments at the Fermilab in Illinois,
all six quark flavors have been finally observed. Gell–Mann and Zweig proposed in 1964, without
any substantial experimental evidence, that hadrons were not elementary particles, but they were
instead composed of specific (triplet) combinations of quarks and antiquarks. They also
postulated independently that there are only three flavors of quarks: up, down and
strange, to which there also ascribed known properties such as, mass, spin and Electric
Charge.
However, within a year, two extensions of the Gell–Mann–Zweig model were proposed when two
other physicists, Sheldon Lee Glashow and James Bjorken, predicted the existence of a fourth
flavor of quark, which they referred to as charm. This addition was needed because it expanded the
power and self–consistency of the theory: it allowed a much improved and consistent description of
the weak interaction when it was relaized that it provided the mechanism that causes the quarks to
decay; interestingly, this new theoretical prediction also equalized the number of quarks
with the number of known leptons, and led to a formula for predicting correctly the
mass of known (π) mesons (that are hadrons with integer spin, or bosons, previously
predicted theoretically by Yukawa in 1934 as the carriers of the nuclear interaction via their
exchange).
In 1968, deep inelastic electron scattering experiments at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
(SLAC) showed that the proton was not an elementary particle, but instead contained much
smaller, ‘point–like’ objects, that were not so hastily identified with quarks. While this showed that
hadrons indeed had a substructure, as predicted by the quark model, physicists remained reluctant
to identify these smaller objects with quarks. Instead, they became known as ‘partons’
(a term proposed by Richard Feynman, and supported by some experimental project
reports). Such partons were later identified as the up and down quarks when other flavors
were also detected. Their discovery is claimed to have ‘validated’ the existence of the
strange quark, because it was necessary in the predictions made by the Gell–Mann/Zweig
model.
In a 1970 paper, Glashow, John Iliopoulos and Luciano Maiani gave much more compelling
theoretical arguments for the prediction of the as–yet undiscovered quark that had charm. The
number of the predicted quark flavors thus grew from two to the current six in 1973, following the
more complete predictions by Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa who noted that the
experimental observation of CP violation could only be explained if there were another pair of
quarks with different flavor from the ones already observed. These two new quarks became
known as ‘beauty’ and ‘truth’, but later were re–named as ‘bottom’ , b, and ‘top’, t,
respectively.
Following a decade without experimental evidence supporting the actual existence of charm
quarks, they were finally produced and observed almost simultaneously by two teams in
November 1974 : one team working at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC)
supervised by Burton Richter and the other at the Brookhaven National Laboratory
supervised by Samuel Ting. The two teams had assigned the discovered particle two
different names, the J and the ψ. The particle hence became formally known as the
J∕ψ ‘meson’ and it was considered a quark–antiquark pair with the charm flavor that
Glashow and Bjorken had predicted, called the ‘charmonium’ particle by the latter
theoreticians.
In 1977, the bottom quark was observed by Leon Lederman’s team at Fermilab in Illinois. This
indicated that a ‘top’ quark should also exist, because the bottom quark would have been most
strangely without a partner if it had not existed. However, it was not until 1995, that the top
quark was finally detected after much effort and lengthy high–energy experimentation. The top
quark’s discovery was crucial; furthermore, it showed that the top quark was significantly more
massive than predicted, ‘almost as heavy as a gold atom’, and thus its presence was found at
higher energies than those expected. The actual theoretical reasons for the top quark’s larger mass
remain to be determined.
1.2 Quarks, Anti-quarks, Nucleons and Hadrons
The building blocks of the atomic nucleus, called also ‘nucleons’–the proton and the
neutron–are baryons. Stable quarks are then considered at present as the ‘elementary
particles’ found in nucleons, that is, ‘inside’ protons and neutrons of atomic nuclei, as
well as in mesons where they appear as quark–pairs. Unstable, high-energy quarks are
present in the ‘physical’ vacuum in virtual states, and also in other subatomic particles
generated in particle accelerators. They are major constituents of matter, along with leptons
(such as electrons and neutrinos). In theoretical physicsl terms, quarks are elementary
fermions (of spin 1∕2) because they are subject to Fermi statistics and the Pauli exclusion
principle.
A critical limitation to the experimental and theoretical studies of quarks is the fact that quarks
are never found as isolated, single particles; rather, they are bound either as quark–pairs or bound
together in composite particles named hadrons, (with the most common hadrons being protons and
neutrons, which are the basic building blocks of all atomic nuclei). For this reason, much of what is
known about quarks has been inferred from observations on the hadrons themselves and
observations of quark jets or pairs that are generated in particle accelerators at very high energies.
Quarks (and antiquarks) are the only known particles whose electric charge comes as exactly one
third of the elementary charge of the electron or proton. However this can never be
directly observed as hadrons because they latter have always an integer charge. There
are two known types of hadrons: baryons, formed of three quarks, and mesons, formed
of a quark and an antiquark pair. The quarks (and antiquarks) which determine the
quantum numbers of hadrons are called valence quarks. Apart from these, any hadron
may contain an indefinite number of virtual quarks, antiquarks and gluons which do
not influence their quantum numbers. Such virtual quarks are called sea quarks (vide
infra).
Remarkably, quarks are the only particles in the current Standard Model of physics
(SUSY) to experience all four fundamental forces: strong, electromagnetic, electroweak and
gravitational.
There are currently six known different types of quarks, that are defined by their flavor: up
(symbols: u), down (d), charm (c), strange (s), top (t) and bottom (b). Furthermore, the QCD
theory holds the view that these are the only possible types of quarks found in nature or in the
high-energy laboratory.
The quarks with the lowest masses, the up and the down quark, are stable within nucleons of
atomic nuclei where they are coupled with each other and interact strongly also via gluons- the
nuclear field carrier particles. The heavier charm, strange, top and bottom quarks are unstable and
decay extremely rapidly; these can only be produced in high energy collisions, such as in particle
accelerators and in cosmic rays. Quarks have defining property in addition to mass, electric charge,
and spin which is unique to nuclear interactions–the color ‘charge’–which behaves somewhat like a
very strong ‘magnetic’ interaction, but with three ‘poles’ instead of the ‘North and South’
characteristic magnetic poles of the classical magnets derived from electron magnetic moment/spin
interactions.
For every quark flavor there is a corresponding antiparticle, called its antiquark flavor, which
differs from the quark only in that its electrical charge has the opposite sign. Such antiparticles of
quarks–called antiquarks– are denoted by a bar over the designating letter for the quark, such as u
for a quark and u for an up antiquark. As with all antimatter, general, antiquarks have the same
mass, lifetime and spin as their respective quarks, but the electric charge and other charges have
the opposite sign.
Having electric charge, mass, spin, flavor and color charge, the quarks are the only known
elementary particles that engage in all four Fundamental interactions of contemporary physics:
Electromagnetism, weak interaction, strong interaction and gravitation. Gravitation, however, is
not included in the theoretical Standard Model, because quantum gravity developments are yet to
be completed, and also because gravitational interactions are extremely weak in comparison with
all of the other three fundamental interactions.
1.3 Quark’s Electric Charge
A quark has a precise fractional electric charge value from that of the electron or proton
(considered as unity), that is, either −1∕3 or +2∕3 times the elementary charge of the latter. More
specifically, the up, charm and top quarks –that are collectively referred to as up or u-quarks– have
a charge of +2∕3each, whereas the down, strange and bottom quarks (down–type , or d-quarks)
have a charge value of −1∕3. The antiquarks, as explained above, have the opposite
charge of their corresponding quark (the up–type antiquarks have charges of −2∕3, and
the down–type antiquarks have a charge value of +1∕3). Since the electric charge of a
hadron is the sum of the charges of the constituent quarks, the combinations of three
quarks, or three anti–quarks, or a quark with an anti–quark, always result in an integer
charge.
The electric charge of quarks is important in the formation of atomic nuclei. The two stable
hadron constituents of the atom, the neutron and the proton, have respectively charge
values of 0 and +1; thus, the quark model expects that the neutron contains two down
quarks and one up quark, whereas the proton contains two up quarks and a down quark.
The total electric charge of a nucleus is given by the number of protons present inside
the atomic nucleus, is known as the atomic number that spans the periodic table of
elements.
1.4 Strong (Nuclear) Interactions and Color Charges
As indicated above, quarks do possess a remarkable property called ‘color charge’; individual
quarks obtain their color charge and interact in this manner via nuclear field carrier particles
known as gluons.
All types of hadrons always have a net (or total) color charge value of zero, that is they are ‘white’.
There are three types of color charge, called ‘blue’, ‘green’ and ‘red’. Each of these color
charges is complemented by an ‘anti–color‘, such as: ‘antiblue’, ‘antigreen’ and ‘antired’,
respectively. Whereas each quarks carries a single color, each antiquark carries a single
anticolor.
The balance of attractive and repulsive interactions between quarks color-charged with
any of the three colors is the cause of what is called ‘strong interaction’ in nuclear and
high-energy physics. The area of physics that studies such strong interactions is called
Quantum Chromodynamics or QCD. Thus, a quark charged with one color value is
bound with an antiquark carrying the corresponding anticolor; also three quarks,(or
anti–quarks) all charged with the three different colors will similarly be bound stably
together. In any other case, composite particles that are not ‘white’ but charge–colored may
not be able to form. The three color types play a role in the process of hadronization,
which is the process of hadron formation out of quarks and gluons. The result of two
attracting quarks that form a stable quark–antiquark pair will be color neutrality: a
quark with ξ color charge plus an antiquark of -ξ color charge will result in a net color
charge of 0, or ‘white’ color, and in the formation of a meson. Analogous to the additive
color charge model, the combination of all three color charges will similarly result in a
‘white’ color charge. This is what also happens when three quarks combine to form a
baryon.
The properties of the color charge are explained by a gauge symmetry (a type of symmetry group)
known as the “special unitary group” SU(3). This gauge symmetry is at the core of quantum
chromodynamics and the details of its mathematical structure explain why only ‘white’–colored
particles can be observed. Each quark is in the basic triplet of the SU(3) group, whose three
components corresponds to each color charge (red, green, and blue). The gluons are then described
by the adjoint representation of this group, which explains why gluons carry at the same time both
the color and anticolor charges. The strong interaction is thus the only one whose field carrier
quantum particles, the gluons, also carry the charge for the (strong) force they mediate.
This feature of gluons makes the strong interaction very difficult to study and prevents
the succesful use of the perturbative techniques previously employed with such great
accuracy in Feynman’s QED approach, for example, in both electromagnetism ( with U(1)
symmetry) and subsequently for the electroweak interaction (with SU(2) symmetry). This
close connection between quantum group symmetries and interactions is present in the
three forces described by the current Standard Model of physics (SUSY). The general
mathematical approach involving these connections is called the unified quantum Yang-Mills
theory.
1.5 Color Confinement and Gluons
A key phenomenon called ‘color confinement’ is thought to trap the quarks within the stable
hadrons. This refers to any individual quark’s inability to escape as a single particle from its
parent hadron, thereby rendering impossible the actual observation of any isolated, single
quark. As already explainede, the color confinement is primarily the result of the strong
interactions with the gluon color field, and also the gluon exchange between quarks.
Color confinement applies to all quarks, except for the case of the top quark where the
actual escape mechanism at extremely high energies is uncertain. One method used was
to compare two hadrons that have all but one quark in common. The properties of
the differing quarks are then inferred from the difference in values between the two
hadrons.
Quarks have inherent relationships with the gluons, that can be theoretically defined as
‘massless vector gauge bosons’. Gluons are therefore responsible for the color field, or the
strong interaction, which ensures that quarks remain bound in hadrons through color
confinement.
Gluons are constantly exchanged between quarks through a virtual emission and re-absorption
process. When a gluon is transferred between one quark and another, a color change occurs in the
receiving and emitting quark. For example, if a red quark emits a red–antigreen gluon, it then
becomes green, and if a green quark absorbs it, it then becomes red. Therefore, although the color
of each quark may always be changing, a bound hadron will ‘confine’ single quarks, thus preventing
single quarks to leave the hadron, or exist in isolation. The color field carried by the gluon
contributes most significantly to such a hadron’s indivisibility into single quarks, or the color
confinement. This is demonstrated by the varying strength of the chromodynamic binding force
between the constituent quarks of a hadron; as quarks get closer to each other, the
chromodynamic binding force actually weakens through a process called ‘asymptotic freedom’,
suggesting the presence also of repulsive forces at extremely close range, somewhat similar to
van der Waals repulsive interactions, but of quite different, and yet unknown nature.
However, when quarks move further apart, the binding strength dramatically increases via
gluon as well as quark-quark color interactions. The color field ‘becomes stressed’ by the
drifting away of the quarks, ‘much as an elastic band is stressed when pulled apart’,
because a multitude of gluons of appropriate color charges are being generated in order to
strengthen the ‘stretched’ field lines that are holding the quarks inside the stable hadron. In
this way, a very large amount of energy would be required to ‘wrench a quark from its
‘hadronized state’ through the formation of a quark pair, rather than of a single isolated
quark. Thus, in a high–energy experiment as soon as enough energy has been spent to
overcome some of the restraining quark–gluon interactions, either a quark–antiquark pair,
or quark–pair ‘jets’ would be produced from the original hadron, but never a single
quark.
Strong interactions are highly non-linear, because gluons can emit gluons and also exchange gluons
with other gluons. This property has led to speculations regarding the possible existence of a
‘glueball’, that is, a particle that is purely made of gluons, despite previous observations indicating
that gluons cannot exist without ‘their attached’ quarks.
1.6 Sea Quarks and Gluon Fluxes
The quarks that contribute to the quantum numbers of the hadrons are called valence quarks (qv).
Hadrons also contain virtual quark–antiquark (qq) pairs, known as sea quarks (qs),
originating from the gluons’ strong interaction field. Such sea quarks are much less
stable, and they annihilate each other very quickly within the interior of the hadron.
When a gluon is split, sea quarks are formed, and this process also works in reverse
in that the annihilation of two sea quarks will emit a gluon. There would be then a
fluctuating quantum flux of sea quarks born from the vacuum, and this would also
allow for a steady cycle of gluon splits and/or re–births. Such a gluon flux is called “the
sea”.
1.7 Quark Masses
There are presently two different terms in use when one describes the quark masses: the current
quark mass refers to the mass of a quark ‘by itself’, while ‘constituent quark mass’ refers to the
current quark mass plus the mass of the gluon particle field(s) surrounding the quark. The two
values are typically quite different for several reasons the will be explained next. In a hadron, like
a proton, most of the mass comes from the gluons that bind the constituent quarks
together, rather than from the individual quarks. The mass of the quarks ‘in themselves’,
or ‘by themselves’ is quite low (about one third) compared to the mass derived from
the gluons’ energy. While gluons are inherently massless, they possess energy, and it
is this energy that contributes so greatly to the overall mass of the hadron through
relativistic effects. This is readily demonstrated for the proton- the most common hadron.
Composed of one d and two u quarks, the proton has an overall mass of approximately
938MeV∕c2, of which the mass of three valence quarks contributes around 11MeV∕c2, with the
remainder coming from the quantum chromodynamics binding energy (QCBE) provided
by sea quarks and gluons. This makes ‘direct’ calculations of quark masses based on
quantum chromodynamics quite difficult, and very often quite unreliable, as quantum
perturbation methods that were very successful in quantum electrodynamics, fail most of
the time in QCD. Mass value estimates can be however derived after obtaining from
experimental data the difference in mass between two related hadrons that have opposing or
complementary quark components. For example, by comparing the proton with the
neutron, where the difference between the two particles is one down quark to one up
quark, the relative masses and the mass differences can be measured by the difference
in the overall mass of the two hadrons. The masses of most quarks were within such
‘predicted ranges’ at the time of their discovery, with the notable exception of the top
quark, which was found to have a mass approximately equal to that of a gold nucleus,
significantly heavier than what was expected from the QCD theoretical estimates. Several
hypotheses have been suggested to explain this very large mass miscalculation. The extended
Standard Model postulates that elementary particles derive their masses through the
Higgs mechanism, thus related to a so far unobserved “Higgs boson”– a hypothetical
particle.
1.8 Flavor Quantum Numbers
In order to explain the phenomenology of strong and weak interactions, particle physicists assigned
quantum numbers to the known baryons and mesons. The first such quantum number is known as
the isospin, related to the symmetry properties determined by the Lie group SU(2). This was
introduced by Werner Heisenberg in 1932 to represent the remarkable similarity between the
properties of the protons and neutrons other than their electric charge value, and the
presence of three types of pions. The z-component, commonly denoted Iz, is related to
the electric charge Q and the baryon number (+1 for baryons, 0 for mesons) of these
particles.
An additional quantum number, strangeness (S, which is not to be confused with the spin), was
introduced in 1954 to explain the unexpectedly long lifetimes of particles such as K mesons and ξ
baryons. This new, (strangeness) quantum number was unchanged by strong interactions, but not
by the weak ones, which would explains the anomalously long life-times of the particles in
question that can be pair-produced by the strong force, but can only decay via the
electro-weak interactions. The formula chosen for the new hypercharge Y was then
:
where B is the baryon number and S is the strangeness value.
This equation is known as the (original) Gell–Mann–Nishijima formula. The connection with group
theory become clear only in 1961 when Gell-Mann and Ne’emann showed that all the proposed
quantum numbers could be explained by relating the fundamental SU(3) triplet to the
three lightest quarks: the up, down and strange quarks. Further advances through both
theory and High energy physics experiments has led to the introduction of a three flavor
quantum numbers, charmness (C), bottomness (B’) and topness (T), corresponding
the charm, bottom and top quark respectively. An enlarged flavor symmetry group,
SU(6), and also unified SU(5), or SU(3) × SU(2) × U(1) groups are being considered to
provide a unified ‘symmetry’ for electromagnetic, electroweak and strong interactions.
The modified Gell–Man–Nishijima formula generalizes the equation for all of the flavor
quantum numbers and the electrical charge, with the modified hypercharge formula
being

that includes also the charm, the ‘truth and beauty’ numbers, with the following notations:
J = spin, B = baryon number, Q = electric charge, Iz = isospin, S = strangeness,
C = charmness, B′ = bottomness, and T = topness.
1.9 Quark Spin and Spin Parton Distributions
The spin is a intrinsic symmetry property, or quantum observable of all quantum particles,
and its orientation is an important degree of freedom. Roughly speaking, the spin of a
particle is a contribution to its angular momentum that is not due to its motion but
whose correct calculation requires relativistic quantum field theory. Unlike the classical
momentum of rotation of a sphere, the spin of a particle takes only discrete values as a
result of momentum quantization in quantum physics, and its observation requires the
presence of an external field gradient such as magnetic or gravitational that ‘raises the
degeneration of the spin levels’, thus splitting quantum particle beams according to their spin
values. Spin group representations are known as Pauli matrices and are being extensively
used for computations of spin hamiltonians and any other interactions or phenomena
that involve the spin property of quantum particles; a widely known, and also very
useful example, is that of the Nuclear Magnetic resonance (NMR) phenomenon with
wide applications in Chemistry, Physics, agriculture and medical imaging (MRI and
2D-FT).
Spin is measured in units of h∕(2π), where h is the Planck constant. This unit is often denoted by
h (“h-bar”), called the “reduced Planck constant”. The result of a measurement of the component
of the spin of a quark along any axis- always in the presence of an external field gradient- is
always either h∕2 or −h∕2; for this reason quarks are classified as spin-1∕2 particles,
called fermions. The component of spin along any given axis– which is by convention the
z-axis–is denoted by an upward-pointing arrow ↑ for the value +1∕2 and down arrow
pointing arrow ↓ for −1∕2; the symbol also follows the up and down values for the flavor,
although one must note that the flavor is ‘not determined’ by the spin, or related to the
latter. For example, an up quark with a spin of +1∕2 along the z-axis is denoted by
u ↑.
The quark’s spin value contributes to the overall spin of the parent hadron, much as quark’s
electrical charge does to the overall charge of the hadron. Varying combinations of quark spins
result in the total spin value that can be assigned to the hadron. However, because
of the vacuum polarization in QCD and the presence of valence and sea quarks, the
spin distribution, or the ‘spin fine structure’ of nuclei involves spin distributions that
are not simple additions of spin values for the individual nucleonic spin constituent
quarks.
1.10 QCD Matter and Asymptotically-Free Quarks
A novel concept that has recently been proposed is that of quark matter, or QCD matter, a number
of theorized phases of matter that might contain only a mixture of strongly interacting ‘free quarks
and gluons’. One of such model is called a quark-gluon plasma. This model assumes that, at
sufficiently high temperatures and densities, quarks and gluons could potentially become
deconfined and degenerate into a plasma which is ‘fluid-like’ consisting of an inhomogeneous mix of
gluons and quarks. The precise extreme conditions needed to give rise to such a ‘quark plasma’
state are yet unspecified, and have been the subject of a great deal of speculation; CERN made
many attempts to produce such conditions in the 1980s and 1990s. The characteristic signatures of
such quark plasma states might include a marked increase in the number of heavier quark pairs
compared to the volume of pairs of up and down quarks. It is also believed by some
that, in the period from a picosecond to the first microsecond after the Big Bang (
called “the quark epoch”), the Universe was filled by a quark-gluon plasma, because
the temperatures were much too high for hadrons to be formed, or condense, as stable
particles. It is also hypothesized that strangematter, that is non-nuclear matter containing
relatively equal numbers of up, down and strange quarks, might also be stable at ‘ordinary’
temperatures and pressures, in atomic nucleus-sized ‘strangelets’ or kilometer-sized “quark
stars”.
Acknowledgement The use of partial content from the author’s contribution to a related entry on
the internet under the GNUL license terms is hereby acknowledged.
References
[1] Weinberg, Steven. 2003. Quantum Field Theory., vol.3, Cambridge University Press:
Cambridge, UK.
[2] The “Quark (subatomic particle)”. in Encyclopedia
Britannica(http : ∕∕www.britannica.com∕EBchecked∕topic∕486323∕quark)
[3] R.Nave. “Confinement of Quarks”. HyperPhysics. (http : ∕∕hyperphysics.phy −
astr.gsu.edu∕hbase∕Particles∕quark.html)., Georgia State University, Department of
Physics and Astronomy.
[4] R.Nave. “Quarks”. HyperPhysics.
(http : ∕∕hyperphysics.phy − astr.gsu.edu∕hbase∕Particles∕quark.html).
[5] B.
Carithers, P. Grannis. “Discovery of the Top Quark” (PDF). Beam Line(SLAC).(http :
∕∕www.slac.stanford.edu∕pubs∕beamline∕25∕3∕25 − 3 − carithers.pdf).
[6] E.D. Bloom (1969).“High-Energy Inelastic e–p Scattering at 6 and 10 deg.”. Physical
Review Letters 23 (16): 930–934. doi : 10.1103∕PhysRevLett.23.930.
[7] R. Breidenbach(1969). “Observed Behavior of
Highly Inelastic Electron-Proton Scattering”. Physical Review Letters 23 (16): 935–939.
doi : 10.1103∕PhysRevLett.23.935.
[8] Ho–Kim, X.–Y. Pham (1998). Elementary Particles and Their Interactions: Concepts
and Phenomena. Springer. ISBN3540636676.
[9] J. Barrow (1997). “The Singularity and Other Problems. The Origin of the Universe”
(Reprint ed.). Basic Books. ISBN978 − 0465053148.
[10] S.S.M. Wong (1998). Introductory Nuclear Physics (2nd ed.). Wiley Interscience.
ISBN0 − 471 − 23973 − 9.
[11] M. Gell–Mann (1964). “A Schematic of Baryons and Mesons”. Physics Letters 8 (3):
214–215. doi : 10.1016∕S0031 − 9163(64)92001 − 3.
[12] G. Zweig (1964a). “An SU(3) Model for Strong Interaction Symmetry and its
Breaking”. CERN Report No.8181∕Th8419.
[13] G. Zweig (1964b). “An SU(3) Model for Strong Interaction Symmetry and its
Breaking: II”. CERN Report No.8419∕Th8412.
[14] K.W. Staley (2004). The Evidence for the Top Quark. Cambridge University Press.
ISBN0521827108.
[15] A. Pickering (1984). Constructing Quarks. University of Chicago Press.
[16] B.J. Bjorken, S.L. Glashow (1964). “Elementary Particles and SU(4)”. Physics
Letters 11 (3): 255. doi : 10.1016∕0031 − 9163(64)90433 − 0.
[17] J.I. Friedman. “The Road to the Nobel Prize”.
Hue University.(http : ∕∕www.hueuni.edu.vn∕hueuni∕en∕newsdetail.php?NewsID =
1606&PHPSESSID = 909807ffc5b9c0288cc8d137ff063c72)
[18] R.P. Feynman (1969).“Very High-Energy Collisions of Hadrons”. Physical Review
Letters 23 (24): 1415–1417.http : ∕∕prola.aps.org∕abstract∕PRL∕v23∕i24∕p1415 − 1.
[19] S. Kretzer et al. (2004). “CTEQ6 Parton Distributions with Heavy Quark Mass
Effects”. Physical Review D69 (11): 114005. arXiv : 0307022v1.
[20] D.J. Griffiths (1987). Introduction to Elementary Particles. John Wiley and Sons.
ISBN0 − 471 − 60386 − 4.
[21] S.L. Glashow, J. Iliopoulos,
L. Maiani (1970).“Weak Interactions with Lepton–Hadron Symmetry”. Physical
Review.D,2(7):1285–1292.(http : ∕∕prola.aps.org∕abstract∕PRD∕v2∕i7∕p12851).
[22] M. Kobayashi, T. Maskawa (1973). “CP–Violation in the Renormalizable Theory
of Weak Interaction”. Progress of Theoretical Physics 49(2): pp.652–657.(http :
∕∕ptp.ipap.jp∕link?PTP∕49∕652∕pdf).
[23] “New Precision Measurement of Top Quark Mass”. BNL News. (http :
∕∕www.bnl.gov∕bnlweb∕pubaf∕pr∕PRdisplay.asp?prID = 04 − 66).
[24] J. Joyce (1982) [1939]. Finnegans Wake. Penguin Books. p. 383. LCCN59 −
354.ISBN0 − 14 − 00 − 6286 − 6.
[25] M. Gell–Mann (1995). The Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and
the Complex. Owl Books.
[26] C. Amsler et al. (2008). “Review of Particle Physics: New Charmonium-like
States”. Physics Letters (Particle Data Group) B667 (1): 1–1340. (http :
∕∕pdg.lbl.gov∕2008∕reviews∕rpp2008 − rev − new − charmonium − like − states.pdf).
[27] E.V. Shuryak (2004). The QCD Vacuum, Hadrons and Superdense Matter. World
Scientific.
[28] B. Povh et al. (2004). Particles and Nuclei. Springer.
ISBN3540201688.OCLC53001447.
[29] W. Demtröder (2002). Atoms, Molecules and Photons: An Introduction to
Atomic–Molecular–and Quantum Physics (1st ed.). Springer. pp. 39–42. ISBN
3540206310.
[30] “Weak Interactions” –Written at Menlo Park (CA). Virtual Visitor Center. Stanford
Linear Accelerator Center.
2008.(http : ∕∕www2.slac.stanford.edu∕vvc∕theory∕weakinteract.html)
[31] C. Burgess, G. Moore (2007). The Standard Model. A Primer. Cambridge University
Press. ISBN0 − 521 − 86036 − 9.
[32] A. Watson (2004). The Quantum Quark. Cambridge University Press.
ISBN0521829070.
[33] C. Amsler et al. (2008). “Review of Particle Physics: Quarks”. Physics Letters
(Particle Data Group) B667 (1): 1-1340. (http : ∕∕pdg.lbl.gov∕2008∕tables∕rpp2008 −
sum − quarks.pdf).
[34] F. Canelli. “The Top Quark: Worth its Weight in Gold”. University of Rochester.
(http : ∕∕conferences.fnal.gov∕lp2003∕forthepublic∕topquark∕index.html)
[35] W. Heisenberg (1932). “Über den Bau der Atomkerne I, II, III. Zeitschrift für
Physik 77: 1–11; 78: 156–164; 80: 587–596 (in German)
[36] T. Wu, W.–Y. Pauchy Hwang (1991). Relativistic quantum mechanics and quantum
fields. World Science. ISBN9810206089.
[37] F. Garberson (2008). “Top Quark Mass and Cross Section Results from the
Tevatron”. arXiv : 0808.0273v1.
[38] P. Renton (1988). Electroweak Interactions. Cambridge University Press. p. 332.
ISBN 0521366925.
[39] R.P. Feynman (1985). QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter (1st ed.).
Princeton University Press.
[40] C.–Y. Wong (1994). Introduction to High–energy Heavy–ion Collisions. World
Scientific. p. 149. ISBN9810202636.
[41] D.H. Perkins (2000). Introduction to High Energy Physics. Cambridge University
Press. ISBN0521621968.
[42] 2008 Physics Nobel Prize lecture by Makoto Kobayashi
[43] 2008 Physics Nobel Prize lecture by Toshihide Maskawa
[44] 1976 Physics Nobel Prize lecture by Samuel C.C. Ting
[45] 1976 Physics Nobel Prize lecture by Burton Richter
[46] 1969 Physics Nobel Prize lecture by Murray Gell–Mann