🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9204161853.AA11528@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>, jscott@winvmc.VNET.IBM.COM (Jonath writes...
>...
>If every baryon was held together by one of these functions (call it a
>"baryon quark") with charge Q = +2 and baryon number B = 1, rather than
>"gluons", then the ordinary quarks could be identical to the leptons and
>would not need fractional quantum numbers.  The "baryon quark" could
>also act as a marker to distinguish the sequence of otherwise identical
>quarks, avoiding the need for "colour".
>... 
>Does this idea seem reasonable?  I'd like to know about any theoretical
>or experimental results which might be relevant.
> 
>Jonathan Scott
>jscott@winvmc.vnet.ibm.com

 The two most important experimental inputs for the color quantum number
are the antisymmetric baryon wavefunctions for, e.g. the omega; and the "color
factor" in e+e- --> q \bar{q} which is needed to match the predicted and
measured cross sections. Coupled with recent LEP results * which show that
Abelian couplings are excluded by 5 standard deviations, and you are left
with some very narrow hoops for any new theory to jump through.

*e.g. "Evidence for the Triple-Gluon Vertex from Measurements of the QCD 
Colour Factors in Z Decay into 4 Jets", Decamp, et al (the ALEPH collab),
CERN PPE/92-31, to be published in Physics Letters B.

 ==============================================================================
         Lee Sawyer     | Dept of Physics          
       (SSCVX1::SAWYER) | Univ of Texas - Arlington    
                        | Arlington, TX            
 ==============================================================================