The "Strangeness" of Protons

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Technologists frequently exploit the magnetism of the proton¿which Otto Stern discovered to be some three times larger than predicted by quantum mechanics in 1933. A prime example is the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machine, widely used in biology and medicine. But physicists still don't understand what exactly generates the particle's magnetism. The chief problem is that they can't just take a proton apart to study how its constituent parts¿the quarks¿actually contribute to its properties. But a new set of experiments reported in the December 15th issue of Science sheds some light on the role that strange quarks in particular play in the proton's magnetic pull¿and, in fact, they suggest that it's a much smaller role that previously thought.

In the 1970s, researchers investigated "strangeness" by scattering beams of particles called pions off protons and neutrons, collectively referred to as nucleons. A second line of attack, scattering with muons, followed in the 1980s. In the new study, though, a team of physicists from nine different universities tried a third approach: electron scattering that takes advantage of the fact that so-called weak forces violate mirror symmetry, or parity. "The parity-violating nature of the weak force provides a powerful tool to unravel the internal structure of the proton," says Doug Beck of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. "The basic idea is to study the preference for the proton's interaction with electrons spinning counterclockwise over those spinning clockwise."

The group first sent an intense beam of electrons scattering off a liquid hydrogen target, which suggested a potentially large contribution from strange quarks to the proton's magnetism. But in a second test, they scattered electrons off deuterium and got a different reading. "The new results imply that less than 6 percent of the proton's magnetic moment arises from the strange quark," Beck says. The physicists ascribe the difference to an effect long predicted but never measured¿the so-called anapole moment of the proton. They plan to continue their work using a special toroidal superconducting magnet, which is now undergoing testing. "The new magnet should allow measurement of the anapole moment with much greater precision over a wide range of momentum transfers," Beck comments. "Instead of seeing the proton's overall magnetic moment, we will be able to vary the size of our probe to study small structures within the proton."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe