If protons are getting charged from quarks.. then the charge in quarks is fractional and not quantized. Does this mean that the charge we see is not fundamental? And the charges in quarks are just adding up somehow to make integer charges in what we see and experience daily. Does this mean the charge is not quantized fundamentally and that's why we haven't come across a magnetic monopole?
Is charge not quantized fundamentally and that is why we haven't come across magnetic monopole?
2$\begingroup$ Whether charges are integer multiples of $e$ or $e/3$, surely it doesn't make a difference. $\endgroup$– J.G.Mar 19, 2022 at 7:28
$\begingroup$ Possible duplicate: Why do physicists believe that there exist magnetic monopoles? $\endgroup$– Qmechanic ♦Mar 19, 2022 at 11:33
$\begingroup$ A question on the unification of electricity and magnetism $\endgroup$– HolgerFiedlerMar 20, 2022 at 5:45
then the charge in quarks are fractional and not quantized.
This is not true. Charge is still quantized as multiples of 1/3. For example, you won't find an object with 0.17 times the elementary charge, hence, quantization of charge.
Does this mean that the charge we see is not fundamental?
PBS SpaceTime recently did an episode on this. Check it out.
And the charges in quarks are just adding up somehow to make integer charges in what we see and experience daily.
This is certainly true. Charge is still quantized, though.
and thats why we haven't come across magnetic monopole?
As far as I can tell, Dirac's original statement was: If magnetic monopoles exist, then electric charge is quantized. An equally true statement is: if electric charge is not quantized, then magnetic monopoles do not exist.
Nonetheless, the current state of science is that electric charges appear to be quantized and magnetic monopoles seem to not exist. That is not a contradiction of Dirac's hypothesis in any way.