* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Tutorial material for weak interactions and more
Dirac equation wikipedia , lookup
Electron scattering wikipedia , lookup
An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything wikipedia , lookup
Higgs mechanism wikipedia , lookup
ATLAS experiment wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization group wikipedia , lookup
Supersymmetry wikipedia , lookup
Future Circular Collider wikipedia , lookup
Relativistic quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Nuclear structure wikipedia , lookup
Quantum electrodynamics wikipedia , lookup
Symmetry in quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Compact Muon Solenoid wikipedia , lookup
Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model wikipedia , lookup
Technicolor (physics) wikipedia , lookup
Bruno Pontecorvo wikipedia , lookup
Quantum chromodynamics wikipedia , lookup
Topological quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
Theory of everything wikipedia , lookup
Weakly-interacting massive particles wikipedia , lookup
History of quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
Yang–Mills theory wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization wikipedia , lookup
Scalar field theory wikipedia , lookup
Elementary particle wikipedia , lookup
Faster-than-light neutrino anomaly wikipedia , lookup
Super-Kamiokande wikipedia , lookup
Lorentz-violating neutrino oscillations wikipedia , lookup
Neutrino oscillation wikipedia , lookup
Grand Unified Theory wikipedia , lookup
Standard Model wikipedia , lookup
Mathematical formulation of the Standard Model wikipedia , lookup
Tutorial material for weak interactions and more Olga Bessidskaia Bylund February 26, 2017 1 Number of generators The generators of SU(n) can be represented by a n x n complex hermitian matrices and any SU(n) transformation can be built from these generators. The hermiticity condition implies that knowing the elements above and on the diagonal is enough to know all the elements in the matrix. We have n(n − 1)/2 elements above the diagonal, each with a real and an imaginary part. We also have n elements on the diagonal, which need to be real for the matrix to be hermitian. The condition that the determinant is one can be shown to be equivalent to that the trace of the matrix is zero. This constraint on the elements on the diagonal reduces the number of degrees of freedom by one. So, we get n2 − n + n − 1 = n2 − 1 degrees of freedom in SU(n) theory. Weak interactions are described by SU(2) theory and thus have 3 generators. This corresponds to three physical particles: W + , W − and Z 0 . For SU(3) theory for strong interactions, we have 8 degrees of freedom. 1.1 SU(3) generators There are eight 3x3 matrices λi that act as SU(3) generators; these are given in Eq. (11b) in Mandl and Shaw, where the Gell-Mann representation is chosen. For example: λ1 = [0, 1, 0; 1, 0, 0; 0, 0, 0] (1) λ2 = [0, −i, 0; i, 0, 0; 0, 0, 0] (2) λ3 = [1, 0, 0; 0, −1, 0; 0, 0, 0] (3) The λi matrices are related to the colour operators F̂i by F̂i = 12 λi . They act on color triplets in the Lagrangian, rotating them. Quark wavefunctions can be factorised into a space+spin part and a colour spinor part χc . The colour spinors are: 1 r = [1; 0; 0] (4) g = [0; 1; 0] (5) b = [0; 0; 1] (6) From local phase transformations, each generator has a gauge field (gluon field) associated with it: Ψf (x) → exp(igs λj ωj (x)/2Ψf ), µ f µ D Ψ (x) = (∂ + (7) igs λj Aµj (x)/2)Ψf , j = 1, 2, .., 8 (8) In QCD, the colour charges are exactly conserved. Each quark carries a colour charge, while a gluon carries two. Quarks don’t exist in isolation, but form hadrons, held together by gluons. The hadrons are always colour neutral (e.g. a red, green and blue quark forming a baryon or a blue quark and an anti-blue anti-quark forming a meson). Hadrons are described by product wavefunctions χch = χc1 χc2 . Colour charges The colour charges for the colour operators can easily be computed by applying them on the colour spinors, e.g.: 1 1 F̂1 r = g, F̂1 g = r, F̂1 b = 0, 2 2 i i F̂2 r = g, F̂2 g = − r, F̂2 b = 0, 2 2 1 1 F̂3 r = r, F̂3 g = − g, F̂3 b = 0. 2 2 (9) (10) (11) Structure constants The commutator is known to give ifijk Fk , note the sum over k. The right hand side can be expressed as a linear combination of the eight matrices F̂k . However, most structure constants are zero. It turns out that the commutator of any pair of matrices F̂i , F̂j can be expressed as a linear combination of at most two matrices F̂k . Evaluate the commutators for some Fi and Fj to find the structure constants fijk . Let’s evaluate [F̂1 , F̂2 ] 1 [F̂1 , F̂2 ] = ([i, 0, 0; 0, −i, 0; 0, 0, 0] − [−i, 0, 0; 0, i, 0; 0, 0, 0]) = 4 1 = [i, 0, 0; 0, −i, 0; 0, 0, 0] = iF̂3 2 2 (12) So the structure constants f123 = 1, while f121 = f122 = f124 = f125 = f126 = f127 = f128 = 0. Also, [F̂2 , F̂1 ] = −iF3 (13) showing that f123 = −f213 . The structure constants are in facts antisymmetric with respect to all indices. Note that evaluating the commutator of e.g. [F̂4 , F̂5 ] will give an expression that is a linear combination of F̂3 and F̂8 , that is both f453 and f458 are non-zero. 2 V-A theory Weak interactions have V-A currents, that is vector minus axial vector (axial vector = pseudovector). Under a parity transformation, the vector part changes sign but the axial part does not. Therefore, parity is not a symmetry of the weak force. The V-A structure was deduced from observation of parity violation of the weak force, as mentioned below. • Parity violation of the weak force was demonstrated by observing β decays of Cobolt into Nickel with the emission of electrons and anti- neutrinos, in an experiment by Wu et al. If parity was conserved, the rate of electron emission would be the same in the direction parallel and anti-parallel to the spin of the atom. This was found not to be the case, parity was broken. A combination of a vector and axial vector current was needed. Additional reading: http://www.hep.phy.cam.ac.uk/ ~thomson/partIIIparticles/handouts/Handout_9_2011.pdfp298 • The correct decay rates of charged pion1 decays are predicted from amplitudes derived from V-A theory, but not from vector or axial only. • In V-A theory, the weak interaction only acts on left-handed particles and right-handed anti-particles. Only left-handed neutrinos and only right-handed anti-neutrinos have been observed. In summary, the observations of parity violation require a theory that is not invariant under parity transformations. This is achieved by having a vector and an axial part in the current. 3 Fermi vs IVB theory The muon can decay into an electron and two neutrinos: µ− → e− + ν̄e + νµ (14) In this way, both the lepton number within each lepton family (e, µ, τ ) and the electric charge is conserved. A naive picture of this interaction would 3 νµ µ νµ ν̄e W µ ν̄e e e Figure 1: Muon decay in four-fermi theory (left) and in intermediate vector boson theory (right). be a four-point interaction with no propagator as in Fermi theory. The interaction is shown in the Fermi picture in Fig. 1 (left). A more complete picture of the interaction is given by Intermediate Vector Boson theory (IVB theory) with the appearance of an intermediate off-shell charged W boson: µ− → W −∗ + νµ → e− + ν̄e + νµ (15) This picture is illustrated in Fig. 1 (right). In four-fermi theory, the decay width of the muon is given by Γ(µ− → e− + ν̄e + νµ ) = G2F m5µ 192π 3 (16) The lifetime of the muon τµ is the inverse of this value, τ = 1/Γ. This prediction of the muon life time agrees to the level of a few parts in a million. More on this in 16.6.1 in Mandl and Shaw. While four-fermi theory gives a good approximation for muon decays, for weak processes at higher energies, the IVB model is required. The W boson was discovered in 1983, once there was a particle accelerator (at CERN) powerful enough to produce it. The Fermi theory can be seen as an effective theory that is valid at exchange of energy much lower than the W mass (80 GeV). A yet more complete theory is electroweak theory, in which also neutral Z bosons can mediate the weak force. There are reasons to believe that the Standard Model is an effective theory that describes physics well at currently available energy, but should be modified in order to also describe physics at higher energies. Many specific models, e.g. of supersymmetry and extra dimensions, address some of the issues with the Standard Model. If one makes the assumption that the new particles predicted by such theories have an masses above the reach of our experiments, one can search for new physics in a more general framework of Effective Field Theory. One assumes that the new particles are too heavy to be produced, but that at high enough energies, sizable corrections to the Lagrangian from new physics will occur, affecting the production rates and distributions of different Standard Model-like processes. 4 Additional reading on the 4-fermi prediction for muon decay: Schwartz chapter 29.4. Additional reading on Effective Field Theory: http://arxiv.org/abs/ 1303.3876 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.00046 4 Neutrino oscillations The calculations below are meant to fill in the gaps in the part on neutrino oscillations in Mandl and Shaw. It gives a general form of the mass term for neutrinos that can be added to the Standard Model. Neutrino mixing: the interaction states νe , νµ , ντ of neutrinos are not mass eigenstates (1,2,3), but rather linear combinations of them: The free field Lagrangian for neutrinos should be expressed in term of the mass eigenstates: Inverting the previous equation and using that U is a unitary matrix = U †: U −1 In the last step, it is used that γ 0 and Ulj commute (they act on different spaces). So, The expression defines the mass matrix for neutrinos. Here mj is a diagonal matrix and one gets the same index three times. The free field Lagrangian can be 5 written as: The second term in this expression includes neutrino oscillations - the change of flavour l of neutrinos over time. These oscillations are possible because the different neutrinos have different masses. It is not known by what mechanism neutrinos acquire mass and why this mass is very small. The see-saw mechanism is a popular model. It is also not known whether neutrinos are their own anti-particles (Majorana neutrinos) or not. Additional reading on the see-saw mechanism: arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/ 0109264v2.pdf. Additional reading on measurements of β decays to test whether neutrinos are Majorana particles: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.4791.pdf. The idea is that if the neutrino is its own anti-particle, one can join a neutrino and an antineutrino into a neutrino propagator and get a double β decay without neutrino emission (Fig 3 in the link). If the neutrino is not it’s own anti-particle, this can not be done, and only a double β decay accompanied by two neutrinos is possible. 4.1 Probability to remain in the same interaction state Here it is derived what the probability of a neutrino produced as a an electron neutrino to remain in that state some time T later. It is assumed that only electron neutrinos and muon neutrinos can oscillate to each other, which is reasonable for comparatively short times. The starting point is the expression for the mass eigenstates in terms of the interaction eigenstates as a function of time: |ν1 (t)i = (cos θ |νe i − sin θ |νµ i)e−iE1 t (17) −iE2 t (18) |ν2 (t)i = (sin θ |νe i + cos θ |νµ i)e Inverting the equations at t = 0, one gets: |νe i = cos θ |ν1 i + sin θ |ν2 i (19) Then the probability of the neutrino to be in the same state some time T later is: hνe | |νe (T )i = cos2 θe−iE1 T + sin2 θe−iE2 T . The probability of it remaining an electron neutrino is then 6 (20) | hνe | |νe (t)i |2 = cos4 θ + sin4 θ + sin2 θ cos2 θ(e−i(E1 −E2 )T + ei(E1 −E2 )T ) = = cos4 θ + sin4 θ + sin2 θ cos2 θ2 cos[(E1 − E2 )T ] = = cos4 θ + sin4 θ + 2 sin2 θ cos2 θ{1 − 2 sin2 θ[(E1 − E2 )T /2]} = = 1 − 4 sin2 θ cos2 θ sin2 [(E1 − E2 )T /2] = = 1 − sin2 2θ sin2 [(E1 − E2 )T /2](21) 4.2 Rewriting in terms of mass difference The neutrinos are produced in a flavour eigenstate with some fixed momentum p. When produced, they are not in a mass eigenstate or energy eigenstate, but in a superpostition of two energies E1 and E2 . Making a Taylor expansion: q 1 m21 , (22) E1 = m21 + p2 ≈ p + 2 p q 1 m22 E2 = m22 + p2 ≈ p + . (23) 2 p Then E1 − E2 = m21 − m22 . 2p (24) In natural units and approximating that the neutrinos travel at the speed of light, T = L, where L is the distance travelled. Then, writing E in place of p: | hνe | |νe (T )i |2 = 1 − sin2 2θ sin2 [(m21 − m22 )L/4E]. (25) By observing the number of neutrinos that have changed flavour at different distances L from the neutrino source, one can deduce the difference of the masses squared for the mass eigenstates. 4.3 Best place for seeing oscillations Assuming E = 4 MeV and ∆m2 = m21 − m22 = 7.5 · 10−5 eV−1 , the largest oscillation effect would be seen when ∆m2 L π = . 4E 2 (26) or L= 2πE = 335 · 109 eV−1 . ∆m2 (27) Converting from natural units, eV−1 = 1.97 · 10−5 m. So L = 66 km away from the neutrino source, the effects of the oscillation can be best observed. 7 5 Peskin and Schroeder 4.2 The Lagrangian describes the free fields and interactions of two hypothetical bosons (Φ, φ). Provided that the Φ boson is at least twice as heavy as φ, it can decay into two φ-s. We are to find the mean lifetime τ of Φ. The lifetime τ of a particle is related to its decay rate ? by Eq. (16.38) in Mandl and Shaw: For the Lagrangian (13), we only have one decay mode Φ → φφ, thus only one Γ to consider. The expression for the differential decay rate is, from Eq. (16.36) in Mandl and Shaw: To find M, we do a perturbation expansion in first order of the interaction part of the Lagrangian. We consider the first order term: Keeping in mind that both fields are real, we call the annihilation and creation operators for Φ: a, a† and for φ: b, b† . Our initial state is |ii = a† (p) |0i. Our final state is |f i = b† (p01 )b† (p02 ) |0i, so hf | = h0| b(p01 )b(p0 2) is: A factor 2 has been inserted because there are two ways of matching the final state momenta to the two ? fields. The integral over the x-dependent terms gives (2π)4 δ 4 (p01 + p02 − p), which is already included in the equation for dΓ. We get: and Inserting this into the equation for dΓ: Choosing the rest frame of the decaying particle, the δ functions impose that: 8 Integrating over p02 : Using spherical coordinates: d3 p01 = |p01 |2 d|p01 |dΩ and making a variable substitution |p01 |2 = E102 − m2φ , 2|p01 |d|p01 = 2E 0 dE 0 : So, the mean lifetime of Φ is given by: We see that this only has a real value if MΦ ≥ 2mφ . 6 Madgraph There was a brief demonstration of how to make predictions from the Standard Model using the event generator MadGraph https://launchpad.net/ mg5amcnlo. We specifically looked at the predictions for producing a lepton pair e + e− from colliding protons at 13 TeV collision energy. In the invarip ant mass spectrum minv = (E10 + E20 )2 − |p01 + p02 |2 a peak was seen at the mass of the Z boson (91 GeV). At low minv , there was instead a large contribution to e+ e− production from off-shell photons γ ∗ . The interference between Z and γ ∗ was found to be small for this process. 9