* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download ANDRÉ PETERMANN by Antonino Zichichi
Casimir effect wikipedia , lookup
Photoelectric effect wikipedia , lookup
Quantum chromodynamics wikipedia , lookup
Scalar field theory wikipedia , lookup
Atomic nucleus wikipedia , lookup
Old quantum theory wikipedia , lookup
Quantum vacuum thruster wikipedia , lookup
ALICE experiment wikipedia , lookup
Aharonov–Bohm effect wikipedia , lookup
Higgs mechanism wikipedia , lookup
Introduction to quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Quantum electrodynamics wikipedia , lookup
Large Hadron Collider wikipedia , lookup
ATLAS experiment wikipedia , lookup
History of quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
Technicolor (physics) wikipedia , lookup
Standard Model wikipedia , lookup
Relativistic quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Electron scattering wikipedia , lookup
Eigenstate thermalization hypothesis wikipedia , lookup
Theoretical and experimental justification for the Schrödinger equation wikipedia , lookup
Elementary particle wikipedia , lookup
Mathematical formulation of the Standard Model wikipedia , lookup
Compact Muon Solenoid wikipedia , lookup
Introduction to gauge theory wikipedia , lookup
Grand Unified Theory wikipedia , lookup
Supersymmetry wikipedia , lookup
Future Circular Collider wikipedia , lookup
Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model wikipedia , lookup
ANDRÉ PETERMANN by Antonino Zichichi I was in Rome when, for the first time, I heard of André Petermann during a seminar by Bruno Ferretti on hot topics in Theoretical Physics. The topic being discussed was the paper by Stueckelberg and Petermann where the electromagnetic coupling “constant” was loosing its fundamental property of being “constant”. The audience was literally shocked to learn that the electric charge had to change with energy. The origin of this conceptual revolution was the work of E.C.G. Stueckelberg and A. Petermann [1] who discovered that all quantities 2 such as the gauge couplings (i ) and the masses (mj) must “run” with q , the invariant quadrimomentum of a process. It took many years to realize that this “running” allows the existence of a Grand Unification (GUT), opens the way to Supersymmetry and finally produces the need for a non point-like description of physics processes – the Relativistic Quantum String Theory – which should produce the so much needed quantization of gravity. It is probably interesting to recall the reasons why Stueckelberg and Petermann paper attracted so much attention [1]. The radiative corrections to any electromagnetic process were found to be logarithmically divergent. Fortunately all divergencies could be grouped into two classes: one had the property of a mass, while the other class had the property of an electric charge. If these divergent integrals were substituted with the experimentally measured mass and charge of the electron, all theoretical predictions could be made to be “finite”. This procedure was called “mass” and “charge” renormalization. Stueckelberg and Petermann discovered [1] that if the mass and the charge are made to be finite, they must run with energy. It remains the freedom to choose one’s renormalization subtraction points. Petermann and Stueckelberg proposed that this freedom had to obey the rules of an Invariance Group, which they called the “Renormalization Group”. This is the origin of what we now call the Renormalization Group Equations which, as mentioned above, imply that all gauge coupling and masses must run with energy. It was remarkable to find that the three gauge couplings could converge – even if not very well – towards the same value. This means that all gauge forces could have the same origin: GUT. We will see that the first fellow, who realized that the convergence of the 1 three gauge couplings could be “perfect” if Supersymmetry was introduced, is Petermann. The second occasion to know about Petermann came when I was engaged in measuring the (g–2), anomalous magnetic moment, of the muon. The most accurate theoretical prediction was due to André Petermann. There was no high precision measurement of this quantity due to technical problems which had yet to be solved. For example, the construction of a magnet able to produce a set of high precision polinomial magnetic fields along a path as long as possible. This is how the biggest (6 meters long) “flat magnet” was built at CERN with the invention of a new technology. André Petermann was working only during night hours; since he was very interested in the experimental difficulties, he was spending nights with me in the SC-Experimental Hall. It was for me a great help to interact with the theorist who was the author of the most accurate theoretical prediction for the anomalous magnetic moment of a particle 200 times heavier than the electron. The muon must show up a difference in such a fundamental property, its (g–2); otherwise why is its mass 200 times greater than that of the electron? When the experiment proved that – at the level of (½)‰ – the muon behaves as a perfect electromagnetic object, the problem in focus was why are there so many muons around? The answer was in the incredible value of the mass difference between the muon and its father, the π. Another “heavy electron”, the “3rd lepton” in the Gev-mass-range, could exist having no father strongly interacting, like a heavy π. Has any search ever been done for this third “lepton”? The answer was no. Only strongly interacting particles were studied. This is how the search for a new heavy lepton, called HL, was implemented at CERN, with the socalled PAPLEP (Proton AntiProton into LEpton Pairs) project: where the production process was the proton-antiproton annihilation. These topics were discussed in the CERN Experimental Hall during the night shifts which André Petermann was spending with me. The results of the PAPLEP experiment gave the unexpected extremely strong value for the (Time-like) Electromagnetic Form-Factor of the proton. This is how, during another series of night discussions with André, it was decided that the “ideal” production process for a third “lepton” was (e+e) annihilation. There was no such a collider at CERN. The only one was being built at Frascati by Bruno Touschek, a good friend of Bruno Ferretti, and another physicist working preferably at night. I had the great 2 privilege of knowing Bruno Touschek when I was in Rome. He also became a strong supporter of the search for a “3rd lepton” with the new collider “ADONE”. Unfortunately the top energy of ADONE was 3 Gev and the only result we could get was a limit of 1 Gev for the mass of the so much wanted “3rd lepton”. Another argument being discussed with André has its roots in the famous work with Stueckelberg: the running with energy of the fundamental coupling of the three interactions: electromagnetic, weak and strong. The crucial point here was at the EPS conference in York (1978) and at the EPS conference in Geneva (1979). In my closing lecture at the EPS-Geneva I stated: “Unification of all forces needs first a Supersymmetry. This can be broken later, thus generating the sequence of the various forces of nature as we observe them”. This statement was based on a work with André where the renormalization group running of the couplings, introducing a new degree of freedom due to Supersymmetry, was studied: the convergence of the three couplings improved a lot. This work was not published, but known to a few. The Erice Schools «Superworld I», «Superworld II» and «Superworld III» sparked off from this work. This is how we arrived at 1991 when it was announced that the search for Supersymmetry had to wait until the multiTev energy threshold could be available. A group of 50 young physicists was engaged at LEP with me to search for the lightest supersymmetric particle in the L3 experiment. If these new theoretical “predictions” were true there was no point in spending so much efforts to look for Supersymmetry breaking at LEP energy. Reading these papers, we realized that no one had ever considered the Evolution of Gaugino Mass (EGM). During many nights of work we improved the 1979 unpublished result mentioned above: the EGM effect was to bring down the energy threshold for Supersymmetry breaking by nearly three orders of magnitude. Thanks to this series of works I could assure my collaborators that the “theoretical” predictions on the Energy level where SUSY breaking could occur was perfectly compatible with LEP energy (and now with LHC). Finally, in the field of Scientific Culture, I would like to pay tribute to André Petermann for having been a strong supporter for the establishment of the Ettore Majorana Centre for Scientific Culture in Erice. In the old days, when no one knew Ettore Majorana, André 3 Petermann was one of the very few fellows who knew about the Majorana neutrinos and about the fact that relativistic invariance does not give any privilege to (spin ½) particles such as the privilege of having antiparticles, all spin values being with the same privilege. In all my projects André has been of great help, encouraging me to go on, no matter what the opposition could present in terms of arguments which often he found to be far from being of rigorous validity. REFERENCES [1] The Normalization Group in Quantum Theory E.C.G. Stueckelberg and A. Petermann, Helv. Phys. Acta 24, 317 (1951); La Normalisation des Constantes dans la Théorie des Quanta E.C.G. Stueckelberg and A. Petermann, Helv. Phys. Acta 26, 499 (1953); Quantum Electrodynamics at Small Distances M. Gell-Mann and F.E. Low, Phys. Rev. 95, 1300 (1954); Introduction to the Teory of Quantized Fields N.N. Bogoliubov and D.V. Shirkov, Interscience Publishers, New York (1959); For an excellent description of the subject see "Renormalization and Symmetry: a review for Non-Specialists", S. Coleman, in "Properties of the Fundamental Interactions", Erice 1971, A. Zichichi (ed), Editrice Compositori, Bologna, 605 (1973); Renormalization Group and the Deep Structure of the Proton A. Petermann, Phys. Reports 53, 157 (1979); Renormalization J.C. Collins, Cambridge University Press, (1984). 4