DOCSLIB.ORG

With Toshihide Maskawa Interviewer: Shigeki Sugimoto

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
With Toshihide Maskawa Interviewer: Shigeki Sugimoto IPMU Interview with Toshihide Maskawa Interviewer: Shigeki Sugimoto 1 My rst paper was a Ph.D. Professor Sakata’s group. thesis There I was often teased about Sugimoto How are you? First behaving as if I were some I’d like to ask kind of big shot, even though your graduate I hadn’t written any papers. student days. (Laughs). Actually, my rst Maskawa Well, paper was my doctoral thesis. during those days at Once Yoichi Iwasaki2 came Nagoya University, to Nagoya with the intention graduate students who of observing us because he were theoretically oriented thought people from the were not assigned to any Nagoya group were standing particular group. Instead, they out and attracting his interest went around different theory in places like summer school. groups during the rst year Unfortunately, we were very or so. By the time they were busy at that time preparing about ready to write their for things like the Beijing master’s theses, they were Symposium, a student version assigned to the groups of of the Japan-China Academic their choice. Anyway, I joined Exchange Program, and for summer school. So, poor Toshihide Maskawa was awarded Iwasaki had to go back after the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physics having hardly any discussion jointly with Makoto Kobayashi for “the discovery of the origin of the with us. Subsequently, broken symmetry which predicts the 3 existence of at least three families Professor Shoichiro Otsuki of quarks in nature,” or, for the gave us a good scolding. “Kobayashi-Maskawa theory” of CP violation. He has also received He said that he was really many other distinguished awards, in particular the 1985 Japan Academy ashamed of us, as we had Prize and the 2008 Order of Cultural missed the opportunity to talk Merit. He received a Doctorate from Nagoya University in 1967, and with a fellow researcher who became a Research Associate. He had come all this way. We had moved to Kyoto University in 1970. In 1976, he became an Associate a saying in those days: people Professor at INS, the University of ＊ Tokyo, and in 1980, a Professor at living north of Hakone YITP, Kyoto University. He served as measured the publications by Director of YITP from 1997 through 2003. He is now Nagoya University’s University Professor and Director ＊ Here“, north of Hakone” essentially General of KMI, Nagoya University. means Tokyo. On the other hand, He is also a Professor at Kyoto “west (or south) of Hakone” includes Sangyo University and a member of the Nagoya, Kyoto, and Osaka its board of trustees. districts. 16 IPMU News No. 11 September 2010 weight, rather than by quality. however, we had only one Sugimoto By weight? copy of each journal for the Maskawa Yes, we held that E-laboratory (the traditional their approach emphasized name to represent the the quantity rather than the elementary particle theory quality of publications, but group at Nagoya University). that we were different. We We had to ght over who were aware that we had to got it rst. So we were write high-quality papers. I having a meeting within the had though no publication at E-laboratory to introduce all, so there was no quality to new articles by taking turns. discuss. (Laughs) I was assigned to three or Sugimoto Have you ever felt four journals in my rst turn. that you were at a dead-end Among them was a paper or become depressed? by Fitch and Cronin on a CP Maskawa No, I’m not the violation. I read it, but at rst I kind of person. did not think it was important Sugimoto I see. and wondered if I should skip it. For some reason, though, I Encountering a CP violation reported the article. I thought in a journal club something strange was Maskawa Whenever I happening but did not have a encounter a problem, I usually clear understanding of what it analyze the situation and try was. Although I did not write to nd a solution myself. If a paper, the article motivated something seems beyond my me to pursue theories of ability, I am willing to switch weak interactions. Many to an alternative without people were working on weak hesitation. I try to construct a interactions in those days, but story to describe the hurdle in they were using them as a my path. Of course, the story probe for studying the quark is not likely to re¢ect the truth. model rather than actually But I try anyway. However, studying weak interactions. when things progress and Contrary to these approaches, I am beginning to see a I became rmly aware of breakthrough, this story- the need to study weak building suddenly becomes interactions in the framework helpful. For this reason, I guess, of renormalizable theory. The we could move rather quickly famous GIM paper4 appeared on the CP problem. We used in 1969 (I remember only the to have a journal club, when I year of preprint publication). was at the end of my master’s Later, when Ziro Maki5 wrote course or at the beginning of a paper, he mentioned that he Interview my doctorate. Of course, now had rst been informed of the you can see any paper just by Shigeki Sugimoto is an IPMU clicking through web pages. Professor. He is a theoretical physicist. Sugimoto That’s right. When he was a graduate student at Kyoto University, he joined Professor Maskawa In those days, Maskawa’s group. 17 GIM paper by Maskawa. What think it was either me or even wrote a paper together Nambu had virtually certied intrigued him about this paper Kobayashi who rst suggested with Sandip Pakvasa12 and our work. It was like a was a natural consequence of revisiting the CP violation gave presentations. Sugawara, declaration of victory. introducing charm based on problem. However, we decided who was only about two years Sugimoto I see. higher order effects in weak to work together again, as we older than me and lived in the Maskawa I didn’t remember interactions. But I was more both happened to be in Kyoto. United States for some time, at all how I managed to return interested in the detailed was already a widely respected home that night.15 (Laughs) discussion of how far the Kobayashi-Maskawa theory physicist by then. Thanks to Sugimoto Oh, boy! (Laughs) theory was renormalizable. got gradual recognition his introduction, our paper You also pointed out more That part was given after the Sugimoto Was the CP became known and gradually than one possibility for the CP charm part using about twice violation a big issue in those began to be cited. violation, like the two-Higgs the space. days? Sugimoto I understand the model, in the Kobayashi- Sugimoto That is very Maskawa Not really. I paper drew very little attention Maskawa paper. interesting. guess in 1964, right after when it rst appeared. Maskawa Let me explain Maskawa Then, the paper the Fitch-Cronin paper had Maskawa Ziro Maki was the why we did that. I had been by ’t Hooft and Veltman6 been published, one physicist rst to cite our work when curious why the Sakata appeared in 1971 or 1972. tried to solve the problem by he wrote a paper about the model16 did not or could not At that time I was working introducing a 5th force. But 4-quark model. But there were develop into Gell-Mann’s at Kyoto University. Taichiro it was not very interesting no citations for the next three octet-model.17 But I hardly Kugo7 recalls that I gathered because the postulation of years or so. Then Pakvasa and knew the real reason for a group of people and the 5th force that violates CP Sugawara mentioned our it. So I used to ask around. hosted a seminar. Since now should have directly solved work in their paper. Professor Yoshio Ohnuki18 ’t Hooft had proven the the problem, if it had existed. Sugimoto So your paper told me that he knew how to renormalizability of weak Very few people followed this became better known after make an octet out of a three- interaction theory, I thought it particular idea. At that point Pakvasa and Sugawara’s dimensional representation, was time to revisit the problem we started to investigate paper. but he hesitated to go in that I had left behind earlier. It was this problem and published Maskawa Yes, the existence direction because of Professor time to revisit the CP violation. a paper. But, our paper was of our paper was more widely Sakata’s landmark experience. It was now calculable. I guess almost completely ignored. known after that. Then, at Professor Sakata discussed what was in the mind of I’m not entirely sure, but I the Tokyo Conference13 in Heisenberg’s paper19 on Makoto Kobayashi8 at that think it was probably Sheldon 1978, Professor Yoichiro nuclear structure theory in his time was the Niu-event,9 Glashow10 who then wrote a Nambu14 mentioned our undergraduate dissertation although I never asked him paper without knowing about work in his summary talk. He in a very animated way. He directly. our work. compared various CP violation noted that the most important Sugimoto What is the Niu- Sugimoto I see. models and concluded that thing was the discovery of event? Maskawa However, Yoichi our approach seemed the the neutron. He wrote that Maskawa It was a charm Iwasaki,2 Hirotaka Sugawara11 most appropriate. After the people had faced many candidate found in cosmic and others acknowledged our conference, about ten of us, contradictions prior to that, rays, although only one event work.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2018 ENCATC International Study Tour to Tokyo TABLE of CONTENTS
    The European network on cultural management and policy 2018 ENCATC International Study Tour to 5-9 November 2018 Tokyo Tokyo, Japan ENCATC Academy on Cultural Policy & Cultural #ENCATCinTokyo Diplomacy and Study Visits The ENCATC International Study Tour The ENCATC Academy is done in Media partners The ENCATC International Study The ENCATC International Study Tour and Academy are an initiative of partnership with Tour is done in the framework of and Academy are supported by www.encatc.org | #ENCATCinTokyo 1 2018 ENCATC International Study Tour to Tokyo TABLE OF CONTENTS Presentation 3 6 reasons to join us in Tokyo 6 Programme 7 Study Visits 12 Open Call for Presentations 13 Meet Distinguished Speakers 14 Bibliography 21 List of Participants 22 Useful Information & Maps 24 About ENCATC and our Partners 33 ENCATC Resources 35 Be involved! 36 @ENCATC #ENCATCinTokyo @ENCATC_official #ENCATCinTokyo @ENCATC #ENCATCinTokyo ENCATC has produced this e-brochure to reduce our carbon footprint! We suggest you download it to your smartphone or tablet before arriving to Tokyo. COVER PHOTOSFROM TOP LEFT CLOCKWISE: “Koinobori now!” at the National Art Center Tokyo www.nact.jp/english/; Mori Building Digital Art Museum teamlab borderless https://borderless.teamlab.art/; Poster of a performance from the Japan Arts Council https://www.ntj.jac.go.jp/english.html; EU Commissioner European Commissioner for Education, Culture, Youth and Sport meeting with Yoshimasa Hayashi, Japan Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) on 6 July
    [Show full text]
  • The Growth of Scientific Communities in Japan^
    The Growth of Scientific Communities in Japan^ Mitsutomo Yuasa** 1. Introdution The first university in Japan on the European system was Tokyo Imperial University, established in 1877. Twenty years later, Kyoto Imperial University was founded in 1897. Among the graduates from the latter university can be found two post World War II Nobel Prize winners in physics, namely, Hideki Yukawa (in 1949), and Shinichiro Tomonaga (in 1965). We may say that Japan attained her scientific maturity nearly a century after the arrival of Commodore Perry in 1853 for the purpose of opening her ports. Incidentally, two scientists in the U.S.A. were awarded the Nobel Prize before 1920, namely, A. A. Michelson (physics in 1907), and T. W. Richard (chemistry in 1914). On this point, Japan lagged about fifty years behind the U.S.A. Japanese scientists began to achieve international recognition in the 1890's. This period conincides with the dates of the establishment of the Cabinet System, the promulgation of the Constitution of the Japanese Empire and the opening of the Imperial Diet, 1885, 1889, and 1890 respectively. Shibasaburo Kitazato (1852-1931), discovered the serum treatment for tetanus in 1890, Jiro ICitao (1853- 1907), made public his theories on the movement of atomospheric currents and typhoons in 1887, and Hantaro Nagaoka (1865-1950), published his research on the distortion of magnetism in 1889, and his idea on the structure of the atom in 1903. These three representative scientists were all closely related to Tokyo Imperial University, as graduates and latter, as professors. But we cannot forget to men tion that the main studies of Kitazato and Kitao were made, not in Japan, but in Germany, under the guidance of great scientists of that country, R.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Research on Japanese Employment System Based on the Theories of David Marsden, James C
    Journal of Economics, Business and Management, Vol. 3, No. 4, April 2015 A Comparative Research on Japanese Employment System Based on the Theories of David Marsden, James C. Abegglen and Ronald P. Dore Sun Yan topic that has been centered on is to explore the international Abstract—The theme of Japanese administration has been a diversity of employment relationship. He aims to solve the hot topic debated during decades and scholars have done their question of why there are such great differences in researches in a various fields over this subject. There are three international employment relations and why firms and outstanding achievements in searching for the truth of Japanese workers should take employment relationships as their employment system made by David Marsden, James Abegglen, and Ronald Dore on behalf of each period. Though numerous economic cooperation basis. Flexibility in employment discussions have been done on each of their typical logics, there relationship not only provides the managers authority of is still no study to string the three together. Of course theories of organizing work, but also sets limitations on obligations of the three consider different periods, stand for different fields or employees. As one of the preventative example in Marsden‟s even view from different perspectives, but they also show discussion [2], Japanese employment system has been factors in common, and the meaning of comparative study lies demonstrated according to this general theory. in their key concepts on Japanese employment system. As the title shows, this paper attempts to make a review It is universal acknowledged that the typical characteristics based on the theories of the three in order to search for an of Japanese administration have been first put forward by 2 integrated understanding of Japanese employment system Abegglen in his book “The Japanese factory: aspects of its through Marsden’s framework, Dore’s detailed data analysis, social organization” published in 1958.
    [Show full text]
  • HOPE Meetings Are Held for Excellent Graduate Students and Young Researchers Specially Selected from Countries Around the 9Th Asia-Pacific and Africa Region
    For Overseas Cooperating Institutions Objective HOPE Meetings are held for excellent graduate students and young researchers specially selected from countries around the 9th Asia-Pacific and Africa region. These meetings give an opportunity for the participants to engage in interdisciplinary discussions with Nobel laureates and other distinguished HOPE MEETING scientists pioneering the frontiers of knowledge. They also give the participants, who lodge together over the course of the event, a chance to make friends and form collegial networks with Nobel Laureates with peers from the regions. The title “HOPE Meeting” signifies the promise held for the future roles of young researchers and optimism for creating a bright S&T future within the global community. Date F ebruary 26- ■ Saturday, February 25: Orientation & Registration M arch 2, 2017 ■ Sunday, February 26: Nobel Prize Dialogue Tokyo 2017 Organizer Venue Tokyo , JAPAN Office of the HOPE Meetings, JSPS E-mail [email protected] Tel: +81-3-3263-2414 Fax:+81-3-3234-3700 HOPE MEETINGS with Nobel Laureates Organizing Committee of the HOPE Meetings ■ Chair Makoto Kobayashi <Nobel Laureate in Physics 2008> Honorary Professor Emeritus, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK) ■ Members Noriko Osumi Mitsuhiko Shionoya Tohoku University The University of Tokyo Takaaki Kajita <Nobel Laureate in Physics 2015> Yousuke Takahama The University of Tokyo Tokushima University Kazuhiro Kosuge Fumio Hanaoka Tohoku University Tsukuba University Program of the HOPE Meeting The program
    [Show full text]
  • Ernest Rutherford and the Accelerator: “A Million Volts in a Soapbox”
    Ernest Rutherford and the Accelerator: “A Million Volts in a Soapbox” AAPT 2011 Winter Meeting Jacksonville, FL January 10, 2011 H. Frederick Dylla American Institute of Physics Steven T. Corneliussen Jefferson Lab Outline • Rutherford's call for inventing accelerators ("million volts in a soap box") • Newton, Franklin and Jefferson: Notable prefiguring of Rutherford's call • Rutherfords's discovery: The atomic nucleus and a new experimental method (scattering) • A century of particle accelerators AAPT Winter Meeting January 10, 2011 Rutherford’s call for inventing accelerators 1911 – Rutherford discovered the atom’s nucleus • Revolutionized study of the submicroscopic realm • Established method of making inferences from particle scattering 1927 – Anniversary Address of the President of the Royal Society • Expressed a long-standing “ambition to have available for study a copious supply of atoms and electrons which have an individual energy far transcending that of the alpha and beta particles” available from natural sources so as to “open up an extraordinarily interesting field of investigation.” AAPT Winter Meeting January 10, 2011 Rutherford’s wish: “A million volts in a soapbox” Spurred the invention of the particle accelerator, leading to: • Rich fundamental understanding of matter • Rich understanding of astrophysical phenomena • Extraordinary range of particle-accelerator technologies and applications AAPT Winter Meeting January 10, 2011 From Newton, Jefferson & Franklin to Rutherford’s call for inventing accelerators Isaac Newton, 1717, foreseeing something like quarks and the nuclear strong force: “There are agents in Nature able to make the particles of bodies stick together by very strong attractions. And it is the business of Experimental Philosophy to find them out.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Mechanics Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD)
    Quantum Mechanics_quantum chromodynamics (QCD) In theoretical physics, quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is a theory ofstrong interactions, a fundamental forcedescribing the interactions between quarksand gluons which make up hadrons such as the proton, neutron and pion. QCD is a type of Quantum field theory called a non- abelian gauge theory with symmetry group SU(3). The QCD analog of electric charge is a property called 'color'. Gluons are the force carrier of the theory, like photons are for the electromagnetic force in quantum electrodynamics. The theory is an important part of the Standard Model of Particle physics. A huge body of experimental evidence for QCD has been gathered over the years. QCD enjoys two peculiar properties: Confinement, which means that the force between quarks does not diminish as they are separated. Because of this, when you do split the quark the energy is enough to create another quark thus creating another quark pair; they are forever bound into hadrons such as theproton and the neutron or the pion and kaon. Although analytically unproven, confinement is widely believed to be true because it explains the consistent failure of free quark searches, and it is easy to demonstrate in lattice QCD. Asymptotic freedom, which means that in very high-energy reactions, quarks and gluons interact very weakly creating a quark–gluon plasma. This prediction of QCD was first discovered in the early 1970s by David Politzer and by Frank Wilczek and David Gross. For this work they were awarded the 2004 Nobel Prize in Physics. There is no known phase-transition line separating these two properties; confinement is dominant in low-energy scales but, as energy increases, asymptotic freedom becomes dominant.
    [Show full text]
  • Scaling Laws in Particle Physics and Astrophysics
    SCALING LAWS IN PARTICLE PHYSICS AND ASTROPHYSICS RUDOLF MURADYAN Dedicated to the Golden Jubilee (1961-2011) of publication of the article by Geoffrey Chew and Steven Frautschi in Phys. Rev. Lett. 7, 394, 1961, where a celebrated scaling law J m2 has been conjectured for spin/mass dependence of hadrons. G. Chew S. Frautschi 1. INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS SCALING? Any polynomial power law f() x c xn , where constant c has a dimension dim f dimc (dimx )n exhibits the property of scaling or scale invariance. Usually n is called scaling exponent. The word scaling express the fact that function f is shape-invariant with respect to the dilatation transformation x x f ( x) c ( x)n n f() x and this transformation preserves the shape of function f . We say, following Leonhard Euler, that f is homogeneous of degree “n” if for any value of parameter f ( x) n f() x . Differentiating this relation with respect to and putting 1we obtain simple differential equation x f() x n f() x solution of which brings back to the polynomial power scaling law. There are tremendously many different scaling laws in Nature. The most important of them can be revealed by Google search of scaling site:nobelprize.org in the official site of Nobel Foundation, where nearly 100 results appears. Ten of them are shown below: 1. Jerome I. Friedman - Nobel Lecture 2. Daniel C. Tsui - Nobel Lecture 3. Gerardus 't Hooft - Nobel Lecture 4. Henry W. Kendall - Nobel Lecture 5. Pierre-Gilles de Gennes - Nobel Lecture 6. Jack Steinberger - Nobel Lecture 7.
    [Show full text]
  • The Twenty-First Century Paradigm and the Role of Information Technology
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Springer - Publisher Connector Chapter 2 The Twenty-First Century Paradigm and the Role of Information Technology In Chap. 1 , we considered demand by roughly classifying it into two types: “diffusive demand” and “creative demand.” The “paradigm of the twentieth century and before” was characterized by diffu- sive demand. The paradigm was constituted by a material desire to satisfy needs for food, clothing, and shelter, as well as transportation, and social mobility. Many of the industries that came into being in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries were intended to satisfy such desires. I describe those material desires as diffusive demand leading to a “saturation of man-made objects .” It follows that new demand in the twenty-fi rst century will be generated by a new paradigm. Thus, in this chapter fi rst describes what the paradigms of the twenty-fi rst century are and then refl ects on the role played by the knowledge explosion, one of those paradigms, and the role played by information technology, which looks as if it came into being to solve problems created by the knowledge explosion. Exploding Knowledge, Limited Earth, and Aging Society What are the paradigms of the twenty-fi rst century? I believe there are three, which I classify as “exploding knowledge ,” “limited earth,” and “aging society” (Fig. 2.1 ). These three paradigms do not represent anything that is either good or bad for humanity. Each constitutes a basic framework containing both light and shadow. For instance, there has been an explosive increase in knowledge .
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E Nobel Prizes in Nuclear Science
    Nuclear Science—A Guide to the Nuclear Science Wall Chart ©2018 Contemporary Physics Education Project (CPEP) Appendix E Nobel Prizes in Nuclear Science Many Nobel Prizes have been awarded for nuclear research and instrumentation. The field has spun off: particle physics, nuclear astrophysics, nuclear power reactors, nuclear medicine, and nuclear weapons. Understanding how the nucleus works and applying that knowledge to technology has been one of the most significant accomplishments of twentieth century scientific research. Each prize was awarded for physics unless otherwise noted. Name(s) Discovery Year Henri Becquerel, Pierre Discovered spontaneous radioactivity 1903 Curie, and Marie Curie Ernest Rutherford Work on the disintegration of the elements and 1908 chemistry of radioactive elements (chem) Marie Curie Discovery of radium and polonium 1911 (chem) Frederick Soddy Work on chemistry of radioactive substances 1921 including the origin and nature of radioactive (chem) isotopes Francis Aston Discovery of isotopes in many non-radioactive 1922 elements, also enunciated the whole-number rule of (chem) atomic masses Charles Wilson Development of the cloud chamber for detecting 1927 charged particles Harold Urey Discovery of heavy hydrogen (deuterium) 1934 (chem) Frederic Joliot and Synthesis of several new radioactive elements 1935 Irene Joliot-Curie (chem) James Chadwick Discovery of the neutron 1935 Carl David Anderson Discovery of the positron 1936 Enrico Fermi New radioactive elements produced by neutron 1938 irradiation Ernest Lawrence
    [Show full text]
  • The Nobel Prize in Physics: Four Historical Case Studies
    The Nobel Prize in Physics: Four Historical Case Studies By: Hannah Pell, Research Assistant November 2019 From left: Arnold Sommerfeld, Lise Meitner, Chien-Shiung Wu, Satyendra Nath Bose. Images courtesy of the AIP Emilio Segré Visual Archives. Grade Level(s): 11-12, College Subject(s): History, Physics In-Class Time: 50 - 60 minutes Prep Time: 15 – 20 minutes Materials • Photocopies of case studies (found in the Supplemental Materials) • Student internet access Objective Students will investigate four historical case studies of physicists who some physicists and historians have argued should have won a Nobel Prize in physics: Arnold Sommerfeld, Lise Meitner, Chien-Shiung Wu, and Satyendra Nath Bose. With each Case Study, students examine the historical context surrounding the prize that year (if applicable) as well as potential biases inherent in the structure of the Nobel Prize committee and its selection process. Students will summarize arguments for why these four physicists should have been awarded a Nobel Prize, as well as potential explanations for why they were not awarded the honor. Introduction Introduction to the Nobel Prize In 1895, Alfred Nobel—a Swedish chemist and engineer who invented dynamite—signed into his will that a large portion of his vast fortune should be used to create a series of annual prizes awarded to those who “confer the greatest benefit on mankind” in physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, 1 literature, and peace.1 (The Nobel Prize in economics was added later to the collection of disciplines in 1968). Thus, the Nobel Foundation was founded as a private organization in 1900 and the first Nobel Prizes were awarded in 1901.
    [Show full text]
  • C11 Commission on Particles and Fields Fermilab MS 370 +1(630)840-8071
    Patricia McBride C11 Commission on Particles and Fields Fermilab MS 370 +1(630)840-8071 His Excellency Mr. Tatsuo Kawabata Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology 3-2-2 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku Tokyo, 100-8959 Japan Your Excellency, The members of the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics (IUPAP) C11 Commission on Particles and Fields would like to acknowledge the significant and distinguished contributions of Japanese scientists and Japanese scientific research projects to the field of elementary particle physics. C11 promotes the exchange of information and views among the members of the international scientific community in the field of Particles and Fields. This field of science investigates the nature and properties of the fundamental constituents of matter and the forces acting between these constituents. In addition, the field encompasses the accelerators, detectors and techniques used in these investigations and the industrial applications of related technologies. Scientists working in Japan have made many major contributions to our field. The discovery of neutrino mass was heralded as one of the most important discoveries in elementary particle physics during the last quarter century. The first convincing evidence for neutrino masses came from Super-Kamiokande, a Japanese experiment. The Kamiokande experiment on the other hand, the predecessor of Super-Kamiokande, detected neutrinos coming from supernova 1987a. These detected neutrinos showed that we are able to understand the science of supernova explosions. In 2002, the Japanese scientist Masatoshi Koshiba won a Nobel Prize for his leading role in the Kamiokande and Super-Kamiokande experiments. The Japanese research center KEK and the American research center SLAC have studied the difference between the behavior of matter and antimatter at their facilities known as "B-Factories".
    [Show full text]
  • Geometric Approaches to Quantum Field Theory
    GEOMETRIC APPROACHES TO QUANTUM FIELD THEORY A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Science and Engineering 2020 Kieran T. O. Finn School of Physics and Astronomy Supervised by Professor Apostolos Pilaftsis BLANK PAGE 2 Contents Abstract 7 Declaration 9 Copyright 11 Acknowledgements 13 Publications by the Author 15 1 Introduction 19 1.1 Unit Independence . 20 1.2 Reparametrisation Invariance in Quantum Field Theories . 24 1.3 Example: Complex Scalar Field . 25 1.4 Outline . 31 1.5 Conventions . 34 2 Field Space Covariance 35 2.1 Riemannian Geometry . 35 2.1.1 Manifolds . 35 2.1.2 Tensors . 36 2.1.3 Connections and the Covariant Derivative . 37 2.1.4 Distances on the Manifold . 38 2.1.5 Curvature of a Manifold . 39 2.1.6 Local Normal Coordinates and the Vielbein Formalism 41 2.1.7 Submanifolds and Induced Metrics . 42 2.1.8 The Geodesic Equation . 42 2.1.9 Isometries . 43 2.2 The Field Space . 44 2.2.1 Interpretation of the Field Space . 48 3 2.3 The Configuration Space . 50 2.4 Parametrisation Dependence of Standard Approaches to Quan- tum Field Theory . 52 2.4.1 Feynman Diagrams . 53 2.4.2 The Effective Action . 56 2.5 Covariant Approaches to Quantum Field Theory . 59 2.5.1 Covariant Feynman Diagrams . 59 2.5.2 The Vilkovisky–DeWitt Effective Action . 62 2.6 Example: Complex Scalar Field . 66 3 Frame Covariance in Quantum Gravity 69 3.1 The Cosmological Frame Problem .
    [Show full text]