DOCSLIB.ORG

Charged Current Reactions fi Mediated Rest; CP-Invariance fi These States Have Identical Properties

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Charged Current Reactions fi Mediated Rest; CP-Invariance fi These States Have Identical Properties 6. ELECTROWEAK INTERACTIONS Question: why do mm+-and have same lifetime? Answer: CP-conservation (weak interaction is invariant under combined operation CP, even though both C and P are Charged and neutral currents separately violated). CP operator transforms particles at rest to corresponding antiparticles at Neutral current reactions fi mediated by Z0 boson; charged current reactions fi mediated rest; CP-invariance fi these states have identical properties. In muon decays, P changes q to by W ± boson. Electroweak interaction: unifies weak and electromagnetic interactions, but p - q, while C changes particles to antiparticles. Hence CP-invariance alone fi GG+-()cosqq=-() cos . Substituting G (cosq ), gives GG= (equal lifetimes) and unification only becomes manifest at very high energies; at low energies weak and mm m ± +- electromagnetic interactions still clearly separated. Predicts existence of new spin-0 boson xx+-=- (CP-invariance) in agreement experiment. (Only known violations of CP are very (Higgs boson) associated with origin of particle masses within the model. small effects that occur in the decays of some neutral mesons.) Symmetries of the weak interaction Spin structure of weak interactions Will consider weak interactions alone and deduce general properties valid at all energies based on parity (P) and charge conjugation ()C operators. First direct demonstration of (a) Neutrinos: Use helicity states (spin quantised along direction of motion of particle). 60 60 * - parity violation: study of CoÆ++ Ni e ne in magnetic field and cooled to 0.01K. At Definitions for spin-1/2 particle: nL means left-handed neutrino (spin antiparallel to this temperature, interaction of magnetic moments of nuclei with magnetic field overcomes momentum), eR right-handed electron etc. Fact: only left-handed neutrinos nL and right- tendency to thermal disorder fi nuclear spins align parallel to the field direction fi cobalt- handed antineutrinos nR are observed in nature. Violates C-invariance (neutrinos and 60 nuclei (partially) polarized. Parity violation established by observation of “forward- antineutrinos have identical weak interactions) and P-invariance (nnand have identical backward decay asymmetry”, i.e. fewer electrons emitted in forward hemisphere than in LR weak interactions), but compatible with CP-invariance: backward hemisphere with respect to spins of the decaying nuclei. Follows because parity reverses particle momenta p while leaving orbital angular momenta rpŸ (and by analogy spin angular momenta), unchanged. In rest frame of decaying nuclei, effect is: - 152 152 * Helicity of neutrino first measured in reaction eEuJ+=Æ=+()01Sm () J ne . Consistent with occurrence of left-handed neutrinos only. (Later experiments have shown that only right-handed antineutrinos take part in weak interactions.) Parity invariance requires rates for both processes to be equal fi equal numbers of electrons emitted in forward and backward hemispheres with respect to the nuclear spins – (b) Pions and muons: Spin dependence of V-A form. V denotes proper vector, (direction contradicted by experiment. Charge conjugation operator C changes all particles to reversed by parity: example p) Because parity not conserved in weak interactions fi antiparticles – also not conserved in weak interactions. corresponding weak charged current has another component whose direction is unchanged by a parity transformation – called an axial-vector (A) (example: L = r Ÿp) Important result: in C-violation and P-violation in leptonic decays mnn--Æ++e and mnn++Æ++e of - e m e m the limit that their velocities approach that of light, only left-handed fermions nLL, e etc polarized muons. In rest frame of muon, angular distributions of final leptons are of the form + and right-handed antifermions nRR, e etc are emitted in charged current interactions -+ (“forbidden” helicity states eeRL, etc are suppressed by factors typically of order 1 È x± ˘ GG± (cosq )=-1 cosq 24 2 m 2 ± ÎÍ 3 ˚˙ mc2 E , where m is the appropriate fermion mass.) ++l q = angle between muon spin direction and lepton momentum, x± = asymmetry parameters, Illustrated by pnÆ+l. In rest frame of pion, charged lepton and neutrino recoil in -1 - + opposite directions fi spins must be opposed (angular momentum conservation about decay G± = total decay rates (lifetimes t± ∫G± ). C transforms m decay to m decay fi GG+-= axis). Since neutrino is left-handed fi charged lepton must also be left-handed, in and xx+-= (C-invariance). Parity preserves identity of particles, but reverses their momenta contradiction to the expectations for a relativistic antilepton. For positive muon this is fi q Æ fi GG±±cosqq=- cos while leaving spins unchanged pq- , mm() () (P-invariance). ± unimportant, since it recoils non-relativistically so both helicity states are allowed. However, Substituting for G ± (cosq ) fi x± = 0 (P-invariance). Experimentally, m lifetimes equal to 25- m a positron does recoil relativistically fi this mode is suppressed by 22610().mme p = x . very high precision fi prediction for lifetimes satisfied; but xx-+=- =100.. ± 004 fi both Thus positron decay mode is predicted to be much rarer than the muonic mode: measured C-invariance and P-invariance violated. 6.1 6.2 -4 2 h ratio is ()1..218± 0 014x 10 (agrees with calculation). Helicity argument fi muons emitted Strength of each vertex is given by (dimensionless parameter) apww=ªgc41400 for all in pion decays are polarized (also agrees with experiment). three generations. Thus the weak interaction has a similar intrinsic strength to the electromagnetic interaction. Its apparent weakness in many low-energy reactions, is because W± and Z0 bosons the exchange bosons are heavy (effect of propagator). WW+-and and Z0 all discovered at CERN in 1983 in the reactions Weak interactions of hadrons ± +- -+ 00 Understood in terms of basic processes in which W bosons are emitted or absorbed by their pp+Æ W + X,, pp +Æ W + Xand pp +Æ Z + X - constituent quarks, e.g. neutron decay: dueÆ+ +ne: XX± and 0 are arbitrary hadronic states allowed by conservation laws. Beams produced using a proton-antiproton collider (built specifically for this purpose). At the time it had proton and antiproton beams with maximum energies of 270 GeV each, (total centre-of-mass energy of 540 GeV). Two independent experiments were mounted, one (called UA1) shown schematically in Fig.6.11; example of the modern type of layered detector system. WZ± and 0 boson masses are: 22 MWZ==80.,. 6GeV / cM 91 2 GeV / c lifetimes are about 3x10-25 s. Dominant decays lead to jets of hadrons: -- and pion decay: pmn()du Æ+m : Also leptonic decays: Understood in terms of two ideas: lepton-quark symmetry, and quark mixing. (For simplicity, WW++Æ+llnn, -- Æ+ and ZZ00Æ+ll+-, Æ+nn ll l l just consider two generations of quarks.) Lepton-quark symmetry: first two generations of quarks and first two generations of leptons have identical weak interactions fi can obtain ± 0 In contrast to the zero mass photons and gluons, the WZand are very massive particles W ±-quark vertices from replacements nnmÆÆue,,,-- d Æ c Æ s in basic W ±- -3 e m fi very short ranges, RRWZªª¥210 fm. ± lepton vertices, leaving the coupling constant gW unchanged. Resulting W –quark vertices: As in QED, Feynman diagrams for weak interactions are constructed from fundamental three line vertices. For lepton-quark (charged current) interactions: 6.3 6.4 - - weak mixing angle q is given by ; = coupling constant which fi fundamental processes du+Æ W and s+cÆ W occur with same couplings gW as W cosqWWZ∫ MM gz corresponding leptonic processes, while processes su+Æ W- and dc+Æ W- are characterises strength of neutral current vertices. forbidden, i.e. gg== g. But: many decays forbidden in this simple scheme actually cs ud W 0 occur, albeit at a rate which is suppressed relative to the “allowed” decays. Example: Neutral current interactions accounted for in terms of basic Z -lepton vertices. K --Æ+mn, which requires su+Æ W- vertex that is not present in the above scheme. Corresponding quark vertices can be obtained from the lepton vertices by using lepton-quark m symmetry and quark mixing. Resulting set of vertices is: All suppressed decays can be successfully incorporated into theory by quark mixing: d and s quarks participate in the weak interactions via the linear combinations dd¢ =+cosqqCC s sin and sd¢ =-sinqqCC + s cos qC = Cabibbo angle. Lepton-quark symmetry now applies to the doublets Ê u ˆ Ê cˆ Á ˜ and Á ˜ Ëd¢¯ Ës¢¯ fi neutral current interactions, like electromagnetic interactions, conserve quark numbers Generates new vertices previously forbidden. Example: usW vertex required for NNNu ,,d s ..., in contrast to the charged current interactions that do not conserve them. -- K Æ+mnm arises from interpretation of ud¢ W vertex shown: Finally, in any process in which a photon is exchanged, a Z0 boson can be exchanged as well. At energies that are small compared to the Z0 mass, the Z0 -exchange contributions can be neglected compared to the corresponding photon exchange contributions, and these reactions can be regarded as purely electromagnetic to a high degree of accuracy. However, at very high energy and momentum transfers, Z0 -exchange contributions become comparable with photon exchange, and we are therefore dealing with genuinely electroweak processes which involve both weak and electromagnetic interactions to a comparable degree. Illustrated by cross-section ee+-+Æmm + + -. Assume energy is large enough for the Hypothesis enables theory and experiment to be brought into good agreement by choosing o lepton masses to be neglected, then centre-of-mass energy E is the only quantity in the q C = 13 . Rates for previously “allowed” decays occur at rates which are suppressed by system that has dimensions. Because cross-sections have dimensions of an area, a simple 2 cosqC ª 095 . , while previously “forbidden” decays are now allowed, but with rates dimensional argument gives the electromagnetic cross-section for one-photon exchange to be 2 saª 222()hcE.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Story of Large Electron Positron Collider 1
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Publications of the IAS Fellows GENERAL ç ARTICLE The Story of Large Electron Positron Collider 1. Fundamental Constituents of Matter S N Ganguli I nt roduct ion The story of the large electron positron collider, in short LEP, is linked intimately with our understanding of na- ture'sfundamental particlesand theforcesbetween them. We begin our story by giving a brief account of three great discoveries that completely changed our thinking Som Ganguli is at the Tata Institute of Fundamental and started a new ¯eld we now call particle physics. Research, Mumbai. He is These discoveries took place in less than three years currently participating in an during 1895 to 1897: discovery of X-rays by Wilhelm experiment under prepara- Roentgen in 1895, discovery of radioactivity by Henri tion for the Large Hadron Becquerel in 1896 and the identi¯cation of cathode rays Collider (LHC) at CERN, Geneva. He has been as electrons, a fundamental constituent of atom by J J studying properties of Z and Thomson in 1897. It goes without saying that these dis- W bosons produced in coveries were rewarded by giving Nobel Prizes in 1901, electron-positron collisions 1903 and 1906, respectively. X-rays have provided one at the Large Electron of the most powerful tools for investigating the struc- Positron Collider (LEP). During 1970s and early ture of matter, in particular the study of molecules and 1980s he was studying crystals; it is also an indispensable tool in medical diag- production and decay nosis.
    [Show full text]
  • 12 from Neutral Currents to Weak Vector Bosons
    12 From neutral currents to weak vector bosons The unification of weak and electromagnetic interactions, 1973{1987 Fermi's theory of weak interactions survived nearly unaltered over the years. Its basic structure was slightly modified by the addition of Gamow-Teller terms and finally by the determination of the V-A form, but its essence as a four fermion interaction remained. Fermi's original insight was based on the analogy with elec- tromagnetism; from the start it was clear that there might be vector particles transmitting the weak force the way the photon transmits the electromagnetic force. Since the weak interaction was of short range, the vector particle would have to be heavy, and since beta decay changed nuclear charge, the particle would have to carry charge. The weak (or W) boson was the object of many searches. No evidence of the W boson was found in the mass region up to 20 GeV. The V-A theory, which was equivalent to a theory with a very heavy W , was a satisfactory description of all weak interaction data. Nevertheless, it was clear that the theory was not complete. As described in Chapter 6, it predicted cross sections at very high energies that violated unitarity, the basic principle that says that the probability for an individual process to occur must be less than or equal to unity. A consequence of unitarity is that the total cross section for a process with 2 angular momentum J can never exceed 4π(2J + 1)=pcm. However, we have seen that neutrino cross sections grow linearly with increasing center of mass energy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Standard Model Part II: Charged Current Weak Interactions I
    Prepared for submission to JHEP The Standard Model Part II: Charged Current weak interactions I Keith Hamiltona aDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: Rough notes on ... Introduction • Relation between G and g • F W Leptonic CC processes, ⌫e− scattering • Estimated time: 3 hours ⇠ Contents 1 Charged current weak interactions 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Leptonic charge current process 9 1 Charged current weak interactions 1.1 Introduction Back in the early 1930’s we physicists were puzzled by nuclear decay. • – In particular, the nucleus was observed to decay into a nucleus with the same mass number (A A) and one atomic number higher (Z Z + 1), and an emitted electron. ! ! – In such a two-body decay the energy of the electron in the decay rest frame is constrained by energy-momentum conservation alone to have a unique value. – However, it was observed to have a continuous range of values. In 1930 Pauli first introduced the neutrino as a way to explain the observed continuous energy • spectrum of the electron emitted in nuclear beta decay – Pauli was proposing that the decay was not two-body but three-body and that one of the three decay products was simply able to evade detection. To satisfy the history police • – We point out that when Pauli first proposed this mechanism the neutron had not yet been discovered and so Pauli had in fact named the third mystery particle a ‘neutron’. – The neutron was discovered two years later by Chadwick (for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize shortly afterwards in 1935).
    [Show full text]
  • Discovery of Weak Neutral Currents∗
    Discovery of Weak Neutral Currents∗ Dieter Haidt Emeritus at DESY, Hamburg 1 Introduction Following the tradition of previous Neutrino Conferences the opening talk is devoted to a historic event, this year to the epoch-making discovery of Weak Neutral Currents four decades ago. The major laboratories joined in a worldwide effort to investigate this new phenomenon. It resulted in new accelerators and colliders pushing the energy frontier from the GeV to the TeV regime and led to the development of new, almost bubble chamber like, general purpose detectors. While the Gargamelle collaboration consisted of seven european laboratories and was with nearly 60 members one of the biggest collaborations at the time, the LHC collaborations by now have grown to 3000 members coming from all parts in the world. Indeed, High Energy Physics is now done on a worldwide level thanks to net working and fast communications. It seems hardly imaginable that 40 years ago there was no handy, no world wide web, no laptop, no email and program codes had to be punched on cards. Before describing the discovery of weak neutral currents as such and the cir- cumstances how it came about a brief look at the past four decades is anticipated. The history of weak neutral currents has been told in numerous reviews and spe- cialized conferences. Neutral currents have since long a firm place in textbooks. The literature is correspondingly rich - just to point out a few references [1, 2, 3, 4]. 2 Four decades Figure 1 sketches the glorious electroweak way originating in the discovery of weak neutral currents by the Gargamelle Collaboration and followed by the series of eminent discoveries.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Subatomic- Particle Spectrometers∗
    IIT-CAPP-15/2 Introduction to Subatomic- Particle Spectrometers∗ Daniel M. Kaplan Illinois Institute of Technology Chicago, IL 60616 Charles E. Lane Drexel University Philadelphia, PA 19104 Kenneth S. Nelsony University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22901 Abstract An introductory review, suitable for the beginning student of high-energy physics or professionals from other fields who may desire familiarity with subatomic-particle detection techniques. Subatomic-particle fundamentals and the basics of particle in- teractions with matter are summarized, after which we review particle detectors. We conclude with three examples that illustrate the variety of subatomic-particle spectrom- eters and exemplify the combined use of several detection techniques to characterize interaction events more-or-less completely. arXiv:physics/9805026v3 [physics.ins-det] 17 Jul 2015 ∗To appear in the Wiley Encyclopedia of Electrical and Electronics Engineering. yNow at Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, MD 20723. 1 Contents 1 Introduction 5 2 Overview of Subatomic Particles 5 2.1 Leptons, Hadrons, Gauge and Higgs Bosons . 5 2.2 Neutrinos . 6 2.3 Quarks . 8 3 Overview of Particle Detection 9 3.1 Position Measurement: Hodoscopes and Telescopes . 9 3.2 Momentum and Energy Measurement . 9 3.2.1 Magnetic Spectrometry . 9 3.2.2 Calorimeters . 10 3.3 Particle Identification . 10 3.3.1 Calorimetric Electron (and Photon) Identification . 10 3.3.2 Muon Identification . 11 3.3.3 Time of Flight and Ionization . 11 3.3.4 Cherenkov Detectors . 11 3.3.5 Transition-Radiation Detectors . 12 3.4 Neutrino Detection . 12 3.4.1 Reactor Neutrinos . 12 3.4.2 Detection of High Energy Neutrinos .
    [Show full text]
  • Measurement of Neutrino-Nucleon Neutral-Current Elastic Scattering Cross-Section at Sciboone
    Measurement of Neutrino-Nucleon Neutral-Current Elastic Scattering Cross-section at SciBooNE Hideyuki Takei Thesis submitted to the Department of Physics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Science at Tokyo Institute of Technology February, 2009 2 Abstract In this thesis, results of neutrino-nucleon neutral current (NC) elastic scattering analysis are presented. Neutrinos interact with other particles only with weak force. Measure- ment of cross-section for neutrino-nucleon reactions at various neutrino en- ergy are important for the study of nucleon structure. It also provides data to be used for beam flux monitor in neutrino oscillation experiments. The cross-section for neutrino-nucleon NC elastic scattering contains the 2 axial vector form factor GA(Q ) as well as electromagnetic form factors unlike electromagnetic interaction. GA is propotional to strange part of nucleon spin (∆ s) in Q2 → 0 limit. Measurement of NC elastic cross-section with smaller Q2 enables us to access ∆ s. NC elastic cross-sections of neutrino- nucleon and antineutrino-nucleon were measured earlier by E734 experiment at Brookheaven National Laboratory (BNL) in 1987. In this experiment, cross-sections were measured in Q2 > 0.4 GeV 2 region. Result from this experiment was the only published data for NC elastic scattering cross-section published before our experiment. SciBooNE is an experiment for the measurement of neutrino-nucleon scat- tering cross-secitons using Booster Neutrino Beam (BNB) at FNAL. BNB has energy peak at 0.7 GeV. In this energy region, NC elastic scattering, charged current elastic scattering, charged current pion production, and neutral cur- rent pion production are the major reaction branches.
    [Show full text]
  • Charged Current Anti-Neutrino Interactions in the Nd280 Detector
    CHARGED CURRENT ANTI-NEUTRINO INTERACTIONS IN THE ND280 DETECTOR BRYAN E. BARNHART HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT BOULDER ADVISOR: ALYSIA MARINO Abstract. For the neutrino beamline oscillation experiment Tokai to Kamioka, the beam is clas- sified before oscillation by the near detector complex. The detector is used to measure the flux of different particles through the detector, and compare them to Monte Carlo Simulations. For this work, theν ¯µ background of the detector was isolated by examining the Monte Carlo simulation and determining cuts which removed unwanted particles. Then, a selection of the data from the near detector complex underwent the same cuts, and compared to the Monte Carlo to determine if the Monte Carlo represented the data distribution accurately. The data was found to be consistent with the Monte Carlo Simulation. Date: November 11, 2013. 1 Bryan E. Barnhart University of Colorado at Boulder Advisor: Alysia Marino Contents 1. The Standard Model and Neutrinos 4 1.1. Bosons 4 1.2. Fermions 5 1.3. Quarks and the Strong Force 5 1.4. Leptons and the Weak Force 6 1.5. Neutrino Oscillations 7 1.6. The Relative Neutrino Mass Scale 8 1.7. Neutrino Helicity and Anti-Neutrinos 9 2. The Tokai to Kamioka Experiment 9 2.1. Japan Proton Accelerator Research Complex 10 2.2. The Near Detector Complex 12 2.3. The Super-Kamiokande Detector 17 3. Isolation of the Anti-Neutrino Component of Neutrino Beam 19 3.1. Experiment details 19 3.2. Selection Cuts 20 4. Cut Descriptions 20 4.1. Beam Data Quality 20 4.2.
    [Show full text]
  • 1989-1990 Eight College Teachers Participated in the Training
    SATYENDRA NATH BOSE NATIONAL CENTRE FOR BASIC SCIENCES Calcutta ANNUAL REPORT April 1, 1989 to March 31,1990 Objectives The objectives of the S N Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences established in June 1986 as a registered society functioning under the umbrella of the Department of Science & Technology, Government of India, are : To foster, encourage and promote the growth of advanced studies in selected branches of basic sciences ; To conduct original research in theoretical and mathematical sciences and other basic sciences in frontier areas, including challenging theoretical studies of future applications ; To provide a forum of personal contacts and intellectual interaction among scientists within the country and also between them and scientists abroad ; To train young scientists for research in basic sciences. Governing Body The present Governing Body of the Centre consists of the following members : 1 Dr V Gowariker Secretary Chairman Department of Science & Technology Government of India, New Delhi 2 Professor C N R Rao Direct or Member Indian Institute of Science Bangalore 3 Professor C S Seshadri Dean Member School of Mathematics SPIC, Science Foundation Madras Professor J V Narlikar Director Member Inter-Universit y Centre for Astronomy & Astrophysics Pune Shri B K Chaturvedi Joint Secretary & Financial Adviser Member Department of Science & Technology Government of India, New Delhi Shri T C Dutt Chief Secretary Member Government of West Bengal Calcutta Professor C K Mzjumdar Director Member S N Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences Calcutta Dr J Pal Chaud huri Administrative Officer Non-member-Secretary S N Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences Calcutta At the moment the Centre operates from a rented house located at DB 17, Sector I, Salt Lake City, Calcutta 700 064.
    [Show full text]
  • The Weak Interaction
    The Weak Interaction April 20, 2016 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 The Weak Interaction 2 2.1 The 4-point Interaction . .3 2.2 Weak Propagator . .4 3 Parity Violation 5 3.1 Parity and The Parity Operator . .5 3.2 Parity Violation . .6 3.3 CP Violation . .7 3.4 Building it into the theory - the V-A Interaction . .8 3.5 The V-A Interaction and Neutrinos . 10 4 What you should know 11 5 Furthur reading 11 1 1 Introduction The nuclear β-decay caused a great deal of anxiety among physicists. Both α- and γ-rays are emitted with discrete spectra, simply because of energy conservation. The energy of the emitted particle is the same as the energy difference between the initial and final state of the nucleus. It was much more difficult to see what was going on with the β-decay, the emission of electrons from nuclei. Chadwick once reported that the energy spectrum of electrons is continuous. The energy could take any value between 0 and a certain maximum value. This observation was so bizarre that many more experiments followed up. In fact, Otto Han and Lise Meitner, credited for their discovery of nuclear fission, studied the spectrum and claimed that it was discrete. They argued that the spectrum may appear continuous because the electrons can easily lose energy by breamsstrahlung in material. The maximum energy observed is the correct discrete spectrum, and we see lower energies because of the energy loss. The controversy went on over a decade. In the end a definitive experiment was done by Ellis and Wooseley using a very simple idea.
    [Show full text]
  • Cross Sections for Neutral-Current Neutrino-Nucleus Interactions: Applications for 12C and 16O
    PHYSICAL REVIEW C VOLUME 59, NUMBER 6 JUNE 1999 Cross sections for neutral-current neutrino-nucleus interactions: Applications for 12C and 16O N. Jachowicz,* S. Rombouts, K. Heyde,† and J. Ryckebusch Institute for Theoretical Physics, Vakgroep Subatomaire en Stralingsfysica, Proeftuinstraat 86, B-9000 Gent, Belgium ~Received 29 September 1998; revised manuscipt received 4 February 1999! We study quasielastic neutrino-nucleus scattering on 12C and 16O within a continuum random phase ap- proximation ~RPA! model. The RPA equations are solved using a Green’s function approach with an effective Skyrme ~SkE2! two-body interaction. Besides a comparison with existing calculations, we carry out a detailed study using various methods ~Tamm-Dancoff approximation and RPA! and different forces ~SkE2 and Landau- Migdal!. We evaluate cross sections that may be relevant for neutrino nucleosynthesis. @S0556-2813~99!01606-4# PACS number~s!: 25.30.Pt, 24.10.Eq, 26.30.1k I. INTRODUCTION function approach in which the polarization propagator is approximated by an iteration of the first-order contribution Neutrinos are extremely well-suited probes to provide de- @14#. The unperturbed wave functions are generated using tailed information about the structure and properties of the either a Woods-Saxon potential or a HF calculation using a weak interaction, as they are only interacting via the weak Skyrme force. The latter approach makes self-consistent HF- forces. Moreover, being intrinsically polarized and coupling RPA calculations possible. Calculations using either a to the axial vector as well as to the vector part of the had- Skyrme or a Landau-Migdal force must give indications ronic current, neutrinos are able to reveal other and more about possible differences and sensitivity in methods to the precise nuclear structure information than, e.g., electrons do.
    [Show full text]
  • How the First Neutral-Current Experiments Ended
    How the first neutral-current experiments ended Peter Galison Lyman Laboratory of Physics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 At the beginning of the 1970s there seemed little reason to believe that strangeness-conserving neutral currents existed: theoreticians had no pressing need for them and several experiments suggested that they were suppressed if they were present at all. Indeed the two remarkable neutrino experiments that eventual- ly led to their discovery were designed and built for very different purposes, including the search for the vector boson and the investigation of the parton model. In retrospect we know that certain gauge theories (notably the Weinberg-Salam model) predicted that neutral currents exist. But until 't Hooft and Veltman proved that such theories were renormalizable, little effort was made to test the new theories. After the proof the two experimental groups began to reorient their goals to settle an increasingly central issue of physics. Do neutral currents exist? We ask here: What kind of evidence and arguments persuaded the par- ticipants that they had before them a real effect and not an artifact of the apparatus~ What eventually con- vinced them that their experiment was over? An answer to these questions requires an examination of the organization of the experiments, the nature of the apparatus, and the previous work of the experimentalists. Finally, some general observations are made about the recent evolution of experimental physics. CONTENTS weak interaction. Certainly the provisional advance af- I. Introduction 477 forded by such a move had many historical precedents. A II. The Experiment "Cxargamelle": from W Search to hundred years earlier Ampere unravelled many of the Neutral-Current Test 481 laws of electrodynamics by studying the interactions of III.
    [Show full text]
  • Sam Treiman Was Born in Chicago to a First-Generation Immigrant Family
    NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES SAM BARD TREIMAN 1925–1999 A Biographical Memoir by STEPHEN L. ADLER Any opinions expressed in this memoir are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences. Biographical Memoirs, VOLUME 80 PUBLISHED 2001 BY THE NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS WASHINGTON, D.C. Courtesy of Robert P. Matthews SAM BARD TREIMAN May 27, 1925–November 30, 1999 BY STEPHEN L. ADLER AM BARD TREIMAN WAS a major force in particle physics S during the formative period of the current Standard Model, both through his own research and through the training of graduate students. Starting initially in cosmic ray physics, Treiman soon shifted his interests to the new particles being discovered in cosmic ray experiments. He evolved a research style of working closely with experimen- talists, and many of his papers are exemplars of particle phenomenology. By the mid-1950s Treiman had acquired a lifelong interest in the weak interactions. He would preach to his students that “the place to learn about the strong interactions is through the weak and electromagnetic inter- actions; the problem is half as complicated.’’ The history of the subsequent development of the Standard Model showed this philosophy to be prophetic. After the discovery of parity violation in weak interactions, Treiman in collaboration with J. David Jackson and Henry Wyld (1957) worked out the definitive formula for allowed beta decays, taking into account the possible violation of time reversal symmetry, as well as parity. Shortly afterwards Treiman embarked with Marvin Goldberger on a dispersion relations analysis (1958) of pion and nucleon beta decay, a 3 4 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIRS major outcome of which was the famed Goldberger-Treiman relation for the charged pion decay amplitude.
    [Show full text]