DOCSLIB.ORG

Weak Interaction of Hadrons. Weak Interactions of Hadrons: Constituent Quarks Emit Or Absorb W Bosons

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Weak Interaction of Hadrons. � Weak Interactions of Hadrons: Constituent Quarks Emit Or Absorb W Bosons Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics Weak interaction of hadrons. Weak interactions of hadrons: constituent quarks emit or absorb W bosons e- g W- W ν d gud e n d u u d p u Figure 93: Neutron β-decay. d π− d π− u u W- s d Λ u Λ s W- d u u d u p u p d u Figure 94: The dominant quark diagrams for Λ decay. Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 193 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics Lepton-quark symmetry: corresponding generations of quarks and leptons have identical weak interactions: ν ν ν µ c τ t e ↔ u ↔ ↔ e- d µ- s τ- b u d u d c s c s g ud gud gcs gcs ± ± ± ± W W W W Figure 95: The W-quark vertices obtained from lepton-quark symmetry if quark mixing is ignored. Examples of reactions allowed and not allowed in the lepton-quark symmetry scheme are pion and kaon decay: − − − π → µ + νµ du → µ + νµ allowed ! - − − K → µ + νµ su → µ + νµ not allowed ! Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 194 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics The kaon decay can be made allowed by introducing quark mixing (originally proposed by Cabibbo). According to the quark mixing scheme, d- and s-quarks participate in the weak interactions via the linear combinations: θ θ d' = dcos C + ssin C θ θ s' = –dsin C + scos C θ where the parameter C is called the Cabibbo angle. With quark mixing the quark-lepton symmetry applies to doublets like u and c d' s' u d’ u d u s gW gud gus ≡ + ± ± ± W W W θ θ gud=gWcos C gus=gWsin C Figure 96: The ud´W vertex can be interpreted as a sum of the udW and usW vertices. Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 195 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics With the quark mixing hypothesis some more W-quark vertices are allowed: u d u d c s c s g gud ud gcs gcs g cosθ g cosθ g cosθ g cosθ W C W C W C W C ± ± ± ± W W W W u s u s c d c d gus g us gcd gcd g sinθ W C g sinθ –g sinθ –g sinθ W C W C W C ± ± ± ± W W W W Figure 97: The basic W-quark vertices if quark mixing is taken into account. The top row of diagrams have couplings given by θ gud ==gcs gW cos C (102) while the bottom row diagrams have the couplings θ gus ==–gcd gW sin C (103) Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 196 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics The Cabibbo angle is measured experimentally by comparing decay rates like: Γ()- → µ-ν 2 K µ gus 2 ----------------------------------- ∝θ--------- = tan Γπ()- → µ-ν 2 C µ gud which give the result θ ° ± ° C = 12,7 0,1 (104) θ , gW cosC = 0 98gW θ , gW sinC = 0 22gW The charmed quark couplings gcd and gcs are measured in neutrino scattering experiments and this give the same result: θ ° ± ° C = 12 1 Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 197 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics Experimentally it has been observed that charmed hadrons almost always decays into strange hadrons. µ µ ν ν µ µ g g W W + W W+ θ c g cos g sinθ W C c W C s d Figure 98: Cabbibo-allowed and Cabbibo-suppressed semi-leptonic decay of a charmed quark. The ratio of semi-leptonic decays with Cabbibo-allowed and Cabibbo surpressed couplings are given by 2 g 2 1 --------cd ==tan θ ------ 2 C 20 gcs Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 198 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics The third generation The existence of the c-quark was first predicted from the lepton-quark symmetry. After the discovery of τ, ντ, and b, the sixth quark was predicted to complete the symmetry and the top-quark was discovered in 1994 with a mass of about 180 GeV/c2. The two generation quark mixing is conveniently written in matrix form as: cosθ sinθ d' = C C d (105) θ θ s' –sin C cos C s A third generation: gives rise to the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix Vαβ : V V V d' ud us ub d = V V V s' cd cs cb s b' b (106) Vtd Vts Vtb Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 199 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics The coupling constants are then: α ,, β ,, ) gαβ ===gWVαβ ( uct; dsb (107) If the mixing between the b quark and (d,s) quarks can be neglected, the CKM matrix is reduced to V V V θ θ ud us ub cos C sinC 0 V V V ≈ θ θ (108) cd cs cb –sin C cosC 0 Vtd Vts Vtb 001 and hence b’=b. Since the two-generation mixing model agree well with data Vub, Vcb, Vtd and Vts must be small. Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 200 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics The b-quark is heavy (mass=4.5 GeV) and it can decay to the lighter u and c quarks as in the following decay: l- g W - W ν l V g b ub W gub u Figure 99: The semi-leptonic decay of the b-quark to a lighter quark. This decay modes has a rate proportional to the squared couplings: 2 2 2 gub = Vub gW (109) If Vub and Vcb are 0, b-quark must be stable. τ ≈ –12 Experimentally, b 10 s which is a long but not infinite lifetime. Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 201 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics The weak b-quark decay can be compared to that of the τ-lepton. l- g W - W ν l τ− g W ντ Figure 100: The decay of the τ-lepton. This decay should have decay rates 2 proportional to gW . If one assumes thatVub = 1 then one can predict what lifetime this would result in for the b-meson: 5 1 mτ τ ≈ ----------- τ ≈ –15 b . τ 10 s Nmb -13 where ττ≈3x10 s is the lifetime of the τ-lepton, N is the number of possible b-quark decays per τ analogous -decays (3 or 4) and mτ and mb are the masses of the τ and the b. Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 202 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics τ ≈ ∞ Vub ==Vcb 0 b Conclusion: τ ≈ –15 Vub = 1 b 10 s τ ≈ –12 Experimentally: b 10 s The most precise measurements at present yield ≈ , ≈ , Vub 0 004 and Vcb 004 (110) V V V θ θ , ud us ub cos C sin C 0004 V V V ≈ –sinθ cosθ 004, cd cs cb C C Vtd Vts Vtb ∼ 0 ∼ 0 ∼ 1 098, 022, 0004, ≈ , , , –022 098 004 ∼ 0 ∼ 0 ∼ 1 Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 203 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics The top-quark The top-quark is much heavier than even W bosons and can decay by W+ W+ W+ ≅ ≅ t gtd 0 t gts 0 t gts= gW d s b Figure 101: Weak interactions involving the top-quark. ≅ ≅ Since gtd 0 and gts 0 the only significant decay mode of the t-quark is t → W+ + b (111) with a rate proportional to α 2 ⁄ π ≈ × –3 W = gW 4 4,2 10 Γα∼ ∼ Estimation of the decay width: Wmt 1 GeV suggests a very short lifetime for the top-quark: τ ≈ × –25 t 4 10 s (112) Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 204 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics Discovery of the top quark. The top-quark was discovered in pp-collisions in the Collider Detector at Fermilab (CDF) in 1994. The Tevatron accelerator with a collision energy = 1.8 TeV was used. PRODUCTION: In proton colliders, pairs of top quarks are produced by the quark-antiquark annihilation process: q + q → g → t + t (113) p t q g q p t Figure 102: The production of top quarks in pp annihilation. Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 205 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics DECAY: The top quark decay in most cases to a b-quark and to a W which in turn decays to leptons or quarks: l+ q + W ν l W- q t b t b Figure 103: The decay of top quarks. The final state is a complex mix of jets and leptons: - ν ← l + l {q + q ← W - + b ← p + p t + t + X ← W + + b + ν ← l + l {q + q Figure 104: The production of tt-pairs in pp-collisions. Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 206 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics Figure 105: The CDF experiment which discovered the top quark. Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 207 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics The events that the CDF collaboration searched for were: t + t → b + l + ν + b + q + q where the lepton l was either an electron or a muon. SIGNATURE: Two b-jets Two light quark jets Missing energy from the neutrino Lepton with large transverse energy Figure 106: A top event in the CDF experiment. Oxana Smirnova & Vincent Hedberg Lund University 208 Weak Interactions: W and Z bosons Particle Physics The measured mass distribution (by the CDF experiment) of the events with the required signature was: Expected Signal Expected Background Figure 107: Mass distribution of top events.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Quantum Field Theory*
    Quantum Field Theory y Frank Wilczek Institute for Advanced Study, School of Natural Science, Olden Lane, Princeton, NJ 08540 I discuss the general principles underlying quantum eld theory, and attempt to identify its most profound consequences. The deep est of these consequences result from the in nite number of degrees of freedom invoked to implement lo cality.Imention a few of its most striking successes, b oth achieved and prosp ective. Possible limitation s of quantum eld theory are viewed in the light of its history. I. SURVEY Quantum eld theory is the framework in which the regnant theories of the electroweak and strong interactions, which together form the Standard Mo del, are formulated. Quantum electro dynamics (QED), b esides providing a com- plete foundation for atomic physics and chemistry, has supp orted calculations of physical quantities with unparalleled precision. The exp erimentally measured value of the magnetic dip ole moment of the muon, 11 (g 2) = 233 184 600 (1680) 10 ; (1) exp: for example, should b e compared with the theoretical prediction 11 (g 2) = 233 183 478 (308) 10 : (2) theor: In quantum chromo dynamics (QCD) we cannot, for the forseeable future, aspire to to comparable accuracy.Yet QCD provides di erent, and at least equally impressive, evidence for the validity of the basic principles of quantum eld theory. Indeed, b ecause in QCD the interactions are stronger, QCD manifests a wider variety of phenomena characteristic of quantum eld theory. These include esp ecially running of the e ective coupling with distance or energy scale and the phenomenon of con nement.
    [Show full text]
  • Weak Interaction Processes: Which Quantum Information Is Revealed?
    Weak Interaction Processes: Which Quantum Information is revealed? B. C. Hiesmayr1 1University of Vienna, Faculty of Physics, Boltzmanngasse 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria We analyze the achievable limits of the quantum information processing of the weak interaction revealed by hyperons with spin. We find that the weak decay process corresponds to an interferometric device with a fixed visibility and fixed phase difference for each hyperon. Nature chooses rather low visibilities expressing a preference to parity conserving or violating processes (except for the decay Σ+ pπ0). The decay process can be considered as an open quantum channel that carries the information of the−→ hyperon spin to the angular distribution of the momentum of the daughter particles. We find a simple geometrical information theoretic 1 α interpretation of this process: two quantization axes are chosen spontaneously with probabilities ±2 where α is proportional to the visibility times the real part of the phase shift. Differently stated the weak interaction process corresponds to spin measurements with an imperfect Stern-Gerlach apparatus. Equipped with this information theoretic insight we show how entanglement can be measured in these systems and why Bell’s nonlocality (in contradiction to common misconception in literature) cannot be revealed in hyperon decays. We study also under which circumstances contextuality can be revealed. PACS numbers: 03.67.-a, 14.20.Jn, 03.65.Ud Weak interactions are one out of the four fundamental in- systems. teractions that we think that rules our universe. The weak in- Information theoretic content of an interfering and de- teraction is the only interaction that breaks the parity symme- caying system: Let us start by assuming that the initial state try and the combined charge-conjugation–parity( P) symme- of a decaying hyperon is in a separable state between momen- C try.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Drawing Feynman Diagrams
    1 Drawing Feynman Diagrams 1. A fermion (quark, lepton, neutrino) is drawn by a straight line with an arrow pointing to the left: f f 2. An antifermion is drawn by a straight line with an arrow pointing to the right: f f 3. A photon or W ±, Z0 boson is drawn by a wavy line: γ W ±;Z0 4. A gluon is drawn by a curled line: g 5. The emission of a photon from a lepton or a quark doesn’t change the fermion: γ l; q l; q But a photon cannot be emitted from a neutrino: γ ν ν 6. The emission of a W ± from a fermion changes the flavour of the fermion in the following way: − − − 2 Q = −1 e µ τ u c t Q = + 3 1 Q = 0 νe νµ ντ d s b Q = − 3 But for quarks, we have an additional mixing between families: u c t d s b This means that when emitting a W ±, an u quark for example will mostly change into a d quark, but it has a small chance to change into a s quark instead, and an even smaller chance to change into a b quark. Similarly, a c will mostly change into a s quark, but has small chances of changing into an u or b. Note that there is no horizontal mixing, i.e. an u never changes into a c quark! In practice, we will limit ourselves to the light quarks (u; d; s): 1 DRAWING FEYNMAN DIAGRAMS 2 u d s Some examples for diagrams emitting a W ±: W − W + e− νe u d And using quark mixing: W + u s To know the sign of the W -boson, we use charge conservation: the sum of the charges at the left hand side must equal the sum of the charges at the right hand side.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Discovery of the W and Z Boson 1983 at CERN Spps Accelerator, √S≈540 Gev, UA-1/2 Experiments 1.1 Boson Production in Pp Interactions
    Experimental tests of the Standard Model • Discovery of the W and Z bosons • Precision tests of the Z sector • Precision tests of the W sector • Electro-weak unification at HERA • Radiative corrections and prediction of the top and Higgs mass • Top discovery at the Tevatron • Higgs searches at the LHC 1. Discovery of the W and Z boson 1983 at CERN SppS accelerator, √s≈540 GeV, UA-1/2 experiments 1.1 Boson production in pp interactions − − p , q p ,q u W u Z ˆ ˆ d s ν u s +,q p , q p → → ν + → → + pp W X pp Z ff X σ (σ ) 10 nb W Z Similar to Drell-Yan: (photon instead of W) 1nb = ≈ sˆ xq xq s mit xq 12.0 2 1.0 nb = ≈ = 2 sˆ xq s .0 014 s 65( GeV ) → Cross section is small ! sˆ M 1 10 100 W ,Z 1.2 UA-1 Detector 1.3 Event signature: pp → Z → ff + X + p p − High-energy lepton pair: 2 2 2 m = (p + + p − ) = M Z ≈ MZ 91 GeV → → ν + 1.4 Event signature: pp W X Missing p T vector Undetected ν − ν Missing momentum p p High-energy lepton – Large transverse momentum p t How can the W mass be reconstructed ? W mass measurement In the W rest frame: In the lab system: • = = MW p pν • W system boosted 2 only along z axis T ≤ MW • p • p distribution is conserved 2 T −1 2 dN 2p M 2 Jacobian Peak: T ⋅ W − 2 ~ pT pT MW 4 dN dp T • Trans.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Supersymmetry
    Introduction to Supersymmetry Pre-SUSY Summer School Corpus Christi, Texas May 15-18, 2019 Stephen P. Martin Northern Illinois University [email protected] 1 Topics: Why: Motivation for supersymmetry (SUSY) • What: SUSY Lagrangians, SUSY breaking and the Minimal • Supersymmetric Standard Model, superpartner decays Who: Sorry, not covered. • For some more details and a slightly better attempt at proper referencing: A supersymmetry primer, hep-ph/9709356, version 7, January 2016 • TASI 2011 lectures notes: two-component fermion notation and • supersymmetry, arXiv:1205.4076. If you find corrections, please do let me know! 2 Lecture 1: Motivation and Introduction to Supersymmetry Motivation: The Hierarchy Problem • Supermultiplets • Particle content of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model • (MSSM) Need for “soft” breaking of supersymmetry • The Wess-Zumino Model • 3 People have cited many reasons why extensions of the Standard Model might involve supersymmetry (SUSY). Some of them are: A possible cold dark matter particle • A light Higgs boson, M = 125 GeV • h Unification of gauge couplings • Mathematical elegance, beauty • ⋆ “What does that even mean? No such thing!” – Some modern pundits ⋆ “We beg to differ.” – Einstein, Dirac, . However, for me, the single compelling reason is: The Hierarchy Problem • 4 An analogy: Coulomb self-energy correction to the electron’s mass A point-like electron would have an infinite classical electrostatic energy. Instead, suppose the electron is a solid sphere of uniform charge density and radius R. An undergraduate problem gives: 3e2 ∆ECoulomb = 20πǫ0R 2 Interpreting this as a correction ∆me = ∆ECoulomb/c to the electron mass: 15 0.86 10− meters m = m + (1 MeV/c2) × .
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:0901.3958V2 [Hep-Ph] 29 Jan 2009 Eul Rkn SU(2) Broken, Neously Information
    Gedanken Worlds without Higgs: QCD-Induced Electroweak Symmetry Breaking Chris Quigg1, 2 and Robert Shrock3 1Theoretical Physics Department Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, Illinois 60510 USA 2Institut f¨ur Theoretische Teilchenphysik Universit¨at Karlsruhe, D-76128 Karlsruhe, Germany 3C. N. Yang Institute for Theoretical Physics Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York 11794 USA To illuminate how electroweak symmetry breaking shapes the physical world, we investigate toy models in which no Higgs fields or other constructs are introduced to induce spontaneous symme- ⊗ ⊗ try breaking. Two models incorporate the standard SU(3)c SU(2)L U(1)Y gauge symmetry and fermion content similar to that of the standard model. The first class—like the standard elec- troweak theory—contains no bare mass terms, so the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry within quantum chromodynamics is the only source of electroweak symmetry breaking. The second class adds bare fermion masses sufficiently small that QCD remains the dominant source of elec- troweak symmetry breaking and the model can serve as a well-behaved low-energy effective field theory to energies somewhat above the hadronic scale. A third class of models is based on the left- ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ right–symmetric SU(3)c SU(2)L SU(2)R U(1)B−L gauge group. In a fourth class of models, built on SU(4)PS ⊗ SU(2)L ⊗ SU(2)R gauge symmetry, lepton number is treated as a fourth color. Many interesting characteristics of the models stem from the fact that the effective strength of the weak interactions is much closer to that of the residual strong interactions than in the real world.
    [Show full text]
  • Supersymmetry: What? Why? When?
    Contemporary Physics, 2000, volume41, number6, pages359± 367 Supersymmetry:what? why? when? GORDON L. KANE This article is acolloquium-level review of the idea of supersymmetry and why so many physicists expect it to soon be amajor discovery in particle physics. Supersymmetry is the hypothesis, for which there is indirect evidence, that the underlying laws of nature are symmetric between matter particles (fermions) such as electrons and quarks, and force particles (bosons) such as photons and gluons. 1. Introduction (B) In addition, there are anumber of questions we The Standard Model of particle physics [1] is aremarkably hope will be answered: successful description of the basic constituents of matter (i) Can the forces of nature be uni® ed and (quarks and leptons), and of the interactions (weak, simpli® ed so wedo not have four indepen- electromagnetic, and strong) that lead to the structure dent ones? and complexity of our world (when combined with gravity). (ii) Why is the symmetry group of the Standard It is afull relativistic quantum ®eld theory. It is now very Model SU(3) ´SU(2) ´U(1)? well tested and established. Many experiments con® rmits (iii) Why are there three families of quarks and predictions and none disagree with them. leptons? Nevertheless, weexpect the Standard Model to be (iv) Why do the quarks and leptons have the extendedÐ not wrong, but extended, much as Maxwell’s masses they do? equation are extended to be apart of the Standard Model. (v) Can wehave aquantum theory of gravity? There are two sorts of reasons why weexpect the Standard (vi) Why is the cosmological constant much Model to be extended.
    [Show full text]
  • Supersymmetry Min Raj Lamsal Department of Physics, Prithvi Narayan Campus, Pokhara Min [email protected]
    Supersymmetry Min Raj Lamsal Department of Physics, Prithvi Narayan Campus, Pokhara [email protected] Abstract : This article deals with the introduction of supersymmetry as the latest and most emerging burning issue for the explanation of nature including elementary particles as well as the universe. Supersymmetry is a conjectured symmetry of space and time. It has been a very popular idea among theoretical physicists. It is nearly an article of faith among elementary-particle physicists that the four fundamental physical forces in nature ultimately derive from a single force. For years scientists have tried to construct a Grand Unified Theory showing this basic unity. Physicists have already unified the electron-magnetic and weak forces in an 'electroweak' theory, and recent work has focused on trying to include the strong force. Gravity is much harder to handle, but work continues on that, as well. In the world of everyday experience, the strengths of the forces are very different, leading physicists to conclude that their convergence could occur only at very high energies, such as those existing in the earliest moments of the universe, just after the Big Bang. Keywords: standard model, grand unified theories, theory of everything, superpartner, higgs boson, neutrino oscillation. 1. INTRODUCTION unifies the weak and electromagnetic forces. The What is the world made of? What are the most basic idea is that the mass difference between photons fundamental constituents of matter? We still do not having zero mass and the weak bosons makes the have anything that could be a final answer, but we electromagnetic and weak interactions behave quite have come a long way.
    [Show full text]
  • Measurement of the W-Boson Mass in Pp Collisions at √ S = 7 Tev
    EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN) Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 110 CERN-EP-2016-305 DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5475-4 9th November 2018 Measurementp of the W-boson mass in pp collisions at s = 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector The ATLAS Collaboration A measurement of the mass of the W boson is presented based on proton–proton collision data recorded in 2011 at a centre-of-mass energy of 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, and corresponding to 4.6 fb−1 of integrated luminosity. The selected data sample consists of 7:8 × 106 candidates in the W ! µν channel and 5:9 × 106 candidates in the W ! eν channel. The W-boson mass is obtained from template fits to the reconstructed distributions of the charged lepton transverse momentum and of the W boson transverse mass in the electron and muon decay channels, yielding mW = 80370 ± 7 (stat.) ± 11 (exp. syst.) ± 14 (mod. syst.) MeV = 80370 ± 19 MeV; where the first uncertainty is statistical, the second corresponds to the experimental system- atic uncertainty, and the third to the physics-modelling systematic uncertainty. A meas- arXiv:1701.07240v2 [hep-ex] 7 Nov 2018 + − urement of the mass difference between the W and W bosons yields mW+ − mW− = −29 ± 28 MeV. c 2018 CERN for the benefit of the ATLAS Collaboration. Reproduction of this article or parts of it is allowed as specified in the CC-BY-4.0 license. 1 Introduction The Standard Model (SM) of particle physics describes the electroweak interactions as being mediated by the W boson, the Z boson, and the photon, in a gauge theory based on the SU(2)L × U(1)Y symmetry [1– 3].
    [Show full text]
  • Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking in the Higgs Mechanism
    Spontaneous symmetry breaking in the Higgs mechanism August 2012 Abstract The Higgs mechanism is very powerful: it furnishes a description of the elec- troweak theory in the Standard Model which has a convincing experimental ver- ification. But although the Higgs mechanism had been applied successfully, the conceptual background is not clear. The Higgs mechanism is often presented as spontaneous breaking of a local gauge symmetry. But a local gauge symmetry is rooted in redundancy of description: gauge transformations connect states that cannot be physically distinguished. A gauge symmetry is therefore not a sym- metry of nature, but of our description of nature. The spontaneous breaking of such a symmetry cannot be expected to have physical e↵ects since asymmetries are not reflected in the physics. If spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking cannot have physical e↵ects, this causes conceptual problems for the Higgs mechanism, if taken to be described as spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking. In a gauge invariant theory, gauge fixing is necessary to retrieve the physics from the theory. This means that also in a theory with spontaneous gauge sym- metry breaking, a gauge should be fixed. But gauge fixing itself breaks the gauge symmetry, and thereby obscures the spontaneous breaking of the symmetry. It suggests that spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking is not part of the physics, but an unphysical artifact of the redundancy in description. However, the Higgs mechanism can be formulated in a gauge independent way, without spontaneous symmetry breaking. The same outcome as in the account with spontaneous symmetry breaking is obtained. It is concluded that even though spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking cannot have physical consequences, the Higgs mechanism is not in conceptual danger.
    [Show full text]
  • Particle Physics: Problem Sheet 5 Weak, Electroweak and LHC Physics
    2010 — Subatomic: Particle Physics 1 Particle Physics: Problem Sheet 5 Weak, electroweak and LHC Physics 1. Draw a quark level Feynman diagram for the decay K+ → π+π0. This + is a weak decay. K has strange quark number, Ns = −1. The final state has no strange quarks so Ns = 0. The number of strange quarks can only change when a W boson is exchanged. 2. Write down all possible decay modes of the W − boson into quarks and leptons. What is the strength of each of these vertices? Decay Strength − − W → e ν¯e gW − − W → τ ν¯τ gW − − W → µ ν¯µ gW − W → ¯us gW Vus − W → ¯ud gW Vud − W → ¯ub gW Vub − W → ¯cd gW Vcd − W → ¯cs gW Vcs − W → ¯cb gW Vcb − W → ¯t d gW Vtd − W → ¯t s gW Vts − W → ¯t b gW Vtb 3. By drawing the lowest order Feynman diagrams, show that both charged (W ± exchange) and neutral current (Z0 exchange) contribute to neutrino − − electron scattering: νe + e → νe + e . 2010 — Subatomic: Particle Physics 2 Charged current means exchange of the W ± boson, neutral current means exchange of the Z0 boson. Because we can draw both diagrams, whilst obeying all the conservation laws, it means that both are able to happen. When we observe an electron-neutrino scat- tering event we can never tell, on an event-by-event basis, whether the Z-boson or the W -boson was responsilbe. However by measuring the total cross section and comparing with predictions, we can show that both charged and neutral currents are involved.
    [Show full text]
  • The Discovery of the W and Z Particles
    June 16, 2015 15:44 60 Years of CERN Experiments and Discoveries – 9.75in x 6.5in b2114-ch06 page 137 The Discovery of the W and Z Particles Luigi Di Lella1 and Carlo Rubbia2 1Physics Department, University of Pisa, 56127 Pisa, Italy [email protected] 2GSSI (Gran Sasso Science Institute), 67100 L’Aquila, Italy [email protected] This article describes the scientific achievements that led to the discovery of the weak intermediate vector bosons, W± and Z, from the original proposal to modify an existing high-energy proton accelerator into a proton–antiproton collider and its implementation at CERN, to the design, construction and operation of the detectors which provided the first evidence for the production and decay of these two fundamental particles. 1. Introduction The first experimental evidence in favour of a unified description of the weak and electromagnetic interactions was obtained in 1973, with the observation of neutrino interactions resulting in final states which could only be explained by assuming that the interaction was mediated by the exchange of a massive, electrically neutral virtual particle.1 Within the framework of the Standard Model, these observations provided a determination of the weak mixing angle, θw, which, despite its large experimental uncertainty, allowed the first quantitative prediction for the mass values of the weak bosons, W± and Z. The numerical values so obtained ranged from 60 to 80 GeV for the W mass, and from 75 to 92 GeV for the Z mass, too large to be accessible by any accelerator in operation at that time.
    [Show full text]