Could second and third generation SM particles NOT be fundamental?

In summary: There is no evidence for compositeness beyond the first generation. Furthermore, the decay rates and cross sections agree well with the Standard Model.
  • #1
ensabah6
695
0
could second and third generation SM particles NOT be fundamental?

since they are unstable and rapidly decay, could second and third generation SM particles NOT be fundamental? perhaps as bound states of more fundamental first generation particles?

if they are not fundamental, then do we have to worry about SUSY partners of these?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Very, very, very, very unlikely. Their decay happens because it can, and it happens faster for more massive particles because there are more possible momenta that the resulting particles can have.

You can ask "How can that be possible, since momentum is a continuous quantity and not a discrete one"? The answer is that the possible momenta will be discrete for a finite volume, and that there are thus more possible momenta if the total energy is large.

With a large enough volume, the sums become integrals, making the calculation somewhat easier. The volume also drops out of the final results for decay rates and cross sections.

One can also use dimensional analysis to estimate the behavior of decay rates. If a particle's decays involve highly-relativistic and/or massless particles, then the most significant mass scale will be the parent particle's mass. Since in quantum mechanics with hbar = c = 1, mass, momentum, and energy have units of reciprocal length and time, the decay rate will be proportional to the particle's mass.

Violation of these conditions can lead to much greater dependence on mass. Weak interactions, for m << mW, give

m5/v4

m = particle's mass, v = Higgs vacuum expectation value
 
  • #4
lpetrich said:
Furthermore, there isn't any evidence of such compositeness.

Figure 41.6 in Plots of cross sections and related quantities (rev.) at the Particle Data Group site shows how well electron-positron collision rates agree with the Standard Model.

Can't there be a bound state that also agrees electron-positron collision rates agree with the Standard Model? Or could second/third generation be a quantized excited version of first generation, etc?
 

1. What are second and third generation SM particles?

Second and third generation SM particles refer to a group of particles in the Standard Model of particle physics that includes the muon, tau, and their associated neutrinos. These particles are considered to be heavier versions of the first generation particles (electron, electron neutrino, up, and down quarks).

2. How are second and third generation SM particles different from the first generation particles?

The main difference between the first generation and the second/third generation SM particles is their mass. The second and third generation particles are significantly heavier than the first generation particles. They also have different properties, such as a larger electric charge and different interactions with other particles.

3. Are second and third generation SM particles considered to be fundamental particles?

Currently, second and third generation SM particles are considered to be fundamental particles in the Standard Model. This means that they are not made up of smaller particles and are the building blocks of matter. However, there is ongoing research and theories that suggest they may not be fundamental and could be composed of even smaller particles.

4. What evidence suggests that second and third generation SM particles may not be fundamental?

One of the main reasons for questioning the fundamentality of second and third generation SM particles is because of the existence of the Higgs boson. The Higgs boson is a particle that gives mass to other particles, including the second and third generation particles. This has led scientists to speculate that these particles may not be fundamental and could be made up of even smaller particles that interact with the Higgs field.

5. How could the discovery that second and third generation SM particles are not fundamental impact our understanding of the universe?

If it is confirmed that second and third generation SM particles are not fundamental, it would greatly impact our current understanding of the universe. It could lead to the development of new theories and models that can better explain the fundamental nature of particles and the interactions between them. It could also open up new avenues for research and potentially lead to the discovery of new particles and forces in the universe.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
2
Replies
59
Views
7K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
0
Views
821
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
13
Views
2K
Back
Top