Register to reply

Why are heilicty and chirality equivalent for massless particles?

by Superposed_Cat
Tags: chirality, equivalent, heilicty, massless, particles
Share this thread:
Superposed_Cat
#1
Dec17-13, 03:23 PM
Superposed_Cat's Avatar
P: 270
Salutations, question:
For massless particles—such as the photon, the gluon, and the (hypothetical) graviton—chirality is the same as helicity; a given massless particle appears to spin in the same direction along its axis of motion regardless of point of view of the observer.
~wikipedia. I'm assuming that's because (correct me if i'm wrong) those particles would travel at c and you could not overtake them so their chirality and helicity are equal.But if a photon was coming towards you then zoomed past you surely the chirality would change because you now see it going away from you?
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Vibrational motion of a single molecule measured in real time
Researchers demonstrate ultra low-field nuclear magnetic resonance using Earth's magnetic field
Bubbling down: Discovery suggests surprising uses for common bubbles
mfb
#2
Dec17-13, 05:26 PM
Mentor
P: 11,819
But if a photon was coming towards you then zoomed past you surely the chirality would change because you now see it going away from you?
It is now going away, but the spin also changed its radial direction: if it was oriented towards you before, it will be oriented away from you afterwards, and vice versa.
Or, in other words, the spin is always in the direction of motion or against, and this does not change.
Superposed_Cat
#3
Dec17-13, 06:17 PM
Superposed_Cat's Avatar
P: 270
But then why does it change for massive particles?

ChrisVer
#4
Dec17-13, 06:19 PM
P: 861
Why are heilicty and chirality equivalent for massless particles?

does it change for massive particles? The chirality does not coincide with helicity, because chirality symmetry is explicitly broken
Superposed_Cat
#5
Dec17-13, 06:53 PM
Superposed_Cat's Avatar
P: 270
helicity sorry. why does for massive particles?
Vanadium 50
#6
Dec17-13, 07:03 PM
Mentor
Vanadium 50's Avatar
P: 16,317
Please don't take this the wrong way, but do you know what either helicity or chirality are? From your questions, it doesn't look like you do.
Superposed_Cat
#7
Dec18-13, 03:06 AM
Superposed_Cat's Avatar
P: 270
No worries I take no offence. I just no what i read on the wiki.
Vanadium 50
#8
Dec18-13, 04:52 AM
Mentor
Vanadium 50's Avatar
P: 16,317
Usually people understand one and are confused about the other. (And answering the question hinges on finding which one they understand) But if you don't know what either of them are, it will be difficult to explain the difference.
ChrisVer
#9
Dec18-13, 05:01 AM
P: 861
Quote Quote by Vanadium 50 View Post
Usually people understand one and are confused about the other. (And answering the question hinges on finding which one they understand) But if you don't know what either of them are, it will be difficult to explain the difference.
In fact, can't your just write your state as a superposition of helicity eigenstates, and then look at how it transforms under a lorentz transformation to see that?
Superposed_Cat
#10
Dec18-13, 07:00 AM
Superposed_Cat's Avatar
P: 270
V-50 I was wondering why they said you can't change your reference frame because you can't overtake it. Surely if it flyies past you it is the same as overtaking it?
P.S. thanks chrisver
Bill_K
#11
Dec18-13, 07:05 AM
Sci Advisor
Thanks
Bill_K's Avatar
P: 4,160
Chirality (aka handedness) = 1 is the eigenvalue of γ5. It's a Lorentz invariant, but for a particle with nonzero m it's not a constant of the motion, i.e. [H, γ5] ≠ 0.

Helicity = 1 is the eigenvalue of σp/|p|. For a free particle it's a constant of the motion, but clearly not a Lorentz invariant.

The easiest way to see the relation between the two is to follow Peskin-Schroeder and use the Weyl representation, in which γ5 is diagonal,

[tex]\gamma^5 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}-1&0\\0&1\end{array}\right)[/tex]
The eigenfunctions of γ5 corresponding to 1 are denoted ψR and ψL, respectively. In terms of ψL and ψR the Dirac equation is
[tex]\left(\begin{array}{cc}-m&E + \sigma \cdot p\\E - \sigma \cdot p&m\end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c}\psi_L\\\psi_R\end{array}\right) = 0[/tex]
and so for m = 0 we have that ψR and ψL are also eigenstates of helicity, σp = E.
dauto
#12
Dec18-13, 10:17 AM
Thanks
P: 1,948
Quote Quote by Superposed_Cat View Post
V-50 I was wondering why they said you can't change your reference frame because you can't overtake it. Surely if it flyies past you it is the same as overtaking it?
P.S. thanks chrisver
No, when you overtake a particle, you're moving faster than the particle and in your reference frame the particle is seen moving the opposite direction reversing its helicity. When a particle overtakes you you still see the particle moving in the same direction with no helicity reversal.
Superposed_Cat
#13
Dec18-13, 11:59 AM
Superposed_Cat's Avatar
P: 270
Thanks all esp. dauto
kurros
#14
Dec18-13, 05:04 PM
P: 364
Quote Quote by dauto View Post
No, when you overtake a particle, you're moving faster than the particle and in your reference frame the particle is seen moving the opposite direction reversing its helicity. When a particle overtakes you you still see the particle moving in the same direction with no helicity reversal.
And perhaps to make it even more obvious, there is no preferred "centre" of a reference frame, i.e. nothing explicitly stating where "you" are relative to the particle. x=0 is not special. So nothing you measure about the particle is going to change as it zooms past some arbitrary location, except it's position of course.

Going to a different frame via a Lorentz boost is a different story though (note again that you don't have to "actually" "overtake" the particle, since "you" are not anywhere in the math)


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Massless particles Special & General Relativity 13
How do one describe particles with chirality? High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics 3
Massless particles and C Special & General Relativity 11
Re: Massless Particles General Physics 2
Re: Massless Particles General Physics 1