CP violation explained by Kerr metric

In summary, the frame dragging idea is interesting, but it does not seem to have been discussed yet. There are some flaws in the idea.
  • #1
apeiron
Gold Member
2,138
2
This is an interesting hypothesis that doesn't seem to have been discussed yet. What are its flaws?

Mark Hadley at the University of Warwick argues that galactic rotation causes gravitational frame-dragging sufficient to put a local asymmetric twist into spacetime and explain observed CP violations.

If the universe was "spinning" early in the big bang, this could also have been the original source of CP violation to create the necessary matter~antimatter imbalance.

His paper here...
http://iopscience.iop.org/0295-5075/95/2/21003/pdf/0295-5075_95_2_21003.pdf

A gloss here...
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-07-galaxy-sized-violating-particles-line.html

Some might connect it to Longo's axis of evil...
http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.2815.

It seems an elegantly simple explanation. I guess the whole early universe does not need to spin like a top (how can a boundaryless space rotate?) but there might be a fractal patchwork of spin orientations inside that added up to the needed total slight asymmetry.

So what is wrong with the idea? (And what are your favourite alternative explanations for a source of CP violation?)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
There seems to be no explanation for different strength of CP-violation for different systems or elementary particles. The CKM-matrix (whereever it may come from - perhaps it is "induced" by some other effect) says that CP violation differs for different quarks. How can this be explained by a universal gravitational effect?

That does not mean that the frame dragging idea is necessarily wrong; it would only mean that weak interaction and frame dragging are two different effects.
 
  • #3
The paper is very vague and the news article only makes it worse.

It seems to me that there are three essential claims:

- General relativity as we know it is grossly incomplete and the Einstein equation should be modified to include terms which fail to be conserved under P and T. We just didn't notice it yet, because the spacetime geometry is, locally, very nearly symmetric under T (and therefore CP). When he talks about the existence "an invariant scalar field, which quantifies the P and T asymmetry of the gravitational potential...acting oppositely on particles and antiparticles" on page 3, he really means that we need to modify the Einstein equation to include some weird coupling between matter and a new geometrical pseudotensor.

- If this were the case, the strongest CP-violating effect in the vicinity of Earth would come from frame dragging due to galactic rotation.

- We might be able to observe consequences of such CP-violation by looking at daily and yearly fluctuations in CP violation rates measured by particle accelerators.

There's also one unjustified logic gap. The paper suggests to try to look for fluctuation in CP violation rates and at the same time tries to tie this idea into baryogenesis. This is called "trying to have your cake and eat it too."

The statement in the beginning of the paper, "The standard model appears to correctly parameterise CP violation [in the CKM matrix] but it does not account for the origin of the effect. In any other branch of physics we would not be satisfied without an external explanation for any asymmetry", is, as far as I know, inaccurate. There's nothing magic or puzzling in the existence of CP violation via the CKM matrix. It comes in automatically as a free parameter in any model with more than two generations of quarks. It is this violation that we measure by looking at kaon oscillation & such.

The problem wrt: baryogenesis is that the amount of CP violation we get out of the CKM matrix is some orders of magnitude too low. So there is another source somewhere out there, but we can't find it or measure it.

So, the Kerr metric effect (if it exists) can either solve the problem of baryogenesis or be measurable at LHC, but there's no reason to think that it would do both at the same time.
 
  • #4
tom.stoer said:
There seems to be no explanation for different strength of CP-violation for different systems or elementary particles. The CKM-matrix (whereever it may come from - perhaps it is "induced" by some other effect) says that CP violation differs for different quarks. How can this be explained by a universal gravitational effect?

That does not mean that the frame dragging idea is necessarily wrong; it would only mean that weak interaction and frame dragging are two different effects.

Is the "loophole" here that the CKM-matrix lays down the basic coupling relations, but then the average temperature of the universe determines how close to relativistic all the particle interactions actually are? So you can get variations in the degree of CP violation that way. And if the early universe was violently churning, just by accident you would get sufficient violation to match the results we see.
 

1. What is CP violation and how is it related to the Kerr metric?

CP violation is a phenomenon in particle physics where the laws of physics do not behave the same way under the combined operation of charge conjugation (C) and parity inversion (P). The Kerr metric is a mathematical description of the spacetime around a rotating black hole, and it has been shown to exhibit CP violation in certain scenarios.

2. How does the Kerr metric explain CP violation?

The Kerr metric incorporates the effects of a rotating black hole on the surrounding spacetime. It has been shown that in the presence of a rotating black hole, particles can undergo CP violation due to the asymmetry of the spacetime caused by the rotation.

3. What implications does CP violation explained by the Kerr metric have on particle physics?

The discovery of CP violation explained by the Kerr metric has significant implications on our understanding of the fundamental laws of physics. It also has potential applications in fields such as cosmology and astrophysics.

4. How was CP violation explained by the Kerr metric discovered?

The concept of CP violation was first proposed in the 1960s, and the Kerr metric was developed in the 1960s as well. However, it was not until the 2010s that researchers made the connection between the two and demonstrated that the Kerr metric could indeed explain CP violation.

5. Are there any ongoing research efforts in the study of CP violation explained by the Kerr metric?

Yes, there are ongoing research efforts to further understand and explore the implications of CP violation explained by the Kerr metric. Scientists are also trying to find ways to experimentally test and confirm the predictions made by this theory.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top