Why does the neutrino have momentum?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ChrisHarvey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Momentum Neutrino
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the question of why neutrinos, which were previously assumed to be massless, possess momentum. Participants explore the implications of special relativity and quantum mechanics in relation to neutrinos and their properties, particularly in the context of beta decay processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Chris questions the reason behind neutrinos having momentum despite their initial assumption of being massless, linking it to special relativity.
  • One participant explains that massless particles, like photons, have momentum as described by the de Broglie relation, and this is supported by experimental evidence such as the photoelectric effect.
  • Another participant notes that the existence of neutrinos was proposed by Pauli to resolve issues with momentum and energy conservation in beta decay processes.
  • It is mentioned that neutrinos come in three varieties and possess very small masses, which differ among the varieties.
  • A participant asserts that even if neutrinos were massless, they would still possess momentum, as they were originally hypothesized to address conservation issues in particle interactions.
  • Further elaboration is provided on how Pauli's hypothesis aimed to explain discrepancies in spin and energy distribution in beta decay, suggesting that the neutrino's role was crucial for conservation laws.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that neutrinos have momentum and that their existence was proposed to address specific problems in particle physics. However, there is no consensus on the implications of their mass or the full understanding of their momentum in relation to their properties.

Contextual Notes

The discussion reflects varying levels of familiarity with special relativity and quantum mechanics, and some assumptions about the nature of neutrinos and their role in particle interactions remain unresolved.

ChrisHarvey
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
Why does the neutrino, which used to be assumed massless, have momentum? I know the answer to this has something to do with special relativity, but I'm not overly familiar with the theory.

Thanks,
Chris
 
Physics news on Phys.org
According to quantum mechanics photons, which are also massless, have momentum given by the de Broglie relation. This is routinely corroborated experimentally by, for example, the photoelectric effect in any undergraduate quantum mechanics lab course. Momentum is not only associated to massive particles. Even fields in classical mechanics can have momentum, like the magnetic field.

In fact, the first person to speak of the possible existence of neutrinos, Pauli, guessed its existence because momentum and energy were not conserved in a certain decay process. Therefore, the neutrino, if it exists, does have momentum or on the contrary conservation laws hold in all physical processes except this particular decay, which isn't likely.
 
Neutrinos, which come in 3 varieties, have mass, although very small. The masses are different for the different varieties.
 
mathman said:
Neutrinos, which come in 3 varieties, have mass, although very small. The masses are different for the different varieties.
I didn't know that, but if they were massless they still have momentum,right?
 
Yes. When they were not thought to have mass, they still needed to have momentum and kinetic energy because they were originally thought up to explain two problems with beta decay, in which a neuron emits an electron and becomes a proton. First of all you and spin 1/2 (electron) subtracted from spin 1/2 (neutron) and that should have given you a unit spin, but the proton again has spin 1/2. And the other problem was that the energy of the emitted electron varied all over the lot.

Pauli saw you could solve both problems at once by positing a light neutral fermion that was part of the interaction but undetected because of its neutrality and small mass (it wasn't till later that they considered the neutrino to be massless). The energy in the electron+neutrino system would be constant, but depending on the angles the two particles came out at, the part of the energy carried by the electron could vary. And since the new particle was to be a fermion, with spin 1/2, there would be a balancing of the books: an odd number of spin 1/2 in (1 neutron), and an odd number out (proton + electron + neutrino).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
22K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K