Can someone explain to me this process?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Xuekai Du
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Explain Process
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the classification of the interaction process π- + p→Λ + K0, specifically questioning why it is considered a strong interaction despite changes in quark content. Participants explore the implications of strangeness conservation and the nature of hadronic interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the interaction is a strong one because it is a pure hadronic interaction and strangeness is conserved.
  • Others suggest that while strangeness-conserving hadronic interactions are typically strong, they do not necessarily have to be; the process could also proceed via weak or electromagnetic interactions.
  • One participant notes that hadronic-only strangeness-changing processes must be weak, but strangeness-conserving processes can involve various interaction types.
  • Another participant emphasizes that their statement regarding the nature of the interaction pertains specifically to light hadrons and flavor SU(3), indicating that the presence of heavy quarks could lead to different decay processes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the classification of the interaction, with no consensus reached on whether the process must be strong or if it can also be weak or electromagnetic. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the general rules governing these interactions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their arguments, including the dependence on definitions of strangeness conservation and the specific types of quarks involved in the interactions.

Xuekai Du
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
π- + p→Λ + K0
Why is this a strong interaction instead of weak? Since the quark content changed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The strong interaction can produce (and eliminate) quark+antiquark pairs of the same type. Like gluon -> strange + antistrange.
The interaction here does not have to be strong but that is by far the most likely process.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Xuekai Du
Xuekai Du said:
Since the quark content changed.

But the net flavor did not.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Xuekai Du
Xuekai Du said:
π- + p→Λ + K0
Why is this a strong interaction instead of weak? Since the quark content changed.
1) It is pure hadronic interaction, and 2) strangeness is conserved: Strangeness-conserving hadronic interactions can not be weak.
 
samalkhaiat said:
Strangeness-conserving hadronic interactions can not be weak.
This isn't a general rule. Hadronic-only strangeness-changing processes must be weak, but hadronic-only strangeness-conserving processes needn't be strong. The example in the original post can proceed via strong, weak, or electromagnetic diagrams (albeit that does mean it would be called "strong" since that diagram will dominate). The decay ##B_s^0 \rightarrow D_s^{^-} \pi^+## conserves strangeness but proceeds only weakly since bottomness and charmness are changed.
 
Envelope said:
This isn't a general rule. Hadronic-only strangeness-changing processes must be weak, but hadronic-only strangeness-conserving processes needn't be strong. The example in the original post can proceed via strong, weak, or electromagnetic diagrams (albeit that does mean it would be called "strong" since that diagram will dominate). The decay ##B_s^0 \rightarrow D_s^{^-} \pi^+## conserves strangeness but proceeds only weakly since bottomness and charmness are changed.
My statement was about light hadrons, i.e., flavour [itex]SU(3)[/itex]. Of course, if you include heavy quarks, then you can have weak decays in which the s-quark behaves as spectator giving [itex]| \Delta S | = 0[/itex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K