Conservation of strangeness and eigenstates

  • I
  • Thread starter Xico Sim
  • Start date
  • #1
43
3
Hi, guys.

In Povh's book, page 198, he says: "The strong force conserves the strangeness S and so the neutral kaons are in an eigenstate of the strong interaction."

I do not see why this must be the case. My atempt to understand it:

$$ŜĤ_s |K_0 \rangle = Ĥ_sŜ |K_0 \rangle$$
So
$$Ŝ(Ĥ_s |K_0 \rangle) = -Ĥ_s |K_0 \rangle $$

Since the ket ##Ĥ_s |K_0 \rangle## has strangeness -1, it belongs to the eigensubspace of ##Ŝ## with eigenvalue -1. I don't know how one conclude, from this, that
$$ Ĥ_s |K_0 \rangle \, \alpha \, |K_0\rangle $$
which is what I want to prove.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
ChrisVer
Gold Member
3,373
459
well, abstractly speaking, can't you write [itex]|K_0>[/itex] state in whichever basis you want? and so the strong interactions' basis... the commutation relation you wrote (and I guess you take as given) will hold in any basis of the state [itex]|K_0>[/itex].
So you can define that the [itex]K_0[/itex] represents a strong state.
 
  • #3
35,269
11,543
A more experimental approach: neutral kaons cannot decay via the strong interaction (they are the lightest neutral particles with a strange quark and ##K^0 \to K^+ \pi^-## is not possible either), so no matter how you write them as state, they have to be an eigenstate of the strong interaction.
 
  • Like
Likes fresh_42
  • #4
43
3
So you can define that the [itex]K_0[/itex] represents a strong state.
"So"? i don't see why...
 
  • #5
ChrisVer
Gold Member
3,373
459
whether you define the x axis showing to your left hand, or showing to your right, if there is a left/right symmetry it doesn't really matter.

If we suppose that K0 in your case is not a strong state, you can "rotate" it into being in the strong state K0'...
THis happens by diagonalizing the Hamiltonian in the strong basis by [itex]H \rightarrow H_{\text{str-diag}}=U H U^\dagger [/itex] and so will the states: [itex]|K_0> \rightarrow U |K_0>[/itex] which will be your states written in the strong interaction basis.
The thing is that U is a unitary matrix (since it only changes the basis) and you of course get the same thing..
 
  • Like
Likes Xico Sim

Related Threads on Conservation of strangeness and eigenstates

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
250
Replies
7
Views
9K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
871
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K
Top