A Does the Z boson pole show up in the photon propagator?

springbottom
Messages
7
Reaction score
5
TL;DR Summary
Z and photon have same quantum numbers, how are their pole structures of the (interacting) propagator related?
If I look at the photon propagator <A_mu (x) A^nu(0) > in momentum space, as I understand it I am to compute this by summing up all the self-energy diagrams of the photon, which look like:

photon -> stuff -> photon

In particular, since the photon shares the same quantum numbers as the Z, you get a collection of diagrams that are:

photon -> stuff -> Z -> stuff -> Z -> stuff -> photon

(where the stuff connecting photon with Z could be a fermion loop for example). In this case, it would seem that the pole structure of the Z is inherted by the photon propagator? In particular, if there is some complex momenta value at which the Z boson has a pole, then the photon propagator should also have the same pole? Is this true?
[I may have messed something very basic up, I am still quite bad at basic QFT]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, because of gauge symmetry (Ward identity)
 
springbottom said:
Z and photon have same quantum numbers,

Why do you think that? The photon has odd parity. The Z doesn't even have parity.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and protonsarecool
Vanadium 50 said:
Why do you think that? The photon has odd parity. The Z doesn't even have parity.
I thought that the photon and Z both had helicity and not parity. Was I mistaken?
 
The weak interaction does not conserve parity. Parity is not a good quantum number when discussing the weak interaction.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, ohwilleke and malawi_glenn
For instance the Z boson couple to fermions via gamma5 (couple differently for left- and right-handed fermions), the photon does not care about such things.

1657561494693.png

this diagram does not contribute to the 1PI diagrams of the photons self-energy
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top