Doubt on Ademollo-Gatto theorem proof

Einj
Messages
464
Reaction score
59
I'm studying the semileptonic decay of the kaon and I'm currently reading about the Ademollo-Gatto theorem. The question is probably silly. However, here it is.
The proof starts by just considering that [V_-,V_+]=V_3, where V is the V-spin. Now, we consider the matrix element \langle K^0|V_3|K^0\rangle=1.

I understand that the |K^0\rangle state is an eigenstate of V3 (is the same thing that happens for the usual isospin), but why exactly 1? Consider for example the third component of isospin. As K0 has I3=1/2 I'd expect that matrix element to be 1/2. Why is 1?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually isn't the V-spin of the K0 equal to 1? It belongs to a V-spin triplet along with K0 bar and some linear combination of π0 and η0.
 
I'm not really sure but I think that that is the U-spin. The V-spin should be the operator that allows the transition from K0 to π- and so the K0 should belong to the doublet (K0-), while the V-spin triplet should be composed by K+, K- and π08. But, again, I'm not really sure.
 
Whoops, you are correct! :blushing:
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
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