How do the W and Z Gauge Bosons work in the weak nuclear force?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies the roles of W and Z bosons in weak nuclear interactions, explaining that both W+ and W- bosons facilitate transformations between neutrons and protons while conserving charge. The W+ boson is involved when a neutrino interacts with a neutron, changing a bottom quark to an up quark, while the W- boson occurs when a down quark emits it to become an up quark, resulting in similar transformations. The Z boson, which is neutral, mediates interactions that do not involve charge changes, allowing particles to scatter without altering their charge. The mechanics of these interactions are illustrated through Feynman diagrams, emphasizing the importance of gauge bosons in mediating forces. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexity and variety of weak interactions in particle physics.
Roroy
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I've seen explanations that when a neutrino with a W+ Boson comes near a neutron, it affects one of the bottom quarks and changes it to a up quark which effectively turns the neutron into a proton. The neutrino then turns into an electron.

Source:

(2:20 onwards)

I've seen other explanations which say that a down quark in a neutron emits a W- Boson and changes into a up quark, effectively turning the neutron into a proton. And then the W- Boson decays into an electron and antineutrino.

Source: http://atlas.physicsmasterclasses.org/en/zpath_radioactivity.htm

So which is the correct explanation?
And one more thing, I've searched many websites and I still can't find a good explanation for what exactly the Z boson does?
I get that it is neutral, but that's it.

Thanks to any help in advance. :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Both are correct, they're just describing different weak interactions. The first one is something called "charged current interaction", and can be shown schematically here: (time on the y axis)
feynman03.jpg


The second describes weak nuclear decay, schematically shown here:

These are just two examples of weak interactions. The boson that carries the weak force for any given reaction is the one that conserves electrical charge. Hence W+ in the first example, W- in the second. If no charge is carried, you use the Z boson. For example, the scattering of a neutrino and an electron:

feynman04.jpg


Does this clear things up?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi,

Thank you very much for the reply.
I've never learned how Feynman diagrams work but after doing some more research, I think I understand the first two interactions. :)
I take it that both the first two interactions apply to both W+ and W- bosons? As in the first interaction can also happen with W- and the second can also happen with W+?
Also, a question on the second interaction, if the W- Boson decays into an electron and anti-neutrino, then why isn't the arrow of the anti-neutrino the other way?

m7colg.jpg
And I still don't understand how the Z boson works exactly. Does it carry "no charge" between particles? Why does it need to carry no charge? Can't the electron and neutrino collide and then scatter by themselves?
I'm still quite confused on the mechanics and purpose of the Z boson.
Also, are there any other interactions? Or is it just these three?

Sorry for all the questions, I'm just really interested in this stuff.
Thanks again for the replies! :)
 
Last edited:
Roroy said:
Hi,

Thank you very much for the reply.
I've never learned how Feynman diagrams work but after doing some more research, I think I understand the first two interactions. :)
I take it that both the first two interactions apply to both W+ and W- bosons? As in the first interaction can also happen with W- and the second can also happen with W+?
Also, a question on the second interaction, if the W- Boson decays into an electron and anti-neutrino, then why isn't the arrow of the anti-neutrino the other way?

proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Foi62.tinypic.com%2Fm7colg.jpg

No, the arrow of anti-particles go in the opposite direction to that of the particles - this is notation, and harks back to the fact that antiparticles look like particles traveling backwards in time.

No, the choice of W+ or W- depends on the charge. You need to conserve charge at every vertex, so if you have a neutron turning into a proton, one unit of negative charge needs to be carried away by a W-, for a proton turning into a neutron, you need to carry away one unit of positive charge with the W+. So, with the above reactions, if instead you had a proton turning into a neutron, you'd have a W- in the first case, W+ in the second.
Roroy said:
And I still don't understand how the Z boson works exactly. Does it carry "no charge" between particles? Why does it need to carry no charge?

Like I said, you need to conserve charge at each vertex.

Can't the electron and neutrino collide and then scatter by themselves? I'm still quite confused on the mechanics and purpose of the Z boson.

That's exactly what that diagram shows! Collisions occur through some mediating force, which must be carried by a gauge boson. In this case, the weak force, and W+/W-/Z0. When electrons scatter off of each other, the force is mediated by a photon, the gauge boson for the electromagnetic force.

Also, are there any other interactions? Or is it just these three?

Many, many others! I alluded to a couple up at the top of this post, but there are many others beyond this! And I've only shown you the most simple version of the processes we've been discussing, too.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Let there be a person in a not yet optimally designed sled at h meters in height. Let this sled free fall but user can steer by tilting their body weight in the sled or by optimal sled shape design point it in some horizontal direction where it is wanted to go - in any horizontal direction but once picked fixed. How to calculate horizontal distance d achievable as function of height h. Thus what is f(h) = d. Put another way, imagine a helicopter rises to a height h, but then shuts off all...
Back
Top