How Does Chiral Symmetry Breakdown Influence Meson Mass Differences?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChrisVer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chiral Symmetry
ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
Why is the chiral symmetry breakdown determined for the vector/axial current as:

V = \frac{m_{π^{+}}-m_{π^{0}}}{m_{π^{0}}+m_{π^{+}}}\approx 0.01
A= \frac{m_{π^{+}}-m_{f^{0}}}{m_{f^{0}}+m_{π^{+}}}\approx 1
?
why do we choose the difference between the pion+ (~140MeV) and pion0 (~135MeV) for the vector current or the difference between the pion(~140MeV) and the f0 meson (~900MeV) for the axial? Also why take that formulas for those asymmetries?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If a symmetry is not spontaneously broken, then we expect to find groups of particles with the same mass that are related to each other by that symmetry. For example, the lightest three mesons are the three pions. They all have approximately same mass--##V## in your post is small--and they are related to each other by isospin rotations. This is because isospin is conserved to pretty good accuracy.

If the chiral version of isospin were conserved, we would expect to find groups of particles with the same mass related to each other by chiral isospin rotations. Chiral transformations, among other things, transform pseudoscalars into scalars. So we would expect there to be some scalar meson degenerate with the pions, which are pseudoscalars. There's no such meson; the ##f_0## is one of the lightest scalar mesons and it is much heavier than the pions, as the large value of ##A## in your post shows. So chiral isospin rotations must be spontaneously broken.
 
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