How to determine the coupling parameters in SM or beyond SM?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter yancey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coupling Parameters
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on determining coupling parameters in scalar and vector fields, particularly in the context of quantum electrodynamics (QED) and the 4-Fermi effective theory. The scalar field action is defined with a coupling parameter ξ, which can be free or constrained based on the theory. In fundamental theories like QED, coupling constants such as the electric charge must be experimentally measured, often through processes like Compton scattering. Conversely, in non-fundamental theories, coupling values can sometimes be derived theoretically, as illustrated by the relationship between the Fermi coupling constant (G_F) and the weak coupling constant (g_W).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of scalar and vector fields in theoretical physics
  • Familiarity with quantum electrodynamics (QED) and its principles
  • Knowledge of Lagrangian mechanics and its application in field theory
  • Basic grasp of experimental measurement techniques in particle physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and implications of the Fermi coupling constant (G_F) in particle physics
  • Explore the role of coupling constants in quantum field theories, particularly in QED
  • Research methods for measuring cross sections in particle interactions, such as Compton scattering
  • Investigate the constraints on coupling parameters in effective field theories
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, graduate students in particle physics, and researchers interested in the dynamics of coupling parameters in quantum field theories.

yancey
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Dear everyone,
For example, the simplest action for a nonminimally coupled scalar field is
<br /> S=\int d^{4}x\sqrt{-g}\left[ \frac{1}{2}g^{\mu \nu }\partial _{\mu }\phi<br /> \partial _{\nu }\phi -V(\phi )+\frac{\xi }{2}R\phi ^{2}\right].<br />
\xi=0 leads to the scalar field minimally coupled to the gravity; \xi=\frac{1}{6},V=0 leads to a theory which is invariant under conformal transformations
<br /> \widetilde{g}_{\mu\nu}={\Omega}^{2}(x)g_{\mu\nu}.<br />
So the coupling parameter ξ is free, are there any constraints on it? How to get these constraints if they exist?
The same thing happens to a genaral vector field case {\xi}RA_{\mu}A^{\mu}.
In QED, the coupling constant characterize the interaction between the pin-1/2 field and the electromagnetic field is the electric charge of the bi-spinor field, how dose people determine this constant? by theoretical prediction or by experimental measurements?
How does the constraints on the form of the Lagrangian leads to constraints on coupling parameters?
Any documents can resolve my confusion will be welcome.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It depends on the theory you are considering. In general (at least as far as I know) if you have a fundamental theory (say QED) the couplings of the theory are free parameters and therefore they must be experimentally measured. Consider, for example, QED and suppose that we still don't know what the value of the electric charge, i.e. of the coupling, is. What you could do is, starting from your theoretical Lagrangian, compute the cross section for a certain process, e.g. compton scattering. This cross section will be a function of the electric charge. Then, measuring the value of the cross section with a suitable experiment you can fit the value of e.

However, if the theory is not fundamental, you can sometimes deduce the value of the coupling directly from theoretical arguments. Right now I have in my mind the 4-Fermi effective theory. The coupling for that Lagrangian is given by the Fermi coupling, ##G_F##. However, since this is just a low energy expansion of the complete electro-weak theory (when your energy scale is much lower that the mass of the W boson) one can show that the coupling is actually given by:

$$G_F=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{8}\frac{g_W^2}{M_W^2},$$

where ##g_W## is the weak coupling constant and ##M_W## is the mass of the W boson. So, in principle, if these quantities are know you can theoretically compute the value of ##G_F##. Of course, now the problem is simply shifted to the determination of the electro-weak coupling constant (which is the coupling of a fundamental theory, i.e. a free parameter).I hope I didn't write anything wrong and I hope this is useful.
Cheers
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: yancey
Einj said:
It depends on the theory you are considering. In general (at least as far as I know) if you have a fundamental theory (say QED) the couplings of the theory are free parameters and therefore they must be experimentally measured. Consider, for example, QED and suppose that we still don't know what the value of the electric charge, i.e. of the coupling, is. What you could do is, starting from your theoretical Lagrangian, compute the cross section for a certain process, e.g. compton scattering. This cross section will be a function of the electric charge. Then, measuring the value of the cross section with a suitable experiment you can fit the value of e.

However, if the theory is not fundamental, you can sometimes deduce the value of the coupling directly from theoretical arguments. Right now I have in my mind the 4-Fermi effective theory. The coupling for that Lagrangian is given by the Fermi coupling, ##G_F##. However, since this is just a low energy expansion of the complete electro-weak theory (when your energy scale is much lower that the mass of the W boson) one can show that the coupling is actually given by:

$$G_F=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{8}\frac{g_W^2}{M_W^2},$$

where ##g_W## is the weak coupling constant and ##M_W## is the mass of the W boson. So, in principle, if these quantities are know you can theoretically compute the value of ##G_F##. Of course, now the problem is simply shifted to the determination of the electro-weak coupling constant (which is the coupling of a fundamental theory, i.e. a free parameter).I hope I didn't write anything wrong and I hope this is useful.
Cheers
Thank you, Einj. You explained my confusion clearly!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
7K