A How to draw the angles of the CKM matrix?

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Heidi
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the graphical representation of the CKM matrix, particularly in the context of three generations of quarks. It references the Cabibbo angle and the associated two-dimensional basis, questioning whether a similar visual model exists for the three-dimensional case involving three mixing angles and a CP-violating phase. The conversation highlights the complexity of representing the CKM matrix, noting that it has eight dihedral angles and five constraints, excluding the phase. The challenge lies in clearly depicting the Euler angles in a three-generation scenario, as opposed to the simpler two-generation case. Overall, the participants seek insights into visualizing the intricate relationships within the CKM matrix.
Heidi
Messages
420
Reaction score
40
Hi Pfs,
please look at the CKM article on wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabibbo–Kobayashi–Maskawa_matrix

It begins with the case of two generation (with the Cabibbo angle)
We have two orthonorma basis related by a rotation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cabibbo_angle.svg

I wonder if such a graphical representation exists with the CKM matrix (with three angles)
we would have two (three dimensional) basis and each of of vector eigenstate woul be associated to the 3 angles. Have you ever seen such a picture?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Such a body would have 8 dihedral angles and 5 constraints on these angles. That ignores the phase. What would such a thing even look like?
 
I read this in the wikipedia article about the CKM matrix:
For the Standard Model case (n = 3), there are three mixing angles and one CP-violating complex phase.
 
In the general case of a CKM matrix with n generation (n * n matrix)
the standard parameterization gives n(n-1)/2 angles but as it is a choice, it is not obvious
that the Euler angles appear clearly in a picture likr in tbe 2 * 2 case with its unique angle.
 
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...