I have some confusion over neutrino oscillations?

Doofy
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to learn the basic theory of neutrino oscillations at a postgraduate level. I have a few things that are bothering me.

1) All of the papers & textbooks I have looked at start out by just assuming that each neutrino flavour eigenstate is a superposition of the mass eigenstates. However, I can't work out where this has come from - what led people to this conclusion?
Or was it just that someone happened to be playing around and said "let's just make this assumption, then we can predict oscillations should occur" - then the evidence came along to support it, so now all the stuff I've been reading starts out by just stating that this assumption is true?

2) I'm trying to understand are where the equation for the probability of oscillation between lepton flavours comes from, P_\nu_\alpha_-_>_\nu_\beta = sin^2\theta sin^2(1.27\frac{\deltam_\alpha_\beta L}{E} )

I am following this paper's treatment: http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0409230.pdf
I understand all the way down until equation 2.7, but have been unable to find any paper that gets me from that equation to the familiar form of the oscillation probability equation I have written in this post above.

Can anyone help me out here?
Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've once written a report on neutrino oscillations for a cosmology course, if you remind me I can how much detail that went into.
 
Well, I haven't studied this formally, but as I have recently read a SM textbook that describes this and think I just about understand the equations, I will attempt to give a simpler example and, without full rigour, show the derivation. Hopefully the others here will pipe up if I've got any of this wrong!

Consider a neutrino that is created as an electron neutrino with energy E at t=0, z=0, and travels along the z axis. It propogates as a mass eigenstate \nui with mass mi. Assuming it is relativistic, its momentum can be approximated as

\large p_{i} = E\ (1 - \frac{m^{2}_{i}}{2E})​

Assuming the neutrino propagates as a Dirac wavefunction with negative helicity, this wavefunction will be of the form

\large \psi_{L} e^{-i[Et - p_{i}z]}\ \ =\ \ \psi_{L} e^{-i[Et - Ez + \frac{m^{2}_{i}}{2E}z]}​

where the spinor \psi_{L} = (0, 1)^{T}. We will suppress the latter as it has no effect on this immediate calculation.

If I have a detector at z=D, the amplitude for the electron neutrino to propagate as a \nu_{i} eigenstate and then be found as a \nu_{\alpha} (\alpha = e/\nu/\tau) if detected in my detector is

\large V^{*}_{\alpha i}\ e^{-i[Et - ED + \frac{m^{2}_{i}}{2E}D]}\ V_{ei}​

where V_{\alpha i} are the PMNS matrix coefficients. To simplify matters, we will approximate these using

\large sin (\theta_{e2}) = s \approx .84,\ \ cos (\theta_{e2}) = c \approx .54,\ \ sin (\theta_{\mu3}) \approx cos (\theta_{\mu3}) \approx 1/\sqrt{2},\ \ sin (\theta_{e3}) = 0\ \so\large \ \ \delta = irrelevant​

V_{e3} = 0 in this approximation, so the original neutrino can only enter the \nu_{1} and \nu_{2} states, and the total amplitude for being in the \nu_{\alpha} state if detected is thus

\large V^{*}_{\alpha 1} e^{-i[Et - ED + \frac{m^{2}_{1}}{2E}D]} V_{e1}\ \ +\ \ V^{*}_{\alpha 2} e^{-i[Et - ED + \frac{m^{2}_{2}}{2E}D]} V_{e2}​

and hence

\large P (e → \alpha)\ \ =\ \ |(V^{*}_{\alpha 1} e^{-i[Et - ED + \frac{m^{2}_{1}}{2E}D]} V_{e1}\ \ +\ \ V^{*}_{\alpha 2} e^{-i[Et - ED + \frac{m^{2}_{2}}{2E}D]} V_{e2})|^{2}​

\large =\ \ (V^{*}_{\alpha 1} e^{-i[Et - ED + \frac{m^{2}_{1}}{2E}D]} V_{e1}\ \ +\ \ V^{*}_{\alpha 2} e^{-i[Et - ED + \frac{m^{2}_{2}}{2E}D]} V_{e2})\ (V_{\alpha 1} e^{\textbf{+}i[Et - ED + \frac{m^{2}_{1}}{2E}D]} V^{*}_{e1}\ \ +\ \ V_{\alpha 2} e^{\textbf{+}i[Et - ED + \frac{m^{2}_{2}}{2E}D]} V^{*}_{e2})​

Each term in the first bracket has a phase factor of e^{-i[Et - ED]} which is canceled out by its conjugate on each term in the second bracket, so on multiplying out the brackets we get

\large P (e → \alpha)\ \ =\ \ |V^{2}_{\alpha 1}| |V^{2}_{e 1}|\ \ +\ \ V^{*}_{\alpha 1}V_{\alpha 2}V_{e 1}V^{*}_{e 2}\ e^{+i[\frac{m^{2}_{2} - m^{2}_{1}}{2E}D]}\ \ +\ \ V_{\alpha 1}V^{*}_{\alpha 2}V^{*}_{e 1}V_{e 2}\ e^{-i[\frac{m^{2}_{2} - m^{2}_{1}}{2E}D]}\ \ +\ \ |V^{2}_{\alpha 2}| |V^{2}_{e 2}|​

For today's simple example, our approximated PMNS matrix elements are all real, so we can drop the stars on the V_{\alpha i} and we have

\large P (e → \alpha)\ \ \approx\ \ V^{2}_{\alpha 1} V^{2}_{e 1}\ \ +\ \ V^{2}_{\alpha 2} V^{2}_{e 2}\ \ +\ \ 2 V_{\alpha 1}V_{\alpha 2}V_{e 1}V_{e 2}\ \ cos(\frac{\Delta m^{2}_{12} D}{2E})​

Plugging in our approximate numbers, for \alpha = e this is approximately

\large P (e → e)\ \ \approx\ \ c^{4} + s^{4} + 2 c^{2} s^{2} cos(\frac{\Delta m^{2}_{12} D}{2E})\ \ \approx\ \ 0.5 + 0.1 + 0.4\ cos(\frac{\Delta m^{2}_{12} D}{2E})​
 
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}...

Similar threads

Back
Top