Kobayashi Maskawa Matrix Error ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anne-Sylvie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error Matrix
Anne-Sylvie
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone,

I'm studying some lectures on electroweak interactions and I was reading the paper from Kobayashi and Maskawa, particulary the matrix :

47c2893dc9404e8ed5d48c7c6f9f3a32.png


But these matrix have to be unitary... And my professor said that it was not the case. When I compute the product of this matrix and its conjugate transpose, I actually don't find the identity matrix but I don't rely on my computation...

Is there REALLY an error in the paper ?
(I computed for many values of θ1, θ2 and θ3 numerically the product and I never have the identity.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you look at the Wikipedia page on the CKM Matrix, they show that the "standard" parametrization can be factored into three Euler-angle rotations. This makes it obvious that the result is unitary. And although they don't do it, the "original" KM parametrization can be factored in a similar manner.

(If only I knew how to write a matrix!) But anyway, it's a rotation by θ3 in the 23 plane, followed by a rotation by θ1 in the 12 plane, followed by a rotation by θ2 again in the 23 plane. The matrix is correct as you give it.
 
And the matrix as you give it is unitary.
 
Thanks very much for your answer.
In fact, the matrix that I give is unitary as you said.
But this is not EXACTLY the matrix as in the paper of Kobayashi and Maskawa ;
The V_3,3 term have been corrected. In the paper they write a sin(θ3) term in place of a cos(θ3) term.

Thank you ! :smile:
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top