Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Majorana particles and U(1) charges

  1. Jul 23, 2010 #1
    Hi...

    Recently read that neutrinos can be Majorana particles only because they are singlets under the unbroken U(1) electromagnetic..

    I can understand that...Majorana means that the particle is its own antiparticle..this cant happen if it is charged, as the antiparticle should have the opposite charge as the particle...

    Does this mean that a Majorana particle cannot have any charge? Or is it fine for it to have charges under symmetries which are broken in our world?


    Krishna
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 23, 2010 #2

    tom.stoer

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Neutrinos carry weak isospin
     
  4. Jul 23, 2010 #3
    A Majorana mass term explicitly violates the conservation of any additive charge. Therefore, the only charges that can be carried by a Majorana particle are those belonging to symmetry groups that are broken by the same physics that generates the Majorana mass.
     
  5. Dec 13, 2011 #4
    This is wrong, A Majorana mass term stops conservation of any charge that reverses under electromagnetic charge conjugation, but is just fine if stays the same under C, but reverses under P, i've been looking at such an axial force for 5+ years, and still believe it is possible.
     
  6. Dec 14, 2011 #5
    Several things. First, this thread is almost a year and a half old. Did you really just drag it up out of the ether to tell me I'm wrong?

    Second, the charge conjugation that shows up in the definition of a Majorana field is pretty much defined to include all charges (conserved or not), not just EM.

    Third, while I already knew that Majorana fields can couple to axial currents, I'm not really clear on the physical implications of what you're suggesting. Are you saying that you have an axial interaction that has the opposite sign behavior under parity than would be expected just from the action of the parity operator on an axial current?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook