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

Muon g-2

  1. Jan 25, 2006 #1

    mathman

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    A few years ago BNL did some experiments measuring muon g-2. At the time there was a significant enough difference from the calculations based on the Standard Model to raise questions about SM. Since then I've seen papers indicating that SM was probably OK, with the discrepancy being due to the difficulty in calculation, particularly the hadronic contribution. Where do things stand today? Has it been resolved to the community's satisfaction or is the question still open?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 26, 2006 #2

    arivero

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    The theoretical community rebuilt the calculations, finding some signs here and there and adding some new higher order terms until they entered into agreement within the experimental error gaussian. Then, the experimentalist did a new round of experiments reducing the experimental error, and the question was left open.
     
  4. Jan 26, 2006 #3

    mathman

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Are there any recent papers (e.g. in ArXiv) which discuss these issues?
     
  5. Jan 30, 2006 #4

    arivero

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Actually all the stuff is in the ArXiV, but I can not tell which the good ones are. Use SPIRES instead of the arxiv to navegate across the citation tree.

    In our paper hep-ph/0503104 we quote hep-ph/0406325 and hep-ph/9810512 as sources for the theoretical calculation.

    The most recent experimental measurement is still, I believe, http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0401008

    The theoretical calculation keeps giving papers; last review from Kino****a at http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0512330

    A recent "independent" review of the state of the question could be hep-ph/0509372 by M. Passera, last updated 10/Oct/2005
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2006
  6. Jan 30, 2006 #5

    arivero

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    It is funny to look table 1 of http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0509372 from our (Hans and me) point of view. We consider instead of [tex]a_\mu[/tex] the difference [tex]a_\mu-a_e[/tex], to which we add the surviving therms of a_e in the substraction, namely [tex]a^{vp}_e[/tex], the so called vacuum polarisation terms, so that the whole expresion is really [tex]a_{\mu}^{vp}[/tex] Then we put table 1 in terms of mass units by mapping

    [tex]a_\mu \to {m_e \over (a_\mu-a_e+a^{vp}) }[/tex]

    And we get the table
    Code (Text):

    80.418 GeV
    80.417 GeV
    80.420 GeV
    80.417 GeV
    80.396 GeV
    80.407 GeV
     
    Now, the most current evaluation from LEP EW group for W mass is 80.392 GeV, and so the result closest to M_W in our remapped table happens to be also the result closest to [tex]a^{exp}_\mu[/tex] in Passera's table.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2006
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Muon g-2
  1. Muon decay (Replies: 15)

  2. Muon and Scintillator (Replies: 1)

  3. Muon Production (Replies: 6)

Loading...