- #1

Cinquero

- 31

- 0

First of all, many books assume first that K_S and K_L are CP eigenstates. They then tell that by observation that cannot be true. Is that relevant to the CP violation? Why don't the authors just tell that K_L is a mixed state with only a small amount of CP=+1 eigenstate?

Second, observing CP=+1 decays at long distances is regarded as CP-Violation. Why is that? Is it because the K_0 was a perfectly balanced mixture of both CP eigenstates directly after the strong decay (eg. pi^- and Proton to Lambda and K_0) and now the decay products do not show this perfect balance any more (we have more CP=+1 decays)?

Third and last, how exactly is CP violation defined? The whole process of the neutral Kaon decay requires us to take different decay rates for the two CP eigenstates into account. Without CP=+1 states decaying before the CP=-1 states, this sort of CP violation could not be observed because the CP-changing weak interaction would have no net effect on the CP amplitudes of the Kaon. Is that correct? If yes, how comes that the definition of CP violation takes into account the CP=+1 decay processes? Isn't that a too far-reached definition/interpretation of the CP symmetry?

Is there any book/article where that problem is being treated with rigour? I have perused the particle data guide book but the reviews there are only very superficial (IMHO).

Second, observing CP=+1 decays at long distances is regarded as CP-Violation. Why is that? Is it because the K_0 was a perfectly balanced mixture of both CP eigenstates directly after the strong decay (eg. pi^- and Proton to Lambda and K_0) and now the decay products do not show this perfect balance any more (we have more CP=+1 decays)?

Third and last, how exactly is CP violation defined? The whole process of the neutral Kaon decay requires us to take different decay rates for the two CP eigenstates into account. Without CP=+1 states decaying before the CP=-1 states, this sort of CP violation could not be observed because the CP-changing weak interaction would have no net effect on the CP amplitudes of the Kaon. Is that correct? If yes, how comes that the definition of CP violation takes into account the CP=+1 decay processes? Isn't that a too far-reached definition/interpretation of the CP symmetry?

Is there any book/article where that problem is being treated with rigour? I have perused the particle data guide book but the reviews there are only very superficial (IMHO).

Last edited: