Neutrino-antineutrino annihilation

  • Thread starter Thread starter hellfire
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Annihilation
hellfire
Science Advisor
Messages
1,048
Reaction score
1
As far as I know the usual extension of the standard model to include a massive neutrino implies a violation of the conservation of quantum numbers, this means the lepton number (since the neutrino is uncharged). During its propagation a massive left-handed neutrino can be regarded as a massive right-handed antineutrino with an appropiate Lorentz boost (as explained here). In that case, how can neutrino-antineutrino annihilation processes be explained? Do actually neutrinos and antineutrinos annihilate? It seams to me that there could exist an observer that regards the antineutrino as a neutrino, but still the neutrino as a neutrino.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Dirac neutrinos with mass behave like electrons with mass.
LH and RH refer to their weak interaction. Making a LT on a LH neutrino could give it positive helicity, but it would not be considered a RH particle or an anti-neutrino.
 
Thanks for the answer, but I think my question is rather about Majorana neutrinos. I think neutrino-antineutrino mixing is only possible with Majorana neutrinos. If the neutrino is a Majorana spinor, do annihilations take place?
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
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}...
Back
Top