Neutrino masses and sterile neutrinos

ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
I am wondering... And I may be wrong but please correct me...
In general we have some constraints on the masses of the 3 flavored neutrinos m_{\nu_e}, m_{\nu_\mu} , m_{\nu_\tau} and so there must be some constrain on the values of the 3 neutrino masses m_1, m_2, m_3. Am I right?
Also the probability of flavor change is oscillating with distance with a frequency that's proportional to \Delta m_{ij}^2 (i,j in [1,3] ).
My question is what happens if there is a 4th sterile neutrino, of the acceptable mass of m_\nu \sim 50~\text{GeV} ?
I'd think then that the additional m_4 that we would have to introduce would have to be very large as well (so that its combination with m_i is large)...and finally \frac{\Delta m _{4i}^2}{E} \approx \frac{m_4^2}{E} = \frac{2500 ~\text{GeV}^2}{5 \cdot 10^{-3}~\text{GeV}} = 5 \cdot 10^5~\text{GeV}
Is this right so long? I'd guess then that a reasonable distance for oscillation to occur would be at approximately L \sim 10^{-21} m?
http://pdg.lbl.gov/2011/reviews/rpp2011-rev-neutrino-mixing.pdf
(used 13.15 together with 13.12)
 
  • Like
Likes arivero
Physics news on Phys.org
ChrisVer said:
In general we have some constraints on the masses of the 3 flavored neutrinos mνe,mνμ,mντmνe,mνμ,mντ m_{\nu_e}, m_{\nu_\mu} , m_{\nu_\tau} and so there must be some constrain on the values of the 3 neutrino masses m1,m2,m3m1,m2,m3m_1, m_2, m_3. Am I right?

No, the flavour states do not have definite masses, the definite masses are properties of the mass eigenstates. If you want to talk about effective masses of flavour eigenstates there are several different combination of the mass eigenstate masses which are relevant in different applications.

What is constrained better is the mass squared differences, the absolute scale is still quite unknown.

ChrisVer said:
My question is what happens if there is a 4th sterile neutrino, of the acceptable mass of mν∼50 GeVmν∼50 GeVm_\nu \sim 50~\text{GeV} ?
A neutrino of that mass would be kinematically distinguishable from the light neutrinos. It would therefore quickly decohere and there would be no oscillations.
 
Orodruin said:
No, the flavour states do not have definite masses, the definite masses are properties of the mass eigenstates. If you want to talk about effective masses of flavour eigenstates there are several different combination of the mass eigenstate masses which are relevant in different applications.

Hmm is there some invariant independent of the different combinations? Trace of the mass matrix, for instance?
 
arivero said:
Hmm is there some invariant independent of the different combinations? Trace of the mass matrix, for instance?
The trace is just the sum of the masses. You would need to find a setting where this is relevant to make it an observable. The most interesting invariant with regards to mixing is probably the Jarlskog invariant which measures the degree of CP violation.
 
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