P, CP and CPT symmetry in neutrino oscillation? (quick question)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the application of P, CP, and CPT symmetries in neutrino oscillation, specifically the notation P(να → νβ). The transformation under charge conjugation (C) and time reversal (T) is clearly defined, while the incorporation of parity transformation (P) raises questions due to the absence of right-handed neutrinos. The weak force's maximal violation of P and C is highlighted, alongside the expectation of CP violation in the neutrino sector. It is established that CPT symmetry should hold exactly, with implications for local Lorentz symmetry if violated.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of neutrino oscillation and flavor eigenstates
  • Familiarity with quantum field theory and symmetry operations
  • Knowledge of the weak force and its properties
  • Basic concepts of particle-antiparticle relationships
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of CPT symmetry in quantum field theory
  • Study the role of CP violation in the neutrino sector
  • Explore the properties of left-handed and right-handed neutrinos
  • Investigate the relationship between Lorentz symmetry and CPT violation
USEFUL FOR

Particle physicists, researchers in quantum field theory, and students studying neutrino physics will benefit from this discussion.

Doofy
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
Just a quick question about notation really here. In neutrino oscillation we can calculate a probability of an oscillation occurring between two flavour eigenstates - invariably denoted P(\nu_{\alpha} \rightarrow \nu_{\beta}). I've got some confusion about what happens to this when we apply operators for P, CP and CPT.

Charge conjugation turns particles to anti-particles, so I'm thinking this transformation would be denoted P(\nu_{\alpha} \rightarrow \nu_{\beta}) \rightarrow P(\overline{\nu_{\alpha}} \rightarrow \overline{\nu_{\beta}})

Time reversal would presumably be P(\nu_{\alpha} \rightarrow \nu_{\beta}) \rightarrow P(\nu_{\beta} \rightarrow \nu_{\alpha})

The combination of C and T operations would therefore be P(\nu_{\alpha} \rightarrow \nu_{\beta}) \rightarrow P(\overline{\nu_{\beta}} \rightarrow \overline{\nu_{\alpha}})

My question is how would the parity transformation be incorporated here?

ie. how would one write \hat{P} P(\nu_{\alpha} \rightarrow \nu_{\beta}), \hat{C}\hat{P} P(\nu_{\alpha} \rightarrow \nu_{\beta}) and \hat{C}\hat{P}\hat{T} P(\nu_{\alpha} \rightarrow \nu_{\beta}) ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The application of P will switch the chirality of a fermion. For neutrinos, this would be rather problematic, as, so far as we know, there are no right-handed neutrinos. (This is related to the fact that the weak force violates P maximally.) C, on the other hand, will reverse all charges, but will not reverse chirality; so, it will take you from a left-handed neutrino to a left-handed anti-neutrino. But, as you can check for yourself, the anti-neutrino state which must be included to allow spin-conservation in gauge interactions involving a left-handed neutrino is actually the right-handed anti-neutrino. (Equivalently, the existence of a left-handed anti-neutrino would require the existence of a right-handed neutrino.) So, again, we have a maximal violation, this time of C. It's only if we apply CP (turning a left-handed neutrino into a right-handed anti-neutrino) that we should expect to get a meaningful conjugation.

Now, as it happens, we already know that the weak force slightly violates CP, as well; and, it's expected that there should be some CP violation in the neutrino sector; but, this ought to be a small effect compared to the size of the oscillation effects.

CPT, on the other hand, should be an exact symmetry. There's a good deal of work showing that a violation of CPT necessarily entails a violation of local Lorentz symmetry.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K