Parity violation in weak decays

JoePhysicsNut
Messages
35
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am confused about parity violation in weak decays. I learned about Wu's famous experiment and how it demonstrates that parity is violated in weak decays.

However, when I am doing a course problem on nuclear β-decay, then it still necessary to conserve parity.

Homework Equations



As an example, consider the
La_{57} (J^P=2^-) → Ce_{58} (J^P=0^+) decay, where I am asked to figure out what the angular momentum and spin state of the electron-neutrino system is.

The Attempt at a Solution



I get the right answer, when I require l=1 as this carries P=-1 and S_{enu}=1 to conserve angular momentum overall.

So my question is, why I am requiring parity to be conserved in nuclear β-decay when parity is violated for weak decays?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
JoePhysicsNut said:

Homework Statement


I am confused about parity violation in weak decays. I learned about Wu's famous experiment and how it demonstrates that parity is violated in weak decays.

However, when I am doing a course problem on nuclear β-decay, then it still necessary to conserve parity.

Homework Equations



As an example, consider the
La_{57} (J^P=2^-) → Ce_{58} (J^P=0^+) decay, where I am asked to figure out what the angular momentum and spin state of the electron-neutrino system is.

The Attempt at a Solution



I get the right answer, when I require l=1 as this carries P=-1 and S_{enu}=1 to conserve angular momentum overall.

So my question is, why I am requiring parity to be conserved in nuclear β-decay when parity is violated for weak decays?

Because parity is usually NOT violated. The exception doesn't make the rule. Even then it's not violated by much. Only certain cases in the quark mixing matrix will you get any significant violation at all. That's why it took till 1956 to discover. It's a perfectly fine approximate symmetry.
 
Last edited:
Dick said:
Because parity is usually NOT violated. The exception doesn't make the rule. Even then it's not violated by much. Only certain cases in the quark mixing matrix will you get any significant violation at all. That's why it took till 1956 to discover. It's a perfectly fine approximate symmetry.

But in Wu's experiment, ALL the electrons come out in one direction making parity MAXIMALLY violated.
 
JoePhysicsNut said:
But in Wu's experiment, ALL the electrons come out in one direction making parity MAXIMALLY violated.

Oh heck. I was thinking about CP violation. Different thing. Sorry!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top