Pion+/- decay - what *Exactly* is happening?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Asgrrr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Decay Pion
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the decay process of pions (π+/-), specifically focusing on the mechanisms involved and the fate of quarks during this decay. Participants explore theoretical aspects, the role of weak interactions, and the interpretation of Feynman diagrams in the context of teaching these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants describe pion decay as a process where a pion decays into a muon and a neutrino, mediated by the W field, leading to the quarks ceasing to exist.
  • Others argue that Feynman diagrams should not be taken literally, as they are mathematical representations rather than direct depictions of particle interactions.
  • A participant suggests that teaching materials should connect pion decay to established weak interactions involving W particles, emphasizing the need for clarity in explanations.
  • Some express skepticism about the feasibility of explaining Feynman diagrams to high school students without oversimplifying or misrepresenting the underlying physics.
  • There is a discussion about the decay process involving quarks, with one participant proposing that an up quark decays to a down quark via a W boson, leading to a scenario where quarks annihilate each other.
  • Another participant raises concerns about the simultaneous decay of two particles and questions the nature of their annihilation, seeking a more fundamental explanation of the interactions involved.
  • Some participants clarify that weak interactions, mediated by W bosons, allow for transitions between different types of quarks, and discuss the implications for energy and momentum conservation during these processes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the interpretation of pion decay and the role of Feynman diagrams, with no clear consensus reached. Disagreements persist regarding the nature of quark interactions and the adequacy of existing explanations for educational purposes.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the complexity of the concepts being discussed, the varying levels of background knowledge among participants, and the potential for misinterpretation of Feynman diagrams and decay processes.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to educators developing teaching materials on particle physics, students seeking to understand pion decay, and those interested in the nuances of weak interactions and particle decay processes.

  • #31
Sure, and the effective models are governed by chiral symmetry and thus take the form they take. Pions are a bound state with the specific quark content. Already these quarks are constituent quarks of course!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
ChrisVer said:
OK, draw the Feynman Diagram of the linear combination for me
You would draw both diagrams, and you have to calculate both diagrams for the decay and add their amplitudes.
ChrisVer said:
afterall superpositions aren't natural.
Everything is a superposition - in most bases. Saying "this is not a superposition" without specifying a basis is meaningless. Superpositions are much more natural than the special case of pure states.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Orodruin and vanhees71
  • #33
mfb said:
You would draw both diagrams, and you have to calculate both diagrams for the decay and add their amplitudes.
in any case in the 1st diagram you would end up with a ddbar or with a uubar... so according to the OP, this wouldn't be a neutral pion.
 
  • #34
ChrisVer said:
in any case in the 1st diagram you would end up with a ddbar or with a uubar... so according to the OP, this wouldn't be a neutral pion.
The point is that you have to draw all the other diagrams as well and take the appropriate linear combination when you actually compute the decay amplitude. Indeed the uubar state is not a neutral pion, but the neutral pion projection onto the uubar direction (or vice versa) is non-zero so you have to include it when you compute the amplitude.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
  • #35
ChrisVer said:
afterall superpositions aren't natural.
Somebody should tell the ##K-\bar K## oscillations ... :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
  • #36
mfb said:
Everything is a superposition
I disagree...
The fact that you can have an electron with spin up or spin down, doesn't mean that a single electron would have both... A collection of electrons would of course have 50% up and 50% down (given that the orientation symmetry is preserved), the single electron would have either up or down (you'd need to measure it).
 
  • #37
ChrisVer said:
I disagree...
The fact that you can have an electron with spin up or spin down, doesn't mean that a single electron would have both... A collection of electrons would of course have 50% up and 50% down (given that the orientation symmetry is preserved), the single electron would have either up or down (you'd need to measure it).
Before the measurement an electron may very well be in a superposition of spin up and down. It is your measurement process that forces it to select either by singling out a basis. After your measurement each individual electron is in an eigenstate - in your chosen direction. If you change from the z to the x direction each electron is in an equal parts linear conbination so whether it is a linear combination of seceral states really is a question of your choice of basis.
 
  • #38
A single electron has the spin it prepared in. Usually it will be in a mixed state (aka unpolarized electron).
 
  • #39
ChrisVer said:
I disagree...
The fact that you can have an electron with spin up or spin down, doesn't mean that a single electron would have both... A collection of electrons would of course have 50% up and 50% down (given that the orientation symmetry is preserved), the single electron would have either up or down (you'd need to measure it).
Sorry Chris, but you are wrong, and repeating wrong statements won't improve them.
Up and down in which direction? Your perfectly polarized beam of electrons "up" in the z-direction will be in a superposition of up and down in all other directions. And yes, the electrons do have both up and down in these directions. It is important to consider both directions and their relative phase to describe the electron correctly in such a basis. If you want to assign them a specific orientation in a different basis, then you don't get your perfectly polarized beam in z-direction any more.

A pure (edit) measurement eigenstate is a very special case, in general you have superpositions.
 
Last edited:
  • #40
mfb said:
A pure state is a very special case, in general you have superpositions.
A superposition can be a pure state as well. I believe you mean "a measurement eigenstate".
 
  • #41
OK people, I will agree with you and say that the neutral pion is only the u\bar{u}-d\bar{d} state... In that manner the decay \pi \rightarrow \pi^0 e \nu can't happen since there is no meson with the d\bar{d} (or u\bar{u}) alone quark content...
Also what's the meson that has the state: u\bar{d} \pm u\bar{s} \pm u \bar{b} \pm c \bar{s}\pm c \bar{d} \pm c \bar{b} (that would come from the W hadronic decay addition of Feynman Diagrams)?
 
  • #43
vanhees71 said:
How do you come to that conclusion? According to the particle data booklet the decay indeed happens (although quite rarely):

http://pdglive-temp.lbl.gov/BranchingRatio.action?desig=4&parCode=S008

because I couldn't produce a neutral pion according to the definition I am getting: I either end up with processes resulting to u\bar{u} or to d\bar{d} (so projections of the neutral pion, as well as the sigma mesons)... I originally said that the decay was possible (like a semileptonic meson decay), since those were actually neutral pions but I was wrong.
 
  • #44
ChrisVer said:
because I couldn't produce a neutral pion according to the definition I am getting: I either end up with processes resulting to u\bar{u} or to d\bar{d} (so projections of the neutral pion, as well as the sigma mesons)... I originally said that the decay was possible (like a semileptonic meson decay), since those were actually neutral pions but I was wrong.
But it's not wrong, as you can see from the particle data booklet (the branching ratio is only about ##10^{-8}##, but it's a measured decay of the charged pions). I still don't understand, why you come to the conclusion that this decay cannot exist, only because the pion is the given superposition?
 
  • #45
They have a neutral pion component.
ChrisVer said:
Also what's the meson that has the state: u\bar{d} \pm u\bar{s} \pm u \bar{b} \pm c \bar{s}\pm c \bar{d} \pm c \bar{b} (that would come from the W hadronic decay addition of Feynman Diagrams)?
There is no such thing, and a W cannot decay to a single meson anyway.

We had a great question about partial widths a while ago, where you can see the effect of the superpositions of quark states directly in the branching fractions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
  • #46
vanhees71 said:
I still don't understand, why you come to the conclusion that this decay cannot exist, only because the pion is the given superposition?
Because that decay ends up with u\bar{u} or d\bar{d} and not in a superposition of the two... and that is not a neutral pion (as I was repeatedly told in this discussion)...
On the other hand, if we are to "add" every possible outcome (and so say we can have both the u\bar{u} and d\bar{d} in a combination, al), then I would ask on this counter-example (a possible W decay to a meson):
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1001.3317.pdf (Fig2)
D^0 \rightarrow \rho^+ \pi^- : c \bar{u} \rightarrow W (d\bar{u}) \rightarrow (u \bar{d}) (d \bar{u})
my question would then be why do we get a \rho^+ (with the u\bar{d} decay of a W ) and not a \alpha u\bar{d} + \beta u \bar{s} (forgetting the bottoms due to energy). Instead we call the 1st a rho, and the second a possible Kaon (2 different outcomes)... Is it related to a flavour symmetry or something?
 
  • #47
ChrisVer said:
Because that decay ends up with u¯uuu¯u\bar{u} or d¯ddd¯d\bar{d} and not in a superposition of the two...
This is self contradictory. If it can end up in uubar and ddbar, clearly it can end up in a linear combination of those states. It is a question of what the amplitude is.

ChrisVer said:
my question would then be why do we get a ρ+ρ+\rho^+ (with the u¯dud¯u\bar{d} decay of a W ) and not a αu¯d+βu¯sαud¯+βus¯ \alpha u\bar{d} + \beta u \bar{s} (forgetting the bottoms due to energy).
What makes you think it doesn't decay to both linear combinations? The only difference is that the s quark is heavy enough for the mass eigenstates to be essentially equivalent to the flavour states, which does not happen in the pion system.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
5K