Strong Flavor Dynamics for tops questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChrisVer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dynamics
ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
I was reading through this paper:
A Model for Strong Flavor Dynamics for the Top Quark
Ehab Malkawi, Tim Tait, C.--P. Yuan
It's pretty old, so maybe some things might have changed...

I have two questions.
Q1:
I quote from abstract:
If one takes the Rb data seriously
and from intro
If one takes the above measurements seriously, one can advocate specific types of new physics which tackle these experimental concerns
Were (or are) the measurments that showed the inconsistencies (to SM predictions) of Rc and Rb considered non-serious? In fact reading in a paper "taking those measurements seriously" made me giggle and think if I should take what's written "seriously" (or if I am badly mistaken).

Q2:

And finally I don't really understand the mass-hierarchy for the fermion mass spectrum (again mentioned in the intro).
The relatively large mass of the third generation fermions may suggest a dynamical behavior different from that of the first two generations
The top quark mass is relatively as larger to charm quark mass (3rd to 2nd), as charm is to up (2nd to 1st)... In numbers:
\frac{m_t}{m_c} \approx 134 ~~,~~ \frac{m_c}{m_u} \approx 561
Any idea? Or is the "relative" mass compared to something else (like the QCD scale)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
See the introduction of the first paper for references and significances. 3.5 and 2.5 sigma, respectively - something that can be a statistical fluctuation, but it could also be a hint of something new. The paper is discussing effects that can influence the value, but you can say "I don't take that 'seriously', it is probably just a statistical fluctuation".

The quark masses have a huge ratio for the third generation if you compare everything to the first generation, e.g. charm/up ~ 550, while top/up ~ 75000.
 
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}...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
13
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
5K
Replies
94
Views
11K
Back
Top