Strong Flavor Dynamics for tops questions

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ChrisVer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dynamics
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the paper "A Model for Strong Flavor Dynamics for the Top Quark" by Ehab Malkawi, Tim Tait, and C.--P. Yuan, focusing on the inconsistencies in Rb and Rc measurements compared to Standard Model predictions. The participants question the seriousness of these measurements and their implications for new physics. Additionally, they explore the mass hierarchy of fermions, particularly the significant mass differences between the top quark and its lighter counterparts, suggesting potential dynamical behaviors that differ across generations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Standard Model predictions in particle physics
  • Familiarity with quark mass ratios and their implications
  • Knowledge of statistical significance in experimental physics
  • Basic concepts of flavor dynamics and fermion mass hierarchy
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Rb and Rc measurements on new physics theories
  • Study the mass hierarchy of fermions in detail, focusing on the top quark
  • Examine statistical fluctuations in particle physics experiments
  • Explore advanced topics in flavor dynamics and their experimental validations
USEFUL FOR

Particle physicists, researchers in flavor dynamics, and students studying the implications of quark mass hierarchies in theoretical physics.

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:
[itex]\frac{m_t}{m_c} \approx 134 ~~,~~ \frac{m_c}{m_u} \approx 561[/itex]
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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K