# The different lifetimes of W boson and Pion?

• isospin
In summary: Do you think I am making this stuff up?In summary, according to the content, the positive W boson decays to a anti-muon and a muon neutrino, but the positive Pion can also decay to a anti-muon and a muon neutrino. The lifetimes of these particles are proportional to their masses, but the W boson's lifetime is much larger than the Pion's.
isospin
The positive W boson decays to a anti-muon and a muon neutrino, it should be a weak interaction.
And the positive Pion can decays to a anti-muon and a muon neutrino, too.
But the lifetimes of them are totally different, so why?
I know the positive Pion is composed of two quarks, but could you please give me a quantitative analysis?

Last edited:
There is no theorem that states that particles with the same decay products have the same lifetime.

The pion lifetime is proportional to m_W^4/m_pi^5.

The W lifetime is proportional to m_W.

There is no theorem that states that particles with the same decay products have the same lifetime.

The pion lifetime is proportional to m_W^4/m_pi^5.

The W lifetime is proportional to m_W.
To note: while the charged pion lifetime is proportional to m^pi^-5, the lifetime of the neutral pion (whose decay is electromagnetic) is proportional to m_pi^-3

And now, if you consider the product of lifetime times m^3 for all the electromagnetic decays of neutral particles, you will we surprised they keep all in the same order of magnitude, from pi0 up to Z0. And thus also the charged W boson keeps near of this line. In fact the fit is better than order of magnitude, I have told about it elsewhere.

As you say, there is not a theorem. But it is a general and almost exhaustive empirical rule (it only fails, afaik, for the Upsilon).

And of course, for weak decays there is "almost a theorem", or a couple of them, and there was an empirical rule already in 1930, sometimes named "Sargent's rule", from a paper of an obscure physicist having this name.

isospin said:
I know the positive Pion is composed of two quarks, but could you please give me a quantitative analysis?

Hmm I am prety sure https://www.physicsforums.com/search.php?searchid=1028755 having some part of the kind of quantitative analysis you are interested on...

Ah, here! But it only works out how the weak decay rate of a quark (or a charged lepton, too?) does depend of its mass. See figure 2 of post #13.

Perhaps someone would like to expand the thread adding a calculation of charged pion decay as a function of its mass. I have never seen such beast, but it could exist in some obscure paper.

Last edited by a moderator:
arivero said:
And of course, for weak decays there is "almost a theorem", or a couple of them, and there was an empirical rule already in 1930, sometimes named "Sargent's rule", from a paper of an obscure physicist having this name.

Yes, but that's a statement that the lifetimes are different (and go as m^5), not that they are the same.

One can calculate the lifetime of the charged pion, but one will end up needing to include a factor f_pi, which is a measure of the wavefunction overlap between the two quarks. Typically, one gets f_pi from the measured lifetime of the pion, although I suppose one could use the lattice instead.

There is no theorem that states that particles with the same decay products have the same lifetime.

The pion lifetime is proportional to m_W^4/m_pi^5.

The W lifetime is proportional to m_W.

I just thought that the lifetime of W boson, with the weak interaction decay, would be much larger, as the characteristic constant of weak interaction is much smaller that that of Strong interaction.
But the fact is just opposite. What is the right relationship of the lifetime and interacton constant?
Excuse me, I am not expert on it...

The pion decays by the weak interaction.

The pion decays by the weak interaction.

Really?
In my opinion, the poin decays to a quark, an anti-quark and a W boson first. Then the W boson decay into leptons via the weak interaction. But the annihilation of the left q and anti-q should be a strong interaction precess.
Is it true?

isospin said:
Really?

Do you think I am making this stuff up?

isospin said:
In my opinion,

This isn't an opinion poll. What happens happens.

This isn't an opinion poll. What happens happens.

Indeed. A 99.98% of the time.

http://pdglive.lbl.gov/Rsummary.brl?nodein=S008&sub=Yr&return=MXXX005

Now, while calling for strong process is out of reach because we do not know what to do with the resulting gluon, I wonder if it is possible to think of the process
μ ν γ [c] ( 2.00 ± 0.25 ) × 10 − 4
in the lines of Isospin's suggestion. Ie with the gamma coming from anhiquilation of quark and antiquark.

On the other hand, the process claimed by Isospin exists somehow when the W decays to electrons instead of muons:

e+ ν π0 ( 1.036 ± 0.006 ) × 10 − 8

it is just that the extant quarks take some time to decay, they do live as a neutral pion. An then the neutral pi0 decay is not really "strong". The QCD aspects of the interaction are hidden in the "pion decay constant", as V50 told before somewhere. The products of the decay are a pair of photons.

Last edited by a moderator:
just a point, isospin. In modern terms, the W boson *IS* the weak interaction. The W comes from "Weak". Try to keep focused in post- QCD models.

Of course in the 1950s the terms weak and strong, both, were standing for different objects that nowadays.

So if you tell that something decays to a W boson, and its mass is less than the mass of the W, it is the same that telling that it decays via the Weak interaction.

Last edited:
I am really sorry because I didn't make the question clear and said some silly words. To be honest, I was confused by those conceptions.

Ok, I just want to know why the positive W boson is so short-lived with a lifetime of about 3 × 10−25 s, which is almost the typical tme scale for a strong reaction.
But in fact the decay of W+ should be a weak reaction. Is it just because the heavy mass of it?

Last edited:
isospin said:
I am really sorry because I didn't make the question clear and said some silly words. To be honest, I was confused by those conceptions.

Ok, I just want to know why the positive W boson is so short-lived with a lifetime of about 3 × 10−25 s, which is almost the typical tme scale for a strong reaction.
But in fact the decay of W+ should be a weak reaction. Is it just because the heavy mass of it?
Point is, the weak decay is weak only when (or because) the mass of the decaying particle is smaller than the mass of the weak intermediate boson, W. The detailed calculation for the simplest case is in the thread I referred to, and you can follow the integrals.

At higher scales, weak decay is not weak.

Plus, all the interactions have an scaling with the some power of the mass, so you can not compare straighforwardly the decay rates at 1GeV and 100GeV.

arivero said:
I wonder if it is possible to think of the process
μ ν γ [c] ( 2.00 ± 0.25 ) × 10 − 4
in the lines of Isospin's suggestion. Ie with the gamma coming from anhiquilation of quark and antiquark.

I don't think that's a good model.

There are three places for the photon to couple to - the quarks, the W (through the trilinear gauge coupling - the w1-w2-w3 coupling of the unbroken SU(2)), and the outgoing lepton. In the first two cases, you would expect that BF(l nu gamma)/BF(l nu) to be independent of flavor. In the third case, you would expect it to be larger for the electron, because the electron is lighter. As it happens, this ratio is 1/5000 for muons and 1/750 for electrons. So the data is telling us that a good fraction of this is coming from radiation off the outgoing lepton.

From a theoretical perspective, to first order any radiation off the u-quark is canceled by radiation off the u-bar. (Note that pi0 -> gamma gamma is in fact a second-order EM transition)

So while I wouldn't say this reaction never occurs, it is quite suppressed.

## 1. Why do W bosons have a shorter lifetime compared to Pions?

W bosons are considered to be the carriers of the weak nuclear force, which is responsible for radioactive decay. This force is much stronger than the strong nuclear force, which is responsible for the stability of particles like Pions. Therefore, W bosons have a shorter lifetime because they are more likely to decay due to the stronger force acting on them.

## 2. How are the lifetimes of W bosons and Pions measured?

The lifetimes of particles are measured using a particle accelerator, which can create and detect these particles in controlled environments. Scientists measure the decay rate of these particles and use mathematical models to calculate their lifetimes.

## 3. Can the lifetimes of W bosons and Pions be changed?

No, the lifetimes of particles are considered to be a fundamental property that cannot be altered. However, their lifetimes can vary depending on the energy and environment in which they are created.

## 4. Why do W bosons and Pions have different lifetimes if they are both subatomic particles?

W bosons and Pions have different properties and roles in the Standard Model of particle physics. W bosons are responsible for the weak nuclear force, while Pions are made up of quarks and play a role in the strong nuclear force. These differences in properties result in different lifetimes for these particles.

## 5. How do the different lifetimes of W bosons and Pions contribute to our understanding of the universe?

The different lifetimes of particles provide valuable information about the fundamental forces and interactions that govern the behavior of matter in the universe. By studying and comparing the lifetimes of particles, scientists can gain a deeper understanding of the structure and behavior of the universe at a subatomic level.

• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
304
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
11
Views
1K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
23
Views
518
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
1K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
5
Views
2K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
30
Views
2K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
17
Views
5K
• High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K