Understanding Isotopic Spin in Standard Model Doublets: Electron or Neutrino?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ruslan_Sharipov
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spin
Ruslan_Sharipov
Messages
104
Reaction score
1
Some elementary particles in Standard Model are grouped into doublets, e. g. electron and e-neutrino (both left). As to me, the wave function of such a doublet should be
<br /> \psi^{ia}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\nu^a \\ e^a \end{array}\right)<br />
where i=1,2 and a is a spinor index. In other words it is composed of electron and neutrino components. If nu^a=0, it is a pure electron wave function, and if e^a=0 it is a pure nutrino wave function. However, performing an SU(2)-gauge transfoprmation, I can mix the components of the doublet. My question is what particle I actually describe - an electron or a neutrino?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Ruslan_Sharipov said:
Some elementary particles in Standard Model are grouped into doublets, e. g. electron and e-neutrino (both left). As to me, the wave function of such a doublet should be
<br /> \psi^{ia}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\nu^a \\ e^a \end{array}\right)<br />
where i=1,2 and a is a spinor index. In other words it is composed of electron and neutrino components. If nu^a=0, it is a pure electron wave function, and if e^a=0 it is a pure nutrino wave function. However, performing an SU(2)-gauge transfoprmation, I can mix the components of the doublet. My question is what particle I actually describe - an electron or a neutrino?

You describe both. That's the whole point: from the ''point of view'' of the weak interaction, the electron neutrino and the electron are two states of the same particle. They really are very similar to the spin up and spin down states of the electron, except that we don't give different particle names to the spin up and down of the electron. The weak interaction changes an electron neutrino into an electron and vice versa (through the emision or absorption of a W+-) as the elctromagnetic interaction may flip the spin of an electron.

Hope this makes sense.


Patrick
 
gauge transformation is not a physical process.

nrqed said:
The weak interaction changes an electron neutrino into an electron and vice versa (through the emision or absorption of a W+-).

Well, I understand that if W+- is absorbed or emitted, then electron/neutrino states could change. My question was about a gauge transformation which is a purely mathematical trick.
Why (and how) it changes electron/neutrino states?

Ruslan.
 
nrqed said:
You describe both. That's the whole point: from the ''point of view'' of the weak interaction, the electron neutrino and the electron are two states of the same particle.

But all the particles in a multiplet commuting with Poincare should have the same mass... Oh wait, they have: they are both massless.
 
Ruslan_Sharipov said:
Well, I understand that if W+- is absorbed or emitted, then electron/neutrino states could change. My question was about a gauge transformation which is a purely mathematical trick.
Why (and how) it changes electron/neutrino states?

Ruslan.

The gauge transformation doesn't affect the states, nor the observables, it acts only on fields, classical/quantum, which are not really observable.

Daniel.

P.S. Think about the EM field. Do we measure A_{\mu} ...? (which is affected by a U(1) gauge transformation)
 
arivero said:
But all the particles in a multiplet commuting with Poincare should have the same mass... Oh wait, they have: they are both massless.

Yes..thanks Higgs!:biggrin:
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
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}...
Back
Top