What is the Number of Quarks Operator in Quantum Field Theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Einj
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator Quarks
Einj
Messages
464
Reaction score
59
Hi everyone. In QFT one usually defines the "number of valence quarks" of a certain particle via the operator:
$$
\hat N_{val}=\sum_f |\hat Q_f|,$$
where:
$$
\hat Q_f=\int d^3x \bar \psi_f\gamma_0\psi_f.$$

According to this definition I expected, for example, for the J/\psi to have N_{val}=0, i.e. the same quantum numbers as the vacuum. However, I can't understand what I am doing wrong. Very roughly speaking, in terms of creation/annhilation operators we have:
$$
\hat Q_c\sim (a_{\bar c}+a_c^\dagger)(a_c+a_{\bar c}^\dagger)=a_{\bar c}a_c+a_{\bar c}a^\dagger_{\bar c}+a_ca_c^\dagger+a^\dagger_c a^\dagger_{\bar c}.
$$
Hence, when applied to the particle |J/\psi\rangle=|\bar c c\rangle is should give me:
$$
\hat Q_c|J/\psi\rangle\sim |0\rangle+2|\bar cc\rangle+|\bar c\bar ccc\rangle,
$$ thus giving a number of valence quarks equal to 2. What's wrong with my calculation?

Thanks a lot
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Einj said:
$$
\hat Q_c\sim (a_{\bar c}+a_c^\dagger)(a_c+a_{\bar c}^\dagger)=a_{\bar c}a_c+a_{\bar c}a^\dagger_{\bar c}+a_ca_c^\dagger+a^\dagger_c a^\dagger_{\bar c}.
$$
Isn't it N_c = a_c^\dagger a_c for the quarks and N_{\bar c} = a_{\bar c}^\dagger a_{\bar c} for the antiquarks? And then N = N_c - N_{\bar c} is zero for the J/ψ state.
 
Oh I think I got it. You are right. The point is that in the canonical quantization you need to write the operators using the "good order" prescription. I also wrote it incorrectly, we should have:
$$
\hat Q_c\sim(a_{\bar c}+a_c^\dagger)(a_c+a^\dagger_{\bar c})=a_{\bar c}a_c+a_{\bar c}a_{\bar c}^\dagger+a_c^\dagger a_c+a_c^\dagger a_{\bar c}^\dagger.
$$
In order to have the right order (annihilation on the left) you need to anticommute the second term, thus obtaining the extra minus sign.

Thanks!
 
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