What parameters of SM can be changed gradually?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dmitry67
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Parameters
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the variability of parameters within the Standard Model (SM) of particle physics. It highlights that while mass cannot vary without violating energy conservation, other parameters, such as CKM angles, could theoretically change under specific conditions. The SM does not explain why parameters have their observed values, leaving room for speculation about their variability. However, any significant alteration would imply a departure from the current SM framework. The conversation emphasizes that while constants are essential, the dynamics of mass can be explored within different theoretical contexts.
Dmitry67
Messages
2,564
Reaction score
1
For example, mass spectrum can't vary because energy is conserved (locally).
What's about other parameters? Could CKM angles be different in earlier époque? It could save the Sakharov’s mechanism, if CP violation was more intense during bareogenesis.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The answer depends on what do you mean by "can".
Anything is possible, unless you specify some constraint (which you don't).
In principle, any constant in SM (including the masses) could be a variable, but then it would not be described by SM any more.
 
Last edited:
SM itself does not explain WHY parameters have the values we observe.
So it does not put any constrains on them.

Mass can't be variable - it would be absolutely different physics, because enrgy won't be conserved.
 
Dmitry67 said:
SM itself does not explain WHY parameters have the values we observe.
That's true.

Dmitry67 said:
So it does not put any constrains on them.
It puts at least one constraint: They must be - constant!

Dmitry67 said:
Mass can't be variable - it would be absolutely different physics, because enrgy won't be conserved.
That's not true, it is easy to write a Lagrangian with a dynamical effective mass with a conserved Hamiltonian. In fact, the Lagrangian describing the Higgs mechanism, which is a part of the SM, is one such Lagrangian.
 
Demystifier said:
That's not true, it is easy to write a Lagrangian with a dynamical effective mass with a conserved Hamiltonian. In fact, the Lagrangian describing the Higgs mechanism, which is a part of the SM, is one such Lagrangian.

In fact, in any relativistic QFT "mass" becomes a dynamical quantity through the non-vanishing self-energies of the particles.

In many-body theory this even happens for non-relativistic particles: In the most simple case one can describe the many-body system as a dilute quantum gas of quasi-particles, which may have the same quantum numbers as the elementary constituents (e.g., electrons in a condensed-matter system) but with different effective masses or charges. Other quasi-particle excitations (effective degrees of freedom) may not be medium modifications of elementary constituents but collective modes like phonons (lattice vibrations) in a solid body, plasmons/plasminos (plasma oscillations) in a plasma,...
 
Interesting - I did not think about that.
Thanks
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
808
Replies
2
Views
3K