Where does the energy of a destroyed W boson go?

Macocio
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hello.

I'm new so I am uncertain to which forum this post should be posted in so I'll just leave this here.

Anyways, I was reading about the four fundamental forces and it came to my mind that the W boson is 80.4 GeV, whilst the two lepton that are excreted upon destruction are 0.511 MeV (Electron) and 2.4 eV (The corresponding neutrino). So where does the 80.3994889976 GeV go when W is destroyed and excretes these two particle? Kinetic Energy?

I also noticed that a W boson excreted by another generation of fermion seems to also cause the boson to excrete another generation of leptons, why is this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The W boson is "excreted" in a reaction of the following type:

u -> d + W

Is this reaction exoenergetic or endoenergetic?
 
Macocio said:
the two lepton that are excreted

A friendly linguistic tip: in English we usually say "emitted" or "released" in this context.

"Excrete" is usually used to describe a certain body function that most people do about once per day. :smile:
 
Dickfore said:
The W boson is "excreted" in a reaction of the following type:

u -> d + W

Is this reaction exoenergetic or endoenergetic?

I do think that it is exoenergetic since the build up of a radioactive atom needs an external source of energy to create such an atom in the first place. The energy is stored in the build up of the atom so you might also consider it endoenergetic.

jtbell said:
A friendly linguistic tip: in English we usually say "emitted" or "released" in this context.

"Excrete" is usually used to describe a certain body function that most people do about once per day. :smile:

I knew that, only excrete came to my mind. xD But I guess you know what I mean.
 
Macocio said:
Hello.
So where does the 80.3994889976 GeV go when W is destroyed and excretes these two particle? Kinetic Energy?
Yes.
 
Also, often the W and Z bosons are virtual, so you don't really need that much energy lying around to use them.

In fact, weak interactions have roughly the same fundamental strength as electromagnetism. The reason it is "weak" at everyday scales is that W and Z require so much energy to create, that processes involving them are extremely virtual, meaning that they are heavily suppressed due to the "borrowing" of energy.
 
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