Why Are Feynman Diagrams Crucial for Understanding Electroweak Vertices?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jodahr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electro Weak
Jodahr
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I have a question about Feynman Diagrams:

let's say we have a process: up antidown -> W+ -> up antidown...

the first vertex is like V_CKM G PL ( mixing, gamma, projector)
the second is the same..only with the complex conjugate CKM matrix...
but why?...

If I compute the M* I have to bar the vertices..and there I got the same vertex..with the same flow..but there I would change PL to PR and interchange PL and Gamma..why is that the case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jodahr said:
I have a question about Feynman Diagrams:

let's say we have a process: up antidown -> W+ -> up antidown...

the first vertex is like V_CKM G PL ( mixing, gamma, projector)
the second is the same..only with the complex conjugate CKM matrix...
but why?...

If I compute the M* I have to bar the vertices..and there I got the same vertex..with the same flow..but there I would change PL to PR and interchange PL and Gamma..why is that the case?

Hello, in my opinion the answer is the following: the Feynman diagram you are considering is composed of two vertices: in the first an up is destroyed, an antidown is destroyed and a W+ is created; in the second vertex an up is created, an antidown is created and a W+ is destroyed; so, roughly speaking, the first is associated with a term in the lagrangian like (u dbar W-), while the second with (ubar d W+), that is its hermitian conjugate (of course I have forgot all the contraction matrices...); this is the origin of the conjugation of the CKM matrix paramters (and, of course, one should be careful with the imaginary units!)

Francesco
 
Last edited:
I think another way of looking at it is like this.

That Feynman diagram also describes the processes

u → W+ + d
W+ + d → u​

as all I have done here is replace the incoming anti-d with an outgoing d, and the outgoing anti-d with an incoming d.

The CKM matrix, as defined, is the factor for 'converting' down-type quarks to up-type, eg

|u> = Vud |d>​

Provided only the three known generations of quarks exist, the CKM matrix must be unitary, and hence

V-1 = V

so

|d> = V*ud |u>​
 
Last edited:
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}...

Similar threads

Back
Top