Why Are Neutrinos So Confusing?

BkBkBk
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
I am having real problems fitting nuetrinos into my mental models of the world,when i think of strong,electromagnetic and gravitational interactions i find it much easier to work with because there's always something tangible i can relate it to,fermions,light or falling for example,but when i try to fit the weak interaction in i get lost,is there a weak field? how far can W and Z bosons travel?what are the nuetrinos doing all this time if not interacting,do they intereact with each other ,do superposition rules apply to them?if so can they be made coherent? every time i try to fit them in i feel lost,does anyone else have such problems fitting them into their pictures of the world?

when i first read of them,the nuetron intercations seemed quite simple,the idea of a nuetrino causing flavour change then spitting out an electron and anti nuetrino seemed fine,but the more i learn of them the less they make any sense to me,are they just the different between the energies exchanged in the interaction,please help me I am lost!

is there a starting place you guys would suggest for getting them more under my control,books i should read etc?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Big relief – I was afraid that there was a new sort of neutrino discovered: 3 known flavors, then sterile, then stupid :)
 
Well, we already have strange quarks... why not? :D
 
BkBkBk said:
is there a starting place you guys would suggest for getting them more under my control,books i should read etc?

When the unhelpful jokers have departed, you could perhaps try (re?)-reading the sticky
thread in this forum entitled "Elementary particles presented". There's lots of
references to relevant sources therein.
 
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