Why is the helicity of a neutrino unchanged by the weak interaction?

Final
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
Hi...

Consider a neutrino with a Dirac mass m_\nu and the weak interaction

{\cal{L}}=\frac{g}{2 \sqrt{2}} \sum_l[{W_{\mu}^+ \cdot \bar{\psi}_{\nu_l} \gamma^{\mu}(1-\gamma_5)\psi_l + W_{\mu}^- \cdot \bar{\psi}_{l} \gamma^{\mu}(1-\gamma_5)\psi_{\nu_l} }\right{]} + \frac{g}{4 \cos(\theta_w)} <br /> \sum_l Z_{\mu}[ \bar{\psi}_{\nu_l} \gamma^{\mu}(1-\gamma_5)\psi_{\nu_l} +\bar{\psi}_{l} \gamma^{\mu}(a+b\gamma_5)\psi_{l} ]
Why this interaction doesn't change the helicity of the neutrino? It is true?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you have any elements in that interaction that have a left-handed neutrino on one side of the operator and a right-handed one on the other?
 
For massless particle ok, because the elicity is the chirality projector \frac{1 \pm \gamma^5}{2}... But for a massive neutrino? It's the same?
 
I don't see any 1+\gamma^5 there, do you? Which leads me back to my original point: do you see anything in the Lagrangian which has a left-handed neutrino on one side of the operator and a right-handed one on the other?
 
Yes... For example Z_{\mu} \bar{\psi}_{\nu_l} \gamma^{\mu}(1-\gamma_5)\psi_{\nu_l}. You may take \nu \rightarrow \nu +Z with the first neutrino left-handed and the second right-handed.
The amplitude is {\cal{M}}_{fi} \approx \bar{u}&#039; \gamma^{\mu}(1-\gamma_5)u \epsilon_{\mu}
with u^t=\sqrt{\epsilon+m}(\omega_+,\frac{\vec{p}\cdot\vec{\sigma}}{\epsilon+m}\omega_+ ) and u&#039;^t=\sqrt{\epsilon&#039;+m}(\omega_-,\frac{\vec{p&#039;}\cdot\vec{\sigma}}{\epsilon+m}\omega_- ) where \omega_{\pm} are the eigenstates of the elicity...
 
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
5K
Back
Top