Why is this decay allowed and another not?

unscientific
Messages
1,728
Reaction score
13
Consider ##\Sigma^0 \rightarrow \Lambda + \pi^0##. (Not Allowed)

vertex1.png


According to griffiths, this strong interaction is not allowed by 'Conservation of Energy'. I'm not sure why, as this simply shows an up and anti-up quark coming together, producing a gluon, where mass of gluon is mass of up and anti-up quark combined.

Consider ##p + p \rightarrow p + p + p + \bar p##. (Allowed)

Why is this possible by the strong interaction then?

vertex2.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
unscientific said:
Consider ##\Sigma^0 \rightarrow \Lambda + \pi^0##. (Not Allowed)

According to griffiths, this strong interaction is not allowed by 'Conservation of Energy'. I'm not sure why

Consider this process in the rest from of the initial ##\Sigma^0## particle. What is the total energy of the initial ##\Sigma^0## particle? What is the minimum possible total energy of a final state containing a ##\Lambda^0## particle and a ##\pi^0## particle?

unscientific said:
Consider ##p + p \rightarrow p + p + p + \bar p##. (Allowed)

Why is this possible by the strong interaction then?

vertex2.png

This is not a diagram that contributes to ##p + p \to p + p + p + \bar p##. In your diagram, one of the protons is unaffected and might as well not be there. So effectively the process you have drawn is ##p \to p + p + \bar p##, which like your first example is not allowed because of energy conservation. (Also there is a more technical reason why this diagram is not allowed, which is that a single gluon cannot produce a proton-antiproton pair because of color conservation. You need at least two gluons).

Here is a possible diagram for ##p + p \to p + p + p + \bar p##:
pp_to_pppp.png
 
  • Like
Likes unscientific and Naeem Anwar
Also, the reason a proton-proton collision can create an additional proton-antiproton pair is that the pp system is not a bound system and the protons can have a significant kinetic energy in the CoM frame (if they do not have enough, the process is forbidden).
 
  • Like
Likes unscientific
Put simply, the first one is a (forbidden) decay, whereas the second one is a collision
 
  • Like
Likes unscientific
dukwon said:
Put simply, the first one is a (forbidden) decay, whereas the second one is a collision
That totally clears it up. Thanks!
 
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

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top