• Home
  • Textbooks
  • Quarks and leptons: introductory course in modern particle physics
  • Weak Interactions

Quarks and leptons: introductory course in modern particle physics

Francis Halzen, Alan D. Martin

Chapter 12

Weak Interactions - all with Video Answers

Educators


Chapter Questions

01:20

Problem 1

Give the $\pi^{+}$and $\mu^{+}$decay processes. List the possible decay modes of the $\tau^{-}$lepton (the $\tau$ is the third lepton in the sequence e, $\mu, \tau$ with a mass $m_\tau=1.8 \mathrm{GeV}$ ).

Narayan Hari
Narayan Hari
Numerade Educator

Problem 2

Show that a (charge-lowering) weak current of the form
$$
\bar{u}_e \gamma^\mu \frac{1}{2}\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_v
$$
involves only left-handed electrons (or right-handed positrons). In the relativistic limit $(v \approx c)$, show that the electrons have negative helicity.

The $\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\gamma^5\right)$ in (12.9) automatically selects a left-handed neutrino (or a right-handed antineutrino). This $V-A$ (vector-axial vector) structure of the weak current can be directly exposed by scattering $\nu_e$ 's off electrons (see Section 12.7), just as the $\gamma^\mu$ structure of electromagnetism was verified by measurements of the angular distribution of $\mathrm{e}^{+} \mathrm{e}^{-}$scattering.

It is natural to hope that all weak interaction phenomena are described by a $V-A$ current-current interaction with a universal coupling $G$. For example, $\beta$-decay of Fig. 12.2 and $\mu$-decay of Fig. 12.4 can be described by the amplitudes
$$
\text { IR }\left(\mathrm{p} \rightarrow \mathrm{ne}^{+} \nu_e\right)=\frac{G}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\bar{u}_n \gamma^\mu\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_p\right]\left[\bar{u}_{v_k} \gamma_\mu\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_e\right]
$$
and
$$
\operatorname{\vartheta R}\left(\mu^{-} \rightarrow \mathrm{e}^{-} \bar{\nu}_e \nu_\mu\right)=\frac{G}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\bar{u}_{v_\mu} \gamma^\sigma\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_\mu\right]\left[\bar{u}_e \gamma_\sigma\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_{v_e}\right],
$$
respectively. The $1 / \sqrt{2}$ is pure convention (to keep the original definition of $G$ which did not include $\gamma^5$ ). We then proceed in analogy with the Feynman rules for QED. The calculations only involve particles, and the diagrams show only particle lines. Antiparticles do not appear. Thus, the outgoing $\bar{\nu}_e$ (of momentum $k$ ) in $\mu$-decay is shown in Fig. 12.4 as an ingoing $\nu_e$ (of momentum $-k$ ). As before, the spinor $u_{v_e}(-k)$ of (12.11) will be denoted $v_{v_e}(k)$, see (5.33). The same remarks apply to the outgoing $\mathrm{e}^{+}$of $(12.10)$.

Check back soon!
09:37

Problem 3

Show that the charge-raising weak current
$$
J^\mu=\bar{u}_\nu \gamma^{\mu \frac{1}{2}}\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_e
$$
couples an ingoing negative helicity electron to an outgoing negative helicity neutrino. Neglect the mass of the electron. Besides the configuration $\left(\mathrm{e}_L^{-}, v_L\right)$, show that $J^\mu$ also couples the following (ingoing, outgoing) lepton pair configurations: $\left(\bar{\nu}_R, \mathrm{e}_R^{+}\right),\left(0, \nu_L \mathrm{e}_R^{+}\right)$, and $\left(\mathrm{e}_L^{-} \bar{\nu}_R, 0\right)$.

Further, show that the charge-lowering weak current, (12.9), is the hermitian conjugate of (12.12):
$$
J_\mu^{\dagger}=\bar{u}_e \gamma_\mu \frac{1}{2}\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_\nu
$$

List the lepton pair configurations coupled by $J_\mu^{\dagger}$.
Weak interaction amplitudes are of the form
$$
\Re=\frac{4 G}{\sqrt{2}} J^\mu J_\mu^{\dagger} .
$$

Charge conservation requires that $\Re$ is the product of a charge-raising and a charge-lowering current; see, for example, (12.10) and (12.11). The factor 4 arises because the currents, (12.13), are defined with the normalized projection operator $\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\gamma^5\right)$ rather than the old-fashioned $\left(1-\gamma^5\right)$.

Robert Zaballa
Robert Zaballa
Numerade Educator

Problem 4

Verify the isospin factor $\sqrt{2}$ in (12.19). Note that ${ }^{14} \mathrm{C}$, ${ }^{14} \mathrm{~N}^*,{ }^{14} \mathrm{O}$ form an isospin triplet, which can be viewed as $\mathrm{nn}, \mathrm{np}, \mathrm{pp}$, together with an isospin zero ${ }^{12} \mathrm{C}$ core (see Fig. 2.2). Keep in mind that for indistinguishable proton decays, we must add amplitudes, not probabilities.

The rate $d \Gamma$ for the " $\mathrm{p}$ " $\rightarrow$ " $\mathrm{n}^{\prime} \mathrm{e}^{+} \nu$ transition is related to $|9|^2$ by (4.36). We obtain
$$
\begin{aligned}
d \Gamma= & G^2 \sum_{\text {spins }}\left|\bar{u}\left(p_v\right) \gamma^0\left(1-\gamma^5\right) v\left(p_e\right)\right|^2 \frac{d^3 p_e}{(2 \pi)^3 2 E_e} \\
& \times \frac{d^3 p_\nu}{(2 \pi)^3 2 E_\nu} 2 \pi \delta\left(E_0-E_e-E_v\right),
\end{aligned}
$$
where $E_0$ is the energy released to the lepton pair. The normalization factor $\left(2 m_N\right)^2$ cancels with the equivalent $2 E_p 2 E_n$ factor in (4.36), as indeed it must. The summation over spins can be performed using the techniques we introduced in Chapter 6. Neglecting the mass of the electron, we have
$$
\begin{aligned}
\sum_{\text {spins }}\left|\bar{u} \gamma^0\left(1-\gamma^5\right) v\right|^2 & =\sum\left(\bar{u} \gamma^0\left(1-\gamma^5\right) v\right)\left(\bar{v}\left(1+\gamma^5\right) \gamma^0 u\right) \\
& =\operatorname{Tr}\left(p_\nu \gamma^0\left(1-\gamma^5\right) p_e\left(1+\gamma^5\right) \gamma^0\right) \\
& =2 \operatorname{Tr}\left(p_v \gamma^0 p_e\left(1+\gamma^5\right) \gamma^0\right) \\
& =8\left(E_e E_v+\mathbf{p}_e \cdot \mathbf{p}_v\right) \\
& =8 E_e E_v\left(1+v_e \cos \theta\right),
\end{aligned}
$$
where $\theta$ is the opening angle between the two leptons and where the electron velocity $v_e=1$ in our approximation. Here, we have used the trace theorems of Section 6.4 ; see also (12.25) and (12.26). Substituting (12.21) into (12.20), the transition rate becomes
$$
d \Gamma=\frac{2 G^2}{(2 \pi)^5}(1+\cos \theta)\left[\left(2 \pi d \cos \theta p_e^2 d p_e\right)\left(4 \pi E_\nu^2 d E_v\right)\right] \delta\left(E_0-E_e-E_v\right),
$$
where $d^3 p_e d^3 p_v$ has been replaced by the expression in the square brackets.
Many experiments focus attention on the energy spectrum of the emitted positron. From (12.22), we obtain
$$
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d \Gamma}{d p_e} & =\frac{4 G^2}{(2 \pi)^3} p_e^2\left(E_0-E_e\right)^2 \int d \cos \theta(1+\cos \theta) \\
& =\frac{G^2}{\pi^3} p_e^2\left(E_0-E_e\right)^2 .
\end{aligned}
$$

Thus, if from the observed positron spectrum we plot $p_e^{-1}\left(d \Gamma / d p_e\right)^{1 / 2}$ as a function of $E_e$, we should obtain a linear plot with end point $E_0$. This is called the Kurie plot. It can be used to check whether the neutrino mass is indeed zero. A nonvanishing neutrino mass destroys the linear behavior, particularly for $E_e$ near $E_0$. (In practice, of course, we must examine the approximations we have made, correct $E_e$ for the energy gained from the nuclear Coulomb field, and allow for the experimental energy resolution.)

Our immediate interest here is of a different nature. We wish to determine $G$ from the observed value $E_0$ and the measured lifetime $\tau$ of the nuclear state to $\beta$-decay. We therefore carry out the $d p_e$ integration of (12.23) over the interval $0, E_0$. Making the relativistic approximation $p_e \approx E_e$, we find
$$
\Gamma=\frac{1}{\tau}=\frac{G^2 E_0^5}{30 \pi^3} .
$$

Now, for ${ }^{14} \mathrm{O} \rightarrow{ }^{14} \mathrm{~N}^* \mathrm{e}^{+} \nu$, the nuclear energy difference $E_0$ is $1.81 \mathrm{MeV}$, and the measured half-life is $\tau \log 2=71 \mathrm{sec}$. Using this information, we find
$$
G \simeq 10^{-5} / m_N^2 \text {. }
$$

Recall that $G$ has dimension (mass) ${ }^{-2}$. We have chosen to quote the value with respect to the nucleon mass.

Check back soon!
07:41

Problem 5

Calculate $G$ from the data for the $\beta$-transition ${ }^{10} \mathrm{C} \rightarrow$ ${ }^{10} \mathrm{~B}^* \mathrm{e}^{+} \nu$. The measured half-life is $\tau \log 2=20 \mathrm{sec}$, and $E_0=2 \mathrm{MeV}$. $\left({ }^{10} \mathrm{C}\right.$ and ${ }^{10} \mathrm{~B}^*$ are both isospin $1, J^P=0^{+}$states.)

Mayank Tripathi
Mayank Tripathi
Numerade Educator
04:13

Problem 6

Accepting the vector boson exchange picture of weak interactions with coupling, $g=e$, estimate the mass $M_W$ of the weak boson. (In the standard model of weak interactions, introduced in Chapter 13, $g \sin \theta_W=e$, with $\sin ^2 \theta_W \approx \frac{1}{4}$.)

Deepak Kohli
Deepak Kohli
Numerade Educator

Problem 7

Verify these results.

Check back soon!
14:04

Problem 8

Derive (12.34) by performing the $d \omega$ integration on the righthand side (see Exercise 6.7).

Using (12.31) and (12.29), we find the spin-averaged probability is
$$
\overline{\left.|\Re|\right|^2} \equiv \frac{1}{2} \sum_{\text {spins }}|\Re|^2=64 G^2\left(k \cdot p^{\prime}\right)\left(k^{\prime} \cdot p\right),
$$
where $p=p^{\prime}+k+k^{\prime}$ on account of the $d^4 k$ integration performed in (12.33). Since $m_\mu>200 m_e$, we can safely neglect the mass of the electron.

Mahnoor Amin
Mahnoor Amin
Numerade Educator
05:54

Problem 9

Verify (12.35). Neglect the mass of the electron, but not that of the muon.

Sai Chaitanya Tadepalli
Sai Chaitanya Tadepalli
Numerade Educator

Problem 10

Show that
$$
2\left(k \cdot p^{\prime}\right)\left(k^{\prime} \cdot p\right)=\left(p-k^{\prime}\right)^2\left(k^{\prime} \cdot p\right)=\left(m^2-2 m \omega^{\prime}\right) m \omega^{\prime}
$$
in the muon rest frame, where $p=(m, 0,0,0)$.
Gathering these results together, the decay rate in the muon rest frame is
$$
\begin{aligned}
d \Gamma= & \frac{G^2}{2 m \pi^5} \frac{d^3 p^{\prime}}{2 E^{\prime}} \frac{d^3 k^{\prime}}{2 \omega^{\prime}} m \omega^{\prime}\left(m^2-2 m \omega^{\prime}\right) \\
& \times \delta\left(m^2-2 m E^{\prime}-2 m \omega^{\prime}+2 E^{\prime} \omega^{\prime}(1-\cos \theta)\right),
\end{aligned}
$$
and, as for $\beta$-decay, we can replace $d^3 p^{\prime} d^3 k^{\prime}$ by
$$
4 \pi E^{\prime 2} d E^{\prime} 2 \pi \omega^{\prime 2} d \omega^{\prime} d \cos \theta .
$$

We now use the fact that
$$
\delta\left(\cdots+2 E^{\prime} \omega^{\prime} \cos \theta\right)=\frac{1}{2 E^{\prime} \omega^{\prime}} \delta(\cdots-\cos \theta)
$$
to perform the integration over the opening angle $\theta$ between the emitted $\mathrm{e}^{-}$and $\bar{\nu}_e$ and obtain
$$
d \Gamma=\frac{G^2}{2 \pi^3} d E^{\prime} d \omega^{\prime} m \omega^{\prime}\left(m-2 \omega^{\prime}\right) .
$$

The $\delta$-function integration introduces the following restrictions on the energies $E^{\prime}, \omega^{\prime}$, stemming from the fact that $-1 \leq \cos \theta \leq 1$ :
$$
\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2} m-E^{\prime} & \leq \omega^{\prime} \\
0 & \leq \frac{1}{2} m, \\
0 E^{\prime} & \leq \frac{1}{2} m .
\end{aligned}
$$

These limits are easily understood in terms of the various limits in which the three-body decay $\mu \rightarrow \mathrm{e} \bar{\nu}_e \nu_\mu$ becomes effectively a two-body decay. For example, when the electron energy $E^{\prime}$ vanishes, $(12.39)$ yields $\omega^{\prime}=m / 2$, which is expected because then the two neutrinos share equally the muon's rest energy.

To obtain the energy spectrum of the emitted electron, we perform the $\omega^{\prime}$ integration of (12.38):
$$
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d \Gamma}{d E^{\prime}} & =\frac{m G^2}{2 \pi^3} \int_{\frac{1}{2} m-E^{\prime}}^{\frac{1}{2} m} d \omega^{\prime} \omega^{\prime}\left(m-2 \omega^{\prime}\right) \\
& =\frac{G^2}{12 \pi^3} m^2 E^{\prime 2}\left(3-\frac{4 E^{\prime}}{m}\right) .
\end{aligned}
$$

This prediction is in excellent agreement with the observed electron spectrum. Finally, we calculate the muon decay rate
$$
\Gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\tau}=\int_0^{m / 2} d E^{\prime} \frac{d \Gamma}{d E^{\prime}}=\frac{G^2 m^5}{192 \pi^3} .
$$

Inserting the measured muon lifetime $\tau=2.2 \times 10^{-6} \mathrm{sec}$, we can calculate the Fermi coupling $G$. We find
$$
G \sim 10^{-5} / m_N^2 .
$$

Comparison of the values of $G$ obtained in (12.24) and (12.43) supports the assertion that the weak coupling constant is the same for leptons and nucleons, and hence universal. It means that nuclear $\beta$-decay and the decay of the muon have the same physical origin. Indeed, when all corrections are taken into
account, $G_\beta$ and $G_\mu$ are found to be equal to within a few percent:
$$
\begin{aligned}
G_\mu & =(1.16632 \pm 0.00002) \times 10^{-5} \mathrm{GeV}^{-2}, \\
G_\beta & =(1.136 \pm 0.003) \times 10^{-5} \mathrm{GeV}^{-2}
\end{aligned}
$$

Check back soon!
03:21

Problem 11

Draw a diagram showing the particle helicities in the $\mu^{-}$rest frame in the case where the emitted electron has its maximum permissible energy. In this limit, explain why the electron angular distribution has the form $1-P \cos \alpha$, where $\mathbf{P}$ is the polarization of the muon and $\alpha$ is the angle between the polarization direction and the direction of the emitted electron:
$$
P \equiv \frac{N_{+}-N_{-}}{N_{+}+N_{-}},
$$
where $N_{ \pm}$are the numbers of spin-up, spin-down muons.

Linda Winkler
Linda Winkler
Numerade Educator

Problem 12

Predict" the rate for the decay $\tau^{-} \rightarrow \mathrm{e}^{-} \bar{\nu}_e \nu_\tau$, where the $\tau$-lepton has mass $1.8 \mathrm{GeV}$. The observed branching ratio of this decay mode is approximately $20 \%$. Calculate the lifetime of the $\tau$-lepton. Can you explain this branching ratio?

Check back soon!
04:00

Problem 13

Predict the ratio of the $\mathrm{K}^{-} \rightarrow \mathrm{e}^{-} \bar{\nu}_e$ and $\mathrm{K}^{-} \rightarrow \mu^{-} \bar{\nu}_\mu$ decay rates. Given that the lifetime of the $\mathrm{K}^{-}$is $\tau=1.2 \times 10^{-8} \mathrm{sec}$ and the $\mathrm{K} \rightarrow \mu \nu$ branching ratio is $64 \%$, estimate the decay constant $f_K$. Comment on your assumptions and on your result.

Sinisa Stura
Sinisa Stura
Numerade Educator
00:47

Problem 14

On purely dimensional grounds, show that the cross section (for a point interaction) must behave as $\sigma\left(\nu_e \mathrm{e}^{-}\right)-G^2 s$ at high energies. Comment on the significance of this result.

David Collins
David Collins
Numerade Educator
View

Problem 15

Show that
$$
\sigma\left(\nu_e \mathrm{e}^{-}\right) \approx\left(E_\nu \text { in } \mathrm{GeV}\right) \times 10^{-41} \mathrm{~cm}^2,
$$
where $E_v$ is the laboratory energy of the neutrino.
The Feynman diagram for $\tilde{\nu} \mathrm{e}^{-} \rightarrow \mathrm{e}^{-} \tilde{\nu}_e$ is shown in Fig. 12.8b. We see that it can be obtained by crossing the neutrinos in $\nu_e \mathrm{e}^{-} \rightarrow \mathrm{e}^{-} \nu_e$ of diagram (a); see Sections 4.6 and 4.7. We therefore simply replace $s$ by $t$ in (12.57):
$$
\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2} \sum_{\text {spins }}|\mathscr{T}|^2 & =16 G^2 t^2 \\
& =4 G^2 s^2(1-\cos \theta)^2,
\end{aligned}
$$
where $\theta$ is the angle between the incoming $\bar{\nu}_e$ and the outgoing $\mathrm{e}^{-}$(see Fig. 12.9), and
$$
t=-\frac{s}{2}(1-\cos \theta),
$$
see (4.45). From (12.61), we obtain
$$
\frac{d \sigma}{d \Omega}\left(\bar{\nu}_e \mathrm{e}^{-}\right)=\frac{G^2 s}{16 \pi^2}(1-\cos \theta)^2,
$$
and integrating over angles yields
$$
\sigma\left(\bar{v}_e \mathrm{e}^{-}\right)=\frac{G^2 s}{3 \pi} .
$$

Comparing with (12.60) gives
$$
\sigma\left(\bar{v}_e \mathrm{e}^{-}\right)=\frac{1}{3} \sigma\left(\nu_e \mathrm{e}^{-}\right) .
$$

Results (12.59), (12.62), and (12.64) expose the $\gamma^\mu\left(1-\gamma^5\right)$ structure of the weak current in a way that can be experimentally checked. We can convince ourselves of this important statement by comparing the results with those obtained for the $\gamma^\mu$ vertex in the electromagnetic process $\mathrm{e} \mu \rightarrow \mathrm{e} \mu$ or by performing the following exercise.

Victor Salazar
Victor Salazar
Numerade Educator

Problem 16

If the weak current had had a $V+A$ structure, $\gamma^\mu(1+$ $\gamma^5$ ), show that
$$
\frac{d \sigma}{d \Omega}=\frac{G^2 s}{4 \pi^2}(1+\cos \theta)^2
$$
for both $\nu$ e and $\bar{v}$ e elastic scattering. If this were the case, then, in contrast to (12.64), we would have
$$
\sigma\left(\bar{\nu}_e \mathrm{e}\right)=\sigma\left(\nu_e \mathrm{e}\right) .
$$

The most striking difference between the two angular distributions, (12.59) and (12.62), is that $\bar{\nu}_e$ e scattering vanishes for $\cos \theta=1$, whereas $\nu_e$ e scattering does not. With our definition of $\theta$, see Fig. 12.9, this corresponds to backward scattering of the beam particle. We could have anticipated these results from the helicity arguments we used to interpret previous calculations. The by now familiar pictures are shown in Fig. 12.10. Backward $\bar{\nu}_e$ e scattering is forbidden by angular momentum conservation. In fact, the process $\bar{\nu}_e \mathrm{e} \rightarrow \bar{\nu}_e \mathrm{e}$ proceeds entirely in a $J=1$ state with net helicity +1 ; that is, only one of the three helicity states is allowed. This is the origin of the factor $\frac{1}{3}$ in (12.64). With our definition of $\theta$, the allowed amplitude is proportional to $d_{-11}^1(\theta)=\frac{1}{2}(1-\cos \theta)$, see (6.39), in agreement with result (12.61).
Elastic $\nu_e \mathrm{e}^{-}$and $\bar{\nu}_e \mathrm{e}^{-}$scattering can also proceed via a weak neutral current interaction (see Fig. 12.11) which interferes with the charged current interaction (Fig. 12.8a). This is discussed in Section 13.5. However, high-energy neutrino beams are predominantly $\nu_\mu$ (or $\bar{\nu}_\mu$ ), and so the most accessible (charged current) purely leptonic scattering process is
$$
\nu_\mu+e^{-} \rightarrow \mu^{-}+\nu_e
$$
(i.e., inverse muon decay). Here, there is no neutral current contribution, and so the cross section is given just by (12.59).

Check back soon!
View

Problem 17

Using the above approach, show that
$$
\Gamma\left(\pi^{-} \rightarrow \pi^0 \mathrm{e}^{-} \bar{\nu}_e\right)=\frac{G^2}{30 \pi^3}(\Delta m)^5,
$$
where $\Delta m=m\left(\pi^{-}\right)-m\left(\pi^0\right)=4.6 \mathrm{MeV}$. Evaluate the decay rate and compare with $\Gamma\left(\pi^{-} \rightarrow \mu^{-} \bar{v}_\mu\right)$.
We are now ready to tackle neutrino-quark scattering. As the quarks and lepton weak currents have identical forms, we can carry over the results for $\nu$ e scattering that we obtained in Section 12.7. From (12.59) and (12.62), we obtain in the center-of-mass frame
where $\theta$ is defined as in Fig. 12.13. From the figure, it is immediately apparent that the backward $\bar{\nu}_\mu \mathrm{u} \rightarrow \mu^{+} \mathrm{d}$ scattering $(\theta=\pi)$ is forbidden by helicity considerations. The cross sections for scattering from antiquarks, $\bar{\nu}_\mu \overline{\mathrm{d}} \rightarrow \mu^{+} \overline{\mathrm{u}}$ and $\nu_\mu \overline{\mathrm{u}} \rightarrow$ $\mu^{-} \overline{\mathrm{d}}$, are given by (12.69) and (12.70), respectively. We see that, for instance, $\nu_\mu$ does not interact with either $\mathrm{u}$ or $\overline{\mathrm{d}}$ quarks.

To compare these results with experiment, we have to embed the constituent cross sections, (12.69) and (12.70), in the overall $\nu N$ inclusive cross section. The procedure is familiar from Chapter 9. We obtain First, note that the angular distributions of the constituent process have been expressed in terms of the dimensionless variable $y$. It is related to $\cos \theta$ by
$$
1-y=\frac{p \cdot k^{\prime}}{p \cdot k}=\frac{1}{2}(1+\cos \theta)
$$

Victor Salazar
Victor Salazar
Numerade Educator
12:11

Problem 18

Show that deep inelastic electron electromagnetic scattering on an isoscalar target gives
$$
\frac{d \sigma(\mathrm{eN} \rightarrow \mathrm{eX})}{d x d y}=\frac{2 \pi \alpha^2}{Q^4} x s\left[1+(1-y)^2\right] \frac{5}{18}[Q(x)+\bar{Q}(x)]
$$
per nucleon, see Exercise 9.5. Note that, in contrast to $\nu \mathrm{N} \rightarrow \mu \mathrm{X},(12.78)$ embodies parity conservation so $Q$ and $\bar{Q}$ appear symmetrically.

If there were just three valence quarks in a nucleon, $\bar{Q}=0$, the $\nu \mathrm{N} \rightarrow \mu^{-} \mathrm{X}$ and $\bar{\nu} \mathrm{N} \rightarrow \mu^{+} \mathrm{X}$ data would exhibit the dramatic $V-A$ properties of the weak interaction exactly. That is,
$$
\frac{d \sigma(\nu)}{d y}=c, \quad \frac{d \sigma}{d y}^n=c(1-y)^2,
$$
where $c$ can be found from (12.76); and for the integrated cross sections,
$$
\frac{\sigma(\bar{\nu})}{\sigma(\nu)}=\frac{1}{3} .
$$

Ren Jie Tuieng
Ren Jie Tuieng
Numerade Educator

Problem 19

If $\sigma(\bar{v}) / \sigma(v)=R$, show that
$$
\frac{\int x \bar{Q}(x) d x}{\int x Q(x) d x}=\frac{3 R-1}{3-R} .
$$
Detailed analyses show that the functions $u(x), d(x), \ldots$, are indeed the same whether one extracts them from electroproduction or neutrino experiments. This is a definitive success of the parton model: the $u(x), d(x)$, describe the intrinsic structure of the hadronic target and are the same whatever experimental probe is used to determine them.

Check back soon!

Problem 20

Show that $|\vartheta(\nu \mathrm{q} \rightarrow \nu \mathrm{q})|^2$ behaves like $s^2, s^2(1-y)^2$, $s^2 y^2$ for pure $V-A$, pure $V+A$, and $S, P$ neutral couplings of the quark, respectively. Pure $V \pm A$ denote $\gamma^{\bar{\mu}}\left(1 \pm \gamma^5\right)$ couplings, and $S, P$ stands for the scalar, pseudoscalar interaction amplitude
$$
\Re=\frac{G_N}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\bar{u}_p\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_p\right)\left(\bar{u}_q\left(g_S-g_P \gamma^5\right) u_q\right)
$$
The parton model predictions for the neutral current (NC) processes $\nu \mathrm{N} \rightarrow \nu \mathrm{X}$ and $\bar{\nu} \mathrm{N} \rightarrow \bar{\nu} \mathrm{X}$ are obtained by following the calculation of the $\mathrm{CC}$ processes $\nu \mathrm{N} \rightarrow \mu^{-} \mathrm{X}$ and $\bar{\nu} \mathrm{N} \rightarrow \mu^{+} \mathrm{X}$ of Section 12.8. For an isoscalar target, we find that the cross section per nucleon is
$$
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d \sigma(\nu \mathrm{N} \rightarrow \nu \mathrm{X})}{d x d y}= & \frac{G_N^2 x s}{2 \pi}\left[g_L^2\left(Q(x)+(1-y)^2 \bar{Q}(x)\right)\right. \\
& \left.+g_R^2\left(\bar{Q}(x)+(1-y)^2 Q(x)\right)\right],
\end{aligned}
$$
where, if we assume only $\mathrm{u}, \mathrm{d}, \overline{\mathrm{u}}, \overline{\mathrm{d}}$ quarks within the nucleon,
$$
g_L^2 \equiv\left(g_L^u\right)^2+\left(g_L^d\right)^2
$$
and similarly for $g_R^2$. We may integrate over $x$ and define
$$
Q \equiv \int x Q(x) d x=\int x[u(x)+d(x)] d x
$$
see (12.75). Cross section (12.92) and that for $\bar{\nu} \mathrm{N} \rightarrow \bar{\nu} \mathrm{X}$ become
$$
\begin{aligned}
& \frac{d \sigma^{N C}(\nu)}{d y}=\frac{G_N^2 s}{2 \pi}\left\{g_L^2\left(Q+(1-y)^2 \bar{Q}\right)+g_R^2\left(\bar{Q}+\left(1-y^2\right) Q\right)\right\}, \\
& \frac{d \sigma^{N C}(\bar{\nu})}{d y}=\frac{G_N^2 s}{2 \pi}\left\{g_I^2\left(\bar{Q}+(1-y)^2 Q\right)+g_R^2\left(Q+\left(1-y^2\right) \bar{Q}\right)\right\},
\end{aligned}
$$
which are to be contrasted with the charged current expressions (12.76) and $(12.77)$
$$
\begin{aligned}
& \frac{d \sigma^{C C}(\nu)}{d y}=\frac{G^2 s}{2 \pi}\left(Q+(1-y)^2 \bar{Q}\right) . \\
& {\frac{d \sigma^{C C}}{d y}}^{(\bar{\nu})}=\frac{G^2 s}{2 \pi}\left(\bar{Q}+(1-y)^2 Q\right) .
\end{aligned}
$$

Correcting (12.95) and (12.96) for the neutron excess in an iron target and for an s quark contribution, the present data give
$$
g_L^2=0.300 \pm 0.015, \quad g_R^2=0.024 \pm 0.008
$$

The experimental verdict is that the weak neutral current is predominantly $V-A$ (i.e., left-handed) but, since $g_R \neq 0$, not pure $V-A$. The NC and the CC have a tantalizingly similar structure, but the $\mathrm{CC}$ is believed to have a pure $V-A$ form. Chapter 13 takes up this point, but first we must look more carefully at the quark sector.

Check back soon!
02:50

Problem 21

Estimate the relative rates for the following three decay modes of the $\mathrm{D}^0(\mathrm{c} \overline{\mathrm{u}})$ meson: $\mathrm{D}^0 \rightarrow \mathrm{K}^{-} \pi^{+}, \pi^{-} \pi^{+}, \mathrm{K}^{+} \pi^{-}$.

Sarah Mccrumb
Sarah Mccrumb
Numerade Educator
01:24

Problem 22

Given that the partial rate
$$
\Gamma\left(\mathrm{K}^{+} \rightarrow \pi^0 \mathrm{e}^{+} \nu\right)=4 \times 10^6 \sec ^{-1},
$$
calculate the rate for $\mathrm{D}^0 \rightarrow \mathrm{K}^{-} \mathrm{e}^{+} \boldsymbol{\nu}$. Hence, estimate the lifetime of the $\mathrm{D}^0$ meson.

Kai Chen
Kai Chen
Princeton University
03:22

Problem 23

Show, in the "spectator" quark model approach, that the charmed meson lifetimes satisfy
$$
\tau\left(D^0\right)=\tau\left(D^{+}\right)=\tau\left(F^{+}\right) .
$$
where $\mathrm{F}^{+}$is made of $\mathrm{c}$ and $\bar{s}$ quarks, see Chapter 2 .

Suzanne W.
Suzanne W.
Numerade Educator

Problem 24

Verify (12.125) using (5.39).
With the replacements (12.123), the first charged current of (12.121) becomes
$$
\begin{aligned}
\left(J_{c a}^\mu\right)_C & =U_{c a}\left(\bar{u}_c\right)_C \gamma^\mu\left(1-\gamma^5\right)\left(u_a\right)_C \\
& =-U_{c a} u_c^T C^{-1} \gamma^\mu\left(1-\gamma^5\right) C \bar{u}_a^T \\
& =U_{c a} u_c^T\left[\gamma^\mu\left(1+\gamma^5\right)\right]^T \bar{u}_a^T \\
& =(-) U_{c a} \bar{u}_a \gamma^\mu\left(1+\gamma^5\right) u_c .
\end{aligned}
$$

The above procedure is exactly analogous to that used to obtain the charge-conjugate electromagnetic current, (5.40).
The parity operation $P=\gamma^0$, see (5.62), and so
$$
P^{-1} \gamma^\mu\left(1+\gamma^5\right) P=\gamma^{\mu \dagger}\left(1-\gamma^5\right),
$$
see (5.9)-(5.11). Thus,
$$
\left(J_{c a}^\mu\right)_{C P}=(-) U_{c a} \bar{u}_a \gamma^{\mu \dagger}\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_c,
$$
and hence
$$
\Re_{C P}-U_{c a} U_{d b}^*\left[\bar{u}_a \gamma^\mu\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_c\right]\left[\bar{u}_b \gamma_\mu\left(1-\gamma^5\right) u_d\right] .
$$

We can now compare $9 \pi_{C P}$ with $9 \pi^{\dagger}$ of (12.122). Provided the elements of the matrix $U$ are real, we find
$$
\Re_{C P}=\Re^{\dagger} \text {, }
$$
and the theory is $C P$ invariant. At the four-quark (u,d,c,s) level, this is the case, as the $2 \times 2$ matrix $U,(12.106)$, is indeed real. However, with the advent of the $\mathrm{b}$ (and t) quarks, the matrix $U$ becomes the $3 \times 3$ Kobayashi-Maskawa (KM) matrix. It now contains a complex phase factor $e^{i \delta}$. Then, in general, we have
$$
\pi_{C P} \neq \mathscr{R}^{\dagger} \text {, }
$$
and the theory necessarily violates $C P$ invariance.
In fact, a tiny $C P$ violation had been established many years before the introduction of the KM matrix. The violation was discovered by observing the decays of neutral kaons. These particles offer a unique "window" through which to look for small $C P$ violating effects. We discuss this next.

Check back soon!
02:48

Problem 25

Show that $C=-1$ for a photon and hence that $C=$ +1 for a $\pi^0$.

Nicole Smina
Nicole Smina
Numerade Educator
04:20

Problem 26

Show that in the absence of angular momentum, a $\pi^{+} \pi^{-}$or $\pi^0 \pi^0$ state is an eigenstate of $C P$ with eigenvalue +1 . Further, show that by adding an $\mathrm{S}$ wave $\pi^0$, we obtain $C P$ eigenstates $\pi^{+} \pi^{-} \pi^0$ or $3 \pi^0$ with eigenvalue -1 .

Hafiz Shahzaib
Hafiz Shahzaib
Numerade Educator