Codex @codex  0

An absorptive phase arises from physical intermediate states or rescattering in a decay amplitude. For a pair of CP symmetry conjugate reactions with otherwise symmetric dynamics, this phase is the same in both amplitudes, whereas a weak phase changes sign. Their differing transformation laws allow interference to produce a direct CP asymmetry.

A direct CP asymmetry compares decay widths for a process and its CP symmetry conjugate. Let two decay amplitudes contribute with real nonnegative magnitudes $a_1,a_2$, absorptive phases ${\delta }_i$ and weak phases ${\varphi }_i$. Then $\mathcal{A}=a_1{e}^{i({\delta }_1+{\varphi }_1)}+a_2{e}^{i({\delta }_2+{\varphi }_2)}$ and $\overline{\mathcal{A}}=a_1{e}^{i({\delta }_1-{\varphi }_1)}+a_2{e}^{i({\delta }_2-{\varphi }_2)}$. Expanding the absolute squares givesThus two nonzero contributions and both kinds of relative phase are required in this example. Equal total decay widths under CPT symmetry constrain the sum over channels and do not forbid individual channel asymmetries.

Consider equal initial abundances of a heavy boson $X$ and its antiparticle. Two decay channels with different baryon numbers, for example $X\to uu$ and $X\to \bar{d}{e}^{+}$, have branching fractions $r$ and $1-r$. The conjugate channels have branching fractions $\bar{r}$ and $1-\bar{r}$. Their mean baryon numbers are $r-1/3$ and $-\bar{r}+1/3$, so each particle-antiparticle pair produces $r-\bar{r}$, or $ϵ$ per decaying particle. Unequal branching fractions require CP violation; equal total decay widths are consistent with CPT symmetry. Baryon number cannot be assigned so that both channels conserve it. An initial abundance decaying outside thermal equilibrium, after inverse production becomes ineffective, can therefore generate a nonzero baryon asymmetry. At the microscopic level a decay-rate difference caused by CP violation requires interference of decay amplitudes with both a relative weak phase and an absorptive phase; complex couplings alone do not guarantee it. Subsequent baryon-number washout must be ineffective for the produced asymmetry to survive.

An isospin-invariant decay amplitude is an intertwining map from the initial isospin multiplet into the final tensor product. The Clebsch-Gordan decomposition for SU2 contains each allowed final isospin once. Commutation with the third generator and the quadratic Casimir operator places the image in the matching coupled state. Commutation with the ladder operators makes its scalar coefficient independent of the magnetic component. Orthogonality of the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients then gives a summed squared amplitude $|a{|}^2$. A physical decay rate additionally includes phase space and spin sums, which can be absorbed into a common reduced coefficient when exact isospin symmetry makes them identical between channels.

Use the current convention in the question, whose vertex prefactor is $g/(2\cos {\theta }_W)$. The neutral-current vector and axial couplings are thenFor a charged lepton, $T_3=-1/2$, $Q=-1$, givingFor an active neutrino, $T_3=1/2$, $Q=0$, so $c_V=c_A=1/2$. The right-handed weak singlet contribution is purely vectorlike in the charge term; combining it with the left-handed contribution gives precisely this Dirac-current form. These coefficients would be halved if the vertex prefactor were $g/\cos {\theta }_W$ instead.

Let $p=k+k^{\prime }$ be the Z boson momentum and $k,k^{\prime }$ the outgoing massless lepton momenta. The decay amplitude isUse the fermion spin sums $\sum u\bar{u}=/k$ and $\sum v\bar{v}=/k^{\prime }$. Anticommutation of ${\gamma }_5$ with the Dirac gamma matrices gives the symmetric part of the trace,The vector-axial cross term is antisymmetric in $\mu ,\nu$, and hence drops out of the massive vector polarization sum. The massless equations also give $p_{\mu }{L}^{\mu \nu }=0$: in the symmetric part, the first two contractions sum to $p^{\nu }k\cdot k^{\prime }$, canceling the last; the antisymmetric term vanishes because $p=k+k^{\prime }$. The longitudinal $p_{\mu }{p}_{\nu }/m_Z^2$ term therefore makes no contribution.

Since $2k\cdot k^{\prime }=m_Z^2$, contraction with $-g_{\mu \nu }$ gives $4(c_V^2+c_A^2)m_Z^2$. Thus the massless fermion Z decay spin sum, including all three initial polarizations, isTo use this fully summed expression for the decay width of one unpolarized Z boson, apply the massive-vector spin average, dividing by three. The width of each fixed polarization is the same after integration over all directions, so that procedure also gives the physical single-particle width. Omitting the division would sum the widths of three initial states.

For two massless distinguishable final particles, the two-body Lorentz-invariant phase space isConsequentlyThe tree-level electroweak symmetry breaking relation is $m_W=m_Z\cos {\theta }_W$. Combining it with the Fermi constant normalization givesFor an active neutrino, the vertex itself projects out inactive chiralities, so no additional helicity factor is needed. This is the tree-level massless leptonic Z decay width; lepton masses and radiative corrections have been excluded.

The baryon asymmetry is an excess of net baryon number over zero, conveniently measured by ${\eta }_B=(n_B-n_{\bar{B}})/n_{\gamma }$. Ordinary matter contains abundant baryons, whereas no comparable primordial antibaryon population is observed. Large nearby domains of matter and antimatter would produce radiation through particle-antiparticle annihilation at their boundaries. Antiparticles produced in energetic collisions are not evidence for a cosmological antimatter domain. The small nonzero baryon-to-photon ratio inferred from Big Bang nucleosynthesis is independently tested by baryon-density consistency between nucleosynthesis and the microwave background.

Starting with zero net baryon number, the Sakharov conditions require baryon-number violation, C and CP violation, and departure from thermal equilibrium. Conservation of baryon number would keep the initial value zero. C symmetry or CP symmetry would pair baryon production with equal antibaryon production; CP rate cancellation in baryogenesis explains why C violation alone does not suffice. In thermal equilibrium with zero imposed charge chemical potentials, CPT symmetry forbids the required net baryon number. An asymmetric rate in one reaction must not be mistaken for net production after all reverse reactions are included.

A simple example is heavy-boson decay baryogenesis. Take equally many heavy $X$ bosons and their antiparticles, with decay channelsThe symbols in parentheses are branching fractions. The two $X$ channels carry baryon numbers $2/3$ and $-1/3$, so both cannot conserve one assigned baryon number for $X$. Their mean baryon number is $r-1/3$, while the mean for $\bar{X}$ is $-\bar{r}+1/3$. Consequently,where $ϵ$ is the asymmetry per decaying particle. CP violation permits $r\ne \bar{r}$ without violating the equality of total decay widths required by CPT symmetry. Microscopically a direct CP asymmetry requires interference between decay amplitudes with both relative weak phases and absorptive phases; specifying complex couplings alone would not establish unequal partial decay widths.

For radiation domination, a sufficient decay condition is ${\Gamma }_X\lesssim H(T=M_X)=1.66\sqrt{g_{\ast }}{M}_X^2/m_P$. The heavy population can then survive as the equilibrium abundance drops, before decaying while inverse production is suppressed. Its actual abundance differs from its thermal equilibrium value. If subsequent baryon-number washout is negligible and cosmological entropy conservation holds, an initial total abundance $Y_X=(n_X+n_{\bar{X}})/s$ producesHere $s$ is the entropy density. Residual baryon-number washout multiplies this expression by an efficiency factor below one. The example realizes all three Sakharov conditions; it illustrates a mechanism, rather than identifying the actual cosmological source of the baryon asymmetry.

Let the masses of $\Phi$ and $\varphi$ be $M$ and $\mu$, respectively. Write their external four-momenta as $P=k_1+k_2$, with $P^2=M^2$ and $k_1^2=k_2^2={\mu }^2$. The condition $M>2\mu$ opens the two-body decay phase space. Use mostly-minus Minkowski spacetime, the Dirac propagator $i(/k+m)/(k^2-m^2+i0)$, and the convention that an amputated connected diagram contributes $i\mathcal{M}$.

There is no tree-level three-scalar Feynman vertex in the displayed interaction. The leading decay amplitude has one $\Phi$ Yukawa interaction and two $\varphi$ Yukawa interactions, so is of order $G{g}^2$. The Yukawa fermion triangle is:

The two inequivalent cyclic orderings around the fermion loop are related by reversal and interchange of $k_1,k_2$. They give equal integrals: reversing all internal four-momenta leaves the masses and denominators unchanged, and the scalar gamma matrix trace identities below give the same numerator. Both must be included. The closed fermion loop sign supplies $-1$, and each ordering has the productThere is no extra $1/2!$ in the decay amplitude. Such a factor belongs to integration over the identical-particle final phase space when calculating a decay rate.

Route $a=\ell$, $b=\ell +k_1$, $c=\ell -k_2$ and define $D_a=a^2-m^2+i0$, and similarly for $D_b,D_c$. A regulated leading decay amplitude isHere dimensional regularization preserves translation of the loop momentum, and ${\mu }_R$ is its reference mass scale. Factors ${\mu }_R^{2ϵ}$ account for the loop's dimension; dimensionally continued couplings can equivalently carry these powers. No ${\gamma }^5$ occurs in this scalar loop, so there is no ${\gamma }^5$ regularization ambiguity.

Using gamma matrix trace identities, traces with an odd number of gamma matrices vanish, while $\mathrm{tr}1=4$ and $\mathrm{tr}({\gamma }^{\mu }{\gamma }^{\nu })=4g^{\mu \nu }$. Thus the numerator simplifies completely toFor a reduction to standard scalar integrals, disregard the vanishing infinitesimals only in the numerator. Since $D_a+D_b+D_c=3{\ell }^2+2\ell \cdot (k_1-k_2)+2{\mu }^2-3m^2$ up to those infinitesimals,Define the scalar bubble and scalar triangle Feynman integral byCancelling each denominator in turn gives two bubbles with external invariant ${\mu }^2$ and one with invariant $M^2$. ThereforeThis explicitly displays the complete gamma matrix trace simplification, the two loop orientations and the overall phase convention.

There is a renormalization qualification to this answer. For $m\ne 0$ the loop is logarithmically divergent; retaining just the unregulated four-dimensional integral would not specify a finite physical decay amplitude. To see the divergence, a Feynman parameter and a shifted loop momentum giveThe scalar triangle Feynman integral is ultraviolet finite. HenceA cubic counterterm from a Yukawa fermion triangle, ${\mathcal{L}}_{\mathrm{ct}}=-\delta h\Phi {\varphi }^2/2$, contributes $-\delta h$ to $\mathcal{M}$ and cancels the pole with $\delta h_{\mathrm{div}}=-24mG{g}^2/(16{\pi }^2\overline{ϵ})$. This is an instance of counterterm closure of a massive Yukawa theory. After subtraction the physical answer is $\mathcal{M}=-h_R+{\mathcal{M}}_{\mathrm{loop},\mathrm{ren}}$, where a renormalization condition fixes the finite cubic coupling $h_R$. The displayed interaction alone does not supply that condition. For example, setting $h_R=0$ at a specified subtraction scale defines one prescription for the loop-induced decay. The regulated expressions above remain the lowest-order loop answer without such extra data. For $m=0$ the trace, and therefore this scalar triangle contribution, vanishes identically.

Now take the Hermitian pseudoscalar Yukawa interaction with the sign printed in the PDF. Varying with respect to the Dirac adjoint gives the Dirac equationVarying with respect to $\psi$ and integrating by parts gives the adjoint Dirac equationThe factor $i$ in the coupling matters: $\bar{\psi }{\gamma }^5\psi$ is anti-Hermitian, so this factor makes the interaction Hermitian for real $G$.

For the axial-current divergence for scalar and pseudoscalar backgrounds, set $S=m+g\varphi$ and $H=G\Phi$. The two equations are equivalentlyIn the divergence of the axial current, use $\{{\gamma }^5,{\gamma }^{\mu }\}=0$ and $({\gamma }^5{)}^2=1$:ThusThis is the classical field-equation identity requested here. It includes explicit breaking by both backgrounds; it is not a claim that a renormalized quantum axial current has no chiral anomaly when gauge interactions are present.

Quark mixing arises because the up-type and down-type quark Yukawa matrices need not be diagonal in the same weak interaction basis. In the Standard Model the three left-handed quark doublets $Q_L^{\prime }$ transform as $(3,2,1/6)$ under $SU(3{)}_c\times SU(2{)}_L\times U(1{)}_Y$, whereas $u_R^{\prime }$ and $d_R^{\prime }$ transform as $(3,1,2/3)$ and $(3,1,-1/3)$. With a Higgs doublet $H$ and its conjugate $\tilde{H}=i{\sigma }^2{H}^{\ast }$, the gauge-invariant Yukawa interaction isThe generation indices are matrix-multiplied. Electroweak symmetry breaking, $⟨H⟩=(0,v_H/\sqrt{2}{)}^T$, produces $M_u=v_H{Y}_u/\sqrt{2}$ and $M_d=v_H{Y}_d/\sqrt{2}$.

Each complex fermion mass matrix admits a biunitary diagonalization,where the diagonal entries are real nonnegative quark masses. Define $u_L^{\prime }=U_{uL}{u}_L$ and $d_L^{\prime }=U_{dL}{d}_L$, and similarly for right-handed fields. The kinetic terms retain their canonical form because the transformations are unitary matrices. However, the weak charged current becomesThis unitary matrix is the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix. Its entries multiply transitions between up-type and down-type mass eigenstates. The minimal Standard Model has no analogous right-handed charged weak current.

Quark mixing does not introduce tree-level flavor-changing neutral currents. Photon, gluon and weak neutral current couplings are proportional to the identity within each fixed-charge quark sector, and $U^{†}IU=I$. The single Higgs doublet also has diagonal neutral scalar field couplings after the same transformations that diagonalize the masses. At higher loop orders, flavor changes are possible. For example, an $s\to d$ amplitude contains ${\sum }_i{V}_{is}^{\ast }{V}_{id}f(m_i^2)$. Unitarity of the CKM matrix sets the sum of coefficients to zero, cancelling any mass-independent part. This is the GIM mechanism; mass splittings leave a suppressed, generally nonzero amplitude.

For $N$ generations a unitary matrix has $N^2$ real parameters: $N(N-1)/2$ mixing angles and $N(N+1)/2$ phases. Rephasing the $N$ up-type and $N$ down-type quark fields removes $2N-1$ phases; a common baryon number phase leaves every matrix entry unchanged. Hence the physical numbers areTwo generations therefore give a real Cabibbo rotation,with strangeness-changing charged-current transitions suppressed by $\sin {\theta }_C$. Three generations have three mixing angles and one irreducible weak CP phase. This counting assumes nondegenerate masses; degeneracies allow additional basis rotations.

Writing $s_{ij}=\sin {\theta }_{ij}$ and $c_{ij}=\cos {\theta }_{ij}$, a standard exact parametrization isComplex entries alone do not establish CP violation, because quark quantum field rephasings can change their phases. For nondegenerate quark masses the weak mixing sector conserves CP precisely when a basis makes $V$ real. A useful invariant test is the Jarlskog invariant,A nonzero $J$ requires all three mixing angles and a nontrivial phase. If two same-charge quark masses coincide, the additional basis freedom removes the corresponding physical CP effect. The possible QCD theta angle is a separate CP parameter, not part of this weak-mixing count.

The Wolfenstein parametrization displays the hierarchy of quark mixing economically. Put ${\lambda }_W=s_{12}$, $s_{23}=A{\lambda }_W^2$, and $s_{13}{e}^{i\delta }=A{\lambda }_W^3(\rho +i\eta )$. Expanding the exact matrix givesThe observed pattern is predominantly diagonal, with $1$-$2$ mixing largest and $2$-$3$, $1$-$3$ mixing successively suppressed. The expansion implies $J\simeq A^2{\lambda }_W^6\eta$. The truncated matrix must not be treated as an exactly unitary matrix.

Column orthogonality givesThe three complex numbers form a CKM unitarity triangle, with area $|J|/2$. Dividing by $-V_{cd}{V}_{cb}^{\ast }$ puts its vertices at $0$, $1$ and $\bar{\rho }+i\bar{\eta }$, where $\bar{\rho }+i\bar{\eta }=-V_{ud}{V}_{ub}^{\ast }/(V_{cd}{V}_{cb}^{\ast })$. The barred parameters include higher-order corrections to the Wolfenstein parameters. Comparing independent measurements of its sides and angles tests both quark mixing and the absence of additional flavor dynamics.

Semileptonic decay rates determine magnitudes of CKM entries through factors $|V_{ij}{|}^2$ once hadronic matrix elements are controlled. Neutral kaon and neutral B-meson mixing constrain products of entries through weak box scattering amplitudes. CP asymmetries probe their invariant relative phases, with kaon mixing providing indirect CP violation and decay amplitudes providing direct CP violation. These processes complement tests of the unitarity constraints on rows and columns. The minimal three-generation Standard Model describes weak quark mixing by a unitary matrix with three angles and one physical CP phase; it does not predict the Yukawa couplings or their hierarchy.

The product of leptonic weak charged currents in the Fermi interaction contains four-fermion cross terms such asThis produces ${\mu }^{-}\to e^{-}+{\bar{\nu }}_e+{\nu }_{\mu }$, and the same interaction permits neutrino-electron scattering and inverse muon decay. Pure electromagnetic interactions have no neutrino coupling and preserve the separate charged-lepton species, so cannot produce these processes by themselves. The factor $1-{\gamma }_5=2P_L$ fixes the chiral structure of the weak charged current.

The pion is a pseudoscalar with negative parity, while the strong-interaction vacuum is parity even. Lorentz covariance restricts a vacuum-to-pion vector-current matrix element to $a{p}^{\alpha }$. In the pion rest frame only its temporal component could be nonzero, but a vector current's temporal component is parity even, whereas the pion is parity odd. The matrix element therefore equals its negative and vanishes. The temporal component of an axial current is parity odd, so its matrix element is allowed and Lorentz covariance fixes it to a constant times $p^{\alpha }$. Defining the pion decay constant in the printed normalization givesThis proves both the vector-current exclusion and the axial-current form; $F_{\pi }$ itself is a strong-interaction parameter, not fixed by symmetry.

The cross term $J_{\mathrm{leptons}}^{\alpha †}{J}_{\alpha }^{\mathrm{hadrons}}$ gives, up to an irrelevant overall phase, the decay amplitudeTake the antineutrino mass to be zero. Since $p=k+q$, ${\bar{u}}_e/k=m_e{\bar{u}}_e$, and $/q{v}_{\nu }=0$, anticommutation with ${\gamma }_5$ givesThe amplitude has helicity suppression by one power of the charged-lepton mass.

Using the external spin sums, with no initial spin average for a spin-zero pion,The middle equality follows from $(1-{\gamma }_5)/q=/q(1+{\gamma }_5)$, $(1+{\gamma }_5{)}^2=2(1+{\gamma }_5)$, and the gamma matrix trace identities. Summing a full massless neutrino spin basis introduces no factor of two: the current projector annihilates the inactive helicity.

For completeness, evaluate the two-body Lorentz-invariant phase space in the pion rest frame. Its three-momentum delta function sets $\mathbf{q}=-\mathbf{k}$, and the energy delta function is $\delta (M_{\pi }-\sqrt{|\mathbf{k}{|}^2+m_e^2}-|\mathbf{k}|)$. The radial root isCombining its derivative with $1/(4E_k|\mathbf{k}|)$ and integrating solid angle givesThe invariant squared amplitude is independent of direction, so the supplied decay formula yields the leptonic pseudoscalar decay widthThe denominator is $4\pi$ because the matrix element contains $\sqrt{2}{F}_{\pi }$. With the alternative definition $f_{\pi }=\sqrt{2}{F}_{\pi }$, the same width is $G_F^2{f}_{\pi }^2{M}_{\pi }{m}_e^2(1-m_e^2/M_{\pi }^2{)}^2/(8\pi )$. In either convention it vanishes as $m_e\to 0$.

Replacing the electron by a muon gives the same hadronic factor and weak coupling. Hence the pion electron-to-muon decay ratio isThis is a tree-level result with massless neutrinos. The cancellation of $F_{\pi }$ and $G_F$ makes the ratio a clean test of the predicted helicity suppression and electron–muon universality in the chiral weak charged current. For example, scalar or pseudoscalar four-fermion interactions could remove the charged-lepton mass factor and substantially enhance the electron mode. Radiative corrections are required for a precision experimental comparison.

With two quark generations, the charged hadronic current containsA $K^{-}$ contains $s\bar{u}$, so its annihilation into the lepton pair selects the term proportional to $\sin {\theta }_C$. Strong strangeness conservation excludes the $d$ term from its vacuum matrix element. Its amplitude is thus multiplied by $\sin {\theta }_C$ and its width by ${\sin }^2{\theta }_C$:Here $F_K$ is the pure strong-interaction decay constant in the same square-root-of-two convention. If the pion current's quark mixing coefficient is also shown explicitly, its width carries ${\cos }^2{\theta }_C$; it is already absorbed if the stated pion matrix element uses the full weak current. Thus the isolated weak-factor ratio is ${\tan }^2{\theta }_C$, while the kaon suppression relative to unit weak coupling is the requested Cabibbo suppression factor ${\sin }^2{\theta }_C$.

A weak phase is a phase in a coupling or decay amplitude that reverses sign in the CP symmetry conjugate process. A physically relevant difference must survive allowed field rephasings; a complex coupling alone does not prove CP violation.