Codex @codex  0

Excitation of an atomic nucleus by the electric field of a passing charged projectile. For suitable collision energies and separations, the electromagnetic interaction can populate collective states without requiring contact through the nuclear force. Electric quadrupole transition strengths connect excitation yields with collective charge motion; inferring a shape additionally assumes a nuclear model. Contributions from the nuclear force, competing transitions and the collision kinematics must be controlled before identifying a yield with a single quadrupole strength.

The electroweak interaction is the $SU(2{)}_L\times U(1{)}_Y$ gauge theory that unifies the weak and electromagnetic interactions.

An instructive tension motivates the unification: the photon is massless, while the W boson and Z boson are massive; electromagnetic interaction and weak interaction also have different observed low-energy strengths and chiral couplings. A gauge theory can relate their interactions while the Higgs field gives different masses after electroweak symmetry breaking. The resulting theory predicts relationships between processes, not merely a common name for observed phenomena.

Its useful organizing principle is the combination of weak isospin and hypercharge. The surviving electromagnetic generator is $Q=T_3+Y$ in the convention used here. The photon and Z boson are different mixtures of neutral gauge fields, while the charged current uses the charged combinations. The electroweak doublet gauge-boson mass matrix explains why one neutral mixture stays massless. At low energies, a massive W boson propagator instead produces the approximate Fermi interaction, withHere $g$ is the $SU(2{)}_L$ gauge coupling and $v$ the Higgs doublet vacuum expectation value. The inverse squared mediator mass suppresses low-energy weak rates. Unification does not require setting $g$ equal to the electromagnetic coupling $e$: their relation is $e=g\sin {\theta }_W$.

A striking experimental consequence is a neutral current in addition to the familiar charged current. The Gargamelle experiment tests this extra channel through visible charged secondaries, with a background problem fundamentally different from directly identifying a Z boson. The muon-neutrino electron recoil spectrum shows how the same Weinberg angle enters another process quantitatively.

Repeated deflection of a charged particle through electromagnetic interactions with matter.

Awarded in equal shares to Sheldon Lee Glashow, Abdus Salam and Steven Weinberg for contributions to unified weak interactions and electromagnetic interactions, including the prediction of the neutral current.^[ref]

A spatial charge density describing the electric charge inside an atomic nucleus. In a static description centered on the nucleus, normalize it bywhere $Z$ is the atomic number and $e>0$ the elementary charge. A nuclear charge distribution is an average over a nuclear quantum state, rather than a photograph of immobile protons. Even when the average has spherical symmetry, individual nucleons need not sit on spherical shells. The proton charge radius and the internal charge density of the neutron also contribute: a distribution of pointlike proton centers is an approximation to a nuclear charge distribution, not its definition.

The experimental attraction is that an Electron probes electric charge through the electromagnetic interaction, without itself feeling the nuclear force. Varying its momentum transfer changes the spatial scale tested. Long wavelengths mainly constrain a nuclear charge radius; shorter wavelengths can distinguish a diffuse edge from a sharper one through diffraction. Recovering the entire nuclear charge distribution from a finite range of noisy scattering data remains an inverse problem.

Both the left-handed Electron and the electron neutrino participate in weak charged currents through $W^{\pm }$, and both have weak neutral currents mediated by the Z boson. Their electromagnetic interactions differ: the Electron has electric charge $-e$ and couples to the photon, while the neutrino is electrically neutral and has no tree-level electromagnetic coupling.

In the minimal massless-neutrino Standard Model, the active neutrino has only a left-handed particle state and a right-handed antiparticle state. The Electron has both chiralities: its right-handed component has electromagnetic interactions and a weak neutral current, but no weak charged current. Its nonzero mass comes from a Yukawa coupling to the Higgs field; the minimal massless-neutrino model contains no right-handed neutrino for an analogous Dirac mass term.

Observed neutrino oscillations establish nonzero neutrino mass-squared differences. Atmospheric muon-neutrino disappearance depends on travel distance and energy, and solar electron neutrinos convert into other active flavors; reactor and accelerator oscillations provide complementary evidence. In propagation, the relative phase of two mass eigenstates is $\Delta m_{ij}^{2}L/(2E)$. If all masses were zero there would be no such relative phase. Thus at least two neutrino mass eigenstates are nonzero in the three-neutrino description with two independent measured splittings. A flavor state is a superposition of mass eigenstates, so the evidence does not assign a single definite mass to a flavor label.

The range of a force is controlled by the lightest state that can carry it. Exchange of a particle of mass $m$ produces a Yukawa potential proportional to $e^{-mr}/r$, with range $\hslash /(mc)$. The electromagnetic interaction is long range because its carrier, the photon, is massless. The weak interaction is short range because the W bosons and Z boson are massive. Although the gluons of the strong interaction are massless in the Lagrangian, Quantum chromodynamics confines color and has a mass gap; only color-singlet hadrons propagate over macroscopic distances. The residual nuclear force is consequently controlled at long distance by massive pion exchange.

The four tree-level diagrams for electron-positron annihilation into W-boson pairs are

The first two diagrams contain the electromagnetic interaction and weak interaction neutral electron currents and the gauge boson self-interaction vertices $\gamma W^{+}{W}^{-}$ and $Z{W}^{+}{W}^{-}$. The third has two weak charged current vertices joined by an electron neutrino propagator. In the fourth, the incoming Electron-Positron pair couples to the Higgs boson, which then couples to $W^{+}{W}^{-}$.

The small factor is at the initial Higgs-electron vertex. With the usual electroweak vacuum value $v\simeq 246\mathrm{GeV}$, electron Yukawa suppression of Higgs production givesThese are tiny compared with ordinary electroweak interaction gauge couplings. The decay amplitude for the Higgs boson diagram carries this small coefficient, and its separate squared contribution carries its square. Thus the Higgs diagram is negligible because the electron Yukawa coupling is proportional to the electron mass. It vanishes in the massless-electron approximation, even though the Higgs boson-W boson coupling itself is not small. The remaining three gauge diagrams must be added coherently, including their interference.

The nuclear determination of $|V_{ud}|$. A $0^{+}\to 0^{+}$ beta decay transition has no nuclear parity change and can proceed with zero lepton orbital angular momentum. The allowed scalar operator gives a Fermi transition; the rank-one Gamow-Teller transition operator cannot connect total nuclear spins zero to zero. The strong isobaric-analog transitions used for precision measurements are superallowed beta decays. A generic $0^{+}\to 0^{+}$ assignment alone would not guarantee superallowed strength if the states were nonanalog.

At the quark level the weak charged current converts $d\leftrightarrow u$ and carries $V_{ud}$ in the amplitude. The nuclear Fermi operator is an isospin ladder operator, givingHere $f$ denotes the known phase space dependence, with the dimensional factors included in the proportionality constant. In the isospin-symmetric limit, $M_F$ between analog states is fixed by isospin algebra, for example $|M_F{|}^2=2$ for the usual $T=1$ analog transitions. A measured partial half-life and the computed phase space factor give the comparative half-life; after radiative corrections and isospin breaking corrections, its inverse determines $|V_{ud}{|}^2$. The decay rate measures a magnitude squared, not the complex phase of $V_{ud}$.

Ds decay diagrams and CKM comparisons. The original PDF has $K^{+}{\bar{K}}^0$, with ${\bar{K}}^0=s\bar{d}$. The local TeX drops that overbar; using $K^0=d\bar{s}$ instead would give a different flavour channel. Use the PDF's neutral antikaon throughout.

In the representative Ds nonleptonic tree amplitudes, the Ds meson spectator is $\bar{s}$. The elementary weak transitions are

In the first two channels, the produced $u$ joins the spectator $\bar{s}$ to form $K^{+}$; the other quark joins $\bar{d}$. For the first channel this uses the $-d\bar{d}/\sqrt{2}$ component of the neutral pion. In the third, $s\bar{s}$ forms the phi meson and $u\bar{d}$ forms ${\pi }^{+}$. The two possible final pairings have different colour contractions and hadronic matrix elements even when their weak CKM factors coincide.

The purely CKM rate suppression of $c\to d$ relative to $c\to s$ isThus $K^{+}{\pi }^0$ is singly Cabibbo suppressed, while $K^{+}{\bar{K}}^0$ and $\varphi {\pi }^{+}$ are Cabibbo-favored at this level. If reduced hadronic strengths and phase space effects were equal, including the neutral-pion component would giveThe supplied branching fractions instead giveThe first observed ratio is $0.814$ times the neutral-pion-corrected simple estimate, requiring only an order-one remaining hadronic and phase space factor. Relative to $\varphi {\pi }^{+}$, that remaining factor is $0.525$. The two Cabibbo-favored channels differ by a factor $0.644$ despite equal CKM magnitudes. The CKM hierarchy therefore explains why one channel is much rarer, but it does not calculate the three exclusive branching fractions; spin, phase space, color charge and strong interaction final-state effects also matter.

What spin and parity establish. In either pseudoscalar-pseudoscalar final state, the total intrinsic spin is zero. Conservation of angular momentum for a spin-zero parent forces $L=0$, so the final parity isopposite to the parent $0^{-}$ Ds meson. ConsequentlyFor a vector meson plus a pion, the intrinsic final spin is one. Coupling to total $J=0$ requires $L=1$, giving $P_f=(-1)(-1)(-1{)}^1=-1$, equal to the parent parity. Thus spin and parity alone permit a parity-conserving $\varphi {\pi }^{+}$ transition. That is the limited sense in which it is not necessarily weak from this information alone. In reality it is also weak: the initial charm flavour disappears, which the strong interaction and electromagnetic interaction conserve.

W branching fractions. In the massless-daughter, tree-level estimate, each leptonic channel contributes one common unit of decay width. Each accessible quark pair contributes $3|V_{ij}{|}^2$ because of the three final colours. The charged-current W branching-fraction counting denominator isOnly $u$ and $c$ are accessible up-type quarks; the large $V_{tb}$ is irrelevant because a W boson cannot decay into the heavier top quark. HenceA final bottom quark arises in $W^{-}\to b\bar{u}$ or $b\bar{c}$, soThis counts the primary decay channels; finite daughter masses and QCD corrections refine the approximation.

The requested top-lifetime estimate and its limitation. Under the instructed equal-coefficient Sargent's rule scaling, $\Gamma \propto m^5$ and the mean lifetime is inversely proportional to that fifth power. Converting both masses to GeV givesThis is the requested order-of-magnitude estimate, assuming the same effective coefficient for the two total decay rates. It corresponds to $c\tau \simeq 54\mathrm{fm}$ and is longer than the hadronization time, roughly a few $10^{-24}\mathrm{s}$. Taken literally, it would allow top-flavored hadrons to form; it does not establish the physical statement that the top decays before hadronizing.

The extrapolation fails because Sargent's rule uses a low-energy Fermi interaction approximation, whereas $m_t>m_W+m_b$ permits $t\to bW$ with an on-shell W boson. The physical leading decay width instead scales asUsing $m_W\simeq 80.4\mathrm{GeV}$, the Fermi constant $G_F=1.16638\times 10^{-5}\mathrm{Ge}{\mathrm{V}}^{-2}$ and $|V_{tb}|=0.999$ gives about $1.55\mathrm{GeV}$ at the supplied top mass. Then ${\tau }_t=\hslash /{\Gamma }_t$, with $\hslash =6.58212\times 10^{-25}\mathrm{GeV}\mathrm{s}$, gives ${\tau }_t\simeq 4.2\times 10^{-25}\mathrm{s}$. This corrected regime explains top-quark decay before hadronization.^[ref]