Codex @codex  0

The interaction-labelled fields of several particle species can be linear combinations of the propagation or mass eigenfields. A unitary matrix relates orthonormal bases with canonical kinetic normalization. Quark mixing is described by the CKM matrix; the lepton mixing matrix describes the corresponding mismatch for leptons. A mixing angle parametrizes part of this matrix once ordering and phase conventions are fixed.

Matter changes the effective mixing angle and level splitting of propagating neutrinos. The electron-flavour charged current potential is $\sqrt{2}{G}_F{N}_e$ relative to the other active flavours. In the two-flavour Hamiltonian, equality of its two diagonal entries gives the displayed resonance condition. Adiabatic evolution through a varying density can therefore cause a large flavour change even when the local vacuum mixing angle is smaller. The equality alone does not guarantee adiabatic propagation.

TODO: a numerical estimate from the missing MINOS spectrum cannot be supplied. On source page 7 the graph is absent: PDF Form /Im3 invokes undefined image /Im1 with no image resources, and the archived bundle has the same defect. In particular, no measured minimum energy survives. For maximal mixing angle, the first minimum of muon neutrino survival obeysA restored spectrum or fitted data are needed to choose $E_{\min }$. This is a relation for the survival minimum; a minimum in the raw event spectrum also depends on flux, cross section and smearing. For context only, accelerator and atmospheric results put the splitting at a few $10^{-3}{\mathrm{eV}}^2$, versus the solar splitting about $7.5\times 10^{-5}{\mathrm{eV}}^2$, roughly thirty times smaller. This known scale is not a reconstruction of the absent graph. ^[ref]

Finite event statistics, hadronic shower energy resolution, the muon scale, near-to-far flux extrapolation, interaction and nuclear modeling, backgrounds and detector calibration limit the precision; the baseline itself is comparatively well known. In a two-flavour vacuum fit the sign of $\Delta m^2$ is inaccessible. Evidence for dominant ${\nu }_{\mu }\to {\nu }_{\tau }$ includes the zenith-angle-dependent atmospheric deficit in Super-Kamiokande, approximately preserved active neutral current rates, small electron-flavour appearance at this scale, atmospheric tau appearance and direct tau appearance in OPERA. The latter had already reported four candidates and $4.2\sigma$ evidence in 2014; a later five-candidate discovery result is not needed for this June 2015 answer. ^[ref] These tests constrain a dominant sterile conversion as well as conversion into electron neutrinos.

In a dense beam dump, long-lived pions and kaons usually interact and lose energy before decaying. Their residual stopped decays yield low-energy neutrinos, below the useful high-energy tau-interaction sample. Prompt charmed mesons have much shorter lifetimes and can decay before reinteraction. This suppresses the conventional muon neutrino background relative to the prompt component. The production sequence is Quantum chromodynamics creation of $c\bar{c}$, principally $gg\to c\bar{c}$ with $q\bar{q}\to g^{\ast }\to c\bar{c}$ also allowed, followed by hadronization $c\bar{s}\to D_s^{+}$ and its charge conjugate. The $gg$ process includes both quark-exchange diagrams and the three-gluon diagram. Fragmentation also produces other hadrons; the proton does not turn directly into one isolated Ds meson.The charge-conjugate chain gives a prompt tau antineutrino and a secondary tau neutrino. Thus each leptonic Ds meson chain produces both tau-flavour signs. The corresponding Feynman diagrams are shown in a.

For the CKM matrix, diagonalizing the up/down quark mass matrices by $U_{uL},U_{dL}$ leaves $V=U_{uL}^{†}{U}_{dL}$ in the charged current:The three-generation unitary matrix has three physical mixing angles and one CP violation phase after field rephasings. At fixed kinematics and hadronic matrix element, rates are proportional to $|V_{ij}{|}^2$; phase space, parent lifetimes, form factors and helicity suppression must also be included when comparing branching fractions.

For a charged pseudoscalar meson $P^{+}=(c\bar{q})$, leptonic pseudoscalar decay width givesThe Ds meson channel is Cabibbo-favoured, $|V_{cs}|\simeq 0.974$, whereas the charged D meson channel uses $|V_{cd}|\simeq 0.224$. Taking $m_{D_s}\simeq 1.968$, $m_D\simeq 1.870$ and $m_{\tau }\simeq 1.777$ in GeV givesIncluding the approximate lifetime ratio ${\tau }_{D_s}/{\tau }_D\simeq 0.48$ and the given production ratio $5.2/11$ gives a tau yield ratio about $17(f_{D_s}/f_D{)}^2$, already much greater than one even with equal decay constants. This is an illustrative estimate using approximate additional mass/lifetime inputs, not a determination from the production cross sections alone. A neutral D meson cannot annihilate to the charged $\tau \nu$ pair by electric charge conservation; its semileptonic tau modes have insufficient phase space once the required strange or nonstrange recoil hadron is included. Light mesons are below threshold; bottom production is much smaller at this fixed-target energy. Consequently neither the larger $D^0$ production rate nor ordinary light-hadron production outweighs the Ds meson tau source. ^[ref]

The neutral vector mesons with isospin zero have the same conserved quantum numbers, so an off-diagonal mass matrix can mix the singlet $V_1=(u\bar{u}+d\bar{d}+s\bar{s})/\sqrt{3}$ and octet $V_8=(u\bar{u}+d\bar{d}-2s\bar{s})/\sqrt{6}$. Choose phases such thatAt the ideal mixing angle $\tan \theta =1/\sqrt{2}$, or $\theta \simeq 35.3^{\circ }$, these becomeThe overall sign of $\varphi$ is unobservable. The omega meson near $782\mathrm{MeV}$ decays predominantly to three pions, whereas the phi meson near $1020\mathrm{MeV}$ strongly favours kaon-antikaon channels when they are open. Suppression of its nonstrange channels agrees with the OZI rule and a predominantly strange state. The omega meson is below the two-kaon threshold, so its absence of that channel alone would not establish the mixing angle; masses and the broader decay pattern provide the evidence together.^[ref]

The lepton mixing matrix relates charged-current neutrino flavour fields to mass eigenfields: ${\nu }_{\alpha L}={\sum }_i{U}_{\alpha i}{\nu }_{iL}$. Nondegenerate masses then give relative propagation phases and flavour oscillations. This is the three-massive-neutrino extension of the minimal massless-neutrino Standard Model.

A unitary three-by-three matrix has nine real parameters: three rotation angles and six phases. For Dirac leptons, the independent field rephasings remove five phases, because one common phase acts trivially. Three angles and one physical Dirac phase remain. For Majorana neutrinos two additional phases cannot be removed, but they cancel from ordinary oscillation probabilities.

The phases printed in the lower two rows do not give a unitary matrix for general $\delta$. A consistent convention is $U=R_{23}{U}_{13}(\delta )R_{12}$, where the real rotations use the indicated mixing angles andThe lower-row phase factors in the resulting full matrix are $e^{+i\delta }$, opposite to the $e^{-i\delta }$ in $U_{e3}$. For the source's all-minus assignment, the scalar product of the electron row with the conjugated muon row is $-2i{s}_{23}{s}_{13}{c}_{13}\sin \delta$, which is nonzero at $\delta =\pi /2$ and nonzero mixing. This supplies an explicit counterexample. The electron-row moduli used below are unaffected by this correction.^[ref]

For a rate measurement of the small mixing angle ${\theta }_{13}$, choose the first fast disappearance maximum,A 47 km baseline instead lies near the slow oscillation maximum associated with ${\theta }_{12}$. Its much lower flux, approximately falling as $1/L^2$, and the many fast oscillations washed out by a reactor's broad energy spectrum make it a poor choice for this simple ${\theta }_{13}$ design. A medium-baseline spectral experiment can still constrain neutrino oscillation parameters if it has enough events and resolution; 47 km is not intrinsically useless, but it is not the optimal short-baseline rate experiment. In a, ${\theta }_{13}$ also affects the slow envelope through ${\cos }^4{\theta }_{13}$, so the sensitivity there is not identically zero.

The relevant resolution condition is on the oscillation phase, not solely on which mixing angle is being measured. Since $\Delta \propto L/E$,At the same medium baseline, the fast ${\theta }_{13}$-dependent ripples have phases about $37.5$ times larger than the slow ${\theta }_{12}$ component. Resolving those ripples therefore requires a much better fractional energy resolution. At 47 km, $|{\Delta }_{23}|\simeq 59.5$; avoiding substantial phase smearing requires a resolution appreciably better than $1/59.5\simeq 1.7\%$.

However, a short-baseline ${\theta }_{13}$ experiment near 1.24 km and a ${\theta }_{12}$ experiment near 46.5 km each operate near their relevant first maximum, $\Delta \simeq \pi /2$. Their intrinsic fractional phase-resolution requirements are then comparable. The smaller ${\theta }_{13}$ disappearance amplitude demands careful relative calibration and background control, but it does not by itself impose a universally finer energy resolution. The proposal is conditional on baseline and analysis, rather than a general requirement.