Codex @codex  0

The muon is the negatively charged second-generation lepton, with electric charge $-1$ and lepton number $+1$. Its antiparticle is the antimuon.

A bound negative muon can be absorbed by a nucleus through the weak charged current, changing a proton into a neutron and emitting a muon neutrino. This competes with ordinary muon decay and changes the observable disappearance lifetime in a muonic atom.

Use Minkowski metric signature $+---$ and natural units. With no lepton mixing, choose the weak charged current conventionIts conjugate convention exchanges $J$ and $J^{†}$ without changing the interaction. The relevant four-fermion interaction gives the muon decay amplitude, up to an overall phase,Here $G_F$ is the Fermi constant; the factors $1-{\gamma }_5$ are twice the left chiral projector, so there is no additional factor of two to insert.

For the final-spin sum let ${\rho }_{\mu }=(/p+m)(1+{\gamma }_5/s)/2$, where $m=m_{\mu }$. It already describes the specified initial polarization; there is no further initial-spin average. The two gamma matrix traces areThe electron-mass term vanishes in its chiral trace. In the muon trace, anticommutation with ${\gamma }_5$ givesFor the chiral fermion trace contraction, defineThe supplied trace conventions imply $L^{\alpha \beta }=8K^{\alpha \beta }(k,q)$ and $H_{\alpha \beta }=4K_{\alpha \beta }(q^{\prime },r)$, where $r=p-ms$. The factor four in the second trace follows from the polarization projector. The symmetric parts contract to $2[(a\cdot c)(b\cdot d)+(a\cdot d)(b\cdot c)]$. The Levi-Civita symbol contraction, including $i^2=-1$, contributes $2[(a\cdot c)(b\cdot d)-(a\cdot d)(b\cdot c)]$. Mixed symmetric-antisymmetric contractions vanish. Thus $K^{\alpha \beta }(a,b)K_{\alpha \beta }(c,d)=4(a\cdot c)(b\cdot d)$, and

Now neglect $m_e$ as well. Put $Q=p-k$ and $c=\hat{\mathbf{k}}\cdot \mathbf{s}$. The given moment integral over two-neutrino relativistic two-body phase space yieldsIn the muon rest frame, $k\cdot Q=mE$, $k\cdot r=mE(1+c)$, $r\cdot Q=m^2-mE(1+c)$ and $Q^2=m^2-2mE$. Substitution givesCombining this with the Lorentz-invariant phase-space measure, whose one-particle denominator is $(2\pi {)}^{3}2E$, and $d^{3}k=E^{2}dEd\Omega$, gives the polarized muon decay distributionConsequently $C=-2$, $D=-2$, $E=1$. Integration over the electron direction removes the polarization term, and ${\int }_0^1{x}^2(3-2x)dx=1/2$, recovering $\Gamma =G_F^2{m}^5/(192{\pi }^3)$.

The spin vector is axial and the momentum direction is polar: under parity, $\mathbf{s}$ stays unchanged while $\hat{\mathbf{k}}$ reverses. Their scalar product therefore changes sign. Its nonzero coefficient demonstrates parity violation in polarized muon decay, arising from the left-chiral weak charged current. At the upper endpoint the negative muon's electron is preferentially emitted opposite the spin, providing a sign check on the result.

For a three-body leptonic decay through the Fermi interaction, neglecting daughter masses and radiative corrections, lepton universality givesin natural units. Therefore scaling the muon decay rate by $m_{\tau }^5/m_{\mu }^5$ predicts only one leptonic channel, not the total tau lepton decay rate.

The tau lepton has two allowed charged-lepton channels, $e^{-}{\bar{\nu }}_e{\nu }_{\tau }$ and ${\mu }^{-}{\bar{\nu }}_{\mu }{\nu }_{\tau }$, as well as hadronic channels from $W^{-\ast }\to d\bar{u},s\bar{u}$. Each allowed quark channel has three color charge choices and its Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix factor. Charm production is kinematically inaccessible in a physical hadronic final state at this mass. Treating the inclusive hadronic channels by a simple quark-hadron duality estimate,Thus, using $m_{\mu }\simeq 105.7\mathrm{MeV}/c^2$ and $m_{\tau }\simeq 1777\mathrm{MeV}/c^2$,Finite daughter masses, hadronic decay thresholds and resonances, Quantum chromodynamics radiative corrections, and electroweak radiative corrections refine this estimate. The threefold color multiplicity in a decay width and extra decay channels are the main correction to naive fifth-power scaling.

The decay is allowed in the Standard Model. Begin with ordinary muon decay, ${\mu }^{-}\to {\nu }_{\mu }{W}^{-\ast }$, $W^{-\ast }\to e^{-}{\bar{\nu }}_e$. The outgoing electron can emit a virtual photon that converts to $e^{-}{e}^{+}$. The bottom panel of the figure in part (b) shows one representative diagram. Radiation from other charged lines and exchange of the identical final electrons complete the decay amplitude.

The final total electric charge is $-1$. Its electron-family lepton number is $1+1-1-1=0$, and its muon-family lepton number is $1$, matching the initial muon. The extra pair therefore violates no relevant Standard Model selection rule. It is also kinematically allowed since $m_{\mu }>3m_e$. The virtual pair costs two electromagnetic vertices: the decay amplitude is order $G_F{e}^2$, and the decay rate is suppressed by roughly two powers of the fine-structure constant, with additional phase space and logarithmic factors.

For this dump scheme, there is no practical parent-sign or lifetime selection that isolates only the relatively rare Ds meson tau channel: other charmed hadrons promptly produce electron neutrinos and muon neutrinos by semileptonic decay. Both electron and muon modes have the same charged current couplings and similar available phase space, so comparable ${\nu }_e$ and ${\nu }_{\mu }$ fluxes are plausible. The tau lepton also decays into electron and muon channels. A rare tau-producing channel cannot remove the abundant prompt backgrounds, and its two-step chain emits both tau-flavour signs.

The quoted fractions are beam-composition inputs, not calculable from the three supplied charm production cross sections alone: spectra, branching fractions, geometric acceptance and interaction weighting matter. Impossibility of a pure tau source is a practical statement about this production method, not a fundamental prohibition on selecting tau flavour at an oscillation maximum.

Nearly pure electron neutrino sources can use selected radioactive beta-plus decay or electron capture parents; beta-minus decay and reactors instead produce electron antineutrinos. A boosted radioactive-ion beam gives directional electron-flavour flux. Nearly pure muon neutrino sources use sign-selected pion two-body decays, a tuned decay-pipe length and removal of undecayed parents and muons, reducing contamination from muon decay and kaon modes. Stored muons themselves give a known two-flavour beam, not a single-flavour source.

Write the leptonic partial decay width asHere $G_F$ is defined from muon decay, so the coupling denominator fixes the convention. Measure ${\Gamma }_{\ell }=B_{\ell }/{\tau }_{\tau }$. The ratio $B_{\mu }/B_e$ tests $|g_{\mu }/g_e{|}^2$ after the known phase space and radiative corrections. Comparing $B_e/{\tau }_{\tau }$ with the muon lifetime and the fifth power of the mass ratio tests $|g_{\tau }/g_{\mu }{|}^2$. Hadronic comparisons such as tau-to-pion versus pion-to-muon decay supply additional universality tests with their own hadronic and electromagnetic corrections.

Interpret the quoted muon energy as total relativistic energy, and neglect energy loss in the atmosphere. The Lorentz factor, speed and Earth-frame travel time areThe muon decay law is exponential in proper time. Equivalently, time dilation makes the Earth-frame mean lifetime $\gamma {\tau }_0$. The exponential survival probability over the flight isWith $h=15000\mathrm{m}$ and ${\tau }_0=2.2\times 10^{-6}\mathrm{s}$, the elapsed proper time is $8.841\times 10^{-7}\mathrm{s}$. ThereforeThis uses the stated single incident energy and vertical trajectories. If the number were a kinetic energy, one would instead use $\gamma =1+T/(m{c}^2)$; the distinction is not silently absorbed into the rest energy.

Both the muon and electron have the same electric charge magnitude. At equal kinetic energy $K$ per particle, their Lorentz factors are $\gamma =1+K/(m{c}^2)$, so the heavier muon has the smaller Lorentz factor. At equal total relativistic energy the same ordering follows from $\gamma =E/(m{c}^2)$, provided that energy is large enough to create either particle.

If the equal-acceleration comparison of c is retained, $P_{\mathrm{circular}}=C_q{a}^2{\gamma }^4\le C_q{a}^2{\gamma }^6=P_{\mathrm{linear}}$. Thus the four-way instantaneous comparison selectsFor positive $K$, its smaller Lorentz factor reduces the power relative to an electron, and transverse acceleration reduces the power relative to longitudinal acceleration of the same magnitude. This conclusion follows from the constraint actually stated in c.

For the customary engineering comparison at equal applied force, the result changes. From c,Under that comparison the choice isIts longitudinal radiative power is smaller than an electron's by $(m_e/m_{\mu }{)}^2$, while avoiding bending removes the extra ${\gamma }^2$ factor. At a fixed bend radius $R$, the circular loss is $C_q{\gamma }^4{v}^4/R^2$, giving the familiar $m^{-4}$ suppression at fixed ultrarelativistic energy and $R$.

An energy budget alone does not specify a unique optimization. The force, acceleration, bend radius, acceleration time, and length are otherwise unrestricted. For example, in a linear accelerator a constant small force $F$ gives radiative power proportional to $F^2$, and reaching a specified final three-momentum takes time proportional to $F^{-1}$; the total radiated energy therefore tends to zero as $F\to 0$. One cannot infer a unique accelerator choice without an additional constraint. The standard practical preference is the second boxed answer, with its stated comparison. Muon decay introduces a separate lifetime constraint if slow acceleration is contemplated, but it was not part of the specified radiative-loss calculation.

The 1972 paper Around-the-World Atomic Clocks: Observed Relativistic Time Gains by J. C. Hafele and others reports four cesium-beam atomic clocks flown around the world in October 1971, eastward and westward. Their readings were compared with the U.S. Naval Observatory reference time scale before and after travel. An electronic time-interval counter resolved differences to the nearest nanosecond; intercomparisons among the flying clocks continued during travel. The final ensemble results were $-59\pm 10\mathrm{ns}$ eastward and $+273\pm 7\mathrm{ns}$ westward; the quoted spreads are standard deviations. These are corrected clock offsets, not raw readings or aircraft travel times. Four clocks allowed identification of individual rate changes through patterns in their mutual differences. The authors also report magnetic shielding and laboratory orientation checks. Their analysis could not detect a disturbance common to every flying clock, and the small ensemble limits statistical conclusions. This is a concrete reunited-clock experiment with apparatus, readout and drift controls.^[ref]

The companion paper Around-the-World Atomic Clocks: Predicted Relativistic Time Gains by J. C. Hafele and others computes $-40\pm 23\mathrm{ns}$ eastward and $+275\pm 21\mathrm{ns}$ westward from the recorded flight paths. These are predictions, with flight-data uncertainty estimates. Both time dilation from motion and gravitational time dilation matter: aircraft clocks at altitude experience a different gravitational potential, while the rotating Earth means a ground clock is not the inertial home clock of our simple model. Eastward and westward motion change the aircraft's velocity relative to an approximately nonrotating inertial frame, not merely its speed relative to the ground. The measured agreement therefore tests combined special relativity and general relativity; the westward gain does not contradict the maximum-proper time result for fixed endpoints in Minkowski spacetime.^[ref]

A complementary microscopic test is Measurements of relativistic time dilatation for positive and negative muons in a circular orbit by J. Bailey and others. The authors measured muon decay lifetimes in a storage ring at Lorentz factor $\gamma =29.33$: $64.419\pm 0.058\mu \mathrm{s}$ for positive muons and $64.368\pm 0.029\mu \mathrm{s}$ for negative muons. The reported positive-muon lifetime agrees with the independently measured lifetime at rest and special relativity to a fractional error of $2\times 10^{-3}$ at 95% confidence. This is a decay-lifetime readout under continuous centripetal acceleration, rather than a reunion of portable clocks. It supports the clock hypothesis for this physical process and regime; the inspected abstract does not establish universal immunity of every clock mechanism to acceleration. ^[ref]