Past exam of the particle physics course of the University of Oxford / 2019 / 6

Use the leading-order parton model: scatter incoherently from an approximately on-shell collinear quark carrying nucleon momentum fraction $x$, neglect quark and lepton masses, use an unpolarized target, and neglect nuclear binding and higher-twist corrections. The condition $Q^2\gg m_p^2$ suppresses target-mass effects, while $Q^2\ll M_W^2$ permits the local Fermi interaction instead of the full W propagator. CKM-weighted accessible final flavours are approximated by their leading light-quark sums. The struck-quark centre-of-mass energy is $\hat{s}\simeq xs$, with $s=(k+p{)}^2\simeq 2m_N{E}_{\nu }$.

A neutrino scatters through $\nu d\to {\mu }^{-}u$ or $\nu s\to {\mu }^{-}c$, and through the corresponding crossed antiquark channels such as $\nu \bar{u}\to {\mu }^{-}\bar{d}$. The chiral charged current makes the massless quark contribution independent of $y$ and the antiquark contribution proportional to $(1-y{)}^2$. The scattering probability is weighted by the parton distribution functions; the explicit factor $x$ comes from $\hat{s}=xs$. In the usual convention $q(x)dx$ is a number probability density, while $xq(x)$ is a momentum density. Approximate Bjorken scaling leaves mainly $x$ dependence; QCD evolution adds a logarithmic $Q^2$ dependence.

The printed proton-density formula is not an isoscalar formula in the standard PDF convention. For a proton, neglecting incoming charm and taking accessible CKM sums as unity, the conventional leading-order result isFor an isoscalar target per nucleon, average proton and neutron and use charge symmetry of nucleon parton distributions: $d_n=u_p$, ${\bar{u}}_n={\bar{d}}_p$, $s_n=s_p$. This givesThe standard normalization follows equivalently by inserting $F_2^{\nu p}=2x(d+s+\bar{u})$ and $x{F}_3^{\nu p}=2x(d+s-\bar{u})$ into the charged-current structure-function formula.^[ref]

A concrete discrepancy remains even with a simple valence model: take $u_p=2h(x)$, $d_p=h(x)$ and all sea densities zero. The correctly averaged isoscalar bracket is $3h(x)$, while the printed bracket is only $h(x)$ with the same prefactor. Thus the intended helicity and $x$ dependence can be explained, but the literal printed isoscalar claim cannot be derived. If the symbols were instead defined as momentum densities, the extra explicit $x$ would also need removal.

For the stationary target, $p=(m_N,0)$. The invariant definition immediately givesNo massless approximation is needed for this laboratory identity when binding and target recoil conventions are neglected.

For the angular relation, specify the neutrino-parton centre-of-momentum frame and neglect masses there. The incoming and outgoing leptons then each have energy $\sqrt{\hat{s}}/2$. Their momentum transfer satisfiesSince $Q^2=xys$ and $\hat{s}=xs$, cancellation givesThis identifies the antiquark weight $(1-y{)}^2$ with the corresponding squared angular factor. The relevant massless condition is sufficient energy in the lepton-parton subprocess; $E_{\nu }\gg m_{\mu }$ alone does not control every endpoint configuration.

The frame qualifier matters: the complete neutrino-nucleon centre-of-mass final state contains a variable-mass hadronic system. In that frame, still neglecting masses but retaining $x$, direct two-body kinematics for $\mu +X$ gives insteadFor example $x=1/2$ and ${\theta }_{\nu N}=\pi /2$ give $y=2/3$, not $1/2$. Thus the simple angle-only relation implicitly uses the partonic frame.

For a valence-dominated isoscalar target, $u_v^N(x)=d_v^N(x)=q_v(x)$. A left-chiral incident neutrino has unsuppressed scattering on a left-chiral quark and the $(1-y{)}^2$ weight for a right-chiral quark. Summing the up and down contributions yieldswhere $G_L^2=(g_L^u{)}^2+(g_L^d{)}^2$ and $G_R^2=(g_R^u{)}^2+(g_R^d{)}^2$. The common normalization here uses the conventional Fermi coupling and PDFs in a; the requested $y$ shape is independent of an overall normalization convention.

Put $w={\sin }^2{\theta }_W$. With $I_3^u=+1/2$, $I_3^d=-1/2$, $Q_u=2/3$ and $Q_d=-1/3$,soFit the relative constant and $(1-y{)}^2$ components to determine their coupling ratio, or use the NC-to-CC cross-section ratio to constrain the absolute combination. In this valence limit, integrating over $0<y<1$ givesThe same valence momentum integral cancels between numerator and denominator. Experimentally, NC events have hadronic activity without the charged-current outgoing muon; known fluxes or CC normalization, muon identification and acceptance corrections are needed. Sea-quark contributions, charm thresholds, QCD corrections and departures from isoscalarity must be included for a precision weak-mixing-angle measurement.