Gauge Theory

Gauge Theories & Particle Physics
Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg
February 3, 1997
Principal Text: C. Quigg, Gauge Theories of the Strong, Weak, and Electromagnetic Interactions
(Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1983).
Recommended: I. J. R. Aitchison and A. J. G. Hey, Gauge Theories in Particle Physics: A
Practical Introduction second edition (Adam Hilger, Bristol, 1989).
L. B. Okun, Particle Physics: The Quest for the Substance of Substance (Harwood Academic
Press, New York, 1985).
Field Theory Basics: F. Mandl and G. Shaw, Quantum Field Theory (Wiley, New York, 1984).
*****
Recommended Reading:
Okun, Chapter 1.
Gauge Theories, Chapters 1 and 2.
E. L. Hill, Rev. Mod. Phys. 23, 253 (1953).
Cultural Reading:
C. Quigg, “Elementary Particles and Forces,” Sci. Am. 252, (April, 1985), p. 84.
H. Harari, “The Structure of Quarks and Leptons,” Sci. Am. 248, (April, 1983), p. 56.
J. R. Rees, “The Stanford Linear Collider,” Sci. Am. 261, (October, 1989), p. 58.
S. Myers and E. Picasso, “The LEP Collider,” Sci. Am. 263, (July, 1990), p. 54.
L. M. Lederman, “The Tevatron,” Sci. Am. 264, (March, 1991), p. 48.
J. Huth, “High Energy Physics — The Road Ahead,” Am. Sci. 82, 326 (1994)
B. Carithers and P. Grannis, “Discovery of the Top Quark,” SLAC Beam Line 25, No. 3,
p. 4 (Fall 1995). The entire issue is available in pdf format at
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/publications/beamline/95iii.pdf.
*****
If you do not already own the 1996 Review of Particle Physics [Phys. Rev. D54, 1 (1996)] and
the Particle Physics Booklet, send an e-mail request to [email protected]. You may instead write to
Particle Data Group, MS 50-308, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, to request
a copy. There is no charge. The PDG’s WWW server is at http://www-pdg.lbl.gov.
*****
Course information, including class schedules and assignments, will be available on the World Wide
Web. Point your web client to http://lutece.fnal.gov/Princeton/.
Problems (due February 13, 1997)
1. Consider bound states composed of a b-quark and a b̄-antiquark. For (bb̄) composites,
(a) Show that a bound state with orbital angular momentum L must have quantum numbers
C = (−1)L+S P = (−1)L+1 ,
where S is the spin of the composite system.

(b) Allowing for both orbital and radial excitations, construct a schematic mass spectrum of
(bb̄) bound states. Label each state with its quantum numbers J P C .
2
2. Consider bound states composed of color-triplet scalars, or squarks (denoted b̃) and anti-
squarks.
¯
(a) Show that a (b̃b̃) bound state with angular momentum L (i.e., an orbital excitation) must
have quantum numbers
C = (−1)L ; P = (−1)L .
(b) Allowing for both orbital and radial excitations, construct a schematic mass spectrum of
(b̃¯b̃) bound states. Label each state with its quantum numbers J P C . How does the spectrum
of squarkonium differ from that of quarkonium?
3. (a) Using the Feynman rules given in Appendix B.5 of Gauge Theories, compute the differ-
ential cross section dσ/dΩ and the total (integrated) cross section σ ≡ dΩ(dσ/dΩ) for the
reaction e+ e− → µ+ µ− . Work in the center of momentum frame, and in the high-energy limit
(where all the masses may be neglected). Assume that the colliding beams are unpolarized,
and sum over the spins of the produced muons.
(b) Look up the original evidence for quark–antiquark jets in the inclusive reaction e+ e− →
hadrons [G. J. Hanson et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 35, 1609 (1975)]. Now recompute the dif-
ferential cross section for the reaction e+ e− → µ+ µ− , assuming the initial beams to be
transversely polarized. See also R. F. Schwitters et al., ibid. 35, 1320 (1975).
4. Define the requirements for an experiment to measure the gyromagnetic ratio of the tau
lepton, taking into account the τ -lifetime and the anticipated result gτ ≈ 2. For background,
become acquainted with the methods used to measure the magnetic anomalies of the electron
[A. Rich and J. Wesley, Rev. Mod. Phys. 44, 250 (1972); R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., P. B. Schwinberg,
and H. G. Dehmelt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 93 (1977); R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., “Anomalous Magnetic
Moment of Single Electrons and Positrons: Experiment,” in Quantum Electrodynamics, edited
by T. Kinoshita (World Scientific, SIngapore, 1990), p. 322.] and muon [F. Combley, F. J.
M. Farley, and E. Picasso, Phys. Rep. 68, 93 (1981); F. J. M. Farley, and E. Picasso, “The
Muon g − 2 Experiments,” in Kinoshita’s QED, p. 479], and the magnetic dipole moments of
the nucleons [N. F. Ramsey, Molecular Beams, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1956] and
unstable hyperons [L. Schachinger et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 41, 1348 (1978); L. G. Pondrom,
Phys. Rep. 122, 57 (1985). For an interesting new technique, see D. Chen et al., Phys. Rev.
Lett. 69, 3286 (1992), and V. V. Baublis, et al., Nucl. Inst. Meth. B90, 150 (1994)]. Indirect
determinations of (g −2)τ are discussed by R. Escribano and E. Massó, “Improved Bounds on
the Electromagnetic Dipole Moments of the Tau Lepton,” (bulletin board: hep–ph/9609423);
G. Köpp, D. Schaile, M. Spira, and P. Zerwas, Z. Phys. C65, 545 (1995); M. A. Samuel and
G. Li, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 33, 1471 (1994).
5. For a free particle moving in one dimension, the Lagrangian is L = 12 mẋ2 . Show that the
action S corresponding to the classical motion of a free particle from position x1 = x(t1 ) to
position x2 = x(t2 ) is
m(x2 − x1 )2
S= .
2(t2 − t1 )
m
6. For a harmonic oscillator with Lagrangian L = (ẋ2 − ω2 x2 ), show that the classical action
2
for a particle that moves from position x1 at initial time t1 to position x2 at final time t2 is
mω 2
S= (x1 + x22 ) cos ωT − 2x1 x2 ,
2 sin ωT
where T ≡ t2 − t1 .
February 13, 1997
Okun, Chapter 2.
Gauge Theories, Chapter 3.
Howard Georgi, Weak Interactions and Modern Particle Theory, (Benjamin, Menlo Park,
California, 1984), Chapter 1: “Symmetries in Field Theory.”
On the continuation to imaginary time: J. Schwinger, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 44, 956 (1958).
Cultural Reading:
Akira Tonomura, “Electron Holography: A New View of the Microscopic,” Phys. Today 43,
22 (April, 1990).
Robert Mills, “Gauge Fields,” Am. J. Phys. 57, 493 (1989).
On geometrical phases: M. V. Berry, “Anticipations of the Geometric Phase,” Phys. Today
43, 34 (December, 1990).
Deep Background:
T. P. Cheng and L.-F. Li, “Resource Letter: GI-1 Gauge Invariance,” Am. J. Phys. 56, 586
(1988).
Murray Peshkin and Akira Tonomura, The Aharonov-Bohm Effect, (Springer-Verlag, New
York, 1989).
Quantum Coherence, Proceedings of the International Conference on Fundamental Aspects
of Quantum Theory to Celebrate Thirty Years of the Aharonov–Bohm Effect, edited by J.
S. Anandan (World Scientific, Singapore, 1990).
J. W. Zwanzinger, M. Koenig, and A. Pines, “Berry’s Phase,” Ann. Rev. Phys. Chem. 41,
601 (1990).
Alfred Shapere and Frank Wilczek, Geometrical Phases in Physics, (World Scientific, Singa-
pore, 1989).
7. Use the requirement that the Lagrangian be invariant under a continuous symmetry to de-
duce the conserved quantity that corresponds to a particular transformation. Show that
invariance under (i) translations in space, (ii) translations in time, (iii) spatial rotations
implies conservation of (i) momentum, (ii) energy, (iii) angular momentum.
8. Making use of the Dirac equation, show that the most general parity-conserving form for the
electromagnetic current of the proton is
Jµ ∼ ū(p )[Γ1 (q 2 )γµ + Γ2 (q 2 )iσµν q ν + Γ3 (q 2 )qµ ]u(p),
where σµν ≡ (i/2) [γµ , γν ] and q ≡ p−p . What are the consequences of current conservation,
∂ µ Jµ = 0?
9. Calculate the differential cross section in the laboratory frame for elastic electron-proton
scattering (a) for a structureless proton (i.e., a Dirac particle); (b) for a real proton (using
the results of Problem 8).
10. (a) Consider a nonrelativistic particle with charge q moving along the axis of a cylindrical
Faraday cage connected to an external generator, which causes the potential V (t) on the
cage to vary with time only when the particle is well within the cage. Show that, if the wave
2
function ψ0 (x, t) is a solution of the Schrödinger equation for V (t) ≡ 0, the solution when
t
the generator is operating will be ψ(x, t) = ψ0 (x, t)eiS/h̄ , where S = − dt qV (t ).
(b) Now suppose that a single coherent beam of charged particles is split into two parts,
each of which is allowed to pass through its own long cylindrical cage of the kind just de-
scribed. On emerging from the Faraday cages the beams are recombined and the resulting
interference pattern is observed. The beam is chopped into bunches that are long compared
with the wavelength of an individual particle but short compared with the Faraday cages.
The potentials on the two cages vary independently, but are nonzero only when a bunch is
well within the tubes. This ensures that the beam traverses a time-varying potential without
experiencing electric or magnetic forces. Describe how the interference pattern depends upon
the applied voltages. [Reference: Y. Aharonov and D. Bohm, Phys. Rev. 115, 485 (1959).]
11. If baryon number is absolutely conserved, the conservation law may be a consequence of a
global phase symmetry like that of electromagnetism, with the electric charge replaced by
baryon number. (a) How would Newton’s law of gravitation be modified if the baryonic phase
symmetry were a local gauge invariance?
(b) In view of the close equality of inertial and gravitational masses imposed by the Eötvös
experiment [P. G. Roll, R. Krotkov, and R. H. Dicke, Ann. Phys. (NY) 26, 442 (1967)], what
can be said about the strength of a hypothetical gauge interaction coupled to the baryon
current? [Reference: T. D. Lee and C. N. Yang, Phys. Rev. 98, 150 (1955).]
(c) How would a gauge boson γB coupled to baryon number affect the properties of the
bb̄ resonances? For part (c) only, allow for the possibility that γB has a nonzero mass.
[Reference: D. Bailey and S. Davidson, Phys. Lett. B348, 185 (1995).]
For another recent examination of the possibility that a light U (1) gauge boson is coupled
to baryon number, see C. D. Carone and H. Murayama, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 3122 (1995).
On the possibility of a massless gauge boson coupled to lepton number, see L. B. Okun,
Yad. Fiz. 10, 358 (1969) [English translation: Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 10, 206 (1969)]. For a
critical reëxamination of the limits, see S. I. Blinnikov, A. D. Dolgov, L. B. Okun, and M.
B. Voloshin, Nucl. Phys. B458, 52 (1996).
12. Outline a “three-neutrino experiment” to establish that a neutral, penetrating beam of ντ
materializes into τ upon interacting in matter. [For background, look at the first two-neutrino
experiment, J. Danby, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 9, 36 (1962). See also the Nobel Lectures of
“Murder, Inc.,” (as they called themselves), Mel Schwartz, J. Steinberger, and Leon M. Led-
erman, reprinted in Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 527, 533, 547 (1989).] What would provide a copious
source of ντ ? What energy would be advantageous for the detection of the produced τ ? What
characteristics would be required of the detector? What are the important backgrounds, and
how would you handle them? Some information about a three-neutrino experiment in prepa-
ration at Fermilab can be found at http://fn872.fnal.gov.
*****
Course information, including class schedules and assignments, is available on World Wide Web.
Point your web client to http://lutece.fnal.gov/Princeton/.
February 18, 1997
On (unsuccessful) gauge theories of the strong interaction: J. J. Sakurai, Ann. Phys. (NY)
11, 1 (1960).
Okun, pp. 19–34.
Aitchison and Hey, Chapter 8.
Cultural Reading:
M. M. Nieto, “Past, Present, and Possible Future Limits on the Photon Rest Mass” (bulletin
board: hep–ph/9212283).
On limits to the photon mass: J. D. Barrow and R. R. Burman, “New Light on Heavy Light,”
Nature (London) 307, 14 (1984).
For a limit on Mγ based on Earth’s magnetic field: E. Fischbach, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 73,
514 (1994).
On prospects for improving the bound on Mγ by an order of magnetude: V. A. Kostelecký
and M. M. Nieto, “Bounding the Photon Mass with Solar Probes,” Phys. Lett. B317, 223
(1993) (bulletin board: hep–ph/9304250).
13. Derive the Yang-Mills Lagrangian for a scalar field theory in which the three real scalar fields
correspond to the triplet representation of SU (2). The free-particle Lagrangian is
L = 12 [(∂µ φ)2 − m2 φ2 ],
with  
φ1
φ =  φ2  .
φ3
14. (a) By making the minimal substitution ∂µ → Dµ in the free-particle Lagrangian, construct
a theory of the electrodynamics of a massive spin-one boson V ± and deduce the Feynman
rules for the theory.
(b) Now
compute the differential cross section dσ/dΩ and the total (integrated) cross section
σ ≡ dΩ(dσ/dΩ) for the reaction e+ e− → V + V − , for various helicities of the produced
particles. Work in the c.m. frame, and in the high-energy limit (where all the masses may
be neglected). Assume the colliding beams are unpolarized. Compare the results with the
cross sections for e+ e− → µ+ µ− derived in Problem 3. [Reference for Feynman rules: J. D.
Bjorken and S. D. Drell, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964,
Appendix B.]
15. Show that the transformations

i i −1
Bµ = GBµ G −1
+ (∂µ G)G = G Bµ + G (∂µ G) G−1
−1
g g
of the gauge fields form a group—that is, under successive transformations on the matter field
given by ψ → ψ = G1 ψ → ψ = G2 ψ the transformation of the gauge field is characterized
by G = G2 G1 .
16. Apply the analysis of nucleon-nucleon forces of Gauge Theories, §4.3, to the nucleon-antinucleon
case. Compare the Yang-Mills “predictions” with the spectrum of nonstrange mesons.
2
*****
Typographical errors in the fifth paperbound printing of Gauge Theories (identified at the bottom
of p. vi by EFGHIJ-MA-89):
 
χλ
√
uλ (p) = E + m  λ |p|
 (A.4.15)
χλ
E +m

1 λ |p| √ χλ
1
(1 ± γ5 )uλ (p) = 1± E +m (A.4.20)
2
2 E +m ±χλ
−4 d4 k (k 2 )m−2 B(m, n − m)
Imn = (2π) = (B.3.12)
(k 2 − a2 )n 16π 2 i(a2 )n−m
*****
Course information, including class schedules and assignments, is available on the World Wide
Web. Point your browser to http://lutece.fnal.gov/Princeton/.
February 27, 1997
M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder, An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory (Addison-
Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1995), §11.1 and §20.1.
Okun, Chapter 5.
Cultural Reading:
Alan Lightman, Einstein’s Dreams (Pantheon, New York, 1993).
On the analogy between the Ginzburg-Landau picture of the superconducting phase tran-
sition and the Higgs mechanism: Robert E. Marshak, Conceptual Foundations of Modern
Particle Physics (World Scientific, Singapore, 1993), §4.4.
S. Weinberg, The Quantum Theory of Fields, vol. 2, “Modern Applications” (Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1996), §19.1, 19.2, 21.1.
Problems (due March 4, 1997)
17. The two-dimensional Ising model is an instructive cartoon model of a ferromagnet that dis-
plays a second-order phase transition—spontaneous magnetization—at a critical (inverse)
temperature βc = 0.4407. It is easily studied by Monte Carlo simulation. For this exercise,
take advantage of Kenji Harada’s java applet at http://fndsys.kuamp.kyoto-u.ac.jp/˜harada/
Monte-eg.html or the Ising simulation XIsing in Mike Creutz’s collection of Xtoys at
http://penguin.phy.bnl.gov/www/xtoys/xtoys.html.
(a) Heat the system above the critical temperature and observe the disordered state.
(b) Cool the system just below the critical temperature to see the formation of domains.
(c) Cool the system further and watch the evolution of the spontaneous magnetization.
(d) Beginning from a zero-temperature (ordered) configuration, heat the system and observe
the formation of small bubbles of flipped spins. When the temperature exceeds the critical
temperature, the bubbles expand and merge, and up-down symmetry is restored.
Repeat the experiments enough times to develop some intuition about the occurrence of con-
figurations far from the average. [The original paper is E. Ising, Z. Phys. 31, 253 (1925). For
more than you want to know, see B. M. McCoy and T. T. Wu, The Two-Dimensional Ising
Model (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1973).]
18. Analyze the spontaneous breakdown of a global SU (2) symmetry. Consider the case of three
real scalar fields φ1 , φ2 , and φ3 , which constitute an SU (2) triplet, denoted
 
φ1
φ =  φ2  .
φ3
The Lagrangian density is
L = 12 (∂µ φ) · (∂ µ φ) − V (φ · φ),
where as usual
V (φ · φ) = 12 µ2 φ · φ + 14 |λ| (φ · φ)2 .
2
Assume that for µ2 < 0 the potential has a minimum at

 
0
φ0 =  0  .
v
Then show that (a) the vacuum remains invariant under the action of the generator T3 , but
not under T1 or T2 ; (b) the particles associated with T1 and T2 become
massless (Goldstone)
particles; (c) the particle associated with T3 acquires a mass = −2µ2 .
19. Generalize the preceding example to a Lagrangian that describes the interactions of n scalar
fields and is invariant under global transformations under the group O(n). After spontaneous
symmetry breaking and the choice of a vacuum state, show that the vacuum is invariant under
the group O(n − 1). Verify that the number of Goldstone bosons corresponds to the number
of broken generators of the original symmetry group—i.e., to the difference between the
number of generators of O(n) and O(n − 1).
20. The Ginzburg–Landau theory of superconductivity provides a phenomenological understand-
ing of the Meissner effect: the observation that an external magnetic field does not penetrate
the superconductor. Ginzburg and Landau introduce an “order parameter” ψ, such that
|ψ|2 is related to the density of superconducting electrons. In the absence of an impressed
magnetic field, expand the free energy of the superconductor as
2 4
Gsuper (0) = Gnormal (0) + α |ψ| + β |ψ| ,
where α and β are phenomenological parameters.

(a) Minimize Gsuper (0) with respect to the order parameter and discuss the circumstances
2
under which spontaneous symmetry breaking occurs. Compute |ψ| 0 , the value at which
Gsuper (0) is minimized.
(b) In the presence of an external magnetic field B, a gauge-invariant expression for the free
energy is
B2 1 ∗
Gsuper (B) = Gsuper (0) + + ψ (−i∇ − e∗ A)2 ψ.
2 2m∗
(The effective charge e∗ turns out to be 2e, because |ψ| represents the density of Cooper
2
pairs.) Derive the field equations that follow from minimizing Gsuper (B) with respect to ψ
and A. Show that in the weak-field approximation (∇ψ ≈ 0, ψ ≈ ψ0 ) the photon acquires
a mass within the superconductor. [Reference: V. L. Ginzburg and L. D. Landau, Zh. Eksp.
Teor. Fiz. 20, 1064 (1950); English translation: see Men of Physics: Landau, Vol. II, edited
by D. ter Haar, Pergamon, New York, 1965. For further information, see §21.6 of Weinberg.]
*****
0
φ0 = (5.2.4)
0
φ1 + iφ2
φ= √ (5.3.2)
2
*****
March 4, 1997
Gauge Theories, §6.1 – 6.4.
Aitchison and Hey, §14-1 – 14-5.
On the σ Model: J. F. Donoghue, E. Golowich, and B. R. Holstein, Dynamics of the Standard
Model, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992), pp. 10–12, 21–22.
K. Gottfried and V. F. Weisskopf, Concepts of Particle Physics vol. II (Oxford University
Press, New York, 1986): on the choice of the electroweak gauge group, §VI.B.2 (pp. 491-496);
on the analogy with superconductivity, §VI.C.1 (pp. 509-516).
Cultural Reading:
To celebrate the hundredth anniversary of the discovery of the electron (and the beginning
of particle physics), read the articles by Abraham Pais, Steven Weinberg, and Chris Quigg
in the Spring 1997 issue of the SLAC Beam Line, available in pdf format at
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/pubs/beamline/97i.pdf.
Robert N. Cahn and Gerson Goldhaber, The Experimental Foundations of Particle Physics
(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, 1989), chapter 12.
On spontaneous symmetry breaking: Mary M. Crone and Marc Sher, “The environmental
impact of vacuum decay,” Am. J. Phys. 59, 25 (1991).
21. Derive the equation of motion for the photon field Aν in the Abelian Higgs model and show
that it amounts to a relativistic generalization of the Ginzburg–Landau description of a
superconductor.
22. (a) Compute the decay rate for the disintegration of the tau lepton, τ − → e− ν̄e ντ , neglecting
the electron mass, and compare with the familiar rate for muon decay.
(b) How would the rate change if, by virtue of an unconventional lepton number assignment,
ντ ≡ ν̄e ?
23. (a) Compute the differential and total cross sections for νe e and ν̄e e elastic scattering in the
Weinberg–Salam model. Work in the limit of large MW and MZ , and neglect the electron
mass with respect to large energies. The computation is done most gracefully by Fierz
reordering one of the graphs, as indicated in §6.4 of Gauge Theories. [Reference: G. ’t Hooft,
Phys. Lett. 37B, 195 (1971).]
(b) Without calculating the cross section, compute the ν̄e energy for which W − is formed as
an s-channel resonance.
24. (a) Compute the cross section for the reaction
e+ e− → H → f f¯ ,
where f is a massive fermion.
(b) How does the result differ for leptons and quarks?
(c) Write the cross section for the reaction e+ e− → all in the form
+ −
4πΓ(H → e e )Γ(H → all)
σ(e+ e− → H) = .
(s − MH
2 )2 + M 2 Γ(H → all)2
H
How does the result change if the colliding particles are muons, rather than electrons?
(d) What integrated luminosity would be required to discover a 120-GeV Higgs boson in the
reaction µ+ µ− → H, if the only decay products are eē, µµ̄, τ τ̄, uū, dd̄, ss̄, cc̄, and bb̄ pairs?
2
25. Consider the process e+ e− → γγ, which is described, in QED, by the two Feynman diagrams
and for which the amplitude may be written M = ∗1ν ∗2µ (Aµν + Ãµν ), where i is the
polarization vector of a photon and Aµν (Ãµν ) corresponds to the first (second) diagram.
(a) Calculate the tensors Aµν and Ãµν .
(b) Show that gauge invariance requires that
k1ν (Aµν + Ãµν ) = 0 = k2µ(Aµν + Ãµν ).
(c) Verify that these conditions are met, although the quantities k1ν Aµν , k1ν Ãµν , k2µAµν ,
and k2µ Ãµν are all different from zero.
*****
I strongly recommend that you work through the calculations in §6.1 of Gauge Theories. So that
we may cover many topics during the semester, I will not do all of these calculations in class. The
calculations are done very explicitly in the book, so you should have no trouble in reproducing them.
It might also be a useful experience to try doing the calculations at the blackboard, explaining
steps to classmates who are free to object, offer advice, or peek at the answer.
*****
Comment on Problem 12: Because the interaction rate must be very high in a multi-TeV hadron
collider, the continuous fluxes of neutrinos may be high enough to allow very high-energy neutrino
experiments, including a three-neutrino experiment. The possibilities are worked out in some detail
by A. De Rújula, E. Fernández, and J. J. Gómez-Cadenas, Nucl. Phys. B405, 80 (1993).
*****
p. 140, Problem 6-3, below (A.4.29):

. . . where Γi = (1, γµ , σµν , iγµ γ5 , γ5 ) . . .
*****
March 13, 1997
Aitchison and Hey, §14-1 – 14-5.
On parity violation in atomic physics: E. D. Commins, “Atomic Parity Violation Exper-
iments,” Physica Scripta 36, 468 (1987); M.-A. Bouchiat, “Neutral Currents in Atoms,
Experiments in Cesium and Implications,” in Neutral Currents: Twenty Years Later, edited
by U. Nguyen-Khac and A. M. Lutz (World Scientific, Singapore, 1994), p. 247.
E. D. Commins, “Resource Letter ETDSTS-1: Experimental Tests of the Discrete Space-
Time Symmetries,” Am. J. Phys. 61, 778 (1993).
Cultural Reading:
D. B. Cline, C. Rubbia, and S. van der Meer, “The Search for Intermediate Vector Bosons,”
Sci. Am. 246, (March, 1982), p. 48.
S. van der Meer, “Stochastic cooling and the accumulation of antiprotons,” Rev. Mod. Phys.
57, 689 (1985).
C. Rubbia, “Experimental observation of the intermediate vector bosons W + , W − , and Z 0 ,”
Rev. Mod. Phys. 57, 699 (1985).
M.-A. Bouchiat and L. Pottier, “An Atomic Preference between Left and Right,” Sci. Am.
250, (June, 1984), p. 100.
Deep Background:
M. J. Musolf, et al., “Intermediate-energy semileptonic probes of the hadronic neutral cur-
rent,” Phys. Rep. 239, 1 (1994), gives the nuclear-physicist’s perspective on characterizing
the neutral current.
26. At very low momentum transfers, as in atomic physics applications, the nucleon appears
elementary. If the effective Lagrangian for nucleon β-decay can be written in the limit of
zero momentum transfer as
GF
Lβ = − √ ēγλ (1 − γ5 )ν p̄γ λ (1 − gA γ5 )n,
2 2
where gA = 1.2601 ± 0.0025 is the axial charge of the nucleon (renormalized from unity by
the strong interactions), show that the eN neutral-current interactions may be represented
by
GF
Lep = √ ēγλ (1 − 4xW − γ5 )ep̄γ λ (1 − 4xW − gA γ5 )p
2 2
and
GF
Len = − √ ēγλ (1 − 4xW − γ5 )en̄γ λ (1 − gA γ5 )n.
2 2
Regard the nucleus as a noninteracting collection of Z protons and N neutrons. Now perform
the nonrelativistic reduction of the implied nuclear matrix elements. Show that, for a heavy
nucleus, the dominant parity-violating contribution to the electron–nucleus amplitude will
be of the form
iGF
Mp.v. = − √ QW ēρN (r)γ5 e,
2 2
2
where ρN is the nucleon density as a function of the electron coordinate r, and the weak
charge is
QW = Z(1 − 4xW ) − N.
27. The weak charge of 205

81 Tl has been measured by a group at the University of Washington
[P. A. Vetter, D. M. Meekhof, P. K. Majumder, S. K. Lamoreaux, and E. N. Fortson, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 74, 2658 (1995)] as
QW = −114.2 ± 1.3 ± 3.4 ,
where the first error is experimental and the second refers to the uncertainty in atomic theory.
Using the first-order expression derived in Problem 26, deduce the weak mixing parameter
sin2 θW and its uncertainties.
28. LEP measurements on the Z 0 were summarized by Joachim Mnich, Phys. Rep. 271, 181
(1996), as follows:
MZ 91.1884 ± 0.0022 GeV/c2

ΓZ 2.4963 ± 0.0032 GeV
Γ(Z → hadrons) 1744.8 ± 3.0 MeV
σhad (pole) 41.488 ± 0.078 nb
Γ(Z → e+ e− ) 83.92 ± 0.17 MeV
Γ(Z → µ+ µ− ) 83.92 ± 0.23 MeV
Γ(Z → τ + τ − ) 83.85 ± 0.29 MeV
+ −
Γleptonic = Γ(Z → ) 83.93 ± 0.14 MeV
Γinvisible 499.9 ± 2.5 MeV
ae −0.5011 ± 0.0004
ve −0.0380 ± 0.0007
Let us confront these results with the lowest-order predictions of the Weinberg–Salam model.
(a) Use the value of the Z 0 mass to determine xW ≡ sin2 θW .
(b) Using your value of xW , predict the W ± mass and compare it with the current world
average: MW = 80.38 ± 0.09 GeV/c2 .
(c) Use the measured value of the Z 0 mass to predict the partial width Γ(Z → ν ν̄). By
comparing with Γinvisible measured at LEP, determine the number of light neutrino species.
(d) Use your value of the weak mixing parameter xW to predict Γleptonic = Γ(Z → + − ),
Γ(Z → hadrons), ae , and ve . Neglect the masses of all fermions but the top quark.
*****
3
Supplement to references on inverse muon decay, p. 95 of Gauge Theories:

¶ S. R. Mishra, et al., Phys. Lett. 252B, 170 (1990).
σ(νµ e → µ− νe )/σth = 0.981 ± 0.049 (stat.) ± 0.030 (syst.)
for neutrino energies up to 600 GeV.

¶ P. Vilain, et al. (CHARM II Collaboration), Phys. Lett. 364B, 121 (1995).
σ(νµ e → µ− νe )/σth = 0.929 ± 0.019 ± 0.048
in the SPS wideband beam (

Eν = 23.8 GeV, neutrino energies up to 150 GeV).
¶ J. Dorenbosch, et al. (CHARM Collaboration), Z. Phys. C41, 567 (1989).
σ(νµ e → µ− νe )/σth = 1.10 ± 0.08 (stat.) ± 0.13 (syst.)
in the SPS wideband beam.
Additional references on νµ e neutral current reactions:

¶ N. J. Baker, et al., Phys. Rev. D40, 2753 (1989), ibid. 41, 1715E (1990).
¶ L. A. Ahrens, et al., Phys. Rev. D41, 3297 (1990), Brookhaven experiment E-734.
¶ P. Vilain, et al. (CHARM II Collaboration), Phys. Lett. 335B, 246 (1994).
¶ J. Dorenbosch, et al. (CHARM Collaboration), Z. Phys. C41, 567 (1989).
Detection of ν̄e e scattering:

F. Reines, H. S. Gurr, and H. W. Sobel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 315 (1976).
Detection of νe e scattering:
R. C. Allen, et al., Phys. Rev. D47, 11 (1993).
*****
First class after spring break: Monday, March 24.
*****
March 25, 1997
On the mixing of quark flavors: F. J. Gilman, K. Kleinknecht, and B. Renk, “The Cabibbo–
Kobayashi–Maskawa Mixing Matrix,” in Particle Data Group, Phys. Rev. D54, 1 (1996); see
pp. 94–97.
Cultural Reading:
For an excellent overview of the analysis of LEP data, see J. Mnich, Phys. Rep. 271, 181
(1996).
On physics opportunities at µ+ µ− colliders, see V. Barger, et al., (bulletin board: hep–
ph/9604334).
Background Reading:
F. E. Close, An Introduction to Quarks and Partons, Chapters 9 and 11.
On lower bounds to the Higgs-boson mass deduced from the requirement of vacuum stability
of electroweak potentials, see M. Sher, Phys. Rep. 179, 273 (1989). For useful updates in
light of the large mass of the top quark (mt ≈ 175 GeV/c2 ), see G. Altarelli and G. Isidori,
Phys. Lett. B337, 141 (1994); J. Espinosa and M. Quirós, Phys. Lett. B353, 257 (1995).
Problems (due April 3, 1997)
29. Carry out the computation of the amplitudes for the reaction e+ e− → W + W − described in
§6.5 of Gauge Theories, retaining the electron mass. Verify the role of the Higgs boson in
the cancellation of divergences.
30. Because the most serious high-energy divergences of a spontaneously broken gauge theory
are associated with the longitudinal degrees of freedom of the gauge bosons, which arise from
auxiliary scalars, it is instructive to study the Higgs sector in isolation. Consider, therefore,
the Lagrangian for the Higgs sector of the Weinberg–Salam model before the gauge couplings
are turned on,
Lscalar = (∂ µ φ)† (∂µ φ) − µ2 (φ† φ) − |λ| (φ† φ)2 .
(a) Choosing µ2 < 0, investigate the effect of spontaneous symmetry breaking. Show that
the theory describes three massless scalars (w + , w −, z 0 ) and one massive neutral scalar (h),
which interact according to
Lint = − |λ| vh(2w + w − + z 2 + h2 )
−(|λ| /4)(2w + w − + z 2 + h2 )2 ,
√
where v2 = −µ2 /√|λ|. In the language of the full Weinberg–Salam theory, 1/v2 = GF 2
2
and λ = GF MH / 2. Note the resemblance to the σ-model Lagrangian discussed in class on
March 3 and 4. The correspondence is π ± ↔ w ± , π 0 ↔ z 0 , h ↔ σ. In the σ model, v = Fπ
and |λ| = Mσ2 /2Fπ2.
(b) Deduce the Feynman rules for interactions and compute the lowest-order (tree diagram)
amplitude for the reaction hz → hz.
(c) Compute the J = 0 partial-wave amplitude √ in the high-energy limit and show that it
2
respects partial-wave unitarity only if MH < 8π 2/GF . [Reference: B. W. Lee, C. Quigg,
and H. B. Thacker, Phys. Rev. D16, 1519 (1977).]
2
31. The parton model leads to many informative sum rules about structure functions. Some of
these are true quite generally (up to perturbative QCD corrections), while some depend on
additional assumptions.
(a) Show that in the quark-parton model, the integral
1 µp
F2 (x, Q2) − F2µn (x, Q2)
IG = dx
0 x
can be expressed as
1
IG = 1
3
+ 2
3
dx u(x, Q2 ) − d(x, Q2) .
0
(b) Derive the Gottfried sum rule [K. Gottfried, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18, 1174 (1967)],
IG = 13 , from the assumption that the sea is up-down symmetric.
(c) How do you interpret the observation that IG(Q2 = 4 GeV/c2 ) = 0.2281 ± 0.0065?
[See M. Arneodo, et al. (New Muon Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. B487, 3 (1997).]
(d) What other experiments might be sensitive to a difference between the sea distribu-
tions of up and down quarks?
*****
You can follow the progress of the LEP experiments on their Web pages.
• aleph, http://alephwww.cern.ch
• delphi, http://delinfo.cern.ch/Delphi/Welcome.html
• L3, http://hpl3sn02.cern.ch/welcome.html
• opal, http://www.cern.ch/Opal/
*****
April 3, 1997
On tests of lepton-number conservation, see the minireview, “Tests of Conservation Laws,”
in the 1996 Review of Particle Physics [Particle Data Group, Phys. Rev. D54, 1 (1996)], pp.
59–63.
On neutrino mass and mixing, see the minireviews, “Neutrinos” (pp. 275–280) and “Searches
for Massive Neutrinos and Lepton Mixing” (pp. 287–301), also in the 1996 RPP.
On neutrino oscillations in matter, see T. K. Kuo and J. Pantaleone, Rev. Mod. Phys. 61,
937 (1989).
Cultural Reading:
F. Boehm and P. Vogel, Physics of Massive Neutrinos, second edition (Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 1992)
B. Kayser, F. Gibrat-Débu, and F. Perrier, The Physics of Massive Neutrinos (World Scien-
tific, Singapore, 1989).
S. M. Bilenky and S. T. Petcov, “Massive neutrinos and neutrino oscillations,” Rev. Mod.
Phys. 59, 671 (1987).
T. J. Bowles and V. N. Gavrin, “The Status of the Solar Neutrino Problem,” Ann. Rev. Nucl.
Part. Sci. 43, 117 (1993).
J. Bahcall, Neutrino Astrophysics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989).
M. Moe and P. Vogel, “Double Beta Decay,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 44, 247 (1994).
Escapist Literature for Those Afflicted by Generals:
Ettore Majorana vanished without a trace from a ferry between Sicily and the Italian main-
land. Leonardo Sciascia has written a fictional account that Majorana’s colleagues denounced
as scurrilous fantasy. Firestone Library has the Italian original, La Scomparsa di Majorana,
as well as an English translation, which is in The Moro Affair and the Mystery of Majorana.
32. Because the neutrino-nucleon cross section increases with energy, the Earth is opaque to
ultrahigh-energy neutrinos. From what you know of the measured cross section for charged-
current νN interactions [Particle Data Group, Phys. Rev. D45, S1 (1992); see p. III.82],
compute the “water equivalent” interaction length, Lint = 1/[σνN (Eν )NA ], where NA is
Avogadro’s number. If the diameter of the Earth is 11 kilotonnes/cm2 , i.e., 1.1 × 1010 cmwe
(centimeters of water equivalent), at what energy does the charged-current interaction length
become smaller than one Earth diameter? How does the W -boson modify your conclusions?
[A. DeRújula, S. L. Glashow, R. R. Wilson, and G. Charpak, Phys. Rep. 99, 341 (1983), §8;
R. Gandhi, C. Quigg, M. H. Reno, and I. Sarcevic, Astroparticle Physics 5, 81 (1996).]
33. Compute the rate for the dominant decay rate of the top quark, t → bW + , neglecting the
mass of the b quark. You will need to sum over the possible polarizations of the W -boson.
Show that it takes the form

2 2

GF m3t MW 2MW 2
Γ(t → bW ) =
+
√ |Vtb | 1 − 2
2
1+ ,
8π 2 mt m2t
where Vtb measures the strength of the t → bW + coupling. What fraction of the decays
produce W -bosons with longitudinal polarization? [I. Bigi, Yu. L. Dokshitzer, V. Khoze, J.
Kühn, and P. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. B181, 157 (1986).]
2
34. Consider the one-loop modifications to Coulomb scattering in the limit of low momentum
transfer −q 2 m2 . Beginning from Equation (8.2.31) in Gauge Theories, show that the
amplitude is modified by a factor

αR q 2
1− 2
+ O(αR ) .
15π m2
Show that this corresponds, in position space, to an additional interaction of the form
4 α2R 3
δ (x) ,
15 m2
and estimate the first-order shift in the energy levels of the hydrogen atom. [E. A. Uehling,
Phys. Rev. 48, 55 (1935); for an early application, see R. Serber, ibid., p. 49.]
35. The model of M.-Y. Han and Y. Nambu [Phys. Rev. 149B, 1006 (1965)] is an integer-charge
alternative to the fractional-charge quark model, with charges assigned as
Flavor
Color u d s
Red 0 −1 −1
Green 1 0 0
Blue 1 0 0
(a) Show that below the threshold for color liberation, the ratio
R ≡ σ(e+ e− → hadrons)/σ(e+ e− → µ+ µ− )
is R = 2, as in the fractional-charge model, and that R = 4 if color can be liberated.

(b) Consider the reaction γγ → hadrons, viewed as γγ → q q̄. Show that with fraction-
ally charged quarks,
σ(γγ → hadrons) ∝ e4i = 23 ,
i
and that in the Han-Nambu model,

2 below color threshold
σ(γγ → hadrons) ∝ e4i =
4 above color threshold
i
[References: F. E. Close, An Introduction to Quarks and Partons, (Academic Press, New

York, 1979), Chapter 8; H. J. Lipkin, Nucl. Phys. B155, 104 (1979); M. S. Chanowitz,
“Color and Experimental Physics,” in Particles and Fields–1975, edited by H. J. Lubatti
and P. M. Mockett (University of Washington, Seattle, 1975), p. 448.]
36. Show that the n×n unitary matrix U introduced to describe the mixing of quarks of different
flavors [cf. equations (7.1.27–29) in Gauge Theories] can be parametrized in terms of n(n −
1)/2 real mixing angles and (n − 1)(n − 2)/2 complex phases, after the freedom to redefine
quark fields has been taken into account. For the specific case of three quark doublets (n = 3),
show that U may be written in the form
       
1 0 0 c1 s1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
U =  0 c2 s2  ·  −s1 c1 0  ·  0 1 0  ·  0 c3 s3  ,
0 −s2 c2 0 0 1 0 0 eiδ 0 −s3 c3
where si = sin θi and ci = cos θi . Discuss the implications of the phase δ for CP invariance.
[M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, Prog. Theor. Phys. (Kyoto) 49, 652 (1973).]
3
*****
Update on parity violation in atomic physics. In Problem 27, I should have cited a second determi-
nation of the weak charge of 205
81 Tl, derived from measurements of the parity nonconserving optical
rotation near the 6P1/2 → 6P3/2 magnetic dipole transiton in atomic thallium. The University of
Oxford group [N. H. Edwards, S. J. Phipp, P. E. G. Baird, and S. Nakayama, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74,
2654 (1995)] report QW (205 Tl) = −121.9 ± 3.5 ± 3.4 (my interpretation).
The most incisive of the parity-violation experiments in atoms is the measurement of weak
charge of 133
55 Cs by a group from the University of Colorado [M. C. Noecker, B. P. Masterson, and
C. E. Wiemann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 310 (1988), atomic structure calculations revised by S. A.
Blundell, W. R. Johnson, and J. Sapirstein, ibid. 65, 1411 (1990)]. Their value is QW (13355 Cs) =
−71.04 ± 1.58 ± 0.88, where the first error is experimental and the second refers to the uncertainty
in atomic theory.
*****
of p. vi by EFGHIJ-MA-89): In equation (7.1.13), the coefficient of xW Q should be 4, not 2. This
appears twice.
*****
April 8, 1997
On the importance of the 1-TeV scale, and experimental approaches to it: E. Eichten, I.
Hinchliffe, K. Lane, and C. Quigg, “Supercollider Physics”, Rev. Mod. Phys. 56, 579 (1984).
R. S. Chivukula, M. J. Dugan, M. Golden, and E. H. Simmons, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.
45, 255 (1995).
H. Murayama and M. Peskin, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 46, 533 (1996).
On Quantum Chromodynamics: Gauge Theories, §8.1 – 8.5.

M. Gell-Mann, Acta Physica Austriaca Suppl. IV, 773 (1972).
Cultural Reading:
On the physics of a supernova: H. A. Bethe and G. Brown, Sci. Am. 252, (May, 1985), p. 60.
On the U (1) axial anomaly: J. F. Donoghue, E. Golowich, and B. R. Holstein, Dynamics of

the Standard Model, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992), §III–3.
On gauge theories of the forces between elementary particles, G. ’t Hooft, Sci. Am. 242,
(June, 1980), p. 104.
Deep Background:
T. Muta, Foundations of Quantum Chromodynamics (World Scientific, Singapore, 1987).
On QCD corrections to the reaction e+ e− → hadrons: L. Surguladze and M. Samuel, Phys.

Rev. Lett. 66, 560 (1991).
37. Consider neutrino oscillations in vacuum, in a world with N flavors of neutrinos. The fla-
vor eigenstates νe , νµ, ντ , . . ., denoted by Greek labels as |να , can be expressed as linear
combinations of the mass eigenstates ν1 , ν2, . . . , νN , denoted by roman indices as |νi . The
evolution of a state that was initially a flavor eigenstate can be written as

|να t = Uαi exp (−iEi t)|νi ,
i
where U is a real unitary matrix, providing that CP is conserved.

(a) Ignoring oscillatory terms, show that the probability that an electron neutrino remain an
electron neutrino after a time t is

Pe←e = |νe |νe |2 = |Uei |4 .
i
2
(b) By minimizing Pe←e subject to the constraint that i |Uei | = 1, show that the minimum
2
probability is attained when all of the |Uei | are equal, i.e., when
2 1
|Uei | = .
N
Use the method of Lagrange multipliers to impose the constraint.
2
38. Compute the one-loop charge renormalization in QED using the method of dimensional
regularization.
39. Modify the calculation (Problem 25) of the amplitude for the process e+ e− → γγ to describe
the reaction q q̄ → gg in quantum chromodynamics. In this case, the two diagrams shown in
Problem 24 are not by themselves gauge invariant.
(a) Show
that in QCD the quantities k1ν (Aµν +Ãµν ) and k2µ (Aµν +Ãµν ) are proportional
a b
to λ , λ , where a and b are the SU (3) color indices of the two gluons.
(b) What is the resolution of this nonivariance?
(c) For the full gauge-invariant amplitude described by ∗1ν ∗2µT µν , under what conditions
are the requirements k1ν T µν = 0 = k2µT µν fulfilled?
40. Consider a gauge theory of the strong interactions based on the color symmetry group SO(3),
in which both quarks and gluons are assigned to the adjoint representation. By appropri-
ately modifying the color factors entering Equation (8.3.27) of Gauge Theories, evaluate the
running coupling constant in one-loop order. What is the condition for asymptotic freedom
in this theory?
*****
April 17, 1997
Aitchison and Hey, §15.1.
J. F. Donoghue, E. Golowich, and B. R. Holstein, Dynamics of the Standard Model, (Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992), §II–2.
R. K. Ellis, W. J. Stirling, and B. Webber, QCD and Collider Physics, (Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 1996), Chapters 1 and 2.
Cultural Reading:
On precision electroweak measurements: J. L. Rosner, “New Developments in Precision
Electroweak Physics,” EFI-97-18 (electronic archive: hep–ph/9704331).
On massive neutrinos: G. G. Raffelt, “Neutrino Masses in Astrophysics and Cosmology”
(electronic archive: hep–ph/9704315).
Deep Background:
T.-P. Cheng and L.-F. Li, Gauge Theory of Elementary Particles (Oxford University Press,
New York, 1984), Chapter 10.
On new calculational techniques: R. Gastmans and T. T. Wu, The Ubiquitous Photon: the
helicity method for QED and QCD, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1990), Chapters 1 – 3.
M. L. Mangano and S. J. Parke, Phys. Rep. 200, 301 (1991).
Z. Bern, L. Dixon, and D. A. Kosower, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 46, 109 (1996).
41. Compute the differential cross section dσ/dt for the scattering of unlike quarks in QCD, i.e.,
for the elementary reaction ud → ud.
(a) Show that
4πα2s s2 + u2
dσ(ud → ud)/dt = ,
9s2 t2
where s, t, u are the usual Mandelstam invariants.
(b) Compare with the cross section for µ− e− scattering in QED.
(c) How would the result change if the quarks were color sextets, instead of color triplets?
42. Using the Feynman rules for the Faddeev–Popov ghost given in Figure 8-15 and §8.3 of Gauge
Theories, verify that the modification to the gluon propagator due to one ghost loop as shown
in Figure 8-16 is given by
2
µν −ig2 acd bcd 1 µ ν −q
I¯ghosts (q 2 ) = 2
f f 6 q q + 1 2 µν
12 q g log .
16π µ2
*****
Updated update on parity violation in atomic physics. The Boulder group [C. S. Wood, et al., Sci-
ence 275, 1759 (1997)] has published a new measurement of the weak charge of 133 W 133
55 Cs: Q ( 55 Cs) =
−72.11 ± 0.27 ± 0.88, where the first error is experimental (greatly improved) and the second refers
to the uncertainty in atomic theory (unchanged).
*****
May 1, 1997
Aitchison and Hey, §15.1–15.2.
K. Nakamura, “Note on Nucleon Decay,” in 1994 Review of Particle Properties, Phys. Rev.
D50, 1173 (1994), pp. 1673–1675.
Cultural Reading:
P. Langacker, “Proton Decay” (electronic archive: hep–ph/9210238).
Deep Background:
G. G. Ross, Grand Unified Theories (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1984).
W. McKay and J. Patera, Tables of Dimensions, Indices, and Branching Rules for Represen-
tations of Simple Algebras (Dekker, New York, 1981).
Problems (due May 6, 1997)
43. Let us investigate the coupling-constant unification predicted by the SU (5) unified theory.
(a) Using your favorite values of the fine structure constant and the strong coupling
constant at the Z 0 mass [for example, 1/α(MZ2 ) = 129.89 ± 0.09 from H. Burkhardt and
B. Pietrzyk, Phys. Lett. B356, 398 (1995) or S. Eidelman and F. Jegerlehner, Z. Phys. C67,
1585 (1995), and αs (MZ2 ) = 0.118±0.003 from the 1996 Review of Particle Physics], calculate
the unification energy u and the value 1/αu of the SU (5) coupling constant at the unification
scale.
(b) Using the value of the unification scale you found in (a), compute the weak mixing
parameter xW ≡ sin2 θW at the Z 0 mass and compare with the value that you found in
Problem 28 using the LEP data.
(c) Now use the connection between the measured value of xW , α2 , and α to determine
1/α2(MZ2 ). Compute 1/αY (MZ2 ) and, from it, 1/α1 (MZ2 ). Evolve 1/α1 , 1/α2 , and 1/α3 to
high energies and test whether they meet at a single unification point.
44. Consider a unified theory based on the gauge group SO(10).
(a) By referring to the SU (5) ⊗ U (1) decomposition of the representations of SO(10),
show that each fermion generation can be accommodated in an irreducible 16-dimensional
representation, which also has a place for a left-handed antineutrino.
(b) Show that the adjoint 45 representation contains the gauge bosons of the SU (5)
theory.
(c) Now examine the branching of SO(10) into SU (4) ⊗ SU (2) ⊗ SU (2), and the sub-
sequent branching of SU (4) into SU (3) ⊗ U (1). Use the SU (3) ⊗ SU (2) ⊗ SU (2) decompo-
sition of the fermion representation to show that SO(10) contains the left-right-symmetric
electroweak group as a subgroup.
(d) Give the transformation properties of the 45 gauge bosons under SU (3) ⊗ SU (2) ⊗
SU (2), and identify the SU (5) gauge bosons among them. [Reference: H. Fritzsch and P.
Minkowski, Ann. Phys. (NY) 93, 193 (1975).]
*****

Gauge Theory

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gauge Theory

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gauge Theory

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gauge Theories & Particle Physics

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

Problems (due February 13, 1997)

where S is the spin of the composite system.

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

February 13, 1997

Problems (due February 20, 1997)

Jµ ∼ ū(p )[Γ1 (q 2 )γµ + Γ2 (q 2 )iσµν q ν + Γ3 (q 2 )qµ ]u(p),

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

February 18, 1997

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

February 27, 1997

Problems (due March 4, 1997)

The Lagrangian density is

Assume that for µ2 < 0 the potential has a minimum at

where α and β are phenomenological parameters.

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

k1ν (Aµν + Ãµν ) = 0 = k2µ(Aµν + Ãµν ).

p. 140, Problem 6-3, below (A.4.29):

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

March 13, 1997

Problems (due March 27, 1997)

27. The weak charge of 205

QW = −114.2 ± 1.3 ± 3.4 ,

MZ 91.1884 ± 0.0022 GeV/c2

Supplement to references on inverse muon decay, p. 95 of Gauge Theories:

σ(νµ e → µ− νe )/σth = 0.981 ± 0.049 (stat.) ± 0.030 (syst.)

for neutrino energies up to 600 GeV.

σ(νµ e → µ− νe )/σth = 0.929 ± 0.019 ± 0.048

in the SPS wideband beam (

σ(νµ e → µ− νe )/σth = 1.10 ± 0.08 (stat.) ± 0.13 (syst.)

in the SPS wideband beam.

Additional references on νµ e neutral current reactions:

Detection of ν̄e e scattering:

First class after spring break: Monday, March 24.

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

March 25, 1997

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

Problems (due April 10, 1997)

is R = 2, as in the fractional-charge model, and that R = 4 if color can be liberated.

and that in the Han-Nambu model,

[References: F. E. Close, An Introduction to Quarks and Partons, (Academic Press, New

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

On Quantum Chromodynamics: Gauge Theories, §8.1 – 8.5.

On the U (1) axial anomaly: J. F. Donoghue, E. Golowich, and B. R. Holstein, Dynamics of

On QCD corrections to the reaction e+ e− → hadrons: L. Surguladze and M. Samuel, Phys.

Problems (due April 17, 1997)

where U is a real unitary matrix, providing that CP is conserved.

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

April 17, 1997

Physics 539 Spring Semester 1997 Chris Quigg

You might also like