4442 Particle Physics

Ryan Nichol
Module 2

http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~rjn/teaching/PHASM442

From:
http://www.phy.bris.ac.uk/groups/particle/
PUS/A-level/CP_violation.htm
Module 2
• Transformations
• Invariance
• Symmetries
• Conservation laws
• Groups in particle physics
• Discrete transformations:
– Parity(P)
– Charge conjugation(C)
– CP

2
Symmetries
• Symmetries are very powerful - often the basis of a
theory or invoked when theory is incomplete and they’re
intimately connected with conservation laws.
• Definition: A system has symmetry if it is
unchanged(invariant) under a transformation
• Maths of describing symmetries is “group theory” e.g.
the set of rotations we can perform on a system forms a
group - each rotation is an element of the group
• Transformation group rules
A) Closure: if Ri and Rj are in the set so is RiRj
B) Identity: an element, I, exists such that IRi=RiI
C)Inverse: for every Ri there is an R-1i such that
• Ri R-1i= R-1i Ri=I
D)Associativity: Ri(RjRk)=(RiRj)Rk
3
Quantum Mechanics Reminder
Probability that system described by eq(1)

Hamiltonian, H, is the observable describing energy of system

& it generates the time evolution of the quantum state i.e.

Expectation value of operator X : : eq(2)

If X corresponds to an observable then
and eigenvalues are real eq(3)

eq(4)

eq(5)

eq(6)

eq(7)

4
Noether’s Theorem

We require physics to be unchanged by a symmetry operation, U

If **

Emmy Noether’s Theorem

“Every invariant symmetry transformation has an associated conservation law”

“the most significant creative mathematical genius thus far

produced since the higher education of women began” : Albert
Einstein.

Demonstration of theorem by considering a transformation as the

sum of infinitesimal transformations **

Relation between transformation operator and the group “generator”

operator ,G. G is conserved **

5
 = Rate (22)
=
Groups in Particle Physics Flux Flux
U †U = 1
• Unitary groups : U(n) U † U = 1 U †U = 1
• Special Unitary Groups : SU(n) : + detU = 1
detU = 1
• Special Real Orthogonal Groups : SO(n) : detU = 1 + all
elements real

• Examples:
– U(1) --> Describes symmetries of QED interactions
– SU(2) --> Describes symmetries of Weak interactions
– SU(3) --> Describes symmetries of QCD interactions
Volume 151 B, number 1 PHYSICS LETTERS

3 3
• SU(N) has N2-1 parameters 3
INFINITY CANCELLATIONS IN SO(32) SUPERSTRING THEORY ~
– SU(2) = 3 (W+, W-,
Z) Michael B. GREEN 1 and John H. SCHWARZ

– SU(3) = 8 (8 gluons) Californialnstitute of Technology,Pasadena,CA 91125, USA

Received 1 October 1984

– SO(32) = ? 6
Type I superstring theory was previously shown to be anomaly-free ff the gauge gro
Parity
• Non-continuous (discrete) transformation
• Parity (P) operator : space inversion :

• For more complex vectors other than the position vector

the parity operator can flip or retain the sign e.g.
• has eigenvalue +1 i.e. is “even”
under the parity operator
• Definitions
Vector P↵
~= ↵
~
Axial-Vector P↵
~ = +~
↵
Scalar P (S) = +S
Pseudo-scalar P (S) = S
7
More Parity
• Intrinsic parity of particles
– Fermions +1
– Antifermions -1
– Bosons same parity as antiparticles (-1 for gluon and
photon)
– Composite particles P=(-1)L (L= relative angular
momentum)

• Parity is conserved in EM and strong interactions but

violated maximally in weak interactions : example pion
decay **

8
Charge Conjugation
• Charge Conjugation Operator (C) : more than just
charge, actually flips all non momenta (spin, L) values :
charge, colour, lepton-# etc and so converts a particle to
anti-particle.

• But there aren’t so many particles where particle = anti-

particle except e.g. γ, π0 and so concept of limited use.
• Again it is conserved in EM & strong interactions but not
weak (pion decay **)
• The more interesting operator is the combined “CP”
operator. It is a more relevant matter to anti-matter
operator. Given we know matter predominates in our
universe then we know CP cannot be conserved in all
weak interactions (although it is in pion decay **)
9
CP Violation
• Sakharov conditions for matter preponderance (i.e. life):
– B number violation (not yet observed)
– C violation (observed in weak decays)
– CP violation (observed in weak decays, but very small
amount)
– Rate of matter generating reactions less than rate of
universe expansion (need to avoid thermal equilibrium)

• CP violation has been observed in a handful of weak

interaction decays
– strange meson (kaon) decays (1964) ~ 2x10-3
– B-meson decays (2001) Selected ~ 10 -4
for a Viewpoint in Physics
week ending

– C-meson decays (2011?)

PRL 108, 111602 (2012) P H Y S I C A L REVIEW LETTERS 16 MARCH 2012

Evidence for CP Violation in Time-Integrated D0 ! h! hþ Decay Rates

R. Aaij et al.*
(LHCb Collaboration) 10
(Received 6 December 2011; published 12 March 2012; publisher error corrected 12 March 2012)
0 ! þ
 detU = 1
CP Violation in Kaon Decays
P↵
~= ↵
~
• Feynman Diagrams inducing CP violation are subtle **
P↵
~ = +~
↵
• To discuss CP violation concept of expressing |Ψ> in
P (S) = +S
terms of eigenstates of the measurement is important.
0 0
K ,
The nomenclature and what actually “is Pthe K particle” can
(S) = S
get confusing: K 0, K 0
1) K0 are produced via strong interactions:
KL , KK0 ,SK 0
2) K0 decay via weak interaction
K 0, K 0 with two lifetimes: KL , KS
3) K0 decay to 2π or 3π (CP=+1 or -1): K1 , K23
KL , KS

• We will consider the CPKviolation

1 , K2
in Kaon decays ***
1
|KL i = p (|K2 i + ✏ |K1 i)
1 + |✏|2
1
|KS i = p (|K1 i ✏ |K2 i)
1+ |✏|2
11
Aside: Charge Definition
|KS i = p
1
(|K1 i ✏ |K2 i)
2
K2|✏|
• Leptonic decays of1 + and K1
K2 ! e + ⌫ e ⇡
K1 ! e ⌫ e ⇡ +
• Since KL is predominantly K2
– Can define positive charge as being the charge of the
lepton produced in the decays of long-lived neutral kaons

• Weak interaction also defines direction by its unique

parity nature
– Left handed is the handedness of neutrinos produced in
weak decays

• CPT is a fundamental symmetry conserved in all 12

interactions.
The Mythical Axion
• Finally, while it is observed that strong interactions do
not violate CP (e.g. no discernible neutron electric dipole
moment has been measured) there is no a priori reason
from the symmetries/structure of QCD why this should
be so (unlike QED) and indeed the QCD Lagrangian has
been “fiddled” such that CP violation is zero by adding a
new particle (named after a brand of detergent) - the
axion - that cleans up QCD.
• This particle, has yet to be observed, although evidence
for it was presented by the PVLAS collaboration in Dec
2006 by using an axion property that it should change
into a photon in the presence of a large magnetic
field…. and then retracted in 2007.

13
Strings + Axions == ?
Axionic Dark Radiation and the Milky Way’s Magnetic
Field
Malcolm Fairbairn⇤
arXiv:1310.4464v1 [astro-ph.CO] 16 Oct 2013

Theoretical Particle Physics and Cosmology, Department of Physics,

King’s College London, The Strand, London WC2R 2LS, U.K.
Figure 2: log10 of the probability of a photon
16th October 2013 arriving at Sun through normal Galactic field.
M = 1013 GeV, m = 10 5 neV, ! = 800eV. Plot corresponds to Galactic coordinates with
(b, l) = (0, 0) at the centre, b increases vertically and l increases to the right.
Abstract
Recently it has been suggested that dark radiation in the form of axions produced
during the decay of string theory moduli fields could be responsible for the soft x-ray
excess in galaxy clusters. These soft X-ray photons come about due to the conversion of
these axions into photons in the magnetic fields of the clusters. In this work we calculate
the conversion of axionic dark radiation into X-ray photons in the magnetic field of our
own Galaxy. We consider N⌫ ⇠ 0.5 worth of dark radiation made up of axions with
energy of order 0.1-1 keV. We show that it is possible, if a little optimistic, to explain
the large regions of X-ray emission located above and below the centre of the Galactic
plane detected in the 3/4 keV ROSAT all sky map completely due to the conversion
of dark radiation into photons with an inverse axion-photon coupling of M ⇠ 3 ⇥ 1013
GeV and an axion mass of m  10 12 eV. Di↵erent parameter values could explain both
these features and the 3/4 keV X-ray background. More conservatively, these X-ray
observations are a good way to constrain such models of axionic dark radiation.

1 Introduction
The incredible view of the Cosmic Microwave Radiation provided by the Planck satellite has
tightened our understanding of cosmology [1]. One question it has not yet completely answered
is whether there is an extra contribution to radiation other than the CMB photons themselves
Figureand
3: the three known neutrino species. While it has been pointed out that there is not strong
Same as figure 2 but with magnetic field corresponding to the Fermi bubble with shell
See arXiv:1310.4464
evidence [astro-ph.CO]
for requiring such radiation in a Bayesian sense [2] it is also true that there is still 14
configuration.
room for a small component of radiation. In particular, discrepancies between the values of H0
obtained by the HST and by Planck may be alleviated if a small component of dark radiation is
 Scale-changes in the physical 3 + 1 world can thus be represented by studying
Useful
dynamics in String Theory?
a mathematical fifth AdS/CFT Correspondence
dimension with the AdS5 metric. Di↵erent values
of the holographic variable z determine the scale of the invariant separation between
• In the
he partonic last 15 years
constituents. This isthere hasinbeen
illustrated Fig. a1. lot of scattering
Hard work onprocesses
occur instudying
the small-zthe correspondence
ultraviolet between
(UV) region of AdS space. In particular, the Q ! 1
zero separation limit corresponds to the z ! 0 asymptotic boundary, where the QCD
– Conformal field theory with strongly interacting fields
Lagrangian is defined.
– String theory with weakly interacting fields + gravity

15
See e.g. arXiv:0802.0514v1 [hep-ph]
Scattering amplitudes and the positive Grassmanian

Preprint typeset in JHEP style - HYPER VERSION PUPT-2435

Scattering Amplitudes and the

Positive Grassmannian

N. Arkani-Hameda , J. Bourjailyb , F. Cachazoc , A. Goncharovd , A. Postnikove ,

and J. Trnkaa,f
a
School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ
b
Department of Physics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

arXiv:1212.5605v1 [hep-th] 21 Dec 2012

c
Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Waterloo, Ontario, CA
d
Department of Mathematics, Yale University, New Haven CT
e
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
f
Department of Physics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ

Abstract: We establish a direct connection between scattering amplitudes in pla-

nar four-dimensional theories and a remarkable mathematical structure known as the
positive Grassmannian. The central physical idea is to focus on on-shell diagrams
as objects of fundamental importance to scattering amplitudes. We show that the
all-loop integrand in N = 4 super Yang-Mills (SYM) is naturally represented in this
way. On-shell diagrams in this theory are intimately tied to a variety of mathematical
objects, ranging from a new graphical representation of permutations to a beautiful
stratification of the Grassmannian G(k, n) which generalizes the notion of a simplex
in projective space. All physically important operations involving on-shell diagrams
map to canonical operations on permutations—in particular, BCFW deformations
correspond to simple adjacent transpositions. Each cell of the positive Grassmannian
is naturally endowed with “positive” coordinates ↵i and an invariant measure of the
Q
form i d log ↵i which determines the on-shell function associated with the diagram.
This understanding allows us to classify and compute all on-shell diagrams, and give
a geometric understanding for all the non-trivial relations among them. The Yangian
invariance of scattering amplitudes is transparently represented by di↵eomorphisms
of G(k, n) which preserve the positive structure. Scattering amplitudes in (1 +1)-
dimensional integrable systems and the ABJM theory in (2 +1) dimensions can both
be understood as special cases of these ideas. On-shell diagrams in theories with less
(or no) supersymmetry are associated with exactly the same structures in the Grass-
mannian, but with a measure deformed by a factor encoding ultraviolet singularities.
16
The Grassmannian representation of on-shell processes also gives a new understand-
https://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20130917-a-jewel-at-the-heart-of-quantum-physics/
ing of the all-loop integrand for scattering amplitudes—presenting all integrands in