Timeline for Antiparticles, charge conjugation and chirality
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2016 at 23:29 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| Apr 29, 2016 at 19:39 | history | edited | OON | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
corrected the creation-annihilation mishmash
|
| Apr 29, 2016 at 19:15 | history | edited | OON | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added about chirality of the antiparticles
|
| Apr 29, 2016 at 19:14 | comment | added | OON | @knzhou After rethinking the question again I'm adding something on the chirality of the antiparticle | |
| Apr 29, 2016 at 6:24 | comment | added | OON | @knzhou "That of course makes a chirality matter of convention on what spinor we are using to describe the particle." More exactly, to describe particle-antiparticle pair. | |
| Apr 29, 2016 at 6:14 | comment | added | OON | @knzhou Yeah, seems that's the crux of the problem. While helicity is connected to the spin and momentum the chirality is defined in terms of the spinor that we use to describe that particle and not the (anti)particle state itself. The helicity operator is $\frac{\vec{p}}{|p}\dot\vec{S}$, the chirality operator is $\gamma_5$. If you apply them to the antiparticle state coming from the chiral spinor you'll get opposite signs. That of course makes a chirality matter of convention on what spinor we are using to describe the particle. | |
| Apr 29, 2016 at 5:02 | comment | added | knzhou | Also: what would you call the chirality of a right-helicity antiparticle arising from a left-handed Weyl spinor? Now that I'm thinking about it, this is the main source of the contradictions: different people call it right-handed or left-handed. | |
| Apr 29, 2016 at 4:54 | comment | added | knzhou | Okay, let's start with the Wikipedia article, which states that C "does not alter the chirality of particles. A left-handed neutrino would be taken by charge conjugation into a left-handed antineutrino." Are they conflating chirality and helicity here? | |
| Apr 29, 2016 at 4:41 | comment | added | OON | @knzhou Ok, to look into those contradictions surely will be fun and likely instructive. | |
| Apr 28, 2016 at 22:00 | comment | added | knzhou | Thanks for the answer! My issue is that everybody (you, the linked article, several other answerers) appears to agree that this stuff is straightforward, but end up saying slightly different things. I'll link you to some contradicting answers if I have time later. | |
| Apr 28, 2016 at 7:44 | history | edited | OON | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
forgot gamma zero... and forgot dagger
|
| Apr 28, 2016 at 7:06 | history | answered | OON | CC BY-SA 3.0 |