-1
$\begingroup$

Neutrinos with specific mass don't have a unique flavor and neutrinos with specific flavor don't have unique mass.

Let's call the neutrinos with specific mass $\nu_1, \nu_2, \nu_3$ and the neutrinos with specific flavor $\nu_e, \nu_\mu, \nu_\tau$.

According to the subatomic stories of Fermilab

\begin{align} \nu_1 &= \{ \nu_e \} \\ \nu_2 &= \{ 0.5 \nu_\tau, 0.5\nu_\mu \} \\ \nu_3 &= \{ 0.3 \nu_e, 0.3\nu_\mu, 0.3\nu_\tau \} \end{align}

and

\begin{align} \nu_e &= \{ \text{mix of } \nu_1, \nu_2, \nu_3 \} \\ \nu_\mu &= \{ \text{mix of } \nu_1, \nu_2, \nu_3 \} \\ \nu_\tau &= \{ \text{mix of } \nu_1, \nu_2, \nu_3 \} \\ \end{align}

Since $\nu_1$ has always the flavor of an $\nu_e$, can we say that the mass of $\nu_\mu$ and $\nu_\tau$ depend on the mass of the $\nu_e$?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ "according to ?????" What is your source for this obviously wrong non-fact? $\endgroup$ – Cosmas Zachos Jun 30 at 14:43
  • $\begingroup$ youtube.com/… (understanding neutrino oscillations like the pros) $\endgroup$ – user268802 Jun 30 at 14:54
  • $\begingroup$ iI is the channel of fermilab on youtube where they explain some particle physics stuff. $\endgroup$ – user268802 Jun 30 at 14:56
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Don messed up, glibly. He should have provided ellipsis ... after $\nu_e$ to indicate the less than 50% components of the other flavors. He says "mostly" in words, to indicate this, where green is electron neutrino... He oversimplifies and ends up confusing you. Avoid physics videos... $\endgroup$ – Cosmas Zachos Jun 30 at 15:11
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Right. Popular science expositions not infrequently confuse more than explain... $\endgroup$ – Cosmas Zachos Jun 30 at 15:18
1
$\begingroup$

The {vectors} in your question are the rows and columns of the neutrino mass mixing matrix, which is unitary. That means your statement (which you assign to a source) that

$$ \nu_1 = \{ \nu_e \} \qquad\text{and}\qquad \nu_3 = \{0.3 \nu_e, \cdots \} $$

can not be correct. That's too much neutrino.

The middles of the allowed ranges (which aren't the same as the best-fit values, for reasons that require about an hour to explain to a new grad student) are

\begin{align} \nu_1 &= \{ 0.67 \nu_e,\ 0.13 \nu_\mu,\ 0.16\nu_\tau \} \\ \nu_2 &= \{ 0.30 \nu_e,\ 0.33 \nu_\mu,\ 0.35\nu_\tau \} \\ \nu_3 &= \{ 0.02 \nu_e,\ 0.50 \nu_\mu,\ 0.47\nu_\tau \} \end{align}

If tables of numbers make you a little cross-eyed, like they do me, a commenter linked to this explanation which includes the following graphic:

neutrino mass/flavor mixing diagram

(with $\color{green}{\text{electron}},\ \color{yellow}{\text{muon}},\ \color{cyan}{\text{tau}}$ neutrinos represented by the three colors.)

These are consistent with the values in your question, with two changes. First, my $\nu_2, \nu_3$ are swapped relative to yours --- which may be a difference between "normal hierarchy" versus "inverted hierarchy," or may just an arbitrary labeling. Second, your question has $\nu_1 = \{\nu_e\}$, where the reality is $\nu_1=\{\text{mostly } \nu_e\}$.

None of the flavor neutrinos $\nu_e, \nu_\mu, \nu_\tau$ has a well-defined mass, and the masses of the $\nu_1, \nu_2, \nu_3$ are independent parameters.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy