• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

201 submissions , 159 unreviewed
4,953 questions , 2,122 unanswered
5,324 answers , 22,571 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
809 active unimported users
More ...

  Dimension 5 operator for neutron dipole moment

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

In the HW for an online effective field theory course that I'm working through the professor says that "With the full standard model gauge group it is not possible to write down a dimension five operator (which contributes to the neutron dipole moment) without breaking gauge symmetry". But what is wrong with  the operator,

$$i \bar{u} _R \sigma^{\mu\nu} u_R B _{\mu\nu} $$

for example (here I define $B_{\mu\nu} \equiv \partial _\mu B_\nu -  \partial _\nu B_\mu$, where $B_\mu$ is the hypercharge vector boson)? I think it should give an electric contribution since it forms the photon and $Z$ boson. 

asked Apr 14, 2014 in Phenomenology by JeffDror (650 points) [ revision history ]
edited Apr 17, 2014 by JeffDror

1 Answer

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

It does not respect Lorentz symmetry. Specifically, you should have \(\bar{u}_R\sigma^{\mu\nu}u_L\) or \(\bar{u}_L\sigma^{\mu\nu}u_R\) to have Lorentz invariance, but then you lost \(SU(2)_L\) invariance.

answered Apr 18, 2014 by jerry_phy (30 points) [ no revision ]

Ah, yes of course. Thanks so much. I thought it would be something silly. 

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights