Quantcast
  • 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.

News

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

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

180 submissions , 140 unreviewed
4,598 questions , 1,850 unanswered
5,209 answers , 22,242 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
729 active unimported users
More ...

  Wavefunctions of (Pseudo)-scalar/vector meson and Tensor meson

+ 1 like - 0 dislike
26 views

Two quarks can bound to form a meson, and the wavefunction consists of several quantum degrees of freedom:

$$ \psi=\psi(\text{flavor})\psi(\text{color})\psi(\text{orbital})\psi(\text{spin}) $$

According to Wikipedia, there are several possibilities of mesons: enter image description here

How could we write the representative wavefunction form for all of them? e.g. Pseudoscalar meson, Pseudovector meson, Vector meson, Scalar meson, Tensor meson. In particular, how would the Tensor meson differs from other ones ((Pseudo)-scalar/vector meson)?

(We can assume just $u,d,s$ quarks, and $r,g,b$ colors.)

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:43 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
asked Sep 25, 2017 in Theoretical Physics by annie marie heart (500 points) [ no revision ]
The $S$ and $L$ columns in the included table don't look right to me (incomplete rather than incorrect). I changed them on Wikipedia this morning. Last night someone decided that you can make a $0^+$ state from $S=0$ and $L=1$, $i.e$ $|0 - 1|\leq 0 \leq 0 + 1$. I'm not sure if that was vandalism or not...

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:43 (UTC), posted by SE-user dukwon
@dukwon, not sure what do you mean, there is no $S=0, L=1$ state in $J^P=0^+$ state on Wiki page?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:43 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
It's not there any more because I fixed it. It was introduced in this change: en.wikipedia.org/w/…

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:43 (UTC), posted by SE-user dukwon

2 Answers

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

The terms (pseudo)scalar, (axial)vector and tensor represent the structure of a given meson in Dirac space. So, $\bar\psi\Gamma_i\psi$ with $i\in$ {scalar, pseudoscalar, ...}.

Any $4\times 4$ spinor matrix $\Gamma$ can be decomposed in a linear combination of the unit matrix $\textbf 1$ or products of $\gamma$-matrices and thus into terms with well-defined Lorentz transformation properties when sandwiched by Dirac fields: $\psi\Gamma\psi$. This is then called a $\textit{Dirac bilinear}$.


$\textbf{Lorentz transformation properties.}$ How something transforms under a Lorentz transformation is determined by its free Minkowski indices. A scalar transforms like, $$U^{-1}S(x)U = S(\Lambda ^{-1}x),$$ regardless how this operator $U$ looks in detail (this is determined by the nature of $S$). A vector $V^\mu$ transforms like, $$U^{-1}V^\mu(x)U = {\Lambda^\mu}_\nu V^\nu (\Lambda ^{-1}x),$$ that is for every free Minkowski index, we get an additional ${\Lambda^\mu}_\nu$ on the right-hand side.


$\gamma\textbf{-matrices.}$ We have some matrices $\gamma^\mu$ ($\mu=0,1,2,3$ in 4 spacetime dimensions) with their defining property, $$\{\gamma^\mu, \gamma^\nu\}\equiv \gamma^\mu\gamma^\nu+\gamma^\nu\gamma^\mu=2\eta^{\mu\nu}\textbf{1},$$ as well as a fifth $\gamma$-matrix $\gamma^5 := \text{i} \gamma^0 \gamma^1 \gamma^2 \gamma^3 $. We can combine them into five terms with definite index structure: $\Gamma \in \{\textbf{1}, \gamma^\mu, \gamma^5, \gamma^\mu\gamma^5, \gamma^\mu\gamma^\nu-\gamma^\nu\gamma^\mu\}$ (you may think of additional combinations, but they are not independent of the ones I wrote here, see e.g. here.)

According to the indices, we can assign {scalar, vector, scalar, vector, tensor} ("tensor" is just a name for objects with more indices than a vector). Almost finished.


$\textbf{Parity transformation.}$ Parity acts on quantum fields like $\gamma^0$. It doesn't change the scalar part $\textbf 1$, but since $\gamma^0$ anti-commutes with every other $\gamma$ matrix, it also anti-commutes with $\gamma^5$. So we pick up a minus sign if parity acts on $\gamma^5$, $$\gamma^0 (\gamma^5...) = -\gamma^5\gamma^0...,$$ this means objects built with $\gamma^5$ are no regular scalars, they are $\textit{pseudo}$scalars.

The same goes for the difference in vectors and axial-vectors (That's why there is a minus sign in the table you posted in the P-column: vectors change sign under party, whereas axial-vectors don't).


$\textbf{Dirac bilinears.}$ Caveat: $\gamma^\mu$ itself is no vector. Only if we sandwich a $\gamma$-matrix in-between two spinors, we get something that transforms properly under Lorentz transformations. Finally,

$$ \begin{array}{ll}\hline \text{Dirac bilinear} & \text{transformation properties}\\\hline \bar \psi\psi & \text{scalar}\\ \bar \psi\gamma^5\psi & \text{pseudoscalar}\\ \bar \psi\gamma^\mu\psi & \text{vector}\\ \bar \psi\gamma^\mu\gamma^5\psi & \text{axial-vector}\\ \bar \psi(\gamma^\mu\gamma^\nu-\gamma^\nu\gamma^\mu)\psi & \text{tensor}\\\hline \end{array} $$

$\textbf{Examples.}$

$$ \begin{array}{lllll}\hline \text{meson} & \text{spin (# of Lorentz indices)} & \text{parity} & J^{P} & \text{Dirac structure}\\\hline \pi^+ & 0 & - & 0^- & \gamma^5\\ \omega^\mu & 1 & - & 1^- & \gamma^\mu\\ a_0^- & 0 & + & 0^+ & \textbf{1}\\\hline \end{array} $$

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:43 (UTC), posted by SE-user Stephan
answered Sep 27, 2017 by stephan (20 points) [ no revision ]
+1, Thanks so much. For the parity part $P$ is fine, but how is the choice of $S$ ad $P$? I know the whole wavefunction should be anti-symmetriezed. But it will be nice to give a few examples outlining the properties and differences for the 5 cases.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:43 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
I've edited the post with some examples - did this answer your question? If not, please reformulate your question.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:43 (UTC), posted by SE-user Stephan
Thanks, but I am also interested in knowing the wavefunction. Other then the color needs to be a singlet, what else constraint do we have for the spin sectors?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:43 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
+ 0 like - 0 dislike

You can simply use the idea that any meson corresponds to some representation of the $SU(3)$ group (aka eightfold way by Gell-Mann). Then you just need to classify all possible of fundamental and adjoint representations and relate them to the physical particles - mesons, baryons and other. Finally, the only thing you need is to write the wave-function, which is done by using the matrix representation of the $SU(3)$ group.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:43 (UTC), posted by SE-user Name YYY
answered Sep 25, 2017 by NAME_XXX (1,055 points) [ no revision ]
Thanks! But it will be nice to write a few examples. Because it is not obvious are you talking about pseudo ones or not. It is clearly related to Representations [but it is difficult to do than just state in principle.]

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:43 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart

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:
p$\hbar$ysics$\varnothing$verflow
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
...