Quantitative Particle Physics: Cargèse 1992

431 Pages·1993·17.839 MB·English

by  T. D. Lee (auth.), Maurice Lévy, Jean-Louis Basdevant, Maurice Jacob, Jean Iliopoulos, Raymond Gastmans, Jean-Marc Gérard (eds.)

Rhythms in Fishes
NATO ASI Series
Advanced Science Institutes Series
A series presenting the results of activities sponsored by the NA TO Science Committee,
which aims at the dissemination of advanced scientific and technological knowledge,
with a view to strengthening links between scientific communities.
The series is published by an international board of publishers in conjunction with the
NATO Scientific Affairs Division
A Life Sciences Plenum Publishing Corporation
B Physics New York and London
C Mathematical and Physical Sciences Kluwer Academic Publishers
D Behavioral and Social Sciences Dordrecht, Boston, and London
E Applied Sciences
F Computer and Systems Sciences Springer-Verlag
G Ecological Sciences Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, London,
H Cell Biology Paris, Tokyo, Hong Kong, and Barcelona
I Global Environmental Change
Recent Volumes in this Series
Volume 230—Biological Control of Plant Diseases: Progress and Challenges
for the Future
edited by E. C. Tjamos, G. C. Papavizas, and R. J. Cook
Volume 231—Formation and Differentiation of Early Embryonic Mesoderm
edited by Ruth Bellairs, Esmond J. Sanders, and James W. Lash
Volume 232—Oncogene and Transgenics Correlates of Cancer Risk Assessments
edited by Constantino Zervos
Volume 233—T Lymphocytes: Structure, Functions, Choices
edited by Franco Celada and Benvenuto Pernis
Volume 234—Development of the Central Nervous System in Vertebrates
edited by S. C. Sharma and A. M. Goffinet
Volume 235—Advances in Cardiovascular Engineering
edited by Ned H. C. Hwang, Vincent T. Turitto,
and Michael R. T. Yen
Volume 23S—Rhythms in Fishes
edited by M. A. Ali
Series A: Life Sciences
Rhythm s in Fishe s
Edited by
M.A.Al i
University of Montreal
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Springer Science+Busines sMedia, LLC
Proceedings of a NATO Advanced Study Institute
on Rhythms in Fishes,
held August 4-17,1991,
in Montreal, Quebec, Canada
NATO-PCO-DATA BASE
The electronic index to the NATO ASI Series provides full bibliographica l references (with keywords
and/or abstracts) to more than 30,000 contribution s from internationa l scientist s published in all
sections of the NATO ASI Series. Access to the NATO-PCO-DATA BASE is possible in two ways:
—via online FILE 128 (NATO-PCO-DATA BASE) hosted by ESRIN, Via Galileo Galilei, I-00044
Frascati, Italy
Additional material to this book can be downloaded from http://extra.springer.com.
Librar y of Congress Cataloglng-ln-PublIcatIo n Data
Rhythms 1n fishe s / edite d by M.A. All .
p. cm. — (NATO ASI series . Serie s A, Lif e science s ; vol.
236)
"Proceeding s of a NATO Advanced Stud y Institut e on Rhythms i n
Fishes , hel d August 4-17 , 1991, i n Montreal , Quebec, Canada"—T.p.
verso.
"Publishe d 1n cooperatio n wit h NATO Scientifi c Affair s Division. "
Include s bibliographica l reference s and Index .
ISBN 978-1-4613-6326-2 ISBN 978-1-4615-3042-8 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4615-3042-8
1. Fishes—Physiology—Congresses . 2. Fishes—Behavior -
-Congresses . 3. Biologica l rhythms—Congresses. I . Ali ,M . A.
(Mohamed Ather) , 1932- . II . NATO Advanced Stud y Institut e on
Rhythms 1n Fishe s (199 1 : Montreal , Ouebec) III . Nort h Atlanti c
Treat y Organization . Scientifi c Affair s Division . IV . Series : NATO
.ASI series . Serie s A, Lif e science s ; v. 236.
QL639.1.R53 1992
597' . 01882—dc20 92-3286 3
CIP
ISBN 978-1-4613-6326-2
© 1992 Springer Science+Business Media New York
Originally published by Plenum Press, New York in 1992
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1992
All rights reserved
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming,
recording, or otherwise, without written persmission from the Publisher
PREVIOUS CARGESE SYMPOSIA PUBLISHED IN THE
NATO ASI SERIES B: PHYSICS
Volume 261 ZO PHYSICS: Cargese 1990
edited by Maurice Levy, Jean-Louis Basdevant, Maurice Jacob, David Speiser,
Jacques Weyers, and Raymond Gastmans
Volume 223 PARTICLE PHYSICS: Cargese 1989
edited by Maurice Levy, Jean-Louis Basdevant, Maurice Jacob, David Speiser,
Jacques Weyers, and Raymond Gastmans
Volume 173 PARTICLE PHYSICS: Cargese 1987
edited by Maurice Levy, Jean-Louis Basdevant, Maurice Jacob, David Speiser,
Jacques Weyers, and Raymond Gastmans
Volume 156 GRAVITATION IN ASTROPHYSICS: Cargese 1986
edited by B. Carter and J. B. Hartle
Volume 150 PARTICLE PHYSICS: Cargese 1985
edited by Maurice Levy, Jean-Louis Basdevant, Maurice Jacob, David Speiser,
Jacques Weyers, and Raymond Gastmans
Volume 130 HEAVY ION COLLISIONS: Cargese 1984
edited by P. Bonche, Maurice Levy, Phillippe Quentin, and Dominique Vautherin
Volume 126 PERSPECTIVES IN PARTICLES AND FIELDS: Cargese 1983
edited by Maurice Levy, Jean-Louis Basdevant, David Speiser, Jacques Weyers,
Maurice Jacob, and Raymond Gastmans
Volume 85 FUNDAMENTAL INTERACTIONS: Cargese 1981
edited by Maurice Levy, Jean-Louis Basdevant, David Speiser, Jacques Weyers,
Maurice Jacob, and Raymond Gastmans
Volume 72 PHASE TRANSITIONS: Cargese 1980
edited by Maurice Levy, Jean-Claude Le Guillou, and Jean Zinn-Justin
Volume 61 QUARKS AND LEPTONS: Cargese 1979
edited by Maurice Levy, Jean-Louis Basdevant, David Speiser, Jacques Weyers,
Raymond Gastmans, and Maurice Jacob
Volume 44 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN GRAVITATION: Cargese 1978
edited by Maurice Levy and S. Deser
Volume 39 HADRON STRUCTURE AND LEPTON-HADRON INTERACTIONS: Cargese 1977
edited by Maurice Levy, Jean-Louis Basdevant, David Speiser, Jacques Weyers,
Raymond Gastmans, and Jean Zinn-Justin
Volume 26 NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN QUANTUM FIELD THEORY AND STATISTICAL
MECHANICS: Cargese 1976
edited by Maurice Levy and Pronob Mitter
Volume 13 WEAK AND ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERACTIONS AT HIGH ENERGIES:
Cargese 1975 (Parts A and B)
edited by Maurice Levy, Jean-Louis Basdevant, David Speiser, and Raymond Gastmans
PREFACE
The 1992 Cargese Summer Institute on Quantitative Particle Physics was organized
by the Universite Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris (M. Levy and J.-L. Basdevant), CERN (M.
Jacob), the Ecole Normale Superieure, Paris (J. Diopoulos), the Katholieke Universiteit
te Leuven (R. Gastmans) and the Universite Catholique de Louvain (J-M. Gerard),
which, since 1975, have joined their efforts and worked in common. It was the tenth
Summer Institute on High Energy Physics organized jointly at Cargese by these three
universities.
The 1992 School centered on quantitative tests of the Standard Model for
electroweak and strong interactions. First, Professor T.D. Lee reviewed the fascinating
history of weak interactions. Professor R. Barbieri then discussed the implications of the
latest experimental results of LEP presented by Professor Foil.. Professor G. Ecker
described in detail the interplay between electroweak and strong interactions at low
energy. Professors K. Berkelman and J-M. Gerard stressed the necessity to study the
effects of CP-violation in both B-and K-physics. The first results of the HERA machine
were presented by Professor G. Wolf, while Professor M. Shochet reviewed heavy
flavor physics in hadron collider experiments. Recent non-accelerator experiments in
neutrino physics were presented by Professor B. Barish. Finally, Professor M. Turner
reviewed Cosmology after COBE.
We owe many thanks to all those who have made this Summer Institute possible!
Special thanks are due to the Scientific Committee of NATO and its President for a
generous grant. We are also very grateful for the financial contribution given by the
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique and the Institut National de Physique
Nucleaire et de Physique des Particules (IN2p3).
We also want to thank Ms. M.-F. Hanseler for her efficient organizational help,
Mr. and Ms. Ariano and Ms. Cassegrain for their kind assistance in all material matters of
the school, and, last but not least, the people from Cargese for their hospitality.
Mostly, however, we would like to thank all the lecturers and participants: their
commitment to the school was the real basis for its success.
M.Levy J. Iliopoulos
J.-L. Basdevant R. Gastmans
M. Jacob J-M. Gerard
vii
CONTENTS
History of Weak Interactions ................................................................... 1
T.n. Lee
Physics at LEP ..................................................................... '" ... ..... . ... 29
L.Foa
Electroweak Precision Tests: What do we Learn? .......................................... 71
R. Barbieri
Chiral Perturbation Theory ......................... .... .......... ............................... 101
G. Ecker
CP- and T- Violations in the Standard Model ................................................ 149
J-M. Gerard
Heavy Flavor Physics 173
K. Berkelman
Physics at HERA ... ........... ........... .... ... .... ........ ... .... ... .... ... ..... .... ....... . ... 211
G. Wolf
Physics with Hadron Colliders ....................................................... ....... ... 259
M.J. Shochet
Neutrino Physics .......... ........ .... ..... .................. ............ ........ .... .... .... .... 301
B.C. Barish
Inflation After COBE: Lectures on Inflationary Cosmology............................... 341
M.S. Turner
Oblique Electroweak Parameters and Additional Fermion Generations ..... ........ .... 399
G. Bhattacharyya
Electroweak Symmetry Breaking from the Top .. ............. ........................ ...... 407
N. Evans
Higgs Mass Limits from Electroweak Baryogenesis ....................................... 413
S. Myint
Carbon 60 .......................................................................................... 425
T.n.Lee
Index ................................................................................................ 433
ix
HISTORY OF WEAK INTERACTIONS
T. D. Lee
Columbia University, New York, N.Y. 10027
We may separate the history of weak interactions into three periods:
1. Classical Period, 1898-1949
2. Transition Period, 1949-1956
3. Modern Period, 1956-
1. CLASSICAL PERIOD (fJ DECAY)
In 1898 Lord Rutherford1 discovered that the so-called Becquerel ray actually con
sisted of two distinct components: one that is readily absorbed, which he called alpha
radiation, and another of a more penetrating character, which he called beta radiation.
With that began the history of the weak interaction. Then, in 19002, the Curies measured
the electric charge of the fJ particle and found it to be negative.
Sometimes when we think of physics in those old days, we have the impression that
life was more leisurely and physicists worked under less pressure. Actually, from the very
start the road of discovery was tortuous and the competition intense. A letter written
in 1902 by Rutherford (then 32) to his mother expressed the spirit of research at that
time3,4:
"I have to keep going, as there are always people on my track. I have to publish my
present work as rapidly as possible in order to keep in the race. The best sprinters in this
road of investigation are Becquerel and the Curies ...."
Most of the people in this room can appreciate these words. Rutherford's predicament is
still very much shared by us to this day. Soon many fast runners came: Hahn, Meitner,
Wilson, Von Baeyer, Chadwick, Ellis, Bohr, Pauli, Fermi and many others.
In preparing this lecture, I was reminded once more of how relatively recent these
early developments are. We know that to reach where we are today took more than 90
years and a large cast of illustrious physicists. I recall that when Lise Meitner came to
Quantitative Particle Physics, Edited by
M. Uvy et aL, Plenum Press, New York, 1993
New York in the mid '60s, I had lunch with her at a restaurant near Columbia. Later KK
Darrow joined us. Meitner said, "It's wonderful to see young people." To appreciate this
comment, you must realize that Darrow was one of the earliest members of the American
Physical Society and at that lunch he was over 70. But Lise Meitner was near 90.
I was quite surprised when Meitner told me that she started her first postdoc job in
theory with Ludwig Boltzmann. Now, Boltzmann was a contemporary of Maxwell. That
shows us how recent even the "ancient" period of our profession is.
After Boltzmann's unfortunate death in 1906, Meitner had to find another job. She
said she was grateful that Planck invited her to Berlin. However, upon arrival she found
that because she was a woman she could only work at Planck's institute in the basement,
and only through the servant's entrance. At that time, Otto Hahn had just set up his
laboratory in an old carpenter shop nearby. Lise Meitner decided to join him and to
become an experimentalist. For the next thirty years, their joint work shaped the course
of modern physics.
In 1906, Hahn and Meitner published a papers stating that the (3 ray carries a unique
energy. Their evidence was that the absorption curve of a (3 ray shows an exponential
decrease along its path when passing through matter, like the a ray.
Then W. Wilson6, in 1909, said "no", the (3 ray does not have a unique energy. By
observing the absorption curve through matter of an electron of unique energy, Wilson
found electrons to exhibit totally different behavior from the a particle; the absorption
curve of a unique energy electron is not exponential. Consequently, Wilson deduced that
the apparent exponential behavior of the absorption curve of (3 decay implies that the
(3 does not have a unique energy, the same experimental observation on (3 but with a
totally opposite conclusion.
In 1910, Von Baeyer and Hahn7 applied a magnetic field to the (3 ray; they found
the (3 to have several discrete energies. In this way, they also reconciled the conclusion
of W. Wilson. Then, in 1914, ChadwickS said "no". The (3 energy spans a continuous
spectrum, instead of discrete values. The discrete energy observed by Von Baeyer and
Hahn was due to the secondary electron from a nuclear 'Y transition, with the 'Y energy
absorbed by the atomic electron. In this process, the discrete energy refers to the nuclear
'Y emission.
Then came World War I and scientific progress was arrested. In 1922, Lise Meitner9
again argued that the (3 energy should be discrete, like a and 'Y. The apparent contin
uum manifestation is due to the subsequent electrostatic interaction between (3 and the
nucleus. From 1922 to 1927, through a series of careful measurements, Ellislo again said
"no" to Meitner's hypothesis. The (3 energy is indeed continuous. Furthermore, Ellis
proved that the maximum (3 energy equals the difference of the initial and final nuclear
energy.
There would then appear a missing energy. This was incorporated by Niels Bohrll,
who proposed the hypothesis of non-conservation of energy.
Very soon, Pauli said "no" to Bohr's proposition. Pauli12 suggested that in the (3
decay energy is conserved, but accompanying the (3 particle there is always emission of
2
a neutral particle of extremely small mass and with almost no interaction with matter.
Since such a weakly interacting neutral particle is not detected, there appears to be an
apparent nonconservation of energy.
Fermi13 then followed with his celebrated theory of {3 decay. This in turn stimulated
further investigation of the spectrum shape of the {3 decay, which did not agree with
Fermi's theoretical prediction. This led Konopinski and Uhlenbeck14 to introduce the
derivative coupling. The confusion was only cleared up completely after World War II, in
1949, by Wu and Albert15, signalling the end of one era and the beginning of a new one.
2. CLASSICAL PERIOD (OTHER WEAK INTERACTIONS)
When I began my graduate study of physics at the University of Chicago, in 1946,
the pion was not known. Fermi and Teller16 had just completed their theoretical analysis
of the important experiment of Conversi, Pancini and Piccioni17. I attended a seminar
by Fermi on this work. He cut right through the complex slowing-down process of the
mesotron, the capture rate versus the decay rate, and arrived at the conclusion that
the mesotron could not possibly be the carrier of strong forces hypothesized by Yukawa.
Fermi's lectures were always superb, but that one to me, a young man not yet twenty and
fresh from China, was absolutely electrifying. I left the lecture with the impression that,
instead of Yukawa's idea, perhaps one should accept Heisenberg's suggestion18 that the
origin of strong forces could be due to higher-order processes of {3 interaction. As was
known, these were highly singular.
At that time, the {3 interaction was thought to be reasonably well understood.
Fermi's original vector-coupling form,
was, after all, too simple; to conform to reality, it should be extended to include a Gamow
Teller term. Fermi told me that his interaction was modelled after the electromagnetic
forces between charged particles, and his coupling G was inspired by Newton's constant.
His paper was, however, rejected by Nature for being unrealistic. It was published later
in Italy, and then in ZeitschriJt fUr Physip3. Fermi wrote his / matrices explicitly in
terms of their matrix elements. His lepton current differs from his hadron current by a /5
factor; of course the presence of this /5 factor has no physical significance. Nevertheless,
it is curious why Fermi should choose this particular expression, which resembles the V-A
interaction, but with parity conservation. Unfortunately, by 1956, when I noticed this, it
was too late to ask Fermi.
A year later, the discovery of the pion through its decay sequence 7r -+ J.£ -+ e
by Lattes, Muirhead, Occhialini and Powell19 dramatically confirmed the original idea of
Yukawa. The fact that the higher-order {3 interaction is singular is not a good argument
that it should simply become the strong force.
In January 1949 my fellow student, Jack Steinberger, submitted a paper20 to The
Physical Review in which he established that the J.£ meson disintegrates into three light
3