3 ms·
And at the risk of muddying the original point, it turns out that strictly speaking the neither the neutral Z boson nor the electromagnetic photon can be said t
by cshimmin 5y ago
And at the risk of muddying the original point, it turns out that strictly speaking the neither the neutral Z boson nor the electromagnetic photon can be said to come from SU(2) or U(1). Instead, each field is a linear combination of some abstract fields (namely the neutral W0 and the weak hypercharge B bosons) from the unitary gauge induced by the compound symmetry SU(2)xU(1). This is because when both symmetries SU(2) and U(1) are present, there are different ways you can "mix" the two into the Lagrangian. The mixing that gives us the photon and the Z0 boson is known because of the experimental confirmation of these particles. This is what is meant when it is said that electromagnetism and weak neuclear forces are united in a higher-energy theory as a single "electroweak" force.
- trenchgun 5y agoThank you!
- jasonwatkinspdx 5y agoThanks for these comments. This simplified a whole bunch of things I had questions about.
- tinco 5y agoThis is great, you perfectly bridged the gap between having been 25 once and vaguely remembering the math terms mentioned and bringing it back to reality. Really epic how this (at least to me) abstract and arcane math not only explains the behaviors of the subatomic particles, but even predicts the existence of more and their related forces. The work of theoretical physicists always seemed like the other side of an ocean of math away, but thanks to this explanation it feels like I can at least make out a lighthouse in the distance.