Electroweak Interactions pp 63-124 | Cite as
The Electroweak Interaction in e+e- Annihilations
Abstract
The role of e+e- annihilation in studying the weak neutral current has taken on an increased significance during the last two or three years due to the operation of PETRA and PEP which provide values of s (= C.M. energy2) in excess of 1000 GeV2. Although it was clear from the outset that several years would be needed to collect enough data to make an accurate determination of the neutral current parameters, it was not long after PETRA had started operation that it was realised how even a modest amount of data could put tight limits on some of the lepton couplings [1]. The data also restricted the scope of possible extended gauge models.
Keywords
Gauge Boson Total Cross Section Polarisation Asymmetry Axial Coupling Hadron Final StatePreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.R. Marshall, RL-80–029 and Proc. XV. Rencontre de Moriond, Les Arcs, France, 9–21 March 1980.Google Scholar
- 2.N. Cabibbo and R. Gatto, Phys. Rev. 124 (1961) 1577.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.J. Ellis and M.K. Gaillard, Physics with very high energy +e- colliding beams, CERN 7 6–18 (November 1976).Google Scholar
- 4.F.A. Behrends and R. Kleiss, Nucl. Phys. B177 (1981) 237.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.J.J. Sakurai, UCLA/77/TEP/15 and Neutrino ’77, Int. Conf. on Neutrino Physics and Neutrino Astrophysics, Elbrus, USSR, June 1977.Google Scholar
- 6.R. Budny, Phys. Lett. 55B (1975) 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.L.M. Sehgal, PITHA 80/5. Int. School of Elementary Particles Physics, Kupari, Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia, 16–30 September 1979.Google Scholar
- 8.R.P. Feynman, Proc. Neutrino ’72, Vol.11, Balatonfüred, June 1972. G. Farrar and J.L. Rosner, Phys. Rev. D7 (1973) 2747.ADSGoogle Scholar
- 8a.R. Cahn and E. Colglazier, Phys. Rev. D9 (1974) 2658.ADSGoogle Scholar
- 8b.S.J. Brodsky and N. Weiss, Phys. Rev. D16 (1977) 2325.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8c.C.J. Maxwell and M.J. Teper, Zeit. f. Phys. C7 (1981) 295.Google Scholar
- 9.G.F. Pearce, private communication.Google Scholar
- 10.A. Bartl et al., Zeit. f. Phys. C6 (1980) 335.Google Scholar
- 10a.J. Nieves, Phys. Rev. D20 (1979) 2775.ADSGoogle Scholar
- 10b.J. Ranft and G. Ranft, Zeit. f. Phys. C12 (1982) 253.Google Scholar
- 11.J. Jersak et al., Phys. Lett. 98B (1981) 363.Google Scholar
- 12.V. Barger et al., Phys. Lett. D22 (1980) 727.Google Scholar
- 13.V. Elias et al., Phys. Lett. 73B (1978) 451.Google Scholar
- 14.
- 15.E.H. de Groot, G.J. Gounaris and D. Schildknecht, Zeit. f. Phys. C5 (1980) 127Google Scholar
- 15a.E.H. de Groot and D. Schildknecht, Zeit. f. Phys. C10 (1981) 139 and BI-TP 80/32 December 1980.Google Scholar
- 16.M. Kuroda and D.Schildknecht, BI-TP 81/22 December 1981.Google Scholar
- 17.G.J. Gounaris and D. Schildknecht, Zeit. f. Phys. C12 (1982) 57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.P.Q. Hung and J.J. Sakurai, Nucl. Phys. B143 (1978) 81.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.P. Steffen, XVII. Rencontre de Moriond. Les Arcs, France, March 1982. A. Wagner, Frühjahrstagung der Deutschen Phys. Ges. Karlsruhe, March 1982.Google Scholar
- 20.D.H. Perkins, Oxford Univ. preprint 81/037. Royal Society Meeting on Gauge Theories, London, April 1981.Google Scholar