Implications of Current Algebra for η Decay— A Summary

  • R. Ramachandran
  • Aditya Kumar


In calculations involving pions, the use of equal time commutation relations for the currents together with PCAC (Partial Conservation of Axial Vector Current) principle for the pion field operator has had some success over the last couple of years. Most spectacular among these is the calculation of Adler1 and Weissberger2 giving the weak axial vector renormalization g A in terms of the total crosssection in π-N scattering. Subsequently, the current algebra was found successful in relating various leptonic K-decay processes3 and in giving some details of nonleptonic decays.4 Hara and Nambu4 applied these techniques to successfully predict the energy spectrum of the unlike pion in the K → 3π decay. There is a lot of similarity between η and K → 3π decays, and it is natural to expect that similar mechanism explain both processes. However, the current algebra techniques that were so successful in K decays have not had a similar effect in η decays. We shall see that some of the difficulties will be traced to the ambiguity in the various extrapolations possible from the soft pion limit (where the current algebra makes definite predictions) to the physical pions. In this talk we shall review briefly the various approaches and then suggest an extrapolation procedure that we think best explains the π-decay process.


Matrix Element Current Algebra Pseudoscalar Meson Dalitz Plot Axial Vector Current 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S. L. Adler, Phys. Rev. Letters 14: 1051 (1965).ADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    W. I. Weissberger, Phys. Rev. Letters 14: 1047 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    C. G. Callan and S. B. Treiman, Phys. Rev. Letters 16: 153 (1966).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Y. Hara and Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. Letters 16: 875 (1966); D.K. Elias and J. C. Taylors, Nuove Cimento 44 518(1966); S. K. Bose and S. N. Biswas Phys. Rev. Letters 16: 330 (1966): H. D. I. Aberbanel, Phys. Rev. 153: 154 (1967).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Ramachandran, Nuovo Cimento 47A: 669 (1967); S. K. Bose and A. M. Zimerman, Ibid 43A: 1165 (1966); R. Graham, S. Pakvasa, and L. O’Rafea-ataigh, Ibid 48A: 830 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Letters 17: 616 (1966); N. N. Khuri, Phys. Rev. 153: 1477 (1967).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Columbia Berkeley-Purdue-Wisconsin-Yale Collaborators, Phys. Rev. 149: 1044 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. G. Sutterland, Phys. Letters 23: 384 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    W. Bardeen, L. S. Brown, B. W. Lee and H. T. Nieh, Phys. Rev. Letters 18: 1170 (1967).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. A. Cronin, Phys. Rev. 161: 1483 (1967); (see also) S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Letters 18: 188 (1967); J. Schwinger, Phys. Letters 24B: 473 (1967); Phys. Rev. Letters 18: 923 (1967); 19: 1154 (1967); and 19: 1501 (1967).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. Crawford and L. R. Price, Phys. Rev. 167: 1339 (1968); also Aditya Kumar and R. Ramachadran, T.I.F.R. preprint (unpublished).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Baltay et al., report on preliminary data at the International Theoretical Physics Conference on particles and Fields, Rochester, September, 1967, (unpublished) give a value of 1.55 ± 0.25; S. Buniatov et al., Phys. Letters 25B: 560 (1967) give R = 1.38 ± 0.15. C. Baglin et al., preprint (presented at the APS Spring meeting, Washington, 1967) report 1.3 ± 0.4.ADSGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    W. A. Dunn and R. Ramachandran, Phys. Rev. 153: 1558 (1967) Similar result for τ and τ′ decays was first noted by N. Khuri and S. B. Treiman, Phys. Rev. 119:1115(1960).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press 1969

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Ramachandran
    • 1
  • Aditya Kumar
    • 1
  1. 1.Tata Institute of Fundamental ResearchBombayIndia

Personalised recommendations