- #1
exponent137
- 561
- 33
Thanks for the answer. But I tried to understand another aspect of my comparison. I will try to better formulate my question, when I will have time. And I need to study more about neutrinos.vanhees71 said:For formulae use LaTeX. Just click the "LaTeX Guide" on the left below the input field:
https://www.physicsforums.com/help/latexhelp/
It's pretty much analogous to the case of the quarks in the electroweak sector of the standard model. Also there by convention when introducing the mixing matrix (in this case the CKM=Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix) you keep the up-like quarks (u,c,t) as mass-eigenstates but "mix" the down-like quarks (d,s,b). That's possible by using all the freedom to define the various physically unimportant phases of the fields.
For the neutrinos the mixing matrix is named PMNS=Pontekorvo-Maki-Nakagawa-Sakati matrix.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabibbo–Kobayashi–Maskawa_matrix
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontecorvo–Maki–Nakagawa–Sakata_matrix
About the text editor: I did use Latex. But at some moment my formulae become blank and I could not corrected them. I suspect that the reason was that I used more time for my post, and one overtake me, thus this software made some mistake. I wrote formulae inside signs "#", maybe this was an additional reason.