Lee gave an interesting assessment of this phenomenon in his Nobel lecture: ‘In fact, during this experiment the direction of a circular electric current in a solenoid generating a polarising magnetic field, together with a direction of a preferential emission of b -electrons, unambiguously separates the right system of coordinates from the left one. Thus the parity nonconservation (or, in other words, noninvariance as related to a specular reflection) may be established without involving any theoretical considerations’ [2, reverse translation].

After this initial shock and having accepted the compromise idea of Landau, Lee and Jang on the conservation of combined parity, the physicists suddenly witnessed another incredible development: in 1964 Cronin and Fitch experimentally proved the violation of combined parity during neutral kaons decomposition. In 1980 Cronin and Fitch were also awarded the Nobel Prize.

Richard Feynman summarised the situation in the following way: ‘The Nature by 99.99 per cent does not care if it is left or right, but suddenly one barely noticeable phenomenon stands out and turns out to be absolutely one-sided’ [3, reverse translation].

But is it really the case? In fact, Lee, Jang and Wu “without involving any theoretical considerations” introduced fundamental errors in their treatment of the results of magnetic field experiments.

Firstly, they failed to account for equally probable possibility of left- and right-spirality b -particles emerging during nuclear neutrons decomposition.

Secondly, in their treatment of experimental results neither of the physically nonequivalent phases of the investigated process — neutrons decomposition phase and the phase of hetero-spirality b -particles interaction with the magnetic field of specimen and solenoid — was broken down and put to separate analysis.

Finally, no explanation was given to a phenomenon of b -particles partial polarisation.

Our alternative, theoretically substantiated scenario of this process is as follows.

The dual-component neutrino theory and Pauli principle allows the nuclear neutrons decomposition reaction to be presented in the invariant key:

,

where S is the ideal mirror plane, while indices for the right spirality and for the left spirality show the projection of a particle spin on its impulse.

A proton that remains in a nucleus acquires the spin value opposite to that of the decomposed neutron and, compensating its equal part, decreases by one the summary spin of the original nucleus, which has been proved experimentally:

Now, having focused on the equally probable possibility of heterospiral b -particles emergence outside of nuclei, we establish the cause of their predominant distribution precisely against the magnetic field vector.

Peculiarities of behaviour of elementary particles with spin are displayed only in the presence of magnetic field, since in this instance the energy of field interaction included in Schrödinger equation is directly related to a particle spin via its magnetic momentum [4]. For example, in case of electrons it results in two energy values related only to two possible and opposite spin orientations (P. Zeeman and J.　Stark effects, O.　Stern and W. Gerlach experiments, the phenomenon of electron paramagnetic resonance, etc.).

It was established [5] that energies of free electrons in a magnetic field differ depending on their spin orientation:

and

where index denotes the spin orientation with the field, while index — against the field. The inequality results in the b -spectrum energy shift away from the field vector direction. Consequently, a relatively larger number of particles is always registered on this side. It is exactly this relative asymmetry in the b -particles distribution that was discovered by Wu.

Soon afterwards a similar asymmetry in the m - and p -meson decomposition was found at Columbia and Chicago Universities [6]. Here the emerging muons were decelerated in a carbon lump after which they decomposed into electrons and neutrino-antineutrino pairs. When applying to the carbon lump an alternating magnetic field with a period approximately equal to a muon life the authors discovered that there always existed a predominant emission of electrons synchronous with magnetic field oscillations. Obviously, here no account was given for the equally probable possibility of emerging heterospiral muons followed by electrons, as well as for naturally asymmetrical distribution of the latter relative to the magnetic field vector:

;

Cronin and Fitch discovered a very rare and so far unique type of a neutral long-lived (5·10^-8 s) kaon decomposition [7]:

and

Either through the CP operation may be transformed into each other and should be equal provided the composite parity of both decomposition rates is maintained. However, numerous verifying experiments showed proportion between the rates resulting in a slight asymmetry in favour of positrons:

This asymmetry was the main proof of the composite parity violation. Having inserted spirality indices in the following relation

we discover that electrons and positrons are heterospiral and, consequently, will oppositely interact with the deflecting magnetic field of the test device. Positrons will always be acquiring (and electrons will always be losing) additional energy from the field and thus more frequently than electrons be registered by a counter. At the same time, the π¯/π⁺ relation should exactly equal 1!

The principle of invariance is always maintained in the above correlations with the participation of neutrino-antineutrino pairs, until counting of electrons and positrons after their interaction with the magnetic field begins. ‘It would be interesting, noted Jang in his Nobel lecture, to think out a possible link between the parity nonconservation and the role played in symmetry by electric and magnetic fields’ [8, reverse translation].

Unfortunately, it was not done. Now, forty years later, the dramatic role played by magnetic field in the fate of this century’s two sensational ‘discoveries’ has become clear.

Now about the t -Q problem that introduced the theory on the nonconservation of the space parity. The essence of this problem lies basically in the statement that and mesons are identical in their masses and life. Consequently, it would be impossible for one of them to have negative parity, while for the other to have a positive one. Similar difficulties arose after Cronin and Fitch’s group discovered the forbidden decomposition channel .

It turns out that the solution of this problem may be approached by a quite logical assumption that the mass of the third -meson is virtually transformed into energy, which emerges in the correlation of real possibilities [9, 10]:

The mass defect in A type reactions is 145MeV. In the B (a) type reactions the effective mass is established by the Monte-Carlo method only for two charged particles ( and ) in a three-part decomposition scheme, i. e. without considering the mass of a neutral pion. At the same time, the maximum of the experimental histogram by Cronin and Fitch for a two-pion decomposition B (b) type reaction gave the effective mass value (theoretical value of a neutral kaon mass ). It follows that the mass defect in the B type reactions is approximately 137MeV.

Having correlated the mass defect in the A (145MeV) and B (~137MeV) type reactions with the exact theoretical mass (134.69MeV) of the third -meson missing in the reaction we discover that its virtual transformation actually takes place and, consequently, there is no violation of the parity and energy conservation laws.

Thus a realistic investigation of the above processes allows for the rehabilitation of the parity conservation law, as well as for the removal of obstacles hindering the development of this fundamental avenue in theoretical physics.

For example, a possibility of theoretical analysis of hot plasma heterospiral particles retention by high frequency alternating magnetic field model appears.

1. Wu C. S. et al. Phys. Rev., 105, p. 1413, 1957.
2. Ли Ц. Слабые взаимодействия и несохранение четности. — УФН, 66, 1, 1958, с.　89–97.
3. Фейнман Р. Характер физических законов. — М.: Наука, 1987, с.　95.
4. Астахов А.В., Широков Ю.М. Квантовая физика. Т.3 – М.: Наука, 1983, с.56.
5. Каганов М. И., Цукерник В. М. Природа магнетизма. — М.: Наука, 1982, с.　91.
6. Глесстон С. Атом, атомное ядро, атомная энергия. — М.: ИЛ, 1961, с.　609.
7. Эллис Дж. Очень большое и очень малое. — В сб.: Фундаментальная структура материи. — М.: Мир, 1984, с.　228.
8. Янг Ч. Законы сохранения четности и другие законы симметрии. — УФН, 66, 1, 1958, с.　79–87.
9. Мухин К. Н. Экспериментальная ядерная физика. Т. 2. — М.: Энергоиздат, 1983, с.　256, 259, 297–299.
10. Фитч В. Л. Открытие несохранения комбинированной четности. — УФН, 135, 2, 1981, с. 191.

The author would welcome the publication of this article. For copyright inquiries and publication permission apply directly to:

Mr. Igor Mazuk, Apt. 32, 7 Silayeva St., Sevastopol, Ukraine, P. O. 99029

Back