Talk:Neutral current

Comment about etymology of the name
"The interaction is often incorrectly believed to be called 'neutral' because the Z boson has no electric charge. However, the neutral current that gives the interaction its name is that of the interacting particles."

Aren't the two facts, the interacting particles preserving their charges and the neutrality of the Z boson complimentary? I can't see the difference and justify the comment above. - Fatka (talk · contribs) 07:36, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree, see for example the section "Neutral Current Reaction" on the page for the SNO detector: http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/sno/sno2.html 188.29.244.45 (talk) 14:56, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

In retrospect, that the current formed from the interacting fermions is electrically neutral is complimentary to the fact that the Z boson is neutral. However, that is not historically how the name came about. The interaction of two neutral currents was formulated and so labeled well before the concept of a Z boson was formulated. Likewise, the interaction of two charged currents was formulated and so labeled well before the concept of the W bosons.

Formulae?
This article seems to use a bit of mathematical symbology that it does not define. For the average user such as myself, it's difficult to follow what these equations describe:


 * $$\mathfrak{M}^{\mathrm{NC}} \propto J_{\mu}^{\mathrm{(NC)}}(\nu_{\mathrm{e}}) \; J^{\mathrm{(NC)}\mu}(\mathrm{e^{-}})$$
 * $$J^{\mathrm{(NC)}\mu}(f) = \bar{u}_{f}\gamma^{\mu}\frac{1}{2}\left(g^{f}_{V}-g^{f}_{A}\gamma^{5}\right)u_{f},$$

It would be nice to see the meanings/physical implications of $$\mathfrak{M}^{\mathrm{NC}}$$, $$J_{\mu}^{\mathrm{(NC)}}$$, $$J^{\mathrm{(NC)}\mu}$$, $$\bar{u}_{f}$$, $$u_{f}$$, $$\gamma^{\mu}$$, and $$\gamma^{5}$$ clearly enumerated in this article. At the very least, I feel that links to relevant explanatory articles are necessary. 18.111.8.158 (talk) 14:04, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

In simple terms
Thought it would be nice to help average users as bit, as suggested by anonymous above, so have had a go.Reflection (talk) 18:09, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Oh, dammit the story about the terminology referring to the 'no electric charge bit' is murkier than I thought  - off to consult at the literature. Reflection (talk) 21:48, 4 January 2017 (UTC).

Hmm, particularly in technical discussions, "neutral current" is used to refer to any interaction of any kind where there is no transfer of charge - so that, bearing in mind that photons are the exchange particle for the electromagnetic force, and they themselves carry no charge, electromagnetic effects are sometimes explicitly referred to as "neutral currents" -e.g. see Robert Mann (2011), An Introduction to Particle Physics and the Standard Model. 5.80.153.116 (talk) 02:02, 5 January 2017 (UTC) (Apologies - forgot to log in Reflection (talk) 02:09, 5 January 2017 (UTC))

Still, having looked at various more general discussions in CERN papers and nobel lectures, the current wording in this section appears to be fine, certainly at a simple level of detail. 5.80.153.116 (talk) 02:02, 5 January 2017 (UTC) Oops, sorry, wasn't logged in. Reflection (talk) 02:09, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Neutral current. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120121101618/http://www.actaphys.uj.edu.pl/vol37/pdf/v37p2295.pdf to http://www.actaphys.uj.edu.pl/vol37/pdf/v37p2295.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:52, 16 February 2018 (UTC)