RECORD
New CP-violation and preferred-frame tests with polarized electrons
High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 21 Jun 2006
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim We find $|g_{\rm P}^e g_{\rm S}^N|/(\hbar c)< 1.7 \times 10^{-36}$ and $|g_{\rm A}^e g_{\rm V}^N|/(\hbar c) < 4.8 \times 10^{-56}$ for $\lambda > 1$AU.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
We used a torsion pendulum containing $\sim 9 \times 10^{22}$ polarized electrons to search for CP-violating interactions between the pendulum's electrons and unpolarized matter in the laboratory's surroundings or the sun, and to test for preferred-frame effects that would precess the electrons about a direction fixed in inertial space. We find $|g_{\rm P}^e g_{\rm S}^N|/(\hbar c)< 1.7 \times 10^{-36}$ and $|g_{\rm A}^e g_{\rm V}^N|/(\hbar c) < 4.8 \times 10^{-56}$ for $\lambda > 1$AU. Our preferred-frame constraints, interpreted in the Kosteleck\'y framework, set an upper limit on the parameter $|\bm{\tilde {b}}^e| \leq 5.0 \times 10^{-21}$ eV that should be compared to the benchmark value $m_e^2/M_{\rm Planck}= 2 \times 10^{-17}$ eV.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | We used a torsion pendulum containing $\sim 9 \times 10^{22}$ polarized electrons to search for CP-violating interactions between the pendulum's electrons and unpolarized matter in the laboratory's surroundings or the sun, and to test for preferred-frame effects that would precess the electrons about a direction fixed in inertial space. | method 0.54 | 0.96 | 0.05 | asserted 0.93 |
| s1 | We find $|g_{\rm P}^e g_{\rm S}^N|/(\hbar c)< 1.7 \times 10^{-36}$ and $|g_{\rm A}^e g_{\rm V}^N|/(\hbar c) < 4.8 \times 10^{-56}$ for $\lambda > 1$AU. | result 1.00 | 0.97 | 0.47 | asserted 1.00 |
| s2 | Our preferred-frame constraints, interpreted in the Kosteleck\'y framework, set an upper limit on the parameter $|\bm{\tilde {b}}^e| \leq 5.0 \times 10^{-21}$ eV that should be compared to the benchmark value $m_e^2/M_{\rm Planck}= 2 \times 10^{-17}$ eV. | interpretation 0.54 | 0.90 | 0.33 | asserted 1.00 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v1
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
We used a torsion pendulum containing $\sim 9 \times 10^{22}$ polarized electrons to search for CP-violating interactions between the pendulum's electrons and unpolarized matter in the laboratory's surroundings or the sun, and to test for preferred-frame effects that would precess the electrons about a direction fixed in inertial space. We find $|g_{\rm P}^e g_{\rm S}^N|/(\hbar c)< 1.7 \times 10^{-36}$ and $|g_{\rm A}^e g_{\rm V}^N|/(\hbar c) < 4.8 \times 10^{-56}$ for $\lambda > 1$AU. Our preferred-frame constraints, interpreted in the Kosteleck\'y framework, set an upper limit on the parameter $|\bm{\tilde {b}}^e| \leq 5.0 \times 10^{-21}$ eV that should be compared to the benchmark value $m_e^2/M_{\rm Planck}= 2 \times 10^{-17}$ eV.
Human review
References
How the literature uses it
9 arXiv papers cite this in 10 sentences
Papers citing it · 5 sentences without a confident label
Uses its method or tool 2 papers
-
The idea is to use the “spin pendulum” developed by the Eöt-Wash group [ref] which has an effective polarization of roughly $10^23$ electrons but a negligible magnetic moment.
Searching for spacetime granularity: analyzing a concrete experimental setup · Experimental scenario · 0.98
-
The Eöt-Wash group had developed an experimental technique consisting of a continuously rotating torsion balance which involves approximately $10^23$ horizontally polarized electrons possessing negligible magnetic moment [ref] .
Experimental search for a Lorentz invariant spacetime granularity: Possibilities and bounds · Phenomenology with the proposed interaction · 0.92
Uses its data or values 1 paper
-
To avoid this mismatch with classically massless photons one can adopt the induced LIV for lightlike axial vectors $b^ μ .$ In particular, for a lightlike universal axial vector $b^ μ=( ± b,b )$ with $b=|b|$ we find the dispersion relations for the LIV 1-particle states of a fermion species $f$ that read [equation] Now, it turns out that the requirement $p_±^2>0$ for the LIV free 1-particle spinor physical states just drives to the high momenta cutoff $| p |≤m_e^2/4b .$ However, one has to keep in mind that the room for the existence of a universal privileged spatial direction, such as the Æther vector $b ,$ is essentially excluded by the torsion pendulum experiments with polarized electrons [ref] which yield $| b |≤5×10^-21$ eV, that should be compared to the benchmark value $m_e^2/M_Planck=2×10^-17$ eV.
Bare and Induced Lorentz and CPT Invariance Violations in QED · Summary of the Main Results · 0.94
Cites it as background 2 papers
-
The exchange of a new spin-zero or spin-1 boson between two fermions may give rise to some exotic new force, e.g., an axion (spin-zero), a dark photon (spin-1) or a light $Z'$ are among the potential candidates for such a scenario which might lead to an exotic fifth force, which are being actively searched for at several experiments [ref] .
Probing New Physics with Long-Range Neutrino Interactions: An Effective Field Theory Approach · Introduction · 0.92
-
Numerous experimental searches have been dedicated to look for theoretically well-motivated light mediators, such as axions (spin-zero), dark photons (spin-1) or light $Z^'$ (spin-1) [ref] .
Anomalies in $^8$Be nuclear transitions and $(g-2)_{e,\mu}$: towards a minimal combined explanation · Introduction · 1.00
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.