
Nuclear, particle & quantum-information sequence · Interactive lesson
Antiparticles, charge conjugation and CPT
Dirac's equation hands you twice as many solutions as electrons. This lesson refuses to throw the extra half away: it reads them as antiparticles, writes the particle–antiparticle swap as an explicit 4 × 4 matrix, and uses the one symmetry no local theory can break to predict what an antiparticle must weigh and how long it must live.
UPV-17.02 · Lesson 2 of 9 in this unit. Position is not a completion score.Nuclear, particle & quantum-information sequence. These units continue into nuclear and particle physics and quantum information. Follow your university’s prerequisites, mathematical depth and assessment; this independent pathway is not a universal programme specification.
Build the model
Every Dirac solution comes twice; C, P and T say how the two copies are related.
The key idea
An antiparticle is what a relativistic wave equation's negative-energy solution becomes when it is read forward in time: the particle's mass and spin, every additive charge reversed, and, by the CPT theorem, the same total lifetime.
Example. The positron has m = 0.511 MeV/c², spin ½ and charge +e; an e⁺e⁻ pair costs at least 2mc² = 1.022 MeV to create, and the measured e⁺/e⁻ mass ratio agrees with CPT's prediction of exactly 1 to better than 8 × 10⁻⁹.
The complete physical model and assumptions
The Dirac equation bought a first-order time evolution at the price of a spectrum that runs to −∞: for every momentum the 4 × 4 Hamiltonian cα⋅p + βmc² has eigenvalues +Eₚ and −Eₚ, each twice over. The model of this lesson is what to do with the lower half. Dirac filled it and called a vacancy a positron; Stückelberg and Feynman left the vacuum empty and read a negative-energy wave running backward in time as a positive-energy antiparticle running forward — a point reflection (−E, −p) → (+E, +p) that works for bosons as well as fermions. The operator performing the swap is explicit, ψ → ψᶜ = Cψ̄ᵀ with C = iγ²γ⁰, and it sends the equation for charge q to the identical equation for −q while preserving the physical spin. C has an eigenvalue only on states with every additive charge zero, where it forbids decays such as π⁰ → 3γ; the weak interaction violates C outright and CP at the measured 10⁻³ level. What survives, and what the antiparticle concept finally rests on, is CPT: any local, Lorentz-invariant theory is invariant under the product, so particle and antiparticle must share mass and total lifetime and reverse every charge. Those are predictions, not definitions, tested to 6 × 10⁻¹⁹ in the kaon mass and 1.6 × 10⁻¹¹ in the antiproton's charge-to-mass ratio. The cost is locality and Lorentz invariance: give up either and the equalities stop being theorems.
1Two branches, and the lower one cannot be thrown away
Write the free Dirac Hamiltonian HD = cα⋅p + βmc² in the Dirac representation, β = diag(1, 1, −1, −1) and αᵢ carrying σᵢ off the diagonal. For every momentum p it is a 4 × 4 Hermitian matrix with eigenvalues ±Eₚ, Eₚ = √(p²c² + m²c⁴), each twice over: two positive-energy spinors u(p, s) evolving as e(−iEₚₜ/ħ) and two negative-energy spinors v(p, s) evolving as e(+iEₚₜ/ħ). The four eigenvectors are complete, so any wavepacket narrower than the Compton length ħ/mc = 386 fm must contain the lower branch, and an electron coupled to the radiation field could cascade into it without limit. Dirac's answer in 1930 was to fill every negative-energy level and let Pauli exclusion block the cascade; a vacancy in the sea then behaves as a positive-energy particle of charge +e, which Anderson photographed in a cloud chamber in 1932. The sea costs an infinite negative charge density that has to be subtracted by hand, and it means nothing for bosons, whose Klein–Gordon equation has the same two branches and no exclusion principle.
2Feynman–Stückelberg: reverse the time, not the sea
The lower branch carries the phase e(+iEₚₜ/ħ), and the identity e(−i(−E)t/ħ) = e(−iE(−t)/ħ) says a negative-energy wave advancing in time is indistinguishable from a positive-energy wave running backward. Stückelberg (1941) and Feynman (1949) took it literally: a solution of energy −E and momentum −p propagating backward in time is an antiparticle of energy +E and momentum +p propagating forward, every additive charge reversed. On the (pc, E) plane the rule is a point reflection through the origin, drawn in the figure below. Nothing is filled and nothing subtracted, so the same reading works for the Klein–Gordon field, and in quantum field theory it becomes the statement that one field operator carries a particle annihilator and an antiparticle creator, ψ = Σ (a u e(−ip⋅x) + b† v e(+ip⋅x)). The price of an antiparticle is the gap. A photon in a nuclear Coulomb field needs Eγ ≥ 2mec² = 1.022 MeV; a proton beam on a fixed proton target needs √s ≥ 4mpc², a kinetic energy of 6mpc² = 5.63 GeV. The Bevatron's 6.2 GeV was chosen to clear it, and the antiproton appeared in 1955.
3Charge conjugation as an explicit 4 × 4 matrix
With ħ = c = 1, an electron of charge q in a potential Aμ obeys [iγμ(∂μ + iqAμ) − m]ψ = 0. Take the complex conjugate: [−i(γμ)*(∂μ − iqAμ) − m]ψ* = 0. In the Dirac representation γ⁰, γ¹ and γ³ are real and γ² is imaginary, and γ² anticommutes with the other three, so iγ²(γμ)*(iγ²)⁻¹ = −γμ for all four μ. Multiplying from the left by iγ² therefore gives [iγμ(∂μ − iqAμ) − m](iγ²ψ*) = 0: the same equation with q replaced by −q. The map ψ → ψᶜ = iγ²ψ* is charge conjugation, or covariantly ψᶜ = Cψ̄ᵀ with C = iγ²γ⁰, a real antisymmetric matrix with C² = −1 and C⁻¹γμC = −(γμ)ᵀ. Applied to the spin-up electron at rest, (1, 0, 0, 0)ᵀe(−imt), it returns (0, 0, 0, 1)ᵀe(+imt): a negative-energy, spin-down solution, which Feynman–Stückelberg reads as a spin-up positron at rest. C flips the spinor's spin and the reinterpretation flips it back, so the physical antiparticle carries the particle's spin — v(p, s) is iγ²u*(p, s) up to a phase.
4When C is a number: self-conjugate states and forbidden decays
C acts on every state, but it has an eigenvalue only where it returns the state itself, which needs every additive charge to vanish. The photon is the cleanest case: Aμ couples to the current jμ, C reverses jμ, so C|γ⟩ = −|γ⟩ and n photons carry (−1)ⁿ. A fermion–antifermion pair with orbital L and total spin S has C = (−1)(L+S), from exchanging the two, which is what makes C a good label for flavour-neutral mesons and for positronium. The consequences are counting rules with hard numbers. π⁰ (L = S = 0, C = +1) goes to two photons 98.8% of the time, while π⁰ → 3γ would need C = −1 and is not seen, BR < 3.1 × 10⁻⁸. Para-positronium (S = 0, C = +1) decays to 2γ in 125 ps; ortho-positronium (S = 1, C = −1) must emit three, each extra vertex costing a factor of order α, and lives 142 ns — a ratio of 1140, or 8.3/α. ρ⁰ (C = −1) → π⁰γ is allowed and seen at 4.7 × 10⁻⁴, but ρ⁰ → π⁰π⁰ would put C = +1 in the final state and is absent (Bose symmetry forbids it too). None of this applies to the K⁰: C|K⁰⟩ = |K̄⁰⟩ is a different state, so the kaon carries no C-parity at all.
5Where C fails, and CP with it
The weak interaction breaks C as hard as a symmetry can be broken. Only left-chiral neutrinos, projected out by PL = (1 − γ⁵)/2, take part; C alone would turn a left-handed ν into a left-handed ν̄, a state that does not exist, and P alone into a right-handed ν, also absent. The product CP maps νL onto ν̄R, which does exist, and for a while CP looked exact: π⁺ → μ⁺νμ emits a left-handed muon and its CP image π⁻ → μ⁻ν̄μ emits a right-handed one at the same rate. Then in 1964 Cronin and Fitch saw the CP-odd KL decay to the CP-even π⁺π⁻ state with branching ratio 2.0 × 10⁻³, a mixing parameter |ε| = 2.23 × 10⁻³; and the semileptonic asymmetry δL = 3.3 × 10⁻³, by which KL → π⁻e⁺ν beats KL → π⁺e⁻ν̄, defines matter against antimatter without reference to any convention. B mesons show direct CP violation an order of magnitude larger: Γ(B⁰ → K⁺π⁻) exceeds Γ(B̄⁰ → K⁻π⁺) by about 18%, an asymmetry (difference over sum) of 8%. So neither C nor CP can be the reason a particle and its antiparticle share a mass. Something else is.
6CPT: the symmetry that survives, and what it predicts
Lüders and Pauli (1954–55) proved that any local, Lorentz-invariant field theory with a Hermitian Hamiltonian is invariant under the antiunitary product Θ = CPT. Because Θ commutes with H and sends a particle at rest, spin up, to its antiparticle at rest, spin down, the two states share one energy eigenvalue: m̄ = m. Unitarity carries the argument to the imaginary part of the energy, so total widths and lifetimes match, τ̄ = τ, though the sum may be shared out differently among channels, which is what direct CP violation does. Charge and magnetic moment reverse: q̄ = −q, μ̄ = −μ. Each is a tested prediction. The K⁰–K̄⁰ mass difference is below 6 × 10⁻¹⁹ of mK, about 3 × 10⁻¹⁰ eV; the antiproton's charge-to-mass ratio matches the proton's to 1.6 × 10⁻¹¹; free-muon lifetimes give (τμ⁺ − τμ⁻)/τ = (2 ± 8) × 10⁻⁵. The muon test carries a trap: stopped μ⁻ are also captured by nuclei, at 3.8 × 10⁴ s⁻¹ in carbon, so their apparent lifetime in matter is 2.03 μs against 2.20 μs for μ⁺. That 8% is capture, not CPT violation, and must be removed before the comparison means anything.
Key equations
Read the units, assumptions and limits before substituting.
Dirac spectrum: two branches for every p
E = ±√(p²c² + m²c⁴)ψ₋ ∝ v(p) e(+i(Et − p⋅x)/ħ)
Half the solution space sits below −mc². Nothing in the equation lets you discard it, so it has to be given a meaning.
E > 0 here; p momentum (MeV/c), m rest mass (MeV/c²); v(p) the four-component lower-branch spinorFeynman–Stückelberg reinterpretation
e(−i(−E)t/ħ) = e(−iE(−t)/ħ): (−E, −p) backward ≡ (+E, +p) forward
Reads the lower branch as positive-energy antiparticles. No filled sea, so it works for bosons too, which have no exclusion principle.
E, p the antiparticle's physical energy and momentum; every additive charge (q, B, lepton and flavour numbers) reversedCharge conjugation of a Dirac spinor
ψᶜ = C ψ̄ᵀ = iγ²ψ*, C = iγ²γ⁰, C⁻¹γμ C = −(γμ)ᵀ
Maps the equation for charge q onto the identical equation for −q, so ψᶜ is the antiparticle's wavefunction, physical spin preserved.
Dirac representation; C real and antisymmetric with C² = −1; ψ̄ = ψ†γ⁰; Aμ → −Aμ alongsideC-parity of a self-conjugate state
C = (−1)(L+S) for f f̄C(γ) = −1, so nγ carries (−1)ⁿ
Forbids π⁰ → 3γ (BR < 3.1 × 10⁻⁸) and forces ortho-positronium (S = 1) to three photons, some 1100 times slower than para.
L orbital, S total spin of the pair; an eigenvalue only when every additive charge (Q, B, lepton and flavour numbers) is zeroCPT theorem (Lüders–Pauli)
Θ = CPT, [Θ, H] = 0 ⇒ m̄ = m, τ̄ = τ, q̄ = −q, μ̄ = −μ
Antiparticle masses and lifetimes become predictions: |mK⁰ − mK̄⁰|/mK < 6 × 10⁻¹⁹ and (τμ⁺ − τμ⁻)/τ = (2 ± 8) × 10⁻⁵.
Any local, Lorentz-invariant, Hermitian field theory; Θ antiunitary; total widths only — partial widths may differThe price of a pair
Eγ ≥ 2mc² near a nucleusTbeam ≥ 6mpc² for pp → ppp p̄
Baryon and lepton number force antiparticles to appear in pairs, and √s ≥ Σ mfinal sets what the pair costs.
2mec² = 1.022 MeV; 6mpc² = 5.63 GeV, the number the 6.2 GeV Bevatron was built to clearInteractive lab
Predict first. Explore the model. Compare the result.
Explore the model
Try this. Drag m to zero and both branches collapse onto the light cone E = ±pc while the gap box vanishes, so a pair needs no threshold energy — then push p negative and watch the two dots swap quadrants while staying point-reflected through the origin.
Live results
- ENERGY |E|
- 1.304 MeV
- PAIR GAP 2mc²
- 1.022 MeV
- SPEED v/c
- 0.920
- COMPTON LENGTH ħ/mc
- 386 fm
Results follow this lesson’s model and assumptions. Displayed values are rounded.
Predict → change one variable → check
Plan a change before running it. Every other input stays at the saved baseline.
Saved baseline. Momentum pc: 1.2 MeV; Rest energy mc²: 0.511 MeV
This experiment is kept only while this page is open. It does not change saved course progress.
Catch the common trap
Students take 'neutral' to mean 'its own antiparticle', and then try to give every neutral particle a C-parity. It does not follow. C reverses every additive quantum number, not just electric charge, so C|n⟩ is the antineutron with B = −1, a different state that annihilates with a neutron into pions; C|K⁰⟩ is |K̄⁰⟩ with strangeness −1; and C|νL⟩ would be a left-handed antineutrino, which does not exist. An operator has an eigenvalue on a state only when it maps that state onto a multiple of itself, and for C that needs charge, baryon number, lepton number and every flavour number all zero: the photon, π⁰, η, ρ⁰, J/ψ and positronium qualify; n, K⁰ and ν do not. That is why the neutral kaon system is discussed in terms of the CP eigenstates (|K⁰⟩ ∓ |K̄⁰⟩)/√2 rather than a C-parity, and why C-parity selection rules such as π⁰ ↛ 3γ never apply to K⁰ decays.
Practice & worked examples
3 authored examples. Make an attempt, then reveal the reasoning one step at a time.
EasyExample 1
Take C(γ) = −1 and C = (−1)(L+S) for a flavour-neutral quark–antiquark pair. Assign C to π⁰ (L = 0, S = 0) and ρ⁰ (L = 0, S = 1), decide whether π⁰ → 3γ and ρ⁰ → π⁰γ are allowed by C, and say what the measured limit BR(π⁰ → 3γ) < 3.1 × 10⁻⁸ actually tests.
Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.
0 of 4 steps revealed.
- π⁰: C = (−1)(0+0) = +1. ρ⁰: C = (−1)(0+1) = −1. Both are flavour-neutral (charge, baryon number and every flavour number zero), so C is an eigenvalue and these signs are quantum numbers, not labels.
- n photons carry C = (−1)ⁿ. π⁰ → 2γ: +1 → +1, allowed, and it is 98.8% of π⁰ decays. π⁰ → 3γ: +1 → −1, forbidden by C conservation.
- ρ⁰ → π⁰γ: final C = (+1)(−1) = −1 = C(ρ⁰), allowed; it is observed with BR = 4.7 × 10⁻⁴. Compare ρ⁰ → π⁰π⁰, whose final C is +1 and which is not seen — Bose symmetry forbids it too.
- C is exact for the strong and electromagnetic interactions of the Standard Model, so the 3γ channel can open only through a C-violating admixture in the electromagnetic current. BR ∝ |amplitude|², and an extra photon costs a factor of order α in rate even where C allows it, as ortho-positronium shows, so the limit bounds that admixture at roughly √(3.1 × 10⁻⁸ / (0.988α)) ≈ 2.1 × 10⁻³ of the C-conserving strength, an order-of-magnitude estimate that ignores phase space.
Answer. C(π⁰) = +1, C(ρ⁰) = −1; π⁰ → 3γ is C-forbidden, ρ⁰ → π⁰γ is C-allowed. Once the extra photon's factor of α is allowed for, the 3γ limit bounds C violation in electromagnetism below roughly 2 × 10⁻³ in amplitude.
MediumExample 2
In the Dirac representation, apply ψᶜ = iγ²ψ* to the positive-energy, spin-up electron at rest, ψ = (1, 0, 0, 0)ᵀ e(−imc²t/ħ). Write out iγ² explicitly, compute ψᶜ, read off the sign of its energy and its spin from Σ₃ = diag(σ₃, σ₃), and state what the Feynman–Stückelberg rule makes of the result.
Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.
0 of 5 steps revealed.
- γ² = [[0, σ₂], [−σ₂, 0]] with σ₂ = [[0, −i], [i, 0]], so iσ₂ = [[0, 1], [−1, 0]] and iγ² = [[0, 0, 0, 1], [0, 0, −1, 0], [0, −1, 0, 0], [1, 0, 0, 0]] — every entry real, so the matrix leaves the complex conjugation alone.
- Conjugating flips the exponent: ψ* = (1, 0, 0, 0)ᵀ e(+imc²t/ħ).
- ψᶜ = iγ²ψ* picks out the first column of iγ²: ψᶜ = (0, 0, 0, 1)ᵀ e(+imc²t/ħ). Acting with iħ∂ₜ gives −mc², so this is the negative-energy solution at rest, living entirely in the lower two components.
- Σ₃ = diag(1, −1, 1, −1) on (0, 0, 0, 1)ᵀ gives −1: the conjugated spinor is spin down. C has flipped both the sign of the energy and the spin.
- Feynman–Stückelberg: a state of energy −mc², momentum 0 and spin down running backward in time is a positron of energy +mc² = 0.511 MeV, momentum 0 and spin up running forward. The physical spin is the electron's; the flip in the spinor is undone by the reinterpretation, and (0, 0, 0, 1)ᵀ is the rest-frame v(0, ↑).
Answer. ψᶜ = (0, 0, 0, 1)ᵀ e(+imc²t/ħ), an E = −mc², spin-down solution — read forward in time, a spin-up positron at rest with E = +0.511 MeV.
HardExample 3
A cosmic-ray telescope stops muons in carbon. Stopped μ⁺ decay with τ₊ = 2.197 μs; stopped μ⁻ decay at the same weak rate but are also captured by carbon nuclei at Λc = 3.8 × 10⁴ s⁻¹. (a) Predict the apparent μ⁻ lifetime. (b) A student fits 2.03 μs, gets τ₋/τ₊ = 0.92 and claims CPT violation; correct it. (c) The free-muon result (τ₊ − τ₋)/τ = (2 ± 8) × 10⁻⁵ bounds |Γ₊ − Γ₋|: give it in eV and compare with the kaon bound |mK⁰ − mK̄⁰| < 6 × 10⁻¹⁹ mK.
Sketch your answer or reasoning, then compare it with the authored solution. Your writing is not automatically graded or saved.
0 of 5 steps revealed.
- CPT fixes the decay rate, not the disappearance rate: Γdecay(μ⁻) = Γdecay(μ⁺) = 1/τ₊ = 1/(2.197 × 10⁻⁶ s) = 4.552 × 10⁵ s⁻¹.
- In carbon a μ⁻ also vanishes by capture, and rates for independent channels add: 1/τₐₚₚ = 4.552 × 10⁵ + 0.38 × 10⁵ = 4.932 × 10⁵ s⁻¹, so τₐₚₚ = 2.028 μs — matching the measured 2.026 μs.
- The fitted 2.03 μs is therefore the CPT prediction, not a violation of it: 2.028/2.197 = 0.923 is just Γdecay/(Γdecay + Λc). Subtracting the known Λc from the fitted total rate returns 4.55 × 10⁵ s⁻¹, the μ⁺ rate within error. Only a free-muon or capture-corrected comparison tests CPT.
- Convert the free-muon lifetime ratio to a width: Γ = ħ/τ = 6.582 × 10⁻¹⁶ eV s / 2.197 × 10⁻⁶ s = 2.996 × 10⁻¹⁰ eV, and |Γ₊ − Γ₋| = Γ|Δτ/τ| ≲ 3.0 × 10⁻¹⁰ eV × 1 × 10⁻⁴ = 3 × 10⁻¹⁴ eV, taking central value plus one standard deviation as the bound.
- The kaon bound in the same units is 6 × 10⁻¹⁹ × 497.6 MeV = 3.0 × 10⁻¹⁰ eV. In absolute energy the muon-width test is four orders of magnitude tighter; normalised to the quantity measured it is 10⁻⁴ against 10⁻¹⁸. Which is 'the best CPT test' depends on the normalisation, and CPT itself only demands zero for both.
Answer. τₐₚₚ(μ⁻ in carbon) = 2.03 μs, exactly what CPT plus capture predicts; the free-muon bound is |Γ₊ − Γ₋| ≲ 3 × 10⁻¹⁴ eV, against |mK⁰ − mK̄⁰| < 3 × 10⁻¹⁰ eV.
Quick check
Select an answer and explain it before checking.
Review & continue
An antiparticle is what a relativistic wave equation's negative-energy solution becomes when it is read forward in time: the particle's mass and spin, every additive charge reversed, and, by the CPT theorem, the same total lifetime.
- Explain the relationship without looking at the equation.
- Check a sign, a unit and a model assumption in your working.
- Return to the lab or worked example if a step is still unclear.