# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The CPLEAR collaboration has measured  a hitherto unreported C- and CP-asymmetry in $`\overline{p}p`$ annihilation which, under reasonable assumptions, can be identified with a previously predicted  T-asymmetry. Until now, there has been no credible evidence of any departure from reciprocity in any reaction; also, questions have been raised  about the significance of the test proposed in Ref. . Therefore, it may be useful to critically examine the circumstances under which the C- and CP-asymmetry reported by CPLEAR can be interpreted as a demonstration of deviation from T-invariance. We indicate further tests, and the conditions which must be satisfied for the CP-asymmetry found by CPLEAR to be consistent with T-invariance.

## 2 Expectation of T-Asymmetry

The departure from CP-invariance in neutral kaon decays has been reliably established  by a number of independent measurements, including a predicted asymmetry  in $`K_L\pi ^+\pi ^{}e^+e^{}`$ decays which has been observed recently . However, despite many searches, there has been no clear evidence of CP-noninvariance in any phenomenon other than neutral kaon decays. There,the observed effects can be attributed entirely to $`K^0\overline{K}^0`$ mixing, which could arise from CP-noninvariant interactions much weaker  than the weak interactions responsible for the decay of kaons. This may explain the failure to see measureable CP-asymmetric effects in other phenomena.

Invariance of physical laws under inversion  of 4-dimensional space-time — which is not required by Lorentz-invariance but obtains in most Lorentz-invariant theories with further minimal analytic properties, e.g. field theories described by local Lagrangians — can be given a consistent interpretation only if space-time inversion PT is accompanied by particle-antiparticle conjugation C. Within the class of such TCP-invariant theories, lack of symmetry with respect to any of the constituent operations, e.g. particle-antiparticle exchange C or “combined inversion” CP, in which space-coordinates are inverted simultaneously with particle-antiparticle interchange, must be compensated by a corresponding asymmetry with respect to one or more of the other constituent operations, to preserve the overall TCP- symmetry. On this basis, Lee, Oehme and Yang  showed that the possible noninvariance with respect to space-inversion proposed  to explain the “tau-theta puzzle” necessarily required another presumed symmetry to be broken; they showed that observation of the suggested P-noninvariant effects would require C-invariance also to be broken. An elegant way to preserve the symmetry of space, even if P is abandoned, suggested by several authors , is to require exact CP-symmetry, in which case TCP-invariance would automatically assure exact T-invariance as well. The subsequent discovery  that CP is not a valid symmetry in K-meson decays, requires T-invariance also to fail if TCP-invariance is to survive. Following the discovery  of parity- nonconservation, searches  for T-noninvariance were based largely on philosophical grounds: if physical laws are not indifferent to space-inversion, perhaps they might not be symmetric with respect to $`t`$-inversion either. After the discovery of CP-nonconservation, the search for T-noninvariance became a logical imperative. Either T-invariance would also fail, as TCP-invariance requires, or one would face the even greater challenge of TCP-noninvariance.

As long as deviations from CP-symmetry are confined to neutral kaon decays and associated effects, the only place where one has a definite expectation of seeing T-noninvariance must be in the same phenomena. Furthermore, if TCP-invariance is valid, the observed CP- noninvariance manifested in neutral kaon decays must be accompanied by corresponding deviations from T-invariance, which is more precisely described as symmetry with respect to motion-reversal. TCP-invariance requires

$$(\stackrel{~}{a}_T|S|\stackrel{~}{b}_T)=(b|S|a)$$
(1)   
where $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ represents the CP-transform of the channel $`c`$ and $`c_T`$ represents its time-reverse, viz. the channel $`c`$ with all particle momenta and spins reversed. The requirement of CP-invariance:

$$(\stackrel{~}{b}|S|\stackrel{~}{a})=(b|S|a)$$
(2)   
taken together with Eq. (1), would require that

$$(\stackrel{~}{a}_T|S|\stackrel{~}{b}_T)=(\stackrel{~}{b}|S|\stackrel{~}{a})$$
(3)   
i.e. CP-invariance requires reciprocity if TCP-invariance is valid. Conversely, if the requirement, Eq. (2), of CP-invariance fails for a related pair of transition matrix-elements, there must be a corresponding failure of reciprocity in the same case .

We already mentioned that a very feeble CP-noninvariant interaction contributing to $`K^0\overline{K}^0`$ mixing suffices to account for all observed CP-asymmetric effects. Therefore, the departure from T-invariance expected on the basis of TCP-invariance must also appear in $`K^0\overline{K}^0`$ mixing. Departure from reciprocity would appear in a difference between the rates of $`\overline{K}^0K^0`$ and $`K^0\overline{K}^0`$ transitions, expressed by a T-asymmetry parameter:

$$A_T=\frac{P_{K\overline{K}}(\tau )P_{\overline{K}K}(\tau )}{P_{K\overline{K}}(\tau )+P_{\overline{K}K}(\tau )}$$
(4)   
which is found to be a constant in the generalized Weisskopf-Wigner approximation. Its value is given by

$$A_T^{\mathrm{th}}=2\mathrm{Re}(ϵ_S+ϵ_L)=2\mathrm{Re}K_L|K_S$$
(5)   
to lowest order in the CP-nonconserving parameters $`ϵ_{S,L}`$, defined by

$$K_{S,L}[1+ϵ_{S,L}]K^0\pm [1ϵ_{S,L}]\overline{K}^0.$$
(6)   
TCP-invariance requires  $`ϵ_S`$ and $`ϵ_L`$ to be equal; on that basis, the value of $`A_T`$ could be predicted to be 4Re$`ϵ=(6.4\pm 1.2)\times 10^3`$ . Even without assuming any symmetry, the last quantity on the right-hand side of Eq. (5) can be deduced by appeal to unitarity . On the basis of reasonable assumptions, the most relevant of which were subsequently verified , about upper limits on minor modes of neutral kaon decay, it was shown  that the expected T-asymmetry should have substantially the value predicted for the TCP-invariant case, whether that symmetry is assumed or not.

## 3 CP-Asymmetry Measured by CPLEAR

$`\overline{p}p`$ annihilations into  $`\pi ^+K^{}`$$`K^0`$” and $`\pi ^{}K^+`$$`\overline{K}^0`$”, which are expected to occur equally frequently by CP-invariance, were selected by kinematic analysis, and the frequencies of beta-decay of the neutral kaons were compared for the two cases. If we accept the $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=\mathrm{\Delta }Q`$ rule  which requires that $`\pi ^{}e^+\nu `$ and $`\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }`$ arise only from $`K^0`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$, respectively, and assume that the two decay rates are equal, as required by TCP-invariance, then the observed $`\pi ^{}e^+\nu `$ and $`\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }`$ rates at any time $`\tau `$ measure the $`K^0`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ populations at that time. Assuming initial equality of $`K^0`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ populations and survival probabilities, any inequality between the observed annihilation rates into:

$$p\overline{p}\pi ^+K^{}\{\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }\}\mathrm{and}\pi ^{}K^+\{\pi ^{}e^+\nu \}$$
(7)   
must arise from a difference between $`\overline{K}^0K^0`$ and $`K^0\overline{K}^0`$ transition rates. This is the conclusion drawn by CPLEAR.

The CP-asymmetry which they measure is:

$$A_l=\frac{R[\pi ^+K^{}\{\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }\}]R[\pi ^{}K^+\{\pi ^{}e^+\nu \}]}{R[\pi ^+K^{}\{\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }\}]+R[\pi ^{}K^+\{\pi ^{}e^+\nu \}]}$$
(8)   
In Eqs. (7) and (8), the $`\pi e\nu `$ configurations in braces are observed as (delayed) end-products deduced kinematically to arise from beta-decays of neutral kaons. Assuming the validity of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=\mathrm{\Delta }Q`$ rule, this asymmetry can be written as:

$$A_l=\frac{P_{K\overline{K}}(\tau )R[K^0\pi ^{}e^+\nu ]P_{\overline{K}K}(\tau )R[\overline{K}^0\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }]}{P_{K\overline{K}}(\tau )R[K^0\pi ^{}e^+\nu ]+P_{\overline{K}K}(\tau )R[\overline{K}^0\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }]}.$$
(9)   
TCP-invariance requires that

$$R[K^0\pi ^{}e^+\nu ]=R[\overline{K}^0\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }],$$

therefore, under the assumption of TCP-invariance, the CPLEAR asymmetry becomes

$$A_l^{\mathrm{TCP}}=\frac{P_{K\overline{K}}(\tau )P_{\overline{K}K}(\tau )}{P_{K\overline{K}}(\tau )+P_{\overline{K}K}(\tau )}=A_T$$
(10)   
which is a measure of T-asymmetry at the same time as CP-asymmetry. Over a time-interval $`\tau _S<\tau <20\tau _S`$, the observed asymmetry is consistent with being a constant, with a value reported as

$$A_T^{\mathrm{exp}}=(6.6\pm 1.3)\times 10^3$$
(11)   
which agrees with the theoretical prediction. On the other hand, if we insist on exact reciprocity,

$$P_{K\overline{K}}(\tau )=P_{\overline{K}K}(\tau ),$$
(12)   
then Eq. (9) reduces, for the case of exact T-invariance, to

$$A_l^T=\frac{R[K^0\pi ^{}e^+\nu ]R[\overline{K}^0\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }]}{R[K^0\pi ^{}e^+\nu ]+R[\overline{K}^0\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }]}$$
(13)   
and represents a ( CP- and ) CPT-violating effect. The observed asymmetry $`A_l`$, Eq. (8), requires the beta-decay rate for $`K^0\pi ^{}e^+\nu `$ to exceed that for $`\overline{K}^0\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }`$ by about 1.3$`\%`$, if exact T-invariance is imposed. If we parametrize the deviation from TCP-invariance of kaon beta-decay amplitudes by setting :

$$\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }|T|\overline{K}^0=(1+y)\pi ^{}e^+\nu |T|K^0$$
(14)   
where $`y`$ can be taken to be real without loss of generality, the CP-asymmetry, Eq. (13), is given, to lowest order in $`y`$, by -$`y`$; $`y`$ is therefore required to have the value:

$$y=(6.6\pm 1.3)\times 10^3$$
(15)   
if exact T-invariance is demanded.

The charge-asymmetry in $`K_L^0\pi e\nu `$ decays was accurately measured in several concordant experiments, whose combined result is quoted as :

$$\delta _l=(3.27\pm 0.12)\times 10^3$$
(16)   
The phenomenological analysis without assumption of any symmetry, but assuming the validity of $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q=\mathrm{\Delta }S`$, yields 

$$\delta _{l,L}=2\mathrm{Re}ϵ_Ly.$$
(17)   
The corresponding quantity for $`K_S^0`$ decays is

$$\delta _{l,S}=2\mathrm{Re}ϵ_Sy.$$
(18)   
T-invariance requires $`ϵ_S=ϵ_L`$, therefore Eqs. (17) and (18) would constrain the leptonic charge-asymmetry from $`K_S^0`$ decays to have the value:

$$\delta _{l,S}^T=\delta _{l,L}2y=(9.9\pm 1.3)\times 10^3,$$
(19)   
viz. three times the value, Eq. (16), for $`K_L^0\pi e\nu `$ decays, if T-invariance is to be sustained. The CPLEAR data probably contain the information required to confirm or refute this expectation . If not, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$-decays from DA$`\mathrm{\Phi }`$NE, which provide a certified $`K_S^0`$ in association with each $`K_L^0`$ decay, should provide a clean $`K_S^0`$ sample to test the unambiguous prediction (19) required by the hypothesis of T-invariance.

## 4 Conclusions

The simplest interpretation of the CPLEAR asymmetry, reported in Eq. (11), is that it exhibits the T-asymmetry predicted previously, and confirms the sign and magnitude of the expected effect. To this, the logical objection may be raised that the CP-asymmetry measured by CPLEAR translates into the T-asymmetry factor $`A_T`$ defined in Eq. (4) only if the $`\overline{p}p`$ annihilation rates into $`\pi ^+K^{}K^0`$ and $`\pi ^{}K^+\overline{K}^0`$ and the beta-decay rates for $`K^0\pi ^{}e^+\nu `$ and for $`\overline{K}^0\pi ^+e^{}\overline{\nu }`$ are assumed to be equal. The latter is required by TCP-invariance; but if one is prepared to accept TCP as an article of faith, then T-noninvariance follows as soon as CP-invariance fails and no further demonstration is required. Analysis of the CPLEAR asymmetry, without assuming equality of $`K^0`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ beta-decay rates, shows that, subject to the $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q=\mathrm{\Delta }S`$ rule, the leptonic charge-asymmetry for $`K_S^0\pi e\nu `$ decays should be three times larger than the measured asymmetry for $`K_L^0`$ decays, if T-invariance is valid. Thus, it should not be too difficult to distinguish between the simple interpretation of the CPLEAR charge-asymmetry as a direct demonstration of T-noninvariance, and the desperate and radical resort to TCP-noninvariance required to preserve T-invariance; these are the only two alternatives unless one is willing to countenance unequal $`production`$ of $`K^0`$ and $`\overline{K}^0`$ in $`\overline{p}p`$ annihilations.

## 5 Acknowledgments

I thank G.V. Dass, G. Karl, and A. Pilaftsis for careful reading of the manuscript and for helpful suggestions to clarify its meaning.