Dimensions of a probability amplitude (matrix element)?

In summary, the matrix element squared in a QFT calculation has different dimensions depending on whether it is used for a decay process or a cross section. This is due to differences in the phase space factors and results in a decay rate having dimensions of energy, while a cross section has dimensions of 1/(energy squared). This is a normal and expected result.
  • #1
fliptomato
78
0
Greetings. I'm a little bit confused about the dimensions of a probability amplitude in a QFT calculation. My understanding a the squared, spin averaged\summed Feynman diagram should be dimensionless. However, if we consider a decay process, say pair creation from a photon or the decay of the Higgs to two fermions, |M|^2 is dimensionful.

Quick check: the coupling constant of such a decay is dimensionless. There is no dimensionful factor for the initial state (scalar Higgs or photon). The matrix element is proportional to the external fermion factors. When these get spin averaged/summed we get traces of two quantities with dimensions of mass. Hence the matrix element squared has dimensions of mass squared.

Am I losing my mind?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
What about the integral over all of space (or momentum space)? Factors of dx^4 or dp^4 are not dimensionless.
 
  • #3
At tree level there is no momenum integral because there are no propagators. Heuristically, we have a particle at rest (say, a Higgs) with a given 4 momentum, that decays into a particle and antiparticle. By symmetry the decay products have equal masses/energies and opposite 3-momenta, hence all momenta in the system are constrained. the amplitude is just proportional to a dimensionless coupling times the external fermion factors. When this is summed for spins, the fermion factors become a trace of something with dimensions of mass squared.
 
  • #4
fliptomato said:
Greetings. I'm a little bit confused about the dimensions of a probability amplitude in a QFT calculation. My understanding a the squared, spin averaged\summed Feynman diagram should be dimensionless. However, if we consider a decay process, say pair creation from a photon or the decay of the Higgs to two fermions, |M|^2 is dimensionful.

Quick check: the coupling constant of such a decay is dimensionless. There is no dimensionful factor for the initial state (scalar Higgs or photon). The matrix element is proportional to the external fermion factors. When these get spin averaged/summed we get traces of two quantities with dimensions of mass. Hence the matrix element squared has dimensions of mass squared.

Am I losing my mind?

Even if you are at tree level, you need to integrate over the phase space to get the total cross section or the total decay rate. The phase space factors are different in the two cases (see eqs 4.79 and 4.86 in Peskin and Schroeder for example).

In addition, a decay rate has different units than a cross section. A cross-section has dimensions of 1/(energy)^2 (in natural units, [itex] c= \hbar=1[\itex]). A decay rate is in [itex] s^{-1} [/itex] in conventional units, so it must have the dimensions of (energy)^1 in natural units.

So it should not be surprising that the matrix element squared has different dimensions!

As you can see from the eqs in P&S, the phase space for the decay rate has the dimension of energy times the phase space of the cross section
(that comes fom the difference in phase space factors. For the differential cross section there is a factor [itex] {1 \over (2 E_A E_B (v_A-v_B))}[/itex] where A and B refer to the two initial particles and the v_A-v_B is the relative speed whereas in the expression for the differential decay rate one has only [itex]{1 \over 2E_A} = {1\over 2 m_A} [/itex] in the rest frame of the decaying particle).

Therefore, since the squared of the matrix element is dimensionless for the cross section but has dim of energy squared for the decay rate, as you pointed out, one finds
[tex] dim(d\Gamma)= E^3 \,\,\, dim(d\sigma) [/tex]
Since a cross section has dimensions of 1/(energy squared), this means that the decay rate will have dimensions of energy. Putting back the factors of hbar, this will turn into an inverse time, i.e [itex] s^{-1}[/itex] which is of course what is required for a decay rate.

Hope this helps.

Patrick
 
Last edited:

What are dimensions of a probability amplitude?

Dimensions of a probability amplitude refer to the number of rows and columns in a matrix element. This is determined by the number of states or basis vectors in the quantum system being described.

How do you calculate the dimensions of a probability amplitude?

The dimensions of a probability amplitude can be calculated by counting the number of states or basis vectors in the quantum system. For example, if a system has 3 possible states, the probability amplitude would have dimensions of 3x3.

Why are dimensions important in probability amplitudes?

Dimensions are important in probability amplitudes because they determine the size and shape of the matrix element, which affects its mathematical properties and how it interacts with other elements in the system.

How do dimensions of a probability amplitude relate to the principle of superposition?

The dimensions of a probability amplitude are directly related to the principle of superposition, which states that a quantum system can exist in multiple states simultaneously. The number of dimensions in the probability amplitude reflects the number of possible states that the system can be in.

Can the dimensions of a probability amplitude change?

Yes, the dimensions of a probability amplitude can change if the number of states or basis vectors in the quantum system changes. This can happen, for example, if an external force or measurement affects the system and alters its possible states.

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
941
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
0
Views
978
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
0
Views
472
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • Quantum Physics
3
Replies
87
Views
5K
Back
Top