Electron-positron annihilation

  • Thread starter sandy stone
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Annihilation
In summary: On a somewhat related note, I understand that QFT (QED) has made the most precise experimental predictions in history, but isn't it somewhat unsettling that after a thorough mathematical analysis you have to just ignore all your first-order expansion terms because they don't apply to reality?You are right that full renormalization is necessary in order to make predictions that are accurate to within an experimental uncertainty. However, it is worth noting that this accuracy comes at a cost: all subdiagrams that are connected to a bigger diagram by exactly two (external or internal) lines of the same kind are shrunken down to a single line of this kind, no matter how complicated the mess in between. This means that one is left with
  • #1
sandy stone
223
146
I am presently slogging through an introductory text on QFT (a Christmas present - does that officially make me a nerd?) and I have gotten as far as the Dyson expansion of the S operator and Wick's Theorem. The author dismisses all first-order terms of the expansion as being represented by single-vertex Feynman diagrams, which are unphysical. As an example, he uses the interaction where an electron and positron enter and a photon leaves, which is not possible because a real photon cannot carry away the 4-momentum the massive particles entered with. However, I am under the impression that an electron and positron annihilating to produce a high-energy photon is an experimentally observed interaction. Where am I going wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
sandy stone said:
However, I am under the impression that an electron and positron annihilating to produce a high-energy photon is an experimentally observed interaction
Annihilation produces TWO high-energy photons.
 
  • #3
Nugatory said:
Annihilation produces TWO high-energy photons.
Hence the corresponding tree diagram has two vertices joined by a fermion line, each with two external legs (a fermion and a photon).
 
  • #4
Ohhh... OK, that wasn't too hard. Thanks. On a somewhat related note, I understand that QFT (QED) has made the most precise experimental predictions in history, but isn't it somewhat unsettling that after a thorough mathematical analysis you have to just ignore all your first-order expansion terms because they don't apply to reality?
 
  • #5
sandy stone said:
you have to just ignore all your first-order expansion terms because they don't apply to reality?
This is just the simplest instance of a complicated process called renormalization that in fact does much more - it also shrinks all subdiagrams that are connected to a bigger diagram by exactly two (external or internal) lines of the same kind to a single line of this kind, no matter how complicated the mess in between. The result is that one is left with 1PI (1-particle-irreducible) diagrams with more than one vertex - these contain the real physics. Everything else is only scaffolding needed to set up the perturbative formalism in a consistent way.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
sandy stone said:
single-vertex Feynman diagrams, which are unphysical
In QED, their contribution to scattering processes is in fact exactly zero: External legs must correspond to on-shell particles with the correct mass. But a straightforward calculation shows (that you should do yourself - it is really instructive. Doing the same for the above tree diagram will reveal the difference!) that there is no way to assign momenta to the legs such that total momentum is conserved. Therefore the delta function in the corresponding integral forces the value of the integral to zero.

So only zeros are thrown away, which doesn't change any result but simplifies the analysis.

Full renormalization, on the other hand, achieves a miracle since it makes all infinities disappear. If you are interested in understanding why the miracle (stated everywhere, but hardly ever explained in an understandable way) is not just a happy accident, read my tutorial paper on renormalization!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes stevendaryl

What is electron-positron annihilation?

Electron-positron annihilation is a process in which an electron and a positron, which are two particles with opposite charge, collide and produce gamma rays. This process is also known as pair annihilation.

What is the significance of electron-positron annihilation in physics?

Electron-positron annihilation is important in understanding the fundamental forces and particles in the universe. It is one of the ways in which matter and antimatter interact, and the gamma rays produced are evidence of the conversion of mass into energy, as predicted by Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2.

How does electron-positron annihilation occur?

When an electron and a positron collide, they can annihilate each other and produce two or more gamma ray photons. The energy of the gamma rays is equal to the total mass of the particles multiplied by the speed of light squared (E=mc^2).

What are the applications of electron-positron annihilation?

Electron-positron annihilation has various applications in fields such as medical imaging, nuclear physics, and astrophysics. In medical imaging, it is used in positron emission tomography (PET) scans to produce images of the body's tissues and organs. In nuclear physics, it is used to study the properties of subatomic particles. In astrophysics, it is used to detect and study gamma rays emitted from distant stars and galaxies.

Can electron-positron annihilation be reversed?

No, electron-positron annihilation is an irreversible process. The mass of the particles is completely converted into energy in the form of gamma rays. However, the reverse process, where gamma rays can produce an electron-positron pair, is possible in the presence of a high-energy photon or a strong electric field.

Similar threads

Replies
23
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
238
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
642
Back
Top