Pair-production - how come it's always e+e-, never muons or tauons?

  • Thread starter Doofy
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Muons
In summary, the conversation discusses the production of particles in high energy collisions, specifically focusing on the production of electrons and positrons by photons. It is noted that while muon pairs are produced, they are suppressed by a factor of 1/40,000 compared to electrons. Additionally, it is clarified that the particle should be referred to as a "tau lepton" rather than a "tauon". The reason for this suppression is explained to be a 1/m^2 dependence in the production cross-section, which is due to the Coulomb field of the nucleus. Overall, the conversation provides insights into the production of particles in high energy collisions and addresses the terminology surrounding the tau particle.
  • #1
Doofy
74
0
Everyone is familiar with photons pair-producing electrons and positrons, but how come it never seems to be a mu+ / mu- or tau+/tau- pair that gets produced, even when the photon is at a sufficient energy to produce any of these?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
First, there is no such thing as a "tauon". It's a "tau lepton".

Second, muon pairs are produced - it's just suppressed by a factor of at least 1/40,000.
 
  • #3
Vanadium 50 said:
First, there is no such thing as a "tauon". It's a "tau lepton".

Second, muon pairs are produced - it's just suppressed by a factor of at least 1/40,000.

I thought tau and tauon were interchangeable, I went for tauon to keep consistency with muon and electron.

Anyway, what is the reason for that supression?
 
  • #4
Doofy said:
I thought tau and tauon were interchangeable

They're not. I say again, there is no such thing as a "tauon". It's "tau lepton".

There is a 1/m^2 dependence to the production cross-section, which is 40000x smaller for muons than electrons.
 
  • #5
Vanadium 50 said:
They're not. I say again, there is no such thing as a "tauon". It's "tau lepton".

There is a 1/m^2 dependence to the production cross-section, which is 40000x smaller for muons than electrons.

ah right, that's that mystery solved. cheers.

PS. the wiki article on tau leptons reckons tauon is a valid name (1st line):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tau_(particle)
 
  • #6
"Tau" is by far the dominant name for the particle. I was in grad school when it was discovered. I wrote a Monte-Carlo simulation of ##\nu_\tau + N \rightarrow \tau + X## followed by ##\tau \rightarrow e + \bar \nu_e + \nu_\tau## decay in an attempt to find tau-neutrino events in the neutrino experiment that I was working with. I don't remember any of the papers that I read, or people I talked to, using the name "tauon." Nor do I specifically remember seeing the name in the 30+ years since then, although I've kept only peripheral touch with the field.

Nevertheless, a search on http://scholar.google.com for "tauon" does turn up a number of hits, including published papers from 2010 and 2011 on the first page. So it's not unheard of.
 
  • #7
Spires has 8 records for "tauon"* (and nearly 5000 for "tau"). Four are from one author (and three of those are unpublished) and are only cited by this one author. One was changed to tau by the journal, and one was a thesis. Of the remaining two, they are in the same journal - a journal where the style guide says not to use it.

I think we can safely say that this vocabulary isn't used. At least not by anyone who knows anything - Wikipedia notwithstanding.

* Compare that to a dozen references to "relativistic mass". (Including a lovely paper by Lev Okun, "The virus of relativistic mass in the year of physics")
 
  • #8
jtbell said:
"Tau" is by far the dominant name for the particle. I was in grad school when it was discovered. I wrote a Monte-Carlo simulation of ##\nu_\tau + N \rightarrow \tau + X## followed by ##\tau \rightarrow e + \bar \nu_e + \nu_\tau## decay in an attempt to find tau-neutrino events in the neutrino experiment that I was working with. I don't remember any of the papers that I read, or people I talked to, using the name "tauon." Nor do I specifically remember seeing the name in the 30+ years since then, although I've kept only peripheral touch with the field.

Nevertheless, a search on http://scholar.google.com for "tauon" does turn up a number of hits, including published papers from 2010 and 2011 on the first page. So it's not unheard of.
Vanadium 50 said:
Spires has 8 records for "tauon"* (and nearly 5000 for "tau"). Four are from one author (and three of those are unpublished) and are only cited by this one author. One was changed to tau by the journal, and one was a thesis. Of the remaining two, they are in the same journal - a journal where the style guide says not to use it.

I think we can safely say that this vocabulary isn't used. At least not by anyone who knows anything - Wikipedia notwithstanding.

* Compare that to a dozen references to "relativistic mass". (Including a lovely paper by Lev Okun, "The virus of relativistic mass in the year of physics")

ah right, well I will abandon the term then. You can blame the British education system, that word has been floating around in my head since I was a GCSE or A-level student and that's definitely where I got it from.
 
  • #10
No, V50 is right, there's a 1/m2 dependence, even far away from threshold.

To be clear, this is not pair production from photon-photon collisions. This is pair production from a single photon in the Coulomb field of a nucleus. Jauch and Rohrlich give the total cross-section in the high energy limit as

σ = αZ2r02(A ln(ħω/mc2) - B)

where α of course is the fine structure constant, Z is the number of protons in the nucleus, A and B are ugly numerical constants you don't want to look at, and r0 = e2/4πmc2 is the classical electron (or muon!) radius. The r02 is what produces the 1/m2 dependence.
 
  • #11
If A and B are typically O(1), then I concede. But how do they behave at high energies?
 
  • #12
As I said, they are just numerical constants which I didn't want to write down. Oh well, A = 28/9 and B = 218/27.
 
  • #13
jtbell said:
"Tau" is by far the dominant name for the particle. I was in grad school when it was discovered. I wrote a Monte-Carlo simulation of ##\nu_\tau + N \rightarrow \tau + X## followed by ##\tau \rightarrow e + \bar \nu_e + \nu_\tau## decay in an attempt to find tau-neutrino events in the neutrino experiment that I was working with. I don't remember any of the papers that I read, or people I talked to, using the name "tauon." Nor do I specifically remember seeing the name in the 30+ years since then, although I've kept only peripheral touch with the field.

Nevertheless, a search on http://scholar.google.com for "tauon" does turn up a number of hits, including published papers from 2010 and 2011 on the first page. So it's not unheard of.
When I was in grad school there was an older professor who consistently called it a "tauon". He also consistently referred to the muon as the "mu meson" - as it had originally been called, due to the similarity in pi and mu masses - although by then that was considered to be flat-out wrong, since the mu ain't a meson.

I guess there are all kinds of names that get forgotten - I'm glad you don't see too many references to the "truth" and "beauty" quarks any more; those were still being used by a minority of physicists when I was a student. I'm looking forward to the day when no one remembers that anyone (especially physicists) ever called the Higgs the "god particle". :-)
 

Related to Pair-production - how come it's always e+e-, never muons or tauons?

1. Why is the product of pair-production always e+e- instead of other particles like muons or tauons?

The product of pair-production is always e+e- because electrons and positrons are the lightest charged particles and therefore require the least amount of energy to be produced.

2. Can other particles like muons or tauons be produced through pair-production?

Yes, muons and tauons can be produced through pair-production, but they require a significantly higher amount of energy compared to electrons and positrons.

3. How does the energy of the incoming photon affect the production of e+e- pairs?

The energy of the incoming photon is directly related to the energy of the produced e+e- pairs. Higher energy photons have a higher probability of producing e+e- pairs, while lower energy photons may not have enough energy to produce any pairs.

4. Is the process of pair-production only limited to photon interactions?

No, pair-production can also occur through interactions with other particles, such as protons or other high energy particles. However, photons are the most common source of energy for pair-production.

5. Can pair-production occur in a vacuum?

Yes, pair-production can occur in a vacuum as long as there is enough energy present to create the particles. In fact, pair-production is commonly observed in high energy particle physics experiments conducted in a vacuum.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top