Breit Wigner for photon intermediates

  • Thread starter Thread starter bayners123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Photon Wigner
bayners123
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Hey!

I'm hoping someone can help me understand a basic problem I'm having with understanding the BW formula:

<br /> \sigma(i,j) = \frac{\pi}{k^2} \frac{\Gamma_i \Gamma_j}{(E - E_0)^2 + \Gamma}<br />

In this, E_0 is the "characteristic rest mass energy of the resonance." I thought this meant the rest mass of the intermediate particle for the resonance, but in the case of a photon how does this work?

Then I tried to consider the products, but surely the energy of the final system, and therefore it's rest mass, depends on the energy of the incident particles?

The specific reaction I'm trying to understand is e^- + e^+ \rightarrow \gamma \rightarrow \mu^- + \mu^+


Thanks for any help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What's wrong with the obvious, E0 = 0?
 
The Breit-Wigner is not appropriate for that reaction. It would be appropriate if you were going through a massive resonance, like a phi.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
The Breit-Wigner is not appropriate for that reaction. It would be appropriate if you were going through a massive resonance, like a phi.

Gotcha. Turns out that the resonances I was looking at are due to b\bar{b}^\star = \Upsilon^\star intermediates that decay to \Upsilons. For anyone else who stumbles on this, these are the resonances at ~10GeV.
 
Well you may be seeing another resonance, but I still think the Breit-Wigner form (or a limiting case of it) is entirely appropriate for a reaction like this. I'm Looking at Halzen and Martin, who analyze e+ e- → μ+ μ-, specifically for the interference effect caused by neutral currents. That is, the intermediate particle can either be γ or Z. They find the invariant matrix elements (ignoring nonessential factors)

Mγ = e2/s
MZ = g2/(s - MZ2 + iMZΓZ)

where s is the Mandelstam s. The latter is clearly Breit-Wigner, and the former a limiting case of it.
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top