Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Amplitude for fermion-fermion Yukawa scattering

  1. Sep 24, 2014 #1

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Suppose that we have that:
    [itex]\mathcal{M} = c \bar{u}^{s'}(p') u^s(p) \bar{u}^{r'}(k') u^r(k) [/itex]

    For a fermion fermion scattering: [itex] f(k,r)+ f(p,s) \rightarrow f(k',r')+ f(p',s') [/itex]

    Now if I want to calculate the polarization summed and averaged squared amplitude:

    [itex]\frac{|c|^2}{4} \sum_{r,r',s,s'} \bar{u}^{s'}(p') u^s(p) \bar{u}^{r'}(k') u^r(k) \bar{u}^{r}(k) u^{r'}(k') \bar{u}^{s}(p) u^{s'}(p')[/itex]

    In index form I think this can be written:
    [itex]\frac{|c|^2}{4} \sum_{r,r',s,s'} \sum_{a,b,c,d} \bar{u}^{s'}(p')_a u^s(p)_a \bar{u}^{r'}(k')_b u^r(k)_b \bar{u}^{r}(k)_c u^{r'}(k')_c \bar{u}^{s}(p)_d u^{s'}(p')_d[/itex]
    So I can move the spinors around, no? So that I will finally get:
    [itex] \frac{|c|^2}{4} Tr \Big( [p+m][p'+m] \Big) Tr \Big( [k+m][k'+m] \Big) [/itex]?

    where the momenta in the trace are in fact slashed...
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 24, 2014 #2

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Looks reasonable to me.
     
  4. Sep 24, 2014 #3

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Also I have one more question concerning this...
    When you move the spinors, do you get a - for each commutation?
     
  5. Sep 24, 2014 #4

    arivero

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yukawa?
     
  6. Sep 24, 2014 #5

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    yes Yukawa....
    The expression for the amplitude looks like the case for a very low energetic scalar propagator... So that [itex]c = \frac{1}{q^2-m^2} \rightarrow -\frac{1}{m^2}[/itex]
     
  7. Sep 24, 2014 #6

    arivero

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Nice

    I wonder, then... is it not possible to get a repulsive Yukawa core in Quantum Field Theory?
     
  8. Sep 24, 2014 #7

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I think all the yukawa couplings have attractive potential only....both for fermion-fermion and antifermion-fermion...
     
  9. Sep 24, 2014 #8

    arivero

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yep, even spin seems to imply atractive potential.... what about a massive photon?
     
  10. Sep 25, 2014 #9

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    What about it? It doesn't have a Yukawa coupling because it's a vector boson...?
     
  11. Sep 25, 2014 #10

    arivero

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Well, it is not a Yukawa coupling, but can it be approximated by a Yukawa potential? I was wondering how to use QFT to produce a repulsive Yukawa potential. It seems that spin 0 and spin 2 always generate universally attractive potentials when you do the Born approximation.
     
  12. Sep 25, 2014 #11

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    hmmm...I am not entirely sure if that would be the case, but you can always look at what happens with the [itex]W^\pm ,Z^0[/itex] bosons, which are spin 1 and have mass. The reason I say that is that although the Yukawa potential appears always repulsive, the repulsion of the Coulomb potential is a result of the metric [itex]g_{00} = -1 [/itex], whereas its attraction is a result of the [itex]\gamma^0 [/itex] which exists in the vertex (which doesn't exist for the yukawa). So I think it's because the Lagrangian for the EM (spin-1 particles) comes with the [itex]\gamma^{\mu}[/itex] to keep lorentz invariance (the product [itex]\gamma^{\mu}D_{\mu}[/itex], in contrast to the Yukawa which doesn't need it (you have a scalar propagator).

    However I'd try writing:
    If you allow a massive [small value] photon, then you can indeed get a Yukawa potential [since the EM potential can be obtained from the Yukawa by sending m to zero]. However instead of using the exponential as it is, you can expand it:
    [itex]V= -\frac{g^2}{4 \pi r} e^{-mr} \approx - \frac{g^2}{4 \pi r} + \frac{m g^2}{4 \pi} - \frac{g^2}{8 \pi} m^2 r + \mathcal{O}(m^3)[/itex]

    The first term can allow for attractive and repulsive forces, depending on the charges of your particles (practically it's the coulomb potential). The middle term is just a constant term, so it can be neglected so you are left appoximately with:
    [itex]V= V_{C} + V_{a} [/itex] with [itex]V_a = - \frac{g^2}{8 \pi} m^2 r [/itex]
    I am not quiet sure if this tells us anything, it's a weird result since it implies some confinement. However I'd say that partially it can. It would denote a mass for the photon if such a term could exist, at least for the scalar part (unphysical/ghost) of the photon. What do you think?
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2014
  13. Sep 25, 2014 #12

    nrqed

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    No because at that stage you are not dealing with quantum fields, just with matrices and vectors.
     
  14. Sep 25, 2014 #13

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Amplitude for fermion-fermion Yukawa scattering
  1. Fermions are massless (Replies: 8)

  2. Proton as a fermion (Replies: 7)

  3. Vectorlike fermion (Replies: 5)

  4. Fermions and Bosons (Replies: 34)

Loading...