Casimir's Trick/Evaluating Cross Sections

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Spriteling
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cross
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating terms involving the 4-dimensional Levi Civita tensor contracted with the metric tensor in the context of neutrino-proton scattering. Participants explore the implications of symmetry properties and how they affect the evaluation of specific tensor products.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how to evaluate the term i \epsilon_{\alpha \mu \beta \nu} k'_{\alpha}k_{\beta}g^{\mu \nu} when contracting the hadronic and leptonic tensors.
  • Another participant asserts that the symmetry of the metric and the antisymmetry of the Levi Civita tensor imply that the term vanishes.
  • A follow-up question is posed regarding the evaluation of the term i \epsilon_{\alpha \mu \beta \nu} k'_{\alpha}k_{\beta}P^{\mu} P^{\nu}, suggesting a different configuration of vectors.
  • A participant responds that the product P^\mu P^\nu is symmetric, leading to the conclusion that this term also vanishes due to symmetry.
  • Further discussion anticipates the evaluation of i \epsilon_{\alpha \mu \beta \nu} k'^{\alpha}k^{\beta}P^{\mu} P'^{\nu}, noting that no simpler form exists, but provides a specific expression involving permutations of indices.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the implications of symmetry in the evaluated terms, leading to their vanishing. However, the discussion remains open regarding the evaluation of more complex tensor products, with no consensus on a simpler form for the last term discussed.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not resolve the evaluation of the last term completely, and assumptions about the properties of the tensors and vectors involved are not fully articulated.

Spriteling
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Hi all.

I'm working on a project at the moment, and I've run into some questions regarding the 4-d Levi Civita tensor contracted with the metric tensor.

I'm working on finding the cross-section for neutrino-proton scattering. While ccontracting the hadronic and leptonic tensors, I end up with a term like i \epsilon_{\alpha \mu \beta \nu} k'_{\alpha}k_{\beta}g^{\mu \nu} but I am uncertain as to how to evaluate this term. I've looked all through Griffiths and Halzen and Marten and I've googled but I can't find a definitive answer. Can anyone help?
(I'm sorry if this is in the wrong section; I wasn't sure if it should go here, as it is related to HEP, or int he homework help thing, which it isn't really, but it is a question..)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Symmetry of the metric (g^{\mu \nu}=g^{\nu \mu}) and total antisymmetry of \epsilon_{\alpha \mu \beta \nu} imply that \epsilon_{\alpha \mu \beta \nu}g^{\mu \nu}=0 (together with all possible permutations of indices). So all terms of that form vanish.
 
Ah, that makes quite a lot of sense.

What if, on the other hand, you have a term like i \epsilon_{\alpha \mu \beta \nu} k'_{\alpha}k_{\beta}P^{\mu} P^{\nu}? k, k' and P are all 4-vectors. How would you be able to evaluate this?
 
The product P^\mu P^\nu is symmetric under \mu\leftrightarrow\nu, so that term vanishes by symmetry as well. If there were a prime on one of the Ps, it would not.

To anticipate the next logical question, we can ask how to express i \epsilon_{\alpha \mu \beta \nu} k'^{\alpha}k^{\beta}P^{\mu} P'^{\nu}. There really isn't any simpler form to reduce it to, but we can note that

i \epsilon_{\alpha \mu \beta \nu} k'^{\alpha}k^{\beta}P^{\mu} P'^{\nu} = i\left( k'^0k^1P^2 P'^3 \pm \text{permutations} \right).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
708
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
985
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K