Deriving classical potentials from tree diagrams

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on finding a suitable graduate-level textbook that explains how to derive classical potentials from tree-level Feynman processes, specifically using the S-matrix of Compton scattering to derive the Coulomb potential. A key recommendation is the book "Quantum Electrodynamics" by Berestetskii, Livshitz, and Pitaevskii, which discusses the derivation of the Breit potential from electron-positron scattering. The conversation also touches on the possibility of extending classical potential representations in quantum field theory (QFT) beyond tree level, incorporating loops and particle-number-changing interactions, referencing works by Greenberg and Schweber, and others. Additionally, the importance of the Born Transformation in textbooks is highlighted, with suggestions for alternatives to Sakurai's approach, such as Mandl & Shaw and Peskin & Schroeder, for constructing effective potentials through Fourier transforms of the M-matrix elements. The discussion emphasizes the need for resources that cover various spin forces in these derivations.
A/4
Messages
56
Reaction score
3
I'm looking for a good book for graduate students that indicates how one can obtain a (classical) potential from a tree-level Feynman process. For example, how can one go from the S-matrix of e.g. Compton scattering and derive the Coulomb potential. Any help would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A/4 said:
I'm looking for a good book for graduate students that indicates how one can obtain a (classical) potential from a tree-level Feynman process. For example, how can one go from the S-matrix of e.g. Compton scattering and derive the Coulomb potential. Any help would be appreciated.

I can recommend section 83 in

V. B. Berestetskii, E. M. Livs h itz, L. P. Pitaevskii, "Quantum electrodynamics"

where they derived the Breit potential (Coulomb+ magnetic + spin-orbit + spin-spin) of the electron-positron interaction from the 2nd order S-matrix element of the electron-positron scattering.

The Compton scattering S-matrix elements would yield the electron-photon potential. I have never seen such a derivation.

Eugene.
 
By the way, one can build a "classical" potential representation of QFT beyond the tree level, i.e., including loops etc. In this case, particle-number-changing potentials should be allowed as well. Then in addition to the Coulomb and electron-photons potentials one can get "potentials" for annihilation, bremsstrahlung, etc. This is the idea of the "dressed particle" approach, which also provides a consistent way of dealing with divergences. You can find more info in

O. W. Greenberg, S. S. Schweber, "Clothed particle operators in simple models of quantum field theory" Nuovo Cim. 8 (1958), 378

A. V. Shebeko, M. I. Shirokov, "Unitary transformations in quantum field theory and bound states" Phys. Part. Nucl. 32 (2001), 15; http://www.arxiv.org/abs/nucl-th/0102037

E. V. Stefanovich, "Relativistic quantum dynamics" http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0504062.

Eugene.
 
Perhaps some of the books of Sakurai, too?

For tree level, most books should have it under the topic, or the keyword index, of Born Transformation.

It should be interesting if someone can name a textbook containing examples both for spin 1, spin 0, and spin 2 forces. Or at least for spin 1 and spin 0 forces.
 
arivero said:
Perhaps some of the books of Sakurai, too?

For tree level, most books should have it under the topic, or the keyword index, of Born Transformation.

It should be interesting if someone can name a textbook containing examples both for spin 1, spin 0, and spin 2 forces. Or at least for spin 1 and spin 0 forces.

but Sakurai uses that old ict notation (so if you don't like it, like me these days, try Mandl & Shaw, Peskin & schroeder, see also Merzbacher, Quantum Mechanics)

according to Sakurai, to construct an effective 3-dim potential, once you know the non-relativistic limit of your covariant matrix element (the M-matrix), just Fourier Transform the lowest-order (ie. tree-level) M-matrix element. Something like:
V=\frac{1}{(2\pi)^3}\int\, \mathcal{M}_{i\rightarrow f} \;e^{i\vec p \cdot \vec x} d^3 p
 
Last edited:
I've gone through the Standard turbulence textbooks such as Pope's Turbulent Flows and Wilcox' Turbulent modelling for CFD which mostly Covers RANS and the closure models. I want to jump more into DNS but most of the work i've been able to come across is too "practical" and not much explanation of the theory behind it. I wonder if there is a book that takes a theoretical approach to Turbulence starting from the full Navier Stokes Equations and developing from there, instead of jumping from...

Similar threads

Back
Top