Differential cross sections in Peskin & Schroeder

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of differential cross sections as presented in Peskin & Schroeder, specifically regarding the integration over constrained momentum components in the context of scattering processes involving two final-state particles. Participants explore the implications of energy-momentum conservation and the role of delta functions in defining the differential cross section.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how to integrate over constrained variables when defining the differential cross section, questioning the clarity of Peskin & Schroeder's statement regarding the integration process.
  • Another participant suggests that the initial assumption of having completed the four integrations may be incorrect, indicating that specifying angles θ and φ does not fully determine the final momenta without considering energy-momentum conservation.
  • A further participant raises the question of whether the unintegrated form of the differential cross section would include delta functions, arguing that the definition must account for 4-momentum conservation to avoid yielding non-physical results.
  • Another contribution points out that the transition matrix includes terms dependent on momentum variables and that the presence of a delta function for conservation is crucial for reducing the variables in the calculation.
  • One participant confirms the existence of an energy-momentum conserving delta function and references a specific equation in the text to support their point about the invariant matrix element.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; there are multiple competing views regarding the interpretation of the integration process and the role of delta functions in defining the differential cross section.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential ambiguities in the definitions and assumptions related to momentum conservation and the integration of constrained variables, which may affect the clarity of the argument presented in Peskin & Schroeder.

VantagePoint72
Messages
820
Reaction score
34
I'm a bit confused by something Peskin & Schroeder say about differential cross sections. In my printing, this is on page 101 in the paragraph preceding the one that contains eq. 4.62:

"In the simplest case, where there are only two final-state particles, this leaves only two unconstrained momentum components, usually taken to be the angles \theta and \phi of the momentum of one of the particles. Integrating d\sigma/(d^3p_1d^3p_2) over the four constrained momentum components then leaves us with the usual differential cross section d\sigma/d\Omega."

The second sentence seems like a very odd thing to say. How do you integrate over constrained variables? They have defined the generic differential cross d\sigma/(d^3p_1...d^3p_n) as the quantity that, when integrated over any small region d^3p_1...d^3p_n in final momentum space, gives the cross section for scattering into a state with momenta in that region. So, for two particles, if we specify small ranges for \theta and \phi for one of the final momenta then we have specified the entire region d^3p_1...d^3p_n in final momentum space. We can't integrate over the remaining components because they've already been fixed. So what exactly do P&S mean?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you're already assuming that the four integrations have been done which by the fact that you have an energy-momentum conserving delta function, relates all the other variables to θ and ϕ.
before integrating over the "constrained" variables (or taking into account energy-momentum conservation) specifying θ and ϕ does not specify the final momenta completely.
 
So would the unintegrated form contain delta functions? Otherwise, it still wouldn't make sense. As d\sigma/(d^3p_1...d^3p_n) is associated with the probability for scattering into a particular momentum state, it must be identically zero when evaluated at any (\vec{p}_1,...,\vec{p}_n) that don't satisfy 4-momentum conservation. I.e., to be consistent with the definition of the cross section, it must vanish for any impossible final momentum states—which include those don't satisfy 4-momentum conservation. Only a delta function does that.
 
Does not your transition matrix contains terms dependent on momentum variables.Also there is a 4 delta function for conservation of energy and momentum which is always multiplied by this transition matrix square to get cross section.you can use this delta function to reduce the variables.
 
yes there will be an energy momentum conserving delta function.
look at equation 4.73 (pg 104), when he defines the invariant matrix element.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K