Electron-positron annihilation diagram

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter CAF123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Annihilation Diagram
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the tree-level Feynman diagrams contributing to the electron-positron annihilation process, specifically ##e^+ e^- \rightarrow \gamma \gamma##. Participants confirm that two diagrams, the ##t##-channel and ##u##-channel, must be considered to satisfy Bose symmetry for the outgoing photons. The transition amplitude for this process is computed by summing the amplitudes of both diagrams, with the probability given by the squared sum of these amplitudes. Additionally, a connection to Compton scattering is noted, highlighting the crossing symmetry between the two processes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Feynman diagrams and tree-level processes
  • Knowledge of Bose symmetry in quantum field theory
  • Familiarity with transition amplitudes and probability calculations in particle physics
  • Basic concepts of Compton scattering and crossing symmetry
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of transition amplitudes in quantum electrodynamics (QED)
  • Learn about the implications of Bose symmetry in particle interactions
  • Explore the role of crossing symmetry in particle physics processes
  • Investigate the differences between t-channel and u-channel diagrams in various scattering processes
USEFUL FOR

Particle physicists, quantum field theorists, and students studying advanced quantum mechanics who are interested in understanding electron-positron interactions and Feynman diagram calculations.

CAF123
Gold Member
Messages
2,918
Reaction score
87
Just a quick question regarding the tree level Feynman diagram(s) contributing to this process - I am wondering if I wanted to compute the unpolarised transition amplitude for the annihilation ##e^+ e^- \rightarrow \gamma \gamma##, are there two tree level diagrams that contribute or just one?

I am thinking of an electron and positron as initial state, an electron/positron being the virtual particle and the two photons as the external state. (e.g photon a) tagged at vertex with the electron b) and another photon c) tagged at vertex with positron d)) That's one diagram. But I also thought, to take into account the bose symmetry, I would also need to consider an another diagram where photon a) is tagged at vertex with positron d) and another where photon c) is tagged at vertex with electron b)?

Is it correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
220px-Feynman_EP_Annihilation.svg.png

... what was the question?
 
Hi SimonBridge,

I have drawn what I think are the two contributing tree level processes for ##e^+ e^- \rightarrow 2\gamma##. I want to understand why we don't consider the ##t-## channel diagram on the left to be different from the ##u## channel diagram on the right.

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • diphoton.png
    diphoton.png
    3.1 KB · Views: 4,333
CAF123 said:
I want to understand why we don't consider the t− channel diagram on the left to be different from the u channel diagram on the right.

Who is doing this? I think you indeed have to consider both diagrams. But this is not exclusive to bosons, you would also get two diagrams of this kind with outgoing (indistinguishable) fermions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: CAF123
Of course, in the leading (tree-level) order there are the two diagrams you draw, and that's indeed important to fulfill Bose symmetry for the outgoing photons. The diagrams are ##t##- and ##u##-channel diagrams.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: CAF123 and BvU
Ok, many thanks for the confirmation - it is as I thought. So, if I was computing the (unpolarised) transition amplitude for this process I would sum the amplitudes for each of the t and u channel processes? Then a probability would be the square of this:

$$P(e^+ e^- \rightarrow 2 \gamma) = \frac{1}{4} \sum_{\text{spins,polarisations}} |\mathcal M_1+ \mathcal M_2|^2$$
 
That's right.
 
Ok thanks, I am aware of a crossing symmetry that exists between the unpolarised transition probability for compton scattering ##(e^- + \gamma \rightarrow e^- + \gamma)## and that for the case of diphoton production. We did compton scattering in the lecture and I put the notation we used for the process in an attachment, together with the case at hand in another notation.

It seems that by putting ##k \rightarrow k_1, \,\,\ q \rightarrow p_2\,\,\,\ q' \rightarrow p_1## I can get agreement between the two formulas for the unpolarised transition probability. The middle condition here I don't understand. Even though the photon with momentum q is in the initial state in compton scattering is it simply ok to put it to a photon of momentum ##p_2## in the final state of diphoton production?
Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • diphoton1.png
    diphoton1.png
    1.5 KB · Views: 682

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K