Electron-positron annihilation diagram

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the tree level Feynman diagrams contributing to the electron-positron annihilation process into two photons, specifically focusing on the computation of the unpolarised transition amplitude for the process ##e^+ e^- \rightarrow \gamma \gamma##. Participants explore the number of contributing diagrams and the implications of Bose symmetry in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether there are one or two tree level diagrams contributing to the annihilation process, considering the roles of the electron and positron as virtual particles.
  • Another participant presents their drawn diagrams for the process and seeks clarification on the distinction between the ##t##-channel and ##u##-channel diagrams.
  • Some participants assert that both diagrams must be considered to satisfy Bose symmetry for the outgoing photons.
  • There is a discussion about summing the amplitudes for the ##t## and ##u## channel processes to compute the transition probability.
  • A later reply introduces the concept of crossing symmetry between the unpolarised transition probabilities for Compton scattering and diphoton production, questioning the interchangeability of photon momenta in the context of these processes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that there are two contributing diagrams necessary for the process to fulfill Bose symmetry. However, there is some uncertainty regarding the treatment of the ##t## and ##u## channel diagrams and the implications of crossing symmetry, indicating that multiple views remain on these aspects.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the conditions under which photon momenta can be interchanged between different processes, highlighting the need for careful consideration of definitions and assumptions in these 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: 4,340
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: 693

Similar threads

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