Explanation of Yukawa potential

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the Yukawa potential, its derivation, implications, and its relationship to scattering amplitudes in quantum mechanics. Participants explore theoretical aspects, mathematical formulations, and applications related to the Yukawa potential, including its connection to the charge distribution and the nature of interactions between particles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants describe the Yukawa potential as arising from a massive scalar field, characterized by the formula V(r)=-k\frac{exp(-\mu r)}{r}, noting its attractive nature and its reduction to the Coulomb potential when \mu = 0.
  • Others propose that the Yukawa potential can be viewed as a generalization of an inverse-square force potential, emphasizing the role of a massive mediator in force exchange.
  • A participant questions the treatment of the Fourier transformation of the Yukawa potential, arguing that it should depend on 4-momentum rather than just 3-momentum, and seeks clarification on this point.
  • Another participant mentions a problem from Jackson's E&M book regarding the derivation of charge distribution corresponding to the Yukawa potential, expressing difficulty in solving it.
  • Some participants discuss the barycentric system, suggesting it may limit the validity of the Yukawa potential to a center of mass frame, raising concerns about Lorentz invariance.
  • A later reply clarifies that the barycentric system is where total momentum equals zero, and that the Yukawa potential is primarily derived for two nucleons, noting its utility in non-relativistic calculations.
  • One participant expresses curiosity about other factors influencing nucleon-nucleon interactions and requests book recommendations for further study.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the implications of the Yukawa potential, particularly regarding its derivation and the treatment of momentum in scattering processes. There is no consensus on the reconciliation of the Fourier transformation issue, and the discussion remains unresolved on the broader implications of the Yukawa potential in different frames.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in understanding the full implications of the Yukawa potential, particularly concerning relativistic effects and the complexities of nucleon-nucleon interactions beyond the simple Yukawa model.

wofsy
Messages
724
Reaction score
0
I would appreciate an explanation of Yukawa potential
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Yukawa potential is the potential that arises from a massive scalar field. It is:

V(r)=-k\frac{exp(-\mu r)}{r}

where k>0 and \mu is the mass of the mediating field.

Note that:

1.) It is attractive (that is, F=-\frac{\partial V}{\partial r} is negative).

2.) It reduces to the Coulomb potential for \mu =0.
 
The Yukawa Potential can be roughly thought of as a generalization of an inverse-square force potential that takes into account a massive mediator or force. This would mean that instead of massless photons exchanging the force, as is the case with electromagnetism, some other particle with mass exchanges the force between two particles.
 
In the Wikipedia link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukawa_potential

it says that the Fourier transformation of the Yukawa potential is the amplitude for two fermions to scatter. But the Fourier transform ignores 4-momentum and only has 3-momentum. The amplitude to scatter should depend on a 4-momentum squared, and not 3-momentum. So how is this reconciled?
 
There is a problem in Jackson's E&M book which asks you to derive the charge distribution corresponding to this potential. I could never quite get it right.
 
may i know the page no and the problem to be solved in Jackson Book of E and M
 
RedX said:
In the Wikipedia link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukawa_potential

it says that the Fourier transformation of the Yukawa potential is the amplitude for two fermions to scatter. But the Fourier transform ignores 4-momentum and only has 3-momentum. The amplitude to scatter should depend on a 4-momentum squared, and not 3-momentum. So how is this reconciled?

I'm not as familiar with relativistic QM as I would like to be, but it seems like the given formula actually does depend on the four momentum. The k in transform corresponds to the three spatial components of the four-momentum while the m corresponds to mass, which in turn depends on the time component of the four-momentum. Why the fourth component of the four-momentum is left out of the Fourier Transform, on the other hand, is unfamiliar to me.

Brian_C said:
There is a problem in Jackson's E&M book which asks you to derive the charge distribution corresponding to this potential. I could never quite get it right.

It is known that, from the definition of V (in a static field) and the first of Maxwell's equations that:

\nabla\cdot\vec{E}=-\nabla ^2V=\frac{\rho}{\epsilon _0}

So that to find the charge density, one must simply take the negative Laplacian of the potential. This will work every where except for the origin, where you have to apply gauss's law and gauss's vector calculus equation to find the charge. I found:

\rho (r)=4\pi g^2\epsilon _0 \delta (r)-g^2m^2\frac{e^{-mr}}{r}
 
RedX said:
it says that the Fourier transformation of the Yukawa potential is the amplitude for two fermions to scatter. But the Fourier transform ignores 4-momentum and only has 3-momentum. The amplitude to scatter should depend on a 4-momentum squared, and not 3-momentum. So how is this reconciled?
The simplified version of the Yukawa derivation takes place in the barycentric system where the energy component of the 4-momentum transfer vanishes. Then the 3D Fourier T can be made.
 
  • #10
clem said:
The simplified version of the Yukawa derivation takes place in the barycentric system where the energy component of the 4-momentum transfer vanishes. Then the 3D Fourier T can be made.

Does barycentric system mean center of mass frame between the two fermions? Does this mean that the Yukawa potential is only valid in a center of mass frame, since you break Lorentz invariance by choosing a specific frame?
 
  • #11
clem said:
The simplified version of the Yukawa derivation takes place in the barycentric system where the energy component of the 4-momentum transfer vanishes. Then the 3D Fourier T can be made.

May I come to know about the barycentric systems
I have listened the word for the first time and I am curious to know about it because you have mentioned that it reduces the 4 momentum to 3- momentum
 
  • #12
The "barycentric system" is the Lorentz system in which the total momentum equals zero. It is usually loosely called (even by me) the center of mass (cm) system, even though the term "center of mass" has no clear meaning in relativity. The Yukawa potential is usually derived for two nucleons. Then the energy component of the 4-momentum transfer vanishes in the cm system because the two individual energies are equal. It is valid only in the cm system, where most calculations are made anyway. The simple Yukawa potential is used mainly in nonrelativitic calculations , because other effects become important at higher energies. The Yukawa potential by itself is now useful only for simple order of magnitude estimates because the full N-N interaction is more complicated. It does describe the long range part of the N-N potential.
 
  • #13
thanks a lot for such an eloborative reply
butit has increased my curicity
will you help me to tell what are the other factors responsible for N-N interactions
 
  • #14
You really need to go to a book on strong interactions now.
 
  • #15
I know it very well
that I am not known to all these things that's why I sk you for recommending me a book
(a specific book)
because I can have book from a library or may have it on rent before purchasing it
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K