From Feynman diagrams to potential

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving a potential from Feynman diagrams, specifically focusing on the transition from a relativistic quantum mechanical framework to a non-relativistic potential. Participants explore the mathematical formulations and transformations necessary to achieve this, referencing specific equations from a textbook.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in deriving the potential formula from a given amplitude, seeking suggestions or insights.
  • Another participant suggests taking the non-relativistic limit of the matrix element and performing a Fourier transform to obtain the potential.
  • It is noted that the exponential term in the potential arises from the Fourier transform of the propagator, but the derivation of certain terms remains unclear to some participants.
  • Multiple methods for transforming the relativistic potential to a non-relativistic one are mentioned, including the Foldy-Wouthuysen transformation and the 'big-small' components approach.
  • There is a discussion about the treatment of spinors in the calculations, with some participants suggesting they can be temporarily disregarded.
  • A later reply emphasizes the importance of conservation principles in the derivation process, suggesting that the expression should depend on a specific momentum transfer variable.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the approach of taking the non-relativistic limit and performing a Fourier transform, but there is no consensus on the specific steps or methods to achieve the desired potential. Disagreements exist regarding the treatment of certain terms and the implications of different transformations.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific equations and methods from a textbook, indicating that the discussion is heavily dependent on the definitions and assumptions presented therein. The derivation steps remain unresolved, with participants expressing uncertainty about specific transformations and integrations.

Thor Shen
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
I met a problem when I read the textbook "Relativistic Quantum Mechanics" by J.D.Bjorken. He said we can get the potential
V(r_1,r_2)=\frac{f^{2}}{\mu^{2}}(1-P_{ex})(\tau_1\cdot\tau_2)(\sigma_1\cdot\nabla_1)(\sigma_2\cdot\nabla_1)\frac{e^{-\mu|r_1-r_{2}|}}{|r_1-r_{2}|}
(10.51)
from the amplitude
S_{fi}=\frac{(-ig_0)^2M^2}{(2\pi)^2\sqrt{E_1E_2E&#039;_1E&#039;_2}}(2\pi)^4\delta^4(p_1+p_2-p&#039;_1-p&#039;_2){[\chi^{+}_1\bar{u}(p&#039;_1)i\gamma^5\tau u(p_1)\chi_1]\frac{i}{(p&#039;_1-p_1)^2-\mu^2}\cdot[\chi^{+}_2\bar{u}(p&#039;_2)i\gamma^5\tau u(p_2)\chi_2]<br /> -[\chi^{+}_2\bar{u}(p&#039;_2)i\gamma^5\tau u(p_1)\chi_1]\frac{i}{(p&#039;_2-p_1)^2-\mu^2}\cdot[\chi^{+}_1\bar{u}(p&#039;_1)i\gamma^5\tau u(p_2)\chi_2]}
(10.45)

I can get the formula 10.50
\bar{u}(p&#039;_1,s_1)\gamma^5 u(p_1,s_1)=u^{+}(s&#039;_1)\frac{\sigma\cdot(p_1-p&#039;_1)}{2M}u(s_1)
but I can't get the 10.51, please give me an idea or suggestion, or any information, thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The basic idea is to take the non relativistic limit of the matrix element Mfi,the Fourier transform of the corresponding matrix element will give you the potential.you also have to write the four component spinor u in terms of two component spinor like ( x11.p/2m)x1)
 
andrien said:
The basic idea is to take the non relativistic limit of the matrix element Mfi,the Fourier transform of the corresponding matrix element will give you the potential.you also have to write the four component spinor u in terms of two component spinors like ( x11.p/2m)x1)

Thank you for your advice. Actually, I know the exponential term (Yukawa potential \frac{e^{-\mu r}}{r}) come from the Fourier transform of the propagator \frac{1}{(p&#039;_1-p_1)^2-\mu^2}. But I can understand how to get the term (\sigma_1\cdot\nabla_1)(\sigma_2\cdot\nabla_1). I know there are two methods to transform the relativistic potential to non-relativistic one.
One is Foldy-Wouthuysen transform which need the complete Hamilton in Chapter 4, the other is 'big-small' components nonrelativistic limit in Chapter 1. I try to use the latter one to simplify the 10.51 and get the matrix element Mfi
[\chi^+_1\bar{u}(p&#039;_1)i\gamma^5\tau u_1(p_1)\chi_1]\frac{i}{(p&#039;_1-p_1)^2-\mu^2}\cdot[\chi^+_2\bar{u}(p&#039;_2)i\gamma^5\tau u_1(p_2)\chi_2]
=(\tau_1\cdot\tau_2)\chi^+_1 \frac{\sigma_1\cdot(p_1-p&#039;_1)}{2m}\chi_1<br /> \chi^+_2 \frac{\sigma_2\cdot(p_2-p&#039;_2)}{2m}\chi_2\frac{-1}{(p&#039;_1-p_1)^2-\mu^2}
Before Fourier transform, how to deal with the \chi
 
Last edited:
Yes,this is what I have said you to do.Those \chi are not problem because they are spinors like (1 0) or (0 1),so you can forget them for the moment.you have to Fourier transform
(\tau_1\cdot\tau_2) \frac{\sigma_1\cdot(p_1-p&#039;_1)}{2m} \frac{\sigma_2\cdot(p_2-p&#039;_2)}{2m}\frac{-1}{(p&#039;_1-p_1)^2-\mu^2}
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
andrien said:
Yes,this is what I have said you to do.Those \chi are not problem because they are spinors like (1 0) or (0 1),so you can forget them for the moment.you have to Fourier transform
(\tau_1\cdot\tau_2) \frac{\sigma_1\cdot(p_1-p&#039;_1)}{2m} \frac{\sigma_2\cdot(p_2-p&#039;_2)}{2m}\frac{-1}{(p&#039;_1-p_1)^2-\mu^2}

if we define the \vec{p}&#039;_1-\vec{p}_1=\vec{p}and \vec{r}_1-\vec{r}_2=\vec{r}
then
\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}d^3p\frac{1}{\vec{p}^2+\mu^2}e^{-i\vec{p}\cdot\vec{r}}
=\int^{2\pi}_{0}d\phi\int^{1}_{-1}dcos\theta\int^{\infty}_{0}dp\frac{p^2}{p^2+\mu^2}e^{-ipcos\vartheta r}
=4\pi^2\frac{e^{-\mu r}}{r}
so,
\sigma_1\cdot(p_1-p&#039;_1)and\sigma_2\cdot(p_2-p&#039;_2) don't involved in integration, instead of being the operator p=-i\hbar \nabla. Although, the p_2-p&#039;_2 is replaced by p_1-p&#039;_1 for the delta funtion. But the formula of the integrate should be
(\tau_1\cdot\tau_2) \sigma_1\cdot(\nabla_1-\nabla&#039;_1) \sigma_2\cdot(\nabla_1-\nabla&#039;_1) \frac{e^{-\mu|r_1-r_2|}}{|r_1-r_2|}
 
Hey,sorry for being late but the point is that you have to take the conservation principle also into account from p1+p2=p1'+p2' which gives p1-p1'=p2'-p2=q say,when you put it into your expression it only depends on q,now you have to just take the Fourier transform with respect to q and the answer falls in it place.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K