How prone is a photon to interacting with uncharged structureless particles?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter snorkack
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the interactions of photons with uncharged structureless particles, exploring theoretical possibilities and expected interaction strengths. Participants examine various potential interactions, including those with neutrinos, weak bosons, Higgs bosons, gluons, and gravitons, within the context of particle physics and quantum field theory.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that photons can interact with uncharged particles, citing the annihilation of electron-positron pairs into photons as a foundational example.
  • Others argue that interactions such as γν (photon-neutrino) are expected to have extremely small cross sections unless at very high energies, and γG (photon-graviton) interactions may be even less likely.
  • A participant notes that while γZ and γH interactions are theoretically possible, the short lifetimes of Z and Higgs bosons complicate their study in collisions.
  • Some contributions discuss the theoretical framework of these interactions, referencing Feynman diagrams to illustrate potential processes involving photons and other particles.
  • Concerns are raised about the reliance on classical electrodynamics in discussing gravitational effects on photons, with some participants advocating for a more nuanced understanding that incorporates quantum field theory.
  • There is mention of the practical challenges in observing these interactions experimentally, particularly the need for high-energy photon beams and the difficulties in achieving the necessary conditions for significant interaction rates.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature and feasibility of photon interactions with uncharged particles, with no clear consensus reached. Some points are contested, particularly regarding the theoretical underpinnings and practical observability of these interactions.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include unresolved assumptions about the energy scales required for interactions, the dependence on specific theoretical frameworks, and the complexities involved in quantifying cross sections for various processes.

snorkack
Messages
2,388
Reaction score
536
How prone is a photon to interacting with uncharged structureless particles?

It must be fundamentally possible for a photon to interact with a particle that has no external charge and no internal charge either. Because electron and positron can and mostly do annihilate to two photons. Since electromagnetic interaction has CP (and indeed P) symmetry and is expected to therefore have T symmetry, a photon should be able to interact with another photon to produce a pair.

Given that γγ is expected to be possible, how strong are expected to be γ interactions (elastic or inelastic) with other structureless neutral particles:
γν (neutrinoes)
γZ0 (weak interaction boson)
γH0 (Higgs boson)
γg (gluon)
γG (graviton)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
At least γγ -> ee, μμ, WW have been observed, probably some more as well.

γν needs the electromagnetic and the weak interaction via loops so the cross sections will be extremely small unless the energy is very high. γG will be even worse.

γZ/γH cross sections I don't know, but Z and H don't live long enough to produce these collisions. H->γγ is a well-studied decay of course and H->Zγ is interesting as well.

γg should be negligible compared to γq and you can never have the former without the latter.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
mfb said:
γν needs the electromagnetic and the weak interaction via loops so the cross sections will be extremely small unless the energy is very high. γG will be even worse.
Generally the γG interaction is theoretically expected - photons carry mass and are subject to gravity - and also experimentally observed long before any of the other particles were even anticipated (the deflection of light by gravity, like Sun!)... but perhaps it´s poorly quantized? The observed gravitational waves tend to be low frequency, therefore low energy per quantum.
Gravitational waves near source should be significantly nonlinear. Are there any nonlinear effects when electromagnetic waves interact with strong gravitational waves? Like when the frequencies get close?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke
Nothing whatsoever in Einstein's famous result about the gravitational deflection of light relies on photons, i.e., the quantization of the electromagnetic field but only on classical electrodynamics. Nowadays many, if not all, textbooks on relativity argue with a naive photon picture, which is however flawed. A true treatment of photons in GR, i.e., quantum field theory in a given "background spacetime" is very complicated and not needed here. What's called "photon" is rather the eikonal approximation for classical electromagnetic waves:

https://itp.uni-frankfurt.de/~hees/pf-faq/gr-edyn.pdf

Also photons don't carry mass but energy and momentum. The mass of the electromagnetic field is to high accuracy compatible with zero.
 
vanhees71 said:
Nothing whatsoever in Einstein's famous result about the gravitational deflection of light relies on photons, i.e., the quantization of the electromagnetic field but only on classical electrodynamics. Nowadays many, if not all, textbooks on relativity argue with a naive photon picture, which is however flawed. A true treatment of photons in GR, i.e., quantum field theory in a given "background spacetime" is very complicated and not needed here. What's called "photon" is rather the eikonal approximation for classical electromagnetic waves:

https://itp.uni-frankfurt.de/~hees/pf-faq/gr-edyn.pdf
The standard handling of deflection of light by gravity and gravitational red/blueshift handles light as pure rays, without taking account of wave properties either.
 
That's a bug, not a feature. That's why I wrote this little manuscript, because I wanted to understand classical physics within classical physics and not using some hand-waving wrong kind of "photon picture". Of course, at the end you calculate null geodesics, but these then have a clear classical-field-theoretical meaning as has "ray optics" as an approximation to "wave optics" in general.
 
Do I get it correct that a Schwarzschild black hole absorbs some incident radiation and deflects the rest but that, in the far field, all the light that scatters is returned to its initial frequency in the frame where the hole is stationary?
 
snorkack said:
How prone is a photon to interacting with uncharged structureless particles?

It must be fundamentally possible for a photon to interact with a particle that has no external charge and no internal charge either. Because electron and positron can and mostly do annihilate to two photons. Since electromagnetic interaction has CP (and indeed P) symmetry and is expected to therefore have T symmetry, a photon should be able to interact with another photon to produce a pair.

Given that γγ is expected to be possible, how strong are expected to be γ interactions (elastic or inelastic) with other structureless neutral particles:
γν (neutrinoes)
γZ0 (weak interaction boson)
γH0 (Higgs boson)
γg (gluon)
γG (graviton)?

Think about it in terms of the Feynman diagrams.

Photon and Neutrino: You can produce a W boson and corresponding charged lepton. This would be 1 EM vertex and 1 weak vertex.

Photon and Z0: You can produce a pair of charged leptons. Also 1 EM and 1 weak vertex. [A light quark pair is also possible, but the amplitude will be smaller because the quark charges are fractional while the leptons have a full charge.]

Photon and H0: You can produce a pair of charged particles that couple to the Higgs - could be leptons, quarks, or even W bosons. This would be 1 EM vertex and 1 Higgs interaction vertex. The coupling constant is substantial for many of the more massive particles such as the bottom and charm quarks, tau leptons, or of course the W boson.

Photon and gluon: Produce a pair of quarks - one EM and one strong vertex

Photon and graviton: In theory any pair of charged particles, one EM vertex and one gravitational interaction, but here you run into the added complication that gravity only interacts as a "tidal" force. At most, the coupling for the gravitational part is going to be suppressed by the ratio of the Planck mass to the particle mass. The photon and graviton would also need enough energy in their common center of mass frame to create the rest-mass of the pair. This one is in practice unobservable due to the extremely small effective coupling constant since achievable energies are so far below the Planck scale.

Note that for Z0 and H0, the massive particle can create the pair even without a photon being involved. In order to have most of these interactions involve a photon, you would need a photon beam of incredibly high intensity, colliding directly with Z0 or H0. Nearly impossible to do in a lab. Probably would need some sort of next-generation plasma wakefield accelerator that could reach energies of, at minimum, ~100 GeV (~200 GeV to produce a Higgs via Higgsstrahlung since you would need to produce other particles plus the Higgs). You would need an extremely long integration time and even then your signal/background ratio would be terrible since there would be a large amount of purely EM pair production happening at the same time...
 
Last edited:
nightvidcole said:
Think about it in terms of the Feynman diagrams.

Photon and Neutrino: You can produce a W boson and corresponding charged lepton. This would be 1 EM vertex and 1 weak vertex.

Photon and Z0: You can produce a pair of charged leptons. Also 1 EM and 1 weak vertex. [A light quark pair is also possible, but the amplitude will be smaller because the quark charges are fractional while the leptons have a full charge.]

Photon and H0: You can produce a pair of charged particles that couple to the Higgs - could be leptons, quarks, or even W bosons. This would be 1 EM vertex and 1 Higgs interaction vertex. The coupling constant is substantial for many of the more massive particles such as the bottom and charm quarks, tau leptons, or of course the W boson.

Photon and gluon: Produce a pair of quarks - one EM and one strong vertex

Photon and graviton: In theory any pair of charged particles, one EM vertex and one gravitational interaction, but here you run into the added complication that gravity only interacts as a "tidal" force. At most, the coupling for the gravitational part is going to be suppressed by the ratio of the Planck mass to the particle mass. The photon and graviton would also need enough energy in their common center of mass frame to create the rest-mass of the pair. This one is in practice unobservable due to the extremely small effective coupling constant since achievable energies are so far below the Planck scale.

Note that for Z0 and H0, the massive particle can create the pair even without a photon being involved. In order to have most of these interactions involve a photon, you would need a photon beam of incredibly high intensity, colliding directly with Z0 or H0. Nearly impossible to do in a lab. Probably would need some sort of next-generation plasma wakefield accelerator that could reach energies of, at minimum, ~100 GeV (~200 GeV to produce a Higgs via Higgsstrahlung since you would need to produce other particles plus the Higgs). You would need an extremely long integration time and even then your signal/background ratio would be terrible since there would be a large amount of purely EM pair production happening at the same time...
One of these interactions is not like the other.

In all of the cases except the photon-graviton interaction, there is no interaction at tree level, but there could be an interaction at a higher level loop.

In the case of the photon-graviton interaction, while the interaction is indeed very weak, the graviton does have a coupling to the mass-energy of the photon at tree level.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K