How to Calculate Threshold Energy for Top Quark Production?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the threshold energy required for the production of a top quark and an anti-top quark in a head-on collision between electrons and positrons. Participants are exploring the relevant formulas and definitions related to mass and energy in particle physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to clarify the definitions of variables in the threshold energy formula and question how to apply it in the context of a head-on collision. There are inquiries about the appropriate masses to use and whether the formula is suitable for the given scenario.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing insights about invariant mass and the implications of using different frames of reference. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of invariant mass in the calculations, but there is no explicit consensus on the approach to take.

Contextual Notes

There is uncertainty regarding which particle is stationary in the collision and how to correctly apply the threshold energy formula in this context. Participants express a desire for deeper understanding rather than just memorizing formulas.

fabsuk
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
E(threshold energy) = M* − M(squared) −m(squared) divided by 2M

Determine the threshold energy for producing a top quark and an anti-top quark when beams
of electrons and positrons of equal energy are made to collide head on.

What do i sub in where and what do i with M*.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How is your M* defined? How is M and m defined?

There is no standard formula or standard notation for these things.
 
a particle of mass m collides with a stationary particle of mass M, the minimum
energy required to produce a state of mass M* is, in natural units,
 
So what do you think you should put in for M and m?
 
the mass of electron and positron but I don't know which one is stationary,

i.e don't know which corresponds to M and m.

M* must correspond to mass of top quark.
 
your formula is for stationary targets, but you have a head on collision. Now do you know any other ways to do this? Have you used invariant mass?
 
how would invariant mass equation help

does this website help:

http://www.phys.ufl.edu/~rfield/PHY3063/images/Chapter2_9.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You don't learn physics by memorizing a formula, you must know how to derive things so that they fit your needs.

The web page you have linked to show you how to derive the Threshold energy using s, the invariant mass.
 
so we are in a centre of mass frame as the particles are both moving ( i am assuming my equation was for lab frame)

so we use a different equation right

are u saying the positron and electron have equal mass.
but then do we use the positron mass or the elctron mass.
If anybody has any ideas, help would really be appreciated.
 
  • #10
you start with the invariant mass, and yes electron and positron has equal mass.
 
  • #11
But the invariant mass if the total mass in the equation right
where would i subsitute it,

don't i just subsitute mass of top quark and anti top quark (dont i have had to add them together) for M*

and then substitute electron mass for both M and m.
 
  • #12
sure but don't you want to understand WHY one does all this?
 
  • #13
I would love to know but i never get a satisfactory answer .

In many areas of physics i don't completely understand so i end up instead of trying to understand,

I do pattern recognition. ( you can either blame teachers/books for using too much jargon)

Have i done it correctly,(would you add up masses of top and anti top quark)
 
  • #14
use invariant mass:

Left hand side, the eletctron + positron:

we choose labframe; head on collision:

s = (\sum_i E_i)^2 - (\sum _i \vec{p}_i)^2 = 4E^2

right hand side, we choose the frame where the particles are created at rest.

Now try
 
  • #15
Are you trying to derive the equation i have already stated

or are we trying to rearrange the equation to put it in a way we like.
 
  • #16
If one knows how to derive it one knows where to to put in the numbers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
10K
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
9K