I don't understand this Feynman Diagram

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on understanding the lowest-order Feynman diagrams for the process e+e- --> W+W, specifically addressing confusion around a t-channel diagram. The key point is that the electron can interact with a virtual neutrino and a W boson without implying a decay, as the neutrino involved is off-shell. The Feynman diagrams represent terms in a Taylor expansion of the full amplitude, rather than direct processes, which clarifies the apparent contradictions in interpreting the interactions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Feynman diagrams and their representation of particle interactions
  • Knowledge of particle physics concepts such as virtual particles and off-shell states
  • Familiarity with the electroweak interaction and W boson properties
  • Basic grasp of quantum field theory principles
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the role of virtual particles in quantum field theory
  • Learn about the electroweak interaction and its implications for particle decay
  • Explore the concept of off-shell particles and their significance in Feynman diagrams
  • Investigate the mathematical formulation of Feynman diagrams in quantum electrodynamics (QED)
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in particle physics, physicists interested in quantum field theory, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of Feynman diagrams and particle interactions.

11thHeaven
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Question:
Draw the lowest-order Feynman diagrams for the e+e- --> W+W-process

The answer gives three diagrams. I understand the first two, but the third makes no sense to me. Here it is:

WeirdFeynmanDiagram.png
So this is a t-channel Feynman diagram. As far as I can tell regarding how these types of Feynman diagrams are read, the following processes are taking place:

e- --> ve + W-
e+ + ve- --> W+

But this makes no sense to me. How can an electron decay into a neutrino and a W boson? And how can a positron and a neutrino combine to form a W boson?

Am I simply reading this wrongly?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are no decays involved. An electron, a (virtual) neutrino and a W boson couple. That coupling is allowed. For a decay the W and the neutrino would have to be real (leave the Feynman diagram).

Splitting the diagram into those subprocesses doesn't work well because you assign particle properties to things that are not actual particles.
 
11thHeaven said:
Question:
Draw the lowest-order Feynman diagrams for the e+e- --> W+W-process

The answer gives three diagrams. I understand the first two, but the third makes no sense to me. Here it is:

View attachment 108644So this is a t-channel Feynman diagram. As far as I can tell regarding how these types of Feynman diagrams are read, the following processes are taking place:

e- --> ve + W-
e+ + ve- --> W+

But this makes no sense to me. How can an electron decay into a neutrino and a W boson? And how can a positron and a neutrino combine to form a W boson?

Am I simply reading this wrongly?
well, the best way to think about it is to not order the time in the intermediate states because a Feynman diagram is really a combination of several time ordered diagrams. If you insist in thinking of it this way, then this Feynman diagram is a combination of what you described (where you put the vertex e^- W^- vertex occurs first) plus the time ordered diagram for which the other vertex occurs first.

But there is no contradiction here. You ask "how can an electron decay into a neutrino and a W boson?" We are dealing with an off-shell neutrino here (it is a virtual neutrino) so there is no problem with that reaction.
 
Just to add: Maybe you look upon these Feynmandiagrams too literally as processes. The actual process is given by the full amplitude. Feynmandiagrams are terms in its Taylor expansion.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K