Mandelstam Variables for 2->2 Scattering with Equal Masses in CoM Frame

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter spaghetti3451
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Variables
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Mandelstam variables in the context of 2-to-2 scattering processes with equal masses in the center-of-mass frame. Participants explore the relationships between momenta, angles of scattering, and the Mandelstam variables, while addressing conservation laws and calculations related to differential cross-sections.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether all four three-momenta are equal in magnitude or if they simply sum to zero separately for incoming and outgoing particles.
  • Conservation laws are emphasized, with participants noting that both energy and momentum must be conserved in the scattering process.
  • One participant presents a formula for one of the incoming momenta in terms of the Mandelstam variables and seeks guidance on expressing the scattering angle in similar terms.
  • Another participant asserts that in the center-of-momentum frame, the magnitudes of all four three-momenta should be the same due to equal masses and conservation laws, while others challenge this assertion.
  • Expressions for the Mandelstam variables \(s\), \(t\), and \(u\) are derived, with participants discussing their implications and relationships to the scattering angle.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the correct forms of equations and whether certain simplifications or expansions are appropriate in their calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on whether all four three-momenta have the same magnitude; some participants agree with this assertion while others contest it. The discussion includes multiple competing views on the relationships between the Mandelstam variables and the scattering angle, as well as differing opinions on the appropriate steps for calculations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the correct application of conservation laws and the implications of their derived equations. Some calculations are noted to be complex, and there are references to potential errors in earlier statements about the relationships between the variables.

spaghetti3451
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
31
For ##2\rightarrow 2## scattering with equal masses in the centre-of-mass frame, are all the four three-momenta equal to each other, or is it that the incoming three-momenta and the outgoing three-momenta sum to 0 separately?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Have you tried to use conservation laws to obtain the answer? Remember that energy must be conserved as well as momentum.
 
I have. I get my second answer.
 
failexam said:
I have. I get my second answer.

So what's the problem? Do you think that answer is wrong? Can you show your work?
 
This is about calculating one of the incoming momenta and the angle of scattering in terms of the Mandelstam variables. I get

##|\vec{k}| = \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{2s+t+u}##

which is one of the incoming three-momenta ##|\vec{k}|## in terms of the Mandelstam variables and

##t-u = 4\ |\vec{k}|\ |\vec{p}|\ \text{cos}\ \theta,##

where ##|\vec{p}|## is one of the final momenta and ##\theta## is the angle of scattering. How do I proceed with the second equation to remove ##|\vec{p}|## and express ##\cos\ \theta## in terms of the Mandelstam variables?
 
Ok, after seeing your work, you weren't doing what I suggested: using conservation laws to obtain the answer. In the center of momentum frame, it should be obvious that the following two facts are true:

(1) The magnitudes of all four 3-momentum vectors are the same (since the masses are equal and both momentum and energy are conserved).

(2) The directions of the incoming pair of 3-momentum vectors are opposite, and the directions of the outgoing pair are opposite; but the two pairs can be pointing in different directions (the difference in the incoming and outgoing directions is of course the scattering angle).

Does that help?
 
Why should all the four three-momenta have the same magnitude just because their masses are the same?

Conservation law gives us ##E_{1}+E_{2}=E_{\text{cm}}=E_{3}+E_{4}## and ##\vec{k}_{1}+\vec{k}_{2}=0=\vec{k}_{3}+\vec{k}_{4}##, where ##1## and ##2## are incoming and ##3## and ##4## are outgoing, so that ##\vec{k}_{1}=-\vec{k}_{2}## and ##\vec{k}_{3}=-\vec{k}_{4}##, but not ##|\vec{k}_{1}|=|\vec{k}_{3}|##.
 
failexam said:
Why should all the four three-momenta have the same magnitude just because their masses are the same?

The conservation laws you wrote down should tell you. Try writing the energies in terms of the (squared) magnitudes of the momentum vectors.
 
Right, I get it.
 
  • #10
Do you also have some suggestion for managing this calculation:

##\displaystyle{\frac{d\sigma}{d\theta} = \frac{|\mathcal{M}|^{2}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}}##

##\displaystyle{= \frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\left|\frac{i}{s^{2}-m^{2}} + \frac{i}{t^{2}-m^{2}} + \frac{i}{u^{2}-m^{2}}\right|^{2}}##

##\displaystyle{= \frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\bigg[\frac{1}{(s^{2}-m^{2})^{2}}+\frac{1}{(t^{2}-m^{2})^{2}}+\frac{1}{(u^{2}-m^{2})^{2}}+\frac{2}{(s^{2}-m^{2})(t^{2}-m^{2})}+\frac{2}{(s^{2}-m^{2})(u^{2}-m^{2})}+\frac{2}{(t^{2}-m^{2})(u^{2}-m^{2})}\bigg]}##

##\displaystyle{=\frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\bigg[\frac{[(t^{2}-m^{2})(u^{2}-m^{2})]^{2}+[(s^{2}-m^{2})(u^{2}-m^{2})]^{2}+[(s^{2}-m^{2})(t^{2}-m^{2})]^{2}}{[(s^{2}-m^{2})(t^{2}-m^{2})(u^{2}-m^{2})]^{2}}+\frac{2[(u^{2}-m^{2})+(t^{2}-m^{2})+(s^{2}-m^{2})]}{(s^{2}-m^{2})(t^{2}-m^{2})(u^{2}-m^{2})}\bigg]}##
 
  • #11
failexam said:
Do you also have some suggestion for managing this calculation

This is for the same problem?
 
  • #12
Yes, for ##2\rightarrow 2## scattering, but now specialised to the case of ##\phi^{3}## theory.
 
  • #13
I computed

##|\vec{k}_{1}| = \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{2s+t+u}##

and

##\text{cos}\ \theta = \frac{t-u}{2s+t+u}##.

They don't help, do they?
 
  • #14
failexam said:
Yes

Have you obtained expressions for ##s##, ##t##, and ##u## taking into account the conservation laws? For example, ##s = E_{cm}^2##, correct?
 
  • #15
Yes, they are

##s=E_{\text{cm}}^{2}##

##t=-2|\vec{k}_{1}|^{2}(1-\cos\theta)##

##u=-2|\vec{k}_{1}|^{2}(1+\cos\theta)##.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
failexam said:
they are

So each one has units of energy squared--if so, it seems to me that the formula in post #10 should have factors like ##s - m^2##, ##t - m^2##, ##u - m^2##, instead of having the squares of ##s##, ##t##, and ##u##.
 
  • #17
Yes, they do. But how do you proceed?
 
  • #18
You can also use the relativistic energy-momentum relation to write ##E_{cm}^2 - m^2 = s - m^2 = |\vec{k}|^2 = |\vec{p}|^2##. You can use that to get a relation between ##s## and ##t## (and/or ##s## and ##u##).
 
  • #19
I see. So, you do have to expand the brackets in the formula and simplify using the relations for ##s+t##, ##s+u##, ##t+u##, etc?
 
  • #20
failexam said:
you do have to expand the brackets in the formula and simplify using the relations for ##s+t##, ##s+u##, ##t+u##, etc?

That seems like a good thing to try, yes.
 
  • #21
Well, I have this so far:

##\displaystyle{\frac{d\sigma}{d\theta} = \frac{|\mathcal{M}|^{2}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}}##

##\displaystyle{= \frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\left|\frac{i}{s-m^{2}} + \frac{i}{t-m^{2}} + \frac{i}{u-m^{2}}\right|^{2}}##

##\displaystyle{=\frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\bigg[\frac{1}{(s-m^{2})^{2}}+\frac{1}{(t-m^{2})^{2}}+\frac{1}{(u-m^{2})^{2}}+\frac{2}{(s-m^{2})(t-m^{2})}+\frac{2}{(s-m^{2})(u-m^{2})}+\frac{2}{(t-m^{2})(u-m^{2})}\bigg]}##

##\displaystyle{=\frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\bigg[\frac{[(t-m^{2})(u-m^{2})]^{2}+[(s-m^{2})(u-m^{2})]^{2}+[(s-m^{2})(t-m^{2})]^{2}}{[(s-m^{2})(t-m^{2})(u-m^{2})]^{2}}+\frac{2[(u-m^{2})+(t-m^{2})+(s-m^{2})]}{(s-m^{2})(t-m^{2})(u-m^{2})}\bigg]}##

##\displaystyle{= \frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\bigg[\frac{[tu-(t+u)m^{2}+m^{4}]^{2}+[su-(s+u)m^{2}+m^{4}]^{2}+[st-(s+t)m^{2}+m^{4}]^{2}}{[(s-m^{2})(t-m^{2})(u-m^{2})]^{2}}+\frac{2[s+t+u-3m^{2}]}{(s-m^{2})(t-m^{2})(u-m^{2})}\bigg]}##

Expanding out the next set of brackets now seems like a foolish thing to try.
 
Last edited:
  • #22
I'm not sure what your goal is. Sometimes these expressions are complicated. The only things I can see that you haven't done are to write ##s## instead of ##E_{cm}^2## in the denominator of the factor in front, and to try to express ##t## and ##u## in terms of ##s## by using the energy-momentum relations, per one of my previous posts.
 
  • #23
PeterDonis said:
I'm not sure what your goal is. Sometimes these expressions are complicated. The only things I can see that you haven't done are to write ##s## instead of ##E_{cm}^2## in the denominator of the factor in front, and to try to express ##t## and ##u## in terms of ##s## by using the energy-momentum relations, per one of my previous posts.

How is ##\displaystyle{\frac{d\sigma}{d\theta}}## usually written?

Is it usually written in terms of ##s##?

PeterDonis said:
You can also use the relativistic energy-momentum relation to write ##E_{cm}^2 - m^2 = s - m^2 = |\vec{k}|^2 = |\vec{p}|^2##. You can use that to get a relation between ##s## and ##t## (and/or ##s## and ##u##).

Actually, I get

##s=E_{\text{cm}}^{2}##

##s-m^{2}=E_{\text{cm}}^{2}-m^{2}##

##s-m^{2}=E_{1}^{2}+E_{2}^{2}-m^{2}##

##s-{m^{2}}=\vec{k}^{1}_{1}+m^{2}+\vec{k}^{2}_{1}+m^{2}-m^{2}##

##s-m^{2}=2\vec{k}^{2}_{1}-m^{2}##,

where ##\vec{k}_{1}## and ##\vec{k}_{2}## are the incoming momenta.
 
Last edited:
  • #24
failexam said:
I get

You're right, I had misstated the result. But I think your last line should be

$$
s - m^2 = 2 \vec{k}_1^2 + m^2
$$

In the line before you have ##+ m^2## twice and ##- m^2## once, which adds up to ##+ m^2##. This would imply

$$
s = 2 \left( \vec{k}_1^2 + m^2 \right)
$$

which is the correct relativistic energy-momentum relation for the incoming pair (or the outgoing pair since all of the squared momenta are the same).
 
  • #25
Yes, thanks.

Now,

##t=-2|\vec{k}_{1}|^{2}(1-\cos\theta)## so that ##t = -2s(1-\cos\theta)##

and ##u=-2|\vec{k}_{1}|^{2}(1+\cos\theta)## so that ##u=-2s(1+\cos\theta)##.

Therefore,

##\displaystyle{\frac{d\sigma}{d\theta} = \frac{|\mathcal{M}|^{2}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}}##

##\displaystyle{= \frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\left|\frac{i}{s-m^{2}} + \frac{i}{t-m^{2}} + \frac{i}{u-m^{2}}\right|^{2}}##

##\displaystyle{= \frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\left(\frac{1}{s-m^{2}} + \frac{1}{t-m^{2}} + \frac{1}{u-m^{2}}\right)^{2}}##

##\displaystyle{= \frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}s}\left(\frac{1}{s-m^{2}} + \frac{1}{2s(1-\cos\theta)-m^{2}} + \frac{1}{2s(1+\cos\theta)-m^{2}}\right)^{2}}##

Is this a good form to in which to leave the final answer?
 
  • #26
failexam said:
Now,

##t=-2|\vec{k}_{1}|^{2}(1-\cos\theta)## so that ##t = -2s(1-\cos\theta)##

and ##u=-2|\vec{k}_{1}|^{2}(1+\cos\theta)## so that ##u=-2s(1+\cos\theta)##.

These don't look right since we just got through figuring out that ##s = 2 \left( \vec{k}_1^2 + m^2 \right)##, which would mean ##2 \vec{k}_1^2 = s - 2 m^2##.

failexam said:
Is this a good form to in which to leave the final answer?

I don't know. I don't know what you want to use the answer for, or what your personal preferences are for what kinds of expressions look neater than others.
 
  • #27
Actually, I get

##s=E_{\text{cm}}^{2}##

##s-m^{2}=E_{\text{cm}}^{2}-m^{2}##

##s-m^{2}=E_{1}^{2}+E_{2}^{2}-m^{2}##

##s-{m^{2}}=\vec{k}^{1}_{1}+m^{2}+\vec{k}^{2}_{1}+m^{2}-m^{2}##

##s-m^{2}=2\vec{k}^{2}_{1}-m^{2}##,

where ##\vec{k}_{1}## and ##\vec{k}_{2}## are the incoming momenta.[/QUOTE]

There's a mistake here, I think:

##E_{cm}^{2} \neq E_{1}^{2}+E_{2}^{2}##.

Am I correct?
 
  • #28
failexam said:
There's a mistake here, I think:

##E_{cm}^{2} \neq E_{1}^{2}+E_{2}^{2}##.

Am I correct?

Yes, there should be an extra ##2 E_1 E_2## term, so ##s = \left( E_1 + E_2 \right)^2 = E_1^2 + 2 E_1 E_2 + E_2^2##.
 
  • #29
It's not as difficult as it looks. For elastic ##2 \rightarrow 2## scattering of particles of the same mass, ##m## we have with ##p_1,p_2## being the four-momenta in the initial and ##p_3,p_4## those of the final state
$$s=(p_1+p_2)^2=(p_3+p_4)^2, \quad t=(p_1-p_3)^2=(p_2-p_4)^2, \quad u=(p_1-p_4)^2=(p_2-p_3)^2.$$
Then we have the on-shell conditions ##p_1^2=p_2^2=p_3^2=p_4^2=m^2##.

Now let's specialize to the CM frame, where ##\vec{p}_2=-\vec{p}_1=-\vec{p}## and ##\vec{p}_4=-\vec{p}_3=-\vec{p}'##. In this frame we have
$$s=(E_1+E_2)^2=4 E_1^2=4 E_3^2 \; \Rightarrow \; |\vec{p}'|=|\vec{p}|$$
and
$$s=4(m^2+\vec{p}^2) \; \Rightarrow \; |\vec{p}|=|\vec{p}'|=\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{s-4m^2}.$$
The only other parameter of the scattering in the CM frame is the scattering angle ##\vartheta##, defined by
$$\vec{p} \cdot \vec{p}'=|\vec{p}|^2 \cos \vartheta.$$
This angle must be related to the Mandelstam variable ##t## (or ##u##, but ##s+t+u=4m^2##).Indeed we have
$$t=(p_1-p_3)^2=2 m^2-2 p_1 \cdot p_3=2m^2-2(E_1 E_3-\vec{p} \cdot \vec{p}')=2 (m^2-E_1^2+|\vec{p}|^2 \cos \vartheta) = -2 |\vec{p}|^2 (1-\cos \vartheta)=-\sqrt{s-4m^2} (1-\cos \vartheta).$$
The manifestly covariant form of the differential cross section, expressed in Mandelstam variables only reads
$$\frac{\mathrm{d} \sigma}{\mathrm{d} t}=\frac{1}{64 \pi s |\vec{p}|^2} \mathcal{M}(s,t).$$
For the more general case of ##2 \rightarrow 2## scattering (and more kinematics), see
http://pdg.lbl.gov/2016/reviews/rpp2016-rev-kinematics.pdf
 
  • #30
vanhees71 said:
It's not as difficult as it looks. For elastic ##2 \rightarrow 2## scattering of particles of the same mass, ##m## we have with ##p_1,p_2## being the four-momenta in the initial and ##p_3,p_4## those of the final state
$$s=(p_1+p_2)^2=(p_3+p_4)^2, \quad t=(p_1-p_3)^2=(p_2-p_4)^2, \quad u=(p_1-p_4)^2=(p_2-p_3)^2.$$
Then we have the on-shell conditions ##p_1^2=p_2^2=p_3^2=p_4^2=m^2##.

Now let's specialize to the CM frame, where ##\vec{p}_2=-\vec{p}_1=-\vec{p}## and ##\vec{p}_4=-\vec{p}_3=-\vec{p}'##. In this frame we have
$$s=(E_1+E_2)^2=4 E_1^2=4 E_3^2 \; \Rightarrow \; |\vec{p}'|=|\vec{p}|$$
and
$$s=4(m^2+\vec{p}^2) \; \Rightarrow \; |\vec{p}|=|\vec{p}'|=\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{s-4m^2}.$$
The only other parameter of the scattering in the CM frame is the scattering angle ##\vartheta##, defined by
$$\vec{p} \cdot \vec{p}'=|\vec{p}|^2 \cos \vartheta.$$
This angle must be related to the Mandelstam variable ##t## (or ##u##, but ##s+t+u=4m^2##).Indeed we have
$$t=(p_1-p_3)^2=2 m^2-2 p_1 \cdot p_3=2m^2-2(E_1 E_3-\vec{p} \cdot \vec{p}')=2 (m^2-E_1^2+|\vec{p}|^2 \cos \vartheta) = -2 |\vec{p}|^2 (1-\cos \vartheta)=-\sqrt{s-4m^2} (1-\cos \vartheta).$$
The manifestly covariant form of the differential cross section, expressed in Mandelstam variables only reads
$$\frac{\mathrm{d} \sigma}{\mathrm{d} t}=\frac{1}{64 \pi s |\vec{p}|^2} \mathcal{M}(s,t).$$
For the more general case of ##2 \rightarrow 2## scattering (and more kinematics), see
http://pdg.lbl.gov/2016/reviews/rpp2016-rev-kinematics.pdf

Thanks.

So, my goal is to try and simplify the following expression:

##\displaystyle{\frac{d\sigma}{d\theta} = \frac{|\mathcal{M}|^{2}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}}##

##\displaystyle{= \frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\left|\frac{i}{s-m^{2}} + \frac{i}{t-m^{2}} + \frac{i}{u-m^{2}}\right|^{2}}##

##\displaystyle{= \frac{g^{4}}{64\pi^{2}E_{\text{cm}}^{2}}\left(\frac{1}{s-m^{2}} + \frac{1}{t-m^{2}} + \frac{1}{u-m^{2}}\right)^{2}}##

and then to find out which angles dominate the cross-section in the high-energy limit ##\sqrt{s} \gg m##.

How do you simplify the expression first? I think the trick is to express ##t## and ##u## in terms of ##s##. Is this so?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K