Minimum distance for annihilation

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Saado
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Annihilation Minimum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the conditions necessary for particle-antiparticle annihilation, exploring factors such as distance, wave function overlap, and quantum mechanical principles. Participants examine theoretical frameworks, including quantum electrodynamics (QED), and specific cases like positronium.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the likelihood of annihilation increases as the distance between a particle and its antiparticle decreases, with specific reference to positronium and its typical separation of about 1 ångström.
  • Others argue that the annihilation probability depends on various factors, including the relative momentum and masses of the particles, and propose that wave-packet overlap is a crucial condition for annihilation.
  • A participant introduces the concept of the classical electron radius and discusses its relevance to annihilation probabilities in QED, providing a formula for the annihilation rate based on average distance.
  • Some participants emphasize that the wave functions of the particles must overlap for annihilation to occur, while others challenge this by discussing the implications of Feynman diagrams and the role of bound state wave functions.
  • There is a contention regarding the annihilation rates of different angular momentum states, with some asserting that P-wave states can annihilate but at a suppressed rate due to centrifugal barriers, while others question the observational evidence for such predictions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions necessary for annihilation, particularly regarding the significance of wave function overlap and the behavior of P-wave states. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the discussion involves complex quantum mechanical principles and may depend on specific definitions and assumptions regarding particle states and wave functions. The implications of Feynman diagrams and the treatment of bound states are also highlighted as areas of complexity.

Saado
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
How close does does a particle and anti-particle pair have to be with each other in order to achieve annihilation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
My best guess is that the closer they are the more likely annihilation gets. In positronium the separation is typically 1 ångström. For parallel spins and the lifetime is 0.12 ns and for antiparallel 0.14 µs. In excited states where the expected distance is larger, the lifetime increases.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Saado said:
How close does does a particle and anti-particle pair have to be with each other in order to achieve annihilation?

It depends on many factors, such as the relative momentum of the two particles, their masses, what particles they are etc. But I think roughly speaking you should just imagine the two particles as wave-packets, and if those wave-packets overlap, then there is some probability that the particles will annihilate. So typically they will need to be separated by a distance of the same order as their wavelength.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Cross sections and reaction rates in QED are conveniently expressed in terms of a distance:

[tex]r_0 = \frac{e^2}{mc^2}[/tex]
which goes by the (most unfortunate!) name of "classical electron radius." Its value happens to be 2.82 x 10-13 cm.

Also, if a particle is placed in a box of side a, its wavefunction at the origin is order of magnitude |ψ(0)|2 = 1/a3.

These two remarks lend intuitive support to the following answer obtained from QED:
The e+e- annihilation probability per unit time is

[tex]\Gamma = \frac{r_0^2 \,c}{a^3}[/tex]
where a is their average distance apart. For positronium, a is approximately the Bohr radius, 10-8 cm, and if you put these values together you'll get the positronium lifetime that my2cts quoted, 0.1 ns.
 
Last edited:
Saado said:
How close does does a particle and anti-particle pair have to be with each other in order to achieve annihilation?
Close enough for their wave functions to overlap.
 
Meir Achuz said:
Close enough for their wave functions to overlap.
Seems obvious, but actually not! Look at the Feynman diagram, there's two vertices x1 and x2. The electron arrives at point x1 and emits a photon, the positron arrives at point x2 and emits a photon. In between, a virtual particle. The amplitude is obtained by integrating over all x1, x2, but there's no requirement that they coincide.
 
Your Feynman diagram is for free particles. Include spatial bound state wave functions in the full calculation, and then "close enough for their wave functions to overlap" is relevant.
That is why P waves don't annihilate, but S waves do, with the rate proportional to |\psi(0)|^2
 
Meir Achuz said:
Your Feynman diagram is for free particles.
It's not "my" Feynman diagram. But I appreciate the offer! :smile:

Include spatial bound state wave functions in the full calculation, and then "close enough for their wave functions to overlap" is relevant.
"Relevant", I guess, but not accurate. The Feynman diagram approach still works. Just take the result for plane waves and integrate it over the momentum distribution for a bound state. Doesn't change the fact that there are two vertices that need not coincide.

That is why P waves don't annihilate, but S waves do, with the rate proportional to |\psi(0)|^2
P-wave states most certainly do annihilate, even though |ψ(0)|2 = 0. However the rate is suppressed by the usual factor for the centrifugal barrier, (p/mc)2L, since the particles spend more of their time farther apart.

For a p-wave, L = 1, this factor is basically v2/c2, or the ratio of the potential energy to the rest energy, 6 eV/0.5 MeV, about 10-5. Instead of nanoseconds, the lifetime for p-wave annihilation is therefore in the microsecond range. But the radiative decay to s-wave via electric dipole transition takes place in 10-8 sec. So the direct annihilation from p-wave is perfectly possible, but has too small a branching ratio to be observed.
 
Last edited:
Bill_K said:
P-wave states most certainly do annihilate, even though |ψ(0)|2 = 0. However the rate is suppressed by the usual factor for the centrifugal barrier, (p/mc)2L, since the particles spend more of their time farther apart.

For a p-wave, L = 1, this factor is basically v2/c2, or the ratio of the potential energy to the rest energy, 6 eV/0.5 MeV, about 10-5. Instead of nanoseconds, the lifetime for p-wave annihilation is therefore in the microsecond range. But the radiative decay to s-wave via electric dipole transition takes place in 10-8 sec. So the direct annihilation from p-wave is perfectly possible, but has too small a branching ratio to be observed.

Is it a bare prediction, or is direct p-wave annihilation something that can be and has been observed, and measured to have a branching ratio matching the predictions?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K