Pair Production and Momentum Transfer in Photon Interactions

jk4
I read about "pair production" how a photon can create and electron and a positron. I read the calculations and I understand how this is impossible unless something else (a nucleus) is present to take away some of the initial photon momentum, however, the book doesn't say exactly 'how' the nucleus takes away the photons momentum. Any help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
My best guess would be that momentum is transferred during a collision process- the nucleus gains momentum at the photon's expense. But that is only a semi-educated guess. Anyone?
 
jk4 said:
I read about "pair production" how a photon can create and electron and a positron. I read the calculations and I understand how this is impossible unless something else (a nucleus) is present to take away some of the initial photon momentum, however, the book doesn't say exactly 'how' the nucleus takes away the photons momentum. Any help?

I think that's right muppet. But the photon momentum is so small compared to the nucleus mass that the nucleus barely moves in the collision - like an asteriod hitting the earth.
 
Several things happen, and are described by individual Feynman diagrams, four in fact to lowest order in the electron's charge, e.. They all involve photon absorption and emission by the nucleus. You can find these diagrams in many texts. There are two, which represent absorption of the photon by the nucleus followed by emission of another photon that turns into a pair. Also, there is the same diagram with absorption second and emission first.

Then, the electron-nucleus and positron nucleus interactions involve single photon exchange between the leptons and the nucleus. The photon(s) interacting with the nucleus transmit the momentum and energy needed to make the production process go.- true for all diagrams.

And yes, with a photon energy considerably less than the nuclear mass, the nuclear recoil is negligible.

Regards,
Reilly Atkinson
 
ok, so then this process can occur in empty space? However, they quickly annihilate one another again? But in order to prevent them from annihilating each other you must have a nearby nucleus?

Is that all correct?
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Back
Top