Potential energy and annihilation

AI Thread Summary
In a gravitational field, both an electron and an anti-electron possess potential energy. Upon annihilation, this energy is transformed, and the resulting photons will exhibit momentum changes to conserve total energy. The concept of gravitational redshift is relevant, indicating that the energy of the photons decreases relative to a reference point at infinity. There is a discussion on whether light itself has potential energy, suggesting that daughter particles may inherit potential energy from their parent particles. Overall, the interplay of potential energy and momentum conservation during annihilation is a key focus of the discussion.
Guywithquestions
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Let's assume an electron and an anti-electron are in a gravitational field so they both have potential energy.
What will become of this energy if they annihilate?
Will the momentum of the photons after the annihilation will increase so the total energy will be conserved?

Thanks for answering!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Guywithquestions said:
Will the momentum of the photons after the annihilation will increase so the total energy will be conserved?
Yes*. This is known as gravitational redshift.

*With the usual conventions (reference point “at infinity”) it is a decrease rather than an increase
 
Doesn't light have potential energy?

If it has, then it sounds very intuitive that daughter particles would inherit the potential energy of the parents.
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Study of SHM of an object attached to a vertical spring
Replies
7
Views
634
B Can energy be decomposed?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Question about potential energy: gravity and a vertical spring
Replies
12
Views
4K
B Could energy be destroyed during particle annihilation?
Replies
16
Views
1K
Gravitational potential energy -- Why is it always negative?
Replies
10
Views
3K
I Infinite energy from an electric field?
Replies
12
Views
1K
Conservative forces, Nonconservative forces and Potential Energy
Replies
9
Views
3K
I How to interpret this definition of potential energy?
Replies
10
Views
2K
B Energy needed to raise an object to a certain altitude
Replies
7
Views
1K
Gravitational potential energy question -- Ojbect sitting on the Earth
Replies
3
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top