QED Interaction Lagrangian with two different fermions

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the correct Lagrangian for studying electron-proton scattering without considering the proton's quarks. Two forms of the Lagrangian are presented, differing in their interaction terms, with the first one being deemed correct as it respects charge conservation and basic principles of particle physics. The second form, which includes additional constants g and h, is criticized for potentially violating fundamental conservation laws. It is emphasized that the interaction should involve the proton's structure, necessitating a more general vertex factor that adheres to Lorentz invariance, parity, and gauge invariance. Ultimately, the correct approach requires incorporating the proton's internal structure to accurately describe the scattering process.
lfqm
Messages
21
Reaction score
1
Let say I want to study electron-proton scattering (without considering proton's quarks, i.e. no QCD), which is the Lagrangian?

I've seen two different answers to this question :confused:

First one:
L=\bar{ψ}e(i∂-mee+\bar{ψ}p(i∂-mpp-\frac{1}{4}Fμ\nuFμ\nu-e\bar{ψ}eγμψeAμ+e\bar{ψ}pγμψpAμ

Second one:
L=\bar{ψ}e(i∂-mee+\bar{ψ}p(i∂-mpp-\frac{1}{4}Fμ\nuFμ\nu-g\bar{ψ}eγμψpAμ-h\bar{ψ}pγμψeAμ

with g,h some constants... (which constants? :confused:)

The difference is obviously the interaction part, both seem reasonable to me... but I've encountered both... So, which one is correct?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If the proton is assumed without internal structure, one can take the first option. The coupling is really done through the electric charge whose absolute value is the same for both particles. The g and h are probably meant to take into account the proton's internal structure through the so-called form factors.

Oops, i didn't see that the spinors were mixed. Sorry. See Bill's comment.
 
Last edited:
Any reference that gives the second form should be run through a shredder. The interaction g ψeγμψpAμ turns a proton into an electron, violating several basic principles including charge conservation. Likewise for the h term.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Agreed with the above. Think about the Feynman diagrams: you have, e.g, an incoming fermion and anti-fermion which annihilate and then the photon decays into a different species of fermion and anti-fermion. That's how you get coupling between the different fermions: mediated by photons, since they both independently couple to the EM field.
 
Let say I want to study electron-proton scattering (without considering proton's quarks, i.e. no QCD), which is the Lagrangian?
If you really want to study electron-proton scattering without considering qcd then in process you have to involve the structure of proton.So while drawing the feynman diagram the vertex factor at proton site should be modified from -ieγμ to more general one obeying lorentz invariance,parity and gauge invariance.Most generally it is written as [γμF1(q2)+kqvσμvF2(q2)],apart from a overall factor.It was the basis of rosenbluth formula for electron proton scattering.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K