Question about a cross section from PDG

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the accuracy of the cross section formula at Eq 50.25 from the Particle Data Group (PDG) document. The participant questions the term in the denominator, specifically the use of \(\frac{1}{s\Gamma}\) compared to the more common \(\frac{1}{M \Gamma}\) found in other references. They highlight that while both expressions are similar when \(\Gamma \ll M\), the correct term is significant when the center of mass energy \(\sqrt{s}\) approaches the mass \(M\). The participant also notes the propagator can be expressed as \(D(s) = \frac{1}{s-m^2 + i \sqrt{s} \Gamma}\), indicating the complexity and variability in the representations of these terms.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum field theory and propagators
  • Familiarity with cross section calculations in particle physics
  • Knowledge of renormalization schemes
  • Ability to interpret Feynman diagrams
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the Particle Data Group (PDG) cross section formulae for updates
  • Study the differences between propagator representations in various literature
  • Learn about renormalization schemes and their implications in particle physics
  • Examine Feynman diagram calculations related to propagators and cross sections
USEFUL FOR

Particle physicists, researchers in quantum field theory, and students studying cross section calculations will benefit from this discussion.

ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
Hi everyone, I was wondering, is the cross section at Eq 50.25 in
http://pdg.lbl.gov/2017/reviews/rpp2017-rev-cross-section-formulae.pdf
correct?

Because I see a term in the denominator with \frac{1}{s\Gamma} whereas in several other references, the propagator term in the matrix element comes with \frac{1}{M \Gamma}.
[eg. eq29 here http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijhep.20150205.11.pdf and I can give a further list]
Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm a bit surprised to the the center of mass energy there, but note that the two expressions are very similar for ##\Gamma \ll M##: The right term is only relevant if ##\sqrt s \approx M##.
 
Yup. Since I've found instances where the additional part in the propagator (added to s-m^2 ) is written as a function of s: \Pi(s), and through choosing a renormalization scheme they can set it as : \gamma(s = M^2 ) = M , which basically translates to what you've written about the right term.

Additionally I've found that the propagator can be written as: D(s) = \frac{1}{s-m^2 + i \sqrt{s} \Gamma} (after summing up several Feynman diagrams)... as shown on slide7 here: https://www.stfc.ac.uk/files/lecture-7/

Finding multiple different instances for the same thing is confusing indeed...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K