Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Question on differential crossection, pair production

  1. Oct 3, 2008 #1


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper


    I have encountered many differential crossections: [tex]\frac{d\sigma}{dE_+d\Omega _+ d
    \Omega _-}[/tex]
    (Pair production of electrons and positrons)

    Where E+ is energy of positron. However, in all of these crossections, the energy of the electron; E- is included in the formula, e.g eq 2.1.1 (http://www.irs.inms.nrc.ca/EGSnrc/pirs701/node22.html)

    So let's say I know the incident photon energy, k, and want to evaluate the probability to get a positron with energies between E+(1) and E+(2), should I replace the E- in the formula with (assuming that recoil energy of the nucleus is neglectable): E- = k - E+ , then integrating over dE+ ?

    E- is not an independent variable, but I am wondering why all sources I have encountered so far do this? -> Putting E- and p- into the equations when they are dependent on E+ and k... is it just for making the formulas more nice and symmetric?

    This might be a very trivial question, but input from someone else would save my day :-)
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2008
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 3, 2008 #2

    just a general consideration : suppose you know your initial state completely, and you don't have any particular polarization measurement. For a scattering with N particles in the final state, complete reconstruction will give you N 4-vectors, that is 4N variables. You have 4 laws of conservation (energy and momentum) reducing this number of independent variables to 4(N-1). You also know the masses of the N particles in the final states, giving you N additional constraints, so you end up with 3N-4 variables (notice that, instead of starting with 4-vectors, we could also have started by saying you have N energies and 2N angles).

    There is yet an additional trick. If your nucleon (or nucleus ?) was at rest (and with unknown transverse polarization), or if you had a head-on collision, you have an axis-symmetric situation in the initial state. That yet makes you loose one angle in the final state, which is arbitrary and only defines a reference plane of scattering.

    So finally, you have 3N-5 independent variables.

    If N=3 (electron, positron and nucleon) that makes 4 independent variables. If N=1 (for instance, you neglect the recoil of your nucleon) that would be only 1 independent variable.

    Finally, it is very probable that the introduction of E+ and E- is only a matter of symmetrical, more beautiful (or less ugly) equations :smile:
  4. Oct 3, 2008 #3


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Well yes I understand what you wrote my dear friend, I will at this level of accuracy neglect the target nucleis reqoil and initial configuration in phase space, so you are basically telling me that my substitution is accurate?

    I am trying to develop my own MC-generator for gamma conversion in a detector using ROOT-functions. From that I will estimate the background to certain rare e+e- decay modes, such as pi0-e+e- and so on. Just as background why I am asking this ;-P
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook