'Ello,(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I have a question regarding the results in this paper (and another which I will mention later)

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0212199

Now, i'm not so concerned about the 'braney' bit, but more their definition of the cross section in Eqn. (46). They have included the usual (2j+1) term (which is present even in non-relativistic physics) but it seems to me it should be the full g(j) = (2j+1)/((2a+1)(2b+1)) where a and b are the spins of the incident particle and the target (in this case one of them can be zero as they consider a black hole target which is modeled as a classical potential, in some sense).

A similar definition seems to be used in this paper by R. Fabbri:

http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v12/i4/p933_1

in this case in Eqn. (34)

In both cases they consider spin 1 and so one would expect a factor of (2j+1)/3, or no?

Any help would be appreciated :\

Cheers!

-Z

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Spin statistic terms in absorption cross section

Loading...

Similar Threads for Spin statistic terms | Date |
---|---|

A Can Fluctuation-Dissipation Theorem Apply to Magnetic Forces | Jul 21, 2016 |

Spin-Statistics Theorem | Aug 25, 2012 |

W. Pauli: The connection between spin and statistics | Aug 10, 2010 |

Exchange Operators & Spin Statistics - I don't the conclusions | Mar 15, 2010 |

Spin-statistics theorem | Aug 12, 2007 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**