Typical cross sections for ee-uu scattering

  • Thread starter Thread starter alex3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cross Scattering
alex3
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
I'm numerically evaluating the differential cross sections \frac{\operatorname{d}\sigma}{\operatorname{d} \Omega} for e^{-}e^{+}\rightarrow\mu^{-}\mu^{+} scattering by integrating over \operatorname{d}\Omega = \operatorname{d}(\cos{\vartheta})\operatorname{d} \phi.

Assuming no transverse polarisation so that the integration over \phi is simply 2\pi, and also assuming no electron mass, there are three effective cross sections: one due solely to \gamma-\gamma, one due to Z^{0}-Z^{0}, and one due to the interference term of the matrix elements ((\mathcal{M}_{\gamma} + \mathcal{M}_{Z^{0}})^{2}), \gamma-Z^{0}. The photon term is the so-called QED term, while the Z boson terms are the Standard Model terms.

I'm not experienced in plotting or analysing these kinds of events, so my problem is that I'm unsure of what to expect. I know that I should see a resonance, as I am, but I'm worried that the interference term should be contributing more than what I'm seeing.

I've attached three plots, each centred around the Z^{0} mass (which I've taken as about 91.2GeV). The first is the \gamma-\gamma contribution, second the Z^{0}-Z^{0}, third the interference term \gamma-Z^{0}. The fourth plot, the combined total cross section \sigma, can be found http://cl.ly/421W1Y212L0k3h0B0S27 . (These are raw plots! Energy in GeV on x, cross section \sigma on y.)

As you can see, each contribution has a different form (which is OK), but the interference term is much smaller (~10e-3) than the dominating Z^{0}-Z^{0} term. Is this expected behaviour for these types of events?

(I should mention that the given differential cross sections are trivially solvable. I think I have coded it up correctly, but given my inexperience it would be nice to hear from someone with more competence in the field.)
 

Attachments

  • g-g.png
    g-g.png
    3.4 KB · Views: 556
  • z-z.png
    z-z.png
    4.1 KB · Views: 567
  • g-z.png
    g-z.png
    3.8 KB · Views: 557
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
That matches the actual plots for the cross section. Close to the Z peak the Z is completely dominant. Outside the interference term has some influence.
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top