Virtuality of a nearly on-shell photon

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter muppet
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Photon
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the virtuality of photons, particularly in the context of elastic scattering processes and the implications of the finite mass of electrons on the Mandelstam variable t. Participants explore the relationship between photon emission, absorption, and the concept of being "on-shell" versus "off-shell," as well as the applicability of classical electrodynamics to radio waves despite these considerations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the finite electron mass imposes a lower bound on the Mandelstam variable t, suggesting a connection to the virtuality of photons emitted from a radio transmitter.
  • Another participant questions the universality of the claim regarding the lower bound on t, indicating skepticism about its applicability to all scattering processes.
  • A different participant reflects on the kinematics of the situation, suggesting that mass terms may cancel out, which leads to confusion regarding the divergence of the cross-section in certain scattering scenarios.
  • There is a mention of a specific condition where smin is greater than or equal to the electron mass when electrons or positrons are involved, indicating a related but distinct consideration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the finite electron mass on the virtuality of photons and the applicability of classical electrodynamics. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the relationship between these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight limitations in the argumentation regarding the cancellation of mass terms and the conditions under which the lower bound on t applies, indicating that certain assumptions may not hold universally.

muppet
Messages
602
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

It was recently pointed out to me that the finite electron mass puts a lower bound on the Mandelstam variable t describing the square of the transferred momentum in the centre-of-mass frame, [itex]t_{min}=m_{e}^{2}[/itex].

This solved a problem I was worrying about (the finiteness of the tree-level approximation to elastic scattering), but gave me a new one to worry about.

I've often heard it said that whenever a photon leaves a radio-transmitter to be received by my radio, it must be slightly off-shell, simply by virtue of the fact that it's emitted and absorbed. But apparently the minimal virtuality of the photon is set by the electron mass, which corresponds to an energy in the gamma ray spectrum, right?

So if all of this is true, then why does classical electrodynamics describe radio waves well when the virtuality of a photon is vastly larger than its 3-momentum?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
muppet said:
Hi all,

It was recently pointed out to me that the finite electron mass puts a lower bound on the Mandelstam variable t describing the square of the transferred momentum in the centre-of-mass frame, [itex]t_{min}=m_{e}^{2}[/itex].
In which process? I doubt that this is true for all processes.

All low-energetic scattering processes have a small t.
 
Dammit... the claim was that this followed from the kinematics, recalling that ##t=(p_1-p_3)^2## and putting the external momenta on shell. However, checking the argument again, it looks as if the mass terms end up cancelling out. This is what I thought was the case originally, but the (quite senior) lecturer I was speaking to managed to convince me otherwise at the time. So now I'm back where I started with my original problem -namely, why does the cross-section you obtain from the t-channel Born approximation to the elastic scattering of two fermions (say) diverge?
 
smin>=me (as soon as an electron or positron is involved) is the only similar statement I see.
 
Yes, thanks for taking the time to reply.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K