What am I missing here? (QFT: ##e^- - p## scattering)

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Wrichik Basu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qft Scattering
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Feynman amplitude for electron-proton scattering as presented in a particle physics textbook. Participants explore how certain terms related to the scattering process are derived from the Feynman amplitude, specifically focusing on the terms for ##l^{\mu\nu}## and ##h_{\mu\nu}##.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the author derives the terms for ##l^{\mu\nu}## and ##h_{\mu\nu}## from the Feynman amplitude, indicating a potential gap in understanding.
  • Another participant asks if the book has covered the identities for traces and contractions with gamma matrices and polarization spinors, suggesting these may be relevant to the derivation.
  • A later reply confirms that the book has addressed these identities, albeit not in great detail, and emphasizes the importance of remembering which indices are contracted.
  • One participant expresses a feeling of needing to consult a different book, implying dissatisfaction with the current resource.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no explicit consensus on the derivation process, and participants express uncertainty about their understanding of the material. Multiple viewpoints regarding the adequacy of the textbook's explanations are present.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the book does not cover certain identities in detail, which may limit their understanding of the derivation process. There is also an indication that some participants may have forgotten key concepts related to the topic.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in particle physics, specifically those studying Feynman diagrams and scattering processes, may find this discussion relevant.

Wrichik Basu
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
2,188
Reaction score
2,694
I am currently reading Particle Physics by Palash Pal. In one place, the author shows the Feynman diagram for the electron-proton scattering:

1564157025642.png

Then, he writes the Feynman amplitude for the process: $$i \mathcal{M} \ = \ \left[ \bar{u}(\vec{k'}) i e \gamma^\mu u(\vec{k}) \right] \frac{-ig_{\mu\nu}}{q^2} \left[\bar{u}(\vec{p'}) i e \Gamma^\nu u(\vec{p}) \right]$$ Then he writes,
1564157357903.png

where,
1564157387066.png

and
1564157425131.png


After this, he proceeds to find the expression for the ##\Gamma## in ##h_{\mu\nu}##.

My question is, how does he write the terms for ##l^{\mu\nu}## and ##h_{\mu\nu}## just by looking at ##\mathcal{M}##? I am sure I am missing something, and the answer is very trivial, but since I have none to ask, I hope you will help me out.

Notation used: According to the author, bold font means a 3-vector, while normal font means a 4-vector. So, k is a 4-vector, while k is the corresponding 3-vector.[/size]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Has the book gone through the identities for traces and contractions with the gamma matrices and polarization spinors?
 
DarMM said:
Has the book gone through the identities for traces and contractions with the gamma matrices and polarization spinors?
Yes, it has, but not in great details. I might be forgetting something. I need to look those up.
 
Wrichik Basu said:
Yes, it has, but not in great details. I might be forgetting something. I need to look those up.
They're essentially responsible for the result. I'd look them up again and remember what indices are being contracted.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and Wrichik Basu
DarMM said:
They're essentially responsible for the result. I'd look them up again and remember what indices are being contracted.
Seems that I have to take up a different book.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K