What Are Feynman Diagrams and How Are They Used in Physics?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the correct application of Feynman diagrams in quantum electrodynamics (QED), specifically addressing common errors in drawing these diagrams for particle interactions. Participants clarify the rules governing fermion lines, vertex configurations, and the implications of momentum conservation in the presence of matter. Key points include the necessity for fermion lines to maintain directionality, the restrictions on vertex types, and the representation of external photons in diagrams. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding these foundational concepts for accurate diagram representation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum electrodynamics (QED)
  • Familiarity with Feynman diagrams and their components
  • Knowledge of particle interactions, specifically electron and positron behavior
  • Basic principles of momentum conservation in particle physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the rules for drawing Feynman diagrams in QED
  • Learn about the significance of vertex types in particle interactions
  • Explore the concept of virtual particles and their representation in diagrams
  • Investigate the role of external fields in momentum conservation during particle interactions
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, particle physicists, and educators seeking to deepen their understanding of Feynman diagrams and their application in quantum electrodynamics.

unscientific
Messages
1,728
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement



(a) e- + e+ -> e- + e+
(b) e- + e- -> e- + e-
c) e- + e- -> e- + e- + u+ + u-
d) y -> e+ + e-
e) y + y -> y + y

xlxikm.png

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Part (a)[/B]
118j9yp.png


Part (b)

rcslmb.png


Part (c)

dc36l1.png


Part (d)

123pmjs.png


Part (e)

Not sure what to do with this, since usually the squiggly lines serve as the 'internal line' or 'virtual particle'.

 
Physics news on Phys.org
None of them are correct. The first one has the wrong direction on the fermion flow of the incoming positron. In the others you either have the wrong process (b) or vertices that do not exist in QED (c) or the process is not happening in the presence of matter as stated (d).
 
Orodruin said:
None of them are correct. The first one has the wrong direction on the fermion flow of the incoming positron. In the others you either have the wrong process (b) or vertices that do not exist in QED (c) or the process is not happening in the presence of matter as stated (d).

My notes don't really explain how these diagrams are drawn and my course doesn't delve into too much detail as it is left for grad work.

Why does the positron in the first one have the wrong direction? I thought as an anti-particle it is traveling in the opposite direction?

What are the "rules" that tell us how to draw these diagrams?
 
unscientific said:
What are the "rules" that tell us how to draw these diagrams?

  1. Fermion lines never change direction (caveat: not in the Standard Model anyway)
  2. The only allowed vertex is the one you have in (b) and (d). (For all flavours of leptons.)
  3. External fermion lines are particles if the arrow points in the "right" direction, i.e., into the diagram if incoming and out of the diagram if it is outgoing. Otherwise it is an anti-particle. (In your (a), the incoming positron points into the diagram, it should be pointing out.)
 
Orodruin said:
  1. Fermion lines never change direction (caveat: not in the Standard Model anyway)
  2. The only allowed vertex is the one you have in (b) and (d). (For all flavours of leptons.)
  3. External fermion lines are particles if the arrow points in the "right" direction, i.e., into the diagram if incoming and out of the diagram if it is outgoing. Otherwise it is an anti-particle. (In your (a), the incoming positron points into the diagram, it should be pointing out.)

Thanks a lot for clarifying the rules, that was very helpful. I've updated the diagrams to be:

Part(a)

2rfg1hl.png


Part (b)


dzfcs0.png


Part (c)

2nas0ex.png




Part (d)

What do they mean by in the presence of matter?

Part (e)
fun814.png
 
(b) now violates rule 1. The fermion line must keep its direction after the vertex.

(c) violates rule 2. You cannot have a vertex with only a fermion line and a photon line attached. Additionally, you have no external muons. You can remedy both of these errors in the same way.

(d) the reaction cannot happen in vacuum because of momentum conservation. In order for momentum conservation to hold, some momentum must be taken from a nearby electromagnetic field due to the presence of background matter.

(a) and (e) are ok.
 
Orodruin said:
(b) now violates rule 1. The fermion line must keep its direction after the vertex.

(c) violates rule 2. You cannot have a vertex with only a fermion line and a photon line attached. Additionally, you have no external muons. You can remedy both of these errors in the same way.

(d) the reaction cannot happen in vacuum because of momentum conservation. In order for momentum conservation to hold, some momentum must be taken from a nearby electromagnetic field due to the presence of background matter.

(a) and (e) are ok.
Part (b)

feynman3.png


Part (c)

I'm not sure how to do this, but I am guessing:

feynman4.png


Part(d)

I'm not sure how to reflect this 'borrowing' of momentum in the diagram. Does it mean creating another virtual particle? So 2 squiggly lines to a vertex then branches out to e- and e+?


 
(b) You cannot change it by just changing the arrow. While it did become a valid Feynman diagram, it no longer represents two ingoing electrons. When you changed direction of the line, you traded the electron for a positron.

(c) No. Stop guessing and think about it for some time. There is no vertex with three photons so it violates the rule about the only possible vertex. Make sure to check all rules!

(d) It would be represented by an external photon taken from the external field. This is typically represented by a photon line ending in a point with a cross.
 
Orodruin said:
(b) You cannot change it by just changing the arrow. While it did become a valid Feynman diagram, it no longer represents two ingoing electrons. When you changed direction of the line, you traded the electron for a positron.

(c) No. Stop guessing and think about it for some time. There is no vertex with three photons so it violates the rule about the only possible vertex. Make sure to check all rules!

(d) It would be represented by an external photon taken from the external field. This is typically represented by a photon line ending in a point with a cross.
Part (b)

This represents an electron-electron scattering process, not sure what's wrong with this:

feynman3.png


Part (c)

Not sure if this is right, but I obeyed the 'one squiggly-two straight lines rule':

feynman4.png


Part (d)

feynman5.png
 
  • #10
(b) and (c) are correct. Note that there are also more possibilities for (c) that are different from this one. (This also goes for (a).)

On (d) you misunderstood me. You must add an additional external photon. It is in the end of this photon you put a cross, not in a vertex. This represents that the photon is taken from the background.
 
  • #11
Orodruin said:
(b) and (c) are correct. Note that there are also more possibilities for (c) that are different from this one. (This also goes for (a).)

On (d) you misunderstood me. You must add an additional external photon. It is in the end of this photon you put a cross, not in a vertex. This represents that the photon is taken from the background.

So part (d) is:

feynman5.png
 
  • #12
No, as I said, the cross is in the free end of the additional photon, not in the vertex. This represents taking it from the external field.

Squiggly external lines represent internal photon propagators or external photons. There is nothing intrinsically linking them to being virtual. Fermions can also be virtual and internal lines.

To be honest, I do not see the point of trying to make students trying to randomly draw Feynman diagrams without telling them at least the very basics of what they represent ...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: unscientific

Similar threads

Feynman diagram for ##\mu^+\mu^-## production in ##p\bar{p}## reaction
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Tree-level diagram Moller scattering
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
How to translate expression into momentum-space correctly
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Understanding e+e- --> W+W- Process Diagrams
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
How Do You Draw Feynman Diagrams for These Particle Reactions?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
9K
Feynman diagram; ##\pi^0+\pi^0\rightarrow \pi^++\pi^-##
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Feynman Diagrams for Interacting Scalar Fields
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Feynman Diagram for phi^4 theory (path integral)
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Isospin and Partons model in a pentaquark
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
The propagator of eigenstates of the Total Angular Momentum
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K