What is the amplitude for electron-muon scattering at tree level?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the amplitude for electron-muon scattering at tree level, specifically addressing problem 7.26 from Griffiths' "Introduction to Elementary Particles." The user initially struggles with incorporating momenta and spins into the amplitude formula, which is given as -4πα/(p1-p3)² multiplied by spinor products. They derive expressions for the momenta and spinors of the incoming and outgoing particles, leading to a calculation that suggests the amplitude depends on initial momentum, which is incorrect. Ultimately, the user resolves their confusion and retracts their question, indicating they have found the solution.
giant_bog
Messages
13
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm having trouble with e-muon scattering. Tree level, no loops. (This is problem 7.26 in Griffiths Intro to Elem Particles). I get that the amplitude is as stated in the text, but I am having problems coming up with a number when the momenta and spins are added in.

This is in the COM frame with the electron traveling up the z axis with momentum p and the muon going down the z axis with the same momentum. They then repel and go back the way they came. All helicities are assumed to be +1.

Homework Equations



The amplitude is given as -\frac{4\pi\alpha}{(p_1-p_3)^2} \bar{u}_3\gamma^\mu u_1 \bar{u}_4\gamma_\mu u_2.

The Attempt at a Solution



As far as I can figure, p_1 = (E_1/c,0,0,p), p_3 = (E_1/c,0,0,-p), p_2 = (E_2/c,0,0,-p), and p_4 = (E_2/c,0,0,p), for the incoming and outgoing electron, and incoming and outgoing muon, respectively. That would make the spinors equal to:

u_1 = n (1,0,p/n^2,0)^T
u_3 = n (1,0,-p/n^2,0)^T
u_2 = N (1,0,-p/N^2,0)^T
u_4 = N (1,0,p/N^2,0)^T

where n=\frac{E_1+m_e c^2}{c} and N=\frac{E_2+m_\mu c^2}{c}
That makes the adjoints
\bar{u}_3 = u_3^\dagger\gamma^0 = n (1,0,p/n^2,0) and
\bar{u}_4 = u_4^\dagger\gamma^0 = N (1,0,-p/N^2,0)

These are all in the form of (A, 0, B, 0)\gamma^\mu(A, 0, B, 0)^T. It appears to work out that this is always 0 unless \mu=0. But \bar{u}_3 looks exactly like u_1^\dagger, so \bar{u}_3\gamma^0 u_1 = u_1^\dagger\gamma^0 u_1 = \bar{u}_1 u_1 = 2m_e c. The muon term works out the same way to 2m_\mu c. That makes the spinor contribution 4m_e m_\mu c^2

The (p_1-p_3)^2 term in the denominator should be ((E_1/c,0,0,p)-(E_1/c,0,0,-p))^2 = -4p^2 assuming the incoming and outgoing energies are the same, giving the final result M = \frac{4\pi\alpha m_e m_\mu c^2}{p^2}.

I know this is wrong, because the probability shouldn't be dependent on the initial momentum: I could make that momentum as low as I want and make the amplitude as high as I want. Besides, it differs from the answer given in the text and also the answer given in the Physics Bowl episode of The Big Bang Theory! Not sure where I went wrong, though.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
post deleted
 
Last edited:
Now I got it. Never mind, y'all.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top