What Makes Equation 8.9 in Quantum Field Theory So Confusing?

shadi_s10
Messages
87
Reaction score
0
Dear all,
I am taking 'field theory' course this semster and I am reading 'quantum field theory' by mandl and shaw.
In chapter 8, equation (8.9) we see:

E_1 E_2 v_rel=〖[(p_1 p_2 )^2-m_1^2 m_2^2]〗^(1/2)

and we know that as p is a four vector:
p=(E,P)=m
so p_1 p_2 = m_1 m_2

!
Isn't it strange?!
I think the right hand side of eq(8.9)should be zero then!

what am I donig wrong?!

:confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
shadi_s10 said:
and we know that as p is a four vector:
p=(E,P)=m
That doesn't make any sense. The mass m is a scalar. How can it be equal to p, a four-vector?
 
shadi_s10 said:
Dear all,
I am taking 'field theory' course this semster and I am reading 'quantum field theory' by mandl and shaw.
In chapter 8, equation (8.9) we see:

E_1 E_2 v_rel=〖[(p_1 p_2 )^2-m_1^2 m_2^2]〗^(1/2)

and we know that as p is a four vector:
p=(E,P)=m
so p_1 p_2 = m_1 m_2

!
Isn't it strange?!
I think the right hand side of eq(8.9)should be zero then!

what am I donig wrong?!

:confused:
The norm of the 4-vector is equal to m not the vector itself.
 
But if you take a look at field theory by guidry we have the exact same term!
I mean:
p= (E,P) = m
Because as you know in relativity we have:
E^2+P^2=m^2
and this is the exact result from p= m
!
 
You must be leaving out typographical information because what you are writing simply doesn't make sense. It's akin to saying the vector (2,1,3) is equal to the number 6. It just doesn't work from a mathematical perspective.
 
shadi_s10 said:
But if you take a look at field theory by guidry we have the exact same term!
I mean:
p= (E,P) = m
Because as you know in relativity we have:
E^2+P^2=m^2
and this is the exact result from p= m
!
It is actually E^2-P^2=m^2

\vec{p}=(E,\vec{P})

\vec{p}\cdot\vec{p}=E^2-\vec{P}\cdot\vec{P}=m^2
|p|=m
I do not have your book but I know the notation you are using.It does not bother pointing the difference between the vector and the norm.You should be able to figure out what is he is talking about from the context.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top