What Makes Equation 8.9 in Quantum Field Theory So Confusing?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around equation (8.9) from the textbook 'Quantum Field Theory' by Mandl and Shaw, specifically examining the relationship between four-vectors and mass in the context of quantum field theory. Participants express confusion regarding the interpretation of the equation and the definitions involved.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants question the validity of equating a four-vector to a scalar mass, with some suggesting that the original poster may be misunderstanding the notation. Others highlight the need for clarity regarding the distinction between a vector and its norm.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing differing perspectives on the interpretation of the equation and the definitions of four-vectors and mass. Some guidance has been offered regarding the mathematical relationships, but no consensus has been reached.

Contextual Notes

There appears to be confusion stemming from typographical information and notation differences between various texts. Participants are exploring the implications of these differences on their understanding of the equation.

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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K