Take the 2-minute tour ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I want to check whether my result for the invariant amplitude of the electron-electron scattering (to lowest order in $\alpha$; t+u channels) is correct or not.

I can't find any reference that has the result explicitly. Can someone point out some kind of database of scattering amplitudes?

Edit: for completeness I post my result (which might have an error) $$|\mathcal{M}|^2=\frac{2e^4}{u^2t^2}\left((s^2-8m^4)[(t+u)^2+u^4+t^4]+8m^2ut(4m^2-3s)\right)$$

Update: I managed to do the calculation using CompHEP+Mathematica.

On CompHEP I selected the QED model and calculated the diagrams for $e^-e^- \rightarrow e^-e^-$ from which I get the two contributions to the process (t+u channels). Then I exported the symbolic computation of the squared diagrams to Mathematica code which gives $$ \frac{2e^4}{t^2 \left(-4 m^2+s+t\right)^2} (64 m^8+16 m^6 (t-6 s)+4 m^4 \left(13 s^2+3 s t+3 t^2\right)-4 m^2 \left(3 s^3+3 s^2 t+3 s t^2+2 t^3\right)+\left(s^2+s t+t^2\right)^2)$$ where the denominator is clearly $t^2u^2$ by using $s+t+u=4m^2$ but the rest is not so trivial to put in the same form as my equation for $|\mathcal{M}|^2$. So if I substitute the value of $u$ on my first equation I get something that doesn't look anything like the second equation. Therefore my first equation is wrong.

Note: I compared the second equation with the expression for the differential cross section of the Møller scattering from a book and it is consistent.

share|improve this question
1  
The basic SM cross sections (although not amplitudes, I recall) are mentioned in the Particle Data Booklet, see here. –  Vibert Mar 4 '13 at 23:12
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Besides textbooks such as Peskin & Schroeder, COMPHEP has some of the functionality you are looking for as well, although I have never used it for this purpose. From the overview page:

"The symbolic part of CompHEP has the following possibilities: [...] calculate analytical expressions corresponding to squared diagrams by using the fast built-in symbolic calculator;"

To test calculations against actual experimental data, most modern particle physics experiments today will submit their results to HEPDATA. You might try a search for [re e+ e- --> e+ e- and obs sig]

One of the results it: "Measurement of hadron and lepton-pair production in e+ e- collisions at s**(1/2) = 192-GeV to 208-GeV at LEP"

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks, that's an good reference to keep in mind. In my case I was thinking more like a theoretical exercise. Thus for example I calculated the amplitude in terms of Mandelstam variables and wanted to check if my result is correct. The other option is to use a CAS to do the algebra for me, unfortunately I only found a package for Mathematica that does algebraic manipulations of gamma matrices but I don't have access to that software. –  Barefeg Mar 4 '13 at 11:25
    
Hi I expanded my answer to that effect, I guess textbooks are the best source here. –  luksen Mar 4 '13 at 11:43
    
Thanks for pointing out COMPHEP, I'll dig it when I get some time. –  Barefeg Mar 4 '13 at 17:05
    
@Barefeg any luck? I'd personally be interested in this answer as well. –  luksen Mar 8 '13 at 18:21
    
I think compHEP should do the trick but I'm having technical problems. After I square the diagrams I select algebraic manipulation and the program crashes. I'm not sure if this is because I installed from .deb package (I couldn't install it from source it gave me errors). The solution I think is to export to Reduce or Mathematica. I'll install the former and try, but from the code it generates it seems that it can calculate what I asked in the original question –  Barefeg Mar 10 '13 at 12:39
show 1 more comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.