Timeline for Going from scattering amplitudes to classical potentials
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 15, 2021 at 10:17 | comment | added | TheQuantumMan | I see. Thanks a lot for your comment! | |
| Jan 15, 2021 at 10:16 | comment | added | ACuriousMind♦ | @TheQuantumMan: The electrons here are not really indistinguishable if we want to compare to the Born approximation scattering - one of them is a fixed potential source, the other is scattering off it, and really the fixed one is usually not a single electron but some far heavier and complicated thing that contains an electron. So the u-channel does not contribute because of distinguishability. There is no s-channel for electron-electron scattering, you only have that for electron-positron scattering. | |
| Jan 15, 2021 at 10:12 | comment | added | TheQuantumMan | Thanks for the answer! Just a question. Based on the scattered particles and their charge, we should consider the appropriate contributions from each of the s-, u-, t-channels. For example for $e^- e^-\rightarrow e^- e^-$, we consider the t and u (Moller scattering). For $e^- e^+\rightarrow e^- e^+$, we consider the s and t channels (Bhabha scattering). Peskin & Schroeder (p.125) only considers the s-channel and Schwartz (p.308) considers a single channel as well. Shouldn't we add up the contributions of the two channels? Wouldn't that give us $2$ times the Coulomb potential? | |
| Jan 15, 2021 at 8:17 | vote | accept | TheQuantumMan | ||
| Jan 15, 2021 at 0:44 | history | answered | ACuriousMind♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |