Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with feynman-diagrams
Search options not deleted
user 42937
A diagrammatic technique introduced by Richard Feynman to describe the quantum behaviour of subatomic particles and their interactions. Do not use for general questions on diagrams that are not of the Feynman kind.
3
votes
Accepted
Basic question regarding Feynman diagrams
Well I find hard to believe that you have to draw all the diagrams, since they are infinite. You probably have to draw only the first order ones. Start by drawing the in and out external legs and see …
- 2,194
1
vote
Correction to the scalar propagator - derivative coupling
It seems to me that your Lagrangian is just a free Lagrangian in disguise.
Start from
$$\mathcal L =\frac{1}{2} (\partial_\mu \phi)^2 $$
and do a field redefinition
$$\phi(x) \to \frac{2}{\lambd …
- 2,194
1
vote
$T$-Channel matrix element
I assume this is a Compton scattering, so wavy line = photon and straight line = electron.
In this case the photon is massless, so $p_4^2 = p_1^2 = 0$.
So expanding the definition of $k$ you find for …
- 2,194
1
vote
Accepted
Decay and scattering terms in a field theory Lagrangian
It is not correct.
A 3 field operator contributes to scattering amplitude (example: $\bar\psi \gamma^\mu \psi A_\mu$ in QED contributes to the electron scattering) and a 4 field operator can contribu …
- 2,194
1
vote
Accepted
D'Alembert operator interaction term in QFT Lagrangian
I think he has a typo in $(2.21)$. In the first line the $m^2$ at the numerator of the second integral should actually be a $p^2$. You can see that in the second line a $p^2$ appears out of nowhere.
A …
- 2,194