Problems with intuition for scattering / x-sections

In summary: Yes, if you take a die and colour 5 sides red and one side blue, then you would not be surprised that it is 5 times more probable that the die lands on a red side than on a blue side.In summary, the deep reason for the decrease in cross section with increasing center-of-mass energy is due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the factor q^{-2} is due to the Fourier transform of the Coulomb potential. In momentum space, the electron cares about the quarks having colors so that the cross section for the q\bar{q} final state is three times higher than for muons.
  • #1
hagi
11
0
Dear PF,

although I've gone through many particle phyics lectures and textbooks, I still have problems with wrap my mind around the whole scattering theory and cross section topics.

1. Is there a deep reason why cross sections for charged, point-like particles decrease with the center-of-mass energy (the Mandelstam s) as [itex]\frac{1}{s}[/itex]? I read that it can be explained with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, but I don't really see the connection.

2. Moving on to the differential cross section with respect to momentum transfer, I guess that the factor [itex]q^{-2}[/itex] is due to the Fourier transform of the Coulomb potential. In the space picture I understand that it's less likely for a particle to interact with a Coulomb potential if it's further away from it. What is the corresponding intuition in momentum space?

3. Fermi's Golden rule tells us that the interaction rate scales with the phase space, i.e., with the number of possible final states. How can I understand this intuitively? How does an electron know before annihilating with a positron to a photon how many possibilities of decay the photon will have? Similarly, why should the electron care about the fact that quarks have colors so that the cross section for the [itex]q\bar{q}[/itex] final state is three times higher than for muons?

Thanks so much in advance!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
hagi said:
1. Is there a deep reason why cross sections for charged, point-like particles decrease with the center-of-mass energy (the Mandelstam s) as [itex]s^{-2}[/itex]? I read that it can be explained with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, but I don't really see the connection.
Don't you mean s-1? For example, σ(e+e- → μ+μ-) = 4πα2/3s. It has to be s-1 from dimensionality considerations, since s is the only variable, and s-1 is the only way you can form an area. Intuitively, I guess, Heisenberg tells us that the target particle looks smaller at higher energy.

hagi said:
3. Fermi's Golden rule tells us that the interaction rate scales with the phase space, i.e., with the number of possible final states. How can I understand this intuitively? How does an electron know before annihilating with a positron to a photon how many possibilities of decay the photon will have? Similarly, why should the electron care about the fact that quarks have colors so that the cross section for the [itex]q\bar{q}[/itex] final state is three times higher than for muons?
This one's easy: "average over initial, sum over final." The experimenter can't distinguish the color of the quarks involved, and they all happen, so he has to sum over the various possibilities.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
It's worth remembering too that the electron and positron don't annihilate with 100% certainty.
 
  • #4
Bill_K said:
Don't you mean s-1?
Yes, of course I meant that, sorry.

I still don't understand. So if my projectile has low momentum and the spatial resolution is low, the particle doesn't look point-like but like a disc and I have to fold the potential with this disk? If I increase the momentum, the particle will approach its point-like nature and the potential is folded with a delta function?

This one's easy: "average over initial, sum over final." The experimenter can't disitnguish the color of the quarks involved, and they all happen, so he has to sum over the various possibilities.

It seems to be so obvious, but my problem is that I don't understand how we can sum the possibilities. If there were infinitely many colors the cross section and hence the interaction rate would be infinite as well?

In my intuition, the interaction between two particles determines how often they interact and just after this interaction I need to care about how I distribute this interaction rate among the possible final states. I'm sure I'm missing something...
 
  • #5
Yes, you are missing the idea that the number of possible final states actually determines the interaction rate in the first place.
 
  • #6
Jilang said:
Yes, you are missing the idea that the number of possible final states actually determines the interaction rate in the first place.

Yes, and how can I understand that (apart from lengthy calculations)?
 
  • #7
hagi said:
Yes, and how can I understand that (apart from lengthy calculations)?

It's just regular probability theory: if you want to know the probability of any of a number of different things happening, you have to sum up the probabilities of all the possibilities.

hagi said:
If there were infinitely many colors the cross section and hence the interaction rate would be infinite as well?

Yeah, I think if you want a sensible limit when you take the number of colors ##N_c## to infinity you have to scale the coupling ##g## like ##1/\sqrt{N_c}## to compensate for this.
 
  • #8
hagi said:
Yes, and how can I understand that (apart from lengthy calculations)?

As The_Duck says, this is "normal" :). If I take a die and colour 5 sides red and one side blue, then you would not be surprised that it is 5 times more probable that the die lands on a red side than on a blue side.

As for this bit:

hagi said:
It seems to be so obvious, but my problem is that I don't understand how we can sum the possibilities. If there were infinitely many colors the cross section and hence the interaction rate would be infinite as well?

Consider if the die had infinitely many sides. Probability is conserved, so the individual probabilities you are summing would each be infinitesimal. QFT also conserves probabilities so the cross-section isn't going to explode unless there is some bad problem occurring.
 

FAQ: Problems with intuition for scattering / x-sections

What is the meaning of scattering and cross-sections in relation to intuition?

In science, scattering refers to the phenomenon of particles or waves being deflected or redirected when they encounter other particles or obstacles. Cross-sections, on the other hand, are a measure of the likelihood of particles or waves interacting with each other based on their size and shape. In relation to intuition, these concepts can be difficult to grasp as they involve abstract mathematical calculations and are not easily observable in everyday life.

Why is it important to understand problems with intuition for scattering/cross-sections?

Understanding problems with intuition for scattering and cross-sections is important because these concepts are essential in various fields of science, such as physics, chemistry, and astronomy. They are used to explain and predict the behavior of particles and waves, and any errors in our intuition can lead to incorrect interpretations and conclusions.

What are some common misconceptions about scattering and cross-sections?

One common misconception is that the size or shape of a particle is the only factor that affects its scattering behavior. In reality, factors such as the energy and angle of the incident particle, as well as the properties of the medium it is scattering in, also play a significant role. Another misconception is that a large cross-section always means a higher probability of interaction, when in fact, it depends on the specific circumstances.

How can we improve our intuition for understanding scattering and cross-sections?

One way to improve our intuition for scattering and cross-sections is to visualize and understand the underlying concepts and principles. This can be done through simulations, diagrams, and real-life examples. Additionally, practicing and solving problems involving these concepts can also help to strengthen our understanding and intuition.

Can intuition ever be relied upon when dealing with scattering and cross-sections?

While intuition can be a helpful guide, it should not be solely relied upon when dealing with scattering and cross-sections. These concepts are often counterintuitive and require precise mathematical calculations to accurately predict and explain phenomena. It is important to always cross-check our intuition with scientific principles and data to ensure accuracy and avoid errors.

Back
Top