Why can a particle decay into two photons but not one?












10















I recently read an old physics news about the Higgs boson where it was observed to decay into 2 photons and I was wondering why it wouldn't have decayed into a single photon with the combined energy of 2 photons?






particle-physics photons momentum conservation-laws higgs







share|cite|improve this question

























  • Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/427466/2451 and links therein.

    – Qmechanic♦
    2 hours ago


















10















I recently read an old physics news about the Higgs boson where it was observed to decay into 2 photons and I was wondering why it wouldn't have decayed into a single photon with the combined energy of 2 photons?






particle-physics photons momentum conservation-laws higgs







share|cite|improve this question

























  • Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/427466/2451 and links therein.

    – Qmechanic♦
    2 hours ago
















10












10








10


1






I recently read an old physics news about the Higgs boson where it was observed to decay into 2 photons and I was wondering why it wouldn't have decayed into a single photon with the combined energy of 2 photons?






particle-physics photons momentum conservation-laws higgs







share|cite|improve this question
















I recently read an old physics news about the Higgs boson where it was observed to decay into 2 photons and I was wondering why it wouldn't have decayed into a single photon with the combined energy of 2 photons?






particle-physics photons momentum conservation-laws higgs




particle-physics photons momentum conservation-laws higgs






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 1 hour ago









Ben Crowell

49k4151294




49k4151294










asked 22 hours ago









user6760user6760

2,50111737




2,50111737













  • Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/427466/2451 and links therein.

    – Qmechanic♦
    2 hours ago





















  • Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/427466/2451 and links therein.

    – Qmechanic♦
    2 hours ago



















Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/427466/2451 and links therein.

– Qmechanic♦
2 hours ago







Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/427466/2451 and links therein.

– Qmechanic♦
2 hours ago












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















28














No massive particle can decay into a single photon.



In its rest frame, a particle with mass $M$ has momentum $p=0$. If it decayed to a single photon, conservation of energy would require the photon energy to be $E=Mc^2$, while conservation of momentum would require the photon to maintain $p=0$. However, photons obey $E=pc$ (which is the special case of $E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2$ for massless particles). It's not possible to satisfy all these constraints at once. Composite particles may emit single photons, but no massive particle may decay to a photon.






share|cite|improve this answer
























  • Massive particle as in fermion with half integer spin right, so it have to decay into some other particles on top of a photon to conserve energy and spin momentum is this what you are saying?

    – user6760
    20 hours ago








  • 2





    @user6760 This argument is about linear, not angular, momentum. And there are plenty of massive particles which obey Bose-Einstein statistics and have integer spins.

    – rob♦
    19 hours ago





















16














The Higgs boson has spin $0$. A photon has spin $1$. The total angular momentum cannot change in the decay, so a Higgs boson cannot decay into a single photon, regardless of the energy. But the total angular momentum of two photons can be zero (because their spins can be oriented in opposite directions), so this decay mode can conserve angular momentum.



As emphasized in a comment, conservation of angular momentum is only a necessary condition, not a sufficient one. Please see rob's answer for clarification about this.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • 1





    I just look up spin so spin can be negative

    – user6760
    22 hours ago






  • 5





    I think this answer is misleading because it discusses only angular momentum. The hypothetical decays $Ztogamma$ or $text{ortho-}(e^+e^-) to gamma$ can conserve angular momentum, but don't occur for the more basic reason given in my answer.

    – rob♦
    19 hours ago













  • @rob You are absolutely right. Angular momentum conservation is only necessary, not sufficient, and the way my answer is worded is misleading in that respect. I edited my answer to include a link to your answer. Thanks for clarifying this.

    – Dan Yand
    11 hours ago











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f453657%2fwhy-can-a-particle-decay-into-two-photons-but-not-one%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









28














No massive particle can decay into a single photon.



In its rest frame, a particle with mass $M$ has momentum $p=0$. If it decayed to a single photon, conservation of energy would require the photon energy to be $E=Mc^2$, while conservation of momentum would require the photon to maintain $p=0$. However, photons obey $E=pc$ (which is the special case of $E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2$ for massless particles). It's not possible to satisfy all these constraints at once. Composite particles may emit single photons, but no massive particle may decay to a photon.






share|cite|improve this answer
























  • Massive particle as in fermion with half integer spin right, so it have to decay into some other particles on top of a photon to conserve energy and spin momentum is this what you are saying?

    – user6760
    20 hours ago








  • 2





    @user6760 This argument is about linear, not angular, momentum. And there are plenty of massive particles which obey Bose-Einstein statistics and have integer spins.

    – rob♦
    19 hours ago


















28














No massive particle can decay into a single photon.



In its rest frame, a particle with mass $M$ has momentum $p=0$. If it decayed to a single photon, conservation of energy would require the photon energy to be $E=Mc^2$, while conservation of momentum would require the photon to maintain $p=0$. However, photons obey $E=pc$ (which is the special case of $E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2$ for massless particles). It's not possible to satisfy all these constraints at once. Composite particles may emit single photons, but no massive particle may decay to a photon.






share|cite|improve this answer
























  • Massive particle as in fermion with half integer spin right, so it have to decay into some other particles on top of a photon to conserve energy and spin momentum is this what you are saying?

    – user6760
    20 hours ago








  • 2





    @user6760 This argument is about linear, not angular, momentum. And there are plenty of massive particles which obey Bose-Einstein statistics and have integer spins.

    – rob♦
    19 hours ago
















28












28








28







No massive particle can decay into a single photon.



In its rest frame, a particle with mass $M$ has momentum $p=0$. If it decayed to a single photon, conservation of energy would require the photon energy to be $E=Mc^2$, while conservation of momentum would require the photon to maintain $p=0$. However, photons obey $E=pc$ (which is the special case of $E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2$ for massless particles). It's not possible to satisfy all these constraints at once. Composite particles may emit single photons, but no massive particle may decay to a photon.






share|cite|improve this answer













No massive particle can decay into a single photon.



In its rest frame, a particle with mass $M$ has momentum $p=0$. If it decayed to a single photon, conservation of energy would require the photon energy to be $E=Mc^2$, while conservation of momentum would require the photon to maintain $p=0$. However, photons obey $E=pc$ (which is the special case of $E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2$ for massless particles). It's not possible to satisfy all these constraints at once. Composite particles may emit single photons, but no massive particle may decay to a photon.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 20 hours ago









rob♦rob

40k972165




40k972165













  • Massive particle as in fermion with half integer spin right, so it have to decay into some other particles on top of a photon to conserve energy and spin momentum is this what you are saying?

    – user6760
    20 hours ago








  • 2





    @user6760 This argument is about linear, not angular, momentum. And there are plenty of massive particles which obey Bose-Einstein statistics and have integer spins.

    – rob♦
    19 hours ago





















  • Massive particle as in fermion with half integer spin right, so it have to decay into some other particles on top of a photon to conserve energy and spin momentum is this what you are saying?

    – user6760
    20 hours ago








  • 2





    @user6760 This argument is about linear, not angular, momentum. And there are plenty of massive particles which obey Bose-Einstein statistics and have integer spins.

    – rob♦
    19 hours ago



















Massive particle as in fermion with half integer spin right, so it have to decay into some other particles on top of a photon to conserve energy and spin momentum is this what you are saying?

– user6760
20 hours ago







Massive particle as in fermion with half integer spin right, so it have to decay into some other particles on top of a photon to conserve energy and spin momentum is this what you are saying?

– user6760
20 hours ago






2




2





@user6760 This argument is about linear, not angular, momentum. And there are plenty of massive particles which obey Bose-Einstein statistics and have integer spins.

– rob♦
19 hours ago







@user6760 This argument is about linear, not angular, momentum. And there are plenty of massive particles which obey Bose-Einstein statistics and have integer spins.

– rob♦
19 hours ago













16














The Higgs boson has spin $0$. A photon has spin $1$. The total angular momentum cannot change in the decay, so a Higgs boson cannot decay into a single photon, regardless of the energy. But the total angular momentum of two photons can be zero (because their spins can be oriented in opposite directions), so this decay mode can conserve angular momentum.



As emphasized in a comment, conservation of angular momentum is only a necessary condition, not a sufficient one. Please see rob's answer for clarification about this.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • 1





    I just look up spin so spin can be negative

    – user6760
    22 hours ago






  • 5





    I think this answer is misleading because it discusses only angular momentum. The hypothetical decays $Ztogamma$ or $text{ortho-}(e^+e^-) to gamma$ can conserve angular momentum, but don't occur for the more basic reason given in my answer.

    – rob♦
    19 hours ago













  • @rob You are absolutely right. Angular momentum conservation is only necessary, not sufficient, and the way my answer is worded is misleading in that respect. I edited my answer to include a link to your answer. Thanks for clarifying this.

    – Dan Yand
    11 hours ago
















16














The Higgs boson has spin $0$. A photon has spin $1$. The total angular momentum cannot change in the decay, so a Higgs boson cannot decay into a single photon, regardless of the energy. But the total angular momentum of two photons can be zero (because their spins can be oriented in opposite directions), so this decay mode can conserve angular momentum.



As emphasized in a comment, conservation of angular momentum is only a necessary condition, not a sufficient one. Please see rob's answer for clarification about this.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • 1





    I just look up spin so spin can be negative

    – user6760
    22 hours ago






  • 5





    I think this answer is misleading because it discusses only angular momentum. The hypothetical decays $Ztogamma$ or $text{ortho-}(e^+e^-) to gamma$ can conserve angular momentum, but don't occur for the more basic reason given in my answer.

    – rob♦
    19 hours ago













  • @rob You are absolutely right. Angular momentum conservation is only necessary, not sufficient, and the way my answer is worded is misleading in that respect. I edited my answer to include a link to your answer. Thanks for clarifying this.

    – Dan Yand
    11 hours ago














16












16








16







The Higgs boson has spin $0$. A photon has spin $1$. The total angular momentum cannot change in the decay, so a Higgs boson cannot decay into a single photon, regardless of the energy. But the total angular momentum of two photons can be zero (because their spins can be oriented in opposite directions), so this decay mode can conserve angular momentum.



As emphasized in a comment, conservation of angular momentum is only a necessary condition, not a sufficient one. Please see rob's answer for clarification about this.






share|cite|improve this answer















The Higgs boson has spin $0$. A photon has spin $1$. The total angular momentum cannot change in the decay, so a Higgs boson cannot decay into a single photon, regardless of the energy. But the total angular momentum of two photons can be zero (because their spins can be oriented in opposite directions), so this decay mode can conserve angular momentum.



As emphasized in a comment, conservation of angular momentum is only a necessary condition, not a sufficient one. Please see rob's answer for clarification about this.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 11 hours ago

























answered 22 hours ago









Dan YandDan Yand

8,16211134




8,16211134








  • 1





    I just look up spin so spin can be negative

    – user6760
    22 hours ago






  • 5





    I think this answer is misleading because it discusses only angular momentum. The hypothetical decays $Ztogamma$ or $text{ortho-}(e^+e^-) to gamma$ can conserve angular momentum, but don't occur for the more basic reason given in my answer.

    – rob♦
    19 hours ago













  • @rob You are absolutely right. Angular momentum conservation is only necessary, not sufficient, and the way my answer is worded is misleading in that respect. I edited my answer to include a link to your answer. Thanks for clarifying this.

    – Dan Yand
    11 hours ago














  • 1





    I just look up spin so spin can be negative

    – user6760
    22 hours ago






  • 5





    I think this answer is misleading because it discusses only angular momentum. The hypothetical decays $Ztogamma$ or $text{ortho-}(e^+e^-) to gamma$ can conserve angular momentum, but don't occur for the more basic reason given in my answer.

    – rob♦
    19 hours ago













  • @rob You are absolutely right. Angular momentum conservation is only necessary, not sufficient, and the way my answer is worded is misleading in that respect. I edited my answer to include a link to your answer. Thanks for clarifying this.

    – Dan Yand
    11 hours ago








1




1





I just look up spin so spin can be negative

– user6760
22 hours ago





I just look up spin so spin can be negative

– user6760
22 hours ago




5




5





I think this answer is misleading because it discusses only angular momentum. The hypothetical decays $Ztogamma$ or $text{ortho-}(e^+e^-) to gamma$ can conserve angular momentum, but don't occur for the more basic reason given in my answer.

– rob♦
19 hours ago







I think this answer is misleading because it discusses only angular momentum. The hypothetical decays $Ztogamma$ or $text{ortho-}(e^+e^-) to gamma$ can conserve angular momentum, but don't occur for the more basic reason given in my answer.

– rob♦
19 hours ago















@rob You are absolutely right. Angular momentum conservation is only necessary, not sufficient, and the way my answer is worded is misleading in that respect. I edited my answer to include a link to your answer. Thanks for clarifying this.

– Dan Yand
11 hours ago





@rob You are absolutely right. Angular momentum conservation is only necessary, not sufficient, and the way my answer is worded is misleading in that respect. I edited my answer to include a link to your answer. Thanks for clarifying this.

– Dan Yand
11 hours ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f453657%2fwhy-can-a-particle-decay-into-two-photons-but-not-one%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

數位音樂下載

Image
數位音樂下載 為非以「實體」方式來販賣音樂的相關產品，而使用數位格式如mp3、AAC等文件格式來進行銷售販賣的一种音乐产业形式。著名的數位音樂下載服務商有iTunes Store、RecoChoku、Google Play音乐和微软Zune等。数字音乐下载在二十一世纪初一度风靡全球， [1] [2] 使得传统唱片产业走向衰落，但其自身也在2010年代流媒体音乐服务如Apple Music、Spotify等的挤压下迅速失去市场份额。 [3] [4] 数字音乐下载有便于携带、传播迅速、制作简单成本低等优点，与流媒体音乐相比也能更好保障音乐人权益； [5] 但它同时很可能带来侵犯版权和滥用的情形， [6] 也给音乐产业带来了诸多不利影响。数字音乐下载为音乐人和乐迷提供了更加便捷直接的交流渠道，也一定程度上推动了网络音乐人的出现和独立音乐的迅速发展。 [7] 目录 1 历史 1.1 技术积淀（1987-2000） 1.2 出现与兴起（2000-2004） 1.3 唱片市场的颠覆者（2004-2007） 1.4 巅峰和衰落（2005-2013） 1.5 摇摇欲坠的现状与不可预知的明天（2014至今） 2 主要文件格式 2.1 PCM编码格式 2.1.1 WAV 2.1.2 APE 2.1.3 FLAC 2.2 苹果推出的无损文件格式 2.2.1 AIFF 2.2.2 ALAC 2.3 有损压缩格式 2.3.1 MP3 2.3.2 AAC 3 主要市场 3.1 iTunes Store 3.2 Google Play音乐商店 3.3 亚马逊音乐商店 3.4 部分其他音乐商店 4 影响与评价 4.1 对音乐产业的影响 4.2 对科技行业的影响 4.3 正面评价 4.4 负面评价 4.4.1 侵权问题 4.4.2 经营模式不明晰 4.4.3 不适应移动时代 4.5 文化现象 5 延伸阅读 6 参考资料 历史 苹果iTunes+iPod的软硬件搭配让数字音...
Read more

When can things happen in Etherscan, such as the picture below?

Image
2 I don't know why balance of the address is 0. when can this situation? etherscan balances share | improve this question asked yesterday Ru Hi Ru Hi 11 1 New contributor Ru Hi is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct. add a comment  |  ...
Read more

格利澤436b

Image
格利泽436b 太陽系外行星 太陽系外行星列表 艺术家笔下的格利泽436b 母恆星 母恆星 Gliese 436 星座 獅子座 赤經 ( α ) 11 h  42 m  11.0941 s [1] 赤緯 ( δ ) +26° 42′ 23.652″ [1] 距離 33.4 ly (10.2 pc) 光譜類型 M2.5 V [1] 軌道參數 半长轴 ( a ) 0.0291±0.0004 [2] AU 軌道離心率 ( e ) 0.150±0.012 [2] 公轉週期 ( P ) 2.643904±0.000005 [3] d (0.00723849 y) 軌道傾角 ( i ) 85.8 +0.21 −0.25 [3] ° 角距 ( θ ) 2.794 mas 近星點時間 ( T 0 ) 2,451,551.716 ±0.01 JD 半振幅 ( K ) 18.68±0.8 m/s 物理性质 质量 ( m ) 22.2±1.0 [2] M ⊕ 半徑 ( r ) 4.327±0.183 [2] [4] R ⊕ 密度 ( ρ ) 1.51 g cm -3 表面重力 ( g ) 1.18 g 溫度 ( T ) 712±36 [2] K 發現 發現時間 2004 發現者 巴特勒、沃格特、 馬西 et al. 發現方法 徑向速度、凌日法 發現地點 美國加利福尼亞州 發表論文 出版 其他名稱 Ross 905 b, GJ 436 b, [5] LTT 13213 b, GCTP 2704.10 b, LHS 310, AC+27:28217 b, Vyssotsky 616 b, HIP 57087 b, GEN# +9.80120068 b, LP 319-75 b, G 121-7 b, LSPM J1142+2642 b, 1RXS J114211.9+264328 b, ASCC 683818 b, G 147-68 b, UCAC2 41198281 b, BP...
Read more