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♦
    1 hour 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♦
    1 hour 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 48 mins ago









Ben Crowell

49k4151294




49k4151294










asked 21 hours ago









user6760user6760

2,50111737




2,50111737













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

    – Qmechanic♦
    1 hour ago





















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

    – Qmechanic♦
    1 hour ago



















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

– Qmechanic♦
1 hour ago







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

– Qmechanic♦
1 hour 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
    19 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♦
    18 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
    21 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♦
    18 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
    10 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
    19 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♦
    18 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
    19 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♦
    18 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 19 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
    19 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♦
    18 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
    19 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♦
    18 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
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
19 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♦
18 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♦
18 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
    21 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♦
    18 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
    10 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
    21 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♦
    18 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
    10 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 10 hours ago

























answered 21 hours ago









Dan YandDan Yand

8,16211134




8,16211134








  • 1





    I just look up spin so spin can be negative

    – user6760
    21 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♦
    18 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
    10 hours ago














  • 1





    I just look up spin so spin can be negative

    – user6760
    21 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♦
    18 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
    10 hours ago








1




1





I just look up spin so spin can be negative

– user6760
21 hours ago





I just look up spin so spin can be negative

– user6760
21 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♦
18 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♦
18 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
10 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
10 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

Ottavio Pratesi

Image
.mw-parser-output .avviso .mbox-text-div>div,.mw-parser-output .avviso .mbox-text-full-div>div{font-size:90%}.mw-parser-output .avviso .mbox-image div{width:52px}.mw-parser-output .avviso .mbox-text-full-div .hide-when-compact{display:block} Questa voce sull'argomento ciclisti italiani è solo un abbozzo . Contribuisci a migliorarla secondo le convenzioni di Wikipedia. Ottavio Pratesi Nazionalità   Italia Ciclismo Specialità Strada Ritirato 1927 Carriera Squadre di club 1910-1911 Individuale 1912   Alcyon-Dunlop 1913 Globo-Dunlop 1914   Alcyon-Dunlop 1915-1922 Individuale 1923 Lygie 1924 Ostende 1925 Individuale   Modifica dati su Wikidata  · Manuale Ottavio Pratesi (Rosignano Marittimo, 1º gennaio 1889 – Livorno, 3 novembre 1977) è stato un ciclista su strada italiano, professionista tra il 1910 ed il 1925, era soprannominato il "Falco di ...
Read more

Tricia Helfer

Image
Tricia Helfer Tricia Helfer al Comic-Con 2015 Altezza 179 [1]  cm Misure 86-61-89 [1] Taglia 38 [1] (UE) - 8 [1] (US) Scarpe 40 [1] (UE) - 9 [1] (US) Occhi Azzurri [1] Capelli Biondo scuro [1] Modifica dati su Wikidata  · Manuale Tricia Helfer (Donalda, 11 aprile 1974) è una supermodella e attrice canadese, conosciuta principalmente per il suo ruolo di Numero Sei nella serie televisiva Battlestar Galactica . Indice 1 Carriera 2 Filmografia 2.1 Cinema 2.2 Televisione 2.3 Video musicali 2.4 Doppiatrice 2.4.1 Cinema 2.4.2 Televisione 2.4.3 Videogiochi 2.5 Produttrice 2.6 Agenzie 3 Doppiatrici italiane 4 Note 5 Altri progetti 6 Collegamenti esterni Carriera | Di origine inglese, tedesca, norvegese e svedese, nel 1992 Tricia vinse il concorso di "Ford Models Supermodel of the World", organizzato dall'agenzia Ford Models e fu poi assunta dall'agenzia ...
Read more

15 giugno

Image
gennaio  · febbraio  · marzo  · aprile  · maggio  · giugno 2018  · luglio  · agosto  · settembre  · ottobre  · novembre  · dicembre Ve Sa Do Lu Ma Me Gi Ve Sa Do Lu Ma Me Gi Ve Sa Do Lu Ma Me Gi Ve Sa Do Lu Ma Me Gi Ve Sa ← 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 → Il 15 giugno è il 166º giorno del calendario gregoriano (il 167º negli anni bisestili). Mancano 199 giorni alla fine dell'anno. Indice 1 Eventi 2 Nati 3 Morti 4 Feste e ricorrenze 4.1 Civili 4.2 Religiose 5 Altri progetti Eventi | 763 a.C. – Gli Assiri registrano un'eclissi solare 923 – Battaglia di Soissons: re Roberto I di Francia viene ucciso, re Carlo il Semplice viene arrestato dai sostenitori del duca Rodolfo di Borgogna 1094 – Reconquista: Valencia cade nelle mani di El Cid 1215 – Re Giovanni d'Inghilterra appone i...
Read more