ab>c,c>de Does c have to be on-shell?
Hi, I am a new user and considering some process like a b > c d, d >e f, where I should scan the mass M_d. And this will let d to be on-shell or off-shell.
But I find that when Ecm < M_d+M_c, if I use a b > c d, d > e f. I can still get some positive cross section which is weird I think.
(1) Does this mean that when I am writing x y > z, z>..... z is not forced on-shell?
(2) What is the difference if I use a b > d > c e f. instead of a b > c d, d > e f? I checked the cross section but they give me different value. At first I think thats just because "a b > c d, d > e f" means d is always on-shell and "a b > d > c e f" means d is always off-shell. But it seems this understanding is not right...
Question information
- Language:
- English Edit question
- Status:
- Solved
- Assignee:
- No assignee Edit question
- Solved by:
- Olivier Mattelaer
- Solved:
- 2019-10-04
- Last query:
- 2019-10-04
- Last reply:
- 2019-10-03
HI
Please follow/read the following tutorial. This is one of the first point/exercise (solution are at the end of the tuto)
Cheers,
Olivier
> On 3 Oct 2019, at 01:27, Fang Xu <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> New question #684608 on MadGraph5_aMC@NLO:
> https:/
>
> Hi, I am a new user and considering some process like a b > c d, d >e f, where I should scan the mass M_d. And this will let d to be on-shell or off-shell.
> But I find that when Ecm < M_d+M_c, if I use a b > c d, d > e f. I can still get some positive cross section which is weird I think.
> (1) Does this mean that when I am writing x y > z, z>..... z is not forced on-shell?
> (2) What is the difference if I use a b > d > c e f. instead of a b > c d, d > e f? I checked the cross section but they give me different value. At first I think thats just because "a b > c d, d > e f" means d is always on-shell and "a b > d > c e f" means d is always off-shell. But it seems this understanding is not right...
>
> --
> You received this question notification because you are an answer
> contact for MadGraph5_aMC@NLO.
Fang Xu (xufang) said : | #2 |
Thanks Olivier Mattelaer, that solved my question.