Why Does Inserting a Mass Width Simulate Higher Order Diagram Effects?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of inserting a mass width into the denominator of a propagator in quantum field theory (QFT) and its relation to higher order diagrams in calculations of near resonant cross sections. Participants seek to understand whether this method is equivalent to performing calculations to higher orders or if it is merely an ad hoc approach applicable under certain conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that inserting a mass width in the propagator is typically used to account for unstable decay widths and to avoid problematic poles in calculations.
  • Another participant suggests that the equivalence between inserting a mass width and calculating higher order diagrams may be covered in standard QFT texts, recommending Mattuck's work for examples of perturbation expansion.
  • A different participant mentions that the relationship may be proportional to contributions from one-loop self-energy diagrams, indicating a connection to experimental data.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the rigor of the treatment in Peskin & Schroeder, noting that while it is suggestive, it may not provide a complete investigation.
  • Clarifications are made regarding whether the method of adding mass widths is a general equivalence or an ad hoc method, with some participants questioning its applicability under certain circumstances.
  • References to Bailin & Love are made for insights on dimensional regularization and its application to QCD and QED, with a focus on one-loop calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying degrees of uncertainty about the equivalence of inserting mass widths and higher order calculations. While some suggest that there are relevant references, no consensus is reached on the rigor or general applicability of the method.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention limitations in the references they have consulted, indicating that some texts may not provide a rigorous treatment of the topic. There is also a noted dependence on the definitions and contexts in which the mass width is applied.

EL
Science Advisor
Messages
558
Reaction score
0
When calulating near resonant cross sections one usually inserts a mass width in the denominator of the propagator. This should, at least as I have understood it, correspond to taking the higher order diagrams into account.
What I would like to see is a proof for the equivalence between inserting a mass width and calculating the process to higer orders. Anyone's got a reference to this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
EL said:
When calulating near resonant cross sections one usually inserts a mass width in the denominator of the propagator. This should, at least as I have understood it, correspond to taking the higher order diagrams into account.
What I would like to see is a proof for the equivalence between inserting a mass width and calculating the process to higer orders. Anyone's got a reference to this?

Maybe I understood you incorrectly, but it appears that you're asking for the origin, or at least the perturbation expansion, in the self-energy of the propagator. If this is correct, shouldn't this be something that is covered in a typical QFT text? I would even recommend Mattuck's "Feynman Diagram in Many-Body Problems" (Dover), which has planty of examples of such perturbation expansion.

Zz.
 
Usually you add terms like that to the denominator of the propagator when you are treating a particle that has an unstable decay width. So you add the term to smear out its mass function and hence avoid problematic poles.

If you run through the field theoretic calculatiosn carefully you see its simply proportional to contributions from 1 loop self energy diagrams, or you could simply put in numbers from experiment.

Peskin and Shroeder most likely would be your best bet
 
I (or really a co-worker) couldn't find it in Peskin & Schroeder. Neither was there a complete investigation in Mand&Shaw.
I will try Mattuck, and aslo check P&S myself.
 
To clearify: I want to know if the method of adding those mass widths in the denominator of the propagator is equivalent to calculating the process to higher orders in general, or if it is just an ad hoc method or a method that only works under certian circumstances?
 
EL said:
To clearify: I want to know if the method of adding those mass widths in the denominator of the propagator is equivalent to calculating the process to higher orders in general, or if it is just an ad hoc method or a method that only works under certian circumstances?

There IS something about it in P&S, but it is not rigorous although quite suggestive. I don't have the book here handy, but it is close to the application of the optical theorem.
 
vanesch said:
There IS something about it in P&S, but it is not rigorous although quite suggestive. I don't have the book here handy, but it is close to the application of the optical theorem.

Page 236 in P&S
 
Yeah, there is indeed something about it in P&S.
Thanks!
 
I'd suggest Bailin & Love for a nice exposure about "dimensional regularization". It contains the regularization of the 7 "dangerous" diagrams in QCD and Roberto Casalbuoni's lecture notes the application of dimensional regularization to QED.

One loop in both cases, of course.

Daniel.
 
  • #10
dextercioby said:
I'd suggest Bailin & Love for a nice exposure about "dimensional regularization".Daniel.

Is the title "Dimensional regualrisation"?
Just can find "Introduction to gauge field theory" at the library here.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
13K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K