Effective field theory and Wilson's renormalization group

In summary: G. Dvali, G. Gabadadze, M. Shifman, hep-th/02021743- M. Schmaltz and D. Tucker-Smith, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 55 (2005) 229, hep-ph/0502182.In summary, the conversation is about understanding effective field theory (EFT) and its relationship to renormalization in Quantum Field Theory (QFT). The person is seeking help and clarification on the concepts of EFT and how it differs from the traditional approach to renormalization. They have read several sources on the topic but still struggle to fully grasp it. Some suggested references on
  • #1
kloptok
188
0
I have just read my first course on Quantum Field Theory (QFT) and have followed the book by Srednicki. I have peeked a bit in the books by Peskin & Schroeder and Ryder also but mostly Srednicki as this was the main course book. Now, I have to do a project in a topic not covered in the course and I have chosen Effective field theory (EFT), following the approach by Wilson. I have read the chapter(s) in Srednicki related to this topic a few times and understand (I think) the gist of the Renormalization Group (RG) and what it is about, but I can't say I understand the chapter on EFT (chapter 29 in Srednicki). I don't really understand what the EFT approach means and I was hoping that some of you could help me clear this up.

As I understand it, when we use the MS-bar renormalization scheme, the parameters in the lagrangian no longer represent the physical parameters (for example, the m term is not the physical mass) and we can find equations that tell us how the lagrangian parameters vary with the fake parameter μ (any final answer can't depend on μ). This can also be done with the RG approach in a more formal way (as I understand it, the result is the same - we get a group of equations that tell us how the lagrangian parameters vary).

However, the next chapter on EFT:s I struggle to understand. I get that we have a cut-off [itex]\Lambda[/itex] for the momentum and that we can try to see what the theory tells us at momenta well below the cut-off but then a new cut-off [itex]\Lambda_0[/itex] is introduced and I must say I don't understand the difference between the two.

Something I would also like to get some help with is how Wilson's approach with EFT:s relates to renormalization. Why does the EFT approach remove the necessity for a theory to be renormalizable?

Any help and clarifications is highly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Check out this review

http://arxiv.org/pdf/nucl-th/9506035.pdf

and the many references therein. This was where I first started to learn about this stuff.

Actually, my colleague and I are working on a textbook on "Effective Field Theory", but it won't be done for a while. Stay tuned...
 
  • #3
you should also read Wilson's original papers on the topic. They're pretty clear and really show why renormalization is a completely sensible and physical thing to do. Unlike the "sweeping infinities under the rug" perspective which many people don't like (for some reason I never understood)
 
  • #4
kloptok said:
I have just read my first course on Quantum Field Theory (QFT) and have followed the book by Srednicki. I have peeked a bit in the books by Peskin & Schroeder and Ryder also but mostly Srednicki as this was the main course book. Now, I have to do a project in a topic not covered in the course and I have chosen Effective field theory (EFT), following the approach by Wilson. I have read the chapter(s) in Srednicki related to this topic a few times and understand (I think) the gist of the Renormalization Group (RG) and what it is about, but I can't say I understand the chapter on EFT (chapter 29 in Srednicki). I don't really understand what the EFT approach means and I was hoping that some of you could help me clear this up.

As I understand it, when we use the MS-bar renormalization scheme, the parameters in the lagrangian no longer represent the physical parameters (for example, the m term is not the physical mass) and we can find equations that tell us how the lagrangian parameters vary with the fake parameter μ (any final answer can't depend on μ). This can also be done with the RG approach in a more formal way (as I understand it, the result is the same - we get a group of equations that tell us how the lagrangian parameters vary).

However, the next chapter on EFT:s I struggle to understand. I get that we have a cut-off [itex]\Lambda[/itex] for the momentum and that we can try to see what the theory tells us at momenta well below the cut-off but then a new cut-off [itex]\Lambda_0[/itex] is introduced and I must say I don't understand the difference between the two.

Something I would also like to get some help with is how Wilson's approach with EFT:s relates to renormalization. Why does the EFT approach remove the necessity for a theory to be renormalizable?

Any help and clarifications is highly appreciated!

I think the difference between Wilson's approach is that you are not taking the cutoff to infinity, and hence your results will be finite, whereas in standard renormalization you are taking the cutoff to infinity. You can begin from a renormalizable theory (i.e. one in which cutoff can go to infinity) and integrate out ultraviolet modes, allowing you to henceforth integrate to a finite cutoff, but this comes at the expense of having to calculate an infinite number of new interactions which would ordinarily be unrenormalizeable. Luckily however, you don't need to know the values of the coefficients for the new interactions that are unrenormalizeable, because by integrating out more momenta, the coefficients take on values gotten by the renormalizeable terms at the momenta you just integrated out. What has me confused is that when your cutoff becomes extremely low from integrating momenta out, then these unrenormalizeable terms become very important, as they go as 1/cutoff. So at very low energies shouldn't the unrenormalizeable terms dominate over the renormalizable ones?

As far as I can understand, Srednicki uses BPH/counter-term renormalization. So the bare parameters in the theory are actually physical parameters: you perturb about the physical system but this comes at the expense of requiring counter-terms.
 
  • #5
Hi
see the following lecture by Rothstein TASI Lectures on Effective Field Theories
this lecture can be downloaded via the link arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0308266
 
  • #6
references on Effective field theory

Hello,
if you interested on Effective Field theory then look at titles below
References on Effective Field theory
1- Georgi, Effective Field theory www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~hgeorgi/review.pdf
2-A. Pich, http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/9806303
3-video lectures by Cliff Burgess * at the website http://pirsa.org/C09020
4- arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0701053 by Burgess
5- Five lectures on effective field theory http://arxiv.org/abs/nucl-th/0510023 by Kaplan
6-http://arxiv.org/abs/nucl-th/9506035 also by Kaplan
 

1. What is effective field theory?

Effective field theory is a framework used in theoretical physics to study the behavior of a physical system at different energy scales. It involves integrating out high-energy degrees of freedom and focusing on the low-energy degrees of freedom that are relevant to the system being studied.

2. What is Wilson's renormalization group?

Wilson's renormalization group is a mathematical technique used in effective field theory to study how physical quantities change as the energy scale of a system is varied. It involves a repeated process of integrating out high-energy degrees of freedom and rescaling the remaining low-energy degrees of freedom.

3. How is effective field theory related to Wilson's renormalization group?

Effective field theory and Wilson's renormalization group are closely related in that they both involve the systematic study of physical systems at different energy scales. Wilson's renormalization group provides a mathematical framework for implementing effective field theory and understanding how physical quantities change with energy scale.

4. What is the significance of effective field theory and Wilson's renormalization group?

Effective field theory and Wilson's renormalization group are important tools for theoretical physicists to study complex physical systems. They allow for the accurate calculation of physical quantities at different energy scales and provide a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms governing the behavior of these systems.

5. How are effective field theory and Wilson's renormalization group used in practical applications?

Effective field theory and Wilson's renormalization group have a wide range of applications in theoretical physics, including in particle physics, condensed matter physics, and cosmology. They are used to study the behavior of physical systems at different energy scales and make predictions about their properties, which can then be tested through experiments and observations.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
837
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top