Renormalization Scale in Loop Feynman Amplitudes

  • #1
Elmo
35
6
TL;DR Summary
Should the renormalization scale in loop amplitudes be assigned a value or should it be removed via an on-shell subtraction scheme counterterm ?
I want some clarification on what is done about the ##\mu^{2\epsilon}## renormalization scale parameter in loop amplitudes. I am under the impression that it shows up to restore the mass dimension of an amplitude when the loop momentum integral is reduced from 4 to ##4-2\epsilon## dimensions. As such upon expanding in powers of the regulator, one ends up with ##\ln(\mu/m)##.

I also know that physical observables should be independent of ##\mu## but its unclear to me how this is achieved. Some texts say that you simply choose a value for ##\mu## while others like MD Schwartz (Ch 19) imply that adding an on-shell subtraction scheme counterterm diagram to the loop diagram gets rid of both the divergence AND the renormalization scale term.
But this is not a feature of every subtraction scheme like MS or MSbar.

I am confused as to what approach should one take, are there any specific requirements or conditions when choosing a value for the renormalization scale or any particular subtraction scheme ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Well, in the on-shell subtraction scheme (if it's applicable at all, which it is strictly speaking only when no massless fields are involved) the scale must be given by some mass(es) of the particles in involved, and then also the coupling constant(s) must be adjusted with some observed cross section(s) at some energy, where the (renormalized) couplings are small.

The point is that of course observable cross sections are independent on the chosen renormalization scheme but the physical parameters like masses and couplings may change with the scheme, and they depend on the choice of the scale parameter, ##\mu##, of dim. reg. which in turn defines the minimal-subtraction schemes. Their advantage is that they are so-called "mass-independent renormalization schemes" and thus are well suited for renormalizing theories with massless particles/fields (like QED or QCD which have massless gauge bosons).

If you think in a bit more physical terms for theories that have massless fields around, you cannot subtract the diverging proper vertex functions (in QED the self-energies of photons and electrons/positrons as well as the photon-electron-electron vertex) with taken all external four-momenta at 0, but you must subtract at some space-like momenta with ##p^2=-\Lambda^2<0##, which introduces inevitably a scale, and the physical parameters like masses and coupling constants "run" with this scale in such a way that once fixed at one scale the observable cross sections do not change when changing the scale. That's described by renormalization-group equations for the running of the parameters of the theory.

For more on different renormalization schemes and their relation to MS (for ##\phi^4## theory as the most simple example), see Sect. 5.11 in

https://itp.uni-frankfurt.de/~hees/publ/lect.pdf
 

What is the renormalization scale in loop Feynman amplitudes?

The renormalization scale in loop Feynman amplitudes refers to a parameter that is introduced during the renormalization process of quantum field theory calculations. It is used to handle the divergences that arise in loop integrals when calculating higher order corrections to particle interactions. The scale essentially sets a reference energy level at which the coupling constants are defined, helping to maintain the physical predictions independent of the arbitrary cutoffs used to regulate the divergences.

Why is the choice of renormalization scale important?

The choice of renormalization scale is crucial because it affects the convergence and stability of the perturbative expansions used in quantum field theory calculations. An inappropriate choice can lead to large logarithmic terms which may cause the perturbative series to diverge or give unreliable results. A well-chosen scale minimizes these terms, leading to more accurate and stable predictions. Additionally, physical observables should be independent of this scale, a property known as scale invariance, which is a key test for the consistency of the theoretical framework.

How is the renormalization scale determined in practical calculations?

In practical calculations, the renormalization scale is often chosen based on the typical energy scales involved in the physical process being considered. This choice aims to minimize the size of logarithmic corrections in the perturbative series. Sometimes, a process-dependent dynamic scale is used, which can vary with the kinematics of the process. Theoretical arguments like minimal sensitivity and Brodsky-Lepage-Mackenzie (BLM) scale setting are also employed to determine an optimal scale that reduces the dependence of the perturbative results on the renormalization scheme.

What is the impact of varying the renormalization scale on theoretical predictions?

Varying the renormalization scale can significantly impact theoretical predictions, particularly in terms of the uncertainty and stability of these predictions. By analyzing how sensitive results are to changes in the scale, physicists can estimate the theoretical uncertainty associated with their calculations. This sensitivity analysis is crucial for high-precision tests of quantum field theories like Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD), where scale dependence needs to be well understood and controlled.

Can the renormalization scale affect the physical observables?

In theory, physical observables should be independent of the renormalization scale due to the renormalization group invariance. This means that while intermediate calculations in a perturbative expansion might depend on the choice of scale, the final predictions for measurable quantities should not. Any residual dependence on the renormalization scale in calculated observables typically indicates either an insufficient order of perturbative correction or issues in the theoretical framework, highlighting the importance of higher-order calculations for precision physics.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
864
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
916
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
698
Back
Top