1PI one-loop diagrams for phi^3

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ChrisVer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Diagrams
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the one-loop 1PI diagrams in the context of a 6-dimensional ##\phi^3## theory. Participants explore the implications of including a linear term in the Lagrangian, its effects on Feynman diagrams, and the theoretical stability of the model.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants confirm that the ##\phi^3## theory allows for 3-particle vertices, but the specific diagrams to consider depend on the corrections being computed.
  • There is a discussion about the unusual presence of a linear term in the Lagrangian, with some suggesting it allows for a metastable state that can be treated perturbatively.
  • One participant questions the contribution of the linear term to Feynman diagrams, suggesting it may not contribute significantly.
  • Another participant argues that the linear term can generate a 1-point function, raising questions about its implications.
  • Concerns are expressed regarding the expansion of the theory around a metastable point when a linear term is present.
  • Some participants discuss the role of the constant ##c## in the equations of motion and its implications for the vacuum expectation value (VEV) of the field.
  • There is a suggestion that the linear term could represent a constant current interacting with the field, and that n-point functions may require coupling to external currents.
  • One participant notes that the ##\phi^3## theory serves as a learning tool for renormalization techniques but questions its physical viability due to the Hamiltonian not being bounded from below.
  • Another participant argues for the practical use of ##\phi^3## theory in studying nuclear matter, despite its theoretical limitations.
  • There is a mention of the necessity for odd powers of fields in certain physical models, which contrasts with the preference for even powers in stable theories.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the implications of the linear term in the Lagrangian, its contribution to Feynman diagrams, and the overall stability of the ##\phi^3## theory. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views on the utility and implications of the theory.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the definitions of stability and the implications of the linear term, as well as unresolved mathematical steps regarding the n-point functions and their derivations.

ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
I wanted to ask, about the ##6##-dimensional ##\phi ^3 ## theory...
The Lagrangian is:
$$ L = \frac{1}{2} (\partial \phi)^2 - c \phi - \frac{m^2}{2} \phi^2 + \frac{g}{3!} \phi^3$$

When I want to draw all the 1-loop 1PI diagrams, should I make something like these:
plots2.jpg

?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In general yes. The [itex]\phi^3[/itex] theory admits 3-particle vertices. However, it always depends on what kind of correction you want to compute. For example, if you are interested in the propagator (2-point function) then you will consider the diagram a. If you are interested in a 3-particle interaction you will consider b and so on.

P.S. Are you sure about that linear term in [itex]\phi[/itex] it's quite unusual. Also you should be aware that the [itex]\phi^3[/itex] is an unstable theory when quantized since the energy is unbounded from below.
 
that's why they inserted the linear term, so that there will be a metastable state at some point, which allows to treat the theory perturbatively.
 
Interesting... how would it contribute to the Feynman diagrams? A tadpole?
 
I don;t think it would contribute to Feynman diagram... :(
 
Well it can definitely generate a 1-point function. I'm wordering what does that mean...
 
From the EoM however, it seems there is not to be such a thing...It's like everywhere there is a constant ##c## :nb)

[itex][ \partial^2 + m^2 ] \phi = c + \frac{g}{2} \phi^2[/itex]
 
If there is a linear term you are not expanding the theory around the metastable point ...
 
Well I am not sure, I'm using what I read in the exercise I was trying to work on...
plots2.jpg
 
  • #10
Well the presence of the constant c is not a big deal. Take for example the EOM you wrote before. For small constant [itex]\langle\phi\rangle[/itex] then you can neglect both the box and the [itex]\phi^2[/itex] and you obtain: [itex]\langle\phi\rangle=c[/itex], i.e. you field has a non-zero VEV. This is not a problem at all. In particular, it is exactly what happens for example in the Serot-Walechka model for nuclear interactions.

What I was wondering is what is the role of a linear term in the various n-point functions.
 
  • #11
Einj said:
What I was wondering is what is the role of a linear term in the various n-point functions.

The constant ##c## can play the role of a constant-everywhere existing current with which the field interacts with, as for example in a term [itex]\phi \partial_\mu J^\mu[/itex]?

To get the n-point function (if there exists such a thing) I think you have to start acting on the generating functional with functional derivatives wrt to the current J?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Einj
  • #12
Yes, I think you are right. You might need to start inserting a certain number of external currents that then couple to the ##\phi## field.
 
  • #13
Well, ##\phi^3## theory, is just a playground to learn renormalization techniques (usually in 1+5 dimensional space time in order to have a renormalizable and not a superrenormalizable model). It's not a nice physical theory, because the Hamiltonian is not bounded from below and thus there's no ground state for the interacting theory. The linear term in the Lagrangian is needed to get rid of tadpole diagrams. This trouble you don't have with ##\phi^4## theory (in 1+3 dimensions). I don't see, why one should use ##\phi^3## theory instead of ##\phi^4## theory when introducing renormalization techniques. Perhaps it's done in some textbooks (like Collins, Renormalization and Srednicky QFT), because it bears some similarity with spinor QED, where you also only have a three-legged vertex at tree-level.
 
  • #14
Not necessarily. If you study nuclear matter, i.e. QFT not in vacuum, it turns out that in order to obtain the right equilibrium radius for the nucleons inside a nucleus you need odd powers of your fields. So, yes, in general the ##\phi^3## is an easy playground but it also has some practical use.
 
  • #15
Sure, but for a physical model you should have a Hamiltonian bounded from below, i.e., there should be a ground state. Thus in general you have odd and even powers. For a Dyson-renormalizable model you have powers up to four with the coupling in front of ##\phi^4## positive.
 
  • #16
Well you of course get ##\phi^3## interactions in more than just "nuclear". cubic terms can appear when introducing for light quarks the Nambu Goto fields [pions and eta]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K