About propagator and poles in QFT

Lucien1011
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Hi all, I am studying QFT using John Preskill's notes. I have a question about the propagator and poles.

On page 2.91, at the bottom, he said that there is a s-channel pole, which is the pole of the exact propagator. Then he claimed that by the argument about unitarity in page 2.70, the pole is where the physical mass of the particle sits in.

My question is: the scattering process that he is considering is a 2 body scattering process. Isn't the pole in page 2.70 the mass of the virtual particle? Why can he use the argument on page 2.70 for the actual physical mass of the particle?

Here is the link to the notes I am studying:
http://www.theory.caltech.edu/~preskill/ph205/205Chapter2-Page50-102.pdf
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The mathematical expression of the propagator is a consquence of the theory you are using (i.e. of the lagrangian of your theory). Consequently the mass that appear in the denominator is that of your theory which is, after the process of renormalization, the physical mass of the particle.
The vituality of the process you are considering appears only in the value of q=p1+p2 and it obviously doesn't affect the value of the mass of the propagator.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
70
Views
7K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
69
Views
6K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Back
Top