1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

An expression for the mass ?

  1. Jun 9, 2006 #1
    An expression for the "mass"?..

    Let,s suppose we have a NOn-renormalizable theory, and that we wish to calculate the mass of a particle for that theory with lagrangian L, the "mass" will have an expression in terms of an infinite series:

    [tex] m \sim a(0)+ga(1)+g^{2}a(2)+g^{3}a(3)+......... [/tex]

    where every a(n) diverges in the form [tex] a(n)=\Lambda ^{n+1} [/tex] [tex] \Lambda \rightarrow \infty [/tex] (regulator)

    then my question is let,s suppose we truncate the series for a number N :

    [tex] m \sim a(0)+ga(1)+g^{2}a(2)+g^{3}a(3)+......g^{N}a(N) [/tex]

    where g is a finite constant and N say N=139 (for example), of course in that case we have 139 types of divergences, but let,s suppose we could express every divergence recursively in the form:

    .a(n)= c(n)+a(n-1)+a(n-2)+.............+a(0) where c(n) are finite constants and a(0) is the value of the regulator, being this formula valid for every n=1,2,3,4,..........139 so we could calculate our value for the mass in the form:

    [tex] m \sim C(0)a(0)+gc(1)b(1)+g^{2}b(2)c(2)+g^{3}b(3)c(3)+......... [/tex]

    so we have only the divergence a(0) left, then we apply the renormalization process to 2absorb2 this a(0)-->k (finite value) so our finite value for the mass would be:

    [tex] m \sim C(0)k+gc(1)b(1)+g^{2}b(2)c(2)+g^{3}b(3)c(3)+.........g^{N}c(N)b(N) [/tex] finite due to the fact that c(n),b(n) and k are finite constants.

    The question is if we could express always the ultraviolet divergences by a recursion formula...could we calculate any physical parameter truncating the series..even for Non-renormalizable theories?..thanks.
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 11, 2006 #2
    Hmm; your statement,


    doesn't sound quite right. Let us consider the case [itex]n=1[/itex] for your formula:


    You stated earlier that [itex]a(n)[/itex] diverges like [itex]\Lambda^{n+1}[/itex]. So, refering to the previous equation, since [itex]a(0)[/itex] diverges linearly and since you've fixed [itex]c(1)[/itex] to be a finite number, how could [itex]a(1)[/itex] possibly diverge quadratically?
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2006
  4. Jun 12, 2006 #3
    You can find the answer to your question in http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/math-ph/0209025. It is the paper where to consider the case of non-Newtonians Physics where Lagrangian is depend of coordinates and momentums (velocity) only.
  5. Jun 26, 2006 #4
    although it can be very 2fuzzy2 mi intention was to express every UV divergence recursively..so if we knew how to give a "finite" meaning to

    [tex] \int_{0}^{\infty}dp [/tex]

    we could give a 2finite2 meaning to every integral of the form:

    [tex] \int_{0}^{\infty}dpp^{m} [/tex] m>0

    via a recursion formula..of course this would imply that we should "truncate" the series for a finite m in case there are infinitely many m.

    Another question, i have not been able to do that but...what would happen if we could obtain a finite value for the difference:

    [tex] \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}n^{m}-\int_{0}^{\infty}dxx^{m} [/tex] m>0

    Is always the difference above a finite quantity (let,s say C(m) where the constant C depends only on m a similar case is Euler Constant:

    [tex] \sum_{N=1}^{K}n^{-1}-ln(K)=\gamma [/tex] K-->oo
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: An expression for the mass ?
  1. Bilinear Expressions (Replies: 8)

  2. Equivalent expressions (Replies: 5)

  3. Unknown expression (Replies: 3)

  4. SU(2) expression (Replies: 2)