An integral in Srednicki's book

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nklohit
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Book Integral
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a specific integral presented in Srednicki's book on Quantum Field Theory (QFT), particularly focusing on its proof and the use of a cutoff factor in the Feynman propagator. Participants explore the mathematical techniques involved and the implications of different regularization methods.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on the proof of the integral in equation 14.27, expressing confusion over its derivation.
  • Another participant references their manuscript, suggesting that the use of the Gamma function and dimensional regularization is relevant for evaluating Feynman diagrams, specifically from page 143 onward.
  • There is a discussion about the advantages of using a Lorentz-invariant form factor instead of a sharp momentum cutoff, with one participant arguing that the latter can destroy symmetries and complicate renormalization.
  • A participant confirms that the introduction of the cutoff factor is intended to maintain Lorentz invariance and notes its asymptotic property of approaching 1 as the cutoff goes to infinity.
  • One participant mentions that the angular part of the integral is handled elsewhere in the book, while the radial part is described as a standard integral that can be referenced.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the use of cutoff methods, with some advocating for Lorentz-invariant form factors while others may prefer traditional cutoff approaches. The proof of the integral remains unresolved, with no consensus on how to derive it.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of regularization techniques in QFT and the potential implications for symmetry and renormalization, but does not resolve the mathematical steps involved in the integral proof.

nklohit
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Hi all, I have just started to study QFT myself with Srednicki's book but there are some points that aren't clear to me.
First, I search for the proof of the integral in eq. 14.27
[tex]\int \frac{d^{d}\bar{q}}{(2\pi)^d} \frac{(\bar{q}^2)^a}{(\bar{q}^2+D)^b} = \frac{\Gamma(b-a-\frac{d}{2})\Gamma(a+\frac{d}{2})}{(4\pi)^{d/2}\Gamma(b)\Gamma(\frac{d}{2})}[/tex]
but find nothing about it. Can anyone give a hint how to prove it?

Second, I'm very confusing that instead of putting the cut-off into the integration of feynman propagator, he use the factor [tex](\frac{\Lambda^2}{k^2+\Lambda^2 -i\epsilon})[/tex] . Are there any reasons to do that?

Thank you for every answer :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've tried to put together all these techniques in my qft manuscript (but I don't use cutoff renormalization in there very much since I don't like it too much :-)):

http://theorie.physik.uni-giessen.de/~hees/publ/lect.pdf

About the Gamma function and its use in dimensional regularization for the evaluation of Feynman diagrams (loop integrals) you find there from page 143 on.

Concerning your 2nd question: Instead of introducing a sharp momentum cutoff by multiplying the whole integrand with such a factor, is a clever method since a sharp cutoff destroys nearly all nice symmetries as Lorentz invariance etc. This makes it more difficult to deal with the infinities afterwards and then letting the cutoff going to infinity for the renormlized quantities. If you introduce Lorentz-invariant form factors instead (this can be even physical if you deal with extended objects like atomic nuclei or hadrons instead of elementary "pointlike" particles), you avoid a lot of problems, which you would introduce with a sharp cutoff.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you very much :) Your manuscript will be very useful for me.
Do I understand right that by introducing that cutoff factor is to maintain the Lorentz invarince manipulation? And it appears in this form because the asymptotic properties that it become 1 when the [tex]\Lambda[/tex] goes to infinity?
 
Yes, that's what's behind a "form factor".
 
The angular part is done elsewhere in the book. The radial part is a standard integral that you can look up.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K