A Confusion about the Z factor(Renormalization factor)

phylz
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
In Peskin's textbook chapter 7 Radiative Corrections: Some formal developments (page 229), he said the Z factors are irrelevant for calculations at the leading order of perturbation theory, but are important in the calculation or higher-order corrections.

My question is how can the Z factor be irrelevant for calculations at the leading order of perturbation theory. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
phylz said:
In Peskin's textbook chapter 7 Radiative Corrections: Some formal developments (page 229), he said the Z factors are irrelevant for calculations at the leading order of perturbation theory, but are important in the calculation or higher-order corrections.

My question is how can the Z factor be irrelevant for calculations at the leading order of perturbation theory. Thanks.

Z is the field-strength renormalization factor
 
At the lowest order in perturbation theory it is just ##1##.
 
DarMM said:
At the lowest order in perturbation theory it is just ##1##.
@DarMM thank you. Now I got it, for electron, $Z_2^(-1)=1-\frac{d\Sigma}{d\slashed{p}}|_{\slashed{p}=m}$, at the leading-order contribution, electron self-energy is 0, so Z=1.
 
Yes exactly. Note that the singularities in ##Z## and hence the need to renormalise it arise from the fact that ##Z## is not analytic in the coupling constant, so Taylor expanding it causes divergences.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top