Correlation function poles in Peskin's derivation of LSZ formula

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion focuses on the derivation of the LSZ formula as presented in Peskin & Schroeder's Chapter 7, highlighting the unique approach of Fourier transforming the n-point function to analyze the pole structure of correlation functions. The discussion reveals a critical examination of the relationship between the pole in the propagator and the expression \( p^2 - m^2_{\lambda} \), emphasizing the significance of isolated poles and branch cuts in the context of one-particle and multiparticle states. Participants clarify that while the isolated pole corresponds to a one-particle state, the relationship holds true under specific conditions, particularly near the pole region.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the LSZ formula in quantum field theory
  • Familiarity with Fourier transforms in the context of quantum mechanics
  • Knowledge of correlation functions and their pole structures
  • Basic concepts of particle states and mass singularities
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the LSZ reduction formula in detail, focusing on its applications in scattering theory
  • Learn about the properties of correlation functions in quantum field theory
  • Explore the implications of isolated poles and branch cuts in particle physics
  • Investigate the differences between Peskin & Schroeder and Srednicki's approaches to quantum field theory
USEFUL FOR

Quantum field theorists, graduate students in theoretical physics, and researchers focusing on particle physics and scattering processes will benefit from this discussion.

Fysicus
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi folks,

Been trying to fill some of the more formal gaps in my knowledge by tackling the more technical stuff in P&S Chapter 7. Their derivation of the LSZ formula is quite different to those of books like, say, Srednicki, as they basically Fourier transform the whole argument as I understand it to concentrate more interpreting the pole structure of a general correlation function.

My question is this - having Fourier transformed the n-point function with respect to one field co-ordinate:


\int d^4x e^{ip \cdot x} \left\langle \Omega \left| T{ \phi (x) \phi (z_{1}) \phi (z_{2}) ... } \right| \Omega \right\rangle

And splitting the x^{0} integral into three zones (I, II, III):


\int dx^{0} = \int^{\infty}_{T_{+}} dx^{0} + \int^{T_{+}}_{T_{-}} dx^{0} + \int^{T_{-}}_{\infty} dx^{0}

They insert a complete set of states from the interacting theory, and choose to evaluate region I and do the momentum integrals that come with that, along with the position integrals from our Fourier Transform to arrive at the very ugly Eq. 7.36:


\int_{I} d^4x e^{ip \cdot x} \left\langle \Omega \left| T{ \phi (x) \phi (z_{1}) \phi (z_{2}) ... } \right| \Omega \right\rangle = \sum \frac{1}{2E_\textbf{p}(\lambda)} \frac{i e^{i(p^{0}-E_{\textbf{p}}+i\epsilon)T_{+}}}{p^{0}-E_{\textbf{p}}+i \epsilon} \left\langle \Omega \left| \phi (0) \right| \lambda_{0} \right\rangle \left\langle \lambda_{\textbf{p}} \left| T \phi (z_{1}) \phi (z_{2}) \ldots \right| \Omega \right\rangle

Where the sum runs over the different mass states \lambda and the 'I' on the integral just means dx^{0} integrated over the region: \int^{\infty}_{T_{+}} dx^{0}.

At this point they state " the denominator is just that [as]p^2 - m^2_{\lambda} " . I can't see why this is the case - yes, the pole in p^{0} is in the same location as one of the poles in p^2 - m^2_{\lambda} , but since all the integrals are done I can't see any way to massage this into this form exactly (by that i mean playing with delta functions and the E).

In other words, how can this statement true? Are we to literally claim that:

<br /> \frac{1}{2E_\textbf{p}} \frac{1}{p^{0}-E_{\textbf{p}}+i\epsilon} = \frac{1}{p^{2}-m_{\lambda}^{2}} ?

Since, close to the pole, the exponential factor goes to 1, and the leftmost matrix element is the square root of the field strength renormalization factor \sqrt{Z}, do they just mean that this quantity has a pole with residue \sqrt{Z} at p^{0} = E_{\textbf{p}} much like the piece of the full propagator containing the mass singularities? Is this possibly what they mean by the next statement (7.37):


\int d^4x e^{ip \cdot x} \left\langle \Omega \left| T{ \phi (x) \phi (z_{1}) \phi (z_{2}) ... } \right| \Omega \right\rangle \sim \frac{i}{p^{2}-m^{2}+i\epsilon} \sqrt{Z} \left\langle \textbf{p} \left| T \phi (z_{1}) \ldots \right| \Omega \right\rangle

as

p^{0} \rightarrow +E_{\textbf{p}}

Had a look at the P&S questions reference thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=400073 , and it seems no-one has asked about this derivation before, so either I'm missing something, overthinking it, or any explanations might be useful to others for future reference. Cheers!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
$${p^0} = {E_{\bf{p}}}\left( \lambda \right) = \sqrt {{{\left| {\bf{p}} \right|}^2} + m_\lambda ^2} \,\, \Rightarrow \,\,\,{E_{\bf{p}}}\left( \lambda \right){p^0} - E_{\bf{p}}^2\left( \lambda \right) = {\left( {{p^0}} \right)^2} - {\left| {\bf{p}} \right|^2} - m_\lambda ^2 = {p^2} - m_\lambda ^2$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Hey p-brane, thanks for the reply.

So implicit in the first steps you make there is that at the pole region only:


p^{0} \rightarrow E_{\textbf{p}}

Basically you can argue 'backwards' and reinterpret E_{\textbf{p}}p^{0} where instead:


E_{\textbf{p}} \rightarrow p_{0}?

Or to write it another way,


2E_{\textbf{p}}(p^{0}-E_{\textbf{p}}) \rightarrow (p^{0}+E_{\textbf{p}})(p^{0}-E_{\textbf{p}})

Cheers!
 
Fysicus said:
they state " the denominator is just that [as]p^2 - m^2_{\lambda} " . I can't see why this is the case - yes, the pole in p^{0} is in the same location as one of the poles in p^2 - m^2_{\lambda}

7.36 is a "sum over singularities" indexed by λ. If the masses are those of one-particle states, the singularities are poles. If the masses are those of multiparticle states, the singularities are branch cuts. That's why I displayed the energy as a function of the index.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
That's true, so just so I'm understanding it correctly a quick recap, thinking of the whole thing as a function in p^{0}:

We've got an expression which is a sum over poles in p^{0} - with positions determined by the energies E_{\textbf{p}} corresponding to given states \lambda_{\textbf{p}}.

Within this there's one isolated pole defining the one-particle state, then a branch cut beyond the 2 particle threshold which is basically like a continuum of 'poles' - and it's generally true that at the region of the isolated pole this relationship that the denominator equals p^{2}-m^{2}_{\lambda} holds as we may manipulate it as above, and furthermore that on the branch cut, at the point corresponding any given state \lambda_{\textbf{p}} it also holds as each point there will have the value of m_{\lambda} to keep it generally true.

However in the void for ('unphysical') values of p^{0} between the isolated pole and branch-cut, this statement about the denominator of 7.36 being p^{2}-m^{2}_{\lambda} is not true.

Thanks again!
 
Fysicus said:
Within this there's one isolated pole defining the one-particle state…

By “isolated” is meant that there’s a gap between the mass m of any one-particle state and the mass of the lightest multiparticle state, which is the two-particle state with mass 2m. In other words, the mass of anyone particle state is isolated from the continuum of masses of multiparticle states.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K