Deriving Graviton Propagator from Linearized Lagrangian

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter michael879
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Graviton Propagator
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the graviton propagator from the free space linearized gravitational Lagrangian. The user encounters a discrepancy in the factor associated with the propagator, noting a difference of 4 between their calculation and the expected result from their quantum field theory (QFT) reference. The correct propagator should indeed include a factor of 1/2, as clarified through the relationship between the Einstein tensor Gμν and the weak field expansion. The user concludes that any discrepancies in factors can be absorbed into the coupling constant, which is 2κ.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linearized gravitational Lagrangian
  • Familiarity with quantum field theory (QFT) concepts
  • Knowledge of the Einstein tensor Gμν and its relation to graviton fields
  • Basic grasp of propagators in quantum field theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the graviton propagator in linearized gravity
  • Explore the weak field expansion of the Einstein-Hilbert action
  • Investigate the role of coupling constants in quantum field theory
  • Learn about the implications of factors in propagators and their physical interpretations
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum gravity, as well as graduate students studying quantum field theory and gravitational interactions.

michael879
Messages
696
Reaction score
7
Hi, I'm working with the free space linearized gravitation lagrangian and trying to derive the proper propagator for it. I have no problem doing this, the only problem is that my QFT makes a quick note of what form this should take and I'm off by a factor of 4. The flatspace metric terms matching the components of the contracted graviton fields are of the correct form, and there is a 1/k^2 factor. I'm getting an additional factor of 2 though, while my book has a factor of 1/2. 1/2 makes much more sense to me, since there are two propagator terms, so I feel like I'm doing something wrong. Can anyone confirm what the correct propagator is for me?

*edit* sorry, the lagrangian I am using is the quadratic terms from the weak field expansion of R/kappa
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I assume you're getting the usual field equation Gμν = κTμν, and the factor of ½ you're talking about is due to the fact that in first order Gμν = ½ ◻hμν. Well, but that factor doesn't matter, does it? Because in any event the propagator is defined to be the solution of ◻hμν = δ4(x-x'), and any factor of ½ goes into the coupling constant, which will be 2κ.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
946
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K