Dimensional analysis of the fermion mass renormalization

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the dimensional analysis of fermion mass renormalization, specifically how the mass shift \(\delta m\) is proportional to the bare mass \(m_0\) and depends logarithmically on the ultraviolet cutoff \(\Lambda\). The analysis reveals that the integral representing the mass correction of the electron diverges logarithmically, leading to the conclusion that \(\delta m \sim m_e \ln \Lambda\). This confirms that the mass correction must maintain dimensions of mass and emphasizes the significance of dimensional analysis in quantum electrodynamics (QED).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum electrodynamics (QED)
  • Familiarity with the concept of renormalization
  • Knowledge of dimensional analysis in theoretical physics
  • Proficiency in evaluating integrals in four-dimensional momentum space
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of quantum field theory and renormalization techniques
  • Learn about the implications of ultraviolet divergences in particle physics
  • Explore the role of symmetry in quantum field theories
  • Investigate the mathematical techniques for evaluating divergent integrals
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory, particle physics researchers, and students seeking to deepen their understanding of mass renormalization and dimensional analysis in QED.

phypar
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
In the textbook, usually the fermion mass renormalization is introduced as follows: the mass shift \delta m must vanish when m_0=0. The mass shift must therefore be proportional to m_0. By dimensional analysis, it can only depend logarithmically on \Lambda (the ultraviolet cutoff): \delta m \sim \ln \Lambda.

Here I don't understand how the "dimensional analysis" is performed, can somebody explain it in detail? Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Take a look at e.g. the diagram (a) here, in QED: http://ej.iop.org/images/1751-8121/45/38/383001/Full/jpa374448f4_online.jpg

This diagram will correct the mass of the electron. Schematically, this diagram has a value that looks like

##\int d^4 p \frac{\gamma^\mu p_\mu + m_e}{p^2 + m^2}\frac{1}{p^2}##

The integrand has dimension 1/[mass]^3, so the diagram has a whole has dimension [mass]^1.

Now, the integral superficially seems to be linearly divergent, like ##\int d^4 p (1/p^3)##. In that case the result would be proportional to ##\Lambda## times a dimensionless constant (since it must have dimensions of [mass]^1). However, looking a little closer we see that the term involving ##\gamma^\mu p_\mu## is odd in ##p## and therefore cancels out, leaving

##m_e \int d^4 p \frac{1}{p^2 + m^2}\frac{1}{p^2}##

Now we can see that the integral is actually logarithmically divergent, so the diagram is proportional to ##m_e \ln \Lambda##. Here ##m_e## has units of [mass]^1 and ##\ln \Lambda## is dimensionless, so the diagram has units of [mass]^1, as required.

The point of the symmetry+dimensional analysis argument is to argue that this same thing will happen generally. The diagram has to have units of [mass]^1, and must be proportional to ##m_e##. So whatever the diagram evaluates to, it has to look like ##m_e## times something dimensionless. The only dimensionless thing you can make out of ##\Lambda## is ##\ln \Lambda##, so at worst diagrams like this can only diverge like ##\ln \Lambda## and not, say, ##\Lambda^2##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
The_Duck said:
Take a look at e.g. the diagram (a) here, in QED: http://ej.iop.org/images/1751-8121/45/38/383001/Full/jpa374448f4_online.jpg

This diagram will correct the mass of the electron. Schematically, this diagram has a value that looks like

##\int d^4 p \frac{\gamma^\mu p_\mu + m_e}{p^2 + m^2}\frac{1}{p^2}##

The integrand has dimension 1/[mass]^3, so the diagram has a whole has dimension [mass]^1.

Now, the integral superficially seems to be linearly divergent, like ##\int d^4 p (1/p^3)##. In that case the result would be proportional to ##\Lambda## times a dimensionless constant (since it must have dimensions of [mass]^1). However, looking a little closer we see that the term involving ##\gamma^\mu p_\mu## is odd in ##p## and therefore cancels out, leaving

##m_e \int d^4 p \frac{1}{p^2 + m^2}\frac{1}{p^2}##

Now we can see that the integral is actually logarithmically divergent, so the diagram is proportional to ##m_e \ln \Lambda##. Here ##m_e## has units of [mass]^1 and ##\ln \Lambda## is dimensionless, so the diagram has units of [mass]^1, as required.

The point of the symmetry+dimensional analysis argument is to argue that this same thing will happen generally. The diagram has to have units of [mass]^1, and must be proportional to ##m_e##. So whatever the diagram evaluates to, it has to look like ##m_e## times something dimensionless. The only dimensionless thing you can make out of ##\Lambda## is ##\ln \Lambda##, so at worst diagrams like this can only diverge like ##\ln \Lambda## and not, say, ##\Lambda^2##.

Thanks a lot, you gave a very clear explanation. Now I understand it fully.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K