Dimensional analysis of the fermion mass renormalization

In summary, dimensional analysis is a method used to determine the scaling of a physical quantity based on its units and symmetries. By applying this method to the mass shift in fermion mass renormalization, it can be seen that the resulting diagram is proportional to ##m_e \ln \Lambda##, where ##m_e## is the mass of the electron and ##\ln \Lambda## is dimensionless. This shows that the divergence of such diagrams is at most logarithmic, and not worse, due to the cancellation of odd terms in the integral.
  • #1
phypar
12
0
In the textbook, usually the fermion mass renormalization is introduced as follows: the mass shift [itex]\delta m[/itex] must vanish when [itex]m_0=0[/itex]. The mass shift must therefore be proportional to [itex]m_0[/itex]. By dimensional analysis, it can only depend logarithmically on [itex]\Lambda[/itex] (the ultraviolet cutoff): [itex]\delta m \sim \ln \Lambda[/itex].

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
  • #2
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 1 person
  • #3
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
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Back
Top