Dimensional regularization vs momentum cutoff

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the differences in results obtained from dimensional regularization versus momentum cutoff in a 2D sigma model with supersymmetry. Participants explore the implications of these results on mass renormalization and the preservation of supersymmetry in the model.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculates one-loop corrections to worldsheet masses using dimensional regularization, finding that the correction is zero.
  • In contrast, the same participant finds non-zero mass renormalization terms when using momentum cutoff, specifically terms that depend on the cutoff parameter ##\Lambda##.
  • Another participant suggests that the non-zero terms are "pure counterterm" contributions, implying that they can be canceled by adding a local counterterm to the action.
  • A third participant expresses concern that the presence of mass renormalization terms contradicts the expectations from supersymmetry, noting that the results differ for bosons and fermions, which suggests a breaking of supersymmetry.
  • Another participant questions the validity of the calculations and suggests that wavefunction renormalization should respect supersymmetry if no explicit SUSY-breaking terms are present in the Lagrangian.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the mass renormalization terms should be zero in a supersymmetric model, but there is disagreement regarding the implications of the results obtained from momentum cutoff and how to interpret or resolve the discrepancies.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the calculations and assumptions made, particularly concerning the presence of explicit SUSY-breaking terms and the nature of the divergences encountered in the momentum cutoff approach.

nidnus
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone,

I have a 2D sigma model with supersymmetry on the worldsheet. It has both cubic and quartic interactions and I'm interested in the one loop correction to the worldsheet masses. When I calculate this with dimensional regularization I find that everything is zero as expected. In momentum cutoff ##\Lambda## however I find terms corresponding to infinite mass renormalization. That is

Dim reg:

$$ \delta m^2 = 0 $$

while in

momentum cutoff:

$$ \delta m^2 = \alpha \Lambda^2 + \beta $$

where ##\alpha,\beta## are constants like ##1/\pi## etc.

My question is, what is the meaning of the terms popping up in the momentum cutoff? They shouldn't be physical but I feel I lack a proper argument for that statement.

Thanks a lot
 
Physics news on Phys.org
People say that such terms are "pure counterterm", meaning adding a local counterterm of the form delta m^2*phi^2 term in your action is sufficient to cancel such divergences; there's no leftover bit that depends on p or mu, the renormalization scale.
 
Hi Chris,

Thanks for your answer. Indeed, the terms I find correspond to mass renormalization. However, I would expect ##\delta m^2 ## to be zero since its a susy model. What is more, the ##\delta m^2## in hard cutoff is different for boson and fermions implying that susy is broken which should not be the case. I want an argument for how to either get rid of the mass renormalization terms or why I can say they don't matter.

Thanks, Nid.
 
I would also expect it to be zero; I would expect that you'd find wavefunction renormalization that respects supersymmetry, provided you have no explicit SUSY-breaking terms in your Lagrangian in the first place. Have you verified your calculation?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K