I Expansion at first order in QCD counterterm

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the expansion at first order in the counterterms ##\delta_2## and ##\delta_3## within Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) and the implications of taking the ##\epsilon \to 0## limit. It highlights the evaluation of second-order loop corrections to quark and gluon self-energies and the gluon 3-vertex to derive the counterterms ##Z_1##, ##Z_2##, and ##Z_3##, which lead to ##Z_g## through a Slavnov-Taylor identity. The minimal-subtraction scheme is emphasized for determining the coefficients to ##1/\epsilon## order by order in perturbation theory, crucial for managing subdivergences at higher loop orders. The conversation concludes that the divergence in ##1/\epsilon## is not a concern as the limit is taken at the end of the calculations. This understanding clarifies the relationship between counterterms and their dependence on the coupling constant ##\alpha_s##.
Siupa
Messages
30
Reaction score
5


What is the meaning of the expansion at first order in ##\delta_2## and ##\delta_3## at the second step in the last line? These quantities are not "small" - on the contrary, the entire point is to then take the ##\epsilon \to 0## limit and the counterterms blow up
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I can't read light gray on a less light gray background. Can you use LaTex and maybe post your source?
 
  • Like
Likes topsquark and berkeman
The Dyson series is an expansion in the coupling constant ##g##. Obviously you are evaluating the quoted 2nd-order loop corrections to the quark and gluon self-energies as well as the gluon 3-vertex to get the counter terms to evaluate ##Z_1##, ##Z_2##, and ##Z_3##, from which ##Z_g## follows through a Slavnov-Taylor identity (which maybe is Eq. (75), which you didn't quote). Of course since you have the said ##Z##-factors only to order ##g^2## (or order ##\alpha_s=g^2/(4 \pi)##), you can determine only the counterterm contributing to ##Z_g## to this order, and thus you have to expand the expression for it also up to order ##\alpha_s##.

In the here obviously applied minimal-subtraction scheme you need to find the coefficients to ##1/\epsilon## order by order perturbation theory. This determines the counter terms order by order. At higher loop order you have to take care of the subdivergences by using the corresponding counter terms of subdiagrams.
 
  • Like
Likes Siupa and topsquark
Vanadium 50 said:
I can't read light gray on a less light gray background. Can you use LaTex and maybe post your source?
If you open the imgur link it should be in high res. Anyways the reference is chapter 3, end of subchapter 3.3 of this pdf
 
vanhees71 said:
The Dyson series is an expansion in the coupling constant ##g##. Obviously you are evaluating the quoted 2nd-order loop corrections to the quark and gluon self-energies as well as the gluon 3-vertex to get the counter terms to evaluate ##Z_1##, ##Z_2##, and ##Z_3##, from which ##Z_g## follows through a Slavnov-Taylor identity (which maybe is Eq. (75), which you didn't quote). Of course since you have the said ##Z##-factors only to order ##g^2## (or order ##\alpha_s=g^2/(4 \pi)##), you can determine only the counterterm contributing to ##Z_g## to this order, and thus you have to expand the expression for it also up to order ##\alpha_s##.

In the here obviously applied minimal-subtraction scheme you need to find the coefficients to ##1/\epsilon## order by order perturbation theory. This determines the counter terms order by order. At higher loop order you have to take care of the subdivergences by using the corresponding counter terms of subdiagrams.
Eq. (75) is just the definition of ##Z_1 = Z_g Z_2 Z_3^{\frac{1}{2}}##. Anyways thank you I understand now, the expansions of ##1/Z_2## , ##1/Z_3## are obviously at first order in ##\alpha_s##, which in turn means first order in the counterterms since they are proportional to ##\alpha_s## because they were computed at 1-loop. I guess the divergence in ##1/\epsilon## doesn't matter since we only take the limit ##\epsilon \to 0## in the end?
 
Right! That's the idea!
 
  • Love
Likes malawi_glenn
Thread 'Some confusion with the Binding Energy graph of atoms'
My question is about the following graph: I keep on reading that fusing atoms up until Fe-56 doesn’t cost energy and only releases binding energy. However, I understood that fusing atoms also require energy to overcome the positive charges of the protons. Where does that energy go after fusion? Does it go into the mass of the newly fused atom, escape as heat or is the released binding energy shown in the graph actually the net energy after subtracting the required fusion energy? I...