Explicit form of scalar propagator

parton
Messages
79
Reaction score
1
Hi!

I have encountered a little problem. I want to show
that the explicit form of the Feynman propagator for massless scalar fields is given by:

<br /> \begin{align}<br /> G_F(x) &amp; = - \lim_{\epsilon \to +0} \int \dfrac{\mathrm{d}^{4}k}{(2 \pi)^{4}} \dfrac{1}{k^{2} + i \epsilon} \mathrm{e}^{- i k x} <br /> \\<br /> &amp; = - \lim_{\epsilon \to +0} \dfrac{1}{4 \pi^{2}} \dfrac{1}{x^{2} -i \epsilon} <br /> \end{align}<br />

And I would like to do that directly, i.e., without starting from the massive case and considering the limit m \to 0.

I found a script where one can find a derivation of that result,

http://mo.pa.msu.edu/phy853/lectures/lectures.pdf

on pages 58-59.

There, the integration is split up into the imaginary and real part.

But for the imaginary part, the author finds:

<br /> \begin{align}<br /> G_F,i(x) &amp; = \dfrac{1}{4 \pi^{2} r} \int_{0}^{\infty} \mathrm{d}k \cos(k x_{0}) \sin(k r)<br /> \\<br /> &amp; = \dfrac{1}{16 \pi^{2} r i} \int_{0}^{\infty} \mathrm{d}k \left[ \mathrm{e}^{ik(x_{0}+r)} - \mathrm{e}^{-ik(x_{0}+r)} + \mathrm{e}^{-ik(x_{0}-r)} - \mathrm{e}^{ik(x_{0}-r)} \right]<br /> \\<br /> &amp; = - \frac{1}{8 \pi^{2} r} \left[ \dfrac{1}{x_{0} + r} - \dfrac{1}{x_{0} - r} \right]<br /> \\<br /> &amp; = - \frac{1}{4 \pi^{2} x^{2}}<br /> \end{align}<br />

Here, I don't understand how the integration is performed. I think if you integrate every exponential term it will diverge at \infty, but somehow the author ends up with a finite term.

Does anyone understand what is going on here?

Furthermore, I think we should end up with Cauchy's principal value and not just 1/x^2, right?

Maybe, someone has a more "elegant" way of deriving the massless propagator?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Make a change of variables k'=ik or k'=-ik as needed
 
dauto said:
Make a change of variables k'=ik or k'=-ik as needed

Thank you for your hint, but somehow I don't see how that could help.
If I make the substitution k&#039; = i k I find:

<br /> \begin{align}<br /> \int_{0}^{\infty} \mathrm{d}k &amp; \left[ \mathrm{e}^{ik(x_{0}+r)} - \mathrm{e}^{-ik(x_{0}+r)} + \mathrm{e}^{-ik(x_{0}-r)} - \mathrm{e}^{ik(x_{0}-r)} \right] =<br /> \\<br /> &amp; = -i \int_{0}^{i \infty} \mathrm{d}k \left[ \mathrm{e}^{k(x_{0}+r)} - \mathrm{e}^{-k(x_{0}+r)} + \mathrm{e}^{-k(x_{0}-r)} - \mathrm{e}^{k(x_{0}-r)} \right]<br /> \\<br /> &amp; = -i \left[ \dfrac{1}{x_{0} + r} \left( \mathrm{e}^{k(x_{0}+r)} + \mathrm{e}^{-k(x_{0}+r)} \right) - \dfrac{1}{x_{0} - r} \left( \mathrm{e}^{k(x_{0}-r)} + \mathrm{e}^{-k(x_{0}-r)} \right) \right] \Bigg|_{0}^{i \infty}<br /> \\<br /> &amp; = -2 i \left[ \dfrac{1}{x_{0} + r} \mathrm{cosh}(k (x_{0} + r)) - \dfrac{1}{x_{0} - r} \mathrm{cosh}(k(x_{0}-r)) \right] \Bigg|_{0}^{i \infty}<br /> \end{align}<br />

And this will diverge for k \to i \infty.

Do you have an idea to resolve this problem?
 
Multiply integrand by \exp(-\alpha k), integrate it and then take limit of \alpha as zero.
\alpha is real and positive.
 
Ravi Mohan said:
Multiply integrand by \exp(-\alpha k), integrate it and then take limit of \alpha as zero.
\alpha is real and positive.

OK, thanks a lot :smile:. This seems to work.

But what I still not undestand is: Why can the result - \dfrac{1}{4 \pi^{2} x^{2}} be undestood as Cauchy's principal value?
 
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Back
Top