A Heavy Quark Propagators in HQET

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the construction of heavy quark propagators in Heavy Quark Effective Theory (HQET) and the challenges associated with loop corrections. It begins with the standard momentum representation of a heavy quark interacting with soft particles, highlighting the distinction between hard and soft momenta. The confusion arises when attempting to apply similar logic to loop corrections, as the loop momentum cannot be assumed to be soft due to its range. The participant seeks clarification on how to reconcile these aspects in the context of heavy quark propagators derived from QCD. The inquiry emphasizes the need for a deeper understanding of loop momentum behavior in HQET.
Elmo
Messages
37
Reaction score
6
TL;DR
A confusion about the Feynman rule for the HQET propagator.
I have a confusion about how the heavy quark propagators are constructed in HQET and how the loops (in the included figure) are constructed.
A standard sort of introduction and motivation to HQET (as in reviews and texts like Manohar & Wise and M.D Schwartz) is as follows :

The momentum of a heavy quark interacting with soft particles is #p^{\mu}=Mv^{\mu}+k^{\mu}# and the derivation of the heavy quark propagator from its corresponding form in QCD is thus :

\slashedp+\slashedk+M(p−k)2−M2∼M(1+\slashedv)2Mv.k . The thing which makes it tick is the fact that #k^{\mu}# is soft and #M# is hard. This is all fine but I dont understand how we can apply the same logic to get the following loop correction in the figure (which is also solved in multiple sources).
Σ∼∫dDq1[q2][v.(p+q)]If we write the same quark propagator from QCD and work onwards from that :

\slashedp+\slashedq+M(p+q)2−M2∼M(1+\slashedv)+\slashedqq2+2Mv.q
Here we cant take q to be soft can we, as its spans all regions of the loop momentum.
hq.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sorry, my original post did not render for some reason even though it did show up (mostly) correctly in the preview.
So here is the PDF file of the question.
 

Attachments

We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...

Similar threads