How does a virtual particle becomes a point interaction?

jim burns
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
If you want to show that a propagator of a heavy particle reduces to a point interaction at distances large compared to the inverse mass of the particle by Taylor expanding the propagator (for simplicity take 1-dimension):

$$G(x)=\int^\infty_{-\infty} \frac{dk}{2\pi} \frac{e^{-ikx}}{k^2+M^2}=
\int^\infty_{-\infty} \frac{dk}{2\pi} \frac{e^{-ikx}}{M^2(1+\frac{k^2}{M^2})}=
\int^\infty_{-\infty} \frac{dk}{2\pi} \frac{e^{-ikx}}{M^2} (1-\frac{k^2}{M^2}+...(-1)^n\left(\frac{k^2}{M^2}\right)^n)
$$

then how does one justify this expansion when k>M? The first term gives the δ(x) point interaction, and the rest give derivatives of δ(x). But how is the Taylor expansion in the integrand justified?

It seems that the answer must have to do with the fact that x>M-1 in the exponential?

Also, a related question: if you have an arbitrary function

$$f(x)=\int^\infty_{-\infty} \frac{dk}{2\pi} e^{-ikx} f(k)$$

and specify that x>M-1, does that tell you anything about the contribution of f(k) for k>M to f(x)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why are you doing the expansion in the first place? You can just calculate the propagator in position representation. You find it explicitly done in older textbooks on quantum field theory like Schweber or in the Pauli Lectures.
 
I was following some lectures (McGreevy's notes - if anyone's interested it's page 16 of http://physics.ucsd.edu/~mcgreevy/s15/215C-2015-lectures.pdf ) and they showed the expansion so I thought it was important to understand why it could be done mathematically.

I was thinking that physically high energy virtual modes don't contribute to the propagator at long time scales, so that you should be able to ignore the integral at high k when your time argument of the propagator in position space is long (>M-1). However, I don't see the justification mathematically.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top