Is Brute Force the Best Approach to Proving Feynman's Denominator Formula?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter spaghetti3451
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving Feynman's denominator formula and exploring various approaches to tackle the problem, including brute force methods and alternative techniques like proof by induction and contour integration. The scope includes theoretical aspects and mathematical reasoning related to Feynman parametrization and Schwinger parameterization.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses interest in proving Feynman's denominator formula using a brute force approach but finds the algebra complex and messy, suggesting a possible alternative method of proof by induction.
  • Another participant references Schwinger parameterization and presents an integral they wish to prove, questioning the need for contour integration and expressing uncertainty about the presence of branch points in the complex plane.
  • A different participant argues against the necessity of contour integration, stating that the integral exists under the condition of having a positive imaginary part for A, and provides a derivation of the integral using the antiderivative of the exponential function.
  • This participant also connects the result to its application in perturbation theory, emphasizing the importance of the imaginary part in defining the time-ordered propagator.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants have differing views on the necessity of contour integration for proving the integral related to Schwinger parameterization. While one participant suggests it is required, another argues it is not, indicating a lack of consensus on this point.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the conditions under which the integrals are valid, particularly concerning the imaginary part of A in the context of the integrals discussed.

spaghetti3451
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
31
I would like to prove Feynman's denominator formula:

##\frac{1}{A_{1}\dots A_{n}} = (n-1)!\int_{0}^{1}dx_{1}\dots dx_{n}\delta(x_{1}+\dots+x_{n}-1)(x_{1}A_{1}+\dots+x_{n}A_{n})^{-n}##

I was wondering if you would recommend brute force approach to solving this problem. I proved the formula for ##n=1,2,3##, and then attempted for the general case using a brute force but the algebra looks messy.

Would you recommend trying an alternative method, perhaps proof by induction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have also been checking out Schwinger paramaterization and I found the following integral:

##\displaystyle{\frac{1}{A}=-i\int^\infty_0 du \, e^{iuA}}##

I would like to prove this formula but am having a hard time proving it.

I think you need to solve the RHS by contour integration, and since there is a factor of ##iuA## in the exponent, you close the contour in the upper half of the complex ##u##-plane. But I don't see any branch points, so I am led to guess that the RHS integral is 0.

For the LHS to be equal to RHS, I think that the residue is ##{\frac{1}{2\pi A}}##, but I cannot explain this. Am I missing a branch point in the upper half complex ##u##-plane?
 
You don't need contour integration. For the integral to exist you must only have ##\mathrm{Im} A>0##. Then you can simply use the antiderivative of the exponential function (which is the exponential function):
$$F(u)=\int \mathrm{d} u \exp(\mathrm{i} u A)=-\frac{i}{A} \exp(\mathrm{i} u A),$$
and then the Feynman integral is
$$\int_0^{\infty} \mathrm{d} u \exp(\mathrm{i} u A)=\lim_{u \rightarrow \infty} F(u)-F(0)=\mathrm{i}{A},$$
which proves the formula.

It's exactly what you need for the denominators in perturbation theory, because you have time-ordered Green's functions which always have a positive imaginary part in the denominator, which defines the time-ordered propagator in the usual sense, namely
$$\Delta(p)=\frac{1}{p^2-m^2+\mathrm{i} 0^+}.$$
The ##\mathrm{i} 0^+## is crucial here to get the right propagator, namely the time-ordered one.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K