New Feynman Rules in QED from Counterterms

blackie1008
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I have been looking at the renormalisation of QED and been using Peskin & Schroeder. I understand (I think) what is going on, but I am slightly confused over 2 issues:

1. In the new feynman rules from the counterterms, the feynman diagrams all have a small circle with a cross in them...what do these represent? (P&S p332, fig 10.4)

2. why do we need the renormalization conditions? (P&S p331-331 eq 10.40)

Help would be much appreciated!

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For question 1., the circles represent the counter-terms themselves.

For question 2., the renormalization conditions are required to fix the counterterms. For example the bare mass in the Lagrangian is m_{0}. We split this into the physical mass and the counterterm, m_{0} = m + \delta m. However you need the figure out what \delta m should be so that the physical mass is m. The physical mass being m means that \Sigma(m^{2}) = 0. This provides you with the equation you need to obtain \delta m.
 
Thanks for clearing up question 2, but as for question 1, by "representing the counterterms themselves" do you mean that it represents all the contributions that are taken into account?
 
blackie1008 said:
Thanks for clearing up question 2, but as for question 1, by "representing the counterterms themselves" do you mean that it represents all the contributions that are taken into account?
The black circle with for the interaction vertex represents \delta \lambda to all orders. At a given order of perturbation theory it can only stand for \delta \lambda to that order or less. For instance let's say you were computing at third order, you could have a diagram with one normal interaction vertex and one counter-term interaction vertex, the counter-term vertex will contain the counter-term to second order, so you will get \lambda from the usual vertex and \lambda^{2} from the counter-term vertex, giving you a third order contribution.
 
Ahhh ok think I have got it now!

Thanks for the help, its much appreciated!
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
7K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Back
Top