Understanding the Role of Poles in the Propagator for Massive Vector Fields

  • Thread starter Thread starter eoghan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Poles Propagator
eoghan
Messages
201
Reaction score
7
Hi!
From "Le Bellac, Quantum and statistical field theory, 10.5.2-Massive vector field":
"The longitudinal part of the propagator k_{\mu}D^{\mu\nu} has no pole at
k^2=m^2, so the longitudinal part doesn't constitute a dynamical degree of freedom."

I have two questions:
1) Why the propagator doesn't represent a dynamical degree of freedom if it hasn't any pole?
How do you demonstrate that physical particles correspond to the pole of the propagator?

2) The propagator D^{\mu\nu} is a rank-2 tensor. The longitudinal part is k_{\mu}D^{\mu\nu} and it is a vector, so, how can it be a propagator?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
eoghan said:
Hi!
From "Le Bellac, Quantum and statistical field theory, 10.5.2-Massive vector field":
"The longitudinal part of the propagator k_{\mu}D^{\mu\nu} has no pole at
k^2=m^2, so the longitudinal part doesn't constitute a dynamical degree of freedom."

I have two questions:
1) Why the propagator doesn't represent a dynamical degree of freedom if it hasn't any pole?
How do you demonstrate that physical particles correspond to the pole of the propagator?

2) The propagator D^{\mu\nu} is a rank-2 tensor. The longitudinal part is k_{\mu}D^{\mu\nu} and it is a vector, so, how can it be a propagator?

The components of the vector field satisfy the Klein-Gordan equation

$$(-\partial_\nu \partial^\nu + m^2) A_\mu =0.$$

By Lorentz-invariance, the mass appearing there must be the same for all components. The momentum-space propagator is the Fourier transform of the 2-point function ##\langle A_\mu(x)A_\nu(y)\rangle##. Because of the KG equation above, all physical components (and linear combinations of them) of the propagator must either have a pole at ##m^2## or vanish.

The longitudinal part is a linear combination of propagators, or equivalently, the propagator for a linear combination of components of ##A_\mu##. Since there is no pole, the corresponding combination of vector fields, ## k^\mu A_\mu## cannot satisfy a non-trivial KG equation. So it cannot be a physical degree of freedom.
 
Also you can study the spectral representation by Kallen-Lehmann (for example in Bjorken-Drell book). It is an exact result (not a perturbative one) and it shows that any Green function have always a pole at the physical mass of the particle.
 
I've read the Kallen-Lehmann representation and I've understood why the propagator has poles. However I don't fully understand fzero's answer. I don't understand this passage

fzero said:
Because of the KG equation above, all physical components (and linear combinations of them) of the propagator must either have a pole at ##m^2## or vanish.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top