QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion

In summary, when Peskin evaluates the renormalization condition for QED, he sets ##q^2=0## in the full propagator including counterterm, but the ##q^{\mu}q^{\nu}## term is still present.
  • #1
thatboi
121
18
Hey all,
When looking at the renormalization conditions for QED (see page 332, equation 10.40 from Peskin), there is a condition that requires the photon propagator at ##q^2 = 0## to evaluate to 0. But looking at the expression for the photon propagator counterterm: ##-i(g^{\mu\nu}q^2 - q^{\mu}q^{\nu})\delta_{3}##, can I not rewrite ##q^{\mu}q^{\nu} = g^{\mu\nu}q_{\nu}q^{\nu} = g^{\mu\nu}q^{2}## and then the entire counterterm just disappears?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
thatboi said:
Hey all,
When looking at the renormalization conditions for QED (see page 332, equation 10.40 from Peskin), there is a condition that requires the photon propagator at ##q^2 = 0## to evaluate to 0. But looking at the expression for the photon propagator counterterm: ##-i(g^{\mu\nu}q^2 - q^{\mu}q^{\nu})\delta_{3}##, can I not rewrite ##q^{\mu}q^{\nu} = g^{\mu\nu}q_{\nu}q^{\nu} = g^{\mu\nu}q^{2}## and then the entire counterterm just disappears?
Try writing your expression for the second term explicitly. What you wrote was
##\displaystyle q^{\mu} q^{\nu} = \left ( \sum_{\nu} g^{\mu \nu} q_{\nu} \right ) q^{\nu} = g^{\mu \nu} \left ( \sum_{\nu} q_{\nu} q^{\nu} \right ) = g^{\mu \nu} q^2##

Does this make sense?

-Dan
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes thatboi, vanhees71 and malawi_glenn
  • #3
thatboi said:
can I not rewrite ##q^{\mu}q^{\nu} = g^{\mu\nu}q_{\nu}q^{\nu} = g^{\mu\nu}q^{2}##
You need another index
##q^{\mu}q^{\nu} = g^{\mu\tau}q_{\tau}q^{\nu}## which is not equal to ##g^{\mu\nu}q^{2}##
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes dextercioby, thatboi, vanhees71 and 1 other person
  • #4
Great, thanks a lot. As a followup question (let me know if I should make a new thread for this): For the renormalization condition Peskin evaluates the photon propagator at ##q^2 =0##, how do I deal with the ##q^{\mu}q^{\nu}## term?
 
  • Like
Likes ohwilleke
  • #5
What do you mean by "deal with"
 
  • Like
Likes topsquark
  • #6
malawi_glenn said:
What do you mean by "deal with"
As in equation (10.44) of Peskin's book. To get the counterterm ##\delta_{3}##, they set ##q^2=0## in the full propagator including counterterm, but then what happens to the ##q^{\mu}q^{\nu}## term?
 
  • #7
thatboi said:
Great, thanks a lot. As a followup question (let me know if I should make a new thread for this): For the renormalization condition Peskin evaluates the photon propagator at ##q^2 =0##, how do I deal with the ##q^{\mu}q^{\nu}## term?
The photon is a gauge boson. That implies Ward-Takahashi identities which tell you that there is no mass generated by loop corrections and there's also no mass counterterm necessary to renormalize the photon propagator, i.e., there's only a wave-function renormalizing counter term. This implies that the photon-polarization tensor (aka photon self-energy tensor) is of the form
$$\Pi^{\mu \nu}(k)=k^2 \Pi(k) \left (g^{\mu \nu}-\frac{k^{\mu} k^{\nu}}{k^2} \right).$$
The Dyson equation then tells you that the photon propagor reads
$$D_{\gamma \perp}^{\mu \nu} = -\frac{\Theta^{\mu \nu}(k)}{k^2 (1-\Pi(k))}+D_{\gamma 0 \parallel}^{\mu \nu},$$
i.e., the longitudinal part is non-interacting, and the longitudinal photons are unphysical gauge-dependend pieces, which don't participate in any physical quantities, which are gauge invariant.

For details, see Sect. 6.6 in

https://itp.uni-frankfurt.de/~hees/publ/lect.pdf

where I used the particularly elegant and simple background-field gauge description of QED.
 
  • Like
Likes thatboi, topsquark, malawi_glenn and 1 other person

1. What is QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion?

QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion refers to a phenomenon in quantum electrodynamics (QED) where the mathematical calculations for certain physical quantities, such as mass and charge, diverge or become infinite. This leads to confusion and difficulty in accurately predicting and understanding the behavior of subatomic particles.

2. What causes QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion?

The root cause of QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion is the inherent difficulty in accurately describing and modeling the behavior of subatomic particles, which exist in a realm where traditional laws of physics break down. This leads to the need for renormalization, a mathematical technique used to remove infinities and make predictions more accurate.

3. How does renormalization help with QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion?

Renormalization involves introducing a counterterm, which is a mathematical correction factor, to cancel out the infinities in a calculation. This allows for more accurate predictions of physical quantities and helps to resolve the confusion caused by QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion.

4. Is QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion a significant issue in the field of physics?

Yes, QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion is a significant issue in the field of physics, particularly in the study of subatomic particles. It has led to the development of new mathematical techniques and theories, such as quantum field theory, to better understand and predict the behavior of these particles.

5. Can QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion be completely eliminated?

No, QED Renormalization Counterterm Confusion cannot be completely eliminated. It is an inherent issue in the study of subatomic particles and is a consequence of the limitations of our current understanding of the laws of physics. However, through continued research and refinement of mathematical techniques, we can minimize its effects and gain a better understanding of the behavior of these particles.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top