QFT Peskin Errata: Pauli Vilars Regularization & Ward Takahashi Identity

  • Thread starter Thread starter simic4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Peskin Qft
simic4
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Hi,

This is regarding showing, in ch.7, around p.220, that the Pauli Vilars regularization technique is consistent with the ward takahashi identity.

I cannot get the following to work:

I add eq. 7.31 to eq. 7.32 and do not get zero. I get alpha over 4 pi.
(I am left with integral ( 1 - z) * alpha over 2 pi )


we are supposed to show it is zero. i ve checked it and some of the preceding results a few times but cannot get it.

what am i missing. can anyone confirm the problem?

Id really appreciate it! its making me a little nuts.

thanks!

simic
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I shall give it a go for you, it's pretty straightforward, you've probably just made some small cock up somewhere, I do it all the time.

\delta Z_2+\delta F_1(0)=\frac{\alpha}{2\pi}\int^1_0dz\left[-z\log\frac{z\Lambda^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}+2(2-z)\frac{z(1-z)m^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}+(1-z)\log\frac{z\Lambda^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}+(1-z)\frac{(1-4z+z^2)m^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}\right]
=\frac{\alpha}{2\pi}\int^1_0dz\left[(1-2z)\log\frac{z\Lambda^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}+\frac{(1-z^2)(1-z)m^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}\right]

Because, as I'm sure you've already worked out,

(1-z)\frac{(1-4z+z^2)m^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}+2(2-z)\frac{z(1-z)m^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}=\frac{(1-z^2)(1-z)m^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}

Now split the log up

\int^1_0dz(1-2z)\log\frac{z\Lambda^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}=\int^1_0dz\left[(1-2z)\log\frac{\Lambda^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}+(1-2z)\log z\right]
=\int^1_0dz\left[(1-z)-\frac{(1-z^2)(1-z)m^2}{(1-z)^2m^2+z\mu^2}+(1-2z)\log z\right]

Plugging that back in gives

\delta Z_2+\delta F_1(0)=\frac{\alpha}{2\pi}\int^1_0dz\left[(1-z)+(1-2z)\log z\right]=0

As

\int^1_0dz(1-z)=-\int^1_0dz(1-2z)\log z=\frac{1}{2}

I presumably did the same as you first time, as I got \alpha/4\pi, I forgot the extra logarithm you're left over with at the end, or you just didn't notice that P&S had split it up in the first place (if you don't split it up, i.e. leave the z in the numerator of the log, the integration by parts they performed for you diverges).
 
Last edited:
Hey thanks a million.

I forgot to split up the log, completely missed it :).

sim.
 
Qutie alright
 
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!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...

Similar threads

Back
Top