Understanding the Running of Mass in Particle Interactions

In summary, the properties of particles, such as charge, isospin, and color, change in strength as the energy increases under renormalization flow. However, properties such as spin and parity remain constant. The mass is the only kinematical property that changes under RG flow, possibly because it appears in the Lagrangian as a coupling. In the Standard Model, the mass couplings can be related to the terms that couple masses in a gravitational theory by replacing the Minkowski metric with the GR metric and adding the Einstein-Hilbert term to the Lagrangian.
  • #1
metroplex021
151
0
I have a question on quantities that 'run' under the renormalization group flow. What's clear is that the properties through which particles couple -- such as charge, isospin, color etc -- change in their strengths as the energy increases. But this running is also true of the mass, which is a property that particles have even when they're not interacting. However, the other properties that we can define in a free field theory -- spin and parity, say -- don't change under the RG flow. So what is it about the kinematical property of mass in particular that allows us to treat it as a coupling?

(A weird question I know, but I'd be interested to hear any thoughts!)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The quantities that are scale dependent under renormalization flow are those quantities that appear as parameters of the Lagrangian. The mass and charge of the particles explicitely appear in the Lagrangian while properties such as spin don't.
 
  • #3
Thanks very much: of course that's the answer. But may I ask one more thing.

All the parameters appearing in the Lagrangian are interaction couplings, with the exception of from mass. Is there a reason that mass is singled out in this way? Is there perhaps some reason that we can think of it as a coupling in some sense, even though at present we await a model of quantum gravity?
 
  • #4
I guess it dependends on how you define "coupling". Consider for example a scalar field theory. The mass appears in front of the quadratic term [itex]m^2\phi^2[/itex] which is included in the Lagrangian of the free theory:
$$
\mathcal{L}_{free}=\frac{1}{2}\partial_\mu\phi\partial^\mu\phi-\frac{1}{2}m^2\phi^2.
$$
This is the free Lagrangian since it gives the equation of motion of a free particle. When you add other terms to this Lagrangian they will appear with coupling "contants" in front of them. Therefore, one usually defines "coupling" those parameter that appear in the interaction Lagrangian.
The mass is a parameter of the free Lagrangian and hence it's not a coupling in the usual sense.
 
  • Like
Likes metroplex021
  • #5
I would say that mass can be treated as a coupling; it's just the coupling of a field to itself. See e.g. Susskind,



What you do is to write down all the powers in the field with a constant in front of it, and consider renormalizability. All the parameters you use in this process are basically "couplings".
 
  • Like
Likes metroplex021
  • #6
That's great people: I think I know the Susskind lecture and I'll watch it again. Final question. Does anyone know of a place where a conjectured Lagrangian for a QFT of gravity is written down? I would like to see how the mass 'couplings' that occur in, say, the Standard Model relate to the terms that couple masses in a gravitational theory. But thanks again folks!
 
  • #7
To couple a theory to gravity you take the Lagrangian density ##\mathcal{L}## of your theory, replace all instances of the Minkowski metric ##\eta_{\mu\nu}## with the GR metric ##g_{\mu\nu}##, and write down the action
[tex]S = \int d^4x \sqrt{-g} \mathcal{L}[/tex]
where ##g## is the determinant of the metric tensor. This turns out to give a coupling between the metric (i.e., the gravitational field) and the stress-energy tensor of the theory original theory. The terms in ##\mathcal{L}## that give mass to particles, for example the ##m^2 \phi^2/2## term in a scalar field theory, contribute to the stress-energy tensor and so produce couplings between massive particles and the gravitational field. But gravity also couples to all other sources of stress-energy, including the energy of massless particles.
 
  • Like
Likes metroplex021
  • #8
Thanks, The_Duck. Fascinating!
 
  • #9

1. What are "running constants" in scientific research?

Running constants, also known as control variables, are factors in a scientific experiment that are kept constant throughout the study. By keeping these variables unchanged, scientists can isolate and analyze the effects of the independent variable.

2. How do scientists determine which variables to keep constant in an experiment?

Scientists typically determine which variables to keep constant based on their knowledge of the system being studied. They may also conduct pilot experiments to identify the most influential variables and keep those constant in the main study.

3. Can running constants change during an experiment?

In most cases, scientists aim to keep running constants unchanged throughout an experiment. However, there may be instances where it is necessary to adjust a constant due to unforeseen circumstances or to improve the accuracy of the results. Any changes should be carefully documented and explained in the results.

4. What are some common running constants in scientific experiments?

Some common running constants in scientific experiments include temperature, time, pH, humidity, and pressure. These variables are often controlled because they can significantly impact the outcome of an experiment.

5. Why is it important to keep running constants constant in an experiment?

Keeping running constants constant helps to ensure that the only factor influencing the outcome of an experiment is the independent variable. This allows for more accurate and reliable results, which are essential for drawing meaningful conclusions and making scientific advancements.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
771
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
2
Replies
48
Views
19K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top