Reallllly dumb question about Feynman Parameters (and simplifying them)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the simplification of Feynman parameters, particularly focusing on the integration limits when applying the delta function in a three-parameter equation. Participants explore the implications of the delta function on the integration region and seek clarification on extending these concepts to four parameters.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about why the limit of integration for y changes to 1-x when simplifying the integral involving the delta function.
  • Another participant suggests that the delta function restricts the integration to a specific plane defined by x+y+z=1, indicating that the integration is effectively over this plane.
  • A participant explains that if y were allowed to exceed 1-x, it would violate the condition x+y+z=1, thus justifying the upper limit on the y integral.
  • There is a proposal for the integration limits in a four-parameter scenario, suggesting a similar pattern of limits based on the established reasoning for three parameters.
  • A participant expresses a desire for further clarification, indicating ongoing uncertainty about the topic.
  • One response simply affirms a previous statement without additional context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the reasoning behind the integration limits based on the delta function, but there remains uncertainty regarding the application of these concepts to four parameters. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the best approach for simplification.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the dependence on the delta function's properties and the geometric interpretation of the integration region, but do not resolve all assumptions or implications related to the transition from three to four parameters.

Elwin.Martin
Messages
202
Reaction score
0
I know the generalized formula for Feynman parameters, my problem is in simplifying.

What I mean is something like this:
Take the simplest 3 parameter equation
[itex]\frac{1}{ABC} = 2 \int_0^1 dx \int_0^1 dy \int_0^1 dz \frac{ \delta \left( 1-x-y-z \right)}{(xA+yB+zC)^3}[/itex]
And you can take this and put move to two integrals by integrating over z, I understand that we use the delta function to get (xA+yB+(1-x-y)C)3 in the denominator of the new integrand...however, I don't understand why we now have:
[itex]2 \int_0^1 dx \int_0^{1-x} dy[/itex]
I've done it out by hand to check it, so I know this is what we need...but why do we substitute in 1-x for the limit of integration?

This is probably a dumb question, but I need to know so I can generalize to four parameters.

Thanks for any and all help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Alright, so after drawing it by hand once...I feel like it has something to do with the shape of region the delta function sort of cuts out? We're realistically only integrating over a plane now, since the delta function assigns zero to everywhere except x+y+z=1, right? So our integration is really over just that plane...still failing from here though.
 
If y was allowed to be bigger than 1-x, then x+y would be bigger than 1. But x+y+z=1, and z is between 0 and 1. So x+y cannot be bigger than 1. Thus the upper limit on the y integral. (We could equally well first integrate over x from 0 to 1-y, and then over y from 0 to 1.)
 
Avodyne said:
If y was allowed to be bigger than 1-x, then x+y would be bigger than 1. But x+y+z=1, and z is between 0 and 1. So x+y cannot be bigger than 1. Thus the upper limit on the y integral. (We could equally well first integrate over x from 0 to 1-y, and then over y from 0 to 1.)

That makes sense.

So for four parameters would we have:
[itex]\int_0^1 dx \int_0^{1-x} dy \int_0^{1-x-y} dz[/itex] ?
 
Bumping this, I would really like to know still...I feel like an idiot, but I sort of need to understand this.
 
Yes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K