Renormalizability - how to determine if a theory is renormalizable?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mhill
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theory
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the criteria for determining whether a given field theory is renormalizable or non-renormalizable, focusing on the implications of the Lagrangian and the dimensionality of operators involved. The scope includes theoretical considerations and mathematical reasoning related to quantum field theory.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether it is possible to determine at first glance if a theory is renormalizable based solely on the Lagrangian and the number of fields, or if one must calculate all infinite diagrams.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the simplicity of determining renormalizability, suggesting that the complexity of the topic has led to significant recognition in the form of Nobel Prizes.
  • Some participants mention general theorems based on power counting that can identify theories that are not renormalizable, implying that only a few theories remain to be tested individually.
  • It is noted that operators of dimension 5 and higher are typically considered non-renormalizable, and a participant inquires about any additional quick rules for assessment.
  • There is a suggestion that if all terms in the Lagrangian are of dimension 4 or less, a careful check is still necessary to determine renormalizability.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the ease of determining renormalizability, with some suggesting that general rules exist while others emphasize the complexity and nuances involved. No consensus is reached regarding a definitive method for assessment.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the reliance on power counting and dimensional analysis but does not resolve the specific conditions under which a theory may be deemed renormalizable or non-renormalizable.

mhill
Messages
180
Reaction score
1
Given a theory with n-different fields [tex]\phi _{n}(x)[/tex] and a known Lagrangian L is possible to see at first sight if the theory will be renormalizable or non*-renormalizable ?? , or on the other hand should we calculate ALL the infinite diagramms to see it, for example i give a certain Lagrangian involving scalar particles, spin 1 particles and spin*-2 particles and several coupling constants could you say if this is renormalizable or not ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I doubt that it is simple to see, otherwise it wouldn't have warranted several Nobel Prizes in recognition of showing that various gauge theories are re-normalisable...
 
mhill said:
Given a theory with n-different fields [tex]\phi _{n}(x)[/tex] and a known Lagrangian L is possible to see at first sight if the theory will be renormalizable or non*-renormalizable ?? , or on the other hand should we calculate ALL the infinite diagramms to see it, for example i give a certain Lagrangian involving scalar particles, spin 1 particles and spin*-2 particles and several coupling constants could you say if this is renormalizable or not ?

There are general theorems based on power counting which tell you which theories are NOT renormalizable. You end up with so few remaining that you can just go around testing them one by one, I believe. I think it is pretty well discussed in Peskin and Schroeder.
 
lbrits said:
There are general theorems based on power counting which tell you which theories are NOT renormalizable. You end up with so few remaining that you can just go around testing them one by one, I believe. I think it is pretty well discussed in Peskin and Schroeder.

As far as I know, the only rule of thumb is that operators of dimension 5 and higher are automatically non-renormalizable. Are there any other quick rule?



IF all the terms are of dimension 4 (or less) then a crafeul check must be made.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K