Renormalization and divergences

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter eljose
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Renormalization
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the topic of renormalization and divergences in theoretical physics, particularly focusing on the use of the Abel-Plana formula and zeta regularization as tools for handling divergent series. Participants explore the implications of these methods in contexts such as quantum field theory (QFT) and gravity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references a paper discussing the Abel-Plana formula as a renormalization tool, suggesting its validity for gravity and presenting a specific mathematical expression.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the physical justification for using methods that yield finite values for divergent series, citing the arbitrary nature of such methods as discussed in Hardy's "Divergent Series."
  • A participant mentions the use of zeta regularization in calculations related to the Casimir effect and string theory, indicating that it provides a finite meaning to divergent series.
  • It is noted that the zeta function referenced is Hurwitz's zeta function, which is used in the context of these calculations.
  • Operator-regularization is introduced as a generalization of zeta-function regularization that is applicable to all loop orders.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the physical validity and implications of the methods discussed. While some acknowledge the utility of zeta regularization and the Abel-Plana formula, others question the physical rationale behind these approaches and their arbitrary nature.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence on definitions and the potential for multiple interpretations of divergent series, as well as the unresolved nature of how these methods align with traditional QFT approaches.

eljose
Messages
484
Reaction score
0
Check the webpage..

http://arxiv.org/ftp/math/papers/0402/0402259.pdf

specially the part of Abel-Plana formula as a renormalization tool...

\zeta(-m,\beta)-\beta ^{m}/2- i\int_{0}^{\infty}dt[ (it+\beta )^{m}-(-it+\beta )^{m}](e^{2 \pi t}-1)^{-1}=\int_{0}^{\infty}dpp^{m}

valid for every m>0 so renormalization for gravity can be possible.:redface: :rolleyes:

\zeta(-m,\beta)-\beta ^{m}/2- i\int_{0}^{\infty}dt[ (it+\beta )^{m}-(-it+\beta )^{m}](e^{2 \pi t}-1)^{-1}=\int_{0}^{\infty}dpp^{m}
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
After reading Ramanujan's letter to Hardy, I picked up a copy of Hardy's "Divergent Series" that you reference in this paper. I've always found it an interesting book.

But these methods of obtaining finite values for horribly divergent series has always struck me as rather arbitrary and unphysical. In fact, Hardy's book gives examples of sums that have more than one choice of finite sum, depending on how you group the terms and the like. This raises two questions.

First, do you have any physical explanation for why these forms should be used?

Second, do the sums you obtain this way match the usual methods of QFT? And how do they extend these methods?

Carl
 
-Zeta regularization...has been used before in calculations for "Casimir effect" \zeta(-3,0) and in String theory for giving a finite meaning to the series... 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+...\rightarrow \zeta(-1,0) [/tex] also an explanation of why it should work is included in Hardy,s book, the Abel-Plana formula is an exact result of complex analysis.

Note that here the "Zeta" function used is Hurwitz's zeta
 
Operator-regularization is a generalization of the zeta-function that works to all loop orders.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K