A Renormalization with hard cutoff of a loop diagram with single vertex

theittsco
Messages
1
Reaction score
4
TL;DR Summary
Confusion on how to renormalize a loop diagram with only a single vertex. Feynman parameters don't work.
Trying to solve for the loop contribution when renormalizing a one loop ##\frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi^4## diagram with two external lines in ##d=4## dimensions. After writing down the Feynman rule I see that:

$$\frac{(-i\lambda)}{2}\int d^4q \frac{i}{q^2-m_{\phi}^2+i\epsilon} $$

But I see no way to convert this to Feynman parameters like in ##1/AB##. When I Wick rotate I get:

$$\frac{(\lambda)}{2}\int dq_E \frac{q_E^3}{q_E^2-m_{\phi}^2} $$

Which when integrated from ##0,\Lambda## (a hard cut off) via the great Mathematica yields:

$$\lambda/2 (1/2)(\Lambda^2-m^2\log(-m^2)+m^2\log(\Lambda^2-m^2))$$

My renormalization conditions are ##\Pi(m^2)=\Pi'(m^2)=0##, so when solving for counter terms:

$$i\Pi(p^2) = \lambda/2 (1/2)(\Lambda^2-m^2\log(-m^2)+m^2\log(\Lambda^2-m^2)) + i(\delta_Zp^2-\delta_m)$$

my counter terms still end up with ##\Lambda## dependence. So I messed up somewhere but I can't figure out where. Help please!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your counter terms should absolutely depend on the cut-off, that's how they cancel the divergences. There's no momentum dependence so ##\delta_Z = 0## and ##\delta_m## cancels out everything. Also I'm pretty sure you made a mistake when you did your wick-rotation, the sign in the denominator should be positive.

The whole idea behind renormalized perturbation theory is that you deform your theory with some parameter ##\Lambda## that makes the observables finite, then you ascribe ##\Lambda##-dependence to your constants which are selected to cancel the infinites and satisfy the renormalization conditions.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and theittsco
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!
Back
Top