Renormalized vertex always a log?

  • Thread starter Thread starter geoduck
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Log Vertex
geoduck
Messages
257
Reaction score
2
Is there a reason that one-loop corrections to vertex functions seem to always be logarithmic?

If you write the vertex as a Taylor series in the external momenta, then the first couple of terms (say the constant and linear terms) diverge, but these divergence gets subtracted off, so you now have a Taylor series minus the first couple of terms, and this Taylor series is a log?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With some exceptions (e.g., the 4-photon vertex), the one-loop divergence is given by the usual power-counting arguments, and depends on the nature of the vertex, and the theory that it's part of.

That said, we are often interested in theories with dimensionless coupling constants, and (again probably with some exceptions, though none come to mind at the moment) then the one-loop vertex correction (to a vertex corresponding to a dimensionless coupling) is indeed logarithmic, by power-counting arguments.
 
that is the result of renormalization,it is better to have a logarithmic divergence compared to quadratic one.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top