Scalar decay to one-loop in Yukawa interaction

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the one-loop amplitude for the decay process ##\phi \to e^+e^-## under the Yukawa interaction defined by the Lagrangian ##\mathcal{L}_I = -g\phi \bar{\psi}\psi##. The participant identifies four contributing diagrams: three self-energy corrections and one vertex correction. They express confidence in their integral calculations and counterterm applications but question the validity of their renormalization conditions, specifically regarding the scalar and fermion propagators and the vertex function. The analysis concludes that all diagrams vanish due to the applied renormalization conditions, raising concerns about the implications for the coupling constant ##g##.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of one-loop quantum field theory calculations
  • Familiarity with Yukawa interactions and their Lagrangian formulation
  • Knowledge of renormalization techniques, particularly on-shell renormalization
  • Proficiency in calculating Feynman diagrams and propagators
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of one-loop amplitudes in quantum field theory
  • Explore the implications of renormalization conditions in Yukawa interactions
  • Learn about Feynman diagram techniques for self-energy and vertex corrections
  • Investigate the relationship between coupling constants and particle masses in quantum field theories
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, graduate students in particle physics, and anyone interested in quantum field theory, particularly in the context of Yukawa interactions and renormalization techniques.

Gaussian97
Homework Helper
Messages
683
Reaction score
412
TL;DR
One-loop correction for $\phi \to e^+e^-$ under a Yukawa interaction seems to vanish trivially.
I am trying to calculate the amplitude for a decay ##\phi \to e^+e^-## under a Yukawa interaction ##\mathcal{L}_I = -g\phi \bar{\psi}\psi## to one-loop order (with massless fermions for simplicity).

If I'm not wrong, there are 4 diagrams that contribute to 1 loop, three diagrams involving self-energy corrections (i.e. inserting a loop into the external lines) and an extra diagram with vertex correction (a ##\phi## field exchanged by ##e^+## and ##e^-##).

I have no problem calculating the integrals and using counterterms to cancel the infinities that arise, but I'm not sure if the conditions I use for renormalization are correct. Following the example of QED, to apply on-shell renormalization I used the following conditions;

The scalar propagator in the limit ##p^2 \to M^2## should be ##\frac{i}{p^2-M^2}##

The fermion propagator in the limit ##\not{\!p} \to 0## should be ##\frac{i}{\not{p}}##

The vertex function in the limit ##p^2 \to M^2## should be ##-ig##. (##p## is the momentum of the scalar particle.)

Now, because the self-energy diagrams are all in external legs, the first two corrections mean that those diagrams vanish.
But the third condition tells that the vertex correction must also vanish when the scalar particle is on-shell (as in my diagram). Therefore all the diagrams here vanish trivially due to renormalization conditions.

Is this analysis correct? Or did I make some mistake in the renormalization part?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Gaussian97 said:
Yukawa interaction,,,with massless fermions
By doing so, didn't you just set the coupling to zero?
 
Vanadium 50 said:
By doing so, didn't you just set the coupling to zero?
Mmm... Not sure I follow you, maybe I'm saying something stupid. But how is the coupling constant ##g## in ##\mathcal{L}_I = -g\phi \bar{\psi}\psi## related to the mass of the fermions?
 
I'm sorry. I saw "Yukawa" and my brain immediately jumped to "Higgs Yukawa".
 
Oh, okay I understand now the confusion.
I'm doing this simply to practice (most textbooks deal with $\phi^4$ and QED), so I thought that Yukawa was a simple enough example to try to do it by myself.
There is no intention of this being applicable in the Standard Model or anything like that, just to have fun.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K