The one-loop correction in Lehmann-Kallen form

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter JILIN
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Correction Form
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the one-loop correction in quantum field theory as presented in Chapter 15 of Srednicki's QFT book. Participants analyze the implications of equations (15.12), (15.8), and (15.13) regarding the imaginary part of the propagator and its relation to the spectral density function.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why the term ##\pi \delta(k^2+m^2)## disappears in the transition from eq. (15.12) to eq. (15.13).
  • Another participant clarifies that eq. (15.12) is only applicable when ##{\rm Im}\Pi(k^2)\ne0##, suggesting that eq. (15.11) should be used when ##{\rm Im}\Pi(k^2)=0##.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that the equations imply a modified form of eq. (15.13) that includes a delta function term, leading to a disagreement about the validity of the original equation presented in the text.
  • Some participants discuss the starting point of the integral over ##s## in eq. (15.8), with one asserting it does not necessarily start at ##4m^2##, while another emphasizes that it does due to the known behavior of ##\rho(s)##.
  • One participant proposes that eq. (15.13) should be valid for any ##s##, and discusses the implications for the region ##s<4m^2##, asserting that it leads to ##\mathrm{Im}\Pi(-s)=0## for that range.
  • Another participant challenges the consistency of the modified equation proposed, pointing out that the delta function does not vanish at ##s=m^2##, which is less than ##4m^2##.
  • A later reply introduces an additional condition regarding ##\mathrm{Re}\Pi(-m^2)## to potentially cancel the delta function at ##s=m^2##, referencing a figure from the book.
  • Finally, one participant expresses gratitude for the discussion and indicates a newfound understanding of the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation and implications of the equations discussed, particularly regarding the presence and treatment of the delta function and the conditions under which certain equations apply. No consensus is reached on the modified form of eq. (15.13) or its implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the behavior of ##\rho(s)## and ##\mathrm{Im}\Pi(-s)## for values of ##s<4m^2## is crucial to the discussion, and the validity of certain equations may depend on these conditions. The discussion also highlights the need for careful consideration of specific values such as ##s=m^2##.

JILIN
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Hi.
I would like to ask a question about Chapter 15 in Srednicki's QFT book.

In chapter 15, after eq. (15.12), he compares eq. (15.12)
## \mathrm{Im}\bm{\Delta}(k^2)=\frac{\mathrm{Im}\Pi (k^2)}{(k^2+m^2-\mathrm{Re}\Pi (k^2))^2 + (\mathrm{Im}\Pi (k^2))^2}##
with eq. (15.8)
##\mathrm{Im}\bm{\Delta}(k^2)=\pi \delta(k^2+m^2)+\pi\rho(-k^2).##
Then he gets eq. (15.13)
##\pi \rho(s)=\frac{\mathrm{Im}\Pi (-s)}{(-s+m^2-\mathrm{Re}\Pi (-s))^2 + (\mathrm{Im}\Pi (-s))^2}.##
Why does ##\pi \delta(k^2+m^2)## disappears?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
(15.12) only applies if ##{\rm Im}\Pi(k^2)\ne0##. If ##{\rm Im}\Pi(k^2)=0##, then (15.11) applies.
 
Thanks, Avodyne.
But my question is the following one.

I think that eqs. (15.12) and (15.8) give
##\pi \rho (s) = \frac{\mathrm{Im}\Pi(-s)}{(k^2+m^2-\mathrm{Re}\Pi(-s))^2 + (\mathrm{Im}\Pi(-s))^2} - \pi \delta(-s+m^2),##
instead of eq. (15.13) in his text.
 
That makes no difference in 15.8, because the integral over ##s## starts at ##4m^2##.
 
Integral over ##s## in eq. (15.8) does not necessarily need to start at ##4m^2##.
It starts at ##4m^2## just because we know ##\rho(s)=0## for ##s<4m^2## (this is clearly seen around eq. (13.11) in chapter 13).
Thus, eq. (15.8) and also eq. (15.13) is valid for any ##s## (or any ##-k^2##), although we already know ##\rho(s)=0## for ##s<4m^2##.

In fact, he used eq. (15.13) for ##s<4m^2## in the discussion below eq. (15.13).
Here, he combined eq. (15.13) for ##s<4m^2## with the fact ##\rho(s)=0## for ##s<4m^2##.

My understanding is the following.
Eq. (15.13) should be
##\pi \rho (s) = \frac{\mathrm{Im}\Pi(-s)}{(-s+m^2-\mathrm{Re}\Pi(-s))^2+(\mathrm{Im}\Pi(-s))^2} - \pi \delta(s-m^2)##
(this is valid for any ##s##).
Next, we consider the region ##s<4m^2##.
Combining my modified eq. (15.13) with \rho(s)=0 for ##s<4m^2##, we get ##\mathrm{Im}\Pi(-s)=0## for ##s<4m^2##, which is the same conclusion in the book.
(For ##s \ne m^2##, we can drop the delta-function and the modified eq. (15.13) becomes same as that in the book.
However, we have to be slightly careful at ##s=m^2##.)
 
If you agree that ##\rho(s)=0## and ##{\rm Im}\Pi(-s)=0## for ##s<4m^2##, then your modified eq.(15.13) is not consistent, because the delta function does not vanish at ##s=m^2##, which is less than ##4m^2##.
 
I appreciate your kind discussion (at the same time I'm sorry that I'm slow to understand).

I agree that ##\rho(s)=0## and ##\mathrm{Im}\Pi(-s)=0## for ##4m^2>s \ne m^2##.
But at ##s=m^2##, I think that an additional condition ##\mathrm{Re}\Pi(-m^2)=0## is needed; this condition and ##\mathrm{Im}\Pi(-m^2)=0## can cancel the delta-function ##-\pi\delta(s-m^2)##.
Actually, in Fig. 14.5, ##\mathrm{Re}\Pi(-m^2)## looks zero.
 
Oh, finally I understand!
Thank you very much, Avodyne!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K