Typical Momentum Invariants of a 3-Point Function

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the typical momentum invariants of a three-point function in the context of quantum field theory, particularly in relation to the calculation of beta functions and renormalization conditions. Participants explore the nature of these invariants, their relationships, and how they can be utilized in theoretical calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references Peskin's work, suggesting that typical invariants for a three-point function may include combinations of external momenta such as ##p^2_1##, ##p_1\cdot p_2##, and ##\not{\!p}_1\cdot\not{\!p}_2##.
  • Another participant notes that if the external momenta are on shell, then ##p_i^2 = -m_i^2##, and identifies three combinations of ##p_i\cdot p_j## as additional invariants, while also mentioning momentum conservation relationships that allow simplification.
  • A third participant expresses understanding that any Lorentz invariant expressions made from external momentum 4-vectors can serve as invariant momenta, emphasizing the scale at which these invariants are set.
  • A fourth participant confirms that any amplitude is a Lorentz invariant and discusses the role of Lorentz-invariant quantities in scalar field theories, spinors, and vector fields, while reiterating the importance of setting momentum invariants to ##-M^2## for determining counterterm coefficients.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the nature of Lorentz invariants and their role in the context of three-point functions, but there are nuances in the specific combinations and relationships of these invariants that remain open for discussion.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved aspects regarding the independence of certain invariants and the implications of momentum conservation, as well as the specific conditions under which these invariants are defined.

gobbles
Messages
16
Reaction score
1
According to Peskin, p.414, at the bottom, as part of calculating the ##\beta## functions of a theory, we need to fix the counter terms by setting the "typical invariants" built from the external leg momenta to be of order ##−M^2##. For a 4-point function, these invariants are s, t and u obviously. What are the typical invariants of a three-point function? Are they just any combination of the incoming momenta, like ##p^2_1## or ##p_1\cdot p_2## or ##\not{\!p}_1\cdot\not{\!p}_2##, etc., where ##p_1, p_2## are two momenta on the external legs?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If the external momenta are on shell, then ##p_i^2 = -m_i^2##, so our other invariants are the 3 combinations of ##p_i\cdot p_j##. However momentum conservation also let's us write ##p_1\cdot p_2 + p_1\cdot p_3 = m_1^2## and ##p_2\cdot p_1 + p_2\cdot p_3 = m_2^2##, so we can choose just one of them, say ##p_1\cdot p_2## as our parameter for the amplitude.

For the 4pt function, you can use similar relationships to reduce to, say, ##p_1\cdot p_2## and ##p_1\cdot p_4##, which would be related to ##s## and ##t##. ##u## is not independent because ##s+t+u = \sum m_i^2## (up to a sign that I am too lazy to check).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gobbles
Thank you fzero!
If I understand correctly, any Lorentz invariant expressions made of external momentum 4-vectors can be used as the invariant momenta and when setting the renormalization conditions at a certain scale, we just say that all those invariant momenta are of the order of magnitude of that scale, which, in Peskin is ##-M^2##.
 
Yes, generally any amplitude will itself be a Lorentz invariant, so it will automatically be expressed in terms of Lorentz-invariant quantities. For a scalar field theory, these will all be products of the momenta, though with spinors we have ##\gamma^\mu## to dot into momenta and with vectors we will have polarizations ##\epsilon^\mu## as well. As I described above, there will inevitably be relations among the invariant quantities, so one will typically exploit that if it helps to simplify the mathematical form of an expression.

Peskin indeed determines the renormalization condition at an arbitrary scale ##M##, so we would set all momentum invariants to be ##-M^2## in order to determine the counterterm coefficients.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K