Is the Mass of an Electron Arbitrary in Quantum Field Theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Student57
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Renormalization
Student57
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I have a couple of questions regarding renormalization.

1. If it is possible to change mass as long as we do it simultaneously with changing ultraviolet cutoff, that would imply that the value we pick for mass is more or less arbitrary. If so, how come we have exact decimal value of mass of an electron, which doesn't look arbitrary at all?

2. When we write renormalized mass, m=m_0+dm, we have dm >>m_0. If so, why even include m_0 at all, why not throw it out as something negligible?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Student57 said:
1. If it is possible to change mass as long as we do it simultaneously with changing ultraviolet cutoff, that would imply that the value we pick for mass is more or less arbitrary. If so, how come we have exact decimal value of mass of an electron, which doesn't look arbitrary at all?

The propagator has a pole at a definite energy; this is the mass of the physical particle and is not arbitrary. We distinguish this "pole mass" from the mass parameter that appears in the Langrangian, which depending on your renormalization scheme may have a different value from the pole mass.

Student57 said:
2. When we write renormalized mass, m=m_0+dm, we have dm >>m_0. If so, why even include m_0 at all, why not throw it out as something negligible?

Just because dm is formally infinite doesn't mean the finite parts don't matter. We carefully arrange for the infinities to cancel in calculations of physical processes. Then changing the finite parts of the parameters changes the finite physical results.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
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
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...
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...

Similar threads

Back
Top