Vacuum energy in the Wess-Zumino model

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion focuses on the calculation of vacuum energy in the Wess-Zumino model, specifically addressing the contributions from various interaction terms. The user breaks down the Lagrangian into four components: L1, L2, L3, and L4, and calculates their contributions to the vacuum energy, ultimately arriving at a sum of -4I. The user expresses difficulty in obtaining the expected result of zero and seeks verification of their calculations, referencing a relevant paper for further context.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Wess-Zumino model in supersymmetry (SUSY)
  • Familiarity with Lagrangian mechanics and quantum field theory
  • Knowledge of Feynman diagrams and their contributions to vacuum energy
  • Proficiency in calculating time-ordered expectation values in quantum field theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the paper referenced by the user for insights on vacuum energy calculations in SUSY models
  • Study the derivation of Feynman diagrams specifically for the Wess-Zumino model
  • Learn about the role of Majorana and Dirac spinors in quantum field theory
  • Explore techniques for simplifying complex Lagrangian contributions in quantum calculations
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory and supersymmetry, as well as graduate students seeking to deepen their understanding of vacuum energy calculations in advanced theoretical models.

nrqed
Science Advisor
Messages
3,762
Reaction score
297
:cry:I am at my wit's end so I hope someone can help.

I am trying to do what is (almost) the simplest SUSY calculation one can think of: the calculation of the vacuum energy in the Wess-Zumino model. The result shoudl be zero but I don't get that.

Since SUSY is "beyond the standard model" physics, I decided to cross-post my question here.

Let me start by asking a simpler question and see if anyone can help.

Let me break up the Wess-Zumino interactions into four terms

L_1 = - \frac{1}{2} g^2 (A^2 + B^2)^2

L_2 = - M g (A^3 + A B^2)

L_3 = - g A \overline{\Psi} \Psi

L_4 = - ig B \overline{\Psi} \gamma_5 \Psi

where A and B are scalar fields and Psi is a Majorana spinor, although for the terms I want to check in this post, this makes no difference, they can be treated as Dirac spinors.

I consider the contributions to the vacuum energy of order g^2 so I calculate the time
ordered expectation values of

i L_1 - \frac{1}{2} ( L_2^2 + L_3^2 + L_4^2 + 2 L_2 L_3 + 2 L_2 L_4 + 2 L_3 L_4 )


There are two main classes of diagrams: diagrams in which three lines connect two distinct points.
(i.e. "sunset" diagrams). These are a bit more tricky.

Simpler diagrams are those that contain two loops over independent variables (so the
diagrams contain two independent loops). These should be simple to double check.
I will only give my results for these diagrams, not the sunset diagrams for now. These diagrams should
cancel independently of the sunset diagrams (a fact confirmed by a paper of Zumino).
But I can't get it to work!

These diagrams either have the form of two circles touching each other or two circles connected by
line (forming a dumbell).

These diagrams are all proportional to the integral

I \equiv i g^2 \int D(z-z) D(w-w)

where D is just the usual boson propagator. I will quote all my results in terms of I .


CONTRIBUTION FROM L1

Diagram with two A loops: -3I/2

Diagram with one A loop and one B loop: -I

Diagram with two A loops: -3I/2

CONTRIBUTION FROM L2^2

Dumbell diagram with two A loops: 9 I/2

Dumbell diagram with one A loop and one B loop: 3 I

Dumbell diagram with two B loops: I/2

CONTRIBUTION FROM L3^2

Dumbell diagram, with two fermion loops: 8 I

CONTRIBUTION FROM L4^2

Because there is a gamma 5, there are no dumbell type contribution

CONTRIBUTION FROM L2 L3

Contribution with one A loop and one fermion loop: - 12 I

Contribution with one B loop and one fermion loop: -4 I

CONTRIBUTION FROM L3 L4 is identically zero.


SUM = -4 I

Now, can anyone check any of this??
 
Physics news on Phys.org

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K