Weinberg Paper: Understanding Two Loop Corrections for Gravitational Force

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter romeo6
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Loop
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the interpretation of two-loop corrections in quantum field theory (QFT) as presented in Steven Weinberg's paper on the cosmological constant problem. Specifically, it addresses Zeldovich's assumption that higher-order effects, particularly the gravitational force arising from vacuum fluctuations, are significant. The conversation highlights the relationship between two-loop Feynman diagrams and gravitational interactions, clarifying misconceptions about QFT's applicability to gravity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum field theory (QFT)
  • Familiarity with Feynman diagrams and their significance
  • Knowledge of gravitational interactions in theoretical physics
  • Basic grasp of the cosmological constant problem
NEXT STEPS
  • Read Steven Weinberg's paper on the cosmological constant problem
  • Study the role of vacuum fluctuations in quantum field theory
  • Explore the implications of two-loop corrections in particle physics
  • Investigate the relationship between gravity and quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, cosmologists, and students of quantum field theory seeking to deepen their understanding of gravitational interactions and the cosmological constant problem.

romeo6
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
I have been reading a Weinberg paper (the cosmological constant problem), where he writes

"...Zeldovich assumed that these were canceled leaving only the higher order effects: in particulal, the gravitational force between the particles in the vacuum fluctuations. (In Feynman diagram terms, this corresponds to throwing away te one-loop graphs, but keeping those with two loops"

Can someone help me understand this. I thought QFT said nothing about gravity. Why do the two loops correspond to the gravitational force??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
anyone??

:)
 
You might have better luck if you cite the paper.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K