What is the Landau pole and how does it relate to the coupling constant in QED?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter waterfall
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Landau Pole Qed
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the Landau pole in quantum electrodynamics (QED) and its implications for the coupling constant, particularly in the context of perturbation theory. Participants explore the behavior of the coupling constant at different energy scales and the mathematical representation of this phenomenon.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant cites a definition of the Landau pole, noting that the beta function in QED is positive, leading to an increase in the coupling constant with energy, potentially becoming infinite at high energies.
  • Another participant, BHobba, argues that the coupling constant can increase even at low energies as more terms are added to the perturbation series, suggesting that α could change from 1/137 to 1/127 with additional terms.
  • Mathematical expressions are presented to illustrate how the perturbation series might diverge, with examples of summing terms with different values of the coupling constant.
  • One participant comments on the challenges of perturbation techniques, indicating that while initial terms may provide good approximations, later terms can diverge significantly.
  • Another participant emphasizes the need for a deeper understanding of renormalization and the complexities of quantum field theory, suggesting that the discussion may be premature without that context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the behavior of the coupling constant in relation to the perturbation series. There is no consensus on whether the coupling constant's increase is limited to high energies or if it can also occur at lower energies with more terms in the series.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the limitations of their current understanding of power series and renormalization, indicating that the discussion may not fully capture the complexities involved in QED and its mathematical framework.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying quantum electrodynamics, perturbation theory, and the implications of the Landau pole in theoretical physics.

waterfall
Messages
380
Reaction score
1
According to Wiki:

"If a beta function is positive, the corresponding coupling increases with increasing energy. An example is quantum electrodynamics (QED), where one finds by using perturbation theory that the beta function is positive. In particular, at low energies, α ≈ 1/137, whereas at the scale of the Z boson, about 90 GeV, one measures α ≈ 1/127.

Moreover, the perturbative beta function tells us that the coupling continues to increase, and QED becomes strongly coupled at high energy. In fact the coupling apparently becomes infinite at some finite energy. This phenomenon was first noted by Lev Landau, and is called the Landau pole."

I understood the above since years ago that probing with high energy causes the coupling constant to be larger. But BHobba was claiming that "As the cutoff is made larger and larger the coupling constant gets larger and larger until in the limit it is infinite". He was saying that even at low energy, α ≈ 1/137 would become 1/127 if you increase the terms of the perturbation series. To put in mathematical form.

<br /> \sum_{n=0}^\infty c_n g^n <br /> (where g is the coupling constant).

with one term
<br /> \sum_{n=0}^\infty c_n (1/137)^n .<br />
with two terms or three terms
<br /> \sum_{n=0}^\infty c_n (1/15)^n .<br />

with 1000 terms

<br /> \sum_{n=0}^\infty c_n (1/0)^n .<br />

The above is true even at low energy (before I thought it's only when the probing is high energy). Can anyone science advisor please confirm if this is true and the context of this? Note I'm talking about normal perturbation and let's not complicate things by including the Renormalization Group and the trick of regulator and stuff. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Perturbation techniques can be notoriously tricky. There are other cases where the first few terms of the perturbation series give extremely close approximations to the exact solution, but then start to diverge wildly after that.
 
You may have missed my message on another thread:

If you are just now studying Power Series, you are by my count about 23 courses prior to where renormalization will be discussed. I think you're going to have to accept that the answers you get will be kind of hand-wavy.

If you picked up a murder mystery, read a few pages, and then jumped to the end, you shouldn't be surprised if the killer's identity seems to make no sense.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
You may have missed my message on another thread:



If you picked up a murder mystery, read a few pages, and then jumped to the end, you shouldn't be surprised if the killer's identity seems to make no sense.

I have spent years reading about feynman diagrams and virtual particles and higher order virtual contributions (or more terms in the power series) so I'm familiar already with the landscape and a little tie-up or updates would make me see the wider vistas.

Right now. I'm taking a crash course in relativistic quantum field theory with aims at applications in quantum gravity and beyond..
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K