What is the origin of the 1/2 symmetry factor in Feynman diagrams?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ismaili
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Diagrams Symmetry
ismaili
Messages
150
Reaction score
0
I was suddenly confused by the calculation of symmetry factors of Feynman diagrams.
For example, in Peskin's textbook, as the attached pdf file,
Below eq(4.45), he calculated the symmetry factor in detail,
however, I was confused by the last 1/2 factor.

I'm trying to realize this factor as for the double-counting when we connect two of four legs of u-vertex. But, I am not quite convinced by this above argument.
If we label the four legs of u-vertex with 1,2,3,4.
Connecting legs 1,2 to form a loop, and then connecting legs 3,4 to w-vertex is different from connecting legs 3,4 to form a loop and then connecting 1,2 to w-vertex, right? In this way there is no double-counting!?

Where does that 1/2 factor come from?
Thanks.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
ismaili said:
I was suddenly confused by the calculation of symmetry factors of Feynman diagrams.
For example, in Peskin's textbook, as the attached pdf file,
Below eq(4.45), he calculated the symmetry factor in detail,
however, I was confused by the last 1/2 factor.

I'm trying to realize this factor as for the double-counting when we connect two of four legs of u-vertex. But, I am not quite convinced by this above argument.
If we label the four legs of u-vertex with 1,2,3,4.
Connecting legs 1,2 to form a loop, and then connecting legs 3,4 to w-vertex is different from connecting legs 3,4 to form a loop and then connecting 1,2 to w-vertex, right? In this way there is no double-counting!?

Where does that 1/2 factor come from?
Thanks.
Oh I figured it out.
When we form a loop at vertex u, we have 6 ways.
But when we connect two legs, say 1,2, of vertex u to, say 1,2, of vertex w, we have only 2 possible ways. That is, (11)(22) and (12)(12).
However, we treated the contraction between vertices u and w as four different combination. So the double counting occurs here.
:shy:
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top