Why do people say CSB is non-perturbative?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cello
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of non-perturbative effects in quantum field theory (QFT), particularly in the context of spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB). Participants explore the implications of SSB on vacuum expectation values (VEVs) and the relationship between perturbative and non-perturbative physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references Srednicki's QFT book, suggesting that the vanishing of the VEV at tree level implies perturbative corrections also vanish due to chiral flavor symmetry, questioning whether all SSB is non-perturbative.
  • Another participant argues that in SSB with a scalar field, the effective field theory can lead to the VEV through a tree-level potential, which can be related to Feynman diagrams.
  • Some participants note that in chiral QCD with vanishing quark masses, the absence of a tree-level potential means that fermionic condensates arise from non-perturbative physics, linking this to the QCD scale where perturbative methods fail.
  • A later reply seeks clarification on the breakdown of the scalar field into classical and quantum parts, and the specific diagrams that relate to the VEV, indicating a need for more detailed explanation.
  • Another participant describes the effective potential for fluctuations around the VEV and how Feynman diagrams can represent correlation functions, asserting that certain values of parameters can lead to spontaneous symmetry breaking without invoking non-perturbative physics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between SSB and non-perturbative physics, with some asserting that certain cases can be treated perturbatively while others maintain that non-perturbative effects are essential. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the extent to which SSB can be considered non-perturbative.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their understanding of the effective field theory approach and the relationship between classical and quantum components, as well as the specific conditions under which perturbative methods may fail.

cello
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
For example, in Srednicki's QFT book, he said: "because [tex]\langle\bar{\psi}\psi\rangle[/tex] vanishes at tree level, perturbative corrections then also vanish, because of the chiral flavor symmetry of the lagrangian. Thus the value of vev is not accessible in perturbation theory."

I don't understand, because what he said seems to be true even for the simplest [tex]Z_2[/tex]-breaking phi-4 theory. Here we can say [tex]\langle\phi\rangle[/tex] vanishes because if we use the original field to do perturbation calculations, no Feynman diagram can be drawn that contributes to this vev, exactly because of the [tex]Z_2[/tex] symmetry.

So is it true that any SSB is non-perturbative? Or am I missing something?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
In SSB with a scalar field, there is a tree-level potential for the scalar field (consisting of mass term and [tex]\phi^4[/tex] interaction). By breaking [tex]\phi[/tex] up into a classical and quantum part, the effective field theory of the components leads directly to the value of the VEV. This EFT can be explicitly related to Feynman diagrams.

For chiral QCD with vanishing quark masses, there is no tree-level potential that could lead to the [tex]\langle \bar{\psi}_i\psi_i\rangle[/tex] VEV. Therefore fermionic condensates are produced by nonperturbative physics. Another way to understand this is that [tex]\langle \bar{\psi}_i\psi_i\rangle[/tex] is a dimensionful quantity. The only scale in the theory is the QCD scale, which is defined at a point where perturbative physics is strictly not valid. So observables that depend on this scale are always tied to nonperturbative phenomena.
 
fzero said:
In SSB with a scalar field, there is a tree-level potential for the scalar field (consisting of mass term and [tex]\phi^4[/tex] interaction). By breaking [tex]\phi[/tex] up into a classical and quantum part, the effective field theory of the components leads directly to the value of the VEV. This EFT can be explicitly related to Feynman diagrams.

For chiral QCD with vanishing quark masses, there is no tree-level potential that could lead to the [tex]\langle \bar{\psi}_i\psi_i\rangle[/tex] VEV. Therefore fermionic condensates are produced by nonperturbative physics. Another way to understand this is that [tex]\langle \bar{\psi}_i\psi_i\rangle[/tex] is a dimensionful quantity. The only scale in the theory is the QCD scale, which is defined at a point where perturbative physics is strictly not valid. So observables that depend on this scale are always tied to nonperturbative phenomena.

I'm sorry but I don't get it. What do you mean by breaking phi up into a classical and quantum part? What kind of diagrams do you relate to the vev? Can you explain it in more detail? Thank you, fzero.
 
If we have the potential

[tex]V(\phi) = \frac{m^2}{2} \phi^2 + \lambda \phi^4[/tex]

the classical solution [tex]\upsilon[/tex] satisfies

[tex]\left. \frac{\delta V}{\delta \phi} \right|_{\phi = \upsilon} =0.[/tex]

[tex]\upsilon[/tex] is by definition the VEV of [tex]\phi[/tex], namely [tex]\langle \phi\rangle =\upsilon[/tex]. Small fluctuations around the VEV are parameterized by the quantum field [tex]\varphi[/tex] satisfying

[tex]\phi = \upsilon + \varphi. (*)[/tex]

The effective potential for [tex]\varphi[/tex] can be obtained by direct substitution as [tex]V(\upsilon + \varphi)[/tex]. We can either expand the polynomial or note the Taylor expansion

[tex]V_\text{eff} (\varphi) = V(\upsilon) + \frac{1}{2} \left. \frac{\delta^2 V(\phi)}{\delta\phi^2} \right|_{\phi=\upsilon} \varphi^2 + \cdots . (**)[/tex]

However we can also compute the potential from Feynman diagrams. I don't want to try to draw diagrams, but you can probably find some if you search around for "background field method." The idea is that the Feynman diagrams are a diagrammatic representation of correlation functions:

[tex]\langle \phi(p_1) \phi(p_2) \phi(p_3) \phi(-p_1-p_2-p_3)\rangle \sim \lambda.[/tex]

If we expand these correlation functions using (*), we'll find terms like

[tex]\upsilon^2 \langle \varphi(p) \varphi(-p) \rangle \sim \lambda \upsilon^2 .[/tex]

This expression shows how the [tex]\phi^4[/tex] term generates a contribution to the effective mass for the [tex]\varphi[/tex] field, in correspondence with the 2nd term in (**). Now it turns out that we can also obtain these terms from the Feynman diagrams for the [tex]\phi^4[/tex] theory where we count the different ways that we can insert [tex]\upsilon[/tex] or [tex]\varphi[/tex] on the legs instead of [tex]\phi[/tex].

The upshot of all this, which involves no nonperturbative physics at all, is that, for certain values of [tex]m^2, \lambda[/tex], the potential for [tex]\varphi[/tex] will not be invariant under [tex]\varphi\rightarrow -\varphi[/tex]. So the original symmetry is spontaneously broken by the VEV.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K