Why does dimensional regularization respect the Ward identity?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Dimensional regularization is a mathematical technique used in quantum field theory (QFT) that introduces additional parameters to transform complex integrals into simpler Euclidean forms. It is established that dimensional regularization respects the Ward identity, which is a fundamental result of QFT, while other methods, such as cutoff regularization, do not maintain this property. The Ward identity's validity is linked to the translational invariance of integrals in arbitrary dimensions, a feature that dimensional regularization preserves. For a deeper understanding, refer to "An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory" by Peskin and Schroeder, which discusses this topic in detail.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum field theory (QFT)
  • Familiarity with dimensional regularization techniques
  • Knowledge of the Ward identity in QFT
  • Basic grasp of integrals in multiple dimensions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of dimensional regularization on loop corrections in QFT
  • Examine the differences between dimensional regularization and cutoff regularization
  • Explore the mathematical proof of the Ward identity in the context of QFT
  • Read "An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory" by Peskin and Schroeder for practical examples
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory, theoretical physicists, and students seeking to understand the mathematical foundations of QFT and the implications of regularization techniques.

center o bass
Messages
545
Reaction score
2
It is often stated that this is the case, but I have often wondered if it is a general statement or just something that we observe to be the case when calculating the relevant loop corrections. Can it be proven generally? Is it somehow easy to see?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Dimensional regularization is a fairly general mathematical technique. You can always use it for calculations in QFT. As far as I know, in QFT, the technique basically just amounts to introducing extra parameters (regulators) to change an integral originally in some weird coordinate system into a simple euclidean integral [basically the infinitesimal elements and the integration bounds get retrofitted by the introduction of the regulator].

The Ward identity, on the other hand, is a result of QFT. So it only holds in special circumstances.

You might want to look in Peskin and Schroeder, they have a nice little discussion about dimensional regularization which uses the Gamma function very sneakily.

Edit: Maybe you can't always use it: if you're being very creative, you may have to check whether the regulator you introduce is going to cause something fishy to happen. But in Peskin and Schroeder, you'll see they're doing a very innocuous mathematical manipulation.
 
Last edited:
Jolb said:
Dimensional regularization is a general mathematical technique. You can always use it for calculations in QFT. As far as I know, in QFT, the technique basically just amounts to introducing extra parameters (regularizers) to change an integral originally in some weird coordinate system into a simple euclidean integral [basically the infinitesimal elements get fixed by the introduction of the regularizer].

The Ward identity, on the other hand, is a result of QFT. So it only holds in special circumstances.

I agree, but the ward identity holds when one uses dimensional regularization, while it does not when using for example a simple cutoff regulator.

When searching the net I found that this was due to the fact that integrals in a general dimensional respects a translational substitution; i.e that

$$\int d^{d} p f(p+q) = \int d^{d} p f(p).$$

This is not true for a cut-off regulator and since the proof of ward identity involves such a substitution, dimensional regularization respects it, while a cutoff regulator does not.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
3K