Why Photon Momentum Drops Out of QED Propagator

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter noether21
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Photon Propagator
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the phenomenon where photon momentum terms drop out of the photon propagator in Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) calculations. It highlights the interaction Hamiltonian, defined as V(t) = -∫ d³x j(x,t)A(x,t) - (1/2)∫ d³x d³y (j⁰(x,t)j⁰(y,t)/(4π|x-y|)), and the true photon propagator Dμν(p) = (-i/(2π)⁴)(Pμν(q)/q²). The simplification to D'μν(p) = (-i/(2π)⁴)(gμν/q²) is justified for S-matrix calculations, although Weinberg does not provide a proof for all orders. The discussion references Feynman's 1949 paper and the Ward-Takahashi identity, suggesting a deeper connection to current conservation and the behavior of QED vertices.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Quantum Electrodynamics (QED)
  • Familiarity with the interaction Hamiltonian in field theory
  • Knowledge of photon propagators and gauge theories
  • Basic concepts of Fourier transforms in quantum field theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Weinberg's "The Quantum Theory of Fields" vol. 1, particularly section 8.5
  • Review Feynman's 1949 paper on photon emission and its implications
  • Explore the Ward-Takahashi identity and its proof in path integral formalism
  • Investigate the role of gauge invariance in QED calculations
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, quantum field theorists, and advanced students studying Quantum Electrodynamics and related topics in particle physics.

noether21
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Since the 4-vector A couples to the conserved current j^\mu = \psi-bar gamma^\mu \psi in QED, k_\mu Fourier-transform(j^\mu) = 0. The Fourier-transform of j is a mess. Is there an easy way to see why terms containing photon momentum k_\mu drop out of the photon propagator in practical QED calculations?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can find discussion of this point in section 8.5 in Weinberg's "The quantum theory of fields" vol. 1. The idea is the following:

The true interaction Hamiltonian in QED is

V(t) =-\int d^3x j(x,t)A(x,t) -\frac{1}{2}\int d^3x d^3y \frac{j^0(x,t)j^0(y,t)}{4 \pi|x-y|}

and the true photon propagator is

D_{\mu \nu}(p) = \frac{-i}{(2 \pi)^4} \frac{P_{\mu \nu}(q)}{q^2}

However, results for the S-matrix would not change if you simplify both the interaction and the propagator. In the interaction operator you drop the (current)x(current) term

V'(t) =-\int d^3x j(x,t)A(x,t)

and in the photon propagator you replace the momentum-dependent function P_{\mu \nu}(q) simply by g_{\mu \nu}

D'_{\mu \nu}(p) = \frac{-i}{(2 \pi)^4} \frac{g_{\mu \nu}}{q^2}

Weinberg does not prove that this trick works at all orders, but apparently it works.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the pointer to Weinberg's book.

Weinberg's discussion also seems to merely make the claim without offering any proof;
he refers to Feynman's 1949 paper (section 8). Feynman has an argument to show
that the divergence of the amplitude of a process that emits a photon (real/virtual) vanishes,
implying that the dot product of $k$ and the Fourier transform of the amplitude vanishes. His
argument appears plausible (even if a bit sketchy) and doesn't appear to invoke current conservation to show that the divergence vanishes. If Feynman's argument implies that the $k^\mu k^\nu$ term can be ignored in the photon propagator, it's not obvious as to why/how. The $k^\mu k^\nu$ term does not appear in the propagator in Feynman gauge, but that is not the same as disregarding the term in other gauges. Perhaps there is some simple way to see that the Fourier-transform of the current occurs dotted to the $k_\mu$ term in all Feynman diagrams containing QED vertices?
 
It's also discussed in Zee chapter II.7
As usual, you need external legs to be on shell.
 
I think what you have is a special case of the Ward-Takahashi identity, which is most easily proven in the path integral formalism. If I recall, the identity says that classical equations of motion hold true inside the vacuum expectation value of time-ordered products.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K