In eqn. (82.37) Srednicki derives for the string tension between two quarks as [tex]\tau=\frac{c(g)}{a^2} [/tex] where [tex]c(g)=ln(g^2)[/tex], 'g' is the coupling, and 'a' is the lattice spacing. He later goes on to say that the string tension should be independent of the lattice spacing 'a', and using this condition, calculated the string tension for small 'g' and small lattice spacing 'a' (82.41): [tex]\tau=Ce^{\frac{-1/(b_1g^2)}{a^2}} [/tex]. But didn't he just contradict himself? If the string tension must be the same, then which is it, [tex]\tau=\frac{ln(g^2)}{a^2} [/tex], or [tex] \tau=Ce^{\frac{-1/(b_1g^2)}{a^2}} [/tex]?(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Also, it seems to me that the result eqn. (82.35), [tex](\frac{1}{g^2})^{\frac{A}{a^2}} [/tex], the area law (A=area of the Wilson loop), doesn't depend on its derivation whether g is large or small. You can always expand an exponential [tex]e^x [/tex] about x=0 whether x is big or small! And in order for the Wilson loop to not be zero via eqns (82.31), (82.32), and (82.33), then (82.35) must hold!

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Wilson loops (srednicki eqn. 82.37)

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**