Zeta function regularization and quantum field theory

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the regularization of the sum ∑_{r ∈ Z+1/2} r, with two proposed methods yielding different results: one leading to 1/6 and the other to 1/24. Both methods are deemed valid due to the nature of infinite sums, which can yield different finite results based on the regularization approach used. It is emphasized that consistency in regularization across calculations is crucial for obtaining a well-defined, renormalized result in quantum field theory. Ultimately, the choice of regularization method can affect the outcome, but all infinities should cancel out in a renormalizable theory. The importance of applying the same regularization technique throughout the calculation is highlighted.
sgd37
Messages
212
Reaction score
8

Homework Statement



Hi I need to regularize \sum_{r \in Z+1/2} r

In my opinion there are two ways of going about it either re-express it as \sum_{r \in Z+1/2} r = \sum_{r =1} r - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{r =1} = \zeta (-1) - \zeta (0) = \frac{1}{6}

or

\sum_{r \in Z+1/2} r = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{r =1} r - \sum_{r =1} r = - \frac{1}{2} \zeta (-1) = \frac{1}{24}

I know I need the second answer however I don't see any reason why the first answer is not valid. In fact I think it more so, since the first sum goes term for term with the second, whereas in the second method the r =2 term of the first sum is canceled by the r=1 of the second thus having a staggered structure if the sum was finite. Any thoughts?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sgd37 said:

Homework Statement



Hi I need to regularize \sum_{r \in Z+1/2} r

In my opinion there are two ways of going about it either re-express it as \sum_{r \in Z+1/2} r = \sum_{r =1} r - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{r =1} = \zeta (-1) - \zeta (0) = \frac{1}{6}

or

\sum_{r \in Z+1/2} r = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{r =1} r - \sum_{r =1} r = - \frac{1}{2} \zeta (-1) = \frac{1}{24}

I know I need the second answer however I don't see any reason why the first answer is not valid. In fact I think it more so, since the first sum goes term for term with the second, whereas in the second method the r =2 term of the first sum is canceled by the r=1 of the second thus having a staggered structure if the sum was finite. Any thoughts?

You are making a good point. I am assuming you are encountering this in a quantum field theory calculation?

The unfortunate answer (which, I know, will feel unsatisfactory) is that both expressions are equally valid. This is because the sum is actually infinite, as you know, and therefore regularizing can give different finite results, depending on how one proceed. So the finite answer is pretty much arbitrary! But the key point is that after renormalization, all infinities cancel out (in a renormalizable theory). The key point is that one must regularize all divergent expressions in a consistent way. So if one uses the second expression to regularize an expression in one step of the calculation, one must use the same expression to regularize other divergent sums and then the final, renormalized result is finite and well-defined.

I hope this helps a bit.
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K