Ju2015 PDF

A pedestrian introduction to Renormalization
Ananda Dasgupta
Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Kolkata
May 5 2015
Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Renormalization is not esoteric
An elementary problem from electrostatics
Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

from a infinite straight wire.


Coulomb’s law gives us:
√
x2
+r2
x
r


Z +∞
λ dx
V (r ) = √
√ 4π0 −∞ x + r2
2
x2
+r2
x
r


Z +∞
λ dx
V (r ) = √
√ 4π0 −∞ x + r2
2
x2 It is easy to see that the integral is scale
+r2
x invariant : V (kr ) = V (r ) Details
r


Z +∞
λ dx
V (r ) = √
√ 4π0 −∞ x + r2
2
+r2
r It seems that there is no electric field!


Z +∞
λ dx
V (r ) = √
√ 4π0 −∞ x + r2
2
+r2
(Un)fortunately, the integral diverges!


Z +∞
λ dx
V (r ) = √
√ 4π0 −∞ x + r2
2
+r2
~ = λ r̂
The electric field : E
4π0 r


Z +∞
λ dx
V (r ) = √
√ 4π0 −∞ x + r2
2
+r2
~ = λ r̂
4π0 r
Z r
Shows : V (r ) = − E (r 0 ) dr 0 = ∞!
∞


Z +∞
λ dx
V (r ) = √
√ 4π0 −∞ x + r2
2
+r2
~ = λ r̂
4π0 r
Z r
Shows : V (r ) = − E (r 0 ) dr 0 = ∞!
∞
How does one handle this?


Z +∞
λ dx
V (r ) = √
√ 4π0 −∞ x + r2
2
+r2
~ = λ r̂
4π0 r
Z r
Shows : V (r ) = − E (r 0 ) dr 0 = ∞!
∞
How does one handle this?
One way out : renormalization!

Regularization
√ We can’t make sense out of infinite answer.

x2
+r2
x
r

Regularization

x2 We can’t carry out any manipulations either!
+r2
x
r

Regularization

+r2
x
So ... we must make the answer finite!
r

Regularization

+r2
x
r This is achieved by a process called
regularization.

Regularization

+r2
x
r This is achieved by a process called
regularization.
Once the answer is rendered finite, we can try
to extract meaningful information out of it.

Cut-off Regularization
Impose a cut-off.
√
x2
+r2
x
r

Impose a cut-off.
Z +Λ
λ dx
V (r , Λ) = √
4π0 −Λ x + r2
2
√
x2
+r2
x
r

Impose a cut-off.
Z +Λ
λ dx
V (r , Λ) = √
4π0 −Λ x + r2
2
√ This breaks scale invariance.

x2
+r2
x
r

Impose a cut-off.
Z +Λ
λ dx
V (r , Λ) = √
4π0 −Λ x + r2
2

x2 V (r , Λ) is finite.
+r2
x
r

Impose a cut-off.
Z +Λ
λ dx
V (r , Λ) = √
4π0 −Λ x + r2
2

+r2 √
x
r 2 + Λ2 + Λ
λ
V (r , Λ) = ln √

r 4π0 r 2 + Λ2 − Λ


Impose a cut-off.
Z +Λ
λ dx
V (r , Λ) = √
4π0 −Λ x + r2
2

+r2 √
x
r 2 + Λ2 + Λ
λ
V (r , Λ) = ln √

r 4π0 r 2 + Λ2 − Λ

However, it diverges when we take the limit

Λ→∞

Impose a cut-off.
Z +Λ
λ dx
V (r , Λ) = √
4π0 −Λ x + r2
2

+r2 √
x
r 2 + Λ2 + Λ
λ
V (r , Λ) = ln √

r 4π0 r 2 + Λ2 − Λ


Λ→∞
This was only to be expected ..

Impose a cut-off.
Z +Λ
λ dx
V (r , Λ) = √
4π0 −Λ x + r2
2

+r2 √
x
r 2 + Λ2 + Λ
λ
V (r , Λ) = ln √

r 4π0 r 2 + Λ2 − Λ


Λ→∞
But we must take the Λ → ∞ limit to recover
our problem.

Impose a cut-off.
Z +Λ
λ dx
V (r , Λ) = √
4π0 −Λ x + r2
2

+r2 √
x
r 2 + Λ2 + Λ
λ
V (r , Λ) = ln √

r 4π0 r 2 + Λ2 − Λ


Λ→∞
But we must take the Λ → ∞ limit to recover
our problem.
So, what is the use?

Renormalization
The all important realization ...
√
x2
+r2
x
r

Renormalization

It is potential difference that is physically
meaningful – not the value of potential itself!
√
x2
+r2
x
r

Renormalization

Let us calculate the potential difference
between two points using the regularized
√ expression for the potential
x2
+r2
x
r

Renormalization

x2 ∆V (Λ) ≡ V (r1 , Λ) − V (r2 , Λ)
+r2
x pr 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ

λ 1
= ln p p2

4π0 r22 + Λ2 + Λ 2

r 2
r1 + Λ − Λ

Renormalization

x2 ∆V (Λ) ≡ V (r1 , Λ) − V (r2 , Λ)
+r2
x pr 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ

λ 1
= ln p p2

4π0 r22 + Λ2 + Λ 2

r 2
r1 + Λ − Λ
This expression depends on the cut-off Λ as
well.

Renormalization

x2 ∆V (Λ) ≡ V (r1 , Λ) − V (r2 , Λ)
+r2
x pr 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ

λ 1
= ln p p2

4π0 r22 + Λ2 + Λ 2

r 2
r1 + Λ − Λ
well.
However, this leads to a finite limit when we
remove the cutoff!

Renormalization

x2 ∆V (Λ) ≡ V (r1 , Λ) − V (r2 , Λ)
+r2
x pr 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ

λ 1
= ln p p2

4π0 r22 + Λ2 + Λ 2

r 2
r1 + Λ − Λ
well.
remove the cutoff!
λ r2
lim ∆V (Λ) = ln Details
Λ→∞ 2π0 r1

Renormalization

x2 ∆V (Λ) ≡ V (r1 , Λ) − V (r2 , Λ)
+r2
x pr 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ

λ 1
= ln p p2

4π0 r22 + Λ2 + Λ 2

r 2
r1 + Λ − Λ
well.
remove the cutoff!
λ r2
lim ∆V (Λ) = ln Details
Λ→∞ 2π0 r1
Which is the correct expression for the
potential difference.
Cut-off regularization breaks symmetries!
Cut-off regularization breaks scale invariance.


That’s perhaps a good thing.


It also breaks translation invariance.


In the original version, translating the wire by a distance c along
itself, keeps the potential unchanged.


Once we impose cutoff regularization :
Z +Λ+c
λ dx
Vc (r , Λ) = √ 6= V (r , Λ)
4π0 −Λ+c x2 + r2


Z +Λ+c
λ dx
Vc (r , Λ) = √ 6= V (r , Λ)
4π0 −Λ+c x2 + r2
This is not a big deal in this toy problem.


Z +Λ+c
λ dx
Vc (r , Λ) = √ 6= V (r , Λ)
4π0 −Λ+c x2 + r2

But the fact that cut-off regularization does not respect symmetries
can be a real problem!


Z +Λ+c
λ dx
Vc (r , Λ) = √ 6= V (r , Λ)
4π0 −Λ+c x2 + r2

For instance, in QFT it breaks Lorentz invariance!


Z +Λ+c
λ dx
Vc (r , Λ) = √ 6= V (r , Λ)
4π0 −Λ+c x2 + r2

This often makes interpreting results difficult.


Z +Λ+c
λ dx
Vc (r , Λ) = √ 6= V (r , Λ)
4π0 −Λ+c x2 + r2

This often makes interpreting results difficult.
Solution : use other schemes for regularization.

Dimensional regularization
Why does V (r ) diverge?

Z +∞ Z ∞
dx dx
V (r ) ∼ √ →
−∞
2
x +r 2
0 x

Z +∞ Z ∞
dx dx
V (r ) ∼ √ →
−∞
2
x +r 2
0 x
Too many powers of x in the numerator!

Z +∞ Z ∞
dx dx
V (r ) ∼ √ →
−∞
2
x +r 2
0 x
Let’s do the integral in n dimensions.

Z +∞ Z ∞
dx dx
V (r ) ∼ √ →
−∞
2
x +r 2
0 x
Z +∞ Z Z Z +∞
dx ≡ dτ1 → dτn = Ωn x n−1 dx
−∞ 0

Z +∞ Z ∞
dx dx
V (r ) ∼ √ →
−∞
2
x +r 2
0 x
Z +∞ Z Z Z +∞
−∞ 0
2π n/2
Where Ωn = Details
Γ n2


Z +∞ Z ∞
dx dx
V (r ) ∼ √ →
−∞
2
x +r 2
0 x
Z +∞ Z Z Z +∞
−∞ 0
2π n/2 Details
Where Ωn =
Γ n2

Z +∞ n−1
λ x dx
V (r ) = Ωn n−1
√
4π0 0 µ x + r2
2

Z +∞ Z ∞
dx dx
V (r ) ∼ √ →
−∞
2
x +r 2
0 x
Z +∞ Z Z Z +∞
−∞ 0
2π n/2 Details
Where Ωn =
Γ n2

Z +∞ n−1
λ x dx
V (r ) = Ωn n−1
√
4π0 0 µ x + r2
2
Note that we need an auxiliary scale factor µn−1 to get the

dimensions right!

Z +∞ Z ∞
dx dx
V (r ) ∼ √ →
−∞
2
x +r 2
0 x
Z +∞ Z Z Z +∞
−∞ 0
2π n/2 Details
Where Ωn =
Γ n2

Z +∞ n−1
λ x dx
V (r ) = Ωn n−1
√
4π0 0 µ x + r2
2

dimensions right!
Γ 1−n

λ 2
V (r ) =
4π0 r √ 1−n

µ π

Z +∞ Z ∞
dx dx
V (r ) ∼ √ →
−∞
2
x +r 2
0 x
Z +∞ Z Z Z +∞
−∞ 0
2π n/2 Details
Where Ωn =
Γ n2

Z +∞ n−1
λ x dx
V (r ) = Ωn n−1
√
4π0 0 µ x + r2
2

dimensions right!
Γ 1−n

λ 2
V (r ) =
4π0 r √ 1−n

µ π

Z +∞ Z ∞
dx dx
V (r ) ∼ √ →
−∞
2
x +r 2
0 x
Z +∞ Z Z Z +∞
−∞ 0
2π n/2 Details
Where Ωn =
Γ n2

Z +∞ n−1
λ x dx
V (r ) = Ωn n−1
√
4π0 0 µ x + r2
2

dimensions right!
Γ 1−n
2
λ 2 λ µ Γ()
V (r ) = = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r √ 1−n 4π0 r 2 π

µ π
Details

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π
( 2 2 )
λ µ µ
potential difference : δV = Γ() √ − √
4π0 r1 π r2 π

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π
( 2 2 )
λ µ µ
potential difference : δV = Γ() − √ √
4π0 r1 π r2 π
2
dV λ 2Γ() µ
electric field : E (r ) = − = √
dr 4π0 r r π

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π
( 2 2 )
λ µ µ
4π0 r1 π r2 π
2
dV λ 2Γ() µ
dr 4π0 r r π
We now take the limit → 0 to return to 1 dimension.

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π
( 2 2 )
λ µ µ
4π0 r1 π r2 π
2
dV λ 2Γ() µ
dr 4π0 r r π
We now take the → 0 to return to 1 dimension.
limit
λ r2
δV = ln Details
2π0 r1

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π
( 2 2 )
λ µ µ
4π0 r1 π r2 π
2
dV λ 2Γ() µ
dr 4π0 r r π
limit
λ r2
δV = ln Details
2π0 r1
λ
E (r ) =
2π0 r

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π
( 2 2 )
λ µ µ
4π0 r1 π r2 π
2
dV λ 2Γ() µ
dr 4π0 r r π
limit
λ r2
δV = ln Details
2π0 r1
λ
E (r ) =
2π0 r
We recover the physical results!

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π
( 2 2 )
λ µ µ
4π0 r1 π r2 π
2
dV λ 2Γ() µ
dr 4π0 r r π
limit
λ r2
δV = ln Details
2π0 r1
λ
E (r ) =
2π0 r
We recover the physical results!
The arbitrary auxiliary scale µ drops off!

Renormalization by (minimal) subtraction
µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π
The potential is not physical!

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π

Shifting it by a constant does not change physics!

µ2 Γ()

λ
V (r ) = (n = 1 − 2)
4π0 r 2 π

Shifting it by a constant does not change physics!
Expanding the potential about = 0 Remember! gives
2
λ 1 µ
V (r ) = − γ − ln(π) + ln + O()
4π0 r2
where γ = −Γ0 (1) ≈ 0.577216

2
λ 1 µ
V (r ) = − γ − ln(π) + ln + O()
4π0 r2

2
λ 1 µ
V (r ) = − γ − ln(π) + ln + O()
4π0 r2
The divergence in V (r ) as → 0 comes from the −1 term.

2
λ 1 µ
V (r ) = − γ − ln(π) + ln + O()
4π0 r2

We can replace the potential by a shifted version:
2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln + O()
4π0 r2

2
λ 1 µ
V (r ) = − γ − ln(π) + ln + O()
4π0 r2

2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln + O()
4π0 r2
Or by another version
2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = ln + O()
4π0 r2

2
λ 1 µ
V (r ) = − γ − ln(π) + ln + O()
4π0 r2

2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln + O()
4π0 r2
2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = ln + O()
4π0 r2
In both of these we can remove the regulator (set → 0)

2
λ 1 µ
V (r ) = − γ − ln(π) + ln + O()
4π0 r2

2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln
4π0 r2
2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = ln
4π0 r2
In both of these we can remove the regulator (set → 0)

But not the auxiliary scale!

The Renormalization Group Equation
2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln
4π0 r2

2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln
4π0 r2
The renormalized potential, though finite, depends on the scale µ.

2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln
4π0 r2

Physical quantities can’t!

2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln
4π0 r2

A physical quantity σ must satisfy
dσ
µ =0
dµ

2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln
4π0 r2

dσ
µ =0
dµ
This is the RG flow equation.

2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln
4π0 r2

dσ
µ =0
dµ

In our example, we must have
dδV dE
µ = 0, µ =0
dµ dµ

2
λ µ
VMS (r ) = −γ − ln(π) + ln
4π0 r2

dσ
µ =0
dµ

In our example, we must have
dδV dE
µ = 0, µ =0
dµ dµ
Both of which are trivially satisfied in our example!

The basic idea
An intermediate quantity that diverges can be rendered finite by

regularization.

The basic idea

regularization.
The procedure will introduce extra parameters.

The basic idea

regularization.
We can extract regularization dependent versions of physically
meaningful quantities from these “finite” expressions.

The basic idea

regularization.
Hopefully, these latter expressions will yield finite results for the
things that we really want to calculate.

The basic idea

regularization.
Hopefully, these latter expressions will yield finite results for the
things that we really want to calculate.
This procedure is called renormalization.

Why does this work?
In the early days of QFT, renormalization was regarded as a

mathematical trick.

Why does this work?

mathematical trick.
This was seen by many as an attempt to sweep embarassing
infinities under the rug.

Why does this work?

mathematical trick.
The current viewpoint is more physical.

Why does this work?

mathematical trick.
In our problem, the physics should not really depend on whether the
wire is infinite, or just very long.

Why does this work?

mathematical trick.
In other words, as far as the physically interesting things are
concerned, the part of the wire that is very far away should not
matter!

Why does this work?

mathematical trick.
matter!
In QFT, divergent integrals occur because we integrate over all
momenta!

Why does this work?

mathematical trick.
matter!
momenta!
However, the theory at very high energies is different, indeed
unknown.

Why does this work?

mathematical trick.
matter!
momenta!
However, the theory at very high energies is different, indeed
unknown.
What form the theory takes on there should not affect results at low
energies!

Renormalization in QFT
The ABC theory
Renormalization in QFT is burdened by technical difficulties that any

realistic theory will have.

The ABC theory

We will try to avoid this by exploring a toy model.

The ABC theory

This is the ABC model described by Griffiths.

The ABC theory

In this model, there are just three particles in the world.

The ABC theory

These are spinless and “uncharged”

The ABC theory

They can only interact via the “vertex”:
B C

The ABC theory

B C
If mA > mB + mC this represents the decay of particle A into one B

and one C.

The ABC theory

B C
If mA > mB + mC this represents the decay of particle A into one B

and one C.
More complicated diagrams stand for other processes.
The ABC theory
The diagrams
A B
B A
C
C
A B
A B
both contribute to the A + B → A + B scattering.

The ABC theory
The diagrams
A B
B A
C
C
A B
A B
both contribute to the A + B → A + B scattering.
So does
A B
B A
A B
Feynman rules for the ABC theory
Label the momenta for each line, assigning them directions as well.

For each vertex : −ig (2π)4 δ 4 ( ki )
P

P
i
For each internal line we have a propagator: 2
q − m c 2 + iη
2

P
i
q − m c 2 + iη
2
d 4k
Integrate over each internal momentum with the measure
(2π)4

P
i
q − m c 2 + iη
2
d 4k
(2π)4
4 4
P
This will give you −i(2π) δ ( pi ) M

P
i
q − m c 2 + iη
2
d 4k
(2π)4
4 4
P
We can calculate physically meaningful quantities using M.

P
i
q − m c 2 + iη
2
d 4k
(2π)4
4 4
P
For example, the 2 particle to 2 particle scattering cross section in
the CM frame is given by
2 2
dσ ~c |~pf | S |M|
=
dΩ 8π |~pi | (E1 + E2 )2

P
i
q − m c 2 + iη
2
d 4k
(2π)4
4 4
P
For example, the 2 particle to 2 particle scattering cross section in
the CM frame is given by
2 2
dσ ~c |~pf | S |M|
=
dΩ 8π |~pi | (E1 + E2 )2
Technically, the rules can be derived starting from the Lagrangian

" #
1 X µ
mp2 c 2 2
L= ∂µ φp ∂ φp − φ − g φ A φB φC
2 ~2 p
p=A,B,C

Using the Feynman rules
A B → A B : g 2 order
Have assigned four-momenta to each vertex.
B A
p3 p4
C
p1 q1 p2
A B


Vertices :
(−ig )2 (2π)8 δ 4 (p1 − p3 − q1 ) δ 4 (p2 − p4 + q1 )
B A
p3 p4
C
p1 q1 p2
A B


Vertices :
(−ig )2 (2π)8 δ 4 (p1 − p3 − q1 ) δ 4 (p2 − p4 + q1 )
dq14
Z
i
One internal line:
(2π)4 q12 − mC2 c 2
B A
p3 p4
C
p1 q1 p2
A B


Vertices :
(−ig )2 (2π)8 δ 4 (p1 − p3 − q1 ) δ 4 (p2 − p4 + q1 )
dq14
Z
i
One internal line:
(2π)4 q12 − mC2 c 2
Integration yields
B A 1
p3 p4 −ig 2 (2π)4 2 δ 4 (p1 + p2 − p3 − p4 )
C (p1 − p3 ) − mc2 c 2
p1 q1 p2
A B


Vertices :
(−ig )2 (2π)8 δ 4 (p1 − p3 − q1 ) δ 4 (p2 − p4 + q1 )
dq14
Z
i
One internal line:
(2π)4 q12 − mC2 c 2
Integration yields
B A 1
p3 p4 −ig 2 (2π)4 2 δ 4 (p1 + p2 − p3 − p4 )
C (p1 − p3 ) − mc2 c 2
p1 q1 p2 Thus
A B g2
M1 = 2
(p1 − p3 ) − mc2 c 2


Vertices :
(−ig )2 (2π)8 δ 4 (p1 − p3 − q1 ) δ 4 (p2 − p4 + q1 )
dq14
Z
i
One internal line:
(2π)4 q12 − mC2 c 2
A B Integration yields
p3 p4 1
−ig 2 (2π)4 2 δ 4 (p1 + p2 − p3 − p4 )
C q1 (p1 − p3 ) − mc2 c 2
Thus
p1 p2 g2
M1 = 2
A B (p1 − p3 ) − mc2 c 2
g2
M2 = 2
(p1 + p2 ) − mc2 c 2


Vertices :
(−ig )2 (2π)8 δ 4 (p1 − p3 − q1 ) δ 4 (p2 − p4 + q1 )
dq14
Z
i
One internal line:
(2π)4 q12 − mC2 c 2
A B Integration yields
p3 p4 1
−ig 2 (2π)4 2 δ 4 (p1 + p2 − p3 − p4 )
C q1 (p1 − p3 ) − mc2 c 2
Thus
p1 p2 g2
M1 = 2
A B (p1 − p3 ) − mc2 c 2
g2
M2 = 2
(p1 + p2 ) − mc2 c 2
Total amplitude for A B scattering to order g 2

is: M = M1 + M2
A B
p3 p4
C
q3
B q2 q4 A
q1
p1 C p2
A B
Vertices:
(−ig )4 (2π)16 δ 4 (p1 − q1 − q2 ) δ 4 (p2 + q1 − q4 ) δ 4 (q2 − q3 − p3 ) δ 4 (q3 + q4 − p4 )

A B
p3 p4
C
q3
B q2 q4 A
q1
p1 C p2
A B
Vertices:
(−ig )4 (2π)16 δ 4 (p1 − q1 − q2 ) δ 4 (p2 + q1 − q4 ) δ 4 (q2 − q3 − p3 ) δ 4 (q3 + q4 − p4 )
Internal lines :
dq14 dq24 dq34 dq44 i4
Z
(2π)4 (2π)4 (2π)4 (2π)4 (q12 − mC2 c 2 ) (q22 − mB2 c 2 ) (q32 − mC2 c 2 ) (q42 − mA2 c 2 )

A B
p3 p4
C
q3
B q2 q4 A
q1
p1 C p2
A B
Integration yields, apart from g 4 δ 4 (p1 + p2 − p3 − p4 ),
d 4 q1
Z

2 2 2
(q12 − mC2 c 2 ) (p1 − q1 ) − mB2 c 2 (p1 − p3 − q1 ) − mC2 c 2 (p2 + q1 ) − mA2 c 2

A B
p3 p4
C
q3
B q2 q4 A
q1
p1 C p2
A B
Integration yields, apart from g 4 δ 4 (p1 + p2 − p3 − p4 ),
d 4 q1
Z

2 2 2
(q12 − mC2 c 2 ) (p1 − q1 ) − mB2 c 2 (p1 − p3 − q1 ) − mC2 c 2 (p2 + q1 ) − mA2 c 2
The problem has been reduced to quadratures!

Trouble in paradise
A → A : g 2 order
An “A” particle emits a “B” and a “C” in

flight.
A
p2
B q1 q2 C
p1
A

Trouble in paradise
A → A : g 2 order

flight.
A It reabsorbs them!
p2
B q1 q2 C
p1
A

Trouble in paradise
A → A : g 2 order

flight.
p2 Vertices :
(−ig )2 (2π)8 δ 4 (p1 − q1 − q2 ) δ 4 (q1 + q2 − p2 )
B q1 q2 C
p1
A

Trouble in paradise
A → A : g 2 order

flight.
p2 Vertices :
(−ig )2 (2π)8 δ 4 (p1 − q1 − q2 ) δ 4 (q1 + q2 − p2 )
Two internal
Z lines:
dq14 dq24 i2
Z
B q1 q2 C
(2π)4 (2π)4 (q12 − mB2 c 2 ) (q22 − mC2 c 2 )
p1
A

Trouble in paradise
A → A : g 2 order

flight.
p2 Vertices :
(−ig )2 (2π)8 δ 4 (p1 − q1 − q2 ) δ 4 (q1 + q2 − p2 )
Two internal
Z lines:
dq14 dq24 i2
Z
B q1 q2 C
(2π)4 (2π)4 (q12 − mB2 c 2 ) (q22 − mC2 c 2 )
Integration over q2 : g 2 δ 4 (p1 − p2 ) ×
p1
dq 4
Z
A 1
2
(q12 − mB2 c 2 ) (p1 − q1 ) − mC2 c 2

Trouble in paradise
A → A : g 2 order

flight.
p2 Vertices :
(−ig )2 (2π)8 δ 4 (p1 − q1 − q2 ) δ 4 (q1 + q2 − p2 )
Two internal
Z lines:
dq14 dq24 i2
Z
B q1 q2 C
(2π)4 (2π)4 (q12 − mB2 c 2 ) (q22 − mC2 c 2 )
Integration over q2 : g 2 δ 4 (p1 − p2 ) ×
p1
dq 4
Z
A 1
2
(q12 − mB2 c 2 ) (p1 − q1 ) − mC2 c 2
The integral over q1 diverges!

Making sense of the A → A diagram
Even apart from the divergence, the A → A

diagram shows that even when it is not
bumping into anything, the “A” particle in the
A ABC theory is somehow different than in a
p2 theory which has a free “A” particle.
B q1 q2 C
p1
A


A ABC theory is somehow different than in a
p2 theory which has a free “A” particle.
This is the only A → A diagram to g 2 order.
B q1 q2 C
p1
A


ABC theory is somehow different than in a
theory which has a free “A” particle.
To order g 4 , there are four diagrams.


Note that the first can be split in two disjoint
pieces by cutting one line.


It is a “one particle reducible” diagram.


Many more at higher orders.


What do they mean?


What do they mean?
Note that whenever there is an internal A line
in a diagram, there are also diagrams with
these embellished A lines.


What do they mean?
Note that whenever there is an internal A line
in a diagram, there are also diagrams with
these embellished A lines.
Interaction modifies the A propagator!
The bubble, denoted by −iΣ(p), is the sum of
all one partice irreducible (1PI) diagrams.

i
The bare propagator G = 2 2 is
p − mA c 2 + iη
replaced by the diagrams alongside.
+ + +
+...

i
p − mA c 2 + iη
It is modified to
G + G (−iΣ)G + G (−iΣ)G (−iΣ)G
+ + + +G (−iΣ)G (−iΣ)G (−iΣ)G + . . .
+...

i
p − mA c 2 + iη
It is modified to
+ + + +G (−iΣ)G (−iΣ)G (−iΣ)G + . . .
This is a GP, summing to

G i i
= −1 = 2 2 2
1 + iΣG iG − Σ p − mA c − Σ + iη
+...

i
p − mA c 2 + iη
It is modified to
+ + + +G (−iΣ)G (−iΣ)G (−iΣ)G + . . .
This is a GP, summing to

G i i
= −1 = 2 2 2
1 + iΣG iG − Σ p − mA c − Σ + iη
+...
Interaction “renormalizes” mass of A to
q
mA2 + Σ(p)/c 2
Handling the self energy divergence
The lowest order (g 2 ) term in the self energy is
g2 dq14
Z
M=
(2π)4 2
(q12 − mB2 c 2 + iη) (p1 − q1 ) − mC2 c 2 + iη

g2 dq14
Z
M=
(2π)4 2
(q12 − mB2 c 2 + iη) (p1 − q1 ) − mC2 c 2 + iη
Wick rotation changes it to
g2 d q̄14
Z
M=−
(2π)4 2
(q̄12 + mB2 c 2 ) (p̄1 − q̄1 ) + mC2 c 2

g2 dq14
Z
M=
(2π)4 2
(q12 − mB2 c 2 + iη) (p1 − q1 ) − mC2 c 2 + iη
Wick rotation changes it to
g2 d q̄14
Z
M=−
(2π)4 2
(q̄12 + mB2 c 2 ) (p̄1 − q̄1 ) + mC2 c 2
For large r = |q̄1 | the integral goes like

Z ∞ 3
r dr
Ω4 →∞
0 r4

Using the famous “Feynman trick”:

1
g2 d 4 q̄
Z Z
M=− dx 2
(2π)4 0 (q̄ 2 + N(x)2 )
where [N(x)]2 ≡ p̄ 2 x(1 − x) + mB2 c 2 (1 − x) + mC2 c 2 x


1
g2 d 4 q̄
Z Z
M=− dx 2
(2π)4 0 (q̄ 2 + N(x)2 )

We use dimensional regularization, working in n = 4 − dimensions:
1 ∞
g 2 µ2+ r 3− dr
Z Z
M = − 0 n Ωn dx 2
(2π) 0 0 (r 2 + N(x)2 )


1
g2 d 4 q̄
Z Z
M=− dx 2
(2π)4 0 (q̄ 2 + N(x)2 )

1 ∞
g 2 µ2+ r 3− dr
Z Z
M = − 0 n Ωn dx 2
(2π) 0 0 (r 2 + N(x)2 )
For small this reduces to

g µ 2 2 Z 1 2
0 N (x)
M = − −γ− ln dx + O()
4π 0 4πµ2


1
g2 d 4 q̄
Z Z
M=− dx 2
(2π)4 0 (q̄ 2 + N(x)2 )

1 ∞
g 2 µ2+ r 3− dr
Z Z
M = − 0 n Ωn dx 2
(2π) 0 0 (r 2 + N(x)2 )
For small this reduces to

g µ 2 2 Z 1 2
0 N (x)
M = − −γ− ln dx + O()
4π 0 4πµ2
Although this has not cured the divergence, it has helped to isolate
it.

We introduce a new counter-diagram in our

theory.


theory.
This is a diagram that will follow from a
counterterm −(δM)φ2A in the Lagrangian
where (δM) = O g 2 .
A


theory.
A
The bare mass has been in split into two
terms - the physical mass and the correction.


theory.
A A
Every second order A → A diagram must be
X
accompanied by one such counter-diagram.
A A


theory.
A A
X
The total effect on the self energy term will be
g µ 2 2
A A 0
M + Mc = − − J + δM
4π


theory.
A A
X
The total effect on the self energy term will be
g µ 2 2
A A 0
M + Mc = − − J + δM
4π
2
g0 µ2

2
So, if we choose δM = we can
4π
cancel the divergent term in the self energy.
More divergent beasties
Power counting
Introducing the counter-diagram helps us cancel the divergence in

the second order self-energy diagram.

Power counting

Can there be other kinds of divergent diagrams?

Power counting

Divergence ultimately comes from the integrals that converge if
there are enough powers of q̄ in the denominator to overpower the
numerator!

Power counting

numerator!
Let a given diagram have E external lines, I internal lines and V
vertices.

Power counting

numerator!
vertices.
These are connected through E + 2I = 3V

Power counting

numerator!
vertices.
Each internal line contributes q −2 – contributing a total of −2I to D

Power counting

numerator!
vertices.
Each internal line also brings in integration over d 4 q

Power counting

numerator!
vertices.
However, V − 1 of these integrations can be carried out using up the
momentum conserving delta functions brought in by the vertices.

Power counting

numerator!
vertices.
This contributes 4[I − (V − 1)] to D

Power counting

numerator!
vertices.
This contributes 4[I − (V − 1)] to D
Thus D = −2I + 4(I − V + 1) = 4 − E − V

D is called the superficial degree of divergence.


A diagram converges only if
D =4−E −V <0
for it and all its subgraphs.


D =4−E −V <0

Thus a diagram is divergent if it (or a subgraph) has E ≤ 4 − V .


D =4−E −V <0

Since any non-trivial diagram must have at least two vertices, the
only divergent diagrams are those that have simple loops!


D =4−E −V <0

Our mass counterterm can handle those!


D =4−E −V <0

Our mass counterterm can handle those!
The theory is renormalizable.

All self-energy diagrams of ABC theory to g 4 order
Explicit demonstration of renormalization
These are all the A → A diagrams to order g 4 .

Diagram (d) is finite

It is obvious that the divergence in (b) is cancelled by (g),


and that of (c) by (h).


and that of (c) by (h).
Divergence in (a) is exactly cancelled by those in (e), (f) and (i)

M2 g µ 2 2
0
Ma = where M = − −J
p − mA2 c 2
2 4π

M2 g µ 2 2
0
p − mA2 c 2
2 4π
g µ 2 2
0 M
Me = Mf =
4π p 2 − mA2 c 2

M2 g µ 2 2
0
p − mA2 c 2
2 4π
g µ 2 2
0 M
Me = Mf =
4π p 2 − mA2 c 2
g µ 4 4 1
0
Mi =
4π p − mA2 c 2
2 2

" 2 #
g µ 4 1 2 4 2 4
0
Ma +Me +Mf +Mi = −J − −J + 2
4π p 2 − mA2 c 2

" 2 #
g µ 4 1 2 4 2 4
0
Ma +Me +Mf +Mi = −J − −J + 2
4π p 2 − mA2 c 2
The divergent terms cancel out!

" 2 #
g µ 4 1 2 4 2 4
0
Ma +Me +Mf +Mi = −J − −J + 2
4π p 2 − mA2 c 2
The divergent terms cancel out!
The mass counterterm, designed to remove divergence at the second

order, also removes all divergences at the fourth order!
A theory that has only a finite number of different divergent diagrams is

called super renormalizable


The ABC theory in 4 dimensions is just about as super-renormalizable as

it gets!


The ABC theory in 4 dimensions is just about as super-renormalizable as

it gets!
The situation is more complicated in general, but the general idea is the
same!

For example, if we were working in 5 dimensions, diagram (d) above

would also have been divergent.


Needed: an additional g 4 order correction to the mass counterterm.


In most renormalizable theories, the mass counterterm would be

expressed as an infinite series in g , to be calculated order by order.


In most renormalizable theories, the mass counterterm would be

expressed as an infinite series in g , to be calculated order by order.
We would also need to renormalize the coupling constant and the wave
function!
To go beyond ...
Fredrick Olness and Randall Scalise, Regularization, renormalization,

and dimensional analysis: Dimensional regularization meets
freshman E&M, AJP (79), 306 (2011).
Per Kraus and David J. Griffiths, Renormalization of a model
quantum field theory, AJP(60), 1013 (1992).
Steven Weinberg, The quantum theory of fields - Volume 1:
Foundations, Cambridge (1995).
Mehran Kardar, The statistical theory of fields, Cambridge (2007).

Z +∞
λ dx
V (kr ) = √
4π0 −∞ x2 + k 2r 2
Return

Z +∞
λ dx
V (kr ) = √
4π0 −∞ x2 + k 2r 2
+∞ x

d
Z
λ k
= q
4π0 −∞ x 2

k + r2
Return

Z +∞
λ dx
V (kr ) = √
4π0 −∞ x2 + k 2r 2
+∞ x

d
Z
λ k
= q
4π0 −∞ x 2

k + r2
Z +∞
λ dx
= √
4π0 −∞ x2+ r2
Return

Z +∞
λ dx
V (kr ) = √
4π0 −∞ x2 + k 2r 2
+∞ x

d
Z
λ k
= q
4π0 −∞ x 2

k + r2
Z +∞
λ dx
= √ = V (r )
4π0 −∞ x2+ r2
Return

p
λ r 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ
1 2
∆V (r1 , r2 ) = lim ln p 2

p
Λ→∞ 4π0 r12 + Λ2 − Λ

r2 + Λ2 + Λ
Return

p
λ r 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ
1 2
∆V (r1 , r2 ) = lim ln p 2

p
Λ→∞ 4π0 r12 + Λ2 − Λ

r2 + Λ2 + Λ
q q
r2 r2
1 + Λ12 + 1 1 + Λ22 − 1

λ
= lim ln q
q
Λ→∞ 4π0 1 + r222 + 1 r12

Λ 1 + Λ2 − 1
Return

p
λ r 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ
1 2
∆V (r1 , r2 ) = lim ln p 2

p
Λ→∞ 4π0 r12 + Λ2 − Λ

r2 + Λ2 + Λ
q q
r2 r2
1 + Λ12 + 1 1 + Λ22 − 1

λ
= lim ln q
q
Λ→∞ 4π0 1 + r222 + 1 r12

Λ 1 + Λ2 − 1
1 + r12 − r14 + . . . + 1 1 + r22 − r14

λ 2Λ2 8Λ4 2Λ2 8Λ4 + . . . − 1
= lim ln

Λ→∞ 4π0 1 + r222 − r244 + . . . + 1 1 + r122 − r24

2Λ 8Λ 2Λ 8Λ4 + . . . − 1
Return

p
λ r 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ
1 2
∆V (r1 , r2 ) = lim ln p 2

p
Λ→∞ 4π0 r12 + Λ2 − Λ

r2 + Λ2 + Λ
q q
r2 r2
1 + Λ12 + 1 1 + Λ22 − 1

λ
= lim ln q
q
Λ→∞ 4π0 1 + r222 + 1 r12

Λ 1 + Λ2 − 1
1 + r12 − r14 + . . . + 1 1 + r22 − r14 + . . . − 1

λ 2Λ2 8Λ4 2Λ2 8Λ4
= lim ln

Λ→∞ 4π0 1 + r222 − r244 + . . . + 1 1 + r122 − r244 + . . . − 1

2Λ 8Λ 2Λ 8Λ
2 + r12 − r14 + . . . r22 − r14 + . . .

λ 2Λ2 8Λ4 2Λ2 8Λ4
= lim ln

Λ→∞ 4π0 2 + r222 − r244 + . . . r122 − r244 + . . .

2Λ 8Λ 2Λ 8Λ
Return

p
λ r 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ
1 2
∆V (r1 , r2 ) = lim ln p 2

p
Λ→∞ 4π0 r12 + Λ2 − Λ

r2 + Λ2 + Λ
q q
r2 r2
1 + Λ12 + 1 1 + Λ22 − 1

λ
= lim ln q
q
Λ→∞ 4π0 1 + r222 + 1 r12

Λ 1 + Λ2 − 1
1 + r12 − r14 + . . . + 1 1 + r22 − r14 + . . . − 1

λ 2Λ2 8Λ4 2Λ2 8Λ4
= lim ln

Λ→∞ 4π0 1 + r222 − r244 + . . . + 1 1 + r122 − r244 + . . . − 1

2Λ 8Λ 2Λ 8Λ
2 + r12 − r14 + . . . r22 − r14 + . . .

λ 2Λ2 8Λ4 2Λ2 8Λ4
= lim ln

Λ→∞ 4π0 2 + r222 − r244 + . . . r122 − r244 + . . .

2Λ 8Λ 2Λ 8Λ
2
λ r
= ln 22
4π0 r1
Return

p
λ r 2 + Λ 2 + Λ pr 2 + Λ 2 − Λ
1 2
∆V (r1 , r2 ) = lim ln p 2

p
Λ→∞ 4π0 r12 + Λ2 − Λ

r2 + Λ2 + Λ
q q
r2 r2
1 + Λ12 + 1 1 + Λ22 − 1

λ
= lim ln q
q
Λ→∞ 4π0 1 + r222 + 1 r12

Λ 1 + Λ2 − 1
1 + r12 − r14 + . . . + 1 1 + r22 − r14 + . . . − 1

λ 2Λ2 8Λ4 2Λ2 8Λ4
= lim ln

Λ→∞ 4π0 1 + r222 − r244 + . . . + 1 1 + r122 − r244 + . . . − 1

2Λ 8Λ 2Λ 8Λ
2 + r12 − r14 + . . . r22 − r14 + . . .

λ 2Λ2 8Λ4 2Λ2 8Λ4
= lim ln

Λ→∞ 4π0 2 + r222 − r244 + . . . r122 − r244 + . . .

2Λ 8Λ 2Λ 8Λ
2
λ r2 λ r2
= ln 2 = ln
4π0 r1 2π0 r1
Return

To find the solid angle in n dimensions, Ωn we evaluate the integral
Z
2
dτn exp(− kxk )
in two ways :

Z
2
dτn exp(− kxk )
in two ways :
Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞
2 2 2
dx1 dx2 . . . dxn e −x1 e −x2 . . . e −xn
−∞ −∞ −∞

Z
2
dτn exp(− kxk )
in two ways :
Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ n
−x12 −x22 −xn2 −x 2
dx1 dx2 . . . dxn e e ...e = e dx
−∞ −∞ −∞ −∞

Z
2
dτn exp(− kxk )
in two ways :
Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ n
−x12 −x22 −xn2 −x 2
dx1 dx2 . . . dxn e e ...e = e dx = π n/2
−∞ −∞ −∞ −∞

Z
2
dτn exp(− kxk )
in two ways :
Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ n
−x12 −x22 −xn2 −x 2
−∞ −∞ −∞ −∞
and
Z +∞
2
Ωn e −r r n−1 dr
0

Z
2
dτn exp(− kxk )
in two ways :
Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ n
−x12 −x22 −xn2 −x 2
−∞ −∞ −∞ −∞
and
Z +∞ Z +∞
2 1
Ωn e −r r n−1 dr = Ωn e −z z n/2−1 dz
0 2 0

Z
2
dτn exp(− kxk )
in two ways :
Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ n
−x12 −x22 −xn2 −x 2
−∞ −∞ −∞ −∞
and
Z +∞ Z +∞
2 1 1 n
Ωn e −r r n−1 dr = Ωn e −z z n/2−1 dz = Γ Ωn
0 2 0 2 2

Z
2
dτn exp(− kxk )
in two ways :
Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ Z +∞ n
−x12 −x22 −xn2 −x 2
−∞ −∞ −∞ −∞
and
Z +∞ Z +∞
2 1 1 n
Ωn e −r r n−1 dr = Ωn e −z z n/2−1 dz = Γ Ωn
0 2 0 2 2
Equating the two gives us
2π n/2
Ωn =
Γ n2

Return

+∞ n−1 Z +∞ n−1
x n−1
Z
dx r t dt
Ωn n−1
√ = Ωn √
0 µ x + r2
2 µ 0
2
t +1
Return

+∞ n−1 Z +∞ n−1
x n−1
Z
dx r t dt
Ωn n−1
√ = Ωn √
0 µ x + r2
2 µ 0
2
t +1
n−1 Z π
r 2
= Ωn sinn−1 θ cos−n θdθ
µ 0
Return

+∞ n−1 Z +∞ n−1
x n−1
Z
dx r t dt
Ωn n−1
√ = Ωn √
0 µ x + r2
2 µ 0
2
t +1
n−1 Z π
r 2
µ 0
n−1
r 1 n 1−n
= Ωn B ,
µ 2 2 2
Return

+∞ n−1 Z +∞ n−1
x n−1
Z
dx r t dt
Ωn n−1
√ = Ωn √
0 µ x + r2
2 µ 0
2
t +1
n−1 Z π
r 2
µ 0
n−1
r 1 n 1−n
= Ωn B ,
µ 2 2 2
n/2
n−1 n
1−n
π r Γ 2 Γ 2
=
Γ n2 Γ 21

µ
Return

+∞ n−1 Z +∞ n−1
x n−1
Z
dx r t dt
Ωn n−1
√ = Ωn √
0 µ x + r2
2 µ 0
2
t +1
n−1 Z π
r 2
µ 0
n−1
r 1 n 1−n
= Ωn B ,
µ 2 2 2
n/2
n−1 n
1−n
π r Γ 2 Γ 2
=
Γ n2 Γ 21

µ
Γ 1−n

2
=
r√
1−n
µ π
Return

Γ(1 + ) ln x
Γ()x = e


Γ(1 + ) ln x
Γ()x = e

So, for small :
1
Γ()x = Γ(1) + Γ0 (1) + O 2 1 + ln x + O 2


Γ(1 + ) ln x
Γ()x = e

So, for small :
1 1
Γ()x = Γ(1) + Γ0 (1) + O 2 1 + ln x + O 2 = +ln x−γ+O()


Γ(1 + ) ln x
Γ()x = e

So, for small :
1 1
Γ()x = Γ(1) + Γ0 (1) + O 2 1 + ln x + O 2 = +ln x−γ+O()

This leads to
x1
Γ() (x1 − x2 ) = ln + O()
x2
Return to DR
Return to MS

Ju2015 PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Ju2015 PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

A pedestrian introduction to Renormalization

Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Kolkata

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Let’s calculate the potential at a distance r

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ We can’t make sense out of infinite answer.

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ We can’t make sense out of infinite answer.

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ We can’t make sense out of infinite answer.

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ We can’t make sense out of infinite answer.

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ We can’t make sense out of infinite answer.

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ This breaks scale invariance.

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ This breaks scale invariance.

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ This breaks scale invariance.

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ This breaks scale invariance.

However, it diverges when we take the limit

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ This breaks scale invariance.

However, it diverges when we take the limit

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ This breaks scale invariance.

However, it diverges when we take the limit

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

√ This breaks scale invariance.

However, it diverges when we take the limit

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

The all important realization ...

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

The all important realization ...

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

The all important realization ...

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

The all important realization ...

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

The all important realization ...

Ananda Dasgupta Renormalization

The divergence in V (r ) as → 0 comes from the −1 term.

The divergence in V (r ) as → 0 comes from the −1 term.

The divergence in V (r ) as → 0 comes from the −1 term.

The divergence in V (r ) as → 0 comes from the −1 term.

In both of these we can remove the regulator (set → 0)