Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
1 luciano.vanzo@unitn.it
Abstract
1
3.2 The quantum Lagrangian and the ghosts . . . . . . 80
3.3 BRST symmetry and cohomology . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3.4 Physical states and ghost decoupling . . . . . . 90
3.5 BRST Cohomology in the Fock representation . . . 93
3.6 Slavnov-Taylor identities . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
4 The effective action formalism . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
4.1 Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
4.2 Proper vertices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
4.3 The effective potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
4.4 Symmetry and symmetry breaking . . . . . . . . . 113
4.5 The one-loop approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
4.6 Convexity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
5 Spontaneous symmetry breaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
5.1 Classical theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
5.2 Decoupling of vacua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
5.3 The Goldstone theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
5.4 The case of broken gauge symmetries . . . . . . . 133
5.5 The abelian Higgs mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . 136
5.6 The general Higgs mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . 140
5.7 The Standard Model Higgs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
6 The renormalization group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
6.1 Bare and renormalized functions . . . . . . . . . 150
6.2 The renormalization group equations . . . . . . . 153
6.3 Renormalization group trajectories . . . . . . . 154
6.4 Asymptotic behavior and fixed points . . . . . . 157
6.4.1 Infrared free theory . . . . . . . . . . . 158
6.4.2 UV free theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
6.5 General results of the RG analysis . . . . . . . 161
6.5.1 Prescription dependence . . . . . . . . . . 161
6.5.2 Physical Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
6.5.3 Dynamically generated masses . . . . . . . 163
6.5.4 Dimensional transmutation . . . . . . . . 165
6.5.5 The effective potential . . . . . . . . . . 166
6.6 Calculation of the beta function . . . . . . . . 168
6.7 Other renormalization schemes . . . . . . . . . . 170
6.7.1 The RG equation of Gell-mann and Low . . 170
6.7.2 The Georgi-Politzer RG equation . . . . . 171
6.7.3 The Callan-Symanzik RG equation . . . . . 172
6.8 The QED renormalization group equations [incom-
plete...] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
2
6.9 The case of QCD [incomplete...] . . . . . . . . . 177
6.9.1 Renormalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
6.9.2 Asymptotic freedom . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
6.9.3 The running coupling . . . . . . . . . . . 182
6.10 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
6.10.1 A - Operator insertions . . . . . . . . . . 188
6.10.2 B - The Berezin integral . . . . . . . . . 190
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
3
Chapter 1
∇µ ψn = ∂µ ψn − ieAµ ψn (1.2)
4
These rules are dubbed local gauge transformations in the
physics literature, and the corresponding invariance is ac-
cordingly called local gauge invariance. Then the modified
Lagrangian density
L = Lm (ψn , ∇µ ψn ) (1.5)
1 1
LF = − Fµν F µν = − Aµ (□ηµν − ∂µ ∂ν )Aν + boundary terms (1.6)
4 2
5
clarified it is convenient to restrict attention to compact
connected simple Lie groups, the most representative being
perhaps the unitary groups SU (N ) and the orthogonal groups
O(N ) . The matter fields will then furnish a representation
of the group and will be subject to transformation laws of
the kind (a sum over repeated indices is understood)
δψ = iϵa Ta ψ. (1.8)
Cabc = C abc
6
there is no compact simple Lie algebra in dimensions two,
since a three index anti-symmetric tensor cannot exist in
2D; and there is only one in dimension three, because any
anti-symmetric 3-index tensor must be proportional to the
Levi-Civita volume form ϵabc .
A necessary condition for the matrices Ta in any represen-
tation to be Hermitian (and thus the representation of the
group to be unitary) can be simply derived. The quadratic
form Q(u, v) = Tr(Ta Tb )ua v b is real and positive because
7
Now we want to gauge the symmetry. Starting again with a
Lagrangian invariant under (1.8), and making the parameters
ϵa space-time dependent functions, we introduce a new set
of fields Aaµ (x) (one for each independent parameter) and a
covariant derivative
∇µ ψ = ∂µ ψ − iAaµ Ta ψ (1.16)
δA = dϵ + i[ϵ, A] (1.19)
L = Lm (ψ, ∇µ ψ) (1.21)
8
1.2 Gauge field dynamics
As for electromagnetism, any theory with a rigid symmetry
can be gauged trivially by introducing such a vector field
without changing the content of the theory provided the
gauge field has zero strength. But much more interesting
would be not requiring such restriction and consider instead
the gauge fields as dynamical fields, governed by a suitable
gauge invariant Lagrangian.
But first of all, what is now the correct definition
of the field strength, generalizing electrodynamics? The
easiest way to find it is to consider the commutator of
two covariant derivatives; an easy computation leads to an
equation of the form
[∇µ , ∇ν ]ψ = −iFµν
a
Ta ψ (1.23)
where
a
Fµν = ∂µ Aaν − ∂ν Aaµ + C abc Abµ Acν (1.24)
It strongly resembles the electromagnetic field tensor were
it not for the second, non linear term, peculiar to non
abelian groups. It is a field strength characterizing the
presence of a true gauge field, because it turns out that
a
Fµν = 0 if and only if Aaµ = ∇µ ha for some set of functions ha ,
namely, if the potential is “a pure gauge”. This resembles
the flatness conditions of Riemannian manifolds or general
relativity (GR), according to which the metric is flat (that
is there is no true gravitational field) if and only if the
curvature tensor Rµνσρ = 0. Then the metric can be gauged
away to approach the Euclidean or Minkowski metric, as the
case may be.
Using the Eq.(1.17) in (1.23) we can see that F transforms
according to the adjoint representation of the group, or
a
δFµν = iϵb [TbA ]ac Fµν
c
= ϵb C ab c Fµν
c
=⇒ δF = iϵa [F, Ta ] (1.25)
a
in terms of matrices Fµν = Fµν Ta . The finite transformation
′ −1
is Fµν = U Fµν U , showing by the way that Tr Fµν F µν is gauge
invariant. This bring us to define the Lagrangian
1 1 1
L = − Tr Fµν F µν = − gab Fµν
a
F bµν , gab =: Tr Ta Tb (1.26)
2 4 2
9
It is here that the Cartan metric plays a special role. From
(1.25) we see that the gauge invariant of L is equivalent
to the invariance condition (1.14) (which is the reason for
the name)
[g, T A ] = 0 (1.28)
Now for a simple Lie algebra (one that has no proper invari-
ant subalgebras) the matrices T A form an irreducible set3 so
that gab must be proportional to the identity: we write it
in the form
for some real number g, and also adopt the fixed normal-
ization of the gauge generators: Tr[Ta Tb ] = 12 δab . Then by a
rescaling Aaµ → gAaµ we can put the gauge field Lagrangian in
the form
1 a aµν 1
L = − Fµν F = − Tr Fµν F µν (1.30)
4 2
The g factor then appears in the covariant derivatives and
the commutation relations as wells. In particular, the
field strength and the covariant derivatives will take the
form
a
Fµν = ∂µ Aaν − ∂ν Aaµ + gC abc Abµ Acν (1.31)
∇µ ψ = ∂µ ψ − igAaµ Ta ψ (1.32)
10
gauge fields simultaneously. In general there will be one
factor g for any simple component of the total gauge algebra
which, as we know, must be the direct sum of compact simple
and U (1) subalgebras.
The gauge Lagrangian (1.30) has the structure of a free
quadratic part, just like N copies of an abelian gauge
field, plus trilinear and quartic couplings
L = L2 + L3 + L4 (1.34)
where L2 is the free (quadratic) part and
g
L3 = − Cabc (∂µ Aaν − ∂ν Aaµ )Abµ Acν (1.35)
2
g2
L4 = − Cabc Cade Abµ Acν Adµ Aeν (1.36)
4
For a fermion multiplet in a representation T r of the gauge
group with Lagrangian
Lf = −ψ̄(∂/ + m − igA/a Tar )ψ (1.37)
we can read off the interaction
Lf 3 = ig ψ̄γ µ Tar ψ Aaµ = Jaµ Aaµ (1.38)
Similarly, for a scalar multiplet ϕ = (ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn ) in some rep-
resentation of the group, we can write the gauge invariant
standard Lagrangian
Lb = −(∇µ ϕ)∗ ∇µ ϕ − m2 ϕ∗ ϕ − V (ϕ∗ ϕ), ∇µ ϕ = ∂µ − igAaµ Ta ϕ (1.39)
from which we can read off the interactions
←→ ←→
Lb3 = −igϕ∗ Ta ∂ µ ϕAaµ , ϕ∗ ∂ µ ϕ = ϕ∗ ∂ µ ϕ − ∂ µ ϕ∗ ϕ (1.40)
∇µ Rναβ
ρ
+ ∇α Rνβµ
ρ
+ ∇β Rνµα
ρ
=0
4
The gauge symmetry commutes with space-time translations, hence with
the Hamiltonian.
5
In electrodynamics these form the first pair of Maxwell’s equations.
12
still another analogy between gauge theories and general
relativity. The Bianchi identities hold for any gauge field
and do not involve sources. In fact they describe a property
of a general mathematical structure which is common to all
gauge theories, that of a linear connection on a principal
fiber bundle.
The equations linking F with the sources, or in the physics
speech the dynamics of the gauge fields, is derived from
the action principle given above. Let us define the gauge
current, which plays the role of source for the gauge field,
as
δIm
Jaµ = (1.45)
δAaµ
where Im is the matter field (i.e. non gauge, like quarks and
lepton fields) Lagrangian. From the Lagrangian we readily
find the following field equations
∇µ F aµν ≡ ∂µ F aµν + gCabc Abµ F cµν = −J aν (1.46)
We see that the total current
jaµ = Jaµ + gCbc
a bµ cµν
A F (1.47)
is exactly conserved, ∂µ jaµ = 0, but gauge dependent. Since a
non abelian gauge field contributes to the currents it is
itself charged, and it couples to everything carries a gauge
charge or, more formally, to everything carries a gauge in-
dex a, b, c, . . . . Taking the covariant derivative of Eq. (1.46)
it is seen that the current Jaµ , though gauge covariant,
obeys instead the covariant balance equation ∇µ Jaµ = 0.
Remember gravitation: since it couples to everything car-
ries energy and momentum it must couple to itself. This
is the reason why the matter stress tensor is not exactly
conserved, the balance equation being in this case,
1 √
√ ∂µ −gT µν + Γµαβ T αβ = 0
−g
∂µ (T µν + τ µν ) = 0
13
The gravitational stress tensor is a functional of the metric
and its first order partial derivatives, so just like the
gauge current it is gauge dependent6 , that is dependent on
the coordinate frame. At least from this point of view
non abelian gauge theories display then some deep analogy
with general relativity, as a result of which it too can be
considered as a gauge theory of the gravitational field.
ψαβ : Uα ∩ Uβ → G
6
It means it is not a true space-time tensor.
14
These are known as the transition functions of the bundle
P , and satisfy the characteristic relations
15
be read from the free Lagrangian directly and are, respec-
F
tively, for fermions and the gauge bosons in Feynman’s gauge
∂ µ Aaµ = 0,
a p b −iδ ab
=
g
ip/ + m − iϵ
p iδ ab ηµν
=−
p2 − iϵ
dg
a,µ b,ν
e
i
= −gγ µ [T a ]ij
µ,a
VUG
µ,a
p
r
q = gf abc (ηνρ (q − r)µ + ηρµ (r − p)ν + ηµν (p − q)ρ )
ρ,c
ν,b
a,µ d,σ
[
= −ig 2 f abe f cde (ηµσ ηνρ − ηµρ ηνσ ) + f ade f cbe (ηµν ησρ − ηµρ ησν )
]
+ f ace f bde (ηµσ ηνρ − ηµν ησρ ) (1.49)
16
after having been stripped away the polarization vectors of
the gluons. Another would be to take the third order or
fourth order functional derivative of the classical action
with respect to the gauge fields, and Fourier transform
the result9 . For still other ways look at textbooks, for
example11 or.12
Now the diagrams for the tree level f f¯ → gluons are
f¯ g f¯ g f¯ g
+ + (1.50)
f g f g f g
The direct and crossed diagram are just the same as in QED
and the gluon exchange diagram is typical of non abelian
gauge theories and absent in electrodynamics. We can apply
the Feynman rules outlined above to find the total amplitude,
the sum of the three diagrams, which must have the form3
17
for emission of at least one longitudinal gluon should also
vanishes
Now set ϵ∗ν (k2 ) = (k2 )ν and use Dirac’s equations for massless
fermions to write k/2 u(p1 ) = (k/2 − /p1 )u(p1 ) and v̄(p2 )k/2 = v̄(p2 )[k/2 − /p2 ].
The propagators cancel leaving the result
18
such a pair of forward/backward polarized gluons turns out
to be non vanishing
1 ω1
MLB = g 2 v̄(p2 )k/1 T c u(p1 ) f abc , ω1,2 = |⃗k1,2 | (1.57)
2k1 · k2 ω2
This fact has some unpleasant consequences. One is that even
if the states of a single forward or backward polarized boson
have zero norm in the Hilbert space, the state describing
both has positive norm and there seems to be no way to
eliminate it from the spectrum. On the other hand, consider
for example the forward scattering of fermions via gluons
exchange. According to the optical theorem11 , the 1-loop
diagram below has an imaginary part which is proportional
to the scattering cross section for all reactions f f¯ →
gluons.
11
See Weinberg books, Vol.[1], §(3.6).
19
Chapter 2
20
We have evidently
∫
δZ
−i = ⟨0| T ϕ(x) exp(i Jϕd4 x |0⟩ (2.2)
δJ(x)
Now apply the KG operator
( ) ∫
δZ
(□ − m ) −i
2
= (□ − m ) ⟨0| T ϕ(x) exp(i Jϕd4 x |0⟩
2
(2.3)
δJ(x)
Time derivatives do not commute with the time ordering op-
eration due to the presence of θ functions. For example,
using the canonical commutation relations we easily obtain
because
δ 2 Z[J]
∆F (x − y) = −i (2.6)
δJ(x)δJ(y) |J=0
21
For a free field the solution is trivially found: the
equation reduces to
( )
δZ
(□ − m ) i
2
= J(x)Z[J] (2.8)
δJ(x)
with the well known solution
( ∫ )
i
Z[J] = exp J(x)∆F (x − y)J(y)d xd y
4 4
(2.9)
2
In the interacting case there is not an exact solution like
this and one has to resort to some approximation scheme.
An interesting approach is to solve it by functional Fourier
transform. Let us write
∫ ∫ 4
Z[J] = E[φ]ei Jφd x Dφ (2.10)
22
first of all putting the system in a finite box so that
one has actually to perform two limits, the infinite volume
limit and the short distance limit. According to a modern
Wilsonian point of view only the infinite volume limit would
be considered, since at very short distances one does not
really know what are the working degrees of freedom. If
gravity is present even the large volume limit is problem-
atic, because very large spatial distributions of energy
could collapse to form black holes. But from a strictly
formal point of view, lattice regularization could really
provide a good definition of the functional measure.
Another solution of the functional measure problem is
rotating the theory to Euclidean signature, making the
oscillatory integral (2.13) exponentially damped. Actu-
ally, in the theory of random fields it is known after
Borcher’s theorem that if the two-point correlation func-
tion ⟨ϕ(x)ϕ(y)⟩
∫ is a positive distribution, then the functional
Z[J] = ⟨exp(i ϕJ)dx⟩ is the Fourier transform of a positive
measure
∫ ∫ ∫
⟨exp(i ϕJdx⟩ = dµ(φ) ei φJdx
where I0 is the free action. One may use, now, the left
hand side to define the right hand side. After this one may
calculate the interacting path integral (2.13) by expanding
the exponential in powers of V (φ) and then using (2.15)
repeatedly.
complex scalars and vector fields
Complex fields are in no way more complicated than the
case studied. One has sources for both ϕ and ϕ̄, and a
generating functional for chronological Green functions
∫
Z[J, J] = ⟨0|T exp(i (Jϕ
¯ ¯ + J ϕ̄)d4 x)|0⟩ (2.16)
23
Proceeding as before we get the functional integral repre-
sentation
∫ [ ∫ ]
Z[J] = exp i (φ̄(□ − m + iϵ)φ − V (φ, φ̄) + Jφ + J φ̄)d x DφDφ̄
2 ¯ 4
24
The external current is taken here to be conserved, ∂µ J µ = 0,
in order to decouple from Z[J] the spin-0 component of the
vector field1 . We shall therefore postpone a full treatment
of the vector field after we have understood better the
functional integral, in Sec. (2.8.2).
2.1.2 Fermions
Fermi fields can be treated along similar lines. We define2
[∫ ]
Z[η, η̄] = ⟨0| T exp i (η̄Ψ + Ψη)d x |0⟩
4
(2.23)
δL Z δR Z
A= , B=
δ η̄(x) δη(x)
25
For a free Dirac field they are integrated exactly, giving
the result
[ ∫ ]
Z[η, η̄] = exp i η̄(x)∆f (x − y)η(y)dxdy (2.27)
where
∆f (x − y) = (∂/ + m − iϵ)−1 (x, y) = (∂/ − m + iϵ)−1 (x, y) (2.28)
is the fermion Feynman’s propagator. With several qualifi-
cations we can still try a functional Fourier transform
∫ [∫ ]
4
Z[η, η̄] = DψDψ̄ E[ψ, ψ̄] exp i (η̄ψ + ψ̄η)d x (2.29)
26
good when treating the classical limit) and
|q, t⟩ = eiHt |q⟩ (2.32)
is the eigenstate of the Heisenberg position operator Q(t) =
eiHt Qe−iHt whose eigenvalue is q, namely Q(t) |q, t⟩ = q |q, t⟩, so
that
′ ′ ′ ′
⟨q , t |q, t⟩ = ⟨q |e−iH(t −t) |q⟩ (2.33)
′
is indeed the transition probability amplitude from q to q .
Now for very large n the time intervals ϵk = tk − tk−1 are very
small, so that we can approximatively write6
∫
dp
⟨qk , tk |qk−1 , tk−1 ⟩ = exp i[(qk − qk−1 )p − ϵH̃(qk , p)] (2.34)
(2π)N
with increasing precision as ϵ → 0. We defined the (q, p)-
symbol by
H̃(q, p) = ⟨q|H(Q, P )|p⟩ ⟨q|p⟩−1 (2.35)
which is the matrix element of the quantum Hamiltonian or-
dered with all Q’s to the left of all P ’s (as in the
Weinberg’s textbook on QFT). Note that H̃ is complex in gen-
eral.
Plugging the matrix element (2.34) into Eq. (2.31) we obtain
now the exact representation
∫ ∏n ∏ dps
n+1
′ ′
⟨q , t |q, t⟩ = dqr N
(2.36)
r=1 s=1
(2π)
∑
n
× exp{i [(qk+1 − qk )pk − ϵH̃(qk+1 , pk )]}
k=1
′
where by definition q0 = q, qn+1 = q . An interesting inter-
pretation comes out if we take the limit as n → ∞, which
must be possible since the left hand side is independent of
n. Then
∫ ∏n ∏ dps
n+1
′ ′
⟨q , t |q, t⟩ = lim dqr N
(2.37)
n→∞
r=1 s=1
(2π)
∑
n+1
× exp{i [(qk − qk−1 )pk − ϵH̃(qk , pk )]}
k=1
∑N
6
Here and always products like pq really indicate α=1 pα q α .
27
Now construct the broken path with vertices at points Xk =
(qk , pk ) at times tk , and let X(t) = (q(t), p(t)) be a continuous
′
path in phase space on [t, t ], matching the broken path at
the vertices Xk : then the exponent in Eq. (2.36) is an
approximation to the Riemann’s integral along X(t)
∫ ′
t
I[X] = [pdq − H̃(q, p)dt] (2.38)
t
qk + qk−1
q̄k =
2
28
so that
∫
dp
⟨qk , tk |qk−1 , tk−1 ⟩ = exp[i(qk − qk−1 )p − iϵHcl (q̄k , p)] (2.44)
(2π)N
where Hcl (p, q) is now the classical Hamiltonian, and the path
integral becomes
∫ ∏n ∏ dps
n+1
′ ′
⟨q , t |q, t⟩ = lim dqr (2.45)
n→∞
r=1 s=1
(2π)N
∑
n+1
× exp{i [(qk − qk−1 )pk − ϵH̄(pk , q̄k−1 )]}
k=1
where
∫
−2
h(x, y) = (2π) dq dp e−ipx−iqy Hcl (p, q) (2.49)
29
The functional in the exponent
∫ t′
′ ′ ′ ′
I[X] = I[X] − ip q =
˜ [pq̇ − H(p, q)]ds − ip q (2.52)
t
30
coordinate systems on the phase space. To write the func-
tional integral in general coordinates, say z A = (z 1 , . . . , z 2N ),
let us introduce the symplectic 2-form 2σ = σAB dz A ∧ dz B whose
components are7
∑ ∂pk ∂q k
σAB = 2 [A ∂z B]
= {z A , z B }−1 (2.59)
k
∂z
and the Liouville one-form ω = ωA dz A , such that σ = dω, or
locally σAB = ∂A ωB − ∂B ωA . Then the functional integral takes
the form
∫ ∏ ∏
′ ′
⟨z , t |z, t⟩ = Dz [det(σ)]1/2 exp iI[z], Dz = dz A (t) (2.60)
t t,A
31
2.3 The Lagrangian path integral
One the most important cases encountered in physics is when
the Hamiltonian is a quadratic function of momenta with q-
independent coefficients, the paradigmatic example being of
course
P2
H= + V (Q) (2.64)
2m
With this Hamiltonian the momentum integrals are easily done
by using the N -dimensional Fresnel integral
∫ ∞ (√ )N
2 πi
eiap dN p = (2.65)
−∞ a
The result is the Feynman’s path integral formula (as always
′
q0 ≡ q and qn+1 ≡ q )
′ ′
( m )N (n+1)/2 ∫ ∏n
⟨q , t |q, t⟩ = lim dN qr (2.66)
n→∞ 2πiϵ
r=1
{ n+1 [ ]}
∑ m(qk − qk−1 )2
× exp i − ϵV (qk )
k=1
2ϵ
′
where ϵ = (t − t)/(n + 1) so n → ∞ is equivalent to ϵ → 0. We
see that in the Lagrangian formalism the naïve definition
of the measure is not correct, an additional ϵ-dependent
factor being needed.
For a broken path the exponent in (2.66) is the Riemann
integral of the Lagrangian, namely
∫ ′
t ( )
1 2
mq̇ − V (q) dt
t 2
32
Additional corrections appear for Hamiltonians of the kind
1 ∑ ij 1
H= A (q , . . . , q N )pi pj + V (q 1 , . . . , q N )
2 i,j
∏ √
where the local measure reads µ[q] = t det[A(q(t)]. This
can be exponentiated giving a correction to the classical
Lagrangian8 by noting that, formally
∏ ∑
M (q(t)) = exp log M (q(t)) (2.69)
t t
√
where M (q(t)) = det[A(q(t)]; but for continuously increasing
number of division points, with ti+1 − ti = ϵ, we have (with
f (i) = f (ti ))
∑ ∫ ∫
1∑ 1
f (t) = lim ϵf (i) = lim f (t)dt = δ(0) f (t)dt
ϵ→0 ϵ ϵ→0 ϵ
t i
8
If we restore ℏ the local measure is seen to be independent of it, and
thus it represents a quantum correction to the classical Lagrangian.
33
where (restoring ℏ to emphasize the quantum nature of the
correction)
ℏ
Lef f = L(q, q̇) + δ(0) log M (q) (2.71)
i
9
In passing by, we used limϵ→0 1/ϵ = δ(0) ∫ ; this can be obtained
by comparing the discretization
∑ of δ(τ − t)f (t)dt
∑ = f (τ ), which
reads f (i) = limϵ→0 k ϵf (k)δ(ti − tk ), with f (i) = k f (k)δik , where
δik is the Kronecker delta. More details are found in many
textbooks, e.g. Weinberg’s first volume book, in Ch.[9].
The quantum correction in (2.71) was shown to be necessary
to correct the naive perturbation theory of certain quantum
field theories like the non linear sigma models or chiral
theories, as was shown in.35
χj (p, q) = 0, j = 1, . . . , J
34
of the equations of motion and the primary constraints. We
assume here that we have given a complete list of them so
that no new, terziary or higher order constraints can arise
from fulfilling the equations of motion. We will indicate
the primary constraints with indices l, m, n = 1, . . . , M , the re-
maining for j = M + 1, . . . , J being secondary.
For example, one form of the action of a relativistic par-
ticle is
∫ ∫ √
I[x] = Ldτ = −m −ẋ2 dτ (2.72)
pµ pµ + m 2 = 0 (2.74)
∂j π j = −∂j F j0 = J 0 (2.77)
35
law. No other constraints arise from the field equations,
so these are the only ones.
Returning to the general case, the primary constraints
can be handled by the Lagrange multipliers method, using
the Hamiltonian
∑ ∑ ∑
H= pk q̇ k − L + um χm ≡ Hc + um χm (2.78)
χ̇j = 0 (2.80)
or11 , with j = 1, . . . , J, m = 1, . . . , M
∑
{χj , H} ≈ {χj , Hc } + um {χj , χm } = 0 (2.81)
m
36
as any function F (q, p) which weakly commutes with all con-
straints
{F, χj } ≈ 0 (2.82)
or, equivalently,
∑
{F, χj } = uk χk (2.83)
r
Functions which are not first class are called second class.
For example, from ∑ m Eq. (2.81) we see that the total Hamil-
tonian H = Hc + u χm is a first class function. Another
set comes from solutions of Eq. (2.81), since the general
solution of the homogeneous equation
∑
um {χj , χm } = 0 (2.84)
m
H = Hc + U m χm + v a γa (2.85)
37
class constraints are characterized by the condition that
the Poisson brackets
{y i , χa } ≈ 0 (2.89)
λia = −C ab {y i , χb },
σ ij = {y i , y j }∗ ≡ {y i , y j } − {y i , χa }C ab {χb , y j } (2.90)
38
we can write
∫ √
path integral = Dy det(σij ) exp iI[y] =
∫ ∏ √
= DyDχa δ(χa ) det(σij ) exp iI[y]
t,a
∏
2N ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏
dxα = dy i dχa det(σαβ )1/2 = dy i dχa det(σij )1/2 det(Cab )−1/2
α=1 i a i a
p1 ≈ 0, q 1 ≈ 0, {q 1 , p1 } = 1
∑n ( )
∗ ∂F ∂G ∂F ∂G
{F, G} = −
j=2
∂q j ∂qj ∂pj ∂q j
39
and Eq. (2.92) reduces to the usual canonical path inte-
gral over the independent variables (q 2 , . . . , q n , p2 , . . . , pn ). This
is actually not really a special case: it can be proven
that it is always possible to choose local coordinates
(Q1 , . . . , Qn , P1 , . . . , Pn ) around S such that S itself is given
locally by equations Q1 = · · · = Qk = P1 = · · · = Pk = 0. Eq. (2.92)
reduces then to the usual path integral over the remaining
variables (Qk+1 , . . . , Qn , Pk+1 , . . . , Pn ) endowed with the canonical
Poisson bracket (see1, 7 for lot of details).
40
correspond to more than one pair of canonical variables
(q, p). An application of the Jacobi identity then shows that
the bracket {γa , γb } and {γa , H} also generate further gauge
transformations.
A symmetry of the equations of motion that can be speci-
fied independently at any time t12 is a gauge symmetry. We
stress that this is a physical interpretation of the for-
malism which is forced on by the mathematical properties of
the constraints. There is, however, a problem: what is the
role of the secondary first class constraints? The Dirac’s
conjecture is that they too correspond to gauge transfor-
mations. This is not a mathematical statement, and in fact
it is false in general13 . However it seems natural that the
time development could be accompanied by arbitrary gauge
transformations. Moreover, the bracket {γa , γb } is a linear
combination of first class constraints involving in general
both primary and secondary constraints, and the bracket too
generates gauge transformations.
With this interpretation the Hamiltonian should contain
all first class constraints, not just the primary ones,
i.e. HE = H + ua γa , where a runs over the full set of first
class secondary constraints and H = Hc + U m χm + v a γa is the
previously used total Hamiltonian including only the primary
first and second class constraints. This HE is known as
the extended Hamiltonian. The extended equations of motion
Ḟ ≈ {F, HE }
41
G, a subset of phase space over which G acts transitively14 .
The global existence of the orbits is due to the integrabil-
ity conditions satisfied by the transformations generated
by the brackets (2.93). Each orbit corresponds uniquely to a
physical state and viceversa, so it is natural to define the
set of physical states, the so called reduced phase space,
as the quotient space F = S/G, which we assume here to be
a symplectic manifold15 . This last property can actually be
proved, the essential reason being that the null eigenvec-
tors of the symplectic 2-form on the constraint surface are
all tangent to the orbits (for a full proof, see7 ).
The functions defined on the reduced phase space are
all gauge invariant functions, i.e. {z, γa } ≈ 0; given a
complete set of them we can parametrize F (in principle)
with independent coordinates z n (non canonical in general)
so the path integral is taken in the general form
∫ ∏
path integral = Dz n det(σrs )1/2 exp iI[z] (2.95)
t
∫
Here I[z] = [an (z)ż n −H(z)]dt is the action restricted on F, with
H(z) the gauge invariant Hamiltonian, and up to boundary
terms which are needed to accommodate the required boundary
conditions. In is in general an extremely difficult task
to find a complete set of gauge invariant functions Oj ,
satisfying
42
Figure 2.1: The reduced phase space is the set of gauge
orbits
gb ≈ 0
δgb = {Υ, gb }
ϵa {γa , gb } ̸= 0
43
for which there is available the Dirac procedure.
One can say that the surface ga = 0 geometrically intersects
each gauge orbit only once, although this is a much more
stringent global condition than the ones locally given here.
In fact there may be topological obstructions to a global
gauge fixing procedure, a problem known in gauge theories
as the Gribov obstruction.
The path integral can be written now as for any other
system with second class constraints χα = (γa , gb ) ≈ 0, now
embracing the constraints γa plus the gauge fixing functions
gb , in the form (see Eq. (2.92))
∫ ∏ ∏
path integral = Dxm det(Cαβ )1/2 δ(χα ) exp iI[x] (2.97)
t t,α
44
combined with the principle that the measure splits, namely,
∫
′′
Dq[q,q′ ] = Dq[q,q′′ ] Dq[q′′ ,q′ ] dq (2.101)
45
Here we have a functional which depends on the path only at
finitely many points t1 ,...,tn . We set q(tk ) = qk ; using the
splitting principle, we can first integrate over all paths
passing q1 , . . . , qn at times t1 , . . . , tn (by the way, this is the
reason why we need to time order the sequence of times), and
then integrate over all possible values of the coordinates
qk . But the path integral over all path joining qj at tj
to qj+1 at tj+1 is the probability amplitude ⟨qj+1 , tj+1 |qj , tj ⟩, so
that, by also noting that Q(tj ) |qj , tj ⟩ = qj |qj , tj ⟩, we obtain
∫ ∏
n
′ ′
C(t1 , . . . , tn ) = dqj ⟨q , t |qn , tn ⟩ qn ⟨qn , tn |qn−1 , tn−1 ⟩ qn−1 · · · q1 ⟨q1 , t1 |q, t⟩
j=1
∫ ∏
n
′ ′
= dqj ⟨q , t |Qn (tn )|qn , tn ⟩· · · ⟨q1 , t1 |Q(t1 )|q, t⟩ (2.106)
j=1
∫
Using the completeness relations |q, t⟩⟨q, t| dq = 1
∫
′ ′
Dq(s)q(t1 ) · · · q(tn )eiI[q] = ⟨q , t |Q(tn ) · · · Q(t1 )|q, t⟩ (2.107)
d
T ∗ [Q̇(t) · · · ] = T [Q(t) · · · ]
dt
We can extend Eq. (2.108) to functionals which admit a
′
Volterra’s expansion around some fixed path on [t, t ]17 (not
16
Equations valid with arbitrary insertions in the path integral are
also valid as operator equations.
17
They are similar to what Wiener called “analytic functionals”.
46
to be integrated over), for example q(t) = 0
∑ 1 ∫ ∑
F [q] = dt1 . . . dtn Fi1 ,...,in (t1 , . . . , tn )q i1 (t1 ) · · · q in (tn )(2.109)
n
n! i ,...,i 1 n
′
where supp F ∈ [t, t ] (this is for many degrees of freedom,
n
47
in the sense that functional derivatives of Z[f ] with respect
to f (t) at f = 0 give directly the required chronological
functions (times in ). We would appreciate the power of the
functional integral by computing Z[f ] for a free particle
with unit mass and action
∫
1 T 2
I[q] = q̇ ds (2.113)
2 0
The symmetric Dirichlet Green function
t(T − s)
∆(t, s) = (t − s)θ(t − s) − , ∆(t, s) = ∆(s, t) (2.114)
T
obeys
d2
∆(t, s) = δ(t − s) (2.115)
dt2
with the boundary conditions ∆(0, s) = ∆(T, s) = 0. The function
∫ T ∫ t ∫
t T
q0 (t) = ∆(t, s)f (s)ds = (t − s)f (s)ds − (T − s)f (s)ds(2.116)
0 0 T 0
is then a solution of q̈ = f (t) with the Dirichlet boundary
conditions: q0 (0) = q0 (T ) = 0. Therefore we can change the
variable in the path integral from q(t) to q̄(t), where
48
or
[ ∫ T ]
1 q
⟨q, T |0⟩f = ⟨q, T |0⟩ exp i f ⋆ ∆ ⋆ f + sf (s)ds (2.119)
2 T 0
⟨q, T |T F [q]|0⟩
⟨F [Q]⟩ =
⟨q, T |0⟩
qt qt
⟨q, T |Q(t)|0⟩ = ⟨q, T |0⟩ =⇒ ⟨Q(t)⟩ =
T T
ts
⟨Q(t)Q(s)⟩ = −i∆(t, s) + q 2
T2
or, using the previous,
The Green function is the mean (in the above sense) of the
fluctuations, a general result in quantum field theory and
statistical mechanics of Gaussian systems. Similarly
and so on.
49
2.5.2 Commutation relations
Consider for simplicity a free particle of unit mass and
the integral
∫
d2 ′ ′
Dq(τ )q̈(t)q(s)eiI[q] = ⟨q , t |T Q(t)Q(s)]|q, t⟩
dt2
Since
δI
q̈ = −
δq(t)
2
⟨q , t |T Q(t)Q(s)]|q, t⟩ = −iδ(t − s) ⟨q , t |q, t⟩ (2.121)
dt
On the other hand, since T [Q(t)Q(s)] = θ(t−s)Q(t)Q(s)+θ(s−t)Q(s)Q(t)
we have
d
T [Q(t)Q(s)] = T [Q̇(t)Q(s)]
dt
d2
T [Q(t)Q(s)] = T [Q̈(t)Q(s)] + [Q̇(t), Q(t)]δ(t − s) (2.122)
dt2
But Q̈(t) = 0 and Q̇ = P for a free particle with unit mass, so by
comparison with (2.121) we obtain the standard equal time
commutation relation of quantum mechanics, [P (t), Q(t)] = −i.
With few modifications this result can also be obtained for
a particle in a potential, or a system with many particles
or degrees of freedom or in the Hamiltonian version of the
path integral. The path integral is fully equivalent to the
operator method.
50
2.5.3 Equations of motion and Ward identities
Equations of motion: the operator equations of motion have
a counterpart in the functional formalism. Consider rule
(iv) in the following case
∫
δ ( )
Dq(τ ) q(t1 ) · · · q(tn ) · · · eiI[q] = 0
δq(s)
18
The dependence of J(t) on q is hidden. On shell holds the conservation
law J˙ = 0.
51
while the measure still stays invariant. Substituting ev-
erywhere in the functional integral the dummy integration
variable q(s) with q(s) + ϵ(s)F (q), using the invariance of the
measure and (2.125) and expanding to first order in ϵ we
obtain the important equation19
∫
dt ϵ̇(t) ⟨f | T [J(t)Q(t1 ) · · · Q(tn )] |i⟩ (2.126)
∑
n
=i ϵ(tk ) ⟨f |T [Q(t1 ) · · · F (Q(tk )) · · · Q(tn )|i⟩
k=1
52
We are interested in the path integral (2.39) with this
Lagrangian, given by Eq. (2.66) as
∫
− n+1
J = lim(2πiϵ) 2 dq 1 · · · dq n
n→∞
[ n ( )]
∑ (qk+1 − qk )2 ϵ
× exp i − ω(kϵ)qk2 (2.129)
k=0
2ϵ 2
1 ∑ [n] j k qqn q 2
n
A q q − + (2.130)
2ϵ j,k=1 jk ϵ 2ϵ
2 − ϵ2 ω1 −1 0 · · 0
−1 2 − ϵ2 ω2 −1 0 · ·
0 −1 · −1 0 ·
A[n] =
(2.131)
· 0 −1 · −1 ·
· · 0 −1 2 − ϵ2 ωn−1 −1
0 · · 0 −1 2 − ϵ2 ωn
53
so that we have20
q2 [n] −1 q 2 Dn−1
c2 = [([A ) ] nn =
ϵ2 ϵ2 Dn
Finally
∫ ∞ ( ) √ [ ]
iu2 q 2
Dn−1
exp −iu + du = 2πiϵc2 exp −i
−∞ 2ϵc2 ϵ Dn
Using these results into Eq. (2.129) we now have the clean
result
( 2 )
−1/2 iq Dn − Dn−1
J = lim(2πiϵDn ) exp (2.135)
n→∞ 2ϵ Dn
It remains to compute the indicated limit, which since
ϵ = T /(n + 1) is equivalent to ϵ → 0. The determinants Dn
satisfy a very simple recursion relation. Let D0 = 1; we
compute trivially D1 = 2 − ϵ2 ω1 , then
D2 = (2 − ϵ2 ω2 )(2 − ϵ2 ω1 ) − 1 = (2 − ϵ2 ω2 )D1 − D0
54
For example, as ϵ gets very small, with n = T /ϵ, we have
ϵDn+1 − ϵDn f (T ) − f (T − ϵ) df
≃ → (2.140)
ϵ ϵ dT
Similarly
ϵDn+1 − 2ϵDn + ϵDn−1 d2 f
→ (2.141)
ϵ2 dT 2
We still need a boundary condition for f˙(0); but from (2.140)
we have
f˙(0) = lim(D1 − D0 ) = 1 (2.142)
ϵ→0
f1 (t) = f (T − t)
sin ωt
f (t) =
ω
55
Therefore
( )1/2 ( )
ω iωq 2
< q, T |0, 0 >= exp cot ωT (2.146)
2πi sin ωT 2
(iii) As a less trivial example, in Eq. (2.139) we choose
ω(s) = ω02 e−at . The general solution of (2.139) is
( ) ( )
f (t) = c1 J0 2ωe−at /a + c2 N0 2ωe−at /a
C
ρ̈ + ω 2 (t)ρ =
ρ3
56
′
namely η(t ) = η(t) = 0. The path integral becomes
∫ [ ∫ ]
′ ′ i δ 2 I[qcl ]
⟨q , t |q, t⟩ = eiI[qcl ]
Dη exp ηj (t) ηk (s)dtds (2.148)
2 δqj (t)δqk (s)
Any quadratic Lagrangian can be reduced to the form
1 1
L = m(t)q̇ 2 − ω(t)q 2 + J(t)q
2 2
d ′ ′
[m(s)q̇cl ] + ω(s)qcl = J(s), qcl (t) = q, qcl (t ) = q
ds
and
( )
δ 2 I[qcl ] d d
=− m(t) + ω(t) δ(t − s) (2.149)
δqj (t)δqk (s) dt dt
The path integral in (2.148) is formally related to the
determinant of this differential operator, for which a va-
riety of methods exist to compute it. The Gelfand-Yaglom
computation discussed above is actually the computation of
this determinant for the particular case m(t) = 1. This is at
′
the same time the pre-factor A(t , t) and the action I[qcl ] is the
′
exponent B(q , t; q, t)23 . As to the determinant, the Gelfand-
Yaglom computation discussed above has been extended to this
more general class of differential operators.40, 41
57
transition in the presence of a source J(t) from the general
rules of quantum mechanics
1
V (q) = ωq 2 + V1 (q)
2
where the second term is to be considered the interac-
tion energy24 , i.e. we consider the harmonic oscillator as
the ”free dynamics” mentioned above. Thus strictly speaking
there is no scattering in this theory, only transition prob-
abilities from states to states in the harmonic oscillator
spectrum. But of course it is only in field theory that
these states can be interpreted as multi-particle configu-
rations and the transition amplitudes as matrix elements of
the scattering operator.
To proceed, we also assume E0 = 0 (in field theory we always
omit the vacuum energy). Now |q, t⟩ = eiHt |q⟩ is the eigenstate
of the Heisenberg position operator q̂(t) with eigenvalue q
at time t, namely q̂(t) |q, t⟩ = q |q, t⟩, so if the particle is not
trapped in a bound state of V1 (q) we expect that sooner or
later at large |t|, it will escape the support of V1 (q) and
oscillates around the origin where the potential is that of
the harmonic oscillator. Of course lacking a mathematical
proof, this is only a weakly motivated assumption. Thus
24
Which we may assume compactly supported.
58
in the long run the wave functions of the in/out ground
state should become proportional to an harmonic oscillator
gaussian (this is our assumption anyway)
′ ′2
⟨q, t|in, 0⟩t→−∞ ⟨q|0⟩osc ∝ e−ωq ⟨0, out|q , t⟩t→+∞ ∝ e−ωq
2 /2 /2
, (2.152)
One may also note that the path integral is dominated by the
classical path qc (t), which for |t| → ∞ when the source J(t) is
switched off will only feel the potential and perform small
oscillations around the origin.
Now in Eq. (2.150), instead of doing the path integral from
′ ′
q to q followed by the integration over q and q , we may
as well integrate over all unconstrained path over the real
line with finite but unfixed boundary conditions. Thus we
obtain the path integral
∫ ( ∫ )
ω 2
⟨0, out|in, 0⟩|J = Dq exp iI[q] + i dtJq − (q (+∞) + q (−∞))
2
R1 2
where the domain of integration is now the set of all path of
the real line R1 into configuration space, q(t) : (−∞, ∞) → M ,
and the measure Dq includes the integral over q(±∞). Using
the trick25
∫ ∞
2 2
q (+∞) + q (−∞) = lim ϵ q 2 (t)e−ϵ|t| dt
ϵ→0 −∞
we arrive at
59
because for all positive energy states eiEn t(1−iϵ) → 0 as t → −∞,
save for the vacuum. Similarly, since e−iEn t(1−iϵ) → 0 as t → ∞,
we get
′ ′ ′
lim
′
⟨q , t |0⟩J ⟨0|q⟩ = ⟨q |0⟩ ⟨0|0⟩J ⟨0|q⟩
t →∞
′ ′
Thus multiplying ⟨q , t |q, t⟩J by the wave functions and inte-
grating we return to Eq. (2.150) in which the Hamiltonian
is multiplied by a factor 1−iϵ. If as in the above treatment
we split the potential into the harmonic oscillator plus a
correction V1 (q), it can be easily seen that this is equiv-
alent to the prescription ω 2 → ω 2 − iϵ, as was given above
(see,4 §6).
When V1 (q) = 0 the quadratic functional integral can be
done exactly. The action is
∫ [ ( ) ]
1 d2
I[q] = q − 2 − ω + iϵ) q + Jq dt
2
(2.154)
2 dt
Define the propagator as
( )−1
d2
∆(t − s) = − 2 − ω + iϵ
2
(t, s) (2.155)
dt
Then the convolution
∫
∆ ⋆ J(t) = ds∆(t − s)J(s)
60
It remains to compute the propagator. A simple computa-
tion in frequency space gives
∫
1 ′ 1 ′
−iω (t−s)
∆(t − s) = dω ′ 2 e (2.158)
2π ω − ω 2 + iϵ
Computing the integral by the method of residues we get
e−iω(t−s) eiω(t−s)
∆(t − s) = θ(t − s) + θ(s − t) (2.159)
2iω 2iω
We mention here that in the scattering case, the S-matrix
elements are computed by taking the limits using the wave
functions of the scattering in/out states
61
2.8.1 Scalar fields
Boldly extending the definition given for N degrees of
freedom, qi (t), to a continuum q⃗x (t) = ϕ(t, ⃗x) = ϕ(x), which is
now our quantum scalar field, we obtain the generating
functional (2.13), formerly denoted by Z[J]
∫ [ ∫ ]
1
⟨0|0⟩J = exp i ( φ(□ − m + iϵ)φ − V (φ) + Jφ)d x Dφ (2.161)
2 4
2
∏
where Dφ ∝ x dφ(x) and the ϵ-term is the result of selecting
the vacuum to vacuum transition amplitude. It gives the
inverse of the operator □−m2 +iϵ with the Feynman’s boundary
conditions that at large positive times positive energy
modes propagate forward in time, while at negative large
times positive energy modes propagate backward in time. The
proportionality factor is the normalization factor needed
to insure that Z[0] = 1, namely
∏ ∫ [ ∫ ]
i
Dφ = dφ(x)/ exp (φ(□ − m + iϵ)φ − V (φ))d x Dφ (2.162)
2 4
x
2
What have we to do with formulas like this? Recall that
functional differentiation of Z[J] at J = 0 give the chrono-
logical correlation functions, and that these are directly
connected with the scattering operator via the Lehmann-
Zymanzik-Zimmermann reduction formulas. But for general,
even renormalizable, V (ϕ) the integral will not be Gaussian
and must be computed by perturbation theory. One way is the
use of the Gell-mann Low formula, which can be derived from
the path integral in few lines. Simply write
∫
⟨0|T ϕ(1) · · · ϕ(n)|0⟩ = Dφ φ(1) · · · φ(n) (2.163)
[ ∫ ]
i
× exp (φ(□ − m + iϵ)φ − V (φ))d x
2 4
2
∫ ∫
[ ∫ ]
i d4 xV (φ) i
= φ(1) · · · φ(n)e exp (φ(□ − m + iϵ)φ)d x Dφ
2 4
2
[ ∫ 4 ]
⟨0F |T ϕ(1) · · · ϕ(n)ei d x V (ϕ) |0F ⟩
= ∫ (2.164)
⟨0F |T ei d xV (ϕ) |0F ⟩
4
where in the last line the fields are free, the Fock vacuum
|0F ⟩ of the free theory appears because the integral with the
62
free action defines matrix elements in the Fock space and
the denominator is the normalization of the path integral
measure. From this one can compute the chronological cor-
relation functions of the full theory in terms of the known
functions of the free theory, just expanding the exponen-
tial in this formula and making repeated use of the Wick
theorem. But this uses the path integral only indirectly.
A more powerful technique makes use of the identity
( ) ∫ [ ∫ ]
δ i
F −i Z0 [J] = exp (φ(□ − m + iϵ)φ + Jφ)d x F (φ)Dφ
2 4
δJ(x) 2
63
Now expanding (2.165) in powers of the potential energy,
which contains the coupling parameters, and performing the
functional derivatives one generates the usual perturbative
expansion. For the interaction λϕ3 , for example, one would
start perturbation theory by writing the expansion
[∫ ( )3 ]V
∑∞
(−i)V λV δ
Z[J] = VV!
−i d4 z (2.168)
V =0
6 δJ(z)
∑∞ [∫ ]P
(−i)P
× J(x)∆F (x − y)J(y)d xd y
4 4
P =0
2P P !
64
where Jµ is either an external current or a function of
other fields, but not ϕµ . This Lagrangian is chosen because
it leads automatically to the transversality condition
∂µ ϕµ = 0 (2.170)
which has the effect of eliminating the scalar (spin zero)
particle from the spectrum, leaving one with a pure massive
spin-one particle. Our aim will be to obtain a manifestly
Lorentz invariant path integral.
This theory has two second class constraints (latin indices
i, j, k, l, . . . will take spatial values in {1, 2, 3}), namely
χ1 = π 0 = 0, χ2 = ∂j π j − m2 ϕ0 + J 0 = 0
65
functionals δ[χa ] to enforce the constraints . But these
integrations just force π0 = 0 and ϕ0 to be a solution of the
secondary constraint, which is what we have done.
Finally omitting the inconsequential determinant factor
det[m2 δ 3 (⃗x − ⃗y )] of Eq. (2.172), the path integral takes the
form (cf. Eq. (2.92))
∫ [ ∫ ]
Dϕ Dπi exp i (πj ϕ̇ − H)dt
j j
(2.175)
66
this Lagrangian has to be checked against Lorentz invariance
step by step. The last term is just the Yukawa interaction
between “charges” with density J 0 , since it is well known
that
1
(−∇2 + m2 )−1 (⃗x, ⃗y ) = exp(−m|⃗x − ⃗y |)
4π|⃗x − ⃗y |
67
is we have
∫ ∏ [ ∫ ]
µ µ 4
Z[J] = Dφ exp iI[φ] + i Jµ φ d x (2.183)
µ
and
∫ ( )
1 1 2
I[φ] = − Fµν F + (m − iϵ)ϕµ ϕ d4 x
µν µ
4 2
˜ µν = ηµν
∆ .
p2 + m2 − iϵ
which has a well defined zero mass limit and the standard UV
behavior of renormalizable propagators. However, it also
propagates a particle with negative metric.
The naïve propagator i ⟨0|T [ϕµ (x)ϕν (y)]|0⟩ provided by canonical
68
quantization, instead of that provided by path integration,
exhibits the additional non covariant term
69
2.8.3 Spinor fields
Although the path integral for fermionic fields can be de-
duced from an abstract dynamics involving Grassmann (i.e.
anti-commuting) variables, we take a shorter route and sim-
ply use the Fourier representation (2.29) of the generating
functional
Z[η, η̄] = (2.189)
∫ [ ∫ ∫ ]
= DψDψ̄ exp −i ψ̄(∂/ + m − iϵ)ψd x + i (η̄ψ + ψ̄η)d x
4 4
where
∫ [ ∫ ]
Z[0, 0] = DψDψ̄ exp −i ψ̄(∂/ + m − iϵ)ψ d x = det iD
4
/
70
Apart from the nuisance to distinguish between left and right
derivatives and all matters related to the anti-commuting
nature of the fermion fields, most manipulations with the
path integral are straightforward and pattern similar cal-
culations with bosonic functional integrals.
An instructive example is the external field problem.
Suppose the fermions are disturbed by an external classical
electromagnetic field. The path integral becomes now a
functional of the external field A
δS
= e−iS[A] ⟨out, 0|Jµ |0, in⟩A ≡ ⟨J µ ⟩A
δAµ
71
terms, for example the Fermi-type and Yukawa-type interac-
tions
72
Chapter 3
73
are
∂LY M
γ1a ≡ π0a (t, ⃗x) = =0 (3.1)
∂ Ȧ0
γ2a ≡ ∂i πia + gC abc Abi πic = 0, where πia = F0ia (3.2)
The constraints are of course of the type required by gauge
theories, namely first class, with Poisson brackets {γ1 , γ2 } =
0 and
74
then there exist only one g such that F a [Ag ; x] = 0, alias,
for which the delta function δ (F a [Ag ; x]) is non zero. This
is because in the contrary case there are gauge equivalent
field configurations on the same gauge fixing surface, that
is the surface intersects a given orbit more than once. This
phenomenon actually occurs for most choices of the gauge
fixing functional, and is known as the Gribov obstruction.
The gauge equivalent configurations on the gauge fixing
surface are called Gribov copies. Actually it may also
happens that for no g will F a [Ag ; x] = 0, or that there is
no globally defined gauge fixing surface at all. Working
locally, in some suitable sense, we can at least check
whether there are also infinitesimally close Gribov copies.
A direction in field space δAaµ will be tangent to the gauge
fixing surface if
∫
δF a [A; x] b
d4 y δAµ (y) = 0 (3.5)
δAbµ (y)
We introduce the kernel of the so called Faddeev-Popov op-
erator (as always, repeated indices are to be summed over)
∫
δF a [A; x]
µ δ (z − y)d z
ab
M (x, y) = (∇z )cb 4 4
(3.6)
δAcµ (z)
where
∇cb cb
µ = ∂µ δ + gf
cab a
Aµ (3.7)
F a [Aµ + ∇µ ϵ; x] ̸= 0 (3.8)
75
example, in the Lorentz gauge, where F a [Aµ ; x] = ∂ µ Aaµ (x), the
Faddeev-Popov operator takes the form
∫
abc ∂
( µb c )
h → M ab (x, y)hb (y)d4 y = ∂ µ ∇ab
a b µ a
µ h (x) = ∂ ∂µ h + gf A h
∂xµ
Suppose then that we have a good gauge fixing surface. We
can go through the canonical formalism and use the Faddeev
formula (2.97) in the present field theory context, then
after integration over the momentum variables we would get
the fundamental Faddeev-Popov-De Witt path integral formula
for the generating functional in gauge theories3
∫ ( ∫ )
ab µ a 4
Z[J] = DA δ [F [A]] det[M ] exp iI0 [A] + i Ja Aµ d x (3.9)
∏
where DA = a,µ,x dAaµ (x) and, as usual,
∫
1
I0 [A] = − d4 x Fµν
a
F aµν (3.10)
4
The functional Dirac delta is to be formally interpreted as
∏
δ[F [A]] = δ (F a [Aµ ; x]) (3.11)
a,x
3
A concise and very clear presentation of the full matter can be found
in.8
4
This is known as the Faddeev-Popov determinant.
76
where Agµ is the gauge transformed potential by the group
element g and the integral is over the gauge group with a
right invariant measure
∏ ∏
Dgh = d[g(x)h(x)] = dg(x) = Dg (3.14)
x x
∫G G
∫
= D(gh) δ[F [A ]] = Dg δ[F [Ag ]] = ∆[A]−1
gh
(3.15)
G G
77
because the infinite volume of the gauge group drops out in
this ratio.
It remains to compute ∆[A]. To this aim we can restrict
the integration over Dg to a neighborhood of the identity
because the measure appears multiplied with the delta func-
tional enforcing the gauge condition F a [A; x] = 0. We suppose
that for a unique g the delta functional is non zero (for an
A satisfying F a [A; x] = 0 this is the identity, but recall the
Gribov problem). Then putting g = 1 + ϵ in (3.13) we obtain5
∫ ∫
1+ϵ
Dg δ[F [A ]] = Dϵ δ[M ab ⋆ ϵb ] ∝ det[M ab ]−1 (3.17)
G G
F a [A + ∇ϵ; x] = F a [A; x] + M ab ⋆ ϵb = M ab ⋆ ϵb
the ⋆ denoting the convolution with the kernel M ab (x, y). The
last equality in (3.17) is the functional version of the well
known identity in finite dimensions, δ n (M · x) = | det M |−1 δ n (x).
We may therefore set ∆[A] = det[M ab ], and we recover the
original result of the Hamiltonian path integral method.
At the same time, there must not be any zero mode for M ab ,
otherwise det[M ab ] = 0, and the path integral makes no sense.
Two useful examples can be given. One is the axial gauge
fixing, Aa3 (x) = 0; the operator is
∂ 4
M ab (x, y) = δ ab δ (x − y) (3.18)
∂x3
It does not depend on A and can be sorted out from the func-
tional integral. The path integral for Yang-Mills theory
in axial gauge is then given by
∫ ∏ ( ∫ )
a µ a 4
Z[J] = DA δ(A3 (x)) exp iI0 [A] + i Ja Aµ d x (3.19)
a,x
78
example is the Lorenz gauge condition, ∂ µ Aaµ = 0. The Faddeev-
Popov operator is non trivial now
µ δ (x − y)
M ab (x, y) = (∂x )µ (∇x )ab 4
(3.20)
(the derivatives act on the indicated variables), so the
action on functions χb (y) is
∫
∂ ( b c)
χ (x) →
a
µ χ = □χ + gf
M ab (x, y)χb (y)d4 y = ∂ µ ∇ab b a abc
Aµ χ
∂xµ
where as always
∏
δ [∂ µ Aµ ] = δ(∂ µ Aaµ (x))
a,x
∇ · Aa = 0
79
′
will still obeys the gauge condition ∂ µ Aµa = 0. Thus the
ghost operator must have a zero mode (as we showed above
this is always true: the condition for the existence of
a Gribov copy in a neighborhood of a gauge field is the
existence of a zero mode of the ghost operator).
The first (yes, there are many) Gribov region is the set
80
integral we are then integrating with the new local action
∫
1
I[A] = I0 [A] − (∂ µ Abµ )(∂ ν Abν )d4 x (3.26)
2ξ
which is no more gauge invariant. Hence the new term will
still fix the gauge (up to Gribov copies) for any ξ; with a
small abuse of language we then say that a given ξ corre-
sponds to a choice of gauge, even if it does not corresponds
to a condition on the gauge potentials. It is only in the
limit as ξ → 0 that the oscillatory factor forces the Landau
gauge condition ∂ µ Aaµ = 0. One speaks generically of a family
of Rξ gauges, the R standing for renormalizable.
There is a different (and better) way to look at this. We
have noted before that the path integral (3.9) is largely
independent on the choice of the gauge fixing functional,
the only restriction being the absence of zero modes for
the Faddeev-Popov operator. So imagine to use a slightly
more general gauge condition
∂ µ Aaµ − ω a (x) = 0
81
trivially exponentiate ∆[A] → exp log ∆[A], but this is not a
good idea because the logarithm is a non local functional
of A. Instead, we can take advantage of the functional
integration over anti-commuting variables and simply write
the functional integral version of Eq. (6.152), which reads
∫ [∫ ]
ab a ab b 4 4
det[M ] = DcDc̄ exp c̄ (x)M (x, y)c (y)d xd y (3.27)
∏
where as usual DcDc̄ = a,x dca (x)dc̄a (x). The anti-commuting
a
fields must be Lorentz scalar, c is known as the ghost and
c̄a as the anti-ghost field. They are not mutually adjoints,
in particular we take them Hermitian so that the ghost
Lagrangian
∫
Lgh (x) = −i c̄a (x)M ab (x, y)cb (y)d4 y (3.28)
c
= igpµ f bca
µ
82
so the ghosts are decoupled from the other fields, and can
be ignored.
Turning back to the covariant Feynman gauge, the Faddeev-
Popov determinant written as a functional integral provides
a further correction to the Yang-Mills actions in the form
of the ghost Lagrangian, leading to the final local, fully
covariant action
∫ ∫
1
I[A, c̄, c] = I0 [A] − (∂ Aµ )(∂ Aν )d x + i ∂ µ c̄a ∇ab
µ b ν b 4 b 4
µ c d x (3.32)
2ξ
were I0 [A] is the gauge invariant part. As long as the
operators O1 , . . . , On are gauge invariants we have (operators
to the left hand side, c-number functionals to the right)
⟨0|T (O1 (x1 ) · · · On (xn ))|0⟩ = (3.33)
∫
= N DADcDc̄ O1 (x1 ) · · · On (xn ) exp iI[A, c, c̄]
where
∫
−1
N = DADcDc̄ exp iI[A, c, c̄]
83
Now suppose the vector field has a mass term m2A A2 /2, so
there is no gauge symmetry and we can forget about the gauge
fixing Lagrangian. The propagator reads
( )
1 p µ p ν
˜ µν (p) =
∆ ηµν − 2 (3.37)
p2 + m2A − iϵ mA
and we see it conveys a bad ultraviolet behavior. We showed
previously that the coupling to a conserved current allowed
one to use instead the renormalizable propagator
˜ µν (p) = ηµν
∆
p2 + m2A − iϵ
δB Aaµ = ∇µ ca (3.41a)
∑
δB ψm = ig ca [Ta ]mn ψn (3.41b)
n
g
δB ca = − f abc cb cc (3.41c)
2
δB c̄ = iB a
a
(3.41d)
δB B a = 0 (3.41e)
85
vice versa, so we have to complete its definition by re-
quiring that δB should commute (anti-commutes) with bosonic
(fermionic) variables, respectively. This is actually what
Eq. (3.42) says.
Now to the point: since ca cb = −cb ca we can put (one-half)
the commutator [Ta , Tb ] = ifabc Tc in place of Ta Tb . The two terms
then cancel leaving δB2 ψ = 0.
Now consider the ghost. We have after a little algebra
(all repeated indices are summed over as usual), since cb cd ce
is totally anti-symmetric,
g 2 acb cde b d e
δB2 ca = f f cc c (3.44)
2
g 2 ( acb cde )
= f f + f ace f cbd + f acd f ceb cb cd ce
6
But this vanishes by the Jacobi identity. Finally
( g b cde d e )
δB2 Aaµ = δB ∇µ ca = −gf abc ∂µ cb cc + gf abc ∇µ cb cc − A f c c
( ) 2 µ
1 b cde d e
= g f2 abc
f Aµ c c − Aµ f c c
bde d e c
(3.45)
2
We can anti-symmetrize the first term in the last line
(since ce cc = −cc ce ) and rearrange the name and position of
the indices to get at last
( )
δB2 Aaµ = g 2 f abc f bde + f abe f bcd + f abd f bec Adµ cc ce = 0 (3.46)
again by the Jacobi identity. So with regards to the basic
fields the nilpotent character of the symmetry has been
shown. On the other hand, for general (even composite)
fields for which we already know that δB2 Φ1,2 = 0, we have
Hence since δB Φ1 has opposite grading (or statistic) of Φ1 ,
δB2 (Φ1 Φ2 ) = −(−1)σ δB Φ1 δB Φ2 + (−1)σ δB Φ1 δB Φ2 = 0 (3.47)
We can conclude that δB , acting on the polynomial algebra
generated by the local fields (3.41), will be nilpotent.
As with any symmetry that is not spontaneously broken,
in the operator version of the theory there will be a self-
adjoint and conserved BRST charge (in the best of all pos-
sible worlds), say QB , which generates the symmetry in the
sense that
eiθQB Φj e−iθQB = [iθQB , Φj ] = θδB Φj (3.48)
86
where θ is an anti-commuting parameter of the field algebra,
or equivalently
i[QB , Φj ]± = δB Φj (3.49)
But then
δB2 Φj = [iQB , [iQB , Φj ]± ]∓ = −[Q2B , Φj ] = 0 (3.50)
so either Q2B ∝ 1 or Q2B = 0; but the generator of a symmetry
must annihilates the vacuum, so in fact8
Q2B = 0 (3.51)
The conserved current has the form
JBµ = B a ∇µ ca − ∂ µ B a ca + 2i g∂ µ c̄a f abc cb cc − ∂ν (F aνµ ca ) (3.52)
and formally
∫
QB = JB0 d3 x (3.53)
87
where K is a functional with ghost number qg = −1
i a a
K = −i∂ µ c̄a Aaµ − ξ c̄ B (3.58)
2
As with any nilpotent operator there is an associated coho-
mology space. In the space of functionals of gauge, ghost
and auxiliary fields, a closed functional G is defined as
one in the kernel of δB , i.e. δB G = 0, while an exact func-
tional is an element in the image: S = δB W for some W.
Obviously since δB2 = 0
Eq. (3.57) says then that the gauge invariant action from
which we started is an element of this cohomology, and this
is true for any gauge invariant functional with ghost number
zero. It can be actually proved that any BRST invariant
functional of gauge, matter, ghost and auxiliary fields
as needed, which has vanishing ghost number is the sum
of a functional of gauge and matter fields alone, having
vanishing ghost number, plus an exact one. Therefore the
cohomology is the space of gauge invariant functionals. Let
us give a proof.
To simplify formulas let us use the condensed DeWitt
notation: a BRST variation of any field is written as
j
δΦj = cA δA Φj = cA RA (Φ) (3.61)
∑∫
c A
δA Aaµ (y) = [−cb (x)∂xµ δ ab δ 4 (x−y)+f abc cc (x)Abµ (x)δ 4 (x−y)] d4 x = ∇µ ca (y)
b
88
We assume the gauge algebra
C
[δA , δB ] = FAB δC (3.62)
where the F ’s are not necessarily constants (field indepen-
dent). We introduce the Slavnov operator
δ 1 A B C δ δ
S = cA δA ΦB B − FBC c c A
+ iB A A (3.63)
δΦ 2 δc δc̄
A simple calculation show that S 2 = 0 if and only if the
generalized Jacobi identity hold
E B E
F[AB FCD] + δ[A FCD] =0 (3.64)
where the square brackets denote total anti-symmetrization
with respect to the free indices, or taking the cyclic sum.
Finally let us introduce the Hodge operator
δ
H = ic̄A A (3.65)
δB
Then we get a dilatation operator by taking the anti-
commutator with S
δ δ
{S, H} = −c̄A A − B A A (3.66)
δc̄ δB
The Slavnov operator does not change the total number of B
and c̄ fields, so if we expand a BRST invariant functional
as a sum of term each containing a definite number N of B
and c̄ fields
∑
I= IN , SI = 0 (3.67)
N ≥0
therefore
IN = −N −1 SHIN (3.68)
and it follows that
∑ 1
I = I0 + SK, K=− HIN (3.69)
N ≥1
N
and we see that indeed I is co-homologous to a gauge in-
variant functional I0 of ghost number zero, containing no B
and c̄ fields, and therefore no c fields either.
89
3.4 Physical states and ghost decoupling
The quantum version of the previous important results can
be obtained by the following argument. A variation of the
action due to a variation of the gauge fixing functional
should not change any physical result because these must be
gauge invariant if the theory has to make any sense. From
(3.57) this change doesn’t affect the cohomology because it
is of the form δI = δB δK. Now what is the variation of a
physical matrix element induced by δI? We have first of all
∫ [ ∫ ]
⟨ϕ, out|χ, in⟩ ∝ DADψm DcDc̄DB exp iI[A, ψm ] + i δB Kd x
4
QB |phys⟩ = 0
90
showing by the way that the Hilbert space must have an
indefinite scalar product. However, zero norm states are
orthogonal to every state vector, so they have zero tran-
sition probability. Therefore physical states are actually
elements of the BRST cohomology, just like the gauge in-
variant functional we considered before. It is reasonable
that in the quotient Hilbert space describing the cohomology
the scalar product is positive definite, since after all we
confined the zero norm states in the null equivalent class.
But unlikely as it seems, there could still be negative
norm states like those associated to the time component of
the gauge field. For a full formal proof that this is not
the case, and that the state cohomology is a true Hilbert
space with no ghosts or anti-ghosts, see.25 A proof for free
fields will be given soon.
One should also prove that the S matrix for states in the
physical Hilbert space is unitary, but this follows if the
S matrix is (pseudo) unitary in the larger space containing
also the unphysical degrees of freedom, which will be the
case if the Lagrangian is Hermitian.
Let us sketch briefly how this question of unitarity can
be resolved in gauge theories using BRST symmetry. First
notice that since QB is conserved and leaves invariant the
Lagrangian, it must commute with the Hamiltonian and the
scattering operator as well:
[QB , H] = 0, [QB , S] = 0 (3.72)
The physical state space is therefore left invariant by the
time evolution and by the scattering operator. Also, both
L and H are Hermitian in the indefinite state space of the
theory, so in this space the scattering operator computed
with this Lagrangian is (pseudo) unitary, S ∗ S = SS ∗ = 1,
implying for each initial state, |i⟩, and final state ⟨f |,
the condition holds10
∑
σn ⟨f |S ∗ |n⟩ ⟨n|S|i⟩ = ⟨f |i⟩ (3.73)
all states
91
normalized,
∑
σn | ⟨n|S|i⟩ |2 = 1 (3.74)
n
S ∗ S = SS ∗ = 1 (3.75)
92
norm physical state, which is orthogonal to everything else.
Therefore the equation ⟨ψ|S ∗ S|ϕ⟩ = ⟨ψ|ϕ⟩, for example, really
depends only on the cohomology classes of the vectors |ϕ⟩,
|ψ⟩, as Eq. (3.76) indicates11 , showing that S is unitary in
the ordinary sense. By the same token, this means that in
the unitarity equation we can restrict the summation over
the physical, positive norm states, that is put σn = 1 in
(3.73) so that
∑ ∑
⟨ψ|ϕ⟩ = σn ⟨ψ|S ∗ |n⟩ ⟨n| S|ϕ⟩ = ⟨ψ|S ∗ |n⟩ ⟨n| S|ϕ⟩ (3.79)
all states physical
states
93
the wave equation □c̄a = □ca = □B a = 0, and also
1
B a = ∂ µ Aaµ (3.80)
ξ
The auxiliary field is a zero norm field, since its momentum
πB = −A0 is unrelated to Ḃ and the equal time commutation
relations are [B a , B b ] = [Ḃ a , B b ] = 0, leading to
[B a (x), B b (y)] = 0, [B a , cb ] = [B a , c̄b ] = 0 (3.81)
The only non trivial CAR are in the ghost sector and are
seen to be
[ca (x), c̄b (y)]+ = [ca (x), (c̄b )∗ (y)]+ = iδ ab ∆c (x − y) (3.82)
The remaining anti-commutators all vanish, for example
[ca (x), (cb )∗ (y)]+ = [c̄a (x), (c̄b )∗ (y)]+ = 0 (3.83)
∑
B= [Bk eikx + Bk∗ e−ikx ] (3.89)
k
12
This is not a violation of the spin-statistics theorem because the
Hilbert space carries an indefinite metric and spectral conditions are
also violated by the ghosts.
94
∑
A= [Akα ϵαk eikx + A∗kα ϵα∗
k e
−ikx
] (3.90)
k,α
i√ ⃗
[Bk∗ , Al+ ] = [A∗l+ , Bk ] = − 2|k|δkl 1c (3.95)
ξ
while physical polarizations have the usual commutation re-
lations corresponding to positive norm states. Note that
95
|±, k, a⟩ = Aa∗
k± |0⟩ are zero-norm states, so the linear combina-
tions |+, k, a⟩ + |−, k, a⟩ are negative norm improper states. From
Eq. (3.80) we have also
i∑ µ α a i√
Bka = k ϵµ Akα = − 2|k| Aak− (3.96)
ξ α ξ
which is consistent with the CCR and will be used later. With
these operators we can build as usual the Fock representation
over a vacuum |0⟩ defined by
i∑ µ α a i√ ⃗ a
[QB , c̄ak ]+ = − k ϵµ Akα = 2|k|Ak− (3.101)
ξ α ξ
√
[QB , Aak− ] = 0, [QB , Aak+ ] = − 2|⃗k|cak (3.102)
96
unconstrained fields, namely the matter degrees of freedom
and the transverse polarizations. The operator N is also
BRST-invariant
[QB , N ] = 0 (3.104)
N |ψ⟩ = n |ψ⟩ , n ̸= 0
i
QB |ψ, ϵkα ⟩ = k µ ϵαµ |ψ, ck ⟩
ξ
97
so this is physical because k µ ϵαµ = 0 is the usual transversal-
ity condition characterizing physical polarization states.
On the other hand we have
iξ
|ψ, cak ⟩ = QB √ |ψ, ϵk− ⟩
2|⃗k|
|α, in⟩ = · · · + ⟨ϵk− , ϵp+ |S|α, in⟩ |ϵk− , ϵp+ , out⟩ + ⟨c̄k , cp |S|α, in⟩ |c̄k , cp , out⟩
+ ······
98
∑
Note that there are no intermediate states k |c̄k , ϵk± ⟩ ⟨c̄k , ϵk± |,
since these have non zero ghost number. From (3.108) we now
obtain
[ ]
|p|
|α, in⟩ = · · · + ⟨ϵk− , ϵp+ |S|α, in⟩ |ϵk− , ϵp+ , out⟩ − i |c̄k , cp , out⟩ + · · ·
|k|
We see that the amplitude for production of unphysical glu-
ons, which worried us in §1.5, appears as the coefficient
of a BRST-exact state whose amplitude vanishes when S is
restricted on physical states (it is a zero-norm state). So
what happens here is that the positive norm, but unphysical,
two-gluon state combines with the negative norm two-ghost
state to form a zero-norm state, which is the zero vector
in the cohomology. That this cancellation occurs for any
intermediate state, not only in the two-particle subspace
just seen, is simply the statement that the cohomology has
positive norm and the scattering operator is well defined
on it. We note that if any unphysical state, like our
|ϵk− , ϵp+ , out⟩, were orthogonal to the physical subspace there
would be no need of this discussion, the unwanted term in
the last equation would simply be absent.
Digression II: the operators (Qg , QB ) generate an algebra A
[Qg , Qg ] = {QB , QB } = 0
(3.109)
[Qg , QB ] = QB
whose representation theory is worth analyzing. If we assume
they do not suffer from spontaneous symmetry breaking, one-
particle states should be classified by representations of
(3.109). These are at most four-dimensional due to the
nilpotence of QB , hence singlets, doublets or quartets.
Kugo and Ojima found three types of representations: (I)
BRST singlets are the physical particles, having Qg = 0,
(II) singlet pairs, which are ghost number conjugate pairs
of two BRST singlets, and (III) the quartet, a ghost number
conjugate pair of two BRST doublets. Actually there are
four types of pseudo-unitary representations of (3.109) in
a pseudo-Hilbert space equipped with a non degenerate scalar
product ⟨·|·⟩. The theorem is:13
13
See M. Henneaux & C. Teitelboim, Quantization of gauge systems,
Ch. [14], 1991.
99
The most general pseudo-unitary representation of the al-
gebra [A] is the direct orthogonal sum of the the following
four blocks:
(i) Singlet:
QB |ϕ⟩ = 0
Qg |ϕ⟩ = 0 (3.110)
⟨ϕ|ϕ⟩ = ±1
′
QB |ϕ⟩ = 0, QB |ϕ ⟩ = 0
′ ′
Qg |ϕ⟩ = k |ϕ⟩ , Qg |ϕ ⟩ = −k |ϕ ⟩ , k ̸= 0 (3.111)
′
⟨ϕ|ϕ ⟩ = 1
QB |f ⟩ = |g⟩ , QB |g⟩ = 0
Qg |f ⟩ = − 12 |f ⟩ , Qg |g⟩ = 12 |g⟩ (3.112)
⟨f |g⟩ = ±1
(iv) Quartet:
QB |f ⟩ = |g⟩ , QB |g⟩ = 0
′ ′ ′
QB |f ⟩ = |g ⟩ , QB |g ⟩ = 0
Qg |f ⟩ = (k − 1) |f ⟩ , Qg |g⟩ = k |g⟩ (3.113)
′ ′ ′ ′
Qg |f ⟩ = −k |f ⟩ , Qg |g ⟩ = (−k + 1) |g ⟩
′ ′
⟨f |g ⟩ = − ⟨f |g⟩ = 1
100
Representation (iii) is only relevant if there are fermionic
constraints, the case (iv) for k = 1 is relevant to Yang-
Mills theories as we have seen. The quartet of states can
′ ′
be taken as |f ⟩ = |ϵ+ ⟩, |f ⟩ = i |c̄⟩, |g ⟩ = |ϵ− ⟩, |g⟩ ∝ |c⟩. All
four states have zero norm, nevertheless there can be some
overlap between them because |ϵ+ ⟩ and |c̄⟩ are not physical and
Hphys has no orthogonal complement in H.
14
It may be easier to consider the commutators with the even generator
λQB , λ being a Grassmann parameter.
101
is unaffected by the the change of variables Φj → Φj + δB Φj .
Adding sources to the action we can say the same of the
generating functional
∫ ( ∫ )
Z[J] = Πj DΦj exp iI[Φ] + i Jk Φk (3.117)
δ(x0 − y 0 )[Aa0 (x), ∂ ν Abν (y)] = −ξδ(x0 − y 0 )[Aa0 (x), π0b (y)] = iξδ 4 (x − y)δ ab
102
and the identity is indeed satisfied. Introducing the self-
energy15 iΠ = ∆−1 − ∆−1
0 , the exact propagator is given by
˜ µa;νb (k) = ∆
∆ ˜ 0µa;νb (k) + ∆
˜ 0µa;ρc (k)iΠρc;σd (k 2 )∆
˜ σd;νb (k) (3.124)
kµ Πµc;νd (k 2 ) = 0 (3.125)
or
15
The sum of all 1PI Feynman diagrams with two external lines carrying
momentum k into the diagrams.
16
Use δB Aa+ a
µ (x) = ∂µ c (x), then pass to momentum space.
103
Chapter 4
4.1 Preliminaries
We proceed formally for now. Consider a scalar field theory
with generating functional
∫ ∫ ( ∫ )
Z[J] = ⟨0|T exp i Jϕdx|0⟩ = Dφ exp iA[ϕ] + i Jφdx (4.1)
104
is clearly the vacuum expectation value of the field operator
in presence of the current J (we may call it the mean field)
∫
φ(x) = ⟨0|T ϕ(x) exp i Jϕdx|0⟩ = ⟨ϕ(x)⟩J (4.3)
δA[φc ]
= −J(x)
δφc (x)
105
correspond to matrix elements (rather than to expectation
values)
106
can be computed by the sum of all connected diagrams with
n external legs. Then Γ[φ] is the generator of the one-
particle irreducible (abbr. 1PI ) amputated diagrams with
n external lines, known as the proper vertices Γn (x1 , . . . , xn ),
δ n Γ[φ]
Γn (x1 , . . . , xn ) = (4.12)
δφ(x1 ) · · · δφ(xn ) |φ=0
′′
Therefore the second functional derivative Γ (x, y) is (minus)
the inverse of the full propagator. We shorten the equation
by writing symbolically
′′ ′′
Γ ⋆ W = −1 (4.14)
a ⋆ denoting the kernel’s convolution and a prime the func-
tional derivative. The Fourier transform of a convolution
is the product of the Fourier transform of the factors,
therefore if we set
107
get
′′′ ′′ ′′ ′′′ ′′
Γ ⋆W −Γ ⋆W ⋆Γ =0 (4.15)
which shows that the three-point function is
′′′ ′′ ′′′ ′′ ′′
W =W ⋆Γ ⋆W ⋆W (4.16)
or more explicitly
⟨0|T ϕ(x1 )ϕ(x2 )ϕ(x3 )|0⟩ = ∆3 (x1 , x2 , x3 )
∫
′′′
= iΓ (y1 , y2 , y2 )∆2 (x1 , y1 )∆2 (x2 , y2 )∆2 (x3 , y3 )dy1 dy2 dy3 (4.17)
′′′
thus confirming the interpretation of iΓ (x1 , x2 , x3 ) as the
proper three-point vertex, the sum of all connected am-
putated 1PI diagrams with three external lines, because
′′
W = i∆2 is the full propagator. It is represented in
Fig. 4.2, with full propagators on the external lines.
108
+
=
| ⋆ ·{z
W (n) = W · · ⋆ W } ⋆Γ(n) + 1P reducible terms (4.19)
n times
′
If φ were the true vacuum expectation value of ϕ then Γ [φ]
would drop out from (4.20), and the integral would be taken
over the shifted action, keeping only 1PI diagrams of course.
In this way
∫
exp iΓ[φ] = Dχ exp iA[φ + χ] (4.21)
1P I
109
where ℏ has been reinserted as an expansion parameter in the
semi-classical limit ℏ → 0. Each internal line (propagator)
carries then a factor ℏ and each vertex a factor ℏ−1 , so
each connected diagram with I propagator and V vertices has
a global factor ℏI−V = ℏL−1 , where L = I − V + 1 is the number
of loops. Therefore the left hand side has a loop expansion
∑
ℏ−1 WΓ [J] = ℏL−1 WL [J]
L≥0
δΓ[φ]
= −J(x)
δφ(x)
i i
exp (Γ[φJ ] + J ⋆ φJ ) (1 + O(ℏ)) = exp W [J](1 + O(ℏ))
ℏ ℏ
110
cosmological constant to enormous precision. We simply put
it to zero. The function Γ1 (x) is the sum of all tadpole
diagrams, the 1PI diagrams with only one external line.
Clearly
δΓ
= Γ1 (x)
δφ(x) |φ=0
In other words, for the given unit norm states and the
Hamiltonian H
1
min(Ψ, HΨ) = − Γ[φ] = V3 Veff (φ) (4.26)
T
The proof rests on the fact that for an adiabatic switching
of the current from zero to some constant value J (x) which
last some long time T and whose Fourier transform do not
intersect the spectrum of the mass operator −Pµ P µ (so that
there is not particle creation), and finally adiabatically
switches off to zero again, the vacuum is converted to a
state |ΨJ ⟩ with a certain energy EJ , a functional of J .
111
The vacuum-vacuum amplitude Z[J] takes then the value
Z[J] = exp(−iEJ T )
W [J] = −EJ T
112
holds (question: why the factor 1/T ?).
113
Above we assumed that ⟨0|ϕ(x)|0⟩ vanishes for vanishing source
J. But it may not. When ⟨0|ϕn (x)|0⟩ = vn (a non zero constant
vector), namely when
δW [J]
= vn (4.31)
δJn (x) |J=0
we say that the symmetry is broken by the expectation value
of the field, because obviously a non zero v would not be in-
variant under all symmetry transformations in G. This is not
in contradiction with the invariance condition W [RJ] = W [J],
which together with (4.31) seems to imply the invariance of
v, because Eq. (4.31) has multiple solutions in the case
of symmetry breaking. For in fact, if the limit of δW /δJn
as Jn → 0 were unique, then differentiating the invariance
condition W [RJ] = W [J] and setting J = 0 we would obtain the
invariance of v under all G, hence v = 0. On the other hand,
there could be set of elements h such that h·v = v, which form
in this case the residual symmetry group H, and we say that
the symmetry is spontaneously broken from G down to H. The
space of vacua is then isomorphic to the coset space G/H.
Whether or not there is a residual symmetry group, if we
pick a vacuum vector vn and J is the current such that the
eq. (4.31) holds, then W [J] is the generating functional
of the connected n-point functions of the shifted fields
ϕen = ϕn − vn
δ n W [J] e 1 ) · · · ϕ(x
e n )|v⟩
W (n) ≡ = in−1 ⟨v|T ϕ(x (4.32)
δJ(x1 ) · · · δJ(xn ) |J=0 conn
114
But φn = vn when Jn → 0, therefore
δΓ[φ] ∂Veff
= 0 or =0 (4.35)
δφ(x) φ=v ∂φ φ=v
According to this important equation, the vacuum expecta-
tion value v = ⟨v|ϕ|v⟩ is a stationary point of the effective
potential, one which is actually a minimum as we know from
the energy interpretation (as we will see, Veff is actually
a convex function). Note that this is not incompatible
with the symmetry of the effective action, which states
the invariance Γ[Rφ] = Γ[φ]. In fact this is the landmark
of spontaneous symmetry breaking: a symmetry of the action
which is not a symmetry of its solutions.
Higher order functional derivatives of the effective action
still give the proper vertices of the theory, except that
they are evaluated at φn = vn rather than φn = 0. Therefore
since Γ(1) (x) = 0 (equation (4.35)) the generating functional
Γ[φ] has the expansion
∑∞
1 (n)
Γ[φ] = Γ ⋆ (φ − v)i1 ⋆ · · · ⋆ (φ − v)in (4.36)
n=2
n! i1 ...in
∂V
+ Ti = 0 (4.38)
∂ϕi |ϕ=v
115
derived. Writing v = vc + δT v, where vc is the tree level
minimum, we get, since δT v is very small
∂ 2V (1)
δT vj + Ti = 0
∂ϕi ∂ϕj |vc
(1)
where Ti is the one-loop approximation to the tadpole. An
immediate constraint arises: since the mass matrix Mij (the
second derivative term) has zero eigenvalues with eigenvec-
(1)
tors ui , then obviously ui Ti = 0. In the orthogonal subspace
M is strictly positive, and solving for δT v we get
δT vi = −Mij−2 Ti
(1) (1)
= −i∆ij (0)Tj (4.39)
where the last term is the scalar propagator, ⟨ϕi (p)ϕj (−p)⟩,
evaluated at zero momentum.
′ 1 ′′
A[φ + χ] = A[φ] + A [φ] ⋆ χ + χ ⋆ A [φ] ⋆ χ + · · ·
2
The first term is sorted out of the path integral. The linear
term does not contribute to 1PI graphs and can be omitted.
It also vanishes for solutions of the classical equations of
motion. Neglecting the higher order terms is just the one-
loop approximation. The integral of the quadratic term is
automatically 1PI, because a Gaussian path integral has no
other diagrams. The path integral reduces to a functional
determinant, therefore remembering the normalization Γ[0] = 0
we get6
i ( ′′ ′′
)
Γ[φ] = A[φ] + log det(A [φ])/ det A [0] (4.40)
2
For most operator appearing in quantum field theory the
determinant can be defined in Euclidean space, where the
6
The classical action A[φ] vanishes for zero field because we set the
bare cosmological constant to zero.
116
energy becomes imaginary according to Wick’s rule, p0 → ip4 .
This then eliminates the i in (4.40).
The second order derivatives of the action is typically a
differential operator; for example in the case of a scalar
field theory with quartic interaction, it is
′′ λ
A [φ] = (□ − m2 − φ2 (x))δ 4 (x − y) (4.41)
2
The computation of the determinant is obviously practical
for constant background field, but generally impossible for
varying backgrounds, and further approximations are needed.
It is interesting that inserting ℏ back in the functional
integral and expanding in powers of ℏ1/2 χ around φ we dis-
cover soon that the quantum one-loop correction is of order
ℏ. That is the loop expansion is a power series in ℏL−1 .
The particular case of a constant φ can be computed making
use of the formula log det M = Tr log M , which gives the ef-
fective potential as the integral in d-dimensional Euclidean
space (whereby p0 = ipd )
∫ ∞ ( )
1 d−1 λφ2 /2
Veff (φ) = Vcl (φ) + d d/2 p dp log 1 + 2 (4.42)
2 π Γ(d/2) 0 p + m2
In one dimension (quantum mechanics) the integral converges,
in d = 4 it diverges quadratically. The divergent terms
are proportional to φ2 and φ4 , respectively, and can be
eliminated by mass and coupling constant renormalizations,
as would be expected on the basis of renormalization theory.
Remarkably, even for zero mass the integral converges in the
infrared. The case
1 λ
Vcl (φ) = m2 φ2 + φ4
2 4!
is well studied. With the renormalization conditions
′′ ′′′′
Veff (0) = m, Veff (0) = λ
117
For negative m2 this potential is complex precisely in
the range of φ for which the classical potential is non
convex, and the one-loop approximation breaks down. In fact,
the full effective potential of a theory which possesses a
Euclidean formulation with positive two-point correlation
function must be a convex function.
The massless case is more interesting. In this case we
cannot define the renormalized coupling at zero field, but
employ instead the safer condition at some arbitrary mass
scale M
′′′′
V (M ) = λM (4.44)
118
4.6 Convexity
One can show that if the Euclidean path integral is well
defined, then the effective potential must be a convex
function. In fact in Euclidean space we have
∫
exp W [J] = (dϕ)e−A[ϕ]+J⋆ϕ (4.47)
for f ∈ Lp , g ∈ Lq and 1
p
+ 1q = 1 and dµ a positive measure. Then
for x ∈ [0, 1] we get
∫
exp W [xJ1 + (1 − x)J2 ] = (dϕ)e−A[ϕ] exJ1 ⋆ϕ e(1−x)J2 ⋆ϕ (4.49)
(∫ )x(∫ )1−x
−A[ϕ]+J1 ⋆ϕ −A[ϕ]+J2 ⋆ϕ
≤ (dϕ)e (dϕ)e
119
Chapter 5
Spontaneous symmetry
breaking
120
This theory has a discrete Z2 × Z2 manifest symmetry under
which ϕ1 → −ϕ1 , ϕ2 → −ϕ2 . For certain values of the pa-
rameters it may have enhanced symmetries. For example if
m1 = m2 = m and λ1 = λ2 there is a further exchange symmetry
under which ϕ1 → ϕ2 , ϕ2 → ϕ1 and the group becomes Z2 × Z2 × Z2 .
If also λ1 = λ2 = λ there is an additional continuous SO(2)
symmetry acting in the guise of rotations, but in field
space
ϕ1 → ϕ1 cos θ − ϕ2 sin θ
(5.2)
ϕ2 → ϕ1 sin θ + ϕ2 cos θ
which is rendered manifest by writing the Lagrangian as
1 1 1 λ
L = − (∂µ ϕ1 )2 − (∂µ ϕ2 )2 − m2 (ϕ21 + ϕ22 ) − (ϕ21 + ϕ22 )2 (5.3)
2 2 2 4
It combines with the discrete symmetries to form the group
O(2). Now consider the configurations with minimum energy
density, at first in the classical theory. We have two
important cases
(i) the symmetric phase with m2 > 0: the minimum is at
ϕ1 = ϕ2 = 0, it is rotational invariant with zero energy
density. In the quantum version there is a unique in-
variant vacuum, the symmetry is unitarily implementable
and the particle states fall into unitary representa-
tions of the group. This is all the way familiar.
m2
ϕ21 + ϕ22 = − = v2 (5.4)
λ
The symmetry maps vacuum configurations to different
vacuums. We (or the system itself via relaxation mech-
anisms) may choose one, for example ϕ0 = (u, v), and con-
sider fluctuations around it: ϕ = (u + φ1 , v + φ2 ). It
24, 38, 39
is a mathematical fact that these solutions form
“vacuum sectors”, stable by the time evolution, but
not invariant under the O(2)-symmetry transformations.
There is a vacuum sector for each choice of the poten-
tial’s minimum, but there are also other, non vacuum,
121
sectors in the space of solutions. The vacuum sec-
tors have the form Sϕ0 = {ϕ0 + φ(t), φ(t) ∈ H 1 (R3 )} (the first
Sobolev space). In particular, there are no finite
energy solutions of the field equations interpolating
between different sectors2 . In a sense, each vacuum acts
as a superselection rule. On the other hand, pertur-
bations not decaying at spatial infinity sufficiently
fast have infinite energy, and are not realizable phys-
ically. Therefore it is the infinite spatial volume and
the non linearity of the field system that makes all
the difference. A symmetry transformation will rotate
the vacuum vector, therefore it cannot act as a sym-
metry within a fixed vacuum sector. For example, the
natural action ϕ0 + φ → ϕ0 + g · φ of the group G furnish
a representation of G, but it doesn’t define a symme-
try transformation because it fails to commute with the
time evolution. This means that the symmetry is broken:
the group transformations do not act on the space of
solutions with a fixed vacuum, and the group is not im-
plementable. But of course for any solution the rotated
one is again a solution, since the equations of motion
are still symmetric, only it belongs to a different
sector and cannot be reached from the former by local
operations only (or finite energy perturbations). In
this sense the symmetry is spontaneously broken. Note
that there is no energetic barrier separating the minima
of the potential related by symmetry in the continuous
case, still there is no physically realizable operation
(a finite energy perturbation, see footnote 2) leading
from one sector to another, even an “adjacent” one.
122
theory.
We may understand better the breaking of the symmetry by
studying its relation with the classical Noether theorem,
which implies the existence of a conserved current whether
or not the symmetry is broken. For our simple model this is
↔
J µ = ϕ2 ∂ µ ϕ1 − ϕ1 ∂ µ ϕ2 = v∂ µ χ + φ ∂ µ χ (5.6)
123
symmetry still exists in the Lagrangian, albeit non linearly
realized. Indeed the (affine) transformations
124
The N − 1 fields χk are the massless Goldstone bosons and
m2φ = −2m2 . The vacuum
0
0
.
ϕ̄ =
. (5.14)
0
v
is left invariant under the O(N − 1) subgroup of O(N ) acting
on the first N − 1 coordinates. In infinitesimal terms the
symmetry acts as
∑
δϕn = i ϵα [Tα ]nm ϕm (5.15)
m
125
Here is a more complicated model with SU (2) symmetry. We take
a scalar doublet Φ = (Φ1 , Φ2 ) plus a spinor doublet Ψ = (Ψ1 , Ψ2 ),
with Lagrangian (we assume g, h > 0)
g
L = −∂µ Φ† ∂ µ Φ − µ2 Φ† Φ − (Φ† Φ)2 − ΨL ∂/ΨR − ΨR ∂/ΨL −
2
− hΨR Φ† ΨL − hΨL ΦΨR (5.19)
Here Φ† ΨL is the spinor 2−1 Φ∗1 (1 + γ5 )Ψ1 + 2−1 Φ∗2 (1 + γ5 )Ψ2 and ΨR =
(1 − γ5 )Ψ/2 is the right handed part. For negative µ2 the
symmetry is broken by the minimum at Φ† Φ = −µ2 /g ≡ v 2 ; we
take advantage of the symmetry to take the vacuum value
at Φ = (v, 0), and expand around this vacuum Φ = (v + ϕ, χ) for
generally complex fields ϕ = σ + iπ1 , χ = π2 + iπ3 . The three
fields πj are then massless and σ has mass −4µ2 . Perhaps
more importantly, the expansion generates a mass term for
the fermions
126
which has two local minima at q = ±v and a local maximum at
q = 0. The states of minimum energy |±⟩ such that ⟨±|q|±⟩ = ±v
are the closest quantum analogue of the classical vacuums
but the overlap ⟨−|+⟩ ̸= 0, because the potential barrier
in between has finite height. Therefore transitions are
possible, and the true vacuum is in fact a unique symmetric
combination of |+⟩ and |−⟩. For infinite systems, involving
infinitely many dynamical degrees of freedom, in particular
for spatially infinite systems, things are different because
the transition probability among different vacua becomes
vanishingly small and vanishes in the limit.
127
where PΩ is the projection operator over the ground state
manifold, i.e. one “sums over all minima’ of H. In par-
ticular, Exp(S) = 0.
Where the symmetry really is broken is in the infinite N
limit, namely for a spatially macroscopic spin system. In
this limit all “vacua” became orthogonal
128
infinite volume limit in any local quantum field theory.
For example, labelling the vacua with continuous parameters
h, g, . . . , and given any two local field operators, we can
write
∑
⟨h|A(x)B(0)|g⟩ = ⟨h|A(0)|f ⟩ ⟨f |B(0)|g⟩
f
∑∫
+ dPn eiPn ·x ⟨h|A(0)|n, Pn ⟩ ⟨n, Pn |B(0)|g⟩ (5.23)
n
and similarly
∑
⟨h|B(0)A(x)|g⟩ = ⟨h|B(0)|f ⟩ ⟨f |A(0)|g⟩
f
∑∫
+ dPn eiPn ·x ⟨h|B(0)|n, Pn ⟩ ⟨n, Pn |A(0)|g⟩ (5.24)
n
In writing these equations we assumed that P |f ⟩ = 0 for a
vacuum state, and that this is a discrete eigenvalue. We
assumed also the existence of the translation group, with
operators T (x) = exp(−iP · x) such that
129
5.3 The Goldstone theorem
The existence of a symmetry group always implies a set of
conserved currents Jαµ , one for each symmetry generator, and
global charges
∫
Qα (t) = dxJα0 (t, x), Q̇α = 0 (5.25)
P |k⟩ =
∫ ∫
−ik·x
= e [P , J (x, 0)] |0⟩ = −i e−ik·x ∇J 0 (x, 0) |0⟩ dx =
0
∫
= k e−ik·x J 0 (x, 0) |0⟩ dx (5.27)
6
An important theorem due to Kastler states that the limit exist for
any local operator A(x), if only the smearing is done also over the time
variable.
130
the last equality being true because the commutators of
local operators vanish for space-like separation. Inserting
a complete set of states each with given momentum, we may
then write
( )
∑ ∑
⟨0|J(0)|n⟩ ⟨n|A|0⟩ e−iEn t − ⟨0|A|n⟩ ⟨n|J(0)|0⟩ eiEn t δ 3 (Pn ) ̸= 0
n n
where
∫
QV T = J 0 (x, t)fT (t)dxdt (5.33)
V
131
potential, which we showed has the symmetry of the classical
action. Then the identities hold
∑ ∂V
(T α )nm ϕm = 0 (5.34)
n,m
∂ϕn
Taking derivatives
∑ ∂ 2V ∑ ∂V
(T α )nm ϕm + (T α )nl = 0 (5.35)
n,m
∂ϕ n ∂ϕ l n
∂ϕ n
′′
In fact the matrix Vnm (v) is the sum of all 1PI amputated
Feynman diagrams with two external lines carrying zero mo-
mentum into ∑ the diagrams. Not only this. We noted that the
fields πα = ϕn [Tα ]nm vm can be considered as the Goldstone
modes of the theory. Because the n − th order derivative of
V at ϕ = v is the full proper vertex at zero external mo-
mentum in the quantum theory, then what (5.37) says is that
the amplitude for a Goldstone boson to make transitions at
vanishing momentum into any other scalar vanishes. Taking
the derivative of (5.35) then setting ϕ = v and contracting
with (Tβ v) ⊗ (Tγ v) gives
( )
∂ 3V
(Tα v)n (Tβ v)m (Tγ v)l = 0 (5.38)
∂ϕn ∂ϕm ∂ϕl |v
132
which says that there is no amplitude for a transition
between three zero momentum Goldstone bosons. In particu-
lar, very soft Goldstone bosons are not emitted by external
Goldstone bosons lines in Feynman diagrams.
133
(for a simple proof see Weinberg2 ). The fields σn are the
massive fields because they oscillate around the minimum
of the potential along directions orthogonal to the flat
directions. One can see this most clearly expanding the
potential (classical or effective, the argument is the same)
to quadratic order in the fluctuating fields σn = vn + hn (x),
vn = ⟨ϕm ⟩0 ,
1 ∂ 2V
V (v + h) = V0 + hn hm + · · ·
2 ∂σn ∂σm |v
134
that Eq. (5.39) actually is a gauge transformation, under
which the Lagrangian of the gauge and matter fields is
invariant by definition. Therefore if we wish, we could use
the fields σn (x) everywhere and forget about the Goldstone
fields. The second condition (5.40) becomes then a choice
of gauge, imposed on the scalar fields rather than as a
condition on the gauge potentials. The choice is known in
this context as the unitary gauge. To be more precise, the
fields gnm (x) reappear in the gauge transformed potential,
which becomes Aµ → g −1 Aµ g + ig −1 ∂µ g. But then g(x) disappears
from the equations of motion, from the Feynman rules and
can be made to disappear from the path integral by a simple
change of variables. For example, if the O(N ) model is
gauged, then (5.41) is a gauge transformation and the matrix
Rnm (x) decouples from the Lagrangian. The unitary gauge in
this example is ϕ1 = ϕ2 = · · · ϕN −1 = 0 and σ is the only physical
field.
In general there is no standard way to put coordinates on
the coset space G/H as descriptors of the Goldstone fields.
One natural way to do this is to use the Cartan decomposition
of the Lie algebra of G relative to the subgroup H. One
takes a basis made of generators for the Lie subalgebra of
H, such that by definition
135
and since the Lagrangian is invariant under G-transformation,
it will depend on g(x) only through the “covariant deriva-
tives” Dµ σ = (∂µ + g −1 ∂µ g)σ. This determines the way the Gold-
stone fields interact with themselves and the other fields
in the Lagrangian. For a detailed exposition of these re-
sults and applications to low energy hadron physics we defer
to the (vast) existing literature (a fairly complete treat-
ment including references can be found in the book of one
of the founders of the entire matter, namely S. Weinberg2 ).
However in a theory with gauge fields it is the gauge co-
variant derivative that matters, so we have now
∑ ( )
∇µ ϕn = gnm (x) ∂µ σm − i[g −1 Aαµ Tα g]ml σl + (g −1 ∂µ g)ml σl
m
1
ϕ = √ (v + σ) exp(iθ)
2
1
ϕ → √ (v + σ)
2
7
It was actually and independently discovered by Kibble, Englert,
Brout, Guralnik and Hagen in the same years as Higgs described it.
137
is in fact the unitary gauge for the Higgs abelian model.
As we noted, the quantization in this gauge looks awkward.
We return then to anoth er parametrization
1
ϕ = √ (v + h(x) + iπ(x)) (5.48)
2
The Lagrangian becomes
1 1 1
L = − F 2 − (∂µ h + eAµ π)2 − (∂µ π − eAµ (v + h))2 (5.49)
4 2 2
1 2 λ
− m ((v + h)2 + π 2 ) − [(v + h)2 + π 2 ]2
2 8
This is still invariant under the gauge symmetry
1
δh = −ϵ(x)π, δπ = ϵ(x)(v + h),
δAµ = ∂µ ϵ (5.50)
e
so quantization will need a gauge fixing term, for example
1
Lgf = − (∂µ Aµ )2 (5.51)
2ξ
Then the quadratic part is
1 1 1 1 1
L2 = − F 2 − µ2A A2 − (∂A)2 − (∂µ h)2 − (∂µ π)2 (5.52)
4 2 2ξ 2 2
1 2 2
− m h + µA Aµ ∂µ π (5.53)
2 h
where m2h = −m2 = λv 2 . We see that π is massless but couples
to the gauge field. Moreover, the interactions are all
of renormalizable types. A more clever gauge fixing term
is possible if we choose it to cancel the π − A derivative
coupling in L2 , namely
1
Lgf = − (∂µ Aµ − evξπ)2 (5.54)
2ξ
With this choice the Lagrangian becomes a sum of squares
1 1 1 1 1
L = − F 2 − µ2A A2 − (∂A)2 − (∂µ h)2 − m2h h2 (5.55)
4 2 2ξ 2 2
1 1
− (∂µ π)2 − ξµ2A π 2 + · · · (5.56)
2 2
In this gauge, the abelian version of the Rξ gauge,
√ the
Goldstone field has the gauge dependent mass mπ = ξ µA and
138
the propagator ∆π = (p2 + ξµ2A )−1 . It vanishes as ξ → ∞ making
the Goldstone field non dynamical and decoupled from the
other fields. In fact, this limit is nothing else than the
unitary gauge.
The gauge field propagator is
( )
1 p µ pν
∆µν = 2 ηµν − (1 − ξ) 2 (5.57)
p + µ2A p
It has the usual UV behavior allowing the theory to pass
the power counting test of renormalizability. This is why
the gauge (5.54) is known as the Rξ -gauge.
Digression - The propagators8 for the theory with quadratic
part (5.52) can be written with some computations. They are
( )
1 pµ pν pµ pν
∆µν = 2 2
ηµν − 2 +ξ 4 (5.58)
p + µA p p
pµ
∆µπ = iξµA (5.59)
p4
1 ξµ2A 1
∆ππ = + , ∆hh = (5.60)
p2 p4 p2 + m2h
The propagators are simpler in Landau’s gauge, ξ = 0. There
are the three degrees of freedom of the massive vector field
and the “Higgs field” h(x). However the Goldstone boson is
really present and propagates as a massless mode. The theory
is also potentially infrared divergent.
Just as an illustration, in Landau gauge the Lagrangian has
two new vertices coming from the π − A interaction and the
A mass term; they correspond to graphs
µ pµ µ ν
The left diagrams has vertex factor −evpµ , the right one has
factor −iηµν e2 v 2 . Taken together they give a contribution to
the photon self-energy,
e2 v 2
−e2 v 2 (ηµν − pµ pν /p2 ) = − (ηµν p2 − pµ pν )
p2
8
These are defined as i times the contractions ⟨0|T Φr Φs |0⟩ of the various
fields. Also, iϵ-factors in denominators are omitted for simplicity.
139
µ ν
−i
p2
1
∆µν (p) = (ηµν − pµ pν /p2 )
p2 (1 − π(p2 ))
Dµ ϕ = ∂µ ϕ − igAaµ Ta ϕ (5.62)
140
Ta the scalar representation with imaginary, anti-symmetric
matrices. Let the constant vector v be a minimum of the
potential, the lowest order approximation to the vacuum
expectation ⟨ϕ⟩V AC in perturbation theory. Then
∂V
=0
∂ϕn |v
ϕ=v+φ
1 1
− Dµ ϕT Dµ ϕ = − (∂µ φT + igAaµ φT Ta )(∂µ φ − igAaµ Ta φ)+
2 2
1 1 1
− igD φ Aµ Ta v + igAaµ v T Ta Dµ φ − g 2 v T Ta Tb vAaµ Abµ (5.63)
µ T a
2 2 2
There are two relevant things here: one is the generation
of a mass term for the gauge fields, with mass matrix
∑
m2ab = g 2 v T Ta Tb v = −g 2 a
Tnm b
Tnl vm vl (5.64)
nml
141
be handled as in connection with Eq. (5.43), with the result
m2ab = 2 ⟨ψ⟩†0 Ta† Tb ⟨ψ⟩0 = ⟨ψ⟩†0 {Ta , Tb } ⟨ψ⟩0 (5.65)
provided the kinetic term be taken in the form
K = −(∇µ ψ)† ∇µ ψ
142
with gauge dependent masses. They are infinitely massive in
the unitary gauge, giving a different explanation for their
decoupling.
The scalar propagator ∆nm (p), is the inverse of the matrix
′′
∑
∆−1
nm = p δnm + Vnm − ξg
2 2
(tα v)n (tα )m
α
143
5.7 The Standard Model Higgs
This is an excellent example to illustrate the symmetry
breaking mechanism in a phenomenological very important
physical theory. We are alluding to the Glashow-Weinberg-
Salam electroweak theory, of course. In this theory the
symmetry breaking is entrusted to a doublet of SU (2) scalars,
the Higgs field
[ + ]
ϕ ϕ1 + iϕ2
Φ= 0 , ϕ+ = √ (5.75)
ϕ 2
whose dynamics is governed by the Lagrangian
λ
L = −[Dµ Φ]† Dµ Φ + µ2 Φ† Φ − (Φ† Φ)2 , µ2 > 0 λ > 0 (5.76)
2
The covariant differentials are given by
′
Dµ Φ = ∂µ Φ − igAaµ ta Φ − ig Bµ Y Φ (5.77)
where ta = σa /2 are the SU (2) generators, Y = 1/2 × identity
the weak hypercharge and, for future records, q = t3 + Y the
unbroken electric charge generator in units of e = 0.302 (the
positron charge)10 . Then ϕ+ is electrically charged in the
way the notation suggests.
With this potential the symmetry is broken already at a
classical level by a vacuum expectation value which we may
choose in the form after a global SU (2) rotation
[ ]
1 0 µ2
Φ0 = √ , v2 = (5.78)
2 v λ
With this the global gauge symmetry is spontaneously broken.
Note that no generator ta leaves the vacuum value invariant,
but qΦ0 = (t3 + Y )Φ0 = 0, so q is unbroken. We then set
1
ϕ0 = √ (v + H(x) + iϕ3 (x)) (5.79)
2
The local gauge transformations under which L is invariant
are still there, with arbitrary parameters θa (x) and θ4 (x),
′
δΦ = igθa (x)ta Φ + ig θ4 (x)Y Φ (5.80)
10
Part of these definitions is conventional and can be changed, as can
be observed by reading different authors. Weinberg for example uses
q = t3 − Y , but then
√ Y = −1/2 and nothing changes. His L is one-half our,
but there is no 2 factor in the vacuum, etc.
144
or in terms of components
ig 1 i ′
δϕ+ = (θ − iθ2 )ϕ0 + (gθ3 + g θ4 )ϕ+ (5.81)
2 2
ig 1 i ′
δϕ0 = (θ + iθ2 )ϕ+ − (gθ3 − g θ4 )ϕ0 (5.82)
2 2
These must be fixed by hand via the gauge fixing procedure.
In fact it is impossible to spontaneously break a local
gauge symmetry, a result known as the Elitzur’s theorem.
Standard results of the EW theory are the following relations
between the electric and weak charges2
′
e = g sin θ = g cos θ (5.83)
and the weak angle
′
g g
sin θ = √ , cos θ = √ , (5.84)
g2 + g′2 g2 + g′2
It will be convenient to rotate the gauge parameters with
the mixing angle to new parameters θZ , θA , as follows
θ3 = θZ cos θ + θA sin θ, θ4 = −θZ sin θ + θA cos θ (5.85)
′
where tan θ = g /g by definition. In this way
′ ′ ′
gθ3 + g θ4 = (g sin θ + g cos θ)θA + ((g cos θ − g sin θ)θZ
′
g2 − g 2
= 2eθA − √ θZ (5.86)
g2 + g′2
′ ′
√
gθ3 − g θ4 = (g cos θ + g sin θ)θZ = − g 2 + g ′ 2 θZ (5.87)
Thus ϕ+ transform as a positively electrically charged field
and ϕ0 as a neutral field.
The unitary gauge condition of Eq. (5.42) is easily imple-
mented for the Higgs field with vacuum value (5.78). It
correspond to
ϕ1 = ϕ2 = ϕ3 = 0 (5.88)
√
or equivalently ϕ+ = 0 and ϕ0 = (v + H)/ 2 and real. This
is the only physical field. But we have to keep in mind
that there is an unbroken generator, the electric charge,
145
so the corresponding U (1) symmetry remains unbroken, and
must be fixed too. The massless U (1) gauge field is the
electromagnetic field, a mix of A3µ and Bµ ,
146
i√ 2 g
Dµ ϕ0 = ∂µ ϕ+ + g + g ′ 2 Zµ ϕ0 − i √ Wµ ϕ+ (5.97)
2 2
√
Setting then ϕ+ = ϕ3 = 0 and ϕ0 = (v + H)/ 2 in L , we get
1 g2 1 ′
LH = − ∂µ H∂ µ H − Wµ∗ W µ (v + H)2 − (g 2 + g 2 )Zµ Z µ (v + H)2
2 4 8
1 2 λ
+ µ (v + H)2 − (v + H)4 (5.98)
4 8
from which we read the mass of the Higgs MH2 = µ2 = λv 2
and its coupling to the vector bosons. The absence of
electromagnetic coupling means that H is a neutral field,
and there are self-interactions. The coupling to the Z can
be written in different ways, e.g.
′ g2 e2
g2 + g 2 = =
cos2 θ (sin θ cos θ)2
v
√ 0 ′2
(5.101)
2
0 0 2 g +g
It is an ultralocal operator (no partial derivatives) so
its determinant interpreted in a functional sense can be
exponentiated, using the identity (see Weinberg1 p.392-393)
( ∫ )
4 4
Det[Mij ] = exp δ (0) log det Mij (x) d x
147
where Det[Mij ] denotes the functional determinant, det Mij the
matrix determinant. In this approach we would get, up to an
irrelevant multiplicative constant (namely exp δ 4 (0) ln det[Gij ]),
[ ∫ ]
det M = exp i −3iδ (0) log(1 + H(x)/v)d x
4 4
(5.102)
148
in function space. Therefore
∏ ∏
Det[Mij ] = det[Gij (1 + H(x)/v)] = det[Gij ](1 + H(x)/v)3
x x
149
Chapter 6
150
is generally related to the renormalization scheme and how
infinities are actually subtracted. We use a mass inde-
pendent renormalization scheme which can also we applied
to massless fields and avoid infrared divergences as m → 0
in the coupling parameter (see Weinberg,2 Vol. 2, Ch. 18
for explanations on how this comes about). For example, we
could require the inverse propagator to satisfy
Γ2 (p)
Γ2 (p)|p2 =µ2 = µ2 , =1 (6.4)
dp2 |p2 =µ2
and the four-point proper vertex to satisfy
1
Γ4 (pi ) = −λ at pi · pj = µ2 (δij + ) (6.5)
3
where µ is an arbitrary mass scale. We will use instead
the minimal subtraction scheme, denoted MS, wherein the
renormalized proper vertices (see below) are defined by
I
n 1 dϵ n
Γren = Γ (ϵ) (6.6)
2πi ϵ
In both scheme, the Zi are functions Zi (λ, ϵ) with no mass
dependence. This is because they make sense at m = 0, but
could only depend on m through logarithms terms log(m/µ) in
loop effects, which are singular as m → 0.
The renormalizability of λϕ4 is the statement that one
can choose the bare parameters and fields λ0 , m0 , ϕ0 (or
equivalently the Zi ’s) as functions of the renormalized
ones and the cutoff ϵ in such a way that in the limit
ϵ → 0 all correlation functions of the renormalized fields
are finite and satisfy the general requirements of quantum
field theory. Now the (time ordered) connected correlation
functions are related to the bare functions by
Gn (xi ; λ, m, µ) = Z(λ, ϵ)−n/2 Gn0 (xi ; λ0 , m0 , ϵ) (6.7)
which entails that
Z(λ, ϵ)n/2 Gn (xi ; λ, m, µ) (6.8)
is independent on the scale µ. Similar considerations can
be done for the proper vertices, denoted here Γn (pi , λ, m, µ),
which are obtained by Fourier transforming the connected am-
putated functions, those Gn whose external propagators have
151
been stripped away and the momentum conserving δ-function
factored out.
Since Γ2 (p, λ, m, µ) = Z(λ, ϵ)Γ20 (p, λ0 , m0 , ϵ) is the inverse of the
full propagator, and the bare amputated Green functions are
defined by
∏
n
T
G0 (p1 , . . . , pn ) = Γ20 (pi , λ0 , m0 )G0 (p1 , . . . , pn ) (6.9)
i=1
or in d = 4
152
6.2 The renormalization group equations
The observation following Eq. (6.11) can be translated into
the statement that at fixed bare parameters λ0 , m0 and ϵ
∂
µ Z(λ, ϵ) Γ (pi ; λ, m, µ)
−n/2 n
=0 (6.14)
∂µ λ0 ,m0 ,ϵ
From Eq. (6.3) we can solve for λ = λ(λ0 µ−ϵ , ϵ), so at fixed
bare parameters m and λ become functions of µ. From (6.14)
we then get
∂ n ∂
µ Γ (pi ; λ, m, µ) + β(λ, ϵ) Γn (pi ; λ, m, µ)+
∂µ ∂λ
∂ n
+ γm (λ, ϵ)m Γ (pi ; λ, m, µ) − nγ(λ, ϵ) Γn (pi ; λ, m, µ) = 0 (6.15)
∂m
where
∂λ ∂ log Z̃λ
β(λ, ϵ) = µ = −ϵλ − λµ (6.16)
∂µ |λ0 ,m0 ,ϵ ∂µ |λ0 ,m0 ,ϵ
∂ n ∂
µ G (pi ; λ, m, µ) + β(λ, ϵ) Gn (pi ; λ, m, µ)+
∂µ ∂λ
∂ n
+ γm (λ, ϵ)m G (pi ; λ, m, µ) + nγ(λ, ϵ)Gn (pi ; λ, m, µ) = 0 (6.19)
∂m
From (6.3) we see that the beta-function can be written as
∂ log Z̃λ ∂ log Z̃λ
β(λ, ϵ) = −ϵλ − λµ = −ϵλ − λ β(λ, ϵ) (6.20)
∂µ |λ0 ,m0 ,ϵ ∂λ
153
Eq. (6.15) and (6.19) are the homogeneous renormalization
group equation for the proper vertices (first proposed by
Weinberg, ’t Hooft and Zinn-Justin around 1973); it differs
from the Callan-Symanzik equation in that it is homogeneous
and admits a zero mass limit without recourse to asymptotic
expansions in the momenta. As we will see, combined with
dimensional analysis they are able to determine the asymp-
totic behavior of the theory at very large (and often very
small) momentum and energy.
The renormalization constants have expansions (in the MS
scheme)
∑
∞
Z̃n (λ)
Z̃(λ, ϵ) = 1 + (6.21)
n=1
ϵn
λ̄(0) = λ, m̄(0) = m
154
Then the RG equations tell us that
d [ ]
Z(t)−n/2 Γn (pi ; λ̄(t), m̄(t), et µ) = 0 (6.25)
dt
where
√
d log Z(t)
= γ(λ̄(t)) (6.26)
dt
or
Γ(n) (et pi , λ, m, µ) =
( ∫ t )
= exp (4 − n)t − n ds γ(λ̄(s)) Γ(n) (pi , λ̄(t), e−t m̄(t), µ) (6.29)
0
155
beta function vanishes, β(λ) = 0, can we have exact scale in-
variance, albeit with a modified (or anomalous) dimension.
To be more precise, for a massless theory exact dilatation
invariance would imply the Ward identity
( n )
∑ ∂ ∑n
pi · + (n − 4) Γ (p1 , . . . , pn ) = 0,
(n)
pi = 0 (6.30)
i=1
∂pi i=1
while (6.29) actually implies the true Ward identities (take
the t-derivative of (6.29) and set t = 0 afterward)
( n )
∑ ∂ ∂Γ(n)
pi · + (nd − 4) Γ(n) (p1 , . . . , pn ) = β(λ) (6.31)
i=1
∂p i ∂λ
where d = 1+γ(λ) can be interpreted as the anomalous dimension
of the renormalized field. Clearly only at a fixed point
can we have exact scale invariance. By the way, if we put
dφt ∂φ
= δφ(p) = (d − 4)φ − p ·
dt |0 ∂p
156
6.4 Asymptotic behavior and fixed points
Look at Eq. (6.33): for β(λ) > 0 the effective coupling
continues to increase as t → ∞ until it meets one of the
situations: (a) if the integral (6.33) converges
∫ ∞
dx
<∞
λ β(x)
157
If β(λ) = b0 λn + · · · near the origin and b0 > 0 the theory is IR
free, i.e. the coupling decreases with decreasing energy;
if b0 < 0 then the theory is UV free and the coupling decreases
at higher energies. For an asymptotically free theory in
the IR perturbative calculations of amplitudes cannot be
trusted beyond a sufficiently high energy.
′ ′ dβ
β(λ) ≃ |β |(λ∗ − λ), β (λ) =
dλ
which implies the rate of approach to the fixed point
′
λ(t) →t→∞ λ∗ − c exp(−|β |t)
158
From eq. (6.29) it follows that the UV behavior of the proper
vertices is given by
( )
Γn (et pi , λ, m, µ) −→ e(4−n−nγ(λ∗ ))t × Γn pi , λ∗ , e−t(1−γm (λ∗ )) m, µ (6.36)
t→∞
t
e−2 − e(t)−2 =
6π 2
159
distances we penetrate the virtual cloud and see the bare
charge. In fact, we can identify the bare coupling as the
effective charge at the scale t = 1/ϵ, for in fact e20 = e2 /Z3
(see the footnote).
160
6.5 General results of the RG analysis
We collect few general results concerning the renormaliza-
tion group, beyond the study of asymptotic behavior of Green
functions.
′ ′ d log F (λ)
γ (λ∗ ) = γ(λ∗ ) + β(λ∗ ) = γ(λ∗ )
dλ
161
β(λ) = b0 λ2 + b1 λ3 + · · · , we have from (6.43), (6.44),
′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′
β (λ ) = b0 λ 2 + b1 λ 3 + · · · = b0 λ2 + (2ab0 + b1 )λ3 + O(λ4 )
= (1 + 2aλ + 3bλ2 + · · · )(b0 λ2 + b1 λ3 + · · · )
= b0 λ2 + (2ab0 + b1 )λ3 + O(λ4 )
′ ′
from which b0 = b0 , b1 = b1 . Similarly, if γ(λ) = γ1 λ + · · ·
′ ′ ′ ′ ′
and γ (λ ) = γ1 λ + · · · then γ1 = γ1 . This requires another
small computation.
RP = 0 (6.45)
Then
RR2 (g, m, µ) R2 (m, g, µ)
− 2 Rm2p + RA = −2γ(g)G2 (p; m, g, µ) (6.49)
p2 + m2p (p + m2p )2
162
From this we derive the result
Rmp = 0 (6.50)
RS(p1 , . . . , pn ; g, m, µ) = 0 (6.53)
β γm
B= , Γ=
1 − γm 1 − γm
163
the solution is
(∫ z )
f (g, z) = f (1, ḡ(z)) exp Γ(ḡ(t))dt (6.57)
0
where
dḡ(t)
= B(ḡ(t)), ḡ(0) = g (6.58)
dt
The limit m → 0 corresponds to z → −∞, so we are probing
the infrared limit of the RG. If there is an IR stable fixed
point g∗ , and if γm (g∗ ) < 1, then
m→0 1
mP −→ mf (1, g∗ ) exp[zΓ(g∗ )] = f (1, g∗ )m 1−γm (g∗ ) → 0 (6.59)
164
g = 0, as was to be expected for a dynamically generated mass
which vanishes at any order in perturbation theory if it is
protected by some symmetry, like gauge invariance or chiral
symmetry. If there is a UV cutoff Λ (perhaps the Planck
mass at ∼ 1019 Gev), and we send µ → Λ, then g 2 decreases in
the limit
1
g 2 (µ) −→
µ→Λ log(Λ/mP )
driving the bare coupling g02 = g 2 (Λ) to even small values (see
the end of the next section).
P(g, µ) = m∆
P f (g)
165
It is instructive to look at the behavior of the physical
mass given by (6.61), as µ is scaled up to the order of
the UV cutoff Λ. Then, given β(g) = −b0 g 3 /2 (as for QCD) and
µ → Λ, the coupling scales as g(µ) → g(ln Λ); but if Λ is the
UV cutoff, this is the bare coupling g0 , so that
( ∫ ) ( ) ( )
g(µ)
dx 1 1
mP = µ exp − = Λ exp − 2 = Λ exp − 2
β(x) b0 g (ln Λ) b0 g 0
166
The small ϕ behavior is reached as t → −∞, therefore it is
controlled by the infrared stable fixed point of the theory.
A pure λϕ4 /4! theory with λ > 0 is infrared stable, the beta
function being given by β(λ) = 3λ2 /16π 2 + · · · . Hence the flow
is
λ 16π 2
λ(t) = ∼ for large negative t
1 − 16π
3λt
2 3|t|
λ 16π 2
λ(t) = 3|λ|t
∼− for large positive t
1+ 3t
16π 2
167
6.6 Calculation of the beta function
The starting point will be Eq. (6.20) together with the
expansion (6.21). We recall both, here, in the form
( )
∂ 1
β(g, ϵ) 1 + g Z̃g (g, ϵ) = − ϵg Z̃g (g, ϵ) (6.67)
∂g 2
∑
∞
zn (g)
Z̃(g, ϵ) = 1 + (6.68)
n=1
ϵn
168
the RG equation (6.67), using for that purpose β(g, ϵ) = β(g)−ϵg.
The solution is (actually the explicit dependence on µ is
apparent, since the ratio is µ-dependent only via the running
of g)
[∫ g ]
g0 µ−ϵ β(x)
Z̃g (g, ϵ) = = exp dx (6.73)
0 x( 2 ϵx − β(x))
1
g
169
so, for finite ϵ, g0 is complex and the theory fails to be
unitary. Thus it seems that there is no sensible, unitary
definition of a non-asymptotically free theory.
No such problems are encountered for an AF theory, for which
β(g) < 0 close to the origin, since the integral (6.73) has
no singularities as long as g < g1 , where g1 is an infrared
stable fixed point. One finds in this case that g0 → 0 as
we remove the cutoff.
In fact, given β(g) = −b0 g 3 + · · · we have
( ∫ 2 )
g
b 0 x g2ϵ ϵ
g02 ≃ g 2 exp − dx ϵ 2
= 2 + ϵ/2
→ = ḡ 2 (1/ϵ) (6.75)
0 2
+ b 0 x b 0 g b 0
170
and the running coupling satisfies the RG equation
( )
dg m
µ = β g, (6.77)
dµ µ
Unlike the mass independent renormalization scheme, the new
beta function and anomalous dimension depends on m through
the ratio m/µ, by dimensional analysis. Due to explicit
dependence of β and γ on µ, it is in general impossible
to give an explicit solution of the RG equation, like the
one we found previously in the M S scheme. An asymptotic
solution for p, µ ≫ m can be found that is identical to the
previous, since β(g, 0) and γ(g, 0) are essentially identical to
the RG functions computed in the M S scheme.
p2 →µ2 1
G(2) (p) −→
p2 + m2
171
6.7.3 The Callan-Symanzik RG equation
This section will be more elaborate. To begin, the renor-
malization scheme employs normalization conditions at zero
momentum to define the renormalized mass3 and coupling, m
and g. Thus
dΓ(2)
Γ(2) (p = 0) = −m2 , = −1, Γ(4) (0, 0, 0, 0) = mϵ g (6.81)
dp2 |p2 =0
We also
∫ need the Green functions with insertions of l oper-
ators ϕ (x)d x = ϕ̃2 (0). This requires a new renormalization
2 d
constant, say Z2 , such that ϕ2 (x) = Z2 Z −1 ϕ20 (x) that has finite
matrix elements with ϕ-correlation functions as one removes
the cutoff ϵ = 4 − d; note that ϕ2 (x) ̸= ϕ(x)ϕ(x) = Z −1 ϕ0 (x)ϕ0 (x).
Because obviously
⟨ϕ2 (1) · · · ϕ2 (l)ϕ(1) · · · ϕ(n)⟩ = Z2l Z −l−n/2 ⟨ϕ20 (1) · · · ϕ20 (l)ϕ0 (1) · · · ϕ0 (n)⟩
δ = 4 − n − 2l
172
which is satisfied at zero coupling. From the perturbative
standpoint, the following identity is true
∂ (l,n)
m0 Γ (q1 , . . . , ql ; p1 , . . . , pn , m0 , g0 , ϵ) =
∂m0 0
(l+1,n)
− m20 Γ0 (0, q1 , . . . , ql ; p1 , . . . , pn , m0 , g0 , ϵ) (6.84)
(l,n)
∑
Γ0 = il−1 1P I
∂ (l,n) ∑
m0 Γ0 = −m20 il 1P I
∂m0
173
This is in turn the Fourier transform of the Ward identity
for dilatations, which states that
∑n ∫
⟨ϕ(x1 ) · · · δϕ(xi ) · · · ϕ(xn )⟩ = i d4 x ⟨∆(x)ϕ(x1 ) · · · ϕ(xn ⟩ (6.87)
i=1
δϕ = −(1 + x · ∂)ϕ
∂ ∂ ∂
D =m =m + Dg
∂m |g0 ∂m |g ∂g |m
174
or explicitly,
( )
∂ ∂
m + β(g) − nγ(g) Γ(n) (pi , g, m) =
∂m ∂g
= −m2 σ(g)Γ(1,n) (0; pi , g, m) (6.91)
where we defined
γ(g) + σ(g) = 1
175
the scale variation of the effective action
∫
δΓ 4 ∂Γ[φ, g, m]
(δ + x · ∂)φ(x) d x = β(g) +
δφ(x) ∂g
∂
+ (2 − δ(g))m2 Γ[φ, g, m] (6.95)
∂m2
so scale invariance is broken even for the massless m = 0
theory. However, if the theory sits at a fixed point g∗
where β(g∗ ) = 0, then for the massless theory scale invariance
is maintained, albeit with a slightly different dimension
for the fields, d∗ = 1 + γ(g∗ ). More interesting is the case
where g∗ is a UV stable fixed point, that is when the running
g(t) → g∗ as t → ∞. In that case scale invariance is recovered
asymptotically in the UV, as was first observed by K. Wilson
and expected on physical grounds.
∆0nl (x1 , y1 , x2 , y2 , · · · ; z1 , · · · zl , m0 , e0 , ϵ) =
= ⟨ψ0 (x1 ) ⊗ ψ 0 (y1 ) · · · A0 (z1 ) ⊗ · · · ⊗ A0 (zn )⟩ (6.96)
∆nl (x1 , y1 , x2 , y2 , · · · ; z1 , · · · zl , m, e, ξ, µ) =
−l/2
= Z2−n Z3 ∆0nl (x1 , y1 , x2 , y2 , · · · ; z1 , · · · zl , m0 , e0 , ξ0, ϵ) (6.97)
√ √
where
√ ψ0 = Z2 ψ and A0 = Z3 A are the renormalized fields, e =
e0 Z3 the √renormalized electric charge, m the renormalized
mass, ξ0 = Z3 ξ, µ the renormalization scale and ϵ = 4 − d the
cutoff. The constants Zi being dimensionless are functions
of e and ϵ, and Z2 is also gauge dependent.
176
6.9 The case of QCD [incomplete...]
Quantum chromodynamics is the dynamical theory of the strong
interaction among NF = 6 quarks flavor, based on a gauge
internal symmetry under the group SU (3), known as the color
symmetry.
6.9.1 Renormalization
The bare Lagrangian for an SU (3) gauge theory like QCD with
f massless quark flavors6 including gauge fixing and ghosts,
is (in d = 4 − ϵ dimensions)
∑ ( )
1 a aµν 1 λa a
L = − F0µν F0 − (∂µ A0 ) −
aµ 2
Ψ0f ∂/ − ig0 A/0 + m0 Ψ0f
4 2ξ0 f
2
( )
− i∂ µ θ̄0a ∂µ + g0 f abc Ab0µ θ0c (6.98)
m0 = Z m m
where
λa a λa µ a ϵ
A/ = A/ = γ Aµ , F a = dAa + gµ 2 Z̃g f abc Ab ∧ Ac (6.101)
2 2
√
and we defined Z̃g = Zg Z3 and ξ = ξ0 /Z3 . For perturbative
calculations one may further split the Lagrangian into a
free quadratic part plus interactions terms, and afterward
6
f = (u, d, c, s, t, b)
177
also split the constants as Zi = 1 + δi , putting the terms
depending on δi into a remainder known as the counter-term
Lagrangian Lc , which has the form
1 ( )2 ∑ ∑
Lc = − δ3 ∂µ Aaµ − ∂ν Aaµ − δf Ψf ∂/Ψf − δmf Ψf Ψf
4 f f
ϵ ϵ
− iδ̃ ∂ µ θ̄a ∂µ θa + gµ 2 δ1 f abc ∂ µ θ̄a Abµ θc + igµ 2 δ2 Ψf A/Ψf + · · · (6.102)
178
among them. For example
counterterm, which is
( )
−(Z3 − 1)δab k 2 ηµν − kµ kν
179
The self-energy has the same structure (Slavnov-Taylor iden-
tities again)
( )
Πab;µν = π(k 2 , ϵ)δab k 2 ηµν − kµ kν
180
the last value being valid for SU (N ), or 4/3 for QCD. To
compute Z̃g we look at the fermion-gluon vertex (fig.4.6),
where the counter-term is
181
fixed point of QCD with less than 16 flavors, or that QCD
is an asymptotically free theory.
The property of asymptotic freedom was a landmark 1973 dis-
covery of D. Gross, F. Wilczek and H. D. Politzer7 . Besides
the totally unexpected features of these properties of non
abelian gauge theories as seen from that times, at the
top of the bootstrap hypothesis and S-matrix theory, the
establishment of AF had many benefits:
182
This beta function up to three loops order is2, 12, 13
β(αs ) = −b0 αs2 − b1 αs3 − b2 αs4 + O(αs5 ) (6.111)
where
33 − 2nF 153 − 19nF
b0 = , b1 = , (6.112)
12π 24π 2
77139 − 15099nF + 325n2F
b2 =
3456π 3
nF is the number of active quarks, those quarks whose masses
are below the scale of interest. The three loop coefficient
b2 is scheme dependent and given here in the M S renormal-
ization scheme, the favorite one in QCD. The graph up to
two loops and nF = 3 is (taken from13 )
183
depending on a momentum scale Q2 (we may ignore the quark
masses for Q2 much bigger than any other mass scale). For
example, the process may be the long studied deep inelastic
scattering of leptons off protons,
2.2 Electromagnetic interaction 9
Px
P
184
We see that all scale dependence of R is determined by the
running αs (Q2 ), with µ2 hidden in the initial data. The
solution of Eq. (6.115) is implicitly given by
∫ αs (Q2 )
dx Q2
t = exp , t = log 2 (6.116)
αs (µ2 ) β(x) µ
185
One says that is working to leading order (LO) and next-
to-leading order (NLO), respectively. Then the solution
R(1, αs (Q2 )) can be determined, in particular its scaling prop-
erties for large Q2 .
We neglected quark masses in the above discussion. If
included, we get of course the more general dependence
R(Q2 /µ2 , αs , m/Q) (we are using only one quark flavor), and
the renormalization group equation is
( )
2 ∂ ∂ ∂
µ + β(αs ) − γm (αs )m R(Q2 /µ2 , αs , m/Q) = 0 (6.121)
∂µ2 ∂αs ∂m
The function γm is the anomalous mass dimension and can be
calculated; the result in M S scheme is10
αs 303 − 10nF 2
γm =+ 2
αs + O(αs3 ) (6.122)
π 72π
The equation for the running is (see (6.24))
∂m
Q2 = −γm (αs )m(Q2 ) (6.123)
∂Q2
with the solution
( ∫ )
Q2
dq 2
m(Q2 ) = m(µ2 ) exp − γm (αs (q 2 )) 2 (6.124)
µ2 q
( ∫ )
αs (Q2 )
γm (x)
= m(µ2 ) exp − dx (6.125)
2
αs (µ ) β(x)
so, again, the non trivial scale dependence is contained in
the running of the coupling and the mass, i.e.
186
(non trivial) discussion to the literature and the books,
e.g.10, 12, 13, 36
A summary pf αs measurements corresponding to the strong
coupling measured at the mass of the Z boson, which has the
value αs (Mz2 ) = 0.116 ± 0.005, is illustrated in the next figure.
For a recent review see.37
187
6.10 Appendix
6.10.1 A - Operator insertions
We used insertions of operators ϕ2 (x) into Green functions to
derive the Callan-Symanzik equation. It is interesting that
they can be managed with the functional integral formalism.
We introduce a source K(x) for ϕ2 (x) and define a new W [J, K]
∫
2
exp iW [J, K] = (dφ)eiA[φ]+iJ⋆φ+iK⋆φ (6.126)
δ l+n W [J, K]
=
δK(1) · · · δK(l)δJ(1) · · · δJ(n) J=K=0
= il+n−1 ⟨ϕ2 (1) · · · ϕ2 (l)ϕ(1) · · · ϕ(n)⟩c (6.127)
188
the bracket is computed summing connected Feynman diagrams
with n + l external vertices of two types. The figure is the
graphical representation of W (3,5) with dotted lines repre-
senting ϕ2 insertions. Now we perform a Legendre transform
= W (3,5) [J, K]
over J
Γ[ϕ, K] = W [J, K] − J ⋆ ϕ (6.128)
where
δW [J, K]
ϕ= (6.129)
δJ
One assumes that a solution for J exists, a functional of
ϕ and K. We have
δϕ δϕ
= W (0,2) = i ⟨ϕ(1)ϕ(2)⟩J,K , = W (1,1) = i ⟨ϕ2 (1)ϕ(2)⟩J,K (6.130)
δJ δK
We also assume W (1,1) = 0 for J = K = 0, since this is an
odd correlation function, and of course W (0,2) is the full
propagator in this limit. As with the effective action, one
has the dual relations
δΓ[ϕ, K] δΓ[ϕ, K] δW [J, K]
= −J, = (6.131)
δϕ δK δK
where the undifferentiated variables are kept fixed (these
are “partial derivatives” so to speak). From the first we
get the identity
W (0,2) ⋆ Γ(0,2) = −δ (6.132)
At zero sources this says that Γ(0,2) is (minus) the inverse
of the full propagator. Taking further derivatives in the
189
sources gives a chain of identities with the general struc-
ture
W (l,n) = W
|
(0,2)
⋆ ·{z
· · ⋆ W (0,2)} ⋆Γ(l,n) + 1P reducible terms (6.133)
n times
Γ(l,n) (x1 , . . . , xl ; y1 , . . . , yn ) =
c
= il−1 ⟨ϕ2 (x1 ) · · · ϕ2 (xl )ϕ(y1 ) · · · ϕ(yn )⟩AMP,1PI (6.134)
δ = 4 − n − 2l
θi θj + θj θi = 0
f (θ) = w0 + wj θj + wjk θj θk + · · · wn θ1 · · · θn
190
Under constant translation θi → θi + χi the coefficients are
reshuffled except wn : for example
′ ′ ′ ′
f (θ + χ) = w0 + wj θj + wjk θj θk + · · · wn θ1 · · · θn
with
′
w0 = w0 + wj χj + · · · + wn χ1 · · · χn
′
and so on, but in any case wn = wn . Therefore if we want to
define a translation invariant integral
∫ ∫
d θf (θ + χ) = dn θf (θ)
n
(6.135)
f (Lθ) = (det L) wn θ1 · · · θn + · · ·
therefore we deduce
∫ ∫
d θf (Lθ) = (det L) dn θf (θ)
n
(6.137)
equivalently
∫ ∫
n ′ −1 ′
d θ f (θ) = (det L) dn θf (θ), θ = Lθ (6.138)
191
just the converse of the change of variable formula for
bosonic integrals
∫ ∫
n −1
d xf (Lx) = (det L) dn xf (x) (6.139)
or
∫ ∫
n ′ ′
d x f (x) = (det L) dn xf (x), x = Lx (6.140)
192
and since the integral of each factor is xk , the full integral
becomes
∫ ( ) ∏
n 1 T
p
√
d θ exp θ Mθ = xk = det M (6.145)
2 k=1
The integrals
∫ ∫ ∫ ∫ ∫
dθ̄θ̄ = dθθ = 1, dθ̄θ = dθθ̄ = 0, dθdθ̄ θ̄θ = 1
193
Eq.s (6.138), (6.145) can be easily extended to complex
anti-commuting variables. For instance, under a change of
variables
′ ′
θ̄ = U θ̄, θ =Vθ
′ ′
the n-th order coefficients in the expansion of f (θ , θ̄ ) is
′ ′
f (θ , θ̄ ) → det U det V wn
Changing variables to
θ = χ − M −1 J , θ̄ T = χ̄T − J¯T M −1
194
Bibliography
Textbooks
[1] S. Weinberg, The Quantum theory of fields. Vol. 1:
Foundations, Cambridge, UK: Univ. Pr. (1995)
195
Gauge Theories and QCD
[10] *C. Quigg, Gauge Theories of the Strong, Weak and
Electromagnetic Interactions, Second Ed., Princeton
University Press, (2013).
Standard Model
[16] *C. Burgess & G. D. Moore, The Standard Model: a
Primer, Cambridge University Press, (2007).
[18] *P. Langacker, The Standard Model and Beyond, CRC Press
(2009).
Mathematical
[19] V. Rubakov, Classical Theory of Gauge Fields, Princeton
University Press (2002).
196
[20] M. Chaichian and A. Demichev, Path integrals in
physics. Vol. 1: Stochastic processes and quantum me-
chanics, Bristol, IOP (2001)
Advanced
[22] B. De Witt, The Global Approach to Quantum Field Theory,
Oxford University Press, 2003.
[27] *S. Coleman and E. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D7, 1888 (1973)
[radiative corrections ssb]
[29] *R. Fukuda and T. Kugo, Phys. Rev. D13, 3469 (1976)
[gauge dep. EFP]
197
[33] H. Georgi and H. D. Politzer, Phys. Rev. D 14 (1976)
1829.
198