## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

M. FISHBANE AND

J. D.

SULLIVAN

Phys. Rev. D 6, 3543 (1972). and D. J. Gross, Phys. Rev. Letters

P. M. Fishbane and D. Sullivan, Phys. Rev. D 6, 645 (1972) (hereafter known as paper II). 3P. M. Fishbane and D. Sullivan, Phys. Rev. D 6, 3568 (1972) (hereafter known as paper III). 4S. D. Drell, D, J. Levy, and T.-M. Yan, Phys. Rev. Letters 22, 744 (1969); Phys. Rev. 187, 2159 (1969); Phys. Rev. D 1, 1035 (1970); 1, 1617 (1970); 1, 2402 (1970). 5P. M. Fishbane and D. Sullivan, Phys. Rev. D 4, 458 (1971). 6V. N. Gribov and L. N. Lipatov, Phys. Letters 37B, 78 (1971); Yad. Fiz. 15, 781 (1972) @ov. J. Nucl. Phys. 15, 438 (1972)]; Yad. Fiz. 15, 1218 (1972). ~Such graphs have been studied in renormalizable theories by, among others, S.-J. Chang and P. M. Fishbane, Phys. Rev. D 2, 1084 (1970); by V. N. Gribov and L. N. Lipatov, Ref. 6. For an alternate and efficient way to carry out such leading-logarithm calculations see N. Christ, B. Hasslacher, and

J.

A. H. Mueller,

J.

C. G. Callan

J.

22, 156 (1969). 9P. V. Landshoff, J. C. Polkinghorne, and R. D. Short, Nucl. Phys. B28, 225 (1971). R. L. Jaffe and C. H. Llewellyn Smith (unpublished). ~~Actually the cutoff choice z, z' ~ A2x 2 for the simple one-loop diagrams generates results which satisfy both the analytic continuation and the reciprocal relation. We are unaware of any physical interpretation of this cutoff or the appropriate generalization to multiloop diagrams. Throughout this section we will use = to denote quantities calculated according to the leading-logarithmic approximation of Sec. III. R. P. Feynman (unpublished); J. D. Bjorken and E. Paschos, Phys. Rev. 185, 1975 (1969). ~4S. L. Adler, Phys. Rev. 143, 1144 (1966).

PHYSICAL REVIEW

D

VOLUME

7, NUMBER

6

15 MARCH 1973

**Radiative Corrections as the Origin of Spontaneous
**

Sidney Coleman

and

Lyman Laboratory

Symmetry

Breaking*

Erick Weinberg of Physics, Harvard University, Cambridge, (Received 8 November 1972)

Massachusetts

02138

We investigate the possibility that radiative corrections may produce spontaneous symmetry breakdown in theories for which the semiclassical (tree) approximation does not indicate such breakdown. The simplest model in which this phenomenon occurs is the electrodynamics of massless scalar mesons. We find (for small coupling constants) that this theory more closely resembles the theory with an imaginary mass (the Abelian Higgs model) than one with a positive mass; spontaneous symmetry breaking occurs, and the theory becomes a theory of a massive vector meson and a massive scalar meson. The scalar-to-vector mass ratio is computable as a power series in e, the electromagnetic coupling constant. We find, to lowest order, m (8)/m (V) = (3/2~){e /4m). We extend our analysis to non-Abelian gauge theories, and find qualitatively simQar results. Our methods are also applicable to theories in which the tree appraximation indicates the occurrence of spontaneous symmetry breakdown, but does not give complete information about its character. (This typically occurs when the scalar-meson part of the Lagrangian admits a greater symmetry group than the total Lagrangian. ) We indicate how to use our methods in these cases.

I. INTRODUCTION

photon acquire

a mass as a result of radiative cor-

rections.

Massless scalar electrodynamics, the theory of interactions of a mass-zero charged scalar field, has had a bad name for a long time now; the attempt to interpret this theory consistently has led to endless paradoxes. ' In this paper we describe how nature avoids these paradoxes: Massless scalar electrodynamics does not remain massless, nor does it remain electrodynamics; both the scalar meson and the

the electromagnetic

The preceding statement may appear less oracular if we imbed massless scalar electrodynamics in a larger family of theories with a mass. If we write the complex scalar fields in terms of two real fields, y, and y„ the Lagrange density is'

'(a 2 = --,(F„.)'+ '(s„q, — „y,)'+ —, „q, + eA„y, )' eA '

—,

RA DIA

plus renormalization

TIVE CORRE

C TIONS AS TH E

ORIGIN

OF. . .

1889

counterterms. (The quartic self-coupling is required for renormalizability, to cancel the logarithmic divergence that arises in the amplitude for scalar Coulomb scattering. ) It is widely believed that if p. is positive, this is a normal field theory. ' The particle spectrum consists of a charged scalar particle, its antiparticle, and a massless photon. On the other hand, if p.' is negative, the theory is unstable; spontaneous symmetry breaking takes place. 4 The scalar field acquires a vacuum expectation value, the Higgs phenomenon occurs, and at the end we are left with a massive neutral scalar meson and a massive neutral vector meson. ' Our assertion is that the massless theory is like the second case rather than the first; the only difference is that the driving mechanism of the instability is not a negative mass term in the Lagrangian, but certain effects of higher-order processes involving virtual photons. Other interesting things happen in this theory. The Lagrange density (1.1), with vanishing mass, involves two free parameters, e and A. . After spontaneous breaking, the theory is still expressed in terms of two parameters; these are most conveniently chosen to be e and the vacuum expectation of the field, (rp). The surprising thing is that we have traded a dimensionless parameter, A. , on which physical quantities can depend in a complicated way, for a dimensional one, (cp), on which physical quantities must depend in a trivial way, governed by dimensional analysis. We call this phenomenon dimensional transmutation, and argue that it is a general feature of spontaneous symmetry breaking in fully massless field theo-

massless field theories. Section IV contains the computations for massless scalar electrodynamics, and a discussion of their reliability. Section V is an explanation of how to apply the renormalization group of Gell-Mann and Low to our problem; we use this method to extend the domain of reliability of our earlier results. The reader who just wants to get a general idea of what we are up to is strongly advised to skip Sec. V, which is independent of nearly everything else in the paper. Section VI extends our methods to theories of multiplets of massless scalar mesons interacting with massless non-Abelian gauge fields and massless fermions. We obtain closed forms for the lowest-order effects of virtual gauge particles in the general case; these forms are valid even in theories in which there is a negative-mass term driving symmetry breakdown, and therefore may be of use to readers who do not share our

fascination with fully massless theories. Section VII lists our conclusions and makes some specula-

tions.

Two appendixes deal with matters peripheral to our main line of argument. One shows that certain interesting properties of our explicit lowest-order computations persist in higher orders; the other discusses the sense in which the massless theories we study are the limits of massive theories as the mass goes to zero.

II. FUNCTIONAL METHODS

AND

THE EFFECTIVE POTENTIAL

ries.

of dimensional transmutation quantities must be functions of e alone. In particular we find that the scalar-to-vector mass ratio is given by

One consequence

is that all dimensionless

m'(S) m'(V)

3 e2

2v 4n '

plus higher-order corrections. We think that this is the most interesting result of our analysis; we believe it is the first time a small mass ratio (rather than a small mass difference) has been found as a natural consequence of the presence of a small dimensionless coupling constant. The outline of our paper is as follows: Section II is a brief review of the formalism upon which our work is based, the method of generating functionals and effective potentials. Section IG is a detailed sample computation in the simplest

case, massless quartically self-interacting meson theory. Here we show how to treat in our formalism the infrared divergences

which occur in

In this section we review the functional methods introduced into quantum field theory by Schwinger, and extended to the study of spontaneous symmetry breakdown by Zona-Lasinio. It is common to study spontaneous symmetry breakdown in the socalled semiclassical approximation, that is to say, to search for minima of the potential, the negative sum of all the nonderivative terms in the Lagrange density. The method of Zona-Lasinio enables us to define a function, called the effective potential, such that the minima of the effective potential give, without any approximation, the true vacuum states of the theory. Furthermore, there exists a diagrammatic expansion for the effective potential, such that the first term in this expansion reproduces the semiclassical approximation. From our viewpoint, the virtue of this method is that it enables us to compute higherorder corrections while still retaining a great advantage of the semiclassical approximation: the ability to survey all possible vacua simultaneously. Thus we are able to investigate the character of the unstable but symmetric theory described by the same Lagrangian which governs a

'

) ~ y. in the presence of the source Z(x). neglecting all diagrams with closed loops).6) d V 4 dPc (2. ) — ordinary )+" ] . (2. by turning minima in the effective potential into maxima). Z(y.(x. whose dynamics are described by a Lagrange density. such investigations are much more difficult.2) Taylor series ~ We can expand W in a functional 1 W=g n! d'x n — ~ ~ d'x d"'(x x )d(x)" d(» ) (2. In other formalisms for computing higher-order corrections to spontaneously broken symmetries. (o' «x) og I . The effective action may be expanded in a manner similar to that of (2. cp„ is defined by pc(x) 6W called the effective potential. The usual renormalization conditions of perturbation theory can be expressed in terms of the functions that occur in (2. . [The alert reader may wonder what happens to these conditions in massless field theories. )+-. )'Z(rp.8). (2. we are able to investigate cases in which the radiative corrections qualitatively change the structure of the theory (e.9c) 6I ( ) =-d(x) . is defined by a functional Legendre transformation ( ))=)()'(J) — &'*&(*)w f From this definition. it follows directly that (*)* (2.9a) 0 p ) I Likewise. W(d). it is much more difficult to detect the occurrence of such phenomena. even in the presence of renormalization effects. then d V doc' (2. not a functional — Ip-) (2. ). In tree approximation (that is to say. [A IPI (one-particle-irreducible) diagram is a connected diagram that cannot be disconnected by cutting a single internal line. For example. we shall restrict our selves in this section to the theory of a single scalar field. J(x). (n) ~ ~ x„)y. I'= n — d x. is defined in terms of the transition amplitude from the vacuum state in the far past to the vacuum state in the far future. in other formalisms.9b) 0 Similarly. I'i"' is the sum of all 1PI Feynman diagrams with n external Feynman lines. In addition. I = d'x[-V((p.g. then (O' IO ) (2.5) (2. '(S„(p. General Formalism and Definitions For notational simplicity. S„(p). such an expansion looks like Z+ d-(x)(p(x) . ] There is an alternative way to expand the effective action: Instead of expanding in powers of y„we can expand in powers of momentum (about the point where all external momenta vanish). it is easy to see that the noh derivative of V is the sum of all 1PI graphs with n vanishing external momenta. By convention. In position space. the standard condition for the normalization of the field becomes z(0)=I. if we define the squared mass of the meson as the value of the inverse propagator at z ro momentum.4) The effective action I'((p. an V((p. " d »„I'"'(x. y. &&I((z) (p+ is function.3): given Goldstone-type asymmetric theory.'I) A. the negative sum of all nonderivative terms in the Lagrange density. Let us consider the effect of adding to the Lagrange density a linear coupling of y to an external source. a c-number function of space and time: Z(rp.8).8) The connected generating functional. S„rp) It is possible to show that the successive coefficients in this series are the II'I Green's functions (sometimes called proper vertices). for which the Green's functions have logarithmic singularities (infrared divergences) when the exter- . A. The classical field.1890 SIDNE Y COLEMAN AND E RICK WE IN BE RG This equation will shortly turn out to be critical in the study of spontaneous breakdown of symmetry. The generalization to more complicated cases is trivial. (x„) . V is just the ordinary potential. 1PI diagrams are evaluated with no propagators on the external lines.3) It is well-known that the successive coefficients in this series are the connected Green's functions. By comparing the expansions (2. G "' is the sum of all connected Feynman diagrams with n external lines.7) and (2. ~ (2. if we define the four-point function at zero external momenta to be the coupling constant.

(However. . ) The point is. We shall now attempt to show that one such sensible method is the loop the desired result. to calculate it requires an infinite summation of Feynman diagrams. Then it is easy to see that 5r Gap. 11) for some nonzero value of q.] We are now ready to apply this apparatus to the study of spontaneous symmetry breaking. etc. The value of y. The Loop Expansion P =L-1. Further.4) and (2. and by the redefinition of the division of the Lagrangian into free and interacting parts associated with such shifts.6). a is equal to one. while every vertex carries a factor of a (Note that it is important that we are dealing with 1PI graphs. are computable from equations exactly like the Eqs. ) On the other hand. number of internal lines in the graph and V is the number of vertices. where I is the (2. we can simplify this to d97c dv =0 (2. (2. . This is because the propagator.V+1 . as we shall show in Sec. 16) (2. rather. being the inverse of the differential operator occuring in the quadratic terms in g. L=I. 12)]. . (2. (2. Let us introduce a parameter a into our Lagrange density. the stationary point given by Eq. III. since we are typically only interested in cases where the vacuum expectation value is translationally invariant (that is to say. indeed. From Eqs. since the loop expansion corresponds to expansion in a parameter that multiplies the total Lagrange density. 14) and (2. (2. except that the derivatives are evaluated at (y). this occurs if expansion: first summing all diagrams with no closed loops (tree graphs). the number of loops. it is certainly no worse than ordinary perturbation theory for small coupling constants. 1891 nal momenta vanish. carries a factor of a. as we will show in Sec. L is given by P=I —V. except for one 5 function that is left over for over-all energy-momentum conservation. 0 (2. for which there are no propagators attached to external lines. for simplicity. .10) for some nonzero value of y. we define a new quantum field with vanishing vacuum expectation value.14) '. It is easy to see that if this situation is to be stable under small external perturbations. is the expectation value of p in the new (asymmetric) vacuum. Let us suppose our Lagrange density possesses an internal symmetry. as a subset. is trivial. a task beyond our computational abilities. it is important to know a sensible approximation method for V. by defining (2. 15).12b) from which it immediately follows that the actual mass. (2. we do not know the effective potential. redefinition of This is because the number of loops in a diagram is equal to the number of independent integration momenta. for which the minimum occurs. which we denote by (y). even when the source Z(x) vanishes. . every internal line contributes one integration momentum. The point of this analysis is not that the loop expansion is a good approximation scheme because a is a small parameter.' Of course. To explore the properties of the spontaneously broken theory. Unfortunate1y. then those with one closed loop. Thus. sponit to be the transformation taneous symmetry breaking occurs if the quantum field cp develops a nonzero vacuum expectation value. but every vertex contributes a 5 function that reduces the number of independent momenta by one. 12a) This generates a corresponding the classical field. it is unaffected by shifts of fields [such as in Eq. coupling constant. 11) must be a minimum of the effective potential. (2. this summation y. 13) We shall now show that the loop expansion is equivalent to a power-series expansion in a. (2. except for trivial models. we find that (2. Combining Eqs. all graphs of nth order or less in the coupling constants. Let P be the power of a associated with any graph. since the set of graphs with n loops or less certainly includes. but.9).16) Knowledge of the effective potential is knowledge of the structure of spontaneous symmetry breakdown. The n-loop approximation to the effective potential thus preserves what we have identified . let us imagine Then.-p. B.RA DIA TIVE CORRE C TIONS AS THE ORIGIN OF. III. we are not interested in the spontaneous breakdown of momentum conservation). The answer is that they survive with only minor modifications. etc. each stage in this expansion also involves an infinite summation. rather than at zero.

2) seems hideously infrared divergent. (3. like P'lnP'. This is reminiscent of the phenomenon we would have encountered had we attempted to compute the radiative corrections to the propagator in this theory. [Equation (3. order by order in the expansion. and therefore the 1/4! in the definition of the coupling is incompletely canceled. 1. rotation or reflection of the n-sided polygon does not lead to a new contraction in the Wick expansion. we can avoid them by staying away from vanishing y. As we see. The Lagrange density for this theory is & = a(spp) — ( p + a&(st%) kf!9' 4( C9' (3. the apparent infrared divergence has been turned into a logarithmic singularity at qr. equals zero. The one-loop approximation potential. it is eaten by the renormalization counterterms. and C are the usual wave-function.2a) To next order (one-loop approximation). 2. The two situations are precisely parallel.3) tain (3. shown in Fig.3) also has an apparent logarithmic singularity in the coupling constant. At first glance. only to be evaluated to lowest order in our expansion parameter.2b) k + ie where B and C are. X for the effective FIG. the theory of a massless. quartically self-interacting meson field. this is because the theory posesses no symmetry that would guarantee vanishing bare mass in the limit of vanishing renormalized mass. by imposing the definitions of the scale of the renormalized field. 2. we have rotated the integral into Euclidean space and dropped the i&. as we shall show immediately. However. the expression (3.1892 SIDNE Y COLEMAN AND ERICK STEINBERG Certain numerical factors in this expression require further explanation: (1) The over-all factor of i comes from the definition of W.2). we would have found a sequence of increasingly infrared-divergent terms. even though we are studying the massless theory. B. it enables us to survey all possible vacuum states at once.3) is still ultra- / FIG. ] Of course. Thus we obtain d'k (271) ~ „-g 1 2n 2A. considerable improvement is obtained if we sum the as the main advantage of the effective potential method. 1. where. (3. in momentum space. and to compute higher-order corrections before deciding which vacuum the theory finally picks. the renormalized mass. each term in the sum is worse than the one before. However. y. these behave. The no-loop approximation potential. !lq for the effective . and coupling-constant renormalization counterterms to be determined self-consistently. here. A SAMPLE COMPUTATION AND THE PROBLEM OF INFRARED DIVERGENCES In this section we shall present a detailed cornputation of the one-loop approximation to the effective potential in the simplest possible case.1) where A. in the numerator of the fraction is a Bose statistics factor. (2. in this expression. had we been so foolish as to attempt to calculate this function by computing its power-series expansion at p' equals zero. Thus we ob- series 9 c -B9c d4k ~ pc (2. As is well known. interchange of the two external lines at the same vertex does not lead to a new graph. III. ' (3. .e that a mass renormalization term is present. ' (2) The factor of —. Eq. '} To lowest order (tree approximation) only one graph contributes. we have the infinite series of polygon graphs shown in Fig. just as in Eq. we can avoid the infrared divergences by staying away from vanishing momentum. and therefore the 1/n! in Dyson's formula is incompletely canceled. to lowest nontrivial order. this singularity is illusory. mass. the integral in Eq. in this case the loop-counting parameter a. as usual in renormalization theory.) '" "2i' (3. (3) The 1/2nis acombinatoric factor. even though all our momenta vanish. and the renormalized coupling constant (Not.2}. as well as the contributions from the mass and coupling-constant counterterms.

with no effect on the physics of the problem. because it is on top of the logarithmic singularity in momentum space. for the computation we are now doing.9c). (4) It is easy to check explicitly that the renormalization mass.9a). ) mentum . not a change of phys- ics. when all the dust of renormalization has settled. (2. where similar arbitrary renormalization masses enter for massless field theories.12) i' where M is some number with the dimensions of a mass. is indeed an arbitrary parameter. Several comments are in order: (1) This is a renormalizable theory.9) we find where we have thrown away A' goes to infinity. A. 3Z' 32m' M" M (3. (The learned reader may remember that. We avoid this difficulty as we This is simply a reparametrization of the same function. different parametrizations of the theory. M. M'. because of the logarithmic infrared singularity. (3. this is reminiscent of the situation that exists in momentum space for the same theory. . Here. (2. we should lose much of the simplicity of our computation if we attempted to extend it away from vanishing momentum to do exactly the same thing. Once again.10) may be rewritten as V= —. but any nonzero 4I is as good as any other. and define the coupling constant at a point away from the singularity in classicalfield space. (3. This method is the renormalization group of Ge11-Mann and Low. the n-loop contribution to V is simply proportional to A. however. just as is the corresponding quantity in the momentum-space analysis. (2} As we remarked earlier. we remark that the standard condition for defining the scale of the field. (3. That is to say. we cut off the inviolet-divergent. the logarithmic dependence on the coupling constant has also disappeared.8) o This implies that XA' B=.32r (3 8) we cannot follow Eq. — . There.'I) + ln '. tegral at O' =A'. 4t&~ 256„& "M& 6 (3. y. (2.11) Equation (3.10) (3. We show in Appendix A that this is true to all orders in the loop expansion. fol- Putting all of this together. and we will do so in Sec. . it is a change of definitions. (3) More surprisingly. 9c) Z(M) =1 V= —.9b). (2.RADIATIVE CORRECTIONS AS THE ORIGIN OF. '+ y d4V dVc =A. by replacing Eq.7}. the standard strategy is to define the coupling constant at some off-mass-shell position in momentum space. different choices for will lead to different definitions of the coupling constant. so we should expect all dependence on the cutoff to disappear from our final expression for V. the coupling constant can not be defined at the usual mass-shell symmetry point. We emphasize that M is completely arbitrary. It can be transferred bodily to the formalism we are using. . we define the renormalized coupling constant by This is our final expression for the effective potential in the one-loop approximation and completes our sample computation. to the order in which we are working. define the renormalized coupling constant. + — Bcp. . to evaluate it. but as promised. the fourth derivative of V at the origin does not exist. We want the renormalized lowing Eq. C y +~ . is afflicted by the same infrared singularity as Eq. we find d V dt's now determine terms that vanish as the counterterms by imrenormalized mass mass to vanish. it is easy to do a parallel thing. V.8) 11 3 Imposing Eq.9b) to Unfortunately. this is indeed the case. d'V dkp. the violent infrared singularities in the individual diagrams have become a singularity at the origin of classical-field space. In Appendix A we show that this is also true to higher orders. then we define a new coupling constant "". Eq. . in mospace. — + O(X') . there exists a method of "improving" perturbation theory to obtain an expansion in which the independence of the renormalization masses is exact to every order. Although we do not need to know the wave-function renormalization counterterm. away from the singularity.4) 3x' 32 (3. We can value of the renormalization posing the definitions of the and coupling constant. xM 2g we find (3. and obtain by 1893 avoided the previous one. + —. (2. If we pick a different mass. ~ 64 256 2A 2 (3.

running around the polygon. -(-s„rp.5) This function. even for an arbitrarily small coupling constant. and must be rejected as an artifact of our approximation. As we shall see shortly. the central idea of this paper. 3. cp. Some diagrams which do not contribute to the effective potential in scalar quantum electrodynamics. Thus there are only three classes of graphs to compute: those of the type shown in Fig. 4. This is because the external momentum is zero. FIG. Aside from trivial numerical factors. Furthermore. MASSLESS SCALAR ELECTRODYNAMICS (4. (4. determined by 32 (y)' m'+O(A. outside the expected domain of validity of our approximation.13) Since we expect higher orders to bring in higher powers of X in(y. therefore the momentum of the internal meson is the same as that of the internal photon. . 1) (4. )' + —. those of the same type. all are of exactly the same structure as the graphs considered in Sec. we can obtain a minimum by balancing a term of order A. gp v — kgkv/k p v k2+i (3. the minimum arose from balancing a term of order Z against a term of order )Pin(rp/M). the solid lines. for small A. there is no reason in the world why A. itself of order e4. thus. We think this point is so important that we will restate it in slightly different language: At first glance. with a photon running around the polygon. We write the charged meson field in terms of two real fields. that higherorder effects may qualitatively change the char- We shall now apply the apparatus developed in the last two sections to massless scalar electrodynamics. that the one-loop corrections have generated spontaneous symmetry breaking. it appears as though the one-loop corrections have turned the minimum at the origin into a maximum. the new minimum lies very far outside the expected range of validity of the one-loop approximation. III. the minimum need not be illusory. 3 vanishes. like the one discussed in Sec. — (E„„)'+5 eA„qr. and to which the same criticism can not be applied. III. against a term of order e ln(y/M). and y„and write the Lagrange density as '. with a y. Indeed. IV. 's. III. and caused a new minimum to appear away from the origin. even for an arbitrarily small coupling constant.1894 SIDNE Y COLEMAN AND ERICK WEINBERG Landau gauge. The photon contribution to the one-loop approximation for the effective potential. ')' —. '(s„y. and those shown in Fig.2} + counterterms. cannot be of the same order of magnitude as e'. '/M'). + 0 ~ ~ FIG. running around the polygon. to cancel the divergence in Coulomb scattering. Alas. there do exist physically interesting theories for which the effective potential has a very similar form.4) . The calculation of the effective potential can be somewhat simplified if we realize that it can only depend on 9c 2 2 — =0'zc 2 +9 2c (4. + cp. = —— is (4. has a minimum away from the origin. ) . 2. however. 4. but with a cp. we obtain + 4~ 9 c 1152' 64' Wc M2 6 is massless scalar electrodynamics.3) external lines Thus. appearances are deceptive: The apparent new minimum occurs at a value of y. After some straightforward computation. In Sec.that is to say. Even though the second term formally arises in a higher order of our expansion than the first. we need only compute graphs with all the if we work in ~I(). Here. Aln. the theory of a massless charged meson minimally coupled to the electrodynamic field. The wiggly lines represent photons. . Here. and vanishes when it is contracted with the photon propagator. this is what we should expect if we think of the quartic meson self-interaction as being forced on us by renormalization. Among them then the contribution of any graph of the type shown in Fig. where F„„= A„. spinless mesons. though. + eA„(p. where the photon propagator (5} Since the logarithm of a small number is negative. B. )' — (y.8„&„. it inevitably occurred at large 1n(y/M).

If we had adapted a different definition of A. and we have ended up with two (e and &y&). we might as well simplify our computational task by choosing it to be the actual location of the minimum. has disappeared.' in Eq. (4. since it is of the same order of magnitude as the two-loop electromagnetic corrections. but this is not the case: We have not lost any free parameters. we would have to define particle masses as the locations of poles in propagators rather than as the values of inverse propagators at zero momentum. the intermediate equations (4. Thus we obtain 1895 realize that dimensional transmutation is an inevitable feature of spontaneous symmetry breakdown in a massless field theory.11) are exact only in our approximation. for a fixed theory. }. the radiative corrections (Fig. despite the fact that graphs with more loops in- . 10) The would-be Goldstone boson combines with the photon to make a massive vector meson. the final value of A. . we shalt. since the renormalization mass M is arbitrary. use the renormalization group to show that all of our results extend without alteration to a more general case. Their right-hand sides have corrections of higher order in e. this says nothing about their actual relative magnitudes. which can be comparable. as we have been doing. as the number of loops increases. 12) 0= V = 11e' 6 16m' &~&'' (4. .5} is negligible compared to the other terms. Also. This is because the first of these definitions is gauge-invariant„while the second. What is slightly surprising is that we have traded a dimensionless parameter. a change in the arbitrary renormalization mass leads to a change in the numerical value of the dimensionless coupling constants. the first effects of the electromagnetic coupling. . Under this assumption. they grow rapidly more difficult to compute in practice. 3) are pro forma of higher order than the effects of the direct quartic coupling (Fig. but Eq. aeter of a physical theory. III]. 11) we find 9c +64&29 c ln( &2 6 (4. From this point on the analysis is the same as for the familiar Abelian Higgs model. these are unambiguously calculable in principle. 7) or.8) Note that the redefinition of the coupling constant associated with shifting the fields has led to a determination of X in terms of e. seems to be in flat contradiction with the basic idea of perturbation theory. . and we can drop it. consistency demands we drop it. we started out with two (e and A. in(y.5)-(4. Therefore. (4. which we have not computed. ' After shifting the field. We call this phenomenon dimensional transmutation. all reference to A. &rp&. . so we expect the effects of higher orders on the effective potential in this region to be small. A.9) would have remained unaltered. its mass is given by the conventional formula m'(V) =e'&y&' . This smells suspiciously like some sort of bootstrap or eigenvalue condition. although. Like all other radiative corrections.6) Combining these two equations. V. This is not so. for a dimensional one. Indeed. for the time being. The reader who has followed our arguments should the result announced in the Introduction. However. is independent of the initial value of A. if we were to go to higher orders. In Sec. we m m'(S) (V) e' 4v' (4. (4.9) This is parametrized in terms of e and &rp& alone. in general. 33 r e (4. Thus. To what extent do we expect these yet higherorder corrections to affect the qualitative behavior we have found'? Near &rp&. even for very small e and A. we obtain our final expression for the effective potential (4. the term of order A. . it is nothing but a reflection of the simple fact that. 3 2w Since &y& deduce is defined to be (&y&) the minimum of V. the two definitions coincide. that higher-order effects are always small corrections to lower-order ones.8)-(4. 1). Also. arbitrary (but still small) e and X. Fortunately. /&y&) is small. We emphasize that Eqs. to the order in which we are working [see remark (4) at the end of Sec. the mass of the scalar meson is given by m'(S) = V "(&q») (4. to the order in which we are working. 4 ~ (4. Phrased more dramatically. &y&. In the case under consideration.RADIATIVE CORREC TIONS AS THE ORIGIN OF. is not.8) would have changed. after we have done the shift. we will restrict ourselves to the case where X is indeed of order e'.

through Eq.3) and (5. M. (2. +P 8 — +ny 8$ r'"' x. logarithms grow large for small values of their arguments as well as large. For our purposes. it is convenient to define t =In(y. ) lf we apply Eqs. ii) (s. although graphs with more loops might turn the maximum at the origin back into a minimum. As we have seen. —— Bt 4 v'"(t ~)=0 (5 9) ( —— Bt z(t. (M BM +P — 8& By + 2y X=0. (5. to work with the dimensionless function 84@ plus corrections which we expect to be small. they cannot turn it into an absolute minimum. (5.7). so our expansion scheme is as unreliable near the origin as it is for large y.3) +yy. /(cp)) into the potential along with higher powers of e. Of course. (s. 8). .9) and (5. we y= — 1 8 — z). perhaps. our entire expansion scheme breaks down. (5. (5 4) 3e'(y)' 128e ' (4. for the argument given in the preceding paragraph is just the standard argument used to derive the renormalization group. Thus. this mass is arbitrary. (3.7). V. its only function is to define the renormalized coupling constant.1) to the expansion of F in terms of 1PI Green's functions. ~) =~ and (s. no graph can change the value of V at zero.7) and (3. it is better to exploit Eq. as we have emphasized. P and y can depend z(o. z)=0. the explicit expression for the effective action in this theory involves a mass. although we should trust the minimum we have found at (y). 13) It will turn out to be convenient.7) let us begin by restricting ourselves to the theory of a self-interacting meson field.2) These are the familiar differential equations of the renormalization group. A. though. (5. Eq. Eqs. However.8).i896 SIDNE Y COLEMAN AND ERICK WEINBERG M 8 BM troduce higher powers of ln(rp. later we will extend our analysis to massless quantum electrodynamics. On the other hand. and an appropriate small rescaling of the field. (5. be new minima lurking in this region. a small change in M can always be compensated for by an appropriate small change in A.8) (5. /M) . /M. (5 6) It is also useful to define P =P/(1 y). . (5.4) In terms of these quantities. become — —8 +p 8 +4y — —8 +p 8 +2y BA. Thus. If we combine these find that Eq. and the asymmetric vacuum we have found remains a local minimum definitely lower than that at the origin.1) by applying it to the expansion (2.8). Therefore. through Eq. and the scale of the renormalized field. graphs with more loops might well turn this into a minimum again. can only depend on y. ~QgL&)a v=0.10). z) =1. In this way we obtain ' M and 8 BM +P — 'By. (x). the renormalization conditions.i3) . But. 10) +p — +y 8 4 d'xy. +yy 8 8 BX V=O (5. THE RENORMALIZATION GROUP Bgc (5. and M through the ratio y. instead of working with V. This should be no surprise.1) This is the form of the renormalization-group equations that we shall use. This statement can be expressed as an equation 8 For simplicity. For extremely large values of cp„where the logarithm becomes large. we find that only on z.5) Since dimensionless quantities. (5. we should not trust the maximum we have found at zero. and y = y/(1 — y) (5. . III.i2) with for an appropriate choice of the coefficients P and y. such as V ' and Z. (By dimensional analysis. There may. (3. but it is beyond the capabilities of any perturbative computational method to detect them. ~ ~ x„=o . In terms of the quantities we have defined. discussed in Sec. z(0. (3. which stays firmly fixed at zero. become v"'(0.

(5. Of course. in terms of P and y. 16). ~)]' . in which we know them only to lowest order 7 Let us suppose that we construct an approximation for X'(A. and use Eqs. for some range of t. the terms we have neglected by truncating the power series for P are indeed small compared to the terms we have retained. z(ln(M'/M). (5. that is to say. (5. we will merely describe the construction. For the moment. (5. X))exp where t n 0 dt y{X'(t. It is easy to extend all this analysis to a general massless renormalizable field theory: The renormalization group equations will have one Plike term for every coupling constant and one ylike term for every field. X) = A. x) =z . — ~) —4y ~ . Thus.' = y. '(t. and we will obtain an improved approximation — "improved" in the sense that it is valid over a larger range of (It is important to remember that the domain of reliability of the one-loop approximation is determined not only by the condition that the cou- =P(&'). for then the terms we have neglected are large compared to the terms we have retained. though.10} are special cases.22) (5. if we know the derivatives that occur on the right-hand sides of these equations. t) by integrating. in terms of their first derivatives at t=o.20) to compute how the renormalized coupling constant changes when we change the renormalization mass. x). from some small X. let us imagine we know P and y exactly. If we are lucky. the approximation becomes evident nonsense. at y.14) c= M Thus. for all t. at best.RADIATIVE CORRE and p= C TIONS AS THE ORIGIN OF. Nevertheless. even if we are very industrious. arbitrary function f. '.2). in this domain. 11) and (5.24) This elucidates the meaning of the function of which Eqs. X'(t.15) is of the form F(t.)'Z {ln(M'/M). and we will be able to trace out the changes in the renormalized coupling constants as the renormalization point changes. fix the f '. and refer the reader to the literature" for its derivation. x) becomes large. ) '~ the new coupling constant. ~) = ~'(t. Otherwise. . We would expect this approximation to be reliable for that range of t for which A. as we shall see. we can only know the first few terms in their loop expansions. A.1t) Then. X) remains small. (5. a)). then (s„y'. all will be as before.)' = (e„y. obtained by replacing P by its one-loop approximation. t 0 Thus we obtain Z(t. one for each coupling constant. ~)[z(t. 16) will become a system of coupled ordinary differential equations. By definition. (5. (5. at N —— (5. However. Z and V are completely determined. for. we can only know the first few terms in the power-series expansions of P and y. x)=exp and 2 dtyg'(t.16) with the boundary z'(O. X) =f{X'(t. W'e begin by finding the function A. those functions in the effective action that fix the renormalization conditions will be determined in terms of their derivatives at the renormalization point. Since this is of the same structure as the muchstudied Eq. and shows the power of the renormalization group. . =M to (5. (5. (5. given by A.23) A. Then it is easy to construct the general solution of the equation If y' is the new field. we know P and y. '(t. (5. '{ln(M'/M).21) (5.15) ) . an approximate version of Eq. Equation (5.19} v'"(t. So much for the dream world in which we know P and y exactly. (5.19) and (5. — —a +P a +ny F(t. 1897 tion point from ' v'"(0.12). we cannot know these derivatives exactly. . .20) This is a remarkable result. We can go further. ~)) (5.18) is an arbitrary function. even this is useful information. y. the approximation for X' will stay small for a large range of t. k) =0.9) and (5. Let us suppose we change our renormaliza- ' t. condition (5. if. What about the real world. For the special cases of Z and V the renormaiization equations. X) defined as the solution of the ordinary differential equation dt ~'(t. whence z). the general solution of Eq. is gt a4 V Pc 4 pc= =Z 'V 'i(in(M'/M).

(Xt~«l). We now see that our mistrust was justified. ' dt 16' 2 (5. —4y V'"(t. We impose the same renormalization conditions on Z and V as before. . III we also found a phony minimum at large t.34) differential equation is 3 e2 Z=1+.H q. we deduce that =-ey (5.40) 8 8 and ( — — —8 + P 8 + P ' 8 + 2y H(t. a. but we mistrusted this. A. 8w (5. III. in the one-loop approximation. they vanish: Z=1 . The renormalization-group equation for this theory is M — +P 8 8 +P.1898 SIDNE Y COLEMAN AND ERICK WEINBE RG gin by expanding the effective action and retaining only those terms which define the renormalization pling constant be small. t. not a minimum.27) H(M) =1 . constants: r= ' d'x —Vq.33) We have computed all these functions in the oneThe results are loop approximation. /M). Z.31) is valid in a much larger range of t. ) Let us apply these ideas to the one-loop approximation in self-interacting meson theory.31) has a pole at large t.31) is a good approximation near the origin. for in this range A.26) (5. this is a consequence of gauge invariance. the computation is straightforward. (5. + + — ——8 +P — Z t.31) +y Note that this agrees with the one-loop approximation in its expected domain of validity ((A( «1.. (5. %e now turn to scalar electrodynamics.32) Note that the last group of terms has a common coefficient function.32). not compute the one-loop corrections to Z. Differentiating Eq. III. we fix the scale of the renormalized electromagnetic field by In Sec.28) The approximate dA. F„. as before. + 3A. (5. We be- cp„+ (p. we did in the one-loop approximation. Eq.38) This is the reflection in our formalism of the old result that Zy Z2 We also find that — —P. (5. It is the latter restraint that the renormalization group may allow us to escape. . Thus. ' ]+ ' ' ' } ~ + 2~(pc)[(sp&c —e& pc p2c) + (8p9'2 + e+ p 9'x ) 62) t (5. Eq. (3. --. (5. p. 8t 8A. in this approximation. because the region near the origin (large negative t) was outside the domain of validity of the approximation. discussed in Sec. we find that V (4) =A.30) From this we obtain the improved approximation for the effective potential. e) 0. Eq. we found that the one-loop corrections turned the minimum at the origin of classical-field space into a maximum. III. is In(cp. and it predicts a maximum. in addition.29) and Its solution is A.36) ' 1 —3gt/16v' (5. e =0. I =0. 8e —— — Here the barred coefficients are defined as before. (4) 5X2 9e4 (5. including all negative t. However. in place of this. (5.35) ' 3A. howand the ever.37) Applying this to P Eg. (5. — +y 8 1-3zt/16v' ' (5. but also by the condition that the logarithmic factor t not be too large. V(4) where t.25) (5. (5. not the former. where equally phony — our new approximation is as untrustworthy as our old one.10). +P — +2y 8 +P —8 8 = (5. '. result is that. but it is this is a region of large A. y=O and (5. In Sec.39) (5. In Sec. ' remains small. e) = 0 .

(5. the third is a massless version of the Weinberg-Salam theory of leptons. (5. therefore we restrict our detailed discussion to three specific models for which we have done explicit computations. = e'/48m' . Vl. IV. Of course.50) where 8 is an integration constant. . A. Thus. even for very small e. ' becomes large. so our approximation certainly breaks down in this region.that X be of the order of magnitude of e'. In this section we compute in closed form the one-loop corrections to the effective potential in a general massless renormalizable gauge-field theory. As t becomes large and negative. .46} becomes e". we do not have enough skill in the manipulation of arbitrary representations of arbitrary gauge groups to be able to give even a qualitative discussion of the structure of spontaneous symmetry breaking in the general case. for arbitrary small e and A. and it is then a straightforward calculus exercise to find the minima of V. For any given theory. For we can make the argument of the tangent change by 2w by varying t so as to move through a very small range. unlike the preceding case. '. all is not lost. e") d (5. One is a Yang-Mills triplet coupled to a scalar isovector. from any small value to any other small value by a change in the renormalization mass that does not change the order of magnitude of e.is in fact no restriction at all.44) and P. Thus our approximation also breaks down in this region. the approximate must solve are de = e "/48m'. In particular. to be chosen such that A. For. we can still obtain useful information.47) however. This means that the restriction we imposed in Sec. '=A. We should emphasize that all of our analysis is on the level of that of Sec.RA D IA TI V E CORR E C T ION S AS THE ORIGIN OF. another is the same triplet coupled to a scalar isotensor.48) Eq. Thus. and all mass ratios are computable in terms of dimensionless coupling con- stants. but we can trust it for the region of smaLl A. we can always make it such. but in their gross features they are all the same as massless scalar electrodynamics: Radiative corrections induce spontaneous symmetry breaking. What about their utility? As t becomes large and positive. is not of the order of magnitude of e'.43) (5. we cannot trust the further reaches of this excursion. by dividing by (1 — Evaluating these equations at the renormalization point. (5. if A.45) dz' dt =( x" 3e" x'+9e")/4w' . X' traverses the entire real axis. ) In the course of this variation. Unfortunately. the effective potential for massless scalar electrodynamics develops a minimum away from the origin. =5fP-19ft+54. to 2e' is more than sufficient. we obtain the one-loop approximation to the coefficient functions: y = 3e'/16 m'. since the argument of the tangent inevitably passes through a multiple of n. e' becomes large. We can hardly praise these solutions for their beauty.42) 'e' (By the crudest estimates. . The second looks more fearsome. just as in the preceding case. Thus. These display a range of interesting phenomena. the range from —. V me mere able to remove this restriction from our study of massless scalar electrodynamics with the aid of the renormaliza- e" . 1899 y). by appropriately changing the renormalization mass. and spontaneous symmetry breakdown occurs. we cannot use the renormalization group to obtain an approximation to the effective potential that is valid near the origin of classical-field space as well as near the renormalization point. '/e". NON-ABELIAN GAUGE THEORIES quadrature: e2 e't/24m' 1— (5. IV. (5. this means that we will always assume that the quartic scalar self-couplings are of the order of magnitude of e'. In Sec. when e'=e. we can move A. e' stays small. it is simple to compute these quantities. Nevertheless. define if we R = A. =~o e" (5. but A. (5. p = (~sr' —3e"x+ 9e')/4v'. dt and differential equations we (5.49) This can also be solved by quadrature: ' [v'719 tan(~4719 Ine' + 8}+19]. The expressions we obtain involve traces of functions of certain matrices constructed from the coupling constants of the theory.46) by The first of these can be solved trivially.

3) of the gauge-field loops may be computed in a similar way. all the g's are equal. the appropriate range in each case. V. This corresponds to multiplying the W matrices around the loop and then taking their trace. FIG.e T'~m} (6. We define a matrix M'(y) in terms of the nonderivative coupling of gauge fields to spinless mesons: absorb in V. + V. This vertex. which we denote by qP. A. is the zero-loop approximation.2) '. or if we were to compute two-loop corrections to the effective potential. Note that in the fermion sum. If we quantize the theory in Landau gauge. in Landau gauge. . ) Following the same reasoning as before. We call this matrix M' because. is the coupling constant of the associated gauge field. (Of course. ) in a general massless gauge theory. }j. . The contribution plus cutoff-dependent quartic terms. and gauge-field loops. is given by W. + Vf + V. Computation of the Effective Potential a'y. gauge mesons (Fig. this is not necessarily the case. = &4. All these fields are massless. III. which and a set of real vector fields. and g. V&. V(rp.) = tion group. + V. to first nonvanishing order M'. shown in Fig. V. To compute V.4) " Like O'. only graphs with an even number of external lines occur. ) Thus. is the contribution from coupling-constant-renormalization counterterms. (6. and 5. ever. (5. (If the gauge group is simple. which we 2= ~ ~ ~ + -'Q M'(q )A ab A" + ~ ~ ~ . The directed lines represent fermions. . we must sum over all possible internal mesons. we find that V. Sometimes we will find it convenient to assemble all the spinless fields into a vector. is the representation of the ath infinitesimal transformation of the gauge group. ) = V. These are to be inserted in the vertices of the polygon graphs of Figs. 4. 4). 6. we denote by 4 which we denote by A'„. the only graphs we need consider are polygon graphs with either spinless mesons (Fig. ) lnW(y. and V. n= r. which we denote by y.5) where T. (i4. connecting an internal meson of type a with one of type b. this is because the trace of an odd number of y matrices vanishes. these have no direct coupling to the spinless fields. and the interactions between them are of renormalizable type: quartic self-interactions of the spinless bosons. or even if we were to work in a less well-chosen gauge. and minimal gaugeinvariant couplings of the vector fields. . M' is a real symmetric matrix and a quadratic function of y. copying directly from Sec. 6. The fermion contribution to the effective potential. a set of Dirac bispinor fields. Howthere are also the famous ghost fields. The index a runs over (6. zn(T. the one-loop approximation to the effective potential can be written as a sum of terms: Vis a real symmetric matrix and a quadratic function of y. Yukawa-type boson-fermion couplings (not necessarily parity-conserving}. we would have to take account of ghost fields if we were to compute terms in the effective action that depend on classical gauge fields. otherwise. we can write M'. These are not the only internal lines in a non-Abelian gauge theory. The class of Lagrangians we will study involves a set of real spinless boson fields. Thus. . and thus need not be considered for our computation. but we have not yet extended these methods to the non-Abelian case. 2. fermion. or fermions (Fig. Because the vector mesons are minimally coupled. (g)) is the square of the vector-meson mass matrix. where V. 5) running around the loops. 5. TrLW'(y.i900 SIDNE Y COLEMAN AND ERICK WEINBERG occurs at the corner of a polygon graph. 2). . The vertices which are needed to compute the one-loop appraximation to V(y. To compute the n-sided polygon. and V~ are the contributions from spinless-meson. is a quartic polynomial determined in terms of the other four terms once we have stated our renormalization conditions. we need to know the vertex that Wob (Pc) &c mob 0 b (&P~) M~ob (&c) + rs 1& + FIG.

14) and the quartic by A. The ratio of the masses of the charged vector mesons to that of the remaining (neutral) scalar meson is given by m'(S) m'(V) 2 e' v 4v ' (6. To first nonvanishing order.) A and B are Hermitian matrices and linear functions of y. which we absorb in V. (6. it is not . However.5). Note that in this equation the trace runs over Dirac indices as well as internal indices. and of the effects of shifting the renormalization point to the minimum. this effect is completely negligible. For this theory.9) The sum is then seen to be the same as in the other cases. Eq. . scalar coupling constant is given (6. III. This is.6) plus quartic terms. Vf is smaller than V. which we absorb in V. which we identify with electric charge. From Eq. except for the coefficient. and we obtain V~ = =. We now turn to our first model. of exactly the same form as the corresponding term in massless scalar electrodynamics.6). (rp)+. .10).6) and (6. this means that the effect of fermion closed loops can make shallower. )]. )lnM (y. and the field develops a vacuum expectation value. IV. (6. " Tr[(m m (y. (6 6) (We use a Hermitian y. as we see from Eqs. minima caused by the other terms.5} we find that 2 (6.13} pg 0 ~ ~ (6. is the same as that given in Sec. since. plus quartic terms. We should bear in mind. with masses comparable to the vector-meson masses. . The vacuum expectation value is necessarily invariant under a U(1) subgroup of the original SU(2) group.RADIATIVE CORREC TIONS AS THE ORIGIN OF. i6) = 33e' 4 2 Because the potential is twice as great as that of the Abelian theory. })'ln(m m" (y. spontaneous symmetry breakdown occurs. the effective potential can depend only on the length of this vector. First Model: Yang-Mills Fields 2Tr[M (cp. except. that V pg 1 p7g 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ppg =32. this ratio is so small that the effect of fermion loops is tiny even when compared with that of two-loop electromagnetic corrections. The extra factor of three in this equation comes from the trace of the numerator of the Landau-gauge propagator. for the standard minus sign for fermion loops. Thus. from our experience with the Abelian theory. (6. (6. (6.11) The matrix m is a matrix in Dirac space as well as in internal space: maa Aaa+ iBa~ y5 . because. . . from Eq. w 3e in@. m. of course. by a factor on the order of the fourth power of the fermion-to-vector-meson mass ratio. the discussion of its minimum. whence its name. + ab ~ ~ ~ . The fermion contribution to the effective potential has opposite sign to the other terms. though. (4. Hence. these formulas differ by a factor of two from the corresponding ones we found in Sec. The gauge field associated with this subgroup (the photon) remains massless. or even eliminate altogether. for the only model with fermions we shall consider (the Weinberg-Salam theory of leptons). By SU(2) invariance. we expect this to be the dominant term in the effective potential. We can exploit the fact We begin by computing V. g. all other entries vanish. that if we build a model in which the Yukawa couplings are such that superheavy fermions appear. . Since in this model a massless photon remains after symmetry breakdown. . therefore it suffices to compute it in the case when only the third component is nonzero: (C let 'P2cs 93c) ( 1 1 9 c) (6. We assemble the scalar fields into a vector in the standard way. ))]. The contribution of the fermion loops may be computed in a similar way. while the two other (charged) gauge fields eat the corresponding scalar mesons and acquire a mass. this effect can be important. we find that V = 1901 and a Scalar Isovector B. We define a matrix m(p) in terms of the Yukawa coupling: 2= ~ ~ ~ —Q 4'. the theory of a triplet of SU(2) gauge fields minimally coupled to a set of scalar mesons transforming according to the vector representation of the group. m((y}) is the fermion mass matrix.12) that only graphs with an even number of internal fermions contribute to the sum by grouping terms in the matrix product pairwise: ~ ~ ~ where e is the gauge-field coupling constant. Thus we find.

and associated with this subgroup. C. we would be in trouble for two reasons: (1} We would only determine a + b'+ c' at the minimum. and had zero mass. Just as in Sec. we choose to do this such that ' V =Vo+Vg 16@2 3e'. even in this case. a=b 2 C=-3' (6. Moral: The techniques developed in this paper may be of use even to someone who thinks that all this talk " a+ b+ c=0 of massless scalars is nonsense. Second Model: Yang-Mills Fields and a Scalar Isotensor . with no loss of generality. . choose this matrix to be diagonal: " 0 0 0 b 0 (6. We now turn to the actual computation of the effective potential. (6. would still possess a larger symmetry than SU(2}. and a pair of doubly charged scalars. a neutral scalar. to wit. A. (6. The other particles remaining in the theory would For. . We begin by investigating the restrictions placed by SU(2) symmetry upon the zeroth-order potential V. [Digression: This has an amusing consequence. Just as before.14) predicts that the charged vector mesons are about twelve times more massive than the neutral scalar meson. Try'.22) From this expression it is evident that y--p. in contrast to the preceding model. . a cubic interaction. . we exclude this by adding to our continuous symmetry There group the discrete transformation are apparently two possible quartic couplings. 18) Our second model is the same as the first. and we can neglect it. V. there V~= 6 2(a —b) ln[(a —b)'/p'] + cyclic permutations. if we do this. if we analyzed the theory in the semiclassical (no loop) approximation. abc. 4 . we now assume that X is of the order of magnitude of e".21) be a pair of charged vector mesons. 17) Thus there is only one term in Vo.c)' 2 2+2I 0 (c. . (6. which we could identify with the photon. except that the scalar fields transform according to the five-dimensional (tensor) representation of SU(2). a massless vector meson.b)' 1 + cyclic permutations (6. is allowed by the group. (a-b)' = 3p. (2) even if we picked a vacuum expectation value arbitrarily from this over-rich set.23) V. Further. Eq. which we could identify with electric charge. Try' and (Try')'. not just of trivial group theory. and to obtain a nonzero mass for the doubly charged scalars. it will be as a consequence of detailed dynamics. ] To compute V. we would find that the doubly charged scalars were spurious Goldstone bosons. and would have no idea how to fix the other SU(2) invariant. is a minimum of for it is a minimum of two of . We emphasize that there is nothing in the symmetry properties of this theory that guarantees that the minimum of V will obey Eq. by introducing a negative mass term in the Lagrangian. (6. we can. we can always adjust p. ' can always be compensated for by a change in the quartic coupling constant.16) 0 0 where c) . these are related by the tracelessness of y'. where p' is an arbitrary renormalization mass. 18). IV. to give the quartic coupling any desired value. however. SO(5). then V. it would be necessary to compute the effects of gauge-field loops. To simplify our problem. Thus. if a massless photon emerges. a change in p. is small compared with V. We represent these in the standard way as a traceless symmetric matrix. (6.20) (a. for even if we had destabilized the vacuum by hand. To pick the right vacuum. In computing the effective potential.b)') Hence. in this case.18) would remain an unbroken U(1) subgroup of the original SU(2) group. we begin by calculating the vector-meson mass-squared matrix: We would be especially happy if the minimum of the effective potential corresponded to a situation for which 1 a=b=-&c ((b.1902 SIDNE Y COLEMAN AND ERICK WEINBERG Tr y' = 2(Tr rp')' foolish to identify e with the actual electromagnetic coupling constant. In contrast to the previous case. (6. Thus. ~ ln (a.a)' 0 (6.

and by the remark at the end of Sec.2V) and m (D) =3e p. (6. that of the singlet g'. to be real. m'(S) m'(D) and (6. with no loss of generality. [2g'm'(W')+(g'+g")m'(Z)] The model of leptons proposed by Weinberg and Salarn" has been so much discussed in the recent lite "ature that. which we denote by (y).31) and (6. Comparing this with our previous work. for (y). VIA. (6.24) Fortunately. —. Eq. (6.a pre- . This is what we would expect from simple parameter counting. Z. its mass is not determined in terms of the other masses in the theory. they make a negligible contribution to the effective potential.16): S 3 D D (6. (6. thus.29) 3 (g'+g")'] y.29) would still have survived.2 p. arrange that only one component of the doublet has nonzero vacuum expectation value.and have obtained one new relation. there are the leptons. the Lagrangian contains a negative mass term for this doublet. and we can choose this value. electric charge remains a manifest symmetry and there is 1903 a massless photon. the only surviving member of the original complex doublet.20): sons form a complex doublet. rather than explaining it in detail.RADIATIVE CORREC TIONS AS THE ORIGIN OF. the three terms in Eq. with mass S 3 vY (6. (6. . with masses ' m'(W') =-. in diagonal form. muon. Playing the game just as before. 'In@. the matrix M'is given to us. 3 3 [2g'+ (g'+g")']( y)' . Because of the symmetry. the coupling constant of the triplet gauge fields is called g. with coupling m'(V) = 2e'p. we shall just remind the reader of some of its salient features. we find m (S) =9e g'/2v (6. which forces spontaneous symmetry breaking. (6. of course. /2v Whence. [2g'+ m'(D) m'(V) 3 e' v 4~ (6. but we will not give the proof here. the scalar masses are zero. we need only consider diagonal perturbations in Eq.iso a neutral scalar meson. the vector mesons are a massless photon. Thus we obtain V. We want to investigate what new information we obtain if we assume that.25) m'@) =-'(g'+g")(c)' . =1024. (6. It is possible to show that this is the only minimum of V (other than those obtained from it by trivial permutations). before symmetry breakdown.33) [We should note that had we put a negative mass term in the theory. After symmetry breaking. ] D. all we have to do is to substitute y. The gauge group is SU(2)xU(1). Also. S. . because the no-loop approximation would still have made no contribution to the mass of the doubly charged scalars.32) C=. 2S vY' 3 where S is the neutral scalar and D is a Hermitian combination of the two charged scalars. we can. The mass of the charged vector follows directly from (6.22). as discussed in the preceding digression. [The square roots are to give these fields the right nor' malization in the kinetic energy.28) There is a. by Eqs. ] Expanding (6. g'(q)'.32). We have added one new assumptionvanishing scalar mass before symmetry breakdown. Weinberg-Salam Theory of Leptons plus quartic terms.34) . but for our immediate purposes these are of no interest. we see that the important thing is to compute V. (6.31) and a massive neutral meson. (6.18). which are of no importance. '. we immediately find m'(S) =. to compute the scalar masses. .26) (6. '. Fortunately. Tr(e„ye y). since they are just the usual electron. The spinless me- The important observation is that this puny relation is al/ the new information we obtain.22) and a maximum (but with vanishing second derivative) of the third. Note that this is of the form (6. 8". and neutrinos.30) g +g' two massive charged mesons. and that symmetry breakdown is driven by radiative corrections. identified with the intermediate bosons of the weak interactions.

Then we are led to a remarkable situation: As we have seen. such as massless spinor electrodynamics. theless. VII. Thus ue are led to a Program for comPuting the fine-structure constant. to compute the masses of spurious Goldstone bosons. the effective potential is a simple power. We therefore feel that our computations have the same a priori plausibility as any other perturbative computation in a renormalizable field theory with weak coupling constants. or have so many free parameters that they can be made to fit experiment whatever the scalar masses. we have not been able to find a sensible approximation method on this idea. when symmetry breakdown occurs in a fully massless field theory. (5. Nevertheless. then we should expect symmetry breakdown even in theories mthout fundamental spinless diction of the scalar mass after symmetry breakdown. some of our computational techniques may be of use even in theories in which symmetry breakdown is driven by a negative mass term. after symmetry breakdown. Meanwhile. we are speculating. This is obviously what will happen if we apply our ideas to any of the current horde of gauge theories of the weak and electromagnetic interactions. We are very much aware that we are exploring unconventional ideas and that there may be some basic flaw in our whole approach which we have been too stupid to see. it is natural to ask what connection it has with the generalized eigenvalue condition. (2) Since our work does lead to the determination of some coupling constants in terms of others [for example. this possibility can be investigated in a systematic way. such as. if a model is found that satisfies experiment and has only a small number of free parameters. as shown by the model of VI B. one dimensionless coupling constant disappears. II to such objects' . we do not believe that the ideas developed in this paper will make a significant contribution to Nevercurrent weak-interaction phenomenology. massless scalar electrodynamics undergoes radiatively induced spontaneous symmetry breakdown. in the real world. and that. to study whether this in fact happens. VI. to be replaced by a mass parameter. analogous to the one we have used. and escapes these abhorrent systems by the Goldstone-Higgs mechanism. or both. being careful of our approximations and not discarding terms obviously large compared to those retained. or makes the interactions short-range. it will be interesting to see what constraints are put on the parameters of this model by the condition that the theory be fully massless. For. The trouble is that the object which we would expect to develop a vacuum expectation value is a composite field. In principle. CONCLUSIONS AND A SPECULATION (1) We hope that the reader who has followed our arguments will now agree with our basic contentions: that radiative corrections can be the dominant driving force of spontaneous symmetry breaking. we believe we have done an honest computation by the standards of perturbation theory. theorists may discover a simple and compelling model with only a small number of adjustable parameters that fits experimental reality. If the P 's vanish. in particular. these constraints may play an important role. which also seeks to determine coupling constants by demanding that. the formal machinery of the functional Legendre transformation does not depend on whether we couple our external sources to fundamental or composite fields. even for weak coupling constants.7). If and when this happens. there is no obstacle to extending the formalism of Sec. if the P's vanish. then its only possible minimum is at the origin. (4. In practice. we know of no computational Unfortunately. the computation of the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron. for example. though. the P coefficients in the renormalization-group equations vanish. by Eq. so does dimensional transmutation. some day the grail may be found. so do the P 's. (4) The speculation: A bold way of interpreting our results would be to say that nature abhors massless particles with long-range interactions between them. at least for weak coupling constants. like 0 4. Barring this possibility. The answer is that the two ideas cannot both be true. which gives the particles a mass. If we accept this statement. But spinor electrodynamics (or. " bosons. that. Nevertheless. Since these theories typically either contradict experiment whatever the scalar masses. though. Eq. or the theory of non-Abelian gauge fields coupled to massless fermions.1904 SIDNE Y COLE MAN AND ERICK WEINBE RG (~) As we explained at the end of Sec. If the effective potential is a simple power. so let us assume spontaneous symmetry breakdown does take place in such theories. any theory of gauge fields and fermions based on a simple Lie group) has only one dimensionless coupling constant to begin with. (We emphasize that this . scheme. we do not believe that our ideas will be of any immediate use in the currently popular gauge theories of weak and electromagnetic interactions. we are left with no free dimensionless coupling con- stants. for that matter.8)]. These theories typically contain so many arbitrary parameters that the additional constraints imposed by demanding that the scalar mesons be massless before symmetry breakdown offer only a slight improvement. Thus.

From this viewpoint. III are a degenerate case. and denote the number of type-n vertices in the graph by V„. David Politzer. we define a type-n vertex to be one with n internal lines (and therefore. . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1905 (A1) V = V2+ V3+ V4 . Howard Georgi. ) To propose such a program is an act of hubris. V3=2. Sheldon Glashow. but we can moderate our ambition and imagine working in a theory in which the gauge group has two simple factors. all vertices are either type-two.) would like to express his thanks to the Aspen Institute for Physics and to the Stan- ford Linear Accelerator Center for their hospitality while this work was being completed. who has followed this work from its beginnings and who has shed light in many dark places. type-three. All other L-loop graphs are generated from the prototype graphs by sticking an arbitrary number of type-two vertices onto the internal lines of the prototype graphs. a simple circle. + 4V. and show that the sum of all n-loop graphs can be expressed as a finite sum of n-tuple integrals. but all mass ratios (such as the muon-electron ratio) could be computed in terms of it. (3. which led to the factor of 1/n in Eq. For a 1PI graph. the total number of internal lines is given by 2I =2V. each of which is infrared-divergent. and it is trivial to sum up the result of all such insertions. (As) Thus. Nevertheless. since we have an independent geometric series for each internal prototype line. We shall now extend this result. the number of loops in the graph is L=I —V+1 —~V +V +1. . however. it would be very pleasant to be able to investigate the question in a quantitative way. Even this last speculation is certainly very ambitious. These are V4 — 1. + 3V. and Steven Weinberg for instructive comments. This rule may readily be extended to massless the only difference is FIG. compute the sum of all n-loop prototype graphs. Thus we feel that the outstanding theoretical challenge posed by our work is to extend our methods to theories without fundamental spinless fields. but make the following substitution for every internal propaga- tor: (A4) scalar electrodynamics. Curtis Callan. above]. Therefore. there exist only a finite number of graphs with L loops and no type-two vertices. VS=0. each of these integrals will be obtained by summing an infinite series of graphs. the insertion of type-two vertices does not introduce any new symmetry into the graph. and each end terminates on a vertex. or typefour. For a general graph contributing to the effective potential. . MORE LOOPS 1. . Benjamin Lee. Below: Two of the infinite series of two-loop graphs obtained from these by inserting type-two vertices on the internal lines. Roger Dashen. and therefore most likely false. 4n external lines) attached to it.2b). and the fine structure constant would still be a free parameter.C. We are especially grateful to H. the ends of the internal lines in the prototype graph are pinned down to prototype vertices. In this case one would survive. APPENDIX A. for them the prototype graph is a graph with no vertices. The total number of vertices is given by graphs. for any fixed L.RADIATIVE CORRECTIONS AS THE ORIGIN OF. (A2) Thus. The Disappearance of Infrared Divergences In Sec. is not the same as the eigenvalue condition [see (2). 7. III we were able to show that the infinite set of one-loop graphs for the effective potential could be summed to give a single integral. Above: The only two-loop prototype graphs in self-interacting meson theory. and V4=0. we begin by restricting ourselves to the self-interacting meson theory of Sec. Thus we obtain the following Computational Rule: To evaluate the sum of all n-loop graphs for n greater than one. Just as in the one-loop case. III. For simplicity. For all other cases. the one-loop graphs of Sec. We shall refer to these as prototype graphs. and thus there are two coupling constants. Since each internal line has two ends. We are indebted to James Bjorken. the only relic of the infrared divergences remaining in the sum will be a singularity at the origin of classical field space. This is responsible for the peculiar cyclic symmetry of these graphs. David Gross. Figure 7 shows this process for the two possible two-loop prototype One of us (S.

III we showed that. we have only discussed graphs for which all external lines carry zero momentum. because there is no rescaling of momenta that will simultaneously eliminate the coupling constants from the denominators of both the meson propagator. gg k -ey. We shall now extend this result to many-loop graphs in selfinteracting meson theory. /k' explicit factor of A. gp u —krak u/k 2 k'+ i~ . It is much more difficult to perform a similar ~". Thus. y.14). Had we followed the more usual renormalization procedure. This has the interesting consequence that if we compute Z by differentiating the above function with respect to p' at the origin. g(p/A. and would not be legiti- mate. but we may sometimes wish to compute graphs for which some of the external momenta are nonzero [for example. /M)(&)"'. of course. (A5). . there is. the substitution Z . Here the logarithms of the coupling constant have not disappeared. explained above. those for which one or both of the external momenta attached to the type-two vertices are nonzero. the contribution to the effective potential is of the form +jr g. since our prescription is to subtract graphs at fixed cp. The computational rule here is the same as before. . it implies that in the L-loop approximation. M. 2. This is a natural arrangement of powers from the viewpoint of the renormalization group. That is to say. and subtracted at some fixed Euclidean momentum. We can now add up all the powers of the coupling constant associated with a given prototype graph. we where g is a function which depends on the prototype graph under consideration. we find that the L-loop contribution is proportional to A~. we do not know whether the n-loop contributions to the effective potential are simple polynomials in e and A. a singUlarity at the origin of classical-field space. 'f(q. For example. we find a result of the form of Coupling Constants In Sec. (A9) In both cases we see that the infrared divergences in the individual graphs become. the nonzero momentum serves to distinguish these type-two vertices from the ruck of the others. The Disappearance of Logarithms is a where M is the renormalization mass and function depending on the graph under consideration. Politzer's suggestion is to para- " . after renormalization. another carries a momentum -p. Eq. have for every integration momentum. reasoning as before. Nevertheless. /M ) +'= y. on e of the L-loop contribution to the effective potential. both terms in the formula for P. In this case. '/M')A (A11) =X'~20' we find that 1 (Ae) new If we express the propagator in terms of the variable. 'g(P' /M. to preserve momentum conservation. Until now. 'f(y. but are associated with the logarithmic dependence of the function on p'. Indeed. k —— Ap (A7) In addition. and the photon propagator. We shall use the analysis in terms of prototype graphs. for every vertex. f p ~l/2p p (A10) Then. the sum of all the one-loop graphs for the effective potential was proportional to ~'. )]. let us consider summing a set of L-loop graphs for which one external line carries a momentum p. after we have determined A. u — krak&. (5. (A4). The reason for this is simple: In counting combinations to produce a geometric series. /M)(&)"" '=q. (AS) Please note that this rescaling of momenta does not affect our renormalization procedure. rp. are proportional to A. the rescaling would change our renormalization conditions. we must also rescale the external momentum. The situation is somewhat different if we consider graphs in which some external lines carry nonzero momenta. except that the class of prototype graphs will include some graphs with type-two vertices. let us consider computing the corrections to the two-point function in a fixed classical field. as a function of e by shifting the renormalization point to the minimum of V. an analysis for massless scalar electrodynamics. In addition to the powers explicitly displayed in the preceding two equations. using an ingenious trick suggested we can investigate the dependence by Politzer. u y. or whether they contain logarithms of the coupling constants. In every prototype graph let us define a new momentum variable for each loop. Eq.i906 SIDNE Y COLEMAN AND ERICK WEINBERG is (A5) that for internal photon lines. and all others carry momentum zero. de =g2d4y' . to compute Z(cp. Eq. in the sum. at this time.

interactions. goes to zero if we abruptly change the definition of X at the last moment.3). 2. Since in this region (k'+ p. ) exists only to be eliminated in favor of e at the end of the computation. '+. for the reader who might be interested in the massive theory for its own sake. A. We shall not give the details here. to theories in which the spinless fields were massless. in the many-meson case„ the relevant formulas in Sec. Self-Interacting Mesons with Positive Mass ' V=-. in zero-loop approximation.p. in which the renormalization conditions force V"(0) to be some fixed nonzero quantity. Self-Interacting Mesons with Imaginary Mass We now investigate negative. 2 — 2 y. metrize the expansion not in terms of A. is replaced by e'. we give the form of V with this renormalization convention: (e') ". We determine B and C just as in Sec. as we have been doing. this clearly goes smoothly into the corresponding expression for the massless theory.10). we can drop the i&. Thus.3). B and C are renormalization counterterms. (A13) Thus. ')'ln 1+ A. for. Of course. 1. The expression for V we obtain in this way is For simplicity.'xy. give it explicity only in the regime of interest for the study of the zero-mass limit. the L-loop contribution to the effective potential is proportional to +. and the integral is over Euclidean momentum space. MASSIVE SCALAR MESONS In the body of this paper we restricted ourselves. Eq. ') never vanishes. III. either real or imaginary. (k'+ p. remain valid in the massive theory if Vo is interpreted as including quadratic mass terms as well as quartic self. but in terms of another parameter. Eq. 'y. except that we now assume that the meson has a positive mass. if we shift the renormalization point to a minimum of V. '+ —. either positive or negative. and it is easy to construct a rescaling argument to determine the e dependence of the loop expansion. III. The advantage of is that it is easy to write in closed form the equation that eliminates it. that is to say. we could choose M to be zero. Eqs. «M: z. we could hardly expect a smooth limit as p. Nevertheless. Eq. (p'+-'Py. etc. . without proof. . we state. „defined by 6 ~V iV 3 8+ 1907 (A12) where. . In any event. ')' In 1+ 2 I 1 ~ +2~v 2 y. becomes For the same hypothetical reader. but merely state that the results are the same as those in the previous case. This is obviously a stupid thing to do if one is studying the zero-mass limit. p. since the massive theory is free of infrared divergences. which is all that is needed to define an iterative renormalization procedure. p. except for brief digressions. 4 +4~2 y. + 2~0 2 Pc 2 3 2 S~ gc 4 We begin with the self-interacting meson theory of Sec.' is In this case. Thus. (A12) becomes d9c and q C =o (B2) d Vt 4 dy. all graphs that involve the quartic-meson self-coupling disappear. 4 ln 24~ ~P 2 phd (B4) As the mass goes to zero. In this appendix we discuss the extension of our techniques to theories in which the scalar mesons have masses.2) and (6. in which the renormalization conditions forced V"(0) to vanish. . The only effect of this is to change the meson propagator from the massless to the massive form. which parameter we use in the intermediate stages should not be important. by imposing the renormalization conditions d V This is certainly as good (or as bad) a definition of the renormalized coupling constant as our old one. that. the oneloop approximation to the effective potential. that is to say. X (or A. (3. (3. (6. 7T (p'+-. as before.RADIATIVE CORRECTIONS AS THE ORIGIN OF. except that A. VI. we will somewhat cumbersome. APPENDIX B. ') can vanish even . the theory for which p. both parameters equal the bare values of A. =0.

A. Is ordinary real-mass scalar electrodynamics unstable' No. (Bl). . From Eq. we can only control the real part of V"(0}. it represents a genuine physical effect.'. (B6) The second term in this equation is just an additive constant. We should observe that the imaginary part of the effective potential does not affect the reality of zero-momentum Green's functions in the physical (asymmetric) theory For.2 +„.9). in the case at hand. Here. ) Now. Massive Scalar Electrodynamics for Euclidean k. depends on our choice of M. and its value at the second minimum is evidently lower than its value at the first. It would be perverse to do otherwise. it was first observed in the classic calculation by Euler and Heisenberg" of the effective Lagrangian for constant electromagThe netic fields in quantum electrodynamics. Eq. cannot be swept under the rug. and we must use a nonzero renormalization mass. ' is now even more remote than before. we must keep M fixed.1908 SIDNE Y COLEMAN AND ERICK WEINBERG 3. (B9) four times and find " Se 8m ln m2 M2 — +3 (Blo) Re d V dpi( ' c (Bv) (jc=O If we wish to make contact with the conventional description of the massive theory. It is easy to compute this imaginary part: " lmV=- 64m 'Ay. Then. (4. no matter what the value of A. ') P-] . it has no effect on the physics of the system. there is still a surprise lurking in this formula: For sufficiently small positive p'. thus V develops an imaginary part. Since we can only add real counterterms to the Lagrangian. ' — &y. thus we cannot drop the i e in Eq. because. even for positive p. The first term. when we are studying the zero-mass limit. for negative p'. discussed in Sec. but it is still a finite quantity which serves to parametrize the theory. X and M. diagrams involving photon loops are still infrared divergent. thus. Thus. (B8} This is a point at which the 8 function in Eq. IO. ln 64K m (B9) Note that m is not a renormalization mass but a genuine parameter which. together with e and p. because of the negative mass term in our initial Lagrangian. V evidently has two local minima. is positive. thus all derivatives of V at this point are real. so we can neglect the effects of meson loops compared with those of photon loops. in the presence of a constant electric field. (B2) must be replaced by For scalar electrodynamics. . counterterms. then we should choose M to be on the order of p. We can gain some heuristic understanding of this effect if we return to the analogy between V and the momentum-space propagator. then it is easy to show that The physical meaning of p. it is trivial to verify the smooth approach to the zero- mass limit. as we shall now explain. we differentiate Eq. to . the only mass in the theory. the vacuum itself is kinematically unstable. Following Sec. V=~g 2 fj{). (B6) vanishes. Just as in the usual theory of unstable particles. Thus M becomes many times larger than p. The point is that the conventional wisdom states that the theory does not suffer spontaneous symmetry breaking if p' is positive and A. if V is to have a second minimum at all (let alone one that is lower than the one at the origin). I. we will assume that X is of the order of magnitude of e'. [(y'+ —. it is not. (Of course. to define the quartic coupling constant. the photon does not. we can create spurious contradictions by describing a physical situation in two different formalisms in which we assign the same symbol to two drastically different objects. Euler-Heisenberg function is real for constant magnetic fields. though. This seems to contradict the conventional wisdom stated in Sec. and can be dropped with impunity. —. . one at the origin and one near m. the presence of an imaginary part forces us to modify our mass renormalization condition.but here we are asking a different question. ')'8(-p. it replaces the redundant pair of variables. M. but imaginary for constant electric fields. VI. Nevertheless. 2y. the vacuum expectation value of y is given by p'+~6A(y)' =0 . the vacuum can decay into electronpositron pairs. In ordinary perturbation theory. and M. characterizes the theory. and the effective potential has an imaginary This cannot be canceled by the I3 and C part. these must remain real. even if the meson has a mass. Thus. As we have said many times. We cannot claim credit for discovering this phenomenon. we can find a mass m such that " . to preserve the reality of the Lagrangian. the value of A. (B9).lowest order. the propagator has an imaginary part at those momenta for which the off-mass-shell particle is kinematically unstable. Eq. spontaneous symmetry breaking occurs.

Our notation follows the review of S. Rev. 5. T. 3137 (1972). 823 (1972). . Nucl. to be pub- lished). N. Lee and J. A. ~3This model was suggested to us by S. Weinberg. N. 't Hooft. but it is still a completely well-defined renormalized quantity which can be used to parametrize the theory. Popov. 345 (1961). 452 (1951). . Proc. Goldstone. 1969). . Weinberg. The eigenvalue condition was first advanced as a condition for the bare charge in quantum electrodynamics by GeQ-Mann and Low (Ref. if only because. Phys. Rev. Goldstone. Faddeev and V. it is not too surprising to be told that. etc. A. . the effects of radiative corrections dominate those of the quartic self-coupling. Bogoliubov and D. 5. Higgs. 3We will return to (and verify in our formalism) this common belief in Appendix B. We use a metric with signature (+ -). this is indeed the renormalized mass of the meson. L. Rev. S. 3121(1972). Gell-Mann and F. . B.5. 455 (1951). P. we would expect such a theory to have no stable vacuum at all. Y. SWe give here a brief list of some of the standard papers on these phenomena. A good review of these methods is the contribution of B. that this phenomenon might provide an explanation for the hierarchy of (apparently) broken symmetries found in the real world. as we did not. Except for scale invariance. ibid. Introduction to the Theory of Quantized Fields (Interscience. 'Y. New York. Letters 13. W. Rev. P. at least for small x (on the order of e'). G. B. edited by N. If p2 is positive. Johnson. The effective potential was first introduced by Goldstone. Salam. because. as we shall see in Sec. Nambu and G. Letters 25B. we should choose the one that does least violence to our intuition. is negative if M is on the order of p. D 5. For small e (in particular. Coleman. W. M. Jona-Lasinio. the scalarmeson part of the Lagrangian inevitably is invariant under a larger symmetry group than the total Lagrangian was made independently by S. Spontaneous symmetry breaking: J. Phys. We shall show that even the latter type of theory does not exist. 95. W. They were attracted to this model because loop effects are important in it even if V contains a mass term. Phys. Lee.RA DIA ln 3e4m'2 4 16p2 p2 TIVE CORRE C TION S AS THE ORIGIN OF. the theory in which we have found a second minimum is not conventional massive scalar electrodynamics at all. 173 (1971). Rev. V decreases without bound. 127. We have argued that this is the natural way to interpret the two minima in Eq. and turn V upwards again. since they are evidence against the existence of an 8 matrix but not against the existence of a theory of off-massshell Green's functions.] S. it will turn out that these well-known difficulties are somewhat off the point. Phys. K. Phys. R. Phys. Letters 12. Phys. N. Zumino. Zinn-Justin. 585 (1964). (MIT. by demanding that the theory obey the homogeneous renormalization-group equations rather than the inhomogeneous version of these equations. Natl. Shirkov. Phys. Guralnik. Nuovo Cimento 19. Wess. 29 (1967) Except that the 2 from the reflection symmetry of the diagram is missing. J. Even if the reader does not believe this. Kibble. Salam. At first glance. but a theory with negative quartic coupling constant. Nevertheless. For a detailed explanation. who collaborated with us on the analysis of its structure. B35. D. S. Schwinger. properly interpreted. Higgs. and that is afflicted with anomalies. 145. Phys. B. — Mass. Zumino to Lectures in Elementary Particles and Quantum Field Theory. 177. 1156 (1966). J. Rev. (88). it is the renormalized mass about the symmetric vacuum. Brout. Jona-Lasinio. 2238 (1969). Nambu. However. Letters 29. 321 (1964). Rev. Higgs phenomenon: F. More clever than we. 1264 (1967). and Weinberg (Ref. C. and B. Georgi. and T. If p2 is negative. Kibble. but this is replaced by a ~ that comes from only summing the even terms in the series. this implies that A. Winey tPhys. he realized. B. edited by S. For the unsophisticated reader. New York. New York. ibid. Baker. Low. Sci. *Work supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. when given two otherwise equivalent descriptions of the same physical phenomenon. G. 5). S. 122. L. 167 (1971). 1554 (1967). see Coleman (Ref. we emphasize that p2 is not the bare mass. 965 (1962). 9). 37. Rev. and R. in Proceedings of the 1971 International Summer School "Ettore Majorana" (Academic. we emphasize that these remarks will be explained in greater detaQ later. 4For the sophisticated reader. 132 (1964). Hagen. 8). Deser et al. 1698 (1972). Renormalization: G. and therefore should be preferred. Letters 19. V. the Callan-Symanzik equations. it possesses no such simple interpretation. Nuovo Cimento 34. Letters 13. 1959). Acad. ~ 6J. U. for e as small as the physical electron charge). 1909 &-I . In fact. Thus. Letters 26B. Glashow and H. ~We refer here to such familiar problems as infinite cross sections. Weinberg. 30819X. in Elementary Particle Theory: Relativistic GrouPs and Analyticity (Nobel Symposium No. Salam. as will be explained in the text. 155. and S. Coleman. Phys. we can define masslessness in a general abstract way. 37. Phys. 1970). ibid. 1790 (1964). and by M. but we follow the development of Jona-Lasinio here. 154 (1961). The discovery that. Rev. B33. 1300 (1954). as we move away from the origin. B1111 (1964)]. Svartholm (Wiley. Phys. Weinberg. for certain theories. Rev. 626 (1968). [S. Cambridge. we think he must admit that it is no less natural than the alternative interpretation (that radiative corrections cause normal massive scalar electrodynamics to suffer spontaneous symmetry breaking). 3155 (1972). Phys. Englert and R. W. 9). 136. V.

3021 (1972)l. ' We have been referring so far to the "U-gauge" formulation of the theory only. Schwinger. In quasirenormalizable theories some of the infinities — spurious ones— the cancel against infinities in other graphs. 82. Sec. Bjorken (private communication). In this gauge the fields are redefined so as to eliminate superfluous scalar bosons. Adler [ibid. Just because of the spurious-divergence problem mentioned above. and 19104 Department Kenneth Lane of Physics. I. Such an ambiguity has already been encountered in the early calculations of the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon in Weinberg's theory. Dashen and D. California 94720 (Received 16 October 1972) higher-order correcAn extremely simple method is presented to calculate unambiguously tions in the unitary (U) gauge of theories with spontaneously broken gauge symmetries. Here terms can be left finite. By now a large number of models of this type have been proposed which also include hadronic interactions. Heisenberg PHYSICAL REVIEW D VOLUME 7. 1818 (1971)] and by S. Rev. second paragraph. Weinberg' presented the first such realistic model. of course. W. individual Feynman diagrams contributing to a specific process contain nonrenormalizable divergences. 664 (1951). As a check on our methods. where " . the weak muon anomaly in Weinberg's model is calculated. 'H. The main content of this section is an answer by H. University Wolfgang Kummerg of Pennsylvania. Euler. It is well known for renormalizable theories of the usual type that different arbitrary regularizations yield different finite additions to the divergent parts of Feynman graphs. and various fields. This was pointed out to us by R. ' This is not serious because the infinite together with such (ambiguous) finite parts are absorbed into mass and charge renormalization anyhow. University of California. the proof of renormalizability for these theories has not been given in the U gauge. 714 (1936). D. Politzer (private communication). the complete cancellation of these graphs is demonstrated in the cases of fermion-fermion scattering to fourth order in the Abelian model considered by Appelquist and Quinn and for the similar neutrino scattering in Weinberg's SU(2)z x Y model. We shall call these infinities "spurious" because they happen to cancel when all individual diagrams are added. regularization-dependent over. Gross (private communication). 5. Without making reference to any specific global regularization scheme. Z. D. INTRODUCTION One of the most interesting recent developments of field theory is the discovery of models of "quasirenormalizable" type. inManipulating Feynman integrals in coordinate space. J. D 3. our role is reportorial only. The reason for such complete cancellation is seen to be a consequence of the algebraic structure of the equal-time commutators among currents. to a given order of perturbation theory. Politzer to a question raised by J. Wilson [Phys. Berkeley. Philadelphia. their divergences. In a series of fundamental papers 't Hooft' and Lee and Zinn-Justin9 have given the proof in the so-called "R gauge. ' A common feature of all these theories is the fact that.19j. and agreement is found with the (gauge-invariant) results of other authors. Physik 98. in which he proposed to unify the weak and electromagnetic interactions of leptons through the spontaneous breakdown of symmetry in a gauge-invariant Lagrangian via the Higgs phenomenon. Rev. This structure.0 SIDNEY COLEMAN AND ERICK WEINBERG It has been advocated as a condition for the physical coupling constants by K. and H. D. is dictated by the original gauge symmetry. I. Cancellations of this type have been shown to occur in the Weinberg theory" and in a simplified Abelian model' by means of a simple cutoff prescription to regulate the integrals involved. Phys. NUMBER 6 15 MARCH 1973 Divergence Cancellations Department in Spontaneously Broken Gauge Theories* Pennsylvania of Physics. the spurious nonrenormalizable finities of this gauge are isolated in the form of (contracted) Feynman graphs.

- choose EM.pdf
- Gravitational Shielding Effects in Gauge Theory of Gravity
- Lecture_III_notes.pdf
- FieldTh-StatisticalPhysics
- Carlos Castro Perelman's CV
- 1708.03298.pdf
- Boulevard of Broken Symmetries
- Quantum Relativity.pdf
- E. Witten, Physics and Geometry
- A Short Review on Noether’s Theorems, Gauge Symmetries and Boundary Terms
- 1705.05725
- Space dependent Fermi velocity in strained graphene
- Aim
- On the orbital velocities nearby rotary stars and black holes.
- 10.A2E-Chap4
- Simultaneity in Relativity
- Exceptional Lie Groups, E-infinity Theory and Higgs Boson - El-Okaby
- The Relation Between Classical and Quantum Electrodynamics
- Electromagnetic Field
- Quantum field Theory - Notes Chapter 1

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Close Dialog## This title now requires a credit

Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

Loading