1: \overfullrule=0pt
2:
3: \newcount\mgnf
4:
5: \mgnf=1
6: \ifnum\mgnf=0
7: \def\openone{\leavevmode\hbox{\ninerm 1\kern-3.3pt\tenrm1}}%
8: \def\*{\vglue0.3truecm}
9: \hsize=15truecm
10: \vsize=23.truecm
11: \parindent=4.pt
12: \baselineskip=0.45cm
13: \font\titolo=cmbx12
14: \font\titolone=cmbx10 scaled\magstep 2
15: \font\cs=cmcsc10
16: \font\css=cmcsc8
17: \font\ottorm=cmr8
18: \font\msxtw=msbm10
19: \font\euftw=eufm10
20: \font\msytw=msbm10
21: \font\msytww=msbm8
22: \font\msytwww=msbm7
23: \font\indbf=cmbx10 scaled\magstep1
24: \font\grbold=cmmib10\fi
25:
26: \ifnum\mgnf=1
27: \def\openone{\leavevmode\hbox{\ninerm 1\kern-3.63pt\tenrm1}}%
28: \def\*{\vglue0.5truecm}
29: \magnification=1100
30: \hoffset=0.truecm
31: \hsize=16truecm
32: \vsize=24.truecm
33: \baselineskip=1.4em plus 0.05em minus0.1em
34: \parindent=1em
35: \lineskip=0.1em\lineskiplimit=0.1em
36: \parskip=0.1pt plus1pt
37: \font\titolo=cmbx12 scaled\magstep 1
38: \font\titolone=cmbx10 scaled\magstep 3
39: \font\cs=cmcsc10 scaled\magstep 1
40: \font\ottorm=cmr8 scaled\magstep 1
41: \font\msxtw=msbm10 %scaled\magstep1
42: \font\euftw=eufm10 scaled\magstep1
43: \font\msytw=msbm10 scaled\magstep1
44: \font\msytww=msbm8 %scaled\magstep1
45: \font\msytwww=msbm7 scaled\magstep1
46: \font\grbold=cmmib10 scaled\magstep1
47: \font\indbf=cmbx10 scaled\magstep2 \fi
48:
49:
50: \global\newcount\numsec
51: \global\newcount\numapp
52: \global\newcount\numfor
53: \global\newcount\numfig
54: \global\newcount\numsub
55: \global\newcount\numlemma
56: \global\newcount\numtheorem
57: \global\newcount\numdef
58: \global\newcount\appflag
59:
60: \numsec=0\numapp=0\numfig=1
61:
62: \def\veroparagrafo{\number\numsec}
63: \def\veraformula{\number\numfor}
64: \def\veraappendice{\number\numapp}
65: \def\verasub{\number\numsub}
66: \def\verafigura{\number\numfig}
67: \def\verolemma{\number\numlemma}
68: \def\verotheorem{\number\numtheorem}
69: \def\veradef{\number\numdef}
70:
71: \def\section(#1,#2)
72: {\advance\numsec by 1\numfor=1\numsub=1%
73: \numlemma=1\numtheorem=1\numdef=1\appflag=0%
74: \SIA p,#1,{\veroparagrafo} %
75: \write15{\string\Fp (#1){\secc(#1)}}%
76: \write16{ sec. #1 ==> \secc(#1)}%
77: \hbox to \hsize{\titolo\hfill\number\numsec. #2\hfill%
78: \expandafter{\alato(sec. #1)}}\*}
79:
80: \def\appendix(#1,#2)
81: {\advance\numapp by 1\numfor=1\numsub=1%
82: \numlemma=1\numtheorem=1\numdef=1\appflag=1%
83: \SIA p,#1,{A\veraappendice} %
84: \write15{\string\Fp (#1){\secc(#1)}}%
85: \write16{ app. #1 ==> \secc(#1) }%
86: \hbox to \hsize{\titolo\hfill Appendix A\number\numapp. #2\hfill%
87: \expandafter{\alato(app. #1)}}\*}
88:
89: \def\senondefinito#1{\expandafter\ifx\csname#1\endcsname\relax}
90:
91: \def\SIA #1,#2,#3 {\senondefinito{#1#2}%
92: \expandafter\xdef\csname #1#2\endcsname{#3}\else \write16{???? ma
93: #1#2 e' gia' stato definito !!!!} \fi}
94:
95: \def \Fe(#1)#2{\SIA fe,#1,#2 }
96: \def \Fp(#1)#2{\SIA fp,#1,#2 }
97: \def \Fg(#1)#2{\SIA fg,#1,#2 }
98: \def \Fl(#1)#2{\SIA fl,#1,#2 }
99: \def \Ft(#1)#2{\SIA ft,#1,#2 }
100: \def \Fd(#1)#2{\SIA fd,#1,#2 }
101:
102: \def\etichetta(#1){(\veroparagrafo.\veraformula)%
103: \SIA e,#1,(\veroparagrafo.\veraformula) %
104: \global\advance\numfor by 1%
105: \write15{\string\Fe (#1){\equ(#1)}}%
106: \write16{ EQ #1 ==> \equ(#1) }}
107:
108: \def\etichettaa(#1){(A\veraappendice.\veraformula)%
109: \SIA e,#1,(A\veraappendice.\veraformula) %
110: \global\advance\numfor by 1%
111: \write15{\string\Fe (#1){\equ(#1)}}%
112: \write16{ EQ #1 ==> \equ(#1) }}
113:
114: \def\getichetta(#1){%Fig. \verafigura%
115: \SIA g,#1,{\verafigura} %
116: \global\advance\numfig by 1%
117: \write15{\string\Fg (#1){\graf(#1)}}%
118: \write16{ Fig. #1 ==> \graf(#1) }}
119:
120: \def\etichettap(#1){\veroparagrafo.\verasub%
121: \SIA p,#1,{\veroparagrafo.\verasub} %
122: \global\advance\numsub by 1%
123: \write15{\string\Fp (#1){\secc(#1)}}%
124: \write16{ par #1 ==> \secc(#1) }}
125:
126: \def\etichettapa(#1){A\veraappendice.\verasub%
127: \SIA p,#1,{A\veraappendice.\verasub} %
128: \global\advance\numsub by 1%
129: \write15{\string\Fp (#1){\secc(#1)}}%
130: \write16{ par #1 ==> \secc(#1) }}
131:
132:
133: \def\Eq(#1){\eqno{\etichetta(#1)\alato(#1)}}
134: \def\eq(#1){\etichetta(#1)\alato(#1)}
135: \def\Eqa(#1){\eqno{\etichettaa(#1)\alato(#1)}}
136: \def\eqa(#1){\etichettaa(#1)\alato(#1)}
137: \def\eqg(#1){\getichetta(#1)\alato(fig. #1)}
138: \def\sub(#1)#2{\0\palato(p. #1){\bf \etichettap(#1).}{\it #2}}
139: \def\asub(#1)#2{\0\palato(p. #1){\bf \etichettapa(#1).}{\it #2}}
140:
141:
142: \def\lemma{\0{\bf Lemma.\hskip.1truecm}}
143: \def\alemma{\0{\bf Lemma.\hskip.1truecm}}
144: \def\corollary{\0{\bf Corollary.\hskip.1truecm}}
145: \def\theorem{\0{\bf Theorem.\hskip.1truecm}}
146: \def\atheorem{\0{\bf Theorem.\hskip.1truecm}}
147: \def\proposition{\0{\bf Proposition.\hskip.1truecm}}
148: \def\definition(#1){\0{\bf Definition #1\hskip.1truecm}}
149: \def\proof{\0{\bf Proof\hskip.1truecm}}
150:
151: \def\equv(#1){\senondefinito{fe#1}$\clubsuit$#1%
152: \write16{eq. #1 non e' (ancora) definita}%
153: \else\csname fe#1\endcsname\fi}
154:
155: \def\grafv(#1){\senondefinito{fg#1}$\clubsuit$#1%
156: \write16{fig. #1 non e' (ancora) definito}%
157: \else\csname fg#1\endcsname\fi}
158:
159: \def\secv(#1){\senondefinito{fp#1}$\clubsuit$#1%
160: \write16{par. #1 non e' (ancora) definito}%
161: \else\csname fp#1\endcsname\fi}
162:
163: \def\lmv(#1){\senondefinito{fl#1}$\clubsuit$#1%
164: \write16{lemma #1 non e' (ancora) definito}%
165: \else\csname fl#1\endcsname\fi}
166:
167: \def\almv(#1){\senondefinito{fal#1}$\clubsuit$#1%
168: \write16{lemma A #1 non e' (ancora) definito}%
169: \else\csname fal#1\endcsname\fi}
170:
171: \def\thmv(#1){\senondefinito{ft#1}$\clubsuit$#1%
172: \write16{th. #1 non e' (ancora) definito}%
173: \else\csname ft#1\endcsname\fi}
174:
175: \def\athmv(#1){\senondefinito{fat#1}$\clubsuit$#1%
176: \write16{ath. #1 non e' (ancora) definito}%
177: \else\csname fat#1\endcsname\fi}
178:
179: \def\defzv(#1){\senondefinito{fd#1}$\clubsuit$#1%
180: \write16{def. #1 non e' (ancora) definito}%
181: \else\csname fd#1\endcsname\fi}
182:
183: \def\equ(#1){\senondefinito{e#1}\equv(#1)\else\csname e#1\endcsname\fi}
184: \def\graf(#1){\senondefinito{g#1}\grafv(#1)\else\csname g#1\endcsname\fi}
185: \def\secc(#1){\senondefinito{p#1}\secv(#1)\else\csname p#1\endcsname\fi}
186: \def\lm(#1){\senondefinito{l#1}\lmv(#1)\else\csname l#1\endcsname\fi}
187: \def\thm(#1){\senondefinito{t#1}\thmv(#1)\else\csname t#1\endcsname\fi}
188: \def\defz(#1){\senondefinito{d#1}\defzv(#1)\else\csname d#1\endcsname\fi}
189: \def\sec(#1){{\S\secc(#1)}}
190:
191: \def\BOZZA{\bz=1
192: \def\alato(##1){\rlap{\kern-\hsize\kern-3em{$\scriptstyle##1$}}}
193: \def\palato(##1){\rlap{\kern-4em{$\scriptstyle##1$}}}
194: }
195:
196: \def\alato(#1){}
197: \def\galato(#1){}
198: \def\palato(#1){}
199:
200:
201: {\count255=\time\divide\count255 by 60
202: \xdef\hourmin{\number\count255}
203: \multiply\count255 by-60\advance\count255 by\time
204: \xdef\hourmin{\hourmin:\ifnum\count255<10 0\fi\the\count255}}
205:
206: \def\oramin{\hourmin }
207:
208: \def\data{\number\day/\ifcase\month\or gennaio \or febbraio \or marzo \or
209: aprile \or maggio \or giugno \or luglio \or agosto \or settembre
210: \or ottobre \or novembre \or dicembre \fi/\number\year;\ \oramin}
211: \setbox200\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle \data $}
212: \footline={\rlap{\hbox{\copy200}}\tenrm\hss \number\pageno\hss}
213:
214:
215: \let\a=\alpha \let\b=\beta \let\g=\gamma \let\d=\delta \let\e=\varepsilon
216: \let\z=\zeta \let\h=\eta \let\thv=\vartheta \let\th=\vartheta
217: \let\k=\kappa \let\l=\lambda
218: \let\m=\mu \let\n=\nu \let\x=\xi \let\p=\pi \let\r=\rho
219: \let\s=\sigma \let\t=\tau \let\f=\varphi \let\ph=\varphi \let\c=\chi
220: \let\ps=\psi \let\y=\upsilon \let\o=\omega \let\si=\varsigma
221: \let\G=\Gamma \let\D=\Delta \let\Th=\Theta \let\L=\Lambda \let\X=\Xi
222: \let\P=\Pi \let\Si=\Sigma \let\F=\Phi \let\Ps=\Psi
223: \let\O=\Omega \let\Y=\Upsilon
224:
225: \def\PP{{\cal P}}\def\EE{{\cal E}}\def\MM{{\cal M}}\def\VV{{\cal V}}
226: \def\CC{{\cal C}}\def\FF{{\cal F}}\def\HH{{\cal H}}\def\WW{{\cal W}}
227: \def\TT{{\cal T}}\def\NN{{\cal N}}\def\BB{{\cal B}}\def\ZZ{{\cal Z}}
228: \def\RR{{\cal R}}\def\LL{{\cal L}}\def\JJ{{\cal J}}\def\QQ{{\cal Q}}
229: \def\DD{{\cal D}}\def\AA{{\cal A}}\def\GG{{\cal G}}\def\SS{{\cal S}}
230: \def\OO{{\cal O}}\def\AAA{{\cal A}}
231:
232: \def\pp{{\bf p}}\def\qq{{\bf q}}\def\ii{{\bf i}}\def\xx{{\bf x}}
233: \def\yy{{\bf y}}\def\kk{{\bf k}}\def\mm{{\bf m}}\def\nn{{\bf n}}
234: \def\zz{{\bf z}}\def\uu{{\bf u}}\def\vv{{\bf v}}
235: \def\xxi{\hbox{\grbold \char24}} \def\bP{{\bf P}}\def\rr{{\bf r}}
236: \def\tt{{\bf t}}\def\bT{{\bf T}}
237:
238: \def\ss{{\underline \sigma}} \def\oo{{\underline \omega}}
239: \def\ee{{\underline \varepsilon}} \def\aa{{\underline \alpha}}
240: \def\un{{\underline \nu}} \def\ul{{\underline \lambda}}
241: \def\um{{\underline \mu}} \def\ux{{\underline x}}
242: \def\ue{{\underline \e}} \def\uy{{\underline y}}
243: \def\uz{{\underline z}} \def\uo{{\underline \o}}
244: \def\us{{\underline \s}} \def\xxx{{\underline \xx}}
245: \def\kkk{{\underline\kk}}
246:
247: \def\MMM{\hbox{\euftw M}} \def\BBB{\hbox{\euftw B}}
248: \def\RRR{\hbox{\msytw R}} \def\rrrr{\hbox{\msytww R}}
249: \def\rrr{\hbox{\msytwww R}} \def\CCC{\hbox{\msytw C}}
250: \def\cccc{\hbox{\msytww C}} \def\ccc{\hbox{\msytwww C}}
251: \def\NNN{\hbox{\msytw N}} \def\nnnn{\hbox{\msytww N}}
252: \def\nnn{\hbox{\msytwww N}} \def\ZZZ{\hbox{\msytw Z}}
253: \def\zzzz{\hbox{\msytww Z}} \def\zzz{\hbox{\msytwww Z}}
254: \def\TTT{\hbox{\msytw T}} \def\tttt{\hbox{\msytww T}}
255: \def\ttt{\hbox{\msytwww T}} \def\EE{\hbox{\msytw E}}
256: \def\eeee{\hbox{\msytww E}} \def\eee{\hbox{\msytwww E}}
257:
258: \let\dpr=\partial
259: \let\circa=\cong
260: \let\bs=\backslash
261: \let\==\equiv
262: \let\txt=\textstyle
263: \let\dis=\displaystyle
264: \let\io=\infty
265: \let\0=\noindent
266:
267: \def\\{\hfill\break}
268: \def\Dpr{\V\dpr\,}
269: \def\aps{{\it a posteriori}}
270: \def\pagina{{\vfill\eject}}
271: \def\lft{\left}
272: \def\rgt{\right}
273: \def\la{{\langle}}
274: \def\ra{{\rangle}}
275: \def\bra#1{{\langle#1|}}
276: \def\ket#1{{|#1\rangle}}
277: \def\media#1{{\langle#1\rangle}}
278: \def\norm#1{{\left|\hskip-.05em\left|#1\right|\hskip-.05em\right|}}
279: \def\ie{\hbox{\it i.e.\ }}
280: \def\eg{\hbox{\it e.g.\ }}
281: \def\der{\hbox{\rm d}}
282: \def\tgl#1{\not\!#1}
283: \def\defin{{\buildrel def\over=}}
284: \def\tende#1{\,\vtop{\ialign{##\crcr\rightarrowfill\crcr
285: \noalign{\kern-1pt\nointerlineskip}
286: \hskip3.pt${\scriptstyle #1}$\hskip3.pt\crcr}}\,}
287: \def\otto{\,{\kern-1.truept\leftarrow\kern-5.truept\to\kern-1.truept}\,}
288: \def\fra#1#2{{#1\over#2}}
289: \def\der{{\rm d}}
290:
291: \def\T#1{{#1_{\kern-3pt\lower7pt\hbox{$\widetilde{}$}}\kern3pt}}
292: \def\VVV#1{{\underline #1}_{\kern-3pt\lower7pt\hbox{$\widetilde{}$}}\kern3pt\,}
293: \def\W#1{#1_{\kern-3pt\lower7.5pt\hbox{$\widetilde{}$}}\kern2pt\,}
294: \def\Re{{\rm Re}\,}\def\Im{{\rm Im}\,}
295: \def\lis{\overline}\def\tto{\Rightarrow}
296: \def\etc{{\it etc}} \def\acapo{\hfill\break}
297: \def\mod{{\rm mod}\,} \def\per{{\rm per}\,} \def\sign{{\rm sign}\,}
298: \def\indica{\leaders \hbox to 0.5cm{\hss.\hss}\hfill}
299: \def\guida{\leaders\hbox to 1em{\hss.\hss}\hfill}\mathchardef\oo= "0521
300: \def\V#1{{\bf #1}}
301: \def\Halmos{\hfill\vrule height6pt width4pt depth2pt \par\hbox to \hsize{}}
302: \def\virg{\quad,\quad}
303:
304: \def\Overline#1{{\bar#1}}
305: \let\ciao=\bye
306: \def\qed{\raise1pt\hbox{\vrule height5pt width5pt depth0pt}}
307: \def\hf#1{{\hat \f_{#1}}}
308: \def\barf#1{{\tilde \f_{#1}}} \def\tg#1{{\tilde g_{#1}}}
309: \def\bq{{\bar q}} \def\bh{{\bar h}} \def\bp{{\bar p}} \def\bpp{{\bar \pp}}
310: \def\Val{{\rm Val}}
311: \def\indic{\hbox{\raise-2pt \hbox{\indbf 1}}}
312: \def\bk#1#2{\bar\kk_{#1#2}}
313: \def\tdh{{\tilde h}}
314: \let\prp=\perp
315: \let\pll=\parallel
316:
317:
318:
319: %%% INSERIMENTO FIGURE ( se si usa DVIPS )
320: %
321: % Se si vuole utilizzare delle macro postscript personali, contenute
322: % nel file ini.ps, togliere il commento alla riga seguente
323: %\special{header=ini.pst}
324: %
325: % Il comando seguente inserisce una scatola contenente #3 in modo che
326: % l'angolo superiore sinistro occupi la posizione (#1,#2)
327: %
328: \def\ins#1#2#3{\vbox to0pt{\kern-#2 \hbox{\kern#1 #3}\vss}\nointerlineskip}
329: %
330: % Il comando seguente crea una scatola di dimensioni #1x#2 contenente
331: % il disegno descritto in #4.ps;
332: % in questo disegno si possono introdurre delle stringhe usando \ins
333: % e mettendo le istruzioni relative nell'argomento #3.
334: % Il file #4.ps contiene le istruzioni postscript, che devono essere scritte
335: % presupponendo che l'origine sia nell'angolo inferiore sinistro della
336: % scatola, mentre per il resto l'ambiente grafico e' quello standard.
337: % #5 deve essere della forma \eqg("nome simbolico").
338: %
339: % Le istruzioni postscript possono essere inserite nel file che contiene
340: % l'istruzione \insertplot, racchiudendole fra le istruzioni \initfig{#4}
341: % e \endfig; inoltre ogni riga deve cominciare con "write13<" e deve finire
342: % con ">". In questo modo si crea il file #4.ps relativo alla figura.
343: %
344: \newdimen\xshift \newdimen\xwidth \newdimen\yshift
345:
346: \def\insertplot#1#2#3#4#5{\par%
347: \xwidth=#1 \xshift=\hsize \advance\xshift by-\xwidth \divide\xshift by 2%
348: \yshift=#2 \divide\yshift by 2%
349: \line{\hskip\xshift \vbox to #2{\vfil%
350: #3 \special{psfile=#4.pst}}\hfill \raise\yshift\hbox{#5} }}
351: %\raise\yshift\hbox{#5}}}
352:
353:
354:
355: \openin14=\jobname.aux \ifeof14 \relax \else
356: \input \jobname.aux \closein14 \fi
357: \openout15=\jobname.aux
358:
359:
360: \let\st=\scriptstyle
361: \font\tenmib=cmmib10
362: \font\sevenmib=cmmib10 scaled 800
363: \font\titolo=cmbx12
364: \font\titolone=cmbx10 scaled\magstep 2
365:
366: \font\book=cmcsc9
367: \font\giornale=cmti10
368: \font\journal=cmti10
369: \font\pagine=cmti10
370: \font\anno=cmtt10
371:
372: \font\cs=cmcsc10
373: \font\css=cmcsc8
374: \font\ss=cmss10
375: \font\sss=cmss8
376: \font\crs=cmbx8
377: \font\ninerm=cmr9
378: \font\ottorm=cmr8
379: \textfont5=\tenmib
380: \scriptfont5=\sevenmib
381: \scriptscriptfont5=\fivei
382: \font\msxtw=msbm10 scaled\magstep1
383: \font\euftw=eufm10 scaled\magstep1
384: \font\msytw=msbm9 scaled\magstep1
385: \font\msytww=msbm8 scaled\magstep1
386: \font\msytwww=msbm7 scaled\magstep1
387: \font\indbf=cmbx10 scaled\magstep2
388: \font\type=cmtt10
389:
390:
391:
392: \newskip\ttglue
393: \font\ottorm=cmr8\font\ottoi=cmmi8\font\ottosy=cmsy7
394: \font\ottobf=cmbx7\font\ottott=cmtt8\font\ottosl=cmsl8\font\ottoit=cmti7
395: \font\sixrm=cmr6\font\sixbf=cmbx7\font\sixi=cmmi7\font\sixsy=cmsy7
396: \font\fiverm=cmr5\font\fivesy=cmsy5\font\fivei=cmmi5\font\fivebf=cmbx5
397:
398: \def\ottopunti{\def\rm{\fam0\ottorm}\textfont0=\ottorm%
399: \scriptfont0=\sixrm\scriptscriptfont0=\fiverm\textfont1=\ottoi%
400: \scriptfont1=\sixi\scriptscriptfont1=\fivei\textfont2=\ottosy%
401: \scriptfont2=\sixsy\scriptscriptfont2=\fivesy\textfont3=\tenex%
402: \scriptfont3=\tenex\scriptscriptfont3=\tenex\textfont\itfam=\ottoit%
403: \def\it{\fam\itfam\ottoit}\textfont\slfam=\ottosl%
404: \def\sl{\fam\slfam\ottosl}\textfont\ttfam=\ottott%
405: \def\tt{\fam\ttfam\ottott}\textfont\bffam=\ottobf%
406: \scriptfont\bffam=\sixbf\scriptscriptfont\bffam=\fivebf%
407: \def\bf{\fam\bffam\ottobf}\tt\ttglue=.5em plus.25em minus.15em%
408: \setbox\strutbox=\hbox{\vrule height7pt depth2pt width0pt}%
409: \normalbaselineskip=9pt\let\sc=\sixrm\normalbaselines\rm}
410: \let\nota=\ottopunti
411:
412: %%% RIFERIMENTI SIMBOLICI A FORMULE , PARAGRAFI E FIGURE
413: %
414: % Ogni paragrafo deve iniziare con il comando \section(#1,#2), dove #1
415: % e' il simbolo associato al paragrafo e #2 e' il titolo. Per le
416: % appendici bisogna pero' usare \appendix(#1,#2).
417: %
418: % Se nel titolo compaiono riferimenti ad altri simboli, questi vanno
419: % racchiusi fra parentesi graffe, per es. {\equ(1.2)}; in caso contrario
420: % si provoca un errore.
421: %
422: % Ogni sottoparagrafo deve iniziare con il comando \sub(#1) o \asub(#1),
423: % nelle appendici.
424: %
425: % I riferimenti a paragrafi e sottoparagrafi si realizzano con il comando
426: % \sec(#1), che produce il numero effettivo preceduto dal simbolo di
427: % paragrafo, o \secc(#1), che produce solo il numero (serve nel caso si
428: % faccia riferimento ad un sottoparagrafo, che e' un Lemma, un Teorema o
429: % altro oggetto suscettibile di una denominazione speciale).
430: %
431: % Le formule sono contrassegnate con \Eq(#1), eccetto che all'interno
432: % del comando \eqalignno, dove si deve usare \eq(#1). Nelle appendici
433: % i comandi corrispondenti sono \Eqa(#1) e \eqa(#1).
434: % I riferimenti alle formule si realizzano con \equ(#1).
435: %
436: % La numerazione delle figure utilizza il comando \eqg(#1), per
437: % contrassegnarle, e \graf(#1) per citarle.
438: %
439:
440:
441:
442:
443: %%% DATA E PIE' DI PAGINA
444:
445: {\count255=\time\divide\count255 by 60
446: \xdef\hourmin{\number\count255}
447: \multiply\count255 by-60\advance\count255 by\time
448: \xdef\hourmin{\hourmin:\ifnum\count255<10 0\fi\the\count255}}
449:
450: \def\oramin{\hourmin }
451:
452: \def\data{\number\day/\ifcase\month\or gennaio \or febbraio \or marzo \or
453: aprile \or maggio \or giugno \or luglio \or agosto \or settembre
454: \or ottobre \or novembre \or dicembre \fi/\number\year;\ \oramin}
455: \setbox200\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle \data $}
456: \footline={\rlap{\hbox{\copy200}}\tenrm\hss \number\pageno\hss}
457:
458:
459:
460: %%% INSERIMENTO FIGURE ( se si usa DVIPS )
461: %
462: % Se si vuole utilizzare delle macro postscript personali, contenute
463: % nel file ini.ps, togliere il commento alla riga seguente
464: %\special{header=ini.ps}
465: %
466: % Il comando seguente inserisce una scatola contenente #3 in modo che
467: % l'angolo superiore sinistro occupi la posizione (#1,#2)
468: %
469: %\def\ins#1#2#3{\vbox to0pt{\kern-#2 \hbox{\kern#1 #3}\vss}\nointerlineskip}
470: %
471: % Il comando seguente crea una scatola di dimensioni #1x#2 contenente
472: % il disegno descritto in #4.ps;
473: % in questo disegno si possono introdurre delle stringhe usando \ins
474: % e mettendo le istruzioni relative nell'argomento #3.
475: % Il file #4.ps contiene le istruzioni postscript, che devono essere scritte
476: % presupponendo che l'origine sia nell'angolo inferiore sinistro della
477: % scatola, mentre per il resto l'ambiente grafico e' quello standard.
478: % #5 deve essere della forma \eqg("nome simbolico").
479: %
480: % Le istruzioni postscript possono essere inserite nel file che contiene
481: % l'istruzione \insertplot, racchiudendole fra le istruzioni \initfig{#4}
482: % e \endfig; inoltre ogni riga deve cominciare con "write13<" e deve finire
483: % con ">". In questo modo si crea il file #4.ps relativo alla figura.
484: %
485: \newdimen\xshift \newdimen\xwidth \newdimen\yshift
486:
487: \def\insertplot#1#2#3#4#5{\par%
488: \xwidth=#1 \xshift=\hsize \advance\xshift by-\xwidth \divide\xshift by 2%
489: \yshift=#2 \divide\yshift by 2%
490: \line{\hskip\xshift \vbox to #2{\vfil%
491: #3 \special{psfile=#4.ps}}\hfill \raise\yshift\hbox{#5}}}
492:
493: \def\initfig#1{%
494: \catcode`\%=12\catcode`\{=12\catcode`\}=12
495: \catcode`\<=1\catcode`\>=2
496: \openout13=#1.ps}
497:
498: \def\endfig{%
499: \closeout13
500: \catcode`\%=14\catcode`\{=1
501: \catcode`\}=2\catcode`\<=12\catcode`\>=12}
502:
503:
504: \def\eqfig#1#2#3#4#5{ \par\xwidth=#1
505: \xshift=\hsize \advance\xshift by-\xwidth \divide\xshift by 2
506: \yshift=#2 \divide\yshift by 2 \line{\hglue\xshift \vbox to #2{\vfil #3
507: \special{psfile=#4.ps} }\hfill\raise\yshift\hbox{#5}}}
508:
509: \def\8{\write13}
510: \def\figini#1{\catcode`\%=12\catcode`\{=12\catcode`\}=12
511: \catcode`\<=1\catcode`\>=2\openout13=#1.ps}
512:
513: \def\figfin{\closeout13\catcode`\%=14\catcode`\{=1
514: \catcode`\}=2\catcode`\<=12\catcode`\>=12}
515:
516: \def\didascalia#1{\vbox{\nota\0#1\hfill}\vskip0.3truecm}
517:
518:
519:
520: \def\bar#1{{\overline#1}}
521:
522: \def\qed{\raise1pt\hbox{\vrule height5pt width5pt depth0pt}}
523:
524: \def\ha{{\widehat \a}}
525: \def\hx{{\widehat \x}}
526: \def\hb{{\widehat \b}}
527: \def\hr{{\widehat \r}}
528: \def\hw{{\widehat w}}
529: \def\hv{{\widehat v}}
530: \def\hf{{\widehat \f}}
531: \def\hW{{\widehat W}}
532: \def\hH{{\widehat H}}
533: \def\hK{{\widehat K}}
534: \def\hW{{\widehat W}}
535: \def\hU{{\widehat U}}
536: \def\hp{{\widehat \ps}} \def\bp{{\bar \ps}}
537: \def\hn{{\hat \h}}
538: \def\jm{{\jmath}}
539: \def\hj{{\widehat \jmath}}
540: \def\hg{{\widehat g}} \def\tg{{\tilde g}}
541: \def\hQ{{\widehat Q}}
542: \def\hC{{\widehat C}}
543: \def\hD{{\widehat D}} \def\hDD{{\hat \D}}
544: \def\bl{{\bar \l}}
545: \def\hG{{\widehat G}}
546: \def\hS{{\widehat S}}
547: \def\hR{{\widehat R}}
548: \def\hM{{\widehat M}}
549: \def\hT{{\widehat T}}
550: \def\hN{{\widehat N}}
551:
552:
553:
554:
555: \def\barf#1{{\tilde \f_{#1}}}
556: %\def\tg#1{{\tilde g_{#1}}}
557: \def\bq{{\bar q}}
558: \def\indic{\hbox{\raise-2pt \hbox{\indbf 1}}}
559:
560:
561: \def\RRR{\hbox{\msytw R}} \def\rrrr{\hbox{\msytww R}}
562: \def\rrr{\hbox{\msytwww R}} \def\CCC{\hbox{\msytw C}}
563: \def\cccc{\hbox{\msytww C}} \def\ccc{\hbox{\msytwww C}}
564: \def\NNN{\hbox{\msytw N}} \def\nnnn{\hbox{\msytww N}}
565: \def\nnn{\hbox{\msytwww N}} \def\ZZZ{\hbox{\msytw Z}}
566: \def\zzzz{\hbox{\msytww Z}} \def\zzz{\hbox{\msytwww Z}}
567: \def\TTT{\hbox{\msytw T}} \def\tttt{\hbox{\msytww T}}
568: \def\ttt{\hbox{\msytwww T}}
569: \def\QQQ{\hbox{\msytw Q}} \def\qqqq{\hbox{\msytww Q}}
570: \def\qqq{\hbox{\msytwww Q}}
571:
572: %%% FORMATO PAGINA E LETTURA FILE .AUX
573: \newcount\mgnf %ingranimento
574: \mgnf=0
575:
576: \ifnum\mgnf=0
577: \def\openone{\leavevmode\hbox{\ninerm 1\kern-3.3pt\tenrm1}}%
578: \def\*{\vglue0.3truecm}\fi
579: \ifnum\mgnf=1
580: \def\openone{\leavevmode\hbox{\ninerm 1\kern-3.63pt\tenrm1}}%
581: \def\*{\vglue0.5truecm}\fi
582:
583:
584: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% BIBLIOGRAFIA %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
585: \newcount\tipobib\newcount\bz\bz=0\newcount\aux\aux=1
586: \newdimen\bibskip\newdimen\maxit\maxit=0pt
587:
588: %\openin14=\jobname.aux \ifeof14 \relax \else
589: %\input \jobname.aux \closein14 \fi
590: %\openout15=\jobname.aux
591:
592: \tipobib=0
593: \def\9#1{\ifnum\aux=1#1\else\relax\fi}
594:
595: \newwrite\bib
596: \immediate\openout\bib=\jobname.bib
597: \global\newcount\bibex
598: \bibex=0
599: \def\verabib{\number\bibex}
600:
601: \ifnum\tipobib=0
602: \def\cita#1{\expandafter\ifx\csname c#1\endcsname\relax
603: \hbox{$\clubsuit$}#1\write16{Manca #1 !}%
604: \else\csname c#1\endcsname\fi}
605: \def\rife#1#2#3{\immediate\write\bib{\string\raf{#2}{#3}{#1}}
606: \immediate\write15{\string\C(#1){[#2]}}
607: \setbox199=\hbox{#2}\ifnum\maxit < \wd199 \maxit=\wd199\fi}
608: \else
609: \def\cita#1{%
610: \expandafter\ifx\csname d#1\endcsname\relax%
611: \expandafter\ifx\csname c#1\endcsname\relax%
612: \hbox{$\clubsuit$}#1\write16{Manca #1 !}%
613: \else\probib(ref. numero )(#1)%
614: \csname c#1\endcsname%
615: \fi\else\csname d#1\endcsname\fi}%
616: \def\rife#1#2#3{\immediate\write15{\string\Cp(#1){%
617: \string\immediate\string\write\string\bib{\string\string\string\raf%
618: {\string\verabib}{#3}{#1}}%
619: \string\Cn(#1){[\string\verabib]}%
620: \string\CCc(#1)%
621: }}}%
622: \fi
623:
624: \def\Cn(#1)#2{\expandafter\xdef\csname d#1\endcsname{#2}}
625: \def\CCc(#1){\csname d#1\endcsname}
626: \def\probib(#1)(#2){\global\advance\bibex+1%
627: \9{\immediate\write16{#1\verabib => #2}}%
628: }
629:
630:
631: \def\C(#1)#2{\SIA c,#1,{#2}}
632: \def\Cp(#1)#2{\SIAnx c,#1,{#2}}
633:
634: \def\SIAnx #1,#2,#3 {\senondefinito{#1#2}%
635: \expandafter\def\csname#1#2\endcsname{#3}\else%
636: \write16{???? ma #1,#2 e' gia' stato definito !!!!}\fi}
637:
638:
639: \bibskip=10truept
640: \def\hboxto{\hbox to}
641: \def\hsizeby{\hsize by}
642: \catcode`\{=12\catcode`\}=12
643: \catcode`\<=1\catcode`\>=2
644: \immediate\write\bib<
645: \string\halign{\string\hboxto \string\maxit%
646: {\string #\string\hfill}&%
647: \string\vtop{\string\parindent=0pt\string\advance\string\hsize%
648: by -1.55truecm%
649: \string#\string\vskip \bibskip
650: }\string\cr%
651: >
652: \catcode`\{=1\catcode`\}=2
653: \catcode`\<=12\catcode`\>=12
654:
655:
656: \def\raf#1#2#3{\ifnum \bz=0 [#1] \cr\else
657: \llap{${}_{\rm #3}$}[#1]\cr\fi}
658:
659: \newread\bibin
660:
661: \catcode`\{=12\catcode`\}=12
662: \catcode`\<=1\catcode`\>=2
663: \def\chiudibib<
664: \catcode`\{=12\catcode`\}=12
665: \catcode`\<=1\catcode`\>=2
666: \immediate\write\bib<}>
667: \catcode`\{=1\catcode`\}=2
668: \catcode`\<=12\catcode`\>=12
669: >
670: \catcode`\{=1\catcode`\}=2
671: \catcode`\<=12\catcode`\>=12
672:
673: \def\makebiblio{
674: \ifnum\tipobib=0
675: \advance \maxit by 10pt
676: \else
677: \maxit=1.truecm
678: \fi
679: \chiudibib
680: \immediate \closeout\bib
681: \openin\bibin=\jobname.bib
682: \ifeof\bibin\relax\else
683: \raggedbottom
684: \input \jobname.bib
685: \fi
686: }
687:
688: \openin13=#1.aux \ifeof13 \relax \else
689: \input #1.aux \closein13\fi
690: \openin14=\jobname.aux \ifeof14 \relax \else
691: \input \jobname.aux \closein14 \fi
692: \immediate\openout15=\jobname.aux
693:
694:
695: \def\biblio{\*\*\centerline{\titolo References}\*\nobreak\makebiblio}
696: \def\defi{{\buildrel def \over =}}
697: \def\wdg{\wedge}
698: \def\apt{{\;\buildrel apt \over =}\;}
699: \def\nequiv{\not\equiv}
700: \def\Tr{{\rm Tr}}
701: \def\sgn{\rm sgn}
702: \def\wt#1{\widetilde{#1}}
703: \def\wh#1{\widehat{#1}}
704: \def\sqt[#1]#2{\root #1\of {#2}}
705:
706:
707: \def\sde{{\cs SDe}}
708: \def\wti{{\cs WTi}}
709: \def\osa{{\cs OSa}}
710: \def\ce{{\cs CE}}
711: \def\rg{{\cs RG}}
712: %*****************************************************************************
713: \def\chapter(#1,#2){{}}
714: \def\intro(#1,#2){{}}
715: \frenchspacing
716: %\BOZZA
717:
718: \input impaginatesi.txt
719:
720:
721:
722:
723: \pageno=1
724:
725:
726:
727:
728: \centerline {UNIVERSIT\`{A} DEGLI STUDI DI ROMA ``LA SAPIENZA''}
729:
730: \vskip.1truecm
731: \vbox
732: {\insertplot{90pt}{150pt}%
733: {}%
734: {s}{}
735: }
736: \vskip1em
737:
738: \centerline {FACOLT\`{A} DI SCIENZE MATEMATICHE FISICHE E NATURALI}
739: \vskip1.5truecm
740: \centerline {TESI DI DOTTORATO IN MATEMATICA}
741: \vskip2.7truecm
742: \centerline{\titolone Rigorous construction of the Thirring model:}
743: \vskip1mm
744: \centerline{\titolone Ward-Takahashi Identities, Schwinger-Dyson Equations}
745: \vskip1mm
746: \centerline{\titolone and New Anomalies} \vskip1cm
747:
748: \vskip3truecm
749:
750: \hbox to \hsize
751: {\hskip2em \vtop{
752: \hbox{\hskip1em Relatori}
753: \hbox{Prof. G.Benfatto}
754: \hbox{Prof. V.Mastropietro}}
755: \hfill
756: \vtop{
757: \hbox{\hskip1em Dottorando}
758: \hbox{Dott. P.Falco}}
759: \hskip2em\null}
760:
761:
762:
763:
764: \vskip2truecm
765:
766: \centerline {Anno Accademico 2004-2005}
767: \null
768: \null
769: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
770: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
771:
772: \indice
773:
774: %\openout1=indice.txt
775: %%%%%%
776: %%%%%%
777: \intro(I,Introduction)
778: {\bf Historical outlook.} The Thirring
779: model was proposed in [T58]. It describes Dirac fermions in
780: $d=1+1$ spacetime dimensions with local current-current
781: interaction. With summation over repeated indices, the classical
782: Action for mass $\m$ and coupling $\l$ reads:
783: %
784: $$
785: \int\!\der^2x\
786: \bar\psi_x\left(i\tgl{\partial}+\m\right)\psi_x-
787: {\l\over 2} \int\!\der^2x\
788: \r_\n(x) \r^\n(x)\;,
789: \Eq(1)
790: $$
791: %
792: where $\psi$ and $\bar\psi\defi\ps^\dagger \g^0$ are 2-spinors;
793: $x\defi(x_0,x_1)$; $\r^\m(x)\defi \bar\ps_x\g^\m\ps_x$ is the
794: current; and the $\g$'s matrices are a realization of the Clifford
795: algebra
796: $$
797: \g^0\defi
798: \pmatrix{0&1\cr
799: 1&0\cr}\;,
800: \qquad
801: \g^1\defi
802: \pmatrix{0&-1\cr
803: 1&0\cr}\;,
804: \qquad
805: \g^5\defi i\g^0\g^1
806: =
807: \pmatrix{i&0\cr
808: 0&-i\cr}\;,
809: \Eq(eca)$$
810: which, for $\h^{\m,\n}\defi \d_{\m,\n}(1-2\d_{\m,1})$, do satisfy the properties
811: %
812: $$\eqalign{
813: \{\g^\m,\g^\n\}=2\h^{\m,\n}\;,
814: &\qquad
815: \left(\g^\m\right)^\dagger=-\g^0_M\g^\m_M\g^0_M\;,\cr
816: \{\g^5,\g^\m\}=0\;,
817: \qquad
818: &\left(\g^5\right)^2=-1\;,
819: \qquad
820: \left(\g^5\right)^\dagger=-\g^0\g^5\g^0=-\g^5\;.
821: }$$
822: %
823: This model is enough simple to be analysed in full details; and
824: yet it contains many of the typical features of the quantization
825: of relativistic {\it quantum field theories} (QFT), such as the
826: {\it anomalous scaling} -- as conjectured in QED, [JZ];
827: and the {\it anomalous phase and chiral symmetries} -- like the
828: anomalous chiral symmetry of QED or Standard Model.
829:
830: As peculiarity of the $1+1$ spacetime dimension, since there are
831: only two independent component of the current, the invariance of
832: the classical massless Lagrangian under phase transformation
833: $\psi_x\to e^{i\a} \psi_x$ and under chiral transformation
834: $\psi_x\to e^{i\g^5\a_{x}} \psi_x$ led to the hope to find an
835: exact solution also for the quantum massless model.
836:
837: First, Thirring, [T58], derived many matrix elements of the
838: interacting field; then, Glaser, [G58], gave an explicit formula
839: for such a field operator, arising the criticism of Pradhan and
840: Scarf. The breakthrough had place with Johnson, [J61], who first
841: found the expression for the two point Schwinger functions which,
842: until nowadays, has been accepted as the {\it exact solution}. In
843: the end, Klaiber, [K64], with a slightly different technique,
844: wrote out the general formula for all the Schwinger functions. All
845: this story is commented upon in [W64]; here it is worthwhile to
846: stress that {\it all above papers} were plagued by the typical
847: infinities of relativistic QFT: the virtue of Johnson's
848: development merely was a greater solidity of the final result.
849:
850: A remarkable feature in [J61] is the presence of {\it anomalies}
851: in the
852: \hbox{Ward-Takahashi} identities (\wti): they
853: occur -- some years {\it before} the discovery of Adler, [A70] --
854: as a modification of the field-current commutation relations,
855: simply guessed in order to avoid triviality of the identities.
856:
857: Remarkable as well is the procedure of joining of the
858: Schwinger-Dyson equation (\sde) together to the phase and chiral
859: \wti, in order to obtain a Closed Equation (CE) for the two point
860: Schwinger function which can be solved straightforwardly.
861:
862: In order to clear the result of all the surreptitious calculations
863: with infinities, Wightman, [W64], stressed that the set of
864: Schwinger function of Johnson and Klaiber, no matter how they were
865: derived, only represent {\it good candidates}: if they verified
866: the requirements of an axiomatic program, they would define a QFT
867: to be called ``Thirring model" essentially by definition. But no
868: kind of {\it positive definiteness} of inner product of physical
869: Hilbert space has ever been possible to prove; up to recent years,
870: when in [M93] the {\it reflection positivity} was obtained as
871: consequence of the Hamiltonian formulation of a many particle
872: model, the Luttinger model, exactly soluble as showed in [ML65]
873: and in a sense close to the massless Thirring model.
874:
875: The massive theory is much less analysed, [GL72]. In such a case
876: no ``exact solution'' was ever found; as well as no physical
877: positive metric.
878:
879: Now, a different point of view can be considered, the
880: Renormalization Group (\rg) approach {\it \`a la Wilson}. Such a
881: technique has been revealed very profitable for certain QFT, like
882: the Yukawa$_2$ model, [S75] and [MS76], or the ultraviolet part
883: of Gross-Neveu model, [GK85] and [FMRS85]; the subtle point being
884: that all such models are superrinormalizable, or were studied in
885: asymptotically free regimes.
886:
887: The Thirring model, instead, is renormalizable, but not
888: superrinormalizable; and no regime is asymptotically free, since
889: the effective coupling remains essentially constant
890: over every regime. This property, called {\it vanishing of Beta
891: function}, was already used in [BoM97] to point out the critical
892: behavior of the infrared regime of Yukawa$_2$ model; and
893: it is a
894: consequence of the phase and chiral \wti{} -- in agreement with
895: the general belief that, without the aid of symmetries, \rg{} can
896: be effective only in constructing {\it trivial} theories.
897:
898: As matter of fact, there is a basic conflict between the
899: regularization of the theory and the phase and chiral symmetries.
900: The situation is very similar to the scaling transformation: the
901: classical theory is scale invariant; the theory regularized with a
902: cutoff is no longer; removing the cutoff, scale invariance is
903: recovered, but with a different exponent, called anomalous. In the
904: same way, removing the cutoff, the \wti{} are recovered, but a
905: change in the factor in front of the currents makes such
906: identities anomalous.
907:
908: In recent times, Benfatto and Mastropietro, [BM01],[BM02],[BM04],[BM05],
909: have developed
910: a technique to complete construction of Luttinger liquids
911: without any reference to the exact solution of the Luttinger model.
912: As byproduct of their developments, the anomaly of the
913: \wti{} arose.
914:
915: The aim of this thesis is to use such a technique to
916: construct, by a {\it self-consistent \rg{} approach},
917: uniform in the mass,
918: the Thirring model at imaginary time.
919: And then to make a continuation to Minkowskian spacetime by
920: verifying the Osterwalder and Schrader axioms, (\osa).
921: The occurrence of the phenomenon of {\it fermion doubling} --
922: peculiar of the discretization on a lattice --
923: has been solved introducing a momentum dependent mass term, as suggested
924: in [W76], but also a mass counterterm which avoids the generation of mass in
925: the massless theory.
926:
927: As main applications, the anomalous \wti{} stated by Johnson are
928: derived and, as consequence, the current operator is proved not to
929: need any renormalization. Anyway, the explicit value of
930: the anomaly obtained by Johnson are wrong by lowest order calculation,
931: and this is {\it in violation of the Adler-Bardeen's
932: theorem}, [A69]. Also the rigorous implementation of the
933: Johnson's closure of the \sde{} is proved: it will be showed,
934: anyway, the arising of a {\it new anomaly}, missed in the formal
935: developments, which have driven Johnson to a {\it wrong anomalous
936: exponent}.
937: %%%%%%%%
938: %%%%%%%%
939: \chapter(RR,Definitions and Main Results)
940:
941:
942: \section(ETM,Euclidean Thirring Model)
943:
944: Many properties of a quantum field theory
945: can be obtained from the {\it Schwinger functions},
946: the ``cumulants'', or the ``truncated expectations''
947: of a statistical measure which correspond to the
948: {\it imaginary-time version}
949: of the model. Such a measure
950: can be conveniently formulated in terms of
951: a ``path integral'' on a lattice spacetime.
952: Since the fields dealt with are
953: {\it fermions} -- namely only the case of anticommuting
954: fields is considered -- they are represented in
955: the path integral formulation
956: by Grassmannian variables.
957:
958: \*
959: \sub(SWF){Weyl formalism.} While in Dirac
960: notation of \equ(1) the independent fields are
961: the \hbox{2-spinor} $\bar\ps$ and $\ps$, in Weyl notation
962: they are
963: $\hp_{k}\defi (\hp^-_{k,+},\hp^-_{k,-})^T,\hp^\dagger_{k}\defi
964: (\hp^+_{k,+},\hp^+_{k,-})$.
965: The Euclidean Clifford Algebra is defined to be:
966: %
967: $$\eqalign{
968: \{\g^\m,\g^\n\}=2\d^{\m,\n}\;,
969: &\qquad
970: \left(\g^\m\right)^\dagger=\g^\m\;,\cr
971: \{\g^5,\g^\m\}=0\;,
972: \qquad
973: &\left(\g^5\right)^2=1\;,
974: \qquad
975: \left(\g^5\right)^\dagger=\g^5.
976: }$$
977: %
978: Such requirements are fulfilled by the same $\g'$s matrices
979: in \equ(eca), by multiplying $\g^1$ and $\g^5$ by the
980: imaginary unity; namely, from now on
981: the definitions in \equ(eca) are turned into:
982: %
983: $$
984: \g^0\defi
985: \pmatrix{0&1\cr
986: 1&0\cr}\;,
987: \qquad
988: \g^1\defi
989: \pmatrix{0&-i\cr
990: i&0\cr}\;,
991: \qquad
992: \g^5\defi
993: -i\g^0\g^1
994: =
995: \pmatrix{1&0\cr
996: 0&-1\cr}\;.
997: $$
998: %
999: Accordingly,
1000: the Euclidean Action, for mass $\m$ and coupling $\l$,
1001: is defined to be:
1002: %
1003: $$\eqalign{
1004: &\sum_{\o,\s=\pm}
1005: \int\!
1006: {\der^2k\over (2\p)}\
1007: \hp^+_{k,\o}T_{\o,\s}(k)
1008: \hp^-_{k,\s}\cr
1009: &\phantom{***********}
1010: -
1011: {\l\over 2}\sum_{\o=\pm}
1012: \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}
1013: {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
1014: \hp^+_{p,\o}\hp^-_{q,\o}\hp^+_{k,-\o}\hp^-_{p+k-q,-\o}\;,}
1015: \Eq(el)$$
1016: %
1017: where the coefficients of the quadratic part are
1018: $$ T_{\o,\s}(k)
1019: \defi
1020: \pmatrix{ D_+(k) & -\m \cr
1021: -\m & D_-(k)\cr}_{\o,\s}\;,
1022: \qquad
1023: {\rm with}\quad D_\o(k)\defi -ik_0+\o k_1\;.$$
1024: %
1025:
1026: \*
1027: \sub(STL){Spacetime Lattice.}
1028: Let $a$ and $L$ be respectively the spacing
1029: and the side length of the lattice to be constructed,
1030: such that $L/a$ is an integer.
1031: Then, in correspondence of such parameters, let the quotient set $Q$
1032: be defined as
1033: %
1034: $$Q\defi\left\{(n_0,n_1)\in \ZZZ^2
1035: \Big|\ n\sim n'\ {\rm if}\ n-n'\in {L\over a}\ZZZ^2 \right\}\;;$$
1036: %
1037: the spacetime lattice, $\L$, and its reciprocal one, $D$, are defined as
1038: %
1039: $$\L\defi\{an_0,an_1\left|n\in Q\right.\}\;,
1040: \qquad
1041: D
1042: \defi
1043: \left\{{2\p\over L}\left.\left(m_0+{1\over 2}\right),{2\p\over L}
1044: \left(m_1+{1\over 2}\right)
1045: \right|m\in Q\right\}\;.$$
1046: %
1047: To shorten the notation, the Riemann sums
1048: on the lattices are denoted with integrals
1049: %
1050: $$\int_{\L}\!\der^2x\
1051: f(x)\defi a^2\sum_{x\in\L} f(x)\;,
1052: \qquad
1053: \int_{D}\!\der^2k\
1054: \wh f(k)\defi
1055: \left({2\p\over L}\right)^2\sum_{k\in D}
1056: \wh f(k)\;.
1057: \Eq(rs)$$
1058: %
1059:
1060: \*
1061: \sub(FI){Grassmann Algebra.}
1062: In correspondence of the fields in \equ(el),
1063: there are four sets
1064: of Grassmann variables that, {\it with abuse of notation},
1065: are called $\{\hp_{k,\o}^\s\}_{\s,\o=\pm}^{k\in D}$ as well.
1066: The integration in such a {\it finite algebra} is defined
1067: so that the integral of a constant is
1068: zero, while
1069: %
1070: $$\int\!\!\der\hp^{\s'}_{k',\o'}\ \hp^\s_{k,\o}=\d_{\s',\s}\d_{k',k}\d_{\o',\o}\;;$$
1071: %
1072: then the operation is extended by linearity to any polynomial of fields,
1073: considering $\big\{\der \hp_{k,\o}^\s\big\}_{\o,\s}^{k\in D}$ anticommuting
1074: with themselves and with all the fields.
1075: As consequence, the integration of the monomial $\QQ(\ps)$,
1076: $\int\!\prod_{k\in D}
1077: \prod_{\o=\pm}\der\hp_{k,\o}^+\der\hp_{k,\o}^-\QQ(\ps)$,
1078: assigns 1 to
1079: \hbox{$\QQ(\ps)=\prod_{k\in D}\prod_{\o=\pm} \hp_{k,\o}^- \hp_{k,\o}^+$},
1080: and 0 to all the other $\QQ'(\ps)$ which cannot be obtained
1081: as permutation of fields in $\QQ(\ps)$.
1082:
1083: The derivative in the Grassmann algebra is defined to be
1084: equivalent to the integration:
1085: $${\partial \QQ(\ps)\over \partial \hp^+_{k,\o}}
1086: \defi\int\!\!\der\hp^+_{k,\o}\ \QQ(\ps)\;,
1087: \qquad
1088: {\partial \QQ(\ps)\over \partial \hp^-_{k,\o}}
1089: \defi-\int\!\!\QQ(\ps)\ \der\hp^-_{k,\o}$$
1090: %
1091: -- hence the derivative in $\hp^-_{k,\o}$ {\it acts from the right}.
1092:
1093: \*
1094: \sub(SF){Schwinger functions.}
1095: In order to give a meaning to the path integral formulation of
1096: the Schwinger function, it is necessary
1097: to introduce a ``cutoff function'', $\c_N(k)$, made as follows.
1098: Let a momentum unity, $\k$, be fixed. Chosen any $\g>1$,
1099: let $N$ be any integer such that
1100: \hbox{$\k \g^{N+1}\leq 3\p/4a$}.
1101: Then, let $\wh\c_N(t)$ be a $C_0^\io(\RRR)$ function
1102: with compact support $\{t\in \RRR: |t|\le \k\g^{N+1}\}$
1103: and $\wh\c_N(t)\=1$ in \hbox{$\{t\in \RRR:|t|\le \k\g^N\}$.}
1104: Besides, because of technical reason,
1105: it is convenient to take $\wh\c_N$
1106: in the Gevrey class $\a$: for a positive constant $C$,
1107: %
1108: $$\sup_{t\in \rrr}\left|{\der^n\wh\c_N\over \der t^n}(t)\right|
1109: \leq C^n (n!)^\a\;;$$
1110: %
1111: in particular, $\a=2$ will be good enough.
1112: The possibility of constructing
1113: such a compact support function is discussed in \secc(GCF).
1114: Finally, $\c_N(k)\defi \wh \c_N(k_0)\wh\c_N(k_1)$.
1115: Calling $D_N\subset D$ the support of $\c_N(k)$,
1116: the {\it Generating Functional} of the Schwinger functions of the
1117: Thirring model is defined to be $\WW(\jm,\f)$:
1118: in correspondence of
1119: certain parameters $\l_N$, $\m_N$, $Z_N$ and $\z^{(2)}_N$,
1120: it is such that
1121: %
1122: $$\eqalign{
1123: e^{\WW(\jm,\f)}
1124: \defi
1125: \int\!\!\der P^{(\leq N)}(\ps)
1126: \exp
1127: &\left\{ -\l_N \VV\left(\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)+
1128: \z_N^{(2)}\JJ(\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps)
1129: +\FF\left(\f,\ps\right)\right\}\;.}\Eq(gf)$$
1130: %
1131: The explanation of the above formula is the following.
1132: The integration
1133: is done w.r.t. the normalized Gaussian measure given by
1134: %
1135: $$\eqalign{
1136: \der P^{(\leq N)}(\ps)
1137: \defi
1138: &\exp\left\{L^2O_N- Z_N\sum_{\a,\b=\pm}
1139: \int_{D_N}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
1140: {T_{\o,\s}(k)\over \c_N(k)}
1141: \hp_{k,\o}^+\hp_{k,\s}^-\right\}\cr
1142: &\prod_{k\in D_N}\prod_{\o=\pm}\der\hp_{k,\o}^+\der\hp_{k,\o}^-
1143: \;,}\Eq(distr)$$
1144: %
1145: where the {\it covariance}
1146: $\hg_{\o,\s}(k)$ is such that:
1147: %
1148: $$
1149: \hg^{-1}(k)\defi
1150: {T(k) \over \c_N(k)}\;,
1151: \qquad{\rm with}\quad
1152: T_{\o,\s}(k)
1153: \defi
1154: \pmatrix{ D_+(k) & -\m_N \cr
1155: -\m_N & D_-(k)\cr}_{\o,\s}\;;$$
1156: %
1157: hence $\hg(k)$ is periodic by the compact support of $\c_N$
1158: and well defined for any $k\in D$,
1159: also for $\m_N=0$, since the point $(0,0)$
1160: does not belong to $D$. As well as
1161: $\hg^{-1}(k)$ is well defined in $D_N$,
1162: since the points in which the cutoff is
1163: zero do not belong to $D_N$.
1164: The factor $e^{O_N}$ is the normalization of the
1165: Gaussian measure:
1166: %
1167: $$O_N\defi\int_{D_N}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
1168: \ln\lft({L^4|k|^2\over \c_N^2(k)}\rgt)\;.$$
1169: %
1170:
1171: The self-interaction is given by the potential
1172: %
1173: $$\VV(\ps)
1174: \defi
1175: {1\over 2}\sum_\o\int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
1176: {\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
1177: \hp^+_{p,\o}\hp^-_{q,\o}\hp^+_{k,-\o}\hp^-_{p+k-q,-\o}\;;$$
1178: %
1179: while the interaction
1180: with the external sources are
1181: %
1182: $$\eqalign{
1183: \JJ_\s(\jm,\ps)
1184: &\defi
1185: \sum_\o\int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
1186: \hj_{p-k,\o}\hp^+_{k,\s\o}\hp^-_{p,\s\o}\;,\cr
1187: \FF(\f,\ps)
1188: &\defi
1189: \sum_\o\int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
1190: \left[\hf^+_{k,\o}\hp^-_{k,\o}+\hp^+_{k,\o}\hf^-_{k,\o}\right]\;;}$$
1191: %
1192: and $\{\hj_{k,\o}\}_{k,\o}$ are a commuting variable, while
1193: $\{\hf^\s_{k,\o}\}_{k,\o,\s}$ are anticommuting.
1194:
1195: Finally, w.r.t. the classical Action \equ(1),
1196: $\l$ has been replaced with $\l_N Z^2_N$, the ``bare coupling'';
1197: $\m$ with $\m_N$, the ``bare mass'';
1198: the free action was multiplied times $Z_N$, the ``field strength'';
1199: and the interaction with the external source $\jm$
1200: brings a coupling $Z^{(2)}_N\defi \z^{(2)}_N Z_N$,
1201: the ``density strength'':
1202: such parameters are essential in order to have a finite
1203: interactive quantum theory, see Theorem \thm(T1).
1204: Besides, in has to be remarked
1205: that the introduction of the cutoff has required a reference
1206: momentum, $\k$, absent in the classical action of the
1207: massless theory, which will allow the arising of the anomalous
1208: dimension without violating the scaling symmetry.
1209:
1210: The Fourier transform of the fields defines
1211: a Grassmann algebra also in the lattice $\L$.
1212: The conventions are:
1213: %
1214: $$\ps_{x,\o}^\s\defi\int_D\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
1215: e^{i\s kx} \hp_{k,\o}^\s\;;
1216: \qquad
1217: \f_{x,\o}^\s\defi\int_D\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
1218: e^{i\s kx} \hf_{k,\o}^\s\;;$$
1219: $$\jm_{x,\o}\defi\int_D\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
1220: e^{i kx} \hj_{k,\o}\;.$$
1221: %
1222: The definition of derivative extends also
1223: to the fields $\big\{\ps^\s_{x,\o}\big\}_{\o,\s=\pm}^{x\in \L}$,
1224: $\big\{\hf^\s_{k,\o}\big\}_{\o,\s=\pm}^{k\in D}$ and
1225: $\big\{\f^\s_{x,\o}\big\}_{\o,\s=\pm}^{x\in \L}$;
1226: while the derivative w.r.t. the fields
1227: $\big\{\hj_{k,\o}\big\}_{\o=\pm}^{k\in D}$ and
1228: $\big\{\jm_{x,\o}\big\}_{\o=\pm}^{x\in \L}$ is the conventional one.
1229:
1230: Well then, setting $\ux\defi x^{1},\ldots,x^{n}$,
1231: and $\uz\defi z^{1},\ldots,z^{m}$,
1232: collections of points in $\L$,
1233: for any given choice of the labels
1234: $\us\defi(\s_1\ldots,\s_m)$,
1235: $\uo\defi(\o_1\ldots,\o_n)$
1236: and $\ue\defi(\e_1\ldots,\e_n)$,
1237: the Schwinger functions are defined as
1238: %
1239: $$
1240: S^{(m;n)(\ue)}_{\us;\uo}(\uz;\ux)\defi
1241: {\partial^{n+m}\WW\over\partial
1242: \jm_{z^{1},\s_1}\cdots\partial\jm_{z^{m},\s_m}
1243: \partial\f^{\e_1}_{x^{1},\o_1}\cdots\partial\f^{\e_n}_{x^{n},\o_n}}
1244: (0,0)\;.\Eq(sd11)$$
1245: %
1246: In order to
1247: shortening the notations of the Schwinger functions
1248: which will be most used in the following, let
1249: %
1250: $$S^{(2)}_{\o}(x-y)\defi S^{(0;2)(-,+)}_{\o,\o}(x,y)\;,
1251: \qquad
1252: S^{(1;2)}_{\s;\o}(z;x-y)\defi S^{(1;2)(-,+)}_{\s;\o,\o}(z;x,y)\;.$$
1253:
1254: \*
1255: \sub(c){Remarks.}
1256: The role of the lattice discretization is only to have
1257: a finite Grassmann algebra: the
1258: {\it continuous limit},
1259: $\k L,(\k a)^{-1}\to\io$
1260: is taken as soon as the Schwinger function are derived;
1261: it is trivial, since, on the other hand, the use of
1262: the functional integral suggest,
1263: but it is not strictly necessary to, the developments.
1264:
1265: On the contrary, the function $\c_N$ is an essential cutoff
1266: on the large momenta: the parameters
1267: $\l_N$, $\m_N$, $Z_N$ and $\z^{(2)}_N$
1268: will be chosen in a way to compensate
1269: the divergences of
1270: the {\it limit of removed cutoff}, $N\to +\io$,
1271: of the Schwinger functions.
1272:
1273: \*
1274: \theorem(T1){
1275: There exists $\e>0$ and two positive constant,
1276: $c$ and $C$, such that, for any $\l:|\l|\le \e$
1277: and $\m:0\leq \m\leq \k\g^{-1}$,
1278: and for suitable $\l_N$, $\m_N$, $Z_N$ and $Z^{(2)}_N$,
1279: analytic function of $\l$,
1280: the following properties of the Schwinger functions hold.
1281: \elenco{
1282: %
1283: \art There exist three critical indices, $\h_{\l}$,
1284: $\h^{(2)}_{\l}$, and
1285: $\bar\h_{\l}$, independent from the cutoff scale $N$
1286: and from the mass $\m$, analytic functions of $\l$ and such that
1287: %
1288: $$\h_\l=\h_{2}\l^2+{\rm O}(\l^3)\;,\qquad
1289: \h^{(2)}_\l=\h^{(2)}_{2}\l^2+{\rm O}(\l^3)\;,$$
1290: $$\bar\h_\l=-\bar\h_{1}\l+{\rm O}(\l^2)\;,$$
1291: %
1292: with $\h_{2}$, $\h^{(2)}_{2}$
1293: and $\bar\h_{1}$ strictly positive; and, for any $N$,
1294: %
1295: $$Z_N=\g^{-N\h_\l}\big(1+{\rm O}(\l^2)\big)\;,
1296: \qquad
1297: Z^{(2)}_N=\g^{-N\h^{(2)}_\l}\big(1+{\rm O}(\l^2)\big)\;,$$
1298: $$\m_N=\m\g^{-N\bar\h_\l}\big(1+{\rm O}(\l))\;,$$
1299: %
1300: where ${\rm O}(\l)$ are finite in $N$.
1301: %
1302: \art
1303: In the limit of removed cutoff, the Schwinger
1304: function are well defined distribution,
1305: fulfilling the \osa{}.
1306: %
1307: \art
1308: In the limit of removed cutoff,
1309: the two point Schwinger function verifies
1310: the bound
1311: %
1312: $$\lft|S^{(2)}_{\o}(x-y)\rgt|
1313: \leq
1314: {\k C\over \big(\k|x-y|\big)^{1+\h_{\l}}}
1315: e^{-c\sqrt{\lft({\m\over \k}\rgt)^{1+\bar\t}{\k|x-y|}}}\;,$$
1316: %
1317: for $\bar\t\defi -\bar\h_\l/(1+\bar\h_\l)$.
1318: The same bound holds also for
1319: $S^{(0;2)(-,+)}_{\o,-\o}(x,y)$.
1320: %
1321: \art
1322: In the limit of removed cutoff and
1323: of vanishing mass, i.e. $\m=0$,
1324: %
1325: $$S^{(2)}_{\o}(x-y)=
1326: (1+\l B_{\l})\int\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\ e^{-ik(x-y)}
1327: {1\over D_\o(k)}
1328: \lft({|k|\over \k}\rgt)^{\h_\l}\;,\Eq(sf)$$
1329: %
1330: with $B_{\l}$ analytic and O$(1)$ in $\l$.
1331: While $S^{(0;2)(-,+)}_{\o,-\o}(x,y)\=0$.}}
1332:
1333: \0The proof of the first three statements is
1334: obtained by the analysis in Chapter \secc(R),
1335: the study of the flows of the effective couplings
1336: in \secc(BGF),
1337: the convergence of the Schwinger functions, \lm(SF)
1338: and \secc(P3P1),
1339: and by the equivalence of the Euclidean and Hamiltonian
1340: regularization, \secc(PTM).
1341: The fourth statement is consequence of
1342: symmetries: see \secc(SCE).
1343:
1344: The \osa{} are reported in Appendix \secc(OS). When they hold,
1345: the \hbox{Osterwalder-Schrader} reconstruction theorem guarantees the
1346: possibility of analytically continuing the set of Schwinger
1347: functions to a set of functions obeying the Wightman axioms:
1348: this means the construction of a consistent
1349: relativistic and quantum field theory.
1350:
1351: By item 2., the parameters $Z_N$ and $Z^{(2)}_N$ are
1352: vanishing in the limit of removed cutoff;
1353: whereas $\m_N$ is vanishing or diverging according to the sign
1354: of $\l$.
1355:
1356: \*
1357: \sub(1.3){Ward-Takahashi identities: first anomaly.} In the
1358: massless case, the phase and chiral symmetry makes current
1359: expectations and field expectations strictly related.
1360: By neglecting {\it formally} the presence of the cutoffs, and
1361: performing a combination of the phase and chiral transformation of
1362: the fields, it holds the following identity for the Fourier transform
1363: of such Schwinger functions:
1364: %
1365: $$ {D_\s(p)\over \z^{(2)}_N}
1366: \hS^{(1;2)}_{\s;\o}(p;k)
1367: =\d_{\s,\o} \left[\hS^{2}_{\o}(k)
1368: -\hS^{2}_{\o}(k+p)\right]\;. \Eq(wil0)
1369: $$
1370: %
1371: \vbox
1372: {\insertplot{330pt}{90pt}%
1373: {}%
1374: {f23}{\eqg(f23)}
1375: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f23)}: Graphical representation of \equ(wil0)}}
1376: \vskip2em
1377: %
1378: This relation is actually {\it wrong}. Indeed, the presence of the
1379: cutoff -- {\it essential ingredient} of meaningful QFT's -- breaks the
1380: symmetries and generates a correction term
1381: $\hH^{(1;2)}_{\s;\o}$:
1382: %
1383: $$
1384: {D_\s(p)\over \z^{(2)}_N} \hS^{(1;2)}_{\s;\o}(p;k)
1385: =\d_{\s,\o}
1386: \left[\hS^{(2)}_{\o}(k) -\hS^{(2)}_{\o}(k+p)\right]
1387: +\hH^{(1;2)}_{\s;\o}(p;k)\;.
1388: \Eq(wi)
1389: $$
1390: %
1391: What is at first sight surprising is that in the limit of removed
1392: cutoff {\it the corrections are not vanishing}; and yet {\it
1393: anomalous \wti{}, strictly different from \equ(wil0)}, are valid.
1394:
1395: \*
1396: \theorem(P2)
1397: {\it There exists $\e>0$ and two positive constants,
1398: $c$ and $C$,
1399: such that, for any \hbox{$\l:|\l|\le\e$} and $\m:0\le \m\le \k\g^{-1}$,
1400: the following properties hold.
1401: \elenco{
1402: \art
1403: For $\m=0$,
1404: there exists two ``bare parameters'', $\l_b$ and
1405: $\z^{(2)}_b$, analytic in $\l$,
1406: such that the coupling $\l_N$ and the
1407: field strength $\z^{(2)}_N$, as chosen in Theorem \thm(T1),
1408: are independent form
1409: the scale of the cutoff, $N$; and are
1410: \hbox{$\l_N=\l_b$},
1411: \hbox{$\z^{(2)}_N=\z^{(2)}_b$}.
1412: %
1413: \art
1414: For $\m=0$, there exist two coefficients,
1415: $a$ and $\bar a$, analytically
1416: dependent on $\l$, such that
1417: %
1418: $${1\over \z^{(2)}_b}\hS^{(1;2)}_{\s;\o}(p,k)
1419: ={a+\bar{a}\s\o\over2}\
1420: {\hS^{(2)}_{\o}(k)-\hS^{(2)}_{\o}(k+p)\over D_\s(p)}\;,
1421: \Eq(kjk)$$
1422: with $(a+\bar a\s\o)/2\neq \d_{\o,\s}$ whenever $\l\neq 0$.
1423: %
1424: \art The current-current correlation satisfies the bound
1425: %
1426: $$\left|S^{(2;0)}_{\s,\o}(x,y)\right|\leq {C\over (\k|x-y|)^2}
1427: e^{-c\sqrt{\k\left({\m\over\k}\right)^{1+\bar\t_{\l}}|x-y|}}\;,\Eq(dcc)$$
1428: %
1429: for any allowed value of the mass $\m$.}}
1430:
1431: \*
1432: \0The coupling $\l_N$ and the density strength $\z^{(2)}_N$
1433: do not depend on the cutoff scale since,
1434: the mass being zero, the theory is scaling invariant.
1435: The second statement is a sub-case of Theorem \thm(LWTI);
1436: while the third is proved in \secc(P2P2).
1437:
1438: By item 3, the short distance behavior is the same as
1439: in the free theory: no critical index occurs and changes the
1440: exponent $2$ of $1/(\k|x-y|)$.
1441:
1442: It is interesting to see how the anomalous \wti{} arises. It is
1443: possible to find two finite counterterms, $\n^{(+)}$ and $\n^{(-)}$,
1444: analytically dependent on $\l$ and independent
1445: on $N$, such that the correction can be
1446: decomposed as
1447: %
1448: $$\eqalign{
1449: \hH^{(1;2)}_{\s,\o}(p;k)
1450: =&\n^{(+)} D_\s(p)\hS^{(1;2)}_{\s;\o}(p;k)
1451: +\n^{(-)} D_{-\s}(p)\hS^{(1;2)}_{-\s;\o}(p;k)\cr
1452: &+\D \hH^{(1;2)}_{\s;\o}(p;k)\;;} \Eq(gg)$$
1453: %
1454: and, for $p$ and $k$ {\it fixed independently from $N$},
1455: the rest $\D\hH^{(1;2)}_{\s;\o}(p;k)$ is now really
1456: vanishing. To adhere to the Johnson's notation, let
1457: $$
1458: a\defi{1\over 1-\left(\n^{(-)}+\n^{(+)}\right)}\;,
1459: \qquad
1460: \bar a\defi{1\over 1-\left(\n^{(-)}-\n^{(+)}\right)}\;;
1461: $$
1462: %
1463: then, replacing \equ(gg) in \equ(wi), and taking the limit of
1464: removed cutoff, gives \equ(kjk). Johnson's \wti{} is precisely given by
1465: \equ(kjk); and his explicit values for $a$ and $\bar a$
1466: are in agreement with the Adler-Bardeen theorem on absence
1467: of radiative correction to the anomaly. Anyway, these values are
1468: {\it wrong}: while Johnson states $\n^{(+)}=0$, by lowest order
1469: computation, for $\l$ small enough, $\n^{(+)}<0$ (see \secc(LOC)).
1470:
1471: Despite the anomaly, and despite
1472: the phase and chiral symmetry hold only in the massless case,
1473: it is possible to prove the finiteness of
1474: the limit value of $\z^{(2)}_N$,
1475: {\it even in the massive model}; and accordingly
1476: the finiteness of
1477: the current-current Schwinger function, with no arising
1478: of an anomalous exponent.
1479:
1480: \*
1481: %%%%
1482: \sub(SA){Closed equation: new anomaly}.
1483: The fields
1484: equation can be turned into an equation for the Schwinger
1485: function, the {\it Dyson-Schwinger equation}. In
1486: the massless case, the one for the two point Schwinger function
1487: reads
1488: %
1489: $$\eqalign{
1490: {\hS^{(2)}_{\o}(k)\over g_\o(k)}
1491: =
1492: {1\over Z_N}
1493: -{\l_b\over \z^{(2)}_b}
1494: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 p\over (2\p)^2}\ \hS^{(1;2)}_{-\o;\o}(p;k-p)\;.
1495: }\Eq(DS2)$$
1496: %
1497: \vbox
1498: {\insertplot{330pt}{60pt}%
1499: {}%
1500: {f24}{\eqg(f24)}
1501: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f24)}: Graphical representation of \equ(DS2)}}
1502: \vskip2em
1503: %
1504: Inserting the \wti{} \equ(wi) and the identity
1505: \equ(gg) in \equ(DS2), since
1506: $\int_{D}\!\der^2 p \ D^{-1}_{-\o}(p)=0$ by oddness,
1507: %
1508: $$\eqalign{
1509: {\l_b\over \z^{(2)}_b}
1510: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 p\over (2\p)^2}\
1511: \hS^{(1;2)}_{-\o;\o}(p;k-p)
1512: &={a-\bar{a}\over2}\l_b
1513: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\ {\hS^{(2)}_{\o}
1514: (k-p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\cr
1515: &+
1516: \sum_\m {a-\m\o\bar{a}\over2}\l_b
1517: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
1518: \D \hH^{(1;2)}_{\m;\o}(p;k-p)\;.
1519: }\Eq(intwti)$$
1520: %
1521: In the limit of removed cutoff, {\it if} the integral of
1522: $\D\hH^{(1;2)}_{\m;\o}$ had been vanishing, \equ(intwti)
1523: would have been turned into
1524: %
1525: $$\eqalign{
1526: {\l_b\over \z^{(2)}_b}
1527: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 p\over (2\p)^2}\
1528: \hS^{(1;2)}_{-\o;\o}(p;k-p)
1529: &={a-\bar{a}\over2}\l_b
1530: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\ {\hS^{(2)}_{\o}
1531: (k-p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\;.}\Eq(intwti)$$
1532: %
1533: Replacing it into \equ(DS2),
1534: it would have held the equation
1535: $${\hS^{(2)}_{\o}(k)\over g_\o(k)}
1536: ={1\over Z_N}
1537: -{a-\bar a \over 2}\l_b
1538: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
1539: {\hS^{(2)}_{\o}(k-p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\;,\Eq(rene)$$
1540: %
1541: where $1/Z_N$ is divergent and should compensate
1542: the divergence of the integral.
1543: The above equation, {\it in a sense stated by Johnson}
1544: -- actually his operations were even more formal; but his final finite solution
1545: is exactly the solution of \equ(rene) -- is {\it wrong}.
1546: Indeed, $\D\hH^{(1;2)}_{\m;\o}$ was said to be vanishing only
1547: for fixed arguments, while here it is integrated over all the
1548: scales allowed by the cutoff. This seems to waste the possibility
1549: of the closure of the \sde; and yet, again, an {\it anomalous \ce}
1550: still holds.
1551:
1552: \*
1553: \theorem(P3)
1554: {Under the same assumptions of Theorem \thm(T1):
1555: \elenco{
1556: \art
1557: The following equation holds,
1558: asymptotically in the limit of removed cutoff
1559: $${\hS^{(2)}_{\o}(k)\over g_\o(k)}
1560: ={B_N\over Z_N}
1561: -A \l_b {a-\bar{a} \over 2}
1562: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
1563: {\hS^{(2)}_{\o}(k-p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\;,\Eq(secan)$$
1564: %
1565: where $A$, the ``new anomaly'', is analytic and O$(1)$ in $\l$;
1566: while $B$ is $1+{\rm O}(\l)$ and analytic in $\l$ as well.
1567: %
1568: \art
1569: It holds the following relations between the anomalous
1570: exponent and the coefficients in the first and second anomaly:
1571: %
1572: $$\h_\l= A {\l_b\over 2\p} {a-\bar a\over 2}\;.\Eq(jj)$$
1573: %
1574: }}
1575:
1576: \0This result is a sub-case of Theorem \thm(LCE),
1577: with the explicit expression of $\h_\l$
1578: is discussed in \secc(SCE).
1579:
1580: The name ``new anomaly'' is justified since
1581: such is an effect of using
1582: a symmetry, exact only at removed cutoff,
1583: inside an integral which in the same limit is divergent;
1584: it has been overlooked not only in rigorous works,
1585: but even in the physical literature.
1586: In particular, $A\neq 1$ would imply a
1587: {\it striking and net difference
1588: w.r.t. the Johnson critical index}.
1589:
1590: Such a difference could have been
1591: checked directly by lowest order computation of $\h_\l$ itself;
1592: but, since the fourth is the first non-trivial order,
1593: the actual computation is almost prohibitive.
1594: Therefore \equ(jj) is a shortcut, since it gives
1595: $\h_\l$ in terms of
1596: the easier calculations of $a-\bar{a}$ and $A$.
1597:
1598: Now, by symmetry reasons, the first order of $A$ is equal to 1,
1599: while $a-\bar a={\rm O}(\l)$:
1600: this is in agreement with the the fact that
1601: $\h_\l$ is an even function of $\l$ -- as can
1602: be easily proved by transformation \hbox{$\hp^{\s}_{k,\o}\to \hp^{\s}_{\s k,\s\o}$}
1603: in the functional-integral
1604: measure.
1605: But there is no general reason
1606: for which this result should survive also
1607: at the second order, at least for a {\it generic}
1608: choice of the cutoff function:
1609: in \secc(LOC) there is a Montecarlo simulation
1610: which {\it does not prove,} but enforces the clue that $A\neq 1$.
1611:
1612: It is appropriate to disclose here the developments
1613: leading to \equ(secan), leaving to the next chapters
1614: the proofs and the generalizations to the
1615: multi-point Schwinger functions.
1616: For a suitable choice of four counterterms,
1617: $\{\a^{(\m)}\}_{\m=\pm}$ and $\{\s^{(\m)}\}_{\m=\pm}$,
1618: analytically dependent on $\l$,
1619: %
1620: $$\eqalign{
1621: &\l_b
1622: \sum_\m {a-\bar{a}\m\o\over2 }
1623: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
1624: \D\hH^{(1;2)}_{\m;\o}(p;k-p)
1625: =
1626: \left(\sum_\m{a-\bar a\m\o\over 2}\s^{(\m\o)}\l_b\right){\hS^{(2)}_\o(k)\over \hg_\o(k)}\cr
1627: &+
1628: \left(\sum_\m{a-\bar a\m\o\over 2}\a^{(\m\o)}\l_b\right)
1629: {\l_b\over \z^{(2)}_b}
1630: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
1631: \hS^{(1;2)}_{-\o;\o}(p;k-p)+\D\hK_{\o}(k)}\;,$$
1632: %
1633: where, for $k$ {\it fixed independently from $N$}, the rest $\D\hK_{\o}(k)$ is vanishing.
1634: Putting together the above identity with \equ(intwti) and
1635: \equ(DS2), \equ(secan) holds for
1636: %
1637: $$\eqalign{
1638: A&\defi{1\over 1-(\l_b/2)\sum_\m (a-\bar{a}\m)\left(\a^{(\m)}-\s^{(\m)}\right)}\;,\cr
1639: B&\defi{ 1-(\l_b/2)\sum_\m (a-\bar{a}\m)\a^{(\m)}
1640: \over 1-(\l_b/2)\sum_\m (a-\bar{a}\m)\left(\a^{(\m)}-\s^{(\m)}\right)}\;.}\Eq(A1)$$
1641: %%%%%%%%
1642: %%%%%%%%
1643: \chapter(HR,Hamiltonian Regularization)
1644: Two different {\it regularizations} of the Thirring model can be considered:
1645: the Euclidean one, depicted in the previous Chapter, and the Hamiltonian one,
1646: introduced in the present Chapter.
1647: As well as, two are the main requirements
1648: of the \osa:
1649: the {\it Euclidean invariance} and the
1650: the {\it reflection positivity}.
1651:
1652: Well then, the former property is evident
1653: only in the former regularization -- and even
1654: false in the latter, if
1655: the limit of removed cutoff is not taken;
1656: while the latter property is built-in in the latter,
1657: and not so clear in the former.
1658:
1659: But it is possible to prove
1660: that, for two (in general) {\it different} choices of the parameters
1661: of the Lagrangian,
1662: the two regularization, in the limit of
1663: removed cutoff, are equivalent,
1664: in the sense that the Schwinger function
1665: derived in the one or in the other
1666: scheme are {\it exactly the same}. And
1667: therefore they fulfill both the crucial
1668: properties.
1669:
1670: This theorem is a first example of the effectiveness
1671: of the \rg{} approach, which is introduced in the next Chapter.
1672:
1673: \*
1674: \section(HM, Hamiltonian Thirring Model)
1675:
1676: This time only the space is discretized.
1677: Then, a finite dimensional Fock space, together to a
1678: many-body Hamiltonian, is built, guaranteeing {\it a priori} the
1679: validity of the {\it reflection positivity} (see \secc(RP))
1680: also after taking the continuum space limit.
1681:
1682: Other constructions, different from the Hamiltonian formalism and
1683: verifying such positivity property, would have been possible: \eg
1684: a certain lattice discretization of both space and time
1685: (different from the one in Chapter 1)
1686: would have turned the quantum field model into a statistical mechanical
1687: lattice model, nearest neighbours interactive, which is reflection
1688: positive by standard proof, [OS77]. Anyway,
1689: despite of the popularity of the latter route, here the former
1690: is preferred, since the consequent integration of the {\it hard
1691: fermions} (see later) was called upon, but never explicitly proved
1692: in [BM01] and in the following papers -- where the setting can only
1693: be Hamiltonian, since they deal with many-body quantum models.
1694: As consequence, space and time are not managed on the same ground,
1695: and the phenomenon of {\it light velocity modification} occurs
1696: (as first noticed in [M93]): it is necessary to introduce a {\it
1697: counterterm} to fix the light velocity to 1.
1698:
1699: In any case, lattice discretization of fermionic QFT -- no matter if
1700: it affects only the space or both space and time -- encounters
1701: the well known problem of the {\it doubling of fermions}. In order
1702: to make the effect of the double fermions to vanish, a
1703: possibility is to use a momentum dependent mass term, [W76]; but
1704: it destroys the symmetries of the propagators and generates a mass
1705: term even in the massless theory: a counterterm also for the mass is
1706: necessary, so that the mass on physical scale can be fixed
1707: to chosen value $\m\geq 0$.
1708:
1709: \*
1710: \sub(1.2){Hamiltonian.} A finite dimensional Fock space
1711: is constructed in terms of the periodic spatial lattice, $\L_1$,
1712: as follows. Let $\k$ be fixed. Choosing $\g>1$ and integer, let $a$ and
1713: $L$ be respectively the lattice spacing and the lattice side
1714: length, s.t. $4\k a\defi \g^{-N}$ and $4\k L\defi \g^{-h}$, for
1715: $N,-h$ large positive integers; then, the periodicity of the
1716: lattice is given by the quotient set
1717: %
1718: $$
1719: Q_1\defi\left\{n \in \ZZZ
1720: \ \big|\ n\sim n'\ {\rm if}\ n-n'\in {L\over a}\ZZZ \right\},
1721: $$
1722: %
1723: so that the lattice $\L_1$ and its reciprocal $D_1$ are
1724: %
1725: $$
1726: \L_1\defi\left\{an_1\ \big|\ n_1\in Q_1\right\}\;,
1727: \qquad
1728: D_1\defi \left\{{2\p\over L} \lft(m_1+{1\over 2}\rgt)\ \big|\ m_1\in Q_1\right\}\;.
1729: $$
1730: %
1731: Now, let two couples of fermionic creation and destruction
1732: operators $\{a^\s_{k_1,\o}\}_{k_1\in \L_1}^{\s,\o=\pm}$ be defined
1733: with empty state $\ket{0}$; setting $c(k_1)\defi[1-\cos(k_1a)]/2a$,
1734: $e(k_1)\defi \sin(k_1a)/a$ --
1735: the Fourier transform of the discrete derivative in $x_1$ --
1736: and, for any choice of the mass $\m\geq 0$,
1737: letting $\m(k_1)\defi \m+c(k_1)$ be the ``momentum dependent
1738: mass term'', the free Hamiltonian is
1739: %
1740: $$
1741: H_0
1742: \defi {1\over L}
1743: \sum_\o
1744: \sum_{k_1\in \D_1}
1745: \o e(k_1)
1746: a^+_{k_1,\o}a^-_{k_1,\o}
1747: +
1748: {1\over L} \sum_\o \sum_{k_1\in \D_1}
1749: \m(k_1) a^+_{k_1,\o}a^-_{k_1,-\o}\;.
1750: $$
1751: %
1752: In the limit $a\to 0$, the energy dispersion $e(k_1)$ is
1753: asymptotic to {\it two} linear dispersion: one containing $k_1=0$,
1754: which is the Euclidean Thirring dispersion; another one
1755: containing $k_1=\p/a$, and representing the double fermions: the
1756: role of $\m(k_1)$ is to assign
1757: to the doubles a mass which is diverging with $N$.
1758:
1759: The Hamiltonian is made interactive by the term
1760: %
1761: $$
1762: {\l\over 2}
1763: {1\over L^3}\sum_\o
1764: \sum_{k_1,p_1,q_1\in D_1}
1765: a^+_{k_1,\o}a^-_{p_1,\o}a^+_{q_1,-\o}a^-_{k_1+q_1-p_1,-\o}\;.
1766: \Eq(int)$$
1767: %
1768: As in the Euclidean regularization,
1769: the parameter of the Lagrangian have to be tuned
1770: so to have a finite theory.
1771: Then, $\l$ and $\m$ are replaced with $\l_N$ and $\m_N$;
1772: and $H_0$ is multiplied times the {\it field strength} $Z_N$.
1773:
1774: Furthermore, to fix the mass to the chosen value
1775: and to have Schwinger functions with light velocity
1776: equal to 1 (as in the Euclidean regularization),
1777: it is necessary to introduce two further counterterms
1778: $d_N$ and $\g^Nn_N$, such that, setting $\n_N\defi n_N/Z_N$ and $\d_N\defi d_N/Z_N$,
1779: the interactive Hamiltonian finally reads
1780: $$\eqalign{
1781: H
1782: &\defi {1\over L}
1783: \sum_\o
1784: \sum_{k_1\in D_1}
1785: \o e(k_1) Z_N(1 +\d_N)
1786: a^+_{k_1,\o}a^-_{k_1,\o}\cr
1787: &+
1788: {1\over L} \sum_\o \sum_{k_1\in D_1}
1789: \Big(\m(k_1)+\g^N\n_N\Big)Z_N a^+_{k_1,\o}a^-_{k_1,-\o}\cr
1790: &+
1791: {\l_NZ^2_N\over 2}
1792: {1\over L^3}\sum_\o
1793: \sum_{k_1,p_1,q_1\in D_1}
1794: a^+_{k_1,\o}a^-_{p_1,\o}a^+_{q_1,-\o}a^-_{k_1+q_1-p_1,-\o}\;.
1795: }\Eq(hint)$$
1796: %
1797: \sub(GF){Correlations.}
1798: Let the fields and the density be
1799: defined
1800: $$
1801: \ps^\s_{x,\o}\defi
1802: e^{-x_0H}\lft({1\over L}\sum_{k_1\in D_1}e^{i\s k_1 x_1}a^\s_{k_1,\o}\rgt) e^{x_0H}\;,
1803: \qquad
1804: \r^{R}_{x,\o}\defi Z^{(2,+)}_N\ps^+_{x,\o}\ps^-_{x,\o}+Z^{(2,-)}_N\ps^+_{x,-\o}\ps^-_{x,-\o}\;,
1805: $$
1806: where $Z^{(2,+)}_N$ and $Z^{(2,-)}_N$
1807: are the density strengths: they are two,
1808: rather than one as in the Euclidean regularization,
1809: since in this setting space and time are on different
1810: ground and the symmetry which make $Z^{(2,+)}_N=Z^{(2,-)}_N$
1811: is missing.
1812:
1813: For any
1814: $\uz\defi z^{(1)},\ldots,z^{(m)}$
1815: and
1816: $\ux\defi x^{(1)},\ldots,x^{(n)}$,
1817: fixed set on spacetime points
1818: such that $0<z_0^{(1)}<z_0^{(2)}<\cdots<x_0^{(1)}<\cdots<x_0^{(n)}$,
1819: the {\it correlations} are defined to be,
1820: %
1821: $$G^{(m;n)(\ue)}_{\us;\uo}(\uz;\ux)\defi
1822: {\Tr\lft[e^{-LH} \r^R_{z^{(1)},\s_1}\cdots \r^R_{z^{(m)},\s_m}
1823: \ps_{x^{(1)},\o_1}^{\e_1}\cdots \ps_{x^{(n)},\o_n}^{\e_n}\rgt]
1824: \over \Tr\big[e^{-L H}\big]}\;,
1825: \Eq(avr)$$
1826: %
1827: where $\Tr$ is the
1828: trace over a complete set of states of the quantum lattice model.
1829: \*
1830:
1831: \sub(TWT){Propagator.}
1832: Also in this case the Schwinger function can be obtained in terms
1833: of a path integral formula, and a Grassmannian integration.
1834: The free Hamiltonian can
1835: be diagonalized in terms of a set of new creation and destruction
1836: operators, $\{b^\s_{k_1,\o}\}_{k_1\in\L_1}^{\s,\o=\pm}$, and
1837: energy dispersion $E(k_1)\defi \sqrt{e^2(k_1)+\m^2(k_1)}$:
1838: $$ H_0=
1839: {1\over L}\sum_\o\sum_{k_1\in \L_1}
1840: \o E(k_1) b^+_{k_1,\o}b^-_{k_1,\o}\;,$$
1841: %
1842: where $b_{k_1,\m}^\s\defi\sum_\n a^\s_{k_1,\n}
1843: \Big(C^{-1}(k_1)\Big)_{\n,\m}$ for
1844: %
1845: $$
1846: C(k_1)\defi\pmatrix{ \m(k_1)& E(k_1)-e(k_1)\cr
1847: e(k_1)-E(k_1)& \m(k_1)\cr}
1848: {1\over \sqrt{\m^2(k_1)+\big[E(k_1)-e(k_1)\big]^2}}\;.
1849: $$
1850: %
1851: Calling $T$ the time ordering, it is useful to define the
1852: {\it propagator}
1853: as
1854: %
1855: $$\eqalign{
1856: g_{\a,\b}(x)
1857: &\defi
1858: {\Tr\lft[e^{-L H_0} T \big(a^+_{k_1,\a}a^-_{k_1,\b}\big)\rgt]
1859: \over \Tr\big[e^{-L H_0}\big]}
1860: =
1861: \sum_\o
1862: {\Tr\lft[e^{-L H_0} T \big(b^+_{k_1,\o}b^-_{k_1,\o}\big)\rgt]
1863: \over \Tr\big[e^{-L H_0}\big]}
1864: C(k_1)_{\o,\a}C(k_1)_{\o,\b}
1865: \cr
1866: &=
1867: {1\over L} \sum_{k_1\in D_1}
1868: e^{-ix_1k_1 -x_0 \o E(k_1)}\cr
1869: &\phantom{*******}
1870: \cdot\sum_\o
1871: \left\{{\c(x_0>0)\over 1+e^{-\o E(k_1)L}}
1872: -
1873: {\c(x_0\leq0)e^{-\o E(k_1)L}\over 1+e^{-\o E(k_1)L}}
1874: \right\}
1875: C(k_1)_{\o,\a}C(k_1)_{\o,\b}\;.
1876: }$$
1877: %
1878: By {\it partial-fraction expansion} of the meromorphic functions in the curl
1879: brackets (see \secc(PFE)), the propagator is
1880: turned into:
1881: %
1882: $$
1883: g_{\a,\b}(x)
1884: =\lim_{M\rightarrow \infty}
1885: {1\over L\b} \sum_{k\in D}
1886: e^{-ik\cdot x}
1887: {\wh\c_M(k_0)
1888: \over
1889: \m_N^2(k_1)+k^2_0+e^2(k_1)}
1890: \pmatrix{ik_0+e(k_1)&\m_N(k_1)\cr
1891: \m_N(k_1)&ik_0-e(k_1)\cr}_{\a,\b}\;,
1892: \Eq(prop)$$
1893: %
1894: with $D\defi D_0\times D_1$ and $D_0\defi
1895: \left\{{2\p\over\b}(m+{1\over 2})\right\}_{m\in \zzz}$
1896: (namely $D$ is the product of a periodic lattice
1897: in the space direction times an unbounded one in the time
1898: direction); $\wh\c_M(k_0)$ a non-negative, smooth cutoff,
1899: introduced to give a meaning to the above expression -- which is a
1900: {\it generalized summation} of a series which does not converge in
1901: absolute sense. Specifically, with reference to
1902: the function $\wh\c_N(t)$ defined in
1903: \secc(SF), the cutoff is defined to be
1904: $\wh\c_M\defi \wh\c_N\left(\g^{-M+N}t\right)$.
1905: \*
1906:
1907: \sub(SFHR){Schwinger functions.}
1908: As well know consequence of the Trotter formula
1909: for the expansion of the evolution operator,
1910: $e^{x_0H}$, and the Wick theorem (see for instance [FW]),
1911: the correlations in \equ(avr)
1912: can be generated from the
1913: functional $\ZZ(\jm,\f)\defi e^{\WW(\jm,\f)}$,
1914: where, in its turn, $\WW(\jm,\f)$ is defined to be the
1915: {\it generating functional of the Schwinger function
1916: in the Hamiltonian regularization}:
1917: %
1918: $$\eqalign{
1919: e^{\WW(\jm,\f)}
1920: \defi
1921: \int\!\der P^{(\leq M)}(\ps)
1922: \exp
1923: &\left\{ -\l_N \VV\left(\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)
1924: +\g^N\n_N\NN\left(\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right) +\d_N
1925: \DD\left(\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)\right.\cr &\left.+
1926: \sum_{\s}\z_N^{(2,\s)}\JJ_\s(\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps)
1927: +\FF\left(\f,\ps\right)\right\}\;. }\Eq(gf)$$
1928: %
1929: The settings are the following.
1930: The Gaussian free measure is given by
1931: $$\eqalign{
1932: \der P^{(\leq M)}(\ps)
1933: \defi
1934: &\exp\left\{L^2O_N- Z_N\sum_{\a,\b=\pm}
1935: \int_{D_M}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
1936: {T_{\a,\b}(k)\over \wh\c_M(k_0)}
1937: \hp_{k,\o}^+\hp_{k,\o}^-\right\}\cr
1938: &\prod_{k\in D_M}\prod_{\o=\pm}\der\hp_{k,\o}^+\der\hp_{k,\o}^-\;,}
1939: \Eq(distr)$$
1940: %
1941: where $O_M$ is the normalization,
1942: $\z_N^{(2,\s)}\defi Z^{(2,\s)}_N/Z_N$ and the covariance
1943: $\hg_{\m,\n}(k)$ is:
1944: %
1945: $$\hg^{-1}(k)\defi
1946: {T(k)\over \wh\c_M(k_0)}\;,
1947: \qquad
1948: T(k)\defi
1949: \pmatrix
1950: {-ik_0+e(k_1) & \m_N(k_1) \cr
1951: \m_N(k_1) & -ik_0-e(k_1)\cr}\;,$$
1952: %
1953: with
1954: %
1955: $$e(k_1)\defi{\sin(k_1a)\over a}\;,\qquad
1956: \m_N(k_1)\defi{1-\cos(k_1a)\over a}+\m_N\;;
1957: \Eq(rr)$$
1958: %
1959: the lattice $D_M\defi\{k\in D:\wh\c_M(k_0)\neq 0\}$; the
1960: self-interaction is given by the potentials
1961: %
1962: $$\VV(\ps)
1963: \defi
1964: {1\over 2}\sum_\o\int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
1965: \hp^+_{p,\o}\hp^-_{q,\o}\hp^+_{k,-\o}\hp^-_{p+k-q,-\o}\;,$$
1966: and
1967: %
1968: $$\DD(\ps)\defi\sum_\o\int_D\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
1969: \o\e(p_1)\hp^+_{p,\o}\hp^-_{p,\o}\;,
1970: \qquad
1971: \NN(\ps)\defi\sum_\o\int_D\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
1972: \hp^+_{p,\o}\hp^-_{p,-\o}\;.$$
1973: %
1974: In order to generate the Schwinger functions, there are also
1975: interactions with external sources:
1976: %
1977: $$\JJ_\s(\jm,\ps)\defi
1978: \sum_\o\int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
1979: \hj_{p-k,\o}\hp^+_{k,\s\o}\hp^-_{p,\s\o}\;.$$
1980: %
1981: \theorem(EEH){There exists $\e>0$, a suitable choice
1982: of the parameters of the Hamiltonian model,
1983: $\l_N$, $\m_N$, $Z_N$, $Z^{(2,+)}_N$, $Z^{(2,-)}_N$,
1984: $\n_N$, $\d_N$, and a suitable choice of the parameters
1985: of the Euclidean model, $\l_N$, $\m_N$ $Z_N$,
1986: $Z^{(2)}_N$ -- the analogous parameters
1987: of the two model being, in general, different -- such that,
1988: in the limit of removed cutoff,
1989: each Schwinger function in the former regularization
1990: coincides with the analogous Schwinger function in the latter one.}
1991: \*
1992:
1993: \0The proof is deferred to the next Chapter: see \secc(PTM).
1994: %%%%%%%%
1995: %%%%%%%%
1996: \chapter(R,Renormalization Group Analysis)
1997: After slicing the momenta in scales,
1998: the parameters of the generating functional
1999: are turned into {\it effective parameters}
2000: for each given momentum scale;
2001: in this way obtaining a
2002: sequence, the {\it flow of the running coupling constants},
2003: which is controlled by the
2004: {\it vanishing of the Beta function}.
2005:
2006:
2007: \section(IN1, Renormalization Group Analysis for Hard Fermions)
2008:
2009: \sub(2.1)
2010: {Momenta slicing.} From now on, to be
2011: definite, the {\it scaling parameter} $\g$ is fixed to be equal to
2012: 3 -- but any other value would be fine, suitable changing the
2013: following definition of the cutoff. Then, $\k\g^{N+1}=3\p/4a$,
2014: and the {\it cutoff function}
2015: $\wh\c_0(k_0)$ is defined, for $t\in \RRR$,
2016: %
2017: $$\wh\c_0(t)\defi
2018: \left\{
2019: \matrix
2020: {1\hfill&\hfill{\rm for\ }|t|\leq \k \cr\cr
2021: 0\hfill&\hfill{\rm for\ }3\k \leq \k|t| \leq 4\k \cr\cr
2022: \in (0,1)\hfill&\hfill{\rm otherwise }\;;}
2023: \right.
2024: $$
2025: %
2026: the actual shape in the third domain is here inessential: it will
2027: be chosen in \secc(CD). Accordingly, for $h=N,\ldots,M$, it
2028: is set $\wh\c_h(t)\defi\wh\c_0\left(\g^{-h}t\right)$. With
2029: $\wh\c_0$ it is possible to make a partition of the momenta
2030: scales: for any $h=N,\ldots,M$,
2031: %
2032: $$
2033: \wh\c_M(t)
2034: =
2035: \wh\c_h(t)
2036: +
2037: \sum_{k=h+1}^M \wh{f}_k(t)\;,
2038: \qquad
2039: {\rm with}\
2040: \wh f_k(t)
2041: \defi
2042: \wh\c_k(t)-\wh\c_{k-1}(t).
2043: \Eq(cut1)$$
2044: %
2045: It is worthwhile to remark $\wh f_k$ has compact support
2046: $\lft\{t:\k\g^{k-1}\leq |t|\leq \k\g^{k+1}\rgt\}$.
2047: \*
2048:
2049: \sub(IR) {Multiscale integration.} The decomposition
2050: \equ(cut1) has the purpose to obtain the following scale
2051: integration of $\WW(\f,\jm)$: for any integer $h:N,\ldots,M$,
2052: %
2053: $$e^{\WW(\jm,\f)}
2054: =
2055: e^{E_h}
2056: \int\!\der \wh P^{(\leq h)}(\ps)\
2057: e^{\WW^{(h)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)}\;,
2058: \Eq(g1)$$
2059: %
2060: where the {\it vacuum energy} on scale $h$, $E_h$, do not depend
2061: on the fields; the measure $\der \wh P^{(\leq h)}$ is the same as
2062: \equ(distr), with $\wh\c_M(k_0)$ replaced by $\wh\c_h(k_0)$; the
2063: {\it effective potential} on scale $h$, $\WW^{(h)}$, is a
2064: functional of the fields:
2065: %
2066: $$\eqalign{
2067: \WW^{(h)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)
2068: \defi
2069: &-\l_N\VV\left(\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)
2070: +\g^N\n_N\NN\left(\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)
2071: +\d_N\DD\left(\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)\cr
2072: &
2073: +\sum_{\s=\pm}\z^{(2,\s)}_N\JJ_\s\left(\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)
2074: +\FF\left(\f,\jm\right)
2075: + \WW^{(h)}_{\rm irr}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)\;;
2076: }\Eq(g2)$$
2077: %
2078: namely it has the same expression of the argument of the
2079: exponential in the r.h.s. member of \equ(gf), apart from the {\it
2080: irrelevant contribution} $\WW^{(h)}_{\rm irr}$.
2081:
2082: Scale integration \equ(g1) can be verified by induction. Indeed,
2083: it is true for $h=M$, with $E_M=0$ and $\WW^{(M)}_{\rm irr}\equiv
2084: 0$; while the procedure to obtain $E_{h-1}$, $\WW^{(h-1)}$ and
2085: $\WW^{(h-1)}_{\rm irr}$ is the following.
2086:
2087: The field $\ps$ is decomposed into the sum of fields
2088: $\ps\rightarrow \ps+ \left(Z_N\right)^{-1/2} \x$, both with
2089: Gaussian distribution. The propagator on scale $h$ of $\x$, the
2090: {\it hard fermion field on scale $h$}, is given by
2091: $$
2092: g^{(h)}_{\a,\b}(x)
2093: \defi
2094: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2095: e^{-ik\cdot x}
2096: {\wh f_h(k_0)
2097: \over
2098: \m^2_N(k_1)+k^2_0+e^2(k_1)}
2099: \pmatrix{ik_0+e(k_1)&-\m_N(k_1)\cr
2100: -\m_N(k_1)&ik_0-e(k_1)\cr}_{\a,\b}\;;
2101: \Eq(ph)$$
2102: %
2103: hence, by decomposition \equ(cut1), $\ps$ is left with propagator
2104: %
2105: $$
2106: g^{(\leq h-1)}_{\a,\b}(x)
2107: \defi
2108: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2109: e^{-ik\cdot x}
2110: {\wh\c_{h-1}(k_0)
2111: \over
2112: \m^2_N(k_1)+k^2_0+e^2(k_1)}
2113: \pmatrix{ik_0+e(k_1)&-\m_N(k_1)\cr
2114: -\m_N(k_1)&ik_0-e(k_1)\cr}_{\a,\b}\;.
2115: \Eq(left)$$
2116: %
2117: Then, calling $\der\wh P^{(\leq h-1)}(\ps)$ and $\der\wh
2118: P^{(h)}(\x)$ the measure \equ(distr), with propagators \equ(ph)
2119: and \equ (left) respectively, the hard fermion is integrated out:
2120: $$\eqalign{
2121: \int\!\der \wh P^{(\leq h)}(\ps)\
2122: e^{\WW^{(h)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)}
2123: &=
2124: \int\!\der \wh P^{(\leq h-1)}(\ps)\
2125: \int\!\der \wh P^{(h)}(\x)\
2126: e^{\WW^{(h)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps+\x\right)}\cr
2127: &\defi e^{\D E_{h-1}}\int\!\der \wh P^{(\leq h-1)}(\ps)\
2128: e^{\WW^{(h-1)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)}\;,
2129: }\Eq(trex1)$$
2130: %
2131: where $\D E_{h-1}$ is the part of the integration constant the
2132: fields. Therefore, the vacuum energy on scale $h-1$ is defined to
2133: be:
2134: $$
2135: E_{h-1}\defi E_{h}+\D E_{h-1}\;;
2136: $$
2137: while,
2138: $$\eqalign{
2139: &\WW_{\rm irr}^{(h-1)}
2140: \lft(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\rgt)\cr
2141: \defi&
2142: \ln\int\!\der \wh P^{(h)}(\x)\
2143: e^{\WW^{(h)}\lft(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps+\x\rgt)}-\D E_{h-1}\cr
2144: =&\sum_{n^\ps,n^\f,n^\jm \geq 1}^{n^\ps+n^\f+n^\jm\neq 0}
2145: \sum_{\underline\o,\underline\s}
2146: \int_{\L}\!\der^2\ux\ \der^2\uy\ \der^2\uz\ \cr
2147: &\left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\ps}\sqrt{Z_N}\ps^{\s_i}_{x^{(i)},\o_i}\right)
2148: \left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\f} {\f^{\s'_i}_{y^{(i)},\o'_i}\over \sqrt{Z_N}}\right)
2149: \left(\prod_{j=1}^{n^\jm} \jm_{z^{(i)},\o''_i}\right)
2150: W^{(h-1)}_{n^\ps;n^\f;n^\jm,\underline\o,\underline\s}
2151: (\ux,\uy,\uz)\;,
2152: }\Eq(5.4)$$%
2153: where $\ux$, $\uy$ and $\uz$ are short notations for
2154: $x^{(1)},\ldots,x^{(n^\ps)}$, $y^{(1)},\ldots,y^{(n^\f)}$ and
2155: $z^{(1)},\ldots,z^{(n^\jm)}$ respectively. By the well known
2156: formula for the truncated expectation w.r.t. a Gaussian measure,
2157: the function $W^{(h-1)}_{n^\ps;n^\f;n^\jm,\uo,\us}(\ux,\uy,\uz)$
2158: is a power series in the couplings $\l_N, \n_N, \d_N$, and
2159: coefficient given by all the Feynman graphs with
2160: $n^\ps+n^\f+n^\jm$ external legs of kind $n^\ps,n^\f,n^\jm$
2161: attached respectively to the points $\ux,\uy,\uz$, with eventually
2162: a constraint that some among the point in $\ux$ may coincide: this
2163: is explained in more details in Appendix~\secc(TE). The remarkable
2164: fact is that the number of the Feynman graphs at $n$-the order
2165: expansion is about $n!$; and yet, by {\it cluster expansion} and
2166: anticommutativity of the fermion fields, it is possible to prove a
2167: $C^n$-bound, making the power series defining
2168: $W^{(h-1)}_{n^\ps;n^\f;n^\jm,\uo,\us}(\ux,\uy,\uz)$ {\it
2169: absolutely convergent} for $\l_N, \n_N, \d_N$ small enough (see
2170: \secc(ClE)).
2171:
2172: Finally, $\WW^{(h-1)}_{\rm irr}$ is defined by \equ(g2):
2173: in power series expansion,
2174: it corresponds to the terms in \equ(5.4)
2175: which are at least O$(\l_N)$,
2176: except the terms for $n^\ps=4$, $n^\f=n^\jm=0$
2177: and linear in $\l_N$.
2178: \*
2179:
2180: \sub(DB)
2181: {Dimensional bounds.} In order to have a bound for
2182: $W^{(h)}_{n^\ps;n^\f;n^\jm,\uo,\us}$, it is possible to prove the
2183: following decay property of the diagonal and antidiagonal
2184: propagators: there exist two positive constants $c$ and $C$ such that
2185: %
2186: $$\eqalign{
2187: &\left| g^{(h)}_{\o,\o}(x)\right|
2188: \leq
2189: C\g^{N} e^{-c\sqrt{\g^N\k|x|}}e^{-c\sqrt{\g^h\k|x_0|}}\;,\cr
2190: &\left| g^{(h)}_{\o,-\o}(x)\right|
2191: \leq
2192: \g^{-(h-N)}C \g^{N} e^{-c\sqrt{\g^N\k|x|}}e^{-c\sqrt{\g^h\k|x_0|}}\;.}\Eq(prop>N)$$
2193: %
2194: Since $h>N$, the more factor $\g^{-(h-N)}$ in the
2195: bound of the antidiagonal propagator
2196: represents a ``gain factors'' w.r.t. the bound of the diagonal one.
2197:
2198: In the end of the integration of all hard fermions scales,
2199: \equ(g1) reads
2200: %
2201: $$e^{\WW(\jm,\f)}
2202: =
2203: e^{E_N}
2204: \int\!\der \wh P^{(\leq N)}(\hp)\
2205: e^{\WW^{(N)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\hp\right)}\;,
2206: \Eq(4.6)$$
2207: %
2208: which is the starting point of the analysis of the double and
2209: light fermions in the next sections. Let $d(\ux)$ be the {\it tree
2210: distance} of the points $\ux$, namely the length of the shortest
2211: tree path connecting every point in $\ux$.
2212:
2213: \*
2214: \lemma(T1bis)
2215: {There exist $\e>0$ and the positive
2216: constants $c$ and $C$ s.t., for any choice of the couplings
2217: $|\l_N|,|\d_N|, |\n_N|<2\e$, the following bounds hold.
2218: \elenco{
2219: \art If $n^\f+n^\jm\neq 0$,
2220: $$
2221: \int_{\L}\!\der^2\ux\
2222: \left|W^{(N)}_{n^\ps;n^\f;n^\jm,\uo,\us}
2223: (\ux,\uy,\uz)\right|
2224: \leq
2225: C{\g^{N\big(2-(1/2)n^\ps-(3/2)n^\f-n^\jm\big)}
2226: \over e^{{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\sqrt{\g^N\k d(\uy,\uz)}}}\;.
2227: $$%
2228: \art If $n^\f+n^\jm= 0$,
2229: $$
2230: \int_{\L}\!\der^2_*\ux\
2231: \left|W^{(N)}_{n^\ps;0;0,\uo,\us}
2232: (\ux)\right|
2233: \leq
2234: C\g^{N\big(2-(1/2)n^\ps\big)}\;,
2235: $$
2236: %
2237: where $\der^2_*\ux$ means that the integration is performed w.r.t.
2238: all but any one variable among $x^{(1)},\ldots,x^{(n)}$. }}
2239: \0The proof is the same of Lemma \lm(SS).
2240: \*
2241:
2242: \sub(R)
2243: {Remark: superrinormalizability.}
2244: The key feature, here, is the scaling
2245: $\left(Z_N\right)^{-1/2}$ of hard fermion in the decomposition
2246: $\hp\rightarrow \ps+ \left(Z_N\right)^{-1/2} \x$: this factor is
2247: {\it the same for all the scales $h>N$}, so that there is no generation
2248: of anomalous dimension in the hard fermion regime.
2249:
2250: \*
2251:
2252: \section(DF,Renormalization Group Analysis for Double Fermions)
2253:
2254: \sub(CDDF)
2255: {Momenta slicing.}
2256: At this point it is convenient to choose the image in $(0,1)$ of
2257: the cutoff function so that the constant function $I\equiv 1$ on
2258: the periodic lattice $D_1$ is equal to the sum of two
2259: $\wh\c_N$ functions, the former centred in $k_1=0$, and the latter
2260: centred in $k_1=\p/a$:
2261: %
2262: $$
2263: \wh\c_N(t)+\wh\c_N\left(t-{\p\over a}\right)\equiv 1\;
2264: \Eq(dec)$$
2265: %
2266: (and such that $\wh\c_0$ is a Gevrey function: see \secc(GCF)).
2267: After the integration of the hard fermions, it was left the
2268: measure $\der \wh P^{(\leq N)}(\ps)$, with propagator given by
2269: \equ(left) for $h=N$: it is possible now to decompose the fields
2270: $\ps$ into the sum $\ps\rightarrow \ps+ \left(Z_N\right)^{-1/2}
2271: \x$, where the
2272: {\it double fermion field}, $\x$, has propagator
2273: $$\eqalign{
2274: g^{({\rm D})}_{\a,\b}(x)
2275: &\defi
2276: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2277: e^{-ik\cdot x}
2278: {\wh\c_N(k_0)\wh\c_N\left(k_1-(\p/a)\right)
2279: \over
2280: \m^2_N(k_1)+k^2_0+ e^2(k_1)}
2281: \pmatrix{ik_0+e(k_1)&-\m_N(k_1)\cr
2282: -\m_N(k_1)&ik_0-e(k_1)\cr}_{\a,\b}\;;
2283: }\Eq(ph2)$$
2284: %
2285: therefore, because of \equ(dec) and setting
2286: $\c_N(k)\defi\wh\c_N(k_0)\wh\c_N(k_1)$, $\ps$ is left with
2287: propagator
2288: %
2289: $$
2290: g^{(\leq N,D)}_{\a,\b}(x)
2291: \defi
2292: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2293: e^{-ik\cdot x}
2294: {\c_{N}(k)
2295: \over
2296: \m^2_N(k_1)+k^2_0+e^2(k_1)}
2297: \pmatrix{ik_0+e(k_1)&-\m_N(k_1)\cr
2298: -\m_N(k_1)&ik_0-e(k_1)\cr}_{\a,\b}\;.
2299: \Eq(left2)$$
2300: %
2301:
2302: \*
2303: \sub(DBDF){Dimensional bounds.}
2304: Because of the definition of
2305: $\m_N(k_1)$, the propagator $g^{\rm D}_{\m,\n}(x)$ is massive, and
2306: hence, without decomposition of
2307: $\wh\c_N(k_0)\wh\c_N\left(k_1-(\p/a)\right)$ into scales, it
2308: enjoys the bound,
2309: for $c$ and $C$ two positive constants,
2310: %
2311: $$\eqalign{
2312: &\left|g^{({\rm D})}_{\a,\b}(x)\right|
2313: \leq
2314: C\g^{N} e^{-c\sqrt{\g^N\k|x|}}\;.
2315: }\Eq(prop=N)$$
2316: %
2317: Indeed in the
2318: support of $\wh \c_N(k_0)\wh\c_N\left(k_1-(\p/a)\right)$,
2319: it holds $\p/4a\le |k_1|\le \p/4$, while
2320: $|k_0|$ can be very small: since
2321: the mass $\m_N$ is supposed non-negative,
2322: the denominator is not
2323: lower than $\m^2_N(k_1)\geq c^2(k_1)\ge \lft(\k\g^N(2-\sqrt2)/2\p\rgt)^2$.
2324: And the bound follows by dimensionality argument. In this
2325: way the effects of the second pole are confined on the scale of the
2326: cutoff, $N$: since it will be proved that the Schwinger functions
2327: do not depend on contribution on such scales, the addition of
2328: $c(k_1)$ to the mass has had the effect to suppress the effects of
2329: the double fermions.
2330:
2331: Integrating out the double field now requires
2332: a localization, which will be explained in the next
2333: section.
2334:
2335: \*
2336: \section(I,Renormalization Group Analysis for Soft Fermions)
2337:
2338: \sub(CD)
2339: {Momenta slicing.}
2340: The last, more
2341: involved regime to be studied is the set of momentum scales below
2342: $N$. Let $\c_N(k)$ be decomposed over the scales
2343: %
2344: $$\c_N(t_0,t_1)=\c_h(t_0,t_1)+
2345: \sum_{k=h+1}^N f_k(t_0,t_1)\;,\Eq(cut2)$$
2346: %
2347: where the function $f_k(t_0,t_1)$
2348: is defined to be $\c_k(t_0,t_1)-\c_{k-1}(t_0,t_1)$
2349: and has squared support
2350: \hbox{$\left\{(t_0,t_1):
2351: \k\g^{k-1}\leq \max\{|t_0|,|t_1|\}\leq \k\g^{k+1}\right\}$}.
2352: \*
2353:
2354: \sub(j=N)
2355: {Multiscale integration.} As for the hard fermions, the
2356: functional integration of the soft fermions is performed scale by
2357: scale. By induction, for any integer $h:h\leq N$, it holds:
2358: %
2359: $$e^{\WW(\jm,\f)}
2360: =
2361: e^{E_h}
2362: \int\!\der\wt P^{(\leq h)}(\ps)\
2363: e^{\WW^{(h)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_h}\ps\right)}\;,
2364: \Eq(g2)$$
2365: %
2366: where the effective potential on scale $h$ is
2367: %
2368: $$\eqalign{
2369: \WW^{(h)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_h}\ps\right)
2370: \defi
2371: &-\l_h \VV\left(\sqrt{Z_h}\ps\right)
2372: +\g^h\n_h\NN\left(\sqrt{Z_h}\ps\right)
2373: +\d_h\DD\left(\sqrt{Z_h}\ps\right)\cr
2374: &
2375: +\sum_{\s=\pm}\z^{(2,\s)}_h\JJ_\s\left(\jm,\sqrt{Z_h}\ps\right)
2376: +\FF\left(\f,\jm\right)
2377: +\WW^{(h)}_{\rm irr}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_h}\ps\right)\; ;
2378: }\Eq(gi3)$$
2379: %
2380: the measure $\der\wt P^{(\leq h)}$, the couplings $\l_h,\n_h$,
2381: $\d_h$, $\z_h^{(2,\s)}$ and the irrelevant potential
2382: $\WW^{(h)}_{\rm irr}$ are inductively specified by the procedure
2383: to construct $\WW^{(h-1)}$.
2384:
2385: The field $\ps$ is decomposed into the sum of two fields,
2386: $\ps\rightarrow \ps+ \left(Z_{h}\right)^{-1/2} \x$, both with
2387: Gaussian distribution. The propagator of the {\it soft fermion}
2388: field, $\x$ is, {\it for $h\neq N$}:
2389: %
2390: $$\eqalign{
2391: g^{(h)}_{\a,\b}(x)
2392: &=
2393: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2394: e^{-ik\cdot x}
2395: {\wt{f}^{(h)}(k)
2396: \over
2397: \wt\m_h^2(k)+k^2_0+ e^2(k_1)}
2398: \pmatrix{ik_0+e(k_1)&-\wt\m_h(k)\cr
2399: -\wt\m_h(k)&ik_0-e(k_1)\cr}_{\a,\b}\cr}\;,\Eq(p1)$$
2400: %
2401: with
2402: $$\wt{f}^{(h)}(k)\defi f_{h}(k)\wt C^{(1)}_h(k)\;,
2403: \qquad
2404: \wt c_h(k)\defi
2405: {Z_N\over Z_h}c(k_1) \wt C^{(1)}_h(k)\;,$$
2406: $$\wt\m_h(k)\defi \m_h\wt C^{(2)}_{h}(k)+\wt c_h(k_1)\;,$$
2407: %
2408: and
2409: the quantities $Z_h$, $\m_h$, $\wt C^{(1)}_h(k)$ and $\wt C^{(1)}_h(k)$ will
2410: be constructed in the following {\it localization}.
2411: For $h=N$, to the above expression for the propagator it has to be
2412: added the propagator deriving from the the double fermions,
2413: $g^{(\rm D)}_{\a,\b}(k)$.
2414:
2415: Since in presence of $\c_{h-1}(k)$, by simply support compatibility, $\wt
2416: C^{(1)}_h(k)\equiv\wt C^{(2)}_h(k)\equiv1$, by \equ(cut2), $\ps$
2417: is left with propagator:
2418: %
2419: $$
2420: g^{(\leq h-1)}_{\a,\b}(x)
2421: \defi
2422: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2423: e^{-ik\cdot x}
2424: {\c_{h-1}(k)
2425: \over
2426: \m^2_{h-1}(k_1)+k^2_0+e^2(k_1)}
2427: \pmatrix{ik_0+e(k_1)&-\m_{h-1}(k_1)\cr
2428: -\m_{h-1}(k_1)&ik_0-e(k_1)\cr}_{\a,\b}\;,
2429: \Eq(p2)$$
2430: %
2431: with
2432: $$
2433: \m_h(k_1)\defi \m_h + {Z_N\over Z_h}c(k_1)\;,
2434: $$
2435: without any residue of $\wt C^{(1)}_h(k)$ or $\wt C^{(2)}_h(k)$.
2436:
2437: The soft fermions can be integrated out, scale by scale; this time
2438: this operation does not give directly $\WW^{(h-1)}$, but rather
2439: $\wt\WW^{(h-1)}$. Calling $\der P^{(\leq h-1)}(\ps)$ and $\der
2440: P^{(h)}(\x)$ the measure \equ(distr), with $Z_N$ replaced by $Z_h$
2441: and propagators respectively given by \equ(p2) and \equ(p1)
2442: %
2443: $$\eqalign{
2444: \int\!\der\wt P^{(\leq h)}(\ps)\
2445: e^{\WW^{(h)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_h}\ps\right)}
2446: &=
2447: \int\!\der P^{(\leq h-1)}(\ps)\
2448: \int\!\der P^{(h)}(\x)\
2449: e^{\WW^{(h)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_h}\ps+\x\right)}\cr
2450: &\defi\int\!\der P^{(\leq h-1)}(\ps)\
2451: e^{\wt\WW^{(h-1)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_h}\ps\right)+\D E_{h-1}}\;,
2452: }\Eq(trex2)$$%
2453: where $\D E_{h-1}$ is the part of the integration constant in the
2454: fields. Again, by the well known formulas of the truncated
2455: expectations:
2456: %
2457: $$\eqalign{
2458: &\wt\WW^{(h-1)}
2459: \left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_h}\ps\right)\cr
2460: &=\sum_{n^\ps,n^\f,n^\jm\geq 1}^{n+n^\f+n^\jm\neq 0}
2461: \sum_{\underline\o,\underline\s}
2462: \int_{\L}\!\der^2\ux
2463: \der^2\uy\der^2\uz\ \cr
2464: &\left(\prod_{i=1}^n\sqrt{Z_h}\ps^{\s_i}_{x^{(i)},\o_i}\right)
2465: \left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\f} {\f^{\s'_i}_{y^{(i)},\o'_i}\over \sqrt{Z_h}}\right)
2466: \left(\prod_{j=1}^{n^\jm} \jm_{z^{(i)},\o''_i}\right)
2467: \wt W^{(h-1)}_{n^\ps;n^\f;n^\jm,\uo,\us}(\ux,\uy,\uz)\;.
2468: }\Eq(g3)$$
2469: %
2470: For the light fermions a further step is necessary to extract
2471: parts of $\wt\WW^{(h-1)}$ that can be absorbed either into the
2472: free measure $\der P^{(\leq h-1)}$, or in the couplings; this is
2473: the {\it Localization}. In the end of this operation they are
2474: left a potential $\WW^{(h-1)}$ and a measure $\der\wt P^{(\leq
2475: h-1)}$, which fulfil \equ(gi3).
2476: \*
2477:
2478: \sub(DBSF)
2479: {Dimensional bounds.} It is convenient to decompose
2480: the propagator $g^{(h)}_{\o,\s}$
2481: into the one of the Euclidean Model, $g^{({\rm E},h)}_{\o,\s}$,
2482: plus the rest, $g^{({\rm R},h)}_{\o,\s}$, plus the eventual
2483: contribution of the double fermion, $g^{({\rm D})}_{\o,\s}$;
2484: in their turn,
2485: let $g^{({\rm E1},h)}_{\o,\s}$, $g^{({\rm R1},h)}_{\o,\s}$ and
2486: $g^{({\rm D1})}_{\o,\s}$ be respectively the part of
2487: $g^{({\rm E},h)}_{\o,\s}$, $g^{({\rm R},h)}_{\o,\s}$
2488: and $g^{({\rm D})}_{\o,\s}$
2489: which is constant or linear in the mass. Finally:
2490: %
2491: $$\eqalign{
2492: g^{(h)}_{\o,\s}(x)
2493: &\defi g^{({\rm E1},h)}_{\o,\s}(x)
2494: +g^{({\rm R1},h)}_{\o,\s}(x)+ \d_{h,N}g^{({\rm D1})}_{\o,\s}(x)
2495: +r^{(1,h)}_{\o,\s}(x)+
2496: r^{(2,h)}_{\o,\s}(x)}\;,\Eq(decp)$$
2497: %
2498: with the following definitions
2499: %
2500: $$\eqalign{
2501: &g^{({\rm E1},h)}_{\o,\o}(x)
2502: \defi
2503: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2504: e^{-ik\cdot x}
2505: { \wt f^{(h)}(k)
2506: \over D_\o(k)}\;,
2507: \qquad
2508: g^{({\rm E1},h)}_{\o,-\o}(x)
2509: \defi
2510: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2511: e^{-ik\cdot x}
2512: {-\wt\m_h(k)\over
2513: k_0^2 + k_1^2}\wt f^{(h)}(k)\;,\cr
2514: &g^{({\rm R1},h)}_{\o}(x)
2515: \defi
2516: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2517: e^{-ik\cdot x}
2518: \left[
2519: {ik_0+\o e(k_1)
2520: \over
2521: \wt c^2_h(k)+k^2_0 +e^2(k_1)}
2522: -
2523: {-D_{-\o}(k)
2524: \over
2525: k_0^2 + k_1^2}\right]\wt f^{(h)}(k)\;,\cr
2526: &g^{({\rm R1},h)}_{\o,-\o}(x)
2527: \defi
2528: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2529: e^{-ik\cdot x}
2530: \left[
2531: {-\wt \m_h(k)
2532: \over
2533: \wt c^2_h(k)+k^2_0 +e^2(k_1)}
2534: -
2535: {-\wt \m_h(k)
2536: \over
2537: k_0^2 + k_1^2}\right]\wt f^{(h)}(k)\;,\cr
2538: &r^{(1,h)}_{\o,\o}(x)
2539: \defi
2540: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2541: e^{-ik\cdot x}\left[
2542: {-D_{-\o}(k)\over
2543: \wt\m_h^2(k) + k_0^2 + k_1^2}-
2544: {-D_{-\o}(k)\over
2545: k_0^2 + k_1^2}\right]\wt f^{(h)}(k)\;,\cr
2546: &r^{(1,h)}_{\o,-\o}(x)
2547: \defi
2548: \int_{D}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\
2549: e^{-ik\cdot x}\left[
2550: {-\wt\m_h(k)\over
2551: \wt\m_h^2 + k_0^2 + k_1^2}-
2552: {-\wt\m_h(k)\over
2553: k_0^2 + k_1^2}\right]\wt f^{(h)}(k)\;;}$$
2554: %
2555: then
2556: $g^{({\rm D1})}_{\o,\s}$ is given by the sum of
2557: $g^{({\rm E1},N)}_{\o,\s}$ and $g^{({\rm R1},N)}_{\o,\s}$,
2558: with the cutoff $\wh f_N(k)$ replaced by
2559: $\wh \c_N(k_0)\wh\c_N(k_1-(\p/a))$;
2560: and
2561: $r^{(2,h)}_{\o,\s}(x)$ is defined in consequence of \equ(decp).
2562:
2563: For $\e$ small enough,
2564: (so that, by the inductive hypothesis \equ(ind1)
2565: $1-c_0\e\ge 3/4$),
2566: there exists two positive constants, $c$ and $C$ s.t.:
2567: %
2568: $$\eqalign{
2569: \left|g^{({\rm E1},h)}_{\o,\o}(x)\right|
2570: \leq
2571: {C\g^{h} \over e^{c\sqrt{\g^h\k|x|}}}\;,
2572: \phantom{****}\qquad&
2573: \left|g^{({\rm R1},h)}_{\o,\o}(x)\right|
2574: \leq
2575: \g^{-(3/4)(N-h)}
2576: {C\g^{h}\over e^{c\sqrt{\g^h\k|x|}}}\;,\cr
2577: \left|g^{({\rm E1},h)}_{\o,-\o}(x)\right|
2578: \leq
2579: \left|{\m_h\over \g^h\k}\right|
2580: {C\g^{h}\over e^{c\sqrt{\g^h\k|x|}}}\;,
2581: \qquad&
2582: \left|g^{({\rm R1},h)}_{\o,-\o}(x)\right|
2583: \leq
2584: \left|{\m_h\over \g^h\k}\right|
2585: \g^{-(3/4)(N-h)}
2586: {C\g^{h}\over e^{c\sqrt{\g^h\k|x|}}}\;,\cr
2587: \left|g^{({\rm D1})}_{\o,\o}(x)\right|
2588: \leq
2589: {C\g^{N}\over e^{c\sqrt{\g^N\k|x|}}}\;,
2590: \phantom{*****}\qquad&
2591: \left|g^{({\rm D1})}_{\o,-\o}(x)\right|
2592: \leq
2593: \left|{\m_N\over \g^N\k}\right|
2594: {C\g^{N}\over e^{c\sqrt{\g^N\k|x|}}}\;,\cr
2595: \left|r^{(1,h)}_{\o,\s}(x)\right|
2596: \leq
2597: \left|{\m_h\over \g^h\k}\right|^2
2598: {C\g^{h}\over e^{c\sqrt{\g^h\k|x|}}}\;,
2599: \qquad&
2600: \left|r^{(2,h)}_{\o,\s}(x)\right|
2601: \leq
2602: \left|{\m_h\over \g^h\k}\right|^3\g^{-(3/4)(N-h)}
2603: {C\g^{h}\over e^{c\sqrt{\g^h\k|x|}}}\;.
2604: }\Eq(prop<N)$$
2605: %
2606: It is remarkable the propagators $g^{({\rm R1},h)}_{\o}$
2607: and $r^{(2,h)}_{\o,\s}$ have a gain
2608: factor $\g^{-(3/4)(N-h)}$ more than the standard bounds.
2609: Clearly, the above bounds are useful whenever
2610: $\m_h\leq \k\g^h$: when this condition is not
2611: satisfied, then the mass in the propagator is so large that it is
2612: possible to integrate the remaining scales all at once,
2613: as it was done for the double fermion propagator
2614: (see later the definition of the scale $h^*$).
2615:
2616: \*
2617: \sub(L)
2618: {Localization.}
2619: The contribution to $\wt\WW^{(h-1)}$
2620: of certain kinds of Feynman graphs is extracted from the rest by
2621: {\it localization}: it extracts the 0-th or the 1-th order
2622: Taylor expansion in the momenta and the 0-th or the 1-th order
2623: expansion in the mass parameters $\{\m_k\}_k$.
2624: Since the space of the momenta, $D$, does not contain $(0,0)$,
2625: and is not continuous, the Taylor expansion should be done
2626: taking {\it discrete derivatives} in the four
2627: nearest neighbour lattice site surrounding $0$.
2628: This subtlety cannot be very important, since
2629: the continuous limit (for the lattice $D$ only),
2630: $L\to\io$, was not taken since the beginning,
2631: not to be involved with an infinite Grassmannian algebra.
2632: (The analogous argument is not valid also for the lattice $\L$,
2633: since it is essential to make the limit $N\to+\io$ {\it after}
2634: the renormalization has taken place.)
2635: Therefore, for shake of simplicity, the following developments,
2636: are {\it as if the lattice $D$
2637: were continuous rather than discrete},
2638: leaving the correct technicality to [BM01].
2639:
2640: Well then, it
2641: is convenient to introduce the directional derivatives
2642: %
2643: $$\partial_\o^k\defi{1\over 2}
2644: \left[i{\partial\over \partial_{k_0}}+\o{\partial\over \partial_{k_1}}\right]\;,$$
2645: %
2646: which are orthogonal is the sense that the two relations are true:
2647: $\Big(\partial_\o D_\s\Big)(k) =\d_{\o,\s}$
2648: and \hbox{$\sum_{\o=\pm}D_\o(k)\partial_\o\=k_0\partial_{k_0}+k_1\partial_{k_1}$}.
2649: \elenco{
2650: %
2651: \art
2652: Let $\hW_{2,\a,\b}^{(h-1)}(k)$ be considered.
2653: If $\a=\b$, $\hW_{2,\a,\a}^{(h-1)}(0)$ =0 by \equ(refl); if
2654: $\b=-\a$, independently on $\a$ by \equ(srefl),
2655: it is possible to define
2656: %
2657: $$\hW_{2,\a,-\a}^{(h-1)}(0)=s_{h-1}+ \g^{h-1}\D n_{h-1}
2658: +\D s^{(\m)}_{h-1}\;,$$
2659: %
2660: where, $\D s^{(\m)}_{h-1}$ is the sum of the graphs in
2661: the expansion of $\hW_{2,\a,-\a}^{(h-1)}(0)$ which are at
2662: least quadratic in the masses $\{\m_k\}_k$;
2663: while $s_{h-1}$ is the sum of all the graphs linear in the
2664: masses, and therefore made
2665: with only antidiagonal propagator
2666: $g^{({\rm E1},k)}_{\o,-\o}$, $g^{({\rm R1},k)}_{\o,-\o}$
2667: or $g^{({\rm D1})}_{\o,-\o}$;
2668: finally, the sum of the graphs which are independent on the
2669: masses is in $\g^{h-1}\D n_{h-1}$.
2670: Then, let $\left(\partial_\s\hW_{2,\a,\b}^{(h-1)}\right)(k)$ be considered.
2671: By \equ(refl), for $\b=-\a$, $\left(\partial_\s\hW_{2,\a,-\a}^{(h-1)}\right)(0)=0$;
2672: while, for $\a=\b$, it is possible to define,
2673: independently on $\a$ by \equ(srefl),
2674: %
2675: $$
2676: \left(
2677: \partial_\s\hW^{(h-1)}_{2,\a,\a}\right)(0)
2678: \left\{
2679: \matrix{\defi d_{h-1}^{(+)}+\D d^{(1,+)}_{h-1} \hfill && \hfill{\rm for}\ \ \s=\a \cr
2680: \defi d_{h-1}^{(-)}+\D d^{(1,-)}_{h-1}\hfill && \hfill{\rm for}\ \ \s=-\a\;,\cr
2681: }\right.
2682: $$
2683: %
2684: where $\D d^{(1,\s)}_{h-1}$ is the sum of the graphs
2685: which are at least linear in the masses; while $d_{h-1}^{(\s)}$
2686: is the sum of the masses independent graphs.
2687: Defining $z_{h-1}\defi d_{h-1}^{(+)}+d_{h-1}^{(-)}$, and
2688: $\D d_{h-1}\defi -2 d_{h-1}^{(-)}$ and,
2689: accordingly,
2690: %
2691: $$\D t_{h-1}(k)
2692: \defi
2693: \pmatrix{ z_{h-1}\big(-ik_0+e(k_1)\big)
2694: & s_{h-1}\cr
2695: s_{h-1}
2696: & z_{h-1}\big(-ik_0-e(k_1)\big)\cr}\;,
2697: $$
2698: %
2699: the localization is:
2700: %
2701: $$\eqalign{\LL
2702: &\left[
2703: \sum_{\a,\b}\int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
2704: \hp^+_{k,\a}\hp^-_{k,\b}\hW_{2,\a,\b}^{(h-1)}(k)\right]
2705: =\g^{h-1}\D n_{h-1}
2706: \sum_{\o}\int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
2707: \hp^+_{k,\o}\hp^-_{k,-\o}\cr
2708: &+\D d_{h-1}\sum_\o
2709: \int_{D_{h-1}}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
2710: \hp^+_{k,\o}\hp^-_{k,\o} \o e(k)
2711: +\sum_{\a,\b}
2712: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
2713: \hp^+_{k,\a}\hp^-_{k,\b}\big( \D t_{h-1}\big)_{\a,\b}(k)\;.}$$
2714: %
2715: Setting $\RR\defi 1-\LL$:
2716: $$\eqalign{\RR
2717: &\left[
2718: \sum_{\a,\b}\int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
2719: \hp^+_{k,\a}\hp^-_{k,\b}\hW_{2,\a,\b}^{(h-1)}(k)\right]\cr
2720: &=\D s^{(\m)}_{h-1}
2721: \sum_{\o}\int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
2722: \hp^+_{k,\o}\hp^-_{k,-\o}
2723: +\sum_{\s,\o} \D d^{(\m,\s)}_{h-1}
2724: \int_{D_{h-1}}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
2725: \hp^+_{k,\o}\hp^-_{k,\o} D_{\s\o}(k)\cr
2726: &+z_{h-1}\sum_{\a,\s}
2727: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
2728: \hp^+_{k,\a}\hp^-_{k,\a}
2729: \Big[D_\s(k)- \big(-ik_0+\s e(k_1)\big)\Big]\cr
2730: &+\sum_{\a,\b,\o,\s}
2731: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
2732: \hp^+_{k,\a}\hp^-_{k,\b}D_\o(k) D_\s(k)
2733: \int_0^1\! \der\t\ (1-\t)
2734: \left(\partial_\o\partial_\s\hW_{2,\a,\b}^{(h-1)}\right)(\t k)\;.
2735: }$$
2736: %
2737: The local part $\D t_{h-1}$ is absorbed in the free measure.
2738: Calling:
2739: $$
2740: \wt C^{(1)}_{h-1}(k)\defi
2741: {1+z_{h-1}+\D z_{h-1}\over
2742: 1+\c_{h-1}(k)z_{h-1}+\c_{h-1}(k)\D z_{h-1}}\;,
2743: $$
2744: $$
2745: \wt C^{(2)}_{h-1}(k)\defi
2746: {1+z_{h-1}+\D z_{h-1}\over
2747: 1+\c_{h-1}(k)z_{h-1}+\c_{h-1}(k)\D z_{h-1}}
2748: {1+\c_h(k)\left(s_{h-1}/ \m_{h-1}\right) \over
2749: 1+\left(s_{h-1}/ \m_{h-1}\right)}\;,
2750: $$
2751: and, since $s_{h-1}$ is linear in the masses,
2752: $m_{h-1}\defi s_{h-1}/\m_{h-1}$, the {\it effective field
2753: strength} and the {\it effective mass} on scale $h-1$ are:
2754: %
2755: $$
2756: Z_{h-1}\defi Z_h(1+z_{h-1})\;,
2757: \qquad
2758: \m_{h-1}\defi
2759: \m_h{Z_h\over Z_{h-1}}(1+m_{h-1})\;. \Eq(ga1)$$
2760: %
2761: Then, in the same way,
2762: the local parts $\D n_{h-1}$ and $\D d_{h-1}$ are absorbed
2763: in the {\it effective counterterms} on scale $h-1$, $\n_{h-1}$ and
2764: $\d_{h-1}$:
2765: %
2766: $$
2767: \d_{h-1}\defi\left({Z_h\over Z_{h-1}}\right) (\d_h + \D d_{h-1})\;,
2768: \qquad
2769: \n_{h-1}\defi\left({Z_h\over Z_{h-1}}\right) \g (\n_h + \D n_{h-1})\;.
2770: \Eq(b1)$$
2771: %
2772: A remarkable feature is that $Z_{h-1}$, $\n_{h-1}$ and $\d_{h-1}$
2773: are {\it independent from the mass flow,} $\{\m_k\}_k$.
2774: Finally, in changing free measure on scale $h-1$ from $\der
2775: P^{(\leq h-1)}$ to $\der\wt P^{(\leq h-1)}$, it has to be taken
2776: into account the change of the normalization:
2777: $$
2778: \D \wt E_{h-1}\defi -
2779: \ln\left\{
2780: \left({Z_{h-1}\over Z_h}\right)^2
2781: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2 k\over (2\p)^2}\left[{k^2_0+e^2(k_1)+\wt\m^2_{h-1}(k_1)
2782: \over
2783: k^2_0+e^2(k_1)+\wt\m^2_{h}(k)}\right]
2784: \left({1\over \wt C_{h-1}^{(1)}(k)}\right)^2\right\}\;.$$
2785: %
2786: so that the {\it effective vacuum energy} on scale $h-1$ is
2787: $$
2788: E_{h-1}\defi E_h+\D E_{h-1} +\D\wt E_{h-1}\;.
2789: $$
2790: %
2791: \art
2792: Let $\hW_{4,\o,-\o}^{(h-1)}(k,p,q)$ be considered; and let
2793: %
2794: $$\hW_{4,\o,-\o}^{(h-1)}(0,0,0)\defi\D l_{h-1} + \D l^{(1)}_{h-1}\;,$$
2795: %
2796: where $\D l^{(1)}_{h-1}$ is the sum of all the graphs
2797: in the expansion of $\hW_{4,\o,-\o}^{(h-1)}(0,0,0)$
2798: which are at least linear in the masses.
2799: Then
2800: %
2801: $$\eqalign{
2802: &\LL
2803: \left[\sum_\o
2804: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
2805: {\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
2806: \ps^+_{k,\o}\ps^-_{k+p-q,\o}\ps^+_{p,-\o}
2807: \ps^-_{q,-\o}\hW_{4,\o,-\o}^{(h-1)}(k,p,q)\right]\cr
2808: &=\D l_{h-1}
2809: \sum_\o
2810: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
2811: \ps^+_{k,\o}\ps^-_{k+p-q,\o}\ps^+_{p,-\o}\ps^-_{q,-\o}\;,\cr
2812: &\RR
2813: \left[\sum_\o
2814: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
2815: \ps^+_{k,\o}\ps^-_{k+p-q,\o}\ps^+_{p,-\o}\ps^-_{q,-\o}\hW_{4,\o,-\o}^{(h-1)}(k,p,q)\right]\cr
2816: &=\D l^{(1)}_{h-1}
2817: \sum_\o
2818: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
2819: \ps^+_{k,\o}\ps^-_{k+p-q,\o}\ps^+_{p,-\o}\ps^-_{q,-\o}\cr
2820: &+\sum_{\o,\s}\sum_{p'=k,p,q}
2821: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
2822: \ps^+_{k,\o}\ps^-_{k+p-q,\o}\ps^+_{p,-\o}\ps^-_{q,-\o}
2823: D_\s(p')\cr
2824: &\phantom{*************************}
2825: \cdot\int_0^1\!\der\t
2826: \left(\partial_\s^{p'}\hW_{4,\o,-\o}^{(h-1)}\right)(\t k,\t p,\t q)\;.
2827: }$$
2828: %
2829: The local part $\D l_{h-1}$ is
2830: absorbed in the effective coupling on scale $h-1$:
2831: %
2832: $$
2833: \l_{h-1}\defi \left({Z_h\over Z_{h-1}}\right)^2 (\l_h + \D
2834: l_{h-1})\;, \Eq(b2)$$
2835: %
2836: and also $\l_{h-1}$ is independent from the flow $\{\m_k\}_k$.
2837: %
2838: \art
2839: Let $\hW^{(h-1)}_{1;2,\m;\n}(0,0)$ be considered;
2840: since by \equ(srefl1), it does not depend on $\s$,
2841: it is possible to define
2842: %
2843: $$
2844: \hW_{1;2,\s;\o}^{(h-1)}(0;0)
2845: \defi
2846: \left\{
2847: \matrix{
2848: z^{(2)}_{h-1} + \D z^{(2,+)}_{h-1}+
2849: \D d^{(2,+)}_{h-1}\hfill&\hfill{\rm for }\ \s=\o\cr
2850: \D z^{(2,-)}_{h-1}+\D d^{(2,-)}_{h-1}\hfill&\hfill
2851: {\rm for }\ \s=-\o\;;\cr}\right.$$
2852: %
2853: where $ \D d^{(2,\s)}_{h-1}$ is the sum of the graphs
2854: at least linear in the masses; then $z^{(2)}_{h-1}$ and
2855: $\D z^{(2,+)}_{h-1}$ are mass independent:
2856: the former is the sum of all the graphs made only
2857: with (diagonal) propagators $\{g^{({\rm E1},k)}_{\o,\o}\}_k$,
2858: and interaction $\VV$ (namely all the mass-independent
2859: graphs obtained in the case of the Euclidean model for such
2860: a kernel); while $\D z^{(2,\s)}_{h-1}$ is the sum
2861: of the graphs made with least one propagator
2862: $\{g^{({\rm R},k)}_{\o,\s}\}_k$ or an interaction
2863: $\NN$ or $\DD$.
2864: Then
2865: $$\eqalign{
2866: &\LL
2867: \left[\sum_{\s,\o}
2868: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
2869: \jm_{p-k,\s}\ps^+_{k,\o}\ps^-_{p,\o}
2870: \hW^{(h-1)}_{1;2,\s;\o}(k,p)\right]\cr
2871: &=\left(z^{(2)}+\D z^{(2,+)}_{h-1}\right)
2872: \sum_{\s}
2873: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
2874: \jm_{p-k,\s}\ps^+_{k,\s}\ps^-_{p,\s}\cr
2875: &+
2876: \D z^{(2,-)}_{h-1}\sum_{\s}
2877: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
2878: \jm_{p-k,\m}\ps^+_{k,-\s}\ps^-_{p,-\s}\;,\cr
2879: &\RR
2880: \left[\sum_{\s,\o}
2881: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
2882: \jm_{p-k,\s}\ps^+_{k,\o}\ps^-_{p,\o}
2883: \hW^{(h-1)}_{1;2,\s;\o}(k,p)\right]\cr
2884: &=\sum_{\s,\o}\D z^{(2,\o)}_{h-1}\sum_{\o}
2885: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
2886: \jm_{p-k,\o}\ps^+_{k,\o\s}\ps^-_{p,\o\s}\cr
2887: &+\sum_{\m,\n,\s}
2888: \sum_{q=k,p}
2889: \int_{D_{h-1}}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
2890: \jm_{p-k,\m}\ps^+_{k,\n}\ps^-_{p,\n}
2891: D_\s(q)
2892: \int_0^1\!\der\t
2893: \left(\partial^q_\s\hW^{(h-1)}_{1;2,\m;\n}\right)(\t k,\t p)\;.
2894: }$$
2895: %
2896: The local parts are absorbed into the {\it effective density
2897: strength} on scale $h-1$, $\z^{(2,\s)}_{h-1}$:
2898: %
2899: $$
2900: \pmatrix{
2901: \z^{(2,+)}_{h-1}\cr
2902: \z^{(2,-)}_{h-1}\cr}
2903: \defi
2904: \left({Z_h\over Z_{h-1}}\right)
2905: \pmatrix{
2906: 1+z^{(2)}_{h-1}+\D z^{(2,+)}_{h-1} & \D z^{(2,-)}_{h-1}\cr
2907: \D z^{(2,-)}_{h-1} & 1+z^{(2)}_{h-1}+\D z^{(2,+)}_{h-1}\cr}
2908: \pmatrix{
2909: \z^{(2,+)}_{h}\cr
2910: \z^{(2,-)}_{h}\cr}\;.
2911: \Eq(ga3)$$
2912: %
2913: }
2914:
2915: \0Multiscale integration goes on over all the scales $k$ s.t.
2916: $\m_k\leq \k \g^k$, the first scale for which this is not true
2917: being $k=h^*$. It is simply to verify that , for $h=h^*+1$ the
2918: propagator \equ(p2) has the same dimensional bound of \equ(p1)
2919: %
2920: $$ \left|g^{(\leq h^*)}_{\o,\s}(x)\right|
2921: \leq C \g^{h^*}e^{-c\sqrt{\g^{h^*-1}\k|x|}}\;.$$
2922: %
2923: Finally, it holds the following theorem.
2924: \*
2925:
2926: \theorem(T4)
2927: {Let it be supposed there exists $\e>0$ and the constants
2928: $c_0>0$ such that at any RG step
2929: $h:h^*\leq h\leq N$,
2930: the effective parameters satisfy:
2931: %
2932: $$\g^{-c_0\e^2}\leq{Z_{h}\over Z_{h+1}}\leq\g^{c_0\e^2}\;,
2933: \qquad
2934: \g^{-2c_0\e}\leq{\m_h\over \m_{h+1}}\leq\g^{2c_0\e}\;,
2935: \qquad
2936: \g^{-2c_0\e}\leq{\z^{(2,\s)}_h\over \z^{(2,\s)}_{h+1}}\leq\g^{2c_0\e}\;,
2937: \Eq(ind1)$$
2938: $$|\n_h|,|\d_h|,|\l_h|\leq 2\e\;.
2939: \Eq(ind2)$$
2940: %
2941: Then, for suitable positive constants $C,c$:
2942: \elenco{
2943: \art
2944: If $n^\f+n^\jm\neq 0$,
2945: $$\int_{\L}\!\der^2\ux\
2946: \left|W^{(h)}_{n^\ps;n^\f;n^\jm,\uo,\us}
2947: (\ux,\uy,\uz)\right|
2948: \leq
2949: C{\g^{h\big(2-(1/2)n^\ps-(3/2)n^\f-n^\jm\big)}
2950: \over e^{{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\sqrt{\g^h\k d(\uy,\uz)}}}\;;$$
2951: %
2952: \art if $n^\f+n^\jm= 0$,
2953: %
2954: $$\int_{\L}\!\der^2_*\ux\
2955: \left|W^{(h)}_{n^\ps;0;0,\uo,\us}
2956: (\ux)\right|
2957: \leq
2958: C\g^{h\big(2-(1/2)n^\ps\big)}\;;
2959: $$%
2960: }}
2961:
2962: \0The proof is follows by simple dimensional analysis, and is
2963: consequence of the Appendices \secc(TE) and \secc(P).
2964: Since, by the first item, $\m_h/\g^h$
2965: is strictly decreasing in $h$, for any choice of the mass $0\leq
2966: \m\leq \g^{-1}\k$, the scale $h^*$ is negative; and:
2967: $$
2968: {\log_\g(\m/\k)\over 1-2c_0\e}-1
2969: \leq h^*\leq
2970: {\log_\g(\m/\k)\over 1+2c_0\e}\;;
2971: $$
2972: hence, in the massless case, $h^*=-\io$.
2973:
2974: \*
2975:
2976: \section(BGF, Flows of the Running Coupling Constants)
2977:
2978: A remarkable feature of the Localization is that
2979: among the flows of the effective parameters, only
2980: the one for the mass is constructed with massive propagator;
2981: the others are constructed with propagators
2982: $\{g^{({\rm E1},k)}_{\o,\o}\}_k$,
2983: $\{g^{({\rm R1},k)}_{\o,\o}\}_k$
2984: or
2985: $\{g^{({\rm D1},k)}_{\o,\o}\}_k$,
2986: and therefore are independent on the mass flow.
2987: Since the scale $h^*$ was introduced only to
2988: avoid bad bound on the massive propagators,
2989: all the flow, except $\{\m_k\}_k$,
2990: can be extended from
2991: the range of scales $h^*\le k\le N $,
2992: to the range $k\le N$.
2993:
2994: Other features of the flows of the effective parameters are depicted in
2995: the following Theorem.
2996: \*
2997:
2998: \theorem(FC)
2999: {Fixed any $\th: 0<\th <1/16$,
3000: there exists $\e>0$ and two positive constants $c$ and $c_2$,
3001: such that in correspondence of any
3002: parameters $\m$ and $\l$ satisfying $0\leq \m\leq \k\g^{-1}$
3003: and $|\l|\leq \e$, there exist the parameters
3004: $\l_N$, $\m_N$, $Z_N$, $Z_N^{(2,+)}$,
3005: $Z_N^{(2,-)}$ and $\d_N$, $\n_N$,
3006: such that the following properties hold.
3007: \elenco{
3008: \art
3009: The flow of $\l_N$ is such that
3010: %
3011: $$\lim_{h\to-\io}\l_h=\l\;;
3012: \qquad \left|\l_{h-1}-\l_h\right|
3013: \leq
3014: c\e^2\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h)}\;.
3015: \Eq(l1)$$
3016: %
3017: \art
3018: The flows of $Z_N$ and $\m_N$
3019: are such that
3020: $\m_0=\m$ and $Z_0=1$; furthermore
3021: there exist $\h_\l$ and $\bar \h_\l$,
3022: independent from the regularization
3023: used (Euclidean or Hamiltonian)
3024: from the cutoff $N$, and from the mass $\m$,
3025: such that
3026: %
3027: $$Z_h=\g^{-h\h_\l +\D G_h}\;,
3028: \qquad
3029: \m_h=\m\g^{-h\bar\h_{\l}+\D\bar G_h}\;, \Eq(z1)$$
3030: %
3031: with the rests, $\D G_h$ and $\D \bar G_h$,
3032: summable in $h$:
3033: $\left|\D G_h\right|,\left|\D\bar G_h\right|
3034: \leq c_2\e^2\g^{-(\th/2)\big(N-h\big)}$.
3035: %
3036: \art
3037: The flows of $Z_N^{(2,+)}$ and
3038: $Z_N^{(2,-)}$ are such that
3039: $Z^{(2,+)}_0=Z^{(2,-)}_0=1$; furthermore
3040: there exist $\h^{(2)}_\l$ independent
3041: from the regularization, as well as from the
3042: mass $\m$ and the cutoff $N$,
3043: such that
3044: %
3045: $$Z^{(2,+)}_h=
3046: \g^{-h \h_{\l}^{(2)}+\D G^{(2,+)}_h}\;,
3047: \qquad
3048: Z^{(2,-)}_h=
3049: \g^{-h \h_{\l}^{(2)}+\D G^{(2,-)}_h}\;,\Eq(zz1)$$
3050: %
3051: with the rests $\{\D G^{(2,\s)}_h\}_{\s=\pm}$
3052: summable in $h$:
3053: $\left|\D G^{(2,\s)}_h\right|\leq c_2\e^2
3054: \g^{-(\th/2)(N-h)}$.
3055: %
3056: \art
3057: The flows of $\d_N$ and $\n_N$
3058: are such that
3059: $|\d_h|,|\n_h| \leq 2\e\g^{-\th(N-h)}$.}}
3060:
3061: The proof is given in Appendix \secc(P). It is based on the vanishing of
3062: the Beta function of massless Thirring model.
3063: \*
3064:
3065: \section(PTM, Equivalence of the Euclidean and Hamiltonian Regularization)
3066:
3067: \proof {\bf of Theorem \thm(EEH).}
3068: It is a corollary of the Theorem~\thm(FC).
3069: It can be obtained in the same way
3070: as the proof of Lemma \lm(LRC).
3071: Anyway, using the{\it short memory property }
3072: (see \secc(smp)), and the compact support of
3073: the propagators,
3074: a slightly easier proof is available for
3075: the Fourier transform of the Schwinger functions
3076: with at least one field insertion.
3077: Indeed, the $(m;n+1)$-Schwinger functions
3078: calculated at fixed momenta $p_1,\ldots,p_m$,
3079: $q_1,\ldots, q_n$, no matter if they are obtained
3080: from the Hamiltonian or the Euclidean regularization,
3081: asymptotically
3082: in the limit of
3083: removed cutoff are equal to
3084: the sum of the following Feynman graphs:
3085: all the graphs found in the
3086: expansion of the Schwinger functions, excluding those ones having
3087: an interaction on scale $m\geq N$, or an interaction
3088: $\DD$ or $\NN$, or a propagator $\{g^{({\rm R},k)}\}_{k}$,
3089: and replacing the parameters
3090: $\l_k$, $Z_k$, $Z^{(2,\s)}_k$ and $\m_k$, respectively
3091: with $\l$, $\g^{k\h_\l}$, $\g^{k\h^{(2)}_\l}$
3092: and $\m\g^{k\bar\h_\l}$. Indeed, these graphs
3093: do not depend on the regularization; then, the
3094: difference between the sum of such graphs
3095: and the corresponding Schwinger function
3096: is bounded by the modulus of the sum
3097: of the graphs with one external
3098: fermionic propagator
3099: on the scale of the momentum $q_1$,
3100: called $h_1$ -- fixed $q_1$, by compact support
3101: function, $h_1$ can be chosen between two adjoining momenta scales --
3102: an effective parameter or propagator on scale $m$,
3103: and falling in one of the following cases.
3104: \elenco{
3105: %
3106: \item{\bf i.} It is $m\geq N$. Then, by the short memory
3107: property, the sum of such graphs is bounded, up to a constant,
3108: by $\g^{-\th(N-h_1)}$.
3109: %
3110: \item{\bf ii.} It is $m<N$ and the parameter is $\d_m$ or $\n_m$.
3111: By the property of the flows of $\d_N$ and $\n_N$, and
3112: by the short memory property,
3113: the sum of such graphs is bounded, up to a constant,
3114: by $\g^{-\th|m-h_1|}\g^{-(\th/2)(N-m)}\leq$
3115: $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h_1)}\g^{-(\th/2)|m-h_1|}$.
3116: %
3117: \item{\bf iii.} There is a propagator $g^{(R,m)}_\o$ on scale $m<N$. By the
3118: bound of such a propagator and the short memory property,
3119: the sum of such graphs is bounded
3120: by $\g^{-\th|m-h_1|}\g^{-(3/4)(N-m)}\leq$
3121: $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h_1)}\g^{-(\th/2)|m-h_1|}$, for $\th<3/4$.
3122: %
3123: \item{\bf iv.} It is $m<N$ and effective parameter
3124: $\l_m-\l$, or $Z_m-\g^{m\h_\l}$,
3125: or $\m_m-\g^{m\bar\h_\l}$,
3126: or $Z^{(2,\s)}_m-\g^{m\h^{(2)}_\l}$.
3127: By the property of the flows, and
3128: by the short memory property,
3129: the sum of such graphs is bounded, up to a constant,
3130: by $\g^{-\th|m-h_1|}\g^{-(\th/2)(N-m)}\leq$
3131: $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h_1)}$ $\g^{-(\th/2)|m-h_1|}$.}
3132:
3133: \0Furthermore the scale $h^*$, in the limit of removed cutoff,
3134: only depends on $\l,\m$. Therefore, it is possible to perform the sum over $m$
3135: and to get for the difference of the Schwinger function
3136: derived in the two different settings
3137: a bound $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h_1)}$, for $0<\th<1/16$, up to a constant.
3138: Anyway, in order to have, for different regularizations,
3139: identical values of $\l$ and $\m$ (and consequently also of $\h_\l$,
3140: $\bar\h_\l$ and $\h^{(2)}_\l$), the initial parameters will be
3141: generally different.\hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
3142: %%%%%%%%
3143: %%%%%%%%
3144: \chapter(WTI,Phase and Chiral Symmetries)
3145:
3146: \section(WTI1, Ward-Takahashi Identities)
3147:
3148: The classical Lagrangian is invariant under the {\it global}
3149: transformations of the fields:
3150: $$
3151: \ps^\s_{x,\o}\rightarrow e^{i\s\a_\o}\ps^\s_{x,\o}\;;\Eq(tr)
3152: $$
3153: as the phase, $\{\a_{\o}\}_{\o=\pm}$ does depend on the component
3154: of the fermion fields, $\o$, this transformation is a combination
3155: of the phase and chiral transformations in the Dirac notation.
3156:
3157: This symmetry can be implemented in the generating functional of
3158: the Euclidean Thirring model; and in particular, in order to obtaining
3159: the identity $\h_\l=\h^{(2)}_\l$ and the vanishing of the Beta
3160: function it will be useful to consider the generating functional
3161: with infrared cutoff on scale $h$. It has to be performed a real
3162: exponential transformation and to allow a dependence of the
3163: parameter $\{\a_{\o}\}_{\o=\pm}$ on the space points: a new real
3164: field, $\{\a_{x,\o}\}_{\o=\pm}^{x\in\L}$ arises -- this
3165: prescription looks like, but has not to be confused with, the
3166: implementation of a {\it gauge symmetry}.
3167: \*
3168: %%%%
3169: \sub(WTISF)
3170: {\wti{} for the Schwinger functions.}
3171: An essential condition to get the consequences of the \wti{}
3172: in the functional integration framework is to transform the
3173: field in {\it every site} of $\L$. This seems to be forbidden
3174: by the choice of a compact support cutoff function, ad the consequent
3175: restriction to the momenta in $D_N$.
3176: Therefore, let $\c^\d_N(k)$ be the cutoff function
3177: obtained adding to $\c_N(k)$ an exponential decaying
3178: tail $\d\D \c_N(k)$, alway strictly positive.
3179:
3180: Hence, let the
3181: following transformation of the integration variables in Fourier
3182: space be considered
3183: %
3184: $$
3185: \hp^\s_{k,\o}\longrightarrow
3186: \hp_{k,\o}^\s-\s\int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3187: \ha_{p,\o}\hp^\s_{k-\s p,\o}\;.
3188: \Eq(qtr)
3189: $$
3190: %
3191: Calling $\c^\d_{h,N}(k)\defi \c^\d_N(k)-\c^\d_h(k)$, the \equ(qtr) implies
3192: the following transformation of the kernel of the free measure
3193: %
3194: $$\eqalign{
3195: \int_{D}\! {\der^2k\over(2\p)^2}\
3196: &\hp_{k,\o}^+{D_\o(k)\over \c^\d_{h,N}(k)}\hp_{k,\o}^-
3197: \longrightarrow
3198: \int_{D}\! {\der^2k\over(2\p)^2}\
3199: \hp_{k,\o}^+{D_\o(k)\over
3200: \c^\d_{h,N}(k)}\hp_{k,\o}^-\cr
3201: +
3202: &\int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over(2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over(2\p)^2}\
3203: \ha_{p,\o}\hp_{k,\o}^+\hp_{k+p,\o}^-
3204: \left[{D_\o(k)\over \c^\d_{h,N}(k)}-{D_\o(k+p)\over \c^\d_{h,N}(k+p)}\right]\;,}$$
3205: %
3206: and
3207: %
3208: $$\eqalign{
3209: {D_\o(k)\over \c^\d_{h,N}(k)}
3210: -&{D_\o(k+p)\over \c^\d_{h,N}(k+p)}
3211: \defi
3212: -D_\o(p) - C^\d_\o(k,k+p)\cr
3213: &=-D_{\o}(p)
3214: -
3215: \left[D_{\o}(k)\left(1-\big(\c^\d_{h,N}\big)^{-1}(k)\right)
3216: -D_{\o}(k+p)\left(1-\big(\c^\d_{h,N}\big)^{-1}(k+p)\right)\right]\;.}$$
3217: %
3218: It is suitable to introduce the interactions with the external
3219: source $\ha_\o$:
3220: %
3221: $$\eqalign{
3222: \AAA_0 (\a,\ps)
3223: &\defi
3224: \sum_{\o=\pm}\int_{D}\!
3225: {\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3226: C^\d_\o(q,p)\ha_{p-q,\o}\hp^+_{q,\o}\hp^-_{p,\o}\;,\cr
3227: \AAA_\s(\a,\ps)
3228: &\defi
3229: \sum_{\o=\pm}\int_{D}\!
3230: {\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3231: D_{\s\o}(p-q)\ha_{p-q,\o}\hp^+_{q,\s\o}
3232: \hp^-_{p,\s\o}\;, \quad {\rm for \ }\s=\pm\;,
3233: }$$
3234: %%%
3235: \vbox
3236: {\insertplot{300pt}{90pt}%
3237: {}%
3238: {f0}{\eqg(f0.ps)}
3239: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f0.ps)}: Graphical representation of {$\AAA_0$},
3240: {$\AAA_-$} and {$\AAA_+$}}}
3241: \vskip2em
3242: %
3243: so that, the transformation of $\WW^{(h)}$ reads
3244: $$
3245: \eqalign{
3246: e^{\WW^{(h)}(\jm,\f)}
3247: =\lim_{\d\to 0}
3248: \int\!
3249: &\der P^{[h,N]}(\ps)
3250: \exp\left\{
3251: -l_N\VV(\ps)+ Z_N^{(2)}\JJ(\jm,\ps)
3252: +\FF(\f,\ps)\right\}\cr
3253: &\cdot\exp\left\{
3254: Z_N\AAA_+\left(\a,\ps\right)
3255: +
3256: Z_N
3257: \AAA_0\left(\a,\ps\right)
3258: \right\}\cr
3259: &\cdot\exp\left\{
3260: \sum_{\o=\pm}
3261: \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
3262: \ha_{p,\o}
3263: \left[\hf^+_{k,\o}\hp^-_{k+p,\o}-\hp^+_{k,\o}\hf^-_{k+p,\o}\right]\right\}\;.}
3264: \Eq(trW)$$
3265: %
3266: Being that $\WW^{(h)}$ is independent of $\a$, summing and
3267: subtracting in the argument of the exponential $Z_N\sum_{\m=\pm}
3268: \n^{(\m)}_N\AAA_\m\left(\a,\ps\right)$,
3269: %
3270: and then taking a derivative in $\ha_{p,\m}$ for $\ha= 0$, it
3271: yields:
3272: %
3273: $$\eqalign{
3274: \left({1-\n^{(+)}_N\over \z^{(2)}_N}\right)
3275: &D_\m(p){\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hj_{p,\m}}(\jm,\f)
3276: -{\n^{(-)}_N\over \z^{(2)}_N}
3277: D_{-\m}(p){\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hj_{p,-\m}}(\jm,\f)\cr
3278: &=
3279: \int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
3280: \left[
3281: {\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hf^-_{k,\m}}\hf^-_{k+p,\m}-
3282: \hf^+_{k,\m}
3283: {
3284: \partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hf^+_{k+p,\m}}\right]
3285: -{\partial \WW^{(h)}_\AAA\over \partial \ha_{p,\m}}(0,\jm,\f)\;,
3286: }\Eq(grez)$$
3287: %
3288: where the last term is given is the derivative of the functional
3289: %
3290: $$\eqalign{
3291: e^{\WW^{(h)}_\AAA
3292: (\a,\jm,\f)}\defi
3293: \int\!
3294: \der P^{[h,N]}\
3295: (\ps)
3296: &\exp\left\{
3297: -l_N \VV(\ps) + Z^{(2)}_N\JJ(\jm,\ps) + \FF(\f,\ps)\right\}\cr
3298: &\exp\left\{
3299: Z_N\Big[\AAA_0
3300: +\sum_{\m=\pm}\n^{(\m)}_N\AAA_{\m}\Big]\left(\a,\ps\right)
3301: \right\}\;.
3302: }\Eq(WA)$$
3303: %
3304: Its derivatives are {\it remainders} which will be proved to
3305: vanish in the limit of removed cutoff. Anyway, this holds for
3306: $\{\n^{(\s)}_N\}_{\s=\pm}$ having {\it non-vanishing limit}: w.r.t.
3307: the formal \wti, they represent an {\it anomaly}. Adhering to the
3308: Johnson's notations, let the following definitions be considered:
3309: %
3310: $$
3311: a_N\defi{1\over 1-\left(\n^{(-)}_N+\n^{(+)}_N\right)}\;,
3312: \qquad
3313: \bar{a}_N\defi{1\over 1+\left(\n^{(-)}_N-\n^{(+)}_N\right)}\;;
3314: $$
3315: %
3316: now, the \wti{} due to the {\it phase symmetry} (to be compared
3317: with formula (16) of [J61]) is obtained summing \equ(grez) over
3318: $\m$:
3319: %
3320: $$\eqalign{
3321: \sum_\m D_{\m}(p){1\over \z^{(2)}_N}
3322: {\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hj_{p,\m}}(\jm,\f)
3323: &=
3324: a_N\sum_\m
3325: \int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
3326: \left[
3327: {\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hf_{k,\m}}\hf^-_{k+p,\m}
3328: -
3329: \hf^+_{k,\m}
3330: {\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hf_{k+p,\m}}\right]\cr
3331: &-a_N\sum_\m {\partial \WW^{(h)}_\AAA\over \partial
3332: \ha_{p,\m}}(0,\jm,\f)\;; }$$
3333: %
3334: whereas the one due to the {\it chiral symmetry} (to be compared
3335: with formula (17) of [J61]) is obtained multiplying both members
3336: of \equ(grez) times $\m$ and summing over $\m$:
3337: %
3338: $$\eqalign{
3339: \sum_\m \m D_{\m}(p){1\over \z^{(2)}_N}
3340: {\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hj_{p,\m}}(\jm,\f)
3341: &=\bar{a}_N\sum_\m \m
3342: \int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
3343: \left[
3344: {\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hf^-_{k,\m}}\hf^-_{k+p,\m}-
3345: \hf^+_{k,\m}
3346: {\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hf^+_{k+p,\m}}\right]\cr
3347: &-\bar{a}_N\sum_\m \m{\partial \WW^{(h)}_\AAA\over \partial
3348: \ha_{p,\m}}(0,\jm,\f)\;. }$$
3349: %
3350: Finally, being that $(1+\s\m)/2=\d_{\s,\m}$, summing the two above
3351: equations, the final expression for the \wti{} reads:
3352: %
3353: $$\eqalign{
3354: D_{\s}(p){1\over \z^{(2)}_N}
3355: {\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hj_{p,\s}}(\jm,\f)
3356: &=\sum_\m {a_N+\bar{a}_N\s\m \over 2}
3357: \int_{D}\! {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
3358: \left[
3359: {\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hf^-_{k,\m}}\hf^-_{k+p,\m}-
3360: \hf^+_{k,\m}
3361: {\partial \WW^{(h)}\over \partial \hf^+_{k+p,\m}}\right]\cr
3362: &-\sum_\m {a_N+\bar{a}_N\s\m \over 2}\ {\partial
3363: \WW^{(h)}_\AAA\over \partial \ha_{p,\m}}(0,\jm,\f)\;. }\Eq(WT1)$$
3364: %
3365: By taking suitable derivatives w.r.t. the field $\hf$ for
3366: $\jm=\f=0$, \equ(WT1) generates all the \wti{} involving one
3367: density insertion: for instance, by taking derivatives w.r.t.
3368: $\hf^+_{k,\o}$ and $\hf^-_{k+p,\o}$, \equ(WT1) gives \equ(wi) and
3369: \equ(gg), for
3370: $$\D\hH^{(1;2)}_{\s,\o}(p;k)\defi
3371: {\partial\WW^{(h)}_\AAA\over
3372: \partial \ha_{p,\m}\partial\hf^+_{k,\o}\partial\hf^-_{k+p,\o}}
3373: (0,0,0)\;.$$
3374: \*
3375: %%%%
3376: \sub(F+-)
3377: {Flows of $\n^{(+)}_N$ and $\n^{(-)}_N$. }
3378: The
3379: remainder of the above \wti{} are the Schwinger
3380: functions generated from the functional
3381: $\WW^{(h)}_\AAA$ with one -- and only one -- derivation in the
3382: field $\ha$, and various number of derivation in the fields $\f$'s.
3383: Therefore it is necessary to study the renormalization of the
3384: contraction of the vertices $\{\AAA_{a}\}_{a=0,\pm}$, up to linear
3385: order in $\ha$, which lead to the flows of $\n^{(+)}_N$ and
3386: $\n^{(-)}_N$.
3387:
3388: By induction, having integrated the scale from the $N$-th below to
3389: the $j$-th, it is possible to prove that, up to the
3390: renormalization of the coupling constants already present in
3391: functional $\WW^{(h)}$, the functional $\WW^{(h)}_\AAA$ reads:
3392: %
3393: $$\eqalign{
3394: e^{\WW^{(h)}_\AAA
3395: (\a,\jm,\f)}\defi
3396: \int\!
3397: \der P^{[h,j]}\
3398: (\ps)
3399: &\exp\left\{\WW^{(j)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_j}\ps\right)
3400: +\WW_{\AAA,{\rm irr}}^{(j)}\left(\a,\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_j}\ps\right)
3401: \right\}\cr
3402: &\exp\left\{\Big[\left({Z_N\over Z_j}\right)\AAA_0
3403: +\sum_{\m=\pm}\n^{(\m)}_j\AAA_\m\Big]\left(\a,\sqrt{Z_j}\ps\right)
3404: \right\}\;,
3405: }$$
3406: %
3407: where $\WW^{(j)}$ and $\WW_{\AAA,{\rm irr}}^{(j)}$ are defined as
3408: in formula \equ(g3), but with propagators and couplings obtained
3409: for the Euclidean massless Thirring model; besides in the monomials of
3410: the fields of $\WW_{\AAA,{\rm irr}}^{(j)}$ there is also one
3411: $\a$-field and either $n^\ps+n^\f\geq 2$ or $n^\jm\geq 1$.
3412:
3413: From this section to the end, since all the developments will be
3414: about the Euclidean Massless Thirring model, let $\hg^{({\rm E1},h)}_{\o,\s}$
3415: be called, with abuse of notation, $\hg^{(h)}_{\o}$.
3416: \*
3417: %%%%%%
3418: \lemma(L2)
3419: {Let the kernel $U_{\e;\o}^{(i,j)}(k,p)\defi
3420: C^\d_\o(k,p)\hg^{(j)}_\o(k)\hg^{(i)}_\o(p)$ be considered. It can be
3421: decomposed into
3422: %
3423: $$U_{\e;\o}^{(i,j)}(k,p)
3424: \defi
3425: \sum_\s D_\s(p-k)S_{\e;\o,\s}^{(i,j)}(k,p)\;,$$
3426: %
3427: and $S_{\o,s}^{(i,j)}$, the limit $\e\to 0$ of
3428: $S_{\e;\o,s}^{(i,j)}$, satisfies the bound
3429: %
3430: $$|\partial^{s_i}_k\partial^{s_j}_p S_{\o,\s}^{(i,j)}(k,p)|
3431: \leq
3432: \left\{
3433: \matrix{
3434: C\g^{-i(1+s_i)-j(1+s_j)}\hfill&&\hfill {\rm if\ } i{\rm \ or\ }j=h, N\cr
3435: 0\hfill&&\hfill {\rm otherwise}\;.\cr
3436: }\right.
3437: $$
3438: %
3439: }
3440: \0The proof of the bound is given in appendix \secc(BD). It means
3441: that {\it formally} $C^\d_\o$ can be thought as a 1-dimensional
3442: kernel: since the monomial $\a\ps\ps$ has dimension 1, the power
3443: counting for the graphs with insertion of the vertex $\AAA_0$ will
3444: be found to be always satisfied.
3445: \*
3446: %%%%
3447: \sub(IL)
3448: {Improved localization I.}
3449: As for the effective
3450: potential, also the multiscale integration of $\WW_\AAA$ is
3451: companied by a localization and absorption in the effective
3452: parameters the graphs which are divergent according to the
3453: dimensional analysis. At the $j-1$-th scale, with the inductive
3454: hypothesis the previous scales were integrated and the local terms
3455: were extracted, they holds the following cases.
3456: %
3457: \elenco{
3458: \art
3459: One field $\hp$ of the interaction $\AAA_0$, contracted with a
3460: kernel $\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o}(k)$, has vanishing local part since
3461: $\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o}(0)=0$ by symmetries; furthermore, for compact
3462: support arguments, such a contraction can only occur at
3463: scale $j$:
3464: %
3465: $$\eqalign{
3466: &\LL\left[\int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3467: \ha_{k-q,\o}\hp_{q,\o}^+\hp_{k,\o}^-\
3468: C^\d_\o(q,k)\hg^{(j)}_\o(k) \hW^{(j)}_{2,\o}(k)\right]=0\;,\cr
3469: &\RR\left[\int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3470: \ha_{k-q,\o}\hp_{q,\o}^+\hp_{k,\o}^-\
3471: C^\d_\o(q,k)\hg^{(j)}_\o(k)
3472: \hW^{(j)}_{2,\o}(k)\right]\cr
3473: &=
3474: \sum_{\m=\pm}\int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3475: \ha_{k-q,\o}\hp_{q,\o}^+\hp_{k,\o}^-\cr
3476: &\phantom{************}
3477: D_\m(k)
3478: \left[C^\d_\o(q,k)\hg^{(j)}_{\o}(k)
3479: \int_0^1\!\der\t\
3480: \left(\partial_\s\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o}\right)(\t k)\right]\;;
3481: }$$
3482: %
3483: the derivative clearly improves the bound on the kernel
3484: $\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o}$ of one negative dimension, at a loss of the
3485: bound on the kernel that will be obtained contracting the field
3486: $\hp^-_{k,\o}$ in a scale lower than $j-1$.\\
3487: This automatic dimensional gain is due to the fact that this
3488: situation cannot occur in more than one node $v$ in the tree
3489: expansion, and in its first preceding $v'$; hence an alternative way to
3490: cure it is to multiply by $\g^{-2}\g^{2}$: the former factor makes
3491: negative the dimension of such a graph, the latter worsen the
3492: bound of a constant.
3493: %
3494: \art
3495: As in the previous point, one $\hp$-field of the vertex
3496: $\sum_\s\n_{j}^{(\s)}\AAA_\s$, contracted with a kernel
3497: $\hW^{(j)}_{2,\s\o}(k)$ has vanishing local part; since
3498: $\hp_{k,\o}^+$ has to be contracted on scale $j$:
3499: %
3500: $$\eqalign{
3501: &\LL\left[\int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over(2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3502: \ha_{k-q,\o}\hp_{q,\s\o}^+\hp_{k,\s\o}^-\
3503: D_\o(k-q)\hg^{(j)}_{\s\o}(k) \hW^{(j)}_{2,\s\o}(k)\right]=0\;,\cr
3504: &\RR\left[\int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over(2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3505: \ha_{k-q,\o}\hp_{q,\s\o}^+\hp_{k,\s\o}^-\
3506: D_\o(k-q)\hg^{(j)}_{\s\o}(k)
3507: \hW^{(j)}_{2,\s\o}(k)\right]\cr
3508: &=
3509: \sum_{\m=\pm}
3510: \int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3511: \ha_{k-q,\o}\hp_{q,\s\o}^+\hp_{k,\s\o}^-\
3512: D_\m(k)\cr
3513: &\phantom{***************}
3514: \cdot\left[D_\o(k-q)\hg^{(j)}_{\s\o}(k)
3515: \int_0^1\!\der\t\
3516: \left(\partial_\s\hW^{(j)}_{2,\s\o}\right)(\t k)\right]\;.
3517: }$$
3518: %%
3519: \vbox
3520: {\insertplot{400pt}{90pt}%
3521: {}%
3522: {f2}{\eqg(f2.ps)}
3523: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f2.ps)}: Graphical representation of items 1. and 2.}}
3524: \vskip2em
3525: %
3526: \art
3527: Both $\hp$-field of the interaction $\AAA_0$, contracted
3528: with a graph $\hW^{(j)}_{4,\o,\m}$, is identically vanishing,
3529: except if at least one of the two propagators is on scale $N$, or
3530: $h$. It is convenient to define:
3531: %
3532: $$
3533: \hM_{\o,\s\o,\m}^{(r,s),(4)}(p,q)\defi
3534: \int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2} \
3535: S_{\o,\s\o}^{(r,s)}(q+k,p+k)
3536: \hW^{(j)}_{4,\o,\m}(q,p,k)\;.
3537: $$
3538: %
3539: By symmetry under rotation and under space reflection
3540: (\secc(SR) and \secc(Rot)), it holds:
3541: %
3542: $$
3543: \hM_{\o,\s\o,\m}^{(r,s),(4)}(0,0)
3544: \left\{
3545: \matrix
3546: {=0\hfill&\hfill {\rm \ for\ }\m=-\s\o\cr
3547: \defi \D n_j^{(0,\s)} \hfill&\hfill {\rm \ for\ }\m=\s\o\;.}
3548: \right.
3549: $$
3550: %
3551: Hence the localization of such graphs gives:
3552: %
3553: $$
3554: \eqalign{
3555: \LL
3556: &\left[ \sum_{\s}\int_{D}\!
3557: {\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over
3558: (2\p)^2}\
3559: D_{\s\o}(p-q)
3560: \ha_{p-q,\o}\hp_{q,\m}^+\hp_{p,\m}^-
3561: \hM_{\o,\s\o,\m}^{(r,s),(4)}(p,q)\right]\cr
3562: &=\sum_{\s}\D n_j^{(0,\s)}
3563: \int_{D}\!{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3564: D_{\s\o}(p-q)
3565: \ha_{p-q,\o}\hp_{q,\s\o}^+\hp_{p,\s\o}^-\;,\cr
3566: \RR &\left[ \sum_{\s}\int_{D}\!{\der^2q\over
3567: (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3568: D_{\s\o}(p-q)
3569: \ha_{p-q,\o}\hp_{q,\m}^+\hp_{p,\m}^-
3570: \hM_{\o,\s\o,\m}^{(r,s),(4)}(p,q)\right]\cr
3571: &=
3572: \sum_{k=p,q}\sum_{\s,\n=\pm}
3573: \int_{D}\!{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3574: D_{\s\o}(p-q)
3575: \ha_{p-q,\o}\hp_{q,\m}^+\hp_{p,\m}^-D_\n(k)\cr
3576: &\phantom{********************}
3577: \cdot\int_0^1\!\der\t
3578: \left(\partial_\n^{k} \hM_{\o,\s\o,\m}^{(r,s),(4)}\right)
3579: (\t p,\t q)\;.
3580: }$$
3581: %
3582: \art
3583: For the contraction of both $\hp$-field of the vertex
3584: $\sum_\s\n_i^{(\s)}\AAA_\s$ with a graph
3585: $\hW^{(j)}_{4,\o\s,\m}$ it is
3586: convenient to define:
3587: %
3588: $$
3589: \hM_{\s\o,\m}^{(i,r,s),(4)}(p,q)\defi
3590: \n^{(\s)}_i\int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2} \
3591: \hg^{(r)}_{\s\o}(q+k)\hg^{(s)}_{\s\o}(p+k)
3592: \hW^{(j)}_{4,\s\o,\m}(q,p,k)\;.$$
3593: %
3594: As in the previous item, by symmetries it holds:
3595: %
3596: $$
3597: \hM_{\s\o,\m}^{(i,r,s),(4)}(0,0)
3598: \left\{
3599: \matrix
3600: {=0\hfill&\hfill {\rm \ for\ }\m=-\s\o\cr
3601: \defi \D n_j^{(\s)} \hfill&\hfill {\rm \ for\ }\m=\s\o\;.}
3602: \right.
3603: $$
3604: %
3605: hence, the localization of such graphs gives:
3606: %
3607: $$
3608: \eqalign{
3609: \LL
3610: &\left[
3611: \int_{D}\!{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3612: D_{\s\o}(p-q)
3613: \ha_{p-q,\o}\hp_{q,\m}^+\hp_{p,\m}^-
3614: \hM_{\s\o,\m}^{(i,r,s),(4)}(p,q)\right]\cr
3615: &=\D n_j^{(\s)}
3616: \int_{D}\!{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3617: D_{\s\o}(p-q)
3618: \ha_{p-q,\o}\hp_{q,\s\o}^+\hp_{p,\s\o}^-\;,\cr
3619: \RR
3620: &\left[
3621: \int_{D}\!{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3622: D_{\s\o}(p-q)
3623: \ha_{p-q,\o}\hp_{q,\m}^+\hp_{p,\m}^-
3624: \hM_{\o,\s\o,\m}^{(i,r,s),(4)}(p,q)\right]\cr
3625: &=
3626: \sum_{k=p,q}\sum_{\n=\pm}
3627: \int_{D}\!{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3628: D_{\s\o}(p-q)
3629: \ha_{p-q,\o}\hp_{q,\m}^+\hp_{p,\m}^-D_\n(k)\cr
3630: &\phantom{********************}
3631: \cdot\int_0^1\!\der\t
3632: \left(\partial_\n^{k} \hM_{\s\o,\m}^{(i,r,s),(4)}\right)(\t p,\t q),
3633: }$$
3634: %%
3635: \vbox
3636: {\insertplot{400pt}{90pt}%
3637: {}%
3638: {f1}{\eqg(f1.ps)}
3639: \centerline{{\bf Fig 13:} Graphical representation of items 3. and 4.}}
3640: \vskip2em
3641: %
3642: \art
3643: The self-contraction of the interactions $\AAA_0$
3644: would give divergences because of $C_\o^\e$.
3645: Anyway, such a self-contraction, either for $\AAA_0$,
3646: and for $\{\AAA_\s\}_\s$, cannot occur in the expansion of the Schwinger
3647: function: in such expansions they cannot occur subgraphs
3648: with no external fields of type $\ps$ or $\f$. }
3649:
3650: \0The local parts are absorbed into the effective parameter on scale
3651: $h-1$:
3652: %
3653: $$\n^{(\s)}_{j-1}\defi{Z_j\over Z_{j-1}}
3654: \left(\n^{(\s)}_{j} + \D n_j^{(\s)} +\D n_j^{(0,\s)}\right)\;.$$
3655: %
3656:
3657: \theorem(TWTI)
3658: {Fixed any $\th :0<\th<1/16$,
3659: there exists $\e>0$, a positive constant $c_4$ and two counterterms
3660: $\n^{(+)}$ and $\n^{(-)}$, analytically dependent on $\l$,
3661: such that, for any fixed cutoff scale, $N$, and choosing
3662: $\n^{(\s)}_N=\n^{(\s)}$, it holds
3663: %
3664: $$\left|\n^{(\s)}_j\right|\leq c_4\e \g^{-(\th/2) (N-j)}\;.\Eq(TWTI)$$
3665: %
3666: }
3667:
3668: The proof is in appendix \secc(PL). It is a simple application
3669: of the fixed point theorem; once two counterterms
3670: $\{\n^{(\s)}_N\}_{\s=\pm}$ with the required property
3671: are found, it is easy to
3672: verify they are sum of scaling invariant graphs, and therefore they
3673: are independent on the scale of the cutoff, $N$.
3674: Accordingly, it is natural to
3675: define:
3676: %
3677: $$a\defi{1\over 1-\left(\n^{(-)}+\n^{(+)}\right)}\;,
3678: \qquad
3679: \bar{a}\defi{1\over 1+\left(\n^{(-)}-\n^{(+)}\right)}\;.$$
3680: %
3681: Now it is possible to prove that, even removing the cutoff, the
3682: \wti{} are not equal to the formal one because of the non-vanishing
3683: anomaly $a-\bar{a}$.
3684: \*
3685:
3686: \theorem(LWTI)
3687: {In the same hypothesis of theorem
3688: \thm(TWTI), all the anomalous \wti{}
3689: for Schwinger functions, with only one
3690: density insertion and calculated at fixed momenta w.r.t.
3691: the cutoff scales, $h$ and $N$, in the limit $-h,N\to \io$
3692: are generated by suitable derivatives of the following identity:
3693: %
3694: $$D_{\s}(p){\partial \WW\over \partial \hj_{p,\s}}(\jm,\f)
3695: =\z^{(2)}_b\sum_\m {a+\bar{a}\s\m \over 2}
3696: \int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
3697: \left[
3698: {\partial \WW\over \partial \hf^-_{k,\m}}\hf^-_{k+p,\m}
3699: -
3700: \hf^+_{k,\m}
3701: {\partial \WW\over \partial \hf^+_{k+p,\m}}\right]\;.\Eq(finale)$$
3702: In particular, $(a+\bar a\s\m)/2 = \d_{\s,\m}+ \d_{\s,-\m}{\l/4\p} +{\rm O}(\l^2)$.}
3703: \*
3704:
3705: \0The essence of the anomaly is that $(a+\bar a\s\m)/2\neq \d_{\s,\m}$,
3706: which implies, in spite of the formal result, the non-vanishing of
3707: $\hS^{(1;2)}_{-\o;\o}$. A celebrated consequence of the \wti, not
3708: wasted by the anomaly, is the following.
3709: \*
3710:
3711: \theorem(Co){\it The anomalous exponent of the field
3712: strength and the anomalous exponent of the density strength
3713: coincide: $\h^{(2)}_\l=\h_\l$.}
3714: \*
3715:
3716: \0This is what in formal language is stated as $Z^{(2)}=Z$.
3717: \*
3718:
3719: \proof{\bf of Theorem \thm(LWTI)}.
3720: With reference to \equ(WT1),
3721: it is only required to prove that the derivatives
3722: of $\WW_\AAA^{(h)}$, made w.r.t.
3723: one field $\a$ and various fermionic fields
3724: at fixed momenta, fulfil the same
3725: bound of the derivatives
3726: of $\WW^{(h)}$, with $\a$ replaced by $\jm$,
3727: with a more factor which is vanishing in the limit of
3728: removed cutoff.
3729: Hence, let any integer $n\in \NNN$, any
3730: set of labels
3731: $\e_1,\ldots,\e_n$ and $\o_1,\ldots,\o_n$,
3732: and any momenta $p,k_1,\ldots,k_n$,
3733: chosen independently from $h,N$,
3734: be considered. It holds the
3735: bound
3736: %
3737: $$\eqalign{
3738: {1\over |p|}
3739: &\left|{\partial^{1+n} \WW^{(h)}_\AAA\over
3740: \partial \ha_{p,\m}
3741: \partial \hf^{\e_1}_{k_1,\o_1}
3742: \ldots \partial \hf^{\e_n}_{k_n,\o_n}}\right|
3743: _{\jm\equiv\f\equiv0}
3744: \leq{ C_{n;p,h_1,\ldots,h_n}\over \prod_{j=1}^n \sqrt{Z_{h_j}}}
3745: \left(\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h_1)}
3746: +\g^{-(\th/2)(h_1-h)}\right)}\;,
3747: \Eq(pbound)$$
3748: %
3749: where $\{h_j\}_{j=1}^n$ are the scales of $\{k_j\}_j$:
3750: $\k\g^{h_j-1}\le |k_j|\le \k \g^{h_j}$ and
3751: $C_{n;p,h_1,\ldots,h_n}/ \prod_{j=1}^n \sqrt{Z_{h_j}}$ is
3752: the bound for the same derivatives of the functional $\WW^{(h)}$.
3753: Such a bound can be obtained by the following argument.
3754: The graphs in the expansion of the l.h.s. member of \equ(pbound)
3755: has to have an external propagator on scale $h_1$
3756: -- besides external propagators on scales $h_2,\ldots,h_n$;
3757: and they fall in one of the following cases.
3758: \elenco{
3759: \art
3760: An interaction $\AAA_0$ is contracted: this can happen
3761: only on scale $m=N,h$.
3762: By the short memory property (see \secc(smp)),
3763: the sum of all such graphs is bounded, up to a constant,
3764: with $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h_1)}$ or $\g^{-(\th/2)(h_1-h)}$.
3765: %
3766: \art
3767: An interaction $\AAA_\s$ is first contracted on scale $m$,
3768: and hence brings a coupling $\n^{(\s)}_m$.
3769: By the short memory property
3770: and the bound in theorem \thm(TWTI),
3771: the sum of such graphs is bounded, up to a constant,
3772: with $\g^{-\th|m-h_1|}$ $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-m)}$
3773: $\le \g^{-(\th/2)(N-h_1)}$$\g^{-(\th/2)|m-h_1|}$.}
3774: %
3775: \0Hence it is possible to take the sum over
3776: $m$, obtaining \equ(pbound).\hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
3777:
3778: \*
3779: \proof{\bf of Theorem \thm(Co).} It simply follows from lowest
3780: order expansion of \equ(wi), and from
3781: the proof of Theorem \thm(FC) -- in particular from the
3782: features of the anomalous exponents depicted in \secc(FP).
3783: Indeed, since
3784: $$
3785: \left|\h_\l-\G_h\right|\leq c\e\g^{-\th(N-h)}\;,
3786: \qquad
3787: \left|\h_\l^{(2)}-\G^{(2)}_h\right|\leq c\e\g^{-\th(N-h)}\;,$$
3788: %
3789: then
3790: $$
3791: \log_\g\left({\z^{(2)}_h\over \z^{(2)}_N}\right)
3792: =
3793: (N-h)\left(\h_\l-\h_\l^{(2)}\right)+{\rm O}(\l^2)\;,
3794: \Eq(ette)$$
3795: %
3796: where ${\rm O}(\l^2)$ is a term of the order of $\l^2$ and bounded
3797: for every $h$. Calling $\bar k$ any momentum $\k\g^{h}\leq |\bar k|\leq
3798: \g^{h+1}$, by the lowest order graph expansion
3799: in Appendix \secc(TE), it holds,
3800: %
3801: $$\hS^{(1;2)}_{\o,\o}(2\bar k;\bar k)
3802: ={\z^{(2)}_h\over Z_h}{1+{\rm O}(\l^2)\over D^2_\o(\bar k)}\;,
3803: \qquad
3804: \hS^{(2)}_{\o}(\bar k) ={1\over Z_h}{1+{\rm O}(\l^2)\over
3805: D_\o(\bar k)}\;,$$
3806: $$\D\hH^{(1;2)}_{\o,\o}(2\bar k;\bar k)
3807: ={1\over Z_h}{{\rm O}(\l^2)\over D_\o(\bar k)}\;,
3808: \qquad
3809: {a_N+\bar
3810: a_N\over 2} =1+{\rm O}(\l^2)\;.$$
3811: %
3812: Replacing the above identities into \equ(wi) and \equ(gg),
3813: the bound \hbox{$\log_\g(\z^{(2)}_h/ \z^{(2)}_N)={\rm O}(\l^2)$}
3814: holds for any $h\leq N$: to be consistent with \equ(ette), it
3815: cannot be but $\h_\l-\h_\l^{(2)}=0$.\hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
3816:
3817: \*
3818: \sub(R3){Remark: anomaly and anomalous exponents.}
3819: Formally, by the phase and chiral symmetry, it is possible to
3820: prove the identity of the field and density strength, $Z_N=Z^{(2)}_N$,
3821: so that the renormalization $\z^{(2)}_N\=1$. But in a
3822: rigorous setting, \wti{} are seen to break this identity.
3823: Anyway, since the anomaly only changes a factor in front
3824: of the current, the identity
3825: between the exponents with which
3826: $Z_N$ and $Z^{(2)}_N$ diverge {\it remains true};
3827: therefore $\z_N^{(2)}$, although no longer constant,
3828: is anyway bounded.
3829: \*
3830: %%%%%%%%
3831: \section(CE, Closed Equations)
3832: \sub(SDE){Schwinger-Dyson equation}. The fermionic fields
3833: satisfy an evolution equation which can be turned into a set of
3834: equations for the Schwinger functions: see Appendix \secc(a3).
3835: Such equations relate the $n$-points Schwinger functions to the
3836: $m$-points Schwinger function with $m\le n$ and one density insertion.
3837: Using the \wti{} to write the latter in terms of $m$-point Schwinger functions,
3838: the \ce's arise.
3839: \*
3840:
3841: \sub(CE2)
3842: {Closed equations.} In Appendix \secc(a3), the
3843: following equation, generator of all the \sde, is proved for any
3844: $k:\g^h\k\leq |k|\leq \g^N\k$ -- where the cutoff $\c_{h,N}(k)\=1$:
3845: %
3846: $$\eqalign{
3847: D_\o(k){\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}} \over\partial \hf^+_{k,\o}}
3848: ={\hf^-_{k,\o}e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over Z_N}
3849: -
3850: {\l_N\over \z^{(2)}_N}
3851: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over(2\p)^2}\
3852: {\partial^2 e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over \partial\hj_{p,-\o}
3853: \partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}}\;,}\Eq(DSE2)$$
3854: %
3855: for $\jm\=0$ -- since here only the \ce{} for Schwinger function
3856: {\it without} density insertion are studied.
3857: Since it is possible to prove the convergence of the last integral
3858: for small $p$; and since $|p|\leq 2\g^{N}\k$,
3859: it is convenient make in the argument of
3860: the integral the following replacement:
3861: %
3862: $$ 1\=\c_{N+2}(p)\=\c_{h+2,N+2}(p)+\c_{h+2}(p)\defi\bar\c_{h,N}(p)+\bar\c_{h}(p) \;.$$
3863: %
3864: where $\c_{h+2,N+2}(p)\defi \c_{N+2}(p)-\c_{h+2}(p)$.
3865: Then, from the generator of the \wti, \equ(WT1), it holds
3866: the following integral identity:
3867: %
3868: $$\eqalign{
3869: &{1\over \z^{(2)}_N}
3870: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3871: \bar \c_{h,N}(p){\partial^2 e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over \partial \hj_{p,-\o}
3872: \partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}}\cr
3873: =&\sum_\m {a_N+\bar{a}_N\s\m \over 2}
3874: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3875: {\bar\c_{h,N}(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}
3876: \left[
3877: {\partial^2 e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over \partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}
3878: \partial \hf^-_{q,\m}}\hf^-_{q+p,\m}
3879: -\hf^+_{q,\m}
3880: {\partial^2 e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over
3881: \partial \hf^+_{q+p,\m}\partial\hf^+_{p-k,\o}}\right]\cr
3882: &-\sum_\m {a_N+\bar{a}_N\s\m \over 2}
3883: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3884: {\bar\c_{h,N}(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}
3885: {\partial^2e^{\WW^{(h)}_\AAA}\over
3886: \partial\ha_{p,\m}\partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}}(0,\jm,\f)\;.
3887: }\Eq(intwt11)$$
3888: %
3889: Taking a derivative in $\hf^-_{k,\o}$, and putting $\f=0$,
3890: gives \equ(intwti) -- apart from the function $\bar\c_{h,N}(p)$
3891: that had been skipped for reproducing the Johnson's argument.
3892: By the general analysis of the previous
3893: section, the term proportional to the derivatives of the
3894: functional $\WW_\AAA$ would have been vanishing in the limit of removed
3895: cutoff {\it if the external momenta had been fixed}. But in this case
3896: the external momenta are integrated over, and there is no reason
3897: that this term is vanishing -- differently from what implicitly
3898: stated in [J61].
3899:
3900: \*
3901: \sub(FWY){Flows of $\wt z^{(\m)}_N$ and $\wt \l^{(\m)}_N$.}
3902: To overcome the problem of not having,
3903: neither in the limit, a real closed equation,
3904: it is possible to write such a rest as addends that are
3905: already present in the \sde.
3906: To this purpose, let the functionals
3907: $\WW^{(h)}_{\TT,\m}$, for $\m=\pm$ be defined as
3908: %
3909: $$\eqalign{
3910: e^{\WW^{(h)}_{\TT,\m} (\b,\jm,\f)}
3911: \defi\int\!
3912: &\der P^{[h,N]}(\ps)\
3913: \exp\Bigg\{
3914: -\l_{N} \VV\left(\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)
3915: + \z^{(2)}_{N}\JJ\left(\jm,\sqrt{Z_N}\ps\right)
3916: +\FF(\f,\ps)\Bigg\}\cr
3917: &\exp\left\{
3918: \left[\TT^{(\m)}_0+\sum_{\s=\pm}\n_N^{(\s)} \TT^{(\m)}_{\s}
3919: -\a^{(\m\o)}\l_N\BB^{(3)}-\s^{(\m\o)}\BB^{(1)}\right]
3920: \left(\sqrt{Z_N}\ps,\sqrt{Z_N}\b\right)\right\}\;,
3921: }$$
3922: %
3923: with $\{\a^\m\}_{\m=\pm}$ and $\{\s^\m\}_{\m=\pm}$
3924: four real parameters later fixed;
3925: and
3926: %
3927: $$\eqalign{
3928: \TT^{(\m)}_0(\ps,\b)
3929: &\defi
3930: \sum_{\o=\pm}
3931: \int\! {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3932: \bar\c_{h,N}(p){C_\m(q,p+q)\over D_{-\o}(p)}
3933: \hb_{k,\o}\hp^-_{k-p,\o}\hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p+q,\m}\;,\cr
3934: \TT^{(\m)}_{\s}(\ps,\b)
3935: &\defi
3936: \sum_{\o=\pm}
3937: \int\! {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3938: \bar\c_{h,N}(p){ D_{\s\m}(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\
3939: \hb_{k,\o}\hp^-_{k-p,\o}\hp^+_{q,\s\m}\hp^-_{p+q,\s\m}\;;}$$
3940: %
3941: \vbox
3942: {\insertplot{350pt}{90pt}%
3943: {}%
3944: {f15}{\eqg(f15)}
3945: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f15)}: Graphical representation of the interactions {$\TT_0^{(\m)}$},
3946: {$T_-^{(\m)}$} and {$T_+^{(\m)}$}}}
3947: \vskip1em
3948: %
3949: $$\eqalign{
3950: \BB^{(3)}(\ps,\b)
3951: &\defi
3952: \sum_{\o=\pm}\int\!{ \der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{ \der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{ \der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3953: \hb_{p+k-q,\o}\hp^-_{p,\o}\hp^+_{q,-\o}\hp^-_{k,-\o}\;,\cr
3954: \BB^{(1)}(\b,\ps)
3955: &\defi
3956: \sum_{\o=\pm}\int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
3957: \hb_{k,\o} D_\o(k)\hp^-_{k,\o}\;.
3958: }$$
3959: %
3960: Because of the identity
3961: %
3962: $$\eqalign{
3963: \int\!{\der^2 p\over (2\p)^2}\
3964: {\bar\c_{h,N}(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}
3965: {\partial^2e^{\WW_\AAA}\over \partial \ha_{p,\m}
3966: \partial \hf^+_{k-p,\o}}
3967: =
3968: {1\over Z_N}
3969: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}_{\TT,\m}}\over \partial \hb_{k,\o}}
3970: &+
3971: \a^{(\m\o)}{\l_N\over \z^{(2)}_N}
3972: \int\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3973: {\partial^2 e^{\WW}\over
3974: \partial \hj_{p,-\o} \partial \hf^+_{k-p,\o}}\cr
3975: &+
3976: \s^{(\m\o)} D_{\o}(k)
3977: {\partial e^{\WW}\over
3978: \partial \hf^+_{k,\o}} \;,
3979: }\Eq(ce1)$$
3980: %
3981: it is possible to turn equation \equ(intwt11) into:
3982: %
3983: $$\eqalign{
3984: &\left(1-\sum_\m {a_N-\bar{a}_N\m \over 2}
3985: \a^{(\m)}\l_N\right)
3986: {1\over \z^{(2)}_N}
3987: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
3988: \bar\c_{h,N}(p)
3989: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over \partial \hj_{p,-\o}
3990: \partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}}\cr
3991: &=
3992: \left(\sum_\m {a_N-\bar{a}_N\m \over 2}
3993: \s^{(\m)}\right)D_\o(k)
3994: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over
3995: \partial\hf^+_{k,\o}}
3996: \cr
3997: &+\sum_\m {a_N-\bar{a}_N\o\m \over 2}
3998: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
3999: {\bar\c_{h,N}(p) \over D_{-\o}(p)}\left[
4000: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over \partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}
4001: \partial \hf^-_{q,\m}}\hf^-_{q+p,\m}
4002: -\hf^+_{q,\m}
4003: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over
4004: \partial \hf^+_{q+p,\m}\partial\hf^+_{p-k,\o}}\right]\cr
4005: &-
4006: {1\over Z_N}\sum_\m {a_N-\bar{a}_N\o\m \over 2}
4007: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}_{\TT,\m}}\over \partial \hb_{k,\o}}\cr
4008: &-\lft(\sum_\m {a_N-\bar{a}_N\m \over 2}
4009: \a^{(\m)}\l_N\rgt)
4010: {1\over \z^{(2)}_N}
4011: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4012: \bar\c_{h}(p)
4013: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over \partial \hj_{p,-\o}
4014: \partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}}\;.
4015: }\Eq(CE111)$$
4016: %
4017: The term proportional to the derivatives of
4018: $\WW^{(h)}_{T,\m}$ {\it does vanish} for a suitable choice of the
4019: counterterms; as well as the second term in the last line vanishes,
4020: at least in some important cases -- the \ce{}
4021: for $S^{(2)}$ and for $S^{(4)}$. As consequence, it is suitable to
4022: replace \equ(CE111) in \equ(DSE2), obtaining:
4023: %
4024: $$\eqalign{
4025: &D_\o(k)
4026: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}} \over\partial \hf^+_{k,\o}}
4027: ={B_N\over Z_N}\hf^-_{k,\o}e^{\WW^{(h)}}\cr
4028: &-\l_N A_N
4029: \sum_\m {a_N-\bar{a}_N\o\m \over 2}
4030: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
4031: {\bar\c_{h,N}(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}
4032: \left[
4033: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over \partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}
4034: \partial \hf^-_{q,\m}}\hf^-_{q+p,\m}
4035: \right.\cr
4036: &\phantom{************************************}
4037: \left.
4038: -\hf^+_{q,\m}
4039: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over
4040: \partial \hf^+_{q+p,\m}\partial\hf^+_{p-k,\o}}\right]\cr
4041: &
4042: -
4043: {\l_NA_N\over Z_N}\sum_\m {a_N-\bar{a}_N\o\m \over 2}
4044: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}_{\TT,\m}}\over \partial \hb_{k,\o}}
4045: -{\l_N A_N\over \z^{(2)}_N}
4046: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4047: \bar\c_{h}(p)
4048: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over \partial \hj_{p,-\o}
4049: \partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}}\;,
4050: }\Eq(CECE)$$ %
4051: %
4052: where it was set
4053: %
4054: $$\eqalign{
4055: &A_N\defi{1\over 1-(\l_N/2)\sum_\m
4056: (a_N-\bar{a}_N\m)\left(\a^{(\m)}-\s^{(\m)}\right)}\;,\cr
4057: &B_N\defi{1-(\l_N/2)\sum_\m(a_N-\bar{a}_N\m)\a^{(\m)}\over
4058: 1-(1/2)\sum_\m(a_N-\bar{a}_N\m)\left(\a^{(\m)}-\s^{(\m)}\right)}\;.
4059: }\Eq(A)$$
4060: %
4061: Deriving \equ(CECE) w.r.t. $\hf^-_{k,\o}$, for $\f\equiv0$;
4062: since by the tree expansion, see \secc(TE),
4063: %
4064: $$\lft|\int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4065: \bar\c_{h}(p)
4066: \hS^{(1;2)}_{-\o;\o}(p;k)\rgt|\leq C\g^{(1-\th)(h_1-h)}\;,
4067: \Eq(ale)$$
4068: %
4069: for any $\th:0<\th<1$ and for $h_1$ the scale of the momentum $k$;
4070: and supposing the derivatives of $\WW_{\TT,\m}$ are vanishing,
4071: in the limit of removed cutoff, it holds
4072: the asymptotic formula \equ(secan).
4073:
4074: More in general, in order to prove the derivatives of
4075: $\WW_{\TT,\m}$ are vanishing in the limit of removed cutoff, it is
4076: necessary a multiscale expansion.
4077: \*
4078:
4079: \sub(IL2){Improved localization II.}
4080: After the multiscale integration, down to the $j$-th scale, it
4081: holds:
4082: %
4083: $$\eqalign{
4084: &e^{\WW_{\TT,\m}^{(h)}(\b,\jm,\f)}
4085: \defi
4086: \int\!
4087: \der P^{[h,j]}(\ps)\
4088: \exp\left\{
4089: \WW^{(j)}\left(\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_j}\ps\right)
4090: +\WW^{(j)}_{\TT,{\rm
4091: irr}}\left(\b,\f,\jm,\sqrt{Z_j}\ps\right)\right\}\cr
4092: &\cdot\exp\left\{
4093: \Big[\left({Z_N\over Z_j}\right)^2\TT^{(\m)}_0
4094: +{Z_N\over Z_j}\sum_{\s=\pm}\n_j^{(\s)}
4095: \TT^{(\m)}_{\s} \Big]
4096: \left(\sqrt{Z_j}\ps,\sqrt{Z_j}\b\right)\right\}\cr
4097: &\cdot\exp\left\{
4098: \Bigg[
4099: \wt\z^{(3,\m\o)}_j\BB^{(3)}
4100: +\sum_{k=j}^N{Z_k\over Z_j}\wt\z^{(1,\m\o)}_k\BB^{(1)}\Bigg]
4101: \left(\sqrt{Z_j}\ps,\sqrt{Z_j}\b\right)\right\}\;,}\Eq(FWY)$$
4102: %
4103: where $\wt\z^{(3,\m)}_N\defi
4104: -\a^{(\m)}\l_N$, while, for $j\le N-1$,
4105: $\wt\z^{(3,\m)}_j\defi\left(\wt\l^{(\m)}_j-\a^{(\m)}\l_j\right)$;
4106: and, $\wt\z^{(1,\m)}_N\defi \s^{(\m)}$, while,
4107: for $j\le N-1$, $\wt\z^{(1,\m)}_j\defi\left(\wt z^{(\m)}_{j}-\a^{(\m)} z_{j}\right)$.
4108: Indeed, these are the following possible contractions
4109: of the interactions in $\WW_{\TT,\m}^{(h)}$.
4110: \elenco{
4111: \art
4112: The contraction of the interactions
4113: $\TT^{(\m)}_0$, $\TT^{(\m)}_\s$, $\BB^{(3)}$ and $\BB^{(1)}$
4114: through only one external field
4115: $\hp^-_{k,\o}$ with a kernel $\hW_{2,\o}^{(j)}$ are apparently marginal;
4116: instead the localization is
4117: proportional to $\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o}(0)$, vanishing by symmetries;
4118: for instance, in the case of the occurring of the interaction $\TT^{(\m)}_0$,
4119: it holds:
4120: %
4121: $$\eqalign{
4122: &\LL\left[
4123: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
4124: \bar\c_{h,N}(p-q)\hb_{k+p-q}\hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p,\m}
4125: {C_\o(q,p)\over D_{-\o}(p-q)}\hg^{(s)}_\o(k)\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o}(k)\right]=0\;,\cr
4126: &\RR\left[
4127: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
4128: \bar\c_{h,N}(p-q)\hb_{k+p-q}\hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p,\m}
4129: {C_\o(q,p)\over D_{-\o}(p-q)}\hg^{(s)}_\o(k)\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o}(k)\right]\cr
4130: &=\sum_\s\int{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over
4131: (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
4132: \bar\c_{h,N}(p-q) \hb_{k+p-q}\hp^-_{k,\o}D_\s(k)
4133: \hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p,\m}
4134: {C_\o(q,p)\over D_{-\o}(p-q)}\hg^{(s)}_\o(k)\cr
4135: &\phantom{******************************}
4136: \cdot\int_0^1 \!\der\t\
4137: \big(\partial_\s\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o}\big)(\t k)\;.}$$
4138: %
4139: \*
4140: The above case is given by one-particle reducible graphs,
4141: therefore an alternative argument is the one similar to item 1. and
4142: 2. of the previous section.\*
4143: %
4144: \vbox
4145: {\insertplot{400pt}{70pt}%
4146: {}%
4147: {f3}{\eqg(f3)}
4148: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f3)}: Graphical representation of items 1.}}
4149: \vskip2em
4150: %
4151: \art
4152: The fields $\hp^-_{k,\o}$ and $\hp^-_{p,\m}$ of the vertex
4153: $\TT_0^{(\m)}$ with the kernel $\hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\o}$, is non-irrelevant;
4154: by the explicit expression of $C^\d_\o$, it holds:
4155: %
4156: $$\eqalign{
4157: &\int\!{\der^2k'\over (2\p)^2}\
4158: \bar\c_{h,N}(p+k'-q)\hg^{(r)}_\o(k-k'){C^\d_{\m}(q,p+k')\over
4159: D_{-\o}(p+k'-q)}\hg^{(s)}_\m(p+k')
4160: \hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\o}(k',p,k)\cr
4161: &=
4162: \int {\der^2k'\over (2\p)^2}\
4163: \bar\c_{h,N}(p+k'-q)\left[
4164: \hg^{(r)}_\o(k-k'){D_\m(q)\left(1-(\c^\d_{h,N})^{-1}(q)\right)\over D_{-\o}(p+k'-q)}
4165: {f_s(p+k')\over D_{\m}(p+k')}\right.\cr
4166: &\phantom{******************}
4167: +
4168: \left.\hg^{(r)}_\o(k-k'){\big(\d_{r,N}+\d_{s,h}\big)u_s(p+k')\over D_{-\o}(p-q+k')}\right]
4169: \hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\o}(k',p,k)\;;
4170: }$$
4171: %
4172: only the second term has a non-irrelevant part; indeed, for $j\geq
4173: h+2$, because of $f_s(p+k')$, with $s\geq j$, and because of
4174: $\left(1-(\c^\d_{h,N})^{-1}(q)\right)$, which,
4175: for $q\to 0$
4176: compels $q$ to
4177: be contracted on scale $h$,
4178: $$\eqalign{
4179: |D_{\m}(p+k'-q)|
4180: &\geq |D_{\m}(p+k')|-|D_{\m}(q)|
4181: \geq\g^{j-1}-\g^{h+1}\cr
4182: &\geq(1- \g^{-1})\g^{j-1}\;; }$$
4183: %
4184: this means that the bound of such a
4185: kernel, w.r.t. the standard bound,
4186: has a more factor $\g^{-(j-h)}$
4187: which gives a gain of one unity
4188: in the dimension of the kernel, making it strictly negative
4189: down to scale $h$, where the third field
4190: of the interaction, $\hp_{q,\m}$, {\it is compelled
4191: to be contracted} by $\left(1-(\c^\d_{h,N})^{-1}(q)\right)$.
4192: On the contrary, the other term
4193: %
4194: $$\eqalign{
4195: &\hM^{(r,s),(4)}_{\m,\o}(p,k,q)\cr
4196: &\defi
4197: \int\!{\der^2k'\over (2\p)^2}\
4198: \bar\c_{h,N}(p-q+k')\hg^{(r)}_\o(k-k'){\big(\d_{r,N}+\d_{s,h}\big)u_s(p+k')\over D_{-\o}(p-q+k')}
4199: \hW^{(4)}_{\m,\o}(k',p,k)\;,}$$
4200: %
4201: can occur only if $r$ in on scale
4202: $N$, or $s$ is
4203: on scale $h$; and requires the extraction of the coefficient:
4204: %
4205: $$
4206: \hM^{(r,s),(4)}_{\m,\o}(0,0,0)
4207: \left\{
4208: \matrix{
4209: =0\hfill&&\hfill{\rm \ if\ }\o\m=1\cr
4210: \defi \D\wt l_j^{\;(-,0)}\hfill&&\hfill{\rm \ if\ }\o\m=-1\;,
4211: }\right.
4212: $$
4213: %
4214: so that the above contraction is equal to
4215: %
4216: $$\eqalign{
4217: \LL
4218: &\left[
4219: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}
4220: \hb_{k+p-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p,\m}\right.\cr
4221: &\cdot
4222: \left.\int {\der^2k'\over (2\p)^2}\
4223: \bar\c_{h,N}(p+k'-q)\hg^{(r)}_\o(k-k'){C^\d_{\m}(q,p+k')\over D_{-\o}(p+k'-q)}\hg^{(s)}_\m(p+k')
4224: \hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\o}(k',p,k)\right]\cr
4225: =&\D\wt l_j^{\;(-,0)}\int {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over
4226: (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}
4227: \hb_{k+p-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,-\o}\hp^-_{p,-\o}\;,\cr
4228: \RR
4229: &\left[
4230: \int {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}
4231: \hb_{k+p-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p,\m}\right.\cr
4232: &\cdot
4233: \left.\int {\der^2k'\over (2\p)^2}\
4234: \bar\c_{h,N}(p+k'-q)
4235: \hg^{(r)}_\o(k-k'){C^\d_{\m}(q,p+k')\over D_{-\o}(p+k'-q)}\hg^{(s)}_\m(p+k')
4236: \hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\o}(k',p,k)\right]\cr
4237: =& \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over
4238: (2\p)^2}
4239: \hb_{k+p-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p,\m}\cr
4240: &\cdot\int {\der^2k'\over (2\p)^2}\
4241: \left[
4242: \bar\c_{h,N}(p+k'-q)
4243: \hg^{(r)}_\o(k-k'){D_\m(q)\left(1-(\c^\d_{h,N})^{-1}(q)\right)\over D_{-\o}(p+k'-q)}
4244: {f_s(p+k')\over D_{\m}(p+k')}\right]\cr
4245: &+
4246: \sum_{p'=k,p}
4247: \sum_{\n}
4248: \hb_{k+p-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p,\m}D_\n(p')
4249: \int_0^1d\t\
4250: \left(\partial_\n^{p'}\hM^{(r,s),(4)}_{\m,\o}\right)(\t p,\t k)\;.
4251: }$$
4252: %
4253: With similar developments it is extracted $\D \wt\l_j^{(+,0)}$,
4254: the local part of the graphs with
4255: the fields $\hp^-_{k,\o}$ and $\hp^+_{q,\m}$ of the interaction
4256: $\TT_0^{(\m)}$ contracted with the kernel $\hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\o}$.
4257: %
4258: \art
4259: The contraction of the
4260: fields $\hp^-_{k,\o}$ and $\hp^-_{p,\s\m}$ of the interaction
4261: $\TT_\s^{(\m)}$ with the kernel $\hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\o}$ is non-irrelevant.
4262: Setting:
4263: %
4264: $$\eqalign{
4265: &\wh N_{\m,\s,\o}^{(r,s),(4)}(p,k,q)\cr
4266: &\defi
4267: \int\!{\der^2k'\over (2\p)^2}\
4268: \hg^{(r)}_\o(k-k')\bar\c_{h,N}(p+k'-q)
4269: {D_{\s\m}(p+k'-q)\over
4270: D_{-\o}(p+k'-q)}\hg^{(s)}_{\s\m}(p+k')
4271: \hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\o}(k',p,k)}\;,$$
4272: %
4273: such a contraction requires the extraction of the coefficient:
4274: %
4275: $$
4276: \wh N^{(r,s),(4)}_{\m,\s,\o}(0,0,0)
4277: \left\{
4278: \matrix{
4279: =0\hfill&&\hfill{\rm \ if\ }\o\m=0\cr
4280: \defi \D\wt l_j^{\;(-,\s)}\hfill&&\hfill{\rm \ if\ }\o\m=-1\;,\cr
4281: }\right.
4282: $$
4283: %
4284: so that the above contraction is equal to
4285: %
4286: $$\eqalign{
4287: \LL
4288: &\left[
4289: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}
4290: \hb_{k+p-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p,\m}
4291: \wh N^{(r,s),(4)}_{\m,\s,\o}(p,k,q)\right]\cr
4292: &=\D\wt l_j^{\;(-,\s)}\int {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over
4293: (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}
4294: \hb_{k+p-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,-\o}\hp^-_{p,-\o}\;,\cr
4295: \RR
4296: &\left[
4297: \int {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}
4298: \hb_{k+p-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p,\m}
4299: \wh N^{(r,s),(4)}_{\m,\s,\o}(p,k,q)\right]\cr
4300: &= \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over(2\p)^2}
4301: \sum_{p'=k,p,q}
4302: \sum_{\n}
4303: \hb_{k+p-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\m}\hp^-_{p,\m}D_\n(p')\cr
4304: &\phantom{******************************}\cdot
4305: \int_0^1d\t\
4306: \left(\partial_\n^{p'}\wh N^{(r,s),(4)}_{\m,\s,\o}\right)(\t p,\t k,\t q)\;.
4307: }$$
4308: %
4309: With similar developments it is extracted $\D \wt\l_j^{(+,\s)}$,
4310: the local part of the graphs with
4311: the fields $\hp^-_{k,\o}$ and $\hp^+_{q,\m}$ of the interaction
4312: $\TT_\s^{(\m)}$ contracted with the kernel $\hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\o}$.
4313: \*
4314: \vbox
4315: {\insertplot{350pt}{100pt}%
4316: {}%
4317: {f4}{\eqg(f4)}
4318: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f4)}: Graphical representation of items 2. and 3.}}
4319: \vskip2em
4320: %
4321: \art
4322: The contraction of all and three $\ps$-field of $\TT^{(\m)}_0$
4323: with the kernel $\hW^{(j)}_{6,\m,\o,\n}$ is non-vanishing if at
4324: least one between the two propagators $g_\m$, has scale $N$
4325: or $h$, otherwise the product
4326: $C_{\m}(p,k)\hg_{\m}(k)\hg_{\m}(p+k)$ vanish; it generates non-irrelevant
4327: operators.
4328: Let the contraction be:
4329: %
4330: $$\eqalign{
4331: &\hM^{(r,s,t),(6)}_{\o,\s,\m,\r}(k,q,p)\defi
4332: \int {\der^2k'\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q'\over (2\p)^2}\
4333: \hg^{(r)}_{\o}(k-k')
4334: \bar\c_{h,N}(p+k'-q)
4335: { D_{\s\m}(p+k'-q)\over D_{-\o}(p+k'-q)}\cr
4336: &\phantom{*****************}\cdot
4337: S^{(s,t)}_{\m,\s\m}(q+q',p+k'+q')
4338: \hW^{(6)}_{\m,\o,\r}(q,p,k,k',q')\;,
4339: }$$
4340: %
4341: and let the following coefficient be considered:
4342: %
4343: $$\sum_{\s}\hM^{(r,s,t),(6)}_{\o,\s,\m,\r}(0,0,0)
4344: \left\{
4345: \matrix{
4346: =0\hfill&&\hfill{\rm\ if \ }\r=\o\cr
4347: \defi\D \wt \l^{(0,0,\m\o)}_j \hfill&&\hfill{\rm\ if \ }\r=-\o\;.
4348: }
4349: \right.
4350: $$
4351: %
4352: Then, the decomposition into marginal operator plus irrelevant one is:
4353: %
4354: $$\eqalign{
4355: &\LL\left[
4356: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}
4357: \hb_{p+k-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\r}\hp^-_{p,\r}
4358: \sum_{\s}\hM^{(r,s,t),(6)}_{\o,\s,\m,\r}(k,q,p)\right]\cr
4359: &=\D \wt\l^{(0,0,\m\o)}_j
4360: \int{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
4361: \hb_{p+k-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,-\o}\hp^-_{p,-\o}\;,\cr
4362: &\RR\left[
4363: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}
4364: \hb_{p+k-q,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}\hp^+_{q,\r}\hp^-_{p,\r}
4365: \sum_{\s}\hM^{(r,s,t),(6)}_{\o,\s,\m,\r}(k,q,p)\right]\cr
4366: &=\sum_{p'=q,p,k}
4367: \sum_{\s,\s'}\hb_{p+q-k,\o} \hp^-_{q,\o}\hp^+_{k,\n}\hp^-_{p,\n}D_{\s'}(p')\cr
4368: &\phantom{****************}
4369: \cdot\int\!{\der^2k'\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q'\over (2\p)^2}
4370: \int_0^1\!\der\t \
4371: \left( \partial_{\s'}^{p'}\hM^{(r,s,t),(6)}_{\o,\s,\m,\r}\right)
4372: (\t k,\t q,\t p)\;.}$$
4373: %
4374: Besides, similar decomposition is done when
4375: $\TT_0^{(\m)}$ is replaced by $\TT_\s^{(\m)}$, with
4376: the replacements of $S^{(s,t)}_{\m,\s\m}$ with 1,
4377: and of $\D \wt\l^{(0,0,\m\o)}_j$ with $\D \wt\l^{(0,\s,\m\o)}_j$.
4378: \*
4379: \insertplot{350pt}{100pt}%
4380: {}%
4381: {f5}{\eqg(f5)}
4382: \*
4383: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f5)}: Graphical representation of item 4}
4384: \*
4385: %
4386: \art
4387: The contraction of all and three $\ps$-fields of
4388: $\TT^{(\m)}_0$ with the kernel $\hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\n}$ is non-vanishing
4389: if at least one between the two above propagators $g_\m$,
4390: has scale $N$ or $h$.
4391: Let the contraction
4392: %
4393: $$\eqalign{
4394: &\hM^{(r,s,t),(4)}_{\o,\r,\m}(p)\cr
4395: &\defi
4396: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
4397: \hg^{(r)}_{\o}(k)
4398: \bar\c_{h,N}(p+k'-q){ D_{\r\m}(p-k)\over D_{-\o}(p-k)}
4399: S^{(s,t)}_{\m,\r\m}(q,p-k+q)
4400: \hW^{(j)}_{4,\m,\o}(q,p,k)\;;
4401: }$$
4402: %
4403: then $\hM^{(r,s,t),(4)}_{\o,\r,\m}(0)=0$
4404: by transformation under rotation; while
4405: %
4406: $$
4407: \sum_\r\left(\partial_\s \hM^{(r,s,t),(4)}_{\o,\r,\m}\right)(0)
4408: \left\{
4409: \matrix{
4410: =0\hfill&&\hfill{\rm\ if \ }\s=-\o\cr
4411: \defi \D \wt z^{(0,\m\o)}_j\hfill&&\hfill{\rm\ if \ }\s=\o\;.}
4412: \right.
4413: $$
4414: %
4415: Finally:
4416: %
4417: $$\eqalign{
4418: \LL
4419: &\left[
4420: \sum_{\r}
4421: \int {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
4422: \hb_{p,\o}\hp^-_{p,\r}\hM^{(r,s,t),(4)}_{\o,\r,\m}(p)\right]
4423: =\D \wt z^{(0,\m\o)}_j
4424: \int {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4425: \hb_{p,\o}D_\o(p) \hp^-_{p,\o}\;,\cr
4426: \RR
4427: &\left[
4428: \sum_{\r}
4429: \int {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
4430: \hb_{p,\o} \hp^-_{p,\r}
4431: \hM^{(r,s,t),(4)}_{\o,\m,\r}(p)\right]\cr
4432: &=
4433: \sum_{\s,\s'}\hb_{p,\o} \hp^-_{p,\r}D_{\s}(p)D_{\s'}(p)
4434: \int_0^1d\t \ (1-\t)
4435: \left( \partial_{\s'}^{p}\partial_{\s'}^{p}\hM^{(r,s,t),(4}_{\o,\r,\m}\right)(\t p)\;.
4436: }$$
4437: %
4438: Besides, similar decomposition is done when
4439: $\TT_0^{(\m)}$ is replaced by $\TT_\s^{(\m)}$, with
4440: the replacements of $S^{(s,t)}_{\m,\r\m}$ with 1,
4441: and of $\D \wt z^{(0,\m\o)}_j$ with $\D \wt z^{(\s,\m\o)}_j$.
4442: \*
4443: %
4444: \vbox{
4445: \insertplot{350pt}{60pt}%
4446: {}%
4447: {f6}{\eqg(f6)}
4448: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f6)}: Graphical representation of item 5}}
4449: \*
4450: %
4451: \art
4452: The self-contraction of the
4453: fields $\hp^+_{q,\m}$ and $\hp^-_{k-p,\o}$
4454: of the interactions $\TT_0^{(\m)}$, is non-vanishing
4455: for $\o=\m$ and $q=k-p$.
4456: The kernel is
4457: %
4458: $$\eqalign{
4459: &\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4460: \hg^{(s)}_{\o}(k-p)
4461: \bar\c_{h,N}(p){ C^\d_\o(k-p,k)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\cr
4462: &=\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4463: \lft[
4464: \bar\c_{h,N}(p){(\d_{s,N}+\d_{s,h})u_s(k-p)\over D_{-\o}(p)D_{\o}(k-p)}\rgt.\cr
4465: &\phantom{*********}
4466: \lft.-{f_s(k-p)\over D_{\o}(k-p)}
4467: \bar\c_{h,N}(p){D_\o(k)\Big(1-(\c^\d_{h,N})^{-1}(k)\Big)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\rgt]\;;
4468: }$$
4469: %
4470: only the former addend has non-irrelevant part.
4471: Indeed, in the latter one, for $j\geq h+2$, because of $f_s(k-p)$,
4472: with $s\geq j$, and because of $\Big(1-(\c^\d_{h,N})^{-1}(k)\Big)$,
4473: which compels the momentum $k$ to stay on scale $h$,
4474: %
4475: $$\eqalign{
4476: &|D_{-\o}(p)|\geq |D_{-\o}(k-p)| - |D_{-\o}(k)|\cr
4477: &\geq \g^{j-1}-\g^{h+1}\geq \lft(1-\g^{-1}\rgt)\g^{j-1}
4478: \;;}$$
4479: %
4480: hence, as in item 2, there is a more factor $\g^{-(j-h)}$
4481: in the bound of such a kernel, which gives it
4482: negative dimension down to scale $h$,
4483: where the field $\hp^-_{k,\m}$
4484: is compelled to be contracted by
4485: $\Big(1-(\c^\d_{h,N})^{-1}(k)\Big)$
4486: in the limit $\d\to 0$.
4487: Then, let
4488: the former addend be
4489: %
4490: $$\hT^{(s),(0)}_{\o}(k)\defi
4491: \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4492: \bar\c_{h,N}(p){(\d_{s,N}+\d_{s,h})u_s(k-p)\over D_{-\o}(p)D_{\o}(k-p)}\;.$$
4493: %
4494: It is $ \hT^{(s),(0)}_{\o}(0)=0$ by
4495: transformation under rotation; while
4496: %
4497: $$
4498: \left(\partial_\s \hT^{(s),(0)}_{\o}\right)(0)
4499: \left\{
4500: \matrix{
4501: =0\hfill&&\hfill{\rm\ if \ }\s=-\o\cr
4502: \defi \D \wt z^{(T,0)}_j\hfill&&\hfill{\rm\ if \ }\s=\o\;.
4503: }
4504: \right.
4505: $$
4506: %
4507: Finally:
4508: %
4509: $$\eqalign{
4510: \LL
4511: &\left[
4512: \int {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
4513: \hb_{p,\o}\hp^-_{p,\o}
4514: \hT^{(s),(0)}_{\o}(p)\right]
4515: =\D \wt z^{(T,0)}_j
4516: \int {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4517: \hb_{p,\o}D_\o(p) \hp^-_{p,\o}\;,\cr
4518: \RR
4519: &\left[
4520: \int {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
4521: \hb_{p,\o} \hp^-_{p,\o}
4522: \hT^{(s),(0)}_{\o}(p)\right]\cr
4523: &=
4524: \sum_{\s,\s'}\hb_{p,\o} \hp^-_{p,\r}D_{\s}(p)D_{\s'}(p)
4525: \int_0^1d\t \ (1-\t)
4526: \left( \partial_{\s'}^{p}\partial_{\s'}^{p}\hT^{(s),(0)}_{\o}\right)(\t p)\;.}$$
4527: %
4528: \art
4529: The self-contraction of the
4530: fields $\hp^-_{k-p,\o}$ and $\hp^+_{q,\s\m}$ of the interaction
4531: $\TT_\s^{(\m)}$ is non-irrelevant. Setting:
4532: %
4533: $$\wh T_{\o}^{(s)}(k)
4534: \defi
4535: \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4536: \hg^{(s)}_\o(k-p)\bar\c_{h,N}(p)
4537: {D_{\o}(p)\over
4538: D_{-\o}(p)}\;,$$
4539: %
4540: since $\wh T_{\o}^{(s),(\s)}(0)$,
4541: such a contraction requires the extraction of the coefficient:
4542: %
4543: $$
4544: \lft(\partial_\n^p\wh T^{(s)}_{\o}\rgt)(0)
4545: \left\{
4546: \matrix{
4547: =0\hfill&&\hfill{\rm \ if\ }\o\n=-1\cr
4548: \defi \D\wt z_j^{(T)}\hfill&&\hfill{\rm \ if\ }\o\n=1\;,\cr
4549: }\right.
4550: $$
4551: %
4552: so that the above contraction is equal to
4553: %
4554: $$\eqalign{
4555: \LL
4556: &\left[
4557: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
4558: \hb_{k,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}
4559: \wh T^{(s)}_{\o}(k)\right]
4560: %\cr&
4561: =\D\wt z_j^{(T)}\int {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
4562: \hb_{k,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}D_\o(k)\;,\cr
4563: \RR
4564: &\left[
4565: \int {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
4566: \hb_{k,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}
4567: \wh T^{(s)}_{\o}(k)\right]\cr
4568: &= \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
4569: \sum_{\n,\n'}
4570: \hb_{k,\o} \hp^-_{k,\o}
4571: D_{\n}(k)D_{\n'}(k)
4572: \int_0^1d\t\
4573: \left(\partial_{\n}^k\partial_{\n'}^k\wh T^{(s)}_{\o}\right)(\t k)\;.
4574: }$$
4575: %
4576: \*
4577: \vbox
4578: {\insertplot{350pt}{50pt}%
4579: {}%
4580: {f14}{\eqg(f14)}
4581: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f14)}: Graphical representation of items 6. and 7.}}
4582: \vskip2em
4583: %
4584: \art
4585: The self-contraction of the
4586: fields $\hp^+_{q,\m}$ and $\hp^-_{p+q,\m}$
4587: of the interaction $\TT_0^{(\m)}$, or
4588: the
4589: fields $\hp^+_{q,\s\m}$ and $\hp^-_{p+q,\s\m}$
4590: of the interactions $\{\TT_\s^{(\m)}\}_{\s=\pm}$,
4591: would give problems; but it arises
4592: only for $p=0$ and it is forbidden
4593: by the cutoff function $\bar\c_{h,N}(p)$.
4594: \art
4595: The contraction of one of or both the fields $\hp^+_{q,\m}$ and
4596: $\hp^-_{p,\m}$ was already discussed in the previous section, and
4597: give rise to the flow of $\{\n^{(\s)}_j\}^{\s=\pm}_{j=h,...\ N}$.
4598: }
4599: %
4600: \0Finally, the same above developments can be done
4601: for the contractions of the interactions $\BB^{(3)}$:
4602: the localization containing the couplings $\wt \l^{(\m\o)}_j$ and $\wt z^{(\m\o)}_j$
4603: are $\D \wt\l_{j-1}^{(\m\o)}$ and $\D \wt z_{j-1}^{(\m\o)}$; while
4604: the localization containing $\a^{(\m\o)}$ are exactly the same of the
4605: flows of $\l_N$ and $Z_N$.
4606: Then:
4607: %
4608: $$\eqalign{\wt\l_{j-1}^{(\m\o)}
4609: &\defi
4610: \left({ Z_{j}\over Z_{j-1}}\right)^2
4611: \left(\wt\l_j^{(\m\o)}+\D \wt\l_{j-1}^{(\m\o)}+
4612: \d_{\o\m,-1}
4613: \sum_{a=\pm}\D \wt l_{j-1}^{\;(a,0)}
4614: \right.\cr
4615: &\left.\phantom{*********}
4616: +\d_{\o\m,-1}\sum_{\s,a=\pm}{Z_N\over Z_{j}}\n^{(\s)}_j
4617: \D \wt l_{j-1}^{\;(a,\s)}
4618: +\D \wt l_{j-1}^{\;(0,0,\m\o)}
4619: +\sum_{\s=\pm}{Z_N\over Z_{j}}
4620: \n^{(\s)}_j\D \wt l_{j-1}^{\;(0,\s,\m\o)}\right)\;,}$$
4621: %
4622: $$\wt z_{j-1}^{(\m\o)}
4623: \defi
4624: \left(\D \wt z_{j-1}^{(\m\o)}+
4625: \D \wt z_{j-1}^{\;(0,\m\o)}
4626: +\d_{\o\m,1}\D \wt z_{j-1}^{\;(T,0)}
4627: +\sum_{\s=\pm}{Z_N\over Z_{j}}\n^{(\s)}_j
4628: \lft(\D \wt z_{j-1}^{\;(\s,\m\o)}+\d_{\o\m,1}
4629: \D \wt z_{j-1}^{\;(T)}\rgt)\right)\;.$$
4630: %
4631: The remarkable point is that the following theorem holds.
4632: \*
4633:
4634: \theorem(TT)
4635: {For any fixed $\th:0<\th<1$,
4636: there exist $\e>0$, a constant $c$ and two counterterms
4637: $\{\a^{(\m)}\}$ , analytically dependent on $\l$,
4638: such that, for any fixed cutoff scale, $N$, and choosing
4639: $\a^{(\m)}_N=\a^{(\m)}$, it holds:
4640: %
4641: $$
4642: \left|\wt\z^{(3,\m)}_j\right|\leq c\e\g^{-(\th/2)(N-j)}
4643: \qquad
4644: \left|\wt \z^{(1,\m)}_j\right|\leq c\e^2\g^{-(\th/2)(N-j)}\;.\Eq(TT)$$
4645: %
4646: }
4647:
4648: \0The proof is given in appendix \secc(PL). It is a simple application
4649: of the fixed point theorem in Banach spaces. Once
4650: two $\{\a^{(\m)}_N\}_\m$ are found with the required properties,
4651: it is simply to verify that they are actually independent from $N$.
4652: \*
4653:
4654: \theorem(LCE)
4655: {In the same hypothesis of
4656: theorem \thm(TT) and choosing
4657: %
4658: $$\s^{(\m)}=
4659: -\sum_{k\leq N-1}{Z_k\over Z_N}\wt\z^{(1,\m)}_k\;;$$
4660: %
4661: in the limit of removed cutoff,
4662: the following asymptotic identity
4663: %
4664: $$\eqalign{
4665: &D_\o(k)
4666: {\partial e^{\WW} \over\partial \hf^+_{k,\o}}
4667: ={B_N\over Z_N}\hf^-_{k,\o}e^{\WW}\cr
4668: &-\l_N A_N
4669: \sum_\m{a_N-\bar{a}_N\o\m \over 2}
4670: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
4671: {1\over D_{-\o}(p)}
4672: \left[
4673: {\partial e^{\WW}\over \partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}
4674: \partial \hf^-_{q,\m}}\hf^-_{q+p,\m}
4675: \right.\cr&\phantom{***********************************}\left.
4676: -\hf^+_{q,\m}
4677: {\partial e^{\WW}\over
4678: \partial \hf^+_{q+p,\m}\partial\hf^+_{p-k,\o}}\right]\;,
4679: }\Eq(CEth)$$
4680: %
4681: generates the anomalous \ce{} of those Schwinger functions
4682: which have no density insertion and
4683: the addend relative to which generated by
4684: \hbox{$\int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4685: \bar\c_{h}(p)
4686: {\partial e^{\WW^{(h)}}\over \partial \hj_{p,-\o}
4687: \partial\hf^+_{k-p,\o}}$}
4688: is vanishing.}
4689:
4690: \*
4691: The last requirement is fulfilled, as already stated,
4692: for the $S^{(2)}$ Schwinger function, see \equ(ale).
4693: A similar bound is valid also for $S^{(4)}$.
4694:
4695: \*
4696: \theorem(VBF)
4697: {For $\e$ small enough, for $\th:0<\th<1/16$,
4698: and for any scale
4699: $h\leq N$, the effective coupling is almost
4700: constant:
4701: %
4702: $$\l_h-\l_N={\rm O}(\l^2)\;.\Eq(vbf)$$
4703: %
4704: where ${\rm O}(\l^2)$ is bounded uniformly in $h$.
4705: }
4706:
4707: \*
4708: \proof{\bf of Theorem \thm(LCE).} The choice of $\s^{(\m)}$ makes sense:
4709: by \equ(TT) and \equ(ind1), for $c_0\e^2\le \th/4$
4710: it is finite:
4711: %
4712: $$\left|\sum_{k\leq N-1}{Z_k\over Z_N}\wt\z^{(1,\m)}_k\right|
4713: \le c \e^2\left(1-\g^{-(\th/4)}\right)^{-1}\;.$$
4714: %
4715: With reference to \equ(CECE), the theorem is proved
4716: once it is shown
4717: the bound for the derivatives of $\WW_{\TT,\m}^{(h)}$
4718: has a vanishing factor more than the bound
4719: of the derivatives of $\WW^{(h)}$.
4720: Hence, let any integer $n\in \NNN$, any choice of the label
4721: $\ue\defi(\e_1,\ldots,\e_n)$
4722: and $\uo\defi(\o,\o_1,\ldots,\o_n)$, and
4723: any momenta $\underline k\defi(k,k_1,\ldots,k_n)$
4724: be considered. The
4725: \ce{} equation for the Schwinger function
4726: $\hS^{(0;n+1)(\ue)}_{\uo}(\underline q;\underline k)$
4727: is obtained by suitable derivatives of the above
4728: functional, plus the limit $-h,N\to\io$ of the following rest:
4729: %
4730: $$\eqalign{
4731: {1\over Z_N}
4732: &\left|{\partial^{1+n} \WW^{(h)}_{\TT,\m}\over
4733: \partial \hb_{k,\o}
4734: \partial \hf^{\e_1}_{k_1,\o_1}
4735: \ldots \partial \hf^{\e_n}_{k_n,\o_n}}\right|
4736: _{\jm\equiv\f\equiv0}\cr
4737: &\leq {C_{n;h_0,h_1\ldots, h_n}\over \sqrt{Z_{h_0}}\prod_{j=1}^n \sqrt{Z_{h_j}}}
4738: \left(\g^{-(\th/4)(N-h_0)}
4739: +\g^{(\th/4)(h_0-h)}\right)\;,}\Eq(CEbound)$$
4740: %
4741: where $\{h_j\}_{j=0}^n$ are the scales of the momenta $(k,\underline k)$:
4742: $\k\g^{h_j-1} \le|k_j|\le \k\g^{h_j}$, with $k\defi k_0$;
4743: and $C_{n;h_0,h_1\ldots, h_n}/ \prod_{j=0}^n \sqrt{Z_{h_j}}$
4744: is the bound for the derivatives of $\WW^{(h)}$.
4745: The bound derives from the following arguments.
4746: By the explicit
4747: choice of $\s^{(\m)}$, and by \equ(TT), \equ(ind1),
4748: for $c_0\e^2$ smaller than $\th/4$, it holds:
4749: %
4750: $$\eqalign{
4751: &\left|\sum_{k=m}^N{Z_k\over Z_m}\wt\z^{(1,\m)}_k\right|
4752: =
4753: \left|\sum_{k\le m-1}{Z_k\over Z_m}\wt\z^{(1,\m)}_k\right|\cr
4754: &\le c \e^2\sum_{k\le m-1}\g^{c_0\e^2(m-k)}\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}
4755: \le \wt c \e^2\g^{-(\th/2)(N-m)}\;.
4756: }\Eq(sos)$$
4757: %
4758: for $\wt c\geq c \left(1-\g^{-(\th/4)}\right)^{-1}$.
4759: Then, the graphs in the expansion
4760: of the r.h.s. member of \equ(CEbound)
4761: has one external
4762: propagator on scale $h_0$, and fall in one of the
4763: following classes.
4764: \elenco{
4765: \art
4766: An interaction $\TT^{(\m)}_0$ is first
4767: contracted on scale $j$; there also
4768: has to be one propagator on scale $m=h,N$.
4769: The factor $1/Z_N$ in the r.h.s. member
4770: of \equ(CEbound), times factors coming form the multiscale integration
4771: (see \equ(FWY))
4772: gives $(Z_N/Z_j)^2(\sqrt{Z_j}/Z_N)\le
4773: (Z_N/Z_j)(1/\sqrt{Z_{h_0}})\g^{\e^2c_0|j-h_0|}$.
4774: Now it is $Z_N/Z_m<1$;
4775: while $\g^{\e^2c_0|j-h_0|}$ is turned into
4776: $\g^{-(\th/2)|m-h_0|}$ by a short memory factor between
4777: the scales $m$ and $\min\{j,h_0\}$.
4778: %
4779: \art
4780: An interaction
4781: $\TT^{(\m)}_\s$ is first contracted
4782: on scale $j$.
4783: The factor to be studied is now
4784: $(Z_N/Z_j)\lft|\n^{(\s)}_j\rgt|(\sqrt{Z_j}/Z_N)\leq
4785: (1/\sqrt{Z_{h_0}})\g^{\e^2c_0|h_0-j|}\g^{-(\th/2)(N-j)}$;
4786: and, as in the previous item,
4787: extracting a short memory factor,
4788: $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-j)}\g^{\e^2c_0|h_0-j|}$ is turned into the factor
4789: $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h_0)}\g^{-(\th/2)|h_0-j|}$.
4790: %
4791: \art
4792: An interaction $\BB^{(3)}$ first contracted
4793: on scale $j$.
4794: In this case the factor to be studied is
4795: $(\sqrt{Z_j}/Z_N)\lft|\z^{(3,\o\m)}_j\rgt|\leq
4796: (1/\sqrt{Z_{h_0}})\g^{\e^2c_0(N-j)}\g^{\e^2c_0|j-h_0|}\g^{-(\th/2)(N-j)}$;
4797: then $\g^{\e^2c_0|j-h_0|}$ is changed by the short memory factor
4798: into $\g^{-(\th/2)|m-h_0|}$;
4799: and then, for $\e$ small, it holds
4800: $\g^{-(\th/2)|m-h_0|}\g^{-(\th/2-\e^2c_0)(N-j)}\le \g^{-(\th/4)|m-h_0|}
4801: \g^{-(\th/4)(N-h_0)}$.
4802: \art
4803: The contraction of the interaction $\BB^{(1)}$
4804: can only occur in a scale compatible with
4805: the momentum $k$ (hence two possible contiguous scales):
4806: let it be $h_0$.
4807: Then there is a factor
4808: $\sqrt{Z_{h_0}}/Z_N\lft|\sum_{j=h_0}^N(Z_j/Z_{h_0})\wt\z^{(1)}_j\rgt|\le
4809: (1/Z_{h_0})\g^{-(\th/4)(N-h_0)}$.
4810: }
4811:
4812: \0Besides the decay factor, in the first three
4813: items there is also $\g^{-(\th/2)|j-h_0|}$,
4814: controlling the summation over $j$.
4815: This proves \equ(CEbound). Hence,
4816: keeping $k$ fixed and non-zero, in the limit of removed cutoff,
4817: such derivatives are vanishing.
4818: \hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
4819:
4820: \*
4821: \proof{\bf of Theorem \thm(VBF).}
4822: Taking in \equ(CECE) the derivatives $\partial\f^-_{k+q-s,\o}
4823: \partial\f^+_{q,-\o}\partial\f^-_{s,-\o}$,
4824: for $\f\equiv0$,
4825: it holds the following
4826: \ce{} for $S^{(4)}$
4827: %
4828: $$\eqalign{
4829: &{\hS^{(4)}_{\o,-\o}(k,q,s)\over \hg_{\o}(k)}\cr
4830: &=
4831: -\l_N A_N{a_N+\bar{a}_N\over2}
4832: {\hS^{(2)}_{-\o}(s)-\hS^{(2)}_{-\o}(q)\over D_{-\o}(s-q)}
4833: \hS^{(2)}_{\o}(k+q-s)\cr
4834: &+
4835: \l_N A_N{a_N-\bar{a}_N\over2}
4836: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4837: {\bar\c_{h,N}(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\hS^{(4)}_{\o,-\o}(k-p,q,s)\cr
4838: &+
4839: \l_N A_N{a_N+\bar{a}_N\over2}
4840: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4841: {\bar\c_{h,N}(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}
4842: \lft[\hS^{(4)}_{\o,-\o}(k-p,q,s-p)-\hS^{(4)}_{\o,-\o}(k-p,q+p,s)\rgt]\cr
4843: &-\l_N A_N\sum_\m {a_N-\bar{a}_N\o\m\over2 }
4844: {1\over Z_N}
4845: {\partial^4 \WW_\TT^{(\m)}\over
4846: \partial \hb_{k,\o}\partial \hf^-_{k+q-s,\o}
4847: \partial \hf^+_{q,-\o}\partial \hf^-_{s,-\o}}\cr
4848: &-{\l_N A_N\over \z^{(2)}_N}
4849: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4850: \bar\c_{h}(p)
4851: \lft[\hS^{(1;4)}_{-\o;\o,-\o}(p;k-p,q,s)
4852: -\d(q-s)\hS^{(2)}_{-\o}(q)\hS^{(1;2)}_{-\o;\o}(p;k-p)\rgt]\;,
4853: }\Eq(ce4)$$
4854: %
4855: where $A_N$ was defined in \equ(A). Now, fixing $-q=s=k=\bar k$,
4856: for any $\bar k:\k\g^{h}\leq |\bar k|\le \k\g^{h+1}$,
4857: by lowest order computation it holds:
4858: %
4859: $${\hS^{(4)}_{\o,-\o}(\bar k,-\bar k,\bar k)\over \hg_{\o}(\bar k)}
4860: =
4861: {1\over Z_h^2}{\l_h+{\rm O}(\l^2)\over \bar k^2 D_{-\o}(\bar k)}\;,$$
4862: $$ \l_N A_N{a_N+\bar{a}_N\over2}
4863: {\hS^{(2)}_{-\o}(\bar k)\over D_{-\o}(\bar k)}
4864: \hS^{(2)}_{\o}(\bar k)
4865: ={1\over Z^2_h}{-\l_N+{\rm O}(\l^2)\over \bar k^2 D_{-\o}(\bar k)}\;;$$
4866: %
4867: while (see also [BM04] for more details)
4868: %
4869: $$
4870: \left|\l_N A_N{a_N-\bar{a}_N\over2}
4871: \int_D\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4872: {\bar\c_{h,N}(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\hS^{(4)}_{\o,-\o}(\bar k-p,-\bar k,\bar k)\right|
4873: \leq {\g^{-3h}\over Z_h^2}{\rm O}(\l^2)\;,$$
4874: %
4875: and identical bound for
4876: %
4877: $$\left|\l_N A_N{a_N-\bar{a}_N\over2}
4878: \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4879: {\bar\c_{h,N}(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}
4880: \lft[\hS^{(4)}_{\o,-\o}(\bar k-p,-\bar k,\bar k-p)-
4881: \hS^{(4)}_{\o,-\o}(\bar k-p,p-\bar k,\bar k)\rgt]\right|\;,$$
4882: %
4883: and
4884: %
4885: $$\lft|{\l_N A_N\over \z^{(2)}_N}
4886: \int_{D}\! {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
4887: \bar\c_{h}(p)
4888: \hS^{(1;4)}_{-\o;\o,-\o}(p;\bar k-p,-\bar k,\bar k)\rgt|\;.
4889: $$
4890: %
4891: Finally, by the study of the flow of $\WW_\TT$,
4892: it also hold
4893: %
4894: $$\lft|\l_N A_N\sum_\m {a_N-\bar{a}_N\o\m\over2 }
4895: {1\over Z_N}
4896: {\partial^4 \WW_\TT^{(\m)}\over \partial \hb_{\bar k,\o}
4897: \partial \hf^-_{-\bar k,\o}
4898: \partial \hf^+_{-\bar k,-\o}\partial \hf^-_{\bar k,-\o}}\rgt|
4899: \le{\g^{-3h}\over Z_h^2}{\rm O}(\l^2) $$
4900: %
4901: (namely, in this case, since $k$ is on the infrared cutoff scale,
4902: the rest is not vanishing; but it diverges in $h\to -\io$
4903: with the same exponent, $3-2\h_\l$, of the other
4904: terms in \equ(ce4)).
4905: Considering together the above bound with \equ(ce4),
4906: it holds the theorem.
4907: \hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
4908:
4909: \*
4910: \sub(VVBBFF){Vanishing of the Beta function.}
4911: In the end, it is remarkable how \equ(vbf)
4912: is read in terms of the {\it Beta function}
4913: for the effective couplings.
4914: In agreement with \equ(d2),
4915: the Beta function for the massless Thirring
4916: model, in Euclidean regularization is
4917: such that
4918: %
4919: $$\l_{h-1}-\l_h\defi \b^{({\rm T})}_h(\l_h)+
4920: \sum_{m=h}^N\b^{({\rm T},\l)}_{h,m}(\l_m-\l_h)\Eq(vbf2)$$
4921: %
4922: (see \secc(cf) for the explanation of the addends).
4923: As done for the anomalous exponent,
4924: by scaling invariance of the graphs in the expansion
4925: of $\{\b^{({\rm T})}_h\}_h$, it is possible to prove that
4926: there exist a real function $B$ such that
4927: %
4928: $$|\b^{({\rm T})}_h(\l_h)-B(\l_h)|\leq c\e^2\g^{-\th(N-h)}\;.\Eq(vbf3)$$
4929: %
4930: Well then, as consequence of \equ(vbf), $B\= 0$. Otherwise,
4931: if the coefficient of the $m$-th order expansion of $B(\l)$,
4932: $B^{(m)}$,
4933: where non-zero, then replacing the expansion
4934: $\l_h\defi\sum_{n>0}c_h^{(n)}\l^n$ in \equ(vbf3),
4935: it would be possible to prove -- by an iterative procedure similar to
4936: the one in \secc(cf) -- that for any $h$, and for any $n<m$:
4937: %
4938: $$
4939: \lft|\sum_{m=h}^N\b^{({\rm T},\l)(n)}_{h,m}(\l_m-\l_h)\rgt|\le C^n\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h)}\;,
4940: \qquad
4941: \lft|c^{(n)}_{h-1}-c^{(n)}_{h}\rgt|\le C^n\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h)}\;;$$
4942: %
4943: while, for $n=m$,
4944: %
4945: $$c^{(m)}_{h-1}=c^{(m)}_{h}+B^{(m)}+{\rm O}(\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h)})\;.$$
4946: %
4947: Therefore $\{c^{(m)}_h\}_{h\le N}$ would be a diverging sequence,
4948: in contradiction with \equ(vbf).
4949:
4950: \*
4951: \section(SCE, Solution of the closed equation)
4952:
4953: With simple symmetry considerations and multiscale
4954: integration, it possible to prove the following general
4955: expression for the two point Schwinger function:
4956: %
4957: $$
4958: \hS_{\o}^{(2)}(k)
4959: =
4960: {1\over D_\o(k)}
4961: \left({|k|\over \k}\right)^{\h_\l}
4962: F_{h,N}
4963: \left({|k|\over \k}\right)\;,\Eq(gex)$$
4964: %
4965: where $F_{h,N}$ is finite, uniformly in $h,N$, and
4966: such that, for a suitable real constant $F$,
4967: %
4968: $$
4969: \sup_{\g^{(h/2)}\k\leq|p|\leq \g^{(N/2)}\k}
4970: \left| F_{h,N}
4971: \left({|p|\over \k}\right)-F \right|
4972: =C\left(\g^{-(\th/4)N}+\g^{(\th/4)h}\right)\;.
4973: \Eq(esdecay)$$
4974: %
4975: Indeed,
4976: once the factor $1/(D_\o(k)Z_{h_0})$ is extracted
4977: (with $h_0$ the scale of $k$), the expansion of
4978: $\hS_{h,N;\o}^{(2)}\left(k\right)$
4979: is given by scaling invariant graphs.
4980: Calling $F$ the limit of $ F_{h,N}$, with
4981: all the couplings $\{\l_j\}_j$ replaced by $\l$,
4982: all the ratios $\{Z_{j-1} /Z_j\}_j$ replaced by
4983: $\g^{\h_\l}$ and the factor $(|k|/\k)^{\h_\l}(1/Z_{h_0})$
4984: with 1, the difference between $F_{h,N}$
4985: and $F$ is the sum of all the graphs with an external propagator on scale
4986: $h_0$ and falling in one of the following cases.
4987: \elenco{
4988: \art
4989: There is an interaction on scale
4990: $m>N$ or $m<h$. By the short memory property,
4991: given any $\th:0<\th<1/16$,
4992: the sum of
4993: all such graphs is bounded with $\g^{-\th(N-h_0)}+\g^{-\th(h_0-h)}$,
4994: up to a constant.
4995: %
4996: \art
4997: There is a coupling
4998: $\left[(|k|/\k)^{\h_\l}(1/Z_{h_0})-1\right]$.
4999: By the feature
5000: of the flow of the field strength --
5001: namely the analogous for the Euclidean regularization
5002: of \equ(z1) -- the sum of
5003: all such graphs is bounded with $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h_0)}$,
5004: up to a constant.
5005: %
5006: \art
5007: There is an interaction $\l_m-\l$, or $(Z_{m-1}/Z_m)-\g^{\h_\l}$
5008: on scale $m:h\leq m\leq N$ .
5009: By the short memory factor an features of the flows
5010: -- analogous for the Euclidean regularization
5011: of \equ(l1) and \equ(z1) --
5012: the sum of such graphs is bounded by $\g^{-\th|m-h_0|}$
5013: $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-m)}\leq$
5014: $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h_0)}$
5015: $\g^{-(\th/2)|m-h_0|}$,
5016: up to a constant.}
5017: %
5018:
5019: \0Hence, after summing over $m$, \equ(esdecay) holds.
5020: \*
5021:
5022: Now, replacing \equ(gex) in the \ce{} for the two point Schwinger
5023: function, and taking the limit $h\to -\io$, it holds:
5024: %
5025: $$\eqalign{
5026: \left|{k\over \k}\right|^{\h_\l}
5027: F_{N}(k)
5028: =&
5029: {B_N\over Z_N}
5030: -\l_NA_N {a_N-\bar{a}_N \over 2}
5031: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
5032: \left|{p\over \k}\right|^{\h_\l}
5033: {F_{N}(p)\over D_{-\o}(k-p)D_{\o}(p)}\cr
5034: &+{\D \wh K_{N,\o}(k)}\;,}$$
5035: %
5036: where, by \equ(CEbound),
5037: $$\sup_{|k|\leq \g^{(N/2)}\k}
5038: \left|\D\wh K_{N,\o}(k)\right|\leq {C\over Z_{h_0}}
5039: \g^{-(\th/8)N}\;.
5040: $$
5041: %
5042: The equation for $k=0$ -- then $Z_{h_0}=+\io$ -- gives
5043: %
5044: $${B_N\over Z_N}=\l_NA_N {a_N-\bar{a}_N \over 2}
5045: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
5046: \left|{p\over \k}\right|^{\h_\l}
5047: {F_{N}(p)\over p^2}\;;$$
5048: %
5049: therefore:
5050: %
5051: $$\eqalign{
5052: \left|{k\over \k}\right|^{\h_\l}
5053: F_{h,N}(k)
5054: &=
5055: \l_NA_N {a_N-\bar{a}_N \over 2}
5056: \int_{D}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
5057: \left|{p\over \k}\right|^{\h_\l}
5058: F_{N}(p){k^2+D_{-\o}(p)D_\o(k)\over(k-p)^2 p^2}\cr
5059: &+\D\wh K_{N;\o}(k)\;.
5060: }$$
5061: %
5062: Now it is possible to take the limit $N\to+\io$, for
5063: $k$ fixed: since the rest is vanishing, by
5064: finiteness of $F_N$ uniformly in $N$ and
5065: by \equ(esdecay), the limit can be exchanged with the integral in
5066: $\der^2 p$, it holds:
5067: %
5068: $$
5069: \left|k\right|^{\h_\l}
5070: =
5071: \l_b A {a-\bar{a} \over 2}
5072: \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
5073: \left|p\right|^{\h_\l}
5074: {k^2+D_{-\o}(p)D_\o(k)\over(k-p)^2 p^2}\;.$$
5075: %
5076: The integral can be elementarily computed:
5077: the pure imaginary part is zero by symmetries,
5078: while for the real one it holds, for $\th$
5079: the angle between the vector $p$ and the vector $k$,
5080: for $t\defi \tan(\th/2)$,
5081: and calling, with abuse of notation, $k$ and $p$ the moduli
5082: of the vectors $k$ and $p$ themselves,
5083: %
5084: $$\eqalign{
5085: &{1\over (2\p)^2}\int_0^\io\!\!\!\der p\
5086: p^{\h_\l-1}
5087: \int_{-\p}^\p\!\!\!\der \th\
5088: {k^2-pk\cos(\th)\over k^2+p^2-2pk\cos(\th)}\cr
5089: =&
5090: {1\over (2\p)^2}\int_0^\io\!\!\!\der p\
5091: p^{\h_\l-1}
5092: \int_{-\io}^\io\!\!\!\der t\
5093: {2k\over 1+t^2}
5094: {\big(k+p\big)t^2+\big(k-p\big)\over
5095: \big(k+p\big)^2t^2+\big(k-p\big)^2}\cr
5096: =&
5097: {1\over (2\p)^2}\int_0^\io\!\!\!\der p\
5098: p^{\h_\l-1}
5099: \int_{-\io}^\io\!\!\!\der t\
5100: {2k\over k+p}
5101: \lft[{1\over 1+t^2}-{k-p\over 2k}
5102: \lft({1\over 1+t^2}-{(k+p)^2\over (k+p)^2t^2+(k-p)^2}\rgt)\rgt]\cr
5103: =&
5104: {2\over (2\p)^2}\int_0^k\!\!\!\der p\
5105: p^{\h_\l-1}
5106: \int_{-\io}^\io\!\!\!\der t\
5107: {1\over 1+t^2}={1\over 2\p\h_\l}k^{\h_\l}\;.}$$
5108: %
5109: This gives the following
5110: expression for the critical index $\h_\l$:
5111: %
5112: $$\h_\l=A{\l_b\over 2\p} {a-\bar{a} \over 2}\;,$$
5113: to be compared with the formula for the half value
5114: of $\h_\l$ given in [J61] just after (36)
5115: -- with the following identification: Johnson's $\a$
5116: is here $\h_\l/2$; Johnson's $\l$
5117: is $\l_b/2$; while $a-\bar a$ is, according to Johnson,
5118: equal to $2{\l/2\p\over1-(\l/2\p)^2}$.
5119: %%%%%%%%%
5120: %%%%%%%%%
5121: \appendix(SAR,Simple Analytical Properties)
5122:
5123: \asub(PFE){Partial-fraction expansion.}
5124: The functions
5125: %
5126: $$
5127: f^-_L(z)\defi{ e^{-(x_0+L) z }\over 1+e^{-L z}}
5128: \quad{\rm for\ } -L<x_0 < 0\;,
5129: \qquad f^+_L(z)\defi{ e^{-x_0 z }\over 1+e^{-L z}}
5130: \quad{\rm for\ } 0< x_0 < L\;,$$
5131: %
5132: are both meromorphic, since in any circles, $\CC_R$,
5133: of radius $R$ and centre the origin, their only singularities
5134: are a finite number of poles.
5135: In particular, setting
5136: $D_0\defi \big\{{2\p \over L}(m+{1\over 2})\big\}_{m\in \zzz}$,
5137: they are on the imaginary axis, in
5138: $\{ik_0:k_0\in D_0\}$.
5139: Therefore, by the Cauchy theorem,
5140: for any $e\in \RRR$,
5141: $R>|e|$ and $\s=\pm$,
5142: %
5143: $$
5144: f^\s_L(e)=
5145: \oint_{\CC_R}\!{\der z\over 2\p i}\
5146: {f^\s_L(z)\over z-e}
5147: +\s
5148: {1\over L} \sum_{k_0\in D_0}^{|k_0|\le R}
5149: {e^{-ix_0k_0} \over -ik_0+e}\;. \Eqa(pfe)$$
5150: %
5151: Since, for $0\leq \th \leq \p/2$,
5152: $\cos\th\geq 1-2\th/\p$, then
5153: it holds the following bound:
5154: $$\left|\oint_{\CC_R}\!{\der z\over 2\p i}\
5155: {f^+_L(z)\over z-e} \right|
5156: \leq {2 R\over R-|e|}
5157: \int_0^{\p}\!\der \th {e^{-x_0R\cos\th}\over 1+ e^{-LR\cos\th}}
5158: \leq {2 \over R-|e|}\lft[{\p\over 2x_0}+{\p\over 2(L-x_0)}\rgt]\;,$$
5159: %
5160: and similarly for $f^-_L$.
5161: Hence the first addend in the r.h.s. member of \equ(pfe)
5162: vanish for $R\to\io$, and than, for any $x_0\neq 0: |x_0|< L$,
5163: %
5164: $$
5165: f^+_L(e)\c(x_0>0)- f^-_L(e)\c(x_0<0)=\lim_{R\to+\io}
5166: {1\over L} \sum_{k_0\in D_0}^{|k_0|\le R}
5167: {e^{-ix_0k_0} \over -ik_0+e}\;.$$
5168: %
5169: Such a series, not absolutely convergent,
5170: can be written as $\sin^{-1}(\p x_0/L)$,
5171: times an absolutely convergent series --
5172: and border terms vanishing for large $R$
5173: -- so that it is clear the possibility of
5174: replacing the sharp constraint $|k_0|\leq R$
5175: with a smooth cutoff function.
5176:
5177: \*
5178: \asub(GCF){Gevrey compact-support functions}
5179: It is easy to construct a compact support-function
5180: which also fulfil the Gevrey constraint
5181: on the derivatives.
5182:
5183: Indeed, let the following $C^\io$
5184: function be considered for any number $p>0$:
5185: $$
5186: \th(t)\defi\left\{
5187: \matrix{
5188: 0\hfill&\hfill{\rm for\ }t<0\cr
5189: e^{1-(1/t^p)}\hfill&\hfill{\rm for\ }0\le t\le 1\cr
5190: 1\hfill&\hfill{\rm for\ }t>1\;.}\right.
5191: $$
5192: For $t\leq 0$ and $t\geq 1$ all the derivatives
5193: are identically zero.
5194: For $t:0<t<1$, it is possible to find
5195: a bound for the derivatives using the analyticity of $\th(t)$
5196: in the half-plane \hbox{$\CCC_+\defi\{z\in \CCC:{\rm Re}(z)>0\}$}.
5197: For any $t:0<t<1$,
5198: let the disc \hbox{$D_t\defi\{z\in \CCC:|z-t|\leq t\sin(\p/4p)\}$}
5199: be considered.
5200: By the Cauchy theorem:
5201: $$
5202: |\th^{(n)}(t)|\leq {n!\over 2\p\Big(t\sin(\p/4p)\Big)^n}
5203: \max_{z\in D_t}|\th(z)|\;.
5204: $$
5205: For any $z\defi r e^{i\f}\in D_t$, since
5206: the lines passing through $z=0$ and tangent to $D_t$
5207: have angular parameter $\pm\p/4p$, then
5208: ${\rm Re}\left(z^{-p}\right)\geq r^{-p}\cos(\f p)
5209: \ge (2t)^{-p}\cos(\p/4)$.
5210: Hence, since for any $x\geq 0$, and any constant $c>0$,
5211: it holds \hbox{$x^n e^{-cx^p}\leq C^n (n!)^{(1/p)}$},
5212: then for a certain constant $C>1$,
5213: $$
5214: |\th^{(n)}(t)|\leq C^n (n!)^{1+(1/p)}\;;
5215: $$
5216: namely $\th(t)$ is a Gevrey function of order $\a=1+(1/p)$.
5217: Finally, if $\wh\c_0(t)\defi 1-\th\left({t-1\over \g-1}\right)$,
5218: then $\wh f_j(t)\defi \wh\c_0(t\g^{-j})-\wh\c_0(t\g^{-j+1})$
5219: is a compact-support Gevrey function for any \hbox{integer $j$.}
5220:
5221: \*
5222: \asub(DP){Bounds for the propagators.}
5223: If $K$ is the compact support of $f_0(k)$, the $n$-th derivatives of
5224: $1/D_\o(k)$ are bounded in $K$ by $C_Kc_K^n n!$, for suitable $K$-dependent
5225: constants $C_K$ and $c_K$. Therefore, by Leibniz formula it
5226: follows that it $f(k)$ is a Gevrey, compact-support function of
5227: class $\a\geq1$, also $f(k)/D_\o(k)$ is.
5228: Therefore, for any $n_0, n_1\in \NNN$, by partial derivation
5229: and Stirling formula,
5230: $$\eqalign{
5231: |g^{(0)}_\o(x)|
5232: &\le
5233: {1\over |x_0|^{n_0}|x_1|^{n_1}}
5234: \sup_{k\in K}
5235: \left|\partial_0^{n_0}\partial_1^{n_1} {f_0(k)\over D_\o(k)}\right|\cr
5236: &\leq C \left(\left|{c\over x_0}\right|^{1/\a}{n_0\over e}\right)^{\a n_0}
5237: \left(\left|{c\over x_1}\right|^{1/\a}{n_1\over e}\right)^{\a n_1}\;.
5238: }$$
5239: Therefore, choosing for $n_j$ such that $(|x_j|/c)^{1/\a}-1\leq n_j \le (|x_j|/c)^{1/\a}$,
5240: it holds:
5241: $$
5242: |g^{(0)}_\o(x)|
5243: \le C e^{-\a (|x_0|/c)^{1/\a}} e^{-\a (|x_1|/c)^{1/\a}}\;.
5244: $$
5245: Finally, with similar argument, it is possible to
5246: obtain the same bounds for lattice-spacetime
5247: propagators.
5248: %%%%%%%%%
5249: %%%%%%%%%
5250: \appendix(OS,OS axioms)
5251:
5252: \asub(TF){Test functions.}
5253: For any $n\in \NNN$, setting $\ux\defi (x^{(1)},\ldots,x^{(n)})$,
5254: let $\SS\big(\RRR^{2n}\big)$ be the space of the complex test
5255: functions
5256: on $\RRR^{2n}$, with labels, $\uo\defi
5257: (\o_1,\ldots,\o_n)$, $\ue\defi (\e_1,\ldots,\e_n)$, s.t., for any
5258: integer $m$, and any $f^{(\ue)}_{n,\uo}(\ux)\in
5259: \SS\big(\RRR^{2n}\big)$, the Schwartz norm
5260: %
5261: $$
5262: ||f^{(\ue)}_{n,\uo}||_m\defi \max_{\underline r:\sum_jr_j\leq m}
5263: \sup_{x^{(j)}\in \rrr^2}
5264: \left|
5265: \left(1+\sum_{i=1}^n|x^{(i)}|^{m}\right)\dpr_1^{r_1}\cdots\dpr_n^{r_n} f^{(\ue)}_{n,\uo}(\ux)
5266: \right|
5267: $$
5268: %
5269: is finite. Let $\SS_{\neq}\big(\RRR^{2n}\big)$ be the space of the
5270: functions in $\SS\big(\RRR^{2n}\big)$ which vanish, together with
5271: all their partial derivatives, if $x^{(i)}=x^{(j)}$ for some $1\leq
5272: i<j\leq n$; and let $\SS_<\big(\RRR^{2n}\big)$ be the space of the
5273: functions in $\SS_{\neq}\big(\RRR^{2n}\big)$ which vanish, together
5274: with all their partial derivatives, if the ordering of the times
5275: $x_0^{(1)},\dots,x_0^{(n)}$ is different from
5276: \hbox{ $0<x_0^{(1)}<x_0^{(2)}<\dots<x_0^{(n)}$}.
5277:
5278: Let the ``space translation'', $\t_y$, for $y=(0,y_1)$, be defined
5279: as
5280: %
5281: $$\big(\t_yf\big)^{(\ue)}_{n,\uo}(\ux)
5282: \defi
5283: f^{(\ue)}_{n,\uo}(\t_y\ux)\;,$$
5284: with $\t_y\ux\defi (x^{(1)}+y,\ldots,x^{(n)}+y)$.
5285:
5286: Let the ``time reflection'' be defined as
5287: %
5288: $$
5289: \left(\Th f\right)^{(\ue)}_{n,\uo}(\ux)
5290: \defi
5291: \lft(f^{(\ue^*)}_{n,\underline{\o}^*}\rgt)^*(\th_0\ux)\;,$$
5292: %
5293: with $\th_0\ux\defi (\th_0 x^{(1)},\ldots,\th_0 x^{(n)})$,
5294: where $\th_0(x_0,x_1)\defi (-x_0,x_1)$;
5295: $f^*(x^{(1)},\ldots,x^{(n)})$ is the
5296: complex conjugate of $f(x^{(n)},\ldots,x^{(1)})$;
5297: and the labels $\uo^*$ and $\ue^*$
5298: are defined respectively to be $\o_n,\ldots,\o_1$
5299: and $-\e_n,\ldots,-\e_1$ (see [OS72], formula
5300: (6.2)).
5301:
5302: In the end, it has to be noticed the following fact: for
5303: $\WW$ being the generating functional of the Schwinger functions, then
5304: $e^{\WW}$ is the generating functional of the correlations.
5305: Hence, each Schwinger function -- also called ``truncated correlation'' --
5306: can be written as finite linear combination of correlations,
5307: in term of which the \osa{} are now listed --
5308: with the simplification in the notation that
5309: $G^{(0,n)(\ue)}_{\us;\uo}(\uz,\ux)\defi G^{(n)(\ue)}_{\uo}(\ux)$.
5310:
5311: \*
5312: \alemma(OSII)
5313: {Given $\e$ small enough, for any $\l: |\l|<\e$
5314: and $\m:0\le \m\le \k\g^{-1}$,
5315: the correlations satisfy the Osterwalder-Schrader axioms:
5316: \elenco{
5317: %
5318: \item{\bf E1.}
5319: $G^{(n)(\ue)}_\uo(\ux)$ is a
5320: distribution on $\SS_{<}(\RRR^{(2n)})$; and there exists an integer
5321: $m$ and two constants $c_m, C_m>0$ s.t., for any $n$
5322: %
5323: $$\norm{G^{(n)(\ue)}_\uo}_{m\cdot n}
5324: \defi
5325: \sup_{f\in \SS_{<}\left(\rrr^{(2n)}\right)}
5326: {\lft|\left(G^{(n)(\ue)}_\uo,f\right)\rgt|
5327: \over
5328: \norm{f}_{m\cdot n}} \leq C_m(n!)^{c_m}\;.$$
5329: %
5330: \item{\bf E2.}
5331: $G^{(n)(\ue)}_\uo$ is covariant
5332: under the Euclidean group of translation and rotation of all the
5333: coordinates.
5334: %
5335: \item{\bf E3.}
5336: $ G^{(n)(\ue)}_\uo$ is
5337: antisymmetric under the exchange of the $x^{(i)}, \o_i,\e_i$
5338: respectively with $x^{(j)}, \o_j,\e_j$, for any $1\leq i < j\leq
5339: n$.
5340: %
5341: \item{\bf E4.}
5342: For any finite sequence of ``time ordered'' test functions,
5343: $\left\{f^{(\ue)}_{n,\underline{\o}}(\ux)\in
5344: \SS_{<}(\RRR^{(2n)})\right\}_{n\geq 0,\underline{\o},\ue}$,
5345: the correlations are ``reflection invariant'':
5346: %
5347: $$\lft[G^{(n)(\ue)}_\uo\Big((\Th f)^{(\ue)}_{n,\uo}\Big)\rgt]^*=
5348: G^{(n)(\ue)}_\uo(f^{(\ue)}_{n,\underline{\o}})$$
5349: %
5350: and ``reflection positive'':
5351: %
5352: $$\sum_{m,\uo',\ue'}\sum_{n,\uo,\ue}
5353: G^{(m+n)(\ue',\ue)}_{\uo',\uo}
5354: \Big((\Th f)^{(\e')}_{m,\underline{\o}'}
5355: \otimes f^{(\e)}_{n,\underline{\o}}\Big)
5356: \geq 0\;.\Eqa(rp)$$
5357: %
5358: \item{\bf E5.}
5359: For any $f^{(\e)}_{n,\uo}\in
5360: \SS_{<}(\RRR^{(2n)})$ and $g^{(\e')}_{m,\uo'}\in
5361: \SS_{<}(\RRR^{(2m)})$, decorrelation holds:
5362: %
5363: $$\eqalign{
5364: &\lim_{|y|\rightarrow \io}
5365: G^{(m+n)(\ue',\ue)}_{\uo',\uo}
5366: \lft((\Th g)^{(\ue')}_{m,\uo'}
5367: \otimes (\t_yf)^{(\ue)}_{n,\uo}\rgt)\cr
5368: &\phantom{*************}
5369: =G^{(m)(\ue')}_{\uo'}
5370: \Big((\Th g)^{(\ue')}_{m,\uo'}\Big)
5371: G^{(n)(\ue)}_{\uo}
5372: \Big(f^{(\ue')}_{n,\uo}\Big)\;.}$$
5373: %
5374: }}
5375: The last property, called {\it cluster decomposition},
5376: in terms of the Schwinger function reads:
5377: %
5378: $$\lim_{|y|\rightarrow \io}
5379: S^{(m+n)(\ue',\ue)}_{\uo',\uo}
5380: \lft((\Th g)^{(\ue')}_{m,\uo'}
5381: \otimes (\t_yf)^{(\ue)}_{n,\uo}\rgt)
5382: =0\;.\Eqa(cldec)$$
5383: %
5384:
5385: From the \osa, it is possible to derive the theory in
5386: Minkowskian spacetime, from the Euclidean one. The main difficulty,
5387: here, is to prove the validity of E2 and E4: a
5388: regularization that makes clear the one, usually makes obscure the
5389: other.
5390:
5391: \*
5392: \asub(RP){Reflection Positivity for the Hamiltonian Regularization}
5393:
5394: The Euclidean fields operator in Heisemberg picture are:
5395: %
5396: $$\ps^\s_{x,\o}
5397: \defi
5398: e^{-x_0H}
5399: \left({1\over L} \sum_{k\in D} e^{\s ikx_1} a^\s_{k,\o}\right)e^{x_0H}\;,
5400: \qquad
5401: x\defi(x_0,x_1)\in \RRR\times\TTT\;;$$
5402: %
5403: therefore $\ps^\s_{x,\o}$ is {\it not} the Hermitian conjugate
5404: of $\ps^{-\s}_{x,\o}$ -- as it were in the Minkowskian picture:
5405: it is therefore suitable to
5406: define the operator $\th$ ``time reflection'' s.t.
5407: $\th x=(-x_0,x_1)$, so that $\ps^\s_{x,\o}$ is the Hermitian of
5408: $\ps^{-\s}_{\th x,\o}$.
5409:
5410: Let now the space $\FF$ of the linear functionals
5411: of the operator-valued fields: namely the operators on the Fock space
5412: of the form:
5413: %
5414: $$
5415: F(\ps)=
5416: \sum_{n\geq 0} \sum_{\uo,\us}
5417: \int d^2x^{(1)}\ \cdots d^2x^{(n)}\
5418: f_{n,\uo,\us}\left(x^{(1)},\ \dots,x^{(n)}\right)
5419: \ps^{\s_1}_{x^{(1)},\o_1}\ \cdots\ps^{\s_n}_{x^{(n)},\o_n}
5420: $$
5421: %
5422: for any choice of the
5423: test functions $f_{\uo,\us}\in\SS_{<}\Big((\RRR\times\TTT)^n\Big)$.
5424: Then,
5425: it is simply to verify that $\Th$ on the space $\FF$ is the
5426: Hermitian conjugation.
5427: Hence, for any real $L$,
5428: the following quantity is non-negative:
5429: %
5430: $$\Tr\lft[e^{-LH}(\Th F) F\rgt]\geq 0\;.$$
5431: %
5432: Such an inequality, by the definition of the correlations,
5433: reads as in \equ(rp).
5434: %%%%%%%%%
5435: %%%%%%%%%
5436: \appendix(TE,Tree Expansion and Convergence of
5437: the Schwinger functions)
5438:
5439: The renormalization procedure used here is slightly
5440: different from the classical one, the BPHZ scheme.
5441:
5442: As noticed in the early works on the renormalization,
5443: the localization is necessary and effective in extracting
5444: the divergent contribution of the subgraphs whenever
5445: the momenta flowing in the internal propagators of the subgraphs
5446: are in some sense higher than the momenta flowing on the external ones
5447: ({\it Hepp's sectors}). Anyway, the localization
5448: has a further complication in the massless case: while it improves the
5449: convergence at large momenta, it
5450: worsen consequently the convergence at small ones.
5451:
5452: Accordingly, in the BPHZ scheme, the propagators of the graphs
5453: are decomposed {\it a posteriori}
5454: in scales, and the subgraphs, selected by the Hepp
5455: procedure, are localized: this is done
5456: by extracting the first orders of the Taylor
5457: expansion around zero external momenta, if
5458: the theory is massive; around any fixed non-zero
5459: value, if the theory is massless: in the latter case
5460: some discrete symmetries are broken, and
5461: more ``relevant'' and ``marginal'' terms, even a mass term,
5462: are generated.
5463:
5464: In the scheme here depicted, instead,
5465: the multiscale integration
5466: not only produces directly only subgraphs
5467: satisfying the Hepp's property;
5468: but it makes clear the possibility of localizing at
5469: zero external momenta {\it even the subgraphs with
5470: massless propagators}, since such a localization
5471: is naturally stopped below the scales of the
5472: momenta of the Schwinger function at hand.
5473:
5474: \*
5475: \asub(3.2){Tree structure.}
5476: By expanding iteratively the truncated expectations \equ(trex1) and
5477: \equ(trex2), starting from $\WW^{(M)}$, it is possible to write the
5478: effective potential on scale $\WW^{(h)}$, for $h\le M$, in terms of
5479: a {\it tree expansion}, quite similar to that described, for
5480: example, in [BGPS].
5481: \elenco{
5482: \art
5483: Let a tree, $\t$, be a tree graph with the
5484: following features: if there are $n+1$ points with incidence
5485: number equal to 1, one of such points is the
5486: {\it root}; the other $n$ points are the {\it endpoints};
5487: the integer $n$ is the {\it order} of the tree.
5488: All the points of the tree graphs, except the root and the endpoint,
5489: are called {\it nodes}. The only
5490: node paired to the root by the tree graph is the {\it first node}:
5491: it is required not to be an endpoint.
5492: %
5493: \art
5494: The nodes, the root and
5495: the endpoints are partially
5496: ordered in the natural way by the tree structure,
5497: so that the root is lower than the endpoints:
5498: $v<v'$ means $v$ is lower that $v'$.
5499: In correspondence of any node $v$, the integer $s_v$ is the number
5500: of minimal nodes or endpoints greater than $v$:
5501: such nodes or endpoints are
5502: also said to be {\it first followers of $v$}, and
5503: are denoted $v_1,\ldots,v_{s_v}$.
5504: If $s_v>1$, then $v$ is a {\it branching node}.
5505: In correspondence of a node or an end point $v$, the unique
5506: maximal node lower than it is the {\it first preceding of $v$}, and is
5507: denoted $v'$.
5508: %
5509: \art
5510: Let the {\it topological trees} be the
5511: quotient set of the above depicted trees,
5512: in which any two of them are identified if,
5513: by a suitable continuous deformation
5514: of the length of the links
5515: and of the angled between them,
5516: -- included permutation
5517: of the links coming out of the same branching node --
5518: they can be superposed.
5519: It is then easy to verify that,
5520: since the number of the branching nodes
5521: of a tree with $n$ endpoints is not larger
5522: than $n-1$, then the number of all the
5523: topological tree with $n$ endpoints
5524: is bounded by $4^{2n-1}<16^n$.
5525: %
5526: \art
5527: With each node $v$ of the tree, a scale $h_v:h\leq h_v\leq M$
5528: is assigned, with the compatibility condition that $v'<v$ imply
5529: $h_{v'}<h_{v}$: therefore it is possible to draw the trees as lying
5530: vertically along a family of horizontal parallel lines, each one marking a
5531: scale \hbox{$j:h-1\leq j\leq M+1$}, so that the each node $v$ is contained in
5532: the horizontal line with index $h_v$. The scale $h_u$
5533: of the endpoint $u$ ranges from $h+1$ to $M+1$; if
5534: $v$ is the first preceding of such an endpoint, $h_u=h_v+1$.
5535: The scale of the first node is $h$: because of the distinction that
5536: will be done between the nodes in correspondence of the hard fermion
5537: regime and the soft fermion regime,
5538: $h$ is allowed to be $\le N+1$; the scale of the root is
5539: $h_r=h-1$.
5540: %
5541: \art
5542: There are two kinds of endpoints, {\it normal} and {\it special}.
5543: With each normal endpoint $u$, it is associated one of the three
5544: self-interactions $\l_{h_u-1}\VV$, $\g^{h_u-1}\n_{h_u-1}\NN$ or
5545: $\d_{h_v-1}\DD$, if $h_u-1\leq N$; otherwise
5546: the interactions $\l_N\VV$, $\g^N\n_N\NN$ or
5547: $\d_N\DD$. They are called the endpoints of type $\l$, $\n$,
5548: $\d$, with an obvious correspondence.
5549: With each special endpoint $u$ it is associated one of the three
5550: interactions with the external sources, $\z^{(2,+)}_{h_u-1}\JJ_+$,
5551: $\z^{(2,-)}_{h_u-1}\JJ_-$ or $\FF$, if $h_u-1\leq N$; otherwise
5552: the interactions $\z^{(2,+)}_N\JJ_+$,
5553: $\z^{(2,-)}_N\JJ_-$ or $\FF$. They are called the endpoints
5554: of type $\f$, $\jm_+$ and $\jm_-$.
5555: The endpoints of type $\jm$ are the union of the
5556: ones of type $\jm_+$ and $\jm_-$.
5557: %
5558: \art
5559: Given a node $v$, $n^\f_v$ and $n^\jm_v$ are respectively the
5560: number of endpoints of type $\f$, and of type $\jm$
5561: greater than $v$; $n^{(4)}_v, n^{(2)}_v$ are respectively the
5562: number of normal endpoint of type $\l$ and of type $\n$ or $\d$
5563: greater than $v$; $n_v\defi n^{(4)}_v+n^{(2)}_v$. Analogously,
5564: given a tree $\t$, the integers $n^\f_\t,n^\jm_\t, n^{(4)}_\t,
5565: n^{(2)}_\t$ and $n_\t$ are respectively the number of endpoints of
5566: type $\f$, of type $\jm$, of type $\l$, of type $\n$ or $\d$ and
5567: the total number of normal endpoints of the tree.
5568: %
5569: \art
5570: For any node $v$, the {\it cluster } $L_v$ with frequency $h_v$
5571: is the set of endpoints greater than the node $v$; if $v$ is an
5572: endpoint, it is itself a ({\it trivial}) cluster. The tree provides
5573: an organization of endpoints into a hierarchy of clusters:
5574: $L_{w}<L_{v}$ if $L_{w}\subset L_{v}$
5575: %
5576: \art
5577: A {\it field label} $f$ distinguishes a field
5578: involved in the interactions. If $v$ is an endpoint,
5579: $I_v$ is the
5580: the set of all the fields $\ps$, $\f$ and $\jm$ involved in the
5581: interaction in $v$. If $v$ is a node, $I_v$ is defined as the union
5582: of the sets $I_u$, for any endpoint $u:u>v$; $x(f)$, $\s(f)$ and
5583: $\o(f)$ denote the spacetime point, the (eventual) $\s$ index and
5584: the $\o$ index, respectively, of the field $f$.
5585: If $h_v< N$, one of the field variables belonging to $I_v$ may also
5586: carry a derivative. It is associated with each field label $f$ an
5587: integer $m(f)\in\{0,1,2\}$, denoting the order of the derivative.
5588: %
5589: \art
5590: In correspondence of any node or endpoint $v$,
5591: let $P_v\subset I_v$, the {\it external
5592: fields} of $v$, be constructed as follows. In each endpoint $u$ all
5593: the fields are external: $P_u\defi I_v$. If $v$ is a node, and
5594: $v_1,\ldots,v_{s_v}$ are its first followers, then $P_v$ can be
5595: any set s.t. $P_v\subset \left(\cup_i P_{v_i}\right)$. Let
5596: $Q_{v_i}\defi P_v\cap P_{v_i}$: the union of the complementary ones,
5597: $\cup_i P_{v_i}\bs Q_{v_i}$, is the set of the {\it internal
5598: fields} of $v$
5599: -- or the fields {\it contracted} in correspondence of the node $v$ --
5600: and have not to be an empty at least
5601: \subelenco{
5602: %
5603: \item{$\bullet$}
5604: in the first node, except if its scale is $h=N+1$.
5605: %
5606: \item{$\bullet$}
5607: in the branching points;
5608: %
5609: \item{$\bullet$}
5610: in the first preceding nodes of the endpoints.}
5611: %
5612: Hence, the endpoints are attached to nodes
5613: where some of their external fields are
5614: actually contracted; while the first point is
5615: the lowest node in correspondence of which
5616: some contraction actually occur,
5617: except in the case of trees lying
5618: only on the scales $\ge N+1$, for which
5619: the first point has been set to be on scale $N+1$.
5620: Among the fields in $P_v$, the set of all the
5621: fields of type $\f$ and $\jm$ will be called $S_v$,
5622: the set of the ``special fields''.
5623: Finally, $|P_v|=n^\ps_v+n^\f_v+n^\jm_v$, where $n^\ps_v$ is
5624: the number of external fields of type $\ps$, while
5625: $n^\f_v,$ $n^\jm_v$,
5626: as already defined, are
5627: the the number of
5628: external fields $\f$ and $\jm$ --
5629: indeed there is only one source field in the special
5630: endpoint.
5631: %
5632: \art
5633: Let $\TT_{w;h;n}^{n^\ps,n^\f,n^\jm}$ be the set of all
5634: topological trees, with all the above depicted constraints,
5635: with root on scale $h$, first node $w$ on scale $h+1$,
5636: and with $n$ normal endpoints,
5637: $n^\ps$ external fields of type $\ps$,
5638: $n^\f$ endpoints of type $\f$ and $n^\jm$
5639: endpoints of type $\jm$. To each such tree
5640: it corresponds a sequence of
5641: instructions to built a class of Feynman graphs.
5642: %
5643: \art
5644: Let $\GG$ one of the Feynman graphs
5645: corresponding to the tree
5646: $\t\in\TT_{w;h;n}^{n^\ps,n^\f,n^\jm}$.
5647: The endpoints of $\t$ represents the vertices of
5648: $\GG$, with the specified couplings. Any node $v$ is in
5649: correspondence with a subgraph $\GG_v\subset
5650: \GG\=\GG_w$, in which the external legs are the external
5651: fields of $v$. Specifically, if $v_1,\ldots,v_{s_v}$ ($s_v\geq 1$)
5652: are the first followers of $v$, the Feynman graph $\GG_v$ is constructed
5653: by pairing the internal fields of $v$ with propagators $g^{(h)}$,
5654: in a way that the subgraphs $\GG(v_1),\ldots,\GG(v_{s_v})$ remains
5655: connected.
5656: There are many possible way to chose $\{P_v\}_{v}$,
5657: or equivalently many possible ways of selecting the internal fields
5658: to be involved in the contractions;
5659: and there are many possible
5660: connecting contractions: that is why to
5661: each $\t$ is associated a family of many different Feynman graphs.
5662: %
5663: \art
5664: Let the set of the nodes of $\t$ --
5665: hence considering neither the root, nor
5666: the endpoints --
5667: be denoted,
5668: with abuse of notation, $\t$ as well.
5669: For each node $v$, the integer $l_v$ is the number of lines of
5670: the Feynman graph $\GG_v$; while $l_{o,v}$ is the number of lines
5671: in $\GG_v$, which are not in $\cup_{i=1}^{s_v}\GG_{v_i}$.
5672: Similarly, $l^{\rm anti}_{v}$ and $l^{\rm anti}_{o,v}$
5673: count the number of lines of the graph which
5674: correspond to antidiagonal propagators.
5675: Two fundamental relations are
5676: %
5677: $$\eqalign{
5678: &\sum_{u\in \t}^{u\geq v}(s_u-1)
5679: =n_v+n^\f_v+n^\jm_v-1\;,\cr
5680: &\sum_{u\in \t}^{u\geq v
5681: }l_{o,v}=l_v=2n^{(4)}_v+n^{(2)}_v+(1/2)n^\f_v+n^\jm_v-(1/2)n^\ps_v
5682: \;.}\Eqa(trel)$$
5683: %
5684: For instance, from them, by telescopic decomposition
5685: of the differences of the scales,
5686: $h_u-h_v=\sum_{w\in \t}^{v<w\leq u} h_w- h_{w'}$,
5687: other two identities descend:
5688: %
5689: $$\eqalign{
5690: \sum_{u\in \t}^{u\geq v}(h_u-h_v)(s_u-1)
5691: &=
5692: \sum_{u\in \t}^{u\geq v}(h_u-h_{u'})(n_v+n^\f_v+n^\jm_v-1)\;,\cr
5693: \sum_{u\in \t}^{u\geq v}(h_u-h_v)l_{o,v}
5694: &=
5695: \sum_{u\in \t}^{u\geq v}(h_u-h_{u'})l_u\;.
5696: }\Eqa(treeid)$$
5697: The above formulas are stated as they are for
5698: shake of clarity;
5699: but sometimes it will be used that, by definition,
5700: $h_w-h_{w'}=1$.
5701: %
5702: \art
5703: It is natural to consider the following decomposition.
5704: Given any $\t\in \TT_{w;h;n}^{n^\ps,n^\f,n^\jm}$, let
5705: the ``auxiliary tree'', $\t^a\subset \t$,
5706: be the union of the paths in $\t$
5707: which connects the special endpoint with the root $r$;
5708: for any $w\in \t^a$, let $s_w^*$,
5709: the number of the nodes first followers of
5710: $v$ and in $\t^a$.
5711: Besides,
5712: if $w$ is one of the maximal nodes in $\t^a$,
5713: let the integers $n^\jm_{*,w}$,
5714: $n^\f_{*,w}$, be the number of
5715: the external fields of type $\jm$ or
5716: of type $\f$ which are in the cluster $L_w$;
5717: otherwise, for $w\in \t^a$ but not maximal,
5718: let them be the number of
5719: the external fields of type $\jm$ or
5720: of type $\f$ which are in the cluster $L_w$,
5721: but not in the following clusters $L_{w_1},\ldots,L_{w_{s_w}}$.
5722: Finally, the ``main tree'', $\t^*\subset \t^a$,
5723: is given by the auxiliary tree,
5724: deprived of the nodes above the maximal nodes
5725: with $s_w^*\geq 2$;
5726: for $w\in \t^*$,
5727: let the integer $b^*_w$ be the number of
5728: nodes of $\t^*$ first followers of $w$:
5729: hence $s_w^*= b^*_w+n^\f_{*,w}+n^\jm_{*,w}$.
5730: %
5731: \art
5732: Given any set of fields $M$, let $x(M)\defi\cup_{f\in M}x(f)$.
5733: Let $D_v$ be the {\it tree distance} among
5734: $x\left(I_{v_1}\right),\ldots, x\left(I_{v_{s_v}}\right)$
5735: the sets of the spacetime points
5736: of the clusters $L_{v_1}\ldots L_{v_{s_v}}$:
5737: namely $D_v\defi\min_{g\in
5738: \CC}\sum_{l\in g}|l|$, where $\CC$ the set
5739: of all the possible tree graphs $g$
5740: connecting the spacetime points in
5741: $x\left(I_{v_1}\right),\ldots, x\left(I_{v_{s_v}}\right)$,
5742: and $l$ are the links.
5743: Similarly, $D_{0,w}$ and $D_{1,w}$ are respectively
5744: the ``time'' and ``space''
5745: tree distance
5746: and are defined as the tree distance
5747: among the time component and the space component
5748: of the spacetime points in
5749: $x\left(I_{v_1}\right),\ldots, x\left(I_{v_{s_v}}\right)$.
5750: }
5751:
5752: \*
5753: \asub(ClE){Cluster expansion.} A standard tool in the
5754: fermionic Renormalization Group -- first introduced in [Le87] --
5755: is the cluster expansion of the truncated expectations (see
5756: [B84]). It explains why in the bounds it is better to consider
5757: altogether all Feynman graphs corresponding to
5758: one tree, rather than one Feynman graph singly.
5759:
5760: Let $P_1,\ldots,P_s$ be disjoint sets of $\ps$ fields s.t.
5761: $\left|\cup_i P_i\right|=2n$; and let $P_j^{\s}\defi\{f\in
5762: P_j:\s(f)=\s\}$. A pairing $l$ is the couple of a field $f^+_l$ in
5763: $\cup_j P^+_j$ and a field $f^-_l$ in $\cup_j P^-_j$: let
5764: $x(f^+_l)-x(f^-_l)
5765: \defi x_l$; and
5766: $\big(\o(f^+_l),\o(f^-_l)\big)\defi \underline\o_l$. Then, the
5767: truncated expectation w.r.t. the Gaussian measure of propagator
5768: $g^{(h)}$ is given, up to a global sign, by:
5769: %
5770: $$
5771: \EE^T_{h}\big[\psi(P_1),\ldots,\psi(P_s)\big]=
5772: \sum_{T}\left(\prod_{l\in T} g^{(h)}_{\underline\o_l}(x_l)\right)
5773: \int\!\der P_{T}(t)\ \det G^{h,T}(t)\;,
5774: \Eqa(ce)$$
5775: %
5776: where $T$ is a set of pairings of elements of $\cup_i P_i$, which
5777: would be a connected tree graph if all the points in the same set $P_i$
5778: where identified; the parameters $t=\big\{t_{i,j}\in [0,1] :
5779: i,j=1,\ldots,s\big\}$ have a certain normalized distribution $\der
5780: P_{T}(t)$; finally $G^{h,T}(t)$ is a $(n-s+1)\times (n-s+1)$
5781: matrix, the entries of which
5782: are given by
5783: $G^{h,T}_{f^-_l,f^+_l}= g^{(h)}_{\underline\o_l}(\underline
5784: x_l)t_{\underline i_l}$, where $\underline i\defi (i^+_l, i^-_l)$
5785: s.t. $f^-_{l}\in P^-_{i^-_l}$ and $f^+_{l}\in P^+_{i^+_l}$, for any
5786: possible pair $l$ of elements of $\cup_i P_i$, s.t. $l\notin T$.
5787:
5788: The importance of this formula is that, if all the entries
5789: $M_{i,j}$ of an $n\times n$ matrix $M$ are give by scalar products,
5790: $M_{i,j}=(v^{(i)},w^{(j)})$, where $v^{(1)},\ldots,v^{(n)}$ and
5791: $w^{(1)},\ldots,w^{(n)}$ are vectors, bounded in norm by a constant
5792: $C_0$, the sum of $n!$ monomials that gives the determinant of $M$
5793: can be bounded with $C_0^n$, by a simple application of the volume
5794: inequality. In this way factorial bounds are avoided.
5795: \*
5796:
5797: \asub(BST){Bounds for the kernels.}
5798: Setting $(h\wdg N)\defi \min\{h,N\}$,
5799: the effective potential on scale $h$
5800: is a polynomial of the fields
5801: with coefficients given by the kernels:
5802: %
5803: $$\eqalign{
5804: &\WW^{(h)}
5805: \left(\f,\jm,\ps\right)\cr
5806: =&
5807: \sum_{n>0}\sum_{n^\ps,n^\f,n^\jm\geq 0}
5808: \sum_{\t_v\in \TT_{v;(h\wdg N);n}^{n^\ps,n^\f,n^\jm}}
5809: \sum_{P_{v}\subset I_{v}}^{|P_v|=n^\ps+n^\f+n^\jm}
5810: \int\!\der^2 x(P_{v})\
5811: f(P_{v}) W^{(h)}\Big(\xx(P_{v});\t_v; P_{v}\Big)}\;,$$
5812: %
5813: where, $ f(P_{v})$ denotes the product of
5814: every external field in $P_v$.
5815: In its turn,
5816: the kernel is a sum over the Feynman graphs
5817: of the product of a propagator for each line of the graphs,
5818: $K^{(h)}\Big(\xx(I_{v});\t_v;P_{v}\Big)$
5819: integrated w.r.t. all the internal points
5820: of the cluster $L_v$:
5821: %
5822: $$W^{(h)}\Big(\xx(P_{v});\t_v;P_{v}\Big)
5823: =
5824: \int\!\der^2x(I_{v}\bs P_{v})\
5825: K^{(h)}\Big(\xx(I_{v});\t_v;P_{v}\Big)\;.$$
5826: %
5827: A useful norm to bound the kernels is obtained by
5828: integrating the product of the propagators
5829: w.r.t. all the spacetime points $x\left(I_v\right)$,
5830: except the ``fixed points'',
5831: $x(F_v)$: they are, if $S_v$ is not empty,
5832: the points in $F_v\defi S_v$; otherwise
5833: the point in $F_v\defi\{x_v\}$,
5834: for any choice of $x_v\in P_v$. It holds the following
5835: lemma.
5836: \*
5837:
5838: \alemma(SS){If $h>N$,
5839: there exists a constant $C_2\geq C$ such that,
5840: for any choice of the
5841: tree $\t_v\in \TT_{v;N;n}^{n^\ps,n^\f,n^\jm}$,
5842: with root $r$,
5843: %
5844: $$\eqalign{
5845: &\int\!
5846: \der^2 x\big(I_{v}\bs F_v\big)\
5847: \left| K^{(h)}
5848: \Big(x(I_{v});\t_v;P_{v}\Big)\right|\cr
5849: \leq&
5850: (C_2\e)^n C_2^{n^\f+n^\jm}
5851: \g^{Nd_r}
5852: \left(\sum_{\{P_{w}\}_{w> r}}
5853: \prod_{w\in \t_v}
5854: \g^{d_w+r_w}\right)\cr
5855: &\cdot
5856: \left(
5857: \prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{s_v^*\geq 2}
5858: {\g^{(N+h_w)(s^*_w-1)}\over
5859: e^{{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\left(\sqrt{\g^{N} D_{w}}+\sqrt{\g^{h_w} D_{0,w}}\right)}}\right)
5860: \left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\f}{1\over \sqrt{Z_{N}}}\right)
5861: \left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\jm}{Z^{(2)}_{N}\over Z_{N}}\right)\;,
5862: }\Eqa(l2)$$
5863: with
5864: $$d_w\defi \left\{
5865: \matrix{1-n_w-n^\jm_w-n^\f_w \hfill&\hfill{\rm for\ }h_w\ge N+1\cr
5866: 2-(1/2)n^\ps-(3/2)n^\f-n^\jm\hfill&\hfill{\rm for\ }w=r\;,}\right.$$
5867: and $r_w$ such that $d_w+r_w\le -1/2 -(1/8)n^\ps_w$.
5868: }
5869: \*
5870:
5871: \proof.
5872: Let $\t_{v_1},\ldots,\t_{v_{s_v}}$ be the subtrees of $\t_v$
5873: branching from $v$ -- namely with root in $v$, and first nodes
5874: $v_1,\ldots,v_{s_v}$; the product of propagators
5875: $K^{(h_v)}\Big(\xx(I_{v});\t_v;P_{v}\Big)$ is obtained
5876: as
5877: %
5878: $$\eqalign{
5879: K^{(h_v)}
5880: \Big(\xx(I_v);\t_v;P_{v}\Big)
5881: =&{1\over s_{v} !}\sum_{P_{v_1},\ldots, P_{v_{s_{v}}}}
5882: \left(\prod_{i=1}^{s_{v}}
5883: K^{(h_v+1)}\Big(\xx(I_{v_i});\t_{v_i};P_{v_i}\Big)\right)\cdot\cr
5884: &
5885: \cdot\EE^T_{h}
5886: \left[\psi(P_{v_1}\bs Q_{v_1}),\ldots,\psi(P_{v_{s_{v}}}\bs Q_{v_{s_{v}}})
5887: \right]\;.
5888: }\Eqa(3.38)$$
5889: %
5890: Applying \equ(ce), and iterating till the endpoints, it
5891: holds:
5892: %
5893: $$\eqalign{
5894: K^{(h_v)}
5895: &\Big(\xx(I_{v});\t_v;P_{v}\Big)
5896: =
5897: \left(\prod_{u}^{\rm{e.p.}}\r_u\right)
5898: \cdot\cr&\cdot
5899: \prod_{w\in\t_v}
5900: \sum_{P_{w}}
5901: \sum_{T_{w}}{1\over s_{w} !}
5902: \left(\prod_{l\in T_w} g^{(h_w)}_{\underline\o_l}(x_l)\right)
5903: \int\!\der P_{T_w}(\tt)\ \det G^{h_w,T_w}(\tt)\;,
5904: }\Eqa(iter)$$
5905: %
5906: where $\r_u$ denotes the
5907: coupling in the endpoints: $\l_N$, $\g^N\n_N$ or $\d_N$,
5908: if $u$ is a normal
5909: endpoint; $\z^{(2,\s)}_N$ if $u$ is an endpoint
5910: of type $\jm^{(\s)}$; $1$ if $u$ is an endpoint
5911: of type $\f$.
5912: Then, a bound for
5913: the integral of \equ(iter) can be obtained as follows.
5914: \elenco{
5915: %
5916: \art
5917: Calling $b_{h}(x-y)\defi
5918: e^{-(c/2)\left(\sqrt{\g^N| x_{l}|}+\sqrt{\g^{h}| x_{0,l}|}\right)}$,
5919: by \equ(prop>N)
5920: each
5921: of the $s_w-1$ propagators in a tree $T_w$
5922: is bounded with $ C \g^N b^2_{h_w}(x-y)$; while
5923: $\left|\det G^{h_w,T_w}(\tt)\right|$ is bounded
5924: with a factor $C_0C\g^{N}$ for each of the
5925: $l_{o,w}-(s_w-1)$ rows of the matrix
5926: $G^{h_w,T_w}(\tt)$: globally,
5927: the product of the propagators can be bounded with
5928: %
5929: $$\left(C_0C\g^N\right)^{l_{o,w}}\prod_{l\in T_w}
5930: b^2_{h_w}(x_l)\;.$$
5931: %
5932: \art
5933: Collecting the products over $b_{h_w}(x_l)$
5934: for any node of the tree $\t_v$,
5935: since the branching nodes of the main tree
5936: are not more than the special
5937: endpoints $n^\f+n^\jm$,
5938: %
5939: $$\eqalign{
5940: \prod_{w\in \t_v}
5941: \prod_{l\in T_w} b^2_{h_w}(x_l)
5942: \leq
5943: & \prod_{w\in \t_v}
5944: \prod_{l\in T_w} b_{h_w}(x_l)\cr
5945: &\prod_{w\in \t^*_v}
5946: e^{-{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\left(\sqrt{\g^N D_{w}}+\sqrt{\g^{h_w} D_{0,w}}\right)}
5947: \;. }\Eqa(tdis)$$
5948: %
5949: \art
5950: The integrations in $\der^2 x(I_v/F_v)$ are performed,
5951: the left integrand being the product
5952: of the $ b_{h_w}$'s, increased by replacing in them
5953: $\g^N|x_l|$ with $\g^N|x_{1,l}|$, times constant factors.
5954: It holds
5955: %
5956: $$\int\!\der^2 x(I_v/F_v)\prod_{w\in \t_v}
5957: \prod_{l\in T_w} b_{h_w}(x_l)\le
5958: \prod_{w\in \t}\left(C_1\g^{-(N+h_w)}\right)^{(s_w-s^*_w)}\;.
5959: \Eqa(cas)$$
5960: %
5961: Indeed, the above formula is obtained
5962: iteratively starting from the first node, $v$.
5963: Let the labels
5964: $w_1,\ldots,w_{s_w}$ be assigned to the nodes
5965: following $w$ so that:
5966: for $j=1,\ldots,s^*_w$ the cluster $L_{w_j}$
5967: contains at least a special endpoint,
5968: $S_{w_i}\neq \emptyset$,
5969: and is called ``special cluster'';
5970: for $j=s^*_w+1,\ldots,s_w$, the cluster $L_{w_j}$
5971: contains no special endpoints, $S_{w_i}= \emptyset$ -- eventually it
5972: may be $s^*_w=0,s_w$.
5973: Now, the graph $T_w$ can be thought as a tree graph:
5974: the cluster $L_{w_1}$ is its root,
5975: $L_{w_2},\ldots,L_{w_{s_w}}$ are its nodes,
5976: while the factors $ b_{h_w}$'s are its links.
5977: Then, considering the first node $v$, and starting from
5978: the endpoints of $T_v$, let
5979: $L_{v_j}$ be the first followers of $L_{v_{j'}}$, and
5980: let $b_{h_v}$ be the link connecting them.
5981: If $L_{v_j}$ is a special cluster,
5982: than $b_{h_v}$ is simply bounded with its maximum,
5983: $\norm{b_{h_v}}_\io$;
5984: whereas, if $L_{v_j}$ is a normal cluster,
5985: the link $b_{h_v}$ is bounded with $\norm{b_{h_v}}_1$,
5986: the integral being taken w.r.t. the point in $F_{v_j}$.
5987: Since $\norm{b_{h_v}}_\io\le1$, while
5988: $\norm{b_{h_v}}_1\leq C_1\g^{-(N+h_v)}$,
5989: this gives the factor in \equ(cas) for
5990: $w=v$.
5991: Iterating to all the nodes following
5992: the first, the complete bound is found.
5993: %
5994: \art
5995: The sum over $T_w$ is bounded
5996: by the number of the topological graphs
5997: with $s_w$ nodes, $4^{s_w}$, times the number
5998: of the possible permutations of such nodes,
5999: $s_w!$ .
6000: %
6001: \art
6002: Each factor $\r_u$ are bounded, by \equ(ind2),
6003: with $2\e$ if $u$ is a normal endpoint; otherwise
6004: $\r_u=1/\sqrt{Z_N}$ or $Z^{(2)}_N/Z_N$ if respectively
6005: $u$ is of type $\f$ or $\jm$.}
6006: \*
6007:
6008: \0In the end, the factorial in item 4. is compensated
6009: by the one in the denominator of \equ(iter); while
6010: the powers of $2\e$, $C$, $C_0$, $C_1$ and $4^{s_w}$ is
6011: all together bounded with
6012:
6013: %
6014: $$\prod_{w\in \t_v}(4C_1)^{s_w}(C_0C)^{l_{o,w}}(2\e)^{n_{o,w}}
6015: \leq (C_2\e)^n C_2^{n^\f+n^\jm}\;,$$
6016: %
6017: for $C_2\geq (4CC_0C_1)^2$.
6018: And the rest of
6019: the bound is reduced to simple dimensional analysis.
6020: For each of the
6021: $l_{o,w}$ propagators there is a factor
6022: $\g^{N}$; for each of the $s_w-s^*_w$ integrals
6023: there is a factor $\g^{-(N+h_w)}$ more.
6024: Furthermore, not yet counted in the above items, by \equ(prop>N)
6025: there is a factor $\g^{-(h_w-N)}$ more for any antidiagonal propagator.
6026: Finally, in correspondence
6027: of each endpoint of type $\d$ and $\n$ there
6028: is a factor $\g^{N}$. Therefore the collection of
6029: all such factors gives
6030: %
6031: $$\eqalign{
6032: &\left(\prod_{w\in \t^*_w}\g^{(N+h_w)(s^*_w-1)}\right)
6033: \prod_{w\in \t_v}\g^{h_w\big(1-s_w-l_{o,w}^{\rm anti}\big)}
6034: \g^{N\big(l_{o,w}-(s_w-1)+l_{o,w}^{\rm anti}+ n_{o,w}^{(2)}\big)}
6035: \cr\le &
6036: \left(\prod_{w\in \t^*_w}\g^{(N+h_w)(s^*_w-1)}\right)
6037: \g^{Nd_r}
6038: \prod_{w\in \t_v}\g^{d_w+r_w}\;, }\Eqa(coll21)$$
6039: %
6040: where $r_w\defi-l_w^{\rm anti}$ for $n_w=1$, $n_w^\ps=n_w^\jm=0$,
6041: and $r_w\defi 0$ otherwise.
6042: Now it is possible to prove that
6043: $d_w+r_w\leq-(1/2) -(1/16)n_w^\ps\;.$
6044: Indeed, there are the following possibilities.
6045: \elenco{
6046: %
6047: \art
6048: The number of normal endpoints is zero.
6049: Then, since in the nodes of the tree
6050: there has to be at least a contraction,
6051: and since the self-contraction of
6052: the fields in the endpoint of type $\jm$
6053: is zero by oddness of the diagonal propagator,
6054: $n^\f_w+n^\jm_w\geq2$. Then, since
6055: in such graphs the external fields
6056: of type $\ps$ cannot be more than
6057: $2(n_w^\f+n_w^\jm)$,
6058: it holds $d_w\leq -(1/2)(n^\f_w+n^\jm_w)\leq -(1/2)-(1/8)n^\ps_w$.
6059: %
6060: \art
6061: The number of the normal endpoints is 1, while
6062: $n^\f_w+n^\jm_w=0$.
6063: Then $d_w+r_w\leq -l_w^{\rm anti}$. By explicit
6064: inspection, such graphs, made of self-contractions,
6065: either are zero by oddness of the diagonal
6066: propagator, or
6067: have at least one antidiagonal propagator;
6068: furthermore the number of external $\ps$ fields
6069: cannot be more than two. Therefore
6070: \hbox{$d_w+r_w\leq -(1/2)-(1/4) n^\ps_w$}.
6071: %
6072: \art
6073: The number of the total endpoints,
6074: $n_w+n^\f_w+n^\jm_w$, is greater or equal to 2.
6075: Since in such graphs the external fields $\ps$
6076: cannot be more than
6077: $4(n_w+n^\f_w+n^\jm_w)$,
6078: and $r_w=0$, then
6079: \hbox{$d_w+r_w\leq -(1/2)(n_w+n^\f_w+n^\jm_w)\leq
6080: -(1/2)-(1/16)n^\ps_w$}. }
6081: {\0The proof is complete. \hfill\qed\hskip1em}
6082:
6083: \*
6084: \alemma(DBST){\it If $h\leq N-1$,
6085: and for $\e$ small enough,
6086: there exists
6087: a constant $C_2\geq C$ such that
6088: $$\eqalign{
6089: &\int\!\der^2\xx\big(I_{v}\bs F_v\big)\
6090: \left|K^{(h)}
6091: \Big(\xx(I_{v});\t_v;P_{v}\Big)\right|\cr
6092: \leq& (C_3\e)^n C_3^{n^\f+n^\jm}
6093: \g^{h d_r}
6094: \left(\sum_{\{P_{w}\}_{w> r}}\prod_{w\in \t_v}
6095: \g^{d_w+r_w}\right)
6096: \cdot\cr
6097: &\left(
6098: \prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{s_v^*\geq 2}
6099: {\g^{\big((h_w\wedge N)+h_w\big)(s^*_w-1)}\over
6100: e^{{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\left(\sqrt{\g^{(h_w\wedge N)} D_{w}}+\sqrt{\g^{h_w} D_{0,w}}\right)}}\right)
6101: \left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\f}{1\over \sqrt{Z_{(h_i\wedge N)}}}\right)
6102: \left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\jm}{Z^{(2)}_{(k_i\wedge N)}\over Z_{(k_i \wedge N)}}\right)\;,
6103: }\Eqa(lemma3)$$
6104: %
6105: where
6106: $$d_w\defi\left\{
6107: \matrix{1-n_w-n_w^\f-n_w^\jm\hfill&\hfill {\rm for\ }h_w\geq N+1\cr
6108: 2-(1/2)n_w^\ps-(3/2)n_w^\f-n_w^\jm\hfill&\hfill {\rm for\ }h_w\le N}\right.\;,
6109: $$
6110: and $r_w$ is such that $d_w+r_w\le -1/4 -(1/12)n^\ps_w$.
6111: }
6112: \*
6113:
6114: \proof.
6115: Neglecting the effects of the localization,
6116: with argument similar to the proof
6117: of the previous lemma, the bound
6118: is reduced to simple dimensional analysis:
6119: for each of the $l_{o,w}$ propagators there is a factor
6120: $\g^{h_w}$; for each of the the $s_w-s^*$ integrals
6121: there is a factor
6122: $\g^{-2h_w}$.
6123: Finally, regarding the endpoints, there is a factor $2\e$ for each
6124: endpoint of type $\l$; $2\e \g^{h_w}$ for each endpoint of type
6125: $\d$ or $\n$. Therefore,
6126: collecting only the factors coming from the dimensional analysis,
6127: %
6128: $$\eqalign{
6129: &\left(\prod_{w\in \t^*_w}\g^{2h_w(s^*_w-1)}\right)
6130: \prod_{w\in \t_v}\g^{h_w\big(l_{o,w}-2(s_w-1)+ n^{(2)}_{o,w}\big)}
6131: \cr=&
6132: \left(\prod_{w\in \t^*_w}\g^{2h_w(s^*_w-1)}\right)
6133: \g^{h d_v}
6134: \prod_{w\in \t_v}\g^{d_w}\;,
6135: }\Eqa(coll2)$$
6136: %
6137: with $d_w\defi 2-(1/2)n^\ps_w-(3/2)n^\f_w-n^\jm_w$.
6138: Now the point is that they can occur nodes with non-negative
6139: dimension:
6140: here comes the role of the localization, which improves their
6141: dimension by absorbing the localized part of the graphs into the
6142: coupling constants. Indeed, for the kernel bringing an
6143: $\RR$-operator,
6144: with reference to the items at point \secc(L),
6145: the following facts have to be considered.
6146: \elenco{
6147: \art
6148: The local part $z_{h_w} D_\s$,
6149: occurring in a certain node $w$,
6150: is bounded, up to a constant, by
6151: \hbox{$\g^{h_w}\g^{-(h_w-h_{w_0})}$},
6152: if $w_0$ is the node, lower than
6153: $w$, in correspondence of
6154: which one of the field of momenta $k$
6155: is contracted. While the local part
6156: $z_{h_w}\big|-ik_0+\o e(k_1)-D_\o(k)\big|$
6157: is instead bounded, up to a constant,
6158: with $\g^{h_w}\g^{-(h_w-h_{w_0})}\g^{-(N-h_{w_0})}\leq
6159: \g^{h_w}\g^{-(N-h_{w_0})}\g^{-2(h_w-h_{w_0})}$:
6160: the standard power counting,
6161: as it were using only the factor
6162: $\g^{h_w}$, because of $\g^{-2({h_w}-h_{w_0})}$,
6163: is improved in all the nodes $u$ along the path
6164: connecting $w$ with $w_0$ by $r_u=2$.
6165: Furthermore, with reference to the proof
6166: of the equivalence of the Euclidean and the
6167: Hamiltonian regularization,
6168: the factor $\g^{-(N-h_w)}$
6169: makes such a kernel -- generated only
6170: in the latter regularization --
6171: vanishing in the limit of removed cutoff.
6172: %
6173: \art
6174: One or two increments
6175: $D_\o$, and respectively one or two derivatives in the companying kernels
6176: -- the kernel occurring at node $w$,
6177: the increment having the same momenta of
6178: a $\ps$-field contracted on a lower node, $w_0$ -- gives
6179: a gain w.r.t. the standard power counting:
6180: each derivative gives a factor $\g^{-h_w}$ more,
6181: while each increment gives a factor $\g^{h_{w_0}}$ more.
6182: Since
6183: %
6184: $$\g^{-(h_w-h_{w_0})r}=\prod_u^{w_0\leq u\leq w}
6185: \g^{-r}\;,\qquad {\rm for }\ r=1,2\;,$$
6186: %
6187: all the nodes $u$ in the path connecting
6188: the node $w$ with the node $w_0$
6189: have a gain $r_u=1$ or 2.
6190: %
6191: \art
6192: The local terms which are
6193: linear or quadratic in the factors $\{\m_k/\g^k\}_k$
6194: gives a gain in the bounds since, if they occur
6195: in the node $w$ on scale $h$, $k$ has to be
6196: greater or equal to $h$, and,
6197: by \equ(ind1) and the definition of $h^*$:
6198: %
6199: $$\left({\m_k\over \k\g^k}\right)^r\leq
6200: \left({\m_{h^*}\over \k\g^{h^*}}\right)^r
6201: \g^{-r(1-2c_0\e)(k-h^*)}\leq
6202: \prod_{u\leq w}\g^{-r(1-2c_0\e)}\;,$$
6203: %
6204: and therefore,
6205: for $\e$ small enough,
6206: the dimension of every node $u$ occurring
6207: along the path connecting the node $w$
6208: with the root is improved by $r_u=r3/4$.
6209: %
6210: \art
6211: In the kernels corresponding to
6212: nodes $w$ with $n^\jm_w=0$, and $n^\ps_w=n_w^\f=1$,
6213: the dimension is zero. It is possible to
6214: obtain a gain $r_w=1$ at the price
6215: of worsening the final constant $C_3$
6216: of a factor $\g^2$. Indeed, because of the
6217: compact support of the propagators, it is clear
6218: that such nodes can be both among
6219: the preceding ones of the $n^\f$
6220: special endpoints of type $\f$,
6221: let them be $w_1,\ldots,w_q$,
6222: and among the ones preceding
6223: $w_1,\ldots,w_q$ themselves: namely
6224: no more than
6225: $2 n^\f$ nodes.}
6226: \*
6227:
6228: \0Therefore, with developments similar to
6229: the ones in the previous proof,
6230: it is possible to prove
6231: that $d_w+r_w\le -(1/4)-(1/12)n^\ps_w $.
6232: But since the
6233: localization produces the flows of the
6234: field and densities strengths,
6235: \equ(coll2) has to be replaced
6236: with
6237: %
6238: $$\g^{h d_v}\left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\f}{1\over \sqrt{Z_{h_i}}}\right)
6239: \left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\jm}{Z^{(2)}_{k_i}\over Z_{k_i}}\right)
6240: \left(\prod_{w\in \t^*_w}\g^{2h_w(s^*_w-1)}\right)
6241: \left(\prod_{w\in \t_v}
6242: \left({Z_{h_w}\over Z_{h_w'}}\right)^{(n^\ps_w/ 2)}\g^{d_w+r_w}\right).
6243: $$
6244: %
6245: This completes the proof. \hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
6246: \*
6247:
6248: \asub(R2){Remark.}
6249: The argument in the last item does not apply in the case $n^\jm=1$ and
6250: $n^\ps=2$. This is the main difference of the external sources
6251: $\jm$ and $\f$: while the former requires a coupling constant for
6252: absorbing divergences due to interaction with the source, the latter
6253: need not, since it in
6254: interacts only by {\it one particle reducible
6255: graphs}.
6256: \*
6257:
6258: \alemma(SF){For $\e$ small enough, the perturbative expansion
6259: for the $(n^\jm;n^\f)$-Schwinger
6260: functions is absolutely convergent to a distribution
6261: fulfilling property E1 and E5. of the \osa{}. }
6262: \*
6263:
6264: \proof.
6265: The expansion for the Schwinger function is given by the expansion
6266: for the effective potential in the case $P_v=S_v$ and
6267: for any scale of the first node $h:h^*-1\le h\le N+1$.
6268:
6269: Since the case $h^*$ finite is much more easier
6270: of the case $h^*=-\io$, the following development
6271: will concern only the latter.
6272:
6273: Calling
6274: $\TT_{v,h;\underline k;\underline h;n}^{0,n^\f,n^\jm}$ the set of
6275: trees $\t\in \TT_{v,h, n}^{0,n^\f,n^\jm}$ having the $n^\f$ external
6276: fields of type $\f$ on scales $h_1,\ldots, h_{n^\f}$, and the
6277: $n^\jm$ external fields of type $\jm$ on scales $k_1,\ldots,
6278: k_{n^\jm}$, it holds
6279: %
6280: $$
6281: S_{\us;\uo}^{(n^\jm;n^\f)(\ue)}
6282: \left(\underline z;\underline x\right)
6283: \defi
6284: \sum_{n\leq 0}\sum_{h\leq M}
6285: \sum_{\underline k}^{h< k_j\leq M}
6286: \sum_{\underline h}^{h< h_j\leq M}
6287: \sum_{\t_v\in \TT_{v,(h\wdg N);\underline h;\underline k;n}^{0,n^\f,n^\jm}}
6288: W^{(h)}\Big(\xx(S_v);\t_v;S_v\Big)
6289: \Eqa(sch)$$
6290: %
6291: and, by the just proved bound on the kernels,
6292: %
6293: $$\eqalign{
6294: &\left|W^{(h)}\Big(\xx(S_v);\t_v;S_v\Big)\right|
6295: \leq
6296: (C_2\e)^n C_2^{n^\f+n^\jm}
6297: \g^{h d_r}\prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\geq N+1}
6298: e^{-{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\sqrt{\g^{h_w} D_{0,w}}}\cr
6299: &\cdot\left(
6300: \prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{s_v^*\geq 2}
6301: {\g^{\Big((h_w\wdg N)+h_w\Big)(s^*_w-1)}\over
6302: e^{{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\sqrt{\g^{(h_w\wdg N)} D_{w}}}}\right)
6303: \left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\f}{1\over \sqrt{Z_{(h_i\wdg N)}}}\right)
6304: \left(\prod_{i=1}^{n^\jm}{Z^{(2)}_{(k_i\wdg N)}\over Z_{(k_i\wdg N)}}\right)
6305: \cdot\cr&\cdot
6306: \left(
6307: \sum_{\{P_{w}\}_{w> r}}\prod_{w\in \t_v}
6308: \left({Z_{(h_w\wdg N)}\over Z_{(h_{w'})\wdg N}}\right)^{n^\ps_w\over 2}\g^{d_w+r_w}\right)\;.
6309: }\Eqa(lemma4)$$
6310: %
6311: Let the following facts be considered.
6312: \elenco{
6313: %
6314: \art
6315: For the main tree it holds an identity
6316: similar to \equ(treeid), with $s_v$ replaced by $s^*_v$,
6317: and with $n_v$ removed from the r.h.s. member; so that:
6318: %
6319: $$\eqalign{
6320: &\sum_{w\in \t^*_v}\Big((h_w\wdg N)+h_w\Big)(s^*_w-1)
6321: =2h(n^\f +n^\jm-1)\cr
6322: &\phantom{****}
6323: +\sum_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\le N}(h_w-h_{w'})2(n_w^\f+n_w^\jm-1)
6324: +\sum_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\ge N+1}(h_w-h_{w'})(n_w^\f+n_w^\jm-1)\cr
6325: &\defi h\D d_v+\sum_{w\in \t_v^*}(h_w-h_{w'})\D d_w\;.}$$
6326: %
6327: These factors can be absorbed into
6328: the dimension of any node $w$ of the main tree,
6329: changing it from $d_w$ to
6330: %
6331: $$d_w + \D d_w=
6332: \left\{\matrix{
6333: n^\jm_w+(1/2)n^\f_w -(1/2)n_w^\ps \hfill&\hfill{\rm for\ }h_w\le N\cr
6334: -n_w\hfill&\hfill{\rm otherwise.}}\right.$$
6335: %
6336: \art
6337: Since $n^f_w=\sum_{v\geq w}n^f_{*,v}$ for $f=\f,\jm$,
6338: then
6339: $$\eqalign{
6340: &\sum_{w\geq v}^{h_w<N}(h_w-h)\big(n_{*,w}^\jm+(1/2)n_{*,w}^\f\big)
6341: +\sum_{w\geq v}^{h_w=N+1}(N-h)\big(n_{w}^\jm+(1/2)n_{w}^\f\big)\cr
6342: &=\sum_{w\geq v}^{h_w\le N}(h_w-h_{w'})\big(n_{w}^\jm+(1/2)n_{w}^\f\big)\;,
6343: }$$
6344: %
6345: which formula gives:
6346: %
6347: $$\eqalign{
6348: &\g^{h \big(n^\jm + (1/2)n^\f\big)}
6349: \prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\le N}
6350: \g^{(h_w-h_{w'})\big(n^\jm_w + (1/2)n^\f_w -(1/2)n^\ps_w\big)}\cr
6351: &\phantom{*********}
6352: \cdot\prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\ge N+1}
6353: \g^{-(h_w-h_{w'})n_w}\cr
6354: =&\prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\le N}
6355: \g^{h_w\big(n^\jm_{*,w} + (1/2)n^\f_{*,w}\big)}
6356: \prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\le N}\g^{-(h_w-h_{w'})(1/2)n^\ps_w}\cr
6357: &\cdot\prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w= N+1}
6358: \g^{N\big(n^\jm_{w} + (1/2)n^\f_w\big)}
6359: \prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\ge N+1}\g^{-(h_w-h_{w'})n_w}\;.}\Eqa(ddee)$$
6360: %
6361: \art
6362: In view of the proof of cluster decomposition,
6363: since it can be, for $w={v^*_0}$, the lowest
6364: branching point of $\t^*$,
6365: \hbox{$ n^\jm_{*,w}+(1/2)n^\f_{*,w}=0$},
6366: a further modification of the above decomposition is
6367: performed.
6368: Setting
6369: $m\defi n^\jm+(1/2)n^\f$,
6370: $m_w\defi n^\jm_w+(1/2)n^\f_w$ and
6371: $m_{*,w}\defi n^\jm_{*,w}+(1/2)n^\f_{*,w}$;
6372: and letting $h_0$ be the scale of $v_0^*$,
6373: the following identity
6374: $$1=\g^{-\big(h_w-h_0\big){1\over 8}{m_{*,w}\over m}}
6375: \g^{\big(h_w-h_0\big){1\over 8}{m_{*,w}\over m}}\;,$$
6376: %
6377: for each node $w\in\t^*:h_w\le N$
6378: turns \equ(ddee) into
6379: $$\eqalign{
6380: &\g^{h_0(1/8)}\prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\le N}
6381: \g^{h_wm_{*,w}\big(1-(1/8m)\big)}
6382: \prod_{w\in \t_v}^{h_w\le N}\g^{(h_w-h_{w'})\big((m_w/8 m)-(1/2)n^\ps_w\big)}\cr
6383: &\cdot\prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w= N+1}
6384: \g^{Nm_{w}\big(1-(1/8m)\big)}
6385: \prod_{w\in \t_v}^{h_w\ge N+1}\g^{-(h_w-h_{w'})n_w}\;.}\Eqa(mvm)$$
6386: %
6387: \art
6388: Let each factor $1/\sqrt{Z_{h_i\wdg N}}$ be considered
6389: for $h_i\le N$:
6390: if the $w\in t_v^*$, is the
6391: highest branching point in $\t$
6392: lower than the $i$-th endpoint of type $\f$, $u_i$,
6393: by \equ(ind1), such a factor can be moved to the
6394: node $w$,
6395: \hbox{$1/\sqrt{Z_{h_i}}\leq 1/\sqrt{Z_{h_w}}\g^{(c_0/2)\e^2(h_i-h_w)}$},
6396: at the price of the factor
6397: $\g^{(c_0/2)\e^2(h_i-h_w)}=\prod_{w'}^{w\leq w'\le u_i}\g^{(c_0/2)\e^2}$:
6398: it is absorbed in the
6399: dimension
6400: of the nodes along the path
6401: connecting $u_i$ with the node
6402: $w$ -- by definition such nodes are not in the main tree --
6403: changing it, for $\e$ small enough, from
6404: \hbox{$d_w+r_w\le -1/4-(1/12)n_w^\ps$} to
6405: the new dimension
6406: $\wh d_w\le-1/8 -(1/12)n^\ps_v$.
6407: Similar decomposition is done in case
6408: $h_i\ge N+1$: the lost in the dimension is
6409: only in the nodes on scales $h_w\le N$.
6410: %
6411: \art
6412: Similar procedure is executed
6413: for each factor $Z^{(2)}_{k_i\wdg N}/Z_{k_i\wdg N}$,
6414: for $h_w\le N$:
6415: if $w\in\t^*$,
6416: is the highest branching point in $\t$ lower than
6417: the $i-$th endpoint of type $\jm$, $u_i$
6418: by \equ(ind1),
6419: \hbox{$Z^{(2)}_{k_i}/Z_{k_i}\leq Z^{(2)}_{h_w}/Z_{h_w}
6420: \g^{2c_0\e(k_i-h_w)}$};
6421: the factor $\g^{2c_0\e(k_i-h_w)}$ is absorbed in the
6422: dimension of the nodes
6423: along the path connecting $u_i$ with
6424: $w$, again changing it from
6425: \hbox{$d_w+r_w=-1/4-(1/12)n^\ps_w$}
6426: to the new dimension $\wh d_w\le-1/8-(1/12)n^\ps_v$, for
6427: $\e$ small enough. Similar decomposition is done in case
6428: $k_i\ge N+1$.
6429: %
6430: \art
6431: The exponent $(m_w/8m)-(1/2)n^\ps_w$ of
6432: the factors
6433: in the second product in formula \equ(mvm)
6434: can be bounded with $-1/8-(1/12)n^\ps_w$.
6435: %
6436: \art
6437: Since in every node $w:h_w\leq N$, both in the main tree and in the
6438: rest of the tree, the dimension has been left to be
6439: $\wh d_w=-1/8-(1/12)n^\ps_w$, and since for $\e$ small enough,
6440: $(Z_{h_w}/Z_{h_w'})\leq \g^{c_0\e^2}\leq \g^{(1/12)}$,
6441: it is possible to absorb all the factors
6442: $(Z_{h_w}/Z_{h_w'})^{(1/2){n^\ps_w}}$ into the dimension
6443: $\wh d_w$, turning it into $d'_w\le -1/8 -(1/24)n^\ps_w$.
6444: %
6445: \art
6446: Regarding the nodes $w:h_w\geq N$,
6447: if $n_w>0$, by inspection of
6448: the graphs -- eventually involving the interaction of type $\jm$
6449: and $\f$ -- it can be $n_w\neq 0$,
6450: and than $-n_w\le -(1/4)n^\ps_w\le -1/8 -(1/24)n^\ps_w$;
6451: otherwise $n_w=0$: this can happen only on the highest
6452: node, in the sense that a node with $n_w=0$
6453: cannot be lower than any node $v$ with
6454: $n_v\neq 0$ -- since $n_w$ is a cumulative counter --
6455: then the graphs corresponding to this latter case are
6456: contractions of special vertices only,
6457: and $n_w^\ps\le 2$.
6458: Hence in the region of the tree
6459: where $n_w=0$ there can be no
6460: more than $n^\ps+n^\jm$ branching points:
6461: it is in any case possible, multiplying $C_2$ by a factor
6462: $\g^{2/24}$, to extract a factor $\g^{-(1/24)n^\ps_w}$
6463: for every node $w:h_w\geq N$ such that $P_w\neq P_{w'}$,
6464: namely where some contraction really occur.
6465: %
6466: \art
6467: The product over the nodes where at least
6468: a contraction of internal fields does occur,
6469: $\prod_{w\in \t_v}^{\rm b.p.}\g^{-(\th/24)n^\ps_w}$,
6470: allows to control the summation in $P_w$ -- which,
6471: fixed the tree $\t_v$, is actually only a summation in
6472: $P_w\bs S_w$:
6473: %
6474: $$\eqalign{
6475: &\prod_{w\in \t_v}^{\rm b.p.}
6476: \sum_{P_w}\g^{-(1/24)n^\ps_w}
6477: \leq
6478: \prod_{w\in \t_v}^{\rm b.p.}\sum_{n_w^\ps}\g^{-(1/24)n^\ps_w}
6479: \left(\matrix {n_{w_1}^\ps+\cdots+n^\ps_{w_{s_w}}\cr n_w^\ps}\right)
6480: \cr&\leq
6481: \prod_{u\in \t_v}^{\rm e.p.}
6482: \left(1-\g^{-(1/24)}\right)^{-n^\ps_u}\le \left(1-\g^{-(1/24)}\right)^{-4(n+n^\f+n^\jm)}\;,
6483: }$$
6484: %
6485: where the last-but-one inequality
6486: can be easily proved by induction
6487: by thinking the endpoints $u$ as the node at
6488: which are attached one or more further branches;
6489: while the last simply follows from the fact that
6490: $n_u^\ps\leq 4$.}
6491:
6492: \*
6493: \0Finally, once $C_3$ is
6494: taken greater or equal to $C_2\g^{2/24}(1-\g^{-(1/24)})^{-4}$,
6495: the bound for the Schwinger function has become
6496: %
6497: $$\eqalign{
6498: &\left|\WW^{(h)}\Big(\xx(S_v);\t_v;S_v\Big)\right|\cr
6499: \leq&
6500: (C_3\e)^n C_3^{n^\f+n^\jm}
6501: {\g^{h_0(m+1/8)}\over
6502: e^{{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\sqrt{\g^{h_0}D_{v_0^*}}}}
6503: \left(
6504: \prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w= N}{\g^{h_wm_{w}(1-(1/8m))}\over
6505: e^{{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\sqrt{\g^{N} D_{w}}}}\right)\cr
6506: &\cdot\left(
6507: \prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\le N}
6508: {\g^{h_wm_{*,w}(1-(1/8m))}\over
6509: e^{{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\sqrt{\g^{h_w} D_{w}}}}
6510: \left({Z^{(2)}_{h_w}\over Z_{h_w}}\right)^{n^\jm_{*,w}}
6511: \left({1\over Z_{h_w}}\right)^{(1/2)n_{*,w}^\f}\right)\cr
6512: &\cdot
6513: \left(\prod_{w\in \t_v}^{**}\g^{-1/8}\right)
6514: \left(\prod_{w\in \t_v}^{***}\g^{h_w\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}
6515: e^{-{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\sqrt{\g^{h_w} D_{0,w}}}\right)\;.
6516: }\Eqa(sbound)$$
6517: %
6518: The product $\prod_{w\in \t_v}^{**}$ is over all the nodes in the tree,
6519: except the ones higher than the branching points $w$
6520: with $h_w\geq N+1$ and $n_w=0$.
6521: The product $\prod_{w\in \t_v}^{***}$ is over all the
6522: branching points $w$ with $h_w\geq N+1$ and $n_w=0$;
6523: and the factors $\g^{h_w\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}$ --
6524: strictly greater than 1 -- are added for later purposes.
6525:
6526: This bound is enough to prove the convergence of the
6527: Schwinger function.
6528: Indeed, for any $m>(1/4)$ and $d,\b,z>0$,
6529: the two inequalities hold:
6530: %
6531: $$z^{m}e^{-(\b/m)\sqrt{z}}\leq C_\b^{2m} (4m)!\;,\Eqa(in1)$$
6532: $$\eqalign{
6533: \sum_{h=-\io}^{+\io}\left(\g^h d\right)^me^{-(\b/m)\sqrt{\g^hd}}
6534: &\leq \sum_{h\leq 0}\g^{hm}+\sum_{h>0}\g^{hm}e^{-(\b/m)\sqrt{\g^h}}\cr
6535: &\le C_\b^{4m}(8m)!(1-\g^{-{(1/8)}})^{-1}\;.}\Eqa(in2)$$
6536: %
6537: Then \equ(in1) allows to bound
6538: each factor of the product $\prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\le N}$,
6539: as:
6540: %
6541: $$\eqalign{
6542: &{\g^{h_w m_{*,w}\big(1-(1/8m)\big)}\over
6543: e^{{c\over2( n^\f+n^\jm)}\sqrt{\g^{h_w} D_{w}}}}
6544: \left({Z^{(2)}_{h_w}\over Z_{h_w}}\right)^{n^\jm_{*,w}}
6545: \left({1\over \sqrt{Z_{h_w}}}\right)^{n^\f_{*,w}}\cr
6546: &\phantom{**********}
6547: \leq C_w
6548: \left({1\over D_w}\right)^{m_{*,w}(1-(1/8m)-\h_\l)+ n^\jm_{*,w}\h^{(2)}_\l}\;,}$$
6549: %
6550: for $C_w\sim (m!)^p$, for some positive integer $p$;
6551: and $\prod_{w\in \t^*_v}^{h_w\le N}D_w^{-m_{*,w}(1-(1/8m)-\h_\l)- n^\jm_{*,w}\h^{(2)}_\l}$
6552: is integrable against test functions which vanish with all their derivatives
6553: for each $D_w=0$.
6554: Furthermore, \equ(in2) allows in a similar manner to control the summation over
6555: the scales of the branching points with $n_w=0$ of the factors in the
6556: product $\prod_{w\in \t_v}^{***}$: apart a constant,
6557: it gives a factor $\prod_{w\in \t_v}^{***}D_{0,w}^{-[1/2(n^\f+n^\jm)]}$,
6558: which is integrable against a test function, even if it
6559: does not vanish for $D_{0,w}$, since the number of the factor
6560: is not larger than $n^\f+n^\jm$.
6561:
6562: The summation over the scales
6563: $\underline h, \underline k$,
6564: taking fixed the lowest, $h$,
6565: and also over the scales of all the
6566: remaining branching point in the tree $\t_v$
6567: is clearly controlled by the factors
6568: $\prod_{w\in \t_v}\g^{-1/8}$
6569: and, since the number of the branches in a
6570: tree is no more than twice the number of
6571: the endpoints, it is bounded by $(1-\g^{-{1/8}})^{-2(n+n^\f+n^\jm)}$.
6572:
6573: Then it is possible
6574: to take the summation also over
6575: $-\io<h_0\le N$, which is convergent by \equ(in2),
6576: and gives a further factor $D_v^{-(m+1/8)}$, which,
6577: besides not to waste the integrability against the test function,
6578: guarantees the cluster decomposition,
6579: namely that the Schwinger function
6580: vanish if the distance of {\it any two points} is
6581: sent to infinity.
6582:
6583: The summation over the topology of the trees,
6584: is bounded by $16^{(n+n^\f+n^\jm)}$.
6585: Finally the summation over
6586: $n$ is convergent
6587: for any $\e\leq \Big(16C_3 (1-\g^{-{1/8}})^{-2})\Big)^{-1}$.
6588:
6589: {The lemma is proved. \hfill\qed\hskip1em}
6590:
6591: \*
6592: \asub(smp)
6593: {Short memory property.}
6594: Before performing the summation
6595: over the scales in the product
6596: $\prod_{w\in \t_v}\g^{-1/8}$,
6597: it is possible to extract a factor
6598: $\g^{-(1/16)\big((h_{\rm max}\wdg N)-\h_{\rm min}\big)}$,
6599: for $h_{\rm max}$ and $h_{\rm min}$ respectively the scale of the
6600: one of the maximal nodes and of the minimal node
6601: of the tree, leaving $\prod_{w\in \t_v}\g^{-1/16}$ to
6602: control such a summation.
6603:
6604: Many consequences derives from such a factor.
6605: An example is the following lemma.
6606: \*
6607:
6608: \alemma(LRC)
6609: {In the limit of removed cutoff,
6610: the trees with unbounded maximal scale
6611: gives vanishing contribution
6612: to the integration of the Schwinger function
6613: against the test functions.}
6614: \*
6615:
6616: \proof. Before removing the cutoff,
6617: let $M_N\defi h_{\rm max}\wdg N$; then $M_N\to +\io$.
6618: With reference to the summation over $-\io< h\leq N$
6619: of the factor $ \g^{h (m+1/8)}
6620: e^{-{c\over 2(n^\f+n^\jm)}\sqrt{\g^{h_0} D_{v_0^*}}}$,
6621: the following facts hold.
6622: \elenco{
6623: \art
6624: Since the integration against test functions
6625: over all the space time
6626: is finite, the integration in the region
6627: $\k|D_{v_0^*}|\leq \g^{-(M_N/4)}$ is vanishing.
6628: %
6629: \art
6630: In the domain $\k|D_{v_0^*}|\leq \g^{-(M_N/4)}$,
6631: the summation for $h\ge (M_N/2)$ is vanishing
6632: faster than $e^{-{c\over 4(n^\f+n^\jm)}\g^{M_n/8}}$.
6633: %
6634: \art
6635: Trees with first node on scale $h\le (M_N/2)$
6636: have a short memory factor
6637: $\le \g^{-(1/16)(M_N/2)}$,
6638: which is vanishing too.}
6639: \*
6640:
6641: \asub(P3P1){Completion of the proof of Theorem {\thm(T1)}}
6642: The bound for the two point Schwinger function is, accordingly to
6643: \equ(sbound), for $\e$ small enough,
6644: %
6645: $$\left|S^{(2)}_{\o}(x-y)\right|\leq
6646: C\sum_{h=h^*}^N {\g^{h}\over e^{(c/4)\sqrt{\g^h\k|x-y|}}}
6647: {1\over Z_h}\;.\Eq(tpbound)$$
6648: %
6649: Setting $h_o$ s.t. $\g^{-h_o}\leq k|x-y|< \g^{-h_o+1}$,
6650: if $h_o<h^*$, then
6651: $$\sum_{h=h^*}^N {\g^{h}\over e^{(c/4)\sqrt{\g^h\k|x-y|}}}
6652: {1\over Z_h}\leq K
6653: {\g^{h^*}\over e^{(c/8)\sqrt{\g^{h^*}\k|x-y|}}}{1\over Z_{h^*}}\;;$$
6654: %
6655: while, if $h_o > h^*$, then
6656: $$\sum_{h=h^*}^N {\g^{h}\over e^{(c/4)\sqrt{\g^h\k|x-y|}}}
6657: {1\over Z_h}\leq K
6658: \g^{h_o}{1\over Z_{h_o}}\;.$$
6659: %
6660: Since $\m_{h^*}$ is proportional to $\k \g^{h^*}$, then:
6661: $\m_{h^*}$ is proportional to $\k (\m/\k)^{(1/1+\bar\h_{\l})}$;
6662: $Z_{h^*}$ is proportional to $ (\m/\k)^{-(\h_{\l}/1+\bar\h_{\l})}$;
6663: for $h_o\leq N/2$, in the limit $N\to +\io$, $Z_{h_o}$
6664: is proportional to $(\k|x-y|)^{\h_\l}$.
6665: Hence the item is proved for
6666: $1+\bar\t_{\l}\defi (1/1+\bar\h_{\l})$. \hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
6667:
6668: \*
6669: \asub(P2P2){Completion of the proof of Theorem {\thm(P2)}}
6670: The bound for the current-current Schwinger function
6671: is the same of \equ(tpbound), with the replacement of
6672: $\g^h/Z_h$ with $\g^{2h}(Z^{(2)}_h/Z_h)^2$. Therefore,
6673: with the same developments of Proof \secc(P3P1), using
6674: also the identity $\h_{\l}=\h^{(2)}_\l$,
6675: also this item is verified. \hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
6676: %%%%%%%%%
6677: %%%%%%%%%
6678: \appendix(ES,Exact symmetries)
6679:
6680: The following symmetries will be useful to prove some kernels are
6681: less divergent than what seems from dimensional bounds:
6682: \*
6683:
6684:
6685: \asub(RE){Reflection.}
6686: Let the ``reflection'' be $\th(k_0,k_1)\defi (-k_0,-k_1)$.
6687: It is easy to verify the interactions $\VV$, $\NN$ and
6688: $\DD$, as well as the free action, are all
6689: invariant under the transformation of the fields
6690: %
6691: $$\hp^{\s}_{k,\o}\rightarrow i\o\hp^{\s}_{\th k,\o}\;.\Eqa(refl1)$$
6692: %
6693: In terms of graphs, under reflection the propagator
6694: $\hg^{(j)}_{\m,\o}(k)$ transforms as follows
6695: %
6696: $$\hg^{(j)}_{\m,\o}(\th k)=-\m\o\hg^{(j)}_{\m,\o}(k)\;;\Eqa(refl2)$$
6697: %
6698: while the interactions are all invariant, except the ones corresponding
6699: to the interactions $\DD$, which is odd.
6700: Specifically, let any graph contributing to the kernel $\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o,\o}(k)$
6701: be considered: calling $m_2(\o)$ and $m_2(-\o)$ respectively the
6702: number of vertices with interaction linear in $\ps_{\o}\ps_{\o}$
6703: and $\ps_{-\o}\ps_{-\o}$, after the contraction of only the
6704: off-diagonal propagators, they are left $2(l+m_2(\o)-1)$ half
6705: lines of kind $\o$ and $2(l+m_2(-\o))$ half lines of kind $-\o$ to
6706: be contracted with diagonal ({\it odd}) propagators. As the number
6707: of odd vertices is $m_2(\o)+m_2(-\o)$, and the number of odd
6708: propagators is $2l+m_2(\o)+m_2(-\o)-1$, then $\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o,\o}(k)$
6709: is odd. With a similar argument it is possible to prove
6710: $\hW^{(j)}_{2,\o,-\o}(k)$ is even. Therefore
6711: %
6712: $$\hW^{(j)}_{2,\a,\b}(\th k)=-\a\b\hW^{(j)}_{2,\a,\b}(k)\;,
6713: \qquad
6714: \left(\partial_\s\hW^{(j)}_{2,\a,\b}\right)(\th k)
6715: =
6716: \a\b\left(\partial_{\s}\hW^{(j)}_{2,\a,\b}\right)(k)\;.
6717: \Eqa(refl)$$
6718: %
6719: \*
6720:
6721: \asub(SR)
6722: {Space reflection.}
6723: Let the ``space reflection'' be
6724: $\th_1(k_0,k_1)\defi (k_0,-k_1)$.
6725: %
6726: It is easy to verify the interactions $\VV$, $\NN$
6727: and $\DD$, as well as the free action, are all
6728: invariant under the transformation of the fields
6729: %
6730: $$\hp^{\s}_{k,\o}\rightarrow\hp^{\s}_{\th_1k,-\o}\;.$$
6731: %
6732: In terms of graphs, under space reflection the propagator
6733: $\hg^{(j)}_{\a,\b}(k)$ transforms as follows
6734: %
6735: $$\hg^{(j)}_{\a,\b}(\th_1k)=\hg^{(j)}_{-\a,-\b}(k)\;;$$
6736: %
6737: while the vertices are invariant; therefore,
6738: %
6739: $$
6740: \hW^{(j)}_{2,\a,\b}(\th_1k)=\hW^{(j)}_{2,-\a,-\b}(k)\;,
6741: \qquad
6742: \left(\partial_\s\hW^{(j)}_{2,\a,\b}\right)(\th_1k)
6743: =
6744: \left(\partial_{-\s}\hW^{(j)}_{2,-\a,-\b}\right)(k)\;.
6745: \Eqa(srefl)$$
6746: %
6747: Furthermore, with similar arguments, it is easy to prove
6748: %
6749: $$
6750: \hW^{(j)}_{1;2,\a;\b}(\th_1p;\th_1k)=\hW^{(j)}_{1;2,-\a;-\b}(p;k)\;.
6751: \Eqa(srefl1)$$
6752: %
6753: \*
6754:
6755: \asub(Rot){Rotation.}
6756: Let the ``rotation'' of $\p/ 2$ be
6757: $(k_0,k_1)^*\defi (-k_1, k_0)$.
6758: %
6759: It is easy to verify the interactions $\VV$ and $\NN$, as well as the free
6760: action of the massive Thirring model, are invariant under the
6761: transformation of the fields:
6762: %
6763: $$\hp^\s_{k,\o}\rightarrow e^{i\o{\p\over 4}}\hp^\s_{k^*,\o}\;.$$
6764: %
6765: In terms of graphs, under rotation the propagator
6766: $\hg^{({\rm E},k)}_{\a,\b}(k)$ transforms as follows
6767: %
6768: $$ \eqalign{
6769: \hg^{({\rm E},k)}_{\a,\b}(k^*)
6770: &=-i\o \hg^{({\rm E},j)}_{\o,\o}(k)\;,\cr
6771: \hg^{({\rm E},j)}_{\o,-\o}(k^*)
6772: &=\hg^{({\rm E},j)}_{\o,-\o}(k) \;.}$$
6773: %
6774: Let $\hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\m,\n}(k)$ be defined as the sum of the
6775: graphs of $\hW^{(j)}_{2,\m,\n}(k)$ which are made only with
6776: propagators $\hg^{({\rm E},j)}_{\m,\m}(k)$ and only with
6777: vertices $\VV$.
6778:
6779: Then, each graph of $\hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\o,\o}(k)$ is made of
6780: $l$ diagonal propagators $\hg^{({\rm E},j)}_{\o,\o}$ and $l+1$
6781: diagonal propagators $\hg^{({\rm E},j)}_{-\o,-\o}$; whereas
6782: each graph of $\hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\o,-\o}(k)$ is made of $l$
6783: diagonal propagators $\hg^{({\rm E},j)}_{\o,\o}$ and $l$
6784: diagonal propagators $\hg^{({\rm E},j)}_{-\o,-\o}$ (and also at
6785: least one off-diagonal propagator). Therefore it holds
6786: %
6787: $$\eqalign{
6788: \hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\o,\o}(k^*)
6789: &=i\o\hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\o,\o}(k)\;,
6790: \qquad
6791: \left(\partial_\s\hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\o,\o}\right)(k^*)
6792: =\s\o
6793: \left(\partial_{\s}\hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\o,\o}\right)(k)\;,\cr
6794: \hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\o,-\o}(k^*)
6795: &=\hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\o,-\o}(k)\;,
6796: \qquad
6797: \left(\partial_\s\hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\o,-\o}\right)(k^*)
6798: =-i\s
6799: \left(\partial_{\s}\hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{2,\o,-\o}\right)(k)\;,
6800: }\Eqa(rot)$$
6801: %
6802: and, with similar definitions and arguments:
6803: %
6804: $$\eqalign{
6805: \hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{1;2,\m;\n}(p^*;k^*)
6806: &=\m\n\hW^{({\rm E},j)}_{1;2,\m;\n}(p;k)\;. }\Eqa(rot1)$$
6807: %%%%%%%%%
6808: %%%%%%%%%
6809: \appendix(P,Proof of Theorem {\thm(FC) })
6810:
6811: \asub(BaGF)
6812: {Beta and Gamma functions.} Let $x_N\defi(\n_N,\d_N)$,
6813: $\m_h\defi \m \bar Z_h$
6814: and $\D\l_h\defi \l_h-\l$; a conventional
6815: way of writing the relation \equ(ga1), \equ(ga3) and \equ(b1),
6816: \equ(b2) is in terms of the {\it Gamma functions}:
6817: %
6818: $$\eqalign{
6819: &\log_\g{Z_{h-1}\over Z_h}
6820: =\G_h(\l_h,x_h;\ldots;\l_N,x_N)\;,\cr
6821: &\log_\g{\bar Z_{h-1}\over \bar Z_h}
6822: =\bar\G_h(\l_h,\m_h,x_h;\dots;\l_N,\m_N,x_N)\;,\cr
6823: &\log_\g{Z^{(2,\s)}_{h-1}\over Z^{(2,\s)}_h}
6824: =\G^{(2,\s)}_h(\l_h,x_h;\dots;\l_N,x_N)\;;}\Eqa(d1)$$
6825: and {\it Beta functions}:
6826: $$\eqalign{
6827: &\n_{h-1}-\g\n_h
6828: =\b^{(\n)}_h(\l_h,x_h;\dots;\l_N,x_N)\;,\cr
6829: &\d_{h-1}-\d_h
6830: =\b^{(\d)}_h(\l_h,x_h;\dots;\l_N,x_N)\;,\cr
6831: &\D\l_{h-1}-\D\l_h
6832: =\b^{(\l)}_h(\l_h,x_h;\dots;\l_N,x_N)\;.}\Eqa(d2)$$
6833: %
6834:
6835: Furthermore, such Gamma and Beta function
6836: are given by convergent graph expansion.
6837: \*
6838: \alemma(abgf){In the domain of the effective parameters
6839: given by \equ(ind2), if \equ(ind1) are satisfied,
6840: the Gamma and Beta function in \equ(d1) and \equ(d2)
6841: are well defined and analytic in $\{\l_k,\d_k,\n_k\}_{k\le N}$.}
6842: \*
6843: \proof. Like the proof of the convergence of the Schwinger function,
6844: it is a consequence of the Lemmas \lm(SS) and \lm(DBST),
6845: for the set of fixed points, $F_v$, given by only one point.
6846: \hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
6847:
6848: \*
6849: The evolution of the effective parameters
6850: is determined by the equations \equ(d1) and \equ(d2),
6851: and by fixing the ``initial data''; they are chosen to be:
6852: %
6853: $$\eqalign{
6854: &\D \l_{-\io}=0\;,\qquad
6855: \d_{-\io}=0\;, \qquad\n_{-\io}=0\;,\cr
6856: &\phantom{***}
6857: \log_\g(Z_0)=0\;,\qquad\log_\g(\bar Z_0)=0\;,\cr
6858: &\phantom{*}
6859: \log_\g(Z^{(2,+)}_0)=0\;,\qquad\log_\g(Z^{(2,-)}_0)=0\;.}\Eqa(indat)$$
6860: %
6861: Well then, the strategy to find the solution of the evolution problem
6862: is first to skip the flow of the mass, and to find
6863: the solution of the other flows by a fixed point theorem in a suitable
6864: linear space; then to solve also the flow of the
6865: mass with the other flow already fixed.
6866: \*
6867:
6868: \asub(cf){Flows of the couplings}.
6869: Let
6870: $\MMM$ be the linear space of sequences $y$,
6871: %
6872: $$y\defi
6873: \lft\{\lft(\D \l_k,\d_k,\n_k,
6874: \log_\g(Z_k),
6875: \log_\g\lft(Z^{(2,+)}_k\rgt),
6876: \log_\g\lft(Z^{(2,-)}_k\rgt)\rgt)\in \RRR^6:k\leq N\rgt\}\;,$$
6877: %
6878: such that, for any \hbox{$\th<1/16$},
6879: the following properties hold.
6880: %
6881: \elenco{
6882: \item{\bf i.}
6883: The initial data are as in \equ(indat).
6884: %
6885: \item{\bf ii.}
6886: The increments of the effective coupling
6887: satisfy \equ(l1), for any $h:h\leq N$.
6888: }
6889: \0Then, let such a space be endowed with the norm $\norm{y}_\th$,
6890: which is the smallest real number such that all the
6891: following inequalities hold.
6892: %
6893: \elenco{
6894: \item{\bf iii.}
6895: There exist two positive constants, $c_0$ and $c_1$,
6896: such that, for every $k\leq N$,
6897: %
6898: $$\eqalign{
6899: \left|\D\l_k\right|\le c_1 \e^2&\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}\norm{y}_\th\;,\cr
6900: \left|\d_k\right|\le 2\e\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}\norm{y}_\th\;,
6901: \qquad&
6902: \left|\n_k\right|\le 2\e\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}\norm{y}_\th\;,\cr
6903: \left|\log_\g(Z_{k-1}/Z_k)\right|&\le c_0\e^2 \norm{y}_\th\;,\cr
6904: \left|\log_\g(Z^{(2,+)}_{k-1}/Z^{(2,+)}_k)\right|\le 2c_0\e^2 \norm{y}_\th\;,
6905: \qquad&
6906: \left|\log_\g(Z^{(2,-)}_{k-1}/Z^{(2,-)}_k)\right|\le 2c_0\e^2 \norm{y}_\th\;.}\Eqa(ind3)$$
6907: %
6908: }The space $\MMM_{\th}$ is defined
6909: as $\{y\in \MMM:\norm{y}_\th\leq 1\}$ and
6910: is clearly complete.
6911: Let the equation $y=Ty$ read in $\MMM_\th$:
6912: %
6913: $$\eqalign{
6914: &\D \l_h=-\sum_{k\leq h} \b^{(\l)}_k\;,
6915: \qquad
6916: \d_h=-\sum_{k\leq h} \b^{(\d)}_k\;,
6917: \qquad
6918: \n_h=-\sum_{k\le h} \g^{-(h-k+1)}\b^{(\n)}_k\;,\cr
6919: &\phantom{*********}
6920: \log_\g(Z_h)=\sum_{k=0}^h \G_k\;,
6921: \qquad
6922: \log_\g(Z^{(2,\s)}_h)=\sum_{k=0}^h \G^{(2,\s)}_k\;,}\Eqa(hh)$$
6923: %
6924: where, for $h<0$, let $\sum_{k=0}^h\defi -\sum_{k=h}^0$.
6925: \*
6926: \alemma(hh){
6927: There exist $\e>0$, and $c,c_0,c_1>0$ such that
6928: there exists a (unique) solution to \equ(hh) in the space
6929: $\MMM_\th$, for $c_0$ and $c_1$ the constants in \equ(ind3),
6930: and $c$ the constant in \equ(l1). Furthermore,
6931: such a solution is analytic in $\l$.}
6932: \*
6933: \proof. The equation
6934: makes sense since $\norm{y}_\th\le 1$ and $|\l|\leq \e$,
6935: together to the first of \equ(ind3), for $\e$ small enough,
6936: imply \equ(ind1) and \equ(ind2), and hence Lemma \lm(abgf).
6937:
6938: The existence of a solution
6939: is consequence of the fact that $T$ is a contraction
6940: from $\MMM_\th$ into itself.
6941: Indeed, because of the following arguments,
6942: if $y\in \MMM_\th$, then $Ty\in\MMM_{\th}$.
6943: %
6944: \elenco{
6945: \art
6946: By inductive hypothesis and convergence of the graph
6947: expansion, there exists a constant
6948: $c_2\geq 0$, such that $|z_{h-1}|\leq c_2\e^2$;
6949: hence, for $\e$ small enough and $c_0\geq 2c_2$,
6950: it holds the statement in \equ(ind3)
6951: regarding the field strength flow.
6952: %
6953: \art
6954: For the density strengths,
6955: by definitions \equ(ga3), it is more
6956: convenient to define two new strengths,
6957: $\z^{\rm (u)}_k\defi (\z^{(2,+)}_k+ \z^{(2,-)}_k)/ 2$ and
6958: $\z^{\rm (d)}_k\defi (\z^{(2,+)}_k- \z^{(2,-)}_k)/ 2$,
6959: so that the their flows are given by
6960: %
6961: $$\eqalign{
6962: &{\z^{\rm (u)}_{h-1}\over \z^{\rm (u)}_h}
6963: ={Z_h\over Z_{h-1}}
6964: \left(1+ z^{(2)}_{h-1}+\D z^{(2,+)}_{h-1}+\D z^{(2,-)}_{h-1}\right)\;,\cr
6965: &{\z^{\rm (d)}_{h-1}\over Z^{\rm (d)}_h}
6966: ={Z_h\over Z_{h-1}}
6967: \left(1+ z^{(2)}_{h-1}+\D z^{(2,+)}_{h-1}-\D z^{(2,-)}_{h-1}\right)\;.}
6968: $$
6969: Then, an argument similar to the one of the previous item
6970: proves statement in \equ(ind1) regarding the density strengths.
6971: %
6972: \art
6973: For the flow of the effective coupling,
6974: the argument is more involved: it is based on a cancellation,
6975: the vanishing of the Beta function,
6976: which exactly holds only in the limit of removed cutoff.
6977: Let $\b^{\rm(T)}_k(\l_k,\ldots,\l_N)$ be
6978: the sum of the graphs of
6979: $\b_k^{(\l)}$ which are made only with
6980: diagonal propagators
6981: $\{g^{\rm(E1),k}_{\o,\o}\}_k$ and interactions $\VV$; then,
6982: setting all the arguments equal, let
6983: $\b^{\rm(T)}_k(\l_k)\defi \b^{\rm(T)}_k(\l_k,\ldots,\l_k)$.
6984: As proved in \secc(VVBBFF),
6985: there exists a constant $c_2\geq 0$ such that
6986: $| \b^{\rm(T)}_k(\l_k)|\leq c_2\e^2 \g^{-\th(N-k)}$.
6987: Accordingly, it is convenient to
6988: expand each coupling $\l_m$ in
6989: the function
6990: $\b^{\rm(T)}_k(\l_k,\ldots,\l_N)$
6991: as \hbox{$\l_m=\l_k+(\l_m-\l_k)$}, so that
6992: the following decomposition of the whole
6993: Beta function holds:
6994: %
6995: $$\eqalign{
6996: \b^{(\l)}_k=
6997: &\b^{\rm(T)}_k(\l_k)
6998: +\sum_{m=k}^N
6999: \b^{({\rm T},\l)}_{k,m}(\l_m-\l_k)
7000: +\sum_{m=k}^N \b^{({\rm R},\l)}_{k,m}
7001: +\sum_{a=\d,\n}\sum_{m=k}^N \b^{(\l,a)}_{k,m}a_m }\;,$$
7002: %
7003: where $\b^{({\rm T},\l)}_{k,m}$ is the sum of the graphs in
7004: $\b^{\rm(T)}_k(\l_k,\ldots,\l_N)$, with the replacement
7005: of the all the couplings $\l_n:k\leq n< m$ with $\l_k$,
7006: and a coupling $\l_m-\l_k$ on scale $m$ put apart from it;
7007: $\b^{({\rm R},\l,)}_{k,m}$ is the sum of the graphs made with
7008: interactions $\VV$ and with at least one propagator
7009: $g^{({\rm R1,m})}_{\o,\o}$ on scale $m$;
7010: $\b^{(\l,a)}_{k,m}$ is the sum of
7011: the graphs with at least one coupling $a_m$ on scale $m$
7012: and only diagonal propagators $g^{({\rm E1,m})}_{\o,\o}$
7013: -- if a graph falls in more than one category
7014: the assignment is arbitrary.
7015: By the convergence of power expansion in $\l$,
7016: as stated in \lm(abgf),
7017: and the short memory property
7018: of the tree ordering, the following bounds holds
7019: for the same constant $c_2$ -- if it is chosen large enough:
7020: $$
7021: |\b^{({\rm T},\l)}_{k,m}|\leq c_2\e\g^{-\th(m-k)}\;,
7022: \qquad
7023: |\b^{({\rm R},\l)}_{k,m}|\leq \g^{-(3/4)(N-m)}c_2\e^2\g^{-\th(m-k)}\;,$$
7024: $$|\b^{(\l,a)}_{k,m}|\leq c_2\e^2\g^{-\th(m-k)}\;.$$
7025: %
7026: It is straightforward to conclude
7027: that, to obtain \equ(ind3) and
7028: \equ(l1), as far as the flow $\{\l_h\}_h$ is regarded,
7029: $c_1$ and $c$ have to be chosen
7030: $c\geq 4c_2(1-\g^{-(\th/2)})^{-1}$
7031: and $c_1\geq c(1-\g^{-(\th/2)})^{-1}$.
7032: %
7033: \art
7034: Similarly, it is possible to decompose the Beta function
7035: for the couplings $a=\d,\n$:
7036: $$\b_k^{(a)}
7037: \defi
7038: \sum_{m=k}^N\b_{k,m}^{(a,{\rm R})}
7039: +
7040: \sum_{b=\n,\d}
7041: \sum_{m=k}^N\b_{k,m}^{(a,b)} b_m\;,$$
7042: %
7043: where $\b_{k,m}^{(a,{\rm R})}$ contains all the graphs made
7044: only with interactions $\VV$ and with at least
7045: one diagonal
7046: propagator $g^{({\rm R1,m})}_{\o,\o}$ on scale $m$; whereas
7047: $\b_{k,m}^{(a,b)}$ is made with all the graphs with an interaction $b$
7048: on scale $m$ and only diagonal propagators
7049: $g^{({\rm E1,m})}_{\o,\o}$ -- in ambiguous cases
7050: the assignment is arbitrary.
7051: Again, by convergence of the power expansion in $\l$,
7052: and by the short memory property of
7053: the tree ordering,
7054: $$|\b^{(a,2)}_{k,m}|\leq \g^{-\th(N-m)}c_2\e^2\g^{-\th(m-k)}\;,
7055: \qquad|\b^{(a,b)}_{k,m}|\leq c_2\e^2\g^{-\th(m-k)}\;;$$
7056: %
7057: and since for $\e$ small enough $5c_2\e^2\lft(1-\g^{-(\th/2)}\rgt)^{-1}\le 2\e$,
7058: then \equ(ind3) holds also for what concerns $\{\d_k\}_k$ and $\{\n_k\}_k$.
7059: }%
7060:
7061: \0Therefore $Ty$ is in $\MMM_\th$ for $\e$ small enough;
7062: and, by Lemma \lm(abgf), if $y$ is analytic
7063: in \hbox{$\l:|\l|\le \e$}, then also $Ty$ does.
7064: The next step is to prove that, taken any two
7065: $y,y'\in \MMM_\th$, it holds $\norm{Ty-Ty'}_\th\leq \r\norm{y-y'}_\th$,
7066: for a constant $\r<1$.
7067: %
7068: \elenco{
7069: \art
7070: The variation of the Beta function $\b^{(\l)}$
7071: due to the variation of the $y$
7072: is given by:
7073: %
7074: $$ \eqalign{
7075: \b^{(\l)}_k-{\b'}^{(\l)}_k
7076: =&
7077: \sum_{m=k}^N\D\b^{(\l)}_{k,m}(\l_m-\l'_m)
7078: +\sum_{m=k}^N\b^{({\rm T},\l)}_{k,m}\big[(\l_m-\l_k)-(\l'_m-\l'_k)\big]\cr
7079: &+\sum_{m=k}^N \D\b^{(\l,Z)}_{k,m}\left({Z_{m-1}\over Z_m}-{Z'_{m-1}\over Z'_m}\right)
7080: +\sum_{a=\d,\n}\sum_{m=k}^N
7081: \D\b^{(\l,a)}_{k,m}(a_m-{a'}_m)\;,}$$
7082: %
7083: where $\D\b^{(\l)}_{k,m}$ corresponds to a variation
7084: of the coupling $\l_m$ in one of the two previously
7085: defined $\b^{({\rm T})}_{k,m}$ and
7086: $\b^{({\rm T},\l)}_{k,m}$;
7087: the term $\D\b^{(\l,Z)}_{k,m}$
7088: is due to a variation one factor $Z_{m-1}/Z_m$;
7089: and $\D\b^{(\l,a)}_{k,m}$ to a variation of $a_m$.
7090: Since the power series of the
7091: variation has the same domain of convergence
7092: of the Beta function itself, and since
7093: the vanishing of the Beta function holds
7094: for each order of the power series,
7095: using also the short memory property,
7096: the following bounds holds
7097: for a suitable constant $c_3\ge 0$:
7098: %
7099: $$|\D\b^{(\l)}_{k,m}|
7100: \leq \g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}c_3\e\g^{-\th(m-k)}\;,
7101: \qquad
7102: |\D\b^{(\l,a)}_{k,m}|
7103: \leq c_3\e^2\g^{-\th(m-k)}\;,$$
7104: $$
7105: |\D\b^{(\l,Z)}_{k,m}|
7106: \leq \g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}c_3\e^2\g^{-\th(m-k)}\;,$$
7107: %
7108: where the factors $\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}$ in the
7109: first and third bound come from the
7110: bound on the Beta function on its own, which has been made
7111: previously.
7112: \art
7113: The variation of the Beta functions $\{\b^{(a)}\}_{a=\n,\d}$
7114: is given by:
7115: $$\eqalign{
7116: \b_k^{(a)}-{\b'}_k^{(a)}
7117: \defi &
7118: \sum_{m=k}^N\D\b_{k,m}^{(a,\l)}(\l_m-\l'_m)
7119: +\sum_{m=k}^N \D\b^{(a,Z)}_{k,m}\left({Z_{m-1}\over Z_m}-{Z'_{m-1}\over Z'_m}\right)\cr
7120: &+\sum_{b=\n,\d}\sum_{m=k}^N
7121: \D\b_{h,m}^{(a,b)}\left(b_m-{b'}_m\right)\;,}$$
7122: %
7123: where $\D\b_{k,m}^{(a,\l)}$ is due to
7124: the variation of the coupling $\l_m$;
7125: $\D\b_{k,m}^{(a,Z)}$ to the variation
7126: of the ratio $Z_{m-1}/Z_m$;
7127: $\D\b_{k,m}^{(a,\l)}$ to the variation of the coupling
7128: $\b_m$. And they holds the bounds:
7129: %
7130: $$|\D\b^{(a,\l)}_{k,m}|\leq c_3\e \g^{-\th(m-k)}\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}\;,\qquad
7131: |\D\b^{(a,b)}_{h,k}|\leq c_3\e^2\g^{-\th(m-k)}\;,$$
7132: $$|\D\b^{(a,Z)}_{k,m}|
7133: \leq \g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}c_3\e^2\g^{-\th(m-k)}\;.$$
7134: %
7135: \art
7136: The variation of the Gamma function of the field strength is
7137: %
7138: $$\eqalign{
7139: \G_k-{\G'}_k
7140: \defi &
7141: \sum_{m=k}^N\D \G_{k,m}^{(\l)}(\l_m-\l'_m)
7142: +\sum_{m=k}^N \D\G^{(Z)}_{k,m}\left({Z_{m-1}\over Z_{m}}-{Z'_{m-1}\over Z'_{m}}\right)\cr
7143: &+\sum_{b=\n,\d}\sum_{m=k}^N
7144: \D\G_{h,m}^{(b)}\left(b_m-{b'}_m\right)\;.}$$
7145: %
7146: with clear justification of the various addends.
7147: Now, by the short memory property,
7148: %
7149: $$|\D\G^{(\l)}_{k,m}|\leq c_3\e \g^{-\th(m-k)}\;,
7150: \qquad
7151: |\D\G^{(Z)}_{k,m}|
7152: \leq c_3\e^2 \g^{-\th(m-k)}\;,$$
7153: $$|\D\G^{(b)}_{k,m}|
7154: \leq c_3\e \g^{-\th(m-k)}\;.$$
7155: %
7156: \art
7157: Similar arguments hold for the
7158: field strengths.}
7159: %
7160: \0By such bounds, the operator $T$ is a contraction with rate
7161: $\r\defi e^2(c_3c_1+2c_2c_1+c_3c_0+2c_3)$:
7162: for $\e$ small enough, $\r<1$.
7163: The proof of the Lemma
7164: is obtained by the
7165: fixed point theorem with analytic parameterization.\hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
7166:
7167: \*
7168: Once the flows $y$ has been found, it is possible
7169: to consider the flow for the mass:
7170: %
7171: $$ \log_\g(\bar Z_h)=\sum_{k=0}^h\bar \G_k\;,\Eqa(mm)$$
7172: %
7173: restricted to the range $0\leq k\le N$. In the remaining
7174: scales, $h^*\le k<0$, in fact, the flow is determined
7175: directly, and not by an equation; and since $h^*$,
7176: in its turn, depends on the flow, it is more
7177: convenient to exclude it from the fixed point theorem.
7178:
7179: As for the other flow, it is defined the linear space
7180: $\bar{{\MMM}}$ of the sequences
7181: %
7182: $$x\defi\lft\{\log_\g(\bar Z_k)\in \RRR : 0\leq k\leq N\rgt\}$$
7183: %
7184: such that
7185: \elenco{
7186: \item{\bf i.}
7187: the initial datum is as in \equ(indat).
7188: }
7189: \0Furthermore, such a space is endowed with the
7190: norm $\norm{x}$, the lowest real number such that
7191: \elenco{
7192: \item{\bf ii.}
7193: for the same constant $c_0$ in \equ(ind3),
7194: and for $0\leq k\le N$,
7195: %
7196: $$\lft|\log_\g(\bar Z_{k-1}/\bar Z_k)\rgt|\leq 2c_0\e^2\norm{x}\;.\Eqa(ind4)$$
7197: }
7198: The equation $x=Tx$, which is defined to be \equ(mm),
7199: can be solved in $\bar{{\MMM}}_\th$,
7200: the subspace of $\bar{{\MMM}}$ of the sequences $x$ with
7201: $\norm{x}\le 1$, with the fixed point theorem.
7202:
7203: \*
7204: \alemma(mm){There exists $\e>0$ and the positive constant $c_0$
7205: such that there exists a (unique) solution of
7206: \equ(mm) in the space $\bar{{\MMM}}_\th$,
7207: for $c_0$ the constant in \equ(ind4).}
7208: %
7209: \elenco{
7210: \art
7211: If $x\in \bar{{\MMM}}_\th$, then also
7212: $Tx\in \bar{{\MMM}}_\th$
7213: by the following argument.
7214: The local part
7215: $s_{h-1}$ is the sum of the graphs
7216: with one antidiagonal propagator $g^{({\rm E1},k)}_{\o,-\o}$
7217: or $g^{({\rm R1},k)}_{\o,-\o}$.
7218: As consequence of the convergence of the graphs expansion
7219: and of the dimensional bounds of $s_{h-1}$,
7220: calling $s_{h-1,k}$ the sum of all the graphs of $s_{h-1}$
7221: with $g^{({\rm E1},k)}_{\o,-\o}$ or $g^{({\rm R1},k)}_{\o,-\o}$ on scale $k$
7222: and
7223: divided by $\m_k/ \k\g^k$,
7224: %
7225: $$s_{h-1}\defi\sum_{k=h}^N s_{h-1,k}{\m_k\over \k\g^k}\;,
7226: \qquad{\rm with\ } |s_{h-1,k}|\leq \g^{h-1}c_2\e \;.$$
7227: By \equ(ind4),
7228: for $\e$ small enough,
7229: it holds $(\m_k/\m_h)\leq \g^{2c_0\e(k-h)}<\g^{(1/2)(k-h)}$,
7230: and hence $m_{h-1}=(s_{h-1}/\m_h)\leq c_1(1-\g^{-(1/2)})^{-1}\e$:
7231: since by \equ(ind3) $\g^{-c_0\e^2}(Z_{h-1}/Z_{h})\leq \g^{c_0\e^2}$ and
7232: \hbox{$\log_\g(1+m_{h-1})\leq \left|m_{h-1} \ln(\g)
7233: \int_0^1\!\der t(1+tm_{h-1})^{-1}\right|$},
7234: it is straightforward to obtain that
7235: \hbox{$\g^{-2c_0\e}\leq (\m_{h-1}/\m_h)\leq\g^{2c_0\e}$}
7236: for $\e$ small enough and $c_0\geq 2c_2(1-\g^{-(1/2)})^{-1}$.
7237: \art
7238: If $x,x'\in \bar{{\MMM}}_\th$, then $\norm{Tx-Tx'}\le \r\norm{x-x'}$,
7239: for $\r<1$. Indeed, under variation of the mass flow,
7240: -- having fixed all the other flows --
7241: %
7242: $$\bar\G_k-{\bar\G'}_k
7243: \defi
7244: \sum_{m=k}^N \D\bar\G^{(\m)}_{k,m}\left({\m_m\over \m_k}-{\m'_m\over \m'_k}\right)\;.$$
7245: %
7246: Now, by the short memory property,
7247: and by \equ(ind4),
7248: %
7249: $$|\D\bar \G^{(\m)}_{k,m}|
7250: \leq c_3\e \g^{-\th(m-k)}\;,
7251: \qquad
7252: \left|{\m_m\over \m_k}-{\m'_m\over \m'_k}\right|\leq
7253: c_4\g^{(\th/2)(m-k)}
7254: \sup_{n\geq 0}\left|\bar\G_{n}-\bar\G'_{n}\right|\;;$$
7255: %
7256: -- indeed, $\left|(\m_m/ \m_k)-(\m'_m/ \m'_k)\right|\leq
7257: \max\big\{(\m_m/ \m_k),(\m'_m/ \m'_k)\big\}\ln(\g)\sum_{n=k}^m
7258: \left|\bar\G_{n}-\bar\G'_{n}\right|$,
7259: which, by \equ(ind4), is less or
7260: equal to ${(4/\th)}\ln(\g)
7261: \g^{\big(2c_0\e+(\th/4)\big)(m-k)}\sup_{n}\left|\bar\G_{n}
7262: -\bar\G'_{n}\right|$.
7263: Then the assertion follows enlarging $c_0$ chosen for the
7264: field strength to $c_0\geq c_3c_4(1-\g^{-(\th/2)})^{-1}$.}
7265:
7266: This proves the Lemma.
7267: \hfill\qed\hskip1em\null
7268: \*
7269: \asub(FP){Further properties of the Gamma functions.}
7270: In order to complete the proof of the Theorem \thm(FC),
7271: it is left to prove the
7272: existence of the critical indexes $\h_\l$, $\h^{(2)}_\l$ and
7273: $\bar\h_\l$, which only depends on the
7274: choice of $\l$ and on the graphs that
7275: can be obtained using the diagonal propagator
7276: $\{g^{({\rm E1}, h)}_{\o,\o}\}$
7277: and the interaction $\VV$,
7278: and not from the mass, or from
7279: the regularization of the model.
7280: Indeed, let it be inductively supposed that
7281: there exists a positive constant $c_2$
7282: such that, for any $k:h\leq k\leq N$,
7283: %
7284: $${Z_{k-1}\over Z_{k}}=\g^{\G^{(0)}_k
7285: + \G^{(1)}_k}\;,
7286: \qquad{\rm with}\
7287: |\G^{(1)}_k|\leq c_4 \e^2 \g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}\;,
7288: \Eqa(sindz)$$
7289: %
7290: while
7291: $\G^{(0)}_k$ is given in terms of graphs
7292: made only with the
7293: diagonal propagator $\{g^{({\rm E1}, h)}_{\o,\o}\}$
7294: and the interaction $\l\VV$,
7295: and bounded, $|\G^{(0)}_h|\leq c_2 \e^2$.
7296: Then,
7297: let the following decomposition be considered:
7298: %
7299: $$\eqalign{
7300: z_{h-1}=
7301: &z^{(0)}_{h-1}
7302: +\sum_{k=h}^N \D z^{(\l)}_{h-1,k}
7303: \D\l_k
7304: +\sum_{k=h}^N \D z^{(Z)}_{h-1,k}
7305: \left({Z_{k-1}\over Z_k}-\g^{\G^{(0)}_k}\right)\cr
7306: &
7307: +
7308: \sum_{k=h}^N \D z^{(2)}_{h-1,k}
7309: +\sum_{a=\d,\n}\sum_{k=h}^N \D z^{(a)}_{h-1,k}a_k\;,}$$
7310: %
7311: where $z^{(0)}_{h-1}$ is the sum of the graphs contributing to
7312: $z_{h-1}$ which are made only with propagators
7313: $\{g^{({\rm E1},k)}\}$ and interactions $\VV$,
7314: with all the coupling $\{\l_k\}_k$ replaced by
7315: coupling $\l$ and all the ratios $(Z_{k-1}/ Z_k)$
7316: replaced by $\g^{\G_k^{(0)}}$;
7317: $\D z^{(\l)}_{h-1,k}$
7318: is due to the replacement of $\l_k$ with $\D\l_k$;
7319: $\D z^{(Z)}_{h-1,k}\left[(Z_{k-1}/Z_k)-\g^{\G^{(0)}_k}\right]$
7320: is the sum of the same graphs, but with
7321: at least a factor $(Z_{k-1}/Z_k)-\g^{\G^{(0)}_k}$
7322: in place of the ratio $(Z_{k-1}/Z_k)$;
7323: $\D z^{(2)}_{h-1}$ is the sum of the graphs
7324: which do not contain interactions $\NN$ or $\DD$,
7325: and have a propagator $g^{({\rm R1},k)}$ on scale $k$;
7326: $\D z^{(a)}_{h-1,k}$ is the sum of the graphs
7327: with an interaction $a=\d,\n$
7328: on scale $k$ -- whenever a graph
7329: falls in more than one of the above categories, the
7330: assignment is made in arbitrary way.
7331: Because of the following bound
7332: %
7333: $$|z^{(0)}_{h-1}|\leq c_3\e^2\;,\qquad
7334: |\D z^{(\l)}_{h-1,k}|\leq c_3\e^2\g^{-\th(k-h+1)}\;,\qquad
7335: |\D z^{(Z)}_{h-1,k}|\leq c_3\e^2\g^{-\th(k-h+1)}\;,$$
7336: $$|\D z^{(2)}_{h-1,k}|\leq \g^{-\th(N-k)}c_3\e^2\g^{-\th(k-h+1)}\;,\qquad
7337: |\D z^{(a)}_{h-1,k}|\leq c_3\e^2\g^{-\th(k-h+1)}\;,$$
7338: $$
7339: |\D\l_k|\leq c_1 \e^2\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}\;,\qquad
7340: |(Z_{k-1}/Z_k)-\g^{\G_k^{(0)}}|\leq 2c_4 \e^2\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}\;,$$
7341: $$|a_{k}|\leq 2\e\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}\;,$$
7342: %
7343: the property \equ(sindz) follows straightforwardly
7344: for $c_4\geq 5c_3(1+c_1)(1-\g^{-(\th/2)})^{-1}$
7345: and
7346: %
7347: $$\G^{(0)}_h\defi\log_\g\left(1+z^{(0)}_{h-1}\right)\;.$$
7348: %
7349: By construction, $\G^{(0)}_{h}$
7350: is the sum of scaling invariant graphs:
7351: again using the fixed point theorem theorem
7352: with analytic parameterization, it is possible to
7353: prove the existence of $\h_\l$, limit for $N\to \io$
7354: of $\G^{(0)}_{h}$, analytic in $\l$ and such that
7355: there exists a constant $c_5$
7356: for which
7357: $\left|\G^{(0)}_{h}-\h_\l\right|\leq c_5\e^2\g^{-(\th/2)(N-h)}$,
7358: and then the statements in \equ(z1) referring to
7359: the field strength flow holds for
7360: $c_2\geq (c_4+c_5)(1-\g^{-(\th/2)})^{-1}$.
7361: \*
7362:
7363: For the Gamma function of the mass a similar argument
7364: can be applied. Let it be inductively supposed
7365: for any $k:h\leq k\leq N$ that
7366: %
7367: $${\m_k\over \m_{k+1}}=\g^{\bar \G^{(0)}_{k+1} + \bar \G^{(1)}_{k+1}}\;,
7368: \qquad{\rm with}\
7369: |\bar \G^{(0)}_k|\leq c_2 \e\;,
7370: \quad |\bar \G^{(1)}_k|\leq c_4 \e\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}\;,
7371: \Eqa(sind)$$
7372: %
7373: and $\bar \G^{(0)}_k$ only made with the propagator
7374: $\{g^{({\rm E1},k)}\}_k$ and interactions $\l\VV$. It follows that $(\m_k/ \m_h)
7375: =\g^{-\sum_{m=h}^{k-1}\bar \G^{(0)}_m} + \bar\D_{k,h}$
7376: with $|\bar\D_{k,h}|\leq c_6\e\g^{-(\th/2)(N-k)}$, for
7377: $c_6\geq 2c_42(1-\g^{-\th})^{-1}$ and $\e$ small enough.
7378: Then, with a decomposition similar to the
7379: case of the field strength:
7380: %
7381: $$\eqalign{
7382: m_{h-1}=
7383: &m^{(0)}_{h-1}
7384: +\sum_{k=h}^N \D m^{(\l)}_{h-1,k}(\l_k-\l)
7385: +\sum_{k=h}^N \D m^{(Z)}_{h-1,k}\left({Z_{k-1}\over Z_k}-\g^{\G_k^{(0)}}\right)\cr
7386: &
7387: +\sum_{k=h}^N \D m^{(1)}_{h-1,k}\bar\D_{k,h}
7388: +\sum_{k=h}^N m^{(2)}_{h-1,k}+\sum_{a=\d,\n}\sum_{k=h}^N m^{(a)}_{h-1,k}a_k\;;}$$
7389: %
7390: where
7391: $m^{(0)}_{h-1}$ is the sum of the graphs
7392: made only with interactions $\l\VV$,
7393: all the ratios $\{Z_{m-1}/Z_m\}$ replaced with $\g^{\G^{(0)}_k}$,
7394: all the ratios $\{\m_m/\m_h\}$ replaced with $\g^{-\sum_{n=h}^{m-1}\G^{(0)}_n}$
7395: and all diagonal propagators $g^{({\rm E1}, k)}_{\o,\o}$
7396: on scale $k\geq h$, except one, which is antidiagonal,
7397: $g^{({\rm E1}, k)}_{\o,-\o}$;
7398: $\D m^{(\l)}_{h-1,k}$
7399: is the sum of the graphs of $m_{h-1}$
7400: with all the couplings $\{\l_m\}_m$
7401: replaced, for $m < k$, by $\l$, and at
7402: a coupling $\l_k$ neglected;
7403: $\D m^{(1)}_{h-1,k}$
7404: is the sum of the graphs in which
7405: one ratio $\m_k/\m_h$ neglected.
7406: Then
7407: equation \equ(sind) holds true also in
7408: the case $k=h-1$ for
7409: $c_4$ large enough and
7410: %
7411: $$\bar \G^{(0)}_{h}\defi \G^{(0)}_h+
7412: \log_\g\left(1+ m^{(0)}_{h-1}\right)\;.$$
7413: %
7414: Finally, since $\bar \G^{(0)}_k$ is given by scale invariant graphs,
7415: using the fixed point theorem with analytic parameterization,
7416: it would be possible
7417: to prove the existence of an $\bar\h_\l$
7418: analytic in $\l$ and such that
7419: $\left|\bar \G^{(0)}_k-\bar\h_\l
7420: \right|\leq c_5\e\g^{-\th(N-k)}$ and the statements about the
7421: mass flow in \equ(z1) holds
7422: for \hbox{$c_2\geq (c_5+c_4)(1-\g^{-\th})^{-1}$}.
7423:
7424: Finally, with similar arguments, it
7425: is straightforward to prove \equ(zz1).
7426: %%%%%%%%%
7427: %%%%%%%%%
7428: \appendix(BD,Proof of Lemma {\lm(L2)})
7429:
7430: By definition
7431: %
7432: $$\eqalign{U^{(i,j)}_\o(k,p)
7433: \defi&
7434: C_\o(k,p)\hg_\o^{(i)}(k)\hg_\o^{(j)}(p)\cr
7435: =&
7436: f_i(k)\left(1-\c^{-1}_{h,N}(k)\right)
7437: {f_j(p)\over D_\o(p)}
7438: -
7439: f_j(p)\left(1-\c^{-1}_{h,N}(k)\right)
7440: {f_i(k)\over D_\o(k)}\;.}$$
7441: %
7442: Setting:
7443: %
7444: $$
7445: u_N(k)\defi
7446: \left\{
7447: \matrix{
7448: 0&{\rm \ for\ }|k|<\k\g^N\cr
7449: 1-f_N(k)
7450: &{\rm \ for\ }|k|\geq\k\g^N\;,\cr}
7451: \right.$$
7452: $$u_h(k)\defi
7453: \left\{
7454: \matrix{
7455: 0&{\rm \ for\ }|k|\geq\k\g^h\cr
7456: 1-f_h(k)
7457: &{\rm \ for\ }|k|<\k\g^h\;,\cr}
7458: \right.$$
7459: %
7460: the expansion of $U^{(i,j)}_\o(k,p)$ in terms of
7461: $\Big\{S^{(i,j)}_{\o,\s}(k,p)\Big\}_{\s=\pm}$
7462: can be explicitly given in each of the possible case.
7463: %
7464: \elenco{
7465: \art
7466: For $i=j=N$,
7467: %
7468: $$\eqalign{
7469: &U^{(N,N)}_\o(k,p)
7470: = {u_N(p)f_N(k)\over D_\o(k)}-
7471: {u_N(k)f_N(p)\over D_\o(p)}\cr
7472: &=
7473: \sum_{\s=\pm} D_\s(p-k)
7474: \left[
7475: \d_{\o,\s}{u_N(k)f_N(p)\over D_\o(p)D_\o(k)}
7476: +
7477: {f_N(p)\over D_\o(k)}
7478: \int_0^1 d\t\ \big(\partial_\s u_N\big)\big(p+\t(k-p)\big)\right.\cr
7479: &\phantom{************************}
7480: \left.
7481: -{u_N(p)\over D_\o(k)}
7482: \int_0^1 d\t\ \big(\partial_\s f_N\big)\big(k+\t(p-k)\big)\right]\cr
7483: &\defi
7484: \sum_{\s=\pm} D_\s(p-k) S^{(N,N)}_{\o,\s}(k,p)\;.}$$
7485: %
7486: \art
7487: For $i=N$ and $h<j<N$:
7488: %
7489: $$U^{(N,j)}_\o(k,p)
7490: =-{u_N(k)f_j(p)\over D_\o(p)}\;.$$
7491: %
7492: Being that $u_N(p)f_j(p)\equiv 0$, it holds
7493: %
7494: $$\eqalign{
7495: U_\o^{(N,j)}(k,p)
7496: &=\sum_\s D_\s(p-k){f_j(p)\over D_\o(p)}
7497: \int_0^1d\t\
7498: \big(\partial_s u_N\big)\big(p+\t(k-p)\big)\cr
7499: &\defi
7500: \sum_\s D_\s(p-k)S^{(N,j)}_{\o,\s}(k,p)\;.}$$
7501: %
7502: \art
7503: For $i=N$ and $j=h$
7504: %
7505: $$U^{(N,h)}_\o(k,p)
7506: =-{u_N(k)f_h(p)\over D_\o(p)}
7507: +
7508: {u_h(p)f_N(k)\over D_\o(k)}\;.$$
7509: %
7510: The first addend was already studied in point 2. For the second,
7511: the expansion is similar to the first since $u_h(k)f_n(k)\equiv
7512: 0$; finally:
7513: %
7514: $$\eqalign{
7515: U_\o^{(N,j)}(k,p)
7516: &=\sum_\s D_\s(p-k)
7517: \left[
7518: {f_j(p)\over D_\o(p)}
7519: \int_0^1d\t\
7520: \big(\partial_s u_N\big)\big(p+\t(k-p)\big)\right.\cr
7521: &\phantom{***********}
7522: -
7523: \left.{f_N(k)\over D_\o(k)}
7524: \int_0^1d\t\
7525: \big(\partial_s u_N\big)\big(k+\t(p-k)\big)\right]\cr
7526: &\defi
7527: \sum_\s D_\s(p-k)S^{(N,h)}_{\o,\s}(k,p)\;.}$$
7528: %
7529: \art
7530: For $h<i<N$ and $j=h$:
7531: %
7532: $$
7533: U^{(i,h)}_\o(k,p)
7534: ={u_h(p)f_i(k)\over D_\o(k)}\;.$$
7535: %
7536: Being that $u_h(k)f_i(k)\equiv 0$ it holds
7537: %
7538: $$\eqalign{
7539: U_\o^{(N,j)}(k,p)
7540: &=\sum_\s D_\s(p-k){f_i(p)\over D_\o(p)}
7541: \int_0^1d\t\
7542: \big(\partial_s u_h\big)\big(k+\t(p-k)\big)\cr
7543: &\defi
7544: \sum_\s D_\s(p-k)S^{(N,j)}_{\o,\s}(k,p)\;.}$$
7545: %
7546: }
7547: %\item{5.}
7548: For $i=j=h$, expanding like in point 1
7549: %
7550: $$\eqalign{
7551: U^{(h,h)}_\o(k,p)
7552: &=
7553: \sum_{\s=\pm} D_\s(p-k)
7554: \left[
7555: \d_{\o,\s}{u_h(k)f_h(p)\over D_\o(p)D_\o(k)}\right.\cr
7556: &\phantom{***************}
7557: +
7558: {f_h(p)\over D_\o(k)}
7559: \int_0^1 d\t\ \big(\partial_\s u_h\big)\big(p+\t(k-p)\big)\cr
7560: &\phantom{***************}
7561: \left.
7562: -{u_h(p)\over D_\o(k)}
7563: \int_0^1 d\t\ \big(\partial_\s f_h\big)\big(k+\t(p-k)\big)\right]\cr
7564: &\defi
7565: \sum_{\s=\pm} D_\s(p-k) S^{(h,h)}_{\o,\s}(k,p)\;.}$$
7566: \*
7567:
7568: \0By inspection in each case, since for $n=N,h$ it
7569: holds $\Big|\big(\partial_\s
7570: f_n\big)(k)\Big|, \Big|\big(\partial_\s u_n\big)(k)\Big|\leq
7571: c\g^{-n}$, it is simply to get the following bound
7572: %
7573: $$\Big|\big(\partial_k^{s_i}\partial_p^{s_j} S^{(i,j)}_{\o,\s}\big)(k,p)\Big|
7574: \leq c\g^{-i(1+s_i)-j(1+s_j)}\;.$$
7575: %%%%%%%%%
7576: %%%%%%%%%
7577: \appendix(PL,Proof of Theorems {\thm(TWTI)} and {\thm(TT)})
7578:
7579: It is natural to introduce the Beta functions
7580: also for the flow of the counterterms
7581: $\{\n^{(\s)}_N\}_{\s=\pm}$, and the coupling
7582: $\wt\l^{\m}_{N-1}$, generated
7583: in the multiscale integration of the generating functional
7584: $\WW_{\TT,\m}^{(h)}$:
7585: %
7586: $$\eqalign{
7587: &\n^{(\s)}_{j-1}-\n^{(\s)}_{j}
7588: =
7589: \b^{(\s)}_{j}\left(\l_j,\n_j;\dots,\l_N,\n_N\right)\;,\cr
7590: &\wt\l_{j-1}^{(\m)}-\wt\l_{j}^{(\m)}
7591: =\wt\b_j^{(\m)}\left(\l_j,\n_j,\wt\l_{j}^{(\m)},\wt z_{j}^{(\m)};
7592: \ldots,\l_N,\n_N\right)\;.}$$
7593: %
7594: It has to be remarked that the above Beta function are
7595: defined for the generating functionals
7596: $\WW_\AAA^{(h)}$ and $\WW_{\TT,\m}^{(h)}$ with
7597: infrared cutoff $h=-\io$: this is not restrictive,
7598: since, by inspection of the
7599: properties of the kernel $U^{(i,j)}_\o$, the
7600: flows obtained have the property that
7601: $\wt \l^{(\m)}_k$ and
7602: $\n^{(\s)}_k$,
7603: are, in the range $k: h+1\le k\le N$,
7604: {\it exactly equal to the effective coupling
7605: of such generating functionals with infrared cutoff
7606: on scale $h$ finite.}
7607: \*
7608:
7609: \proof{\bf of Theorem \thm(TWTI).}
7610: Let $\BB_\th$ be the Banach space of all
7611: the finite sequences of vectors
7612: $x\defi\left\{(\n^{(+)}_j,\n^{(-)}_j) :j\leq N\right\}$ s.t.
7613: %
7614: $$
7615: \norm{x}_{\th}\defi \max_{\s=\pm, j\le N}
7616: |\n^{(\s)}_j|\g^{(\th/ 2)(N-j)}\leq c_1\e\;.
7617: $$
7618: In this space, it is possible to find a solution for the
7619: fixed point equation $x=Tx$, which explicitly reads
7620: %
7621: $$\n^{(\s)}_j=-\sum_{m=-\io}^j \b_m^{(\s)}(x)\Eqa(fpe)$$
7622: %
7623: (where the argument of the Beta function has been abridged);
7624: such a solution gives a choice of $\{\n^{(\s)}_N\}_{\s\pm}$,
7625: such that their flows $\{\n^{(\s)}_N\}^{\s\pm}_{h+1\le j\le N}$
7626: have the required decay property.
7627: Indeed, given $x,x'\in \BB_\th$:
7628: %
7629: $$\b_m^{(\s)}(x)
7630: \defi
7631: \b_{m,N}^{(\s,0)}
7632: +
7633: \sum_{n=m}^N\b_{m,n}^{(\s)}\n^{(\s)}_n\;,\qquad
7634: \b_m^{(\s)}(x)-\b_m^{(\s)}(x')
7635: \defi
7636: \sum_{n=m}^N\b_{m,n}^{(\s)}\left(\n^{(\s)}_n-{\n'}^{(\s)}_n\right)\;,$$
7637: %
7638: where $\b_{m,N}^{(\s,0)}$ is the localization of the
7639: sum of the graphs made with no interaction
7640: $\{\n^{(\s)}_k\AAA_\s\}_k$ and one
7641: propagator connecting the interaction $\AAA_0$
7642: contracted on scale $N$; whereas
7643: $\b^{(\s)}_{m,n}$ is the localization of the sum
7644: of the graphs made with an interaction $\n^{(\s)}_n\AAA_\s$,
7645: and deprived of $\n^{(\s)}_n$.
7646: The following bounds hold:
7647: %
7648: $$
7649: \left|\b^{(\s,0)}_{m,N}(x)\right|
7650: \leq c_2\e\g^{-\th(N-m)},
7651: \qquad
7652: \left|\b^{(\s)}_{m,n}\right|
7653: \leq c_2\e\g^{-\th(n-m)},
7654: \Eq(d11)$$
7655: %
7656: Therefore, if $x\in \BB_\th$, then also $Tx\in \BB_\th$
7657: for $\e$ small enough and if $c_1\ge 2c_2(1-\g^{-(\th/2)})^{-1}$;
7658: and $\norm{x-x'}\le C\e \norm{Tx-Tx'}$ for $C>c_2(1-\g^{-(\th/2)})^{-2}$, so that,
7659: for $\e $ small enough, $T$ is a contraction in a Banach space; therefore there exists $x\in \BB_\th$,
7660: solution of the fixed point equation, with analytic parameterization
7661: in $\l:|\l|\le \e$.
7662:
7663: Finally, since all the graphs contributing to $\b^{(\s)}_m$,
7664: are scale invariant, by \equ(fpe) for $j=N$ it is easy to
7665: realize that $\{\n^{(\s)}_N\}_{\s=\pm}$ are constant
7666: in the scale of the cutoff, $N$: hence
7667: %
7668: $$\n^{(\s)}_N=\n^{(\s)}_{N+1}=\n^{(\s)}\;.$$
7669: %
7670: {The proof of the theorem is completed.\hfill\qed\hskip1em}
7671:
7672: \*
7673: \proof {\bf of Theorem \thm(TT).}
7674: The strategy is based on the fixed point theorem as the previous proof. Let
7675: $x\defi\left\{\left(\wt\l_j^{(+)}-\a_N^{(+)}\l_j,
7676: \wt\l_j^{(-)}-\a_N^{(-)}\l_j\right):j\le N\right\}$
7677: (with $\l_N^{(\m)}=0$):
7678: the fixed point equation to be solved in $\BB_{\th/2}$
7679: is $x=Tx$, which explicitly reads:
7680: %
7681: $$ \wt\l_j^{(\m)}-\a_N^{(\m)}\l_j
7682: =-\sum_{m=-\io}^j\left(\wt\b^{(\m)}_m-\a^{(\m)}_N\b_m\right)\;.$$
7683: %
7684: Given $\a^{(\m)}_N$ and ${\a'}^{(\m)}_N$ such that
7685: both $\wt\l_j^{(\m)}-\a_N^{(\m)}\l_j$ and $\wt\l_j^{(\m)}-{\a'}_N^{(\m)}\l_j$
7686: are in $\BB_{\th/2}$, it holds:
7687: %
7688: $$\eqalign{
7689: \wt\b^{(\m)}_m-\a^{(\m)}_N\b_m
7690: \defi&
7691: \wt\b^{(\m,o)}_{m,N}-\a^{(\m)}_N\l_N\b^{(\l)}_{m,N}
7692: +\sum_{\s=\pm}\sum_{n=m}^N\wt\b^{(\m,\s)}_{m,n}\n^{(\s)}_n{Z_N\over Z_n}\cr
7693: &+\sum_{n=m}^{N-1}\b_{m,n}\left(\wt\l_n^{(\m)}-\a_N^{(\m)}\l_n\right)\;;}$$
7694: %
7695: while
7696: %
7697: $$\eqalign{
7698: \left({\a'}^{(\m)}_N-\a^{(\m)}_N\right)\b_m
7699: \defi&
7700: \left({\a'}^{(\m)}_N-\a^{(\m)}_N\right)\l_N\b^{(\l)}_{m,N}
7701: +\sum_{n=m}^{N-1}\b_{m,n}\left({\a'}_N^{(\m)}-\a_N^{(\m)}\right)\l_n\;;}$$
7702: %
7703: where $\wt\b^{(\m,o)}_{m,N}$ is the sum of the graphs
7704: made with an interaction $\AAA_o$, contracted on scale $N$;
7705: $\wt\b^{(\m,\s)}_{m,n}$ is the sum of the graphs
7706: with an interaction $\TT_\s^{(\m)}$ on scale $n$,
7707: deprived of the coupling $\n^{(\s)}_n(Z_N/ Z_n)$;
7708: $b^{(\l)}_{m,N} $ is the sum of the graphs contributing
7709: to he flow of $\a^{(\m)}_N\l_m$ which have an interaction $\BB^{(3)}$
7710: on scale $N$, deprived of the coupling $\a^{(\m)}_N\l_N$;
7711: $\b_{m,n}$ is the sum of the graphs contributing
7712: to the flow of $\a^{(\m)}_N\l_m$ with an interaction $\BB^{(3)}$
7713: on scale $n$, deprived of the coupling $\a^{(\m)}_N\l_n$.
7714: Since the following bounds hold,
7715: %
7716: $$|\wt\b_{m,N}^{(\m,o)}|,|\b_{m,N}^{(\l)}|\leq c_2\e\g^{-\th(N-m)}\;,
7717: \qquad
7718: |\wt\b_{m,n}^{(\m,\s)}|\leq c_2\e^2\g^{-\th(n-m)}
7719: \;,\qquad
7720: |\b_{m,n}|\leq c_2\e\g^{-\th(n-m)}\;,$$
7721: %
7722: if $x\in \BB_{\th/2}$, also $Tx\in \BB_{\th/2}$, for $\e$ small enough
7723: and $c_1\ge 2c_2(1-\g^{-(\th/4)})^{-1}$; moreover,m
7724: for $C>2c_2(1-\g^{-(\th/4)})^{-2}$,
7725: $\norm{x-x'}_{\th/2}\leq C\e\norm{Tx-Tx'}_{\th/2}$
7726: so that, for $\e $ small enough, $T$ is a contraction: by the
7727: fixed point theorem, the solution of such an equation exists and is
7728: in $\BB_{\th/2}$. As consequence, since
7729: %
7730: $$\wt z_j^{(\m)}-\a_N^{(\m)} z_j
7731: =\wt z_{j,N}^{(\m,o)}- \a^{(\m)}_N\l_N z_{j,N}^{(\l)}
7732: +\sum_{\s=\pm}\sum_{n=j}^N\wt z_{j,n}^{(\m,\s)}\n^{(\s)}_n{Z_N\over Z_n}
7733: +\sum_{n=j}^{N-1}z_{j,n}\left(\wt\l_n^{(\m)}-\a_N^{(\m)}\l_n\right)\;,$$
7734: %
7735: where $\wt z^{(\m,o)}_{j,N}$ is the sum of the graphs
7736: made with an interaction $\AAA_o$, contracted on scale $N$;
7737: $\wt z^{(\m\s)}_{j,n}$ is the sum of the graphs
7738: with an interaction $\TT_\s^{(\m)}$ on scale $n$,
7739: deprived of the coupling $\n^{(\s)}_n(Z_N/ Z_n)$;
7740: $z^{(\l)}_{j,N} $ is the sum of the graphs contributing
7741: to the flow of $\a^{(\m)}_N z_j$ which have an interaction
7742: $\BB^{(3)}$ on scale $N$, deprived of the coupling $\a^{(\m)}_N\l_N$;
7743: $z_{m,n}$ is the sum of the graphs contributing
7744: to the flow of $\a^{(\m)}_N z_j$ with an interaction $\BB^{(3)}$
7745: on scale $n$, deprived of the coupling $\a^{(\m)}_N\l_n$.
7746: Since the following bounds hold,
7747: %
7748: $$|\wt z_{j,N}^{(\m,o)}|,|z_{j,N}^{(\l)}|\leq c_2\e\g^{-\th(N-j)}
7749: \;,\qquad
7750: |\wt z_{j,n}^{(\m,\s)}|\leq c_2\e^2\g^{-\th(n-j)}
7751: \;,\qquad
7752: |z_{j,n}|\leq c_2\e\g^{-\th(n-j)}\;,$$
7753: %
7754: also $\left\{(\wt z_j^{(+)}-\a_N^{(+)} z_j,
7755: \wt z_j^{(-)}-\a_N^{(-)} z_j)\right\}_j\in \BB_{\th/2}$.
7756: Finally, since all the graphs contributing
7757: to $\{\wt\l^{(\m)}_m\}_m$ and to $\{\l_m\}_m$ are scale invariant,
7758: %
7759: $$ \a^{(\m)}_N= \a^{(\m)}_{N+1}=\a^{(\m)}\;.$$
7760: %
7761: {The proof of the theorem is completed.\hfill\qed\hskip1em}
7762: %%%%%%%%%
7763: %%%%%%%%%
7764: \appendix(a3,Schwinger-Dyson equation)
7765:
7766: \asub(FD){Functional derivation.} By decomposing the fermionic
7767: fields $\ps^+_{k,\o}\longrightarrow\ps^+_{k,\o}+\hb_{k,\o}$, it
7768: holds:
7769: %
7770: $$\eqalign{
7771: \WW^{(h)}(\jm,\f)=
7772: &\WW^{(h)}_\BB(\b,\jm,\f)
7773: +\sum_{\o=\pm}
7774: \int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
7775: \hb_{k,\o}\hf^-_{k,\o}\cr
7776: &-
7777: \sum_{\o=\pm}
7778: \int_{D}\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
7779: \hb_{k,\o}D_\o(k)
7780: \left[1+Z_N\left(\c^{-1}_{h,N}(k)-1\right)\right]
7781: {\partial \WW\over \partial \hf^+_{k,\o}}(\jm,\f)
7782: +{\rm O}(\b^2)\;,}\Eqa(trans)$$
7783: %
7784: where $\WW^{(h)}_\BB$ is the following functional with the further
7785: source field $\b$:
7786: %
7787: $$\eqalign{
7788: e^{\WW^{(h)}_\BB(\b,\jm,\f)}
7789: \defi
7790: \int\!\der P^{[h,N]}(\ps)
7791: &\exp\left\{
7792: -l_N \VV(\ps)
7793: +Z^{(2)}_N\JJ(\jm,\ps)
7794: +\FF(\f,\ps)
7795: \right\}\cr
7796: &\exp\left\{
7797: -l_N \BB^{(3)}(\b,\ps)+Z^{(2)}_N\BB^{(2)}(\b,\jm,\ps)
7798: -z_N\BB^{(1)}(\b,\ps)
7799: \right\}\;,
7800: }$$
7801: %
7802: with:
7803: %
7804: $$\eqalign{
7805: \BB^{(3)}(\b,\ps)
7806: &\defi
7807: \sum_{\o=\pm}\int_{D}
7808: {\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
7809: {\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}\
7810: \hb_{p+k-q,\o}\hp^-_{p,\o}\hp^+_{q,-\o}\hp^-_{k,-\o}\;,\cr
7811: \BB^{(2)}(\b,\jm,\ps)
7812: &\defi
7813: \sum_{\o=\pm}\int_{D}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
7814: {\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
7815: \hb_{k,\o}\hj_{p-k,\o}\hp^-_{p,\o}\;,\cr
7816: \BB^{(1)}(\b,\ps)
7817: &\defi
7818: \sum_{\o=\pm}\int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
7819: \hb_{k,\o} D_\o(k)\hp^-_{k,\o}\;.
7820: }$$
7821: %
7822: Therefore, extracting the linear part of \equ(trans), for
7823: $k:\g^h\k\leq |k|\leq \g^N\k$ (so that $\c^{-1}_{h,N}(k)-1=0$), it
7824: yield the \sde:
7825: %
7826: $$\hg^{-1}_\o(k){\partial \WW_\BB\over \partial \hf^+_{k,\o}}
7827: (0,\jm,\f)
7828: =
7829: \hf^-_{k,\o}
7830: +{\partial \WW_\BB\over \partial \hb_{k,\o}}(0,\jm,\f)\;.
7831: \Eqa(DSE1)
7832: $$
7833: %
7834: Now, writing the last derivative in terms of the derivative of
7835: $\WW$ -- but loosing in this way the evidence of the
7836: renormalization of composite operators -- and multiplying both
7837: members by $e^{\WW^{(h)}}$ in order to shorten the equations, it
7838: simply holds \eq(DSE2). By derivatives in the sources $\hj$ and
7839: $\hf$, for $\hj=\hf=0$, such an equation generates all the \sde:
7840: for instance, taking a derivative in $\hf^-_{k,\o}$ gives
7841: \equ(DS2).
7842: %%%%%%%%%
7843: %%%%%%%%%
7844: \appendix(LOC,Lowest Order Computations)
7845:
7846: It is interesting to calculate the
7847: lowest order expansion of the anomalies.
7848: The computation of the anomaly of the \wti{}
7849: shows {\it a violation of the Adler-Bardeen theorem}:
7850: the correction to the classical identity is not linear
7851: in the coupling, but has at least also a non-vanishing
7852: second order term.
7853: Then, the computation of the anomaly of the \ce{}
7854: -- made in a quite approximate way -- would imply
7855: {\it the incorrectness of the Johnson solution}.
7856:
7857: \*
7858: \asub(WTIA){\wti{} anomaly}
7859: Simplifying the notations, let $\c(k)\defi \c_0(k)$
7860: and $u(k)\defi u_0(k)$. A useful identity is
7861: %
7862: $$\eqalign{
7863: U_\o(k,k+p)
7864: &=
7865: \left\{u(k+p){\chi(k)\over D_\o(k)}
7866: -u(k){\chi(k+p)\over D_\o(k+p)}\right\}\cr
7867: &=D_\o(p)\left\{{u(k+p)\c(k)\over D_\o(k+p)D_\o(k)}
7868: -\int_0^1\!\der\t\
7869: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{\o}(k+p)}
7870: \right\}\cr
7871: &-D_{-\o}(p)\int_0^1\!\der\t\
7872: {\big(\partial_{-\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{\o}(k+p)}\;.
7873: }$$
7874: %
7875: \0To simplify the computations,
7876: it is performed the following modification to the shape of the cutoff
7877: which, as can be easily checked, it completely harmless
7878: to the development done in the previous Chapters.
7879: Let $\c(k)\defi\wh\c(|k|)$, and $\wh\c(t)$ is
7880: a Gevrey function
7881: with compact support $\{t:|t|\leq \k\g^N\g_0\}$,
7882: for $\g_0:1<\g_0<\g$,
7883: and equal to 1 in $\{t:|t|\leq \k\g^N\}$.
7884: \elenco{
7885: \art
7886: {\bf Computation of {$\n^{(-)}$}.}
7887: The lowest order expansion of $\n^{(-)}$ is given by only one
7888: Feynman graph, which can be computed exactly:
7889: %
7890: $$\n^{(-)}=\int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
7891: {(\partial_{-\o}\c)(k)\over D_\o(k)}=
7892: -{1\over 4\p}\int_0^\io\!\der t\
7893: \wh\c'(t)={1\over 4\p}\;.$$
7894: %
7895: where it was used that $(\partial_{-\o}\c)(k)/D_\o(k)=-(1/2|k|)\wh\c'(k)$.
7896: \*
7897: \insertplot{100pt}{90pt}%
7898: {}%
7899: {f7}{\eqg(f7.ps)}
7900: \*
7901: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f7.ps)}: Graphical representation of the lowest order contribution to
7902: $\n^{(-)}$}
7903: %
7904: \art
7905: {\bf Computation of $\n^{(+)}$.}
7906: Also the lowest order contribution to $\n^{(+)}$ is given by only one Feynman graph:
7907: %
7908: $$\eqalign{
7909: &\int\!{\der^2 p\over (2\p)^2}
7910: \left\{{u(p)\c(p)\over D_\o(p)D_\o(p)}
7911: -
7912: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(p)\over D_{\o}(p)}
7913: \right\}
7914: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2} \hat g_{-\o}(k) \hat g_{-\o}(p+k)\cr
7915: &=\int\!{\der^2 p\over (2\p)^2}
7916: \left\{{u(p)\c(p)-D_\o(p)\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(p)\over p^4}
7917: \right\}
7918: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2} {\c(k)\c(p+k)\over k^2 (k+p)^2}
7919: D_{-\o}^2(p)D_\o(k)D_\o(k+p)\;.}\Eqa(nu+)$$
7920: %
7921: The explicit computation is not so simple as the
7922: previous; anyway it is possible to prove it is strictly
7923: non-zero.
7924: Since $-D_\o(p)\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(p)=-(|p|/2)\wh\c'(|p|)\ge 0$,
7925: as well as $u(p)\c(p)\ge 0$,
7926: while, calling $\th$ the angle between $p$ and $k$
7927: and $\x\defi (|k|/|p|)$,
7928: %
7929: $$D_{-\o}^2(p)D_\o(k)D_\o(k+p)=|k||p|^3
7930: \Big[\cos(\th)+ \x\cos(2\th)\Big]
7931: \defi |k||p|^3J_\x(\th)\;,$$
7932: %
7933: up to a pure imaginary contribution which integrated gives zero
7934: by symmetries.
7935: Now, since by support of the
7936: cutoff functions $|k|\le \g_0$ and $1\le |p|\le \g_0$,
7937: then $\cos(\th)<1/2$ if $\g_0$ is chosen $\le 3/2$.
7938: Hence, $J_1(\th)=\big[\cos(\th)-(1/2)\big]\big[\cos(\th)+1\big]<0$, except
7939: for $\th=\pm (\p/3),\p$, where it vanishes.
7940: Then, the integral over $\th$ of $J_\x(\th)$
7941: is continuous in $\x$, and strictly negative for $\x=1$;
7942: therefore it remains strictly negative also for $\x=|k|/|p|$,
7943: if $\g_0-1\geq |k|/|p|-1$ is small enough.
7944: Therefore, for such values of $\g_0$, the
7945: lowest order contribution to $\n^{(+)}$ is
7946: strictly negative.
7947: \*
7948: \vbox{
7949: \insertplot{150pt}{90pt}%
7950: {}%
7951: {f8}{\eqg(f8.ps)}
7952: \*
7953: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f8.ps)}: Graphical representation of the lowest order contribution
7954: to $\n^{(+)}$}}
7955: }
7956:
7957: \*
7958: \asub(CEA){\ce{} anomaly.}
7959: From \equ(A1), and since $a-\bar a={\rm O}(\l)$,
7960: while $a+\bar a=1+{\rm O}(\l^2)$,
7961: the contribution ${\rm O}(\l)$
7962: to $A$ is proportional to
7963: the terms ${\rm O}(1)$ of $\a^{(-)}-\s^{(-)}$.
7964: \elenco{
7965: %
7966: \art
7967: The $0$-th order of $\a^{(-)}$ is given by two graphs with
7968: values cancelling each other.
7969: %
7970: \art
7971: There is no possible graph for $\s^{(-)}$
7972: at the $0$-th order, since there are no possible
7973: tadpoles.
7974: }
7975: \*
7976: \vbox{
7977: \insertplot{250pt}{70pt}%
7978: {}%
7979: {f20}{\eqg(f20)}
7980: \*
7981: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f20)}: Graphical of item 1}}
7982: \*
7983: \0Well then, $A=1+{\rm O}(\l^2)$. Then, the quadratic
7984: order in $\l$ comes from the linear order
7985: of $\a^{(-)}-\s^{(-)}$, and the O$(1)$ order
7986: of $\a^{(+)}-\s^{(+)}$.
7987: %
7988: \elenco{
7989: \art
7990: There are more than one Feynman graphs contributing to
7991: the linear order of $\a^{(-)}$.
7992: \subelenco{
7993: \item{\bf $\bullet$}
7994: {\bf First graph.}
7995: A first contribution are the two graphs with
7996: all and three external leg of $T$ involved: they are
7997: two, with the same value. Furthermore, the factor $1/2!$ of the
7998: expansion of the interaction is compensated by multiplicity obtained
7999: by exchanging the labels to the two vertices $\VV$ of each graph.
8000: Therefore the sum of them gives the {\it first graph}:
8001: %
8002: $$\eqalign{
8003: &2\int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
8004: {U_{-\o}(k,k+p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}g_\o(p+k)g_\o(k)\cr
8005: =&
8006: -2\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\c(p)\over p^2}
8007: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
8008: {u(k)\c^2(k+p)\over (p+k)^2}\cr
8009: &
8010: -2\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\c(p)\over p^2}
8011: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
8012: {u(k+p)\c(k+p)\c(k)\over D_{-\o}(k) D_\o(p+k)}\;.}$$
8013: %
8014: The latter addend is vanishing in the limit $\g_0\to 1$.
8015: The former is convergent. Indeed:
8016: %
8017: $$\eqalign{
8018: &\int_{|p|\le 1/2}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\c(p)\over p^2}
8019: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
8020: {u(k)\c^2(k+p)\over (p+k)^2}\cr
8021: &=
8022: \int_{|p|\le 1/2}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\c(p)\over p^2}
8023: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
8024: {u(k)(\c^2(k+p)-\c^2(k))\over (p+k)^2}\;,}$$
8025: %
8026: and $|p+k|\geq |k|-|p|\geq 1/2$; while
8027: %
8028: $$\eqalign{
8029: &\int_{|p|> 1/2}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\c(p)\over p^2}
8030: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
8031: {u(k)\c^2(k+p)\over (p+k)^2}\cr
8032: &=
8033: \int_{|p|> 1/2}\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}
8034: {(\c(p)-\c(k))\over p^2}
8035: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
8036: {u(k)\c^2(k+p)\over (p+k)^2}\;.}$$
8037: \*
8038: \vbox{
8039: \insertplot{100pt}{70pt}%
8040: {}%
8041: {f9}{\eqg(f9.ps)}
8042: \*
8043: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f9.ps)}: First graph}}
8044: \*
8045: %
8046: \item{\bf $\bullet$}
8047: {\bf Second graphs.}
8048: The second contribution is given by the graph
8049: %
8050: $$\eqalign{
8051: &-\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8052: g_\o(p) g_\o(p){U_{-\o}(k,k+p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\cr
8053: & =\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8054: {\c^2(p)\over D_\o(p) D_\o(p)}
8055: \left\{-{u(k+p)\c(k)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)D_{-\o}(k)}+
8056: \int_0^1\!\der\t\
8057: {\big(\partial_{-\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}
8058: \right\}\cr
8059: &+\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8060: {\c^2(p)\over D_\o(p) D_{-\o}(p)}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8061: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}\;;}$$
8062: %
8063: and,
8064: subtracting the graph containing the counterterm $\n_N^{(-)}$,
8065: %
8066: $$ \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8067: {\c^2(p)\over D_{\o}(p) D_{-\o}(p)}\int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8068: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k)\over D_{-\o}(k)}$$
8069: %
8070: the last addend is convergent;
8071: while the first two terms are convergent automatically:
8072: %
8073: $$\eqalign{
8074: &\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8075: {\c^2(p)\over D_\o(p) D_\o(p)}{u(k+p)\c(k)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)D_{-\o}(k)}\cr
8076: &=\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8077: {\c^2(p)\over D_\o(p) D_\o(p)}\left\{{u(k+p)\c(k)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)D_{-\o}(k)}
8078: -{u(k)\c(k)\over D_{-\o}(k)D_{-\o}(k)}\right\}}$$
8079: $$\eqalign{
8080: &\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8081: {\c^2(p)\over D_\o(p) D_\o(p)}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8082: {\big(\partial_{-\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}\cr
8083: &=\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8084: {\c^2(p)\over D_\o(p) D_\o(p)}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8085: \left\{{\big(\partial_{-\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}
8086: -{{\big(\partial_{-\o}\c\big)(k)\over D_{-\o}(k)}}\right\}}$$
8087: since the subtracted terms are zero by transformation under rotation.
8088: \*
8089: \insertplot{200pt}{100pt}%
8090: {}%
8091: {f10}{\eqg(f10.ps)}
8092: \*
8093: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f10.ps)}: Second graphs}
8094: %
8095: \item{$\bullet$}
8096: {\bf Vanishing graphs.}
8097: There are four graphs subleading in the limit $\g_0\to 1$:
8098: their total value is the double of the two
8099: {\it vanishing graphs}
8100: \*
8101: \vbox{
8102: \insertplot{200pt}{70pt}%
8103: {}%
8104: {f21}{\eqg(f21)}
8105: \*
8106: \insertplot{200pt}{90pt}%
8107: {}%
8108: {f22}{\eqg(f22)}
8109: \*
8110: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f21)}: Vanishing graphs}}
8111: %
8112: }
8113: \art
8114: The linear order of $\s^{(-)}$ is given by only one graph.
8115: \subelenco{
8116: \item{$\bullet$}
8117: {\bf Third graph.}
8118: Such graph is very similar to the previous:
8119: it is given by the the second graph, with
8120: the replacement of $g^2_\o(p)$ with
8121: $(\partial_\o g_\o)(p)$:
8122: %
8123: $$\eqalign{
8124: &-\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8125: (\partial_\o g_\o)(p)
8126: {U_{-\o}(k,k+p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\cr
8127: & =\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8128: \left[{(\partial_\o\c)(p)\over D_\o(p)}-{\c(p)\over D_\o(p) D_\o(p)}\right]
8129: \left\{-{u(k+p)\c(k)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)D_{-\o}(k)}\rgt.\cr
8130: &\phantom{*********************************}
8131: +\lft.\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8132: {\big(\partial_{-\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}
8133: \right\}\cr
8134: &+\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8135: \left[{(\partial_\o\c)(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}-{\c(p)\over D_\o(p) D_{-\o}(p)}\right]
8136: \int_0^1\!\der\t\
8137: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}\;;}$$
8138: %
8139: and,
8140: subtracting the graph containing the counterterm $\n^{(-)}$,
8141: %
8142: $$ \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8143: \left[{(\partial_\o\c)(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}-{\c(p)\over D_\o(p) D_{-\o}(p)}\right]
8144: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8145: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k)\over D_{-\o}(k)}$$
8146: %
8147: \*
8148: \insertplot{250pt}{50pt}%
8149: {}%
8150: {f11}{\eqg(f11.ps)}
8151: \*
8152: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f11.ps)}: Third graph}}\*
8153: %
8154: the last addend is convergent.
8155: \art
8156: The $0$-th order of $\a^{(+)}$ is given by only one graph,
8157: which is subleading: it vanishes in the limit $\g_0\to 1$.
8158: %
8159: \*
8160: \insertplot{100pt}{60pt}%
8161: {}%
8162: {f20b}{\eqg(f20b)}
8163: \*
8164: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f20b)}: Graph in item 3.}\*
8165: %
8166: \art
8167: The $0$-th order of $\s^{(+)}$ is only given by a tadpole.
8168: \item{$\bullet$}
8169: {\bf Fourth graph.}
8170: It derives from the tadpole of $T_0^{(+)}$: for any $N'\geq 2$
8171: %
8172: $$\int\!{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{u_N(q)\c_{N+N'}(k-q)\over D_{-\o}(k-q)}\;;$$
8173: %
8174: the localization of this term is the extraction of the
8175: zeroth and first order Taylor expansion in the external momentum $k$:
8176: the former is clearly summable and zero by symmetries;
8177: the latter is:
8178: %
8179: $$\int\!{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{u(q)\big(\partial_\o\c_{N'}\big)(q)\over D_{-\o}(q)}
8180: =\int\!{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{u_{-N'}(q)(\partial_\o\c)(q)\over D_{-\o}(q)}\;.$$
8181: %
8182: \*
8183: \vbox{
8184: \insertplot{100pt}{50pt}%
8185: {}%
8186: {f12}{\eqg(f12.ps)}
8187: \*
8188: \centerline{{\bf Fig \graf(f12.ps)}: Fourth graph}}}
8189: \*
8190: \asub(EC){Explicit computation.}
8191: To make the computation easier, the cutoff is
8192: chosen to be a distribution
8193: %
8194: $$\c(k)\defi f(k_0)f(k_1)\;,\qquad{\rm for}\ f(x)\defi \th(x+1)-\th(x-1)\;.$$
8195: %
8196: Then $f'(x)=\d(x+1)-\d(x-1)$.
8197: Since, by definition of $D_\o(k)$,
8198: it holds $k_0=(i/2)\big[D_\o(k)+D_{-\o}(k)\big]$
8199: while $k_1=(\o/2)\big[D_\o(k)-D_{-\o}(k)\big]$,
8200: then:
8201: %
8202: $$\Big(\partial_{\o}\c\Big)(k)=
8203: {i\over2}f'(k_0)f(k_1)+{\o\over2}f(k_0)f'(k_1)\;.$$
8204: %
8205: It is suitable to remark that the above choice of the
8206: cutoff function, in contrast with what done for the
8207: anomaly of the \wti, {\it is not allowed}
8208: in the developments of the previous Chapter. Furthermore
8209: the computation of the following integrals is not exact,
8210: but rather is performed with a simple
8211: Montecarlo simulation. That is way the
8212: incorrectness is not proved,
8213: but it has to be considered as a {\it conjecture},
8214: enforced by such a calculation.
8215: \subelenco{
8216: \item{$\bullet$}
8217: {\bf F.} For the first graph it holds:
8218: $$\eqalign{
8219: {\bf F}\defi
8220: &-2\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\c(p)\over p^2}
8221: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}
8222: {u(k)\c^2(k+p)\over (p+k)^2}\cr
8223: =&-{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8224: {1\over p^2}
8225: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_0\der k_1
8226: {1-f(k_0-p_0)f(k_1-p_1)\over k^2}={ 52.64}{1\over (2\p)^4}\;.}$$
8227: %
8228: \item{$\bullet$}
8229: \0{\bf S.} Calling $p^\t=(1-\t)p$, for the second graph it holds:
8230: $$\eqalign{
8231: {\bf Sa}\defi
8232: &\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8233: {\c^2(p)\over D_\o(p) D_\o(p)}{u(k+p)\c(k)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)D_{-\o}(k)}\cr
8234: =&{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8235: {(p_0^2-p_1^2)\over p^4}
8236: \int_{-1}^{1}\!\der k_0 \der k_1\
8237: {1-f(k_0+p_0)f(k_1+p_1)\over (k+p)^2}(k_0+p_0){k_0\over k^2}\cr
8238: +&{4\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8239: {p_0p_1\over p^4}
8240: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_0\der k_1\
8241: {1-f(k_0+p_0)f(k_1+p_1)\over (k+p)^2}(k_1+p_1){k_0\over k^2}\;.}$$
8242: %
8243: Finally:
8244: $$\eqalign{
8245: {\bf Sa1}\defi
8246: &{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8247: {(p_0^2-p_1^2)\over p^4}
8248: \int_{-1}^{1}\!\der k_0 \der k_1\
8249: {1-f(k_0+p_0)f(k_1+p_1)\over (k+p)^2}(k_0+p_0){k_0\over k^2}\cr
8250: &=2.69{1\over (2\p)^4}\;,\cr
8251: {\bf Sa2}\defi
8252: &{4\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8253: {p_0p_1\over p^4}
8254: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_0\der k_1\
8255: {1-f(k_0+p_0)f(k_1+p_1)\over (k+p)^2}(k_1+p_1){k_0\over k^2}\cr
8256: &=0.29{1\over (2\p)^4}\;.}$$
8257: %
8258: The second addend of the second graph is:
8259: $$\eqalign{
8260: {\bf Sb}\defi
8261: &\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8262: {\c^2(p)\over D_\o(p) D_\o(p)}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8263: {\big(\partial_{-\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}\cr
8264: =&-\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8265: {\c^2(p)\over p^4}{D^2_{-\o}(p)}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8266: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8267: {\big(\partial_{-\o}\c\big)(k)\over \left(k+p^\t\right)^2} D_{\o}\left(k+p^\t\right)\cr
8268: =&\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8269: {\c^2(p)\over p^4}(p_0^2-p_1^2)\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8270: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8271: {(k_0+p_0^\t)f'(k_0)f(k_1)\over \left(k+p^\t\right)^2}\cr
8272: &+2\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8273: {\c^2(p)\over p^4}p_0p_1\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8274: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8275: {(k_1+p_1^\t)f'(k_0)f(k_1)\over \left(k+p^\t\right)^2}\cr
8276: =
8277: &{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8278: {p_0^2-p_1^2\over p^4}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8279: \int_{-1}^{1}\!\der k_1\
8280: {p_0^\t-1\over \left(p_0^\t-1\right)^2+\left(p_1^\t+k_1\right)^2}\cr
8281: &+{4\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8282: {p_0p_1\over p^4}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8283: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_1\
8284: {p_1^\t+k_1\over \left(p_0^\t-1\right)^2+\left(p_1^\t+k_1\right)^2}\;.}$$
8285: %
8286: The third addend of the second graph is
8287: $$\eqalign{
8288: {\bf Sc}
8289: \defi&\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8290: {\c^2(p)\over D_\o(p) D_{-\o}(p)}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8291: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}\cr
8292: =&\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8293: {\c^2(p)\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8294: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8295: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k)\over (p^\t+k)^2}D_\o(p^\t+k)\cr
8296: =&\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8297: {\c^2(p)\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8298: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8299: {(p_0^\t+k_0)f'(k_0)f(k_1)\over (p^\t+k)^2}\cr
8300: =&{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8301: {1\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8302: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_1\
8303: {(p_0^\t-1)\over \left(p_0^\t-1\right)^2+\left(p_1^\t+k_1\right)^2}\;;}$$
8304: %
8305: and its regularization is obtained by subtracting the $\io$ term
8306: $$-{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8307: {1\over p^2}
8308: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_1\
8309: {1\over 1+k_1^2}\;.$$
8310: Therefore:
8311: $$\eqalign{
8312: {\bf Sc}
8313: \defi
8314: &{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8315: {1\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8316: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_1\
8317: \left[
8318: {(p_0^\t-1)\over \left(p_0^\t-1\right)^2+\left(p_1^\t+k_1\right)^2}+
8319: {1\over 1+k_1^2}\right]\;.}$$
8320: %
8321: Setting ${\bf Sd}\defi{\bf Sb}+{\bf Sc}$
8322: finally:
8323: $$\eqalign{
8324: {\bf Sd1}\defi
8325: &-{4\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8326: {p_1^2\over p^4}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8327: \int_{-1}^{1}\!\der k_1\
8328: \left[{p_0^\t-1\over \left(p_0^\t-1\right)^2+\left(p_1^\t+k_1\right)^2}
8329: +{1\over 1+k_1^2}\right]\cr
8330: &=- 0.49{1\over (2\p)^4}\;,\cr
8331: {\bf Sd2}\defi
8332: &{4\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\der p_1\
8333: {p_0p_1\over p^4}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8334: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_1\
8335: \left[{p_1^\t+k_1\over \left(p_0^\t-1\right)^2+\left(p_1^\t+k_1\right)^2}
8336: -{k_1\over 1+k_1^2}\right]\cr
8337: &=0.0056{1\over (2\p)^4}\;.}$$
8338: %
8339: \item{$\bullet$}
8340: {\bf T.} For the third graph it holds:
8341: %
8342: $$\eqalign{
8343: {\bf Ta}\defi
8344: &\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8345: {(\partial_\o\c)(p)\over D_\o(p)}{u(k+p)\c(k)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)D_{-\o}(k)}\cr
8346: =&{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\
8347: {1\over p^2_0+1}
8348: \int_{-1}^{1}\!\der k_0 \der k_1\
8349: {1-f(k_0+p_0)f(k_1-1)\over (k_0+p_0)^2+(k_1-1)^2}
8350: (k_0+p_0){k_0\over k^2}\cr
8351: -&{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_1\
8352: {1\over 1+p_1^2}
8353: \int_{-1}^{1}\!\der k_0 \der k_1\
8354: {1-f(k_0-1)f(k_1+p_1)\over (k_0-1)^2+(k_1+p_1)^2}(k_0-1){k_0\over k^2} \cr
8355: +&{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_1\
8356: {p_1\over 1+p^2_1}
8357: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_0\der k_1\
8358: {1-f(k_0-1)f(k_1+p_1)\over (k_0-1)^2+(k_1+p_1)^2}(k_1+p_1)
8359: {k_0\over k^2}\cr
8360: +&{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\
8361: {p_0\over p^2_0+1}
8362: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_0\der k_1\
8363: {1-f(k_0+p_0)f(k_1-1)\over (k_0+p_0)^2+(k_1-1)^2}(k_1-1){k_0\over k^2}\;.}$$
8364: %
8365: Finally
8366: %
8367: $$\eqalign{
8368: {\bf Ta1}\defi
8369: &{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\
8370: {1\over p^2_0+1}
8371: \int_{-1}^{1}\!\der k_0 \der k_1\
8372: {1-f(k_0+p_0)f(k_1-1)\over (k_0+p_0)^2+(k_1-1)^2}
8373: (k_0+p_0){k_0\over k^2}\cr
8374: &=1.96{1\over (2\p)^4}\;,\cr
8375: {\bf Ta2}\defi
8376: -&{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_1\
8377: {1\over 1+p_1^2}
8378: \int_{-1}^{1}\!\der k_0 \der k_1\
8379: {1-f(k_0-1)f(k_1+p_1)\over (k_0-1)^2+(k_1+p_1)^2}(k_0-1){k_0\over k^2}\cr
8380: &=- 4.1{1\over (2\p)^4}\;,\cr
8381: {\bf Ta3}\defi
8382: +&{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_1\
8383: {p_1\over 1+p^2_1}
8384: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_0\der k_1\
8385: {1-f(k_0-1)f(k_1+p_1)\over (k_0-1)^2+(k_1+p_1)^2}(k_1+p_1)
8386: {k_0\over k^2}\cr
8387: &=- 0.28{1\over (2\p)^4}\;,\cr
8388: {\bf Ta4}\defi
8389: +&{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\
8390: {p_0\over p^2_0+1}
8391: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_0\der k_1\
8392: {1-f(k_0+p_0)f(k_1-1)\over (k_0+p_0)^2+(k_1-1)^2}(k_1-1){k_0\over k^2}\cr
8393: &=0.11{1\over (2\p)^4}\;.}$$
8394: %
8395: The second addend of the third graph is
8396: $$\eqalign{
8397: {\bf Tb}\defi
8398: &\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8399: {(\partial_\o\c)(p)\over D_{\o}(p)}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8400: {\big(\partial_{-\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}\cr
8401: =&\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8402: {(\partial_\o\c)(p)\over p^2}{D_{-\o}(p)}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8403: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8404: {\big(\partial_{-\o}\c\big)(k)\over \left(k+p^\t\right)^2} D_{\o}\left(k+p^\t\right)\cr
8405: =&{1\over 2}\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8406: {f'(p_0)f(p_1)p_0-f(p_0)f'(p_1)p_1\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8407: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8408: {(k_0+p_0^\t)f'(k_0)f(k_1)\over \left(k+p^\t\right)^2}\cr
8409: +&{1\over 2}\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8410: {f'(p_0)f(p_1)p_1+f(p_0)f'(p_1)p_0\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8411: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8412: {(k_1+p_1^\t)f'(k_0)f(k_1)\over \left(k+p^\t\right)^2}\;;}$$
8413: %
8414: $$\eqalign{
8415: {\bf Tc}\defi
8416: &\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8417: {(\partial_\o\c)(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8418: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}\cr
8419: =&\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8420: {(\partial_\o\c)(p)D_{\o}(p)\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8421: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8422: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k)\over (p^\t+k)^2}D_\o(p^\t+k)\cr
8423: =&{1\over 2}
8424: \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8425: {f'(p_0)f(p_1)p_0+f(p_0)f'(p_1)p_1\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8426: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8427: {(p_0^\t+k_0)f'(k_0)f(k_1)\over (p^\t+k)^2}\cr
8428: &+{1\over 2}
8429: \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8430: {f'(p_0)f(p_1)p_1-f(p_0)f'(p_1)p_0\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8431: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8432: {(p_0^\t+k_0)f(k_0)f'(k_1)\over (p^\t+k)^2}\;.}$$
8433: %
8434: Setting {\bf Td$\defi$ Tb + Tc}, some cancellation occurs:
8435: $$\eqalign{
8436: {\bf Td}\defi
8437: &\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8438: {(\partial_\o\c)(p)\over D_{-\o}(p)}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8439: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k+\t p)\over D_{-\o}(k+p)}\cr
8440: =&\int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8441: {(\partial_\o\c)(p)D_{\o}(p)\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8442: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8443: {\big(\partial_{\o}\c\big)(k)\over (p^\t+k)^2}D_\o(p^\t+k)\cr
8444: =&
8445: \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8446: {f'(p_0)f(p_1)p_0\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8447: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8448: {(p_0^\t+k_0)f'(k_0)f(k_1)\over (p^\t+k)^2}\cr
8449: &+
8450: \int\!{\der^2p\over (2\p)^2}\
8451: {f(p_0)f'(p_1)p_0\over p^2}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8452: \int\!{\der^2k\over (2\p)^2}\
8453: {(p_1^\t+k_1)f'(k_0)f(k_1)\over (p^\t+k)^2}}$$
8454: %
8455: Therefore:
8456: $$\eqalign{
8457: {\bf Td1}\defi
8458: &{2\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_1\
8459: {1\over 1+p^2_1}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8460: \int_{-1}^{1}\!\der k_1\
8461: \left[{\t\over \t^2+\left(p_1^\t+k_1\right)^2}
8462: \right.\cr&\phantom{******************}\left.
8463: -{\t-2\over \left(\t-2\right)^2+\left(p_1^\t+k_1\right)^2}
8464: -{2\over 1+k_1^2}\right]
8465: =0.86{1\over (2\p)^4}\;,\cr
8466: {\bf Td2}\defi
8467: &{4\over (2\p)^4}\int_{-1}^1\!\der p_0\
8468: {p_0\over p^2_0+1}\int_0^1\!\der\t\
8469: \int_{-1}^1\!\der k_1\
8470: \left[{1-\t+k_1\over \left(p_0^\t+1\right)^2+\left(1-\t+k_1\right)^2}
8471: -{k_1\over 1+k_1^2}\right]\cr
8472: &=-0.62{1\over (2\p)^4}\;.}$$
8473: %
8474: \item{$\bullet$}
8475: {\bf Q.}Regarding the fourth graph,
8476: since $(\partial_\o\c_0)(q)=-\big(1/2|q|\big)\c'_0(q)D_{-\o}(q)$, and since
8477: when $\c'_0(q)\neq 0$, $u_{-N'}(q)\equiv1$,
8478: the last integral is equal to
8479: %
8480: $$-{1\over 2}\int\!{\der^2q\over (2\p)^2}{\c_0'(q)\over |q|}
8481: =-{1\over 2}\left.{1\over 4\p}\c_0(q)\right|^{q=\g}_{q=1}={1\over 8\p}\;,$$
8482: %
8483: {\it independently} on the scale $N'$ and on the shape of the
8484: function $\c$.
8485: Such a contribution has to be multiplied
8486: times $(a-\bar a)/2=\n^{(-)}+{\rm O}(\l^2)={\p\over (2\p)^2}$,
8487: obtaining
8488: %
8489: $$6.18{1\over (2\p)^2}\;.$$
8490: }
8491: \0In the end,
8492: the quadratic coefficient of the second anomaly,
8493: $A$, is non zero, and in particular $\geq 18/(2\p)^4$ .
8494:
8495:
8496: \intro(Ref,References)
8497: \*
8498: \halign{\hbox to 1.8truecm {#\hss} & \vtop{\advance\hsize by -1.8
8499: truecm \0#}\cr
8500: %
8501: [AAR]& {{\cs Abdalla E., Abdalla M.C.B., Rothe, D.K.}:
8502: Non-perturbative methods in 2 dimensional quantum field theory
8503: {\book World Scientific} (2001). }\cr\cr
8504: %
8505: [A69]& {{\cs Adler S. L.}: Axial-Vector Vertex in Spinor Electrodynamics.
8506: {\journal Phys. Rev.}, {\bf 177},
8507: {\pagine 2426-2438} 1969.}\cr\cr
8508: %
8509: [BM01]& {{\cs Benfatto G., Mastropietro V.}:
8510: Renormalization group, hidden
8511: symmetries and approximate Ward identities in the $XYZ$ model.
8512: {\journal Rev. Math. Phys.}, {\bf 13},
8513: {\pagine 1323-1435}, 2001.}\cr\cr
8514: %
8515: [BM02]& {{\cs Benfatto G., Mastropietro V.}:
8516: On the density-density
8517: critical indices in interacting Fermi systems.
8518: {\journal Comm. Math. Phys.}, {\bf 231},
8519: {\pagine 97-134}, 2002. }\cr\cr
8520: %
8521: [BM04]& {{\cs Benfatto G., Mastropietro V.}:
8522: Ward identities and
8523: vanishing of the Beta function for $d=1$ interacting Fermi systems.
8524: {\journal J. Stat. Phys.}, {\bf 115},
8525: {\pagine 143-184}, 2004.}\cr\cr
8526: %
8527: [BM05]& {{\cs Benfatto G., Mastropietro V.}:
8528: Ward identities and chiral anomaly in the Luttinger liquid.
8529: {\journal Comm. Math. Phys.}, {\bf 258},
8530: {\pagine 609-655}, 2005. }\cr\cr
8531: %
8532: [BoM97]& {{\cs Bonetto F., Mastropietro V.}: Critical indices for
8533: the Yukawa$_2$ quantum field theory. {\journal Nucl. Phys. B},
8534: {\bf258}, {\pagine 541-554}, 1997. }\cr\cr
8535: %
8536: [FMRS85]& {{\cs Feldman J., Magnen J., Rivasseau, V. S\'en\'eorR.}:
8537: Gross-Neveu model: a rigorous perturbative construction.
8538: {\journal Phys. Rev. Lett}, {\bf 54},
8539: {\pagine 1479-1481}, 1985.}\cr\cr
8540: %
8541: [FW]& {{\cs Fetter L., Walecka J.D.}:
8542: Quantum theory of many particle systems.
8543: {\book McGraw-Hill}, 1971. }\cr\cr
8544: %
8545: [F79]& {{\cs Fujikawa K.}:
8546: Path Integral Measure for Gauge Invariant Fermion Theories.
8547: {\journal Phys. Rev. Lett.}, {\bf 42}
8548: {\pagine 1195-1198}, 1979. }\cr\cr
8549: %
8550: [GK85]& {{\cs Gawedzki K, Kupiainen, A.}:
8551: Gross-Neveu model through Convergent Perturbation Expansion.
8552: {\journal Comm. Math.Phys.}, {\bf 102},
8553: {\pagine 1-30}, 1985. }\cr\cr
8554: %
8555: [G58]& {{\cs Glaser V.}:
8556: An explicit solution of the Thirring model.
8557: {\journal Nouvo Cimento }, {\bf 9},
8558: {\pagine 990-1006}, 1958. }\cr\cr
8559: %
8560: [GL72]& {{\cs Gomes M., Lowenstein J.H.}:
8561: Asymptotic scale invariance in a massive Thirring model.
8562: {\journal Nucl. Phys. B}, {\bf 45},
8563: {\pagine 252-266}, 1972. }\cr\cr
8564: %
8565: [H89]& {{\cs Hurd T.R.}:
8566: Soft breaking of gauge invariance in regularized electrodynamics.
8567: {\journal Comm. Math. Phys.}, {\bf 125},
8568: {\pagine 515-526}, 1989. }\cr\cr
8569: %
8570: [J61]& {{\cs Johnson K.}:
8571: Solution of the Equations for the Green's Functions of a two
8572: Dimensional Relativistic Field Theory.
8573: {\journal Nuovo Cimento}, {\bf 20},
8574: {\pagine 773-790}, 1961. }\cr\cr
8575: %
8576: [JZ59]& {{\cs Johnson K., Zumino,B.}: Gauge Dependence of the
8577: Wave-Function Renormalization Constant in Quantum Electrodynamics.
8578: {\journal Phys. Rev. Lett.}, {\bf 3}, {\pagine 351-352}, 1959.}\cr\cr
8579: %
8580: [K68]& {{\cs Klaiber B.}: Lectures in theoretical physics.
8581: ed: A.O. Barut and W.E. Brittin. {\it
8582: Gordon and Breach.}, 1968.}\cr\cr
8583: %
8584: [MS76]& {{\cs Magnen J., S\'en\'eor R.}:
8585: The Wightman Axioms for the Weakly Coupled Yukawa Model in Two
8586: Dimensions.
8587: {\journal Comm. Math. Phys.}, {\bf 51},
8588: {\pagine 297-313}, 1976. }\cr\cr
8589: %
8590: [M]& {{\cs Marcushevich A.I.}:
8591: The theory of analytic functions: a brief course.
8592: {\book MIR} (1983). }\cr\cr
8593: %
8594: [M93]& {{\cs Mastropietro V.}:
8595: Schwinger function in Thirring and Luttinger models.
8596: {\journal Nuovo Cimento}, {\bf 108},
8597: {\pagine 1095-1107}, (1993). }\cr\cr
8598: %
8599: [ML65]& {{\cs Mattis D., Lieb E.}: Exact Solution of a Many
8600: Fermion System and its Associated Boson Field {\journal J. Math.
8601: Phys.}, {\bf 6}, {\pagine 304-312}, (1965). }\cr\cr
8602: %
8603: [MM]& {{\cs Montvay I., M\"unster G.}: Quantum Fields on a
8604: Lattice. {\book Cambridge University Press}, (1994). }\cr\cr
8605: %
8606: [OS73]& {{\cs Osterwalder K., Schrader R.}: Axioms for Euclidean
8607: Green's Functions. {\journal Comm. Math. Phys.}, {\bf 31},
8608: {\pagine 83-112}, (1973). }\cr\cr
8609: %
8610: [OS77]& {{\cs Osterwalder, K., Seiler E.}: Gauge Field Theories on
8611: a Lattice. {\journal Annals of Physics}, {\bf 110}, {\pagine }, (1977). }\cr\cr
8612: %
8613: [S75]& {{\cs Seiler E.}: Schwinger functions for the Yukawa model in
8614: two dimensions
8615: with space-time cutoff {\journal Comm. Math. Phys}, {\bf 42},
8616: {\pagine163-182}, (1975). }\cr\cr
8617: %
8618: [T58]& {{\cs Thirring W.}: A soluble relativistic field theory.
8619: {\journal Annals of Physics}, {\bf 3}, {\pagine}, (1958).
8620: }\cr\cr
8621: %
8622: [W69]& {{\cs Wilson K. G.}:
8623: 9. Non-Lagrangian Models of Current Algebra
8624: {\journal Phys. Rev.}, {\bf 179},
8625: {\pagine 1499-1512}, (1969). }\cr\cr
8626: %
8627: [W76]& {{\cs Wilson W.} {\book Cargese lectures}, (1976). }\cr\cr
8628: %
8629: [Z70]& {{\cs Zimmermann W.}: Lectures on elementary particles and
8630: quantum field theory, vol.1 {\book M.I.T. press }, (1970).
8631: }\cr\cr}
8632:
8633: \closeout1
8634: \bye
8635: