• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,054 questions , 2,207 unanswered
5,345 answers , 22,719 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Under what conditions are the renormalization group equations "reversible"?

+ 4 like - 0 dislike

As I understand it, the renormalization group is only a semi-group because the coarse graining part of a renormalization step consisting of

  1. Summing / integrating over the small scales (coarse graining)

  2. Calculating the new effective Hamiltonian or Lagrangian

  3. Rescaling of coupling constants, fields, etc.

is generally irreversible.

So when doing a renormalization flow analysis one usually starts from an initial action valid at an initial renormalization time $t_0$ (or scale $l_0$)

$$ t = \ln(\frac{l}{l_0}) = -\ln(\frac{\Lambda}{\Lambda_0}) $$

and integrates the renormalization group equations

$$ \dot{S} = -\Lambda\frac{\partial S}{\partial \Lambda} \doteq \frac{\partial S}{\partial t} $$

forward in renormalization time towards the IR regime.

Under what conditions (if any) are the renormalization group transformations invertible such that the renormalization group equations are reversible in renormalization time and can be integrated "backwards" towards negative renormalization times and smaller scales (the UV regime)?

As an example where it obviously can be done, the calculation of coupling constant unification comes to my mind.

asked May 8, 2013 in Theoretical Physics by Dilaton (6,240 points) [ revision history ]
retagged Mar 9, 2014

1 Answer

+ 4 like - 0 dislike

Running the RGEs in reverse should be valid so long as you don't integrate over a scale where degrees of freedom enter/leave the theory. If you integrated out the electrons in QED, you'd have irrevocably lost that information in your low energy description of interacting photons. You'd see some non-renormalizable theory with interacting corrections to pure EM but RG evolving to the UV wouldn't tell you what that would be. Just like RG evolving QED to the UV keeps you unaware of the strong or the weak sector physics.

On the other hand, so long as you've not crossed any characteristic scale in your theory, the theory at the scales you've integrated out should be the same as the theory at the scale you're currently at. So you should be able to go back to where you came from.

To summarize, so long as you don't integrate out some characteristic scale, you can keep going back and forth.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 16:20 (UCT), posted by SE-user Siva
answered May 8, 2013 by Siva (720 points) [ no revision ]
Hm, I am not sure if I understand that completely. Does this mean, that in order to be able to go backward and forward, the number of couplings in the theory or relevant operators should not change?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 16:20 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dilaton

Hmm, I am not sure whether I understand your question completely. As long as you have the originally microscopic theory valid at any scale, you have everything at your hand. Why do you want to reverse something irreversible if you have access to the microscopic theory anyway?

Note, in the condensed matter theories one is not obliged to do any coarse graining. One can have a good microscopic theory without it. However in QED and some other "particle QFT" one is obliged to do subtractions (renormalizations); otherwise one does not have a working theory at all.

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights