Elementary particle theory. Volume 3: Quantum dynamics (Q1792265)

This book is the third volume out of three volumes dealing with ``elementary particle theory'', where here the focus is laid on the concept of particles rather than fields as in usual approaches. This volume gives an introduction into what the author calls ``Quantum Dynamics'' -- a formulation of relativistic quantum physics without the use of renormalization. In the beginning, the concept of the ``dressed'' Hamiltonian formalism which is essential for the whole book. The dressing formalism happens via a unitary transformation acting on the fundamental (``unphysical'') Hamiltonian. Instead of adding a counter term Hamiltonian to eat up divergencies in the original Hamiltonian, the unitary dressing transformation redefines the vacuum and single-particle states. The second chapter deals more detailed with the concept of dressing and applies this to QED. Nevertheless, there is an implicit use of an integral cut-off \(\Lambda\) as in ordinary higher order Quantum Field Theory, although its dependence is supposed to cancel out in the physical expressions. Especially the unitary transformation itself does not have a well-defined limit at \(\Lambda \to \infty\). In the further course of the book, the ``dressed'' theory is applied to physical scenarios: the coulomb potential and the hydrogen atom in Chapter 3, and to decays of unstable particles in Chapter 4 leading to the well-known Breit-Wigner formula; finally, to higher orders in QED (Chapter 5). After that, there is a puzzling step back to classical electrodynamics in Chapter 6, where some classical features are derived from the dressed Hamiltonians and applied to a vast set of examples. Chapter 7 looks for some ``experimental support'' of relativistic quantum dynamics, where some (semi-)classical effects are discussed. Finally, in chapter 8 an outlook is given how to connect the concept os particles with relativity in this language. The reader is left with a statement that does not answer many of the questions that may have come up (Why do we need it? What is ``better'' than ordinary QFT?): ``But our approach is certainly unsatisfactory, because it does not allow the dressed theory to stand on its own two feet.'' The appendices give some more technicalities, especially a proof on the dressing transformation leaving the \(S\)-operator invariant.