Table Of ContentHamiltonian approach to Yang-Mills theory in Coulomb
gauge - revisited¶
H. Reinhardt∗, D. R. Campagnari∗, M. Leder∗, G. Burgio∗, J. M. Pawlowski†,
M. Quandt∗ and A. Weber∗∗
1
1
0 ∗InstitutfürTheoretischePhysik,UniversitätTübingen,AufderMorgenstelle14,72076Tübingen,Germany
2 †InstitutfürTheoretischePhysik,UniversitätHeidelberg,Philosophenweg16,69120Heidelberg,Germany
∗∗InstitutodeFísicayMatemáticas,UniversidadMichoacanadeSanNicholásdeHidalgo,EdificioC-3,Ciudad
n
Universitaria,58040Morelia,Michoacán,Mexico
a
J
6 Abstract. I briefly review resultsobtained within the variational Hamiltonian approach toYang-Mills theory in Coulomb
2 gauge and confront them with recent lattice data. The variational approach is extended to non-Gaussian wave functionals
including three- and four-gluon kernels inthe exponential of the vacuum wave functional and used to calculate the three-
] gluonvertex.AnewfunctionalrenormalizationgroupflowequationforHamiltonianYang–MillstheoryinCoulombgauge
h issolvedforthegluon andghost propagator under theassumption ofghost dominance. Theresultsarecompared tothose
t obtainedinthevariationalapproach.
-
p
e
h INTRODUCTION of Gauss’ law, resulting in the gauge fixed Yang–Mills
[
Hamiltonian[6]
1 In recent years there have been substantial efforts de-
1
v voted to non-perturbative studies of continuum Yang– H = dDx J−1[AAA]PPP J[AAA]PPP +BBB2 +H , (1)
8 YM 2 c
Mills theory. Among these are variational solutions of Z
09 theYang–MillsSchrödingerequationinCoulombgauge H = g2 dD((cid:0)x,x′)J−1[AAA]r a(x)J[AAA](cid:1)Fab(x,y)r b(x),
c
[1–3]. In this approachthe energydensityis minimized 2
5 Z
1. usingGaussian-typeansätzeforthevacuumwavefunc- where P a(x)=d /id Aa(x) is the canonical momentum
tional. In this talk I will first briefly review results ob-
0 (electricfield)operatorand
tained within the Tübingen approach [2] using a modi-
1
1 fiedGaussianwavefunctional.ThenIwillpresentanew J[AAA]=Det(−DDD(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) ) (2)
: approachtoHamiltonianquantumfieldtheory,whichal-
v
lowstousenon-Gaussianwavefunctionalsinvariational istheFaddeev–Popovdeterminant.Furthermore
i
X calculations [4]. The approach is illustrated by using a
r a(x)=−fabcAAAbPPP c (3)
r wavefunctionalwithcubicandquarticgluonictermsin
a
the exponentialand appliedto calculate the three-gluon
isthecolorchargeofthegluonsand
vertex.Finally,Iwilldiscussanewfunctionalrenormal-
izationgroup(FRG)approachtotheHamiltonianformu- Fab(x,y)=hx,a|(−DDD(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) )−1(−(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) 2)(−DDD(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) )−1|y,bi (4)
lationof Yang–Millstheory[5] andpresentresultssup-
portingthefindingsof the variationalapproach[2, 3]. istheso-calledCoulombkernel.Inthepresenceofmat-
ter fields with color charge density r a(x), the gluon
m
charge r a(x) in the Coulomb term is replaced by the
total charge r a(x)+r a(x) and the vacuum expectation
m
VARIATIONALAPPROACH valueofFab(x,y)acquiresthemeaningofthestaticnon-
AbelianCoulombpotential,seeeq.(16)below.
Instead ofworkingwith gaugeinvariantwave function- The gauge fixed Hamiltonian eq. (1) is highly non-
als, it is usually more convenient to fix the gauge. A local due to the Coulomb kernel Fab(x,y), eq. (4), and
particularlyconvenientchoice of gaugeis the Coulomb due to the Faddeev–PopovdeterminantJ[AAA], eq. (2). In
gauge (cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) ·AAA = 0, which allows an explicit resolution addition,the latteralso occursinthe functionalintegra-
tion measure of the scalar product of Coulomb gauge
wavefunctionals
¶ Invited talk given by H. Reinhardt at “T(r)opical QCD 2010”, hy |O|y i= DAJ[AAA]y ∗[AAA]Oy [AAA]. (5)
September26–October1,2010,Cairns,Australia. 1 2 1 2
Z
Whiletheeliminationofunphysicaldegreesoffreedom I (kkk)= Nc d3q 1−(kkkˆ·qqqˆ)2 d(qqq−kkk) .
via gauge fixing is often beneficial (and sometimes un- d 2 (2p )2 w (qqq)(qqq−kkk)2
Z
avoidable) in practical calculations, the price to pay is h i (12)
theincreasedcomplexityofthegaugefixedHamiltonian
eq. (1). The non-trivialFaddeev–Popovdeterminantre- Theghostformfactord(kkk)measuresthedeviationfrom
flectstheintrinsicallynon-linearstructureofthespaceof theQEDcase,whered(kkk)=1.Furthermore,d−1(kkk)rep-
gaugeorbitsanddominatestheIRbehaviorofthetheory. resentsthedielectricfunctionoftheYang–Millsvacuum,
OnceCoulombgaugeisimplemented,anyfunctionalof andtheso-calledhorizoncondition
the(transverse)gaugefieldisaphysicalstate.
d−1(0)=0 (13)
TreatingtheHamiltonian(1)intheordinaryRayleigh-
Schrödingerperturbationtheoryonefindstoleadingor-
ensuresthattheYang–Millsvacuumisadualsupercon-
dertheusualone-loopb functionwithb =−11N [7].
0 3 c ductor [9]. Minimization of the vacuum energy hH i
Our main interest lies, however, in the IR sector of the YM
withrespecttothekernelw (kkk)leadstothegapequation,
theory,whichrequiresanon-perturbativetreatment.
whichafterrenormalizationreads[2],[10]
In ref.[2] the vacuumenergydensitywas minimized
usingthefollowingansatzforthevacuumfunctional
w 2(kkk)=kkk2+c 2(kkk)+c +D I(2)(kkk)+
2
Y [AAA]= N exp −1 d3k w (kkk)Aa(kkk)Aa(−kkk) . +2c (kkk)[D I(1)(kkk)+c1], (14)
J[AAA] 2 (2p )3 i i
(cid:20) Z (cid:21) where
(6)
p
For this wave functional the static gluon propagator is
D I(n)(kkk)=I(n)(kkk)−I(n)(0), w (kkk)≡w (kkk)−c (kkk),
givenby1
N d3q
hAa(−kkk)Ab(qqq)i=d abt (kkk)(2p )3d (kkk−qqq) 1 , (7) I(n)(kkk)= 4c (2p )3 1+(kkkˆ·qqqˆ)2 V(qqq−kkk)
i j ij 2w (kkk) Z (cid:16)w n(qqq)−w n((cid:17)kkk)
× , (15)
sothatw (kkk)representsthe(quasi-)gluonenergy. w (qqq)
To the order considered in ref. [2], i.e., up to two
and
loopsintheenergy(whichcorrespondstooneloopinthe d2(kkk)
associated Dyson–Schwinger equations), it was shown V(kkk)≡g2hFi= (16)
kkk2
[8]thattheFaddeev–Popovdeterminant,eq.(2),canbe
representedas isthenon-AbelianCoulombpotential,wheretheapprox-
imation
J[AAA]=exp − d3xd3yAa(x)c ab(x,y)Ab(y) , (8)
i ij j (−DDD(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) )−1·(−(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) 2)·(−DDD(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) )−1
(cid:20) Z (cid:21)
where (cid:10) ≈ (−DDD(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) )−1 ·(−(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) 2(cid:11))· (−DDD(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) )−1 (17)
1 d 2lnJ[AAA] has been used(cid:10). In the gap(cid:11)equation(cid:10)(14), c1 and(cid:11)c2 are
c iajb(x,y)=−2*d Aai(x)d Abj(y)+=d abtij(x)c (x,y) (tifionni,tew)hreerneoormneailmizaptoiosenscthoenshtoanritzso.nFcoorntdhieticornit(i1ca3l),sbooluth-
(9) w (kkk)andc (kkk)areinfrareddivergent,whichimpliesthat
istheghostloopandrepresentsameasureofthecurva-
thetransversegluonpropagatorvanishesatk→0,while
ture[2]oftheCoulombgaugefixedconfigurationspace.
ExpressingtheghostGreen’sfunctionas w (0)≡lim(w (kkk)−c (kkk))=c . (18)
1
k→0
d
h(−D(cid:209)(cid:209)(cid:209) )−1i= g(−D ), (10) A perimeter law of the ’t Hooft loop requires c1 = 0
andthisvalueisalsofavoredbythevariationalprinciple
[10]. Furthermore, for c =0 the IR limit of the wave
whered(kkk)istheghostformfactor,itsDyson–Schwin- 1
functional(6)is
gerequationreadstoone-looporder
d−1(kkk)=g−1−I (kkk), (11) y [AAA]=N (cid:213) y (kkk), y (kkk=0)=1, (19)
d
kkk
which is the exact vacuum wave functional in 1+1
1 Hereandinthefollowing,tij(kkk)≡dij−kikj/kkk2 denotesthetrans- dimensions [11]. The renormalization parameter c2, on
verseprojectorinmomentumspace. theotherhand,hasnoinfluenceontheIRorUVbehavior
0.45
lattice
0.4
Gaussian functional
0.35 Non-Gaussian functional
0.3
p) 0.25
D( 0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
p
FIGURE 1. Gluon propagator obtained with a Gaussian
FIGURE 2. The numerical solution for the static non-
(dashed line) and a non-Gaussian functional (straight line),
AbelianCoulombpotential[3].
comparedtothelatticedatafromRef.[12].
an inverse gluon propagator which in the UV behaves
ofthesolutionsofthegapequation(14).Onlythemid-
like the photon energy but diverges in the IR, signal-
momentum regime of w (kkk) is weakly dependent on c
2 ingconfinementinagreementwiththeIRanalysis(20),
[2]. Since we are mainly interested in the IR properties
(21),(22).Figures1and2showtheresultinggluonen-
wewillputc =0.
2 ergy w (kkk) and non-Abelian Coulomb potential(16) for
The coupled integral equations (11) and (14) can be
the solution b =1. Their IR behavior is in agreement
solved analytically in the IR (for the critical solution
with the results of the IR analysis. The obtained prop-
satisfying the horizon condition (13)) using power law
agator also compares favorably with the available lat-
ansätze[2,13]
ticedata[12].Thereare,however,deviationsinthemid-
w (kkk)∼k−a , d(kkk)∼k−b . (20) momentum regime (and minor ones in the UV) which
can be attributed to the missing gluon loop, which es-
Under the assumption of a trivial scaling of the ghost- capes the Gaussian wave functionals. These deviations
gluonvertexonefindsthatinDspacedimensionstheIR arepresumablyirrelevantfortheconfinementproperties,
exponentssatisfythesumrule whicharedominatedbytheghostloop(whichisfullyin-
cludedundertheGaussianansatz),butarebelievedtobe
a =2b +2−D. (21) importantforacorrectdescriptionofspontaneousbreak-
ingofchiralsymmetry[16].
Thissumruleensuresthatc (kkk)hasthesameIRbehavior
asw (kkk),cf.eq.(18).Furthermore,inD=3onefindstwo
solutions[13] NON-GAUSSIAN WAVEFUNCTIONALS
b ≃0.8 and b =1. (22)
Inref.[4]thevariationalapproachtoYang–Millstheory
in Coulomb gaugewas extendedto non-Gaussianwave
The latter givesrise to a Coulomb potential(16) which
functionalsoftheform
is strictly linear at large distances. In D = 2 only one
solutionb = 25 isfound,implyinga = 45 andaCoulomb |y [AAA]|2=exp(−S[AAA]), (24)
potential (16) rising as V(r) ∼ r4/5 [14]. Furthermore
1 1
in D=2 onlythe critical solutionsatisfying(13)exists S[A]= w AAA2+ g AAA3+ g AAA4, (25)
3 4
[14]. On the lattice, on the other hand,one finds a =1 Z 3!Z 4!Z
inD=3andalinearlyrisingpotential[15].IntheUV- wherew ,g ,g arevariationalkernels.
3 4
regimethecoupledequations(11)and(14)canbesolved Representing the Faddeev–Popov determinant by a
perturbativelyandonefindsatlargemomentak≫1[2] functionalintegraloverghostfieldsfromtheidentity
w (kkk)∼k, d(kkk)∼1/ log(k). (23) d
0= DA J[AAA]e−S[AAA]K[AAA] , (26)
d A
Thefullnumericalsolutionsoftheabpoveequationswere Z (cid:16) (cid:17)
given, for D=3 space dimensions, in refs. [2] and [3], withK[AAA]anarbitraryfunctionalofthegaugefield,one
where the critical solutionsb =0.8 and b =1, respec- canderive,inthestandardfashion,DSEsforthevarious
tively,werefound,andforD=2inref.[14].Onefinds gluon and ghost Green functions. These DSEs are the
= −2 1
0.5
0
FIGURE3. TruncatedDSEforthethree-gluonvertex,under
theassumptionofghostdominance. 2,0) -0.5
p -1
(A
f3 -1.5
usual DSEs of Landau gauge Yang–Mills theory, how- -2
ever,in D=3 dimensionsandwith the bare verticesof -2.5 this work
the usual Yang–Millsaction replaced by the variational lattice
-3
kernelsw ,g ,g .ItshouldbestressedthattheseHamilto- 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
3 4
nianDSEsarenotequationsofmotionintheusualsense, p
butratherrelationsbetweentheGreenfunctionsandthe
FIGURE 4. Form factor f of the three-gluon vertex for
so far undeterminedvariationalkernels. By using these 3A
orthogonalmomentaandcomparisontolatticedataforthed=
DSEs, theenergydensitycan bewritten asa functional
3Landau-gaugevertex[20].Themomentumscaleisarbitrary
ofthevariationalkernels, and has been adjusted to make the sign change occur at the
samepoint.ThelatticedataareshownbycourtesyofA.Maas.
hH i=E[w ,g ,g ]. (27)
YM 3 4
Byusingaskeletonexpansion,thevacuumenergycanbe
gluonvertex
writtenatthedesiredorderofloops.Confiningourselves G ·G (0)
totwoloops,thevariationofthevacuumenergyEq.(27) f := 3 3 , (29)
withrespecttothekernelg fixesthelatterto 3A G (0)·G (0)
3 3 3
g abc(ppp,qqq,kkk)=2igfabc where G (30) is the perturbativevertex, given by Eq. (28)
ijk with W (ppp) replaced by |ppp|. Furthermore,we consider a
d (p−q) +d (q−k) +d (k−p)
ij k jk i ki j particular kinematicconfiguration,where two momenta
× . (28)
W (ppp)+W (qqq)+W (kkk) havethesamemagnitude
Equation(28)is reminiscentof the lowest-orderpertur- ppp2=ppp2=p2, ppp ·ppp =cp2. (30)
1 2 1 2
bativeresult[17],withtheperturbativegluonenergy|ppp|
replacedbythenon-perturbativeoneW (ppp). To evaluatetheformfactor f (p2,c), we use theghost
3A
Withthisresult,variationofhH iwithrespecttow and gluon propagators obtained with a Gaussian wave
YM
yieldsthe gapequation(14),which now,however,con- functional[3] as input. The IR analysis of the equation
tains on the r.h.s. in addition the gluon loop Ig(kkk) [4], for f3A(p2,c) [Eq. (29)] performed in Ref. [13] shows
which escapes the Gaussian wave functional (6). The thatthisformfactorshouldhaveapowerlawin theIR,
presenceofthegluonloopIg(kkk)inthegapequationmod- withanexponentthreetimestheoneoftheghostdress-
ifiestheUV behaviorandallowsustoextract,fromthe ingfunction;thisisconfirmedbyournumericalsolution
non-renormalizationof the ghost-gluon vertex, the cor- [4].Theresultforthescalarformfactor f fororthogo-
3A
rect first coefficient of the b function. In order to esti- nalmomenta, f(p2,0),isshowninFig.4,togetherwith
matethesizeofthegluon-loopcontributiontothegluon lattice results for d =3 Landau gauge Yang–Mills the-
propagator,weuse thegluonandghostpropagatorsob- ory.Ourresultandthelatticedatacomparefavorablyin
tained with a Gaussian wave functional[3] to calculate the low-momentum regime. In particular, in both stud-
the gluon loop. The result is shown in Fig. 1, together ies,thesignchangeoftheformfactoroccursroughlyat
withlatticedatafromRef.[12].Theagreementbetween thesamemomentumwherethegluonpropagatorhasits
the continuumand the lattice results is improvedin the maximum.(ThescaleinFig.4isarbitrary.)
mid-momentum regime by the inclusion of the gluon
loop,i.e.,thethree-gluonvertex,asobservedalsoinLan-
daugauge[18]. HAMILTONIANFLOW
ThetruncatedDSEforthethree-gluonvertexG under
3
the assumption of ghost dominance is represented dia- TheadvantageofthevariationalapproachtotheHamil-
grammaticallyinFig.3.Possibletensordecompositions tonianformulationisitscloseconnectiontophysics.The
ofthethree-gluonvertexaregiveninRef.[19].Forsake price to pay is the apparent loss of manifest renormal-
of illustration, we confine ourselves to the form factor ization groupinvariance.Renormalizationgroupinvari-
corresponding to the tensor structure of the bare three- ance is naturally built-in in the functional renormaliza-
tion group approach to the Hamiltonian formulation of
k∂ −1= − −
Yang–Millstheoryproposedinref.[5]. k
IntheFRG approachthequantumtheoryofafieldj
isinfraredregulatedbyaddingtheregulatorterm
FIGURE5. Truncatedflowequationofthegluonpropagator.
1 1 Thebareverticesatk=L aresymbolizedbysmalldotsandthe
D Sk[j ]= 2j ·Rk·j ≡ 2 j Rkj (31) regulatorinsertionk¶kRbyacrossedsquare.
Z
to the classical action, which in the Hamiltonian ap-
proachis givenby thelogarithmofthe wave functional
k∂ −1= +
k
(24). The regulator function R (p) is an effective mo-
k
mentumdependentmasswiththeproperties
FIGURE6. Truncatedflowequationoftheghostpropagator
lim R (p)>0, lim R (p)=0, (32)
k k
p/k→0 k/p→0
which ensures that R (p) suppresses propagation of
k
and the perturbative initial conditions at the large mo-
modeswith p.kwhilethosewith p&kareunaffected
mentumscalek=L ,
and the full theory at hand is recovered as the cut-off
scale k is pushed to zero. Wetterich’s flow equation for
theeffectiveactionG [f ]ofafieldf isgivenby dL (p)=dL =const., w L (p)=p+a. (38)
k
1 1 With these initial conditions, the flow equations for the
k¶ G [f ]= Tr k¶ R , (33)
k k 2 G (2)[f ]+R k k ghost and gluon propagators are solved under the con-
k k straintofinfraredscalingfortheghostformfactor.The
d nG [f ]
G (n) [f ]= k (34) resultingfullflowoftheghostdressingfunctionisshown
k,1...n df 1...df n inFig.7.
aretheone-particleirreduciblen-pointfunctions(proper AstheIRcut-offmomentumkisdecreased,theghost
vertices).Thegenericstructureoftheflowequation(33) formfactordk(ppp)(constantatk=L )buildsupinfrared
isindependentofthedetailsoftheunderlyingtheory,but strengthandthefinalsolutionatk=kminisshowninFig.
isamereconsequenceoftheformoftheregulatorterm 9togetherwiththeoneforthegluonenergyw kmin(ppp)in
(31), being quadratic in the field. By taking functional Fig.8.ItisseenthattheIRexponents,i.e.,theslopesof
derivatives of Eq. (33) one obtains the flow equations the curvesdkmin(ppp), w kmin(ppp) do notchange as the min-
for the (inverse) propagators and proper vertices. The imal cut-off kmin is lowered. Let us stress that we have
generalflowequation(33)stillholdsfortheHamiltonian assumed infrared scaling of the ghost form factor but
formulation of Yang–Mills theory provided that f is not the horizon condition d−1 (p = 0)= 0. The latter
k=0
interpretedasthesuperfieldf =(AAA,c,c¯). was obtained from the integration of the flow equation
TheFRG flow equationsembodyan infinitetowerof but notput in by hand(the same is also true for the in-
coupledequationsfortheflowofthepropagatorsandthe frared analysis of the Dyson–Schwinger equations fol-
propervertices.Theseequationshavetobetruncatedto lowing from the variational Hamiltonian approach, i.e.,
get a closed system. We shall use the following trun- assumingscalingtheDSEsyieldthehorizoncondition).
cation: we only keep the gluon and ghost propagators, The infrared exponentsextracted from the numerical
whichwewriteintheform solutions of the flow equations are a =0.28 and b =
p2
G (2) =2w (ppp), G (2) = . (35)
k,AA k k,c¯c d (ppp)
k
Inaddition,wekeeptheghost-gluonvertexG (3) ,which 1e+04
k,Ac¯c
we assume to be bare, i.e., we do not solve its FRG
1e+03
flowequation.Moreover,weshallassumeinfraredghost
dominance and discard gluon loops. Then the resulting 1e+02
flowequationsoftheghostandgluonpropagatorreduce
1e+01
totheonesshowninFigs.5and6.
Theseflowequationsaresolvednumericallyusingthe 1e+00
regulators 1e-05
1e-02
RA,k(ppp)=2prk(ppp), Rc,k(ppp)=p2rk(ppp), (36) p 1e+011e+04 1e+04 1e+02 1e+00 1e-02 1e-04
k
k2 p2
r (ppp)=exp − , (37)
k p2 k2 FIGURE7. Flowdk(p)oftheghostformfactor.
(cid:20) (cid:21)
approaches and highlights the inclusion of a consistent
-3
k ~10 UV renormalizationprocedure in the present approach.
min
k ~10-4 The above results encourage further studies, which in-
100 min -5 cludes the flow of the potential between static color
k ~10
min sourcesaswellasdynamicquarks.
10
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We wish to thank P. Watson for useful discussions.
-7 -5 -3 -1 1 3
10 10 10 10 10 10 Financial support by the DFG under contracts No.
p [GeV]
Re856/6-2,3andbytheCusanuswerkisgreatlyacknowl-
FIGURE8. Inversegluonpropagatorw atthreeminimalcut- edged.
offvalueskmin.
REFERENCES
4
10
1. A.P.Szczepaniak,andE.S.Swanson,Phys.Rev.D65,
-3
k ~10 025012(2001),hep-ph/0107078.
min
103 k ~10-4 2. C.Feuchter,andH.Reinhardt,Phys.Rev.D70,105021
min (2004),hep-th/0408236.
-5
k ~10 3. D.Epple,H.Reinhardt,andW.Schleifenbaum,Phys.
2 min
10 Rev.D75,045011(2007),hep-th/0612241.
4. D.R.Campagnari,andH.Reinhardt,Phys.Rev.D82,
105021(2010),1009.4599.
1
10
5. M.Leder,J.M.Pawlowski,H.Reinhardt,andA.Weber,
Phys.Rev.D83,025010(2011),1006.5710.
0 6. N.H.Christ,andT.D.Lee,Phys.Rev.D22,939–958
10
10-7 10-5 10-3 10-1 101 103 (1980).
p [GeV] 7. D.R.Campagnari,H.Reinhardt,andA.Weber,Phys.
Rev.D80,025005(2009),0904.3490.
FIGURE9. Inverseghostformfactordatthreeminimalcut- 8. H.Reinhardt,andC.Feuchter,Phys.Rev.D71,105002
offvalueskmin. (2005),hep-th/0408237.
9. H. Reinhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 061602 (2008),
0803.0504.
10. H.Reinhardt,and D.Epple,Phys. Rev.D76, 065015
0.64. They satisfy the sum rule found in [13] resulting
(2007),0706.0175[hep-th].
from the DSE obtained in the variational approach but
11. H.Reinhardt,andW.Schleifenbaum,AnnalsPhys.324,
are smaller than the ones of the DSE. Moreover, the 735–786(2009),0809.1764.
present approach allows to prove the uniqueness of the 12. G.Burgio,M.Quandt,andH.Reinhardt,Phys.Rev.Lett.
sum rule (21) [5], analogously to the proof in Landau 102,032002(2009),0807.3291.
gauge[21]. 13. W.Schleifenbaum,M.Leder,andH.Reinhardt,Phys.
Rev.D73,125019(2006),hep-th/0605115.
Replacing the propagators with running cut-off mo-
14. C.Feuchter,andH.Reinhardt,Phys.Rev.D77,085023
mentumscalekundertheloopintegralsoftheflowequa-
(2008),0711.2452.
tionbythepropagatorsofthefulltheory,
15. G.Burgio,M.Quandt,andH.Reinhardt,Phys.Rev.D81,
074502(2010),0911.5101.
dk(ppp)→dk=0(ppp), w k(ppp)→w k=0(ppp), (39) 16. A.Yamamoto,andH.Suganuma,Phys.Rev.D81,014506
(2010),0911.5391.
amountstotakingintoaccountthetadpolediagrams[5]. 17. D.Campagnari,A.Weber,H.Reinhardt,F.Astorga,and
Then the flow equations can be analytically integrated W.Schleifenbaum,Nucl.Phys.B842,501–528(2011),
0910.4548.
and turn into the DSEs obtained in the variational ap-
18. C.S.Fischer,A.Maas, andJ.M.Pawlowski,Annals
proach [2], with explicit UV regularization by subtrac-
Phys.324,2408–2437(2009),0810.1987.
tion.2Thisestablishestheconnectionbetweenthesetwo
19. J.S.Ball,andT.-W.Chiu,Phys.Rev.D22,2550(1980).
20. A.Cucchieri,A.Maas,andT.Mendes,Phys.Rev.D77,
094510(2008),0803.1798.
2 Insteadofthecompleteright-handsideofEq.(14)onereallyobtains 21. C.S.Fischer, andJ. M. Pawlowski,Phys. Rev. D80,
onlytheIR-dominantcontributionc 2.However,itturnsout[5]thatthe 025023(2009),0903.2193.
numericalsolutionoftheequationsisthesameasinRef.[2]overthe
wholemomentumrange.
