Justification of the zeta function renormalization in rigid string model

Journal of Mathematical Physics

Volumn 38, Issue 12, 1997, Pages 6265-6280

  Nesterenko, V V ^a   Pirozhenko, I G ^b  

^a JOINT INSTITUTE FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH   (Russian Federation)

^b PETROZAVODSK STATE UNIVERSITY   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031505908     PISSN: 00222488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.532211     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. N. N. Bogoliubov and D. V. Shirkov, Introduction to the Theory of Quantized Fields (Interscience, New York, 1959).
2. S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phys. 55, 133 (1977).
3. A. Voros, Commun. Math. Phys. 110, 439 (1987).
4. E. Elizalde, S. D. Odintsov, A. Romeo, A. A. Bytsenko, and S. Zerlini, Zeta Regularization Techniques with Applications (World Scientific, Singapore, 1994).
5. Most commonly this operator is the Laplace operator (-Δ). The zeta function regularization is sually applied to the Euclidean version of the models where one has to deal with elliptic operators (Ref. 3).
6. J. Ambijorn and S. Wolfram, Ann. Phys. 147, 1 (1983).
7. B. M. Barbashov and V. V. Nesterenko, Introduction to the Relativistic String Theory (World Scientific, Singapore, 1990).
8. N. F. Svaiter and B. F. Svaiter, J. Math. Phys. 32, 175 (1991).
9. J. Mehra, Physica (Amsterdam) 37, 144 (1967).
10. N. F. Svaiter, B. F. Svaiter, Phys. Rev. D 47, 4581 (1593).
11. G. German, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 6, 1815 (1991).
12. A. M. Polyakov, Nucl. Phys. B 286, 406 (1986).
13. H. Kleinert, Phys. Lett. A 174, 335 (1986); Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 1915 (1987).
14. H. Kleinert, Phys. Lett. A 174, 335 (1986); Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 1915 (1987).
15. G. Lambiase and V. V. Nesterenko, Phys. Rev. D 54, 6387 (1996).
16. E. T. Wittaker and G. N. Watson, A Course of Modern Analysis (Cambridge U.P., Cambridge, 1969).
17. G. H. Hardy, Divergent Series (Oxford U.P., Oxford, 1967).
18. It is implicitly assumed that the singularities are taken away by renormalization of parameters in the theory under consideration.
19. I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals, Series and Products (Academic, New York, 1980).
20. V. V. Nesterenko and N. R. Shvetz, Z. Phys. C 55, 265 (1992).
21. I. Brevik and I. Clausen, Phys. Rev. D 39, 603 (1983).
22. E. Elizalde and A. Romeo, J. Math. Phys. 30, 1133 (1989).
23. K. Kirsten and E. Elizalde, Phys. Lett. B 365, 72 (1996).
24. If fields are considered in a bounded space region, then this procedure is interpreted as the subtraction of infinite space contribution (Ref. 24).
25. N. D. Birrel and P. C. W. Davies, Quantum Fields in Curved Space (Cambridge U.P., Cambridge, 1982).
26. In the framework of a string model, the potential linearly rising at large distances is the classical string energy considered as a function of its length R when R → ∞ (see Ref. 7). On the microscopic level (QCD level), the very appearance of the collective string degrees of freedom is interpreted as a complicated nonperturbative effect in quantum dynamics of gluon and quark fields closely related to nontrivial properties of the QCD vacuum.
27. E. M. Lifshitz and L. P. Pitaevskii, Statistical Physics (Pergamon, Oxford, 1980), Part 2.
28. I. E. Dzyaloshinskii, E. M. Lifshitz, and L. P. Pitaevskii, Adv. Phys. 10(38), 165 (1961).
29. N. G. van Kampen, B. R. A. Nijboer, and K. Schram, Phys. Lett. A 26, 307 (1968).
30. I. Brevik and H. B. Nielsen, Phys. Rev. D 51, 1869 (1996).
31. I. Brevik, H. B. Nielsen, and S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Rev. D 53, 3224 (1996).