Solution to Peskin Problem 6.

3
The leading-order effect of the Higgs boson on the electrons magnetic moment comes
from the following Feynman diagram:

where the stated Lagrangian form implies that the f f h vertex is given by
i

(1)

(with a 5 when we come to the axion case).

6.3a
In terms of the e vertex correction, we have
u
(amp )u =

i
d4 k
i
i
i
0 i

u(p),

(p
)
(ie
)
2
(2)4 k 2 mh + i
p/ + k/ me + i 2
2 p/0 + k/ me + i
(2)

which can be evaluated in exactly the same way as the similar QED correction with a
virtual photon. Using Feynman parameters x + y + z = 1 for the three denominators, we
have
amp =

ZZZ

i2 N
d4 `
(2)4 (`2 + i)3

(3)

= zm2h + (1 z)2 m2e xyq 2

(4)

dxdydz (x + y + z 1)

where
` = k + xp + yp0 ,

and
N = (/
p0 + k/ + me ) (/
p + k/ + me )
i
h
i q

.
= (1 + z)2 m2e + xyq 2 21 `2 + 2m2e (1 z 2 )
2me

(5)

The second expression here follows from the first after a few tricks that we have used
repeatedly (i.e. shifting to ` and throwing away terms odd in ` and using the Gordon
identity). These manipulations appear as an Appendix. As in QED, the first term on
the second line of Eq. (5) contributes to F1 (q 2 ) while the second term contributes to the
F2 (q 2 ), and hence to the anomalous magnetic moment. The l 2 part of the first term is
actually log divergent and must be renormalized, but of course there are many additional
sources of this charge renormalization. In the end, there is a renormalization counter
term that is simply chosen to give the measured value of F1 (0) = e. The contribution to
F2 of the Higgs exchange is simply the coefficient of
(

i q
:
2me

d4 `
i
Higgs F2 (q ) =
dxdydz (x + y + z 1)
z )
4
2
(2) (` + i)3
2
2 ZZZ
me (1 z 2 )

dxdydz (x + y + z 1)
(6)
=
16 2
= zm2h + (1 z)2 m2e xyq 2
ZZZ

2m2e 2 (1

and therefore
Higgs

g2
2

= Higgs F2 (q 2 = 0)
m2e (1 z 2 )
2 ZZZ
dxdydz (x + y + z 1)
=
16 2
zm2h + (1 z)2 m2e
Z
2
2
2
1
(1 z)(1 z )me

dz
=
2
16 0 " zm2h + (1 z)2 m2e
!#
2 m2e
m2h
7
m2e
=
log 2
.
+ O
16 2 m2h
me
6
m2h

(7)

6.3b
According to Eq. (7), the effect of the virtual Higgs boson one the electrons magnetic
moment is suppressed by two very small factors, namely (me /mh )2 and 2 = (me /hHi)2
where hHi 246 GeV is the Higgs fields vacuum expectation value that gives rise to the
electrons mass in the first place. Presently, the Higgs mass mh is not known, but there
is an experimental lower limit of mh >
114 GeV. Hence, using me = 0.000511 GeV and
m = 0.1057 GeV,
g2
Higgs
2
e


g2
Higgs
2

23
<
1.288 10 ,

(8)

14
<
1.29 10 ,

(9)

both corrections being much smaller than the present-day experimental uncertainties of
the two leptons anomalous magnetic moments, which are of order 1 1012 in the case of
ae and of order 0.5 109 in the case of a . (See the lecture notes and the recent preprint
hep-ph/0702027. The latest experimental paper is hep-ex/0602035.)

6.3c
The axions contribution to the anomalous magnetic moment can be calculated similarly to that of the Higgs boson. Again, the e vertex correction is given by Eq. (3), only
now
N = 5 (/
p0 + k/ + me ) (/
p + k/ + me ) 5
h
i
i q

.
= (1 z)2 m2e + xyq 2 21 `2 2m2e (1 z)2
2me

(10)

Consequently,
axion

g2
2

2
16 2

dz
0

2
(1 z)3 m2e
=

I(m2a /m2e ),
zm2a + (1 z)2 m2e
16 2

(11)

where the analytic formula for the integral I(m2a /m2e ) is too complicated to display here.
Asymptotically, I

1
2

for a light axion (ma  me ) and I

heavy axion (ma  me ).

m2e
m2a

a
log( m
)
m2
e

11
6

 1 for a

Supernova 1987a data restricts ma < 105 eV, which is lighter than the electron
of course. So the small ma limit can be used. Given the current experimental limit
|

g2
2
e

| < 1012 , there is a rather low experimental limit on the electron-axion coupling:

A light axion must have || < 1.8 105 .

Appendix on the numerators

In the scalar case, we must reduce

N = (/
p0 + k/ + me ) (/
p + k/ + me )

= (/
p0 + l/ x/
p y/
p0 + me ) (/
p + l/ x/
p y/
p 0 + me )

= [(1 y)/
p0 x/
p + me ] [(1 x)/
p y/
p0 + me ] + l
/ l/ dropping terms odd in l
= [(2 y)me x/
p] [(2 x)me y/
p 0 ] + l l

using u(p0 )/
p0 = u(p0 )me and pu(p)
/
= me u(p)
g 2
l
= [(2 y)me x/
p] [(2 x)me y/
p0 ] +
4

using 4d result for the l l integral not strictly valid since log divergent
l2
= [(2 y)me x/
p] [(2 x)me y/
p0 ]
2

using = 2
l2
= (2 y)(2 x)m2e x(2 x)/
p me y(2 y)me p/0 + xy/
p p/0
(12)
2
As regards the , We now use the identities (applicable inside the spinors):
p
/ = 2p me

(13)

p/0 = 2p0 me

(14)

p
/ p/0 = (/
p + p/0 ) (/
p0 + p)
/ p/0 p/ p
/ p/ p/0 p/0
= (/
p + p/0 ) (/
p0 + p)
/ m2e p
/ me me p/0
= 2(p + p0 ) (/
p0 + p)
/ (p + p0 )2 m2e p
/ me me p/0
= 4me (p + p0 ) (p + p0 )2 m2e p
/ me me p/0
= 4me (p + p0 ) + (q 2 4m2e ) m2e (2p me )me me (2p0 me )
using q 2 = (p0 p)2 = 2m2e 2p p0
= 2me (p + p0 ) + (q 2 3m2e )

(15)

Plugging these results into the previous equation gives

N = (2 y)(2 x)m2e x(2 x)me (2p me ) y(2 y)me (2p0 me )
i
h
l2
+xy 2me (p + p0 ) + (q 2 3m2e )
2
2

0
= (2 y)(2 x)me x(2 x)me (p + p me ) y(2 y)me (p0 + p me )
h
i
l2
+xy 2me (p + p0 ) + (q 2 3m2e )
2
using x y symmetry of everything else to rewrite middle terms
(16)
We now employ the Gordon identity which between spinors reads
(p + p0 ) = 2me 2me
and isolate the and
"

i q
2me

i q
2me

(17)

terms. One finds

l2

[(2 y)(2 x) x(2 x) y(2 y) + xy] + xyq

2
#
"
l2
= m2e (1 + z)2 + xyq 2
2

m2e

(18)

and

i
h
i q
i q
2m2e [2xy + x(2 x) + y(2 y)] =
2m2e 1 z 2
2me
2me

(19)

In the axion case, we must reduce

N = 5 (/
p0 + k/ + me ) (/
p + k/ + me ) 5
=

(/
p0 + l/ x/
p y/
p0 me ) (/
p + l/ x/
p y/
p 0 me )

[y/
p0 x/
p] [x/
p y/
p0 ] + l
/ l/ dropping terms odd in l

[yme x/
p] [xme y/
p 0 ] + l l

p0 = u(p0 )me and pu(p)

/
= me u(p)
using u(p0 )/
g
2
[yme x/
p] [xme y/
p0 ] +
l
4
using 4d result for the l l integral not strictly valid since log divergent
l2
[yme x/
p] [xme y/
p0 ]
2

using = 2
l2
(y)(x)m2e x(x)/
p me y(y)me p/0 + xy/
p p/0
(20)
2

Plugging in the same simplificaton equations, we arrive at

N = (y)(x)m2e x(x)me (2p me ) y(y)me (2p0 me )
h
i
l2
+xy 2me (p + p0 ) + (q 2 3m2e )
2
2

= (y)(x)me x(x)me (p + p me ) y(y)me (p0 + p me )

h
i
l2
+xy 2me (p + p0 ) + (q 2 3m2e )
2
using x y symmetry of everything else to rewrite middle terms
(21)
Using the Gordon identity now gives
"

l2

[(y)(x) x(x) y(y) + xy] + xyq

2
"
#
2
l
= m2e (1 z)2 + xyq 2
2

and

m2e

i q
i q
2m2e [2xy + x(x) + y(y)] =
2m2e () [1 z]2
2me
2me

(22)

(23)