Sign up ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free.

I've read somewhere that disconnected diagrams do not contribute to the S-matrix. I don't see why this is the case. I do know why vacuum bubbles do not contribute: given a generating functional for a scalar field the n-point correlation function follows from: $$ G(x_1, \dots,x_n) = \frac{1}{i^n}\frac{\delta}{\delta J(x_1)}\frac{\delta}{\delta J(x_n)}Z_0[J]|_{J=0} $$ If you treat the generating functional in perturbation theory, expaning out the denominator of $$ Z[J] = \frac{\int\mathcal{D}\phi\exp(iS + i\int J\phi dx)}{\int\mathcal{D}\phi\exp(iS)}$$ will cancel all vacuum bubbles from the numerator. Does something similar hold for the disconnected diagrams?

share|cite|improve this question
Have a look at Peskin and Schroeder section 4.6. – user7757 Jan 24 '13 at 5:52

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

I think they do contribute to the S-matrix.The amplitude of disconnected diagrams is the product of the amplitudes of all disconnected pieces. For example, putting two connected 2-particle scattering diagrams will give you a 4-particle scattering process, but it's not that physically interesting because this process is not a "genuine" 4-particle process in the sense that it's really just two 2-particle scattering processes happening independently(and the jargon is "cluster-decomposed" process), so that it's best to study the connected pieces separately(these pieces correspond to the connected part of S-matrix). A good reference on this is Weinberg's QFT Vol1 chapter 4.

So in a word, disconnected diagrams do contribute to the S-matrix, but not the connected part of S-matrix(the second half of the sentence is a tautology if one uses connected diagram as the definition of "connected part of S-matrix", but it won't be a tautology if one uses Weinberg's recursive definition)

share|cite|improve this answer
Is the point you are trying to make the fact that the disconnected diagrams already contribute to the S-matrix via the connected diagrams? So including them would be some sort of double counting? – Funzies Jan 27 '13 at 13:54
No, what I mean is they do contribute to S-matrix, and they are not double counting, it's just that they don't contribute to the "interesting" part of the S-matrix. – Jia Yiyang Jan 27 '13 at 14:28

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.