Take the 2-minute tour ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free.

When introducing the fine-tuning problem, a sharp cut-off as a regulator in the calculation of the Higgs mass corrections is used. Since this regulator breaks translational and gauge invariance, up to which point can we trust this cut-off as the true validity limit of our theory?

If we do not trust this regulator, there is no way of seeing that the corrections to the Higgs mass are quadratically divergent, right? So how can we know that, in a renormalizable theory, an elementary scalar should have his mass around the highest possible scale in the theory? Moreover, does it even make sense of talking about the cut-off of a theory when it is renormalizable?

Since the notion of a cut-off, the quadratic corrections to the Higgs mass and naturalness are the driving principle to almost every BSM particle physics model I'm pretty puzzled with this.

Any thoughts, hints or literature that could clarify these ideas?

share|improve this question
a theory should be considered valid as long as it does not contradict experimental observations. And in principle, no new physics phenomena beyond the Standard Model may turn up which means we would have to set the cutoff parameter to a value comparable to the Planck scale (which is a 'fine tuning problem'). One way of interpreting the cutoff scale is the scale up to which the Standard Model is valid and at which a new physics phenomena appear (which then can e.g. cancel these divergencies). –  Andre Holzner Sep 25 '13 at 16:25
No, fine tuning problem is present with dimensional regularisation which respects gauge symmetry. –  innisfree Oct 12 '13 at 0:35

Your Answer


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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.