The Divergences in the Iteration Solution

  • J. M. Jauch
  • F. Rohrlich
Part of the Texts and Monographs in Physics book series (TMP)


If quantum electrodynamics were a complete and satisfactory theory, it would be a mathematically rigorous and logically consistent structure which allows—at least in principle—the calculation of all radiative processes. This cannot be said without qualifications of the theory in its present state of development. The equations of this theory seem to lead to mathematically inconsistent consequences. In spite of this defect, it has been possible to extract from this incomplete theory results which are in perfect agreement with empirical data. If we bear in mind that some of these results are far from simple in their analytical form, and that they can be derived from the basic equations of the theory so far developed without any further ad hoc assumptions, we are driven to the conclusion that the theory in its present form is essentially correct. There is not one single experimental fact known today concerning radiative processes which could not be quantitatively explained by this theory.


Radiative Correction Gauge Invariance External Line Mass Renormalization Electron Line 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. G. Källén, Kgl. Danske Videnskab. Selskab 27, 12 (1953)Google Scholar
  2. A. Pais, Developments in the Theory of the Electron, Institute for Advanced Study and Princeton University, 1948Google Scholar
  3. Waller, Z. Physik 62, 673 (1930)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  4. V. Weisskopf, Phys. Rev. 56, 72 (1939).CrossRefMATHADSGoogle Scholar
  5. J. R. Oppenheimer, Phys. Rev. 35, 461 (1930).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  6. F. J. Dyson, Phys. Rev. 85, 631 (1952).CrossRefMATHADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. R. Karplus and M. Kroll, Phys. Rev. 77, 536 (1950)CrossRefMATHADSGoogle Scholar
  8. F. J. Dyson, Phys. Rev. 83, 608 (1951)CrossRefMATHADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. J. S. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 74, 1439 (1948)CrossRefMATHADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. G. Wentzel, Phys. Rev. 74, 1070 (1948).CrossRefMATHADSGoogle Scholar
  11. R. J. N. Phillips, Phys. Rev. 96, 1678 (1954).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  12. A. Uehling, Phys. Rev. 48, 55 (1935).CrossRefMATHADSGoogle Scholar
  13. R. P. Feynman, Phys. Rev. 76, 769 (1949)CrossRefMATHADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. R. Karplus and N. Kroll, Phys. Rev. 77, 536 (1950)CrossRefMATHADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© J. M. Jauch and F. Rohrlich 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. M. Jauch
  • F. Rohrlich
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhysicsSyracuse UniversitySyracuseUSA

Personalised recommendations