one of the main characteristics of field theories defined in noncommutative space is the infrared / ultraviolet ( ir / uv ) mixing , which , even in models without massless particles , leads to the appearance of infrared divergences and , as a consequence , to the breakdown of the perturbative scheme in many renormalizable models ( see @xcite for recent reviews ) .
the presence of infrared divergences in ordinary field theory signals that one may be expanding around a point of nonanaliticity of the exact solution .
it may indicate the existence of nonperturbative effects that can not be reached by a power series expansion on the perturbative coupling .
in such case , two possible approaches are envisaged .
one may try resummations to rearrange the perturbative series to get a better behaved expansion .
a difficulty in this method is the identification of a parameter to control different orders of the new series .
another possible procedure is to enlarge the theory with new interactions , which , hopefully , will cancel the ir divergences leading to a new expansion without the mentioned singularities . for noncommutative theories
both methods have been considered in the literature @xcite .
in fact , it has been argued that the resummation may be efficiently controlled by the wilsonian renormalization group , a la polchinski @xcite . on the other side
, it has been shown that there exists a special class of theories , namely supersymmetric models , which are natural candidates to be consistent on noncommutative space , at least as far renormalization is concerned .
this has been proved to be correct for the noncommutative versions of the four dimensional wess - zumino model @xcite and the three dimensional nonlinear sigma model @xcite to all orders and also , at least up to one - loop order , for some supersymmetric gauge models @xcite
. however , noncommutative theories are so subtle and unusual that detailed investigations even in nonsupersymmetric theories are still in order .
proceeding with the aforementioned investigations here we will study the noncommutative @xmath0 model . in this model local gauge invariance
is attained through a composite field that , at least classically , is not dynamical .
this simplifying aspect makes the model a good laboratory for the investigation of general properties of gauge fields in noncommutative space .
the introduction of a gauge symmetry in noncommutative space produces a very rich structure in the sense that , even for the @xmath3 gauge group , there are three alternative ways in which the basic matter field could transform .
we begin our study by considering here the pure @xmath0 model , i. e. , without fermionic matter fields .
as it happens with its real @xmath4 symmetric counterpart , the nonlinear sigma model , only in two dimensions the commutative version of the model is perturbatively renormalizable .
however , both in two and three space - time dimensions it is @xmath1 expandable @xcite .
dynamical generation of gauge degrees of freedom and confinement are interesting aspects of the @xmath1 expansion of the two dimensional model @xcite . when coupled to fermions either minimally or in a supersymmetric fashion the quanta of the basic field @xmath5 are liberated and exact @xmath6 matrices are found @xcite .
the three dimensional model also possesses some interesting properties .
its @xmath1 expansion presents phases in which the basic fields are either massive or massless @xcite .
in particular , if a chern - simons term is added @xcite one finds radiative corrections to the topological mass at the next to leading order of @xmath1 @xcite . in this study
we will work in the unbroken phase ( massive @xmath2 ) of the 2 + 1 dimensional model .    in the noncommutative @xmath0 model ,
because of the underlying noncommutativity , we may consider the basic field as belonging alternatively to a fundamental ( left or right ) or to the adjoint representation of the gauge group .
we present a detailed discussion of the renormalization of the model in the fundamental representation up to the next to leading order of @xmath1 .
the model turns out to be renormalizable but the existence of planar and nonplanar graphs with distinct uv behaviors unveils some interesting features . in particular , some graphs in the commutative case , as a consequence of charge conjugation do not contribute .
however , these graphs in the noncommutative setting , where charge conjugation no longer holds @xcite , produces non null results . in spite of that , at least up to the leading nontrivial order of @xmath1 , the model turns out to be renormalizable and free of dangerous infrared divergences @xcite .    in contradistinction to the left fundamental representation , the adjoint representation , already at leading order , presents infrared singularities .
the implications of these singularities are twofold . on one hand ,
those divergences that occur in the gauge sector suggest the existence of strong long range forces . besides that , in the @xmath2 field self - energy corrections there are also quadratic infrared divergences which at higher order will destroy the @xmath1 expansion . it could be argued that , similarly to noncommutative @xmath7 @xcite , this behavior may be ameliorated by the inclusion of fermionic fields .
this will be the subject of a subsequent paper where we will discuss the dynamical generation of a chern - simons term .
the elimination of the ( dangerous ) ir / uv mixing in a supersymmetric extension of the model will be also investigated .
this work is organized as follows . in sec .
ii the possible representations for the noncommutative @xmath0 model are presented . in sec .
iii we investigate the leading contributions to the case in which the basic field belongs to the left fundamental representation and proceed a detailed examination of both the uv and ir divergences up to the next to leading order of @xmath1 .
dimensional regularization is used and we prove that the model is free from dangerous divergences ( i. e. , nonrenormalizable or nonintegrable ir divergences are absent ) . in sec .
iv we analyze the behavior of the green functions when the basic fields belong to the adjoint representation .
in this situation we explicitly verify the presence of ir / uv mixing which jeopardizes the consistency of the model . in sec .
v we present some concluding remarks . in the appendix
we discuss some additional properties of the model .
the commutative cp@xmath8 model is specified by the lagrangian density    @xmath9    where @xmath10 , are complex scalar fields , @xmath11 is the covariant derivative of @xmath5 and @xmath12 an auxiliary gauge field ( classically it is just a convenient notation for the composite field @xmath13 ) ; @xmath14 is the lagrange multiplier field enforcing the constraint @xmath15 .
because of this constraint , the presence of the mass term is classically not relevant . at the quantum level , @xmath16 will be identified with the physical mass for the quanta of the @xmath5 field insofar one enforces zero vacuum expectation value for the @xmath14 field .
the discussion of this fact is entirely analogous to the one in the @xmath4 nonlinear sigma model and will not be pursued here @xcite .
the noncommutative versions of the model are obtained by replacing the ordinary pointwise product by the moyal product @xcite which is associative and satisfies @xcite    @xmath17    where the constant and antisymmetric matrix @xmath18 gives a measure of the noncommutativity strength . to evade possible unitarity and/or causality problems @xcite we will keep @xmath19 ( see also ref .
@xcite ) .
as the moyal ordered product is noncommutative , we shall investigate three possible representations for the matter field :    \1 .
left representation :    @xmath20    where @xmath21 is the gauge transformation function and    @xmath22    \2 .
right representation :    @xmath23    \3 .
adjoint representation :    @xmath24    to keep the action unchanged under these transformations , the usual derivatives are replaced by covariant derivatives defined as    @xmath25    in all three above representations , the gauge field transforms as    @xmath26\ast ( { \textrm{e}}^{-i\lambda } ) _ { \ast } .
\label{4}\ ] ]    for sake of simplicity , we shall restrict our analysis to the left and adjoint representations , as the analysis for right and left representations are very similar .
in the left representation the part of the lagrangian containing the auxiliary field @xmath14 must be written either as    @xmath27    if @xmath14 does not change or    @xmath28    if @xmath14 changes according to the adjoint representation .
if @xmath5 belongs to the adjoint representation then @xmath14 also belongs to this representation and the constraint part of the lagrangian should be of the form    @xmath29    where @xmath30 and @xmath31 are free parameters . in
what follows , no matter what representation for the @xmath5 field is adopted , we always assume that @xmath14 belongs to the adjoint representation . as shall be clear in the next section , a great advantage of this assignment is the independence of the @xmath32 and @xmath33 fields in the fundamental representation ( at the leading order of @xmath1 ) . with this choice ,
the noncommutative action for the @xmath0 model in the left representation reads    @xmath34    as we will do shortly , to complete this lagrangian we shall add to it a gauge fixing and faddeev - popov terms .
for the left fundamental representation our graphical notation prescribes the following feynman rules :    @xmath35    for the @xmath5 propagator and    @xmath36    for the vertices ( see fig . [ fig1 ] ) , where @xmath37 . except for some graphs containing the quadrilinear vertex ( [ n8 ] ) , in the left representation , new features associated with the noncommutativity are present only for graphs with more than two vertices
this fact depends crucially on our choice for the @xmath32 field as belonging to the adjoint representation , which fixes the sign of the phase in ( [ n9 ] ) . in particular
, the leading @xmath1 contribution for the mixed propagator @xmath38 is the same as in commutative situation and therefore vanishes , due to lorentz covariance .
contrarily to the @xmath4 nonlinear sigma model , we will demonstrate that it is possible to construct a renormalizable model without nonintegrable ir / uv mixing . actually , we have :    \a .
@xmath14 field propagator : @xmath39 where ( see fig .
[ fig1.0]a )    @xmath40    and the expression in the right corresponds to the large spacelike @xmath41 behavior of @xmath42 ; as shown in the appendix , for the analysis of the renormalization of the theory only the leading @xmath43 is relevant .
it should be remarked also that the above propagator does not have poles and therefore does not have a particle content .
gauge field two point proper function ( fig .
[ fig1.0]b ) :    @xmath44(k^{2}-m^{2})}- \frac{2g_{\mu \nu } } { k^{2}-m^{2}}\right\ } , \ ] ]    which turns out to be finite if a gauge invariant regularization is adopted . indeed , using dimensional regularization
, we obtain    @xmath45    where @xmath46^{1/2}}$ ] . differently from the @xmath32 field ,
the gauge field has a particle interpretation .
indeed , @xmath47 so that for small momenta @xmath33 behaves as a maxwell field of intensity @xmath48 times the usual one . for large spacelike momenta    @xmath49    to get the propagator from ( [ 10 ] ) it is necessary to fix the gauge .
we choose to work in the landau gauge by adding to the lagrangian ( [ 1a ] ) the term    @xmath50\ ] ]    and letting @xmath51 after the calculation . notice the presence of the faddeev - popov ghost term , which due to the non abelian character of the moyal product does not decouple ( the ghost fields will not show up in our leading order calculations but will be relevant in higher orders ) .
it is now straightforward to verify that the gauge field propagator is given by    @xmath52    as a last remark on the feynman rules notice that , as in the commutative theory , any graph containing the diagrams of fig .
[ fig1.0 ] as subgraphs must be omitted since those ( sub ) graphs were already considered ( to construct the propagators for the @xmath33 and @xmath32 fields ) .    with these results at hand , we determine the ultraviolet degree of superficial divergence for a generic graph @xmath53 as being    @xmath54    where @xmath55 , @xmath56 and @xmath57 are the number of the external lines associated to the gauge , @xmath5 , @xmath14 and ghost fields , respectively .
renormalization parts are those graphs having @xmath58 ; in a noncommutative theory they occur only for planar ( sub ) graphs . some of the ultraviolet divergences , associated with the planar graphs , may be absorbed by reparametrizations .
as usual , we define the renormalized quantities by the replacements    @xmath59    so that the lagrangian ( [ 1a ] ) written in terms of the new fields changes as @xmath60 , where the counterterm lagrangian is given by    @xmath61    where we introduced @xmath62    these counterterms may be used to enforce @xmath16 as the physical mass of the @xmath2 field , to ensure the elimination of the remaining divergences of the two point function of the @xmath2 field and of the three point function @xmath63 .
the analysis of the uv divergences is much facilitated by the help of the graphical identities @xcite depicted in fig .
[ fig1a ] . due to the independence of the auxiliary field propagators on the noncommutative parameter ,
these identities are valid also in the present situation .
it should be observed that , as the @xmath32 field has no particle content , the identities may be used even if we restrict ourselves to the one particle irreducible graphs , i. e. , to graphs which can not be separated into disjoint pieces by cutting just one line , wavy or continuous . before going any further
we would like to stress some important consequences of these identities .
as in the commutative case , the identity of fig .
[ fig1a]a implies that the @xmath2 mass counterterm is innocuous since it cancels in all contributions to the green functions .
this will be explicitly verified in our discussion of the renormalization of the two point function of the @xmath5 field .
another implication of the graphical identity is that the @xmath64 counterterm is also innocuous if we consider green functions of the @xmath2 and @xmath33 fields only ( no external @xmath32 lines ) ; in that case @xmath65 may be chosen at will and the wave function renormalization for the @xmath32 field is therefore irrelevant . in our approach
the @xmath32 field tadpole contributions will not be considered separately but just in connection with the computation of the two point green function of the @xmath2 field .
an important implication of the identity of fig .
[ fig1a]b is that , except for the second diagram of fig .
[ fig1.0]b , all contributions containing the quadrilinear vertex will cancel pairwise ; they need not be considered anymore .
we also need to consider those divergences which do not have a corresponding counterterm .
they may have @xmath66 equal to either @xmath67 or @xmath68 .
for @xmath69 , the dangerous divergences are associated with graphs with @xmath70 and @xmath71 . as mentioned earlier
, this last possibility does not happen if a lorentz covariant regularization is employed .
for @xmath72 there are more possibilities :    \1 .
graphs with @xmath73 and @xmath74 equal to either @xmath75 or @xmath76 ,    \2 .
graphs with @xmath71 and @xmath77 ,    \3 .
graphs with @xmath78 and @xmath70 ,    \4 .
graphs with @xmath79 and @xmath70 .
besides the uv behavior , in all cases we need to investigate the possible presence of infrared divergences ( uv / ir mixing ) .
we focus first on the processes whose corresponding counterterms are correlated by gauge invariance , namely , corrections for the @xmath2 propagator , the three point @xmath80 and the four point @xmath81 functions .
we have :    \1 .
the subleading contributions to the self - energy of the @xmath5 field , @xmath82 , are shown in figs .
[ fig2 ] and [ fig2a ] .
they are purely planar and their ( ultraviolet ) divergences should be absorbed into a mass and wave function counterterms for the @xmath5 field .
the mass counterterm is associated to the highest ( quadratic ) divergence gotten by setting zero the external momentum of the contributing graphs . as can be easily checked ,
these divergences cancel between figs .
[ fig2]a and [ fig2]b , due to the graphical identity of fig .
[ fig1a]a .
the contributions for the wave function renormalization of the @xmath2 field come from figs .
[ fig2a]a and [ fig2a]b . using dimensional regularization
, a straightforward calculation furnishes the following results    @xmath83    where @xmath84 and @xmath85 is a quadratically divergent constant that would contribute to the mass renormalization of the @xmath2 field ; as mentioned the mass renormalization terms cancel .
diagram [ fig2a]c , on the other hand , cancels between figs .
[ fig2]a and [ fig2]b due to fig .
[ fig1a]b .
the divergent parts are therefore eliminated by the counterterm @xmath86 which fixes the divergent part of @xmath31 as being @xmath87 .
the overall divergences associated with the tadpole in fig .
[ fig2]b are absorbed in the counterterm in fig .
we also assume that @xmath88 possesses a finite part which enforces @xmath16 as the physical mass , i. e. , by adjusting @xmath88 and @xmath31 we impose the following normalization conditions    @xmath89    \2 .
three point function of the @xmath12 and @xmath5 fields , i. e. , @xmath90 .
because of our previous remark on the cancellation of diagrams containing the quadrilinear vertex @xmath91 , we have to analyze only those diagrams without this vertex , i. e. , those which are depicted in figs . [ fig3a ] and [ fig3 ] . in fig .
[ fig3 ] there are two one - loop diagrams and eight two - loop diagrams .
notice that the last four two - loop diagrams differ from the first four two - loop ones just by the orientation of the charge flow in the upper bosonic loop . in the commutative situation ,
graphs which differ just by the orientation of the charge flow are related by charge conjugation and furry s theorem states that they either give equal contributions or cancel between themselves .
here however charge conjugation is lost and furry s theorem is no longer valid so that the contributions should be individually analyzed . in the construction of the diagrams implicit in fig .
[ fig3a]b it is important to notice that any planar contribution is automatically overall ultraviolet finite .
indeed , these planar diagrams have zero degree of superficial divergence but , because of lorentz covariance they are proportional to @xmath92 what lowers the efective degree of divergence by one unit . on the other hand , as we will show , the nonplanar contributions in fig .
[ fig3a]b are used to cancel infrared divergences in the nonplanar diagrams of fig .
[ fig3 ] .
the first two diagrams shown in fig . [ fig3 ] are purely nonplanar and therefore are ultraviolet finite but could originate nonintegrable ( linear ) ir divergences .
in fact , because of the transversality of the @xmath93 propagator , the graph [ fig3]a is finite being given by    @xmath94_{\mu } \ , [ 2(p_{1}+p)]_{\rho } \ , 2p_{1\ , \sigma } } { [ ( k+p_{1})^{2}-m^{2}]\ , [ ( k+p_{1}+p)^{2}-m^{2}]}\delta ^{\rho \sigma } ( k ) .   &   & \end{aligned}\ ] ]    due to the asymptotic behavior of @xmath95 , this integral is finite even when the phase factor is absent so that the result is free from ir singularities
. graph [ fig3]b , on the other hand , is linearly divergent at @xmath96 . to see how this divergence is canceled we write its amplitude as    @xmath97 , \label{n12}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where    @xmath98_{\mu } } { [ ( k+p_{1})^{2}-m^{2}]\ ,   [ ( k+p_{1}+p)^{2}-m^{2}]}\delta _ { \lambda } ( k)\ ] ]    and @xmath99 presents at most logarithmic divergences
explicitly ,    @xmath100    where we introduced a simplified notation @xmath101 .
now , among the diagrams implicit in fig .
[ fig3a]b we consider the diagram of fig .
[ fig3b]a which may be obtained from the graph [ fig3]b by joining its @xmath5 external lines at a new @xmath102 vertex and attaching the external lines to a second @xmath103 vertex linked to the first one by the @xmath32 propagator .
the amplitude for this graph reads    @xmath104}.\ ] ]    expanding @xmath105 around @xmath106 as before and using ( [ 9 ] ) we get    @xmath107 } \delta _ { \lambda } ( p),\label{const}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where the second term has at most logarithmic ir divergences .
thus , adding the two contributions , no dangerous ir divergence survives .
this cancellation is just a manifestation of the identity expressed in fig .
[ fig1a]a . being nonplanar diagrams [ fig3]a and [ fig3]b do not present ultraviolet divergences either .
this is an interesting point since in the renormalization of commutative @xmath108 model the contribution of the diagram [ fig3]a is important to secure the gauge invariance of the perturbative method .
the above procedure can be generalized for any linearly ir divergent graph . from any nonplanar graph @xmath109
we may construct a new diagram @xmath110 by joining two external @xmath2 lines of @xmath109 in a new trilinear vertex @xmath111 .
this new diagram contains @xmath109 as a subgraph so that it presents the same ir divergence as @xmath109 .
the divergence in @xmath110 may be extracted by a simple taylor expansion as we did in the above calculation .
summing the analytical expressions for @xmath109 and @xmath112 it remains only a mild logarithmic ir divergence .
the next set of graphs shown in fig .
[ fig3 ] consist of four planar diagrams , figs .
[ fig3](c - f ) . as those graphs have two loops they may have one - loop divergent subgraphs . here
, however , we are concerned only with the overall divergence postponing the analysis of the divergences of the subgraphs to a later discussion ( see appendix ) .
graph [ fig3]c is actually finite since due to the transversality of the gauge field propagator the external vertices in the lower line can not depend on the loop momentum containing the two wavy lines . in the sequel we list the divergent contributions arising from the diagrams [ fig3](d - f ) :
fig3]d    @xmath113[(k+q)^2 -m^2](q^2-m^2)[(q+p)^2-m^2]}\nonumber\\ & = & i(p_1)_\mu e^{-ip_1\wedge p}\frac{16}{3n\pi^2}\frac{1}{\epsilon}+   \mbox{finite terms}.\end{aligned}\ ] ]    \b .
@xmath114[(k+q+p)^2-m^2 ] } \nonumber\\ & & \times    \frac{\delta^{\alpha\beta}(k)\delta_\lambda(k+p)}{(q^2-m^2)[(q+p)^2-m^2 ] }   \nonumber\\ & = & i(p_1+p)_\mu e^{-ip_1\wedge p}\frac{16}{3n\pi^2}\frac{1}{\epsilon}+   \mbox{finite terms}.\end{aligned}\ ] ]    \c .
@xmath115[(k+q)^2-m^2]}\nonumber\\ & & \times \frac{1}{(q^2-m^2)[(q+p)^2-m^2 ] } \nonumber\\ & = & -i(2p_1+p)_\mu e^{-ip_1\wedge p}\frac{2}{3n\pi^2}\frac{1}{\epsilon}+   \mbox{finite terms}.\end{aligned}\ ] ]    so altogether we have    @xmath116    the above divergence can be eliminated by the trilinear counterterm @xmath117 , so that @xmath118 .
let us now consider the four nonplanar diagrams shown in [ fig3](g - j ) . as we have outlined in our discussion subsequent to eq .
( [ const ] ) , any infrared linear divergence can be eliminated by adequately combining the graphs .
nevertheless , in specific situations there are further additional simplifications .
indeed , we have :    \a .
graph [ fig3]g : because of our gauge choice , there is no ir divergence associated to that diagram .
graphs [ fig3](h - i ) : again , due to our gauge choice these diagrams may present only a mild logarithmic ir divergence .
this divergence is canceled by the corresponding diagrams implicit in fig .
[ fig3a]b .
graph [ fig3]j : the amplitude associated with this diagram is linearly divergent at zero external momentum . here
we apply the aforementioned construction which produces the graph shown in fig .
[ fig3b]b ( this is another graph implicit in fig . [
fig3a]b ) .
the leading ir divergences of these two diagrams cancels as we proved earlier .
our results can be used now to fix the value of @xmath119 as defined in the counterterm lagrangian ( [ count ] ) .
in fact , as @xmath120 then @xmath121 so that @xmath122 .
we remark that the only possible contributions of @xmath119 would be for the next to leading corrections to the @xmath33 propagator ; due to the graphical identity in fig .
[ fig1a]b a nonvanishing @xmath119 does have none effect up to the order we have been considering .
. four point function of the @xmath123 and @xmath2 fields , @xmath124 .
there are not ultraviolet divergences because a given graph is either nonplanar or one may find a `` partner '' graph to which the graphical identity in fig .
[ fig1a]a may be applied . in the last case ,
the divergence in the original graph and its partner cancel pairwise .
this is consistent with the fact that for this four point function no counterterm is effective ; in fact , the absence of these divergences may be considered as a test for the consistency of the calculation .
although the renormalized lagrangian turned out to be gauge invariant both in commutative and in the noncommutative cases , the mechanism by which this gauge invariance is achieved is entirely different in the two situations .
thus , diagrams [ fig3]a and [ fig3]b which are nonplanar are ultraviolet finite , contrarily to the commutative case . on the other hand , in the noncommutative setting furry s theorem is not valid and so many graph cancellations that hold in the commutative case are now absent and new contributions arise .
\4 . five point function , @xmath125 .
the contributing diagrams are at most logarithmically divergent . in the planar
part this divergence can be get by calculating the regularized amplitude at zero external momenta ( after extracting the phase factors which in this case do not depend on the internal momentum ) . because of lorentz covariance , it is clear that the result of this computation vanishes so that no counterterm is needed .
the possible ir divergence contained in the nonplanar diagrams of this type can be canceled using a construction similar to the one described after eq .
( [ const ] ) .
three point vertex function of the @xmath33 field , @xmath126 .
there are just two one - loop graphs which differ only by the orientation of the charge flow in the loop ( each loop consists of three bosonic lines ) .
these diagrams are both planar and adding them one gets a factor depending on the sine of the wedge product of the two external momenta times an integral which is finite by symmetric integration .
three point vertex function of the @xmath14 and @xmath5 fields , @xmath127 . to order @xmath1 the contributing graphs
are depicted in fig .
[ fig31 ] .
the one - loop graphs [ fig31]a and [ fig31]b are nonplanar and therefore ultraviolet finite although in the infrared limit may present a mild logarithmic divergence .
the graph [ fig31]c , on the contrary , is planar and is ultraviolet logarithmically divergent .
it has an analytic expression given by    @xmath128[(k+p_{1}+p)^{2 } -m^{2}][(k - q)^{2}-m^{2 } ] } &   & \nonumber
\\ \frac{1}{(q^{2}-m^{2})}\delta _ { \lambda } ( q+p_{1})\delta _ { \lambda } ( q+p_{1}+p ) . &   & \label{n10}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    besides presenting an overall logarithmic divergence this integral has a divergent subintegral , namely , the @xmath129 integration ( this divergence will be examined in the context of the four point function of the @xmath5 field , in the next item ) .
the overall divergence can not be eliminated through the use of the @xmath130 counterterm since contributions containing such counterterm are canceled due to the identity of fig .
[ fig1a]a . however , as exemplified in the appendix , the mentioned divergence is irrelevant as far the green functions with only external @xmath2 and @xmath33 fields are concerned .
the analytic expression for the graph [ fig31]d differs from ( [ n10 ] ) just by an additional factor @xmath131 and therefore is ultraviolet finite and has a mild logarithmic divergence when @xmath41 tends to zero .
notice that in the commutative situation graphs [ fig31]c and [ fig31]d would give the same contributions , as a consequence of charge conjugation invariance .
there are other graphs , not shown in fig .
[ fig31 ] , which differ from diagrams [ fig31]c and [ fig31]d just by the replacements , one at each time , of the internal dashed lines by wavy ones ; because of the transversality of the @xmath33 propagator these additional graphs are ultraviolet finite and without infrared singularities .
concerning the contributions to the four point function @xmath132 let us first examine the one - loop diagrams .
one sees that there are two types to be considered as they are depicted in fig .
[ fig4 ] . whereas the graphs in the first row of fig .
[ fig4 ] are ultraviolet linearly divergent , the graphs in the second row are nonplanar and therefore ultraviolet finites ; they do not need counterterms .
no counterterm is also needed for the four graphs of the first row because , as a consequence of the graphical identity of fig .
[ fig1a]a , there are two - loop graphs which cancel the mentioned divergences .
for example , the highest ( linear ) divergence of the graph [ fig4]a is canceled by the one associated with the graph [ fig5]b .
graph [ fig5]b has a subgraph with the same divergence as the graph [ fig4]a .
if we contract this subgraph to a point and use the identity of fig .
[ fig1a]a we obtain the cancellation of these divergences . by a similar mechanism
the logarithimic divergences which are proportional to the external momenta of the graph are also cancelled .
the complete cancellation of all ultraviolet divergences can become complicate as it is illustrated in the appendix .
\8 . six point function , @xmath133 . as before the divergences of the planar diagrams
cancel pairwise by the use of the identity in fig .
[ fig1a]a whereas the nonplanar graphs could at most develop a logarithmic infrared singularity .
the above discussion proves that , up to the leading nontrivial order of @xmath1 , the noncommmutive @xmath0 model is renormalizable and without dangerous infrared singularities if the @xmath2 field transforms in accord with the left fundamental representation .
let us now consider the leading @xmath1 contributions when the basic fields transform in accord with the adjoint representation .
we will adopt the same graphical notation as in the previous section .
however , we have new rules :    \1 .
trilinear @xmath134 vertex @xmath135 @xmath136 .
quadrilinear @xmath137 vertex @xmath135 @xmath138 $ ] .
notice that these interactions are absent in the commutative limit .    using these rules we fix the two point function of the gauge field as being    @xmath139}\sin ^{2 } ( k\wedge p)\right.\nonumber \\   &   & \left.-2g_{\mu \nu } \int \frac{d^{3}k}{(2\pi ) ^{3}}\frac{1}{k^{2}-m^{2 } } \sin ^{2}(k\wedge p)\right].\label{n11}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    as @xmath140 we get a planar part which is twice that of the gauge field two point function in the corresponding commutative theory .
concerning the nonplanar piece , we perform the standard procedures to obtain    @xmath141^{2}}\{4k_{\mu } k_{\nu } + p_{\mu } p_{\nu } ( 2x-1)^{2}-2g_{\mu \nu } [ k^{2}+p^{2}(x-1)^{2 } -m^{2}]\}\label{10a}\ ] ]    where @xmath142 . now , using @xcite ,    @xmath143^{2}}=\frac{i}{(2\pi ) ^{3/2}\sqrt{4m}}\frac{k_{-1/2}[m \sqrt{-{\tilde{p}}^{2 } } ] } { ( -{\tilde{p}^{2 } } ) ^{-1/4}}=\frac{i}{8 \pi } \frac{{\rm e}^{-m\sqrt{-\tilde { p}^2}}}{m } , \label{i - basica - pura}\ ] ]    where @xmath144 is the modified bessel function of order @xmath145 , one obtains the complete two point function of the gauge field ( for simplicity we are employing the same notation used for the counterterms in the previous section ; no confusion should arise since they refer to distinct situations )    @xmath146    where    @xmath147,\ ] ]    @xmath148    and a gauge fixing term was added .
notice that this result possess an infrared singularity at @xmath149 .
concerning the part of the lagrangian which depends on the auxiliary field @xmath32 we should recall that , as pointed out in ( [ 7 ] ) , there is a two - parameter family of possible interaction terms ; some simplifications occur depending on which form the interaction is chosen . in particular , notice that :    \1 .
if the interaction term containing @xmath32 is taken as in the previous section , the computation of the two point function of the @xmath14 field gives the same result as before but , differently from the left representation , the mixed propagator @xmath38 turns out to be nonvanishing .
in fact , we find that at the leading order of @xmath1 the two point function of the @xmath32 and @xmath33 fields is given by    @xmath150 } { \textrm{e}}^{-i2k\wedge p}.\ ] ]    in contrast with the commutative model , the above expression does not vanish and yields    @xmath151    where @xmath65 is a nonvanishing function of @xmath152 and @xmath153
if the interaction term is chosen to be as    @xmath154    then , at the leading order of @xmath1 , the mixed propagator vanishes but the @xmath32 field propagator will have a nonplanar contribution . in this case the two point function of the @xmath32 field will be    @xmath155    where @xmath156 was given in ( [ 9 ] ) and the nonplanar part @xmath157 is    @xmath158    as another consequence of the choice ( [ 30 ] ) , the graphical identity of fig .
[ fig1a]a is no longer valid .
there are much more contributing diagrams than in the left representation .
we are now in a position which allows us to compute the propagators for the @xmath33 and @xmath32 fields at leading order of @xmath1 .
to encompass the two situations listed above , we shall designate the two point function of the auxiliary @xmath32 field by @xmath159 with the understanding that for the case 1 @xmath159 and @xmath160 are given by ( [ 9 ] ) and ( [ 49 ] ) , respectively whereas for the case 2 @xmath159 is given by ( [ 50 ] ) and @xmath161 .
the propagators are then fixed by the inverse of the matrix which appears in the quadratic part of the lagrangian .
a direct calculation then furnishes    @xmath33 propagator :    @xmath162    where    @xmath163(ap^2+b\tilde{p}^2 ) } + \frac{bp^2}{p^2 a(ap^2+b\tilde{p}^2)}.\ ] ]    mixed propagator :    @xmath164    where    @xmath165    @xmath32 propagator :    @xmath166    at small momenta @xmath167 and @xmath168 in both situations discriminated above and @xmath169 for the case 1 . thus , the transversal part of the @xmath33 field propagator diverges badly ( as @xmath170 ) at small momentum . in a local model such behavior
would in a nonrelativistic limit be associated with a potential which grows linearly with the distance from a charge probe .
therefore the quanta of the @xmath2 field would be confined .
however , due to the nonlocal character of the interaction , there are at the vertices momentum dependent form factors ( sine factors ) which smoothens the long - distance behavior of the potential .
besides the aforementioned situation which indicates the possible occurrence of dangerous infrared singularities we would like to stress that , in fact , radiative corrections bring new infrared divergences which at higher order lead to the breakdown of the @xmath1 expansion .
the crucial point of the calculation is provided by the corrections to the @xmath5 field two point function whose contributions are again given by the graphs on the figs .
[ fig2 ] and [ fig2a ] ( we may have other diagrams containing the mixed propagator but these are nonplanar diagrams without ir or uv divergences ) .
let us first examine those contributions for the situation 1 listed above . unless for the graph [ fig2a]b which is still planar , now there are trigonometric factors that deserve special consideration .    in the landau gauge ( @xmath171 ) ,
in which we have chosen to work , the transversality property of the gauge propagator produces a reduction of the degree of divergence of graph [ fig2a]a by two units . indeed the amplitude for the graph [ fig2a]a turns out to be    @xmath172    the ultraviolet ( logarithmic ) divergence of this expression must be removed by an adequate counterterm ; no infrared divergence appears because the sine factors improve the behavior of the integrand for small momenta .
however , graph [ fig2a]c has a leading contribution which , for high loop momenta , behaves as    @xmath173    and is quadratically divergent as @xmath41 goes to zero .
the multiple insertions of this graph into a larger graph leads to nonintegrable singularities which destroy the @xmath1 expansion . at this point
we may wonder if this result could not be modified by another choice for the trilinear interaction among the @xmath32 and @xmath2 fields .
in fact , the choice ( [ 30 ] ) as the interaction part involving the @xmath32 field introduces a sine factor at the trilinear vertex as it already happens with the @xmath174 vertex . if this is done then diagram of fig .
[ fig2a]b would have also a nonplanar part which asymptotically is similar to ( [ 11 ] ) .
however , the numerical factors do not match and no cancellation could take place .
in this work we focused on the construction of a consistent extension of the @xmath0 model to the noncommutative space . as we have seen , there are various possible extensions which depend on the way the fields transform under the gauge group . in all situations ,
we have chosen the auxiliary field @xmath14 as belonging to the adjoint representation . for the @xmath2 field belonging to the fundamental representation this prescription automatically prevents the appearance of a mixed @xmath38 propagator .
in fact the possibility envisaged in eq .
( [ 5 ] ) leads to a nonvanishing two - point proper function of the @xmath12 and @xmath14 fields given by    @xmath175}{\textrm{e}}^{-i2k \wedge p}=\frac{in\tilde{p_{\mu } } } { 8\pi   \sqrt{-{\tilde{p}}^{2}}}\int_{0}^{1}dx{\rm e}^{-m\sqrt{-{\tilde { p}^2}}}.\ ] ]    for the @xmath2 field belonging to the adjoint representation , the mixing of the @xmath32 and @xmath33 fields will occur unless if the constraint lagrangian is as in eq .
( [ 30 ] ) .    up to the leading nontrivial order of @xmath1 ,
all dangerous ir divergences were shown to cancel if the basic @xmath5 field belongs to the left representation of the gauge group .
we also proved that the ultraviolet divergences may be absorbed into counterterms which preserve the form of the original lagrangian .
therefore gauge invariance is maintained but this occurs in a way different from the commutative case .
indeed , in the commutative setting all the counterterms coefficients @xmath31 , @xmath176 and @xmath119 defined in ( [ count ] ) are equal and the @xmath33 field is not renormalized . in the present situation , however , the @xmath33 field gets renormalized and , although innocuous , a quadrilinear vertex @xmath177 counterterm occurs .
an entirely different picture is found if the basic field belongs to the adjoint representation .
first , the graphical identities characteristics of the commutative model are no longer valid .
nonplanarity occurs already at the leading order of @xmath1 and the number of diagrams to be analyzed increases significantly . also , due to the presence of ( moyal )
commutators , the @xmath33 field formally decouples from the theory in the commutative limit .
however , in this limit the green functions are singular and the limit does not seem to exist ( this is , of course , also true if the @xmath2 field is in the fundamental representation ) .
dangerous infrared divergences occur both in the gauge sector and in the radiative corrections to the two point function of the @xmath2 field .    because of the noncommutativity of the moyal product
there is a two parameter family of interaction terms containing the auxiliary @xmath32 field .
however , for no choice it is possible to cancel the divergences .
actually , the existence of ir / uv mixing suggests that to achieve consistency further extensions of the model should be investigated .
this issue is the object of our next study where the inclusion of fermionic matter fields will be investigated .
this work was partially supported by fundao de amparo  pesquisa do estado de so paulo ( fapesp ) and conselho nacional de desenvolvimento cientfico e tecnolgico ( cnpq ) .
in this appendix we shall demonstrate some results concerning the ultraviolet behavior of the noncommutative @xmath0 model when the basic @xmath2 field belongs to the left fundamental representation of the gauge group .
they are :    \a .
the subleading contributions to the @xmath32 and @xmath33 propagators , which are explicit in ( [ 9 ] ) and ( [ 51 ] ) are irrelevant as far as the ultraviolet divergences are concerned .
in fact , the only case that requires special attention is the two point function of the @xmath2 field which becomes at most linearly divergent if the subleading contribution for the auxiliary fields is used .
actually , up the order that we have considered it only occurs in the diagram of fig .
[ fig2a]b . replacing this contribution in figs .
[ fig2 ] and [ fig2a ] one sees that the would be linear divergences cancel among themselves .
the next subdivergence which is only logarithmic vanishes due to lorentz covariance .
contributions containing the mass counterterm cancel pairwise .
this result follows straightforwardly from the graphical identity depicted in fig .
[ fig1a]a where the special vertex stands for the mass counterterm insertion .
finally we will exemplify how the complete cancellation of ultraviolet divergences takes place in the case where several ( sub ) diagrams are involved , as in the three - loops diagram @xmath178 of fig .
the ultraviolet divergent subgraphs of @xmath178 are : @xmath179 and @xmath180 ; they also occur as ( sub)graphs of the diagrams @xmath181 and @xmath180 as shown in fig .
[ fig5 ] ( in spite of having different number of loops they are of the same order in @xmath1 ) .
these diagrams are all planar and have the same noncommutative phase ( @xmath182 $ ] ) which therefore factorizes in their sum .
notice that @xmath183 and @xmath184 are overlapping and that both contain @xmath180 as a subgraph . in the bphz scheme the relevant @xmath178-forests are @xmath185 and @xmath186 .
the bphz subtracted amplitude associated to the graph @xmath178 is therefore      where @xmath188 denotes the unsubtracted amplitude associated with the graph g ; as it is usual , @xmath189 is the amplitude associated to the reduced graph @xmath190 obtained by contracting the subgraph @xmath109 of @xmath178 to a point . for a generic diagram @xmath109 , @xmath191 is defined as the taylor operator on the external independent momenta of @xmath109 with the proviso that it does not act on the noncommutative phase factor .
similarly , the bphz subtracted amplitudes for the graphs @xmath192 , @xmath193 and @xmath180 are          noticing now that , as consequence of the graphical identity in fig .
[ fig1a]a , @xmath196 and that @xmath197 trivial four vertex , we see that when adding the above contributions all the subtraction terms cancel .
we stress that the cancellation occurs for all subtractions including those associated to the last subtraction for the linearly divergent diagram @xmath180 ( in this case , to the reduced vertex associated to the contraction of @xmath180 to a point it is assigned a linear polynomial in the external momenta of @xmath180 ) .
this proves that the sum of the unsubtracted diagrams is finite .    if the charge flow in the upper and lower loops of fig .
[ fig5 ] are in opposite directions the corresponding diagrams are nonplanar
. they still have the same phase factor but it depends on the loop momentum of the @xmath180 diagram .
individually they present a linear infrared divergence which nonetheless is cancelled whenever they are added .
this is most easily seen by factorizing the noncommutative phases and then taylor expanding the remaining of the @xmath180 s integrand up to first order in the independent external momenta of that graph .
nekrasov and m. douglas , rev .
73 , 977 ( 2002 ) ; r. j.szabo , `` quantum field theory on noncommutative spaces '' , hep - th/0109162 ; m. gomes , `` renormalization in noncommutative field theory '' in proceedings of the xi jorge andr swieca summer school , particles and fields
g. a. alves , o. j. p. boli and v. o. rivelles eds , world scientific pub .
co , 2002 ; h. o. girotti , `` noncommutative quantum field theories '' , hep - th/0301237 .
h. o. girotti , m. gomes , a. yu .
petrov , v. o. rivelles and a. j. da silva , phys .
b521 , 119 ( 2001 ) ; h.
o. girotti , m. gomes , v. o. rivelles and a. j. da silva , int . j. mod .
a17 , 1503 ( 2002 ) .
r. kberle and v. kurak , phys rev . lett . *
58 * , 627 ( 1987 ) ; phys .
d * 36 * , 627 ( 1987);e .
abdalla , m. c. abdalla and m. gomes , phys . rev . *
d27 * , 825 ( 1983 ) ; e. abdalla , m. forger and m. gomes , nucl . phys . *
b210 * , 181 ( 1982 ) ; b. berg , m. karowski , v. kurak and p. weisz , nucl .  phys .
* b134 * , 125 ( 1978 ) .
logarithmic infrared divergences resulting from the ir / uv mixing may occur but these are not dangerous because they are integrable .
as discussed in @xcite , unlike the case of logarithmic divergences , multiple insertions of quadratic or linear infrared divergent graphs into a larger graph will produce nonintegrable singularities .
j. gomis and t. mehen , nucl .
b 591 , 265 ( 2000 ) , hep - th/0005129 ; l. alvarez - gaume , j. l. f. barbon and r. zwicky , jhep 0105 , 057 ( 2001 ) , hep - th/0103069 ; a. bassetto , l. griguolo , g. nardelli and f. vian , jhep 0107 , 008 ( 2001 ) , hep - th/0105257 ; yi liao and k. sibold , eur .
j. c25 , 479 ( 2002 ) ; d. bahns , s. doplicher , k. fredenhagen and g. piacitelli , phys . lett . * b533 * , 178 ( 2002 ) , hep - th/0201222 .
m. chaichian , c. montonen and a. tureanu , phys .
b566 , 263 ( 2003 ) , hep - th/0305243 ; m. chaichian , m. n. mnatsakanova , a. tureanu and yu .
s. vernov , nucl . phys .
* b673 * , 476 ( 2003 ) , hep - th/0306158 ; t. ohl , r. rueckl and j. zeiner , hep - th/0309021 .      ) .
the propagators for the @xmath12 , @xmath14 and @xmath5 fields are represented by wavy , dashed and continuous lines , respectively . for the complex field ,
charge flows in the opposite direction to the indicated . ]


in this paper we will discuss the long distance classical and quantum corrections to the schwarszchild and kerr metrics using the techniques of effective field theory .
we will show how the nonanalytic radiative corrections to the energy - momentum tensor can be used to obtain the classical nonlinear terms in these metrics at long distance , and calculate the analogous nonanalytic quantum corrections .
for the schwarzschild metric we consider the case of a massive scalar particle . here
we clear up some numerical disagreements in related calculations that have emerged in the literature .
we then present the kerr results , using a massive fermion as a source , and show that the spin - independent quantum corrections are the same as those of the scalar particle .
we also elucidate various theoretical issues and compare with other results in the literature .
effective field theory is ideally suited for discussing the quantum effects of general relativity at scales well below the planck mass@xcite . while it is expected that the degrees of freedom and the interactions of gravity will be modified beyond the planck scale , at low energies these ingredients are accurately described by general relativity .
effective field theory separates the known quantum effects of the low energy particles from the unknown physics at high energy .
the latter effects are represented by the most general series of effective lagrangians consistent with the symmetry of general relativity .
however the propagation of the low energy particles yields identifiable quantum effects that can be isolated by the techniques of effective field theory .
the present study builds on two sets of recent work .
one of these is the use of effective field theory to study quantum corrections to the gravitational potential@xcite .
while the basic principles of these studies are the same , there are some differences and/or disagreements .
since there is not a universal definition of the meaning of a potential , different authors use different definitions of potential in terms of feynman diagrams , and hence obtain different answers . even in a case where the same definition is used
, different results have been obtained .
we will provide some clarification of these disagreements .
a related paper @xcite provides a full and detailed calculation of the scattering potential of scalar particles . in the present paper
we note that a subset of diagrams is more readily interpreted as a change in the metric , and we calculate these effects .    the other precedent for the present paper is the calculation of the the leading quantum corrections to the reissner - nordstrom and kerr - newman metrics using effective field theory@xcite .
these metrics involve charged particles , so that the quantum corrections involved photon loops , not graviton loops . however , this provided a particularly clear laboratory for the study of metric corrections .
interestingly , we saw that the _ classical _ nonlinearities in the metric can be calculated straightforwardly using feynman diagram techniques .
at the same time we saw that there was a clear identification of certain nonanalytic terms with long - distance quantum effects in the metric .
we use the insights of that study to investigate the present problems , which involve graviton loops . in the present case
the interpretation is not as clear , although the calculations are well defined .
we will be using harmonic gauge throughout this paper . in this gauge
, the schwarzschild metric has the form@xcite , @xmath3 the kerr metric@xcite refers to a particle with spin and , keeping only terms up to first order in the angular momentum , has the harmonic gauge form @xmath4 we will show that using a particular set of feynman diagrams we reproduce the former with the addition of a long distance quantum correction @xmath5 for the kerr metric , @xmath6 it is of course required that the classical spin - independent terms must be the same for a scalar particle and a fermion .
we know of no firm requirement for the spin - independence of the quantum corrections to @xmath7 and @xmath8 , but from our calculation they are seen to be identical .
the metric is derived from the energy - momentum tensor of a source , using einstein s equation as the equation of motion . at lowest order in the fields ,
the source particle is just a point particle in coordinate space .
however , both classical fields and their quantum fluctuations modify the energy - momentum of a particle at long distance .
these modifications can be found by the consideration of the radiative corrections to the energy - momentum tensor . when these are translated into a metric , they yield the classical nonlinearities and quantum modifications of the metric .
let us review what was found in ref@xcite for the conceptually simpler case of charged particles , as our calculation here will follow the same procedure . in that case
the field around the particles was the electromagnetic field and the gravitational interaction was treated purely classically .
the masslessness of the photon implies that there are long range fields around a charged particle and these carry energy and momentum . at the same time , in a feynman diagram calculation of the renormalization of the energy momentum tensor of the charged particle , the masslessness of the photon leads to nonanalytic terms in the formfactors having the structure @xmath0 , where @xmath9 is the momentum transfer , as well as analytic terms of order @xmath10 .
it was shown in detail how the @xmath11 terms account for the classical energy - momentum of the electromagnetic field and how they exactly reproduce the classical nonlinearities in the metric that are present in the reissner nordstrom and kerr newman metrics .
nonanalytic terms of the form @xmath12 also appear , and when they are included in the equations of motion they produce further corrections in these metrics .
explicit examination shows that these latter are linear in @xmath13 - i.e.they are quantum effects .
finally the analytic terms produce only delta functions ( or derivatives of delta functions ) in the metric , such that they vanish at long distance .
thus we saw that the long distance modifications of the metrics are obtained from the nonanlaytic terms in the formfactors of the energy momentum tensor .
the same effects are present in the purely gravitational case .
if one expands the energy and momentum of the particle in powers of g , the lowest order result is that of a point particle .
however , there is energy and momentum also carried by the gravitational field around the particle and this can be calculated via the one loop feynman diagrams . because the graviton is massless , there will also be nonanalytic terms of the forms @xmath0 in the formfactors of the energy momentum tensor .
again these will produce long range modifications of the metric .
if we include the relevant dimensionful couplings , this will have the schematic form @xmath14 \nonumber \\     & \sim & gm \left [ { 1\over r } + { a g m\over   r^2 } + { b g   \hbar\over     r^3 }     + { c g } \delta^3(x ) + \ldots \right ]     \end{aligned}\ ] ] here @xmath15 are dimensionless numbers and further numerical factors of order unity will be inserted later .
we will examine the @xmath16 terms in detail and show how they correctly reproduce all the features of the classical metric .
for the @xmath12 terms we have included the factor of @xmath13 that follows from dimensional analysis .
the analytic correction to the energy momentum tensor yields the delta function term that is not relevant for the long distance behavior .
the nonanalytic terms come from the low energy propagation of gravitons , using the couplings of general relativity . because these features are independent of the high energy behavior of gravity , they are unambiguous predictions of low energy general relativity .
there is also no influence of other possible terms in the gravitational lagrangian , such as @xmath17 or related corrections in the matter lagrangian .
these yield only analytic corrections to the formfactor and hence do not provide long distance modifications of the metric .
these are behaviors that are well known in the effective field theory of gravity@xcite .
let us first consider the theory without loop corrections .
the metric tensor is expanded as @xmath18 where @xmath19 is the usual minkowski metric and the superscript refers to the number of powers of the gravitational coupling which appear .
the dynamical relation which connects @xmath20 and the energy momentum tensor @xmath21 is the einstein equation , whose linearized form in harmonic gauge@xmath22is @xmath23 where @xmath24 represents the trace .
the metric for a nearly static source is then recovered via the green function in either coordinate or momentum space @xmath25    for a quantum mechanical system , @xmath21 is given in terms of the transition density @xmath26 and the conservation condition @xmath27 together with the requirement that @xmath21 transform as a second rank lorentz tensor demands the general ( scalar field ) form ] ] @xmath28\ ] ] where we have defined @xmath29 and @xmath30 .
conservation of energy and momentum requires @xmath31 but there exists no constraint on @xmath32 .    for the case of a point mass
@xmath33 the lowest order form is ( _ cf . _ eq . [ eq : mlg ] ) @xmath34\label{eq : emom}\ ] ] while in the case of the spin 1/2 system we have @xmath35u(p_1)\nonumber\\ \quad\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we use here the conventions of bjorken and drell and have employed the gordon identity@xcite . in either case , for a heavy point mass located at the origin we have the lowest order breit frame result @xmath36 the einstein equation then has the solution @xmath37 which , using @xmath38 corresponds to the coordinate space result . ]
@xmath39 with @xmath40 and reproduces the well - known leading order piece of the schwarzschild solution@xcite . in the case of spin 1/2
there is an additional classical component which arises from the spin . using @xmath41 we find the off - diagonal component of the metric @xmath42 which corresponds to the coodinate space result @xmath43 and agrees to this order with the kerr metric@xcite . with this basic material in hand
we now proceed to the inclusion of loop corrections .
of course , the lowest order discussion given above is straightforward and familiar , while the purpose of the present paper is determine the nonanalytic corrections @xmath44 to the form factors arising from the higher order gravitational self - interaction .
the appearance of such terms was found in i to be associated with the feature that the graviton couples to the ( massless ) photon , and the same is expected to happen in the case of gravitational self - interaction since the graviton is itself massless .
the relevant diagrams are shown in figure 1 and are similar to their electromagnetic analog considered in i , although the tensor nature of the graviton makes the calculation _ considerably _ more tedious .
details of the calculation are given in appendix a and the results are@xcite @xmath45 as found in the case of the electromagnetically corrected vertex studied in i , we observe that the @xmath46 value of the leading form factor @xmath47 is unchanged from its lowest order value of unity , as required by energy - momentum conservation , while the form factor @xmath32 , which is not protected , _ is _ modified .
such higher order corrections are to be expected from the feature that gravity is nonlinear and must contain terms to all orders in the gravitational coupling .
the momentum space form factors imply a coordinate space structure of the energy momentum tensor which is modified at large distance . using the integrals listed in appendix a
, we find the correction to the lowest order energy - momentum tensor to be @xmath48\nonumber\\ & = & m \delta^3(r)-{3gm^2\over 8\pi r^4}-{3gm\hbar \over 4\pi^2 r^5}\nonumber\\ t_{0i}(\vec{r})&=&0\nonumber\\ t_{ij}(\vec{r})&=&{1\over 2m}\int{d^3q\over ( 2\pi)^3}e^{i\vec{q}\cdot\vec{r}}(q_iq_j-\delta_{ij}\vec{q}^2)f_2 ( q^2)\nonumber\\ & = & \int{d^3q\over ( 2\pi)^3}e^{i\vec{q}\cdot\vec{r } } \left[{7\pi gm^2\over 16|\vec{q}|}(q_iq_j-\delta_{ij}\vec{q}^2)- ( q_iq_j-\delta_{ij}\vec{q}^2 ) { gm\over \pi}\log \vec{q}^2 \right]\nonumber\\ & = & -{7gm^2\over 4\pi r^4}\left({r_ir_j\over r^2}-{1\over 2}\delta_{ij}\right)+ { 2gm\hbar \over \pi^2 r^5}\delta_{ij}\nonumber\\ \label{eq : ta}\end{aligned}\ ] ] we have inserted factors of @xmath13 where appropriate , although we continue to use @xmath49 units .
note that the leading correction to @xmath21 is classical in nature , since there are no factors of @xmath13 .
we can show that this effect is generated by the energy and momentum that are carried by the gravitational field
[ eq : sch1] surrounding the point mass .
this field possesses an energy - momentum tensor@xcite @xmath50\nonumber\\ & -&{1\over 2}\partial_\lambda h^{(1)}_{\sigma\nu}\partial^\lambda h^{(1)\sigma}{}_\mu + { 1\over 2}\partial_\lambda h^{(1)}_{\sigma\nu}\partial^\sigma h^{(1)\lambda}{}_\mu
-{1\over 4}\partial_\nu h^{(1)}_{\sigma\lambda}\partial_\mu h^{(1)\sigma\lambda}\nonumber\\ & -&{1\over 4}\eta_{\mu\nu}(\partial_\lambda h^{(1)}_{\sigma\chi } \partial^\sigma h^{(1)\lambda\chi } -{3\over 2}\partial_\lambda h^{(1)}_{\sigma\chi}\partial^\lambda h^{(1)\sigma\chi } ) -{1\over 4}h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}\box h^{(1)}\nonumber\\ & + & { 1\over 2}\eta_{\mu\nu}h^{(1)\alpha\beta}\box h^{(1 ) } _ { \alpha\beta}\end{aligned}\ ] ] in terms of which the classical field correction to the point mass form of the energy - momentum tensor is determined to be @xmath51 where the ellipses indicate contributions localized about the origin . obviously eqs .
[ eq : ta ] and [ eq : tao ] are identical , demonstrating the correspondence of the nonanalytic @xmath16 terms and the classical field energy , just as found in i for the electromagnetic case .
the remaining corrections to @xmath21 contain an explicit factor of @xmath13 and are thus intrinsically quantum mechanical in nature .
the " physics  behind these modifications can be understood in terms of the position uncertainty associated with quantum mechanics , which implies the replacement of the distance @xmath52 in the classical expression by the value @xmath53 . since for macroscopic distances @xmath54 ,
expansion of the classical result in powers of @xmath55 leads qualitatively to the quantum modifications found in our loop calculation .
we emphasize that both eq .
[ eq : ta],[eq : tao ] are long range effects which arise only because the graviton couples to a _ massless _ virtual particle  in this case the self - interaction .
the explicit factor of @xmath13 in the latter indicates clearly that these are quantum effects whose strength and form are necessitated by the quantum nature of the field theory .
here we use this energy momentum tensor to calculate the associated metric . in i
we were able to show that this procedure reproduced well - known results for classical metrics .
we will demonstrate the same feature for the gravitational case . in this section
we treat only the classical @xmath16 terms , which we denote by @xmath56 superscripts to the form factors .
the method here is made somewhat more complex by the necessity of dealing with the nonlinearity of the einstein equation .
here we must consistently work to second order in @xmath57 and to this order there is a nonlinear modification of the equations of motion relating the energy momentum tensor and the metric .
this is worked out in the appendix
[ eq : eet] the result has the form to second order in @xmath57 @xmath58 noting that @xmath59 we find then that @xmath60\nonumber\\ & + & 4g^2m^2\left({\delta_{ij}\over r^2}-2{r_ir_j\over r^4}\right)= -{g^2m^2\over r^2}\left(\delta_{ij}+{r_ir_j\over r^2}\right)\label{eq : nai}\end{aligned}\ ] ] comparing with the schwarzschild solution in harmonic coordinates  eq . [ eq : sch]we find complete agreement .
having identified the classical corrections , we could proceed in a similar fashion to calculate the quantum corrections using the @xmath61 non - analytic terms .
however there is one additional feature which needs to be included .
there is a quantum modification of the equations of motion , which amounts to the addition of the vacuum polarization diagram of fig 2 . in order to see that this is required ,
let us look at the quantum corrected effective action , which also has non - local long distance modifications . at one loop one finds the effective action @xmath62 = -\int d^4x d^4y{1\over 2 } \left [ h_{\mu\nu}(x ) \right .
\left.\delta^{\mu\nu,\alpha\beta}(x - y)h_{\alpha\beta}(y)+\textit{o}(h^3)\right ] + z_{\rm matter}[h,\phi]\ ] ] here the renormalized action @xmath63 contains    @xmath64    where @xmath65 is the differential operator following from the einstein action and @xmath66 is the vacuum polarization function after renormalization , see fig .
1 . following the steps in appendix a we find that the vacuum polarization induces a change in the equations of motion @xmath67 where the projection operator @xmath68 is given by @xmath69    eq . [ eq : hmn ] can be written , in harmonic gauge , as @xmath70 where the last term is just the vacuum polarization graph of fig 2 .
the vacuum polarization has been calculated by thooft and veltman@xcite , and in momentum space it contains a factor of @xmath71 which is the source of the nonlocality .
the specific form is @xmath72\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] when we employ this form along with the graviton propagator , we find for that the vacuum polarization contributes a shift in the metric @xmath73\ ] ] in terms of components , we find , @xmath74    the remaining corrections come from the logarithms in the vertex correction .
using the energy momentum tensor shown above plus the integrals listed in the appendix we find @xmath75 where we have shown only the effects of the quantum logarithms . adding these corrections to the vacuum polarization and classical terms
reproduces the metric displayed in eq .
having understood the spinless sector , we now turn our attention to the case of a particle with spin , in particular spin one - half .
the general form for the spin 1/2 matrix element of the energy - momentum tensor can be written as@xcite @xmath76 u(p_1 )     \end{aligned}\ ] ] the normalization condition @xmath31 corresponds to energy - momentum conservation as found before , while the second normalization condition @xmath77 is required by the constraint of angular momentum conservation .
this can be seen by defining @xmath78 whereby @xmath79 _ i.e. _ , @xmath77 , as found explicitly in our calculation .
the feynman diagrams for fermions are shown in fig 2 .
we find , as shown in the appendix @xmath80    we convert this into an energy - momentum tensor .
writing @xmath81 for the spin , the general relation to the fermion form factors is @xmath82    using our results eq .
[ eq : ff2 ] for the form factors this becomes @xmath83    we can again check the classical piece of this result against our expectations of the energy - momentum carried by the gravitational field .
the spin - independent pieces are identical to that found for the spinless case . in the case of the off - diagonal component of the energy - momentum tensor , eq .
[ eq : eet ] yields @xmath84 \nonumber\\ & = & -{gm\over 2\pi r^6}(\vec{s}\times\vec{r})_i\end{aligned}\ ] ] in agreement with the result obtained from eq .
[ eq : tb ]    now let us calculate the metric components .
in this case we find the relation of the metric to the fermion form factors is given by @xmath85 with the form factors calculated above this yields @xmath86 we observe that the diagonal components of the vertex correction are identical to those found for the spinless case , as expected , and that there exists a nonvanishing non - diagonal term associated with the spin .
the diagonal components of the vacuum polarization are also clearly identical to the bosonic case , but there is a new off - diagonal component associated with the spin @xmath87 again these are added together in order to yield the result quoted in the introduction .
we have thus reproduced the kerr metric  eq .
[ eq : ker]in harmonic gauge together with the associated quantum corrections .
the quantum correction to the schwarzschild metric has previously been discussed by duff@xcite .
while that discussion properly identifies @xmath88 terms as the source of the quantum effects , the calculation is incomplete because it only includes the effect of the vacuum polarization diagram .
this can be traced to the assumption of a `` classical source '' , which meant that the vertex diagrams were not included .
however , any source has a gravitational field surrounding it and that field has a quantum component .
the effective field theory treatment demonstrates the existence of quantum corrections due to the vertex diagrams - they are of the same order as those due to vacuum polarization and they must be included . in this sense , there is no fully classical source in gravity .
if one takes the mass of a particle to infinity , the gravitational coupling also grows and the quantum effects do not decouple . rather for a heavy mass it is long distances which determines the classical limit , as the quantum effects become smaller than the classical effects in the limit of large distance .
however , the vertex corrections are as important as the vacuum polarization for the quantum correction to the metric and they must be included .
the bosonic diagrams that we have considered have also been parts of the calculations of the quantum corrections to the newtonian potential .
we have shown them in detail because there has been numerical disagreements in the literature .
we believe that our results are the correct ones .
there appears to have been a numerical error in the original result of ref @xcite .
we have identified the location of that error and carefully reconsidered that value .
the identity of eq .
[ eq : bbid ] makes it easy to repeat this part of the calculation .
the authors of ref @xcite also appear to be in error .
their calculation would lead to the wrong classical terms , which certainly indicates an error and implies that the quoted quantum portion is also not trustworthy .
in addition , our fermionic calculation serves as an independent confirmation of the bosonic result , as the calculational details are quite different even though the result is the same .
if we use our present result to define the one - particle - reducible potential , including the diagrams in figure 3 , we obtain the result , @xmath89 this potential is not itself the scattering potential . in a separate work
@xcite we calculate the other diagrams which are required to fully define the scattering amplitude . these include box diagrams and several triangle diagrams .
however , the 1pr potential represents the sets of diagrams that are used to define the running charge in qed and qcd and these diagrams can be used for a similar definition here .
we propose that the quantum correction from these diagrams be used to define a running gravitational coupling appropriate for harmonic gauge .
this results in @xmath90 the fact that this definition is independent of the masses of the objects involved suggests that it has a universal character appropriate for the running charge .
our work shows that this form is independent of spin .
note also that the charge becomes weaker at shorter distances .
this is in accord with a heuristic expectation that the gravitational interaction at large distances feels the total mass of the object , but when probed at small distances gravity will see a smaller effect because the quantum fluctuations spread out the energy contained in the fields . that the running gravitational coupling varies with a power of @xmath52 rather than the logarithm
is required by the dimensional gravitational coupling constant .    * acknowledgement *    this work was supported in part by the national science foundation under award phy-98 - 01875 .
brh would like to acknowledge the warm hospitality of forschungszentrum jlich and support by the alexander von humboldt foundation .
bjerrum - bohr would like to thank p.h .
damgaard for discussions .
while many details of the method are given in previous works , we do make special use of the equations of motion in a way that is not shown elsewhere .
here we describe the background that we need for our calculation .
the full gravitational action is given by @xmath91 where @xmath92 is the lagrange density for matter .
variation of eq .
[ eq : ful ] yields the einstein equation @xmath93 where the energy - momentum tensor @xmath21 is given by @xmath94 we work in the weak field limit , with an expansion in powers of the gravitational coupling @xmath57 @xmath95 where here the superscript indicates the number of powers of @xmath57 which appear and indices are understood to be raised or lowered by @xmath96 .
we shall also need the determinant which is given by @xmath97 the corresponding curvatures are given by @xmath98\nonumber\\ r^{(1)}&=&\box h^{(1)}-\partial_\mu\partial_\nu h^{(1)\mu\nu}\nonumber\\ r_{\mu\nu}^{(2)}&=&{1\over 2}\left[\partial_\mu\partial_\nu h^{(2)}+ \partial_\lambda\partial^\lambda h_{\mu\nu}^{(2)}-\partial_\mu\partial^\lambda h^{(2)}_{\lambda\nu } -\partial_\nu\partial^\lambda h^{(2)}_{\lambda\mu}\right]\nonumber\\ & -&{1\over 4}\partial_\mu h^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta}\partial_\nu h^{(1)\alpha\beta } -{1\over 2}\partial_\alpha h^{(1)}_{\mu\lambda}\partial^\alpha h^{(1)}_{\lambda\nu}+{1\over 2}\partial_\alpha h^{(1)}_{\mu\lambda } \partial^\lambda h^{(1)\alpha}_\nu\nonumber\\ & + & { 1\over 2}h^{(1)\lambda\alpha}\left[\partial_\lambda\partial_\nu h^{(1)}_{\mu\alpha}+\partial_\lambda\partial_\mu h^{(1)}_{\nu\alpha}- \partial_\mu\partial_\nu h^{(1)}_{\lambda\alpha}-\partial_\lambda \partial_\alpha h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}\right]\nonumber\\ & + & { 1\over 2}\left(\partial_\beta h^{(1)\beta\alpha}-{1\over 2 } \partial^\alpha h^{(1)}\right)\left ( \partial_\mu h^{(1)}_{\nu\alpha}+\partial_\nu h^{(1)}_{\mu\alpha } -\partial_\alpha h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}\right)\nonumber\\ r^{(2)}&=&\box h^{(2 ) } -\partial^\mu\partial^\nu h^{(2)}_{\mu\nu}-{3\over 4}\partial_\mu h^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta}\partial^\mu h^{(1)\alpha\beta}+{1\over 2}\partial_\alpha h^{(1)}_{\mu\lambda } \partial^\lambda h^{(1)\mu\alpha}\nonumber\\ & + & { 1\over 2}h^{(1)\lambda\alpha}\left(2\partial_\lambda\partial^\beta h^{(1)}_{\alpha\beta}-\box h^{(1)}_{\lambda\alpha}- \partial_\lambda\partial_\alpha h^{(1)}\right)\nonumber\\ & + & \left(\partial^\beta h^{(1)\alpha}_\beta-{1\over 2 } \partial^\alpha h^{(1)}\right ) \left(\partial^\sigma h^{(1)}_{\sigma\alpha}-{1\over 2 } \partial_\alpha h^{(1)}\right)\end{aligned}\ ] ] in order to define the propagator , we must make a gauge choice and we shall work in harmonic gauge@xmath99which reads , to second order in the field expansion , @xmath100 using these results , the einstein equation reads , in lowest order , @xmath101 which , using the gauge condition eq .
[ eq : gau]a , can be written as @xmath102 or in the equivalent form @xmath103 as shown in section 2 , this equation has the familiar solution for a static point mass @xmath104 where @xmath105    in second order the validity of the einstein equation requires that @xmath106 it is useful to write this equation in the form @xmath107 where @xmath108 can be identified as the energy - momentum carried by the gravitational field and can be read off as @xmath50\nonumber\\ & -&{1\over 2}\partial_\lambda h^{(1)}_{\sigma\nu}\partial^\lambda h^{(1)\sigma}{}_\mu + { 1\over 2}\partial_\lambda h^{(1)}_{\sigma\nu}\partial^\sigma h^{(1)\lambda}{}_\mu
-{1\over 4}\partial_\nu h^{(1)}_{\sigma\lambda}\partial_\mu h^{(1)\sigma\lambda}\nonumber\\ & -&{1\over 4}\eta_{\mu\nu}(\partial_\lambda h^{(1)}_{\sigma\chi } \partial^\sigma h^{(1)\lambda\chi } -{3\over 2}\partial_\lambda h^{(1)}_{\sigma\chi}\partial^\lambda h^{(1)\sigma\chi } ) -{1\over 4}h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}\box h^{(1)}\nonumber\\ & + & { 1\over 2}\eta_{\mu\nu}h^{(1)\alpha\beta}\box h^{(1 ) } _ { \alpha\beta}\label{eq : gmn}\end{aligned}\ ] ] using the gauge condition eq .
[ eq : gau]b , eq .
[ eq : soe ] becomes @xmath109 and , using the lowest order solution eq .
[ eq : los ] we find the form @xmath110 for use in the spin 1/2 case we note that the corresponding off - diagonal equation reads @xmath111 however , using the lowest order solutions found above we easily verify that @xmath112 thus the off - diagonal einstein equation in second order has the simple form @xmath113 while the general form in second order is seen to be given by eq . [ eq : eet ] .
here we show the calculation of the nonanalytic terms in vertex correction , following the method of @xcite .
such pieces arise from the diagrams in figure 4 , wherein the external graviton couples to the massless graviton fields in the loop .
we have found that a symmetric ordering of the momentum is useful , using the following integrals @xmath114 + \ldots\nonumber\\ i_\mu&=&\int{d^dk\over ( 2\pi)^d}{k_\mu\over ( k-{q\over 2})^2(k+{q\over 2})^2 ( ( p - k+{q\over 2})^2-m^2)}\nonumber\\ & = & { i\over 32\pi^2m^2}\left[p_\mu\left(1+{q^2\over 2 m } \right)l+{q^2\over 4m^2}s\right]+\ldots\nonumber\\ i_{\mu\nu}&=&\int{d^dk\over ( 2\pi)^d}{k_\mu k_\nu\over ( k-{q\over 2})^2(k+{q\over 2})^2 ( ( p - k+{q\over 2})^2-m^2)}\nonumber\\ & = & { i\over 32\pi^2m^2}\left[-p_\mu p_\nu{q^2\over 2m^2 } ( l+{1\over 4}s)-\left(q_\mu q_\nu-{\eta_{\mu\nu}q^2}\right ) ( { 1\over 4}l+{1\over 8}s)\right ] + \ldots\nonumber\\ i_{\mu\nu\alpha}&=&\int{d^dk\over
( 2\pi)^d}{k_\mu k_\nu k_\alpha\over ( k-{q\over 2})^2(k+{q\over 2})^2 ( ( p - k+{q\over 2})^2-m^2)}\nonumber\\ & = & { i\over 32\pi^2m^2}\left[p_\mu p_\nu p_\alpha\left ( { q^2\over 6m^2}\right)l\right.\nonumber\\ & + & \left.\left((q_\mu q_\nu-\eta_{\mu\nu}q^2)p_\alpha + ( q_\mu q_\alpha-\eta_{\mu\alpha}q^2)p_\nu+(q_\nu q_\alpha -\eta_{\nu\alpha}q^2)p_\mu\right){l\over 12}\right ] + \ldots\nonumber\\ \quad\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath115 .    from figure 4a , we have then @xmath116 while from figure 4b , @xmath117    here the coupling to matter via one - graviton and two - graviton vertices can be found by expanding the spin zero matter lagrangian @xmath118 via @xmath119 the one- and two - graviton vertices are then respectively @xmath120\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have defined @xmath121 .
we also require the triple graviton vertex @xmath122 whose form is @xmath123\right.\nonumber\\ & + & \left.2q_\lambda q_\sigma\left[i^{\lambda\sigma,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i^{\mu\nu , } { } _ { \gamma\delta}+i^{\lambda\sigma,}{}_{\gamma\delta}i^{\mu\nu , } { } _ { \alpha\beta}-i^{\lambda\mu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i^{\sigma\nu , } { } _ { \gamma\delta}-i^{\sigma\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i^{\lambda\mu , } { } _ { \gamma\delta}\right]\right.\nonumber\\ & + & \left.[q_\lambda q^\mu(\eta_{\alpha\beta}i^{\lambda\nu,}{}_{\gamma\delta } + \eta_{\gamma\delta}i^{\lambda\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta})+ q_\lambda q^\nu(\eta_{\alpha\beta}i^{\lambda\mu,}{}_{\gamma\delta } + \eta_{\gamma\delta}i^{\lambda\mu,}{}_{\alpha\beta})\right.\nonumber\\ & -&\left.q^2(\eta_{\alpha\beta}i^{\mu\nu,}{}_{\gamma\delta}+\eta_{\gamma\delta } i^{\mu\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta})-\eta^{\mu\nu}q^\lambda q^\sigma(\eta_{\alpha\beta } i_{\gamma\delta,\lambda\sigma}+\eta_{\gamma\delta } i_{\alpha\beta,\lambda\sigma})]\right.\nonumber\\ & + & \left.[2q^\lambda(i^{\sigma\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta } i_{\gamma\delta,\lambda\sigma}(k - q)^\mu + i^{\sigma\mu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i_{\gamma\delta,\lambda\sigma}(k - q)^\nu\right.\nonumber\\ & -&\left.i^{\sigma\nu,}{}_{\gamma\delta}i_{\alpha\beta,\lambda\sigma}k^\mu- i^{\sigma\mu,}{}_{\gamma\delta}i_{\alpha\beta,\lambda\sigma}k^\nu)\right.\nonumber\\ & + & \left.q^2(i^{\sigma\mu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i_{\gamma\delta,\sigma}{}^\nu+ i_{\alpha\beta,\sigma}{}^\nu i^{\sigma\mu,}{}_{\gamma\delta})+\eta^{\mu\nu}q^\lambda q_\sigma ( i_{\alpha\beta,\lambda\rho}i^{\rho\sigma,}{}_{\gamma\delta}+ i_{\gamma\delta,\lambda\rho}i^{\rho\sigma,}{}_{\alpha\beta})]\right.\nonumber\\ & + & \left.[(k^2+(k - q)^2)\left(i^{\sigma\mu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i_{\gamma\delta,\sigma}{}^\nu + i^{\sigma\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}i_{\gamma\delta,\sigma}{}^\mu-{1\over 2}\eta^{\mu\nu}p_{\alpha\beta,\gamma\delta}\right)\right.\nonumber\\ & -&\left.(k^2\eta_{\gamma\delta}i^{\mu\nu,}{}_{\alpha\beta}+(k - q)^2\eta_{\alpha\beta } i^{\mu\nu,}{}_{\gamma\delta})]\right\}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    before presenting our results , we note a simplification  it can be easily seen that the terms in the 3-graviton vertex function proportional to @xmath124 or @xmath125 do _ not _ produce nonanalytic pieces when inserted into either eq .
[ eq : eqa ] or eq .
[ eq : eqb ] and can be dropped .
a further enormous simplification of indices results from the identity@xcite @xmath126 for all the terms which lead to nonanalytic corrections .
this can be verified straightforwardly .
the resulting integrals are still tedious , but can be done directly .    decomposing the remaining piece of this vertex into the four bracketed terms , we list our results in terms of the contributions from each bracket separately : @xmath127\log(-q^2 ) + [ { 1\over 16}-1 + 1 + 0]{\pi^2m\over \sqrt{-q^2}}\right)\nonumber\\ & = & { gq^2\over \pi}\left(-{3\over 4}\log(-q^2)+{1\over 16}{\pi^2m\over \sqrt{-q^2}}\right)\nonumber\\ f_2(q^2)&=&{gm^2\over \pi}\left([{13\over 3}-1 + 0 - 1]\log(-q^2 ) + [ { 7\over 8}-1 + 2 - 1]{\pi^2m\over \sqrt{-q^2}}\right)\nonumber\\ & = & { gm^2\over
\pi}\left({7\over 3}\log(-q^2)+{7\over 8}{\pi^2m^2\over \sqrt{-q^2}}\right)\nonumber\\ { \rm figure}\,\,4b:\,\,\,f_1(q^2)&=&{gq^2\over \pi}\left ( [ 0 + 2 + 0 - 2]\log(-q^2)\right)\nonumber\\ & = & 0\nonumber\\ f_2(q^2)&=&{gm^2\over \pi}\left ( [ -{25\over 3}+0 + 2 + 2]\log(-q^2)\right)\nonumber\\ & = & { gm^2\over \pi}\left(-{13\over 3}\log(-q^2)\right)\end{aligned}\ ] ]      for the case of spin 1/2 we require some additional formalism in order to extract the gravitational couplings . in this case the matter lagrangian reads @xmath128 and involves the vierbein @xmath129 which links global coordinates with those in a locally flat space .
the vierbein is in some sense the `` square root '' of the metric tensor @xmath1 and satisfies the relations @xmath130 the covariant derivative is defined via @xmath131 where @xmath132 the connection with the metric tensor can be made via the expansion @xmath133 where , as before , the superscript indicates the number of powers of the gravitational coupling @xmath57 which are present .
the inverse of this matrix is @xmath134 and we find @xmath135 for our purposes we shall use only the symmetric component of the c - matrices , since these are physical and can be connected to the metric tensor , while their antisymmetric components are associated with freedom of homogeneous transformations of the local lorentz frames and do not contribute to nonanalyticity .
we find then @xmath136 we have then @xmath137 using these forms the matter lagrangian has the expansion @xmath138 where @xmath139 the corresponding one- and two - graviton vertices are found then to be @xmath140\nonumber\\ \tau_{\alpha\beta,\gamma\delta}(p , p')&=&i\kappa^2\left\{-{1\over 2}({1\over 2}(\not\!\!{p}+\not\!\!{p}')-m)p_{\alpha\beta,\gamma\delta}\right.\nonumber\\ & -&\left.{1\over 16}[\eta_{\alpha\beta}(\gamma_\gamma(p+p')_\delta+\gamma_\delta(p+p')_\gamma ) \right.\nonumber\\ & + & \left.\eta_{\gamma\delta}(\gamma_\alpha ( p+p')_\beta+\gamma_\beta(p+p')_\alpha)]\right.\nonumber\\ & + & \left.{3\over 16}(p+p')^{\epsilon}\gamma^{\xi}(i_{\xi\phi,\alpha\beta}{i^{\phi}}_{\epsilon,\gamma\delta } + i_{\xi\phi,\gamma\delta}{i^{\phi}}_{\epsilon,\alpha\beta})\right.\nonumber\\ & + & \left.{i\over 8}\epsilon^{\rho\sigma\eta\lambda}\gamma_\lambda \gamma_5({i_{\alpha\beta,\eta}}^\nu i_{\gamma\delta,\sigma\nu}{k'}_\rho-{i_{\gamma\delta,\eta}}^\nu i_{\alpha\beta,\sigma\nu}k_\rho)\right\}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    with these results in hand the loop integrations can now be performed , as before , yielding , for spin 1/2 @xmath141\log(-q^2 ) + [ { 1\over 16}+0 - 1 + 1]{\pi^2m\over \sqrt{-q^2}}\right)\nonumber\\ & = & { gq^2\over \pi}\left(-{3\over 4}\log(-q^2)+{1\over 16}{\pi^2m\over \sqrt{-q^2}}\right)\nonumber\\ f_2(q^2)&=&{gq^2\over \pi } \left([{1\over 6}-{7\over 4}+{3\over 4}+{13\over 12}]\log(-q^2 ) + [ 0 + 0-{1\over 2}+{3\over 4}]{\pi^2m\over \sqrt{-q^2}}\right)\nonumber\\ & = & { gq^2\over \pi}\left({1\over 4}\log(-q^2)+{1\over 4}{\pi^2m\over \sqrt{-q^2}}\right)\nonumber\\ f_3(q^2)&=&{gm^2\over \pi}\left([{4\over 3}+0 - 1+{1\over 4}]\log(-q^2 ) + [ { 7\over 16}+0 + 0 + 0]{\pi^2m\over \sqrt{-q^2}}\right)\nonumber\\ & = & { gm^2\over \pi}\left({7\over 12}\log(-q^2)+{7\over 16 } { \pi^2m^2\over \sqrt{-q^2}}\right)\nonumber\\ { \rm figure}\,\,4b:\,\,\,f_1(q^2)&=&{gq^2\over \pi}\left ( [ 0+{11\over 4}-{1\over 2}-{9\over 4}]\log(-q^2)\right)\nonumber\\ & = & 0\nonumber\\ f_2(q^2)&=&{gq^2\over \pi}\left ( [ 0+{7\over 4}-{1\over 2}-{5\over 4}]\log(-q^2)\right)\nonumber\\ & = & 0\nonumber\\ f_3(q^2)&=&{gm^2\over \pi}\left ( [ -{10\over 3}+0 + 0+{7\over 4}]\log(-q^2)\right)\nonumber\\ & = & -{gm^2\over \pi}{19\over 12}\log(-q^2)\end{aligned}\ ] ] all calculations of the form factors where done by hand and by computer . to do the various contractions of indices and integrations by computer , a computer algorithm for maple 7 ( tm)[multiblock footnote omitted ]
were developed and used to do the calculations .
here we collect the integrals used to calculate the long range corrections to the energy momentum tensor and the metric . for the classical correction to the energy momentum tensor we use @xmath142 and the quantum effect use @xmath143 for the metric we require @xmath144 and @xmath145    99 j.  f.  donoghue , `` general relativity as an effective field theory : the leading quantum corrections , '' phys .
d * 50 * , 3874 ( 1994 ) [ arxiv : gr - qc/9405057 ] .
s.  weinberg , `` phenomenological lagrangians , '' physicaa * 96 * , 327 ( 1979 ) .
j.  f.  donoghue , `` leading quantum correction to the newtonian potential , '' phys .
rev.lett .   * 72 * , 2996 ( 1994 ) a.  a.  akhundov , s.  bellucci and a.  shiekh , `` gravitational interaction to one loop in effective quantum gravity , '' phys .
b * 395 * , 16 ( 1997 ) [ arxiv : gr - qc/9611018 ] .
bjerrum - bohr , cand .
thesis , univ . of copenhagen ( 2000 ) .
h.  w.  hamber and s.  liu , `` on the quantum corrections to the newtonian potential , '' phys .
b * 357 * , 51 ( 1995 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/9505182 ] .
i.  j.  muzinich and s.  vokos , `` long range forces in quantum gravity , '' phys .
d * 52 * , 3472 ( 1995 ) n.e.j .
bjerrum - bohr , j.f .
donoghue , and b.r .
holstein , in preparation .
j.  f.  donoghue , b.  r.  holstein , b.  garbrecht and t.  konstandin , `` quantum corrections to the reissner - nordstrm and kerr - newman metrics , '' phys .
b * 529 * , 132 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0112237 ] .
bjerrum - bohr , phys . rev . * d66 * , 084023 ( 2002 ) [ arxiv : hep - th/0206236 ] .
e.g. _ , s. weinberg , * gravitation and cosmology * , wiley , new york ( 1972 ) .
bjorken and s.d .
drell , * relativistic quantum mechanics * , mcgraw - hill , new york ( 1964 ) .
k. schwarzschild , sitzber .
berlin , 189 ( 1916 ) .
kerr , phys .
lett . * 11 * , 237 ( 1963 ) . ref .
@xcite , eq .
. g.  t hooft and m.  j.  veltman , `` one loop divergencies in the theory of gravitation , '' annales poincare phys .
a * 20 * , 69 ( 1974 ) ; m. veltman , in * methods in field theory * , ed r. balian and j. zinn - justin , north holland , amsterdam ( 1976 ) .
h. pagels , phys .
* 144 * , 1250 ( 1966 ) .
m.  j.  duff , `` quantum corrections to the schwarzschild solution , '' phys .
d * 9 * , 1837 ( 1974 ) .