Effective potential between static sources

in quenched light-front Yukawa theory

A.P. Bray and S.S. Chabysheva

Department of Physics, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho 83844 USA

J.R. Hiller
arXiv:2401.00336v1 [hep-ph] 30 Dec 2023

Department of Physics, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho 83844 USA and

Department of Physics and Astronomy,

University of Minnesota-Duluth, Duluth, Minnesota 55812 USA
(Dated: January 2, 2024)

1
 Abstract
We compute a nonperturbative effective potential between two static fermions in light-front
Yukawa theory as a Hamiltonian eigenvalue problem. Fermion pair production is suppressed, to
make possible an exact analytic solution in the form of a coherent state of bosons that form clouds
around the sources. The effective potential is essentially an interference term between individual
clouds. The model is regulated with Pauli-Villars bosons and fermions, to achieve consistent
quantization and renormalization of masses and couplings. This extends earlier work on scalar
Yukawa theory where Pauli-Villars regularization did not play a central role. The key result is that
the nonperturbative solution restores rotational symmetry even though the light-front formulation
of Yukawa theory, with its preferred axis, appears antithetical to such a symmetry.

I. INTRODUCTION

The current understanding of quantum chromodynamics (QCD) as the theory of the

strong interactions is that it provides for the confinement of quarks and gluons. Calculations
within lattice QCD [1, 2] have confirmed this [3–5] as have analytic calculations [6–8],1 not
to mention the experimental evidence for the absence of free quarks and gluons. What has
not been established is the derivation of confinement within a light-front quantization of the
theory [11–16]. This is something that must be nonperturbative or at least an all-orders
resummation of perturbation theory.
We wish to explore how such a nonperturbative light-front calculation might be done.
Here we extend earlier work [17]2 on quenched scalar Yukawa theory to include fermion
sources. The basic approach is to consider the effective potential for two static sources as
a function of their separation, computed from the change in the eigenenergy of the system
relative to the energy of two well-separated sources. This involves renormalization of the
source mass and, as we will show, renormalization of the coupling to bosons. Regularization
is provided by the inclusion of Pauli-Villars (PV) fermions and bosons.3 The PV fermions
provide a convenient simplification of the light-front quantization by eliminating what are
known as instantaneous fermion terms from the light-front Hamiltonian; this is what makes
the analytic solution possible. The PV bosons regulate the self-energy corrections to the
fermion mass.
Some will be concerned that a method based on PV regularization cannot be extended to
QCD, there being a general prejudice against PV regularization of nonabelian gauge theories.
However, as shown in [16], a consistent PV regularization can be constructed. The key is
that the definition of the gauge transformation must be extended when the Lagrangian is
extended to include the PV fields. In other words, there does remain a gauge invariance of
the QCD Lagrangian when PV fields are included. In addition, there is a BRST symmetry
when the gauge is fixed covariantly.
Our definition of light-front coordinates [24] is to take x± = t±z, with x+ as the light-front
time, and ~x⊥ = (x, y) in the transverse. The conjugate light-front energy is p− = E − pz ,
and the light-front momentum is p = (p+ ≡ E + pz , ~p⊥ ≡ (px , py )). The mass-shell condition
p2 = m2 becomes p− = (~p⊥2 + m2 )/p+ . Further details can be found in the review [16].
1
For earlier discussion of static potentials in QCD, see [9, 10].
2
In [17] there are two typographical errors. The factor g/m in Eq. (3.27) should be g/(2m), and the (q + )2
in the numerator of Eq. (3.29) should be q + .
3
For earlier uses of PV regularization in nonperturbative light-front calculations, see [18] for Yukawa theory
and [19–23] for quantum electrodynamics.

2
 For static sources, fixed in a lab frame, the eigenstates are no longer eigenstates of light-
front energy or momentum.4 The ordinary momentum is zero, including the z component.
We therefore seek eigenstates of the ordinary energy with use of the operator E ≡ 21 (P − +P + )
but do so in terms of light-front coordinates. Such a choice is also motivated by the fact
that the definition of an effective potential is in the dependence of the ordinary energy on
the source separation. Most calculations in light-front-quantized theories need not make this
distinction because they use a basis where the light-front momentum is held fixed.
The parameters of the Yukawa Lagrangian are renormalized by fixing the mass of the
dressed fermion state at a physical value m and by requiring the effective potential to be of
g 2 −µR
the standard Yukawa form − 4πR e , where R is the source separation, µ the renormalized
boson mass, and g the physical coupling. For the quenched case considered here, the boson
mass in the Lagrangian is not actually renormalized. The form of the effective potential is
obtained, including its rotational symmetry.
In Sec. II we summarize the structure of light-front Yukawa theory with PV regularization
and of the Hamiltonian eigenvalue problem for static fermions. The solution for a single
source is developed in Sec. III and for a double source in Sec. IV. We summarize the results
in Sec. V and leave some details to Appendices.

II. LIGHT-FRONT YUKAWA THEORY

The Lagrangian for PV-regulated Yukawa theory is [16]5

1 1
 
(∂µ φk )2 − µ2k φ2k + si ψ i (iγ µ ∂µ − mi )ψi − g0
X X X
L= rk βi βj ξk ψ i ψj φk , (2.1)
k 2 2 i ijk

where k = i = j = 0 correspond to physical fields and positive integers to PV fields. The

rk and si are metric signatures, with r0 = s0 = 1 for the physical fields, r1 = s1 = −1 for
the first PV fields, and the remainder (if any) determined by the constraints necessary for a
consistent theory. The factors of βi and ξk provide for adjustments of the relative couplings
of the PV fields, with β0 = ξ0 = 1 as a definition of g0 as the bare coupling for physical
fields. The regularization of loops is provided by the constraints [16]
rk ξk2 = 0 and si βi2 = 0,
X X
(2.2)
k i

because one or the other of these combinations appears for each line in a loop when summed
over the PV contributions. The rk and si factors come from the propagator, and the ξk
and βi come from the vertices at the ends of the line. The leading UV divergence then
involves these sums and is canceled by the constraints (2.2). For example, a boson line
carrying momentum q contributes k rk ξk2 /q⊥ 2
+ O ( k rk m2k ξk2 /q⊥
4
), and the leading term
P P

is zero. This cancellation will be seen explicitly in the next section. The nonperturbative
calculation is effectively a resummation of the regulated loop expansion.
The mode expansions for the boson fields are
Z
dp h
−ip·x † ip·x
i
φk (x) = √ ak (p)e + ak (p)e , (2.3)
16π 3 p+
4
For earlier work with static sources on the light-front, see [25–28].
5
In Eq. (223) of [16] the Yukawa Lagrangian is expressed explicitly in terms of separate fields rather than
a more general sum. Here instead we present it in a form analogous to the QED Lagrangian in Eq. (131).

3
with the nonzero commutation relations being

[ak (p), a†k′ (p′ )] = δ(p − p′ ) ≡ rk δkk′ δ(p+ − p′+ )δ(~p⊥ − p~′ ⊥ ). (2.4)

The factor rk = ±1 fixes the sign of the metric for the field.
The fermion field satisfies the Euler–Lagrange equation

si (iγ µ ∂µ − mi )ψi − g0
X
βi βj ξk φk ψj = 0. (2.5)
jk

To separate the dynamical part ψi+ ≡ 21 γ 0 γ + ψi from the constrained part ψi− ≡ 12 γ 0 γ − ψi ,
we project this Euler-Lagrange equation using 21 γ 0 γ ± to yield the following two equations:
X
si i∂+ ψi+ − si (−i~
α⊥ · ∂⊥ + βmi )ψi− − g0 βi βj ξk φk ψj− = 0 (2.6)
jk

and X
si i∂− ψi− − si (−i~
α⊥ · ∂⊥ + βmi )ψi+ − g0 βi βj ξk φk ψj+ = 0, (2.7)
jk

with γ µ = (β, β~
α). Multiplication of the constraint equation (2.7) by si βi and a sum over
i eliminates the interaction,6 such that the constrained part of the summed fermion field
ψ ≡ i βi ψi satisfies
P

X
i∂− ψ− − (−i~
α⊥ · ∂⊥ ψ+ + β βi mi ψi+ ) = 0. (2.8)
i

This is just the constraint equation for a free fermion. We can then construct the Hamilto-
nian from the free-fermion mode expansion
Z
dp X h
−ip·x † ip·x
i
ψi (x) = √ bis (p)u is (p)e + d is (p)vis (p)e , (2.9)
16π 3 p+ s=±1/2

with
1 h i 1 h i
uis (p) ≡ √ + p+ + α
~ ⊥ · ~p⊥ + βmi χs , vis (p) ≡ √ + p+ + α
~ ⊥ · p~⊥ − βmi χ−s (2.10)
p p
and
1 0
   

1 0
  1  1 

χ+ 1 = √   , χ− 1 = √  . (2.11)

2
2  1  2
2  0 
0 −1
The nonzero anticommutators are

{bis (p), b†js′ (p′ )} = si δij δss′ δ(p − p′ ), {dis (p), d†js′ (p′ )} = si δij δss′ δ(p − p′ ), (2.12)

and si = ±1 sets the metric.

6
√
In [16], the analogous process for QED contains an error in the line above Eq. (138). The factors (−1)i βi
should be replaced with si βi .

4
 Instantaneous fermion interactions do not appear. However, the physics of these inter-
actions has not been lost; they are present implicitly and restored explicitly in the limit of
infinite PV masses, which shrinks a PV-fermion exchange to a contact interaction [21].
The light-front Hamiltonian density is then
" #
1 ~ 1 1
 
(∂⊥ φk )2 + µ2k φ2k + †
α⊥ · ∂~⊥ − βmi ) α⊥ · ∂~⊥ − βmi )ψi+
X X
H = rk si ψi+ (i~ (i~
k 2 2 i i∂−
X
+g0 βi βj ξk φk ψ i ψj . (2.13)
ijk

The Hamiltonian
Z
P− ≡ −
dx : H :|x+ =0 = P0a −
+ P0f −
+ Pn.p. −
+ Ppair (2.14)

is specified by
µ2k + q⊥
2
Z
−
a†k (q)ak (q),
X
P0a = rk dq +
(2.15)
k q
m2i + ~p2⊥ X h †
Z i
− †
X
P0f = si dp bis (p)bis (p) + d is (p)d is (p) , (2.16)
i p+ s

−
X Z Z
dq h
−iq·x † iq·x
i
Pn.p. = g0 βi βj ξk dx √ ak (q)e + ak (q)e (2.17)
ijk 16π 3 q +
dp1 dp2 X
(" !
mi mj †
Z
× + + bis (p1 )bjs (p2 )
16π 3 s p+
1 p2
√ √ ∗ ! #
2~ǫ−2s · ~p1⊥ 2~ǫ2s · p~2⊥ †
+ + bis (p1 )bj,−s (p2 ) ei(p1 −p2 )·x
p+
1 p +
2
" !
mi mj
+ + + + d†js (p2 )dis (p1 )
p1 p2
√ √ ∗ ! # )
2~ǫ−2s · p~1⊥ 2~ǫ2s · ~p2⊥ † i(p −p )·x
− + djs (p2 )di,−s (p1 ) e 2 1 ,
p+
1 p+2

and

−
X Z Z
dq h
−iq·x † iq·x
i
Ppair = g0 βi βj ξk dx √ ak (q)e + ak (q)e (2.18)
ijk 16π 3 q +
dp1 dp2 X
(" !
mi mj †
Z
× − + bis (p1 )d†j,−s (p2 )
16π 3 s p+1 p2
√ √ ∗ ! #
2~ǫ2s · p~1⊥ 2~ǫ−2s · ~p2⊥ †
+ + bis (p1 )dj,s (p2 ) ei(p1 +p2 )·x
†
p+1 p +
2
" !
mi mj
+ − + bjs (p2 )di,−s (p1 )
p+
1 p2
√ √ ∗ ! # )
2~ǫ−2s · ~p1⊥ 2~ǫ2s · p~2⊥ −i(p +p )·x
− + bjs (p2 )di,s (p1 ) e 1 2 ,
p+ 1 p+ 2

5
 √
with√ 2~ǫ2s ≡ −(2s, i) a two-dimensional, transverse vector [29], where s is the spin index and
i = −1. The integral over x has been left undone in the interaction terms, to accommodate
the source wave packets introduced in the next sections. For the quenched theory, the
−
term Ppair is, of course, dropped. Also, we will limit our work to the fermion sector, and
− −
antifermion terms in P0f and Pn.p. will play no role.
The light-front momentum operator is P + = Pa+ + Pf+ with
Z
Pa+ = dq q + a†k (q)ak (q)
X
rk (2.19)
k

and Z Xh i
Pf+ = dp p+ b†is (p)bis (p) + d†is (p)dis (p) .
X
si (2.20)
i s

We can then define the ordinary energy operator

1
E = (P − + P + ). (2.21)
2
In the next sections we explore eigenstates of E that are associated with one or two static
fermion sources.

III. SINGLE STATIC SOURCE

~ to establish the renormalization of the fermion

We first consider a single source at ±R/2
mass. The static fermion is described by a wave packet centered at p = (m, ~0⊥ ) in momentum
space and at x = (∓Rz , ±R ~ ⊥ /2) in coordinate space on the x+ = 0 slice.7 The static fermion
state with spin s and PV type i is then
Z
|Fis± i = dpF ± (p)b†is (p)|0if , (3.1)
p+ >0

with the function F ± peaked at p = (m, ~0⊥ ) and its Fourier transform ψ ± (x) peaked at
(∓Rz , ±R ~ ⊥ /2). Here |0if is the vacuum annihilated by bis . The physical and PV fermions
are all static at the same location and at the same light-front momentum.
The Fourier transform is defined as
dx ip·x ±
Z
±
F (p) = √ e ψ (x). (3.2)
16π 3
For the inverse, where the p+ integration is limited to positive values, we take advantage of
the narrow peak in F ± to extend the p+ integral to −∞
Z
dp
ψ ± (x) = √ e−ip·x F ± (p). (3.3)
16π 3

7
The translation of the longitudinal coordinate, between a lab-fixed frame and light-front coordinates, is
illustrated in Fig. 1 of [17]. We have z = ±Rz /2 fixed and x+ = t + z = 0; therefore, the ordinary time is
t = ∓Rz /2 and the light-front spatial coordinate is x− = t − z = ∓Rz .

6
 ~ ⊥ /2) we require that
For a static source at x = (∓Rz , ±R
~ ⊥ /2).
|ψ ± (x)|2 → δ(x− ± Rz )δ(~x⊥ ∓ R (3.4)

The common normalization

Z Z
1= dx|ψ ± (x)|2 = dp|F ± (p)|2 (3.5)

is fixed by requiring the indefinite norm

Z Z
hFis± |Fis± i = dp′ dpF ±∗ (p′ )F ± (p)si δ(p′ − p) = si dp |F ± (p)|2 = si . (3.6)

From this static-fermion state, we build a fermion state dressed by a cloud of bosons in
a coherent state as the ansatz for the energy eigenstate:

|G± F ± ; si ≡ Ci± |G± ±

X
i i|Fis i (3.7)
i

with q " Z #
†
|G± Zi± dqG±
Y
i i ≡ exp ki (q)ak (q) |0ia . (3.8)
k
−
and |0ia the vacuum annihilated by ak . Because the spin-flip terms in Pn.p. are proportional
to ~p⊥ and the static state requires h~p⊥ i to be zero, the eigenstate is
q diagonal in spin, and
± ± ±
the coefficient Ci and the functions Gki are independent of s. The Zi are normalization
factors for the coherent state, given by
Z !
2
Zi± dq|G±
X
= exp − rk ki (q)| . (3.9)
k

This is then to be the solution to

E|G± F ± ; si = E ± |G± F ± ; si, (3.10)

with E ± = m for the ground state, which is the state of interest. Each term in the sum
over i is also an eigenstate of the boson annihilation operators ak , as is always the case for
a coherent state:
ak (q)|G± ± ±
i i = rk Gki (q)|Gi i. (3.11)
We begin with a projection of the eigenvalue problem onto a static fermion of type i

si hFis± |E|G± F ± ; si = E ± si hFis± |G± F ± ; si = E ± Ci± |G±

i i. (3.12)

This can be reduced with use of the following projections for individual terms in E =
1
2
−
(P0f + Pf+ + P0a
−
+ Pa+ + Pn.p.
−
):

m2i + p2⊥
" #
1 − 1
Z
si hFis± | (P0f + Pf+ )|G± F ± ; si = Ci± dp + p+ |Fi± (p)|2 |G±
i i (3.13)
2 2 p+
m2i
!
m
= Ci± + |G±
i i,
2m 2

7
 µ2 + q 2
" #
1 − 1
Z
si hFis± | (P0a Pa+ )|G± F ± ; si = Ci± dq k + ⊥ + q + a†k (q)G± ±
X
+ ki (q)|Gi i, (3.14)
2 2 k q
and
1 − 1 mi + mj
si hFis± | Pn.p. |G± F ± ; si = g0 βi sj βj ξk Cj±
X
(3.15)
2 2 jk m
Z
dq h
± ±i(q + Rz +~ ~ ⊥ )/2
q⊥ ·R † ∓i(q + Rz +~ ~ ⊥ )/2
q⊥ ·R
i
× √ 3 +
r k G kj (q)e + ak (q)e |G±
j i.
16π q
−
Details of the reduction for the Pn.p. projection can be found in Appendix A. With the
combination of all of these terms, the projected single-source eigenvalue problem becomes

m2i µ2k + q⊥2

! " #
m 1 ±X
Z
Ci± + |G±i i + C i dq +
+ q + a†k (q)G± ki (q)|Gi i
±
(3.16)
2m 2 2 k q
1 mi + m j
Z
dq h
± ±i(q + Rz +~ ~ ⊥ )/2
q⊥ ·R
sj βj ξk Cj±
X
+ g0 βi √ 3q+
r k G kj (q)e
2 jk m 16π
~
+ R +~
i
+ a†k (q)e∓i(q z q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
|G±
j i

= E ± Ci± |G±
i i.

For this to hold, the coefficient of a†k (q) must be zero, to remove states with additional
particles from the left-hand side:

µ2 + q 2
" #
1
0 = Ci± k + ⊥ + q + G± ±
ki (q)|Gi i (3.17)
2 q
1 mi + mj 1 + ~
sj βj ξk Cj± e∓i(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2 |G±
X
+ g0 βi √ 3 + j i.
2 j m 16π q

A slight rearrangement yields an implicit expression for G±

ki

+ ~
g0 βi ξk e∓i(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2 X ± mi + mj
Ci± G±
ki (q)|G ±
i i = − √ 2 2 s j βj C j |G±
j i. (3.18)
16π 3 q + µk +q
+
⊥
+ q + j m
q

The eigenvalue problem (3.16) reduces to

m2i
!
m
Ci± + |G±i i (3.19)
2m 2
1 mi + mj
Z
dq ±i(q + Rz +~ ~ ⊥ )/2
q⊥ ·R
sj βj ξk Cj± rk G ± |G± ± ± ±
X
+ g0 βi √ 3 + kj (q)e j i = E Ci |Gi i.
2 jk m 16π q

On substitution of the expression for G±

ki this becomes

m2i g02
!
m mi + mj X mj + mj ′ ±
Ci± |G± sj βj2 sj ′ βj ′ Cj±′ |Gj ′ i = E ± Ci± |G±
X
+ i i − µIβi i i,
2m 2 2 j m j′
m
(3.20)

8
with I the dimensionless self-energy integral
Z
dq X rk ξk2
I≡ 2
(3.21)
16π 3 µ k (q + )2 + q⊥ + µ2k

and µ the physical mass of the boson. The constraint rk ξk2 = 0 on the ξk factors makes
P
k
I finite.
This defines an nf × nf matrix problem

m20
!
m
Ci± |G± Vij Cj± |G± ± ± ±
X
+ i i+ j i = E Ci |Gi i, (3.22)
2m 2 j

where nf is the number of fermion types and

g02 mi + mj ′ mj ′ + mj
sj ′ βj2′
X
Vij = − µIβi sj βj . (3.23)
2 j′ m m

Now we convert the Fock-space equation (3.22) into an algebraic equation by projecting it
onto hG±
i |
m20
!
m
Ci± + Vij ζij± Cj± = E ± Ci± ,
X
+ (3.24)
2m 2 j

given the overlap integrals

Z !
q
ζij± hG± ±
dq G±∗ ±
X
= i |Gj i = Zi Zj exp − rk ki (q)Gkj (q) , (3.25)
k

with ζii± = 1 and ζij±∗ = ζji± . The nontrivial ζij± can be computed from nonlinear equations
for self consistency with the solution for G± ki , which arises in the projection of (3.18) onto
hG±i |:
+ ~
g0 βi ξk e∓i(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2 X ± mi + mj ±
Ci± G±
ki (q) = − √ 2 2 s j βj C j ζij . (3.26)
16π 3 q + µk +q+
⊥
+ q + j m
q

The two equations (3.24) and (3.25) must then be solved simultaneously, with Gki in (3.25)
given by (3.26). The only R~ dependence appears in the exponentials which cancel in (3.25),
~ Therefore, the ground state determines the physical
leaving the equations independent of R.
±
fermion mass m = E independent of the source location ±R/2, ~ and the eigenvalue problem
(3.24) provides the renormalization of the bare mass m0 implicitly by giving m as a function
of m0 . We then use these solutions to construct a solution for the two-source case in the
next section. For this purpose, an explicit solution of the (3.24)-(3.25) system will not be
needed.

IV. TWO STATIC SOURCES

To compute the effective potential between two sources a distance R apart, we place
them at x = (∓Rz , ±R ~ ⊥ /2) and construct the eigenstate of the ordinary energy E. The
effective potential is then the difference between the eigenvalue and the total rest mass 2m,

9
with m specified by the single-source problem solved in the previous section. Following the
case of scalar Yukawa theory [17], we construct an ansatz for the eigenstate as a product of
single-source solutions:

|G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i ≡ Cij |G+ + − −

X
i Fis1 i|Gj Fjs2 i. (4.1)
ij

This is to be a solution of

E|G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i = E|G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i. (4.2)

We proceed as before with a projection onto the static fermion states

−
si sj hFjs 2
|hFis+1 |E|G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i = Esi sj hFjs
−
2
|hFis+1 |G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i. (4.3)

Cross terms between F + and F − do not contribute because they are proportional to
dx +∗
Z Z
+∗ −
dpF (p)F (p) = 3
ψ (x)ψ − (x), (4.4)
16π
and the second integral is zero from the lack of overlap between narrow wave packets centered
−
apart. Again, the spin-flip terms of Pn.p. do not contribute, being proportional to the
transverse fermion momentum p~⊥ for which the expectation value is zero. The right-hand
side of (4.3) is
−
Esi sj hFjs 2
|hFis+1 |G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i = ECij |G+ −
i i|Gj i. (4.5)
The projected terms in E for the left-hand side are
1 −
−
si sj hFjs |hFis+1 | (P0f + Pf+ )|G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i (4.6)
2
2("
m2i + p2⊥ m2j + p2⊥
# " # )
1
Z
+ + 2
= Cij dp + p |F i (p)| + + p+ |Fj+ (p)|2 |G+ −
i i|Gj i
2 p+ p+
m2i m2j
!
= Cij + + m |G+ −
i i|Gj i,
2m 2m

1 −
−
si sj hFjs |hFis+1 | (P0a + Pa+ )|G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i (4.7)
2
2 "
µ2k + q⊥
2
#
1 XZ
= Cij dq +
+ q a†k (q)ak (q)|G+
+ −
i i|Gj i,
2 k q

and
1 − 1 X
Z
dq
−
si sj hFjs |hFis+1 | Pn.p. |G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i = g0 ξk √ (4.8)
2
2 2 k 16π 3q +
(
h + R +~ ~ + R +~ ~
i mi + mi′ + −
si′ βi′ Ci′ j ak (q)ei(q z q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
+ a†k (q)e−i(q z q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
X
× βi |Gi′ i|Gj i
i′
m

h + R +~ ~ + R +~ ~
i mj + mj ′ + − 
sj ′ βj ′ Cij ′ ak (q)e−i(q z q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
+ a†k (q)ei(q z q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
X
+βj |Gi i|Gj ′ i .
j′
m 

10
Details of this last projection are again in Appendix A. The boson annihilation operators in
(4.7) and (4.8) can be replaced with use of ak (q)|G+ − + − + −
i i|Gj i = rk [Gki (q) + Gkj (q)]|Gi i|Gj i,
which is the two-source extension of (3.11), where a coherent state is an eigenstate of the
annihilation operator.
The projected eigenvalue problem is

m2i m2j µ2 + q 2
( " # )
1 XZ
Cij + +m+ dq k + ⊥ + q + a†k (q)rk [G+ − + −
ki (q) + Gkj (q)] |Gi i|Gj i
2m 2m 2 k q
(
1 X
Z
dq X h
+ − i(q + Rz +~ ~ ⊥ )/2
q⊥ ·R
+ g0 ξk √ 3 +
βi s i ′ βi′ Ci′ j rk [G ′ (q) + G
ki kj (q)]e (4.9)
2 k 16π q i′
~
im +m′
+ i i
+a†k (q)e−i(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2 |G+ −
i′ i|Gj i
m
~ ⊥ )/2
h
−i(q + Rz +~
sj ′ βj ′ Cij ′ rk [G+ − q⊥ ·R
X
+βj ki (q) + Gkj ′ (q)]e
j′
mj + mj ′ + −

~
+
i
+a†k (q)ei(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2 |Gi i|Gj ′ i = ECij |G+ −
i i|Gj i.
m
The reduction of this eigenvalue problem is detailed in Appendix B.
From the reduction we obtain the effective potential Veff ≡ E − 2m as
!2
g 2 X si βi2 mi e−µR
Veff =− 0 , (4.10)
2 i m 8πR

which is clearly rotationally invariant. We define the physical coupling g by a match to the
g 2 −µR
standard form for the Yukawa potential − 4πR e , which implies
X si βi2 mi
g = g0 . (4.11)
i 2m

We can, ofPcourse, have g = g0 if we include 2 PV fermions and impose the additional

constraint i si βi2 mi = 2m.

V. SUMMARY

In this work we have thus obtained the standard, rotationally invariant Yukawa potential
as the effective potential between two static sources in quenched, light-front Yukawa theory.
The effective potential comes from the interference between the two boson clouds that dress
the individual sources and is computed nonperturbatively. The rotational invariance exists
despite the special status for the z axis in light-front quantization.
The key to our approach is to recognize the ordinary energy as the relevant quantity,
both because momentum is not conserved when sources are static and because the effective
potential should be defined in terms of this energy. Light-front energy combines energy and
a momentum component, making it only indirectly related.
To carry out the calculation, we have introduced Pauli-Villars fermions and bosons. The
PV fermions eliminate instantaneous interaction terms which would otherwise interfere with
the construction of analytic solutions. The PV bosons regulate the infinite self-energy of
the sources. The couplings of these are adjusted to satisfy constraints that guarantee the

11
regularization, the correct mass and coupling renormalizations, and the removal of instanta-
neous fermion interactions from the light-front Hamiltonian. The instantaneous interactions
are restored in the limit of infinite PV mass.
Given the successful derivation of a rotationally invariant potential in quenched Yukawa
theory, the next step to be taken is to introduce pair production and annihilation of free
fermions and their own accompanying PV counterparts. (The PV fermions associated with
the static sources need to be separate because they are themselves static.) With pairs
included in the basis, a coherent state solution will no longer be available as the full solution,
and Fock-space methods must be invoked. To have an eigenvalue problem of finite size will
then require truncation, either explicitly in Fock space or in the operator sense of the light-
front coupled-cluster method [30]. The effects of pairs will include renormalization of the
boson mass, renormalization of the static fermion coupling, and modifications of the form of
the effective potential. At short separations, these modifications will be due to the charge
renormalization and the screening that takes place. At large separations, pairs provide for
the Yukawa analog of string breaking. Completion of this work in Yukawa theory will provide
a useful reference for the calculation of effective potentials in QED and QCD.

Appendix A: Projections for the no-pair contribution

We first consider the single-source case. Substitution of the definitions of the individual
factors |Fis± i, Pn.p.
−
, and |G± F ± ; si, as given in (3.1), (2.17), and (3.7), respectively, yields

1 − 1 Z Z
si hFis± | Pn.p. |G± F ± ; si ′ ±∗ ′ ′
X
= g0 si dp F (p )f h0|bis (p ) βi βj ξk dx
′ (A1)
2 2 i′ jk
i Z dp dp
!
Z
dq h mi′ mj
−iq·x † iq·x
ei(p1 −p2 )·x b†i′ s′ (p1 )bjs′ (p2 )
X
√ 1 2
× ak (q)e + a (q)e + +
16π 3 q + 16π 3 p+
1 p2 s′
Z
Ci±′′ dpF ± (p)b†i′′ s (p)|0if |G±
X
× i′′ i.
i′′

Given the contractions

bis (p′ )b†i′ s′ (p1 ) → si δii′ δss′ δ(p′ − p1 ) (A2)
and
bjs′ (p2 )b†i′′ s (p) → sj δji′′ δs′ s δ(p − p2 ), (A3)
the Kronecker and Dirac deltas and the property s2i = 1 can be used to reduce the expression
to
1 − 1
Z Z
dp′ ′
si hFis± | Pn.p. |G± F ± ; si F ±∗ (p′ )eip ·x
X
= g0 βi sj βj ξk dx √ (A4)
2 2 jk 16π 3
!
Z
dq h
−iq·x † iq·x
iZ dp mi mj
× √ 3 +
ak (q)e + a (q)e √ F ± (p)e−ip·x ′+ + + Cj± |G±
j i.
16π q 16π 3 p p

The momentum-space wave function F ± is peaked at (m, ~0⊥ ), which allows any factor of p+
or p′+ to be replaced with m. The two Fourier transforms of F ± can be written in terms of
the spatial wave function ψ in (3.3) and the product replaced by the coordinate-space delta

12
functions of (3.4):
Z
dp′ ±∗ ′ ip′ ·x
Z
dp ~ ⊥ /2). (A5)
√ F (p )e √ F ± (p)e−ip·x = |ψ ± (x)|2 → δ(x− ± Rz )δ(~x⊥ ∓ R
16π 3 16π 3
Integration over x then gives
1 − 1 mi + mj
si hFis± | Pn.p. |G± F ± ; si = g0 βi sj βj ξk Cj±
X
(A6)
2 2 jk m
Z
dq h
±i(q + Rz +~ ~ ⊥ )/2
q⊥ ·R † ∓i(q + Rz +~ ~ ⊥ )/2
q⊥ ·R
i
× √ ak (q)e + a (q)e |G±
j i.
16π 3 q +
Use of (3.11) then yields the result given in (3.15).
When there are two sources, the projection needed is
1 −
−
si sj hFjs |hFis+1 | Pn.p. |G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i (A7)
2
2
1
Z Z Z
= si sj f h0| dp′2 F −∗ (p′2 )bjs2 (p′2 ) dp′1 F +∗ (p′1 )bis1 (p′1 )g0
X
βl βm ξk dx
2 lmk
i Z dp dp
!
Z
dq h
−iq·x † iq·x 1 2 i(p −p )·x ml mm X †
× √ ak (q)e + ak (q)e e 1 2 + + bls (p1 )bms (p2 )
16π 3 q + 16π 3 p+
1 p2 s
Z Z
dp′′1 F + (p′′1 )b†i′ s1 (p′′1 ) dp′′2 F − (p′′2 )b†j ′ s2 (p′′2 )|0if |G+ −
X
× C i′ j ′ i′ i|Gj ′ i.
i′ j ′

Contraction of bms (p2 ) with each of the rightmost creation operators yields
1 −
−
si sj hFjs |hFis+1 | Pn.p. |G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i (A8)
2
2
1 Z Z Z
= si sj f h0| dp′2 F −∗ (p′2 )bjs2 (p′2 ) dp′1 F +∗ (p′1 )bis1 (p′1 )g0
X
βl βm ξk dx
2 lmk
i Z dp dp
!
Z
dq h
−iq·x † iq·x 1 2 i(p −p )·x ml mm X †
× √ ak (q)e + ak (q)e e 1 2 + + bls (p1 )
16π 3 q + 16π 3 p+
1 p2 s
Z Z
dp′′1 F + (p′′1 ) dp′′2 F − (p′′2 )sm δss1 δmi′ δ(p2 − p′′1 )b†j ′ s2 (p′′2 )
X
× C i′ j ′
i′ j ′
Z Z 
− dp′′1 F + (p′′1 )b†i′ s1 (p′′1 ) dp′′2 F − (p′′2 )sm δss2 δmj ′ δ(p2 − p′′2 ) |0if |G+ −
i′ i|Gj ′ i.

With use of the Kronecker and Dirac deltas, this becomes

1 −
si sj hFjs −
|hFis+1 | Pn.p. |G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i (A9)
2
2
1
Z Z Z
= si sj f h0| dp′2 F −∗ (p′2 )bjs2 (p′2 ) dp′1 F +∗ (p′1 )bis1 (p′1 )g0
X
βl ξk dx
2 lk
Z dp dp
Z
dq h i
× √ ak (q)e−iq·x + a†k (q)eiq·x 1 2 i(p1 −p2 )·x
e
16π q3 + 16π 3
( !
ml mi′ Z
+
dp′′2 F − (p′′2 )b†ls1 (p1 )b†j ′ s2 (p′′2 )
X
× Ci′ j ′ si′ βi′ + + + F (p 2
)
i′ j ′
p 1 p 2
!Z )
ml mj ′
−sj ′ βj ′ + + dp′′1 F + (p′′1 )b†ls2 (p1 )b†i′ s1 (p′′1 )F − (p2 ) |0if |G+ −
i′ i|Gj ′ i.
p+
1 p2

13
The remaining contractions produce

1 −
si sj hFjs−
|hFis+1 | Pn.p. |G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i (A10)
2
2
1 Z Z Z
= si sj dp′2 F −∗ (p′2 ) dp′1 F +∗ (p′1 )g0
X
βl ξk dx
2 lk
Z dp dp
Z
dq h
−iq·x † iq·x
i
1 2 i(p1 −p2 )·x
× √ 3 +
ak (q)e + ak (q)e 3
e
16π q 16π
( !
ml mi′
Z
+
F (p2 ) dp′′2 F − (p′′2 )
X
× Ci′ j ′ si′ βi′ + + +
′
ij ′ p 1 p 2
h i
× si δil δ(p′1 − p1 )sj δjj ′ δ(p′2 − p′′2 ) − si δs1 s2 δij ′ δ(p′1 − p′′2 )sj δs2 s1 δjl δ(p′2 − p1 )
!Z
ml mj ′
− sj ′ βj ′ + + dp′′1 F + (p′′1 )F − (p2 )
p+
1 p2
h io
× si δs1 s2 δil δ(p′1 − p1 )sj δs2 s1 δji′ δ(p′2 − p′′1 ) − si δii′ δ(p′1 − p′′1 )sj δjl δ(p′2 − p1 ) |G+ −
i′ i|Gj ′ i.

The additional Kronecker and Dirac deltas, and the fact that s2i = 1, reduce this to

1 −
−
si sj hFjs |hFis+1 | Pn.p. |G+ G− F + F − ; s1 s2 i (A11)
2
2
1 X
Z Z
dq h i Z dp dp
−iq·x † iq·x 1 2 i(p1 −p2 )·x
= g0 ξk dx √ 3 +
ak (q)e + ak (q)e 3
e
2 k 16π q 16π
( " !
mi mi′
Z
dp′2 −
(p′2 )|2 F +∗ (p1 )F + (p2 ) |G+ −
X
× si′ βi′ Ci′ j βi |F + + i′ i|Gj i (A12)
i′ p+
1 p2
! #
mj mi′
Z
+∗
−δs1 s2 Ci′ i βj dp′1 F (p′1 )F − (p′1 )F −∗ (p1 )F + (p2 ) + + |G+ −
i′ i|Gi i
p+
1 p2
" !
Z
mi mj ′
dp′2 F −∗ (p′2 )F + (p′2 )F +∗ (p1 )F − (p2 ) + + + |G+ −
X
− sj ′ βj ′ δs1 s2 Cjj ′ βi j i|Gj ′ i
j′
p1 p2
! #)
mj mj ′
Z
+
−Cij ′ βj dp′1 |F (p′1 )|2 F −∗ (p1 )F − (p2 ) + + |G+ −
i i|Gj ′ i .
p+
1 p2

The p′1 and p′2 integrations yield either unity for direct terms or zero for cross terms; the latter
can be identified by the leading δs1 s2 . The integral in the direct terms is the normalization
integral for F ± . The integral for the cross terms is zero because of zero overlap between the
wave packets of the two sources. The integrals over p1 and p2 can be rewritten in terms of
the Fourier transforms ψ ± , with factors of p′1 and p′2 replaced with (m, ~0⊥ ) at the peak of
F ± . This leaves factors of |ψ ± (x)|2 which become δ(x− ± Rz )δ(~x⊥ ∓ R ~ ⊥ /2). The integral
over x can then be performed. The resulting expression is what is quoted in (4.8).

14
 Appendix B: Reduction of the two-source eigenvalue problem

We begin from the statement of the full eigenvalue problem for two static sources as given
in (4.9). The coefficient of the collected a†k (q) terms is

1 X µ2k + q⊥
2
" #
Cij + q + rk [G+ − + −
ki (q) + Gkj (q)]|Gi i|Gj i (B1)
2 k q+
(
1 1 + ~ mi + mi′ + −
si′ βi′ Ci′ j e−i(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
X
+ g0 ξk √ 3 +
βi |Gi′ i|Gj i
2 16π q i′ m

X
i(q + Rz +~ ~ ⊥ )/2
q⊥ ·R mj + mj ′ + − 
+βj sj ′ βj ′ Cij ′ e |Gi i|Gj ′ i .
j′
m 

If we set Cij = Ci+ Cj− , this coefficient of a†k (q) is automatically zero, given the solution to
the single-source case. This leaves the double-source eigenvalue problem (4.9) in the form

m2i m2j
( )
1 X
Z
dq
Ci+ Cj− + + m |G+
i i|G −
j i + g 0 ξ k √ (B2)
2m 2m 2 k 16π 3 q +
(
+ R +~ ~ mi + mi′ + −
si′ βi′ Ci+′ Cj− rk [G+ − i(q z q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
X
× βi ki′ (q) + Gkj (q)]e |Gi′ i|Gj i
i′
m

−i(q + Rz +~ ~ ⊥ )/2 mj + mj ′ + − 
sj ′ βj ′ Ci+ Cj−′ rk [G+ − q⊥ ·R
X
+βj ki (q) + Gkj ′ (q)]e |Gi i|Gj ′ i
j′
m 

= ECi+ Cj− |G+ −

i i|Gj i.

The combination Ci± G± ±

ki (q)|Gi i can be replaced in each appearance with use of (3.18)

m2i m2j
( )
1 X
Z
dq
Ci+ Cj− + + −
+ m |Gi i|Gj i − g0 ξk √ (B3)
2m 2m 2 k 16π 3 q +

+ ~
mi + mi′ g0 βi′ ξk e−i(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2

~
 +
si′ βi′ Cj− rk ei(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
X
× βi √ 2 2

 i′ m 16π 3 q + µk +q+
⊥
+ q+q
mi′ + mj ′ + −
sj ′ βj ′ Cj+′
X
× |Gj ′ i|Gj i
j′
m
+ ~
+ ~ mi + mi′ + g0 βj ξk ei(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
si′ βi′ Ci+′ rk ei(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
X
+βi |Gi′ i √ 2 2
i′
m 16π 3 q + µk +q
+
⊥
+ q+ q
mj + mj ′ −
sj ′ βj ′ Cj−′
X
× |Gj ′ i
j′
m
+ ~
+ ~ mj + mj ′ g0 βi ξk e−i(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
sj ′ βj ′ Cj−′ rk e−i(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
X
+βj √ 2 2
j′ m 16π 3q + µk +q+
⊥
+ q+q
mi + mi′ + −
si′ βi′ Ci+′
X
× |Gi′ i|Gj ′ i
i′
m

15
 + ~
+ ~ mj + mj ′ + g0 βj ′ ξk ei(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
Ci+ rk e−i(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R⊥ )/2
X
+βj s β
j′ j′ |Gi i √ 2 2
j′
m 16π 3 q + µk +q
+
⊥
+ q+
q
)
mj ′ + mi′ −
si′ βi′ Ci−′
X
× |Gi′ i
i′ m
= ECi+ Cj− |G+ −
i i|Gj i.

The q dependent factors can be combined into a factor that is either the self-energy integral
I defined in (3.21), where the exponential factors cancel, or the integral

dq X rk ξk2 e±i(q Rz +~q⊥ ·R~ ⊥ )

Z +

~ =
Y (R)±
. (B4)
2
16π 3 k (q + )2 + q⊥ + µ2k

We then obtain
m2i m2j
( )
Ci+ Cj− + + m |G+ −
i i|Gj i (B5)
2m 2m

g2  mi + mi′ X mi′ + mj ′ + −
− 0 βi Cj− µI si′ βi2′ sj ′ βj ′ Cj+′
X
|Gj ′ i|Gj i
2 
i′ m j′ m
~ mi + mi′ X mj + mj ′ + −
+βi βj Y + (R) si′ βi′ Ci+′ sj ′ βj ′ Cj−′
X
|Gi′ i|Gj ′ i
i′
m j′
m
~ mj + mj ′ X mi + mi′ + −
+βi βj Y − (R) sj ′ βj ′ Cj−′ si′ βi′ Ci+′
X
|Gi′ i|Gj ′ i
j′
m i′
m

mj + mj ′ mj ′ + mi′ + − 
+Ci+ βj µI sj ′ βj2′ si′ βi′ Ci−′
X X
|Gi i|Gi′ i
j′
m i′
m
= ECi+ Cj− |G+ −
i i|Gj i.

This can be rearranged to reveal parts directly related to the single-source problem
 
m2i g02
!
 m 2 mi + mi′ + mi′ + mj ′

Ci+ |G+ + − −
X X
+ i i − βi µI s ′ β
i i′ s ′
j jβ ′ C j′ |G j ′  Cj |Gj i
i
 2m 2 2 i′ m j′ m
 
m2j g02
!
 m 2 mj + mj ′ − mj ′ + mi′

+Ci+ |G+ −
|G− −
X X
i i Cj + j i − βj µI s ′ β
j j′ s ′ β ′
i i i′ C |G i
i′ 
 2m 2 2 j′ m i′ m
g02 ~ mi + mi′ X mj + mj ′ + −
− βi βj Y + (R) si′ βi′ Ci+′ sj ′ βj ′ Cj−′
X
|Gi′ i|Gj ′ i (B6)
2 i ′ m j ′ m
g02 ~ mj + mj ′ X mi + mi′ + −
− βi βj Y − (R) sj ′ βj ′ Cj−′ si′ βi′ Ci+′
X
|Gi′ i|Gj ′ i
2 j′
m i′
m
= ECi+ Cj− |G+ −
i i|Gj i.

According to (3.20), with E ± = m, the first curly bracket is simply mCi+ |G+ i i, and the
+ − +
second is mCj− |G−
j i. These two terms contribute 2mC i C j |G i i|G −
j i to the equation and,
~ ≡ E − 2m determined
when subtracted from both sides, leave the effective potential Veff (R)

16
by

g02 ~ mi + mi′ X mj + mj ′ + −
si′ βi′ Ci+′ sj ′ βj ′ Cj−′
X
− βi βj Y (R) |Gi′ i|Gj ′ i (B7)
2 i′
m j′
m
= Veff Ci+ Cj− |G+ −
i i|Gj i,

with Y ≡ Y + + Y − .
To extract Veff , we define |G± i ≡ i Ci± si βi |G±
i i, multiply Eq. (B7) by si βi sj βj , and sum
P

over i and j

g2 ~ X
" #
mi + mi′ +
− 0 Y (R) si βi2 sj βj2 si′ βi′ Ci+′
X X
|G i + |G ′ i (B8)
2 i j m i′
m i
 
mj mj ′ − 
×  |G− i + sj ′ βj ′ Cj−′ |Gj ′ i = Veff |G+ i|G− i,
X
m j′
m

To simplify the result further, we use the constraint i si βi2 = 0, which eliminates all terms
P

between the square brackets except for the product of the first in each. We can then equate
coefficients of |G+ i|G− i to obtain
!2
g 2 ~ X si βi2 mi
Veff = − 0 Y (R) . (B9)
2 i m

The integrals in Y are computed in [17]. They yield

~ = e−µk R
rk ξk2
X
Y (R) . (B10)
k 8πR

In the limit of infinite PV boson masses, with r0 = 1, ξ0 = 1, and µ0 = µ, this reduces to

e−µR /(8πR), and the effective potential is found to be
!2
g 2 X si βi2 mi e−µR
Veff =− 0 . (B11)
2 i m 8πR

This is the expression given in (4.10).

[1] C. Gattringer and C.B. Lang, Quantum Chromodynamics on the Lattice (Springer, Berlin,
2010);
[2] H. Rothe, Lattice Gauge Theories: An Introduction, 4e (World Scientific, Singapore, 2012).
[3] S. Necco and R. Sommer, Testing perturbation theory on the N (f ) = 0 static quark potential,
Phys. Lett. B 523, 135 (2001); The N (f ) = 0 heavy quark potential from short to intermediate
distances, Nucl. Phys. B 622, 328 (2002).
[4] A. Bazavov, N. Brambilla, X. Garcia i Tormo, P. Petreczky, J. Soto, and A. Vairo, Determina-
tion of αs from the QCD static energy: an update, Phys. Rev. D 90, 074038 (2014) [erratum:
Phys. Rev. D 101, 119902 (2020)].

17
 [5] N. Brambilla, V. Leino, O. Philipsen, C. Reisinger, A. Vairo, and M. Wagner, Lattice gauge
theory computation of the static force, Phys. Rev. D 105, 054514 (2022).
(n =2)
[6] F. Karbstein, M. Wagner and M. Weber, Determination of Λ f and analytic parametriza-
MS
tion of the static quark-antiquark potential, Phys. Rev. D 98, 114506 (2018).
[7] R. N. Lee, A. V. Smirnov, V. A. Smirnov, and M. Steinhauser, Analytic three-loop static
potential, Phys. Rev. D 94, 054029 (2016).
[8] L. Giusti, A. Guerrieri, S. Petrarca, A. Rubeo, and M. Testa, Color structure of Yang-Mills
theory with static sources in a periodic box, Phys. Rev. D 92, 034515 (2015).
[9] T. Appelquist, M. Dine, and I.J. Muzinich, The static potential in quantum chromodynamics,
Phys. Lett. 69B, 231 (1977); Static limit of quantum chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 17, 2074
(1978).
[10] L.S. Brown and W.I. Weisberger, Remarks on the static potential in quantum chromodynam-
ics, Phys. Rev. D 20, 3239 (1979).
[11] S.J. Brodsky, H.-C. Pauli, and S.S. Pinsky, Quantum chromodynamics and other field theories
on the light cone, Phys. Rep. 301, 299 (1998).
[12] J. Carbonell, B. Desplanques, V.A. Karmanov, and J.F. Mathiot, Explicitly covariant light
front dynamics and relativistic few body systems, Phys. Rep. 300, 215 (1998).
[13] G.A. Miller, Light front quantization: A technique for relativistic and realistic nuclear physics,
Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 45, 83 (2000).
[14] M. Burkardt, Light front quantization, Adv. Nucl. Phys. 23, 1 (2002).
[15] B.L.G. Bakker et al., Light-front quantum chromodynamics: A framework for the analysis of
hadron physics, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 251-252, 165 (2014).
[16] J.R. Hiller, Nonperturbative light-front Hamiltonian methods, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 90, 75
(2016).
[17] S.S. Chabysheva and J.R. Hiller, Nonperturbative light-front effective potential for static
sources in quenched scalar Yukawa theory, Phys. Rev. D 105, 056027 (2022).
[18] S. J. Brodsky, J. R. Hiller and G. McCartor, Application of Pauli-Villars regularization and
discretized light cone quantization to a single fermion truncation of Yukawa theory, Phys. Rev.
D 64, 114023 (2001); The mass renormalization of nonperturbative light-front Hamiltonian
theory: An illustration using truncated, Pauli-Villars regulated Yukawa interactions, Ann.
Phys. (Amsterdam) 305, 266 (2003); Two-boson truncation of Pauli-Villars-regulated Yukawa
theory, Ann. Phys. (Amsterdam) 321, 1240 (2006).
[19] S. J. Brodsky, V. A. Franke, J. R. Hiller, G. McCartor, S. A. Paston, and E. V. Prokhvatilov,
A Nonperturbative calculation of the electron’s magnetic moment, Nucl. Phys. B 703, 333
(2004).
[20] S. S. Chabysheva and J. R. Hiller, Restoration of the chiral limit in Pauli-Villars-regulated
light-front QED, Phys. Rev. D 79, 114017 (2009).
[21] S. S. Chabysheva and J. R. Hiller, A nonperturbative calculation of the electron’s magnetic
moment with truncation extended to two photons, Phys. Rev. D 81, 074030 (2010).
[22] S. S. Chabysheva and J. R. Hiller, Nonperturbative Pauli-Villars regularization of vacuum
polarization in light-front QED, Phys. Rev. D 82, 034004 (2010).
[23] S. S. Chabysheva and J. R. Hiller, A first nonperturbative calculation in light-front QED for
an arbitrary covariant gauge, Phys. Rev. D 84, 034001 (2011).
[24] P.A.M. Dirac, Forms of relativistic dynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 21, 392 (1949).
[25] J.S. Rozowsky and C.B. Thorn, Defining the force between separated sources on a light front,

18
 Phys. Rev. D 60, 045001 (1999).
[26] M. Burkardt and B. Klindworth, Calculating the QQ̄ potential in (2+1)-dimensional light-
front QCD, Phys. Rev. D 55, 1001 (1997).
[27] M. Burkardt and S. Dalley, The relativistic bound state problem in QCD: Transverse lattice
methods, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 48, 317 (2002).
[28] P. Blunden, M. Burkardt, and G. Miller, Light front nuclear physics: Toy models, static
sources and tilted light front coordinates, Phys. Rev. C 61, 025206 (2000).
[29] G. McCartor and D. G. Robertson, Bosonic zero modes in discretized light cone field theory,
Z. Phys. C 53, 679 (1992).
[30] S. S. Chabysheva and J. R. Hiller, A light-front coupled-cluster method for the nonperturbative
solution of quantum field theories, Phys. Lett. B 711, 417 (2012).

19