arXiv subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Matthew Dowling.
We present results for the corrections of order alpha^2 (Z alpha)^5 to the Lamb shift. We compute all the contributing Feynman diagrams in dimensional regularization and a general covariant gauge using a mixture of analytical and numerical methods. We confirm results obtained by other groups and improve their precision. Values of the 32 master integrals for this and similar problems are provided.
We present a new calculation of the order alpha^2 (Z alpha)^5 correction to the Lamb shift, which uses methods developed for multi-loop calculations.
We have calculated the rate of the decay b -> clv to second order in alpha_s in the limit that the b and c quarks have equal masses. The results here confirm recent calculations done in the opposite limit where the c-quark is much lighter than the b-quark.
We compute the O(α_s^2) corrections to the differential rate of the semileptonic decay b -> clv at the "intermediate recoil" point, where the c-quark mass and the invariant mass of the leptons are equal. The calculation is based on an expansion around two opposite limits of the quark masses m_{b,c}: m_c ~ m_b and m_c << m_b. The former case was previously studied; we correct and extend that result. The latter case is new. The smooth matching of both expansions provides a check of both. We clarify the discrepancy between the recent determinations of the full NNLO QCD correction to the semileptonic b -> c rate, and its earlier estimate.
The rate of the semileptonic decay b to c l v is calculated with order alphas^2 accuracy, as an expansion around the limit of equal masses of the b and c quarks. Recent results obtained around the limit of the c-quark much lighter than b are confirmed. Details of the new expansion method are described.
The decay width of b to c,c,c,l,nu has been computed as an expansion in limit (1- 3*(m_c/m_b)) << 1 with zero lepton invariant mass. Considering O(alpha_s^2) corrections to b to c,l,nu with zero invariant lepton mass, inclusion of our result is shown to rectify the disagreement between the expansions around (1-(m_c/m_b)) << 1 and m_c/m_b << 1 at smaller values.