Fourier transorm problem has me stumped

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jasonc65
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fourier
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical equivalence between two representations of the ground state wave functional in photon theory, specifically transitioning from a momentum representation to a coordinate representation. Participants explore the steps involved in this transformation and express varying levels of understanding and clarity regarding the process.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the ground state wave functional in momentum representation and its equivalent in coordinate representation, expressing uncertainty about the transformation process.
  • Another participant suggests starting from the coordinate representation to derive the momentum representation, arguing that this is typically simpler and more intuitive in quantum field theory (QFT).
  • A different participant challenges the clarity of the transformation steps, indicating that multiple steps are necessary and questioning the immediate nature of the equivalence.
  • Concerns are raised about the complexity of certain integrals involved in the transformation, particularly regarding the anti-Laplacian and its relation to gravitational analogies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the clarity and simplicity of the transformation process. There are competing views on the preferred representation and the steps required to establish the equivalence.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the transformation involves intricate mathematical steps that may not be immediately obvious, particularly in relation to specific integrals and their interpretations.

jasonc65
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
The ground state wave functional for the photon theory is given as

[tex]\Psi_0[\tilde{a}] = \eta \exp \left(-\frac{1}{2} \int \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{(\vec{k}\times\tilde{a}(\vec{k}))\cdot(\vec{k}\times\tilde{a}(-\vec{k}))}{|\vec{k}|}\right)[/tex]
(10.81)​

where [tex]\tilde{a}[/tex] is given as the Fourier transform of [tex]a[/tex], that is,

[tex]a_i(\vec{x}) = \int \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi)^3}\tilde{a}_i(\vec{k})e^{i\vec{k}\cdot\vec{x}}[/tex]
(10.67)​

Transforming back to [tex]a[/tex], the book now says that (10.81) is equivalent to

[tex]\Psi_0[a] = \eta \exp \left(-\frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \int d^3x d^3y \frac{(\nabla\times\vec{a}(\vec{x}))\cdot(\nabla\times\vec{a}(\vec{y}))}{|\vec{x}-\vec{y}|^2}\right)[/tex]
(10.83)​

I've had to think about this for a long time, and I'm still not sure I understand it exactly.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Starting with 10.83,substituting a_i from 10.67, get to 10.81
 
Yes,usually the other way around is more simple.Passing from the coordinate representation to momentum representation.I think you struggled a great deal proving the first part of the equivalence.
Basically u really don't have to,usually in QFT,we like more the momentum representation,because we build the Feynman rules in the momentum representation.
So probably the author went backwards.He should have given it first in the coordinate representation and then pass it to momentum.After all,once u have it in the momentum representation,what's the point of passing it into the coordinate representation??

Daniel.

PS.I hope u see that the coordinate->momentum passing is immediate.
 
It takes at least three steps

I don't see it immediately.

[tex]-\frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \int d^3x d^3y \frac{(\nabla\times\vec{a}(\vec{x}))\cdot(\nabla\times\vec{a}(\vec{y}))}{|\vec{x}-\vec{y}|^2}<br /> <br /> = -\frac{1}{(2\pi)^2}\int\frac{d^3xd^3yd^3kd^3k'}{(2\pi)^3(2\pi)^3}\frac{-(\vec{k}\times\tilde{a}(\vec{k})e^{i\vec{k}\cdot\vec{x}})\cdot(\vec{k'}\times\tilde{a}(\vec{k'})e^{i\vec{k'}\cdot\vec{y}})}{|\vec{x}-\vec{y}|^2}[/tex]

[tex]= -\frac{1}{2}\int\frac{d^3xd^3y}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{-(\vec{k}\times\tilde{a}(\vec{k}))\cdot(\vec{k'}\times\tilde{a}(\vec{k'}))\delta^3(\vec{k}+\vec{k'})}{|\vec{k}|}<br /> <br /> = -\frac{1}{2} \int \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{(\vec{k}\times\tilde{a}(\vec{k}))\cdot(\vec{ k}\times\tilde{a}(-\vec{k}))}{|\vec{k}|}[/tex]

For the second step, one needs [tex]\int\frac{4\pi}{(2\pi)^3}d^3x\frac{e^{i\vec{k}\cdot\vec{x}}}{|\vec{x}-\vec{y}|^2} = \frac{e^{i\vec{k}\cdot\vec{y}}}{|\vec{k}|}[/tex], which to me is not immediately obvious. It seems to have something to do with calculating the anti-Laplacian by reasoning in analogy with the inverse square law of gravitation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K