Number operator help


by pleasehelpmeno
Tags: 2nd quantisation, fermionic n operator, number operator
pleasehelpmeno
pleasehelpmeno is offline
#1
Feb16-13, 05:01 AM
P: 160
Hi can anyone tell me why in the fermionic number operator case:
[itex]<0|N/V|0>= \sum_{\pm r}\int d^3 k a^{\dagger}(t,r)a(t,r) [/itex]
because if:
[itex] N=a^{\dagger}(t,k)a(t,k) [/itex]then after fourier decomposition surely one gets:

[itex] \int d^3 r d^3 r \frac{1}{(2Pi)^{3}} a^{\dagger}(t,r)a(t,rk) [/itex]
and when fourier decomposing back i dont see how one can get the creation/annhilation operators as a function of r or how to get this sum term or the [itex] d^3k [/itex] term. This V term gives just a [itex] \frac{1}{V} [/itex] term in the final integral.
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Sensitive detection method may help impede illicit nuclear trafficking
CERN: World-record current in a superconductor
Beam on target: CEBAF accelerator achieves 12 GeV commissioning milestone
strangerep
strangerep is offline
#2
Feb16-13, 07:55 PM
Sci Advisor
P: 1,721
There's seem to be some typos in your integrals, e.g., integration variables not matching the arguments in the integrands. (?)

But -- and I'm just guessing here -- if you intended to Fourier-transform each operator and then multiply them, you'll need different dummy integration symbols in the respective Fourier integral.
pleasehelpmeno
pleasehelpmeno is offline
#3
Feb17-13, 05:06 AM
P: 160
yeah the first line was something i read in a paper and I don't understand how they get there.

I have attached the pdf copy of the issue where the important things are marked with a blue blob. I simply dont understand how they can get an answer in the form that they do, for the number operator.

help.pdf

strangerep
strangerep is offline
#4
Feb17-13, 07:02 PM
Sci Advisor
P: 1,721

Number operator help


Quote Quote by pleasehelpmeno View Post
I have attached the pdf copy of the issue where the important things are marked with a blue blob. I simply dont understand how they can get an answer in the form that they do, for the number operator.
OK, first things first...

Do you understand how they get eq(2.17) ? Do you understand that ##\hat a(\eta,k)## is a different operator than ##a(k)##, and that the latter annihilates the original (time=0) vacuum state?

[For the benefit of other readers: this is a standard calculation of a Bogoliubov transformation on fermionic operators, and calculation of the vev of the transformed number operator wrt an initial vacuum.]
andrien
andrien is offline
#5
Feb18-13, 01:46 AM
P: 973
is not that simply the sum over all modes.In case of summation over infinite modes the usual prescription is to replace the sum by an integral containing the factor d3k/(2∏)3,that is what is usually done in summing over all the modes of electromagnetic field when quantized,also with a sum over r,just like sum over polarization.
pleasehelpmeno
pleasehelpmeno is offline
#6
Feb18-13, 03:35 AM
P: 160
I understand that they are different because they dependent on the things in the bracket and to get between them one fourier transforms. I no that N is of the form [itex] \hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{a}[/itex], but im not sure what N is a function of, as in r or k.

I also understand that [itex] d^3k \rightarrow dk k^2 [/itex] by using the solid angle transformation, but im unsure why it would be a dk and what happens to the sum (i guessed this goes to 2 as it is \ [itex] \pm r[/itex] but not sure). I also understand that the [itex]1/a^3[/itex] term arises from V.

I also know that [itex] <0|a^{\dagger} = a|0>=0 [/itex], so one can cancel away the operators.

I am really just unsure initially as to what N is and then why the integration variables (dk's etc) are present in the way that they are.
pleasehelpmeno
pleasehelpmeno is offline
#7
Feb18-13, 03:42 AM
P: 160
also can one just decide that [itex] \hat{a}(\eta,k) = \alpha(\eta) a(k) + \beta(\eta) b^{\dagger}(-k) [/itex] can then be rewritten as [itex] \hat{a}(\eta,r) = \alpha(\eta) a(r) + \beta(\eta) b^{\dagger}(-r) [/itex] or does one need to fourier transofrm between the two?
stevendaryl
stevendaryl is offline
#8
Feb18-13, 06:44 AM
P: 1,657
Quote Quote by pleasehelpmeno View Post
also can one just decide that [itex] \hat{a}(\eta,k) = \alpha(\eta) a(k) + \beta(\eta) b^{\dagger}(-k) [/itex] can then be rewritten as [itex] \hat{a}(\eta,r) = \alpha(\eta) a(r) + \beta(\eta) b^{\dagger}(-r) [/itex] or does one need to fourier transofrm between the two?
I'm not sure if you're making this mistake, or not, but the [itex]r[/itex] in that section does not refer to position; note that in the text, r is summed over, not integrated over.
pleasehelpmeno
pleasehelpmeno is offline
#9
Feb18-13, 07:48 AM
P: 160
Dince r is in the integral then can one do as i decided and claim that [itex] \hat{a}(\eta,r) = \alpha(\eta)a(r) + \beta(\eta)b^{\dagger}(-r) [/itex]. and then just sub this into the integral?
stevendaryl
stevendaryl is offline
#10
Feb18-13, 08:00 AM
P: 1,657
Quote Quote by pleasehelpmeno View Post
Dince r is in the integral then can one do as i decided and claim that [itex] \hat{a}(\eta,r) = \alpha(\eta)a(r) + \beta(\eta)b^{\dagger}(-r) [/itex]. and then just sub this into the integral?
As I said, in the paper you showed an excerpt from, [itex]r[/itex] is not position. The paper sums over all possibly values of [itex]r[/itex] and it says that it has values [itex]+/- 1[/itex]. Maybe it's a spin index?
stevendaryl
stevendaryl is offline
#11
Feb18-13, 08:10 AM
P: 1,657
Quote Quote by stevendaryl View Post
As I said, in the paper you showed an excerpt from, [itex]r[/itex] is not position. The paper sums over all possibly values of [itex]r[/itex] and it says that it has values [itex]+/- 1[/itex]. Maybe it's a spin index?
In the full paper, they define
[itex]\psi_{+} = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}[/itex]
[itex]\psi_{-} =\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}[/itex]

So the index [itex]r[/itex] means either [itex]+[/itex] or [itex]-[/itex].
pleasehelpmeno
pleasehelpmeno is offline
#12
Feb18-13, 11:22 AM
P: 160
Can you tell me then why it is [itex] \hat{a}(\eta,r) [/itex] or what they are in terms of the bogulobov transformations and operators, i.e. can i define them as i have done so.

Is [itex] \frac{N}{V} = \frac{1}{(2\pi)^3 a^3} \int d^3 k \hat{a}^{\dagger}(\eta, r)\hat{a}(\eta, r) [/itex] just an identity then, I can't see how they form it with only one integration variable d^3 k and why it contains [itex](2\pi)^3[/itex] not [itex] (2\pi)^{3/2} [/itex]?
stevendaryl
stevendaryl is offline
#13
Feb18-13, 02:23 PM
P: 1,657
Quote Quote by pleasehelpmeno View Post
Can you tell me then why it is [itex] \hat{a}(\eta,r) [/itex] or what they are in terms of the bogulobov transformations and operators, i.e. can i define them as i have done so.

Is [itex] \frac{N}{V} = \frac{1}{(2\pi)^3 a^3} \int d^3 k \hat{a}^{\dagger}(\eta, r)\hat{a}(\eta, r) [/itex] just an identity then, I can't see how they form it with only one integration variable d^3 k and why it contains [itex](2\pi)^3[/itex] not [itex] (2\pi)^{3/2} [/itex]?
Looking at the paper here
http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0003045.pdf
I'm almost positive that equation 2.20 contains a typo. Instead of
[itex]\frac{1}{(2\pi)^3 a^3} \int d^3 k \hat{a}^{\dagger}(\eta, r)\hat{a}(\eta, r) [/itex]

it should be

[itex]\frac{1}{(2\pi)^3 a^3} \int d^3 k \hat{a}^{\dagger}(\eta, k)\hat{a}(\eta, k) [/itex]
pleasehelpmeno
pleasehelpmeno is offline
#14
Feb18-13, 02:29 PM
P: 160
Yeah unfortunately it has a lot of typos, how is it formed by using:
[itex] N=\hat{a}^{\dagger}(\eta , x) \hat{a}(\eta , x) [/itex] and fourier expanding it? with k hence the [itex] d^3 k [/itex] and [itex] \frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} [/itex], although shouldn't there be [itex] d^3 k d^3 k [/itex],or is it just a fixed identity?
andrien
andrien is offline
#15
Feb19-13, 06:09 AM
P: 973
Quote Quote by pleasehelpmeno View Post
Yeah unfortunately it has a lot of typos, how is it formed by using:
[itex] N=\hat{a}^{\dagger}(\eta , x) \hat{a}(\eta , x) [/itex] and fourier expanding it? with k hence the [itex] d^3 k [/itex] and [itex] \frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} [/itex], although shouldn't there be [itex] d^3 k d^3 k [/itex],or is it just a fixed identity?
are you aware how to go from fourier summation to fourier integration.In one dimension case,
when one converts a Ʃ into ∫,it is accompanied by a factor of ∫dk/2∏ per unit length.Similarly in three dimensional case,the summation is replaced by ∫d3k/(2∏)3 per unit volume.it is more or less like identity.it is used exhaustively at many places.I think this reference will be some useful,however it is at best suggestive.the result used is much more general.
http://www.math.osu.edu/~gerlach.1/m...et/node30.html
pleasehelpmeno
pleasehelpmeno is offline
#16
Feb19-13, 06:18 AM
P: 160
Ok then is [itex] N=\hat{a}^{\dagger}(\eta , x)\hat{a}(\eta , x) = \int d^3k \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^3}\hat{a}^{\dagger}(\eta , k)\hat{a}(\eta , k) [/itex]
andrien
andrien is offline
#17
Feb19-13, 06:44 AM
P: 973
there is a summation in first over k which is converted to integral in second(per unit volume)
pleasehelpmeno
pleasehelpmeno is offline
#18
Feb19-13, 07:34 AM
P: 160
I am sorry I don't know what you mean, is it like [itex] N/V = \int (\frac{1}{(2\pi)^3}) d^3 k d^3 k' a^\{dagger} a = \int (\frac{1}{(a2\pi)^3}) d^3 k a^\{dagger} a [/itex]


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Number operator in the ground state Advanced Physics Homework 7
Number Operator in Matrix Form Advanced Physics Homework 1
Operator number Quantum Physics 1
root of number operator? Quantum Physics 1
question about number operator and density operator Quantum Physics 7