Quantum Field Theory: Field Operators and Lorentz invariance

In summary, the conversation is about a problem with the Feynman Propagator in Quantum Field Theory and its Lorentz Invariance. The first question is about how to show the self-evident fact that time-ordering is invariant for time-like separated events. The second question is about using Lorentz Invariance to show that the commutator of two scalar field operators vanishes for space-like separated events. The solution is found by showing that the integral vanishes for equal times and is Lorentz invariant, which can then be transformed to show that it must be zero for space-like separated events. The conversation ends with a realization that the speaker should study special relativity more deeply.
  • #1
flix
13
0
[SOLVED] Quantum Field Theory: Field Operators and Lorentz invariance

Hi there,

I am currently working my way through a book an QFT (Aitchison/Hey) and am a bit stuck on an important step in the derivation of the Feynman Propagator. My problem is obviously that I am not a hard core expert of relativitiy :)

Actually, I have TWO questions on the same matter.
The central quantity is the Feynman Propagator

[tex] <0|T([\hat{\phi}(x_1) \hat{\phi}(x_2)|0> [/tex]

where the [tex] \hat{\phi} [/tex] are scalar field operators and T is the time-ordering operator and the x are 4-vectors.

The point of interest is now this quantity's Lorentz Invariance.

The book says: "If the two points [tex]x_1[/tex] and [tex]x_2[/tex] are separated by a time-like interval ([tex] (x_1 - x_2)^2 > 0)[/tex] then the time ordering is Lorentz invariant; this is because no proper (doesn't change the sense of time) Lorentz transformation can alter the time-ordering of time-like separated events."
It goes on:
"The fact that time-ordering is invariant for time-like separated events is what guarantees that we cannot influence our past, only our future "

First question: The first (italic) part sounds suspiciously self-evident, but how can that be quickly shown mathematically? And for the second part: I would say: the fact that it is Lorentz invariant means that one can not think of a coordinate frame where the events change their order of time. Is that right?


Now the book goes on and treats the case of space-like ([tex] (x_1 - x_2)^2 < 0)[/tex] separated events. The book says it can be shown that it can be shown that the two field operators always commute in this case. I tried to show that following a hint:
Commutator of 2 scalar Field Operators of the same kind:

[tex] D(x_1, x_2) = [\hat{\phi}(x_1, t_1), \hat{\phi}(x_2, t_2)] [/tex]
.. with 3-vectors and time component treated seperatly.

I could show that this can be written as

[tex] D(x_1, x_2) = \int \frac{d^3 k}{(2 \pi)^3 2E} [ e^{-ik\cdot(x_1-x_2)} - e^{ik\cdot(x_1-x_2)}][/tex]
... with x and k being again 4-vectors.

The right side is obviously Lorentz invariant. The book now hints that this fact is enough to show that in this case [tex] D(x_1, x_2)[/tex] actually always vanishes.

Second question: How is Lorentz invariance enough to show that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
edit: actually I take all that back. Note that the integral is D(x-y) - D(y-x), so each of those two terms is lorentz invariant and you can continously transform the second term from (x-y) --> - (x-y) and the two terms will cancel for (x-y)^2 < 0
 
Last edited:
  • #3
The book suggests it should be possible without further calculations.
I mean you can nicely show that for equal times the integral vanishes, and surely it must be possible to show that it vanishes in general, but somehow it must be possible to show in a very easy way that it is sufficient that the integral is Lorentz invariant and x_1 and x_2 are space-like separated... I certainly don't see it at the moment...
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Have you calculated D(x-y) for spacelike seperation? eg x - y = r? You should see that the statement I have written down in the edited post makes sense.
 
  • #5
edit: where are my manners :) Thanks so much for helping me out so far! I see your comment is certainly going into the right direction, all I need now is my humble mind to catch on :)

well I am working on it. The quantities in D(x_1, x_2) as I wrote it are 4 vectors. I know something about the square of (x_1 - x_2), but nothing about the quantity k(x_1 - x_2).

As I said, I somehow always avoided delving deeper into special relativity (which I regret A LOT lately...), so I probably just fail to see the obvious.

Let me summarize: In the commutator I have those 2 exponentials of which I know that x_1 and x_2 are space-like separated. I don't understand what you mean by D(x-y) - D(y-x) to be honest. 2 commutators? or are you just referring to the exponential functions under the integral?
 
Last edited:
  • #6
This is straight out of P&S if you want to look at a copy.. But D(x-y) is simply
<0|phi(x)phi(y)|0> which will be proportional to something like int (1/2E) exp (-ip(x-y))
 
  • #7
Ah ok I just found the (as expected: obvious) solution.

As I stated I already showed that the integral vanishes for t_1 = t_2 and the integral is also Lorentz invariant. So I can transform without changing its value.
Now when x_1 and x_2 are space-like separated I can always transform to a system where t_1' = t_2' and the integral vanishes as shown -> the integral must be zero.

Thanks for hinting me into the right direction! I definitely should look deeper into relativistics :)
 

1. What is quantum field theory?

Quantum field theory is a theoretical framework in physics that combines the principles of quantum mechanics and special relativity to describe the behavior of particles and their interactions in a physical system.

2. What are field operators in quantum field theory?

Field operators are mathematical objects that represent the quantum fields in a given system. They act as operators on the quantum state of a particle and allow for the calculation of physical observables such as energy, momentum, and spin.

3. How do field operators relate to Lorentz invariance?

Lorentz invariance is the principle that the laws of physics should appear the same to all observers moving at constant velocities. In quantum field theory, field operators are constructed to be Lorentz invariant, meaning that they transform in a consistent way under rotations and boosts, ensuring that physical measurements are the same for all observers.

4. What is the significance of Lorentz invariance in quantum field theory?

Lorentz invariance is an essential aspect of quantum field theory as it allows for the consistent description of particles and their interactions in a relativistic framework. It also plays a crucial role in the formulation of important theories such as quantum electrodynamics and the Standard Model of particle physics.

5. Are there any experimental tests of Lorentz invariance in quantum field theory?

Yes, there have been numerous experiments that have tested the predictions of Lorentz invariance in quantum field theory, including precision measurements of particle properties and high-energy collisions. So far, all experimental evidence supports the principle of Lorentz invariance.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
837
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
11
Views
926
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
33
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
304
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
924
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
13
Views
1K
Back
Top