Vacuum fluctuations of a free field and closed diagrams

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the confusion surrounding the Scharnhorst and Casimir effects, particularly regarding the role of virtual particles and Feynman diagrams in perturbation theory. Participants clarify that vacuum fluctuations can be computed using Wick's theorem, leading to Feynman diagrams without loops in free fields. The emergence of virtual particles is strictly tied to interactions, as demonstrated by one-loop diagrams that illustrate vacuum fluctuations. The Casimir effect, while involving non-interacting electromagnetic fields, does not necessitate the presence of virtual particles in a free vacuum.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of perturbation theory in quantum field theory
  • Familiarity with Feynman diagrams and Wick's theorem
  • Knowledge of the Casimir effect and its implications
  • Concept of vacuum fluctuations and virtual particles
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Casimir effect using quantum field theory
  • Learn about one-loop Feynman diagrams and their significance in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the implications of virtual particles in quantum field interactions
  • Investigate the Scharnhorst effect and its relation to vacuum fluctuations
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum field theorists, and students of theoretical physics seeking to deepen their understanding of vacuum phenomena and the role of virtual particles in quantum mechanics.

hellfire
Science Advisor
Messages
1,048
Reaction score
1
I am confused with the Scharnhorst and Casimir effects. The confusion started here. As it seams that there is no response to my questions in post #9, I will try here.

I stated there my understanding about perturbation theory which leads to Feynman diagrams: The amplitudes for the fluctuations in the vacuum state of a free field can be computed as a time ordered product of fields in <0|…|0>. According to Wick's theorem, this can be decomposed as a product of Feynman propagators, leading to Feynman diagrams with no loops. Only if an interaction exists, a term [tex]e^{-i\int dt H_I}[/tex] appears within the product <0|...|0> due to the fact that one does not consider |0> anymore but the vacuum state of an interacting field expressed in terms of |0>. Only the term with the integral leads to loops in the Feynman diagrams after expanding the exponential as a power series (this is basically what I understood from P&S).

I think this summarizes to the statement that virtual particles appear only in case of interactions. However, what I wrote above seams to be incorrect. Otherwise, claims like this:

Wikipedia said:
The Casimir effect and Hawking radiation are examples of phenomena whose existence can be proved using one-loop Feynman diagrams.
Make no sense to me. As far as I know the EM field inside the plates of a Casimir effect is not interacting. Phenomena like the Scharnhorst effect (FTL of photons in a Casimir vacuum) make also no sense as it seams to imply that there is some contribution of virtual particles to the propagation of light in a normal free vacuum (a contribution which is smaller in the Casimir vacuum).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Virtual particles arise because of two distinct reasons. You only named one (force carriers). I refer to the https://www.physicsforums.com/journal.php?s=&action=view&journalid=13790&perpage=10&page=4 entry of my journal.

one loop diagrams express the second posibility : ie vacuum fluctuations: particles that pop out of the vacuum and die shortly after at the same position of their origin.


regards

marlon
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hellfire said:
I stated there my understanding about perturbation theory which leads to Feynman diagrams: The amplitudes for the fluctuations in the vacuum state of a free field can be computed as a time ordered product of fields in <0|…|0>. According to Wick's theorem, this can be decomposed as a product of Feynman propagators, leading to Feynman diagrams with no loops. Only if an interaction exists, a term [tex]e^{-i\int dt H_I}[/tex] appears within the product <0|...|0> due to the fact that one does not consider |0> anymore but the vacuum state of an interacting field expressed in terms of |0>. Only the term with the integral leads to loops in the Feynman diagrams after expanding the exponential as a power series (this is basically what I understood from P&S).

I would tend to agree completely with what you write. The strict free field is completely solvable and all its Feynman diagrams are trivial (lines connecting ingoing and outgoing particles) because there are no vertices.

As far as I know the EM field inside the plates of a Casimir effect is not interacting. Phenomena like the Scharnhorst effect (FTL of photons in a Casimir vacuum) make also no sense as it seams to imply that there is some contribution of virtual particles to the propagation of light in a normal free vacuum (a contribution which is smaller in the Casimir vacuum).

What I know is that the expression for the Casimir pressure does not contain the EM interaction constant, and that the contribution is the same for all fields (not necessarily the photon field). As such it seems to be a property of the free field (that's btw how it is calculated, no ? You calculate a (cut-off) energy density of the vacuum (the 1/2 hbar omega term of each mode) of the allowed modes in the box, slightly move one of the walls, and calculate it again, and from the dE over dx you calculate the force. This is purely based upon the free field, EXCEPT OF COURSE that you need to assume an interaction with the walls which will give you the allowed modes. Hence, that's why only EM modes (up to a certain rather low energy) are taken into account (gamma rays are not reflected by the metal walls, nor are gluons or Z-bosons).
In all this, I don't see where a 1-loop diagram comes in...
But I'm out of my depth anyways.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
6K