Haag's Theorem: Explain Free Field Nature

In summary: So in a sense, Haag's theorem is extended to the algebraic approach, but it's not really "new information" in any meaningful sense.
  • #1
lindberg
40
20
TL;DR Summary
Can someone explain in simple terms why, according to Haag's theorem, a free field cannot become an interacting one?
What is the main reason for a free field staying free according to Haag's theorem?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The formal transformation from a free to an interacting field turns out to be mathematically ill defined due to an IR divergence (infinite volume in which the fields live). For details, I highly recommend the book A. Duncan, The Conceptual Framework of Quantum Field Theory, section 10.5 How to stop worrying about Haag's theorem.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes aaroman, bhobba, lindberg and 2 others
  • #3
lindberg said:
according to Haag's theorem, a free field cannot become an interacting one?
That's not quite what Haag's theorem says. A free field and an interacting field are different things, and one cannot "become" the other, regardless of what Haag's theorem or any other mathematical result says.

Haag's theorem says, basically, that free fields and interacting fields live in different, unitarily inequivalent Hilbert spaces. To someone who is used to the usual way of modeling interacting fields as perturbations of free fields, this seems like a problem; but there are other approaches to quantum field theory, such as the algebraic approach, in which it is not a problem at all.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes aaroman, bhobba, lindberg and 2 others
  • #4
PeterDonis said:
To someone who is used to the usual way of modeling interacting fields as perturbations of free fields, this seems like a problem; but there are other approaches to quantum field theory, such as the algebraic approach, in which it is not a problem at all.
Wasn't Haag's conclusion extended later to other approaches?
I might be wrong, don't hesitate to correct me.

An Algebraic Version of Haag’s Theorem​

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00220-011-1236-7
 
  • #5
lindberg said:
Wasn't Haag's conclusion extended later to other approaches?
Given that the whole point of the algebraic approach to QFT is to be able to deal with unitarily inequivalent representations, showing that the algebraic approach leads to unitarily inequivalent representations isn't much of an issue.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba and topsquark

1. What is Haag's Theorem?

Haag's Theorem is a mathematical proof in quantum field theory that states that it is impossible to construct a self-consistent, interacting quantum field theory with an infinite number of free fields. In other words, it shows that the concept of a completely free field does not exist in nature.

2. Why is Haag's Theorem important?

Haag's Theorem is important because it helps us understand the limitations of our current understanding of quantum field theory. It also has implications for the interpretation of quantum mechanics and the nature of reality.

3. What does it mean for a field to be "free"?

In quantum field theory, a free field is one that does not interact with any other fields. This means that the field's equations of motion are linear and there are no interactions between particles. Free fields are often used as a starting point for constructing more complex theories.

4. How does Haag's Theorem impact our understanding of the universe?

Haag's Theorem tells us that there are fundamental limitations to our understanding of the universe. It suggests that the concept of a completely free field is not applicable to our physical world, and that there must be interactions between fields in order for a theory to be self-consistent.

5. Are there any ways to get around Haag's Theorem?

There are some ways to work around Haag's Theorem, such as using effective field theories or introducing new mathematical techniques. However, these approaches do not fully solve the problem and there is still much research being done to better understand the implications of Haag's Theorem in quantum field theory.

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
608
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
29
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
856
Replies
2
Views
871
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
798
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
849
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
773
Replies
61
Views
6K
Back
Top