Recovering Fermion States in New Formalism?

In summary, the conversation discusses the use of creation and annihilation operators for states with definite momenta in quantum field theory. The book being read goes back to the old notation of denoting each particle in a state individually, and there is confusion about the results obtained. After applying the commutator and anti-commutator relations, the result should have a minus sign instead of a plus sign. The mistake was identified as having the ##\pm## on the wrong term in the equation.
  • #1
acegikmoqsuwy
41
4
Hi, I just started a book on QFT and one of the first things that was done was switch from labeling states with their individual particles and instead label states by the number of particles in each momentum eigenstate.

In addition, some "algebras" (not sure if they qualify by the mathematical definition) were defined for creation and annihilation operators as follows:

For creation and annihilation operators for states with definite momenta p and q (working in 3 dimensions), it was defined that $$[a_p,a_q^{\dagger}]=\delta^{(3)}(p-q);\quad [a_p,a_q]=0;\quad [a_p^{\dagger},a_q^{\dagger}]=0$$ for bosons and $$\{a_p,a^{\dagger}_q\}=\delta^{(3)}(p-q);\quad \{a_p,a_q\}=0;\quad \{a_p^{\dagger},a_q^{\dagger}\}=0$$ for fermions, where the square brackets and curly braces denote commutator and anti-commutator, respectively.

The book proceeds to (reverting back to the old notation of denoting each particle in a state individually, I suppose) state that $$\langle p'q'|qp\rangle = \langle 0|a_{p'}a_{q'}a_q^{\dagger}a_p^{\dagger}|0\rangle=\delta^{(3)}(p'-p)\delta^{(3)}(q'-q)\pm\delta^{(3)}(p'-q)\delta^{(3)}(q'-p).$$ On the RHS, the positive sign is taken for bosons and the negative sign for fermions.

I believe the first of these equalities, but for some reason I keep getting a plus instead of a plus/minus on the RHS. Could anyone explain what is wrong with my derivation?

For ease of typing, I let p' = w, q' = x, q = y, p = z and I use a's and b's (with the appropriate subscripts) for the creation and annihilation operators, respectively.

Then we wish to compute $$\langle 0|a_wa_xb_yb_z|0\rangle.$$ By simply applying the commutator and anti-commutator relations, we find $$a_wa_xb_y=a_w(b_ya_x\pm\delta^{(3)}(x-y))=a_wb_ya_x\pm\delta^{(3)}(x-y)a_w.$$ Then $$a_wa_xb_yb_z=a_wb_ya_xb_z\pm\delta^{(3)}(x-y)a_wb_z=a_wb_y(b_za_x\pm\delta^{(3)}(x-z))\pm\delta^{(3)}(x-y)(b_za_w\pm\delta^{(3)}(w-z)).$$

Since we want to compute the result when this expression is sandwiched in between the vacuum state, we can ignore the terms that have an annihilation as the rightmost operator (since those will hit the vacuum state to produce zero). This leaves us with $$\pm\delta^{(3)}(x-z)a_wb_y+\delta^{(3)}(x-y)\delta^{(3)}(w-z)=\pm\delta^{(3)}(x-z)(b_ya_w\pm\delta^{(3)}(w-y))+\delta^{(3)}(x-y)\delta^{(3)}(w-z).$$

Once again, we may remove the terms that will annihilate the vacuum state, leaving us with $$\delta^{(3)}(x-z)\delta^{(3)}(w-y)+\delta^{(3)}(x-y)\delta^{(3)}(w-z).$$ Exactly what I wanted, but with + instead of +/-. What's wrong with my logic?

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
acegikmoqsuwy said:
By simply applying the commutator and anti-commutator relations, we find $$a_wa_xb_y=a_w(b_ya_x\pm\delta^{(3)}(x-y))=a_wb_ya_x\pm\delta^{(3)}(x-y)a_w.$$

You have the ##\pm## on the wrong term:

$$a_wa_xb_y=a_w(\pm b_ya_x + \delta^{(3)}(x-y))$$
 
  • Like
Likes acegikmoqsuwy
  • #3
stevendaryl said:
You have the ##\pm## on the wrong term:

$$a_wa_xb_y=a_w(\pm b_ya_x + \delta^{(3)}(x-y))$$

OMG. Whoops. Haha, thank you, I spent the last four hours trying to figure this thing out!
 

1. What is the New Formalism in relation to recovering fermion states?

The New Formalism is a mathematical framework used to describe and analyze the behavior of fermion states, which are quantum particles with half-integer spin. It offers a different approach to understanding and recovering the properties of fermions compared to traditional methods.

2. How does the New Formalism differ from traditional methods of recovering fermion states?

The New Formalism uses a mathematical structure called the "Clifford algebra" to represent fermion states, while traditional methods use a "Hilbert space" approach. This allows for a more geometric and intuitive understanding of fermions, and can provide new insights into their behavior.

3. What are the advantages of using the New Formalism for recovering fermion states?

The New Formalism allows for a more comprehensive understanding of fermion states, as it takes into account both their spin and position in space. It also offers a more elegant and efficient way of performing calculations, making it a valuable tool for studying fermions in different systems.

4. Are there any limitations to using the New Formalism for recovering fermion states?

Like any mathematical framework, the New Formalism has its own set of limitations. It may not be suitable for all types of fermion systems, and may require a deeper understanding of abstract algebra in order to fully grasp its concepts and applications.

5. How can the New Formalism be applied in practical research?

The New Formalism has already been successfully applied in various research areas such as condensed matter physics, quantum information theory, and quantum computing. Its potential applications are still being explored, and it has the potential to advance our understanding of fermion systems in a wide range of fields.

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
24
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
779
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
813
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
940
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
15
Views
2K
Back
Top