Peskin and Schroeder p. 20-21

In summary, equation 2.23 defines the field \phi as a combination of the creation and annihilation operators, while equation 2.25 is the Fourier transform of this field, taking into account the ground state of particle p at x. To ensure that \phi(x) is real, the requirement of h(-\vec p)=g(\vec p)^* is necessary.
  • #1
nicksauce
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
1,271
7
In equation 2.23 we have
[tex] \phi = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega}}(a + a^{\dagger}) [/tex]

So how come equation 2.25 is

[tex] \phi(x) = \int{\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega_p}}(a_pe^{ipx} + a_p^{\dagger}e^{-ipx})} [/tex]

And not [tex] \phi(x) = \int{\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega_p}}(a_p + a_p^{\dagger})e^{ipx}} [/tex]
 
  • Like
Likes baba26
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
because you have to account for the ground state of particle p at x.

"The" ground state is antisymmetric, not symmetric so your version won't allow for the phase (between ground state and evolved state).
 
  • #3
The Fourier transform of a was substituted into both the a and the a dagger term, and the adjoint of a scalar times an operator is the conjugate of the scalar times the adjoint of the operator.

In other words, the Fourier transform has been applied to the basis states, not to phi(x) directly.
 
  • #4
nicksauce said:
In equation 2.23 we have
[tex] \phi = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega}}(a + a^{\dagger}) [/tex]

So how come equation 2.25 is

[tex] \phi(x) = \int{\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega_p}}(a_pe^{ipx} + a_p^{\dagger}e^{-ipx})} [/tex]

And not

[tex] \phi(x) = \int{\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega_p}}(a_p + a_p^{\dagger})e^{ipx}} [/tex]

Isn't it because [itex]\phi(x)[/itex] is supposed to be a real field?
I.e., we want [itex]\phi(x)^\dagger = \phi(x)[/itex] .
 
  • #5
That is what I have been taught as well, that we "want" a real K.G Field.
 
  • #6
The general solution of the classical KG equation is

[tex]\phi(x)=\int d^3p\left(g(\vec p)e^{i\sqrt{\vec p^2+m^2}-i\vec p\cdot\vec x}+h(\vec p)e^{i\sqrt{\vec p^2+m^2}+i\vec p\cdot\vec x}\right)[/tex]

[tex]=\int d^3p\left(g(\vec p)e^{i\sqrt{\vec p^2+m^2}-i\vec p\cdot\vec x}+h(-\vec p)e^{i\sqrt{\vec p^2+m^2}-i\vec p\cdot\vec x}\right) =\int d^3p\left(g(\vec p)e^{ipx}+h(-\vec p)e^{-ipx}\right)[/tex]

where p0 is defined as the positive square root. What we get from the requirement that [itex]\phi(x)[/itex] be real is just that [itex]h(-\vec p)=g(\vec p)^*[/itex].
 
  • #7
Thanks for the input everyone. The requirement of a real field makes a lot of sense.
 

1. What is the significance of the Lagrangian in Peskin and Schroeder p. 20-21?

The Lagrangian is a mathematical function that describes the dynamics of a physical system. In Peskin and Schroeder, it is used to determine the equations of motion for particles in a field theory. It is a central concept in classical mechanics and is also essential for understanding quantum field theory.

2. How is the Lagrangian used to derive the equations of motion in Peskin and Schroeder p. 20-21?

In Peskin and Schroeder, the Lagrangian is used to determine the action, which is a mathematical quantity that describes the dynamics of a system. The equations of motion can then be obtained by varying the action with respect to the fields in the theory.

3. What is the difference between classical mechanics and quantum field theory?

Classical mechanics describes the motion of particles in a classical, non-quantum way. On the other hand, quantum field theory takes into account the principles of quantum mechanics and describes the behavior of particles and fields at the quantum level. It is a more fundamental and accurate theory than classical mechanics.

4. Why is the Lagrangian an important concept in theoretical physics?

The Lagrangian is a fundamental concept in theoretical physics because it allows us to understand the dynamics of physical systems. It is a powerful tool for describing the behavior of particles and fields and has applications in various areas of physics, such as classical mechanics, quantum mechanics, and quantum field theory.

5. How does the Lagrangian approach differ from the Hamiltonian approach?

The Lagrangian and Hamiltonian approaches are two different ways of describing a system's dynamics. The Lagrangian approach is based on the action principle and uses the Lagrangian to derive the equations of motion. The Hamiltonian approach, on the other hand, uses the Hamiltonian to describe the system's dynamics and is useful for solving problems involving conservation laws.

Similar threads

Replies
24
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
24
Views
522
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
281
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
837
Replies
10
Views
929
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
9
Views
1K
Back
Top