Charge conjugation of Complex Klein Gordon Lagrangian

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the invariance of the complex Klein-Gordon Lagrangian density under charge conjugation. The original poster presents the Lagrangian and the transformation of the field and its conjugate, questioning the validity of their assumptions and steps in the transformation process.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to verify the invariance of the Lagrangian under charge conjugation, expressing uncertainty about the transformation of the conjugate field. Another participant raises a related question about deriving a transformation for operators associated with the fields, indicating a need for clarity on the method used.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants exploring different aspects of charge conjugation and its implications. The original poster expresses confidence in most of their steps but seeks validation, while another participant has resolved their question independently, indicating progress in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working within the framework of quantum field theory, specifically focusing on the properties of fields under symmetry transformations. There is mention of unitary operators and phase factors, which may imply additional constraints or assumptions relevant to the discussion.

orentago
Messages
27
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Show that the complex Klein-Gordon Lagrangian density:

L=N\left(\partial_\alpha\phi^{\dagger}(x)\partial^\alpha\phi(x)-\mu^2\phi^{\dagger}(x)\phi(x)\right)

is invariant under charge conjugation:

\phi(x)\rightarrow C\phi(x)C^{-1}=\eta_c \phi^\dagger (x)

Where C is a unitary operator and \eta_c is a phase factor.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



The transformation can also be written as follows: \phi^\dagger (x) \rightarrow \eta_c^{-1} \phi(x)

Hence performing the transformations on \phi(x) and \phi^\dagger (x) gives:

N\left(\partial_\alpha(\eta_c^{-1}\phi(x))\partial^\alpha(\eta_c\phi^\dagger (x))-\mu^2(\eta_c^{-1}\phi(x))(\eta_c \phi^\dagger(x))\right)=N\left(\partial_\alpha\phi(x)\partial^\alpha \phi^\dagger (x)-\mu^2\phi(x) \phi^\dagger(x)\right)=N\left(\partial^\alpha\phi(x)\partial_\alpha \phi^\dagger (x)-\mu^2\phi(x) \phi^\dagger(x)\right)

Where the final step can be made fairly easily by raising and lowering indices. I'm a little unsure over my first assumption about how \phi^\dagger (x) transforms, but otherwise I'm fairly confident in the rest of my steps. Is this solution valid?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have another question. It can be shown that C a(\mathbf{k})C^{-1}=\eta_c b(\mathbf{k}) and C b(\mathbf{k})C^{-1}=\eta_c^* a(\mathbf{k}).

I can show the first one fairly easily by just substituting the full expressions of the fields into the transformation condition above. I'm a little uncertain about the second one. I can't see how to derive it using the same method as the first one. My other idea was that it could be derived from the first expression, by multiplying both sides from the left by C^{-1} and from the right by C, to get rid of the operators around the a(\mathbf{k}), but then this wouldn't give the right expression on the RHS.

Any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Does anyone have any ideas for the second question, or should I supply more information?
 
Actually no worries I've sorted it: applying charge conjugation twice takes one back to the original state. It's so simple I don't know why I didn't think of it!
 

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
95
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
13K