Confusion (5) from Weinberg's QFT.(invariance of S-matrix)

  • Thread starter Thread starter kof9595995
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Confusion S-matrix
kof9595995
Messages
676
Reaction score
2
At the beginning of section 3.3, he says lorentz invariance of S-matrix means the same unitary operator acts on both in and out states. I feel a bit blur about this since he doesn't give any concrete example. Say the eletron-positron annihilation process, we have 1 electron, 1 positron, 0 photon as in state, and 0 electron, 0 positron, 2 photons as out state, we know lorentz group has different representations on electrons and photons, then how shall we have the same unitary operator of both in and out states in such process?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I prefer a different definition of the Lorentz invariance of scattering. This definition is purely algebraical, does not involve states, and is applied directly to the S-operator:

U_0(\Lambda, a) S U_0^{-1}(\Lambda, a) = S

where U_0 is the non-interacting representation of the Poincare group.

Eugene.
 
The in/out states are multi-particle states, so the unitary operator acting on them is actually an operator acting on a product of different (sub)spaces. For example, the unitary operator corresponding to a photon acts trivially (no change) on a subspace of an electron representation.
 
I don't have the book with me, but I think several times Weinberg gives explicit examples of U(\lambda,a) acting on states with \sum_{\sigma'}D_{\sigma,\sigma'} \psi_\sigma where the D matrix correspond to the specific representation of the Lorentz Group.
 
Thank you all, but somehow I still get a strange feeling somewhere which I can't express clearly. Perhaps I'll come back to this later.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
87
Views
8K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top