A Constant Solutions of Real Scalar Field

hilbert2
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,600
Reaction score
607
Suppose I have a self interacting real scalar field ##\phi## with equation of motion

##\partial^i \partial_i \phi + m^2 \phi = -A \phi^2 - B\phi^3##,

and I attempt to find constant solutions ##\phi (x,t) = C## for it. The trivial solution is the zero solution ##\phi (x,t) = 0##, but there can also be two more constant solutions depending on the values of ##A##, ##B## and ##m##. Obviously ##B## needs to be positive for the system's energy to be bounded from below, but ##A## seems to be arbitrary. Higher order interaction terms would probably make this non-renormalizable.

Do the two nonzero constant solutions have any physical significance? Does this equation allow situations where the static solutions are unstable, becoming something else very quickly if perturbed even a little?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Does it matter that the operators ##\phi(\mathbf{x},t)=C## don't go to zero as ##\mathbf{x} \rightarrow \infty##? I know that's a requirement for wavefunctions in QM, but I'm not sure what the constraints on the operators in QFT are.
 
I'm interpreting the field as a classical field here, similar to an air pressure field or an electromagnetic vector potential. I don't think this kind of fields have to be normalizable.
 
1. The quadratic term on the right just changes the mass, and of course $m^2+A$ must be nonnegative for a physical theory.

2. Without an additional $\phi^4$ term, the action is classically unbounded, hence one wouldn't expect a meaningful quantum solution.

3. With the additional $\phi^4$ term, the zero solution may be unstable. Then the physical vacuum state is (in the classical limit) in a global minimizer of the action, corresponding to a nonzero constant solution. This is just a slightly generaized version of the familiar process of mass generation through broken symmetry.
 
A. Neumaier, you are misreading the equation. The terms on the right come from cubic and quartic terms in the potential.

The complete potential is ##V(\phi)=\frac12 m^2 \phi^2 + \frac13 A \phi^3 + \frac14 B\phi^4##. This potential has a local minimum at ##\phi=0##, but for positive ##B## and large enough ##A##, another minimum at a lower energy, with a maximum in between. For parameters in this range, the minimum at ##\phi=0## is a "false vacuum" in QFT.
 
Avodyne said:
A. Neumaier, you are misreading the equation. The terms on the right come from cubic and quartic terms in the potential.
Oh, sorry, yes, of course. I was thinking of the right hand side in terms of the potential - was too tired yesterday, after a day of travel...

Avodyne said:
This potential has a local minimum at ϕ=0
In general only a stationary point. If ##A## is large enough then this stationary point is an unstable local maximizer.
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top