Correlation function of a Klein-Gordon field

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the correlation function of a Klein-Gordon field, focusing on the properties of the ground state and the momentum operator in the context of quantum field theory. Participants explore the implications of various mathematical expressions and the physical interpretations of these states.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant introduces notation related to the Hamiltonian and momentum operator, discussing the ground state and eigenstates of the Hamiltonian.
  • Another participant clarifies that the expression for the momentum operator acting on the ground state results in it remaining unchanged, raising questions about the implications of this result.
  • Several participants express confusion regarding why the ground state remains unchanged under the momentum operator, suggesting it may be due to a constant phase factor that is unobservable.
  • There is a mention of normal-ordering the momentum operator and its implications for the ground state, with a participant asserting that this leads to the vacuum state being defined as having zero conserved quantum numbers.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty regarding the implications of the momentum operator on the ground state, with no consensus reached on the interpretation of the results or the necessity of normal-ordering.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the assumptions about the normal-ordering of operators and the nature of the ground state may influence the discussion, but these aspects remain unresolved.

Gaussian97
Homework Helper
Messages
683
Reaction score
412
TL;DR
Evaluating a correlation function for the Klein-Gordon field I found a term like ##\langle\Omega|\phi(x)|\lambda_{\vec{p}}\rangle## which should be equal to ##\langle\Omega|\phi(0)|\lambda_{\vec{p}}\rangle e^{-ipx}\left.\right|_{p^0=E_\vec{p}}##
First, let me introduce the notation; given a Hamiltonian ##H## and a momentum operator ##\vec{P}##, and writing ##P=(H,\vec{P})##. Let ##|\Omega\rangle## be the ground state of ##H##, ##|\lambda_\vec{0}\rangle## an eigenstate of ##H## with momentum 0, i.e. ##\vec{P}|\lambda_\vec{0}\rangle=0## and ##|\lambda_\vec{p}\rangle## a ##\vec{p}##-boost of ##|\lambda_\vec{0}\rangle##.

If ##\phi(x)## is the Klein-Gordon field, in the Heisenberg picture ##\phi(x)=e^{iPx}\phi(0)e^{-iPx}## and then $$\langle\Omega|\phi(x)|\lambda_{\vec{p}}\rangle=\langle\Omega|e^{iPx}\phi(0)e^{-iPx}|\lambda_{\vec{p}}\rangle$$. Then I understand that ##e^{-iPx}|\lambda_{\vec{p}}\rangle=e^{-ipx}|\lambda_{\vec{p}}\rangle\left.\right|_{p^0=E_\vec{p}}## because ##|\lambda_{\vec{p}}\rangle## is a ##\vec{p}##-boost of a eigenstate of ##H##. But the term ##e^{iPx}## disapears and I don't understand why. The easy answer would be to suppose that ##H|\Omega\rangle=\vec{P}|\Omega\rangle=0##, the second one I think one can argue that must be satisfied by the ground state, but not the first, in general ##H|\Omega\rangle=E_0|\Omega\rangle\neq 0##.

Also, I for another step I need to use that ##|\Omega\rangle## is Lorentz invariant, what I think makes sense, but also I'm not sure how to prove it, so maybe both problems are related.

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Note that ##x## are c-number valued four-vector comonents and ##P## is the operator of total momentum. Now you have
$$\exp(-\mathrm{i} \hat{P} \cdot x)|\lambda_{\vec{p}} \rangle=\exp(-\mathrm{i} p \cdot \vec{x}) |\lambda_{\vec{p}} \rangle$$
and
$$\exp(-\mathrm{i} \hat{P} \cdot x)|\Omega \rangle=|\Omega \rangle.$$
Now use this to evaluate the one-point function in question.
 
vanhees71 said:
$$\exp(-\mathrm{i} \hat{P} \cdot x)|\Omega \rangle=|\Omega \rangle.$$
Now use this to evaluate the one-point function in question.

I don't see why ##e^{-\mathrm{i} \hat{P} \cdot x}|\Omega \rangle=|\Omega \rangle.## It's because even if the energy of ##|\Omega\rangle## is not zero it's simply a constant phase and then its unobservable?
 
Gaussian97 said:
I don't see why ##e^{-\mathrm{i} \hat{P} \cdot x}|\Omega \rangle=|\Omega \rangle.## It's because even if the energy of ##|\Omega\rangle## is not zero it's simply a constant phase and then its unobservable?
Here ##\hat{P}^{\mu}## is assumed to be the normal-ordered operator, so ##\hat{P}^{\mu}|\Omega \rangle=0##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Gaussian97 said:
I don't see why ##e^{-\mathrm{i} \hat{P} \cdot x}|\Omega \rangle=|\Omega \rangle.## It's because even if the energy of ##|\Omega\rangle## is not zero it's simply a constant phase and then its unobservable?
Indeed. You don't get anything new when assuming ray representations of the proper orthochronous Poincare group. All are equivalent to the usual unitary representations. That's why it's just convenient to normal order energy, momentum and angular momentum, i.e., to make the vacuum the state where all these additive conserved quantum numbers are 0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K