Creation Operator is not a densely defined operator....

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of the creation operator in local quantum field theory, specifically addressing why it is not considered a densely defined operator. Participants explore the definitions and implications of the creation and annihilation operators as presented in the literature, particularly in the context of functional analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on the formal proof of why the creation operator is not densely defined, referencing the definitions provided by Reed and Simon.
  • Another participant questions the source of the claim that the creation operator is not densely defined.
  • A participant notes that the creation operator, as defined, moves states out of the Hilbert space due to the delta function, suggesting this is the basis for the claim of it not being densely defined.
  • It is proposed that smeared creation operators are densely defined since smearing removes the delta function issue.
  • One participant describes the creation operator as an operator-valued distribution, referencing a specific chapter in Zeidler's book.
  • A comment highlights that the delta function's behavior complicates the definition, indicating that the equality holds in the context of distributions and integrals.
  • Another participant mentions that true operators can be defined by omitting one of the arguments, referring to specific pages in Reed and Simon's work.
  • One participant expresses gratitude for the shared notes, indicating they find them helpful.
  • A later reply expresses uncertainty about whether their response will clarify or complicate the issue regarding the delta function's definition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the nature of the creation operator, with some supporting the view that it is not densely defined while others propose alternative perspectives, such as the validity of smeared operators. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views presented.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions and assumptions surrounding the delta function and the nature of the operators, which are not fully resolved. The discussion also highlights the dependence on specific mathematical frameworks and contexts.

FreeBiscuits
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone,

I am currently preparing myself for my Bachelor thesis in local quantum field theory. I was encouraged by my advisor to read the books of M. Reed and Simon because of my lag of functional analysis experience but I have quite often problems understand the “obvious” conclusions.

For example:

Why is the creation operator not a densely defined operator? And how do I proof that formally correctly? I am not asking for a step by step solution but I have absolutely no idea how to start.

Reed, Simon define the creation operator as:

$$(a^\dagger(p)(\psi))^{(n)}(k_1,...k_n) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} \sum_{l=1}^n \delta(p-k_l) \psi^{(n-1)}(k_1,...,k_{l-1},k_k,...,k_n)$$

as the adjoint of the annihilation operator :

$$(a(p)\psi)^{(n)}(k_1,...k_n) = \sqrt{n+1} \psi^{(n+1)}(p,k_1,...k_n)$$

with $$\psi$$ a Schwartz function.

I really appreciate any hints.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Who told you the operator was not densely defined?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
The book of Simon and Reed. (Fourier Analysis chapter X.7)
"The adjoint of the operator a(p) is not a densely defined operator since it is given formally by" the expression I posted before. There is no more explanation given. They merely mention that it is possible to define $$a^\dagger$$ as a quadratic form.
 
I see (books google) that the chapter is about self adjointness.
Relativist fields need creation and annihilation operators. Not only creator operations.
 
According to the formulas given by you, the annihilation operator is densely defiened, but the creation operator moves the states in the alleged domain out of the Hilbert space because of the delta function, hence is not defined on this domain. (This is probably what is really claimed in your quoted piece of text.) However, smeared creation operators are densely defined since smearing removes the delta function.
 
Last edited:
In other words, a creation "operator" is actually an operator-valued distribution. See Chapter 10 "Creation and Annihilation Operators" in the book "Quantum Field Theory II" by Zeidler.
 
As Arnold remarked, the „trick” comes from the delta-Dirac which „explodes” for p equal to any of the k-s, therefore the equality means something only in terms of distributions, i.e. putting integrals and smearing test functions. Actually, the true operators are defined simply by omitting one of the arguments. These operators are defined on pages 208-209 of R-S, Vol.II. For those of you who do not have R-S and understand German, the notes attached by Prof. Keyl are gold. For those who cannot understand German, use the other notes by Prof. Luecke.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: FreeBiscuits
I thank all of you.
The attached notes are a great help. I really appreciate it.
 
  • #10
I think i see what you are stuck on. I am not sure if my response will help you or complicate the issue so i am rather reluctant to post.

δ(p−kl)
δ is not a function of (p−kl) according to the usual mathematical definition of a function which requires a function to have a definite value for each point in its domain.
as above, the range of the integration should contain the origin
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K