A Derivation of energy-momentum tensor in "QFT and the SM" by Schwartz

Hill
Messages
735
Reaction score
575
TL;DR Summary
How the contraction leads to ##g_{\mu \nu}## rather than ##\delta_{\mu \nu}##?
My question is about this step in the derivation:
1708892121220.png

When the ##\partial_\nu \mathcal L## in 3.33 moves under the ##\partial_\mu## in 3.34 and gets contracted, I'd expect it to become ##\delta_{\mu \nu} \mathcal L##. Why is it rather ##g_{\mu \nu} \mathcal L## in the 3.34?
(In this text, ##g_{\mu \nu}=\eta_{\mu \nu}##)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think that eq.(3.34) contains a typo and you're (nearly) correct: in standard tensor notation, the ##g_{\mu\nu}## in (3.34) should actually be ##\delta^{\mu}_{\nu}##.
 
renormalize said:
I think that eq.(3.34) contains a typo and you're (nearly) correct: in standard tensor notation, the ##g_{\mu\nu}## in (3.34) should actually be ##\delta^{\mu}_{\nu}##.
Yes. The derivative has a lower mu in the denominator and hence acts like an upper index. This means the mu on the metric should also be upper, making it a kronecker delta.
 
Be careful when using this book as Schwartz employs a strange convention for contracting Lorentz tensors - namely, he ignores the positioning of the tensor indices (i.e., whether they are "upper" or "lower" indices), as he explains in this passage:

Zrzut ekranu z 2024-02-25 22-27-37.png


With this convention you get ambiguous expressions such as ##\partial_\mu (g_{\mu\nu} \mathcal{L})##, which you've encountered here, and which are impossible to interpret as they stand. Besides, there is always the possibility of there being a typo in a particular formula. All this can lead to unnecessary frustration, so it is best that you supplement the Schwartz's text with other books on QFT that you can always consult. Never let a textbook gaslight you while studying! :-p
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Likes Demystifier, Hill and jbergman
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...
I am not sure if this falls under classical physics or quantum physics or somewhere else (so feel free to put it in the right section), but is there any micro state of the universe one can think of which if evolved under the current laws of nature, inevitably results in outcomes such as a table levitating? That example is just a random one I decided to choose but I'm really asking about any event that would seem like a "miracle" to the ordinary person (i.e. any event that doesn't seem to...
Back
Top