Deriving Equation for Multi-Variable Case in Zee's Quantum Field Theory

  • Thread starter Thread starter noospace
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
2 replies · 3K views
noospace
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
I've decided to slowly work my way through Zee's quantum field theory in a nutshell over the vacation. I'm confused by the second question of the book which deals with matrix differentiation.

Homework Statement



Derive the equation [itex]\langle x_i x_j \cdots x_k x_l \rangle = \sum_{\textrm{wick}} (A^{-1})_{ab}\cdot (A^{-1})_{cd}[/itex] where {a,b,...,c,d} is a permutation of {i,j,...,k,l}

Homework Equations



[itex]\langle x_i x_j \cdots x_k x_l \rangle = \frac{\int d\mathbf{x} e^{1/2 \mathbf{x}^TA \mathbf{x}}x_i x_j \cdots x_k x_l}{\int d\mathbf{x} e^{1/2 \mathbf{x}^TA \mathbf{x}}}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution



I have no trouble deriving this equation for the 1-variable case. For the multi-variable case Zee suggests repeatedly differentiating the equation

[itex]\int d\mathbf{x} e^{-1/2 \mathbf{x}^TA\mathbf{x} + J\mathbf{x}} = [(2\pi)^N /\det A]e^{(1/2) J A^{-1}J}[/itex]

with respect to J. How does one differentiate wrt a matrix anyway?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Doh! It just occurred to me that J is a vector and therefore we can differentiate componentwise. I still don't quite get how to prove this, however. I can show that the claim is true for small n. Is some kind of inductive argument required here??
 
I figured it out: For future knowledge, the trick is to use that the matrix A must be symmetric, and thus the derivative of the [itex]\frac{1}{2}\mathbf{x}^t A^{-1} \mathbf{x}[/itex] with respect to [itex]x_i[/itex], say can be written

[itex]\sum_n (A^{-1})_{in} x_n[/itex].