Differentiating a Hamiltonian - Is this a typo?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the derivation of a Hamiltonian from equation 5.8 in the document provided by Cambridge University. The user initially interprets the equation as yielding a minus sign due to the definition of the dot product of four vectors. However, another participant corrects this interpretation, asserting that the correct formulation should include a plus sign in the expression for the gamma matrices and the space-time derivatives, specifically stating that it should be γ^μ ∂_μ = γ^0 ∂_0 + γ^i ∂_i according to the Einstein summation convention.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hamiltonian mechanics
  • Familiarity with quantum field theory concepts
  • Knowledge of gamma matrices and their properties
  • Proficiency in the Einstein summation convention
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Hamiltonians in quantum field theory
  • Learn about gamma matrices and their role in quantum mechanics
  • Review the Einstein summation convention and its applications
  • Explore the implications of sign conventions in relativistic equations
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory, students studying advanced mechanics, and researchers focused on Hamiltonian formulations in theoretical physics.

latentcorpse
Messages
1,411
Reaction score
0
In equation 5.8 in this document

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/qft/qft.pdf

I am trying to derive this Hamiltonian. I find

[itex]H= \pi \dot{\psi} - L = i \psi^\dagger \dot{\psi} - \bar{\psi} ( i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu - m ) \psi = i \bar{\psi} \gamma^0 \partial_0 \psi - i \bar{\psi} \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu \psi = m \bar{\psi} \psi = \bar{\psi} ( i \gamma^i \partial_i + m ) \psi[/itex]

so I get a minus sign the other way around because of the defn of the dot product of 4 vectors [itex]\gamma^\mu \partial_\mu = \gamma^0 \partial_0 - \gamma^i \partial_i[/itex]

So does anyone else think this is a typo? I'm sure it isn't since he uses it in the following pages!

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


latentcorpse said:
[itex]\gamma^\mu \partial_\mu = \gamma^0 \partial_0 - \gamma^i \partial_i[/itex]

That's wrong. It should be
[itex]\gamma^\mu \partial_\mu = \gamma^0 \partial_0 + \gamma^i \partial_i[/itex]
by the Einstein summation convention.

The space-time derivative is acting to the right.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
95
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K