Electrons in Quantum Field Theory: A Composite Excitation

In summary, an electron in QFT can be considered as a composite excitation of several fields, including the electron field and the asymptotic electron fields. These fields are complex and have different electromagnetic properties, but they do not significantly affect perturbative calculations. The electron also interacts with the weak force through the standard model interaction terms. Whether it is an excitation of one or several fields depends on the choice of fundamental fields in the theory.
  • #1
Philipsmett
78
4
In qft electron can be considered as composite excitation in several fields?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Philipsmett said:
In qft electron can be considered as composite excitation in several fields?

No, it's an excitation of the electron field.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
  • #3
In QED it's an "excitation" of the asymptotic electron fields, which are not the same as the spinor ##\psi## field that appears in the Lagrangian.

However there is much more to it than that, as the details of these asymptotic electron fields are quite complex since they include quantum Coloumb fields (in one formulation) but the full detail would take us into an A-level thread.
 
  • #4
In some sense, I would argue that a physical electron is "composite," in that interactions with the photon field (and really, all other fields in the universe), result in a lone physical electron being an extremely complex composite of the bare fields of your theory. That is, if you wrote down the state of an electron in the Schrödinger representation, defining it as the least massive charge -##e## eigenstate of the Standard Model Hamiltonian, it would be a nontrivial wave functional of the electron and photon fields (and once again, some small contribution from all other fields).

Things get a little subtle because you often want to define "renormalized" fields, and I believe you can do so such that the physical electron is purely made up by an appropriately defined "renormalized electron field." This is probably what the earlier comment meant, and that's not an incorrect view. We are free to redefine which fields we call "fundamental" however we want.

This all also raises the question about how one wants to define QFT non-perturbatively. I tend to think of physical theories with a UV regulator, and this introduces some ambiguity (due to choice of regulator) in all results, which should drop out of low-energy observables.
 
  • #5
king vitamin said:
Things get a little subtle because you often want to define "renormalized" fields, and I believe you can do so such that the physical electron is purely made up by an appropriately defined "renormalized electron field." This is probably what the earlier comment meant

Yes, that's basically what I meant. There are, of course, plenty of complexities lurking underneath, but as @DarMM pointed out, those complexities would probably take us into A-level territory.
 
  • #6
king vitamin said:
That is, if you wrote down the state of an electron in the Schrödinger representation, defining it as the least massive charge -ee eigenstate of the Standard Model Hamiltonian, it would be a nontrivial wave functional of the electron and photon fields (and once again, some small contribution from all other fields).

Things get a little subtle because you often want to define "renormalized" fields, and I believe you can do so such that the physical electron is purely made up by an appropriately defined "renormalized electron field."
Yes basically. Though the field of that electron is an excitement of is a much more complex object than ##\psi_R##, the renormalized version of the Lagrangian spinor field. However these fields are very complex mathematically and have electromagnetic properties very different from what classic electrodynamics would suggest.

This is basically because a proper non-perturbative electron in QED is very different from what it appears like in perturbative QED, fortunately the details don't affect perturbative scattering calculations, so aren't relevant to most experiments.
 
  • #7
DarMM said:
Yes basically. Though the field of that electron is an excitement of is a much more complex object than ##\psi_R##, the renormalized version of the Lagrangian spinor field. However these fields are very complex mathematically and have electromagnetic properties very different from what classic electrodynamics would suggest.

This is basically because a proper non-perturbative electron in QED is very different from what it appears like in perturbative QED, fortunately the details don't affect perturbative scattering calculations, so aren't relevant to most experiments.
If an electron can be a combination of different fields, can electrons interact not only through an electromagnetic force, but also through a strong or weak force?
 
  • #8
Well the electron interacts with the weak force, you'd see this just from the standard model interaction terms even without going into what fields it's an excitement of.

The electron is an excitement of several of the Lagrangian fields, but at the same time is also an excitation of a single electron field that one can define, even though this field doesn't appear in the Lagrangian. So whether it's an excitation of one or several fields depends on what you take as your fundamental fields when writing the theory.
 
  • #9
DarMM said:
Well the electron interacts with the weak force, you'd see this just from the standard model interaction terms even without going into what fields it's an excitement of.

The electron is an excitement of several of the Lagrangian fields, but at the same time is also an excitation of a single electron field that one can define, even though this field doesn't appear in the Lagrangian. So whether it's an excitation of one or several fields depends on what you take as your fundamental fields when writing the theory.
Tell me, for example, if an electron is the excitation of several fields, can it lose its charge?
 
  • #10
Philipsmett said:
Tell me, for example, if an electron is the excitation of several fields, can it lose its charge?
No, that's conservation of electric charge.
 

1. What is the significance of electrons in quantum field theory?

Electrons are fundamental particles that play a crucial role in quantum field theory. They are the building blocks of matter and are responsible for many of the properties and interactions of particles at the quantum level.

2. How are electrons described in quantum field theory?

In quantum field theory, electrons are described as excitations of a quantum field. This means that they are not discrete particles, but rather fluctuations in a continuous field that permeates all of space.

3. What is the role of the Higgs field in understanding electrons in quantum field theory?

The Higgs field is a fundamental field that is responsible for giving particles their mass. In quantum field theory, the Higgs field interacts with the electron field, giving electrons their mass and determining their behavior.

4. Can electrons exist as both particles and waves in quantum field theory?

Yes, according to the principles of quantum mechanics, electrons can exhibit both particle-like and wave-like behavior. In quantum field theory, electrons are described as both particles and waves, depending on the context of the experiment or observation.

5. How does quantum field theory explain the behavior of electrons in different energy states?

In quantum field theory, electrons are described as occupying different energy states within the electron field. These energy states correspond to different quantum numbers, which determine the properties and behavior of the electrons in a given system.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
804
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
794
Replies
5
Views
305
Replies
6
Views
889
Replies
36
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
21
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
884
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
240
Back
Top