Entanglement and density matrix in QFTs

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the density operator in quantum field theories (QFT), particularly in the context of conformal field theory (CFT) and path-integral formalism. Participants are exploring the methods to derive the density matrix and its trace, as well as the implications of these calculations in various scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on calculating the density operator in QFT and its trace, referencing a specific paper.
  • Another participant suggests that understanding CFT is necessary for this topic, although they express uncertainty about their own knowledge.
  • A participant distinguishes between density functional and density matrix, emphasizing the need to understand the latter in the context of QFT.
  • There is a suggestion that fields replace states in QFT, which may alter the approach to calculating the density matrix.
  • One participant provides a detailed analogy with statistical physics, discussing how to express the density matrix using path integrals and boundary conditions.
  • Multiple textbooks and resources are recommended for further reading on relativistic quantum many-body theory and thermal field theory.
  • A participant points out that the calculations in the referenced paper pertain to a zero-temperature CFT and critiques the use of Dirac delta functions in the context of the density matrix.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of integrating out degrees of freedom outside a specified region when calculating the reduced density matrix.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of CFT knowledge for the discussion, the interpretation of density matrices in QFT, and the specifics of the calculations presented in the referenced paper. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the topic.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the calculations may depend on specific assumptions about temperature and the nature of the fields involved. There are also unresolved mathematical steps regarding the integration and boundary conditions necessary for calculating the density matrix.

ShayanJ
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
605
I'm reading this paper. But I haven't read anything on how to calculate the density operator in a QFT or how to calculate its trace. Now I can't follow this part of the paper. Can anyone clarify?
This can be done in the path-integral formalism as follows. We first assume that A is the single interval ##x\in[u, v]## at ## t_E=0 ## in the flat Euclidean coordinates ##(t_E , x) ∈ \mathbb R^2## . The ground state wave function ## \Psi ## can be found by path-integrating from ##t_E = −\infty## to ##t_E = 0## in the Euclidean formalism

## \Psi(\phi_0(x))=\int_{t_E=-\infty}^{\phi(t_E=0,x)=\phi_0(x)} D\phi e^{-S(\phi)} ##

, where ## \phi(t_E,x) ## denotes the field which defines the 2D CFT. The values of the field at the boundary ## \phi_0 ## depends on the spatial coordinate x. The total density matrix ##\rho## is given by two copies of the wave function ## [\rho]_{\phi_0 \phi_0'}=\Psi(\phi_0)\bar{\Psi}(\phi_0') ##. The complex conjugate one ## \bar{\Psi} ## can be obtained by path-integrating from ##t_E = \infty## to ##t_E = 0##. To obtain the reduced density matrix ## \rho_A ## , we need to integrate ## \phi_0 ## on B assuming ##\phi_0(x)=\phi'_0(x)## when ##x \in B##.

##\displaystyle [\rho_A]_{\phi_+\phi_-}=(Z_1)^{-1}\int_{t_E=-\infty}^{t_E=\infty}D \phi e^{-S(\phi)} \Pi_{x\in A} \delta(\phi(+0,x)-\phi_+(x)) \delta(\phi(-0,x)-\phi_-(x)) ##

where ## Z_1 ## is the vacuum partition function on ## \mathbb R^2 ## and we multiply its inverse in order to normalize ## \rho_A ## such that ##tr_A \rho_A=1##.
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well to answer your question, it seems one first needs to learn CFT, I have the book of Di Franchesko but I still didn't read it, so I guess I cannot help here, what is your knowledge of CFT?
 
MathematicalPhysicist said:
Well to answer your question, it seems one first needs to learn CFT, I have the book of Di Franchesko but I still didn't read it, so I guess I cannot help here, what is your knowledge of CFT?
I know some CFT but actually its not necessary for this question. My question is about calculating the density matrix of any QFT. Maybe @samalkhaiat can help.
 
I don't know if it helps or not, but I searched google for density functional in QFT, and got this first hit:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1503.02925

Seems like a good reference, don't know if specifically here it helps.
 
MathematicalPhysicist said:
I don't know if it helps or not, but I searched google for density functional in QFT, and got this first hit:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1503.02925

Seems like a good reference, don't know if specifically here it helps.
Density functional is different from density matrix(operator). In QM, density operator is calculated by the formula ## \rho=\sum_n p_n |\phi_n\rangle \langle \phi_n |## where ## \{|\phi_n\rangle\} ## is a set of not necessarily orthonormal states. I want to know how to calculate the corresponding quantity in QFT.
 
Well, I am not sure; but in QFT wouldn't we have fields instead of the states ##\phi_n##?
 
ShayanJ said:
I know some CFT but actually its not necessary for this question. My question is about calculating the density matrix of any QFT. Maybe @samalkhaiat can help.

Tadashi Takayanagi is good young physicist, I was impressed by his lectures at CERN Winter School on Supergravity 2012. He presented the subject very well, I suggest (if you have not done so) you look at them. As you might know, to explain this properly, one needs to draw pictures. Unfortunately I cannot do this, but this does not prevent us from making formal analogy with QM. In statistical physics, the density matrix in a thermal state at (inverse) temperature \beta is given by \rho (x,y) \propto \langle x | e^{-\beta H} | y \rangle . The proportionality constant which ensures \mbox{Tr}( \rho ) = \int dx \ \rho (x,x) = 1 , is given by \frac{1}{Z} = \frac{1}{\mbox{Tr}( e^{-\beta H})} . One can (if one wants to) express \rho as path integral over the variables x(\tau) which take “boundary” values y at \tau = 0, and x at \tau = \beta. So, you should have no problem with path integral expression \rho (x , y) = \frac{\langle x | e^{-\beta H} | y \rangle }{Z} = (1/Z) \int [dx(\tau)] \ \delta (x(0) - y) \delta (x(\beta) - x) \ e^{- \int^{\beta}_{0} \ L d\tau} . \ \ \ (1) Taking the trace, i.e., setting x = y and integrating, has, therefore, the effect of “gluing the edges” along \tau = 0 and \tau = \beta and forming a "cylinder" of circumference \beta.
Okay, let us formally generalize the above to a bosonic field theory in (1+1)-dimension: the operator \hat{x} will be “replaced” by a complete set of local observables \{ \hat{\varphi}(x) \}, and \hat{x}|x\rangle = x |x\rangle with the eigenvalue equations \{ \hat{\varphi}(x) \} \left( \otimes_{x}| \{ \varphi (x) \} \rangle \right) = \{ \varphi (x) \} \left( \otimes_{x}| \{ \varphi (x) \} \rangle \right) . So, instead of (1), you will have
<br /> \begin{align*}<br /> \rho \left( \varphi^{&#039;&#039;}(x^{&#039;&#039;}) , \varphi^{&#039;}(x^{&#039;}) \right) &amp;= \frac{ \langle \varphi^{&#039;&#039;}(x^{&#039;&#039;}) | e^{-\beta H} | \varphi^{&#039;}(x^{&#039;}) \rangle}{Z} \\<br /> &amp;= \frac{1}{Z} \int [d\varphi (x , \tau)] \prod_{x}\left[ \delta \left( \varphi (x,0) - \varphi^{&#039;}(x^{&#039;}) \right) \delta \left( \varphi (x ,\beta) - \varphi^{&#039;&#039;}(x^{&#039;&#039;}) \right) \right] e^{-\int_{0}^{\beta} L_{E} d\tau} \ \ \ \ (2)<br /> \end{align*}<br />
Again, the delta functions are there to enforce the boundary values \varphi^{&#039;}(x) at \tau = 0, and \varphi^{&#039;&#039;}(x) at \tau = \beta. And the trace is found by setting \varphi^{&#039;&#039;}(x) = \varphi^{&#039;}(x) and integrating over these variables except, in this case, you really have edges to glue along \tau = 0 and \tau = \beta.
So, if you want to calculate \mbox{Tr}(\rho^{n}), you will need to take the products of n path integral of the form (2) which will be equivalent to path integral over n-sheeted Reimann surface.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ShayanJ
For an intro to relativistic quantum many-body theory (QFT), I can recommend three textbooks

J. I. Kapusta and C. Gale, Finite-Temperature Field Theory; Principles and Applications, Cambridge University Press, 2 ed., 2006.
M. LeBellac, Thermal Field Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, 1996.

M. Laine and A. Vuorinen, Basics of Thermal Field Theory, vol. 925 of Lecture Notes in Physics, 2016.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31933-9

or my lecture notes

http://th.physik.uni-frankfurt.de/~hees/publ/off-eq-qft.pdf
 
It seems to me you're talking about something else!

1) The calculations in sec.3.1 of the paper are done for a zero temperature CFT, i.e. ##-\infty<t_E<\infty##.

2) The density matrix for the field in all points is ## [\rho]_{\phi_0\phi_0'}=\Psi(\phi_0)\overline \Psi(\phi'_0) ##. Since ## \displaystyle \Psi(\phi_0)\propto \int_{t_E=-\infty}^{\phi(t_E=0,x)=\phi_0(x)} D \phi e^{-S[\phi]}## and ## \overline\Psi(\phi'_0)\propto \displaystyle \int^{t_E=\infty}_{\phi(t_E=0,x)=\phi'_0(x)} D \phi e^{-S[\phi]} ##, the density matrix should be ## \displaystyle [\rho]_{\phi_0\phi'_0}\propto \int_{t_E=-\infty}^{\phi(t_E=0,x)=\phi_0(x)} \int^{t_E=\infty}_{\phi'(t_E=0,x)=\phi'_0(x)} D \phi D \phi' e^{-S[\phi]} e^{-S[\phi']}##.

3) The path integral with those dirac deltas, is actually the reduced density matrix which is calculated by integrating out all the degrees of freedom outside of region A and the density matrix for all points of space should have no dirac delta! This means that in the density matrix above, we should put ## \phi(x)=\phi'(x) ## and ## \phi_0(x)=\phi'_0(x) ## except for ## x\in A ##. Taking a full trace gives ## \displaystyle Tr \rho=\int_{t_E=-\infty}^{\phi(t_E=0,x)=\phi_0(x)} \int^{t_E=\infty}_{\phi'(t_E=0,x)=\phi'_0(x)} D \phi D \phi' e^{-S[\phi]} e^{-S[\phi']} \prod_{x} \delta( \phi(t_E,x)-\phi'(t_E,x) )=\int_{t_E=-\infty}^{t_E=\infty}D \phi e^{-2S[\phi]}##. But because we don't want the full trace and just want to integrate out degrees of freedom outside of A and have a reduced density matrix for A, we should avoid integrating over all fields for ## x\in A ##. We also need two boundary conditions at zero(## \phi_{\pm}(x) ##). So we put those dirac deltas in the formula for the full trace and get:
## \displaystyle [\rho_A]_{\phi_+\phi_-}\propto \int_{t_E=-\infty}^{t_E=\infty}D \phi e^{-2S[\phi]} \prod_{x\in A} \delta(\phi(+0,x)-\phi_+(x))\delta(\phi(-0,x)-\phi_-(x)) ##.

But as you can see, instead of ## e^{-S[\phi]} ##, I have ## e^{-2S[\phi]} ##. Also I'm not sure about all these because its just my guts filling the blanks!
I also don't quite understand how ## \displaystyle \int_{t_E=-\infty}^{\phi(t_E=0,x)=\phi_0(x)} \int^{t_E=\infty}_{\phi'(t_E=0,x)=\phi'_0(x)} \to \int_{t_E=-\infty}^{t_E=\infty} ## because the second integral should simply give 1 and shouldn't extend the integration interval of the other integral. But it seems that should be done to get the desired result!
 
Last edited:
  • #10
My previous post seems wrong to me now. What actually happens, is that first we write the density matrix as follows:

## \displaystyle [\rho]_{\phi_0 \phi_0'}\propto \int_{t_E=-\infty}^{\phi(t_E=0,x)=\phi_0(x)} \int_{\phi'(t_E=0,x)=\phi_0'(x)}^{t_E=\infty} D\phi D\phi' e^{-S[\phi]}e^{-S[\phi']}##.

To take a full trace, we set ## \phi_0(x)=\phi_0'(x) ## and integrate over ## \phi_0(x) ##, so we have:

## \displaystyle Tr[\rho] \propto \int D\phi_0 \int_{t_E=-\infty}^{\phi(t_E=0,x)=\phi_0(x)} \int_{\phi'(t_E=0,x)=\phi_0(x)}^{t_E=\infty} D\phi D\phi' e^{-S[\phi]}e^{-S[\phi']} ##.

This somehow should reduce to ## \displaystyle Tr[\rho]\propto \int D\phi e^{-S[\phi]} ##, but I have no idea how!
 
  • #11
You integrate "over all paths", where in QFT the paths are in field-configuration space. Your first expression describes the integration over all paths first involving only the part where ##t<0## and at ##t=0## the field is fixed as ##\phi_0(t=0,\vec{x})=\phi_0(\vec{x})## and then a part where ##t>0## and ##\phi_0(t=0,\vec{x})=\phi_0'(\vec{x})##, leading to a functional of ##\phi_0## and ##\phi_0'##.

Now if you want the trace (i.e., the partition sum) you set ##\phi_0=\phi_0'##, i.e., you integrate first for ##t<0## and ##t>0## with fixed field configuration ##\phi_0## for both parts. Finally you integrate also over ##\phi_0##. So altogether you integrate in this final step over all field configurations without restrictions, and that's the meaning of the trace.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ShayanJ
  • #12
Thanks guys. I now understand it clearly.
But I just realized there is another problem. In the paper in the OP, the ground state wave functional is given by ## \displaystyle \Psi(\phi_0(x))=\int_{t_E=-\infty}^{\phi(t_E=0,x)=\phi_0(x)} D\phi e^{-S[\phi]} ##. As you can see the argument of the wave functional appears as the ## t_E=0 ## boundary condition of the path integral. But the calculations mentioned in this thread, give a wave functional whose argument appears as the ## \pm \infty ## boundary condition of the path integral. Where does this discrepancy come from?

EDIT:
Is ## t=it_E ## only a convention for Wick rotation or is it the only right way? Because if I'm allowed to do the Wick rotation with ## t=-it_E ##, the above problem would be solved!
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K