Equivalence of differential operator terms in action

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding the equivalence of three expressions involving differential operators acting on a real field φ. The expressions are (1) (∂^μ φ)(∂_μ φ), (2) ∂^μ ∂_μ |φ|^2, and (3) φ (∂^μ ∂_μ) φ. It is clarified that expressions (1) and (3) are equivalent when integrated, as they yield the same action for a real scalar field. The second expression may not accurately represent a charged scalar field, suggesting a potential misinterpretation. Overall, the key takeaway is the relationship between these forms in the context of field actions and integrals.
Mithra
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hi guys, I'm sure I'm being very stupid here but I'm reading through notes which contain various actions for fields, most of which are very similar, however there is some discrepancies with the way differential operators are shown acting on the fields and I can't for the life of me work out which are equal to which so any advice would be great.

The three forms I can see are, for a real field \phi

<br /> 1) (∂^\mu \phi)(∂_\mu \phi)<br />

<br /> 2) ∂^\mu ∂_\mu |\phi|^2<br />

<br /> 3) \phi (∂^\mu ∂_\mu) \phi<br />

These seem to often be used in very similar places but I can't really see how they relate? This is likely painfully simple and I'm just overthinking it but even just pointing in the right direction would be great, thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Perhaps it is clearer if we just write \partial_\mu \phi as the gradient \nabla\phi. In that case, the three expressions you have written are:
1) (\nabla\phi) \cdot (\nabla\phi)
2) \nabla^2 |\phi|^2
3) (\nabla^2\phi) \phi
where
\nabla \equiv \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial x}, \frac{\partial}{\partial y}, \frac{\partial}{\partial z} \right)
and
\nabla^2 \equiv \nabla \cdot \nabla = \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} + \frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2} + \frac{\partial^2}{\partial z^2}

It may also help you if you write out these expressions for a simple example, like \phi(x, y, z) = xyz.
 
I could be wrong, but I think (2) as you've written it doesn't describe a charged scalar field. I think you may have meant |\partial \phi|^{2}=(\partial^{\mu}\phi^{*})(\partial_{\mu}\phi). Anyways, (1) and (3) are equivalent as long as you remember that these quantities appear in an integral, so that \int d^{4}x (\partial^{\mu}\phi)(\partial_{\mu}\phi)=-\int d^{4}x\, \phi \partial^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}\phi. This means that the action for a real scalar field can be written as S=\frac{1}{2}\int d^{4}x\, [(\partial \phi)^{2}-m^{2}\phi^{2}]=-\frac{1}{2}\int d^{4}x \, \phi(\partial^{2}+m^{2})\phi. (Note \partial^{2}\equiv\partial^{\mu}\partial_{\mu})
 
I am slowly going through the book 'What Is a Quantum Field Theory?' by Michel Talagrand. I came across the following quote: One does not" prove” the basic principles of Quantum Mechanics. The ultimate test for a model is the agreement of its predictions with experiments. Although it may seem trite, it does fit in with my modelling view of QM. The more I think about it, the more I believe it could be saying something quite profound. For example, precisely what is the justification of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K