A Expanding CCRs, and their underlying meaning

golanor
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I remember seeing a few months ago, at a lecture about statistical signal processing, something which looked similar to commutation relations, only with a gaussian, instead of a delta function. Basically, it looked like this:

$$\left[\phi(x),\phi(y)\right] = ie^{-\alpha(x-y)^2}$$

This reminded me an offhanded remark by my QFT professor, that it is possible to generalise the CCRs, and obtained a `smeared' QFT (or something like that).

Now, for some reason, I can't find anything on this subject, which is a shame, since I find it very interesting.
I'd very much appreciate any info/direction on this subject!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe it's related to the Epstein-Glaser approach. Then a good source is

Scharff, Finite QED, Springer.
 
There is a form of the commutation relations (but different from what you wrote) that has an exponential, eg. http://rejzner.com/files/QFT-Roma.pdf (Eq 1 and 2).
 
Last edited:
vanhees71 said:
Maybe it's related to the Epstein-Glaser approach. Then a good source is

Scharff, Finite QED, Springer.

Thanks for the reference. I skimmed over it, seems interesting, but it is definitely not what I was talking about.

atyy said:
There is a form of the commutation relations (but different from what you wrote) that has an exponential, eg. http://rejzner.com/files/QFT-Roma.pdf (Eq 1 and 2).

Not at all what I meant.I tried to look up what I was talking about - apparently the idea was to "smear" the annihilation/creation operators, which modifies the CCR.
Another place this is prevalent, and which made me think of this modification to start with, was the theory of Gaussian Processes.
I think that both theories have the same underlying mathematical structure, and I was wanting to dig deeper into it.
 
Have you found what it is? I have another guess. Is it a Lieb Robinson bound? These make commutation relations that are approximately the same as those as those in relativistic QFT in which enforcing the speed of light is done with commuting spacelike observables, eg. https://arxiv.org/abs/1008.5137 (Eq 10 and the paragraph after, which mentions an approximate light cone) or https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.2970 (which mentions almost local observables).
 
Last edited:
Yes, I think it is Wightman QFT.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top