Graduate Extra terms in the Action in Zee chapter 1.3?

  • Thread starter Thread starter looseleaf
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Terms
Click For Summary
The tau and sigma terms in the expression are arbitrary coupling constants that originate from the self-interaction energy V of the field φ, as expressed in equation (2). They represent the self-interaction part of the arbitrary function V in a series of φ. Additionally, there is confusion regarding the transition from 3-momentum to 4-momentum in the Sidney Coleman lectures, specifically why the operator on the right side is dropped. This transition typically involves simplifying the expression under certain assumptions about the momentum operators. Understanding these concepts is crucial for grasping the underlying physics in the context of quantum field theory.
looseleaf
Messages
24
Reaction score
1
Hi, could someone please explain where the tau and sigma terms come from in this expression:

Screen Shot 2019-09-20 at 10.47.53 PM.png

I see the kinetic energy and quadratic "mattress" potential terms, but the tau and sigma kinda come out of nowhere. Where are they from?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
These are just arbitrary coupling constants. They originate from the self interaction energy V of the field ##\varphi## with itself in equation (2). It is a way of expressing the self interaction part of the arbitrary function V in a series of ##\varphi##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes looseleaf
Hans de Vries said:
These are just arbitrary coupling constants. They originate from the self interaction energy V of the field ##\varphi## with itself in equation (2). It is a way of expressing the self interaction part of the arbitrary function V in a series of ##\varphi##.

Thanks that makes sense.

I was wondering if anyone could address another question I had?
This one is from the Sidney Coleman lectures (2.72)

##e^{i P . x}\alpha(p)e^{-i P . x} = e^{-i p . x}\alpha(p)##

i'm confused why we drop the operator on the right side when we go from 3-momentum to 4-momentum?
 
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 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K