Hi. I've been thinking about this proof for over a day now and have reached the point where I can't come up with any new approaches!(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I'm trying to prove equation (5.15) in these notes:

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/qft/qft.pdf

Just above eqn (5.15) we are told that the proof should be exactly the same as the proof of (5.5) which is done on p107.

I completely understand the proof on p107 for the commutation relations.

When trying to prove the anticommutation relations, the only difference is going to be a minus sign on the second term.

In other words, the proof is the same as on p107 except we have

[tex] \{ \psi( \vec{x}), \psi^\dagger \vec{y} \} = \displaystyle\sum_{s} \in \frac{d^3p}{(2 \pi)^3} \frac{1}{2E_{\vec{p}}} \left( u^s( \vec{p} \bar{u}^s(\vec{p}) \gamma^0 e^{i \vec{p} \cdot ( \vec{x}-\vec{y})} + v^s(\vec{p}) \bar{v}^s(\vec{p}) \gamma^0 e^{-i \vec{p} \cdot (\vec{x} - \vec{y})} \right) [/tex]

This means that if we follow through the next few steps on p107 we arrive at

[tex] \int \frac{d^3p}{(2 \pi)^3} \frac{1}{E_{\vec{p}}} ( p_i \gamma^i + m ) \gamma^0 e^{i \vec{p} \cdot ( \vec{x} - \vec{y} )}[/tex]

and as far as I can tell there is no way to make that into a delta function!!!!!

ANY HELP IS GREATLY APPRECIATED!!!

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Fermion Anticommutation Relations (nightmare!)

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**