Generating function for the zeta function of the Hamiltonian

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the zeta function associated with a Hamiltonian operator and its relationship to the log determinant of the Hamiltonian. Participants explore the mathematical formulation of the zeta function, its interpretation as a generating function, and the derivation of specific relations involving Taylor expansions and derivatives.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant defines the zeta function for a Hamiltonian as ##\zeta_H(s) = tr \frac{1}{H^s} = \sum_{\lambda}^{} \frac{1}{\lambda^s}## and questions how the log determinant can serve as a generating function for the zeta functions.
  • Another participant suggests using the identity ##\ln \det = \mathrm{Tr} \ln## to approach the problem.
  • A participant outlines steps to prove the relation between the log determinant and the zeta function but expresses uncertainty about how to proceed with the Taylor expansion.
  • Another participant proposes a simpler approach using the Taylor expansion of the logarithm to derive the desired relation.
  • One participant successfully reproduces the solution and expresses gratitude for the guidance, while questioning the correctness of their derivation.
  • A participant raises a question about the necessity of taking derivatives to zero when determining coefficients from the Taylor expansion.
  • Subsequent replies clarify that taking ##m^2 = 0## is necessary to isolate terms in the Taylor series when differentiating.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the mathematical framework and steps involved in deriving the relation between the log determinant and the zeta function. However, there is some uncertainty regarding the application of Taylor expansions and the implications of taking derivatives to zero.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the dependence on specific mathematical identities and the implications of Taylor series expansions, but do not resolve all uncertainties regarding the steps involved in the derivation.

spaghetti3451
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
31
Given a Hamiltonian ##H##, with a spectrum of eigenvalues ##\lambda##, you can define
its zeta function as ##\zeta_H(s) = tr \frac{1}{H^s} = \sum_{\lambda}^{} \frac{1}{\lambda^s}##.

Subsequently, the log determinant of ##H## with a spectral parameter ##m^2## acts as a generating function for the zeta functions:

##ln(\frac{det(H+m^2)}{det(H)}) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{n}m^{2n} \zeta_{H}(n)##.

I understand that the zeta function for the Hamiltonian is defined in analogy to the Riemann zeta function. However, I do not understand how the log determinant can be used as a generating function for the zeta functions.

What exactly is a generating function? Can somebody prove the second relation, please?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would try to use the identity ln det=Tr ln.
 
So far, I have gone through the following steps in proving the second relation:

##ln(\frac{det(H+m^2)}{det(H)})\\ = ln(det(H+m^2)) - ln(det(H))\\ = [-\zeta_{H+m^2}^{'}(0)] - [-\zeta_{H}^{'}(0)]\\ = -\zeta_{H+m^2}^{'}(0) +\zeta_{H}^{'}(0)\\ = -\frac{d}{ds}\zeta_{H+m^2}(s)|_{s=0}+\frac{d}{ds}\zeta_{H}(s)|_{s=0}\\ =-\frac{d}{ds}(tr\frac{1}{(H+m^2)^s})|_{s=0}+\frac{d}{ds}(tr\frac{1}{(H)^s})|_{s=0} \\= -\frac{d}{ds}(tr\frac{1}{(H+m^2)^s}-tr\frac{1}{(H)^s})|_{s=0}\\= -\frac{d}{ds}(tr(H+m^2)^{-s}-tr(H)^{-s})|_{s=0}\\=??\\=??\\=??\\=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{n}m^{2n} \zeta_{H}(n)##

I think I am supposed to Taylor-expand the expression around ##m^2 = 0## to obtain the RHS, but I am not sure how to proceed. Could someone please write the next line or two to show me the way?
 
Last edited:
I think that's easier: ## \ln \det(H+m^2)-\ln \det H=\mathrm{Tr}\ln ((H+m^2)/H)=\mathrm{Tr} \ln (1+m^2/H)##
Taylor expansion of your logarithm should give you what you want.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: spaghetti3451
Alright! Let me try to reproduce the solution according to your specification:

##ln(\frac{det(H+m^2)}{det(H)})\\=ln(det(H+m^2))-ln(det(H))\\=tr(ln(H+m^2))-tr(ln(H))\\=tr(ln(\frac{H+m^2}{H}))\\=tr(ln(1+\frac{m^2}{H}))\\=tr(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{n}(\frac{m^2}{H})^{n})\\=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{n}m^{2n}tr(\frac{1}{H^n})\\=\\=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{n+1}}{n}m^{2n}\zeta_{H}(n)##

It's working fine, DrDu. Thank you! I hope there aren't any mistakes in my derivation.
 
I have one other question.
The first and second zeta functions correspond to the leading two coefficients in the small ##m^2##-expansion in the above relation (that gives the generating function for the zeta functions).

Therefore, they are simply determined by taking one and two derivatives of the functional determinant with respect to ##m^2## as

##\zeta_{H}^{L}(1)=+(\frac{\partial}{\partial m^2})^{1}ln(det(H+m^2))|_{m^{2}=0},\\ \zeta_{H}^{L}(2)=-(\frac{\partial}{\partial m^2})^{2}ln(det(H+m^2))|_{m^{2}=0}.##
I understand how the two equations come about when you differentiate both sides of the generating function relation with respect to ##m^2##.
However, I do not understand why you need to take the resulting derivative to zero. Could you please help me out with it?
 
Come on, that's easy! Write down the derivative of the Taylor series explicitly.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: spaghetti3451
Indeed, it's easy! As you mentioned, if I write down the terms of the Taylor series (in the RHS of the generating function relation) explicitly, and then differentiate this series with respect to ##m^2##, then all terms except the first term depend on ##m##. To drop these other terms, we should take ##m^{2}=0##.

I get it! :) Thank you!
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K