How do you find the Lagrangians for different fields?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the methodology for deriving Lagrangians in Quantum Field Theory (QFT), specifically addressing the complex scalar field and the gauge-fixing Lagrangian for the electromagnetic (EM) field. The Lagrangian for the complex scalar field is given as $$\mathcal{L} = (\partial^\mu \phi^\dagger)(\partial_\mu \phi) - m^2 \phi^\dagger \phi$$ and for the EM field as $$\mathcal{L}_{GF} = -\frac{1}{2\xi}(\partial^\mu A_\mu)^2$$. The conversation highlights that while some Lagrangians can be derived from known fields, there is an element of guesswork involved in formulating new theories. The discussion emphasizes the finite nature of field types characterized by their spin and the importance of gauge invariance in constructing Lagrangians.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Quantum Field Theory (QFT) principles
  • Familiarity with Lagrangian mechanics
  • Knowledge of gauge invariance and its role in field theories
  • Basic concepts of particle spin and field types (scalar, vector, tensor)
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Dirac Lagrangian and its implications for fermionic fields
  • Explore the concept of gauge invariance in depth, particularly in the context of QFT
  • Learn about the role of symmetries in formulating Lagrangians for various fields
  • Investigate the process of breaking and restoring gauge invariance in theoretical models
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in theoretical physics, particularly those focusing on Quantum Field Theory, Lagrangian mechanics, and gauge theories. This discussion is beneficial for anyone looking to deepen their understanding of field formulations and the derivation of Lagrangians.

Wrichik Basu
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
2,186
Reaction score
2,694
TL;DR
Is there any specific procedure to find the Lagrangian of different fields?
I am currently studying QFT from this book.

I have progressed to the chapter of QED. In the course, the authors have been writing the Lagrangian for different fields as and when necessary. For example, the Lagrangian for the complex scalar field is $$\mathcal{L} \ = \ (\partial ^\mu \phi^\dagger)(\partial _\mu \phi) \ - \ m^2 \phi^\dagger \phi,$$ while the gauge-fixing Lagrangian for the EM field is $$\mathcal{L}_{GF} \ = \ - \frac{1}{2\xi}(\partial ^\mu A_\mu)^2,$$ where symbols have their usual meanings and ##\xi## is an arbitrary parameter.

Everything is fine, but how does one get these Lagrangians? The authors have simply written down the answers, but say I am trying to find a new theory in QFT. In that case, how do I find the correct Lagrangian? Is this kind of guess work - if you chance upon the correct one, you are good to go, otherwise not? When I was studying the Lagrangian for QED, the authors kind of derived it from the Dirac and photon fields using simple arguments. But what about the other cases that I have studied before? Any specific method to find the Lagrangians?

Honestly, I haven't studied classical dynamics to a great depth (only that much which will help me in studying QM), but when I was listening to an online lecture series, the professor once commented that often an amount of guessing goes into finding the Lagrangian. Is that true?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are several routes that you can take. First, the number of different fields is finite, and characterized by their spin. Spin zero is scalar field. Spin 1 is a vector field (Electromagnetic field), spin 2 is a tensor field (Gravity). The Dirac Lagrangian is the simplest Lagrangian whose Euler-Lagrange equations give the Dirac equation. The number of field types is finite and their equations are already known. For the complex scalar field, the derivative with respect to ##\phi## minus the derivative wrt the derivative wrt \phi is equal to $$(\partial_\mu\partial^\mu - m^2)\phi = 0$$ which is the wave equation for a massive field. The Gauge breaking term is a Landau gauge term. The philosophy of quantization is that you first write down a gauge invariant Lagrangian, then you break gauge invariance, and then you restore it at the end! The book you're reading may have missed some steps :)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Wrichik Basu

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K