I How Does Schwartz Derive the Schrödinger Equation from QFT?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter dm4b
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit Qft Qm
dm4b
Messages
363
Reaction score
4
In Matthew Schwartz's QFT text, he derives the Schrodinger Equation in the low-energy limit. I got lost on one of the steps.

First he mentions that

$$ \Psi (x) = <x| \Psi>,\tag{2.83}$$

which satisfies

$$i\partial _t\Psi(x)=i\partial_t< 0|\phi (\vec{x},t)|\Psi>=i<0|\partial_t\phi(\vec{x},t)|\Psi>.\tag{2.84}$$

That was all fine and good, but he lost me on the next part, going from the first line (i) to the second (ii).

(i)$$i<0|\partial_t\phi(\vec{x},t)|\Psi>=<0|\int \frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3} \frac{\sqrt{\vec{p}^2+m^2}}{\sqrt{2\omega _p}}(a_pe^{-ipx}-a_{p}^{\dagger}e^{ipx})|\Psi>$$
(ii)$$=<0|\sqrt{m^2-\vec{\nabla}^2}\phi_0(\vec{x},t)|\Psi>.\tag{2.85}$$

He apparently uses the Klein-Gordon Equation:

$$\partial _{t}^{2}\phi_0=(\vec{\nabla} ^2-m^2)\phi_0$$

to get the following term

$$\sqrt{m^2-\vec{\nabla}^2}$$

in equation (ii) above, but not quite sure how. Can anyone help me out?

I realize you can expand in terms of $$p^2/m$$ and make use of $$\nabla^2e^{ipx}=-p^2e^{-ipx}$$ to pull the terms out, but I'm really interested in how he uses the KG equation to achieve the same result.

This is on page 24 for those that have the text.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I figured out the answer to this, if an admin would like to delete the OP. Didn't see a way to do that myself
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
QM limit of QFT, in general, is quite an interesting and nontrivial topic, so just because you solved a technical difficulty is not a reason to not continue the discussion.

For instance, there is no position operator in the relativistic theory, but there is in the non-relativistic limit. How about that? I have my own answer, but there is no general consensus on that.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba and dm4b
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