How to Compute charge ##Q## of a particular state in free Dirac field

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pouramat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charge
Pouramat
Messages
27
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
For a free Dirac field, how can I explicitly compute the charge ##Q## of the state ##a_{p1}^{r \dagger}a_{p2}^{s \dagger} b_{p3}^{t \dagger}|0>##.
Relevant Equations
The operator $Q$ is :
\begin{equation}
Q = \int \frac{d^3 p}{(2 \pi)^3} \Sigma_s \bigg(a_p^{s \dagger}a_p^s-b_p^ {s \dagger} b_p^s \bigg)
\end{equation}
suppose I should evaluate $$Qa_{p1}^{r \dagger}a_{p2}^{s \dagger} b_{p3}^{t \dagger}$$ I get lost in the commutator relation. Any help?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hint: You need, of course anti-commutator relations, because the Dirac field must be quantized as fermions. The goal is to bring annihilation operators to the right, so that it's acting on the vacuum state, giving 0. Note that for arbitrary operators
$$[\hat{A},\hat{B} \hat{C}]=\{\hat{A},\hat{B} \} \hat{C}-\hat{B} \{\hat{A},\hat{C} \}.$$
Further you have
$$\{\hat{a}_p^{s},\hat{a}_{p'}^{s' \dagger} \}=(2 \pi)^3 \delta^{(3)}(\vec{p}-\vec{p}') \delta_{ss'}$$
and similar for the b's. All other anticommutators vanish.

It's also intuitively clear, what the charge of this state is, since obviously any a-particle carries a charge of +1 and any b-particle (the anti-particle of the a-particle) carries charge -1. But it's a good exercise to verify this by the explicit calculation.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta Prime
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top