Inner product on boson one-particle space

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on the construction of the one-particle Hilbert space of states for bosons in the context of constructive quantum field theory (QFT), specifically addressing the inner product for bosons satisfying the Klein-Gordon equation. Participants explore the implications of different inner product definitions and the nature of solutions in relation to Lorentz invariance and positive definiteness.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether there exists a similar inner product for bosons as for fermions, noting that previous thoughts suggested the need for an indefinite inner product for bosons, which complicates the application of Hilbert space theory.
  • Another participant suggests using gauge covariant derivatives to derive the inner product, though this is not elaborated upon.
  • A request for clarification on the inner product definition in the context of the Klein-Gordon equation is made, specifically regarding its properties as a constant of motion and its Lorentz invariance and positive definiteness.
  • It is noted that the inner product is only positive definite for positive frequency solutions of the Klein-Gordon equation.
  • One participant expresses a desire for additional resources or books that explain the definition of the Hilbert space of one-particle states and operator definitions, mentioning Geroch's notes as partially helpful but insufficient.
  • A later reply raises concerns about the restriction to positive-frequency solutions, arguing that it is conceptually less appealing than a differential equation approach, particularly in the context of quantizing scalar fields in curved spacetime.
  • Another participant asserts that the covariant derivative and partial derivative have the same effect on a scalar field, although this is contested regarding the second derivative.
  • Discussion includes the possibility of separating positive and negative-frequency solutions in a generally covariant Klein-Gordon equation, with a reference to a specific text that discusses this in the context of stationary spacetimes.
  • One participant acknowledges the restriction of stationary spacetime but expresses interest in related papers by the same author.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the inner product for bosons, the implications of positive-frequency solutions, and the effects of covariant derivatives. There is no consensus on the best approach to defining the inner product or the implications of generally covariant equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the assumptions made about the inner product, the dependence on specific definitions, and the unresolved nature of mathematical steps regarding the separation of solutions in curved spacetime.

schieghoven
Messages
84
Reaction score
1
Hi,

I'm interested in constructive QFT and I'd like to pose a question about construction of the one-particle Hilbert space of states for bosons.

For fermions satisfying the Dirac equation, the inner product is
[tex] \langle \psi, \phi \rangle = \int d^3 x \; \psi^\dagger(x) \phi(x).[/tex]
The inner product is a constant of motion (and Lorentz invariant) because the integrand is the 0th component of a conserved current. The inner product is positive definite, and defines the Hilbert space L^2.

Is there a similar inner product for bosons satisfying the Klein-Gordan equation?

I previously thought that boson state spaces required an indefinite inner product (i.e., existence of negative-norm states), which is a problem because the triangle inequality is broken. This basically ruins any chance of applying Hilbert space theory.

Recently I found a paper [1] which refers to an answer, but doesn't give it explicitly. To quote from the introduction:
The real normalizable solutions of the Klein-Gordan
equation: $\square \psi = m^2 \psi, m>0$; form a real
Hilbert space $K$. $K$ admits a non-singular skew 2-form
$B(\cdot,\cdot)$ which is uniquely determined, apart from
a scalar factor, by the condition that it be invariant under
the canonical action of the proper inhomogeneous Lorentz group
on $K$. There is an orthogonal transformation $\Lambda$ on $K$,
commuting with this action, which when interpreted as
multiplication by $i$ allows $K$ to be made into a complex Hilbert
space $H$ with $B(\cdot,\cdot)$ as the imaginary part of the
inner product. To quantize the Klein-Gordan Field, one needs only
$K$ and $B(\cdot, \cdot)$, or equivalently, $H$.

Can somebody help me out here?

Thanks very much,

Dave

[1] Shale, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 103 (1962) 149, Linear Symmetries of Free Boson Fields.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I say put all derivative operatorings with gauge covariant derivative operatorings, then get answer.
 
Could you be a little more direct in your answer? Suppose H is the space of solutions to the K-G equation, and [itex]\psi, \phi \in H[/itex]. What is the inner product [itex]\langle \psi, \phi \rangle[/itex]? Is it a constant of motion and Lorentz invariant? Is it positive definite?
 
Positive definite ONLY if positive frequency solutions of the K-G. (time look like vector field).
 
Last edited:
This one might help: http://home.uchicago.edu/~seifert/geroch.notes/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I might as well ask it here instead of starting a new thread: Is there a book that explains these things? The sort of "things" I'm talking about is e.g. how to define the Hilbert space of one-particle states from the solutions of the field equation, and how to define operators on that space. Geroch does it pretty well, but there are things in his notes that I just don't get, so it might help to read something written by someone else.
 
Cheers for the help, in fact, I had read parts of Geroch's notes previously and forgot his take on the problem. I'm a little dissatisfied: restriction to the positive-frequency solutions is equivalent to specifying the equation of motion
[tex] i\frac{\partial}{\partial t} \psi = \sqrt{k^2 + m^2} \; \psi[/tex]
in Fourier space, and this isn't equivalent to a differential equation on spacetime. I'd prefer having a differential equation as conceptually more appealing, and it might suggest some way of making it generally covariant. The latter would be necessary if we consider quantizing the scalar field on a curved spacetime.

Or to phrase the same objection in a different way, does the solution space of a generally covariant K-G equation (replace partial derivatives with covariant derivatives) also admit the same separation into positive and negative-frequency solutions?

Any comments?
 
The covariant derivative and the partial derivative operator have exactly the same effect on a scalar.

[tex]\nabla_{\partial_\mu}\phi=\partial_\mu\phi[/tex]

So there's no difference.
 
Yes, for the first covariant derivative, but no, not for the second derivative. The laplacian of a scalar on a Riemannian manifold is

[tex] \square \psi = \psi_{;i}{}^i =<br /> \frac{1}{\sqrt{\det g}}<br /> \left( g^{ij} \psi_{,i} \sqrt{\det g} \right)_{,j}[/tex]
 
  • #10
schieghoven said:
Or to phrase the same objection in a different way, does the solution space of a generally covariant K-G equation (replace partial derivatives with covariant derivatives) also admit the same separation into positive and negative-frequency solutions?

If spacetime is stationary, this separation can be made; see Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics by Wald.
 
  • #11
Stationary spacetime is a heavy restriction! But I'll check it out. I can't get the book you mention but I found some papers by the same author with similar titles on SPIRES and the arxiv. Thanks.
 
  • #12
schieghoven said:
Yes, for the first covariant derivative, but no, not for the second derivative. The laplacian of a scalar on a Riemannian manifold is

[tex] \square \psi = \psi_{;i}{}^i =<br /> \frac{1}{\sqrt{\det g}}<br /> \left( g^{ij} \psi_{,i} \sqrt{\det g} \right)_{,j}[/tex]
D'oh...the posts I write immediately before I go to bed seem to be much dumber than then ones I write at other times of the day.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
6K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K