Integrating a dot product inside an exponential

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion revolves around integrating a dot product within an exponential function as presented in Peskin & Schroeder, specifically on page 14. The function under consideration is U(t) = (1/(2π)³) ∫ d³p e^{-it √(p² + m²)} e^{i\vec{p} \cdot (\vec{x} - \vec{x_0})}. The integration involves expressing the dot product as p·x' = p x' cos(θ) and transitioning to spherical coordinates. The choice of using θ for the inclination angle, rather than φ, is clarified as a simplification for integration purposes, aligning the z-axis with the vector difference (x - x0).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of exponential functions in quantum field theory
  • Familiarity with spherical coordinates in three-dimensional space
  • Knowledge of dot products and vector projections
  • Basic concepts of integration techniques in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of integrals involving exponential functions in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the application of spherical coordinates in multi-variable calculus
  • Explore the implications of vector orientation in physics problems
  • Investigate advanced integration techniques used in theoretical physics
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in theoretical physics, particularly those studying quantum field theory and integration techniques in multi-dimensional spaces.

naele
Messages
199
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


This is from Peskin & Schroeder p. 14 in case anybody's interested. The function is
<br /> U(t)=\frac{1}{(2\pi)^3}\int d^3p\, e^{-it \sqrt{p^2+m^2}}e^{i\vec p\cdot(\vec x-\vec x_0)}<br />

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



Essentially you write out the dot product as p\cdot x&#039;=px&#039;\cos\theta and then change to spherical coordinates and then effect a u-sub letting u=cos(theta). What I'm not sure on is why the angle is written with theta (the inclination angle, physicist convention) and not phi. I understand that the angle between two vectors is the same when projected onto a plane, but is that what's going on here? As in, the choice of theta is simply to make it easier for the integration?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When you switch to spherical coordinates, the axes are set up so that the z axis is aligned with x-x0. You could, in principle, orient the axes differently. In that case, the angle between the two vectors will be a function of both θ and Φ, but why make things complicated?
 
Thank you, that clears everything up.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K