Integration on the way to Generating Functional for the free Dirac Field

Phileas.Fogg
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Hi,
if I want to calculate the generating functional for the free Dirac Field, I have to evaluate a general Gaussian Grassmann integral. The Matrix in the argument of the exponential function is (according to a book) given by:

24114_dirac_field_generating.jpg


I don't understand the comment with the minus-sign and the integration by parts. I tried to do this integration, but didn't get the same result.

Could anyone tell me, how this integration works explicitly?

Or is there a mistake in the book and in the last line it should be +m (not -m) ?

Regards,
Mr. Fogg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The minus sign comes from integration by parts:

\int d^4x\,[\partial^\mu f(x)]g(x) = -\int d^4x\,f(x)\partial^\mu g(x)

where we assume f(x)g(x) vanishes on the surface at infinity. In your case, f(x)=\delta^4(x'-x) and g(x)=\psi(x).
 
Hi,
thanks for your help!

Let me show you my calculation so far:

\int d^4 x' \overline{\psi}(x') \int d^4 x (-i \hbar \gamma \partial^{\mu} \delta^4(x' - x) - m \delta^4(x'-x)) \psi(x)

= \int d^4 x' \; \overline{\psi}(x') \int d^4 x (-i \hbar \gamma \partial^{\mu} \delta^4(x' - x) \psi(x) - m \delta^4(x'-x) \psi(x))

As you suggested

f(x) = \delta(x' - x) , g(x) = \psi(x)

= \int d^4 x' \; \overline{\psi}(x') \left( -i \hbar \gamma( \left[ \delta^4(x'-x) \psi(x) \right]_{-\infty}^{+\infty} - \int d^4 x \delta^4(x'-x) \partial \psi(x)) - m( \psi(x)^2 )_{-\infty}^{+\infty} + m \int d^4 x \psi(x) \delta^4(x'-x) \right)

Somewhere must be a mistake. Can you help me to find it?

Regards,
Mr. Fogg
 
Hi,

I am not sure what you did with the mass-term or why you did it. This term can be trivially integrated over x' due to the delta function:

-\int d^4x\int d^4x'\bar{\psi}(x)m\delta^4(x-x')\psi(x')=-\int d^4x \bar{\psi}(x) m \psi(x)

So you only need to make the partial integration on the derivative term. This you do precisely like Avodyne said, and what your first two terms in your last equation say. So take your last equation, discard the mass-terms, and then use the fact that \bar{\psi}(x)\psi(x)\rightarrow 0, \ x\rightarrow \pm \infty to drop the very first term. Finally the integration over the second term is again trivial and gives you

-\int d^4 x'\int d^4 x\bar{\psi}(x')\delta(x-x')(-i\hbar)\gamma\cdot \partial\psi(x)=\int d^4x \bar{\psi}(x) i\hbar\gamma\cdot \partial \psi(x)

Now adding the mass-term you get the advertised answer.

Hope this helps
 
Last edited:
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In her YouTube video Bell’s Theorem Experiments on Entangled Photons, Dr. Fugate shows how polarization-entangled photons violate Bell’s inequality. In this Insight, I will use quantum information theory to explain why such entangled photon-polarization qubits violate the version of Bell’s inequality due to John Clauser, Michael Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard Holt known as the...
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...
I asked a question related to a table levitating but I am going to try to be specific about my question after one of the forum mentors stated I should make my question more specific (although I'm still not sure why one couldn't have asked if a table levitating is possible according to physics). Specifically, I am interested in knowing how much justification we have for an extreme low probability thermal fluctuation that results in a "miraculous" event compared to, say, a dice roll. Does a...
Back
Top