Interacting QFT - construction of states

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the construction of states in the context of a self-interacting scalar field theory, specifically focusing on the challenges posed by interactions in quantum field theory (QFT). Participants explore the implications of the action for the field and the difficulties in defining a Hilbert space for interacting fields.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines the action for a self-interacting scalar field and raises questions about the Hilbert space on which the field operator acts, noting the complications due to interactions.
  • Another participant suggests a possible solution involving a normal mode decomposition of the scalar field, proposing that single-particle states in the presence of interactions can be expressed as a superposition of multiparticle states.
  • A different participant challenges the proposed mode decomposition, arguing that it does not satisfy the Euler-Lagrange equation derived from the action, indicating a potential issue with the momentum representation.
  • One participant reiterates the original concerns about the Hilbert space construction for interacting fields, emphasizing that this remains an unsolved problem in four-dimensional spacetime.
  • A participant corrects a previous typo regarding the mode expansion, clarifying that it should be in the Schrödinger picture and notes the complexity of the time evolution of the field operator.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the proposed solutions and the implications for the theory. There is no consensus on how to construct the Hilbert space for interacting fields or on the correctness of the mode decomposition presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that the construction of states in interacting QFT is complex and may depend on specific assumptions or definitions that are not fully resolved in the discussion.

paweld
Messages
253
Reaction score
0
Let's consider self-interacting scalar field described by action:
[tex] S = \int d^4 x \frac{1}{2} \left[ \partial_\mu \phi \partial^\mu \phi - m^2 \phi^2 - \frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi^4\right][/tex]
Using relation between Poisson bracket in classical mechanics and
comutators of quantum operators we have:
[tex] [\partial_0\hat{\phi}(t,x_1),\hat{\phi}(t,x_2)] = - i \delta(x_1-x_2)[/tex]
Unfortunatelly in case of interacting field we cannot decompose field in terms
of basic solution (modes) and we don't have operators which create and anihilate
modes. So in case of interaction field construction of Hilbert space on which
[tex]\hat{\phi}[/tex] acts in not straightforward. What is the Hilbert space
on which field operator acts and how the action of it on some basic states
looks like.

Some people claim that in case of interaction we have to assume that the spectrum
of full hamiltonian is the same as spectrum of hamiltonian without interaction
(so that the theory poses particle interpretation). However even if this assumption
is correct we still don't know how [tex]\hat{\phi}[/tex] on these states, and whole
theory is underdetermined.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Just because you don't know how [itex]\hat\phi[/itex] act on interacting states doesn't mean your whole theory is undermined.

Here is one possible solution to your dilemma:
You can still use the normal mode decomposition of the scalar field,
[tex]\hat\phi(x)=\int\frac{d^3\mathbf{p}}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega_{\mathbf{p}}}} (\hat{a}_{\mathbf{p}}e^{-ipx}+\hat{a}^\dag_{\mathbf{p}}e^{ipx})[/tex],​
but now, the single-particle states are no longer created by [itex]\hat{a}^\dag_\textbf{p}[/itex]. Instead, the physical, one particle state in the presence of interactions may be written in terms of Fock states as follows
[tex]|\mathbf{p}\rangle = c_0 a^\dag_{\mathbf{p}}|0\rangle + c_1 a^\dag_{\mathbf{p}/2} a^\dag_{\mathbf{p}/2}|0\rangle + \ldots[/tex]​
where there are an infinity of terms in the Fock expansion and the coefficients are, in principle, calculable in field theory. Note that you know how [itex]\hat{\phi}[/itex] acts on each term individually. Your problem should be solved.
 
Thanks for answer. I'm afraid that your decomposition of [tex]\phi[/tex] does not fulfill
the Euler-Lagrange equation derived form my action:
[tex] \square \phi + m^2 \phi = \frac{\lambda}{3!}\phi^3[/tex]
(or probably the momentum in exponens is not on shell).
The decomposition of state in terms of Fock states looks interesting.
It means that the state of momentum p in case of interacting theory
needs to be a superposition of multiparticles states.
 
paweld said:
Let's consider self-interacting scalar field described by action:
[tex] S = \int d^4 x \frac{1}{2} \left[ \partial_\mu \phi \partial^\mu \phi - m^2 \phi^2 - \frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi^4\right][/tex]
Unfortunatelly in case of interacting field we cannot decompose field in terms
of basic solution (modes) and we don't have operators which create and anihilate
modes. So in case of interaction field construction of Hilbert space on which
[tex]\hat{\phi}[/tex] acts in not straightforward. What is the Hilbert space
on which field operator acts and how the action of it on some basic states
looks like.

In 4-dimensional space-time, this is one of the unsolved problems. In lower dimensions it is solved bot the answer cannot be explained in few words. For 2 dimensions, see, e.g.,

James Glimm and Arthur Jaffe
The λ(φ4)2 quantum field theory without cutoffs III
Acta Mathematica 125, 1970, 203-267
http://www.springerlink.com/content/t044kq0072712664/
 
Ok, I made a slight typo: the mode expansion should have been in the Schrödinger picture (not the Heisenberg as I have written it)

[tex] \hat\phi(\mathbf{x})=\int\frac{d^3\mathbf{p}}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega_{\mathbf{p}}}} (\hat{a}_{\mathbf{p}}e^{i\mathbf{p}\mathbf{x}}+\hat{a}^\dag_{\mathbf{p}}e^{-i\mathbf{p}\mathbf{x}})[/tex]

The time evolution of the field operator will in general be complicated -- again, this necessitates an expansion similar to the one I described for the physical particle.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K