Lancaster&Blundell "QFT Gifted Amateur" Wick theorem on Fermion Ground State

AI Thread Summary
In Lancaster & Blundell's "QFT for the Gifted Amateur," Chapter 18 introduces Wick's theorem, which typically applies to time-dependent interaction picture operators. However, the exercises require applying Wick's theorem to time-independent operators, creating ambiguity, particularly in problem 18.5, where the ground state is confused with the full vacuum state. The discussion highlights the challenge of using Wick's theorem with normal-ordered operators, as the resulting calculations seem inconsistent due to the non-zero nature of these operators in the ground state. A proposed solution involves reinterpreting fermion operators into particle-antiparticle pairs, which aligns better with the ground state functioning as a true vacuum. Ultimately, clarity on the application of Wick's theorem in this context is essential for accurate results.
pines-demon
Gold Member
2024 Award
Messages
978
Reaction score
809
Homework Statement
Use Wick's theorem to simplify [this fermionic operation]
Relevant Equations
##\langle 0|c^\dagger_{p_1-q}c^\dagger_{p_2+q}c_{p_2}c_{p_1}|0\rangle##
In Lancaster&Blundell QFT for the Gifted Amateur, Chaper 18, the authors introduce Wick's theorem. I have already seen it Fetter&Walecka and in here, but my problem with the theorem is that it is usually announced for interaction picture operators with time-dependences. Nevertheless in the exercises they ask us to use Wick's theorem to rewrite different chains of operators that are not time-dependent. This problem (18.5) struck me specfically because it is completely ambiguous, not only one has to understand that ##|0\rangle## is the ground state (GS) and not the full vacuum, but also how does Wick theorem work here? I mean the operators are already normal ordered...

From previous problems I figured out how to use the Wick theorem for time independent operators. One can use that version of the theorem naively and say that
$$\langle 0|c^\dagger_{p_1-q}c^\dagger_{p_2+q}c_{p_2}c_{p_1}|0\rangle=\text{all contracted pairs}$$
Which provides the right result but it is fishy because this operation contains normal orderings like the original one ##c^\dagger_{p_1-q}c^\dagger_{p_2+q}c_{p_2}c_{p_1}## that are not zero by definition of GS. So why does this work? Does the normal ordering has to be redefined here?

A more natural way I have seen this before is to divide the fermion operators into particle-antiparticle operators so that the ground state works like a true vacuum but it seems that there is no need under this more-seemingly-naive use of Wick's theorem.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Thread 'Stacked blocks & pulley system'
I've posted my attempt at a solution but I haven't gone through the whole process of putting together equations 1 -4 yet as I wanted to clarify if I'm on the right path My doubt lies in the formulation of equation 4 - the force equation for the stacked block. Since we don't know the acceleration of the masses and we don't know if mass M is heavy enough to cause m2 to slide, do we leave F_{12x} undetermined and not equate this to \mu_{s} F_{N} ? Are all the equations considering all...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top