Lorentz transform of a scalar in QM

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of Lorentz transformations to scalars in quantum mechanics, specifically the mathematical representation of these transformations. The equation U^{-1}(\Lambda)\phi(x)U(\Lambda)=\phi(\Lambda^{-1}x) illustrates the transformation of a scalar field under a Lorentz transformation. The participants clarify the equivalence of active and passive descriptions of rotations, emphasizing the importance of the order of operations when applying multiple transformations. The conclusion highlights that to maintain the correct order of operations, one must adjust the placement of the transformation operators accordingly.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lorentz transformations in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with scalar fields and their transformations
  • Knowledge of active vs. passive transformation methods
  • Basic concepts of operator algebra in quantum mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical properties of Lorentz transformations in quantum field theory
  • Explore the implications of active vs. passive transformations in physics
  • Learn about the role of operator ordering in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the application of Lorentz transformations in particle physics
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, as well as students seeking to deepen their understanding of Lorentz transformations and their applications.

geoduck
Messages
257
Reaction score
2
If you Lorentz transform a scalar:

[tex]U^{-1}(\Lambda)\phi(x)U(\Lambda)=\phi(\Lambda^{-1}x)[/tex]

If you now perform another Lorentz transform, would it it look like this:

[tex]U^{-1}(\Lambda')U^{-1}(\Lambda)\phi(x)U(\Lambda)U(\Lambda')=\phi(\Lambda'^{-1}\Lambda^{-1}x)[/tex] ?

But isn't this wrong, because this expression is equal to:

[tex]U^{-1}(\Lambda\Lambda')\phi(x)U(\Lambda\Lambda')=\phi([\Lambda\Lambda']^{-1}x)[/tex]

and not:

[tex]U^{-1}(\Lambda'\Lambda)\phi(x)U(\Lambda'\Lambda)=\phi([\Lambda'\Lambda]^{-1}x)[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
geoduck, There are two ways to describe a rotation: active and passive. In both methods the function gets rotated relative to the coordinates, the function goes one way and the coordinates go the other. The only distinction is which you call Λ and which you call Λ-1. What you've described is the active approach. The two methods are completely equivalent of course, but in some ways the passive approach looks more natural:

Let x → x' = Λx. Then U(Λ) φ(x) U(Λ)-1 = φ(x') = φ(Λx).

Two rotations in succession: U(Λ2)U(Λ1) φ(x) U(Λ1)-1U(Λ2)-1 = φ(Λ2Λ1x) = U(Λ2Λ1) φ(x) U(Λ2Λ1)-1
 
Thanks. I think I see it now. As you said, function goes opposite of coordinates. So if you want them to visually go the same way, you have to inverse all the U's.

I guess what it boils down to is that mathematically, we like to read from right to left, which would look like this:

B-1A-1 φ(x) AB

Starting from the right, that should read first B, then A. And this is true if there were a ket on the right end: that's the order you'd perform A and B

But with regards to φ(x), that would read first A, then B.

Now if by default we like U(A)U(B) to mean first B, then A when operating on something to the right, then in order to preserve that when dealing with a function φ(x) in the middle (rather than a ket at the edge), you'll have to put U(A)U(B) on the left hand side, and not the right, so:

U(A)U(B)φ(x)U-1(B)U-1(A)=...

but mathematically then you'd have to invert the stuff to the right of the equal sign, so you'd get:

U(A)U(B)φ(x)U-1(B)U-1(A)=φ(ABx)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K