Lorentz transformation of a scalar field

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Lorentz transformation of a scalar field \(\phi\) is defined by the equation \(\phi'(x) = \phi(\Lambda^{-1} x)\), where \(x \to \Lambda x\) represents an active transformation. The derivative of the scalar field transforms as a vector, expressed as \((\partial_\mu \phi)(x) \to (\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\mu (\partial_\nu \phi)(y)\), with \(y = \Lambda^{-1}x\). This transformation property is derived using the chain rule and the relationship between different coordinate systems as defined by the Lorentz transformation matrices. The discussion clarifies that the principles apply equally to quantum fields, where \(\Phi(P)\) becomes an operator.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lorentz transformations in special relativity
  • Familiarity with scalar fields in quantum field theory (QFT)
  • Knowledge of the chain rule in calculus
  • Basic concepts of coordinate transformations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Lorentz transformation matrices in detail
  • Learn about the implications of scalar fields in quantum field theory
  • Explore the application of the chain rule in multiple dimensions
  • Investigate the role of operators in quantum field theory
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory, students studying special relativity, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of field transformations.

soviet1100
Messages
50
Reaction score
16
Hello,

I'm reading Tong's lecture notes on QFT and I'm stuck on the following problem, found on p.11-12.

A scalar field \phi, under a Lorentz transformation, x \to <br /> \Lambda x, transforms as

\phi(x) \to \phi&#039;(x) = \phi(\Lambda^{-1} x)

and the derivative of the scalar field transforms as a vector, meaning

(\partial_\mu \phi)(x) \to (\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\mu (\partial_\nu \phi) (y).

where y = \Lambda^{-1}x

Could someone please explain the steps above? If the transformation is an active one, meaning that the field itself is rotated, then how does x \to \Lambda x make sense. I don't get how he got the transformation property of the derivative either.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: realanswers
Physics news on Phys.org
A (classical) scalar field assigns a number ##\Phi(P)## to each spacetime point ##P##. (I'll generalize to quantum fields at the end; it's easier to think about numbers for now.) Suppose that Alice uses coordinates ##x## to label a particular spacetime point ##P##, and that Bob uses coordinates ##x'## to label the same spacetime point, and that their coordinates are related by a Lorentz transformation: ##x'{}^\mu=\Lambda^\mu{}_\nu x^\nu##. Alice then uses a function ##\phi## of her coordinates for the field, with the property that ##\phi(x)=\Phi(P)## when ##x## is Alice's label for ##P##. Bob uses a different function ##\phi'## of his coordinates for the field, with the property that ##\phi'(x')=\Phi(P)## when ##x'## is Bob's label for ##P##. From this we have ##\phi'(x')=\phi(x)##. Since ##x'=\Lambda x##, we also have ##x=\Lambda^{-1}x'##. Substituting for ##x## in ##\phi'(x')=\phi(x)##, we get ##\phi'(x')=\phi(\Lambda^{-1}x')##. We now change the dummy label ##x'## to ##x##, and we get ##\phi'(x)=\phi(\Lambda^{-1}x)##, which is Tong's first formula.

Tong's second formula then follows from the chain rule for derivatives. Let ##\partial_\mu## denote a derivative with respect to ##x^\mu##, and ##\bar\partial_\nu## denote a derivative with respect to ##y^\nu=(\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\rho x^\rho##. We want to compute ##\partial_\mu\phi'(x)##. Using ##\phi'(x)=\phi(y)## and the chain rule, we have ##\partial_\mu\phi'(x)=\partial_\mu\phi(y)=\bar\partial_\nu\phi(y)\partial_\mu y^\nu##. Then we have ##\partial_\mu y^\nu = \partial_\mu[(\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\rho x^\rho] = (\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\rho \partial_\mu x^\rho = (\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\rho \delta_\mu{}^\rho = (\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\mu##. Hence we get ##\partial_\mu\phi'(x)=(\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\mu\bar\partial_\nu\phi(y)##, which is Tong's second formula.

Note that it is a property of the Lorentz transformation matrices that ##(\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\mu=\Lambda_\mu{}^\nu##, so we can also write the second formula as ##\partial_\mu\phi'(x)=\Lambda_\mu{}^\nu\bar\partial_\nu\phi(y)##, which looks nicer to me.

In QFT, ##\Phi(P)## is an operator instead of a number, but the key formula ##\phi'(x')=\phi(x)=\Phi(P)## still holds, so all of the above goes through.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: realanswers, dtgiang, soviet1100 and 7 others
Ah, I see it now. Thanks a lot for the help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K