A Lorentz transformation of field with components

ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
I am not looking for a solution, just a "starting point"/guidance for calculating the expression:
[M^{\mu \nu} , \phi_a]
with M^{\mu \nu} being the angular-momentum operators and \phi_a being the field's component, which happens to transform under Lorentz Transformations:
x'^\mu = x^\mu + \delta \omega^{\rho \sigma} X ^\mu_{\rho \sigma}~~ X^{\mu}_{\rho \sigma} = \eta^{\mu}_\rho x_\sigma - \eta^\mu_\sigma x_\rho
like:
\phi_a'(x') = \phi_a(x) + \frac{1}{2} \delta \omega^{\mu \nu} (\Sigma_{\mu \nu})_a^b \phi_b(x)

I have a tendency of writing M^{\mu \nu} =i( x^\mu \partial^\nu - x^\nu \partial^\mu ) but I am not sure that this can help.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
In case you want a solution, I believe there's one in Atkinson's textbook, you should check it out.
 
ChrisVer said:
under Lorentz Transformations:
x'^\mu = x^\mu + \delta \omega^{\rho \sigma} X ^\mu_{\rho \sigma}~~ X^{\mu}_{\rho \sigma} = \eta^{\mu}_\rho x_\sigma - \eta^\mu_\sigma x_\rho
1) You have a factor of half missing in the Lorentz transformation of the coordinates: \bar{x}^{\tau} = x^{\tau} + \delta x^{\tau} , \delta x^{\tau} = \frac{1}{2}\omega_{\mu\nu} (\eta^{\tau \mu} x^{\nu} - \eta^{\tau \nu} x^{\mu}) . \ \ \ \ (1)
2) The commutator [M , \varphi ] means that you are subjecting the field operator to an infinitesimal Lorentz transformation.
3) As an operator, \varphi transforms by (infinite dimensional) unitary representation of the Lorentz group \bar{\varphi}_{a}(x) = e^{-\frac{i}{2}\omega_{\mu\nu}M^{\mu\nu}} \ \varphi_{a}(x) \ e^{\frac{i}{2}\omega_{\mu\nu}M^{\mu\nu}} . Expanding this to first order in \omega, you obtain \delta \varphi_{a}(x) = - \frac{i}{2}\omega_{\mu\nu}[M^{\mu\nu}, \varphi_{a}(x)] , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ (2) \delta \varphi_{a}(x) \equiv \bar{\varphi}_{a}(x) - \varphi_{a}(x) .
4) Since \varphi_{a}(x) is a finite-component field on Minkowski space, Lorentz group mixes its components by (finite-dimensional representation) matrix D(\omega), and transform its argument by \Lambda^{-1} \bar{\varphi}_{a}(x) = D_{a}{}^{b} (\omega) \varphi_{b}(\Lambda^{-1}x) . \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ (3) Infinitesimally, we may write D_{a}{}^{b} (\omega) = \delta_{a}{}^{b} - \frac{i}{2} \omega_{\mu\nu} \left( \Sigma^{\mu\nu}\right)_{a}{}^{b} , \Lambda^{-1}x = x - \delta x . Using these expressions and keeping only the terms linear in \omega, Eq(3) becomes \delta \varphi_{a}(x) = - \delta x^{\tau} \partial_{\tau}\varphi_{a} - \frac{i}{2}\omega_{\mu\nu} \left(\Sigma^{\mu\nu}\right)_{a}{}^{b} \varphi_{b} .
Now, in this expression, substitute (1) and (2) to obtain [M^{\mu\nu} , \varphi_{a}(x)] = i \left(x^{\mu}\partial^{\nu} - x^{\nu}\partial^{\mu}\right) \varphi_{a} + \left(\Sigma^{\mu\nu}\right)_{a}{}^{b} \varphi_{b} .
M^{\mu \nu} =i( x^\mu \partial^\nu - x^\nu \partial^\mu )
This expression has no meaning in field theory: on the left hand side, you have M^{\mu\nu} which is an operator constructed out of \varphi_{a} and its conjugate \pi^{a}, but the differential "operator" on the RHS, x^{[\mu} \partial^{\nu]} is not an operator in field theory. If the generator M^{\mu\nu} acts on the field \varphi according to [M^{\mu\nu} , \varphi (x)] = i (x^{\mu}\partial^{\nu} - x^{\nu}\partial^{\mu}) \varphi (x) , this means that \varphi is a scalar field, i.e., the spin matrix \Sigma = 0.
 
  • Like
Likes ChrisVer, vanhees71 and dextercioby
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top