Lorentz Transformation of Scalar Fields

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the Lorentz transformation of scalar fields as presented in a quantum field theory context, specifically referencing an exercise from Srednicki's QFT. The original poster is attempting to show a specific commutation relation involving the scalar field and the generators of Lorentz transformations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are exploring the implications of the transformation equations and considering how to manipulate the expressions to reach the desired form. Questions about the inverse of the transformation matrix and Taylor expansions of the scalar field are raised.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on how to approach the problem, particularly regarding the Taylor expansion and the inverse of the transformation matrix. However, there is no explicit consensus on the correct form of the Taylor expansion or its implications for the problem at hand.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of uncertainty regarding the treatment of higher-order terms in the Taylor expansion and the correct application of the transformation properties. The discussion reflects a focus on the mathematical details necessary to progress in the exercise.

waht
Messages
1,502
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement



Working on an exercise from Srednicki's QFT and something is not clear.

Show that

[tex][\varphi(x), M^{uv}] = \mathcal{L}^{uv} \varphi(x)[/tex]

where

[tex]\mathcal{L}^{uv} = \frac{\hbar}{i} (x^u \partial^v - x^v \partial^u )[/tex]

Homework Equations



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

(2) [tex]\Lambda = 1 + \delta\omega[/tex]

where [tex]\delta\omega [/itex] is an infinitesimal, and<br /> <br /> (3) [tex]U(\Lambda) = I + \frac{i}{2\hbar} \delta\omega_{uv} M^{uv}[/tex]<br /> <br /> <h2>The Attempt at a Solution</h2><br /> <br /> Got the left side of (1) equal to<br /> <br /> [tex]\varphi(x) + \frac{i}{2\hbar}\delta\omega_{uv}[\varphi(x), M^{uv}][/tex]<br /> <br /> but not sure what to do with the right side and how to get the desired derivatives. I suspect<br /> it has something to do with the transformation (1) of its derivative, but so far no luck.<br /> <br /> [tex]U(\Lambda)^{-1} \partial^u \varphi(x) U(\Lambda) = \Lambda^{u}_{ p} \bar{\partial}^p \varphi(\Lambda^{-1}x)[/tex][/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
1) What does Eq. (2) give you for the inverse of \Lambda?

2) use that expression to Taylor expand the right-hand side of your Eq. (1): that should also give you \phi(x) plus something...
 
borgwal said:
1) What does Eq. (2) give you for the inverse of \Lambda?

Would it be

[tex]\Lambda^{-1} = 1 - \delta\omega[/tex]

and taking the second order [itex]O(\delta\omega^2)[/itex] to zero.

2) use that expression to Taylor expand the right-hand side of your Eq. (1): that should also give you \phi(x) plus something...

If I were to Taylor that then would get something like [itex]\varphi(0) + \varphi^{,}(0)[/itex]

but that doesn't seem right
 
what said:
Would it be

[tex]\Lambda^{-1} = 1 - \delta\omega[/tex]

and taking the second order [itex]O(\delta\omega^2)[/itex] to zero.



If I were to Taylor that then would get something like [itex]\varphi(0) + \varphi^{,}(0)[/itex]

but that doesn't seem right

The first part is correct, the second isn't (but getting close): check your Taylor expansion: what's \phi(x+\epsilon)?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
10K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K