Lorentz transforming a momentum eigenstate

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the transformation of momentum eigenstates under Lorentz transformations in quantum mechanics, specifically referencing Weinberg's framework. The state ##\Psi_p##, an eigenstate of momentum, transforms to ##\Psi_{p'} = N(p') U(L(p')) \Psi_{p}##, where ##N(p')## is a normalization constant. The unitary operator ##U(\Lambda)## is constructed using Wigner's D-matrix, which varies based on the quantum numbers of the state. The conversation highlights the necessity of understanding the representation of Lorentz transformations on Hilbert space and the classification of physical states based on their momentum invariance.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics and momentum eigenstates
  • Familiarity with Lorentz transformations and their mathematical representation
  • Knowledge of Wigner's D-matrix and its application in quantum state transformations
  • Basic concepts of Hilbert space and quantum state normalization
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Weinberg's "The Quantum Theory of Fields, Volume 1" for detailed explanations on Lorentz transformations
  • Learn about the construction and properties of Wigner's D-matrix in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the classification of particles based on their momentum eigenstates and Lorentz invariance
  • Investigate the relationship between Wigner rotations and boosts in four-vector transformations
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, theoretical physicists, and advanced students studying quantum field theory and the implications of Lorentz symmetry on momentum eigenstates.

terra
Messages
27
Reaction score
2
Let's take a quantum state ##\Psi_p##, which is an eigenstate of momentum, i.e. ##\hat{P}^{\mu} \Psi_p = p^{\mu} \Psi_p##.
Now, Weinberg states that if ##L(p')^{\mu}\,_{\nu}\, p^{\nu} = p'##, then ##\Psi_{p'} = N(p') U(L(p')) \Psi_{p}##, where ##N(p')## is a normalisation constant. How to construct an unitary operator like that, or how to even see that such an operator is to be found?

Some thoughts.
I define ## \Lambda^{\mu}\,_{\nu} \, k^{\mu} = p^{\mu}##. Component by component:
\begin{align*}
\Lambda_{00} &= \gamma \\
\Lambda_{0i} = \Lambda_{i0} &= \gamma \beta_i \\
\Lambda_{ij} = \Lambda_{ji} &= (\gamma - 1) \frac{\beta_i \beta_j }{ \beta^2 } + \delta_{ij}.
\end{align*}
Now let's try ##U(\Lambda) \Psi_{k,\sigma} := \sum_{\rho} D^{(j)}\,_{\rho,\sigma}\,(\Lambda) \Psi_{k, \rho}##, where ##D(\Lambda)## is Wigner's D-matrix, which gets different representations depending on the range of the state's quantum numbers ##\sigma##: ##\sigma = j, j-1, ..., -j+1, -j##, altogether ##2j+1## possible values.

If we take ##\Psi_{k,\sigma}## to be a scalar particle for which ##\sigma = j = 0##, ##D^{(0)}\,_{0,0}\,(\Lambda) = 1## so that ##\Psi_{p,0} = N(p) \Psi_{k,0}##. In Dirac's notation, ##\Psi_{k} = | \boldsymbol{k} \rangle = \int d^3 \boldsymbol{x} \, | \boldsymbol{x} \rangle \langle \boldsymbol{x} | \boldsymbol{k} \rangle = \int d^3 \boldsymbol{x} \, | \boldsymbol{x} \rangle e^{-i \boldsymbol{k} \cdot \boldsymbol{x}}##, and ## \Psi_p = N(p) \Psi_k = \int d^3 \boldsymbol{x} \, | \boldsymbol{x} \rangle N(p) e^{-i \boldsymbol{k} \cdot \boldsymbol{x}}##. For these to be equal, I could choose ## N(p) = \int d^3 \boldsymbol{q} \, e^{-i \boldsymbol{p} \cdot \boldsymbol{q} + i \boldsymbol{k} \cdot \boldsymbol{q}}##, so that
\begin{align*}
N(p) \Psi_{k} &= \int d^3\boldsymbol{q} \, \int d^3\boldsymbol{x} \, e^{-i \boldsymbol{p} \cdot \boldsymbol{q} + i \boldsymbol{k} \cdot \boldsymbol{q} - i \boldsymbol{k} \cdot \boldsymbol{x}} |\boldsymbol{x} \rangle \\
&= \int d^3\boldsymbol{x} \, \delta^{(3)}(\boldsymbol{p} - \boldsymbol{q}) e^{-i \boldsymbol{k} \cdot \boldsymbol{x}} |\boldsymbol{x} \rangle \\
&= \int d^3\boldsymbol{x} \, e^{-i \boldsymbol{p} \cdot \boldsymbol{x}} |\boldsymbol{x} \rangle \\
&= \Psi_{p,0}
\end{align*}
However, this choice for ##N(p)## also depends on ##\boldsymbol{k}##...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
##U(\Lambda) \Psi_{k,\sigma} := \sum_{\rho} D^{(j)}\,_{\rho,\sigma}\,(\Lambda) \Psi_{k, \rho}##,
this line is not correct, unless you assume that
## \Lambda^{\mu}\,_{\nu} \, k^{\mu} = k^{\mu}##,
so the result is
##\Psi_{k,0} = N(p) \Psi_{k,0}##.
and ##N(p)=1##
actually N(p) is just a constant to fix the different normalization conventions between states, and it isn't so important here.

the logic here is: if you assume the physical states have a lorentz symmetry, there must be a representation on the hilbert space.

if you want to construct the explict form of ##U(\Lambda)##,you can refer to 2.4 of weinberg's book.
 
Last edited:
That's right, sorry, I was sloppy adding that.
Weinberg shows that
$$ U(\Lambda) \Psi_{p,\sigma} = \sum_{\rho} D^{(j)}_{\rho \sigma}(W(\Lambda,p)) \Psi_{\Lambda p, \rho} $$
where ##W(\Lambda,p)## is such that ##W^{\mu}_{\nu} k^{\nu} = k^{\mu}## so such transformations form a little group for every 'class' of momentum eigenstates. Division to 'classes' is obtained by noticing which quantities stay invariant under every proper orthocronous Lorentz transformation. Three physical 'classes' are obtained: the vacuum for which ##p^2 = 0, p^0=0##, a massless particle for which ##p^2 = 0, p^0 > 0## and a massive particle ##p^2 < 0, p^0 > 0##.
Weinberg then goes on to explaining how to obtain a ##2j+1## dimensional irreducible representation from the generators: angular momentum operators. On the other hand he gives a possible decomposition of Wigner rotation ##W## into boosts and rotations that operate on four-vectors. But he doesn't seem to connect these two types of objects, ##W## and ##D(W)##. That is, how to obtain a representation for ##W = L^{-1}(\Lambda p) \Lambda L(p)## in ##2j+1## dimensions?

Actually, as for massive particles ##W## is a spatial rotation, I should indeed be able to construct a representation for the rotations. But, I will not know how will it be related to boosts performed on four vectors. That is, I know ##D(\alpha, \beta, \gamma)## and a way to write ##W(\Lambda,p)## but not ##D(W(\Lambda, p))##.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K