Massive spin 1 propagator in imaginary time formalism

Judas503
Messages
22
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I have the following massive spin-1 propagator-
$$ D^{\mu\nu}(k)=\frac{\eta^{\mu\nu}-\frac{k^{\mu}k^{\nu}}{m^2}}{k^2 - m^2} $$
I want to write down the propagator in the imaginary time formalism commonly used in thermal field theories.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Factorizing the denominator is easy:
$$ k^2 - m^2 = (k^0)^2 - \mathbf{k}^2 - m^2 $$
Then, the following substitution can be used:
$$ \omega_{k}=\mathbf{k}^2 + m^2 $$
and, $$ k^0 = i\omega_{n}=\frac{2n\pi i}{\beta} $$
However, the problem lies in simplifying the numerator. Any help would be really appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Judas503 said:

Homework Statement



I have the following massive spin-1 propagator-
$$ D^{\mu\nu}(k)=\frac{\eta^{\mu\nu}-\frac{k^{\mu}k^{\nu}}{m^2}}{k^2 - m^2} $$
I want to write down the propagator in the imaginary time formalism commonly used in thermal field theories.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Factorizing the denominator is easy:
$$ k^2 - m^2 = (k^0)^2 - \mathbf{k}^2 - m^2 $$
Then, the following substitution can be used:
$$ \omega_{k}=\mathbf{k}^2 + m^2 $$
You mean \omega_k^2 on the left side, I guess.
and, $$ k^0 = i\omega_{n}=\frac{2n\pi i}{\beta} $$
However, the problem lies in simplifying the numerator. Any help would be really appreciated.

You cannot simplify the numerator. What you can do is to simply provide separately D^{00}, D^{0i} = D^{i0} and D^{ij}.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top