Mathematical Quantum Field Theory - Spacetime - Comments

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
6 replies · 3K views
Messages
573
Reaction score
679
Greg Bernhardt submitted a new PF Insights post

Mathematical Quantum Field Theory - Spacetime
qft_spacetime.png


Continue reading the Original PF Insights Post.
 

Attachments

  • qft_spacetime.png
    qft_spacetime.png
    11.4 KB · Views: 1,241
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby and Greg Bernhardt
Physics news on Phys.org
A minor note: Urs, I imagine you being more of a geometer than an analyst, so I would say: Relativistic field theory takes place on spacetime. ("on" in the exact sense of fiber bundle theory, in which the Minkowski spacetime - or a curved version of it - is the basis manifold of the fiber bundles which accommodate matter fields and gauge fields, thus, technically, one has fields "living" in their own spaces, not in spacetime.
upload_2017-11-8_22-35-8.png

Another note is that the metric tensor on the generic spacetime ##\eta## is nowhere explicitely defined as diag (-++...+) and the benefit of using it compared to the "West Coast" version diag (+--..-).
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-11-8_22-35-8.png
    upload_2017-11-8_22-35-8.png
    3.1 KB · Views: 949
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Urs Schreiber
dextercioby said:
A minor note: Urs, I imagine you being more of a geometer than an analyst, so I would say: Relativistic field theory takes place on spacetime.

Okay, I changed it. But I wasn't meaning to be speaking with any mathematical perspective at this point, but instead to first say something intuitive. I suppose we all feel that we live "in" spacetime, not "on" it. No?

But anyway, I should not be using parenthetical remarks in an expositional paragraph. So I changed it to "on".

dextercioby said:
Another note is that the metric tensor on the generic spacetime ##\eta## is nowhere explicitely defined as diag (-++...+) and the benefit of using it compared to the "West Coast" version diag (+--..-).

I did say what the norm-square is supposed to be, but you are right that I never made explicit the induced Minkowski inner product. I have expanded now def. 2.15 to make it more explicit. Then I also added a remark 2.16 on how the metric encodes length and what this means for units of length (this will be needed later in chapter 5 to understand why mass terms come with the Compton wavelength.)

Thanks for the feedback!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby