Graduate Meaning of "symbol" in algebraic field theory?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the interpretation of the term "symbol" in the context of algebraic field theory, specifically as it relates to the paper by Bucholtz, Longo, and Rehren on "Causal Lie products of free fields and the emergence of quantum field theory." Participants clarify that the symbol ##\phi(f)## represents a real linear functional associated with functions from Schwartz space, which behaves similarly to a Fourier transform. The conversation also touches on the implications of the term "emergence of QFT," highlighting a potential assumption regarding the nature of ##\phi## as an operator-valued distribution.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lie algebras and their properties.
  • Familiarity with Schwartz space and its functions.
  • Knowledge of operator-valued distributions in quantum field theory.
  • Basic concepts of Fourier transforms and their applications in physics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of Lie algebras in the context of quantum field theory.
  • Study the role of Schwartz space in mathematical physics.
  • Explore the concept of operator-valued distributions and their significance in QFT.
  • Investigate the implications of "emergence" in quantum field theory literature.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and students engaged in advanced studies of quantum field theory, particularly those interested in the mathematical foundations and interpretations of field operators.

strangerep
Science Advisor
Messages
3,766
Reaction score
2,214
TL;DR
Physicist-friendly explanation of "symbol ##\phi(f)##", please?
I'm probably inadequately equipped to understand this paper by Bucholtz, Longo and Rehren on "Causal Lie products of free fields and the emergence of quantum field theory", but I decided to give it a try. Alas, I got stuck in the 1st para of sect 2 where it says:
We consider a Lie algebra ##\Phi## that is generated by the symbols ##\phi(f)## which are real linear with regard to ##f \in \mathcal{s}(\mathbb{R}^d)##. [...]
Although I've seen the term "symbol ##\phi(f)##" before, I've never succeeded in properly understanding what it means. Could someone please explain the meaning of this use of "symbol" in a physicist-friendly way?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
##\phi(f)=\int d^4x\, \phi(x)f(x)##
It's similar to a Fourier transform, except that ##f(x)## is not a plane wave but a function that better behaves under integrals (e.g. a function from a Schwartz space or a function defined on a compact support).
 
Last edited:
Oh, thanks, I was over-thinking it.

"Simples".
 
I might be misreading it but isn't it meant in the usual sense of the word? You just take the set of elements indexed by the elements of the Schwartz space, and denoted by ##\phi(f)##, then consider the Lie algebra generated by them (with some additional requirements, that they are linear and satisfy the Klein-Gordan equation).
 
martinbn said:
I might be misreading it but isn't it meant in the usual sense of the word?
It depends what you mean by "usual". In standard English, it means:

noun:
1. something used for or regarded as representing something else; a material object representing something, often something immaterial; emblem, token, or sign.

2. a letter, figure, or other character or mark or a combination of letters or the like used to designate something: the algebraic symbol x; the chemical symbol Au.

3. (especially in semiotics) a word, phrase, image, or the like having a complex of associated meanings and perceived as having inherent value separable from that which is symbolized, as being part of that which is symbolized, and as performing its normal function of standing for or representing that which is symbolized: usually conceived as deriving its meaning chiefly from the structure in which it appears, and generally distinguished from a sign.
... none of which are helpful to understand the mathematical meaning. :oldfrown:

Anyway,.. no worries... I get it now.

Still,... it's seem strange (to me anyway) that they use the phrase "emergence of QFT" in their title, but tacitly assume (ISTM) right from the start that ##\phi## is an operator-valued distribution.
 
Last edited:
strangerep said:
[...].

Still,... it's seem strange (to me anyway) that they use the phrase "emergence of QFT" in their title, but tacitly assume (ISTM) right from the start that ##\phi## is an operator-value distribution.

No, not a Fock-state-operator-valued distribution. That is already a quantum field. The ##\phi(f)## should only be a distribution on (typically) Schwartz space.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
978
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K