Noether's Theorem in the Presence of a Charged Operator

In summary, "Noether's Theorem in the Presence of a Charged Operator" explores the implications of Noether's theorem when applied to systems with charged fields. The paper discusses how symmetry transformations in these systems lead to conserved quantities, even when external electric or magnetic fields are present. It highlights the modifications necessary to account for the presence of charged operators, detailing the relationship between symmetries and conservation laws in quantum field theory. The findings emphasize the importance of understanding these interactions for deeper insights into physical models and the behavior of charged particles.
  • #1
thatboi
133
20
I am trying to understand the following idea that I found from some notes: Generally, a system with U(1) symmetry will have a conserved current: ##\partial_{\mu}j^{\mu} = 0##. The notes then state that in the presence of a local operator ##\mathcal{O}(x)## with charge ##q\in \mathbb{Z}## under U(1), the continuity equation becomes: ##\mathcal{O}(x)\partial_{\mu}j^{\mu}(x') = q\delta(x-x')\mathcal{O}(x)##. I just wanted to better understand the intuition behind this equation. How can I derive this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
thatboi said:
[tex]\mathcal{O}(x)\partial_{\mu}j^{\mu}(x') = q\delta(x-x')\mathcal{O}(x)[/tex]
It is not clear what meaning one can associate with the product of operators on the left hand side.

I you have an exact symmetry, then the Noether current is conserved, i.e., [itex]\partial_{\mu}j^{\mu}(x) = 0[/itex], and its associated charge, [itex]Q = \int d^{3}x \ j^{0}(x)[/itex], generates the correct infinitesimal symmetry transformation of local operators: [tex]\left[Q , \mathcal{O}(y)\right] = \delta \mathcal{O}(y) = - i q \mathcal{O}(y) ,[/tex] or [tex]\left[ j^{0}(x) , \mathcal{O}(y) \right] = -i q \delta^{3}(\vec{x} - \vec{y}) \mathcal{O}(y) . \ \ \ \ (1)[/tex]

Now consider the following time-ordered product [tex]T\left( j^{\mu}(x)\mathcal{O}(y)\right) \equiv j^{\mu}(x)\mathcal{O}(y)\theta (x^{0} - y^{0}) + \mathcal{O}(y)j^{\mu}(x) \theta (y^{0} - x^{0}) .[/tex] Differentiation gives you [tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} T\left(j^{\mu}(x)\mathcal{O}(y) \right) = T\left( \partial_{\mu}j^{\mu}(x) \mathcal{O}(y)\right) + \delta (x^{0} - y^{0}) \left[ j^{0}(x) , \mathcal{O}(y)\right] .[/tex] If the symmetry is exact, then current conservation and eq(1) give you the following (Ward identity):

[tex]\partial_{\mu}^{(x)} \left( T\left( j^{\mu}(x)\mathcal{O}(y)\right)\right) = - i q \delta^{4}(x - y) \mathcal{O}(y).[/tex]
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
0
Views
825
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top