Path integral and partition function

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
1 reply · 2K views
kof9595995
Messages
676
Reaction score
2
I have some confusions identifying the following objects:
(1)Some transition amplitude involving time evolution(Peskin page 281, eqn 9.14):
[tex]\langle\phi_b(\mathbf x)|e^{-iHT}|\phi_a(\mathbf x)\rangle=\int{\cal D\phi \;exp[i\int d^4x\cal L]}[/tex]
(2)Partition function(after wick rotation)
[tex]Z_0=Tr(e^{-\beta H})=\int{\cal D\phi \;exp[i\int d^4x\cal L]}[/tex]
(3)Functional determinant(Klein-Gordon for example, Peskin page 287, eqn 9.25)
[tex]const\times [det(\partial^2+m^2)]^{-\frac{1}{2}}=\int{\cal D\phi \;exp[i\int d^4x\cal L]}[/tex]
All three appear in chap 9 of Peskin's textbook. though (2) is not explicitly written.
I can convince myself (2) and (3) are the same, but have trouble with (1). To make LHS of (1) the same with LHS of (2), shouldn't we impose periodic boundary condition on (1) and integrate over all initial states? That is,
[tex]\int{\cal D}\phi_a\langle\phi_a(\mathbf x)|e^{-iHT}|\phi_a(\mathbf x)\rangle=\int{\cal D}\phi_a\int{\cal D\phi \;exp[i\int d^4x\cal L]}[/tex]
But then the RHS of (1) and (2) become different.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
No, the right-hand sides of (1) and (2) are still the same. The left-hand side of (1) is just a special case of the left-hand side of (2), where the initial state is a single wavefunction, rather than a linear combination of many wavefunctions. In this case, the integration over all possible initial states can be simplified to a single integration over the initial wavefunction.