A Projection trick to obtain time-ordered correlator

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter spaghetti3451
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Projection
spaghetti3451
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
31
To compute the vacuum expectation value

##\langle \Omega | T\{q(t_{1})\cdots q(t_{n})\}|\Omega\rangle##

in the path integral formalism, we start with the time-ordered product in the path integral representation

##\langle q_{f},t_{f}|\ T\{q(t_{1})\cdots q(t_{n})\}\ |q_{i},t_{i}\rangle=\int\ \mathcal{D}\phi\ e^{iS}\ q(t_{1})\cdots q(t_{n}),##

use the fact that

##|\psi\rangle = \int\ dq_{i}\ |q_{i},t_{i}\rangle\ \langle q_{i},t_{i}|\psi\rangle##

and the projection trick

##\lim\limits_{T \to\infty}e^{-iHT(1-i\epsilon)}|\Omega\rangle = \sum\limits_{n}e^{-iE_{n}T(1-i\epsilon)}|n\rangle\langle n|\Omega\rangle##

to project out all the states with ##n \neq 0## and obtain

##\langle \Omega | T\{q(t_{1})\cdots q(t_{n})\}|\Omega\rangle = \frac{\int\mathcal{D}q(t)\ e^{iS[q]}q(t_{1})\cdots q(t_{n})}{\int \mathcal{D}q(t)\ e^{iS[q]}}.##

How can we be sure that the projection trick is a legitimate step in the calculation and not some sleight of hand? Is the projection trick performed in the limit that ##\epsilon \rightarrow 0##?

I would also like some help in deriving
##\langle \Omega | T\{q(t_{1})\cdots q(t_{n})\}|\Omega\rangle## using the above hints. Do I substitute for ##|\Omega\rangle## using the expansion of ##|\psi\rangle## I have from above?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
failexam said:
How can we be sure that the projection trick is a legitimate step in the calculation and not some sleight of hand? Is the projection trick performed in the limit that ##\epsilon \rightarrow 0##?
The limit ##T \rightarrow \infty## kills the exponential, though of course we need ##\epsilon \rightarrow 0^{+}##. It's true that this somewhat feels a bit like a sleight-of-hand, but the introduction of this extra imaginary term works. Similar tricks are used to ensure convergence of various other integrals, although I must admit I'm not entirely sure how to justify the tricks rigorously.
If you do want to treat the problem with mathematical rigor though (i.e. without this small imaginary time trick), then you might want to look at the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma, which states that
\lim_{\mu \rightarrow \infty} \int^{b}_{a} f(x) e^{i \mu x} dx = 0
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Back
Top