Projection trick to obtain time-ordered correlator

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter spaghetti3451
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Projection
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the computation of the vacuum expectation value using the path integral formalism, specifically the time-ordered product of operators. The projection trick is employed to isolate the ground state, leading to the expression for the vacuum expectation value. The legitimacy of this projection trick, particularly in the limit as ε approaches zero, is questioned, with references to the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma for rigorous justification. The final result is a formula for the vacuum expectation value expressed in terms of functional integrals.

PREREQUISITES
  • Path integral formalism in quantum field theory
  • Time-ordered products of quantum operators
  • Understanding of vacuum states and ground state projections
  • Familiarity with the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of vacuum expectation values in quantum field theory
  • Explore the implications of the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate convergence techniques for path integrals
  • Learn about the mathematical rigor behind projection methods in quantum theory
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, quantum field theorists, and advanced students seeking to deepen their understanding of vacuum expectation values and path integral techniques.

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   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K