QFT: Bogolyiubov transformations and KG inner product

Joey21
Messages
15
Reaction score
1
(I hope this post goes in this part of the forum)

Hi,

I was wondering if someone could help me with the following:

I have a (1+1) scalar field decomposed into two different sets of modes. One set corresponds to a Minkowski frame in (t,x) coordinates, the other to a Rinder frame in conformal (##\tau,\bar{\xi}##) coordinates. I know that I need to calculate the bogoliubov coefficients using the Klein Gordon invariante inner product

##(\phi_1,\phi_2)=i\int dx(\phi_1^*\frac{\partial{\phi_2}}{\partial{dx^0}}-\frac{\partial{\phi_1^*}}{\partial{dx^0}}\phi_2)##

How should approach this calculation in my case, where the modes are expressed in different coordinates?

I am not after an easy answer, just some guidance, so thanks in advanced. Any references I could get some furthur reading would be great too! Anything that helps furthur my understanding of QFT.

Thanks again,

Joe.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Have you tried Birrell & Davies, sect 4.5?
 
Hi,

Thanks for the reply. I checked it out, but my problem is slightly different. The field is constrained to a Dirichlet box so I'm not sure it null coordinates are the most convenient for the problem, that's why I was going to try and compute the coefficients via de inner product.

I will give it another read.

Thanks again!
 
Joey21 said:
The field is constrained to a Dirichlet box
Not exactly sure what you mean.

Disclaimer: I have not worked through this (nor the ordinary Rindler space) problem pen-in-hand, but only skim-studied B&D. It could be worthwhile to work through this problem properly, if you have the stamina to type a lot more latex in detail...
 
OK, let me explain.

With a the filed being confined to a Dirichlet box I mean the field is constrained to a 1D box with boundary conditions such that the field is 0 at the edges.

I managed to calculate the integral, its as simple as using the chain rule when you calculate the derivative. I was overworked at the time of posting, so sorry for that.

Thanks again for the help.

P.S If anyone is interested I can type up or scan the solution.
 
Joey21 said:
If anyone is interested I can type up or scan the solution.
I am interested -- but I don't have much spare time for close study right now. I.e., I'd be interested in returning to this later, but I don't expect you to put excessive extra effort into this unless you feel inspired to do so... :oldbiggrin:
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Back
Top