QFT: Computing S-Operator to 1st Order in Coupling Constant lambda

  • Thread starter Thread starter WarnK
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Phi Qft
WarnK
Messages
30
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Compute the S-operator to first order in the coupling constant lambda.


Homework Equations


The given Lagrangian density is
L = : \frac{1}{2} (\partial_{\mu} \phi)^2 - \frac{1}{2}m^2\phi^2 + \frac{1}{2}\frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi^4 :
where phi is a scalar field.

The Attempt at a Solution



S = 1+iT
and I want to calculate iT to first order, which I guess is
<0|T\big( -i\int d^4x \frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi(x)^4 \big)|0>
using Wick's theorem, how is this anything except zero? Or I'm I missing something?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
WarnK said:

Homework Statement


Compute the S-operator to first order in the coupling constant lambda.


Homework Equations


The given Lagrangian density is
L = : \frac{1}{2} (\partial_{\mu} \phi)^2 - \frac{1}{2}m^2\phi^2 + \frac{1}{2}\frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi^4 :
where phi is a scalar field.

The Attempt at a Solution



S = 1+iT
and I want to calculate iT to first order, which I guess is
<0|T\big( -i\int d^4x \frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi(x)^4 \big)|0>
using Wick's theorem, how is this anything except zero? Or I'm I missing something?

Why do you think this should give zero?Wick's theorem tells you to sum over all the possible contractions so you can contract the first field with the second and the third with the fourth or the first with the third and the second with the fourth or the first with the fourth and the second with the third.
 
WarnK said:
how is this anything except zero?
each phi is a linear combination of creation and annihilation terms, so it's not too hard to believe that you can get some non-zero piece out of <phi^4>. To say something quantitative you want to write the time ordered product in terms of normal ordered products and contractions... which is done using wick's theorem.
 
<br /> &lt;0|T\big( -i\int d^4x \frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi(x)^4 \big)|0&gt;<br />
is only one kind of diagram; a disconnected one with no external legs. And that doesn't contribute to any scattering?
 
WarnK said:
<br /> &lt;0|T\big( -i\int d^4x \frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi(x)^4 \big)|0&gt;<br />
is only one kind of diagram; a disconnected one with no external legs. And that doesn't contribute to any scattering?

but that doesn't mean it is equal to zero. The disconnected diagrams in a scattering amplitude factor and cancel with the "denominator" of, say <T[phi_x phi_y phi_z phi_w S(inf)]>/<S(inf)>, but they aren't zero, they just don't "contribute" to the amplitude.

if you want to calculate, say, the free energy then you have to evaluate diagram w no external legs explicitly.
 
WarnK said:
<br /> &lt;0|T\big( -i\int d^4x \frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi(x)^4 \big)|0&gt;<br />
is only one kind of diagram; a disconnected one with no external legs. And that doesn't contribute to any scattering?

You are right. Is this really the calculation you have to do?

Normally, if you have to calculate the scattering of, say, two particles to two particles, you will need to evaluate not th eexpression you wrote above but rather

<br /> &lt;0|T\big( -i ~ \phi(x_1) \phi(x_2) \phi(x_3) \phi(x_4) \int d^4x \frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi(x)^4 \big)|0&gt;<br />

i.e. there are fields connected to the external spacetime points. Are you sure you don't have those fields as well? If not, then you get only disconnected diagrams as you said. And it makes sense that there is no scattering from your expression since there is no extrenal field to connect to!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top