QFT in a nutshell: From field to particle

jdstokes
Messages
520
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



I don't understand how Zee gets Eq. (2) on p. 24:

W(J) = - \frac{1}{2}\int \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi)^4} J(k)^\ast\frac{1}{k^2-m^2+i\varepsilon}J(k)

Homework Equations



W(J) := - \frac{1}{2}\int d^4x\int d^4y J(x)D(x-y)J(y)

The Attempt at a Solution



I don't see where the d^4k and factors of 2pi are coming from. Manipulating the definition of W(J) I was able to show that

W(J) = -\frac{1}{2}\int d^4 x e^{ikx}J(x)\frac{1}{k^2-m^2+i\varepsilon} J(k)
W(J) = -\frac{1}{2}J(-k)\frac{1}{k^2-m^2+i\varepsilon} J(k)

but this obviously doesn't agree.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I see you have a power E^{ikx} but I don't see a k integral... the idea is to substitute J by its Fourier transform:
J(x) = \int \frac{d^4 k}{(2\pi)^4} e^{i k x} J(k)
and
J(y)^* = \int \frac{d^4 k'}{(2\pi)^4} e^{-i k' x} J(k')^*
Now combine the exponentials and perform the x-integration, this will cancel out one of the k integrals
\int dx e^{i (k - k') x} = \delta(k - k')
and then do the manipulations you did to get the \left(k^2 - m^2 + i\epsilon\right)^{-1} and the other stuff right.
 
Hi CompuChip,

Thanks for replying.

Why are you taking the complex conjugate of J(x)? The definition of W(J) is

W(J) := - \frac{1}{2}\int d^4x\int d^4y J(x)D(x-y)J(y)

No complex conjugates there. My approach was to separate the e^{ik(x-y)} term in the expression for the propagation D(x - y) giving

W(J) := - \frac{1}{2}\int d^4x\int d^4y J(x)D(x-y)J(y)
W(J) := - \frac{1}{2}\int d^4x\int d^4y J(x)\frac{e^{ik(x-y)}}{k^2-m^2+i\epsilon}J(y)
W(J) := - \frac{1}{2}\int d^4x\int d^4y e^{ikx}J(x)\frac{1}{k^2-m^2+i\epsilon}e^{-iky}J(y)
W(J) := - \frac{1}{2}\left(\int d^4x e^{ikx}J(x)\right)\frac{1}{k^2-m^2+i\epsilon}\left(\int d^4ye^{-iky}J(y)\right)
W(J) := - \frac{1}{2}J(-k)\frac{1}{k^2-m^2+i\epsilon}J(k).

Note quite right.
 
Omg I'm so dumb! I forgot to put the integral in the propagator. Problem solved now (I think). If J is complex, why is it J^\ast(k) and not J(-k)?
 
Ah, my mistake. You get a \delta(k + k') from the (real)space-integral hence J(k) and J(-k).
I might still be a little off here, but the general idea was as follows: J(x) is real. This implies that
J(x) = \sum_{k = -\infty}^\infty e^{ikx} J(k) <br /> \stackrel{!}{=}<br /> \sum_{k = -\infty}^\infty e^{-ikx} J(k)^* = J(x)^*<br />
so comparing the coefficients of the (basis) exponentials, we conclude that J(k) = J(-k)^*, therefore we can write J(k)* instead of J(-k).
 
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