Quantum Theory: derive EoM of action for a 'general' potential

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the equations of motion (EoM) for a complex scalar field ##\phi## using the Euler-Lagrange (E-L) equations. The participant successfully applies the E-L equations to obtain the EoM but struggles with the potential term ##V(\phi \phi^*)## and its derivative ##\frac{\partial V}{\partial \phi^*}##. The conversation emphasizes the necessity of knowing the specific form of the potential, often chosen as ##\lambda \phi^4##, to progress further in the derivation. The participants also explore the implications of symmetry in the potential and the relationship between the derivatives of the potential with respect to ##\phi## and ##\phi^*##.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Euler-Lagrange equations in classical mechanics.
  • Familiarity with complex scalar fields in quantum field theory.
  • Knowledge of functional derivatives and Taylor expansions.
  • Basic concepts of potential energy functions in field theories.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of equations of motion from first principles in quantum field theory.
  • Learn about the properties of complex scalar fields and their potentials, specifically ##\lambda \phi^4## theory.
  • Explore the concept of functional derivatives and their applications in field theory.
  • Investigate the implications of symmetry in potentials and their effects on equations of motion.
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in theoretical physics, particularly those focusing on quantum field theory and classical mechanics, will benefit from this discussion. It is especially relevant for individuals working on the derivation of equations of motion for scalar fields and understanding the role of potentials in field theories.

binbagsss
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
12

Homework Statement



Action attached:

everybodywantsapieceoftheaction.png


To find the EoM of ##\phi ## / ##\phi^* ##

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
Without deriving from first principles, using E-L equations I have:

## \partial_{u}\frac{\partial L}{\partial_u \phi} - \frac{\partial L}{\partial \phi} =0 ## to get the EoM for ## \phi * ##

So I get:

## -\partial_u \partial^u \phi* +m^2\phi*+ \frac{\partial V}{\partial \phi*} =0 ## (1)

MY QUESTION

Deriving this from first principles I am unsure how to work with the ## V(\phi \phi*) ## term to get the ##\frac{\partial V}{\partial \phi*}## in the EoM .

I.e deriving EoM via ##S'=S+\delta S+O(\delta^2 S)## via plugging in ##\phi \to \phi + \delta \phi ##
I get ## V(\phi \phi*) \to V(\phi^*\delta \phi + \phi \delta \phi^* ) ##

Now to get the EoM I want to factor out ##\delta \phi ## and ##\delta \phi^* ## from ##V(\phi*\delta \phi + \phi \delta \phi^* ) ## to get the EoM for ##\phi*## and ##\phi## respectively, arguing that the integrand multiplying the (e.g) ##\delta \phi ## must vanish since ##\delta \phi ## is arbitrary.

So using the equation (1) above, i.e. sort of cheating and not from first principles I suspect I should be able to show that,

## V(\phi*\delta \phi + \phi \delta \phi* ) = V(\phi*\delta \phi)+V(\phi \delta \phi* )= \frac{\partial V}{\partial \phi*}\delta\phi + \frac{\partial V}{\partial \phi}\delta\phi* ##

I am unsure how to show this explicitly. my thoughts are perhaps integration by parts, but i',m confused with this working with the implicit expression of ##V##

Any help greatly appreciated. thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need to be given a V(phi) to be able to go further. Often V(phi) = lambda phi^4 is chosen. Your approach is correct, but you need more information to get an explicit answer.
 
Why would you not just be able to do \frac{\partial V}{\partial \phi} = V'(\phi^* \phi) \phi^*? Also, shouldn't it be V( \phi \phi^* + \phi \delta \phi^* + \phi^* \delta \phi + \delta \phi \delta \phi^*)-V(\phi \phi^*) =V( \phi \phi^* + \phi \delta \phi^* + \phi^* \delta \phi + \delta \phi \delta \phi^*)-V( \phi \phi^* + \phi \delta \phi^* )+ V(\phi \phi^*+\phi \delta \phi^*)-V(\phi \phi^*)?
 
All you write is correct, but I don't see how much farther you can go without knowing the exact form of the potential.
 
Dazed&Confused said:
Why would you not just be able to do \frac{\partial V}{\partial \phi} = V'(\phi^* \phi) \phi^*? Also, shouldn't it be V( \phi \phi^* + \phi \delta \phi^* + \phi^* \delta \phi + \delta \phi \delta \phi^*)-V(\phi \phi^*) =V( \phi \phi^* + \phi \delta \phi^* + \phi^* \delta \phi + \delta \phi \delta \phi^*)-V( \phi \phi^* + \phi \delta \phi^* )+ V(\phi \phi^*+\phi \delta \phi^*)-V(\phi \phi^*)?

ahhh I see, yeh it should.
and what is the purpose of including the two middle terms in the last equality?
 
binbagsss said:
ahhh I see, yeh it should.
and what is the purpose of including the two middle terms in the last equality?

This is the beginning of writing it out as two derivatives, the physicist's way. Simply divide and multiply each by \delta \phi and \delta \phi^* respectively and take the infinitesimal limit.
 
Dazed&Confused said:
This is the beginning of writing it out as two derivatives, the physicist's way. Simply divide and multiply each by \delta \phi and \delta \phi^* respectively and take the infinitesimal limit.
I'm stuck:

##\frac{V(\phi(\phi*+\delta\phi*)}{\delta \phi} \delta \phi - \frac{V(\phi(\phi*+\delta\phi*)}{\delta \phi*} \delta \phi* ##
Looking at the limit definition of a derivative I don't see how I get derivatives.

so I need to expand out the potential.
 
Dazed&Confused said:
Why would you not just be able to do \frac{\partial V}{\partial \phi} = V'(\phi^* \phi) \phi^*?
sorry what is this, what does the ' denote? is this derivative wrt ##\phi*##?
 
Last edited:
In order to derive EoM from first principle I need functional expansion right?
Is this given by:

##S[\phi+\delta \phi ] = S[\phi] + \frac{\partial S[\phi]}{\partial \phi} \delta{\phi} ## to the desired order.

But where I've computed ##\delta S ## explicitly, where this i given by the prefactor of ##\delta{\phi}## above, except for ##V[\phi,\phi*]##
So similarly I have
##V[\phi,\phi*]=V[\phi,\phi*]+\frac{\partial V[\phi,\phi*]}{\partial \phi} \delta\phi + \frac{\partial V[\phi,\phi*]}{\partial \phi*} \delta\phi * [2] ##

------------------

I have just seen from the previous question that the Lagrangian given, under the transformation ##\phi \to \phi e^{i\epsilon} ## gives the same conserved current as it does without the potential. And in this case I know that ##\delta\phi=-\delta\phi* ## to ##O(\epsilon)=O(\delta)## (it's also obvious from ##V(\phi \phi*) ## without the expansion and keeping in exponential form where they cancel)..

Therefore looking at [2] I see that it must be that ##\frac{\partial V[\phi,\phi*]}{\partial \phi} \delta\phi + \frac{\partial V[\phi,\phi*]}{\partial \phi*} \delta\phi *=0##

##=-\frac{\partial V[\phi,\phi*]}{\partial \phi} \delta\phi* + \frac{\partial V[\phi,\phi*]}{\partial \phi*} \delta\phi *##

so it must be that ##\frac{\partial V[\phi,\phi*]}{\partial \phi}=\frac{\partial V[\phi,\phi*]}{\partial \phi*} ##

Is this true because rather than ##V[\phi,\phi*] ## we have ##V[\phi \phi*] ##
But then I should have a 1 variable taylor expansion rather than 2 variable as I treated it to get [2]?
How would I expand out something like ##V[\phi\phi* + \delta\phi* \phi + \delta \phi \phi*] ## treating ##\phi\phi*## as a single variable?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K