Question about KG with negative mass^2

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChrisVer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Negative
ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
Well can someone review this?

KG equation:
\square \Phi + m^{2} \Phi =0, ~~ m^{2} <0 \Rightarrow m=i \mu
would lead to the form:
\square \Phi = \mu^{2} \Phi.

I'm trying to think if applying the same solution as in KG can also happen here...
Also for on-shell particles, I seem to be getting the "same" equation as we do for normal positive masses:
\int d^{4}k [k^{2}- \mu^{2}] \tilde{\Phi}(k) e^{ikx}=0
and so k^{2} = \mu^{2}
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is your question??

And what is the context? QFT? Classical field theory? First-quantized relativistic wave equation?
 
My question is that in a normal KG equation, you have solutions:

e^{i (E t- \vec{k} \vec{x})}
Where E^{2} - k^{2} = m^{2}
and these are oscillating solutions... Now if I let m^2 <0 then it means that E,k \in C, is that right?
as such the solutions become exponentials...:/ however I was expecting hyperbolic solutions...

I think I'm talking about Classical FT...
 
##\cosh x = (e^x + e^{-x})/2##, ##\sinh x = (e^x - e^{-x})/2## ...
 
and how can someone deduce from that the instability of the field? because it explodes exponentially? although I am a bit confused about x in \phi(x) and what it actually means... eg some people say that it's unstable because if you make some displacement x--> x+dx then it won't remain in the same state...however \phi should exist in the whole space, no?
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top