Question about non-relativistic limit of QFT

  • Thread starter Thread starter guillefix
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limit Qft
guillefix
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Take a plane-wave solution of the KG equation,
\phi=\exp(i\vec p\cdot\vec x - i E t)
where
E =\sqrt{\vec p^2+m^2}
Now assume ##|\vec p|\ll m##. Then we have
E \simeq m + {\vec p^2\over 2m}
and the solution can be written as
\phi=\exp(-imt)\tilde\phi
where
\tilde\phi=\exp\bigl[i\vec p\cdot\vec x - i(\vec p^2\!/2m)t\bigr]
Now we can check that
\left|\ddot{\tilde\phi}\right|\ll m\left|\dot{\tilde\phi}\right|
as claimed. This will also apply to superpositions of different plane waves, provided that only plane waves with ##|\vec p|\ll m## are included in the superposition.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Thanks, and another question

Thanks for that! I've got another question though. In the same document, a bit later, he says that one can also derive the Schrodinger Lagrangian by taking the non-relativistic limit of the (complex?) scalar field Lagrangian. And for that he uses the condition \partial_{t} \Psi \ll m \Psi, which in fact I suppose he means |\partial_{t} \tilde{\Psi}| \ll |m \tilde{\Psi}|, otherwise I don't get it. In any case, starting with the Lagrangian:

\mathcal{L}=\partial^{\mu}\tilde{\psi} \partial_{\mu} \tilde{\psi}^{*} -m^{2}\tilde{\psi}\tilde{\psi}^{*}

Using the inequationI think it's correct, I can only get to:

\mathcal{L}=-\nabla\tilde{\psi} \nabla \tilde{\psi}^{*} -m^{2}\tilde{\psi}\tilde{\psi}^{*}

And from that I've tried relating \tilde{\psi} or \psi (as we can write the above Lagrangian with both, as it's invariant under multiplying by a pure phase), to \dot{\psi}
 
Last edited:
Yes, start with the lagrangian for a complex field,
{\cal L}=\partial^\mu\psi^*\partial_\mu\psi-m^2\psi^*\psi Let
\psi=e^{-imt}\tilde\psi Then we have
\partial_t\psi=e^{-imt}(-im\tilde\psi+\partial_t\tilde\psi) \quad\hbox{and}\quad \partial_t\psi^*=e^{+imt}(+im\tilde\psi^*+\partial_t\tilde\psi^*) Multiply these together, and drop the \partial_t\tilde\psi^*\partial_t\tilde\psi term as "small", but do not drop the cross terms. If you like, then integrate by parts to move the time derivative off \tilde\psi^* and onto \tilde\psi.
 
Last edited:
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
8K
Replies
19
Views
4K
Back
Top