Question on derivation/notation in a report

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TheCanadian
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Report
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the derivation and notation used in a report on collective spontaneous emission, specifically addressing the separation of operators in the Heisenberg representation and the meaning of the PP distribution. Participants explore the mathematical treatment of integrals involving complex variables and the implications of regularization techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the operator D is separated into positive and negative frequencies with an imaginary exponential on only one side of the operator.
  • Another participant proposes setting c=1 to simplify the integral and introduces a small negative imaginary part to k for regularization.
  • There is a request for clarification on the evaluation of an integral in the limit as τ approaches infinity, specifically regarding the introduction of the term -i0+.
  • A participant explains that introducing -i0+ ensures the exponential vanishes in the limit τ→∞, allowing evaluation of the integral at the lower limit τ=0.
  • Discussion arises about the equivalence of two expressions involving the principal part and delta function, with a participant providing a detailed explanation of the integral's behavior around k=k0.
  • Another participant suggests using ε>0 as a substitute for -i0+ and discusses the concept of weak limits in the context of distributions and test functions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the mathematical techniques discussed, with some clarifications provided but no consensus reached on the initial questions posed. The discussion remains unresolved on certain aspects of the derivation and notation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of regularization in evaluating integrals and the conditions under which certain limits can be taken. The discussion highlights the complexity of the mathematical concepts involved, particularly in the context of distributions and principal values.

TheCanadian
Messages
361
Reaction score
13
Screen Shot 2016-06-01 at 12.39.18 PM.png


This is from "An Essay on the Theory of Collective Spontaneous Emission" by Gross and Haroche (1982).

I was wondering how exactly they were able to separate the operator D in the Heisenberg representation into positive and negative frequencies with an imaginary exponential on only the left side of ## D^{\pm}_j ##.

I was also wondering what exactly the PP distribution was referring to. I don't recall reading it defined earlier, and am not entirely sure what it is.

Any help with the above would be greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let's set ##c=1## to simplify things and then regularize the integral by introducing a small negative imaginary part to ##k## then you have the integral
$$I(k-k_0)=\int_0^{\infty} \mathrm{d} \tau \exp[-\mathrm{i} \tau (k-k_0-\mathrm{i} 0^+)]=\frac{1}{\mathrm{i}(k-k_0+\mathrm{i} 0^+)}=-\pi \delta(k-k_0) - \mathrm{i} \text{PP} \frac{1}{k-k_0}.$$
 
vanhees71 said:
Let's set ##c=1## to simplify things and then regularize the integral by introducing a small negative imaginary part to ##k## then you have the integral
$$I(k-k_0)=\int_0^{\infty} \mathrm{d} \tau \exp[-\mathrm{i} \tau (k-k_0-\mathrm{i} 0^+)]=\frac{1}{\mathrm{i}(k-k_0+\mathrm{i} 0^+)}=-\pi \delta(k-k_0) - \mathrm{i} \text{PP} \frac{1}{k-k_0}.$$

Thank you for the response. I think this is fairly basic, but how exactly did you evaluate

$$ \frac{e^{-\mathrm{i} \tau (k-k_0-\mathrm{i} 0^+)}}{-\mathrm{i}(k-k_0 - \mathrm{i} 0^+)} $$

in the limit ## \tau \rightarrow \infty ##?

And I think this is just stemming from my lack of understanding, but how exactly are the two expressions: ##\frac{1}{\mathrm{i}(k-k_0+\mathrm{i} 0^+)}## and ## -\pi \delta(k-k_0) - \mathrm{i} \text{PP} \frac{1}{k-k_0} ## equivalent?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TheCanadian
TheCanadian said:
Thank you for the response. I think this is fairly basic, but how exactly did you evaluate

$$ \frac{e^{-\mathrm{i} \tau (k-k_0-\mathrm{i} 0^+)}}{-\mathrm{i}(k-k_0 - \mathrm{i} 0^+)} $$

in the limit ## \tau \rightarrow \infty ##?

And I think this is just stemming from my lack of understanding, but how exactly are the two expressions: ##\frac{1}{\mathrm{i}(k-k_0+\mathrm{i} 0^+)}## and ## -\pi \delta(k-k_0) - \mathrm{i} \text{PP} \frac{1}{k-k_0} ## equivalent?

Concerning the 1st question: That's the point of introducing the ##-\mathrm{i} 0^+##. No matter how small you take it, it makes the exponential vanish in the limit ##\tau \rightarrow \infty##. That's how you get the final result as the integral only taken at the lower limit ##\tau=0##.

Concerning the 2nd question: Take an analytic test function ##\phi(k)## vanishing quickly enough for (complex!) ##k## anywere. Now we want to evaluate the integral
$$\Phi_{\epsilon}(k_0)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mathrm{d} k \frac{f(k)}{k-k_0+\mathrm{i} \epsilon}.$$
Now we have
$$\frac{1}{k-k_0+\mathrm{i} \epsilon}=\frac{k-k_0-\mathrm{i} \epsilon}{(k-k_0)^2+\epsilon^2}.$$
Thus we can write the integral as
$$\Phi_{\epsilon}(k_0)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mathrm{d} k \left [\frac{f(k)}{k-k_0} \; \frac{(k-k_0)^2}{(k-k_0)^2+\epsilon^2}-\frac{\mathrm{i} \epsilon}{(k-k_0)^2+\epsilon^2} f(k) \right].$$
For the first term the contributions from ##|k-k_0| \gg \epsilon## the 2nd factor is ##\approx 1## while for ##|k-k_0|^2 \ll \epsilon## the contribution is negligible. For ##\epsilon \rightarrow 0^+## you get thus from this term the principle value, because the 2nd factor is symmetric around ##k=k_0##.

In the 2nd term the factor in the integrand is an approximate ##\delta## function, since
$$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mathrm{d} k \frac{\epsilon}{(k-k_0)^2+\epsilon^2}=\arctan \left (\frac{k-k_0}{\epsilon} \right)_{-\infty}^{\infty}=\pi,$$
and for ##\epsilon \rightarrow 0^+## this factor goes to 0 for ##k-k_0 \neq 0## and to ##\infty## for ##k-k_0=0##. So finally we have
$$\lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0^+} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mathrm{d} k \frac{f(k)}{k-k_0+\mathrm{i} \epsilon} = \text{PP} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mathrm{d} k \frac{f(k)}{k-k_0} -\mathrm{i} \pi f(k_0),$$
and this we wanted to show.
 
vanhees71 said:
Concerning the 1st question: That's the point of introducing the −i0+−i0+-\mathrm{i} 0^+. No matter how small you take it, it makes the exponential vanish in the limit τ→∞τ→∞\tau \rightarrow \infty. That's how you get the final result as the integral only taken at the lower limit τ=0τ=0\tau=0.

Thank you for the explanation. That was incredibly helpful! I think I'm just missing this initial part: how is it valid to introduce ##\mathrm{i} 0^+## into the expression? If both both limits ##\tau \rightarrow \infty ## and ##0^+ \rightarrow 0## are necessary to evaluate the original integral, we just have to ensure ##\tau## is increasing more quickly than ##0^+## is decreasing in order to be able to evaluate the integral only at ##\tau = 0##, correct? Regularization of the integral is not something I am too familiar with, but thank you for sharing.
 
This is just a short-hand notation. Instead of introducing ##\mathrm{i} 0^+## introduce ##\mathrm{i} \epsilon## with ##\epsilon>0##. Then you have to integrate first over ##\tau \in [0,\infty)## and then take the limit ##\epsilon \rightarrow 0^+##. This limit has to be understood in the weak sense, i.e., the result of the integral is a distribution which can be seen as a functional on the space of test functions (e.g., the ##C^{\infty}## functions with compact support), i.e., you multiply the expression with a finite ##\epsilon>0## with a test function, take the integral and then take ##\epsilon \rightarrow 0^+##. For many cases one does this once for all test functions like the Dirac ##\delta## distribution or the expression ##1/(k-k_0+\mathrm{i} 0^+)## which stands for a distribution defined in this kind as a "weak limit" of an integral to be taken together with an arbitrary test function.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TheCanadian

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
18K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
579
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K