Questions on field operator in QFT and interpretations

Click For Summary
In quantum field theory (QFT), the field operator for a real scalar field in momentum space can be expressed with phase factors that are often discarded to yield a time-independent form. The discussion emphasizes that the Heisenberg picture is typically used in QFT, where operators evolve in time while states remain fixed. The equal time commutation relations are considered time-independent due to this operator evolution framework. The confusion arises from variations in how the field operator is presented, particularly regarding the presence of phase factors. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding the context and representation used in QFT, especially when referring to annihilation and creation operators.
user1139
Messages
71
Reaction score
8
Homework Statement
Confused over physical interpretations pertaining to QFT
Relevant Equations
Please refer below
For a real scalar field, I have the following expression for the field operator in momentum space.

$$\tilde{\phi}(t,\vec{k})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega}}\left(a_{\vec{k}}e^{-i\omega t}+a^{\dagger}_{-\vec{k}}e^{i\omega t}\right)$$

Why is it that I can discard the phase factors to produce the time independent ##\tilde{\phi}(\vec{k})##?

Also, when we speak about the equal time commutation relations, are we looking at the Heisenberg or the Schrodinger picture? Following up, why can we write the equal time commutation relations as time independent?

Moreover, when we speak about the Fock representation in conjunction with the annihilation and creation operators, which picture are we looking at?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thomas1 said:
Homework Statement:: Confused over physical interpretations pertaining to QFT
Relevant Equations:: Please refer below

For a real scalar field, I have the following expression for the field operator in momentum space.

$$\tilde{\phi}(t,\vec{k})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega}}\left(a_{\vec{k}}e^{-i\omega t}+a^{\dagger}_{-\vec{k}}e^{i\omega t}\right)$$

Why is it that I can discard the phase factors to produce the time independent ##\tilde{\phi}(\vec{k})##?

Also, when we speak about the equal time commutation relations, are we looking at the Heisenberg or the Schrodinger picture? Following up, why can we write the equal time commutation relations as time independent?

Moreover, when we speak about the Fock representation in conjunction with the annihilation and creation operators, which picture are we looking at?
I'm not sure what do you mean when you ask about discarding the phase factors...
But in QFT one usually works with Heisenberg picture, since are the operators (in your case ##\phi##) the ones that evolve in time, not the states.
 
Gaussian97 said:
I'm not sure what do you mean when you ask about discarding the phase factors...
But in QFT one usually works with Heisenberg picture, since are the operators (in your case ##\phi##) the ones that evolve in time, not the states.
Could you explain in layman terms why in QFT we do not time evolve the states? This is because I noticed that ##\phi## is sometimes defined with the phase factor and sometimes without.
 
Last edited:
Which phase factor? From which book are you learning? I'm not sure what this expression you give in #1 should mean. Usually you either have free field operators in time-position representation (in the Heisenberg picture for non-interacting fields, also being used as the field operators in the interaction picture used in perturbation theory) or the creation and annihilation operators for spin-momentum eigenstates.
 
vanhees71 said:
Which phase factor? From which book are you learning? I'm not sure what this expression you give in #1 should mean. Usually you either have free field operators in time-position representation (in the Heisenberg picture for non-interacting fields, also being used as the field operators in the interaction picture used in perturbation theory) or the creation and annihilation operators for spin-momentum eigenstates.
The phase factor I am talking about is ##e^{i\omega t}## and ##e^{-i\omega t}##. I am using the book called "Quantum fields in curved space". However, the part about ##\phi## being sometimes time dependent and sometimes time independent is due to me searching the web and looking at lecture notes available online.
 
At first, I derived that: $$\nabla \frac 1{\mu}=-\frac 1{{\mu}^3}\left((1-\beta^2)+\frac{\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot\vec R}c\right)\vec R$$ (dot means differentiation with respect to ##t'##). I assume this result is true because it gives valid result for magnetic field. To find electric field one should also derive partial derivative of ##\vec A## with respect to ##t##. I've used chain rule, substituted ##\vec A## and used derivative of product formula. $$\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t}=\frac...