Simple S matrix example in Coleman's lectures on QFT

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a specific equation (7.57) from Coleman's lectures on Quantum Field Theory (QFT), particularly focusing on the calculation of the scattering matrix (S matrix) and the implications of the Hamiltonian structure presented. Participants express confusion regarding the definitions and implications of certain terms and concepts, including the nature of the function that governs the interaction and the state representations in different pictures.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the nature of the state ##\left|\psi\right\rangle## in Coleman's equation, wondering if it is in the Schrödinger or interaction picture and what time reference is being used.
  • Another participant expresses concern about the potential implications of treating the function ##f## as a step function, suggesting that it could lead to significant issues in the context of defining the S-matrix correctly.
  • A follow-up question seeks clarification on what specifically goes wrong if a step function is used for ##f##.
  • Participants reference the importance of "adiabatic switching" as discussed by Gell-Mann and Low, indicating that this approach is crucial for a consistent definition of the S-matrix.
  • Links to external resources, including arXiv papers and other lecture notes, are shared to provide additional context and examples related to the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the interpretation of Coleman's equation or the implications of using a step function for the interaction. Multiple competing views remain regarding the correct approach to defining the S-matrix and the role of adiabatic switching.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the lack of clarity in Coleman's definitions and the potential for misunderstanding due to the unspecified nature of the state ##\left|\psi\right\rangle##. The discussion also reflects uncertainty about the mathematical steps involved in transitioning between different pictures in QFT.

Glenn Rowe
Gold Member
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Simple S matrix example in Coleman's lectures on QFT
In Coleman's QFT lectures, I'm confused by equation 7.57. To give the background, Coleman is trying to calculate the scattering matrix (S matrix) for a situation in which the Hamiltonian is given by
$$H=H_{0}+f\left(t,T,\Delta\right)H_{I}\left(t\right)$$
where ##H_{0}## is the free Hamiltonian, ##H_{I}## is the interaction, and ##f## is a function that turns the interaction on only for a time interval ##T## around ##t=0##. ##\Delta## determines the rate at which the interaction is switched on and off.
Since the interaction is off for times in the distant past and future, the state at these times will be the exact state determined by the free Hamiltonian ##H_{0}##. Coleman calls this state (for the distant past) ##\left|\psi\left(-\infty\right)\right\rangle ^{\text{in}}## and claims that it is given by
$$\left|\psi\left(-\infty\right)\right\rangle ^{\text{in}}=\lim_{t^{\prime}\rightarrow-\infty}e^{iH_{0}t^{\prime}}e^{-iHt^{\prime}}\left|\psi\right\rangle =\lim_{t^{\prime}\rightarrow-\infty}U_{I}\left(0,t^{\prime}\right)\left|\psi\right\rangle $$
where ##U_{I}## is the evolution operator in the interaction picture. He doesn't specify what the state ##\left|\psi\right\rangle## is, but I can't make sense of this equation no matter what I assume about it. Is it the state in the Schrödinger picture or the interaction picture? What time is the state supposed to be at?
If it's the Schrödinger picture (as seems to be the case, as he says this when calculating ##S## in equation 7.59) and the time is ##t=0##, then the ##e^{-iHt^{\prime}}## operator would evolve the state to time ##t^{\prime}##, but then what is the additional ##e^{iH_{0}t^{\prime}}## for?
Finally, how does he get the last equality above? According to Coleman's definition of ##U_{I}## (his equation 7.31) we should have
$$U_{I}\left(t,0\right)=e^{iH_{0}t}e^{-iHt}$$
where the ##t## and the 0 are swapped from its occurrence in the above equation.
Anyone have any thoughts? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I hope Coleman didn't really mean that ##f## is a step function, because then he's generally in big trouble. I don't believe that Coleman really made such a claim. It's really important to do this right and introduce "adiabatic switching" as Gell-Mann and Low did to define the S-matrix in a consistent way. A very good explanation in the QFT context is given in Bjorken and Drell, Quantum Field theory.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier
vanhees71 said:
I hope Coleman didn't really mean that ##f## is a step function, because then he's generally in big trouble.
What exactly goes wrong if one takes a step function?
 
Have a look at this:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.5019

I think this is a nice example underlining the importance of a correct and smooth "adiabatic switching" (both on and off!) in QFT.

I ordered Coleman's book, because this must simply be a gem. Unfortunately it'll take more than 4 weeks to arrive :-(.

I found some other lecture notes from Coleman's QFT lectures online

https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.5013

There it's of course correct and very well discussed, as expected.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier and physicsworks

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K