Srednicki Path Integrals eq 6.22

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation and derivation of equation 6.22 from Srednicki's Quantum Field Theory book, specifically focusing on the manipulation of path integrals and the roles of Hamiltonians H_0 and H_1. Participants explore the mathematical steps involved in transitioning from one form of the equation to another, including the differentiation under the integral sign and the implications of the functional forms of H_0 and H_1.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest viewing the exponential term involving H_1 as an operator that acts on the integral expression on the right, assuming differentiation under the integral sign is permissible.
  • Others question whether the roles of H_0 and H_1 can be exchanged and express uncertainty about how to differentiate without knowing the functional form of H_1.
  • One participant proposes that the path integral can be split into parts, allowing for the exchange of H_0 and H_1, and discusses the necessity of differentiating at different times.
  • Another participant argues that the reason for splitting the path integral is that the integral involving H_0 can usually be solved, making differentiation a more manageable approach.
  • There is a discussion about the arbitrary nature of H_1 and an example is provided where H_1 is taken as q^3, illustrating how to apply differentiation to obtain the total path integral.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the convergence of the path integral when attempting to pull H_0 and H_1 out, with references to the importance of the sign in the exponential for convergence.
  • A participant acknowledges the complexity of the discussion and expresses intent to revisit the topic after reviewing their notes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the manipulation of H_0 and H_1, with some agreeing on the potential for exchanging their roles while others remain uncertain. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the best approach to the derivation or the implications of the convergence issues raised.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the functional forms of H_0 and H_1, and unresolved questions about the convergence of the path integral when manipulating the Hamiltonians.

maverick280857
Messages
1,774
Reaction score
5
Hi everyone,

I was reading through the section on path integrals in Srednicki's QFT book. I came across equation 6.22

[tex]\langle 0|0\rangle_{f,h} = \int\mathcal{D}p\mathcal{D}q\exp{\left[i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt\left(p\dot{q}-H_{0}(p,q)-H_{1}(p,q)+fq+hp\right)\right]}[/tex]

[tex]= \exp{\left[-i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt H_{1}\left(\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta h(t)},\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta f(t)}\right)\right]}\times\int\mathcal{D}q\mathcal{D}p\exp{\left[i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt(p\dot{q}-H_{0}(p,q)+fq+hp)\right]}[/tex]

How did we get the second line of the equation?

PS -- f and h are differentiable functions of time, used just to pull down suitable powers of q and p.

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
View

[tex] \exp{\left[-i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt H_{1}\left(\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta h(t)},\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta f(t)}\right)\right]}[/tex]

as an operator that operates on the thing on the right. Assume you can differentiate under the integral sign. Once you do this you get the first line.
 
RedX said:
View

[tex] \exp{\left[-i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt H_{1}\left(\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta h(t)},\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta f(t)}\right)\right]}[/tex]

as an operator that operates on the thing on the right. Assume you can differentiate under the integral sign. Once you do this you get the first line.

Ok, but how and couldn't I have exchanged the roles of [itex]H_0[/itex] and [itex]H_1[/itex] here? Plus, I don't know the functional form of [itex]H_1[/itex] so how do I "differentiate"?
 
maverick280857 said:
Ok, but how and couldn't I have exchanged the roles of [itex]H_0[/itex] and [itex]H_1[/itex] here? Plus, I don't know the functional form of [itex]H_1[/itex] so how do I "differentiate"?

As you know, we can divide
[tex]= \int\mathcal{D}q\mathcal{D}p\exp{\left[i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt(p\dot{q}-H_{0}(p,q)+fq+hp)\right]}[/tex]
into different times. (Please check the origin of this equation).

So we can exchange these [itex]H_0[/itex] and [itex]H_1[/itex] here.

[tex]\exp{\left[-i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt H_{1}\left(\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta h(t)},\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta f(t)}\right)\right]}[/tex]

is also made from many different times.

We must divide the the exponential functions into (1+dt H(t1)..) x (1+dt H(t2)...) x (1+dt H(t3)...) ...
and differentiate at each different time.
We can easily exchange the order of H1 and H0 at this form.

(Sorry for simple explanation).
 
Last edited:
maverick280857 said:
Ok, but how and couldn't I have exchanged the roles of [itex]H_0[/itex] and [itex]H_1[/itex] here? Plus, I don't know the functional form of [itex]H_1[/itex] so how do I "differentiate"?

You can exchange H_0 and H_1 if you want. But the reason you're even splitting the path integral into two parts that way is because

[tex] = \int\mathcal{D}q\mathcal{D}p\exp{\left[i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt(p\dot{q}-H_{0}(p,q)+fq+hp)\right]}[/tex]

usually can be solved! So once you are able to solve this [in terms of h(t) and f(t)], you can get the total path integral you want through differentiation, which is much easier than taking the path integral of the entire thing.

So really this is just the trick of differentiating under the integral sign.

As for the form of H_1, it can be arbitrary. Take H_1=q^3. Then:

[tex] = \exp{\left[-i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt \left(\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta f(t)}\right)^3\right]}\times\int\mathcal{D}q\mathcal{D}p\exp{\left[i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt(p\dot{q}-H_{0}(p,q)+fq+hp)\right]}=<br /> <br /> \int\mathcal{D}q\mathcal{D}p\exp{\left[i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt(p\dot{q}-H_{0}(p,q)-q^3+fq+hp)\right]}[/tex]

If you want to convince yourself that this is true, perhaps you should expand the term with [tex]\exp{\left[-i\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dt \left(\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta f(t)}\right)^3\right]}[/tex] in power series and operate to the right, remembering that:

[tex]\frac{\delta f(r)}{\delta f(t)}=\delta (r-t)[/tex]

where the last delta on this line is the Dirac delta function.
 
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking why not pull both H_0+H_1 out! Then the path integral that's left is merely exp(fq+hp) which is easy to do, and then you can get the complete path integral by differentiation!

But the problem is that the path integral doesn't converge. Usually things that converge are e^(-x^2), and not e^(x). The (-) sign is very important for convergence, and something that I don't get is how an expression like [tex]\int e^{(E^2-\omega^2)x^2} dE[/tex] converges when you take the integral over x! It only converges if E^2-\omega^2<0 . However, this is all ignored by absorbing this into the normalization of the ground state, saying that if the source is equal to zero then the result should be 1, so that [tex]\int e^{(E^2-\omega^2)x^2} dE[/tex] integrates out to 1 (this comment comes after eqn. (7.9) of Srednicki).
 
Hi RedX, thanks for the explanation and apologies for the late reply...I completely forgot about this thread somehow, and got a chance to revisit my QFT notes only this evening after exams of other courses :-P.

RedX said:
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking why not pull both H_0+H_1 out! Then the path integral that's left is merely exp(fq+hp) which is easy to do, and then you can get the complete path integral by differentiation!

Well, that's not quite what I had in mind. I just didn't see how H_1 was being involved in an operator acting on the expression containing H_0. I am going through your replies now, and will work them out for myself. I might bug you again with trivial seeming queries :-P
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K