Srednicki QFT Chapter 4 time-evolved operator

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TeethWhitener
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator Qft Srednicki
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the time evolution of nonhermitian field operators in quantum field theory, specifically as presented in chapter 4 of Srednicki's QFT book. Participants explore the mathematical derivation of the time-evolved operator and the implications of commutation relations in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines their approach to deriving the time-evolved operator using a Taylor series expansion of the operator in the Heisenberg picture.
  • They express concern about the complexity of higher-order terms involving multiple creation and annihilation operators and seek a more efficient method to show how these terms relate to powers of ##\omega##.
  • Another participant suggests using the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff relation as a potential tool for simplification.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of assuming commutation relations when evaluating integrals involving creation and annihilation operators, with one participant questioning whether it is possible to evolve the operator without this assumption.
  • A later reply indicates that the participant's derivation implicitly used the commutation relation, which led to cancellations of sign effects, suggesting that the derivation may also hold for anticommutators.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best method for deriving the time-evolved operator, and there remains uncertainty regarding the implications of commutation versus anticommutation relations in the context of the derivation.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the specific definitions of operators and the unresolved nature of higher-order terms in the Taylor expansion.

TeethWhitener
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
2,630
Reaction score
2,244
In chapter 4 of Srednicki's QFT book (introducing the spin-statistics theorem for spin-0 particles), he introduces nonhermitian field operators (just taking one as an example):
$$\varphi^+(\mathbf{x},0) = \int \tilde{dk}\text{ }e^{i \mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{x}}a(\mathbf{k})$$
and time-evolves them in the Heisenberg picture with the Hamiltonian:
$$H_0 = \int \tilde{dk} \text{ }\omega\text{ } a^{\dagger}(\mathbf{k})a(\mathbf{k})$$
to get:
$$\varphi^+(\mathbf{x},t) = e^{iH_0t}\varphi^+(\mathbf{x},0)e^{-iH_0t} = \int \tilde{dk}\text{ }e^{i kx}a(\mathbf{k})$$
where ##kx = \mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{x}-\omega t##. I'm trying to derive this last line. So far, my approach has been to expand the ##e^{iH_0t}## operators in a Taylor series and calculate each term of the ##\varphi^+## directly. Based on my progress (I've only done through first order in ##H_0##), I figure I'll eventually get:
$$e^{iH_0t}\varphi^+(\mathbf{x},0)e^{-iH_0t} = \int \tilde{dk}\text{ }a(\mathbf{k})e^{i\mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{x}}(1-i\omega t-\frac{1}{2}\omega^2 t^2 + \cdots)$$
Two questions:

1) Second order gives the term ##a(\mathbf{k}')a^{\dagger}(\mathbf{k})a(\mathbf{k})a^{\dagger}(\mathbf{k})a(\mathbf{k})+a^{\dagger}(\mathbf{k})a(\mathbf{k})a(\mathbf{k}')a^{\dagger}(\mathbf{k})a(\mathbf{k})+a^{\dagger}(\mathbf{k})a(\mathbf{k})a^{\dagger}(\mathbf{k})a(\mathbf{k})a(\mathbf{k}')##, and third order will give me permutations of terms with 7 creation/annihilation operators. Et cetera for higher-order terms. Is there a more clever way to do this that will make it clear that these terms all collapse to powers of ##\omega##?

2) In carrying out the evaluation of the first-order term, part of my integrand ended up being proportional to ##a(\mathbf{k})a(\mathbf{k}')-a(\mathbf{k}')a(\mathbf{k})##. I only get ##i\omega t## if I take this term to be zero; i.e., if the creation operators obey commutation relations. But that's what the rest of the chapter is trying to prove in the first place! Is there a way to time evolve this operator that doesn't involve assuming commutation (instead of anticommutation) at the outset?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It could be useful to employ the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff relation $$e^{A}B e^{-A}=B+[A,B]+\frac{1}{2!}[A,[A,B]] + \cdots $$.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and TeethWhitener
Yep that’s it. Thanks! Any ideas about my second question?
 
TeethWhitener said:
Yep that’s it. Thanks! Any ideas about my second question?
I'm not sure since I don't have all details of your derivation. But, isn't so that ##k## and ##k'## only are integration variables. Therefore, such a term will cancel if you do a change of the form ##k\leftrightarrow k'##?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TeethWhitener
eys_physics said:
I'm not sure since I don't have all details of your derivation.
It turns out that I implicitly used the commutation relation twice in a way which canceled out sign effects. This means the derivation works for anticommutators too. This makes sense, since the BCH formula works for any Lie algebra. So everything is clear now. Thanks for your help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
10K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K