Srednicki's Lehmann-Kallen propagator derivation doubt

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem related to the ordering of integrals in the derivation of the Lehmann-Kallen form of the exact propagator as presented in Srednicki's textbook. Participants are examining the implications of the spectral density function and its dependence on momentum variables within the context of quantum field theory.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the validity of interchanging integrals in the derivation process. Some are exploring whether the spectral density can be treated as independent of momentum variables, while others suggest retaining it within the integral.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with various interpretations being explored. Some participants have offered alternative approaches to the proof, while others have expressed uncertainty about the correctness of the existing equations. There is no clear consensus, but several lines of reasoning are being examined.

Contextual Notes

There are references to specific equations in Srednicki's book that are central to the discussion, and some participants have noted the availability of a free draft version of the text for reference. The conversation includes considerations of Lorentz invariance and the implications of retaining or removing the spectral density from integrals.

msid
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Problem with the ordering of integrals in the derivation of the Lehmann-Kaller form of the exact propagator in Srednicki's book.

We start with the definition of the exact propagator in terms of the 2-point correlation function and introduce the complete set of momentum eigenstates and then define a certain spectral density in terms of a delta function. But the spectral density is also a function of 'k', so we cannot take the spectral density outside the integral over 'k'. Since that is not possible, the subsequent manipulations fail too.

Homework Equations



In Srednicki's book :
Equation 13.11 and 13.12

If that is incorrect, the use of 13.15 to get 13.16 is not possible.

The Attempt at a Solution



I don't see how it is possibe to derive the equation without that interchange.

I'd appreciate any clarifications on this issue. Am I missing some trivial thing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't have Srednicki's text, could you post the relevant equations?
 
Luckily, the author has a free draft version of the textbook on his website. The relevant contents are the same.

http://www.physics.ucsb.edu/~mark/qft.html
Pg 107-108
Eqns 13.11, 13.12 and the use of 13.15 to get 13.16
 
Last edited:
I am new to the Physics forum, so I appologise if I doing something wrong by digging up an old thread. I too got stuck at this proof for a while. Now I think I have figured out the correction to the proof. I thought I will share it with others.

There seems to be a mistake in the proof. But the final result is correct.
Instead of rearranging the integrals as Srednicki has done in equation 13.12, retain ρ inside the momentum integral.
1) Now, convince yourself that ρ is independent of the spatial direction of k.
2) Do the time ordering similar to the one in 13.13 and 13.14 but now retaining ρ inside the k integral.
3) The author has used equation 13.15 which is proved in chapter 8. However this is not applicable anymore because ρ is present. However one can obtain an identity similar to the identity 13.15. In this, each integral has an additional function F(|\vec{k}|) inside. Proof is on the lines of the proof of 13.15. Try it.
4) Inserting the new identity you arrive at 13.16

Hope this helps. BTW let me know if there is flaw in my new proof. :)
 
Ignore my previous post. Equation 13.12 is correct.

Heres the explanation:
rho(s) is invariant under Lorentz transformation because, we have summed over all the possibilities for n.
Since rho is invariant under LorentzTransformations, it can depend only on k^2=k_\mu \eta^{\mu\nu} k_\nu=M^2. But then k^2 is effectively equal to s due to the dirac delta.

Since rho is independent of k, it can be taken out of the integral!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gaboroszkar

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K