Total Momentum Operator for Klein Gordon Field

AI Thread Summary
The total momentum operator for the Klein-Gordon field is expressed as an integral involving the energy-momentum tensor, specifically $$\hat{P_i} = \int d^3x \pi \partial_i \phi$$, with a negative sign in Peskin & Schroeder's formulation due to their use of a (+---) metric signature. The transition from $$T^{0}_i$$ to $$T^{0i}$$ involves recognizing that in this signature, $$\partial^i \equiv -\partial_i$$. The discussion also clarifies the correct form of the derivative of the field, confirming that the expression for $$\partial_i \phi$$ aligns with the conventions used in quantum field theory literature. The conversation highlights the importance of careful index placement and sign conventions in tensor calculus.
Samama Fahim
Messages
52
Reaction score
4
Homework Statement
Prove that $$P^i=\int d^3x T^{0i} = -\int d^3 \pi \partial_i \phi$$
Relevant Equations
$$T_{\nu}^{\mu}=\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_{\mu} \phi)}\partial_{\nu}\phi-\delta_{\nu}^{\mu}\mathcal{L}$$
As
$$\hat{P_i} = \int d^3x T^0_i,$$

and

$$T_i^0=\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_0 \phi)}\partial_i\phi-\delta_i^0\mathcal{L}=\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_0 \phi)}\partial_i\phi=\pi\partial_i\phi.$$

Therefore,

$$\hat{P_i} = \int d^3x \pi\partial_i\phi.$$

However, in Peskin & Schroeder it's given with a negative sign:

$$\hat{P^i} = -\int d^3x \pi\partial_i\phi.$$

How do I go from $$T^{0}_i$$ to $$T^{0i}$$?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Does Peskin & Schroeder use a (+---) metric signature? In which case ##\partial^i \equiv - \partial_i## and\begin{align*}
P^i &= \int d^3 x T^{0i} = \int d^3 x \frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_{0} \phi)}\partial^{i}\phi = \int d^3 x \pi \partial^i \phi = -\int d^3 x \pi \partial_i \phi
\end{align*}
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, Delta2 and Samama Fahim
ergospherical said:
Does Peskin & Schroeder use a (+---) metric signature? In which case ##\partial^i \equiv - \partial_i## and\begin{align*}
P^i &= \int d^3 x T^{0i} = \int d^3 x \frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_{0} \phi)}\partial^{i}\phi = \int d^3 x \pi \partial^i \phi = -\int d^3 x \pi \partial_i \phi
\end{align*}
Yes they do use the signature (+---). Why would $$\partial^i$$ become $$-\partial_i$$ in that case?
 
Recall that with (+---) then ##\eta = \eta^{-1} = \mathrm{diag}(1,-1,-1,-1)## and\begin{align*}
v^0 = \eta^{0j} v_j = \eta^{00} v_0 = v_0
\end{align*}whilst, for any fixed ##i = 1,2,3##,\begin{align*}
v^i = \eta^{ij} v_j = \eta^{ii} v_i = -v_i
\end{align*}
 
  • Informative
Likes Samama Fahim
ergospherical said:
Does Peskin & Schroeder use a (+---) metric signature? In which case ##\partial^i \equiv - \partial_i## and\begin{align*}
P^i &= \int d^3 x T^{0i} = \int d^3 x \frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_{0} \phi)}\partial^{i}\phi = \int d^3 x \pi \partial^i \phi = -\int d^3 x \pi \partial_i \phi
\end{align*}
Could you please confirm one more thing:

If

$$\phi = \int d^3k \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^3 \sqrt{2\omega_k}} \left(a(\vec{k})e^{-i(\omega_kx_o-\vec{k}\cdot \vec{x})}+a^{\dagger}(\vec{k})e^{i(\omega_kx_0-\vec{k}\cdot \vec{x})}\right).$$

then we should have

$$\partial_i\phi=\int d^3k \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^3 \sqrt{2\omega_k}} \left(a(\vec{k})(ik_i)e^{-i(\omega_kx_o-\vec{k}\cdot \vec{x})}+a^{\dagger}(\vec{k})(-ik_i)e^{i(\omega_kx_0-\vec{k}\cdot \vec{x})}\right).$$

Is that correct?
 
That looks fine to me.
 
  • Like
Likes Samama Fahim
ergospherical said:
That looks fine to me.
But Jakob Schwichtenberg in No-Nonsense Quantum Field Theory, p. 600 writes:

$$\partial_i\phi=\int d^3k \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^3 \sqrt{2\omega_k}} \left(a(\vec{k})(-ik_i)e^{-ikx}+a^{\dagger}(\vec{k})(ik_i)e^{ikx}\right).$$

Here $$kx \equiv k_{\mu}x^{\mu}$$
 
Apologies, Schwichtenberg's is correct (it's just due to the index placement on ##k##, which I'd overlooked). Remember that ##kx = k_{\mu} x^{\mu} = k_0 x^0 + k_i x^i = k^0 x^0 - k^i x^i##, so that ##\partial_i(kx) = k_i = - k^i##.
 
  • Informative
Likes Samama Fahim
ergospherical said:
Apologies, Schwichtenberg's is correct (it's just due to the index placement on ##k##, which I'd overlooked). Remember that ##kx = k_{\mu} x^{\mu} = k_0 x^0 + k_i x^i = k^0 x^0 - k^i x^i##, so that ##\partial_i(kx) = k_i = - k^i##.
Actually on p. 58, Schwichtenberg defines $$p_{\mu}p^{\mu}$$ to be $$p_0p_0-\vec{p} \cdot \vec{p}$$. And he also uses the metric signature $$(1,-1,-1,-1)$$ and not $$p_0p_0+\vec{p} \cdot \vec{p}$$
 
  • #10
That's correct, yes. By ##\mathbf{k} \cdot \mathbf{x}## one means ##k^i x^i##.
 
  • Like
Likes Samama Fahim
  • #11
ergospherical said:
That's correct, yes. By ##\mathbf{k} \cdot \mathbf{x}## one means ##k^i x^i##.
##\vec{k} \cdot \vec{x} = k_ix_i##, is that true also?
 
  • #12
Samama Fahim said:
##\vec{k} \cdot \vec{x} = k_ix_i##, is that true also?
It would be, yes, simply because ##k^i x^i = (-k_i)(-x_i) = k_i x_i##.
But be careful to note that the symbol ##\partial_i \equiv \partial / \partial x^i## refers to differentiation w.r.t. ##x^i##, not ##x_i##.

It all works out, but you have to be careful not to trip up on signs anywhere!
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes vanhees71 and Samama Fahim
  • #13
Thank you so much for all the responses.
 
  • #14
But on p. 311, Schwichtenberg writes $$kx \equiv k_0x_0-k_ix_i$$ and goes on to take the derivative $$\partial_0 e^{ik_0x_0} = ik_0 e^{ik_0x_0} $$
 
  • #15
It's still fine, because ##k_0 = k^0## and ##x_0 = x^0##. When using (+---), i.e. when ##\eta_{00} = 1##, you can raise/lower a ##0## index without having to change the sign.
 
  • Like
Likes Samama Fahim
  • #16
Four-divergence is

$$\partial_{\mu}K^{\mu}=\partial_0K^0+\partial_iK^i.$$

However, on p. 160 Schwichtenberg writes

$$0=\partial_{\mu}T^{\mu}_0$$
$$=\partial_0T^0_0-\partial_iT^i_0.$$

Why the minus sign? Here T denotes momentum-energy tensor.
 
  • #17
That does look like a blunder, though it doesn't change the argument much.\begin{align*}
\partial_{\mu} T^{\mu}_0 = \partial_0 T^0_0 + \partial_i T^i_0 &= 0 \\ \\

\implies \int_V d^3 x \partial_0 T^0_0 &= -\int_V d^3 x\partial_i T^i_0 \\

\implies \int_{V} d^3 x \partial_0 T^0_0 &= -\int_{\partial V} d^2 S_i T^i_0 = 0

\end{align*}so that ##\dfrac{d}{dx_0} \displaystyle{\int_{V} d^3 x T^0_0} = 0##.
 
  • Like
Likes Samama Fahim
Back
Top