Towards a matrix element definition of PDF

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical representation of parton distribution functions (PDFs) in quantum field theory, specifically as derived in Schwartz's 'Quantum Field Theory and the Standard Model'. Participants explore the meaning of matrix elements in this context and the implications of certain approximations related to the proton's momentum.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the mathematical representation of PDFs, specifically the meaning of the sum over X and the matrix element ##\langle X | \psi | P \rangle##.
  • Another participant suggests that the parton does not possess exactly a fraction of the proton's momentum but rather a dominant fraction with small corrections from transverse motion.
  • A participant seeks clarification on the interpretation of the matrix element ##\langle X | \psi | P \rangle##, comparing it to other expressions in quantum mechanics.
  • One reply attempts to interpret the matrix element as an amplitude related to state transitions, drawing a parallel to the Hamiltonian in quantum mechanics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying degrees of understanding regarding the mathematical representation of PDFs and the implications of the matrix elements. There is no consensus on the interpretation of these concepts, and multiple viewpoints are presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the dependence on assumptions regarding parton momentum and the interpretation of matrix elements, which remain unresolved in the discussion.

CAF123
Gold Member
Messages
2,918
Reaction score
87
In Schwartz's book, 'Quantum Field Theory and the Standard Model' P.696, he starts to derive an expression for a parton distribution function in terms of matrix elements evaluated on the lightcone. Most of the derivation is clear to me, except a couple of things at the start and midway. The derivation begins by saying that the probability for finding a quark within a proton with a given momentum fraction (=PDF) is given by $$f(\zeta) = \sum_X \int \text{d}\Pi_X | \langle X|\psi|P \rangle |^2 \delta( \zeta n \cdot P - n \cdot p),$$ with ##P = p + p_X##. Why is this the correct mathematical representation for a PDF? I understand the delta function constrains the parton to take a fraction ##\zeta## of the proton's momentum in the ##n## direction and that probabilities are squared matrix elements but what does the sum over X mean here (we have no scattering taking place) and what is the meaning of ##\langle X | \psi | P \rangle##?

The other thing was he states that since the proton moves mostly in the ##\bar n = (1,0,0,-1) ## direction, ##\not \bar n \psi \approx 0##. Why does this approximation hold?

Thanks!
 
I think the approach holds by the assumptions you take, i.e. that the parton does not have exactly the a fraction of the proton's momentum but it has mostly the proton's momentum fraction + small corrections that come from the transverse motion and the opposite direction. It derives from 32.111

As for your first question, as is mentioned in the book that's the probability of the proton to have momentum P= p + p_X. X is summed over because you have several other partons inside the proton- which will have some fraction of the proton...
 
Hi ChrisVer,
ChrisVer said:
I think the approach holds by the assumptions you take, i.e. that the parton does not have exactly the a fraction of the proton's momentum but it has mostly the proton's momentum fraction + small corrections that come from the transverse motion and the opposite direction. It derives from 32.111

As for your first question, as is mentioned in the book that's the probability of the proton to have momentum P= p + p_X. X is summed over because you have several other partons inside the proton- which will have some fraction of the proton...
Yes, the concepts are clear - what's bothering me is why the concepts are represented mathematically in the way written down. E.g what does ##\langle X | \psi | P \rangle## mean? Expressions such as ##\langle \psi_j | H | \psi_i \rangle = \delta_{ij}## in QM make sense as saying the Hamiltonian H of some theory is diagonal in the basis spanned by its eigenstates ##\left\{\psi \right\}##. So what is the equivalent meaning of ##\langle X | \psi | P \rangle## ?

Thanks!
 
Let me try to rephrase how I'd interpret the expression of QM you gave: It's the amplitude of an interacting [via the Hamiltonian] state to fall from the state \psi_i to \psi_j... I think in a similar way you can interpret the final expression [psi is a dirac operator]- it's an amplitude. Unfortunately I won't have access to the book before 9th of January to recheck :(
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K