Understanding Goldstone's Theorem Proof: Volume Limit and Commutator

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the proof of Goldstone's theorem, specifically addressing the limit of the commutator as the volume approaches infinity. The key equation defined is $$a(t) = \lim_{V \rightarrow +\infty} {\langle \Omega|[Q_v(\vec{x},t),A(\vec{y})]| \Omega \rangle}$$, where $$|\Omega\rangle$$ represents the vacuum state and $$Q_v$$ is the conserved charge. The proof demonstrates that the commutator vanishes as the distance $$|\vec{x}-\vec{y}|$$ approaches infinity, leading to the conclusion that $$\frac{da(t)}{dt} = 0$$. The transformation from a volume integral to a surface integral using Stokes's theorem is crucial for this argument, particularly in justifying the vanishing of the integral at infinity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Goldstone's theorem in quantum field theory
  • Familiarity with commutators and their significance in quantum mechanics
  • Knowledge of Stokes's theorem and its application in mathematical physics
  • Proficiency in continuity equations and their role in field theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of Goldstone's theorem in spontaneous symmetry breaking
  • Learn about the continuity equation and its applications in quantum field theory
  • Explore advanced applications of Stokes's theorem in physics
  • Investigate the role of conserved charges in quantum mechanics and field theory
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory, theoretical physicists exploring symmetry and conservation laws, and graduate students studying advanced topics in quantum mechanics.

Aleolomorfo
Messages
70
Reaction score
4
Hello everybody!
I have a question regarding the first step of the quantistic proof of the Goldstone's theorem. Defining
$$a(t) = \lim_{V \rightarrow +\infty} {\langle \Omega|[Q_v(\vec{x},t),A(\vec{y})]| \Omega \rangle}$$
where ##|\Omega\rangle## is the vacuum state of the Fock space, ##Q_v## is the conserved charge of the relative current ##J^\mu## and ##A## is a local operator. The first step is to prove that actually ##a(t)## does not depend on ##t##.
$$\frac{da(t)}{dt} = \lim_{V \rightarrow +\infty} \partial_t {\langle \Omega|[Q_V(\vec{x},t),A(\vec{y})]| \Omega \rangle} = $$
$$= \lim_{V \rightarrow +\infty} \partial_t \int_V d\vec{x} {\langle \Omega|[J^0(\vec{x},t),A(\vec{y})]| \Omega \rangle} = $$
$$= \lim_{V \rightarrow +\infty} \int_V d\vec{x} {\langle \Omega|[\partial_t J^0(\vec{x},t),A(\vec{y})]| \Omega \rangle} = $$
I substitute the conservation of the current ##\partial_\mu J^\mu##
$$= - \lim_{V \rightarrow +\infty} \int_V d\vec{x} {\langle \Omega|[\nabla\cdot \vec{J}(\vec{x},t),A(\vec{y})]| \Omega \rangle} = $$
Stoke's theorem
$$= - \lim_{V \rightarrow +\infty} \int_S d\vec{n} {\langle \Omega|[ \vec{J}(\vec{x},t),A(\vec{y})]| \Omega \rangle} = $$
The conclusion is: the commutator is zero since we are doing the limit ##V \rightarrow +\infty##, this means that ##|\vec{x}-\vec{y}| \rightarrow +\infty##.

I do not understand two things.
The first one is the last sentence, I do not see why sending ##|\vec{x}-\vec{y}| \rightarrow +\infty## means that the commutator is zero.
Secondly, essentialy in this proof we change ##J^0## to ##\vec{J}##, why the same argument made about ##\vec{J}## to sent the volume to ##+\infty## was not used to ##J^0##?
Thanks in advance for the help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Applying Stokes's theorem transforms the volume integral in the formula before the last formula to a surface integral over its boundary. Letting the volume "go to infinity", meaning taking the limit that ##V## becomes the entire space, the integral vanishes under the assumption that the limit of the volume integral exists, i.e., that the integrand is going sufficiently quickly to 0 in the limit when the entire surface goes to infinity.

You cannot use the argument directly to ##\dot{J}^0## but you need to convert it via the continuity equation to ##-\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{j}## in order to be able to convert the volume integral to the surface integral over this volume's boundary and then apply the argument with the vanishing of this surface integral when all parts of the surface are pushed to infinity.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Aleolomorfo and dextercioby

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 167 ·
6
Replies
167
Views
11K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K