Understanding S-matrix elements in QFT

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter "Don't panic!"
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Elements Qft S-matrix
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the S-matrix and its role in quantum field theory (QFT), particularly in the context of evolving initial states to final states during scattering processes. Participants explore the definitions, formulas, and interpretations related to the S-operator and its implications in different pictures of quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that the S-operator maps an initial state \(| i \rangle\) to a final state \(| f \rangle\) after a scattering process, suggesting \(| f \rangle = S | i \rangle\).
  • Another participant corrects the formula for the S-operator, indicating that it should involve the free time evolution operator \(U_0(t, t_0)\) and not have a fixed limit.
  • A subsequent participant seeks clarification on the correctness of their understanding regarding the S-operator's role in annihilating and creating states.
  • One participant mentions that in the Schrödinger picture, the correct relationships between initial and final states involve the S-operator and the free evolution operator.
  • Another participant notes that their course has focused on the interaction picture and questions the physical interpretation of the S-operator in that context.
  • One participant expresses that the interaction picture is confusing, while the Schrödinger picture is clearer, explaining how the S-operator relates to free and interacting time evolution.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate formulation of the S-operator and its implications in various pictures of quantum mechanics. There is no consensus on the interpretations or the physical significance of the S-operator across the different perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the limitations of their understanding and the complexity of calculations involving the S-operator, particularly in the context of different pictures of quantum mechanics. There are unresolved aspects regarding the implications of the S-operator in the interaction picture versus the Schrödinger picture.

"Don't panic!"
Messages
600
Reaction score
8
Hi,

I was wondering if I could test my understanding on the S-matrix and its role in evolving initial states of systems to final states (after some scattering process has occurred).

Would it be correct to say the following:

Given a system in an initial state [itex]\vert i \rangle[/itex], the final state, [itex]\vert f \rangle[/itex] of the system, at a sufficiently long time after some scattering process can be mapped to by the so-called S-operator, [itex]S=\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty,\,t_{0}\rightarrow\infty} U\left(t,t_{0}\right)[/itex] (where [itex]U[/itex] is the unitary time-evolution operator) i.e.

[itex]\vert f \rangle=S\vert i \rangle[/itex]​

Is it then correct to say that the S-operator annihilates the initial state [itex]\vert i \rangle[/itex] and creates the final state [itex]\vert f \rangle[/itex]?
Also, would it then be correct to say that the S-matrix element [itex]\langle f\vert S\vert i \rangle[/itex] corresponding to the given scattering process gives the vacuum expectation values (v.e.v) for the appropriate annihilation and creation operators involved?

Sorry for any inaccuracies, hoping to gain a more in depth understanding of the concept. Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The formula you wrote

[itex]S=\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty,\,t_{0}\rightarrow -\infty} U\left(t,t_{0}\right)[/itex]

doesn't have a fixed limit. The correct formula for the S-operator is

[itex]S= \lim_{t\rightarrow\infty,\,t_{0}\rightarrow -\infty} U^{-1}_0\left(t,t_{0}\right) U\left(t,t_{0}\right) = \lim_{t\rightarrow\infty,\,t_{0}\rightarrow -\infty} U_0\left(t_{0}, t\right) U\left(t,t_{0}\right)[/itex]

where [itex]U_0\left(t_{0}, t\right)[/itex] is the free (non-interacting) time evolution operator.
 
ok, thanks for providing the correct one.

Am I correct about the other bits though?
 
Assuming that we are working in the Schroedinger picture and that the initial state [itex]\vert i \rangle[/itex] is at time [itex]t_0 = -\infty[/itex] and the final state [itex]\vert f \rangle[/itex] is at time [itex]t = +\infty[/itex], then correct formulas connecting these states are

[itex]\vert f \rangle=S U_0\left(t,t_{0}\right) \vert i \rangle = U_0\left(t,t_{0}\right) S \vert i \rangle[/itex]​
 
In my course we've been working in the interaction picture.
Would my heuristic explanation of what the S-operator physically does be correct though?
 
In my opinion, the interaction picture is rather confusing and not easy to visualize. But the Schroedinger picture is very transparent. For example, when there is no interaction, which means that [itex]S=1[/itex], then the time evolution of states is governed by the free time evolution operator

[itex]\vert f \rangle=U_0\left(t,t_{0}\right) \vert i \rangle[/itex]​

When there is interaction, the time evolution is governed by the full interacting time evolution operator

[itex]\vert f \rangle=U\left(t,t_{0}\right) \vert i \rangle[/itex]​

This formula is very difficult for calculations, but the whole idea of the scattering theory is that this formula can be simplified without any loss of accuracy


[itex]\vert f \rangle=U\left(t,t_{0}\right) \vert i \rangle = S U_0\left(t,t_{0}\right) \vert i \rangle[/itex]​

This means that you can evolve your state by the (very simple) free evolution operator, and then multiply the result by the S-operator. So, basically, the S-operator tells you by how much the interacting time evolution differs from the free time evolution.
 
Ah, ok. Thank you for your help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K