Units of Fourier expanded field

copernicus1
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
If I write the basic scalar field as $$\phi(x)=\int\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi)^3}\frac1{\sqrt{2E}}\left(ae^{-ik\cdot x}+a^\dagger e^{ik\cdot x}\right),$$ this would seem to imply that the creation and annihilation operators carry mass dimension -3/2. That's the only way I can get the total field ##\phi## to have mass dimension 1, since the ##d^3k## carries three dimensions of mass and the ##1/\sqrt{2E}## factor carries dimension -1/2. This seems contradictory to the fact that ##a^\dagger a## is usually defined as the number operator, which should be dimensionless. Am I missing something here? (My question at first was just how to get the dimensions of the Fourier-expanded field to come out right.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's all about the normalization of the creation and annihilation operators. Using this convention, your normalization is such that the annihilation and creation operators fulfill
$$[a(\vec{p}),a^{\dagger}(\vec{q})]=(2 \pi)^3 \delta^{(3)}(\vec{p}-\vec{q}).$$
Thus ##N(\vec{p})=a^{\dagger}(\vec{p}) a(\vec{p})## are momentum-space number densities, i.e., the dimension for your annihilation and creation operators is, of course, correct since ##N(\vec{p})## must be of mass dimension -3.

Then you directly have for the total energy, e.g.,
$$H=\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \frac{\mathrm{d}^3 \vec{p}}{(2 \pi)^3} \sqrt{m^2+\vec{p}^2} N(\vec{p}).$$

Note that there are many different conventions in the literature concerning the norm of the annihilation and creation operators. The unanimous commutation relation is the equal-time commutation relation of the field operators,
$$[\phi(t,\vec{x}),\dot{\phi}(t,\vec{x})]=\mathrm{i} \delta^{(3)}(\vec{x}-\vec{p}).$$
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Back
Top