What Defines a Local Operator in Position Space?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the definition of local operators in position space, particularly in the context of quantum field theory. Participants explore the mathematical characterization of local operators, their properties, and implications for correlation functions and infinities in quantum theories.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes defining a local operator as one whose matrix elements in position space are a finite sum of delta functions and derivatives of delta functions with constant coefficients.
  • Another participant questions the terminology of "local operators," suggesting that in relativistic quantum field theory, local operators are defined using fundamental field operators that transform under Poincare transformations.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of infinities in loop integrals of perturbation theory, with one participant noting that these infinities are cured by renormalization.
  • Concerns are raised regarding correlation functions, with a participant suggesting that they are usually infinite, particularly in non-free field theories, and questioning whether integrating correlation functions over space leads to the cancellation of infinities.
  • Another participant provides an example of a well-defined correlation function in free field theory, specifically the Feynman propagator, and discusses its mathematical formulation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definition of local operators and the implications of field theory structures on infinities in correlation functions. There is no consensus on the definition or the nature of infinities, indicating that multiple competing views remain.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the formal nature of local operator definitions and the challenges posed by operator-valued distributions. The discussion also touches on the limitations of current definitions and the mathematical complexities involved in defining local operators and handling infinities.

geoduck
Messages
257
Reaction score
2
Is it okay to define a local operator as an operator whose matrix elements in position space is a finite sum of delta functions and derivatives of delta functions with constant coefficients?

Suppose your operator is M, and the matrix element between two position states is <x|M|y>=M(x,y).

It seems that, at least formally, any function f(x,y) can be written as an infinite sum of deltas and derivative of deltas, with constant coefficients. So for example, the Green's function which is \langle x|(\partial^2-m^2)^{-1} |y\rangle=\text{BesselFunction}(x-y) can be written as an infinite sum of deltas and derivatives of deltas, but not a finite sum, so it's not local.

But then what about functions of the momentum operator, such as \log[P] or e^{iP}? Are these local?

Is those functions aren't local, is it safe to say that only polynomials in the momentum operator can be local?

Also, the position operator squared has this matrix element: <x|X2|y>=δ(x-y)x2. If we wanted to expand this matrix element as a sum of delta functions and derivatives with constant coefficients, it would require an infinite amount. However, if we let the coefficients depend on x, then it is a finite amount.

So should the definition of a local operator be modified to as any operator whose matrix elements in position space is a finite sum of delta functions and derivatives of delta functions with coefficients depending only on position?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Where did you get this terminology from? Usually "local operators" are defined in relativistic quantum field theory, using the fundamental field operators as building blocks. In a local QFT, the fundamental field operators are assumed to transform as the corresponding classical fields under proper orthochronous Poincare transformations, which are realized by unitary transformations. For a translation with four-vector ##a^{\mu}## you have, e.g., for a massive vector field
$$\hat{U}_T(a) \hat{A}^{\mu}(x) \hat{U}_T^{\dagger}(a)=\hat{A}^{\mu}(x-a)$$
and for boosts or rotations
$$\hat{U}_L(\Lambda) \hat{A}^{\mu}(x) \hat{U}_T^{\dagger}(\Lambda) = {\Lambda^{\mu}}_{\nu} \hat{A}^{\nu}(\Lambda^{-1} x),$$
where ##\Lambda \in \mathrm{SO}(1,3)^{\uparrow}##.

Such unitary representations of the proper orthochronous Poincare group are called "local realizations". A local operator is then defined as a (formal) polynom of local field operators and its space-time derivatives at the same space-time point. It's only formal, because due to the equal-time canonical commutation or anticommutation relations the field operators are operator-valued distributions that cannot be properly multiplied at the same space-time point in a strict mathematical sense.

That's why the infinities occur in loop integrals of perturbation theory, which are cured by renormalization. There's an alternative treatment, the Epstein-Glaser approach, where these artifacts are avoided by, roughly speaking, smearing out the local field-operator products over a finite space-time volume. For a good introduction into the latter approach, see

G. Scharf, Finite Quantum Electrodynamics, Springer
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: geoduck
vanhees71 said:
That's why the infinities occur in loop integrals of perturbation theory, which are cured by renormalization. There's an alternative treatment, the Epstein-Glaser approach, where these artifacts are avoided by, roughly speaking, smearing out the local field-operator products over a finite space-time volume. For a good introduction into the latter approach, see

G. Scharf, Finite Quantum Electrodynamics, Springer

Thanks. If I have a correlation function, isn't it usually infinity even if all fields in the correlator are at different spacetime points? The exception seems to be a free field theory where everything is finite: therefore it seems infinitys come from structure of hamiltonian, and not the structure of fields.

Also, if fields are distributions, does this mean if you integrate correlation functions over space, all infinitys vanish? This does not seem to be true, because correlation functions in momentum space are infinite and also have momentum conserving delta functions, but momentum correlators are just the spacetime integrals of position ones.
 
For correlation functions of free fields, you get well-defined functions, like the Feynman propagator in the vacuum
$$\mathrm{i} G(x)=\langle 0|\mathrm{T}_c \hat{\phi}(x) \hat{\phi}(0)|0 \rangle.$$
It's given as
$$G(x)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^4} \frac{\mathrm{d}^4 x}{(2 \pi)^4} \frac{1}{p^2-m^2+\mathrm{i} 0^+} \exp(-\mathrm{i} p \cdot x),$$
where the Minkowski product is used in the west-coast convention, i.e., ##p \cdot x=p_{\mu} x^{\mu} = p_0 x_0-\vec{p} \cdot \vec{x}##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
6K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K