What does it mean for the Hamiltonian to not be bounded?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of a Hamiltonian that is not bounded below, specifically in the context of quantizing the Dirac field using commutation relations. The Hamiltonian is expressed as $$H = \int\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi)^3}E_p \sum_{s=1}^2 \Big( a^{s\dagger}_\textbf{p}a^s_\textbf{p} -b^{s\dagger}_{\textbf{p}}b^s_{\textbf{p}} \Big)$$, indicating that energy can be lowered indefinitely by creating more particles with the operator ##b^\dagger##. This leads to the conclusion that the Hamiltonian lacks a lower bound, as the eigenvalues can approach negative infinity by increasing the occupation number of ##b##-particles. To achieve a finite Hamiltonian that is bounded from below, one must quantize Dirac fields as fermions, adhering to the spin-statistics theorem.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum field theory concepts, particularly the Dirac field.
  • Familiarity with Hamiltonian mechanics and eigenvalues in quantum systems.
  • Knowledge of Fock space and occupation number representation.
  • Comprehension of the spin-statistics theorem and its implications for particle statistics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the spin-statistics theorem in quantum field theory.
  • Learn about the quantization of Dirac fields as fermions and its consequences.
  • Explore the concept of normal ordering in quantum mechanics to achieve bounded Hamiltonians.
  • Investigate the role of Fock states and their eigenvalue equations in quantum systems.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory, theoretical physicists working on particle physics, and researchers interested in the implications of unbounded Hamiltonians in quantum systems.

Turbotanten
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
If we were to quantize the Dirac field using commutation relations instead of anticommutation relations we would end up with the Hamiltonian, see Peskin and Schroeder

$$
H = \int\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi)^3}E_p
\sum_{s=1}^2
\Big(
a^{s\dagger}_\textbf{p}a^s_\textbf{p}
-b^{s\dagger}_{\textbf{p}}b^s_{\textbf{p}}
\Big). \tag{3.90}
$$

They write that this Hamiltonian is not bounded below. And that by creating more and more particles with ##b^\dagger## we could lower the energy indefinitely.

What do they mean when they say that we could lower the energy indefinitely by creating more and more particles with ##b^\dagger##? Do they mean that we can lower the energy to negative infinity or do they just mean that we can lower the energy indefinitely to get to the ground state of the system?

Also what does it mean for the Hamiltonian to not be bounded below?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A Hamiltonian is called "bounded from below", if there exists ##E_0## such that for all vectors in Hilbert space
$$\langle \psi|\hat{H}|\psi \rangle \geq E_0.$$

Now you can show easily that (after putting everything in a large box, so that the momentum-spin Fock states become true Hilbert-space states) the Fock states with ##N_b(\vec{p},\sigma)## are eigenstates of the Hamiltonian with eigenvalues ##-\sum_{\vec{p},\sigma} E_p N(\vec{p},\sigma)##, which you can make ##\rightarrow -\infty## by just occupying more and more single-b-particle states.

To get a finite Hamiltonian (via normal ordering) bounded from below you have to quantize Dirac fields as fermions, which holds for any fields with an half-integer spin number. This is the famous spin-statistics theorem.

For details about the general case, see Weinberg, Quantum Theory of Fields, Vol. 1.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: andrien
Great answer but I kinda got lost in your second paragraph.

What does ##N_b(\vec{p},\sigma)## represent? I understand that ##\vec{p}## is the momentum but what is ##\sigma## and ##N_b## in your case?

When you write that ##N_b(\vec{p},\sigma)## are eigenstates of the Hamiltonian do you mean that
##H N_b(\vec{p},\sigma) = -E_pN_b(\vec{p},\sigma)##
 
b^{s\dagger}b^s is some sort of occupation number and counts the number of particles. More number of particles created with b^{\dagger} will increase this occupation number and will give negative contribution to Hamiltonian.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and Turbotanten
The Fock states are defined as the common eigenstates of the number operators ##\hat{N}_{a}(\vec{p},\sigma)=\hat{a}^{\dagger}(\vec{p},\sigma) \hat{a}(\vec{p},\sigma)## and ##\hat{N}_{b}(\vec{p},\sigma)=\hat{b}^{\dagger}(\vec{p},\sigma) \hat{b}(\vec{p},\sigma)##. These states are eigenstates of the Hamiltonian since (for particles in a finite box)
$$\hat{H}=\sum_{\vec{p},\sigma} E_(p) [\hat{N}_a(\vec{p},\sigma)-\hat{N}_b(\vec{p},\sigma)].$$
If you, e.g., choose a state with all ##N_a(\vec{p},\sigma)=0## you can make the eigenvalue of ##\hat{H}## arbitrarily small, i.e., make it ##\rightarrow \infty## by occupying more and more ##b##-particle states.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Turbotanten
vanhees71 said:
The Fock states are defined as the common eigenstates of the number operators ##\hat{N}_{a}(\vec{p},\sigma)=\hat{a}^{\dagger}(\vec{p},\sigma) \hat{a}(\vec{p},\sigma)## and ##\hat{N}_{b}(\vec{p},\sigma)=\hat{b}^{\dagger}(\vec{p},\sigma) \hat{b}(\vec{p},\sigma)##. These states are eigenstates of the Hamiltonian since (for particles in a finite box)
$$\hat{H}=\sum_{\vec{p},\sigma} E_(p) [\hat{N}_a(\vec{p},\sigma)-\hat{N}_b(\vec{p},\sigma)].$$
If you, e.g., choose a state with all ##N_a(\vec{p},\sigma)=0## you can make the eigenvalue of ##\hat{H}## arbitrarily small, i.e., make it ##\rightarrow \infty## by occupying more and more ##b##-particle states.

Thanks! Now I finally get it!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K