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

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the implications of a Hamiltonian that is not bounded below, particularly in the context of quantizing the Dirac field. Participants explore the mathematical formulation of the Hamiltonian, the significance of occupation numbers, and the consequences of creating additional particles.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants explain that a Hamiltonian is considered "bounded from below" if there exists a minimum energy level that can be achieved, while others describe how the Hamiltonian for the Dirac field can lead to energies approaching negative infinity by creating more particles with the operator ##b^\dagger##.
  • One participant notes that the Fock states with occupation numbers ##N_b(\vec{p},\sigma)## are eigenstates of the Hamiltonian, which can yield eigenvalues that decrease indefinitely as more states are occupied.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on the meaning of ##N_b(\vec{p},\sigma)## and its role in the eigenstate equation, indicating a need for deeper understanding of the notation used.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of normal ordering for achieving a finite Hamiltonian that is bounded from below, suggesting that quantizing Dirac fields as fermions is necessary for this condition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the implications of the Hamiltonian not being bounded below. While some points are clarified, there remains uncertainty about specific terms and their meanings, indicating that the discussion is not fully resolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in understanding arise from the complexity of the mathematical formalism and the specific definitions of terms like ##N_b## and ##\sigma##, which are not universally agreed upon or clearly defined in the discussion.

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