What is a Label? QM & QFT Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter resurgance2001
  • Start date Start date
resurgance2001
Messages
197
Reaction score
9
In QM, position is an operator, while in QFT, it is a label. Could someone help me understand what is meant by the term "label" - just in the simplest terms possible? Cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
resurgance2001 said:
In QM, position is an operator, while in QFT, it is a label. Could someone help me understand what is meant by the term "label" - just in the simplest terms possible? Cheers

It may help to know that time is a "label" in both QFT and QM. In both theories the operators correspond to observables, which are the things whose expected values we calculate from the state of the system. The labels identify a particular state of the system, the starting point for the calculation.

In QM, we can ask: What do we expect the position observable to be at a given time? What do we expect the other observables to be? This is using time as a label and treating position as an observable like the others.

In QFT, we can ask: What do we expect the value of the observables to be at a given time and at a given position? This is using time and position as labels.
 
  • Like
Likes resurgance2001
What's meant here is that you label your degrees of freedom. E.g., if you have a spinless particle in QM, you can take the three components of the position operator as a complete set of independent observables, i.e., the Cartesian coordinates ##(x_j)=(x_1,x_2,x_3)##. Here the "label" is just the index ##j## to enumerate the components. If you have a system of ##N## spinless particles, you can take the ##3N## position coordinates. Then you have a label running from ##1## to ##N##. The observables are functions of time (in the Heisenberg picture also all your operators that represent observables in quantum mechanics are a function of time, and the Heisenberg picture is the most natural one in going heuristically from classical mechanics in Hamiltonian form over to quantum theory).

Now in a field theory you have a continuum theory. The dynamical variables are fields, i.e., quantities which are functions of position and time. It gives you the value of the quantity (e.g., an electromagnetic field in terms of the field-strengths components ##\vec{E}## and ##\vec{B}##). This means here you have two kinds of labels, a discrete one, enumerating the components ##(E_j)=(E_1,E_2,E_3)## of the field components and the position ##\vec{x}## in space where you measure these components.

In quantum field theory thus the position arguments in the field operators are just usual number, because they are in that sense a kind of continuous label for the infinitely many degrees of freedom represented by these fields.

Note that time is always a parameter in quantum theory, no matter, whether it's a quantized point-particle system (applicable in non-relativistic quantum theory and unfortunately often called the "first quantization") or a many-body system of indefinite particle number (applicable in both non-relativistic and relativistic quantum theory), i.e., a quantum-field theory.
 
  • Like
Likes resurgance2001, Heinera, bhobba and 1 other person
resurgance2001 said:
In QM, position is an operator, while in QFT, it is a label. Could someone help me understand what is meant by the term "label" - just in the simplest terms possible? Cheers
This is what happens when you go from systems with a finite number of degrees of freedom to an infinite number of continuous degrees of freedom which is a field theory. This happens at the classical level before any kind of quantisation. The point is when you have a finite number of degrees of freedom, the associated coordinates are variables which encode the locations of particles and their variations represent different positions/configurations of the mechanical system in the usual sense. When you have an infinite number of continuous degrees of freedom such as a fluid, you consider your space positions to be fixed points in space which do not vary, in contrast to the previous situation where one takes the positions of the discrete system to be moving in space. In the case of a field, positions in space are fixed and do not move, instead it is the field value defined over these position labels which varies, giving rise to wave-like motion whose form depends on the kind of interactions one defines between the degrees of freedom. If you'd like an example of a field that would make this a bit more tangible, let us know!
EDIT: Only noticed vanhees71's nice post while posting!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes resurgance2001, Heinera and bhobba
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
I am not sure if this falls under classical physics or quantum physics or somewhere else (so feel free to put it in the right section), but is there any micro state of the universe one can think of which if evolved under the current laws of nature, inevitably results in outcomes such as a table levitating? That example is just a random one I decided to choose but I'm really asking about any event that would seem like a "miracle" to the ordinary person (i.e. any event that doesn't seem to...

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
34
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
115
Views
9K
Back
Top