What is a Label? QM & QFT Explained

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter resurgance2001
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of "label" in quantum mechanics (QM) and quantum field theory (QFT), exploring the differences in how position is treated in these two frameworks. Participants seek to clarify the meaning of "label" in the context of degrees of freedom and observables, touching on theoretical implications and interpretations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants explain that in QM, position is treated as an operator, while in QFT, it is referred to as a label, which identifies particular states of the system.
  • It is noted that time serves as a label in both QM and QFT, with operators corresponding to observables whose expected values are calculated from the system's state.
  • One participant describes how degrees of freedom are labeled in QM, using the example of a spinless particle with Cartesian coordinates, where the index enumerates the components.
  • Another participant elaborates on the transition from finite degrees of freedom in QM to infinite continuous degrees of freedom in field theory, emphasizing that positions in space are fixed points in QFT.
  • There is a mention of the dynamical variables in field theory being fields, which are functions of position and time, and how position arguments in field operators act as continuous labels for these degrees of freedom.
  • Participants discuss the implications of having fixed positions in field theory compared to varying positions in discrete systems, highlighting the nature of wave-like motion in fields.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various interpretations of the term "label" and its implications in QM and QFT, but there is no consensus on a singular definition or understanding. Multiple competing views remain regarding the conceptual transition from QM to QFT.

Contextual Notes

Some participants point out that the discussion involves complex theoretical concepts that may depend on specific definitions and assumptions about degrees of freedom and observables in both QM and QFT.

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   Reactions: 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   Reactions: 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   Reactions: resurgance2001, Heinera and bhobba

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • · Replies 473 ·
16
Replies
473
Views
33K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 115 ·
4
Replies
115
Views
10K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K