Why is the Green's function equal to the vacuum expectation of the field?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between Green's functions and vacuum expectation values in quantum field theory (QFT). Participants explore the mathematical expressions that relate these concepts, the implications of these relationships, and seek explanations for their validity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the Green's function for a real scalar field, \(\Delta_F(x-x')\), is proportional to the vacuum expectation value \(\langle 0| T\phi(x)\phi(x')|0\rangle\), and similarly for a 4-spinor field, \(S_F(x-x')\) is proportional to \(\langle 0| T\psi(x)\bar{\psi}(x')|0\rangle\).
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the underlying explanation for these relationships, stating they could prove them through direct calculation but find no satisfactory explanation in QFT texts.
  • Another participant suggests that \("F"\) in the subscript denotes "Feynman," referencing a source that discusses this notation.
  • A participant proposes that \(\Delta_F(x-x')\) represents the field's response to a disturbance at \(x'\), paralleling the quantum amplitude for a particle to propagate from \(x'\) to \(x\) as expressed in the vacuum expectation value.
  • Further elaboration indicates that these expressions hold under certain conditions, including the fields satisfying relativistic equations of motion, canonical (anti)commutation relations, and specific boundary conditions.
  • One participant recommends further reading in A. Zee's "QFT in a Nutshell" for more accessible explanations of advanced concepts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and agreement regarding the explanations for the relationships between Green's functions and vacuum expectation values. No consensus is reached on a definitive explanation, and multiple interpretations are presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants acknowledge that the discussion involves complex concepts that may depend on specific definitions and assumptions, particularly regarding the nature of the Green's functions and the conditions under which the relationships hold.

pellman
Messages
683
Reaction score
6
In QFT expressions such as these hold:

real scalar:
[tex]\Delta_F(x-x')\propto\langle 0| T\phi(x)\phi(x')|0\rangle[/tex]

4-spinor
[tex]S_F(x-x')]\propto\langle 0| T\psi(x)\bar{\psi}(x')|0\rangle[/tex]

where T is the time-ordering operation and the proportionality depends on the choice of normalization.

I can prove these by direct calculation against other means of deriving the Green's functions but what is the explanation as to why it holds? I don't find one in my QFT texts.

Extra credit: what the does "F" subscript denote? Seems to be a standard notation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
F for Feynman. I looked in old good Roman's "Introduction to quantum field theory" - he does it, but it was long ago that I studied this subject, so I will stop at that.
 
I'm only just learning this too, so take with a chunk of salt:

[tex]\Delta_F(x-x')[/tex] is a Green's function of the classical field's equation of motion, i.e. it represents the field evolving undisturbed except for a brief disturbance at x'. We might then reasonably think of [tex]\Delta_F(x-x')[/tex] as representing the value of the field at x that results from the disturbance created at x' (really I guess this makes more sense for the retarded Green's function). But [tex]\langle 0| T\phi(x)\phi(x')|0\rangle[/tex] represents a similar idea in the quantum theory: the amplitude for a particle (disturbance in the field) created at x' to propagate to x, or vice versa.
 
Thanks! That helps actually.
 
pellman said:
In QFT expressions such as these hold:

real scalar:
[tex]\Delta_F(x-x')\propto\langle 0| T\phi(x)\phi(x')|0\rangle[/tex]

4-spinor
[tex]S_F(x-x')]\propto\langle 0| T\psi(x)\bar{\psi}(x')|0\rangle[/tex]

where T is the time-ordering operation and the proportionality depends on the choice of normalization.

I can prove these by direct calculation against other means of deriving the Green's functions but what is the explanation as to why it holds? I don't find one in my QFT texts.

Extra credit: what the does "F" subscript denote? Seems to be a standard notation.

Take a look at my post #8 in this thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=420953

Basically, those expressions represent the amplitude for a particle to propagate
from x' to x, subject to (a) the field satisfies relativistic (KG or Dirac) eqn of motion,
(b) the field satisfies canonical (anti)commutation relations (so that spacelike-separated
events cannot exert a causal influence on each other), and (c) boundary conditions (which
determine whether you're dealing with (say) a retarded propagator, or (more usually in
QFT) a Feynman propagator, etc.

So, in a nutshell, these relations hold because the quantum fields were constructed to
satisfy (suitably causal) relativity and also the basic principles of quantum theory. :-)
 
I would recommend further reading in A.Zee's <QFT in a Nutshell> book. He has some nice, edible explanations for some advanced concepts.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K