I Wick's theorem and Nucleon scattering

Ken Gallock
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Hi.
My question is about nucleon-nucleon scattering.
In David Tong's lecture note, he discusses Wick's theorem and nucleon scattering (page 58-60).
My problem is that I don't know how to calculate the second line of eq(3.48):
\begin{equation}
<p'_1, p'_2|:\psi^\dagger (x_1) \psi (x_1) \psi^\dagger (x_2) \psi (x_2): |p_1, p_2>
=<p'_1, p'_2|\psi^\dagger (x_1) \psi^\dagger (x_2) |0><0| \psi (x_1) \psi (x_2) |p_1, p_2>.
\end{equation}

Especially,
1. what happened to normal ordering?
2. where ##|0><0|## came from?

My guess is normal ordering was used for ##\psi (x_1) \psi^\dagger (x_2) \rightarrow \psi^\dagger (x_2) \psi (x_1) ##. But isn't normal ordering used for ordering ##\hat{b}, \hat{c}## rather than ##\psi##?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1. The right-hand side is written in a normal-ordered form, so we can omit the normal-ordering symbol.

2. The calculation is to be don in free-field theory. ##\psi## is an annihilation operator. The two ##psi##'s either annihilate the two particles in the initial state, leaving the ground state (up to a factor which needs to be computed), or they annihilate the state completely. Thus, if we insert a complete set of states, only the ground state will contribute.
 
Sorry for my late reply. Somehow I didn't get the notification. :(
Your reply helped me a lot. I did calculation as follows:

\begin{align}
&\langle f|: \psi^\dagger(x_1)\psi(x_1)\psi^\dagger(x_2)\psi(x_2) :|i\rangle \notag \\
&=\langle f| \psi^\dagger(x_1)\psi^\dagger(x_2)\psi(x_1)\psi(x_2) |i\rangle \notag \\
&=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \langle f| \psi^\dagger(x_1)\psi^\dagger(x_2) |n\rangle \langle n | \psi(x_1)\psi(x_2) |i\rangle \notag \\
&\sim \sum_{n=0}^\infty \langle 0| bb(b^\dagger +c)(b^\dagger+c ) |n\rangle \langle n | (b+c^\dagger)
(b+c^\dagger)b^\dagger b^\dagger |0 \rangle \notag \\
&=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \langle 0| bbb^\dagger b^\dagger |n\rangle \langle n | bbb^\dagger b^\dagger |0 \rangle \notag \\
&=\langle 0| bbb^\dagger b^\dagger |0 \rangle \langle 0 | bbb^\dagger b^\dagger |0 \rangle + \sum_{n=1}^\infty \langle 0| bbb^\dagger b^\dagger |n\rangle \langle n | bbb^\dagger b^\dagger |0 \rangle \notag \\
&=\langle 0| bbb^\dagger b^\dagger |0 \rangle \langle 0 | bbb^\dagger b^\dagger |0 \rangle \notag \\
&=\langle f| \psi^\dagger(x_1)\psi^\dagger(x_2) |0 \rangle \langle 0 | \psi(x_1)\psi(x_2) |i\rangle . \notag
\end{align}
 
Hi, thanks for putting how you did the calculation. I am also going through Tong's (generally excellent) course and came across the same issue. For future reference, I think the reason we may treat psi in this case as an annihilation operator and psi^+ as a creation operator is because only the 'b' annihilation component of the psi, used in both of them, can 'get rid' of the 2 b^+ in the final state, and only the 'b^+' creation component of the psi+ can build them back up again at a different momentum (remember that the process we are looking at is scattering, implying change of momentum, not the zeroth order non-interacting term). Thus, psi ~ b and psi^+ ~ b^+, and we may simply normal-order the psi, psi^+ for convenience. I agree that it is not made very clear in the notes.
 
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...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Back
Top