Take the 2-minute tour ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

From this mathstack page and in particular Qmechanic's answer:

  1. There exists an $n$-dimensional generalization $$\tag{1} \delta^n({\bf f}({\bf x})) ~=~\sum_{{\bf x}_{(0)}}^{{\bf f}({\bf x}_{(0)})=0}\frac{1}{|\det\frac{\partial {\bf f}({\bf x})}{\partial {\bf x}} |}\delta^n({\bf x}-{\bf x}_{(0)}) $$ of the substitution formula for the Dirac delta distribution under pertinent assumptions, such as e.g., that the function ${\bf f}:\Omega \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n \to \mathbb{R}^n$ has isolated zeros. Here the sum on the rhs. of eq. (1) extends to all the zeros ${\bf x}_{(0)}$ of the function ${\bf f}$.

Also from this page on the Faddeev-Popov procedure they say:

For ordinary functions, a property of the Dirac delta function gives: $\delta(x-x_0) = \left|\frac{df(x)}{dx}\right|_{x=x_0}\delta(f(x))\,$ assuming $f(x)\,$ has only one zero at $x=x_0\,$ and is differentiable there. Integrating both sides gives :$$1 = \left|\frac{df(x)}{dx}\right|_{x=x_0}\int\!dx\,\delta(f(x))\,$$. Extending over $n$ variables, suppose $f(x^i) = 0\,$ for some $x^i_0\,$. Then, replacing $\delta(x-x_0)\,$ with $\prod_i^n \delta^i(x^i-x^i_0)\,$ :$$1 = \left(\prod_i \left|\frac{\partial f(x^i)}{\partial x^i}\right|\right) \int\!\left(\prod_i dx^i\right)\,\delta(f(x^i))\,$$. Recognizing the first factor as the determinant of the diagonal matrix $\frac{\partial f(x^i)}{\partial x^i}\delta^{ij}\,$ (no summation implied), we can generalize to the functional version of the identity: :$$1 = \det\left|\frac{\delta G}{\delta \Omega}\right|_{G=0} \int\!\mathcal{D}\Omega\,\delta[G_a(\phi^\Omega)]\,$$, where $\Delta_F[\phi] \equiv \det\left|\frac{\delta F}{\delta g}\right|_{F=0}\,$ is the Faddeev-Popov determinant.

What I don't understand is that it seems their function $f$ seems to be $f:\Omega \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n \to \mathbb{R}$. How does the generalized Dirac formula $(1)$ work in this case? I don't really understad their notation in:

$$1 = \left(\prod_i \left|\frac{\partial f(x^i)}{\partial x^i}\right|\right) \int\!\left(\prod_i dx^i\right)\,\delta(f(x^i))\,$$

What does $$\frac{\partial f(x^i)}{\partial x^i}$$ mean here?

share|improve this question
add comment

3 Answers 3

up vote 2 down vote accepted

The notation \begin{equation} \frac{ \partial f_i}{ \partial x ^i } \end{equation} means the diagonal elements of the matrix: \begin{equation} J _{ ij} = \frac{ \partial f _i }{ \partial x ^j } \end{equation} where $f_i$ is the component of the vector $\vec{f} (x)$.


I found this very confusing a few weeks ago so. Here is the proof I wrote up for the identity based on the response I received to an earlier question of mine here:

Recall that if $ f (x) $ has one zero at $ x _0 $ then, \begin{equation} \int d x \left| \frac{ df (x) }{ d x } \right| _{ x = x _0 } \delta \left( f (x) \right) = 1 \end{equation} We want to generalize this to instead of having $ f (x) $ we have, $ {\mathbf{g}} ( {\mathbf{a}} ) $ for vectors of arbitrary size. To do this consider the Taylor expansion of $ {\mathbf{g}} $ around its root (we assume it only has one root, $ {\mathbf{a}} _0 $): \begin{equation} g _i ( {\mathbf{a}} ) = \overbrace{g _i ( {\mathbf{a}} _0 )}^0 + \sum _{ j} \frac{ \partial g _i }{ \partial a _j } \bigg|_{ a _0 } ( a _j - a _{ 0,j }) + ... \end{equation} We want to insert this into a delta function, $ \delta ^{ ( n ) } ( {\mathbf{g}} ( {\mathbf{a}} ) ) $. This will only be nonzero near $ {\mathbf{a}} = {\mathbf{a}} _0 $. Thus we have, \begin{align} \delta \left( {\mathbf{g}} ( {\mathbf{a}} ) \right) & = \prod _i \delta \left( g _i ( {\mathbf{a}} ) \right) \\ & = \prod _i \delta \big( \sum _j J _{ ij} ( a _j - a _{ 0,j} ) \big) \end{align} where $ J _{ ij} $ is the Jacobian matrix defined by $ J _{ ij} \equiv \frac{ \partial g _{ i} }{ \partial a _j } \big|_{ a _0 } $. We have, \begin{align} \delta \left( {\mathbf{g}} ( {\mathbf{a}} ) \right) & = \delta \big( \sum _j J _{ 1j} ( a _j - a _{ 0,j} ) \big) \delta \big( \sum _j J _{ 2j} ( a _j - a _{ 0,j} ) \big) ... \end{align} We now use the identity, \begin{equation} \delta ( \alpha ( a - a _0 ) ) = \frac{ \delta ( a - a _0 ) }{ \left| \alpha \right| } \end{equation} We choose to isolate each delta function in the equation above for a different $ a _j $: \begin{align} \delta \big( {\mathbf{g}} ( {\mathbf{a}} ) \big) & = \frac{ \delta ( a _1 - a _{ 0,1 } ) }{ \left| J _{ 1,1 } \right| } \frac{ \delta ( a _2 - a _{ 0,2 } ) }{ \left| J _{ 2,2 } \right| } ... \end{align} If we take the Jacobian matrix to be greater then zero then we have the product: \begin{equation} ( J _{ 1,1 } J _{ 2,2} .. ) ^{-1} = \frac{1}{ \det J } \end{equation} where we have used the fact that the determinant of $ J $ is independent of a unitary transformation. So we finally have, \begin{align} \left( \int \prod _{ i} d a _i \right) \delta ^{ ( n ) } \big( {\mathbf{g}} ( {\mathbf{a}} ) \big) \det \big( \frac{ \partial g _i }{ \partial a _j } \big) & = 1 \end{align} where it is understood that the Jacobian matrix is evaluated at the root of $ {\mathbf{g}} $.

We write the continuum generalization of this equation as, \begin{equation} \int {\cal D} \alpha (x) \delta \left( G ( A ^\alpha ) \right) \det \left( \frac{ \delta G ( A ^\alpha ) }{ \delta \alpha } \right) = 1 \end{equation}

share|improve this answer
    
Hi, thanks for the answer, I have some question though. The notation $J _{ ij} \equiv \frac{ \partial g _{ i} }{ \partial a _j } \big|_{ a _0 }$ makes sense because $g_i$ is a component of the vector function $\bf g$. But in the first paragraph you state that \begin{equation} J _{ ij} = \frac{ \partial f ( x ^i ) }{ \partial x ^j } \end{equation} which doesn't make sense or at least does not agree with the one involving g. I get confused by the notation. Your derivation seems correct and I get that but the first part is a little unclear, which was my original question. Thanks. –  Love Learning Feb 28 at 14:07
    
Whoops, got to exciting to post an answer... My mistake. I updated it now. It is indeed a vector. –  JeffDror Feb 28 at 14:30
    
Makes much more sense to me now :) thanks for your great answer. –  Love Learning Feb 28 at 14:35
1  
I think you have to be more careful here since the function we are considering is $f:\mathbb{R}^n \to \mathbb{R}$ and not $f:\mathbb{R}^n \to \mathbb{R}^m$ then $\frac{\partial f(x^i)}{\partial x^i}$ is simply the normal partial derivative $\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^i}$ and keeping the argument is just misleading. This is different from $\frac{\partial f_i}{\partial x^i}$, which indeed would be a diagonal matrix to the matrix of partial derivatives of all the functions $f_j$ which form an $f:\mathbb{R}^m \to \mathbb{R}^n$ function as $f=(f_1(x^i),f_2(x^i),\cdots,f_m(x^i))$. –  Julio Parra Feb 28 at 16:47
add comment

Again assuming it only has a zero $x^i=x_0^i$ what you have is $$ \delta(f(x^i)) = \frac{\delta(x^1-x_0^1)}{\left|\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^1}\right|_{x^i=x_0^i}} \frac{\delta(x^2-x_0^2)}{\left|\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^2}\right|_{x^i=x_0^i}}\cdots \frac{\delta(x^n-x_0^n)}{\left|\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^n}\right|_{x^i=x_0^i}} = \prod_{j=1}^n \frac{\delta(x^j-x_0^j)}{\left|\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^j}\right|_{x^i=x_0^i}} = \frac{\prod_{j=1}^n\delta(x^j-x_0^j)}{\prod_{j=1}^n\left|\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^j}\right|_{x^i=x_0^i}} $$ then $$ \prod_{j=1}^n\left|\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^j}\right|_{x^i=x_0^i} \delta(f(x)) = \prod_{j=1}^n\delta(x^j-x_0^j) $$ and integrating at both sides in all the variables $\int\left(\prod_{j=1}^n dx^j\right)$ you get $$ \int\left(\prod_{j=1}^n dx^j\right)\prod_{j=1}^n\delta(x^j-x_0^j)=\int\prod_{j=1}^n dx^j\delta(x^j-x_0^j)=1 $$ and since the derivatives are evaluated in the zero and are just numbers $$ \int\left(\prod_{j=1}^n dx^j\right)\prod_{j=1}^n\left|\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^j}\right|_{x^i=x_0^i} \delta(f(x)) = \prod_{j=1}^n\left|\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^j}\right|_{x^i=x_0^i}\int\left(\prod_{j=1}^n dx^j\right) \delta(f(x^i)) $$ so finally we get $$ 1== \prod_{j=1}^n\left|\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^j}\right|_{x^i=x_0^i}\int\left(\prod_{j=1}^n dx^j\right) \delta(f(x^i)) $$

The notation is a bit clumsy but I believe this is what you were looking for.

share|improve this answer
2  
+1 Nice proof! Sorry, my answer is essentially identical to yours... I didn't see you already posted. –  JeffDror Feb 28 at 12:39
add comment

What confused me was the explanation from the tangentbundle homepage (second yellow box in OP). The generalization is straightforward, for simple zeros we have:

$$\bigg\vert\frac{\mathrm{d}f(x)}{\mathrm{d}x}\bigg\vert_{x_0}\delta[f(x)] = \delta(x-x_0)$$ integrate

$$\int \mathrm{d}x\,\bigg\vert\frac{\mathrm{d}f(x)}{\mathrm{d}x}\bigg\vert_{x_0}\delta[f(x)] = 1$$ generalize $$\int \mathrm{d}{\bf x\,\bigg\vert \mathrm{det}\frac{\partial f(x)}{\partial x}\bigg\vert_{x_0}\delta[f(x)]} = 1$$ generalize $$\int \mathcal{D}\alpha(x)\,\bigg\vert \mathrm{Det}\frac{\delta G(A^\alpha)}{\delta \alpha}\bigg\vert_{A^\alpha_0}\delta[G(A^\alpha)] = 1,$$ where it is to be understood that $A^\alpha_0$ is such that $G(A^\alpha_0)=0.$

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.