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.

I'm working through my old notes on QFT (cf. Ref 1) and I'm not quite sure how to approach the derivation of the Hamiltonian density for a free scalar field (question 2.3 on page 19) and the subsequent derivation of the components of the energy-momentum four-vector in terms of the new field operators. Could you point me in the right direction?

$${\mathcal{H}~=~\frac{1}{2}\left[\left(\partial_t\phi\right)^{2}+\left(\nabla\phi\right)^{2}+m^{2}\phi^{2}\right]\textrm{.}}$$

References:

  1. M Dasgupta, AN INTRODUCTION TO QUANTUM FIELD THEORY, Lecture presented at the School for Experimental High Energy Physics Students Somerville College, Oxford, September 2009.
share|improve this question
    
Do you need full derivation? –  PhysiXxx Sep 4 '13 at 14:56

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

First question.

Let's have Lagrangian $$ L = \frac{1}{2}\left( (\partial \varphi )^{2} - m^{2}\varphi^{2}\right) . $$ Stress-energy tensor is equal to $$ T^{\alpha \beta} = \frac{\partial L}{\partial_{\alpha }\varphi }\partial^{\beta}\varphi - g^{\alpha \beta}L = \partial^{\alpha}\varphi \partial^{\beta}\varphi - \frac{g^{\alpha \beta }}{2}((\partial \varphi )^{2} - m^{2}\varphi^{2}). $$ Then $$ H = \int T^{00}d^{3}\mathbf r = ..., \quad \mathbf P^{i} = \int T^{0i} d^{3}\mathbf r = ..., \qquad (.1) $$ and you have an answer.

Second question.

Let's have the solution for scalar real field: $$ \varphi (x) = \int \left( b_{\mathbf k}^{*}e^{ikx} + b_{\mathbf k}e^{-ikx}\right)\frac{d^{3}\mathbf k}{\sqrt{(2 \pi )^{3}2\epsilon_{\mathbf k}}}, \quad kx = \varepsilon_{\mathbf k}x^{0} - (\mathbf k \cdot \mathbf x). \qquad (.2) $$ So you can rewrite $(.1)$ as $$ \mathbf P = \int \mathbf k b_{\mathbf k}b_{\mathbf k}^{*}d^{3}\mathbf k , \quad H = \int \epsilon_{\mathbf k} b_{\mathbf k}b_{\mathbf k}^{*}d^{3}\mathbf k \qquad (.3) $$ (where I ignored the infinite constant summand as we can do for the free field).

Then you want to rewrite operators of $(.3)$ expressions in terms of

$$ \hat {\varphi} , \quad \hat {\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot {\varphi }}} = \hat {\dot {\varphi }} = \hat {\pi} . $$ You can do next steps.

  1. To multiply $(.2)$ by $e^{-i(\mathbf q \cdot \mathbf x )}$ and then take an integration over $\frac{d^{3}\mathbf r}{\sqrt{(2 \pi )^{3}}}$. You'll get $$ \int \varphi (\mathbf r , t) e^{-i (\mathbf q \cdot \mathbf r )}\frac{d^{3}\mathbf r }{\sqrt{(2 \pi )^{3}}} = ... = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \epsilon_{\mathbf q}}}\left( b_{-\mathbf q}^{*}e^{i \epsilon_{\mathbf q} t} + b_{\mathbf q}e^{-i \epsilon_{\mathbf q} t}\right) . \qquad (.4) $$
  2. To take t-derivation of $(.4)$. You'll get $$ \int \pi (\mathbf r , t) e^{-i (\mathbf q \cdot \mathbf r )}\frac{d^{3}\mathbf r }{\sqrt{(2 \pi )^{3}}} = i\sqrt{\frac{\epsilon_{\mathbf q} }{2}}\left( -b_{\mathbf q}e^{- i\epsilon_{\mathbf q} t} + b_{-\mathbf q}^{*}e^{i \epsilon_{\mathbf q} t} \right) \qquad (.5) $$
  3. Now you have from $(.4), (.5)$ a system of linear equations. You can express $b_{\mathbf q}$ from these equations as function of $\varphi , \pi$.
  4. You can use the hermitian nature of $\hat {b}_{\mathbf q}, \hat {b}^{+}_{\mathbf q}$. By assuming the $\hat {b}_{\mathbf q}$ expression you can get $\hat {b}^{+}_{\mathbf q}$ expression. Finally, you'll get $$ \hat {b}_{\mathbf q } = \int \left( \epsilon_{\mathbf q} \hat {\varphi} + i \hat {\pi} \right)e^{i q x}\frac{d^{3}\mathbf r }{\sqrt{2 \epsilon_{\mathbf q} (2 \pi )^{3}}} , \quad \hat {b}_{\mathbf q }^{+} = \int \left( \epsilon_{\mathbf q} \hat {\varphi} - i \hat {\pi} \right)e^{-i q x}\frac{d^{3}\mathbf r }{\sqrt{2 \epsilon_{\mathbf q} (2 \pi )^{3}}}. $$
  5. Use these expressions for the transformation of $(.3)$ expression.

If you want some details of derivations which were used in steps above, I'll help you.

share|improve this answer
1  
Ok. I follow the approach in the first part and I'm working through it now. The approach in the second part makes sense to me (bringing it into ${\pi}$ etc.) up to about step 4, but this is a lack of knowledge on my part. I'm going to read more... Thank you very much for your assistance! –  d3pd Sep 5 '13 at 7:09

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.