1
$\begingroup$

Consider the Green's function of fermion operators with imaginary time, $$\mathcal{G}(\nu, \nu', \tau) = - \langle T_\tau c_{\nu}(\tau) c_{\nu'}^\dagger(0)\rangle\tag{1}$$ To show it satisfies the periodicity, $$\mathcal{G}(\nu, \nu', \tau) = - \mathcal{G}(\nu, \nu', \tau+ \beta) \tag{2}$$ one needs to used the following identity, (see eq (71) and (72) on page 16 of http://folk.ntnu.no/johnof/green-2013.pdf) $${\rm Tr}(ABC \ldots XY Z) = {\rm Tr}(ZAB \ldots XY )\tag{71}$$

$$Tr(e^{-\beta H}c_{\nu'}^\dagger e^{H \tau} c_\nu e^{-H \tau} ) = Tr( e^{H \tau} c_\nu e^{-H \tau} e^{-\beta H}c_{\nu'}^\dagger )\tag{3}$$ which is important for the appearance of the minus sign in equation (2). However, since $c_\nu$ and $c_\nu^\dagger$ are fermions, I doubt equation (3) is not correct. My question is whether (3) is indeed correct or not? If (3) is not correct, how can (2) hold?

$\endgroup$
1
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ equation (3) is an identity of the trace operator being cyclic. $\endgroup$
    – Ismasou
    Feb 25, 2020 at 13:53

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

I can see why you might be confused. If the trace were only over the spinor indices on a fermi field, $\psi_\alpha$ say, then there would be an additional minus sign. Here, however, the trace is over the entire many-body Hilbert space and the $c_\nu$'s are just like any other operator and so have a cyclic trace. This is what Ismasou's terse comment is saying.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Hello, I am still confused why if trace over the entire many-body Hilbert space, their don't have minus sign, is in this space fermion field don't have the anti-commutation property? Could you please elaborate more? $\endgroup$
    – Daren
    Aug 31, 2022 at 2:51
1
$\begingroup$
  1. Consider the trace$^1$ $$ {\rm Tr}_{\cal H}(A)~:=~\sum_{i} A^i{}_i \tag{A}$$ of an operator $A:{\cal H}\to {\cal H}$ with matrix elements $$A^i{}_j~:=~\langle i | A |j\rangle\tag{B}$$ in some basis elements $|i\rangle$.

  2. We assume that we can assign a Grassmann-parity $|i|$ to the elements $|i\rangle$ and a Grassmann-parity $|A|$ to the operator $A$. The Grassmann parity of the matrix elements $A^i{}_j$ are then $$|A^i{}_j| = |i| + |A| + |j|. \tag{C}$$

  3. The cyclic trace property $$ {\rm Tr}(AB)~=~ \sum_{ij} A^i{}_j B^j{}_i~=~\sum_{ij} B^j{}_i A^i{}_j~=~{\rm Tr}(BA)\tag{D}$$ holds for a class of infinite-dimensional matrices where the only non-zero matrix elements of the operators $A$ and $B$ are Grassmann-even:
    $$\begin{align} A^i{}_j \text{ Grassmann-odd} \quad\Rightarrow& \quad A^i{}_j~=~0\cr B^i{}_j \text{ Grassmann-odd} \quad\Rightarrow& \quad B^i{}_j~=~0 \end{align}\tag{E} $$

  4. The links and references are implicitly assuming property (E) even for Grassmann-odd operators. This is readily fulfilled in practice, essentially because there are no Grassmann-odd numbers in Nature.

References:

  1. G.D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics, 1990; p. 134 + eq. (3.2.5).

  2. G.D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics, 2000; p. 110 + eq. (3.29).

  3. A. Das, Finite Temperature Field Theory, 1997; p. 3.

--

$^1$ In contrast the supertrace $$ {\rm sTr}_{\cal H}(A)~:=~\sum_{i} (-1)^{|i|(1-|A|)} A^i{}_i \tag{F}$$ is super-cyclic $$\begin{align} {\rm sTr}(AB) ~=~& \sum_{ij} (-1)^{|i|(1-|A|-|B|)}A^i{}_j B^j{}_i\cr ~=~&(-1)^{|A||B|}\sum_{ij} (-1)^{|j|(1-|A|-|B|)}B^j{}_i A^i{}_j\cr ~=~&(-1)^{|A||B|}{\rm sTr}(BA). \end{align}\tag{G}$$

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Why $A^i_{ \ \ j}=0$ if it’s Grassmann-old? Sorry for this stupid question! I am new for this. $\endgroup$
    – Daren
    Aug 31, 2022 at 15:27
  • $\begingroup$ I updated the answer. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Sep 1, 2022 at 6:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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