12
$\begingroup$

When deriving LSZ reduction theorem Weinberg in his QFT book have assumed n-point generalized Green functions, $$ G(q_{1},...,q_{n}) = \int d^{4}x_{1}...d^{4}x_{n}e^{-i\prod_{i =1}^{n}q_{j}x_{j}} \langle |\hat {T}\left( \hat {O}_{l}(x_{1})\hat {A}_{2}(x_{2})...\hat A_{n}(x_{n})\right) |\rangle , \quad (1) $$ where $\hat {O}_{l}(x)$ transforms under the irreducible representation of the Lorentz group as some free field $\hat {\Psi}_{l}(x)$. By insertion between $\hat {O}_{l}(x_{1})$ and $\hat {A}_{2}(x_{2})$ functional unit $$ \sum_{i, \sigma}\int d^{3}\mathbf p | (\mathbf p , \sigma )_{i}\rangle \langle (\mathbf p , \sigma )_{i}| $$ and by allocation of one-particle states from it he have "reduced" (with some hints) $(1)$ to the form $$ G(q_{1},...,q_{n}) \to f(q)\sum_{\sigma}\langle | \hat {O}_{l}(0)| (\mathbf q_{1}, \sigma )\rangle \times $$

$$ \times \int d^{4}x_{2}...e^{-iq_{2}x_{2}-...}\langle (\mathbf q_{1}, \sigma ) |\hat {T}\left( \hat {A}(x_{2})...\right) | \rangle \delta (q_{1} + ... + q_{n}). \qquad (2) $$ Here $f(q)$ contains the pole of the first order $\frac{1}{q^{2} - m^{2} - i\varepsilon}$ and $q = q_{1} + ... + q_{r}$.

After that he says that in $(2)$ there is equality $\hat {O}_{l}(0)| (\mathbf q_{1}, \sigma )\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{(2 \pi )^{3}}}Nu^{\sigma}_{l}(\mathbf q_{1})| \rangle $.

So I have the question: why was factor $N$ (in comparison with free field-like expression $\hat {O}_{l}(0)| (\mathbf q_{1}, \sigma )\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{(2 \pi )^{3}}}u^{\sigma}_{l}(\mathbf q_{1})| \rangle $) appeared? What is its physical sense? Is its appearance connected with the fact that $| \rangle$ doesn't refer to the "usual" vacuum? Can you also comment this statement, if you please?

$\endgroup$
0

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

Good question. First, I think, we can use Lorentz invariance, i.e, use the properties on how state $\Psi_{\mathbf{q_1} \sigma}$ transforms and how $O_l$ transforms to get to coefficient function, as we did in Chapter 5 when we went down the similar route to obtain coefficient functions from Lorentz transformation of $\Psi_l$ and creation operator (which transforms like a single particle state). Ultimately, we will get again from those conditions that: \begin{align*} (\Psi_0, O_l(0) \Psi_{\mathbf{q_1} \sigma}) = (2 \pi)^{-3/2} N u_l(\mathbf{q_1}, \sigma), \end{align*} where unsurprisingly we will a coefficient function, because in some sense $O_l^\dagger$ is creating a particle (think of a simple case, when $O_l$ is just a scalar field operator); but it could be in general any operator with 'hitherto' unknown normalization, i.e. it might not have the normalization as if it were an operator for a field appearing in the Lagrangian. Basically, we can't say if this general operator will have the same normalization; we are being generic. Next, Weinberg says that if $O_l$ is actually some field operator $\Psi_l$ then at least we should renormalize the fields by $1/N$ so that we can just treat $\Psi_l$ normally in Feynman rules such that: $(\Psi_0, \Psi_l(0) \Psi_{\mathbf{q} \sigma}) = (2 \pi)^{-3/2} u_l(\mathbf{q}, \sigma)$. So, at least in this case N is gone by renormalizing the field operator. This is what we want out of normal field operator (try a scalar field operator for sanity check now after renormalizing in this expression). Hope this helps.

$\endgroup$

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.