1
$\begingroup$

Can anyone show explicitly how the QFT total angular momentum operator $$\hat{\vec{J}} = - i \int \frac{d^3p}{(2 \pi)^3} \hat{a}^{\dagger}_{\vec{p}} ( \vec{p} \times \nabla_{\vec{p}}) \hat{a}_{\vec{p}}$$ gives $$\hat{\vec{J}} |\vec{0} \, \rangle = 0~?$$

Derivation of all the above is here. The question is essentially the same but I can't really implement the existing answer mathematically.

$|\vec{0} \, \rangle$ being a momentum eigenstate.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ you have an annihilation operator to the very right, and the integral is roughly a sum of many such terms. $\endgroup$ – Phoenix87 Dec 31 '14 at 14:55
  • $\begingroup$ Is it that simple? $\endgroup$ – SuperCiocia Dec 31 '14 at 14:56
  • $\begingroup$ hang on you changed the question while I was typing my comment. So the ket you put there is not the vacuum, right? $\endgroup$ – Phoenix87 Dec 31 '14 at 14:57
  • $\begingroup$ It's the vacuum for the momentum. $a_p |0\rangle=0$. What about the action og $J$ on a state of generic momentum $q$, $|q\rangle$? $\endgroup$ – SuperCiocia Dec 31 '14 at 15:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ There's no "vacuum for the momentum". Either it is the vacuum, i.e. annihilating it gives just zero, or it is a one-particle state with zero momentum, i.e. annihilating it with $a_0$ gives the vacuum, or, rather, it is created from the vacuum by $a^\dagger_0$. Which do you mean? $\endgroup$ – ACuriousMind Dec 31 '14 at 15:09
1
$\begingroup$

If the state you're using is just the vacuum, then my comment to your question applies. If otherwise $|\mathbf 0\rangle = a_{\mathbf 0}^\dagger|0\rangle$, then just use that $[a_{\mathbf p},a_{\mathbf q}^\dagger] = \delta_{\mathbf p,\mathbf q}1$, with $\mathbf q=\mathbf 0$ to fix the integral at the term with $\mathbf p = \mathbf 0$ through the Dirac delta $\delta_{\mathbf p,\mathbf 0}$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ How can you, mathematically, take the curl of the annihilation operator? $\endgroup$ – SuperCiocia Dec 31 '14 at 17:07
  • $\begingroup$ In fact you are not taking any derivative of the annihilation operator but rather the functions associated to the "state vector" $\endgroup$ – Phoenix87 Dec 31 '14 at 17:09
  • $\begingroup$ And how do I take the derivative of a ket? $\endgroup$ – SuperCiocia Dec 31 '14 at 17:41
  • $\begingroup$ hello? what functions? There's only a ket...? $\endgroup$ – SuperCiocia Jan 2 '15 at 17:49
  • $\begingroup$ Those kets arise from the Fock Hilbert space, which is constructed out of single particle Hilbert spaces, which you can take to be $L^2$ spaces, that is functions. $\endgroup$ – Phoenix87 Jan 3 '15 at 13:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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