In Peskin/Schroeder there is an explicit calculation showing that the retarded Green's function of the real Klein-Gordon field

$$D_R(x-y) ~\equiv~ \theta(x^0 - y^0) \langle 0 | [\phi(x), \phi(y)] |0\rangle\tag{2.55} $$

fulfills the equation

$$(\partial^2 + m^2) D_R(x-y) = -i\delta^4(x-y).\tag{2.56}$$

I can't follow one specific step in the derivation: It seems like they are doing the substitution

$$(\partial_{x^0}\delta(x^0-y^0))\langle 0 | [\phi(x), \phi(y)] |0\rangle = -\delta(x^0-y^0)\partial_{x^0}\langle 0 | [\phi(x), \phi(y)] |0\rangle. \tag{A} $$

But I don't see how this is justified: If we interpret $(\partial_t \delta(t)) f(t)$ as a distribution and act with it on a test function $g(t)$, we get $$\int (\partial_t \delta(t)) f(t)g(t)dt = - \int \delta(t) \partial_t(f(t)g(t))dt = - \partial_t(f(t)g(t))|_{t=0}.\tag{B} $$

If we act instead with $-\delta(t) \partial_t f(t)$ on $g(t)$ we get $$-(g(t)\partial_t f(t))|_{t=0}.\tag{C} $$

Does somebody have an explanation?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If you just imagine an integral on each side of the equality then there's no problem, correct? $\endgroup$ – Danu Jul 26 '15 at 11:44
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, but I don't see how this helps me. $\endgroup$ – LLang Jul 26 '15 at 11:48
  • $\begingroup$ Why don't you just do the entire derivation under some integral signs and keep in mind that maybe P&S's derivation should be viewed as formal manipulations rather than a real proof? It's seriously non-rigorous throughout... $\endgroup$ – Danu Jul 26 '15 at 11:55
  • $\begingroup$ @LLang: Which pages in P&S? $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Jul 26 '15 at 12:00
  • $\begingroup$ In my edition it is page 30, Eq. 2.56. $\endgroup$ – LLang Jul 26 '15 at 12:16

Peskin & Schroeder, An Intro to QFT, are using that$^1$

$$i\Delta(x-y)~:=~\langle 0 | [\phi(x), \phi(y)] |0\rangle \tag{K} $$ vanishes for space-like vectors, see below eq. (2.53) on p. 28. In particular for equal times $x^0=y^0$, we have

$$i\Delta(0,{\bf x}-{\bf y})~=~0.\tag{L}$$

Therefore at the physics level of rigor


Differentiation of eq. (M) wrt. $x^0$ then yields OP's eq. (A).

Eq. (A) can alternatively be established using test functions.


$^1$ The notation (K) is taken from Itzykson & Zuber, QFT, eq. (3-55).


Yes, they are using the substitution of dirac delta $$ \delta' f(x)=-\delta(x)f'(x) $$ And the calculation follows as $$ (\partial^2+m^2)D_R(x-y)=(\partial^2\theta(x^0-y^0))\langle 0 |[\phi(x),\phi(y)]|0\rangle +\theta(x^0-y^0)(\partial^2+m^2)\langle 0 |[\phi(x),\phi(y)]|0\rangle + 2\partial_{\mu}\theta(x^0-y^0)\partial^{\mu}\langle0|[\phi(x),\phi(y)]|0\rangle $$ Since $\theta(x^0-y^0)$ just depends on time, last term both derivatives must be $\partial_t$. Using these equations below $$ \partial_{\mu}\theta(x^0-y^0)=\delta(x^0-y^0) $$ $$ \partial^2\theta(x^0-y^0)=\partial_t\delta(x^0-y^0) $$

Also commutation relation $[\Pi(x),\phi(x)]=-i\delta^3(x-y)$ and dirac notation, one can compute $$ (\partial^2+m^2)D(x-y)=-i\delta^4(x-y) $$


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.