2
$\begingroup$

How should we understand a complex field? What is the physical significance of its imaginary part? For example, a complex scalar field is written as: \begin{equation} \phi = \phi_{1} + i \phi_{2} \end{equation} What is the physical significance of $\phi_{2}$? If it is the same as the significance of $\phi_{1}$, why is $\phi_{2}$ put in the imaginary part? What does imaginary mean? Does it mean unreal or virtual? If not, then what?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The significance of $\phi_2$ is probably the same as the significance of $\phi_1$. $\endgroup$ – user5174 Mar 17 '17 at 8:44
  • $\begingroup$ Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/11396/2451 $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Mar 17 '17 at 11:21
2
$\begingroup$

Complex fields appear in real-valued (Hermitian) Lagrangians. For example, your $\phi$ may appear in a kinetic term $\partial_\mu\phi^\ast \partial^\mu\phi=\partial_\mu\phi_1 \partial^\mu\phi_1 +\partial_\mu\phi_2 \partial^\mu\phi_2$. In theory, you could forget about $\phi$ altogether, thinking instead in terms of uncoupled real fields $\phi_1,\,\phi_2$; indeed, they remain uncoupled if the potential term is proportional to $\phi^\ast\phi=\phi_1^2+\phi_2^2$. But there is an advantage to writing everything instead in terms of one complex field, which is that the $U\left( 1\right)$ symmetry is obvious, whereas the biggest symmetry you might otherwise notice is $\mathbb{Z}_2^2$.

If $\phi$ denotes the Higgs field, the potential term also contains a contribution proportional to $\left( \phi^\ast\phi\right)^2=\phi_1^4+2\phi_1^2\phi_2^2+\phi_2^4$ which manifestly couples $\phi_1$ to $\phi_2$. However, it is only when we think in terms of the complex $\phi$ that the spontaneous symmetry breaking induced by a choice of a vacuum is evident.

Asking about the physical significance of $\phi_1,\,\phi_2$ separately is a bit like asking about the separate significance of Cartesian coordinates in a plane. If you've studied orbital mechanics for a 2-body solar system, you'll know that polar coordinates have a more obvious physical relevance and interpretation. And in the case of a Mexican hat potential, again a polar representation is more relevant. Let's consider the vacuum case. Writing $\phi=\rho e^{i\theta}$, $\rho$ is the vacuum amplitude while $\theta$ is an arbitrary phase that breaks the symmetry. This cleaving of a computable physical parameter from an arbitrary one implies a greater physical significance than either $\phi_1$ or $\phi_2$ has.

$\endgroup$

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.