0
$\begingroup$

I am currently reading some notes in QFT and I came across the conserved current equation for a complex scalar field that has a transformation given by $$ \hat{\phi}\longrightarrow\hat{\phi}+i\theta\hat{\phi} $$ The notes said that the current is: $$ J^{\mu}=\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi_a)}\delta\phi_a=i\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}\delta\phi-i\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi\dagger)}\delta\phi\dagger $$ but I thought that $\delta\hat{\phi}=i\theta\hat{\phi}$, then should there be a factor of $\theta$ on all terms?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

In the complex scalar field Lagrangian, you have two different dynamic fields: $\psi$ and $\psi^{\dagger}$. The conserved Noether current in this case is defined as $J^{\mu} = \sum_{i = 1}^2 \Pi^{\mu}_i \Delta \psi_i$, where the indices 1 and 2 denote the two different fields.

The symmetry you want is $\psi \rightarrow \psi e^{i\theta}$, and therefore $\psi^{\dagger} \rightarrow \psi^{\dagger} e^{-i\theta}$. If you define $\delta\psi_i \equiv \Delta \psi \delta \theta$, you get that $\Delta \psi = i \psi$ and $\Delta \psi^{\dagger} = -i \psi^{\dagger}$, and you remove the $\delta \theta$ from the definition of the current. Replacing this into the current gives you $$J^{\mu} = i(\Pi^{\mu}_{\psi^{\dagger}}\psi - \Pi^{\mu}_{\psi}\psi^{\dagger})$$ which is what you obtained.

The factor $\delta \theta$ (with $\theta$ a continuous parameter) is not included in the definition of the conserved current because it is just a variation of a parameter and it is irrelevant in the conservation equation $\partial_{\mu}J^{\mu} = 0$. If you were to include it (using $\delta \psi$ instead of $\Delta \psi$ in the definition of $J^{\mu}$), you would get $(\partial_{\mu}J^{\mu})\delta\theta = 0$, which just implies $\partial_{\mu}J^{\mu} = 0$ for non-zero variations. So you just eliminate $\delta \theta$ out of the definition of $J^{\mu}$ because it's irrelevant to the physics.

The definitions on your question are somewhat ambiguous. Remember that $\delta \psi = \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial \theta} \delta \theta$, so you could never have factors of $\theta$ in the definition ($\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta} (e^{i \theta}) = ie^{i \theta}$, NOT $i \theta e^{i \theta}$), only factors of $\delta \theta$

$\endgroup$

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.