We’ve started studying path integrals and perturbative expansion.

We wrote the action as $S[x]= S_0[x] +S_{int}[x]$ where the first term is the action for the model which we can solve exactly, while the represent the perturbative part, due to interaction (example: anharmonic oscillator, $S_0$: harmonic oscillator, $S_{int}$: terms of order $>2$.

The corresponding path integral(generating functional of correlation functions) $$Z[J]=\int Dx \exp{\{iS_{int}[x]\}} \exp{\{iS_0[x]+i\int dt J(t)x(t)\}}. $$ Or in an alternative way $$Z[J]=\exp{\{iS_{int}[-i\frac{\delta}{\delta J}]\}}Z_0[J]$$ Where $\frac{\delta}{\delta J}$ is the functional derivative and the exponential term is interpreted as a differential operator acting on the generating functional of the free theory.

But what is that operator? How did it act? My wind guess is something like the exponential of a matrix. Can an operator be the argument of a functional?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It makes sense perturbatively. $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Jan 23 at 0:11

It might help to consider a scalar example to start. If you are familiar with statistical mechanics, consider the partition function of a system that consists of three spin 1/2 particles (so there are 8 states total), and let us suppose that the Hamiltonian can be written \begin{align*} H &= -h\sum_{i=0}^2\sigma_i-J\sum_{i=0}^2\sigma_i\sigma_{\overline{i+1}},\quad \overline{i}\equiv i\mod 3\\ &\equiv H_0(\sigma_0,\sigma_1,\sigma_2) +H_{int}(\sigma_0,\sigma_1,\sigma_2) \end{align*} The partition function, $Z(h,J) = \sum_{\sigma_0,\sigma_1,\sigma_2}e^{- H(\sigma_0,\sigma_1,\sigma_2)}$ can be computed directly: \begin{align*} Z(h,J) = e^{3(h + J)} + 3e^{(h-J)} + 3e^{-(h-J)}+e^{-3(h+J)} \end{align*}

Recall that in quantum mechanics, the derivative $-i\partial_x$ (often used to represent the momentum operator) can be viewed as a generator of translations: $\exp(-m\partial_x)\Psi(x) = \Psi(x-m)$. (This is essentially because $f(x+h)\approx f(x)+h\nabla f(x)$.) The exact same principles may be applied in the example above: to evaluate $Z(h,J-m)$, simply apply the operator $\exp(-m\partial_J)$ to $Z(h,J)$.

Now let's explore various ways of interpreting $\exp(-m\partial_J)$, or $\partial_J$ even more simply. Just to give a small taste the full set of available approaches (especially in lattice models), we'll start with a somewhat tangential example.

First, notice in \begin{align*} \partial_JZ(h,J) &= -\sum_\sigma M_{int}(\sigma)e^{-hM_0(\sigma) - JM_{int}(\sigma)}\\ &=\sum_\sigma (\sigma_0\sigma_1 + \sigma_1\sigma_2 + \sigma_2\sigma_0)e^{-h\sum_{i=0}^2\sigma_i-J\sum_{i=0}^2\sigma_i\sigma_{\overline{i+1}}} \end{align*} that the expression $\sigma_0\sigma_1+\sigma_1\sigma_2+\sigma_2\sigma_0$ would match $\frac{1}{2}(\sigma_0 + \sigma_1 + \sigma_2)^2$ if it weren't for the extra $\frac{1}{2}(\sigma_0^2+\sigma_1^2+\sigma_2^2)$ term. In fact, because the $\sigma_i$ are limited to $\{-1, 1\}$, the last expression ($\frac{1}{2}\sum_i\sigma_i^2$) is just a constant; $\frac{3}{2}$ in this case. More generally, however, we could introduce a new term to the Hamiltonian, $-P\sum_{i}\sigma_i^2\equiv P M_{sq}(\sigma)$, so that $M_{int}(\sigma) = \frac{1}{2}(M_0(\sigma)^2 - M_{sq}(\sigma))$. Hence, \begin{align*} \partial_J Z(h,J) = -\sum_\sigma \frac{1}{2}(M_0(\sigma)^2 - M_{sq}(\sigma))e^{-hM_0(\sigma)-JM_{int}(\sigma)-PM_{sq}(\sigma)} \end{align*} (where the right hand side is understood as being evaluated at $P = 0$.) Notice that $-M_{sq}(\sigma)e^{-PM_{sq}(\sigma)}$ can be replaced with $\partial_P e^{-PM_{sq}(\sigma)}$, and $M_0(\sigma)^2 e^{-hM_0(\sigma)}$ can be replaced with $\partial_h^2 e^{-hM_0(\sigma)}$. We have just derived the relation \begin{align*} \partial_J Z(h,J) = -\frac{1}{2}\partial_h^2 Z(h,J,P) - \partial_P Z(h,J,P)\Big|_{P=0} \end{align*}

More possibilities present themselves if we allow the parameters $h$, $J$, $P$ etc. to assume different values for each spin (for example, the spins might be impurities positioned variously in a solid, and form an irregular triangle so that pairwise neighbor couplings are distinct.) In this case, the Hamiltonian would read

\begin{align*} H(\sigma) = -\sum_{i=0}^2(h_i \sigma_i - J_i \sigma_i\sigma_{\overline{i+1}}) \end{align*}

with the partition function modified appropriately.

Instead of having to introduce an auxiliary $M_{sq}(\sigma)$ term, we can now simply write \begin{align*} \sigma_0\sigma_1 e^{-\sum_i h_i\sigma_i} = \partial_{h_0}\partial_{h_1} e^{-\sum_i h_i\sigma_i} \end{align*} and \begin{align*} \partial_J Z(h,J) = \sum_{\sigma} \sum_{i=0}^2 \partial_{h_i} \partial_{h_{\overline{i+1}}} e^{-H_0(\sigma, h) - H_{int}(\sigma, J)}. \end{align*} (where $h$ is now understood as a three component vector or tuple.)

You may recognize $\sum_{i=0}^2\partial_{h_i}\partial_{h_{\overline{i+1}}}$ as $M_{int}(\partial_h)$, and moreover that $M_{int}(\partial_h)$ is independent of the spin degrees of freedom and can be moved outside the sum: written explicitly, \begin{align*} \partial_J Z(h_0, h_1, h_2, J) = -M_{int}(\partial_{h_0}, \partial_{h_1}, \partial_{h_2}) Z(h_0, h_1, h_2, J). \end{align*}

Finally, having established that the linear differential operators $\partial_J$ and $M_{int}(\partial_h)$ are equivalent, we can substitute one for the other in the exponential: \begin{align*} \exp(-m\partial_J) = \exp(-m M_{int}(\partial_h)), \end{align*} and hence, \begin{align*} Z(h,J-m) = \exp(-m M_{int}(\partial_h)) Z(h,J). \end{align*}


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.