I have some problems understanding the meaning of a function that vanishes weakly.

As far as I can understand, when somebody writes that a function $F$ in the phase space vanishes weakly, that means that $F=0$ over the surface defined by the constraints $\phi_1=0, \phi_2=0,\dots,\phi_N=0$.

Now, in the statement of the exercise 1.27 of the book Quantization of Gauge Fields, it says that $[\phi_k,\phi_1]$ vanishes on $\phi_{S}=0$ ($S\leq k$) for $k\leq L$ and that $[\phi_{L},\phi_1]\neq 0$ (even weakly).

As I can understand, if we consider that $[\phi_k,\phi_1]$ vanishes on $\phi_{S}=0$ ($S\leq k$) for $k\leq L$, this means that, for example, $[\phi_3,\phi_1]=0$ on the surface defined by $\phi_1=0$, $\phi_2=0$ and $\phi_3=0$. If this is true then, when $k=L$, we will have that $[\phi_L,\phi_1]=0$ on the surface $\phi_1=\phi_2=\dots=\phi_L=0$, but this seems like a contradiction with the assumption $[\phi_{L},\phi_1]\neq 0$ even weakly. I don't understand what is going on.

Second, I have problems trying to prove the identity given in the hint of part (b). Specifically, I have to prove that $$[\phi_i,\phi_j]\approx-[\phi_{i-1},\phi_{j+1}].$$ I have used the Jacobi identity to prove that $$[\phi_i,\phi_j]=-[\phi_{i-1},\phi_{j+1}]-[[\phi_j,\phi_{i-1}],H].$$ However, I'm stuck when I try to prove that the term $[[\phi_j,\phi_{i-1}],H]$ is weakly zero. I am sure that I have to use the fact that $[H,\phi_{k}]\approx0$ for $k\leq L$, but I don't know how to do it. When I use the Jacobi identity again I obtain much more complicated expressions, not very useful.



Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.