Skip to main content
2 of 2
deleted 397 characters in body

It is not true that $\dot\rho(\phi_1,\phi_1)=0$: the object $\rho(\phi_1,\phi_1)$ does not exist.

It doesn't make sense to talk about $\rho$ for $\phi_1=\phi_2$. The object $\rho$ is a distribution (as a function of $\phi$, not $x$) so it is meaningless to "evaluate" it on a given function.

Indeed, $$ \langle\phi_1|\phi_2\rangle=\delta(\phi_1-\phi_2) $$ where $\delta$ is the Dirac delta in the space of functionals (i.e., with respect to functional integration, not regular integration). See this PSE post for some (formal) applications of this formula.

The density matrix $\rho(\phi_1,\phi_2)$ only makes sense under the integral sign: $$ \int_{\mathcal F^2}\rho(\phi_1,\phi_2)F[\phi_1,\phi_2]\,\mathrm d\phi_1\mathrm d\phi_1 $$ where $\mathcal F$ denotes some reasonable function space and $F$ is a healthy functional on it.