Can S and K Integrate to the Same Result?

In summary: Forget about the T, and work with K, where the essence of the argument is. To begin understanding what is going on, consider first the case n=2 and t_0=0, t=1. Take the difference K_2-S_2 and simplify, to get a double integral where the second integral goes from t_1 to 1. Now interchange the two integrals and figure out how the integration interval change, by looking at the possible pairs (t_1,t_2) in the plane. Then use the symmetry of K to see that the integral reduces again to K_2. Then do the same with n=3 and n=4, until you reach enlightenment.Draw a square
  • #1
maverick_starstrider
1,119
6
Hi,

I'm looking at this wikipedia entry ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_series ) for the derivation of the Dyson series and I'm having a great deal of difficulty with:

[itex]S_n=\int_{t_0}^t{dt_1\int_{t_0}^{t_1}{dt_2\cdots\int_{t_0}^{t_{n-1}}{dt_nK(t_1, t_2,\dots,t_n)}}}.[/itex]

If K is symmetric in its arguments, we can define (look at integration limits):

[itex]K_n=\int_{t_0}^t{dt_1\int_{t_0}^{t}{dt_2\cdots\int_{t_0}^t{dt_nK(t_1, t_2,\dots,t_n)}}}.[/itex]

And so it is true that:

[itex]S_n=\frac{1}{n!}K_n.[/itex]

I simply can't get my head around this. How can the S integral lead to the K integral (up to an n factorial)? I don't understand how this integral can be performed. I mean S is a series of coupled integrals that must be performed in succession, K is a product of independent integrals...Thanks in Advance
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
maverick_starstrider said:
Hi,

I'm looking at this wikipedia entry ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_series ) for the derivation of the Dyson series and I'm having a great deal of difficulty with:

[itex]S_n=\int_{t_0}^t{dt_1\int_{t_0}^{t_1}{dt_2\cdots\int_{t_0}^{t_{n-1}}{dt_nK(t_1, t_2,\dots,t_n)}}}.[/itex]

If K is symmetric in its arguments, we can define (look at integration limits):

[itex]K_n=\int_{t_0}^t{dt_1\int_{t_0}^{t}{dt_2\cdots\int_{t_0}^t{dt_nK(t_1, t_2,\dots,t_n)}}}.[/itex]

And so it is true that:

[itex]S_n=\frac{1}{n!}K_n.[/itex]

I simply can't get my head around this. How can the S integral lead to the K integral (up to an n factorial)? I don't understand how this integral can be performed. I mean S is a series of coupled integrals that must be performed in succession, K is a product of independent integrals...

Well, you assumed that K is symmetric in the t_i. In the Dyson series, it isn't. Thats why you need the time-ordering to make it look symmetric...
 
  • #3
A. Neumaier said:
Well, you assumed that K is symmetric in the t_i. In the Dyson series, it isn't. Thats why you need the time-ordering to make it look symmetric...

Those equations aren't me they're from the wikipedia article. However, that doesn't answer how those two can be equal (up to a permutation constant).
 
  • #4
maverick_starstrider said:
Those equations aren't me they're from the wikipedia article. However, that doesn't answer how those two can be equal (up to a permutation constant).

OK, I misunderstood what you were asking for. In context it becomes clear that the formulation in wikipedia is a bit misleading. The ''If'' should be ''Since'', since K is already defined as the time-ordered version.

In the first expression that you quoted, the integration region is over the simplex t_1>...>t_n. It is a geometric fact that the n-dimensional box with sides [t_0,t_n] can be partitioned into the n! simplices obtained by reordering the t_i in all possible ways. Because of symmetry, each of these integrals has the same value. Hence the second integral is n! times the first.
 
  • #5
I appreciate the response but I'm afraid that's way over my head. To me I see this S (for say the third term) as

[itex] \int^{t}_{t_0} \int^{t_1}_{t_0} \int^{t_2}_{t_0} T [ V(t_1)V(t_2)V(t_3) ] dt_1 dt_2 dt_3 [/itex]

and the first integral would be

[itex] \int^{t}_{t_0} \int^{t_1}_{t_0} T [ V(t_1)V(t_2) (V^{(1)}(t_2)-V^{(1)}(t_0) ) ] dt_1 dt_2 [/itex]

where [itex]V^{(1)}(t)[/itex] represents the first integral of V with respect to t. Which leads to a second integral

[itex] \int^{t}_{t_0} V(t_1) \int^{t_1}_{t_0} \left( V(t_2) (V^{(1)}(t_2)-V^{(1)}(t_0) ) ] dt_1 dt_2 [/itex]

and who knows what [itex] \int^{t_1}_{t_0} V(t_2) V^{(1)}(t_2) [/itex] is but you get the picture and this sequence of integrals cascades up until you finally get to the integral from t_0 to t. I don't see how this could possible be equal to

[itex] \frac{1}{n!} \left( \int^t_{t_0} V(t') dt' \right)^n [/itex]
 
  • #6
maverick_starstrider said:
I appreciate the response but I'm afraid that's way over my head.

Forget about the T, and work with K, where the essence of the argument is. To begin understanding what is going on, consider first the case n=2 and t_0=0, t=1. Take the difference K_2-S_2 and simplify, to get a double integral where the second integral goes from t_1 to 1. Now interchange the two integrals and figure out how the integration interval change, by looking at the possible pairs (t_1,t_2) in the plane. Then use the symmetry of K to see that the integral reduces again to K_2. Then do the same with n=3 and n=4, until you reach enlightenment.
 
  • #7
Draw a square. Now draw a diagonal line connecting the lower left corner to the upper right corner, and shade in the lower triangle. The S integral is the lower triangle. The K integral is the entire square.
 
  • #8
hi maverick_starstrider! :smile:

let's take a specific set of values for t1 t2 and t3

consider t1 = 9, t2 = 5, t3 = 7

then ∫∫∫ T( V(t1),V(t2),V(t3) ) = ∫∫∫ ( V(5),V(7),V(9))

similarly, ∫∫∫ T( V(t1),V(t3),V(t2) ) = ∫∫∫ ( V(5),V(7),V(9))

∫∫∫ T( V(t2),V(t3),V(t1) ) = ∫∫∫ ( V(5),V(7),V(9))

∫∫∫ T( V(t2),V(t1),V(t3) ) = ∫∫∫ ( V(5),V(7),V(9))

∫∫∫ T( V(t2),V(t1),V(t2) ) = ∫∫∫ ( V(5),V(7),V(9))

∫∫∫ T( V(t3),V(t2),V(t1) ) = ∫∫∫ ( V(5),V(7),V(9))

(or is it ( V(9),V(7),V(5)) ? … i can't remember :redface:)

(i really like copy-and-pasting! :biggrin:)

in other words: they're all the same!

now add them all up and divide by 3! … still the same! :wink:

ok? :smile:
 

Related to Can S and K Integrate to the Same Result?

1. What is the Dyson series and why is it important in physics?

The Dyson series is a mathematical tool used in quantum mechanics to calculate the evolution of a system over time. It allows us to express the time-dependent evolution operator as a sum of an infinite series of operators, making complex calculations more manageable. This series is important in physics because it allows us to make predictions about the behavior of quantum systems.

2. How is the Dyson series derived?

The Dyson series is derived by expanding the time-evolution operator in terms of a perturbation parameter. This parameter is typically represented as a small number, such as the strength of an external force acting on the system. The series is then manipulated using mathematical techniques such as the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula to simplify the expression and make it easier to work with.

3. What are some applications of the Dyson series?

The Dyson series has many applications in physics, particularly in the study of quantum systems. It can be used to calculate the scattering amplitudes in quantum field theory, analyze the behavior of atoms and molecules in an external field, and study the dynamics of quantum mechanical systems. It is also used in condensed matter physics to understand the behavior of materials at the atomic level.

4. Can the Dyson series be used for systems with strong interactions?

Yes, the Dyson series can be used for systems with strong interactions, but it may not be the most accurate method. In these cases, other techniques such as perturbation theory or numerical simulations may be more appropriate. However, the Dyson series can still provide valuable insights and approximate solutions for these systems.

5. Are there any limitations to the Dyson series?

Yes, there are limitations to the Dyson series, particularly when dealing with non-perturbative systems. This means that the series may not converge or may give incorrect results for systems with very strong interactions. In these cases, alternative methods such as resummation techniques may be used to improve the accuracy of the calculations.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
938
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Differential Equations
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
0
Views
497
  • Classical Physics
Replies
4
Views
801
Replies
2
Views
797
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top