- #1
gjj
- 7
- 0
Is there a difference between the meaning of charge conjugation in Relativistic Quantum Mechanics and its meaning in Quantum Field Theory?
In chapter 4.7.5 of "Thomson Modern Particle Physics" the charge conjugation operator is derived without changing the electromagnetic field Aμ. This approach is also used in other books on relativistic quantum mechanics. Wachter "Relativistic Quantum Mechanics", for instance, defines an "Extended Charge Conjugation" that sets Aμ --> -Aμ, but that's in addition to the usual charge conjugation that makes no change to the fields.
On the other hand when I look at Wikipedia C-symmetry, the statement is made that under charge conjugation every charge is reversed and therefore so are the electromagnetic fields (Aμ --> -Aμ). Wikipedia says "the dynamics would preserve the same form" which I interpret to mean that the motion of the particle would be unaffected by charge conjugation since we've flipped both the charge and the field.
Is charge conjugation defined differently in relativistic quantum mechanics and quantum field theory?
In chapter 4.7.5 of "Thomson Modern Particle Physics" the charge conjugation operator is derived without changing the electromagnetic field Aμ. This approach is also used in other books on relativistic quantum mechanics. Wachter "Relativistic Quantum Mechanics", for instance, defines an "Extended Charge Conjugation" that sets Aμ --> -Aμ, but that's in addition to the usual charge conjugation that makes no change to the fields.
On the other hand when I look at Wikipedia C-symmetry, the statement is made that under charge conjugation every charge is reversed and therefore so are the electromagnetic fields (Aμ --> -Aμ). Wikipedia says "the dynamics would preserve the same form" which I interpret to mean that the motion of the particle would be unaffected by charge conjugation since we've flipped both the charge and the field.
Is charge conjugation defined differently in relativistic quantum mechanics and quantum field theory?