Linear momentum of the Klein Gordon field

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the calculation of linear momentum for the Klein-Gordon field, where the initial expression for momentum includes terms that are not present in the expected result. Participants analyze the integration procedure and identify discrepancies, particularly a factor of 4 in the denominator that needs correction. They emphasize the importance of recognizing odd integrands in the momentum expression, which simplifies the calculation. Ultimately, the conversation reveals that a missing factor in the denominator and the correct treatment of the momentum terms are crucial for arriving at the accurate expression for momentum. The resolution of these issues leads to a more compact and correct formulation of the linear momentum.
Jufa
Messages
101
Reaction score
15
Homework Statement
I need to find an expression for the linear momentum of the Klein Gordon field in terms of creation and anihilation operators, but I fail to do it.
Relevant Equations
##P_j = \int dx^3 \pi(x) \partial^j\phi(x)##
The correct answer is:
#P = \int \frac{dp^3}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1}{2E_{\vec{p}} \big(a a^{\dagger} + a^{\dagger}a\big)#

But I get terms which are proportional to ##aa## and ##a^{\dagger}a^{\dagger}##

I hereunder display the procedure I followed:

First:
##\phi = \int \frac{dp^3}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1}{2E_{\vec{p}}} \big(e^{-ipx}a(\vec{p})+e^{ipx}a^\dagger(\vec{p})\big)##

## \pi = \int \frac{dp^3}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{i}{2} \big(-e^{-ipx}a(\vec{p})+e^{ipx}a^\dagger(\vec{p}) \big)##

So that for the j-th component of the momentum we have

##P_j = \int dx^3 \pi(x) \partial^j\phi(x)=\int \frac{dp^3dp'^3dx^3}{(2\pi)^6}\frac{i}{4E_{\vec{p}}} \Big(-e^{-ipx}a(\vec{p}) + e^{ipx} a^{\dagger}(\vec{p}) \Big) \Big(-ip'_je^{-ip'x}a(\vec{p'}) +ip'_je^{ip'x} a^{\dagger}(\vec{p'}) \Big) = \int \frac{dp^3dp'^3dx^3}{(2\pi)^6}\frac{i}{4E_{\vec{p}}} \Big(- p_je^{-ix(p'+p)}a(\vec{p})a(\vec{p'}) - p_je^{ix(p+p')} a^{\dagger}(\vec{p})a^{\dagger}(\vec{p'})+ p_je^{ix(p-p')}(\vec{p})a^{\dagger}(\vec{p'}) + p_je^{ix(p-p')} a^{\dagger}(\vec{p})a(\vec{p'}) \Big) = \int \frac{dp^3}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{1}{4E_{\vec{p}}} \Big(-p_j a(\vec{p})a(-\vec{p})-p_ja^\dagger(\vec{p})a^\dagger(-\vec{p}) + p_j a(\vec{p})a^\dagger(\vec{p}) + pja^\dagger(\vec{p})a(\vec{p}) \Big)##

Note that there is also a factor 2 that disagrees with the desired solution.

Many thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jufa said:
##P_j = \int dx^3 \pi(x) \partial^j\phi(x)= ... = \int \frac{dp^3}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{1}{4E_{\vec{p}}} \Big(-p_j a(\vec{p})a(-\vec{p})-p_ja^\dagger(\vec{p})a^\dagger(-\vec{p}) + p_j a(\vec{p})a^\dagger(\vec{p}) + pja^\dagger(\vec{p})a(\vec{p}) \Big)##

Note that there is also a factor 2 that disagrees with the desired solution.
Consider ## \int \frac{dp^3}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{1}{4E_{\vec{p}}} \Big(-p_j a(\vec{p})a(-\vec{p})\Big)##

Show that the integrand is odd in ##\vec p##. That is changing ##\vec p## to ##-\vec p## just changes the overall sign of the integrand.

Your factor of 4 occurring in ##4E_{\vec p}## in the denominator looks correct to me. But I might be missing something.

You can write $$ p_j a(\vec{p})a^\dagger(\vec{p}) + p_ja^\dagger(\vec{p})a(\vec{p})$$ as $$2 p_ja^\dagger(\vec{p})a(\vec{p}) + p_j[a(\vec{p}),a^\dagger(\vec{p})] $$ Integration over the 2nd term is trivial if you use the result for the commutator ##[a(\vec{p}),a^\dagger(\vec{p})]##. So, you are left with just an integral over the first term. This has a factor of 2 which can be used to change ##4E_{\vec p}## into ##2E_{\vec p}## in the denominator. You'll end up with a nice compact result for ##P_j##, but it still doesn't agree with the answer that was given to you as shown below:

Jufa said:
The correct answer is:
$$P = \int \frac{dp^3}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{1}{2E_{\vec{p}}} \big(a a^{\dagger} + a^{\dagger}a\big)$$

This doesn't look right. Check to see if you typed this correctly.
 
TSny said:
Consider ## \int \frac{dp^3}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{1}{4E_{\vec{p}}} \Big(-p_j a(\vec{p})a(-\vec{p})\Big)##

Show that the integrand is odd in ##\vec p##. That is changing ##\vec p## to ##-\vec p## just changes the overall sign of the integrand.

Your factor of 4 occurring in ##4E_{\vec p}## in the denominator looks correct to me. But I might be missing something.

You can write $$ p_j a(\vec{p})a^\dagger(\vec{p}) + p_ja^\dagger(\vec{p})a(\vec{p})$$ as $$2 p_ja^\dagger(\vec{p})a(\vec{p}) + p_j[a(\vec{p}),a^\dagger(\vec{p})] $$ Integration over the 2nd term is trivial if you use the result for the commutator ##[a(\vec{p}),a^\dagger(\vec{p})]##. So, you are left with just an integral over the first term. This has a factor of 2 which can be used to change ##4E_{\vec p}## into ##2E_{\vec p}## in the denominator. You'll end up with a nice compact result for ##P_j##, but it still doesn't agree with the answer that was given to you as shown below:
This doesn't look right. Check to see if you typed this correctly.
Yes. it is definitely not right. There's a two at the denominator missing and also the momentum p should multiply the whole expression. Thank you very much for your answer, what you told me about the expression being odd rescues everything.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top