QFT, what are the transformation rules for

In summary: What if you take the state ##| \vec{k}, r \rangle## and apply an annihilation operator to it? The sum you said you were trying to compute in the OP applies annihilation operators to a non-vacuum state, then creation operators to the result.Also, you are applying two different creation operators. What about if you apply the same creation operator twice? Or, even better, apply the corresponding annihilation operator, i.e., take ##b^\dagger_r(\vec{k}) | 0 \rangle## and apply ##b_r(\vec{k})## to it. That's what the sum in your OP does. (And similarly for ##a## and ##a^
  • #1
Jonsson
79
0
I'm taking an introductory course in QFT. During quantization of the Dirac field, my textbook gives a lot of information on how annihilation and creation operators act on vacuum, but nothing about how they act on non-vacuum states. I need these to compute
$$
\int \frac{d^3 p}{(2\pi)^3} \sum_s ( {a^s_ {{\vec{p}}}}^\dagger a^s_ {{\vec{p}}} - {b^s_ {{\vec{p}}}}^\dagger b^s_ {{\vec{p}}} ) |\vec{k},s \rangle,
$$
I have searched google, but I couldn't find anything after about 1 hour of searching.

Are you able to tell me how the annihilation and creation operators from Dirac theory act on non-vacuum?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Jonsson said:
Are you able to tell me how the annihilation and creation operators from Dirac theory act on non-vacuum?

Take the state you get when you apply a creation operator to the vacuum, and then apply another creation operator to it. What do you get? Notice that to answer this question, you need to figure out what operator corresponds to applying two creation operators in succession. Does your textbook talk about that?
 
  • Like
Likes Jonsson
  • #3
PeterDonis said:
Take the state you get when you apply a creation operator to the vacuum, and then apply another creation operator to it. What do you get? Notice that to answer this question, you need to figure out what operator corresponds to applying two creation operators in succession. Does your textbook talk about that?
I am following Peskin. As far as I can tell by reading though Dirac quantization, it doesn't.
 
  • #4
Jonsson said:
I am following Peskin. As far as I can tell by reading though Dirac quantization, it doesn't.

I assume it talks about what state you get when you apply a creation operator to the vacuum. What state is that, and have you tried applying a second creation operator to that state?
 
  • #5
PeterDonis said:
I assume it talks about what state you get when you apply a creation operator to the vacuum. What state is that, and have you tried applying a second creation operator to that state?
Yes
 
  • #7
I didnt recognize the operator you're advertising :/
 
  • #8
Jonsson said:
I didnt recognize the operator you're advertising :/

Um, what? You said "yes" when I asked if you had tried applying a creation operator to the vacuum state, and then taking the state you obtained from that and applying a creation operator to it a second time. I am asking you to give the details of what happened when you did that. I can't help you unless I can see the actual mathematical steps that you're doing.
 
  • #9
Nothing happens magically. I didn't know how to go on from there.
 
  • #10
Jonsson said:
I didn't know how to go on from there

From where?

You haven't posted any math that you personally have done. I can't help you if I can't see what you've already tried. I don't care if you don't think it got you anywhere; I need to see what you've tried.
 
  • #11
I wrote up
$$
b^\dagger_s(\vec{p}) | \vec{k}, r \rangle = (2 E(\vec{k}))^{1/2}b^\dagger_s(\vec{p})b^\dagger_r(\vec{k}) | 0 \rangle
$$
I thought that perhaps i could get an equation by considering the commutation relation, but the operators commute, so that doesn't help. I didn't know how to go on from here.
 
  • #12
Jonsson said:
I wrote up
$$
b^\dagger_s(\vec{p}) | \vec{k}, r \rangle = (2 E(\vec{k}))^{1/2}b^\dagger_s(\vec{p})b^\dagger_r(\vec{k}) | 0 \rangle
$$

What if you take the state ##| \vec{k}, r \rangle## and apply an annihilation operator to it? The sum you said you were trying to compute in the OP applies annihilation operators to a non-vacuum state, then creation operators to the result.

Also, you are applying two different creation operators. What about if you apply the same creation operator twice? Or, even better, apply the corresponding annihilation operator, i.e., take ##b^\dagger_r(\vec{k}) | 0 \rangle## and apply ##b_r(\vec{k})## to it. That's what the sum in your OP does. (And similarly for ##a## and ##a^\dagger##.)
 

FAQ: QFT, what are the transformation rules for

What is QFT?

QFT stands for Quantum Field Theory, which is a theoretical framework used to describe the behavior of particles at the subatomic level.

What are the transformation rules for QFT?

The transformation rules for QFT depend on the specific type of field being studied. However, in general, the rules involve using mathematical operators to transform the fields in space and time.

Why are transformation rules important in QFT?

Transformation rules are important in QFT because they allow us to understand how particles and fields interact and change over time. They also help us make predictions about the behavior of these particles in different situations.

How are transformation rules in QFT related to symmetries?

Transformation rules in QFT are closely related to symmetries, as they describe how the fields and particles behave under different transformations. These symmetries can provide insights into the fundamental laws of nature and help us understand the behavior of particles and fields.

What are some real-world applications of QFT?

QFT has a wide range of applications in modern physics, including particle physics, cosmology, and condensed matter physics. It has helped us understand the behavior of particles in high-energy accelerators, the early universe, and new materials. QFT also has practical applications in technology, such as in the development of quantum computers.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
928
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
2K
Back
Top