0

Does the expectation value of the number operator corresponds to any physical observable or has any significance in classical limit? This is probably a dumb question, but I'm struggling to identify the expectation of number operators with any known classical observables. The closest relevant observables I could find are the Hamiltonian operators for free fields (which can be qualitatively stated as weighted sum of number operators over all possible momentum, the weight factor being energy at particular momentum), and the conserved charge (e.g. for complex scalar field it is proportional to number of particles minus number of anti-particles). Notice that for both of these cases, the observables are always represented as some manipulation of number operators. Is it possible at all to write number operators in terms of other known observables?

A different way to frame this question: Can we think of number operator as some intermediate Hermitian operator which alone has no physical significance (i.e. expectation value has no meaning in classical regime) but can be manipulated to give well defined observables (e.g. Hamiltonian, charge etc)? If this is not just a mathematical construct, what are we exactly measuring using number operator?

Note: I'm trying to understand the significance of vacuum expectation of number operators in the context of Unruh effect and Hawking radiation

KP99
  • 1,684
  • 2
    Why do you think it's called the number operator? – ACuriousMind Jan 29 '22 at 10:56
  • @ACuriousMind Wikipedia and other sources states that "the number operator is the observable that counts the number of particles". I get it that the number operator is a Hermitian operator and that it mathematically corresponds to no. of excitation states. Particle interpretation (at least in flat space time)appears when we weakly couple our system with a detector. But, I am not sure why number operator has to be an observable in the first place. All observables are self adjoint operators, but is the converse also true? – KP99 Jan 29 '22 at 11:14
  • I'm not sure what this has to do with QFT. It seems to me you could be asking the same sort of questions about $N = a^\dagger a$ for the simple harmonic oscillator. For the general question of whether all self-adjoint operators are observables, see https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/373357/50583, but I don't see what this has to do with this specific case - the number operator counts number of excited states, and we can do experiments to actually measure number of excited states, so this operator is the observable corresponding to that. Are you perhaps asking how that experiment works? – ACuriousMind Jan 29 '22 at 11:20
  • Thank you! I am actually interested in how the experiment works. This question also applies for simple harmonic motion in quantum mechanics. I just used the qft tag to cite examples such as hamiltonian and charge operators in field theory to give some motivation. – KP99 Jan 29 '22 at 11:28
  • see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_counting for experimental detection of photon number – ACuriousMind Jan 29 '22 at 11:40
  • Thank you for providing the link!! I also searched for related experiments like the single photon interference experiment, some idea about the 2nd order correlation for HBT experiment, number-phase uncertainty relation etc. These cleared my confusion. – KP99 Jan 29 '22 at 12:20

0 Answers0