-1

For simplicity: imagine a free, scalar theory, and a 1 particle universe.

  1. Spacetime: we have an operator $φ(x)$ defined everywhere on spacetime.

  2. Fock space: the space of states in which the particle can be in. It is possible to express it in terms of field operators $φ(x)$ acting on the vacuum.

I've heard that "when the scalar field operator $φ(x)$ acts on the vacuum, we create particle". Does it means that the Fock space in consideration can have, as basis, multiple $φ_{i}$ acting on the vacuum (only once)? E.g. a general state would be $Ψ= Σ_{i} c_{i}φ_{i}|0>$ [see comment on the bottom*].

And what is the effect of applying φ(x) to Ψ? Do we "collapse" the state Ψ to one of the basis $φ_{i}|0>$ with probability $(c_{i})^2$?And after that, since we are left with an eigenstate of $φ(x)$, what would be the eigenvalue equation? E.g. we collapse to state $φ_{i}|0>$: would the eigenvalue equation be something like $φ(x)|φ_{i}|0>> = y |φ_{i}|0>>$, where y is the eigenvalue? And what is the physical interpretation of this eigenvalue?

*P.S. for simplicity ignore the whole distribution vs delta function discussion, integral vs sum etc. I'm comfortable with the distribution nature of $φ(x)$ but it's out of the question's scope. I am just keeping things simple since I can afford it in this case, because introducing distribution does nothing to solve the problem.

Qmechanic
  • 201,751
  • Related post by OP: https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/786558/2451 – Qmechanic Oct 31 '23 at 17:54
  • Are you asking how to Fourier-transform (superpose) fields φ into decoupled oscillator operators? Do you understand what outputs QFT actually produces, in practice, and why? – Cosmas Zachos Oct 31 '23 at 18:29
  • I am not really interested in how to express/write the field operator (especially not interested in doing so in terms of momentum-eigenstates creation operators) as that topic is omnipresent. I'm rather interested in what is its effect, what does it do. Pick a point on spacetime: we have a field operator φ(x). It's an operator, so it acts: what does it do? "Acts on Fock Space". Ok, but what does it do to the Fock Space? – TrentKent6 Oct 31 '23 at 18:38
  • "Ok, but what does it do to the Fock Space?" ? its a motion in it, just like Hilbert space operators describe motions from vector to vector in Hilbert space. Can you be explicit? It feels like you are trying to do QM monkey-see-monkey-do with QFT tools, which one never even dreams of... – Cosmas Zachos Oct 31 '23 at 18:43
  • You know how the c/a operators $a^\dagger_p$ act on the Fock space, and you know how to express $\phi(x)$ in terms of the c/a operators. What difficulty do you have in determining its action? What problem is this question actually trying to solve? – ACuriousMind Oct 31 '23 at 19:56
  • I wanna explicitely see how it works without the momentum-eigenstates. In my question it was made clear that they are not necessary, especially because you can express the Fock space in terms of the field operators. So we can bypass the momentum-eigenstates-creation-operators, and remain with field operators acting on a Fock space described in terms of field operators acting on the vacuum. So, how would the mathematics look like in this case? Meaning: is the procedure outlined in the question correct, from the "collapse" of field-operator-eigenstates to the eigenvalue equation? – TrentKent6 Oct 31 '23 at 20:14
  • How does all this collapse stuff inform calculation of the cross sections of momentum eigenstates actually relying-on/utilizing QFT? – Cosmas Zachos Oct 31 '23 at 21:18
  • @CosmasZachos the question is simple. If we can express the Fock space in terms of field operators acting on the vacuum, without the need to talk about momentum-eigenstates, how does the mathematics describing the action of the field operator on this space, defined in this way, look like? – TrentKent6 Oct 31 '23 at 21:45
  • Looks like basic linear algebra, no? What is your snag? – Cosmas Zachos Nov 01 '23 at 13:33
  • @CosmasZachos just to confirm that the procedure outlined in my question is correct (and also the mini-questions inside it, such as "what is the physical meaning of this eigenvalue?") – TrentKent6 Nov 01 '23 at 13:55
  • There are lots of questions on this site on eigenvalues of field operators, such as this. – Cosmas Zachos Nov 01 '23 at 14:04
  • but is the procedure outlined in my question is correct? if not, what would it be? (remembering the conditions to consider field operators -not momentum eigenstates creation operators-, and to simplify with one particle states) – TrentKent6 Nov 01 '23 at 14:33

1 Answers1

0

There seems to be some misconceptions. I'll avoid expressing the field operator in terms of the ladder operator, because the OP does not seem to want that. However, it is perhaps important to note that the field operator can be separated into two parts $\phi(x)=\phi^c(x)+\phi^a(x)$ where $\phi^c(x)$ creates a particle and $\phi^a(x)$ annihilates a particle. So now we can indeed use these operators to produce and manipulate the Fock states.

We need to remember that Fock states do not only contain particle-number degrees of freedom but also the other degrees of freedom in the theory, namely the spatiotemporal degrees of freedom. Therefore, when we produce a one-particle state using $\phi^c(x)$, we can multiply it with some mode function and integrate over $x$ to specify the spatiotemporal degrees of freedom of that state. The requirement for normalization is then carried by the properties of that mode function. If we don't do it that way, we get something that may not be a well-defined state because it is not properly normalized.

To avoid this issue of normalization, let's define a single-mode creation operator as $$ \phi_0^{\dagger} = \int \phi^c(x) f_0(x) \text{d}x . $$ By using only $\phi_0^{\dagger}$, we are restricting ourselves to the part of the Hilbert space that only deals with states having the spatiotemporal degrees of freedom defined by $f_0$.

When $\phi_0^{\dagger}$ operates on the vacuum it produces a one-particle Fock state $$ \phi_0^{\dagger}|\text{vac}\rangle = |1\rangle . $$ To produce Fock states with more particles, we need to apply $\phi_0$ multiple times. For example an $n$-particle Fock state is given by $$ \frac{1}{\sqrt{n!}}\left(\phi_0^{\dagger}\right)^n|\text{vac}\rangle = |n\rangle . $$ Note the factor in front which is required for normalization.

To address the comment: what happens when the field operator is applied to the Fock states? Again, we can separate the field operator into the two parts. If the creating part is applied to a Fock state it adds another particle to the state, but again we need to be careful with the normalization. So if we again use $\phi_0^{\dagger}$, we get $$ \phi_0^{\dagger}|n\rangle = |n+1\rangle \sqrt{n+1} . $$

When the annihilating part of the field operator is applied to a Fock state, it removes a particle. To do the calculation correctly, we need to use the equal-time commutation relations. It reads$^a$ $$ [\phi^a(\mathbf{x},t), \phi^c(\mathbf{y},t)] = \delta(\mathbf{x}- \mathbf{y}) . $$ Then for the single mode operators, we have $$ [\phi_0, \phi_0^{\dagger}] = 1 , $$ thanks to the normalization. Now we can apply the single-mode annihilation operator to the single particle Fock state $$ \phi_0|1\rangle=\phi_0\phi_0^{\dagger}|\text{vac}\rangle =[\phi_0,\phi_0^{\dagger}]|\text{vac}\rangle = |\text{vac}\rangle . $$ It can be generalized for the case of a multi particle Fock state.

Hopes this explanation clarifies some of those misconceptions. Let me know if there are more issues.

$a$: It may be better to do these commutations in the momentum basis. What follows is a bit hand wavy.

flippiefanus
  • 14,614
  • (1) the Klein-Gordon equation describes, as solutions, a quantum field defined on spacetime. (2) This field is acting on a Fock space, which can be in turn described as the same field acting on the vacuum. My question was how to mathematically connect (1) and (2) without talking about momentum-eigenstates; at (1) we talk about φ(x) as solutions of an E.o.M. in spacetime and at (2) we talk about $φ{0}|vac⟩$ (please let's keep things simple and focus on a 1 particle state). My question was: **how does φ(x) acts on $φ{0}|$vac$⟩$?** – TrentKent6 Nov 01 '23 at 06:12
  • ...of course, all of this comes from the fact that the field operators, which are solution of the e.o.m. and are defined on spacetime, act on the Fock space – TrentKent6 Nov 01 '23 at 08:42
  • I just saw your updated answer, thanks, but it's still not answering because I am referring to the field operator φ(x), not φ+ or φ- (which I am already familiar with). For example, Weinberg at page 202 (chapter 5) says that φ is a linear combination of φ+ or φ-. How how does φ(x) act on a Fock state? – TrentKent6 Nov 06 '23 at 18:51
  • You know, that is not so difficult to work out, but it would be easier to represent $\phi(x)$ and $\phi_0$ in terms of the momentum basis to do that. – flippiefanus Nov 07 '23 at 08:54
  • Can you please tell me what is its effect? what does it do different from φ+? – TrentKent6 Nov 07 '23 at 14:28
  • As I mentioned, when we use $\phi(x)$, it produces states that are not properly normalized. Therefore, we don't get Fock states by operating with $\phi(x)$ on Fock states. The result is a bit of a mess. The point of using mathematics is to model physics. When we just do mathematics without proper consideration for the physical system, we just get some mathematical stuff with little relevance to the physical system. – flippiefanus Nov 08 '23 at 03:28
  • but the annihilation and creator operators in momentum spaces also produce states that are not properly normalized, yet we still can say what their effect is on a Fock state. In fact, fixing the normalization objection to my question is quite easy by re-phrasing and asking: what is the effect of the operator ̂()=∫̂()()$^{4}$ on a Fock state? [where () is a compactly supported smooth function]. – TrentKent6 Nov 09 '23 at 20:48
  • This is close to what I did in the definition of $\phi_0$. So why don't you like that? – flippiefanus Nov 10 '23 at 02:56
  • because that is about "φ+", while I am referring to "φ", which is a combination of "φ+" and "φ-" – TrentKent6 Nov 10 '23 at 12:01
  • The creation part will just adds a particle. I already showed that it increases the number of particles in the Fock states (see the 4th expression). What more do you need to know? – flippiefanus Nov 11 '23 at 02:54
  • of course the creation part will just adds a particle, i already said that i know this, but in the same logic the annihilation part will just remove a particle. Since φ is a combination of adding a particle (φ+) and removing a particle (φ-), what does it do? – TrentKent6 Nov 11 '23 at 13:36
  • It creates a superposition of two Fock states that differ by two particles. Do you want me add that? – flippiefanus Nov 12 '23 at 03:56