• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,054 questions , 2,207 unanswered
5,347 answers , 22,720 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  How are Bethe-Salpeter type bound state equations derived in light-front QFT?

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

In light-front QCD, one is often interested in computing the lightcone Hamiltonian \(P^-\) constructed from the stress tensor. Then one goes on to expand the fields in an oscillator basis and then normal order the Hamiltonian. Finally, one arrives at an infinite set of coupled integral equations by considering the action of the Hamiltonian on a superposition of multi particle states, e.g. of the form Eq. (18) in http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9705045.pdf .

My question is: how is this derived? Naively, I should think that the wavefunctions (which in the above reference are denoted by \(f_n\)) should not change by acting with the light cone Hamiltonian, since it is basically Wick contractions. What gives rise to the fact that the wavefunctions in Eq. (18) involve different particle numbers?

asked Jul 23, 2015 in Theoretical Physics by Arvindh [ no revision ]

1 Answer

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

(18) is obtained by substituting (12) and (14) into (8). Since (14) contains different numbers of creation and annihilation operators, the mass square operator doesn't preserve particle number.

answered Jul 24, 2015 by Arnold Neumaier (15,787 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights