Quantcast
  • 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.

News

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

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

179 submissions , 139 unreviewed
4,449 questions , 1,753 unanswered
5,131 answers , 21,822 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
681 active unimported users
More ...

  Doubling of degrees of freedom in the Schwinger-Keldysh formalism

+ 3 like - 0 dislike
181 views

I am studying the Schwinger-Keldysh formalism. Basically, we double the number of degrees of freedom for the upper and lower branches.

Let´s consider the case where we have a certain field, coupled to an external current, given by the Lagrangian:

$$L \equiv (\partial_\mu \varphi)(\partial^\mu\varphi) - U(\varphi) + j\varphi$$

Now, in the Schwinger-Keldysh technique, we are going to have the fields and currents:

$$\varphi_+;\varphi_-;j_+;j_-$$

After we perform whatsoever the calculations we want to, typically something like:

$$ \langle 0_{in}|P \space φ_{−}(x_1) · · · φ_{−}(x_{n}) \space φ_{+}(y_1) · · · φ_{+}(y_{p})|0_{in}\rangle $$ ($P$ stands for the ordering in the Schwinger-Keldysh contour, that is to say normal ordering in the uppper branch and anti-time ordering in the lower branch) we take the external fields in both branches to be identical. 

Does it have any physical meaning to keep the external fields  different in our final result?

asked Jan 14 in Theoretical Physics by Manu (15 points) [ revision history ]

Yes, they are identified only at the very end - in the final equations for the correlation functions. otherwise one doesn't get the right equations.

Thank you for your comment. I know this is the way computations are made. I just wondered whether in some special circumstances, keeping the external fields different made any sense, or simply it´s a completely unphysical thing. Namely, if you put the external fields different in the final result, the theory is non unitary, so I didn´t know if that could be related somehow to the non-unitary evolution for the reduced density matrix. 

The fields must be different initially so that one can take partial derivatives with respect to the two parts separately. Otherwise one misses the dissipative part of the reduced dynamics.

Thank you very much again. I don´t know anything about the dynamics of reduced systems (Lynbladian, Feynman-Vernon influence functionals), so I would very much appreciate if you could provide some papers where that´s addressed, preferably in the Schwinger-Keldysh formalism. 

1 Answer

+ 0 like - 0 dislike

Yes, they are identified only at the very end - in the final equations for the correlation functions. otherwise one doesn't get the right equations. The fields must be different initially so that one can take partial derivatives with respect to the two parts separately. Otherwise one misses the dissipative part of the reduced dynamics.

A good treatment is in

E. Calzetta and B.L. Hu,
Nonequilibrium quantum field theory,
Cambridge Univ. Press, New York 2008.

An earlier paper is 

E. Calzetta and B.L. Hu,
Nonequilibrium quantum fields: Closed-time-path effective action, 
Wigner function, and Boltzmann equation,
Phys. Dev. D 37 (1988), 2878--2900.

answered Jan 15 by Arnold Neumaier (14,537 points) [ no revision ]

Thank you very much, I´ll read them.

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:
p$\hbar$ys$\varnothing$csOverflow
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).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




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

Your rights
...