2

Summary:

  • Equation of motion (EOM) for the electromagnetic 4-potential $A^\mu$ is non-invertible. Allegedly, this makes it impossible to determine the Green's function, and complicates quantisation of the theory.
  • My point: EOMs are always non-invertible because they annihilate their own solutions/trajectories. In systems without the gauge invariance (e.g. a Klein-Gordon field) this does not seem to lead to a problem. This is tackled by prescriptions for different kinds of propagators (retarded, advanced, time-ordered Feynman)

Question: what is the exact criterion of sufficient invertibility for the EOM? In other words, what makes the EOM of the EM field different from that of the KG field?

Details:

It is often claimed (e.g. in "Field theory: a path integral approach" by Ashok Das or Peskin & Schroeder sec. 9.4) that the non-trivialities associated with quantising the EM field are related to the gauge symmetry, and, as a consequence, of non-invertibility of the EOM that defines the Green's function:

$$P^{\mu\nu}=\eta^{\mu\nu}\Box -\partial^\mu \partial^\nu\,.$$

Naively, finding the Green's function requires inverting this operator. In the 4-momentum space $A_\mu(x)=\epsilon_\mu e^{ikx}$, we have $$\tilde{P}^{\mu\nu}=-k^2\eta^{\nu\mu}+k^\mu k^\nu\,.$$

This operator annihilates two kinds of solutions

  1. $k^2=0,k\cdot\epsilon=0$
  2. $k^2\ne0, \epsilon^\mu \sim k^\mu$

Apparently, the solutions with $\epsilon_\mu\sim k_\mu$ (both for $k^2=0$ and $k^2\ne0$) make it impossible to invert the EOM.

My question is why there is no such problem for the simpler cases without gauge invariance. For example, the Klein-Gordon operator $$P'=\Box +m^2$$ also has zero eigenfunctions, they are the classical solutions of the EOM, $\phi(x)=e^{ikx}$ for $k$ on-shell, i.e. with $E=\sqrt{|\vec{k}|^2+m^2}$.

As I understand it, strictly speaking, this makes the operator non-invertible. I also think this is very closely related to different prescriptions for propagators (retarded, advanced, time-ordered Feynman) which differ from each other by a free solution.

I don't have any doubts that the EM field propagator is in some sense even less invertible. Maybe it is like having even more zero modes. I think these extra solutions should be related to the fact that the Cauchy problem for $A^\mu$ is underdetermined since trajectories related by a gauge transformation are dynamically equivalent. The question is how one can know directly from the EOM whether it has "too many" solutions.

P.S. I have looked at a few other posts here. The closest one seems to be Gauge fixing, invertibility and Green's functional. But I couldn't find a fully satisfactory answer.

Qmechanic
  • 220,844

1 Answers1

1

We start by considering the Klein-Gordon operator $\square +m^2$ acting in a space of functions $\phi(x)$ decaying sufficiently fast for $|x^\mu| \to \infty$. The general solution of the inhomogeneous Klein-Gordon equation $$ (\square+m^2)\phi(x) = f(x) \tag{1} \label{1} $$ can be written in the form $$ \phi(x) = \phi_{\rm s}(x) + \phi_{\rm h}(x), \tag{2} \label{2} $$ where $\phi_{\rm s}(x)$ is an arbitrary special solution of eq. \eqref{1} and $\phi_{\rm h}(x)$ denotes the general solution of the homogeneous equation $(\square +m^2)\phi_{\rm h}(x)=0$. Clearly, the inverse of $\square +m^2$ does not exist in this space of functions.

As a consequence, the Green function $G(x)$ of the Klein-Gordon operator, defined by $$ (\square + m^2) G(x) = \delta^{(4)} (x) \tag{3} \label{3} $$ is not uniquely determined by eq. \eqref{3} as all functions of the form $G^\prime(x)=G(x)+\phi_h(x)$ satisfy eq. \eqref{3} as well.

Writing $G(x)$ as a Fourier integral, $$ G(x)= \int \! \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi)^4} \, e^{-ikx} \, \tilde{G}(k), \tag{4} \label{4}$$ eq. \eqref{3} becomes $$ (-k^2+m^2)\, \tilde{G}(k) = 1 \tag{5} \label{5} $$ and the ambiguity of the Green function is reflected by the fact that the integral $$ \int \! \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi)^4} \, \frac{1}{m^2-k^2}= \int \! \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi)^4} \, \frac{1}{m^2+ \mathbf{k}^2- (k^0)^2} \tag{6} \label{6} $$ does not exist because of the presence of the poles at $k^0 = \pm (\mathbf{k}^2+m^2)^{1/2}=: \pm \omega(\mathbf{k})$ on the $k^0$-axis.

However, by deforming the path of the $k^0$-integration into the complex $k^0$-plane, the poles on the real $k^0$ can be avoided, making sense of the integral given in \eqref{6}. Depending on the choice of the deformed path, one obtains e.g. the retarded Green function (with $G_{\rm R}(x)= 0$ for $x^0 < 0$), the advanced Green function (with $G_{\rm A}(x)=0$ for $x^0 >0$) or the Feynman propagator (in position space) $G_{\rm F}(x)$, characterized by containing only positive frequency plane waves $\sim \exp(- i \omega(\mathbf{k}) x^0)$ for $x^0 \to \infty$ and only negative frequency plane waves $\sim \exp(i \omega(\mathbf{k}) x^0)$ for $x^0 \to -\infty$. This procedure is equivalent to imposing certain boundary conditions on the Green function, singling out a specific solution of \eqref{3}.

Instead of deforming the path of integration in the complex $k^0$-plane, it is often slightly more convenient to shift the poles away from the real axis, while leaving the $k^0$-integration on the real axis.

Concentrating on the Green function $G_{\rm F}(x)$ with Feynman boundary conditions, shifting the poles to $k^0 = \pm \omega(\mathbf{k}) \mp i \epsilon$ with $\epsilon >0$ is equivalent to considering the differential equation $$ (\square +m^2 - i \epsilon) \, G_{\rm F}(x) =\delta^{(4)}(x). \tag{7} \label{7} $$ In contrast to eq. \eqref{3}, the solution of eq. \eqref{7} is now uniquely determined. The solutions of the corresponding homogeneous equation, being superpositions of plane waves $\sim \exp(\mp i \omega(\mathbf{k}) x^0) \exp(\mp \epsilon x^0)$, explode either for $x^0 \to \infty$ or $x^0 \to - \infty$ and are thus forbidden by our requirement $\phi(x) \to 0$ for $|x^\mu| \to \infty$.

In other words, the inverse of the operator $\square +m^2-i \epsilon$ exists in the space of functions under consideration and the Fourier representation of the corresponding Green function is given by \begin{align} G_{\rm F}(x) &= \int \! \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi)^4} \, \frac{e^{-ikx}}{m^2-k^2-i \epsilon} \tag{8} \label{8} \\[5pt] &= i \theta(x^0) \! \int \!\frac{d^3 k}{(2\pi)^3 2 \omega(\mathbf{k})} \, e^{-i \omega(\mathbf{k}) x^0} e^{i \mathbf{k} \cdot \mathbf{x}} \\[5pt] &+i \theta(-x^0) \! \int \! \frac{d^3 k}{(2\pi)^3 2 \omega(\mathbf{k})} e^{i \omega(\mathbf{k}) x^0 } e^{-i \mathbf{k} \cdot \mathbf{x}}. \end{align}

For the discussion of the field equation of an $U(1)$ gauge field $A^\mu(x)$ we start from the Lagrangian $$ \mathcal{L}= - \frac{1}{4} F_{\mu \nu}F^{\mu \nu} -j^\mu A_\mu \tag{9} \label{9} $$ with the field strength tensor $F_{\mu \nu}= \partial_\mu A_\nu - \partial_\nu A_\mu$ and a conserved current $j^\mu$. The corresponding equation of motion is found as $$ (g_{\mu \nu} \square - \partial_\mu \partial_\nu )A^\nu =j_\mu. \tag{10} \label{10} $$ Again, the solution of eq. \eqref{10} is not unique. As in the previous case, we may always add a solution of the corresponding homogeneous equation (with $j^\mu=0$) to an arbitrary solution of the inhomogeneous equation \eqref{10}.

But we encounter an additional problem. The fields $A^\mu$ and $A^\mu+ \partial^\mu \Lambda$ (with an arbitrary scalar field $\Lambda(x)$) describe the same electromagnetic field given by the gauge invariant (physical) field $F_{\mu \nu}$. Indeed, $$ (g_{\mu \nu} \square - \partial_\mu \partial_\nu) \partial^\nu \Lambda = \square \partial_\mu \Lambda - \partial_\mu \square \Lambda =0 \tag{11}$$ and the $i \epsilon$ prescription alone is obviously not sufficient to cure also this second "disease".

As already well-known from classical electrodynamics, the way out is to impose a gauge condition on the gauge field $A_\mu$. In principle, this can be done in infinitely many ways. A convenient choice is provided by Fermi's trick, where a gauge fixing term is introduced in the Lagrangian, $$ \mathcal{L} \to \mathcal{L}_{\rm eff} = \mathcal{L}- \frac{\xi}{2}(\partial_\mu A_\mu)^2 \tag{12} \label{12} $$ with the resulting field equation $$ \left[ g_{\mu \nu} \square -(1-\xi) \partial_\mu \partial_\nu \right] A^\nu = j_\mu. \tag{13} \label{13} $$ Using again the $i \epsilon$ prescription, the operator $$ g_{\mu \nu} (\square-i \epsilon) -(1-\xi) \partial_\mu \partial_\nu \tag{14} $$ can be inverted, where the corresponding Green function is given by $$ D_{\rm F}^{\mu \nu} (x)= \int \! \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi)^4} e^{-ikx} \frac{-1}{k^2+i \epsilon} \left[ g^{\mu \nu} -\left(1-\frac{1}{\xi}\right) \frac{k^\mu k^\nu}{k^2} \right]. \tag{15} \label{15} $$ Note that observable quantities are, of course, independent of the the (arbitrary) gauge parameter $\xi$, being a good check in actual calculations.

Hyperon
  • 10,007