Abstract The chapter focuses on the problems at the origin of QFT: i) the conflict between locality and energy positivity, which affects relativistic wave equations in general, and ii) the need of describing relativistic particle interactions by contact interactions (such as field-mediated interactions) rather than by interactions at a distance. It is argued that QFT emerges as a possible solution, fully under mathematical control in the free case.
Abstract The chapter focuses on the problems at the origin of QFT: i) the conflict between locality and energy positivity, which affects relativistic wave equations in general, and ii) the need of describing relativistic particle interactions by contact interactions (such as field-mediated interactions) rather than by interactions at a distance. It is argued that QFT emerges as a possible solution, fully under mathematical control in the free case.
Problems with the extension to relativity. The Klein–Gordon equation The attempt to extend the causal interpretation to cover relativistic quantum mechanics raises several problems of technique and principle. These relate not only to difficulties peculiar to the quantum theory of motion but have to do with still unresolved issues in the underlying quantum mechanical formalism (such as the appearance of infinities in the computation of physical quantities and the lack of a relativistic theory of measurement). Some problems are common to both, such as the difficulty of defining positive densities. The subject has not been extensively investigated and in this chapter we shall discuss only some of the relevant issues. There are two particularly important, overlapping problems: Can the trajectory concept be retained in the relativistic quantum domain? And: how do we interpret relativistic quantum fields? The unresolved issue underlying both questions is the extent to which we should require a quantum theory to be ‘relativistic’. It is known that Lorentz covariant wave equations can have consequences in conflict with relativity. This, as we shall see, is indeed the case with the current relativistic formalism as interpreted, or completed, by the quantum theory of motion. Especially in field theory, the individual processes that build up and explain the covariant statistical predictions of the formalism exhibit features that are in conflict with our entrenched ideas regarding covariance and locality as necessary concomitants of relativity theory. That is, relativity is statistically valid but the individual events do not have an intrinsically relativistic character.
For the electromagnetic interaction of two particles the relativistic quantum mechanics equations are proposed. These equations are solved for the case when one particle has a small mass and moves freely. The initial wave functions are supposed to be concentrated at the coordinates origin. The energy spectrum of another particle wave function is defined by the initial wave function of the free moving particle. Choosing the initial wave function of the free moving particle it is possible to obtain a practically arbitrary energy spectrum.
As in non-relativistic quantum theory, the simplest problem to solve in relativistic quantum theory is that of describing a free particle. Much can be learned from this case which will be of use in interpreting the topics covered in later chapters. Furthermore, some of the most profound features of relativistic quantum theory are well illustrated by the free particle, so it is a very instructive problem to consider in detail. Another advantage of the free-particle problem is that the mathematics involved in solving it is not nearly as involved as that necessary for solving problems involving particles under the influence of potentials. Firstly we shall look briefly at the formulae for the current and probability density, then we shall go on to examine the solutions of the Dirac equation and investigate their behaviour. This leads us to a discussion of spin, the Pauli limit, and the relativistic spin operator. Next we consider the negative energy solutions and show how relativistic quantum theory predicts the existence of antiparticles. Some of the dilemmas this concept introduces and their resolution are discussed. At the end of the chapter we go back to the Klein paradox, and examine it for an incident spin-1/2 particle. We find that the Klein paradox exists for Dirac particles in exactly the same way as it existed for Klein—Gordon particles and has the same resolution and interpretation.
Given the classical dynamics of a non-relativistic particle in terms of a Hamiltonian or an action, it is relatively straightforward to obtain the non-relativistic quantum mechanics (NRQM) of the system. These standard procedures, based on either the Hamiltonian or the path integral, however, do not work in the case of a relativistic particle. As a result we do not have a single-particle description of relativistic quantum mechanics (RQM). Instead, the correct approach requires a transmutation of dynamical variables from the position and momentum of a single particle to a field and its canonical momentum. Particles, along with antiparticles , reappear in a very nontrivial manner as the excitations of the field. The fact that one needs to adopt completely different languages to describe a relativistic and non-relativistic free particle implies that obtaining the NRQM limit of QFT is conceptually nontrivial. I examine this limit in several approaches (like, for e.g., Hamiltonian dynamics, Lagrangian and Hamiltonian path integrals, field theoretic description etc.) and identify the precise issues which arise when one attempts to obtain the NRQM from QFT in each of these approaches. The dichotomy of NRQM and QFT does not originate just from the square root in the Hamiltonian or from the demand of Lorentz invariance, as is sometimes claimed. The real difficulty has its origin in the necessary existence of antiparticles to ensure a particular notion of relativistic causality. Because of these conceptual issues, it turns out that one cannot , in fact, obtain some of the popular descriptions of NRQM by any sensible limiting procedure applied to QFT. To obtain NRQM from QFT in a seamless manner, it is necessary to work with NRQM expressed in a language closer to that of QFT. This fact has several implications, especially for the operational notion of space coordinates in quantum theory. A close examination of these issues, which arise when quantum theory is combined with special relativity, could offer insights in the context of attempts to combine quantum theory with general relativity.
Quantum field theory (QFT) provides us with one and almost only suitable language (or mathematical tool) for describing not only the motion and interaction of particles but also their “annihilation” and “creation” out of a field considered a priori in a sophisticated way, whose view seems to be suited for describing dislocations, as a particle or a string embedded within a crystalline ordered field. This chapter concisely overviews the method of QFT, emphasizing distinction from the quantum mechanics, conventionally used for a single and/or many particle problems, and its equivalence to the statistical mechanics. The alternative formalism based on Feynman path integral and its imaginary time representation are reviewed, as the foundation for our use in Chapter 10.
As we have seen in Section 8.4, the basis of our perception of an objective reality is statistical mechanics and field theory. These are routinely used in equilibrium and nonequilibrium statistical thermodynamics (see, for example, Calzetta & Hu [59]), which govern the macroscopic laws of everyday life. Thus the quantum theory of fields must be the fundamental description of Nature. Therefore, the simpler quantum mechanics of particles is necessarily a derived description. This chapter discusses the extent to which a particle picture of matter and radiation is appropriate. In relativistic quantum field theory, particles appear only as asymptotic excitations of the fields. The quantum particle concept therefore makes mathematical (and intuitive) sense only under very special circumstances, namely in those where a system actually behaves like particles do: - As quasiparticles, they are useful in the domain, where the geometric optics perspective applies. - Before and after a scattering event in a dilute gas or a particle collider ring, particles can be considered as being essentially free. During the very short interaction time itself, the scattering process cannot be described by a particle picture, but needs a hydromechanical description or a kinetic description via Kadanoff-Baym equations. Already at the very beginning of modern quantum mechanics, when Born found his probability interpretation, the scattering process of single particles in an external classical field was understood (see Section 14.1 of the Appendix) to be a wave process relating initially and finally stationary particles, freely moving in their center of mass frame. It is a historical accident that one continues to use the name particle in the many microscopic situations, where it is grossly inappropriate to think of it with the classical meaning of a tiny bullet moving through space. When we restrict the use of the particle concept to where it is appropriate, or when we do not think of particles as “objects”, in both cases all mystery is gone, and the foundations become fully rational. The inappropriate focus on the particle aspect of quantum mechanics created the appearance of mystery; common sense is restored by focussing instead on the field aspect. To substantiate the above summary view, we give in Section 12.1 an analysis of the photoelectric effect and in Section 12.2 a review of the origin of particle tracks. This leads in Section 12.3 to a discussion about the reality of particles. In the remainder of the chapter, we discuss the relation between fields and particles in more detail. Section 12.4 poses the problem how the nonrelativistic multiparticle description arises from relativistic quantum field theory. Section 12.5 considers the case of free quantum fields, and Section 12.6 the case of interacting quantum fields. Section 12.7, the final section, discusses the semiclassical view of quasiparticles in the approximation familiar from geometric optics.