Integrating Gauge Fields in the $\zeta$-formulation of Feynman's path integral
Tobias Hartung, Karl Jansen

TL;DR
This paper extends the Fourier integral operator $ta$-function regularization method for Feynman's path integral to include gauge fields, providing new insights into quantum field theory calculations.
Contribution
It introduces a framework for integrating gauge fields into the $ta$-function regularization of Feynman's path integral, filling a gap in previous work.
Findings
Successfully applied the method to well-known quantum field examples
Demonstrated the regularization of vacuum expectation values with gauge fields
Enhanced understanding of gauge field contributions in path integral formalism
Abstract
In recent work by the authors, a connection between Feynman's path integral and Fourier integral operator -functions has been established as a means of regularizing the vacuum expectation values in quantum field theories. However, most explicit examples using this regularization technique to date, do not consider gauge fields in detail. Here, we address this gap by looking at some well-known physical examples of quantum fields from the Fourier integral operator -function point of view.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
11institutetext: Tobias Hartung 22institutetext: Department of Mathematics, King’s College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom 22email: [email protected] 33institutetext: Karl Jansen 44institutetext: NIC, DESY Zeuthen, Platanenallee 6, 15738 Zeuthen, Germany 44email: [email protected]
Integrating Gauge Fields in the -formulation of Feynman’s path integral
Tobias Hartung and Karl Jansen
Abstract
In recent work by the authors, a connection between Feynman’s path integral and Fourier integral operator -functions has been established as a means of regularizing the vacuum expectation values in quantum field theories. However, most explicit examples using this regularization technique to date, do not consider gauge fields in detail. Here, we address this gap by looking at some well-known physical examples of quantum fields from the Fourier integral operator -function point of view.
Keywords:
-regularization; Feynman path integral; gauge fields
1 Introduction
Feynman’s path integral is a fundamental building block of modern quantum field theory. For instance, the time evolution semigroup of a quantum field theory is a semigroup of integral operators whose kernels are given by the path integral. In terms of the Hamiltonian of a given quantum field theory, is the semigroup generated by , i.e., formally satisfies where is the time-ordered exponential for unbounded operators as to be understood in terms of the time-dependent Hille-Yosida Theorem (e.g., Theorem 5.3.1 in pazy ). Furthermore, the path integral is intimately connected to vacuum expectation values which play two very crucial roles. On one hand, vacuum expectation values are physical and allow for experimental verification and thus to test theories. On the other hand, vacuum expectation values of field operators (so called -point functions) uniquely determine the quantum field theory by Wightman’s Reconstruction Theorem (Theorem 3-7 in streater-wightman ).
Let us consider a quantum field theory with Hilbert space and time evolution semigroup . Then, the vacuum expectation value of an observable can be expressed as
[TABLE]
where the denominator is also known as the partition function. Upon closer inspection however, ( ‣ 1) reveals one of the major mathematical obstacles. The traces on the right hand side of ( ‣ 1) should be the canonical trace on trace-class operators but for a continuum theory is a bounded, non-compact operator and is in general an unbounded operator on .
Vacuum expectation values are thus only generally understood in terms of discretized quantum field theories. This is the starting point of lattice quantum field theory for instance and great computational effort is necessary to extrapolate the continuum limit from these discretized vacuum expectation values. If we wish to understand ( ‣ 1) in the continuum however, the traces need to be constructed in such a way that they coincide with the canonical trace on provided .
One such trace construction technique are operator -functions. They were introduced by Ray and Singer ray ; ray-singer for pseudo-differential operators and first proposed as a regularization method for path integrals in perturbation theory by Hawking hawking . The Fourier integral operator -function approach generalizes the pseudo-differential framework to non-perturbative settings with general metrics (Euclidean and Lorentzian) and includes special cases like Lattice discretizations in a Lorentzian background.
Given an operator and a trace for which we want to define , we construct a holomorphic family such that and there exists a maximal open and connected subset of for which maps into the domain of . In general, we construct such that contains a half-space for some . Then, we define the -function to be the meromorphic extension of to an open, connected neighborhood of [math] (provided it exists). If is holomorphic in a neighborhood of [math] and depends only on and not the explicit choice of (that is, if is another admissible choice of holomorphic family with , then ), then we can define as .
For example, if is a positive operator whose spectrum is discrete and free from accumulation points, then we could define and is given by the meromorphic extension of (counting multiplicities); hence, giving rise to the name “operator -function.” This is precisely how Hawking hawking employed -regularization, it has been used successfully in many physical settings (e.g., the Casimir effect, defining one-loop functional determinants, the stress-energy tensor, conformal field theory, and string theory beneventano-santangelo ; blau-visser-wipf ; bordag-elizalde-kirsten ; bytsenko-et-al ; culumovic-et-al ; dowker-critchley ; elizalde2001 ; elizalde ; elizalde-et-al ; elizalde-vanzo-zerbini ; fermi-pizzocchero ; hawking ; iso-murayama ; marcolli-connes ; mckeon-sherry ; moretti97 ; moretti99 ; moretti00 ; moretti11 ; robles ; shiekh ; tong-strings ), and is related to Hadamard parametrix renormalization hack-moretti . This approach has been fundamental for many subsequent developments as it allows for an effective Lagrangian to be defined blau-visser-wipf as well as heat kernel coefficients to easily be computed bordag-elizalde-kirsten , and implies non-trivial extensions of the Chowla-Selberg formula elizalde2001 . Furthermore, the residues have been studied extensively because they give rise to the multiplicative anomaly which appears in perturbation theory elizalde-vanzo-zerbini and contributes a substantial part to the energy momentum tensor of a black hole for instance hawking .
Kontsevich and Vishik kontsevich-vishik ; kontsevich-vishik-geometry showed that this construction gives rise to a well-defined (unbounded) trace for pseudo-differential operators. Their approach was later extended to Fourier integral operators hartung-phd ; hartung-scott . Since Radzikowski radzikowski92 ; radzikowski96 showed that the operators and are pseudo-differential operators (Euclidean spacetimes) or more generally Fourier integral operators (Lorentzian spacetimes), we can apply this framework of operator -functions to the definition of vacuum expectation values as it was first done in hartung ; hartung-iwota and define a -regularized vacuum expectation value of to be
[TABLE]
where is a suitable family of Fourier integral operators (usually pseudo-differential) with such that and satisfy the assumptions on the construction of the corresponding operator -functions.
If we consider to be the time evolution semigroup of a quantum field theory , then this essentially means that we construct a “holomorphic family of quantum field theories ” such that the vacuum expectation value of in is well-defined in Feynman’s sense for in some open subset of and the vacuum expectation value of in the quantum field theory , that we wish to study, is defined via analytic continuation.
Furthermore, it was recently shown hartung-jansen that this construction of -regularized vacuum expectation values can be understood in terms of a continuum limit of discretized quantum field theories which is accessible using quantum computing. This discretization can be constructed directly in the continuum on general metrics, including Riemannian and Lorentzian spacetimes. Alternatively, the discretization can be constructed from spacetime lattices. Given the universal applicability result hartung-jansen of the Fourier integral operator -function approach to -regularized vacuum expectation values, many examples have been considered in this framework on a mathematically fundamental level hartung ; hartung-iwota ; hartung-jansen . However, applications of -regularization in the physical literature beneventano-santangelo ; blau-visser-wipf ; bordag-elizalde-kirsten ; bytsenko-et-al ; culumovic-et-al ; dowker-critchley ; elizalde2001 ; elizalde ; elizalde-et-al ; elizalde-vanzo-zerbini ; fermi-pizzocchero ; hawking ; iso-murayama ; marcolli-connes ; mckeon-sherry ; moretti97 ; moretti99 ; moretti00 ; moretti11 ; robles ; shiekh ; tong-strings have focused on different aspects which leaves a wide gap to demonstrate the practicability of treating quantum field theories with the Fourier integral operator -function regularization in a non-perturbative fashion.
We therefore want to start filling this gap with some fundamental examples of quantum fields which are underlying many gauge field theories. In particular, we will consider free real and complex scalar quantum fields (Sections 2 and 3 respectively) and the free Dirac field (Section 4). Finally, we will consider light coupled to a fermion (Section 5) where we ignore self-interaction of the radiation field for simplicity (the free radiation field has already been discussed in hartung-jansen ). The example of light coupling to matter is of particular interest as it is one of the well-known examples of -regularization from the physical literature iso-murayama which we can now understand in terms of the Fourier integral operator approach to -regularized vacuum expectation values.
2 The free real scalar quantum field
The first example we would like to consider is the free scalar quantum field in dimensions. Its Lagrangian density is given by
[TABLE]
Hence, the generalized momentum is
[TABLE]
and thus we obtain the Hamiltonian density
[TABLE]
Considering the spatial torus , the momenta of the quantum field take values in and the dispersion relation yields the energy of a particle with momentum . Hence, using the canonical quantization of free fields (cf. e.g. tong chapter 2) we obtain the quantized field and momentum
[TABLE]
where and are the normalized annihilation and creation operators for a particle of momentum . In other words, they satisfy the canonical commutation relations and . Plugging these expressions into the Hamiltonian density ( and ) and integrating over then yields the Hamiltonian
[TABLE]
since and . Here, the term is precisely what we expect to see since counts the number of particles with momentum . The term on the other hand diverges. In the physics literature, you usually encounter a renormalization argument at this point or the Hamiltonian is directly redefined to be normally ordered, and the term is dropped. Therefore, we define the normally ordered Hamiltonian to be
[TABLE]
where we artificially added the term which corresponds to the “there are no particles” case.
On the other hand, we are looking to use a -regularized framework and this additional term
[TABLE]
can be interpreted as such where denotes the Riemann -function. In other words, we can define a -regularized Hamiltonian
[TABLE]
It is interesting to note that and coincide in the limit which eventually we need to perform if we want to obtain vacuum expectation values in Minkowski space. However, physically this constant has no impact at all since it is not an observable. This relies on the fact that we cannot measure “absolute” energies but only differences in energy. The choice between and is therefore similar to the choice between measuring temperature in Kelvin () or Celsius ().
In order to use the -formalism, we need to find Fourier integral operator representations of and . Since the two only differ by a constant, we will only consider for the moment. Let be the restriction of to the space generated by at most single particle states. Calling the vacuum state , we can obtain all single particle states using the corresponding creation operator and, since , we directly obtain . In other words, is an orthonormal basis of the Hilbert space spanned by all at most single particle states which we can thus identify with and therefore with as well. In particular, we have the correspondence
[TABLE]
and obtain the representation
[TABLE]
In order to allow multiple particles to exist, suppose we have the particle state . This state can be represented as a sum of permutations of tensor products , where denotes the symmetric group on the set , in the symmetric tensor product . The Hilbert space is then the Fock space given by the Hilbert space completion of .
Thus, states in are of the form
[TABLE]
and the inner product is given by
[TABLE]
Given a pure particle state, we deduce that the restriction of to the particle Hilbert space is given by
[TABLE]
and, finally, we can represent on the Fock space as
[TABLE]
In this case, the energy of the state is given by
[TABLE]
i.e., precisely the expression we were looking for. In particular, this expression is minimal if and only if each summand is zero which implies . In other words, the vacuum expectation of is
[TABLE]
Of course, this directly implies
[TABLE]
as expected.
2.1 The -regularized vacuum expectation values of and
Let us now compare the true vacuum expectations and to the -regularized vacuum expectation values and . Again, we will start with . However, if we try to naïvely ignore that we have a Fock space here,
[TABLE]
shows that we have not completely -regularized since the series might not be convergent for sufficiently small . Instead we need to introduce a regularization for the summation over as well. For instance, let
[TABLE]
Then and we obtain
[TABLE]
which coincides with the .
Regarding , let be a gauged Fourier integral operator such that . Then, and
[TABLE]
implies .
2.2 The particle limit
Alternatively, we can consider the Hamiltonian
[TABLE]
in the “up to particle Hilbert space” where is embedded as . Physically, taking the limit says that we are only considering states that have finitely many particles. The -regularized vacuum energy is then computed as
[TABLE]
in this setting.
3 Free complex scalar quantum fields
Complex scalar fields are generalizations of real scalar fields which allow for the creation of antiparticles. More precisely, in a real scalar field the particle is its own antiparticle. The distinction between particles and antiparticles for the complex scalar field becomes obvious once they are quantized. Writing a complex scalar field as the sum of two real scalar fields and with creation operators and , and expanding the field operator as a sum of planar waves yields
[TABLE]
on where is the set of momenta. This furthermore implies the conjugate momentum
[TABLE]
If we consider the charge operator we directly obtain
[TABLE]
which is not normally ordered. The normally ordered charge is thus given by
[TABLE]
This again can be explained using a -argument and the commutator relation . More precisely, we need to -regularize the series which is nothing other than on . Since has no critical degree of homogeneity, exists and is a well-defined constant (in fact, it is where is the Riemann -function), i.e.,
[TABLE]
As for the Hamiltonian, we repeat the same calculation we did in the real case but with Lagrangian instead of and obtain the normally ordered Hamiltonian
[TABLE]
which differs from the -regularized Hamiltonian by a constant again. This also shows the interesting effect that antiparticles appear with negative energy in the theory which allows us to reproduce the Feynman-Stückelberg interpretation of antiparticles. Considering the wave propagator under time-reversal we obtain an algebraically equivalent theory with reversed roles for and . In other words, antiparticles are particles that move backwards in time and creation and annihilation of particle-antiparticle pairs can be seen as a particle reversing the direction it travels through time.
In any case, the negative energies yield the up to particle and anti-particle Hamiltonian
[TABLE]
on which directly implies that since the degrees of homogeneity are identical to the ones in the real scalar field case.
4 The Dirac field
The free Dirac field is closely related to the complex scalar field but we are now considering spinor valued fields, assume that the creation and annihilation operators satisfy the canonical anticommutator relations, and possibly introduce a mass term . Hence, our fields on the spatial torus are
[TABLE]
where is the set of spins, the set of momenta, and and are spinors, i.e., they satisfy
- (i)
2. (ii)
3. (iii)
4. (iv)
where , , and the -matrices are given in the Dirac basis and with the Pauli matrices , , and . Plugging everything into the Dirac Hamiltonian density and integrating then yields
[TABLE]
and yields the normally ordered Hamiltonian
[TABLE]
For this is precisely the same situation we had for the complex scalar field just with an additional summation over spins.
For we still have the question whether we can normally order the Hamiltonian using a -argument again. In other words, we need to -regularize the trace of an operator with kernel but for we observe the asymptotic expansion
[TABLE]
which has a degree of homogeneity if and only if is odd. In particular, the residue trace is given by . Hence, -regularization fails to normally order this Hamiltonian.
However, this is no problem in the light of vacuum expectation values as we are taking quotients of -functions. Hence, the presence of poles simply means that the value of is given by the quotient of residues rather than the quotient of constant Laurent coefficients.
5 Coupling a fermion of mass to light in dimensions
Coupling light to matter in dimensions is one of the text-book examples of -regularization in the physical literature because it is a toy model for QED. In particular, the Schwinger model which has has been studied extensively (cf. e.g. iso-murayama ). Here, we will show how the well-known applications of -regularization tie into the framework of -regularized vacuum expectation values as discussed in hartung ; hartung-iwota ; hartung-jansen .
In order to consider coupling a fermion to a gauge field , we will restrict our considerations to a fermion in dimensions with a constant background field. This ignores the self-interaction of the gauge field which gives an additional term to the Hamiltonian that has already been discussed in hartung-jansen .
In the present case, and using the temporal gauge , , the (fermionic coupling) Hamiltonian on is given by
[TABLE]
where is the coupling constant, , and is the spinor field which we endow with anti-periodic boundary conditions (this is allowed because is an auxiliary field; all physical quantities are composed of sesquilinear forms in which are periodic).
To study this system, we will first expand into eigenmodes of , i.e., we are looking to solve
[TABLE]
These imply
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
implies that has to satisfy
[TABLE]
In other words, the eigenvalues are given by
[TABLE]
where . For brevity, we will write .
First quantization of , then introduces annihilation operators and for the upper and lower components of with and is given by
[TABLE]
In particular, this implies
[TABLE]
At this point, we will split our considerations into the positive () and negative () chirality sectors. The positive sector has the Hamiltonian and chiral charge . Since there is no minimum energy, we define the -vacuum of the positive chirality sector by filling all states with energies where .
To compute the -chiral charge and -vacuum energy , we use -regularization. The gauge family makes the computation easily accessible on the spectral side. With this choice of gauge, we observe
[TABLE]
where is the Hurwitz -function (analytically continued in the second argument as well). Using ther Bernoulli polynomials - which are defined as , , and - non-positive integer values of are given by . In particular, we will need and , the former of which directly implies
[TABLE]
Similarly,
[TABLE]
The negative chirality sector has chiral charge and Hamiltonian . Again, we introduce an -vacuum filling all energy states with and choose the gauge family . This yields
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Combining both sectors then yields the charge , the chiral charge , their --vacuum expectations
[TABLE]
and the ground state energy of the fermion
[TABLE]
This combined calculation above can be expressed in terms of Fourier integral operator -functions as where .
6 Conclusion
In this paper we provided a number of fundamental examples using the Fourier integral operator -function regularization for systems that are relevant in high energy physics. We demonstrated analytically that we obtain the correct vacuum expectation values within this framework and directly addressed the non-trivial problem of treating gauge fields using this point of view. In particular, we discussed scalar fields in sections 2 (real) and 3 (complex), and the Dirac field in section 4. Additionally, we have shown in section 5 how one of the canonical applications of -regularization in the physics literature (light coupling to a fermion) appears as a special case of the Fourier integral operator -function approach. This opens the door to also study problems where no analytic solution exists and where the -regularization has to be evaluated numerically, e.g. on a quantum computer as demonstrated in hartung-jansen .
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1(1) C. G. Beneventano and E. M. Santangelo. Effective action for QED 4 through ζ 𝜁 \zeta -function regularization. J. Math. Phys. 42 (2001), 3260-3269.
- 2(2) S. K. Blau, M. Visser, and A. Wipf. Analytic results for the effective action. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 6 (1991), 5409-5433.
- 3(3) M. Bordag, E. Elizalde, and K. Kirsten. Heat kernel coefficients of the Laplace operator on the D-dimensional ball. J. Math. Phys. 37 , 895 (1996).
- 4(4) A. A. Bytsenko, G. Cognola, E. Elizalde, V. Moretti, and S. Zerbini. Analytic Aspects of Quantum Fields. World Scientific Publishing (2003).
- 5(5) L. Culumovic, M. Leblanc, R. B. Mann, D. G. C. Mc Keon, and T. N. Sherry. Operator regularization and multiloop Green’s functions. Phys. Rev. D 41 (1990), 514
- 6(6) J. S. Dowker and R. Critchley. Effective Lagrangian and energy-momentum tensor in de Sitter space. Phys. Rev. D 13 (1976), 3224.
- 7(7) E. Elizalde. Explicit zeta functions for bosonic and fermionic fields on a non-commutative toroidal spacetime. J. Phys. A 34 (2001), 3025-3035.
- 8(8) E. Elizalde. Ten Physical Applications of Spectral Zeta Functions. 2nd Ed., Lecture Notes in Physics , vol 855, Springer (2012).
