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

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

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,082 questions , 2,232 unanswered
5,353 answers , 22,789 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
820 active unimported users
More ...

  What's the difference between correlation functions and S-matrix, and between in-in formalism (or "closed time path formalism") and in-out formalism?

+ 4 like - 0 dislike
5292 views

I was reading the "in-in" formalism (or "closed time path formalism" used in condensed matter physics) in cosmology created by Schwinger in 1961, and there is a saying: "they care about correlation functions instead of S-matrix scattering amplitudes". When I learn QFT, these two things are almost the same thing and are related by LSZ formula. Why they use in-in instead of in-out? what's the difference between correlation functions and S-matrix?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-07 15:35 (UCT), posted by SE-user user34669
asked Aug 6, 2014 in Theoretical Physics by Alienware (185 points) [ no revision ]

1 Answer

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

Correlation functions (or Wightman N-point functions) are expectation values of renormalized products of field operators at finite times. The ordering of the operators matters since fields at general arguments do not commute.. The correlation functions need for their nonperturbative definition  via a path integral definition the in-in formalism (= closed time path, CTP, Schwinger-Keldysh formalism) where one integrates over a doubled time contour.

The S-matrix elements are computed from the expectations of time-ordered products of field operators (hence independent of the ordering of the operators), which occur in the LSZ formula and in functional derivatives of the standard path integral. They express in-out properties of asymptotic states of scattering experiments. They are obtained in a path integral formulation by integration along a single time path from $t=-\infty$ to $t=+\infty$. As such they also appear inside the CTP formalism.

The information in a time-ordered products is less than in the ordinary product as one can calculate $T(\phi(x)\phi(y))$ from $\phi(x)\phi(y)$ and $\phi(y)\phi(x)$ (away from its singularity at $(x-y)^2=0$), while the converse is not possible. 

Correlation functions are important if you want to see the Hilbert space. Therefore the CTP path integral takes a doubled time path, so that it returns to the initial state, which computes expectation values in the initial state. The images of the initial state under products of field operators span a dense set of vectors in the Hilbert space. Therefore, at least in in principle, one can compute inner products of arbitrary state vectors using the CTP formalism. The S-matrix doesn't contain this information.

As a consequence, the in-out description of quantum field theory - though simpler and covered by every textbook on QFT - is incomplete as it only gives the asymptotic properties of a quantum field, while the in-in description - though more involved and only in textbooks treating nonequilibrium statistical mechanics - gives everything - the asymptotics and the finite time behavior.

answered May 11, 2015 by Arnold Neumaier (15,787 points) [ revision history ]
edited Apr 19, 2016 by Arnold Neumaier

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$\varnothing$ysicsOverflow
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
...