I can derive a(k)=∫d3xeikμxμ(ω→kψ+iπ)
for a free real scalar Klein-Gordon field in three ways mathematically: the usual Fourier transform way in Peskin/Srednicki, an awesome direct
a=12(2a)=… way (exercise!), and as a by-product of a clever way of mode-expanding the Hamiltonian, but I can't
qualitatively tell you why
a(k)=∫d3xeikμxμ(ω→kψ+iπ)
should be the answer we'll get before doing any mathematical derivations. Good books, like Zee, will sometimes give two or three derivations of the same thing after all:
Thus, in chapter VI.1, instead of deriving Einstein’s field equation as a true Confucian scholar would, I try to get to it as quickly as possible by a method I dub “winging it southern California style.” Similarly, in chapter VI.2, I get to cosmology as quickly as possible.
Zee - Gravity, Intro.
How would you interpret a(k), ψ & π in such a way so as to make the above expression, & similarly for the creation operator, in the real and complex case, obvious - without sweeping the problem under the rug by referring to the analogous expression for quantum harmonic oscillators which should also be explainable with such a description?
Attempt:
What I see so far is pretty interesting, it's not as elementary as I'd like but it's really nice nonetheless: There seems to be a deep link between the U(1) phase invariance symmetry of the expected value of wave functions <g|f>→<g′|f′>=<g|e−iθeiθ|f>=<g|f>
and the fact that the Klein-Gordon action under a U(1) Noether symmetry produces the Lorentz invariant conserved current jμ=i(ψ∗∂μψ−ψ∂μψ∗)=iψ∗↔∂μψ
so that, with a hint of genius, we are somehow
motivated to define
<g|f> explicitly for functions satisfying Klein-Gordon via
⟨g|f⟩=∫R3d3→xig∗↔∂0f
(seeing it in books before, it seemed like a trick with no reasoning) so that the projection of the wave function onto the
k'th frequency gives the
a(k) coefficient.
Thus it seems that, for a function
f satisfying Klein-Gordon, since a wave of charge (time-component of current vector)
k0 is represented by
e−ikμxμ, the amount of
f of charge
k would be found by analyzing
<e−ikμxμ|f>=a(k).
This seems very haphazard, but indicative.
Could anybody give an answer that a) completely wings it to explain a(k) easily, then b) cleans up my attempt?