I'm trying to prove the following equality: $$
$$
What I have done so far:
Assume that the domain of integration, that is, {x∈RR:x(tf)=xf∧x(ti)=xi} is such that all the functions in this set can be analytically continued to a new domain of integration {x∈CC:x(itf)=xf∧x(iti)=xi}. Is this valid?
Plug in the definitions: $
=\mathcal{N}\int_{\left\{ x\in\mathbb{C}^{\mathbb{C}}:\, x\left(it_{f}\right)=x_{f}\wedge x\left(it_{i}\right)=x_{i}\right\} }\mathcal{D}x\exp\left\{ \frac{i}{\hbar}\int_{it_{i}}^{it_{f}}dt\left\{ \frac{1}{2}m\left[x'\right]^{2}-\left(V\left[x\right]\right)\right\}\right\}$ Now to compute ∫itfitidt{12m[x′]2−(V[x])} make a change of variable (is this valid?? Don't you need Cauchy's theorem and also to assume that the time boundaries go to infinity?) t↦−it to get: i∫tftidt{12m[x′]2+V[x]} so you get the correct exponent.
- But how do you prove that N∫{x∈CC:x(itf)=xf∧x(iti)=xi}Dx=N∫{x∈RR:x(tf)=xf∧x(ti)=xi}Dx? Is it even the same N?
Answer
Carefully following Feynman's procedure one actually finds: ⟨x″ =\langle x'', z''|x', z'\rangle =\lim_{N\to \infty\: \epsilon \to 0} \left[\frac{m}{2\pi i \hbar \epsilon} \right]^{N/2}\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\cdots \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \left(\prod_{i=1}^{N-1} dx_i \right) \exp\left\{\frac{i\epsilon}{\hbar} \sum_{j=0}^{N-1} \left[ \frac{m}{2}\left(\frac{x_{j+1}-x_j}{\epsilon} \right)^2-V(x_j)\right]\right\}\quad (1) where z',z'' \in \mathbb C, and \epsilon = \frac{z''-z'}{N}.
Therefore,
the procedure encompasses the general case of complex time lapse z''-z';
\epsilon is a complex number of the same nature as that of z''-z' and this fact is responsible for both the change of sign in front of the kinetic energy, passing from Lorentzian to Euclidean formalism, and the disappearance of the overall factor i in front of the action in the same situation.
As the formula (1) holds for generally complex time z, the "Wick rotation" is automatic: It is nothing but the specification of the nature of z, real or imaginary.
In (1), there are no true paths parametrized by the parameter z, however you are free to interpret x_{j} as a possible position at complex time z_j = z'+ j\epsilon. Actually an effective (powerful I might say!) interpretation is that the sum is computed along the class of all such "broken" paths, in view of the integrations in dx_i connecting in all possible ways x_j and x_{j+1}.
In the limit as N\to +\infty one expects that these paths become smooth (actually the story is different, since the set of smooth paths has zero measure...) and, formally, one writes down the said limit as $$
You see, in particular, that the Euclidean factor \mathcal{N} has to be interpreted as the analytic continuation of the Lorentzian one since \mathcal{N} = \lim_{\epsilon \to 0} \left[\frac{m}{2\pi i \hbar \epsilon} \right]^{N/2} and \epsilon depends on the nature of the considered notion of time.
No comments:
Post a Comment