This board is full of shitty threads so I am going to try to make a not shitty one.
ITT: We teach /sci/ something science or math related.
I am going to go through a basic explanation of what a Quantum Field is because I am pretty sure a decent bit of /sci/ is familiar with the basics of QM but not so much QFT.
Ok so a Quantum Field is essentially a sum of operators and wavefunctions.
Say we have a theory where the state vector [math] \left| {n\left( p \right)} \right\rangle [/math] represents the nth energy level of theory with momenta p.
Then we can define an annihilation operator, [math] {a_p} [/math], of the theory as an operator which lowers the energy of the state on which it acts.
i.e. [math] {a_p}\left| {n\left( p \right)} \right\rangle = c\left| {n\left( p \right) - 1} \right\rangle [/math] for some constant c.
A creation operator can be defined as the hermitian conjugate of the annihilation operator.
i.e. [math] {a^\dag }_p [/math] such that [math] {a^\dag }_p\left| {n\left( p \right)} \right\rangle = {c_2}\left| {n\left( p \right) + 1} \right\rangle [/math] for some constant c_2.
Creation and annihilation operators, of a bosonic theory, obey the following commutation relation. [math] \left[ {{a^\dag }_{{p_1}},{a_{{p_2}}}} \right] = \delta _{{p_2}}^{{p_1} [/math]
So for a simple wave function [math] {e^{ipx}} [/math] we can roughly define a quantum field: [math] \Phi \left( x \right) = \sum\limits_p {\left( {{a^\dag }_p{e^{ipx}} + {a_p}{e^{ - ipx}}} \right)} [/math]
Quantum Fields have the important property that they are an operator, or an observable.
A more accurate definition that fits any real scalar field, would be in the form of a momentum Fourier transform. i.e. [math] \Phi \left( x \right) = \int {\frac{{{d^3}p}}{{{{\left( {2\pi } \right)}^3}}}} \frac{1}{{\sqrt {2{E_p}} }}\left( {{a^\dag }_p{e^{ipx}} + {a_p}{e^{ - ipx}}} \right) [/math] where E_p is the energy of the field at momentum p.
this is shit
poo in loo faggot
how much maths would i have to know to take a quantum mechanics book and breeze through it
You fucked up your latex OP. Besides, I don't understand any of the notation you're using whatsoever. But I have been looking for that pic for awhile it used to be my wallpaper but my computer broke so thanks for trying I guess.
>>7728301
Lin Alg, PDEs, Complex Variables
>>7728269
kek
>>7728315
>You fucked up your latex OP.
Yes I did. Here are the corrected equations.
[eqn] {a^\dagger }_p\left| {n\left( p \right)} \right\rangle = {c_2}\left| {n\left( p \right) + 1} \right\rangle [/eqn]
[eqn]{a_p}\left| {n\left( p \right)} \right\rangle = c\left| {n\left( p \right) - 1} \right\rangle [/eqn]
[eqn]\left[ {{a^\dagger }_{{p_1}},{a_{{p_2}}}} \right] = \delta _{{p_2}}^{{p_1}}[/eqn]
[eqn] \Phi \left( x \right) = \sum\limits_p {\left( {{a^\dagger }_p{e^{ipx}} + {a_p}{e^{ - ipx}}} \right)} [/eqn]
[eqn] \Phi \left( x \right) = \int {\frac{{{d^3}p}}{{{{\left( {2\pi } \right)}^3}}}} \frac{1}{{\sqrt {2{E_p}} }}\left( {{a^\dagger }_p{e^{ipx}} + {a_p}{e^{ - ipx}}} \right) [/eqn]
Okay, so what does this tell me about the cat? Is it dead or alive?
>>7729585
It's an analogy to my dick in your mom. Is it in or out? It's both. Bitch.
>>7728266
wasting your time OP, this board is full of egotistical pseudointellectuals. Likely no-one will understand this so they will try to save face by making fun of you.
>>7728266
so how does this relate to the partition function / action picture where one considers a path integral over quantum fields which are actually just functions rather than operators?
>>7729734
The functions are eigenvalues of the field operators w/ respect to some basis.