Thermo Field Dynamics and quantum
algebras
E.Celeghini†, S.De Martino∗, S.De Siena∗, A.Iorio∗∗, M.Rasetti+ and
G.Vitiello∗
†
Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Firenze, and INFN-Firenze,
I-50125 Firenze, Italy
∗
Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Salerno, and INFN-Salerno,
I-84100 Salerno, Italy
∗∗
+
School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland
Dipartimento di Fisica and Unità INFM, Politecnico di Torino,
I-10129 Torino, Italy
Abstract
The algebraic structure of Thermo Field Dynamics lies in the q-deformation of the
algebra of creation and annihilation operators. Doubling of the degrees of freedom,
tilde-conjugation rules, and Bogoliubov transformation for bosons and fermions are
recognized as algebraic properties of hq (1) and of hq (1|1), respectively.
PACS: 03.70.+k, 03.65.F, 11.10.-z
Keywords: Thermal field theories, q-groups, Lie-Hopf algebras, Bogoliubov transformations, thermal variables, unitarily inequivalent representations.
2
1 Introduction
One central ingredient of Hopf algebras [1] is the operator doubling implied by the
coalgebra. The coproduct operation is indeed a map ∆ : A → A⊗A which duplicates
the algebra. Lie-Hopf algebras are commonly used in the familiar addition of energy,
momentum and angular momentum.
On the other hand, the doubling of the degrees of freedom turns out to be the
central ingredient also in thermal field theories in the formalism of Thermo Field
Dynamics (TFD) [2] which has been recognized [3] to be strictly related with the
C ∗ algebras formalism [4]. In this paper we show that this is not a merely formal
feature, but that the natural TFD algebra is indeed the Hopf algebra of creation and
annihilation operators. Preliminary results in such a direction were presented in [5]
and the strict connection between TFD and bialgebras has been also discussed in [6].
To be more specific we show that the set of the algebraic rules called the ′′ tildeconjugation rules ′′ , axiomatically introduced in TFD (and in its C ∗ -algebraic formulation), as well as the Bogoliubov transformation and its generator follow from
basic and simple properties of quantum Hopf algebras. In particular, the deformed
Weyl-Heisenberg algebra hq (1) describes the TFD for bosons while the quantum deformation hq (1|1) of the customary superalgebra of fermions describes the TFD for
fermions.
In sec. 2 we briefly introduce hq (1) and hq (1|1). In sec. 3 we present our main
result: from the Hopf algebra properties we derive tilde conjugation rules and Bogoliubov transformations with their generator. Sec. 4 is devoted to further discussions.
1
2 The creation and annihilation operator algebras
The bosonic algebra h(1) is generated by the set of operators {a, a† , H, N} with
commutation relations:
[ a , a† ] = 2H ,
[ N , a† ] = a† ,
[ N , a ] = −a ,
[ H , •] = 0.
(1)
H is a central operator, constant in each representation. The Casimir operator is
given by C = 2NH − a† a. h(1) is an Hopf algebra and is therefore equipped with
the coproduct operation, defined by
∆a = a ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ a ≡ a1 + a2 ,
∆H = H ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ H ≡ H1 + H2 ,
∆a† = a† ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ a† ≡ a†1 + a†2 ,
(2)
∆N = N ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ N ≡ N1 + N2 .
(3)
The physical meaning of the coproduct is that it provides the prescription for
operating on two modes. One example of coproduct is the familiar operation performed with the ′′ addition ′′ of the angular momentum J α , α = 1, 2, 3, of two particles:
∆J α = J α ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ J α ≡ J1α + J2α , J α ∈ su(2).
The q-deformation of h(1), hq (1), with deformation parameter q, is:
[ aq , a†q ] = [2H]q ,
[ N , aq ] = −aq ,
[ N , a†q ] = a†q ,
[ H , •] = 0,
(4)
where Nq ≡ N and Hq ≡ H. The Casimir operator Cq is given by Cq = N[2H]q −a†q aq ,
q x − q −x
. Also hq (1) is an Hopf algebra and its coproduct is defined by
where [x]q =
q − q −1
∆aq = aq ⊗ q H + q −H ⊗ aq ,
∆H = H ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ H ,
∆a†q = a†q ⊗ q H + q −H ⊗ a†q ,
(5)
∆N = N ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ N ,
(6)
whose algebra of course is isomorphic with (4): [∆aq , ∆a†q ] = [2∆H]q , etc. .
We denote by F1 the single mode Fock space, i.e. the fundamental representation
H = 1/2, C = 0. In such a representation h(1) and hq (1) coincide as it happens
2
for su(2) and suq (2) for the spin- 12 representation. The differences appear in the
coproduct and in the higher spin representations.
In the case of fermions the ZZ2 -graded algebra h(1|1) is generated by the relations
{ a , a† } = 2H ,
[ N , a ] = −a ,
[ N , a† ] = a† ,
[ H , •] = 0 .
(7)
Also h(1|1) is an Hopf algebra (actually a Hopf superalgebra), equipped with the
same coproduct operations defined in (2)-(3). The deformed algebra hq (1|1) relations
are as those in (4), with the first commutator replaced by the anti-commutator and
its coproduct is defined as in (5)-(6).
As customary, we require that a and a† , and aq and aq † , are adjoint operators.
This implies that q can only be real or of modulus one.
In the two mode Fock space F2 = F1 ⊗F1 , for |q| = 1, the hermitian conjugation of
the coproduct must be supplemented by the inversion of the two spaces for consistency
with the coproduct isomorphism.
Summarizing we can write for both bosons and fermions on F2 = F1 ⊗ F1 :
∆a = a1 + a2 ,
∆aq = a1 q 1/2 + q −1/2 a2 ,
∆H = 1,
∆a† = a†1 + a†2 ,
(8)
∆a†q = a†1 q 1/2 + q −1/2 a†2 ,
(9)
∆N = N1 + N2 .
(10)
We observe that [ai , aj ]∓ = [ai , a†j ]∓ = 0, i 6= j. Here, and in the following, [ , ]−
and [ , ]+ denote, respectively, commutators and anticommutators.
3 Coproduct and the Bogoliubov transformation
In this section we derive our main result, namely that the algebraic structure on
which the TFD formalism is based is naturally provided by the Hopf algebras hq (1)
and hq (1|1).
3
It is convenient to start recalling the so-called ′′ tilde-conjugation rules ′′ which are
defined in TFD. For any two bosonic (respectively, fermionic) operators A and B and
any two c-numbers α and β the tilde-conjugation rules of TFD are postulated to be
the following [2]:
(AB)˜ = ÃB̃ ,
(11)
(αA + βB)˜ = α∗ Ã + β ∗ B̃ ,
(12)
(A† )˜ = Æ ,
(13)
(Ã)˜ = A .
(14)
According to (11) the tilde-conjugation does not change the order among operators.
Furthermore, it is required that tilde and non-tilde operators are mutually commuting
(or anti-commuting) operators and that the thermal vacuum |0(β) > is invariant
under tilde-conjugation:
[A, B̃]∓ = 0 = [A, B̃ † ]∓ ,
(15)
|0(β) >˜ = |0(β) > .
(16)
In order to use a compact notation it is useful to introduce the parity label σ defined
√
√
by σ ≡ +1 for bosons and σ ≡ +i for fermions. We shall therefore simply write
.
commutators as [A, B]−σ = AB −σBA, and (1⊗A)(B ⊗1) ≡ σ(B ⊗1)(1⊗A),without
further specification of whether A and B (which are equal to a, a† in all possible ways)
are fermions or bosons.
As it is well known, the central point in the TFD formalism is the possibility to
express the statistical average < A > of an observable A as the expectation value in
the temperature dependent vacuum |0(β) >:
<A> ≡
T r[A e−βH ]
= < 0(β)|A|0(β) > ,
T r[e−βH ]
and this requires the introduction of the tilde-degrees of freedom [2].
4
(17)
Our first statement is that the doubling of the degrees of freedom on which the
TFD formalism is based finds its natural realization in the coproduct map. Upon
identifying from now on a1 ≡ a, a†1 ≡ a† , one easily checks that the TFD tildeoperators (consistent with (11) – (15)) are straightforwardly recovered by setting
a2 ≡ ã , a†2 ≡ ㆠ. In other words, according to such identification, it is the action of
the 1 ↔ 2 permutation π: πai = aj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, that defines the operation
of ′′ tilde-conjugation ′′ :
πa1 = π(a ⊗ 1) = 1 ⊗ a = a2 ≡ ã ≡ (a)˜
(18)
πa2 = π(1 ⊗ a) = a ⊗ 1 = a1 ≡ a ≡ (ã)˜ .
(19)
In particular, being the π permutation involutive, also tilde-conjugation turns out
to be involutive, as in fact required by the rule (14). Notice that, as (πai )† = π(ai † ), it
is also ((ai )˜ )† = ((ai )† )˜, i.e. tilde-conjugation commutes with hermitian conjugation.
Furthermore, from (18)-(19), we have
(ab)˜ = [(a ⊗ 1)(b ⊗ 1)]˜ = (ab ⊗ 1)˜ = 1 ⊗ ab = (1 ⊗ a)(1 ⊗ b) = ãb̃ .
(20)
Rules (13) and (11) are thus obtained. (15) is insured by the σ-commutativity of a1
and a2 . The vacuum of TFD, |0(β) >, is a condensed state of equal number of tilde
and non-tilde particles [2], thus (16) requires no further conditions: eqs. (18)-(19)
are sufficient to show that the rule (16) is satisfied.
Let us now consider the following operators:
√
√
∆aq
1
Aq ≡ q
=q
(e σθ a + e− σθ ã) ,
[2]q
[2]q
√
√
1
2q δ
1
δ
Bq ≡ q √
∆aq = q
∆aq = q
(e σθ a − e− σθ ã) ,
[2]q σ δθ
[2]q δq
[2]q
√
and h.c., with q = q(θ) ≡ e
σ2θ
(21)
(22)
. Notice that
δ
δ
√
(√
∆aq ) = ∆aq .
σδθ σδθ
5
(23)
The commutation and anti-commutation relations are
√
1
[Aq , A†q ]−σ = 1 , [Bq , Bq† ]−σ = 1 , [Aq , Bq ]−σ = 0 , [Aq , Bq† ]−σ = √ tanh σ2θ ,
σ
(24)
whereas all other σ-commutators equal zero. A set of commuting operators with
canonical commutation relations is given for bosons (σ = 1) by
A(θ) ≡
q
[2]q
†
†
√ [Aq(θ) + Aq(−θ) − Bq(θ)
+ Bq(−θ)
],
2 2
(25)
B(θ) ≡
q
(26)
[2]q
√ [Bq(θ) + Bq(−θ) − A†q(θ) + A†q(−θ) ] .
2 2
and h.c. Analogously, for fermions (σ = −1), anti-commuting operators are given by:
A(θ) ≡
q
[2]q
√ [Aq(θ) + Aq(−θ) + A†q(θ) − A†q(−θ) ] ,
2 2
(27)
B(θ) ≡
q
(28)
[2]q
†
†
√ [Bq(θ) + Bq(−θ) − Bq(θ)
].
+ Bq(−θ)
2 2
and h.c. One has
[A(θ), A† (θ)]−σ = 1 , [B(θ), B † (θ)]−σ = 1 , [A(θ), B † (θ)]−σ = 0 ,
(29)
and all other σ-commutators equal to zero. Of course, here it is understood that the
operators given by eqs. (25)-(26) commute and the operators given by eqs. (27)-(28)
anticommute.
We can also write, for both bosons and fermions,
1
A(θ) = √ (a(θ) + ã(θ)) ,
2
1
B(θ) = √ (a(θ) − ã(θ)) ,
2
(30)
with
√
√
1
a(θ) = √ (A(θ) + B(θ)) = a cosh σθ − ㆠsinh σθ ,
2
√
√
1
ã(θ) = √ (A(θ) − B(θ)) = ã cosh σθ − σa† sinh σθ ,
2
6
(31)
[a(θ), a† (θ)]−σ = 1 , [ã(θ), ㆠ(θ)]−σ = 1 .
(32)
All other σ-commutators are equal to zero and a(θ) and ã(θ) σ-commute among
themselves. Eqs. (31) are nothing but the Bogoliubov transformations for the (a, ã)
pair into a new set of creation, annihilation operators. In other words, eqs. (31), (32)
show that the Bogoliubov-transformed operators a(θ) and ã(θ) are linear combinations of the coproduct operators defined in terms of the deformation parameter q(θ)
and of their θ-derivatives; namely the Bogoliubov transformation is implemented in
differential form (in θ) as
!
i
h
1
1 δ
a(θ) =
1+ √
∆ aq + aq−1 − (aq † − aq−1 † )
4
σ δθ
i
h
δ
δ
1
α(1+ √1σ δθ
)
−α(1+ √1σ δθ
)
= √ e
∆ aq + aq−1 − (aq † − aq−1 † )
−e
2
(33)
!
i
h
1 δ
1
1− √
∆ aq + aq−1 + σ(aq † − aq−1 † )
ã(θ) =
4
σ δθ
i
h
δ
δ
1
)
−α(1− √1σ δθ
)
α(1− √1σ δθ
= √ e
∆ aq + aq−1 + σ(aq † − aq−1 † )
−e
2
where α = 14 log 2 .
Note that inspection of Eq. (31) in the fermion case shows that
(34)
√
σ(= i) changes
sign under tilde-conjugation. This is related to the antilinearity property of tildeconjugation, which we shall discuss in more detail below.
Next, we observe that the θ-derivative, namely the derivative with respect to the
q-deformation parameter, can be represented in terms of commutators of a(θ) (or of
ã(θ)) with the generator G of the Bogoliubov transformation (31).
From (31) we see that G is given by
G ≡ −i
√
σ (a† ㆠ− aã) ,
a(θ) = exp(iθG) a exp(−iθG) , ã(θ) = exp(iθG) ã exp(−iθG) .
7
(35)
(36)
Notice that, because of(31) (and (23)),
√
δ
a(θ) = − σㆠ(θ)
δθ
δ2
a(θ) = σa(θ)
δθ2
√
δ
ã(θ) = −( σa(θ))† ,
δθ
δ2
ã(θ) = σã(θ) ,
δθ2
,
,
(37)
and h.c. . The relation between the θ-derivative and G is then of the form:
−i
δ
a(θ) = [G, a(θ)] ,
δθ
−i
δ
ã(θ) = [G, ã(θ)] ,
δθ
(38)
and h.c. . For a fixed value θ̄, we have
exp(iθ̄pθ ) a(θ) = exp(iθ̄G) a(θ) exp(−iθ̄G) = a(θ + θ̄) ,
(39)
and similar equations for ã(θ).
δ
which can be regarded as the
δθ
momentum operator ′′ conjugate ′′ to the ′′ thermal degree of freedom ′′ θ (in TFD of
In eq.(39) we have used the definition pθ ≡ −i
course θ ≡ θ(β), with β the inverse temperature). The notion of thermal degree of
freedom [7] thus acquires formal definiteness in the sense of the canonical formalism.
It is interesting to observe that derivative with respect to the q-deformation parameter
is actually a derivative with respect to the system temperature T. This may shed some
light on the rôle of q-deformation in thermal field theories for non-equilibrium systems
and phase transitions. We shall comment more on this point in the following section.
Eqs. (37) show that the tilde-conjugation may be represented by the θ-derivative
in the following way:
!†
δ
−√
a(θ)
σδθ
˜
= ã = (a) ,
θ=0
1 δ2
a(θ)
σ δθ2
!
= a = (ã)˜ ,
(40)
= α∗ ã(θ)|θ=0 = α∗ ã ,
(41)
θ=0
and h.c.. We also have
!†
δ
αa(θ)
−√
σδθ
θ=0
δ
= − √ ∗ α∗ a(θ)†
( σ) δθ
!
θ=0
where α denotes any c-number. Thus tilde-conjugation is antilinear, as in fact it is
required in TFD (rule (12)).
8
We finally observe that, from eqs. (37) (and (20)), we have
!†
δ
−√
a(θ)
σδθ
!†
δ
−√
b(θ)
σδθ
= ã(θ)b̃(θ) = (a(θ)b(θ))˜ ,
(42)
for any θ, again in agreement with TFD.
Under tilde-conjugation aã goes into ãa = σaã. From this we note that aã is
√
not tilde invariant. Since σ = i when σ = −1, and i changes sign under tilde√
conjugation, we see that instead σaã is tilde invariant [7]. We also remark that
∆aq and ∆aq † are tilde-invariant in the fermion case.
In conclusion, the doubling of the degrees of freedom and the tilde-conjugation
rules, which in TFD are postulated, are shown to be immediate consequences of
the coalgeebra structure (essentially the coproduct map), of the π permutation and
of the derivative with respect to the deformation parameter in a q-algebraic frame.
Moreover, in the hq (1) and hq (1|1) coalgebras, TFD appears also equipped with a set
of canonically conjugate ′′ thermal ′′ variables (θ, pθ ).
4 Inequivalent representations and the deformation
parameter
We note that in the boson case J1 ≡
1 † †
(a ã
2
+ aã) together with J2 ≡
J3 ≡ 21 (N + Ñ + 1) close an algebra su(1, 1). Moreover,
δ
(N(θ)
δθ
1
G
2
and
− Ñ(θ)) = 0 , with
(N(θ) − Ñ(θ)) ≡ (a† (θ)a(θ) − ㆠ(θ)ã(θ)), consistently with the fact that 41 (N − Ñ )2
is the su(1, 1) Casimir operator.
In the fermion case J1 ≡ 12 G, J2 ≡ 12 (a† ㆠ+ aã) and J3 ≡ 21 (N + Ñ − 1) close
an algebra su(2). Also in this case
δ
(N(θ)
δθ
− Ñ (θ)) = 0 , with (N(θ) − Ñ (θ)) ≡
(a† (θ)a(θ) − ㆠ(θ)ã(θ)), again consistently with the fact that 41 (N − Ñ)2 is related to
the su(2) Casimir operator.
The su(1, 1) algebra and the su(2) algebra, which are the boson and the fermion
9
TFD algebras, are thus described as well in terms of operators of hq (1) and hq (1|1).
The vacuum state for a(θ) and ã(θ) is formally given (at finite volume) by
|0(θ) > = exp (iθG) |0, 0 > =
X
n
cn (θ) |n, n > ,
(43)
with n = 0, ..∞ for bosons and n = 0, 1 for fermions, and it appears therefore to
be an SU(1, 1) or SU(2) generalized coherent state [8], respectively for bosons or for
fermions.
In the infinite volume limit |0(θ) > becomes orthogonal to |0, 0 > and we have
that the whole Hilbert space {|0(θ) >}, constructed by operating on |0(θ) > with
a† (θ) and ㆠ(θ), is asymptotically orthogonal to the space generated over {|0, 0 >}.
1
In general, for each value of the deformation parameter, i.e. θ = √ ln q, we obtain
2 σ
in the infinite volume limit a representation of the canonical commutation relations
unitarily inequivalent to the others, associated with different values of θ. In other
words, the deformation parameter acts as a label for the inequivalent representations,
consistently with a result already obtained elsewhere [9]. In the TFD case θ = θ(β)
and the physically relevant label is thus the temperature. The state |0(θ) > is of
course the thermal vacuum and the tilde-conjugation rule (16) holds true together
with (N − Ñ )|0(θ) >
= 0, which is the equilibrium thermal state condition in
TFD.
It is remarkable that the ”conjugate thermal momentum” pθ generates transitions
among inequivalent (in the infinite volume limit) representations: exp(iθ̄pθ ) |0(θ) >=
|0(θ + θ̄) >.
In this connection let us observe that variation in time of the deformation parameter is related with the so-called heat-term in dissipative systems. In such a case, in
fact, θ = θ(t) (namely we have time-dependent Bogoliubov transformations), so that
the Heisenberg equation for a(t, θ(t)) is
−iȧ(t, θ(t)) = −i
10
δ
δθ δ
a(t, θ(t)) − i
a(t, θ(t)) =
δt
δt δθ
[H, a(t, θ(t))] +
δθ
[G, a(t, θ(t))] = [H + Q, a(t, θ(t))] ,
δt
(44)
δθ
G denotes the heat-term [5], [7], and H is the hamiltonian (responsible
δt
for the time variation in the explicit time dependence of a(t, θ(t))). H +Q is therefore
where Q ≡
to be identified rather with the free energy [2], [5], [10]. When, as usual in TFD,
H|0(θ) >= 0, the time variation of the state |0(θ) > is given by
!
δ
i δθ
−i |0(θ) >=
δt
2 δt
δ
S(θ)
δθ
|0(θ) > .
(45)
Here S(θ) denotes the entropy operator [2], [10]:
√
√
S(θ) = −(a† a ln σ sinh2 σθ − σ aa† ln cosh2 σθ) .
(46)
We thus conclude that variations in time of the deformation parameter actually
involve dissipation.
Finally, when the proper field description is taken into account, a and ã carry
dependence on the momentum k and, as customary in QFT (and in TFD), one should
deal with the algebras
M
k
hk (1) and
M
hk (1|1). In TFD this leads to expect that one
k
should have k-dependence also for θ. The Bogoliubov transformation analogously,
thought of as inner automorphism of the algebra su(1, 1)k (or su(2)k ), allows us to
claim that one is globally dealing with
M
su(1, 1)k (or
k
M
su(2)k). Therefore we are
k
lead to consider k-dependence also for the deformation parameter, i.e. to consider
hq(k) (1) (or hq(k) (1|1) ). In such a way the conclusions presented in the former part
of the paper can be extended to the case of many degrees of freedom.
11
References
[1] V.Chari and A.Pressley, A Guide to Quantum Groups, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge 1994
[2] Y.Takahashi and H.Umezawa, Collective Phenomena 2 (1975) 55; reprinted in
Int. J. Mod Phys. B 10 (1996) 1755
H.Umezawa, H.Matsumoto and M.Tachiki, Thermo Field Dynamics and Condensed States, North-Holland Publ. Co., Amsterdam 1982
H.Umezawa, Advanced Field Theory, American Institute of Physics, New York,
1993
[3] I.Ojima, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 137 (1981) 1
[4] O.Bratteli and D.W.Robinson, Operator Algebras and Quantum Statistical Mechanics, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1979
[5] S.De Martino, S.De Siena and G.Vitiello, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 10 (1996) 1615
[6] A.E.Santana and F.C.Khanna, Phys. Lett. A 203 (1995) 68
T.Kopf, A.E.Santana and F.C.Khanna, J. Math. Phys. 38 (1997) 4971
[7] H.Umezawa, in Banff/CAP Workshop on Thermal Field Theory, F.C.Khanna
et al. eds., World Sci., Singapore 1994, p.109
[8] A.Perelomov, Generalized Coherent States and Their Applications, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, Heidelberg 1986
[9] A.Iorio and G.Vitiello, Mod. Phys. Lett. B 8 (1994) 269
A.Iorio and G.Vitiello, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 241 (1995) 496
[10] E.Celeghini, M.Rasetti and G.Vitiello, Annals of Phys. (N.Y.) 215 (1992) 156
12