1: \documentstyle[epsf,epsfig,wrapfig,here,12pt]{article} % Specifies the document style.
2: \setlength{\topmargin}{-0.5in}
3: \setlength{\textheight}{9.0in}
4: % The preamble begins here.
5: \begin{document} % End of preamble and beginning of text.
6: \baselineskip=0.33333in
7: \begin{quote} \raggedleft TAUP 2832 - 2006
8: \end{quote}
9: %\title{A Sample Document} % Declares the document's title.
10: %\author{Leslie Lamport} % Declares the author's name.
11: %\date{December 12, 1984} % Deleting this command produces today's date.
12: \vglue 0.5in
13: %\maketitle % Produces the title.
14: \begin{center}{\bf The Yukawa Lagrangian Density\\
15: is Inconsistent with the Hamiltonian}
16: \end{center}
17: \begin{center}E. Comay$^*$
18: \end{center}
19:
20: \begin{center}
21: School of Physics and Astronomy \\
22: Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences \\
23: Tel Aviv University \\
24: Tel Aviv 69978 \\
25: Israel
26: \end{center}
27: \vglue 0.5in
28: \vglue 0.5in
29: \noindent
30: PACS No: 03.65.Pm, 13.75.Cs
31: \vglue 0.2in
32: \noindent
33: Abstract:
34:
35: It is proved that no Hamiltonian exists for
36: the real Klein-Gordon field used in the Yukawa interaction.
37: The experimental side supports this conclusion.
38:
39: \newpage
40: About 70 years ago, the Yukawa interaction was proposed as a quantum
41: mechanical interpretation of the nuclear force
42: (see [1], p. 78). This interaction
43: is derived from the Lagrangian density of a system of a Dirac field
44: and a Klein-Gordon (KG) field (see [2], p. 79)
45: \begin{equation}
46: {\mathcal L}_Y = {\mathcal L}_D + {\mathcal L}_{KG} - g\phi \bar {\psi}\psi .
47: \label{eq:LYUKAWA}
48: \end{equation}
49: Here the first term on the right hand side
50: represents the Lagrangian density of a free Dirac field
51: (see [2], p. 43)
52: \begin{equation}
53: {\mathcal L}_D = \bar {\psi } (i\gamma ^\mu \partial _\mu - m)\psi
54: \label{eq:LDIRAC}
55: \end{equation}
56: and the second term represents the Lagrangian density of a free KG field
57: (see [2], p. 16)
58: \begin{equation}
59: {\mathcal L}_{KG} = \frac {1}{2} (g^{\mu \nu}\phi _{,\mu}\phi _{,\nu}
60: -m^2\phi ^2).
61: \label{eq:LKG}
62: \end{equation}
63: The last term of $(\!\!~\ref{eq:LYUKAWA})$
64: represents the interaction. Since the Hamiltonian is a
65: Hermitian operator, the KG function $\phi $ used here is real.
66:
67: In this work, Greek indices run from 0 to 3 and Latin indices run
68: from 1 to 3. The Lorentz metric is diagonal and its entries are
69: (1,-1,-1,-1). Units where $\hbar = c = 1$ are used.
70: The symbol
71: $_{,\mu}$ denotes the partial differentiation with respect to $x^\mu $.
72:
73: Difficulties concerning the KG Lagrangian density
74: of a complex KG function have been pointed
75: out recently. Thus, it is proved that a KG particle cannot interact
76: with the electromagnetic fields: an application of the linear
77: interaction $j^\mu A_\mu $, where the KG 4-current $\j^\mu $ is independent
78: of the external 4-potential $A_\mu $, fails [3]; if the quadratic
79: expression $(p^\mu -eA^\mu)(p_\mu - eA_\mu)$ is used then the inner
80: product of the Hilbert space of the KG wave function $\phi $ is
81: destroyed. In addition to that, there is no
82: covariant differential operator
83: representing the Hamiltonian of a complex KG particle [4].
84:
85: Another difficulty is the inconsistency of the 4-force derived from the
86: Yukawa potential
87: \begin{equation}
88: u(r) = -g^2e^{-mr}/r
89: \label{eq:YUKAWAPOTENTIAL}
90: \end{equation}
91: with the relativistic requirement where
92: the 4-acceleration must be orthogonal to the 4-velocity
93: \begin{equation}
94: a^\mu v_\mu = 0.
95: \label{eq:VA}
96: \end{equation}
97: This requirement is satisfied by the electromagnetic
98: interaction, where the Lorentz force is
99: \begin{equation}
100: ma^\mu = eF^{\mu \nu }v_\nu.
101: \label{eq:LORENTZF}
102: \end{equation}
103: Here the electromagnetic field tensor is antisymmetric
104: $F_{\mu \nu }= A_{\nu ,\mu } - A_{\mu ,\nu }$ and this property
105: satisfies $(\!\!~\ref{eq:VA})$
106: \begin{equation}
107: a^\mu v_\mu = \frac {e}{m}F^{\mu \nu }v_\nu v_\mu = 0.
108: \label{eq:VALORENTZ}
109: \end{equation}
110:
111: On the other hand, the scalar function $\phi $ cannot yield an
112: antisymmetric tensor. Therefore, the force found in the classical limit
113: of the Yukawa interaction is inconsistent with special relativity.
114:
115: The purpose of the present work is to prove that the Lagrangian density
116: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:LYUKAWA})$ of the real KG field $\phi $ is inconsistent with
117: the fundamental quantum mechanical equation
118: \begin{equation}
119: i\frac {\partial \phi }{\partial t} = H\phi.
120: \label{eq:HPSI}
121: \end{equation}
122: This task extends the validity range of
123: the proof of [4] where the complex KG
124: field is discussed.
125:
126: The Euler-Lagrange equations of a given Lagrangian density
127: are obtained from the following general
128: expression (see [2], p. 16)
129: \begin{equation}
130: \frac {\partial }{\partial x^\mu} \frac {\partial {\mathcal L}}
131: {\partial \frac {\partial \phi}{\partial x^\mu }} -
132: \frac {\partial {\mathcal L}}{\partial \phi} = 0.
133: \label{eq:FIELDEQ}
134: \end{equation}
135: Applying $(\!\!~\ref{eq:FIELDEQ})$ to the KG function $\phi $ of
136: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:LYUKAWA})$, one obtains an {\em inhomogeneous} KG equation
137:
138: \begin{equation}
139: (\Box + m^2)\phi = g\bar {\psi}\psi.
140: \label{eq:KGINH}
141: \end{equation}
142:
143: The following argument proves that the Euler-Lagrange equation
144: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:KGINH})$ obtained from the Yukawa Lagrangian density
145: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:LYUKAWA})$ is inconsistent with the existence of a
146: Hamiltonian. Indeed, the term $\partial ^2/\partial t^2$ of
147: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:KGINH})$ and the independence of its right hand side on
148: the KG wave function $\phi $, prove that it is a {\em second order
149: inhomogeneous} partial differential equation. On the other hand,
150: the Hamiltonian equation $(\!\!~\ref{eq:HPSI})$ is a {\em first
151: order homogeneous} equation. Now, assume that at a certain instant $t_0$,
152: a solution $\phi _0$ of $(\!\!~\ref{eq:HPSI})$ solves
153: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:KGINH})$ too. Using the fact that
154: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:KGINH})$ is a second order differential equation,
155: one finds that its first
156: derivative with respect to the time is a free parameter. This degree
157: of freedom proves that an infinite number of different solutions of
158: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:KGINH})$ agree with the {\em single} solution $\phi _0$ of
159: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:HPSI})$ at $t_0$. Thus, for $t>t_0$, just one solution of
160: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:KGINH})$ agrees with the solution of the Hamiltonian
161: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:HPSI})$ and all other solutions differ from it.
162:
163: Moreover, if $\phi _0$ solves the {\em homogeneous} equation
164: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:HPSI})$, then $c\phi _0$, where $c$ is a constant, solves
165: it too. Therefore, at $t_0$,
166: an infinite number of solutions that solve the
167: Hamiltonian equation $(\!\!~\ref{eq:HPSI})$ correspond to every
168: solution of the Euler-Lagrange equation $(\!\!~\ref{eq:KGINH})$ obtained
169: from the Yukawa Lagrangian density.
170:
171: Either of these results prove that the Yukawa Lagrangian density
172: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:LYUKAWA})$ is inconsistent with the existence of a
173: Hamiltonian. It is interesting to note that the Dirac Hamiltonian
174: agrees perfectly with the Euler-Lagrange equation obtained from
175: the Dirac Lagrangian density $(\!\!~\ref{eq:LDIRAC})$ (see
176: [4], p. 32).
177:
178: Another problem of the Yukawa Lagrangian density $(\!\!~\ref{eq:LYUKAWA})$
179: is that its wave function $\phi $ is real. Hence,
180: the real Yukawa function $\phi $
181: cannot be an energy eigenfunction (namely, an eigenfunction
182: of the operator $i\partial/\partial t$),
183: because an energy eigenfunction has a
184: complex factor $e^{-i\omega t}$.
185: Therefore, the Yukawa particle cannot be an isolated free particle. This
186: result provides a proof showing
187: that $\pi ^0$ is not a Yukawa particle. Indeed,
188: the lifetime of $\pi ^0$ is about $10^{-16}$
189: seconds (see [5], p. 500). Thus, having a
190: relativistic velocity, its path is more than $10^7$ fermi. This length
191: is much larger than the nucleon's radius which is about 1.2 fermi. Hence,
192: $\pi ^0$ is a free particle for the most of its lifetime, contrary
193: to the above mentioned restriction on a Yukawa particle.
194:
195:
196:
197:
198: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
199: \begin{figure}[t]
200: \vspace*{3ex}
201: \begin{center}
202: % \rotatebox{0} {\includegraphics*[height=5cm]{Eli_KGY2.eps}}
203: \rotatebox{0} {\includegraphics*[height=7cm]{Eli_KGY2.eps}}
204: % \hspace{10ex}
205: % \includegraphics*[height=5cm]{rotor.eps}
206: \end{center}
207: \begin{quotation}
208: \caption{
209: A qualitative description of the nucleon-nucleon phenomenological potential
210: as a function of the distance between the nucleons' centers.}
211:
212: % {\it Rotations.} The small circle marks the origin. The point
213: % $X=(\half,\half,\half,\half)$ is marked by a cross.
214: %Thick squares show the blocking pattern.
215:
216: %\lbl{figprop}}
217: \end{quotation}
218: \vspace*{-1ex}
219: \end{figure}
220: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
221:
222: Turning to the experimental side, it is not surprising to find that Nature
223: is unkind to the Yukawa theory. Thus,
224: the Klein-Gordon field function $\phi (x^\mu)$ depends on
225: a {\em single} set of space-time coordinates.
226: Hence, like the Dirac field $\psi (x^\mu)$, it describes a
227: structureless pointlike particle.
228: Now, unlike Dirac particles (electrons, muons, quarks etc.),
229: the existence of pointlike
230: KG particles has not been established. In particular, it is now
231: recognized that $\pi $ mesons, which are regarded as the primary
232: example of a KG particle, are made of a quarks
233: and an antiquark. Hence, $\pi $ mesons are not pointlike
234: particles. Experimental data confirms this conclusion (see [5], p. 499).
235:
236:
237:
238:
239: The actual nuclear potential is inconsistent with the Yukawa
240: formula $(\!\!~\ref{eq:YUKAWAPOTENTIAL})$. Indeed, the nuclear
241: potential is characterized by a hard (repulsive) core and at its
242: outer side there is a rapidly decreasing attractive force. Its general
243: form is described in fig. 1 (see [1], p. 97).
244:
245: % Put a figure here
246:
247: Thus, the figure proves that the actual
248: nuclear potential and its derivative with respect to $r$
249: change sign. This is certainly inconsistent with the Yukawa formula
250: $(\!\!~\ref{eq:YUKAWAPOTENTIAL})$. Indeed, neither the Yukawa
251: potential nor its derivative change sign.
252:
253: These arguments prove that the experimental side
254: and the theoretical analysis carried out above, do not support the validity
255: of the Yukawa theory.
256:
257:
258: % ??????????
259:
260:
261: \newpage
262: References:
263: \begin{itemize}
264:
265: \item[{*}] Email: elic@tauphy.tau.ac.il \\
266: Internet site: http://www-nuclear.tau.ac.il/$\sim $elic
267: \item[{[1]}] S. S. M. Wong, {\em Introductory Nuclear Physics} (Wiley,
268: New York, 1998). 2nd edition.
269: \item[{[2]}] M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder, {\em An Introduction to
270: Quantum Field Theory} (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1995).
271: \item[{[3]}] E. Comay, Apeiron, {\bf 11}, No. 3, 1 (2004).
272: \item[{[4]}] E. Comay, Apeiron {\bf 12}, no. 1, 27 (2005).
273: \item[{[5]}] S. Eidelman et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Lett. {\bf B592}, 1 (2004).
274:
275:
276: \end{itemize}
277:
278: \end{document}
279:
280:
281: /*----------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
282:
283:
284: \item[{[1]}] F. Rohrlich, {\em Classical Charged Particles}, (Addison-wesley,
285: Reading Mass, 1965).
286: \item[{[2]}] L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, {\em The Classical
287: Theory of Fields} (Pergamon, Oxford, 1975).
288: \item[{[3]}] J. D. Jackson, {\em Classical Electrodynamics} (John Wiley,
289: New York,1975).
290: \item[{[4]}] K. Hubner, Phys. Rep., {\bf 403}, 177 (2004).
291: \item[{[5]}] S. Eidelman et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Lett.
292: {\bf B592}, 1 (2004).
293: \item[{[6]}] K. S. Krane, {\em Introductory Nuclear Physics} (John Wiley,
294: New York, 1988). p. 201.
295: \item[{[7]}] T. H. Bauer, R. D. Spital, D. R. Yennie and F. M. Pipkin,
296: Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 50}, 261 (1978).
297: \item[{[8]}] P. Achard et al., Phys. Lett., {\bf B571}, 11 (2003).
298: \item[{[9]}] R. M. Carey et al,, Phys. Rev. Lett., {\bf 82}, 1632 (1999)
299: \item[{[10]}] D. H. Perkins, {\em Introduction to High Energy Physics}
300: (Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park, CA, 1987). Pp 272-273.
301: \item[{[11]}] H. Frauenfelder and E. M. Henley, {\em Subatomic Physics},
302: (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1991). pp. 296-304.
303: \item[{[12]}] E. Comay, Apeiron {\bf 10}, no. 2, 87 (2003).
304: \item[{[13]}] E. P. Wigner, Annals of Math., {\bf 40}, 149 (1939).
305: \item[{[14]}] S. S. Schweber, {\em An Introduction to Relativistic
306: Quantum Field Theory}, (Harper \& Row, New York, 1964). pp. 44-53.
307: \item[{[15]}] M. E. Peskin and D. V.
308: Schroeder, {\em An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory} (Addison-Wesley,
309: Reading, Mass., 1995).
310: \item[{[16]}] G. Sterman {\em An Introduction to Quantum
311: Field Theory} (University Press, Cambridge, 1993).
312: \item[{[17]}] E. Comay, Apeiron, {\bf 11}, No. 3, 1 (2004).
313: \item[{[18]}] E. Comay, Apeiron {\bf 12}, no. 1, 27 (2005).
314: \item[{[19]}] P. A. M. Dirac, {\em Mathematical Foundations of Quantum
315: Theory} Ed. A. R. Marlow (Academic, New York, 1978). (See pp. 3,4).
316: \item[{[20]}] S. Weinberg {\em The Quantum Theory of Fields}
317: (Cambridge, University Press, 1995). Vol. 1, pp. 3-8
318:
319:
320:
321:
322:
323:
324: /*----------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
325:
326: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
327: \begin{figure}[h]
328: \vspace*{3ex}
329: \begin{center}
330: \rotatebox{0} {\includegraphics*[height=5cm]{fig_VMD.eps}}
331: % \hspace{10ex}
332: % \includegraphics*[height=5cm]{rotor.eps}
333: \end{center}
334: \begin{quotation}
335: \caption{
336: Two rays of light are emitted from sources $S_1$
337: and $S_2$ which are located at $x=\pm 1$,
338: respectively. The rays intersect at point $O$
339: which is embedded in the $(x,y)$ plane.
340: (This figure is published in [12] and is used here with permission.)
341: }
342:
343:
344: % {\it Rotations.} The small circle marks the origin. The point
345: % $X=(\half,\half,\half,\half)$ is marked by a cross.
346: %Thick squares show the blocking pattern.
347:
348: %\lbl{figprop}}
349: \end{quotation}
350: \vspace*{-1ex}
351: \end{figure}
352: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
353: