Papers

Selected
on

ELECTRODYNAMICS
Editedby JulianSchwinger
Thedevelopment
of quantum
mechanics
duringthe first quarterof this centuryproduceda revolution
in physical
thoughtevenmoreprofound
thanthat associated
with
tne theoryof relativity.Nowhere
is this moreevidentthanin the areaof the theoreticaland experimental
investigations
centering
aboutthe properties
andthe inter.
actions
of theelectromagnetic
field,or,as it is otherwise
known,
electrodynamics.
In thisvolume
the history
of quantum
electrodynamics
is dramatically
unfolded
through
the originalwordsof its creators.lt rangesfromthe initialsuccesses,
to the first
signsof crisis,andthen,withthestimulus
of experimental
discovery,
to newtriumphs
quantitative
leading
to an unparalleled
accord
between
theory
andexperiment.
lt terminateswith the presentpositionof quantum
electrodynamics
as part of the larger
particles,
problems
subjectof theoryof elementary
facedwith fundamental
andthe
futureprospect
of evenmorerevolutionary
discoveries.
Physicists,
mathematicians,
electromagnetic
engineers,
studentsof the historyand
philosophy
of science
will find muchof permanent
valuehere.Thetechniques
of
quantum
electrodynamics
arenot likelyto be substantially
altered
by futuredevelop.
ments,andthe subjectpresents
physical
the simplest
illustration
of the challenge
posedby the "basicinadequacy
and incompleteness
of the present
foundations
of
physics."
theoretical
Papers
areincluded
by Bethe,
Bloch,
Dirac,
Dyson,
Fermi,
Feynman,
Heisenberg,
Kusch,
Lamb,
0ppenheimer,
Pauli,
Schwinger,
Tomonaga,
Weisskopf,
Wigner,
andothers.There
area totalof 34 papers,
29 of whichare in English,
I in French,
3 in German,
ano
1 in ltalian.
Preface
andhistorical
commentary
by the editor.xvii * 423pp.6t/sx 9%.
Paperbound.
()TUSE!
DESIGNEO
A DOVER
EIIITI()N
F()RYEARS
Wehavemadeeveryeffortto makethisthebestbookpossible.
Ourpaperis opaque,
withminimal
show-through;
it will not discolor
or become
are
brittlewithage.Pages
in the method
sewnin signatures,
traditionally
usedfor the bestbooks,
andwill not
with paperbacks
dropout,as oftenhappens
heldtogether
with glue.Books
openflat
for easyreference.
Thebinding
will notcrackor split.Thisis a permanent
book.

d.
ISBN 0-486-604+4-6

$7.50 in U.S.A.

Selected
Popers
on

WWffiWWW
ffifuffiffiWffiffiffiW
Edited
by JuJion
Schwinger
Professor
of Physics,
Horvard
University

DOVTR
PUBTICATIONS,
II{C.,NEW
YORK

COLLEGE
CARROLI.
LIBRARY
}IELENA,MONTANA 5960I

Inc'
Copyright
'riftrts @ 1958 by Dover Publications,
leserved under Pan American and
Af
lnternational Copyright Conventions.
Publishcclirt Canatlltbl Ccncral Ptrblishing Conrpany, Ltd., 30 Leslnill Road, Don Mills, Toronto,
Ontario.
Publishcd in thc Unitcd Kingclom by Constablc
and Company, Ltd., l0 Orangc Strect, London

wc 2.

This Dover etlition, first published in 1958, is

a selection of papers publi'shed for the first timc in
collected form. The editor and publisher are indebted to the original authors, journals and the
Columbia University Library for assistance and permission to reProduce these papers.

Library

Standard Booh Number: 486'60444'6

ol Congress Catalog Caril Number: 58'8521

Manufactured in the United States of Amcrica

Dovcr Publications, Inc.
180 Varick Street
New York, N.Y. 10014

CONTENTS
Preface

vll

PAPERS
P.A.M. Dirac

PAGE

rHE qUANTUM THEoRy oF THE EMrssroN AND ABsoRprroN

OF RADIATION

Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, SeriesA, Vol. l14,

p.243(re27)
Enrico Fermi sopRAr-'nlrnrrRoDINAMrcA euANTrsrrcA
Atti della Reale Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Vol. 12.
p. a3l (1930).
P.A.M. Dirac, V. A. Fock, and Boris Podolsky

24

oN euANTUM

ELECTRODYNAMICS

P hysi halisch e Z e itschr if t der Sowj etuni o n, Band 2, Heft 6 (1932)

P. Jordan and E. Wigner iiern oes pAULrscHEAqurver-rNzvERBor
Zeitschrift f iir Physik,Yol. 47, p. 631 (1928)

29
4l

W. Heisenberg uern orr Mrr DERENTSTEHUNG

voN MATERTE
AUS
sTRAHLUNG vnnrNijprt:sN

LADUNGSscHwANKUNGEN

SachsicheAkademie der Wissenschaften, VoI..86, p. 317 (193a)

V. S. Weisskopf

62

oN THE sELF-ENERGv AND THE ELEcTRoMAGNETTc

FIELD OF THE ELECTRON

Physical Reaiew, Vol. 56, p.72 (1939)

P.A.M. Dirac THEoRIEDUPosrrRoN
Rapport du 7" Conseil Solaay de Physique, Structure et
Proprietes des Noyaux Atomiques, p.203 (I934)

|ll

68

82

Conlenls

tv

usER mr ELEKTRoDYNAMIKDEsvAKUUMS AUF GRUND

V. S. Weisskopf

DER QUANTE,NTHEORIE

DES ELEKTRONS

K ongelige D ansheV i d,eiskab ernesSelskab, M ath ematish-fysishe

MeddelelserX.IZ, No. 6 (1936)
F. Bloch and A. Nordsieck NorESoN THERADIATIoNFIELDoF THE
ELECTRoNPhysical Reaiew,Yol.52, p. 5a (1937)

ro

H.

M.

Foley

ELECTRoNPhysical Reaiew,YoL 73, p' 412 (1948)

il

Willis E. Lamb, Jr. and Robert C. Retherford

OF THE

ATOM

HYDROGEN

H.

A. Bethe

rHE

FINE STRUCTURE

136

ELECTRoMAGNETTc sHrFT oF ENERGY LEvELS

139

PhysicalReuiew,YoI.72,p. 339 (1947)

l3

oN QUANTUM-ELECTRoDYNAMICS
Schwinger
Julian
MAGNETIC MOMENT OF THE ELECTRON

AND THE

r42

P h y s i c a tR e u i e w , Y o l . 7 3 , p . 4 1 6 ( 1 9 4 8 )

l4

t5

oN RADIATIVE coRRECTToNSTo ELECTRoN

Julian Schwinger
scATTERING Physical Reaiew, Vol. 75, p. 898 (1949)
J. R. Oppenheimer

S. Tomonaga

oN A RELATIvISTICALLY

INvARIANT

Progressof Theoretical Physics,Vol. I, p.27 (1946)

CORRECTIONS TO SCATTERING

169

Physical Reaieu, Vol. 76, P. 790 (1949)

S. Tomonaga

oN INFINITE FIELD REAcTIoNS IN QUANTUM FIELD

r H E o R y P h y s i c a lR e a i e u , V o l . 7 4 , P . 2 2 4 ( 1 9 4 8 )
l9

156

Schwinger
QUANTUM ELECTRoDYNAMICS, III: THE
Julian
ELECTROMAGNETIC PROPERTIES OF THE ELECTRONRADIATIVE

l8

145

FoRMULATIoN

OF THE QUANTUM THEORY OF WAVE FIELDS

17

143

ELECTRoNTHEoRY

Soluay,p' 269 (1950)

Rapportsdu 8" Conseilde Physir1ue,

l6

r35

METHOD

BY A MICROWAVE

PhysicalReaiew,Vo1.72, p. 2+L Q9a7)

t2

r29

oF THE

oN THE INTRINSIC MoMENT

P. Kusch

and

92

W.

Paul'i

and

F. Villars

oN THE INvARIANT

r97

REGULARIZATIoN IN

RELATIVISTIC QUANTUM THEORY

Reuiews of Modern Physics,Vol. 21, p.434 (1949)

20

Julian

Schwinger

oN GAUGE INVARIANCE AND vAcuuM

Physical Reuiew, Vol. 82, p. 664 (1951)

2l

R. P. Feynman

198

PoLARIZATIoN

209

rHE THEoRY oF PoSITRoNS

P h y s i c a lR e v i e w , V o l . 7 6 , p . 7 4 9 ( 1 9 4 9 )

225

Conlenls

22
23

R. P. Feynman spACE-TrME
AppRoACHTo quANTUMELECTRoDyNAMrcs Physical Review, Vol. 26, p. 269 (lg.4g)
R. P. Feynman
THEoRy

MATHEMATTcAL

oF ELEcTRoMAGNETTc

FoRMULATToN

oF THE euANTUM

rNrnnaciroN

PhysicalReaiew,Vol. 80,p.440 (1950)

24

25

2b7

F. J. Dyson
rHE RADIATToNTHEoRTESor-.r'oMONAGA,scHwrNGER,
AND FEvNMAN Physical Reaiew,Yol.Tb, p. 486 (lg4g)
F. J. Dyson
P,A.M.

Dirac

rHE

LAGRANGTAN rN quANTUM

R. P, Feynman
MEcHANrcs

2gz

MECHANTcs

Physikalische Zeitschrift der Soutjetunion,Band

27

27b

rHE s-MATRrx rN quANTUM ErFcrRoDyNAMrcs

PhysicalReuiew,Yol.75,p. 1736(1949)
26

296

B, Heft I (lg3g)

spAcE-TrMEAppRoAcH To NoN-RELATrvrsrrc queNtuReaiews of Modern Physics, Vol. 20, p.267 (lg49)

Zl2
g2l

28

rHE THEoRy oF euANTrzED FTELDS,r.

Julian Schwinger
Physical Review, Vol. 82, p. 9t4 (lgbl)

Z4Z

29

rHE THEoRy oF quANTrzED FTELDS,rr.

Julian Schwinger
Physical Reaiew, Vol. 91, p.7lg (lgbg)

Bb6

W. Pauli
THE coNNEcrroN BETwEEN sr'rN AND srATrsrrcs
Physical Reuiew, Vol. 58, p. 716 (1940)

g7Z

30

3l

oN THE GREEN'sFUNcrroNS oF quANTrzED

Julian Schwinger
FTELDS,
r. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,

Yol. 37,p. 452 (1951)

32

Robert

Karplus

MENT

279

and Abraham

OF ATOMIC

ENERGY

Klein
LEVELS,

ELEcrRoDyNAMrc DTsrLACEIII:

THE

HYPERFINE

STRUCTURE

oF posrrRoNruM Physical Reaiew, Vol. 87, p. 848 (lgb2)

33

G, Kiillen

CONSTANTS IN qUANTUM

ELECTRODYNAMICS

KongeligeDanske Videnshabernes
Selshab,yol 27,
No. 12 (1953)
34

Norman

Zg7

oN THE MAGNTTuDE oF THE RENoRMALTzATToN

s98

M. Kroll

and Willis E. Lamb, Jr. oN THE sELF-ENERGv

oF A BoUNDELEC RoN Physical Reuiew,yol. Tb, p. Bgg (1949).

*This paper should properly appearfollowing paper 12,but for reasonsbeyond

my editorial control, it appearsas the last paper. JS

414

PREFACE

ANv sn'rncrroNof important contributions from

the extensive
literature of quantum electrodynamicsnecessarily
reflecma particular viewpoint concerning the significance
of those works,
both historically and intheir implications for the future
progress
of the subject. The folrowing brief commentary
is intended to
indicate that viewpoinr, and to supply a setting
for the individual paperu. The ratter are referied to by coisecutive
numbers; and appear in the same order, which does
not always
correspond to the historical one. A fer,v papers,
which were
omitted only becauseof limitations on the-siie of
the volume,
are mentioned explicitly in the text.
The development of quantum mechanics in the
years 1925
and 1926 had produced rures for the description
of systemsof
microscopic particles, which involved promoting
the fundamental dynamical variabresof a corresponding clissical
s.ysrem
into operators with specified commutators. By this
means. a
system,describedinitially in classicalparticle language,acquires
characteristicsassociatedwith the comple*"rrru.i clissical
wave
picture. It was also known that electromagneticradiation contained in an enclosure,when consideredasi crassicardvnamical
system,was equivalent energeticaly ro a d.enumerabryinfinite
number of harmonic oscillators. with the application
of the
quantization processto these fictitious oscillatlrs the classical
radiation field assumedcharacteristicsdescribable in the
com-

Prefqce

of
plementary classical particle language. The ensuing theory
iight qrruntum emission and absorption by atomic systems [l]
m"urkei the beginning of quantum electrodynamics, as the
theory of the quanrum dynamical system formed by the electronarmagneric field in inreraction with charged particles (in a
,or.,i"r sense, the lightest charged particles) ' The quantization
the ficprocedure could be transferred from the variables of
titious oscillators to the components of the field in three-dimena field
sional space, basecl uPon thl classical analogy between.
sysspecifiei within small sPatial cells, and equivalent particle
electrotlms. When it was attempted to quantize the cornplete
Physik
f'
magnetic field tW. Heisenberg and W' Pauli, Zerts'
56,"1(1929)l,ratherthantheradiationfieldthatremainsafter
enthe coulomb interaction is separated, difficulties were
countered that stem from the gauge ambiguity of the potentials
Maxwell
that appear in the Lagrangian formulation of the
are those
equations. The only t.uidyrturnical degrees of freedom
additional
of the radiation part of the fielrl' Yet one can'employ
a
degrees of freedom which are suPpressed finally by imposing
system
[2] '
.oisistent resrricrion on the admissible states of the
scheme,
To make more evident the relativistic invariance of the
introducing
other equivalent forms rvere given to the theory by
of charged
different time coordinates for each of a fixed number
formal
This
particles coupled to the electromagnetic field t3l'
field lvas terperiod of quantization of the electromagnetic
the accuracy
in
-irrut.d by a critical analysis of the limitations
produced
of simultaneous measurements of trvo field strengths'
measby the knorvn quantum restrictions on the simultaneous
Bohr and
urability of properties of material test bodies [N'
12'
Medd'
L. Rosenfeld, Kgl' Danske Vid' Sels', Math'-fys'
No. 8 (1933) 1. The complete agreement of these considerations
relawith the torrrnt implications of the operator commutation
applying the
tions indicated the necessity and consistency of
sYstems'The
quantum mechanical description to all dynamical
synthesisofthecomplemerrtaryclassicalparticleandfieldlanas exemplified in
guages in the .o.r."p, of the quantized field'
to be of
the treatment of the electromagnetic field, was found

Pref qce,

ix

general applicability to systems formed by arbitrary numbers

of identical particles, although the rules of field quantization
derived by analogy from those of particle mechanics were too
restrictive, yielding only systems obeying the Bose-Einstein
statistics. The replacement of commutators by anti-commutaton
was necessary to describe particles, like the electron, that
obey
the Fermi-Dirac statistics t4l. In the latter situation there is
no
realizable physical limit for which the sysrem behaves as a
classicalfield.
But, from the origin of quantum electrodynamics in
the
du*il1l theory of point charges came a legacy of difficurties.
The
coupling of an elecrron with the electromagnetic field imptied
an infinite energy displacement, and, indeed, an infinite shift of
all spectral lines emitted by an atomic system
IJ. R. Oppen_
heimer, Phys. Rev. gb,46l (lgg0)
l; in the reaction of the elec_
tromagneric field stimulated by the presence of the elecrron,
arbitrarily shorr wave lengths play a disproportionare and divergent role. The phenomenon of .le.t.orr-poritron pair crea_
tion, which finds a natural place in the relativistic eleciron field
theory, contributes to this situation in virtue of the fluctuating
densities of charge and current that occur evep in the vacuum
state [5] as the matter-field counterpart of the fluctuations in
electric and magnetic field strengrhs. In compuring the energy
of a single electro' relative to that of the vac'um state, it is of
significance that the presence of the electron tends to suppress
the charge-current fluctuations induced by the fluctuating electromagnetic field. The resulting electron energ'y, while still
divergent in its dependence upon the contriu.,iiorrs of arbitrarily shorr wave lengths, exhibits only a logarithmic infinity
[6]; the combination of quanrum and relativistic effects has
destroyed all correspondence with the crassical theory and its
strongly structure-dependent electromagnetic mass. The existence of current fluctuations in the vacuum has other implications, since the introduction of an electromagnetic field induces
currents that tend to modify the initial field; the "vacuum,' acts
as a polarizable medium [71. New non-linear electromagnetic
phenomena appear, such as the scamering of one light beam by

Prefqce

another, or by an electrostatic field. But, in the calculation of

the current induced by weak fields, there occurred terms that
depended divergently uPon the contributions of high-energy
electrorr-positron pairs. These were generally considered to be
completely without physical significance, although it was noticed 181 that the contribution to the induced charge density
that is proportional to the inducing density, with a logarithmically divergent coefficient, would result in an effective reduction oi all densities by a constant factor which is not observable
separately under ordinary circumstances. In contrast with the
divergences at infinirely high energies, another kind of divergent
situarion was encountered in calculating the total probability
that a photon be emitted in a collision of a charged particle'
Here, lio*.lr"r, the deficiency was evidently in the approximate
merhod of calculation; in any deflection of a charged particle
it is certain that "zero" frequency quanta shall be emitted, which
fact must be taken into account if meaningful questions are to
be asked. The concentration on photons of very low energy permitted a sufficiently accurate treatnent to be developed [9], in
which it was recognized that the correct quantum description
of a freely moving charged particle includes an electromagnetic
field that accompanies the particle, as in the classical picture. It
also began to be appreciated that the quantum treatment of
radiation processeswas inconsistent in its identification of the
mass of the electron, when decoupled from the electromagnetic
field, with the experimentally observed mass. Part of the effect
of the electromagneric coupling is to generate the field that accompanies the charge, and which reacts on it to produce an
electromagnetic mass. This is familiar classically, where the sum
of the two mass contributions aPpears as the effective electron
mass in arr equation of motion which, under ordinary conditions, no longer refers to the detailed structure of the electron.
Hence, it was concluded that a classical theory of the latter type
should be the correspondence basis for a quantum electrodynamics tH. A. Kramers, Quantentheorie des Elektrons und
der Strahlung, Leipzig, 19381.
Further progress came only with the spur of experimental
discovery. Exploiting the wartime development of electronic

Prefqce

xl

and microwave techniques, delicate measurements disclosed that

the electron possessedan intrinsic magnetic moment slightly
greater than that predicted by the relativistic quanrum theory
of a single particle [10], while anorher prediction of the latter
theory concerning the degeneracy of states in the excited levels
of hydrogen was contradicted by observing a separation of the
states [111. (Historically, the experimental stimulus came entirely from the latter measurement; the evidence on magnetic
anomalies received its proper interpretation only in consequence of the theoretical prediction of an additional spin magnetic moment.) If these new electron properties weie to be
understood as electrodynamic effects, the theory had to be
recast in a usable form. The parameters of mass and charge
associatedwith the elecrron in the formalism of electrodynamics
are not the quantities measured under ordinary conditions. A
free electron is accompanied by an electromagnetic field which
effectively alters the inertia of the system, and an electromagnetic field is accompanied by a current of electron-positron pairs
which effectively akers rhe strength of the field and of all
charges. Hence a processof renormalization must be carried out,
in which the initial parameters are eliminated in favor of those
lvith immediate physical significance. The simplest approximate
method of accomplishing this is ro compure the electrodynamic
corrections to some property and then subtract the effect of the
mass and charge redefinitions. While rhis is a possible nonrelativistic procedure 1121, it is not a satisfactory basis for relativistic calculations where the difference of two individually
divergent terms is generally ambiguous. It was necessaryto subject the conventional Hamiltonian electrodynamics to a transformation designed to introduce the proper description of
single electron anci photon states,so that the interactions among
these particles would be characterized from the beginning by
rxperimental parameters. As the result of this calculation [13],
performed to the first significant order of approximarion in the
electromagnetic coupling, the electron acquired new electrodyriamic properties, which were completely finire. These included an energy displacement in an external magnetic field
corresponding to an additional spin magnetic moment, and a

xii

Prefqce

displacement of energy levels in a Coulomb field. Both predictions were in good accord with experiment, and later refinements in experiment and theory have only emphasized that
agTeement. However, the Coulomb calculation disclosed a serious flaw; the additional spin interaction that appeared in an
electrostatic field was not that expected from the relativistic
transformation properties of the supplementary spin magnetic
moment, and had to be artificially corrected [14, footnote 5],
[15]. Thus, a complete revision in the computational techniques
of the r-elativistic theory could not be avoided. The electrodynamic formalism is invariant under l-orentz transformations
and gauge transformations, and the concePt of renormalization
is ir accord with these requirements. Yet, in virtue of the
divergences inherent in the theory, the use of a particular coordinate system or gauge in the course of computation could
result in a loss of covariance. A version of the theory rvas needed
that manifested covariance at every stage of the calculation. The
basis of such a formulation was found in the distinction betrveen
the elemenrary properries of the individual uncoupled fields,
and the efiects produced by the interaction between them [16]'
'fhe
application
[J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 74, 1439 (1948) ]'
o1 these methods to rhe problems of vacuum polarization, electron mass,and the electromagnetic ProPerties of single electrons
now gave finite, covariant results which justified and extended
the earlier calcularions 1171. Thus, to the first approximation
at least, the use of a'covariant renormalization technique had
produced a rheory thar rvas devoid of divergences and in agreement .r.vithexperience, all high energy difficulties being isolated
in the renormalization constants. Yet, in one asPect of these
calculations, the preservation of gauge invariance, the utmost
caurion was required 1181,and the need was felt for lessdelicate
methods of evaluation. Extreme cale rvould not be necessaryif.
by some device, the various divergent integrals could be rendered convergent while maintaining their general covariant
fearures. This can be accomplished by substituting, for the mass
of the particle, a suitably weighted sPectrum of masses;rvhere
all auxiliary masseseventually tend to infinity [19]. Such a Procedure has no rneaning in terms of physically realizable Particles.

Prefqce

It is best understood, and replaced, by a description of the electron r,vith the aid of an invariant proper-time parameter. Di
\:ergencesappear only when one integrates over this parameter,
and gauge invariant, Lorentz invariant results are automatica[y
guaranteed merely by reserving this integration to the end of
the calculation [20].
Throughout these developments the basic vierv of eiectromagnetism \vas that originated by Maxr,vell and Lorentz-the
interaction betr.veencharges is propagated through the field by
local action. In its quantum mechanical transcription it leads to
formalisms in rvhich charged parricles and field appear on rhe
same footing dynamically. But anorher approach is also familiar
classically;the field produced by arbitrarily moving chargescan
be evaluated, and the dynamical problem reformulated as the
purely mechanical one of particles interacting rvith each other,
and themselves,through a propagated ac[ion at a distance. The
transferenceof this line of thought into quantum language t2ll,
122], {23} rvas accompanied by another shift in emphasis relative to the previously described rvork. In the latter, the effect
on the particles of the coupling rvith the electromagnetic field
was expressedby additional energy terms rvhich could then be
used to evaluate energy displacements in bound states, or to
compute corrections to scattering cross-sections.
Now the fundamental viervpoint rvas that of scattering, and in its approximate
versions led to a detailed space-time description of the various
interaction mechanisms. The two approaches are equivalent;
the formal integration of the differential equations of one
method supplying the starting point of the other t241. But if
one excludes the consideration of bound states,it is possible to
expand the elements of a scattering rnatrix in powers of the
coupling constant, and examine the effect of charge and mass
renormalization, term by term, to indefinitely high porvers. It
appeared that, for any process,the coefficient of each porver in
the renormalized coupling constant rvas completely finite ;251.
This highly satisfacrory result did nor mean, hor,vever, that the
act of renormalizafion had, in itself, produced a more correct
theory. The convergence of the porver series is not established,

xtv

Prefqce

and the series doubtless has the significance of an asymPtotic

expansion. Yet, for prac.tical purposes, in which the smallness of
the coupling parameter is relevant, this analysis gave assurance
that calculations of arbitrary precision could be performedThe evolutionary process by which relativistic field theory
rvas escaping from the confines of irs non-relativistic heritage
culminated in a complete reconstruction of the foundations of
quantum dynamics. The quantum mechanics of particles had
been expressed as a set of operator prescriptions superimposed
upon the structure of classical mechanics in Hamiltonian form.
When extended to relativistic fields, this approach had the disadvantage of producing an unnecessarily great asymmetry
between time and space, and of placing the existence of FermiDirac fields on a purely empirical basis. But the Hamiltonian
form is not the natural starting point of classical dynamics.
Rather, this is supplied by Hamilton's action principle, and
action is a relativistic invariant. Could quantum dynamics be
developed independently from an action principle, which, being
freed from the limitations of the correspondence principle,
might automatically produce two distinct types of dynamical
variables? The correspondence relation between classical action,
and the quantum mechanical description of time develoPment
by a transformation function, had long been knorvn t261. It had
also been observed that, for infinitesimal time intervals and sufficiently simple systems, this asymptotic connection becomes
sharpened into an identity of the phase of the transformation
function with the classically evaluated action i271. The general
quantum dynamical principle was found in a difierential characterization of transformation functions, involving the variation
of an action operator t281. When the action operator is chosen
to produce first order differential equations of motion, or field
equations, it indeed predicts the existence of nvo types of dynamical variables, with operator properties described by commutators and anti-commutatorc, respectively t291. Furthermore,
rhe connection benveen the statistics and the spin of the particles
is inferred from invariance requirements, which strengthens the

Prefoce

previous arguments based upon properties of non-interacting

particles t301. The practical utility of this quantum dynamical
principle stems from its very nature; it supplies differential
equations for the construction of the transformation functions
that contain all the dynamical properries of the sysrem. It leads
in particular to a concise expression of quantum electrodynamics in the form of coupled differential equations for electron and photon propagation functions t3ll. such functions
enjoy the advantages of space-time pictorializability, combined
with general applicability to bound systems or scatrering situations. Among these applications has been a treatment of that
most electrodynamic of systems-positronium, the metastable
atom formed by a positron and an electron. The agreement
between theory and experiment on the finer details of this
system is another quantitative triumph of quantum electrodynamics [32].
The post-war developments of quantum electrodynamics have
been largely dominated by questions of formalism and technique, and do not contain any fundamental improvement in
the physical foundations of the theory. such a situarion is not
new in the history of physics; ir took the labors of more than a
century to develop the methods that express fully the mechanical principles laid down by Newton. Bur, we may ask, is there
a fatal fault in the srrucrure of field rheory? Could it not be that
the divergences-apparent symproms of malignancy-are only
spurious byproducts of an invalid expansion in powers of the
coupling constant and that renormalization, which can change
no physical implication of the theory, simply recrifies this
mathematical enor? This hope disappears on recognizing that
the observational basis of quantum electrodynamics is self-contradictory. The fundamenral dynamical variables of the electron-positron field, for example, have meaning only as symbols
of the localized creation and annihilation of charged particles,
to which are ascribed a definite mass without reference to the
electromagnetic field. Accordingly it should be possible, in principle, to confirm these properties by measurements, which, if

xvl

Prefoce

they are to be uninfluenced by the coupling of the particles to

the electromagnetic field, must be performed instantaneously.
But there appears to be nothing in the formalism to set a standard for arbitrarily short times and, indeed, the assumption that
over sufficiently small intervals the two fields behave as though
free from interaction is contradicted by evaluating the supposedly small effect of the coupling. Thus, although the starting
point of the theory is the independent assignment of properties
to the two fields, they can never be disengaged to give those
properties immediate observational signi{icance. It seems that
we have reached the limits of the quantum theory of measurement, which asierts the possibility of instantaneous observations,
without reference to specific agencies.The localizat\on of charge
with indefinite precision requires for its realization a coupling
with the electromagnetic field that can attain arbitrarily large
magnitudes. The resulting appearance of divergences, and contradictions, serves to deny the basic measurement hypothesis.
\{e conclude that a convergent theory cannot be formulated
consistently within the framework of present space-time concepts. To limit the magnitude of interactions while retaining
the customary corirdinate description is contradictory, since no
mechanism is prbvided for precisely localized measurements.
In attempting to account for the properties of electron and
positron, it has been natural to use the simplified form of quantum electrodynamics in which only these charged particles are
considered. Despite the apparent validity of the basic assumption that the electron-positron field experiences no appreciable
interaction with fields other than electromagnetic, this physically incomplete theory suffers from a fundamental limitation.
It can never explain the observed value of the dimensionless
coupling constant measuring the electron charge. Indeed, since
charge renormalization is a property of the electromagnetic
field, and the latter is influenced by the behavior of every kind
of fundamental particle with direct or indirect electromagnetic
coupling, a full understanding of the electron charge can exist
only when the theory of elementary particles has come to a stage

Prefqce

xvtl

of perfection that is presently unimaginable. It is not likely

that future developments will change drastically the practical
results of the electron theory, which gives contemporary quarrtum electrodynamics a cerrain enduring value. yet the real significance of the work of the past decade lies in the recognition
of the ultimate problems facing electrodynamics, the problems
of conceptual consistency and of physical completeness. No final
solution can be anticipated until physical science has met the
heroic challenge to comprehend the structure of the sub-microscopic world that nuclear exploration has revealed.

Cambridge,Mass.
1956

Jurrex ScnwrNcrR

WffiffiWKffiW
ffifuffiffiWffiffiffiW

P o p e rI

The Quantum, Theory of the Emission and, Abso,t"lpti;onof

Rad,iatiotz..
By P. A. M. Dmlc, St. John's College,Cambridge,and Institute for
TheoreticalPhysics, Copenhagen.
(Communicatecl
by N. Bohr,X'or.Mem.R.S.-Received.February2, L927.)
$1. Introd,untionand,Summ,ary.
The new quantum theory, based on the assumption that the dynamical
variablesdo not obey the commutativelaw of multiplication, has by now been
developedsufficientlyto form,a fairly completetheory of dynamics. One can
treat mathematically the problem of any dynamical system composedof a
numberof particleswith instantaneousforcesacting betweenthem, provideclit
is describableby a Hamiltonian function, and onecaninterpret the mathematics
physically by a quite definite general method. On the other hand, hardly
anybhinghas beendone up to the presenton quantum electrodynamics. The
questionsof the correct treatment of a systemin which the forcesare propagateclwith the velocity of light insteadof instantaneously,of the proiluction of
an electromagneticfield by a moving electron,and of the reaction of this fielcl
on the electron have not yet been touched. In adclition, there is a serious
ilifficulty in making the theory satisfy all the requirementsof the restricted

244

P. A. M. Dirac.

principle of relativity, since a Hamiltonian*function can no longer be used.

This relativity questionis, of course,connectedwith the previousones,and it
rryillbe impossibleto answerany one questioncompletelywithout at the same
time answeringthem all. However, it appearsto be possibleto build up a
fairly satisfactorytheory of the emissionof radiation and of the reaction of
the radiation field on the emitting systernon the basis of a kinematics and
dynamics which are not strictly relativistic. This is the main object of the
present paper. The theory is non-relativistic only on account of the time
beingcountedthroughoutasa c-number,insteadof beingtreated symmetrically
with the spaceco-ordinates. The relativity variation of mass with velocity
is taken into accountwithout difficulty.
The underlyingideasof the theory are very simple. Consid,er
an atom interaoting with a field of rad.iation,which we may supposefor definitenessto be
confinedin an enclosureso as to have only a discreteset of d.egrees
of freedom.
Resolvingthe radiation into its X'ouriercomponents,we can considerthe energy
aud.phaseof eachof the componentsto be dynamical variablesdescribingthe
radiation field. Thus if E, is the energy of a componentlabelled r anil 0"
is the corresponcling
phase(definedasthe time sincethe wavewasin a standard,
phase),wecansupposeeachE, and 0, to form a pair of canonicallyconjugate
variables. In the'abs"o"" of any interaction betweenthe fielctand the atom,
the whole systemof fielcl plus atom will be descibable by the Hamiltonian
H:

X"E,* Ho

(1)

equalto the total energy,Ho being the Hamiltonian for the atom alone,since
the variables 8,, 0, obviously satisfy their canonicalequationsof motion

E,:-ffi:0,6,:ffi:t.
When there is interaction between the fielcl and the atom, it could be taken into
account on the classical theory by the acldition of an interaction term to the
Hamiltonian (1), which would be a function of the variables of the atom and of
the variables 8,, 0, that describe the field.
This interaction term would give
the efiect of the rad.iation on the atom, and also the reaction of the atom on the
radiation field.
In order that an analogous method. may be used. on the quantum theory,
it is necessary to assume that the variables Er, 0n are q-numbers satisfying
the stand.ard. quantum oonditions 0rE, - Erg, : ih, etc., where h is (2rc)-r
times the usual Planek's constant, like the other dynamical variables of the
problem. This assumption immed.iately gives light-quantum properties to

Em,iss'ionand, Absorlttion of Rad,ia,tion,

245

the rafiation.*
X'or if v" is the frequency of the component r, 2rvr0, is an
augle variable, so that its canonical conjugate E,l2nv, can only &ssumea
discrete set of values tlifiering by multiples of. h, which means that En can
changeonly by integral multiples of the quantum (Znh)v,. rf we now add an
interactionterm (taken over from the clasicaltheory) to the Hamiltonian (1),
the problem can be solved zsselding to the rules of quantum mechanics,and
we would expect to obtain the correct results for the action of the radiation
and the atom on one another. It will be shownthat we actually get the eorrect
laws for the emission and absorption of radiation, and the correct values for
Einstein's A's and.B's. In the author's previoustheory,f where the energies
and phasesof the eomponentsof radiation were c-numbers,only the B's could.
be obtained,and the reaction of the atom on the rafiation could not be taken
into account.
It will also be shown that the Hamiltonian which describesthe interaction
of the atom and the electromagneticwaves carl be mad.eidentical with the
Hamiltonian for the problem of the interaction of the atom with an assembly
of partioles moving with the velocity of light and satisfying the Einstein-Bose
statistics, by a suitable choice of the interaction energy for the particles. The
mrmberof particleshaving any specifieddirection of motion and energy,which
can be used.as a dynamical variable in the Hamiltonian for the particles, is
equal to the number of quanta of energy in the correspond.ingwave in the
Hamiltonian for the waves. There is thus a complete harmony between the
wave and light-cluantum d.escriptionsof the interaction. We shall actually
build up the theory from the light-quantum point of view, and.show that the
Hamiltonian transforms naturally into a form which resemblesthat for the
waves.
The mathematicaldevelopmentof the theory has beenmad.epossibleby the
author's general transformation theory of the quantum matrices.f owing
to the fact that we countthe time asa c-number,we areallowedto usethe notion
of the value of any dynamical variable at any instant of time. This value is
* Similar assumptions have been qsed by Born and
Jordan [.2. f. physik,, vol. B4,
p. 886 ( 1925)l for the purpose of taking over the classical formula for the emission oJ rad.iation
by a dipole into the quantum theory, and by Born, Heisenberg and Jordan ['Z, f. physik,'
vol. 35, p. 606 (r925)l for calculating the energy fluctuations in a field of black-bod.y
radiation.
'
t Roy. Soc. Proc.,'A, vol. ll2, p. 661, $ b (f926). This is quoteil later by, loc. cit.,I.
'
1 Roy. Soc. Proc.,' A, vol. ll3, p. 62I (1927). This is quotort later by lnc. ci,t,,Il.. An
essentially equivalent theory has been obtained inclependently by Jordan [,2. f. physik,'
vol. 40, p. 809 (1927)1. Seealso, X'. London, ,2. f. physik,, vol. 40, p. t9B (1926).

P. A. M. Dirac.

216

a q-number, capable of being represented by a generalised " rnatrix " according

to many fifierent matrix schemes,some of whioh may have continuous langes
of rows and columns, andl may require the matrix elements to involve certain
kincls of infnities (of the type given bythe 8 functions*). A matrix scheme can
be found in which any clesiredset of constants of integration of the dynamical
systemthatcommuteare represented by diagonal matrices, or in which a set of
variables that commute are represented by matrices that a,re diagonal at a
specified time.t The values of the diagonal elements of a diagonal matrix
representing any q-number are the characteristic values of that q-number. A
Cartesian co-ordinate or momentum will in general have all characteristic values
from - o to * co , while an action variable has only a discrete set of characteristio values. (We shall make it a rule to use unprimed letters to denote the
dynamioal variables or q-numbers, and- the same letters primed or multiply
primed to denote their oharacteristic values. Transformation fu:rctions or eigenfunctions are functions of the characteristic values and not of the q-numbers
themselves, so they shoulcl always be written in terms of primed variables.)
If /((, tl) is any funotion of the canonical variables lp, r1a,t'he matrix representing/at any time I in the matrix scheme in which the [a at time I are diagonal
matrices may be written down without any trouble, since the matrices representing the r and r1ethemselves at time I are linown, namely,

:1t'8 (1'1"),
t*('1")
),,
8(Er+r'-r+r")"'
nr,(e'{): -ih8 (Lt'-(t")...I ({o-t'-2,,-t")8'(E*'-1*')
Thus if the Hamiltonian H is given as a function of the ei, and 47,,we can at
once write down the matrix H(1' 4\. We can then obtain the transformation
funotion, (l'la') say, which transforms to a matrix scheme (a) in which the
Hamiltonian is a d.iagonalmatrix, as (l' l0-')must satisfy the integral equation
f

.(1'ln'),
l]J(qe')d1"(1"1n'): W (oc')

(3)

are the energylevels. This equation

of which the characteristicvaluestrV(oc')
(E' lo'),which becomes
for
the'eigenfunctions
just
equation
wave
schr<idinger's
is
an ordinary difierential equationwhen H is a simple aigebraicfunction of the
* Loc. ci,t.II, S,2.
at all times
f One can have a matrix scheme in which a set of variables that commute are
must
matrices
the
that
condition
il
one
will
sacrifice
the
matrices
by
diagonal
represented
satisfy the oquations of motion. The transformation function from guch a scheme to one
See p. 628
in which the equations of motion are satisfied will involve the time explicitly,
in loc. cit., TI.

Ent,issionand, Absotption of Radiation.

247

ieand.vleon account of the special equations (2) for the matrices representing
e and r;e. Equation (3) may be written in the more general form

I,,r't',

d,l'6'la!): tho gq,

la,)lot,

(3',)

in which it can be applied to systemsfor which the Hamiltonian involves the

time explicitly.
one may have a dynamical system specifiedby a Hamiltonian H which
cannot be expressedas an algebraicfunction of any set of canonicalvariables,
bnt udich canallthe samebe representedby a matrix H(8,,). such a problem
can still be solved by the presentmethod.,since one can still use equation (B)
to obtainthe energylevelsand eigenfunctions. 'w,eshall find that the Hamilto_
nianwhich describestheinteraction of a light-quantum andanatomicsystemis
of this moregeneraltype, so that the interaction can be treated mathematically,
although one cannot talk about an interaction potential energy in the usual
sense.
rt should be obs:erved.
that there is a difierencebetweena light-wave and the
de Broglie or schrrifinger w'ayeassociatedwith the light-quanta. x'irstly, the
light-wave is always real, while the cle Broglie wave associatedwith a lightquantum moving in a definite direction must be taken to involve an imaginary
exponential. A more important difierenceis that their intensities are to be
interpreted in different ways. The number of tight-quanta per u:rit volume
associatedwith a monochromaticlight-wave equalsthe energyper unit volume
of the wave divitled by the energy (2nh)v o{ a single light-quantum. on the
other hand a monochromaticd.eBroglie wave of amplitude a (multiplied into
the imaginary exponentialfactor) must be interpreted as representingazlightquanta per unit volumefor all frequencies. This is a specialcaseof the general
rule for interpreting the matrix analysis,* accorfing to which, if.
1l;1a,1or
*o (*') is the eigenfunctionin the variables [p of the state oc,of an atomic
system (or simple particle), r*o (tr')lz is the probability of each(ahaving the
value17,'
,lor I {; (Ei ) 12dll dr' . . . is the probability of each* lyrng between
the values(7r'and.Er'* dr', whenthe (ahavecontinuousrangesof characteristic values]on the assumptionthat all phasesof the systemareequallyprobable.
The r-ave whoseintensity is to be interpreted in the frst of ihure two
ways
appea* in the theory only whenoneis dealingwith an assemblyof the associated
particles satisfying the Einstein-Bosestatistics. There is thus no
such wave
associatedwith electrons.
* Loc. cit., II, g$ 6, ?.

248

P. A. M. Dirac.

g2. Tlw Perturbqtionof an Assembl'yof Ind'epenilentBystems'

an
we shall now oonsiderthe transitions produced in an atomic system by
arbitrary perturbation. The method we shall aclopt will be that previously
given by the author,f which leails in a simple way to equationswhich determine
ihe probability of the system being in any stationary state of the unpertr:rbed
syrt"* at any time.f This, of cour$e,givesimmediatelythe probablenumber
o1 systems in that state at that time for an assembly of the systems
that are indepenilent of one another and are all perburbeclin the same way.
rates
The object of the presentsectionis to show that the equationsfor the
in a
form
Hamiltonian
the
of changeof these probable numbers can be put in
to be
simple manner, which will enable further developmentsin the theory
made.
Let I{o be the Hamiltonian for the unperturbedsystemand Y the perburbing
and may
energy,which can be an arbitrary function of the dynamical variables
perturbed
or may not involve the time explicitly, sothat the Hamiltonian for the
must'
system
perturbed
the
for
systemis H : Ho * Y. The eigenfunctions
satisfv the wave equation

(Ho+ Y),1,,
i'ha,s13t:

this equation
where(Iro * Y) is an operator. If (l : >,erQ,is the solutionof
that satisfiesthe properinitial conditions,wherethe tf,'s are the eigenfunctions
with one stationary state labellecl
for the unperturbedsystem,eachassooiatecl
is the probby the suffixr, and the Q,,'satefunctionsof the time only, then lo, l2
be norability of the systembeing in the state r at any time' The o"s must
theory will
malised initially, and will then always remain normalised.. The
applydirectlytoanassemblyofNsimilarinclepenclentsystemsifwemultiply
that'
of thesear's by NL so as to makeE, I a, lz : N' S'e shall now have
"u"n
in the state r'
lo, 12is the probablenumberof systems
the rate of changeof the a,'s is$
The equationthat d'etermines
'ihd,: XJ',*,,
wherethe V,*'s ate t'he elementsof the matrix representingV'
imaginary equationt
_nuu,*: xrvrr*or* : xpr*v..

(4)
The coniugate
$,)

I lroc. adt.I.
extended by Born [,2. f. Physik,' vol. 40, p. 167 (1926)]
t Th" tn"ory has recently been
changes in the stationary stat'es that may be
adiabatic
tho
account
go as to take into
This extension is not used in
produced by tho perturbation as well as the transitions.
the Present PaPer.
$ Loc. cit., I, equation (25).

E'mission cr,ndAbsorption of Radiation.

249

Ifwe regard a, and ih ao* as canonical conjugates, equations (4) and (4') take
rhe Hamiltonian form with the Hamiltonian function X', : Xrron*vrro'
namely,

on't

dan

dt

'ih 6",*t

., ila.* :

Xll --;.-

dt

aF,

:---:

da,

lve can transform to the canonicalvariablesN,

d, by the contact transJormation
a, :

fi t"-i6'1n,

an* -

fr *gt$":h,

This transformation makes the new variablesI{, and

S,real, N" being equal
io a,e,,*: lu,lz, the probablenumber of systemsin the state r, and,
$,lh
beingthe phaseof the eigenfunctionthat representsthem. The Hamiltonian
F, now becomes
X'3.:

)"rVrrNr+$r*9i (d'-6';72,

and the equations that d.etermine the rate at which transitions occur have the
canonical form
8Ft
0F,
\rr

'" : -

9": N'

4l'

A moreconvenientway of putting the transition equationsin the Hamiltonian

{orm may be obtainedwith the help of the quantities
br:

&re-iw'tlh,

br* :

gr*

"iw,tlh,
'We
\Y,beingtheenergyof the state r.
have l4ls equalto la,lz,the probable
numberof systemsin the state r. X,orb" we find

ih'b,: W,b,+,ihh,s-;wsft
- Wrb,| 2"Yrrb"ei(w,--w,)4,1
rviththe help of (a). If rve putY,r:p*si(w,-w"Itth,sothato* is a constant
when V doesnot involve the time explicitly, this red.uces
to
ih'b,:W,b,+X,0",6"
:8"Hr"6",

(5)

rvhereHru : trl-"8r*f or' which is a matrix elementof the total Hamiltonian

H : Ho f v with the time factor ei(w'-w)'/l removed,sothat Hr" is a constant
rvhenH doesnot involve the time explicitly. Equation (b) is of the sameform
as equation(4), and may be put in the Hamiltonian form in the sameway.
rt shouldbe noticedthat equation(b) is obtaineddirectly if onevrritesdown
the schriidingerequationin a set of variablesthat specifythe statiouary states
of the unperturbed.system. rf these variablesarc (0, and if H(E'e') d.enotes
vol,. cxlv.-a.

P. A. M. Dirac.

250

a matrix element of the total Hamiitonian H in the ([) scheme,this

Schriidingerequation woulcl be

i,hA,!G')lAt: Er-H (4'e'),l/(F.'),

(6)

like equation (3,). This differs from the previous equation (5) only in the
notation, a single suffix r being there used to denote a stationary state instead
of a set of numerical values l*' fot the variables 11,,and.fu being used instead
of + (g'). Equation (6), ancl therefore also equation (5), can still be used when
the Hamiltonian is of the more general type which cannot be expressed as an
algebraic function of a set of canonial variables, but can still be represented
by a matrix H(Z'\') or H,.".
'We
now lake b, and''ihb,* to be canonically conjugate variables instead of
The equation (5) anct its conjugate imaginary equation will
a, and.'iha,*.
now take the Hamiltonian form rvith the Hamiltonian function
X' :

(7)

Xrrbr* Hrr6".

Proceeding as before, we make the contact transformation

br:Nj

s-de'lh,

bf -

Nrt d!o'tk,

(8)

to the new canonical variables N", 0r, where N, is, as before, the probable
trumber of systems in the state r, and 0, is a new phase. The llamiltonian n'
will now become

'F :
XruH", Nr* N s+e!(e'-e')lk,

and the equations for the rates of change of N" and 0, will take the canonical
form

'l\":
r a F ;-0 F
ur:
aN;.
D-0,

The Hamiltonian may be written

n':

xrw"N, * xr.?r"N"*Nslet(0"-o''r&.

(9)

The first term X,Wf{" is the total proper energy of the assembly, and the
seoondmay be regardeclas the additional enelgy d"ueto the perturbation. If
theperturbation is zero, the phases0nwould increaselinea,rlywith the time,
while the previousphases{, would in this casebe constants'
Stati,sti,cs.
theEi,nstei,n-Bose
$3. Ihe Perturbutionof an Assembtysati,sfui,ng
According to the precedingsection we oan describethe efiect of a perturbation on an assembly of independent'systems by means of canonical variables
and Hamiltonian equations of motion. The developmentof the theory which

Emission and Absorption of Rad,iation.

25L

naturally suggestsitself is to makethesecanonicalvariablesq-numberssatisfying the usual quantum conditions instead of c-numbers,so that their lramiltonian equations of motion become true quantum equations. The Hamiltonian
function will now provide a Schr<ifingerwave equation, which must be solved
and.interpreted in the usual manner. The interpretation will give not merely
theprobablenumberof systemsin anystate, but the probability of any given
tlistribution of the systems among the various states, this probability being,
in fact, equal to the squareof the modulus of the normalisedsolution of the
wave equation that satisfies the appropriate initial conditions. We could, of
course,calculate directly from elementaryconsiderationsthe probability of
any given distribution when the systems are ind.epenclent,as we know the
probability of eachsystembeing in any particular state. 'Weshall find that the
probability calculateddirectly in this way doesnot agreewith that obtained
ftom the wave equationexceptin the specialcasewhenthere is ouly onesystem
in the assembly. rn the generalcaseit will be shownthat the wave equation
Ieads to the correct value for the probability of any given clistribution when
tl.e systemsobey the Einstein-Bosestatistics instead of being independent.
we assumethe variablesb,,,ihb,* of $ 2 to be canonicalq-numberssatisfying
the quantumcond.itions
b,.,ihb,*- ,ihb,*.b, : ih
or
and

b&r* - br*b,:
brb,- brb,: g,
b,b"*-h"*br:O

1,

b,*br* - br*h * : 0,
(slr).

The transformation equations (8) must now be witten in the quantum form
b, : (N, I I'f
: -i,,/aNrl
"-t'e'1n
I
br* - N-#o,.th- eie,tk
(N" + I)+, J

(10)

in order that the N,, 0n may also be canonicalvariables. Theseequations

show that the \ can have only integral characteristic values not less than
zero,t which provides us with a justification for the assumption that the
variables are q-numbersin the way we have chosen. The mrmbersof systems
in the difierent states are row ordinary quantum numbers.
'Roy. Sci6.Proc.,,
A, vol. lll, p. 281 (f926). W.hat are
t S"e $ 8 of the author's papor
there called the c-number values that a q-num.bor can take are here given the more preoise
name of the charaeteristic valuos of that q-number.

lo
P. A' M' I)irac'

252

The Hamiltonian (7) now becomes

n' :
:

(N' { L1t
Er.b"*Hrrb,: xrrNrfot0'/lEf"
"-;e'1tt
$,,)*s.t(4"-e")1h
l,.,H,,N,l (N, + 1

(11)

inwhichtheH,,arestillc-numbers.Wemaywritethisn.intheformcorre.
spondingto (9)
(11',)
x' : x,wN" * x",o",Ni (N, +1 - 8',)* dt@'-o'tth
X'W'N' and an interin which it is again composedof a proper energy term
action energYterm.
The wave equationwritten in terms of the variablesN' ist

,ih&+ (Nr',Nr', N"' '..) : F.l,(Nr',N2',N3' "'),

(12)

interpreted to meanih a /aNr' "

where T is au operator , each 0, occurring in n' being
N," "'N"' "') of the
If we applythe operator e+il'lhto any functiou -f(Nr"
variables N1', N2', ... the result is
e + i o , ll (kN l , N r ' ,

... Nr', ... ) :

6 + a / u t " ' 7 ( N 1N' ,z ' , . " N r ' " ' )

- -f(Nr',Nr', "'N"' + 1' "' )'

(11)for x' we obtainf
If weusethis rulein equation(12)andusethe expression
m! l,(N,',Nn',Nr' ..' )
dt"'

-1,
:!r,H",Nr',l(Nr', + 1 - 8^)+t(Nr" Nr','..Nr',

"'Nr', + 1, "')'

(13)

equation that in the matrix leplewe see from the right-hand side of this
to
ed?'-t')lk will contribute
senting X', the term in n' involving
-only
thosematrixelementsthatrefertotransitionsinwhichN,decreases
'i'e', t'o matrix elements of the type
by unity and N, increases by unitv,

- 1 "'N"' + 1 "')' rf we find a

u ( o i , f r r ' . . . N , ' . . . N , ' ; N 1 ' ,N z ' " ' N , '
normaliseclli.e., onefor which
*oloiioo +(or,, Ni ...) of equation (13) that is
and that satisfiesthe proper initial conNr' .'.)lt:1]
XN,,,*,,...i,trtN.',
2
of that distribution in
aitioo., then I Q (N1" Nz' . ..) l will be the probability
at any time'
which Nr' systemsare in state 1, Nr'in state 2' "'

Considerfirstthecasewhenthereisonlyonesystemintheassembly.Th
by the eigenfunction
probability of its being in the state g is determined
fWearesupposingfordefinitenesst.hat,thelabelrofthestationarystatest,akesthe
valuesI, 2,3, ..'.
1 "' lf*' f l) is to be takento meanrf (N"N" "'N"'"')'
t Whens : r,{r (N1',Nr'..'N''-

ll

Emission and, Absoryttion oJ Racl,iation.

253

{(\', Nr', ...) in which all the N,'s are put equalto zero except\,, which is
'when
put equal to unity. This eigenfunctionwe shall denoteby
it is
Q{q}.
substituted in the lefb-hanclside of (18), all the terms in the summation on
the right-hand side vanish exceptthosefor which r :
{, and we are left with
4

,ih
*+{q}:

E"Ho,{{s},

which is the sameequationas (5) with ..l.,

{q} playrngthe part of bo. This establishes the {act that the presenttheory is equivalentto that of the preceding
sectionvrhenthere is only one systemin the assembly.
Now take the generalcaseof an arbitrary numberof systemsin the assembly,
and assumethat they obey the Einstein-Bosestatistical mechanics. This
requires that, in the ordinary treatment of the probrem, only those eigenfunctions that are symmetrical betweenall the systemsmust be taken into
account,theseeigenfunctionsbeing by themselvessuffcient to give a complete
quantum solution of the problem.f we shall now obtain the equationfor the
rate of changeof one of thesesymmetrical eigenfunctions,and show that it is
identicalwith equation(13).
rf we label each system with a number n, t]o,enthe Hamiltonian for the
assemblywill be He : X,H (zr),whereH (n) is the H of $2 (equalto Ho
f V)
expressedin terms of the variablesof the ruth system. A stationary state of
the assemblyis definedby the numberst11r 2 .. . r, . . . which are the labelsof the
stationary statesin which the separatesystemslie. The Schriiclingerequation
for the assemblyin a set of variablesthat specifythe stationary stateswill be
of theform(6) fwith 116instead of H], and we can write it in the notation of
equation(5) thus:i h b @ r r r . . . :) X o , , , , . . . F . e . @ {!r .s. r. s z. . . ) b ( s r s r . . . ) ,

(14)

whereH^(rrre...i sr$2...)isthe generalmatrix elementof Hafwiththetime

factor removed]. This matrix elementvanisheswhen more than one s, d.ifiers
foom the corresponfing rr; equals Hr."^ when s. differs trom r* and every
other s' equalsrn; and.equals}n]tr*, when everys, equalsr". substituting
thesevaluesin (14), we obtain
i,h'b(rrrr...): x*xu,,*rfir,,",h(r{r...rm-lsmrm+r...)
* )rHr.r^b(r{2...). (tb)
we must now restriot b (ry, ...\ to be a syn,metricalfunction of the variables
11,r2... in order to obtain the Einstein-Bosestatistics. This is permissible
sinceif b (rtrr...) is symmetricalat anytime, then equation(1b) showsthat
I Loc.ci,t.,I,g 3.

t2
254

P. A. M. Dirac.

b1rrr, ...) is also symmetrical atthat time, so that b ('t, "') rrill remain
symmetrical.
Let N, denotethe numberof systemsin the state r. Then a stationary state
of the assemblydescribableby a symmetrical eigenlunction may be specified
by the numbers\, N, .'. N,... just as well as by the numberstv t2 "' ra "'t
and we shall be able to transform equation (15) to the variablesN1, Nr ....
'We
cannot aotually take the new eigenfunctionb (N1,Nz "') equalto the previous one b (rrrr...), but must take one to be a numerical multiple of the
other in order that each may be correctly normalised.with respect to its
respeotivevariables. We must have,in fact,
\ r u r , . . l b( r r r r . . . ) l ' : 1 : X u , , N , i. b. .( N r ,N , " ' ) l ' ,
and hencewe must take lb(Nr, N, ...) l2 equalto the sum of lb(rtrr "')12 for
allvaluesof thenumberst1,rs...suchthat there are N. of themequalto 1,Nt
: XNn
equalto 2, etc. Thereare N l/Nl ! N2 ! ... terms in this sum, whereN
is the total number of systems,and they are all equal, since b(rtrr"') is a
symmetricalfunction of its variablest1, 12 ."' Hencewe must have
b (N1,N2 '..) : (N !/Nr ! Nz ! ...)*a ('{, "')'
If we make this substitution in equation(15),the left-haud side will become
"')
ift (\ ! N, ! ... /N !)* i (Nr,N, ...). The term H,,n,*b(r{, "'r*-1s',,nr7aar
become
will
sid'e
in the first summationon the right-hand
(N1,N2 ... N,- 1"'N'+ 1"'), (16)
lN1! N2! ... (N'-1) !...(N'+ 1) ! .../N lll H,ub
where we have written r tor r* and s for s*. This term must be summed-for
all valuesof s exceptr, and must then be summedfor r taking eachof the values
t1t rz .... Thus eachterm (16) gets repeatedby the summatiouprocessuntil
it occursa total of Nntimes, sothat it contributes
N, [N, ! N2 ! ... (N' - 1) ! ... (N,+1) ! ...lN !]] H,,b (N1,Nz ..'N,-1 "' N' + 1"')
: N , * ( N , * 1 ) + ( N!, N 2 1 . . . / N! ) ' H " b ( N 1 ' N z . 'N. " - 1 . . .N " + 1 . . . )
to the right-hanclsitle of (15). n'inally, the term I.o}J,,,*b(rr, 12"'\ becomes
>J'TJI,,.b(r{r...) :xN,Hnn'(N, ! N,l "'A'T!)+b (\' N, "')'
Henoeequation(15)becomes,with the removalof the faotor (N, ! N2 !... /N !)+,
,ihb (NL,N, ...) : x,x,*, N"*(N"+1)+H^b (Nr,N, ... N'-1 "' N, + 1 "')
+>N"H""b(N1, N2...)' (17)

t3
Emission and, Absorgttion of Rcrd,itttion.

255

which is identical with (18) fexcept for the fact that in (17) the primes have
beenomitted from the N's, which is permissiblewhen we do not requireto refer
to the N's as q-numbers]. we have thus establishedthat the Hamiltonian
(11)describesthe efiectof a perturbationon an assemblysatisfyingthe EinsteinBosestatistics.

$4. The Reactionof the Assembl,yon the perturbi,ngSystem.

up to the presentwe have consideredonry perturbationsthat can be represented by a perturbing energy v added to the Hamiltonian of the perburbed
system,Y being a function only of the dynamical variablesof that systemand
perhapsof the time. The theory may readily be extend.edto the casewhen
the perturbation consistsof interaction with a perturbing dynamical system,
the reaction of the perturbed system on the perturbing system being taken
i:nto account. (The distinction betweenthe perturbing system and the perturbed systemis, of co'rse, uot real, but it will be kept up for convenience.)
-w-e
now consider a perturbing system; d.escribed,say, by the canonical
variables Jr, or,,,the J's being its first integrals when it is alone, interacting
vith an assemblyof perturbedsystemswith uo mutual interaction, that satisfv
the Einstein-Bosestatistics. The total Hamiltonian will be of the form
H, : H" (J) f X,H (n),
where H" is the Hamiltonian of the perturbing system (a function of the J,s
only) anclH (zr)is equalto the properenergyHo (n) prusthe perturbation energy
v(za)of the nth systemof the assembly. H (n) is a function only of the variables
of the zlth systemof the assemblyand of the J's and zo's,and d.oesnot involve
the time explicitly.
The schriidinger equ.ationcorrespondingto equation (I4) is now
ihb g', rtr z ...): Es- Er,,r, ... H, (J,,rtrz... ; J,,, srsr.,,)b (J,,srsa...),
in which the eigenfunction b involves the additional variables J6,. The matrix
elementHr(J', r{2.,.; J',srsr...) isnowalways a constant. As before,it
vanishes when more than one s, difiers from the corresponding r*. when
s. difiers lromr* and every other s, equalsr, it reduoesto H (J'r*; J,,s*),
which is the (J'r*i tr"s*) matrix element (with the time factor removed)of
H : Ho f Y, the proper energy plus the perburbation energy of a single
system of the assembly; while when every s, equars ro, it has the value
H, (J') 8.r,y,* 2*H (J'r*i J"r*). ff, as before, we regtrict the eigenfunctions

LIBRI\R?
COLLEGE
EARROLT

l4

256

P. A. M. Dirac'

to the
to be symmetrical in the variable$ t1112 "', w can again transform
variablesN1, Nz . ' ., which will lead, as before,to the result
dhbQ', N1',Ne' ...) : Hr (J1)b (J', N'r, Nn' ...)
g)s,E".$r'*(Ns',+1-8n,)+Ir1J',r;J',s)b(J",Nr"Nz',..'N,',-'l..'N,',*1"') (18)
function
This is the schr<iclingerequation correspondingto the Hamiltonian
(e'-e)/2,
(1e)
x' : Hp (J) + t",. H,, N,* (N, f 1-8,.)l s"
being such that when reprein which H", is now a function of the J's and'?'1"s,
J"s). (It
sentedby a matrix in the (J) schemeits (J',J") elementis H (J',r ;
shoulalbe noticed.that H,, still commuteswith the N's and 0's')
the
Thus the interaction of a perturbiny' system and an assemblysatisfying
form (19)'
Einstein-Bosestatistics can be describedby a Hamiltonian of the
Wecanputitintheformcorrespondingto(11,)byobservingthatthematrix
elementH(J'r;J's)iscomposed-ofthesumoftwoparts,apartthatcomes
and'
s:r
foom the proper enegy Hq, which equalsW, when J7,":Jo'and
energy Y,
vanishesotherwise, and a part that comes from the interaction
which may be denotedby u(J'r; J"s)' Thus rre shall have
-W'
8"' * 0"'
H'" :
the matrix
whereon,is that function of the J's and ru'swhich is representedby
whose(J'J") elementis tr (J'r ; J's), anil so (19) becomes
-8")'"d(e'-eln'
n' : Hr,(J)+>Jil"N,*),,,o""N"* (N,+1

(20)

system
The Hamiltonian is thus the sum of the proper energyof the perturbing
perturbaHr(J), the proper energyof the perturbed systems>Jil,N, and the
8",)+d:'Q'-q')lh.
tion energy)nro,,Nn* (N, + I
,in
state to othersof tlw sameErwgy .
$5. Th,eoryof Trans,itions a systemfrom orw
we
Bofore applyrng the results of the precedingseotionsto light-quanta,
the
of
Ilamiltonian
a
shali consider the solution of the problem presentetl by
type (19). The essentialfeature of the problem is that it refers to a dynamical
d.oos
system which can, under the influence of a perturbation energy which
to others of
not involve the time explicitly, make transitious from one state
and an
the sameenergy. The problem of collisions betweenan atomic system
Botn's
electron,which hasbeentreated by Born,* is a specialcaseof this type.
consists, in
method is to fincl a period,i,csolution of the wave equation which

wayes'
sofarasnt"""*"'.'l::.;i:ff_:T;:ffiffi':""'of prane

t5
Emission and, Absorptiun of Eqd,iation.

257

representingthe incident electron, approachingthe

atomic system,which are
scatberedor difiracted in all directions. The square
of the amplitude of the
wavesscatteredin any direction with any frequency
is then ur.,i*"d by Born
ro be the probability of the electron being scattered
in that direction with
rhe correspondingenergy.
This methoddoesnot appearto be capableof extension
in any simplemariner
ro the generalproblemof systemsthat maketransitions
from onestateto others
of the sameenergy. Arso there is at presentno very
direct and certain way
of interpreting a periodicsorutionof a wave equation
to appryto a,non-periodic
physical phenomenonsuch as a colrision. (The more
definite method that
s-ill now be given showsthat Born's assumption
is not quite right, it being
necessaryto multiply the squareof the amplitude by
u
factor.)
A,' alternative method of solving a collisionprobrem ""rtuio
is to find a non-peri,od,,ic
solution of the wave equation which consistsinitialry
simply of prane waves
moving over the whole of spacein the necessarydirection
with the necessary
trequencyto representthe incident electron. fn course
of time wavesmoving
ia other directions must appearin order that the
wave equation may remain
satisfied. The probability of the electronbeingscattered
ii any direction with
any energywill then be determinecrby the rate of growth
of the corresponding
harmonic component of these wa",,e'. The way
the mathematics is to be
interpreted is by this method quite definite, being
the same as that of the
beginning of 92.
we shall apply this method to the generarproblem
of a systemwhich makes
transitions from one state to others of the same
energyunder the action of a
perturbation. Let Ho be the rramiltonian of the
unperturbed system and.
Y the perturbing energy, which must not involve
the Jime explici'y. If we
take the caseof a continuousrangeof stationary
states,specifiedby the first
integrals, q'k say' of the unperturbed motion, then, following
the method of
$2, we obtain

i,ha (u') :

fV

@,n,)i[,x,,. a (a!,),

(2rl

correspondingto equation(4). The probability of

lhe systembeing in a state
for which eachaelies betweenoca,and.aa'{ d,ue,
at any time isla (u,)12
d,ar,. fur, ...
wtren a (a') is p'roperly normalised and satisfi.esthe proper
initial conditions.
rf initially the systemis in the state a0,wemust take
the iuitiar value of a (a,)
to be of the form o0' 8 (oc'- a0). 'we shalr keep
oo arbitrary, as it would be
inconvenienttonormalisea(u') inthe presentcase.
x'or a first approximation

l6

P. A. lL Dilac.

258

wemaysubstitutefora(oc,)intheright-hand-sideof(21)itsinitialvalue'This
gives

i'ha(a-') - aoY(ct'ao): xoa(u'uo\'{[\Y(o')-w(ao)Jtift'

of the state a"
is * ooo*tuot anil W (ot') is the energy
where o (oc'oco)

| aoa(x'a.o)#ffi
a08(o!- no)
i,ha(a"'):

'

Hence

Pzj

appreciably from W(c(0)'o(a')

X'orvaluesof the a1' such that W (or')difiers
is small when-the perburbing
is a periodic function of the tirne whoseamplitucle
enelgyVissmall,sothattheeigenfunct,ionscorrespondingtothesestationary
On the other hancl'for values'
statesare not excited'to any appreciableextent'
for somek' a (*') increases
'
v"Lo
of the xp' such that W (a')-: W (oco)antl d'l *
uni{ormlywithrespecttothetime,sothattheprobahilityofthesystembeing
inthestateu'atatytimeincreasesproportionallywiththesquareofthetime'
Physically,theprobabilityofthe'y*tt*beinginastatewithexactlythesame
(oco)
is of no importance' being
proper energyas the initial'prcper energy W
infinitesimal,.Weareinterested"onlyintheintegraloftheprobability
about the initiai proper energy'
through a small range of proper energyvalues
the time, in agreementwith the
which, as we shall find, increaseslinearly with
ordinary ProbabilitY laws'
r'o a set of variablesthat are
We transform from the variables0(1,0(2" ' *u
that one of them is the proper
arbitrary independentfu:rctionsof the oc'ssuch
n(u-.' The probability at any time
energy W, say, the variablesW, Yr, \2, "'
each1r lies bet'ween^r&'andl
of the systemlying inastationarystate for whioh
factor) equal to
yn' * d,yr,'is now (apart from the normalising

. d\r'...d^(u-,'i
f ffiffi
d^(r'
Iotot')

dw''

(23)

Toratimethatislargeoomparedwiththeperiodsofthesystemweshallfincl
is contributed by values of
that practically the i,not" of the integral in (23)
W' verY closeto W-o: W (oco)' Put
: J (W" "y')'
a (u'):o (W', y') and ? (ar', uz'. . ..n,')13(W', T" "' Tu-r')
of (22) (provided'Tk'*\ka
Then for the integral in (23) we findl, with the help
for somek)

I ir(w',T')ltJ (w',v')dw'
t*'-*"r'ro
-j]!:o !:':t'4:11 dw'
: Ia0l, i, {w',v' ; w0,yo)l' J (w',r', [eo
J
-W0)2'dW'
- 2 I *01'[ 1, 1W',v'; Wo,yo)l' J (W',T')[1- cos(W'-Wo) t lh]| (W'
J

pJ (W0f hr lt,^O(L- cosr) lnz'd'n'

(WoI hnlt,y';Wo,^ro)
: 2 I aoV,ft .
IL,

17

Emission and, Absorption of Rad,icttiotr,.

if one makes the substitution(w'-w0)t1h:*.
reducesto

259

n'or large values of f this

2laolztlh .lu(W0, y' ; 1V0,T0)j, J (Wo,y,)

f'

(t-" osn)lrz . d,n

: zrc
tlh.f r,#, r, i wo,yo)l, J(W, y,).
I aolz
The probability per unit time of a transition to a state for which each
y7,lies
betweenya' and yr,'* dT*, is thus (apart from the normalisingfactor)
Znl aolLlh. l, (Wo,y' i W0,yo)l, J (Wo, ilTr,.il^(r,... d,y*_t,, (24)
T,)
which is proportionalto the squareof the matrix elementassociatedwith
that
transition of the perturbing energy.
To apply this result to a simprecollisionproblem, we take the cr,sto
be the
eomponentsof momentuu p*, pa, 7t" of the colliding electron and the
y,s to
be 0 and /, the angleswhich determineits direction of motion. If, taking
the
relativity change of mass with velocity into account, we let p denote
the
resultantmomentum,equal to (p|*pf*p*)t,and
E the energy,equal to
(mzc4a-Pcz1t,
of the electron, mheingits rest-mass,we find for the Jacobian
^
P , , P u , ' P ":\ : E P - ' - -u'
"J :-0 : (TE;o;;)
;, "o
Thusthe J (Wo,y') of the expression(24) hasthe value
J (Wo,T') : E'P' sin 0'/c2,

(25)

where E' and P' refer to that value for the energy of the scattered
electron which
nrakesthe total energy equartheinitial energywo (i,.e.,to that
varue resuired
by the conservation of energy).
We must now interpret the initial value of a(x,), namely, a0 g(a,_ao),
which we did not normalise. According to 2 the wave function in terms
$
of the
variables ae is 6 (a'): a (a') s-iw'tln, so that its initial value is
o0 8(oc'- d.o)e-iw'tth:ao E(p,, -p,o)g(pr, -

puo)g(p,, _,p:)e-i\\'tth.

If we use the transformation function*

r' lh,
(r' IP' ) : (2Th)-3l2si>*"P"'

andthetransrormati;;;
d,p'd,pu,d,sti,
l{*,rn) rr(p,)
we obtain for bhe initial wave fu4ction in the co-ord.inates n,
ao z the value
ao (%t6;

zt z
"i>

q,p,or'I h
i'w'tI h
e.

't The symbol

c is used for brevity to detroten, y, z,

l8

26A

P. A. M. Dirac.

per unit
This correspondsto an initial distribution of I o012(2tch)*3electrons
striking a
volume. since their velocity is Pocz/Eo,the number per unit time
unit surfaceat right-anglesto their direction of motion is lo0l2P0c2/(2nh)sBo'
(25)'
Dividing this into the expression(24) we obtain, with the help of
po)itSrio 0' d,0'd+'.
-''
4n2(%ch)2E$t,
t 0t' ;

(26)

cn

it shall
This is the efiective area that must be hit by an electron in order that
result
This
energy E''
be scattered.in the solid. angle sin 0' d0'd{'withthe
for the
difiers by the factot (Zrch)zlumv',. P',/Po from Born's.* The necessity
of
detailecl
principle
lactor P'/Po in (26) could have been predicted" from the
2
the clirect and
balancing, as the factor I o: (p' ; Po)l is symmetrical between
Teverseprocesses.f
$ 6. Appli,cation to Light-Qrtanta'
of the
We shall now apply the theory of $ 4 to the case when the syst'ems
since lightassernbly are light-quanta, the theory being applicable to this case
A
interaction.
quanta obey the Einstein-Bose statistics and have no mutual
momenlight,quantum is in a stationary state when it is moving with constant
comthree
the
by
tum in a straight line. Thus a stationary state r is flxed
specifies its
ponents of momentum of the light-quantum anil a variable that
are a finite
there
Jate of polarisation. We shali work on the ass*mption that
as it would.
number of these stationary states, lying very close to one anothel'
light-quanta
of
the
be inconvenient to use continuous ranges. The interaction
form (20),
with an atomic system will be described by a Hamiltonian of the
and the
in rrhich H, (J) is the Hamiltonian for the atomic system alone,
this form
coefficients ,t)rs ate for the present unlic0.own. we shall show that
laws for the
lor the Hamiltonian, with the o", arbitrary, leads to Einstein's
emission and absorption of radiation.
to exist
The light-quantum has the peculiarity that it apparently ceases
its
in
which
when it is in one qf its stationary states, namely, the zero state,
moment'um, and therefore also its energy, ate zetl, When a light-quantum
when one is
is absorbed it can be consicleredto jump into this zero state, and
in which it is
emitted it can be considered to jump from the zero state to one
* In a morerecentpaper('Nachr. Gesell.d. Wiss',' Gottingen,p' 146 (1926))Born has
mechanics,
obtained a,result in agreementwith that of the presentpapertor non-relativit'y
I am
theorems.
by using an intorpretation of the analysis baseil.on the conservation
work'
of
this
copy
indebteclto Prof. N. Bohr for soeingan atlvance
'2.
f SeeKlein and Rosseland, f. Physik,' vol' 4, p' 46, equation(4) (1921)'

t9

Emission antl Absorpttionof Rad,iation.

261

::rsically in evidence,so that it appearsto have

beencreatecl. since trrereis
- -' limil to the numberof right-quantathat may
be createclin this way, rvemust
!'.pose that there are an infinite number of light-quanta
in the zero srate, so
::at the Nu of the Hamiltonian (20) is infinite.
we must now have 0u,the
,,-:riablecanonicallyconjugateto
No, a constant,since
Oo: afTaNo : Wo f termsinvolvingNo-l
o, (No1 1;-;
'"d wo is zero. rn order that the Hamiltonian
(20) may remain finite it is
-.eessaryfor the
coeffi.cientsor0,oorto be infinitely smali.
We shall suppose
:iat they are infinitely small in such a way
as to make oreNo+and zr6rNoi
:nite, in ord.erthat
the transition probability coeffcients
may be finite. Th's
-e put
o"o (No *

l)!' e-ieotn -

oD

ustNr!6i0oih :

ur*,

rhere u, and 'i.r'+are finite and. conjugate

imaginaries. we may consicler the
'' and u,* to
be functions only of the J's and zo'sof
the atomic system, since
:heir factors (Nn * l)t s-tea'nand Nodrteo/a
are practically constants, the rate
-'f change of No being very small compared
with Nr. ihe Hamiltonian (20)
now becomes
n' :

Hr(J) + >,W,N, lZ,asfu,Njglo

* o,o(N, r tf
"_te,1n1
*X"*oX"*o?r,,N,+(N" + I - 8,,)*fto,.-e;tr,.
e7)
The probability of a transition in which
a light-quantum in the state r is
absorbed is proportional to the square of
the modulus of that matrix element of
the Hamiltonian which refers to this transition.
This matrix eiemenr, must
come from the term arN,ls.an in the Hamiltonian,
and must therefore be
proportional to N"'* where N,' is the number
of light-quanta in state r before
the process. The probability of the absorptioo
p"or.*, is thus proportional
to Nn'' rn the same way the probability
oi a light-quantum in state r being
emitted is proportional to (N,,
f l), and the probability of a light_quantum in
state r being scatteredinto state s is proportional
to N,, (ti,, it).
Radiative
processesof the more generar type considered
by Einstein and Ehrenfest,f in
which more than one light-quantum take part
simultaneously, are not ailowed
on the present theory.
To establish a convrsslien between the number
of light-quanta per stationary
state and the intensity of the radiation,
we consider an enclosure of finite
volume, A say, containing the radiation.
The number of stationary states
for light-quanta of a
type of polarisation whose frequency
lies in the
_given
| 'Z. f. Physik,'vol. lg, p. BOf (f923).

20

262

P. A. M. Dirac.

rarge v?.to v, { dv, and whose d.irection of motion lies in the solid angle d'a,
about the direction of motion for state r will now be Lv,2d,v,cla,l&. The energy
of the iight-quanta in these stationary states is thus Nr' .Znhv, . Av,2d'vrd'arlC'
This must equal Ac-lr durt^,, where I, is the intensity per unit frequency
ranse of the radia.tion about the state r.

Hence

I, : N,' (Zrh)v,t f c2,

(28)

so that N,'is propoqtional to I, and (N,' { 1) is proportional to I, f (2nh)v,3lcz'

-We
thus obtain that the probability of an absorption process is proportional to
I,, the incident intensity per unit frequency range, and that of an emission
(Znh)v,s/cz, which are just Einstein's laws.*
process is proportional to I,l
In the sameway the probability of a processin which a light-quantum is scattered
from a state r to a state s is proportional to r, [I" |
law for the scattering of radiation by an electron.t

(2nh)v,3lcl, which is Pauli's

57. The Probabi,l,i,tyCoffici,entsfor Em'ission and' Absorption'

We shall now consider the interaction of an atom and.radiation from the wave
point of view. we resolve the radiation into its xtourier components,. and
suppose that their number is very large but finite. Let each component be
labelletl by a suffix r, andl supposo there ale o,reomponents associated with the
radiation of a definite type of polarisation per unit solid' angle per unit frequency range about the component r. Each component r can be desoribed by
a vector potential k, chosen so as to make the scalar potential zero. The
perturbation term to be adcled to the Hamiltonian will now be, according to
the classical theory with neglect of relativity mechanics, c-L\, rc, XD where X,
rn,
,is the component of the total polarisation of the atom in the direction of
which is the direction of the electric vector of the component r'
'we
can, as explained in $ 1, supposethe field to be described bythe canonical
variables Nn, 0n, of which N, is the number of quanta of energy of the oomponent r, and 0, is its canonically conjugate phase, equal to 2rchv"times the
'We
shall nowhave Kr:&raos \rlh, where o, is the amplitudeof
0, of $1.
.rn, rvhich can be oonnected with N, as follows:-The flow of energy per unit
area per unit time for the component 7 is uftc-r ar2v,2. Hence the intensity
* The ra,tio of stimulated to spontaneousemissionin the presenttheory is just twice its
value in Einstein's. This is becausein the presenttheory either polarised.componentof
the incident radiation can stimulate only radiation polarisedin the sameway, while in
Einstein's the two polarisedcomponentsare treated together' This remark applies also
.to the scatteringProcess.
'.2. f. ?hysik,' vol' 18,p.272 (7923).
f Pauli,

2l

Eqn';ssioncud, Absorpti,on of Rad,ia,tion.

263

per unit frequency range of the radiation in the neighbourhood of the component r is I":72rc-\d,2v,26,. Comparing this with equation (28), we obtain
a, : 2 (hv,I co")lNr}, and hence
u,,:2(hv,lco")l N,+ cos O"/fr.
The Hamiltonian for the whole system of atom plus radiation would now be,
according to the classical theory,
F : Hr, (J) + >" lZihvSN, f 2c-rX" (hv,lco,)l X"N,! cos 0"/1,
(2g)
where He (J) is the Hamiltonian for the atom alone. On the quantum theory
we must make the variables N" and 0" canonical q-numbers like the variables
Jp, w,that describethe atom.
by the real q-nurnber

We must now replace th.e l{"} cos O,.fhin (2g)

+ e-i?rthNi}:1r{y7;i otortt+ (N,.+ 1),,s-i,erfty

! {N,.+B:e,tt,
.sothat the Hamiltonian (29) becomes
F:

Hr, (J) + >, (2nhv,) N" a /a+6- ; ), ( v,/o,)l X, {IrI,}rta'lr'f (N, f

1)r e

-ierlh\

)'
(30)

This is of the form (27), wiih

ur*- ht c-; (vr/o,.)lX"
nrr:()
(r, s I 0).

ar:
and

(31)

The wave point of view is thus consistent with the light-quantum point of view
and gives values for the unknown interaction coeffi.cient o," in the lightquantum theory. These values are not such as would. enable one to express
the interaction energy as an algebraic function of canonical variables. Since
the wave theory gives ,u"r: 0 for r, s f 0, it would seemto show that there are
no direct scattering processes,but this may be due to an incompleteness in
the present wave theory.
lVe shall now show that the Hamiltonian (30) leads to the correct expressions
for Einstein's A's and B's. we mustfirst modifyslightly the analysis of $b
so as to apply to the casewhen the system has a large number of discrete stationary states instead of a continuous range. rnstead of equation (2I) we shall
now have
i,ha (a' ) : 2^', Y (a'a") a (a").
If the system is initially in the state oc',we must take the initial value of a (a')
to be 8.,'0, which is now correctly normalised. This gives for a first approximation
i'h a (a.'):

(a')-N (ao))tlh,

: u(a'al)
Y (oc'0c0,)

which leadsto

"i'l'er

'ih a(u'):

$.,on{

u(u'*o)

,d[W(c)-W(ao)]llh

r,fW(oc')-W(no)llh'

22

P. A. M. Dirac.

264

correspondingro Q2)- If, as before, we transform to the variables w, Tr,

Tz ...\u-r, we obtain lwhen1' # Yo)
o (IM'Y'): o (W', y' ; W0,To)[1-ei(w'-sr94h]/(W'-W0)'
The probability of the'system being in a state for which eaoh1r equals11'
is Er,v,lo (W' y')lt. If the stationary stateslie closetogether and if the time I
is not too great,wecanreplacethis sumby the integral ( AWr-t | | o (W'T') l' dW',
where AW is the separationbetweenthe energylevels. Evaluating this integral
as before,weobtain for the probability per unit time of a transition to a state
for which eachy* : yo'
(321
2nlhN[. lu (Wo,y'; Wo,yo)12.
In applying this result'we oan take the 1's to be any set of variablesthat are
independentof the total proper energy'v[ and that together with w define
a stationary state.
we now return to the problem d.efinedby the llamiltonian (30) ancl consider
an absorptionprocessin which the atom jumps from the state J0 to the state
J' with the absorptionof a iight-quantum fromstate r. we take the variables
y, to be the variables J', of the atom together with variables that define the
direction of motion and state of polarisation of the absorbedquantum, but
not its energy. The matrix element o (W0, Y' ; W0, Yn)is now
hu2c- Bt2$, fo,)rI2Xi (JoJ')N"0,
whereX,1J0J')is the ordinary (JoJ',)matrix elementof X". Hencefrom (32)the
probability per unit time of the absorptionprocessis
2n

hvr, i

,rr

ftfrWff,\*,(JoJ')lzN,o'
To obtain the probability for the processwhen the light-quantum comesfoom
any direction in a solid angledo, we must multiply this expressionby the number
of possibledirections for the light-quantum in the solid angle d<o,which is
d,a o,LW lZzth. This gives
Vr

'r
t
o^ -h"tl x"

lJoJ';l' N,o :

d'J=rlx,

zlcll"a\;'

lJoJ'; 1tI'

with the help of (28). Iilence the probability coefficientfor the absorption
prooessisll}nhzcv,z.lX,(J0J',)lr, in agreementwith the usualvalue for Einstein,s absorption coefficient in the matrix mechanics. The agreement for
the emissioncoeff.cientsmay be verified in the samemanner'

23

Em,issionand, Absorption of Rad'iation,

265

The present theory, since it gives a proper account of spontaneous emission;

must presumably give the efiect of radiation reaction on the emitting system,
and enable one to calculate the natural breadths of spectral lines, if one can
overcome the mathematical difficulties involved in the general solution of the
wave problem correspondingto the Hamiltonian (30). ilso the theory enables
one to understand how it comes about that there is no violation of the law of the
conservation of energy when, say, a photo-electron is emitted from anatom
under the action of extremely weak incident radiation. The energy of interaction of the atom and.the rad.iation is a q-number that does not commute with
the frst integrals of the motion of the atorn alone or with the intensity of the
radiation. Thus one cannot specify this energy by a c-number at the same
time that one specifi.esthe stationary state of the atom and the intensity of the
radiation by c-numbers. In particular, one cannot say that the interaction
energy tends to zero as the intensity o{ the incident radiation tends to zero.
There is thus always an unspecifiable amount of interaction energy which
can supply the energy for the photo-electron.
r would like to express my thanks to Prof. Niels Bohr for his interest in this
work and for much friendly discussion about it.
Summ,tr,ry.
The problem is treated of an assembly of similar systems satisfying the
Einstein-Bose statistical mechanics, which interact with another difierent
system, a Hamiltonian {unction being obtained. to describe the motion. ,The
theory is applied to the interaction of an assembly of light-quanta with an
ordinary atorn, and. it is shown that it gives Einstein's laws for the emission
and absorption of radiation.
The interaction of an atom with electromagnetic waves is then considered,
and it is shown that if one takes the energies ancl phases of the waves to be
q-numbers satisfying the proper quantum conditions instead of c-numbers,
the Hamiltonian function takes the same form as in the light-quantum treatment. The theory leads to the correct expressions for Einstein's A's and B,s.

24

P o p e r2

R E N D I C O NDTEI L L AR . A C C A D E M INAA Z I O N A LD
EE I L I N C E I
Classe di Scienze fisiche. matematiche e naturali.
Estrattodal vol. XlI, serie6', zo sem.,fasc.9. - Roma,novembrergJo-vrrr.

Fisica. - Sopra I'elettrodinami.ca

quantistica.Nota II (') di
E. Frnur, presentatadal Socio O. M. ConerNo.
In una Nota pubblicata recentemente in questi < Rendiconti 1 (z) [e
scritto in forma quantistica le equazioni dell'elettrodinamica; ciod le equazioni del sistema costituito dal campo elettronragnetico e da un numero
qualunque di cariche elettriche puntiformi. Le equazioni scritte allora si
iiferivano al caso non relativistico; presupponevano ciob che Ia velocitl
delle cariche uon fossero molto elevate. Esse possono tuttavia senzaalcuna
difficolti essere scritte in forma relativistica, basandosi sopra la teoria di
Dirac dell'elettrone rotante. E noto che recentemente anche W. Heisenberg
e W. Pauli (r) lx6le triittato il problema dell'elettrodinamica quantistica.
Siccome pero i metodi seguiti da questi autori sono essenzialmentediversi
dai miei, credo non inutile pubblicare anche i miei risultati.
La forma definitiva in cui ver-ranno espressii risultati di questo lavoro
b particohrmente semplice. Troveremo infatti che la Hamiltoniana che, nel
senso del principio di corrispondenza, rappresenta la naturale traduzione
quantistica dell'elettrodinamica classica, si ottiene senrplicemente aggiungendo alla Hamiltoniana clella teoria dell'irradiazione di Dirac un termine
che rappresental'energia elettrostatica del sistema di cariche elettriche; per
modo che, nella presente forma, l'elettrodinamica quantistica viene a non
esserein alcun modo piri complicata della teoria di Dirac deli'irradiazione.
Questa semplificazione si pub raggiungere come vedremo mediante una
opportuna espressionedella condizione

(')

+t#+di'u-o

che lega tra di loro i potenziali scalare e vettore e che, anche nella teoria
di Heisenberg e Pauli costituisce uno degli elementi pir\ caratteristici delI'elettrodinamica quantistica.
(zI) che rappresentaI'HaNella Nota I abbiarnotrovata I'espressione
miltonianadel nostro sistema, Se, invece della meccanicaclassica,vogliamo
rappresentareil moto dei punti per mezzo della Hamiltoniana di Dirac,
il z9 settembrergjo,
(r) Pervenuta
all'Accademia
(21E, Fnnut,<Rend.Lincei>,9,88r, 1929.Citatanel seguitocon I.
und W. Peurt,<Zs,f. Phys.>, 56, r, ry29; tg, r5o, r93o,
13) W. HcrsrNnnnc

25

-432possi4moverilicarefacilmenteche, al posto della (zr) I dobbiamousare

l' Hamiltonianaseguente
:

-)8,m, r. +1t,tlp)
(") H - - ,2t,X p,,
+ ) e , t l *) t,x

t,; +
e, cos

(a ,2 s,
r
f A ,,w ,,* A,"w,") sinls;

. ?l+(<oi
1oi + 6: -

P?)+ zrr"u?
(*?,+ w?,+ x?- a)]

Le notazioni sono quelledella Nota I; 8, e y, rappresentano

un q-scalare e un { - vettore tali che 8;, f;r ,T;f ,Ti< sono i quattro operatori,rappresentabili con matrici del quarto ordine, che intervengono nella Hamiltonianarelativaall' i.esimo punto materialeI natr-rrahneute
le y e la I rel;rtive
a uno dei punti sono permutabili con le y e Ia 8 relative a un altro dei

Punu.
Osservianro
in particolareche dall'Hamiltoniana
(z) risulta
.

ALI

AH
i P,: -tO -

\Q,:ffi:-t'
,l a H
ar:ad*:4,

G)r:

y''n2vlq' - '

AHAX

-r

4tt'vl a' -

coS
rs;
I tZe;
'fEnle,t,X a,sinf,;

aH

z\r:*--cTi

da cui
d_

,-

cos Ii; -

2rc\ts\i\

a, sin lr; .

Da questa equazionee dalle (3) risulta subito che anche dalla nuova
Hamiltoniana (z) deriva l'equazione (lB)I;
e quindi clre se l'espressione
(t9) I si annulla insieme alla sua derivata prima all'istantezero, essaresta
sernpre nulla in virtu delle equazioni differenziali. E rest:r quindi verificata
l a c o n d i z i o n e( r ) , e q u i v a l e n t ea l l a ( r 9 ) I . P e r t n e z z od e l l e ( 3 ) , I a ( r 9 ) I

si pu6 scrivere

(+)

2ft\ts ls -

P, :

e la sua deriv:rta, a meno di un fattore costante

(t)

6s- 27rvs
a, * #

l*1',cos

rs;: o.

26

-433In una interpretazione classica potfemmo dunque dire che l'elettrodinamica ordinaria si ottiene integrando le eqr-razionicanoniche dedotte dalla
(z) e imponendo (4) e (5) come condizioni iniziali; ci6 basta, poichd si
d detto che se (4) e (5) sono verificate all'istaute zero, esse lo sotro anche
automaticamente a un istante qualsiasi.
Per tradr.rrre tutto questo nel linguaggio della meccanica quantistica,
(i) possalro avere simulosserviamo che, affinchd le due grand,ezze(+)
"
siano
commutabili, poichd
che
esse
zero,
E
necessario
valore
taneanrenteil
un
valore determinato
ha
altrirrenti il fatto che una clelle due grandezze
renderebbedi necessiti indeterrninato il valore dell'altra. Ora si verifica facilmente, in b;rse alle ordinarie regoie di conrmutazione, che i primi membri
di (a) e (5) sono effettivamente comtnutabili; si puo quindi anche quantisticamente attribuire ad essi allo stesso istante il valore determinato zero.
Al procedimento classicodi integrazione delle equazioni canonichecon
valori arbitrari delle costanti di integrazione, corrisponde, nella nreccanica
ondulatoria f integrazione dell'equazionedi Schroedinger corrispondente alla
Hamiltoniana (z), scegliendo arbitrariamente la funzione che raPpresenta
lo scalare di campo
(6)

* :

Q(t , h tQ; tw,, t'tt),',X,, Q')

(ot rappresentasimbolicamente la coordinata interna < spincoordinate> dell'i.esimo corpuscolo) per il valore t: o del terl.lPo. Se vogliamo invece
soddisfareIe condizioni (+) (l) nort possiamo pir\ lasciare arbitraria questa
"
funzione; resta invece determinato il modo secondo cui essa dipende dalle
vari:rbili ls e Qs . Siccome infatti 6, , conittgatadi 2g', deve avere, secondo
l. (l) il valore
6 s .:

c r/B
^
27r\s
Q - rr*a |/ "# ? e;cosfs;

da p nel fattore
risultache tf devedipendere

0)

r,;).
,"# *,('*, a' . *\ EV ",'o'

Dalla (4) seguein modo simile che Q' deve intervenire soltanto nel
fattore
(8)

zxi
2frltuti/t
h

il quale b del resto gii contenuto nel fattore (Z). In conclusionela solualle condizioni (a) e (5) deveaverela forma:
zione corrispondente

- .*iffi4",'""",,)]
,"Ij''("n,e,
(s) *:
e(t,x;,,oi,w,,,w,,).
lU

-43+Dobbiamo 'ra dimostrare che effettivamente si pro soddisfare I'equazione di Schroedinger per tnezzo della posizione (9). L'eqr.razionecli Schroedinger dedotta dall'Hamiltoniarra(z) d

-*#:"q

( ro)

dove H d naturalmente interpretato corne un operatore. sostituendo nella

(to) al posto di { l'espressione(9) si trova, con calcoli non difficili la
seguenteequazionea cui deve soddisfareg:

-*#:

(r t)

on

dove R rappresentail seguente oPeratore

:) R: -t1T;Xpt
fr

+' ) l : ( c o '

alz'"

-)8imic"

{)e'clf?r,X

(A,,2u,,
I A,,w,,)sinr,,
*

+ .;) + 2n2v2
@:,+ *:)]+#?n(?,'

.o,r,,).

A prescinderedall'ultimo termine, R coincide co' I'Hamiltoniana

della
teoria dell'irradiazionecli Dirac, in cui si trascura il potenziale
scalaree la
componentelongitudinaledel potenzialevettore, considerandosolo
il campo
determinato delle componenti trasversali del potenziale 'ettore,
e ciob il
solo campo di radiazione. Dobbianro discutere il significato
dell,ultirno ter*
mine. Per questo lo trasformiamo nel modo s.guente,

,' s l_(
: #> r,r,gl#1&:
cosr,;)
lE{ra u,, \;>e;
atTi;
/

-_

vr

C' 5r ,.,. 5l cOSls; cos fsi

2
"Alo'ot

La somma rispetto ad s si pub trasformare in un integrale e si

trova,
con calcoli privi di difficolti
5 cos Is; cos Is7 : rrO r

a--

":

zc,Ti

d,ove hj rappresenta Ia distanza tra i due punti i e . Sostituendo troviamo

i
(tl)

:1*r>+(> e;cos
r,;): lDU
.
TEsr.iv;\zf,r;i
/

-4Jtci dI dunque serltplicementela ordinaria espressione.delLa (r3)

-"i.itrortatica;
iome nell'elettrostaticaclassica,I'espressione(r3)
l'energia
diventa infinita nel caso di cariche elettriche puntiformi. Questo inconveniente, pir\ che dalla elettrodinamica, deriva dalla imperfetta cqnoscenza
della stiottuta clell'elettrone, e potrebbe p. es. venir eliminato considerando
suol
elettroni di raggio finito. Noi lo elimineremo forrnalmente, come si
teri
fare anche nelltl.ttrortatica classica,escludendo dalla somma (t3)
mini per cui i : f che rappresentanoin certo modo una costante additiva
infiniumente srande. Indichererno cib cou un'apice al segno ) ' Pet mezzo
della (r3), la (rz) diventa:

('+) R -

- c)yr X Pt -2}rmic'

4')efi

rsi*
(A,,cu,,
* A,"w,,)sin
[o ?t, *

* *:")l*+4';'
- ?f;(.,', * o,:)+ 2rc'zv:(w?,
Osserviamoinfine che la funzioneg che abbiamo sostituitoallo scaIare di campo ,lt per mezzodella (y) puo in tutte le considerazionisostituirsi ad esio, da cui differisce per un fattore complessodi modulo r .
di schroe(rr) che d del tipo di una equazione
La g soddisfaall'equazione
dinglr in cui pero si deve prenderecome HamiltonianaR invecedi H
dalla (t4)
qolsta nuova HamiltonianaR, come si legge immediatamente
dell'energia
espressione
aggiungendol'ordinaria
d costituitasemplicemente
elettrostaticaalla ordinaria Hamiltonianadei termini di pura radiazione'
Possiamodunqueconcludereche, in questaforma, il problemadi elettrodinarlricaquaniisticanon d in alcun modo piir complicatodi un ordinario
problernadi teoria della radiazione.
Naturalmente,come giir abbiagroaccennato,anchequestateoria conserva in se due difeni fondamentaliche pero piu che di origine elettrodidella
namica,possonoconsiderarsiderivanti dallanon completaconoscenza
struttura elettronica.Essi sono la possibilithche ha l'elettronedi Dirac di
passarea livelli energetici con energia negativaed il fatto che l'energia
puntiforme.
intrinsecaa valore infinito se si ammettei'elettroneesattamente

ON QUANTUMELECTRODYNAMICS.
3a P.A.M.Di,rac,

Tl.A.Fock and, Bori,s pod,ol,skg.

(Received October 25, 1992.)

In the first part of this paper the equivalence
of the new form o1
r e l a t i v l s t i c Q u a n t u m M e c h a n i c sI t o t h a t o f H e i s e
n b e r g . a n dp a u l i 2 i s
pr_ovedin a new way which has the advantage
of showin'g their physical
relation anrl serves to suggest further deveiopment
con"sidereci^
in tire
second part.

Part I. Equivalenc0 0f Dirac's and Heisenberg_

Pauli's Theories.
- S _ 1 :R c c e n i l y R o s e n f e l d s h o w e d 3t h a t t h e n e w f o r r n
of relativistic Quantum Mechanics1 is equivarentto that
- n oof
*H e i s e n b e r g a n c lp a u l i . 2 R o s e n f e i d , s p r o o f i s ,
eyer, 0bscure and. ioes not bring out someleatures
of the
relation of the two theories. To issist in the further development of the theory we give here a simplifiedproof
of the
equivalence.
Consitlera system, with a Hamiltonian H, consisting of
two parts A and.B with their respective Hamiltonians _I/r"and
I/a and the interaction V. We have
H:Ho*Ho*Ir,

wherc
Ha:

(1)

Ha(poeoT')i Eu : Eu (puqaT);
v: V (poqo0ueuT)

and 7 is the time for the entire system. The wave function
for the entire system will satisfy lhe equationn
(H-ihdldT)g@"qu?): o
(2)
ancl will be a function of the variables indicated.
D i r a c , P r o c .R o y .Soc. A 136, 458, 1982.
H e i s e n b e r g a n c Pauli,
l
ZS. f. physik, b6, 1, 1929 and 59, 168,
1930.
R o s e n f e l d , Z S . f . p h y s i k 7 6 , 7 2 5 ,t S B 2 .
4
ft, is P I a n c k's constant divided by 2:r.
1

30
On Quantum ElectrotlYnanics.

Now, upon perfbming the canonical transformation

(3)

r* : r*"u' g,

by which clynamical variables, say ]7, transform as follows

Fn : e*HbrFr- I'o' ,

(4)

Eq. (z) takes the form

(H:+V* -ihdldT) ** : o.

(5)

on-lheotherhand'
sinoe f/, commuteswith r[' HI:Ho'
is not clis'
variables
bet*een
relation
iunctional
the
since
turbecl by the canonical transformation (a), Z* is the same
p, q..
function of the transformedvariables P*, Qn as z is of
q"'
q;:
that
Fi: P",
Bttt gto and. qo commute with f/u so
Thorefore
(6)
vx - T (It"q"piqi),
where

n;:;
9i:,*aor

'nrr-*"u'
(7)

nr'-

*o"

It wili be shown in $ 7, after suitable notation is developetl, that Eqs. (z) are equivalent to

oqitdt:f,{n,u;-qiila)
dpildt:J@uni-pi*t)

I
|

,',

where I is the separate time of the part B'

the
These,however, are just the equationsof motion for
d'
part
of
part B alone, unperturbed by the presence
g 2. Now let part B corresponclto the fielct and parl A
to ihe particles present. eqs. 1a; must then be equivalent
then
to Maxwetl's equations for empty space' Eq' (z) is
w
hile
t
h
e
o
r
y
'
t h e w a v e e q u a t i o no f H e i s e n b e r g - P a u l i ' s
of
terms
in
Un. ful, in wiricn the perturbation is expressed
equawaYe
the
pdt.oiiut. corresponding to gmpty-space,is
to
tion of the new theory. Thui, this theory corresponcls

3t
470

P. A. tr'f.Dirac, V. A. Fock and Boris podolsky,

treating separately a part of the system, which is in some

problemsmore convenient.r
Now, l?" can be representedas a sum of the Hamlltonians
for the separatepar:ticles. The interaction betweenthe particles is not included in flo for this is taken to be the resuit of interactionbetweenthe particlesand the fielcl. simiIatly, v is the sum of interactionsbetweenthe field and the
particles. 'Iirus, we mav rvrite
1t
TT

t7n :
"

1T

\,

/ , l \ C d " . ID,
a
s

-1- 1
1 ) ,r t - ( l ) t
i ' . ' u" - t l -

\- rt
Atts
!-1

and

(e)
r/x:
\r T/*- \r
r,rr
'
'./' s- 2'" " L- (r", T) - o"' A (r", T)l
s:l

S:1

where ?'sare the coortlinatesof the s - th particle andn is the

number of particles.
Eq. (r) takes the form
1tr

l!r..r
l.L/t"s

v:) -ihdtd?l .o',{"";

J; T): s,

(10)

/ standsfor the variablesdescribingthe field. Besidesthe

commontime ?'and the field time r an indivirlual time ts:tt,
t2,..,t,, is introducedfor each particle. Eq. (rO) is satisfierl
by the commonsolution of the set of equations
where

(R' -i'hdldf") {*:0,

( 11 )
R : 6q.
nL,c2e"4*f e.,fO(r" 16)- o A (r rt
*
"
".?"
".
")]
:|n(r, rz . .. rnl tt tz . . . t,ri ,I), when
and tl,,*'
all the l's are
put equal to the common time ?.

Now, Eqs. (r t) are the equationsof lJirac'stheory. They

are obviousiy relativistically invariant and form a generalizatlon of Ec1.(t0). This obvious relativistic invariince is
achievedby the introduction of separatetime for each particle.
g 3. For further developmentwe shail neeclsome formu_
las of quantizationof electromagneticfields and shall use
1 This is somewha,t analogous
to F r e n k e l's method of treating
i n c o m p l e t e s y s t e m s ,s e e F r e n k e l ,
Sow. phys. l, 99, 1982.

32
On QuantumElectrodynamics.

+71

for this purpose some formtrlas obtained by F o c k and P 0d o 1sk y. t Starting nwith the Lagrangian function
'1

't

"\2
L -;(G:-6:)- .1 /
1ir'.'a+;a),

Uz)

(Q,,QrQrQ) the poterrtials((DAtAzAs),

taking as coord,inates
and retainins the usual relations
(t : - grad tD-

1
-,r.
A:

$ :

curl .J,

(13)

one obtains
(P, PrPr) : r:
P,t:
-

--

O;
|
' (
l- ,ir)
o,u^++
,
c
c

(11)

l'

anclthe Hamiltonian
s2
1 T (99' -oQ'\'
P':- P)+
P'?)-+s: , (P.
z f\or,
dn1)
3

lf - cP.rrad.Qo.
b"zad*'
"P.T
The equationsof **on

ur.,

):e2P-,cgrado,
6:-c2Po-cditA,
i: :

(15)

t: - grad div l - c grad p6 ,

I
I)

{'-1-'6 )

[
I
4:-_cdivP,
0n eliminationof P antl Po, Eqs.(16) give the D'Alernbert equationsfor the potentlals(D and ,4. To obtain Maxweil's equationfor empty spaceone must set Po:9. The
quantization rules are expressedin terms of the amplitudes
of the Fourier's integral. Thus, for every F:F(nAat),
1 F o c k a n d P o d o l s k y , S o w . P h y s . 1 , 8 0 1 ,1 9 3 2 , l a t e r q u o t e d a s lc. .
For other treatments see Jorclan
anrl PauIi,
ZS. f. Physik, n, $L,
1928 or F e r m i, Rend. Lineei, 9, 881, 1929. The Lagrangian (12) cliffers
lrom that of Fermi
only by a'four-dimensional divergence.
r A dot oyer a field quantity will be userl to designate a rlerivative
rr,'ith respect to the field time /.

33
P. A. M. Dirac, V. A. Fock and Boris podolsky,

472

amplitucles I'(tu) and J'+(k) are introduced by the equation

/t\"1,

'
(r; / .J {ftttl e-dclktt+it r + F+(k)s-ricrktt-ut ' r\ d,k (r7)
where r:(nya)
is the position vector, k:(k*k11k,) is the
wave vector having the magnitucle I fu| : 2rll,, d,k: d,krd,ksdkr,
the integration being performed for each component of &
from - co t0 oo. In terms of the amplituclesequationsof
motion can be written
t:

- tklA(k)l:- I s(rl
P(k): I trcaOrl
:
I
- k.a(k))
Po(k):itlnl o (tu)
I
)

trst

the other two equations being algebraic consequences of

these.
The commutation rules for the potentials are
o+(k)@(k,)-o(k,) o+(k): :L8(k- \
2tht

kJ

- A*(t') Af (k): -,tlh

Af(k)A,o(k')

- k)
6tua(k

(1e)

all other combinationsof amplituiles commuting.

Part II. The Maxwellian

Case.

$ 4. For the Maxwellian casethe following aclclitionaiconsiderations are necessary. In obtaining the field variables,
besidesthe regular equationsof motion of the olectromagnetic
fieid onemust usethe atlditional conclitionp0-0, 0r -cps:
:rliv A-l@1c:O. This condition cannot be regardedas a
quantum mechanical equation,but rather as a condition on
permissible tf functions. This can be seen,for example,from
the fact that,.when regarded as a quantum mechanichlequatiol, div A{Afu:0
contradictsthe commutationru}es. Tnus,
oniy those {'s should be regardetl as physically permissible
which satisfy the conclition

- cpo*:(u'"A++b),l - o.

(20)

34
473

Od QuantumElectroclynamics.

by the
Condition(20), expressedin terms of amplitucles
use of Eq. (18),takesthe form
i L k.A (h )- I kl o (/r ) 1,1,:0 I
(zo')
antl
-i,[k. A+(D- t rl o+(/r)]q,t:0.rl
the wave equation
To thesemust, of course,be aclcled
(21)
(Hb-ihdldr) q:0,
where fIa is the Hamiltonian for the fieltl
(22)
Ha : 2 | | A+(k).A(k)- o+(k){'(tu)} I klz dk,
as in l. c.
If a number of equations,4,|:0, Bq:0, etc., are simul'
taneousiysatisfied,then ,4BQ..=0, 8A,1.,.0, etc.; and thereetc. AII such new equationsmust be
f,ore(AB-Bilq:0,
of the old, i. e. must not give any new condiconsequences
tions on tp. This may be regardod as a test rrf consisteney
of the original equations. Applying this to our Eqs. (20')
and (zt) we have
Po@)Pf (k') - Pf,(k',)Pu(h)
=..tz yn.A(k)lt'.A+(k')- k' .A+(k')k. A(k)l

{ c'zlttlv{lp(k) o+(k')- o+(k')o(k)

(23)

since ,4's commutewith @'s. -\pplying now the commutation

rulcs of Eq. (ts), we obtain
Po(k) Pf (tt') -

Pf, (k') Po(k)

-:#()tc,A',,i"*z lfrl \fi,

i(k-k')
lkt:1

o.

(24)

ilq. (z ) is satisfieclin consequenceof quantum- mechanical

equations,hence
q: o
lP,,(k)Pf,(k')- Pt(k') P,,(tu)l
is not a condition on tl,. Thus,conditions(20')are consistent.
Since Po(k) antl Pf'(k) commute wllh d1dt,to test the consistenceof condition(20)with (21) one must test the conclition
(25)
(HoP,,-&Fb) q:0
However,since fl, : (itlt) (HoPo- PoHr,),Eq. (zr) takes the
f o r m P , l,: 0 , 0 r i n F o u r i e r ' s c o m p o n e n t s
Pu(k)'!-: - it:lkl P',(k)
I- o

35
174

P. A. M. Dirac, V. A. Fock and Boris poiiolsky,

and

Pt(k)I : ic lkl pf (k)Q: 0.

just
But these are
the conditions (zo,). Thus,conditions(zo)
and (zt) are consistent.
$ 5. The extra condition of Eq. (zo) is not an equation
of motion, but is a ,,c0nstraint',imposed on the initial coor_
dinates and velocities, which the equationsof motion then
preserye for all time. The existence of this constraint for
the Maxwellian case is the reason for the additional considerations, mentioned at the beginning of $ +. It turns out
that we must modify this constraintwhen particlesare present, in order to get somethingwhich the equationsof motion will preserve for all time.
The conditions(20') as they stantl, when applied to tp,are
not consistentwith Eqs. (11). It is, howevei, not ttifficuit
to see that they can be replaced by a somewhat different
set of conditions1

C (k),y:s a n d C +(k)+:0,

where

(26')

C(k): i Lk.A(k)- l/rlo(k)l

*

r , , k.,i ,/ ,,"
! \!

t.l

i."r'"

tktt"-ik'rs.

(27')

Terms in C(k) not contained in_ cp*(k) are functions of

.
the coordinates and the time for the particies. They commute with Hu-i,hdtdt, with &(k) and with each orher.
ThereforeEqs. (26') are consistentwith each other and with
Eq. (zt). It remains to show that Eqs. (zo') are consistent
with Eqs. (11). In fact C(k) and 6+1r; commute with R"_
-ih()idt". We shatl show this for
C(k).
Destgnatlng,
in the usual way, AR-nS as lA, B], we see
that it is sufficient to show that

and
1 We shall
of {r*.

l'(n)'n"-,,U'-tu)]:o

(28)

dldt"- e,(D(r"f")l : s.
lC(k), i.l't,

(2e)

drop the asterisk and in the following

use p iustead

36
n Quantum Electrodynarrrir:s.

+75

By consideringthe form of C(/r),these becomerespec,tiYely

Ik'A(k), A(r"t,)f- t6;W
and

sle ct'',",p"f:o.
eiekit

(30)

s-lk'r" |eielktts,i,tt0Idt,f := o. (Bt)

flk[o(k), <It(r'r,)]* TeryW
Now
/ r \1',^
' '',
t"tts'-tk'
clk',
Ik. A(k), A(r' t"\1.- ( ; ) J to.,1(k),.1+(k'))sic:
by Eq. (17) and because ,4(/u) commutes with l(k'). Using
the commutation formulas and performing the integration it
becomes
,.-t,;c
2lzn)'llkl "

::Il

ti ts

ik'ra.

(32)

On the other hand

fe-t't'

' ?'.s, :
1ts]

hi, grad,s-nk'r" -

hke-ik' rB

(33)

'fhus, Eq. (ao) is satisfied. Similarly Eq. (31) is satisfietl

because
-nh

k t,-ik't'"
r ". ) ] =
Ilklo(k), <D11
,(=,.)r-:,sic

(34)

an0
(35)
feicth\ts,i'h'didt"f=-clxlkleacftlts,
Thus, conditions(26') satisfy ail the requilementsof consistence. It can be shown that these requirementstletermine C(k) uniquely up to an additive constant if it is taken
to have the form ,i[k.A(k)- ltulo(A)]{ f(r,ts).
$ 6. We shall now show that the introduction of separate
time for the field and for each particle allows the use of the
entire vacuum eiectrodynamicsof $ 3 and 1.c., except for
ihe change discussed,in $ 5. In fact, we shall show that
M a x w e l i ' s e q u a t i o n s o f e l e c t r o d y n a m i ci ns , w h i c h e n ter current or chargedensities,becotneconditions on,f
functio'n.
For convenience we collect together our fundamental
equations.

37
P. A. M. Dirac, V. A. Fock anrl Boris potlolsky,

476

The equationsof vacuum electroclynamicsare

G--gradO:
ae_r..
o;
;r-@:
The wave equationsare

I dirnl;
6:curl14
r :.
LA- L"]A: o.

(R"-'i'n,ldl") I : 0,

where
Rs:

Cqs.P, {m"cza.s(4)- e"au-A(r"t")f

(l 3)
(36)

l tr rl

e"(D(r"l*). I

The additional contlitions on 0 function are

C(k)q,:s and C+(k)g:o,
where

c(k): i Ik.a(k)- |kl o(e)l

-r, ' i 3
I ktts- ik'''e'
Z@fi;W

(26')

(2i')

A'"tn"
We transform the last two equationsby passingfrom the
amplitutles C(k) and C+(k) t0 C(r,t) by meansof Eq. (1?).
Thus we obtain
C(r, t) 9:0
(26)
and
C (r, t): div,4

I i #-i ho("*",), (zz)

where X antl X" are four dimenrionuf vectors y:(nyat),

Xr : (r"97'a"/')antl A is the so- called invariant delta function I

^(x): rl la{r";
* ct)-E(ri-- cf)1"

(37)

F'rom Eqs. (13) follows immediately

div$:o andcurlG
+

f, fi,$:o

(38)

s0 that these remain as quantum- mechanical equations.

Using Eqs. (13) and (s0) and condition (26) we obtain by
direct calculation

(*'rOl See Jordan

I q,Y) g"u,a
j jga(x-x")e
o:
,,

and Pauli,

s:l

ZS. f. Physik 42, lbg, 1928.

(Be)

38
On Quantum Electroclynamics.

477

and

---+(-j,: or"- xr)+.

(divo),f
fr

(40)

Now, let us consider what becomes of these equations

when we put I - tt ---t2: . . .'=: tn: ?, which is impliecl in
Maxwell's equationsand which we shall write for short
&S ts:f.

F o r a n y q u a n t i t yf : f ( t k t z . . . t n )

us#:[(rJ.(#) + +(#)]^:,(41)
and for each of lhe n derivatives d1dt,we have an equation
of motion
dfi
(R"f - fR,).
(42)
;;": h
If we put /:A(r,t) or f:Q(r,t), then, sinceboth com*
mute with Rs,dfldts:0 and we get
da da
Dt: ar

and

do : do
dt
dr'

(43)

lt foliows that

G-- +yr-grad@; 6:curt,4,

(44)

so that the form of the connectionbetweenthe fielctand the

potentials is preserved.Rememberingthat for t:t" we have
A (X- &) : 0 and hence grad A (X- X") : O, and using
Eqs. (26),(so) and (40) we obtain

q 1),
/ni,,a- a-*,)
c or"l

\
t oG\
t
,*
l c u r l . -p - =(_ lo r f t * : r 9 : L )
\

(45)
(46)

and

- Y-= if 3.A(x-.\;)" ' l|o r * 9.

idivg)o:
'
dt
.ltIr
lc

$7)

39
P. A. M. Dirac, V. A. Fock ancl Boris Podolsky,

478

For further reduction of Eq. (+0) we must use Eqs. ( t )

and (42),from which follows
tl

->hln.' Gl
\;-"t J,,:, , m
ao\

/r

I dc

(48)

and [-8",G] is easily calculated,b0eausethe only term in R"

which doesnot commutewith @ is - e"a".z4
(rrt,r), ancl -@1c
is the momentum conjugate to u1. In this way we obtain
[n", @]

'i611,e,'d.*
6(r -

r").

(4e)

For the reduction of Eq. (+Z) we need only rernember.l

that

- att
3('r)'
l+ :t^tt' l,:o:

(50)

'fhus, Eqs. (a6) and (47) become

n

1 df,s\
{curlg
- - +c -:;),1,> i.4i,(r-r")g
otl'
\\ / 8 : 1

(51)

(aivO)e:-i e"E(r- r"),f,

(52)

and

which are just the remaining M a x w e 1l's equationsappear.ing as conditions on ,f. Eq. (rz) is the additional conclition
of H eisenb erg-P auli's theory.
g 7. We shall now derive Eq. (8) 0f S 1. For this we
need to recall that the transformation (T) is a canonical
transformation which preservestho form of the algebraicrelations between the variables, as well as the equationsof
motion. These rvill be, in the exact notationnow developed,
dq;
dT:

i ,,.*
hLn'

Qi)t,:ri

'-u';:

t lu.,pih":r.

(rr)

As we have seen in the discussion following Eq. (f)

H*: H"+ Hu* T*

1 Heisenberg

und Pauli,

Z S . f . P h y s i k5 6 , 3 4 , 1 9 2 9 .

(5+)

40
On QuantumElectroclynamics.

479

anal since 4a antl p6 commute with Ho, q.; untl pi commute

with IIj and hence with If". Therefore Eqs. (ss) become
.
0q;
._,
)

dT: f, lln,' q;!!tv.' qill":r I

dp;

dr

(55)

f, ftnu,e;l+ lv., pifl,":, |

On the other hand, we have from Eqs. (41) and (42)

u#:\#*fi)w,,qlil,.:,

ancl

u#:1#*#iro,,nil\,*,

(56)

Now the only term in B" which tloesnot commutewith

r| and qi rs Vi so that
(bz)
lR",qi|:1Vi, e.J and lR",pi|:lvi, pil.
Since2V::

I/*, Eqs.(ro) become

u#:{#*tv.,qil},":"
u#-{#*"tv.'
ai)|,,"-,
I
t

(58)

Comparisonof Eqs. (b5) with (bB) fiually gi ves

(H),:,: f,tnu,Q*u.t,:,I
(
(#),:,: #tuu'Pitt-r

which is, in the more exaet notation, just Eqs. (8).

Cambridge,Leningrad anrl Kharkor'.

(5e)

P o p e r4

Uber das paulische

Von P. Jorilan

41

Aquivalenzverbot.

und E. Wigner

in Giittingen.

(Eingegangen am 26. Januar 1929.)

Die Arbeit enthiilt eine Fortsetzung der kiirzlich von einem iler yerfasser
vor_
gelegten Note ,,Zur Quantenmechanik der Gasentartungu, deren
Ergebnisse hier
wesentlich erweitert werden. Es handert sich darum, ein ideales oder
nichtideares,
dem Paulischen aquivarenzverbot unterworfenes Gas zu beschreiben
mit _Begriffen,
die keinen Bezug nehmen auf den abstrakten l(oorclinatenraum der
Atomges"-tt
des Gases, sondern nur den gewdhnlichen dreidimensionalen Raum
"it
benutlzen, Das
wird ermiiglicht durch die Darstellung des Gases vermitteist eines
gequanterten
dreidimensionalen wellenferdes, wobei rlie besonderen nichtkomnutaiiven
uuttiplikationseigenschaften der weilenamplitude gleichzeitig fiir die
Eristenz korpuskularer Gasatome und fiir die Giiltigkeit des paulischen Aquivalenzverbots
verantwortlich sind. Die Einzerheiten der Theorie besitzen enge
Analogien zu crer
e n t s p r e c h e n d e nT h e o r i e f i i r E i n s t e i n s c h e
ideale oder nicrriideale Gase, wie sre
v o n D i r a c , K l e i n u n d J o r d a n a u s g e f i i h r tw u r r l e .

$ 1. schon bei clenerstenuntersuchungenzur systematischen

Ausbildung der Matrizentheorieder euantenmechanikergabensich Hinweise
darauf, da8 die bekannten schwierigkeiten der Strahlungstheorieiiberwundenwerden kiinnten, indem man nicht nur auf die materieilenAtome,
sondernauch auf classtrahrungsreld die quantenmechanischen
Methoden
anwendet*. In diesemsinne sind clurch mehrereArbeiten** der letzten
Zeit Fortschritte erzielt worden einerseits beziiglich einer quanten_
mechanischenBeschreibung des elektromagnetischenFerdes, uode.erseits beziiglich ei.nerFormulierung der euantenmechanikmaterieller 'leil_
chen, welche die wellendarstellung im abstrakten Koordinatenraum
vermeidetzugunsteneiner Darstellung durch quantenmechanische
wellen
im gewdhnlichendreidimensionalen
Raume,und welche die Existenz
materieller Teilchen in ?ihnlicherweise zu erklaren sucht, wie durch
die
Quantelungder elektromagnetischen
wellen die Existenz von Liehtquanten
bzrv. jeder durch die Annahme von Lichtquanten zu deutendephysikalische Effekt erklart wird.
Man verfii,hrt bei dieser Beschreibung so, daIJ man diejenige, als
q-zabL atlzufassendeGr6fe ir, welche in korpuskulartheoretischer
um* M. Boin, W. Heisenberg
und p. Jordan, ZS. f. phys. gb, b5Z, 1926.
** P. A. M, Dirac, Proc. Rov.
S o c .L o n d o n ( A ) 1 1 4 , Z 4 g , 7 l g 1 l g 2 7 ; p . J o r d a n ,
4 ! : 4 7 3 , 1 9 2 7 ( i r n f o t g e n d e na l s A b e z e i c h n e t ) ;p . J o r d a n u n d O . K l e r n ,
i!. ll!y".
ZS. f. Phys. 46, 7bI, 1922; p. Jorttan, ZS. f. phys. 4b,, 766,192?
(im folgenden
als B bezeichnet); P. Jordan undw. pauli jr., ZS. f. phys. (im
Erscheinei).
Zeitachtifl fiir Physik. Bd, 42.
t

42

63i

P. Jordan und E. Wigner'

eines Kastens) im r-ten

deutung die Anzahl von Atomen (etwa innerhalb

Quantenzustande miBt, in zwei Fakto-1en

N, -

(l)

bTb,

der lrorm
2nt ^

g-

b, :

@r

Yrlz,

(2>

zfrd ^

ul,: lrlt'c-T't
zerlegt,wobei man forderf, da6 $, @' kanonisch konjugiert seien'
Legt man nun als Definition kanonisch konjugierter Gro0en diejenige
zugrunde,die von einemder Verfasserkiirzlich vorgeschlagenwurtle*, so
erhii,lt man die Miiglichkeit, in clieserForm nicht nur die Einsteinsche
Statistik darzustellen,bei der die Eigenwerte Ni von -lI, durch
-lli:0,

(3)

1,2,3,...

gegebensind, sondernauch die Paulisohe, bei der nur

(4>

lr;-0,

'weitere
in Frage konmt. Man erhalt dann ferner sofort neben (2)
und zwar im Einsteinschen Falle
Gleichungen,

b,:

( 1 * l I , ) ' /' - ' # u ' ,

)l

bf,:#u'g4Ns',,t

(5)

aber statt ilessenim Paulischen Falle:

0"

(1 -

1\r) tzs

ztui ^
---sr
'"

2fl1 ^
-+

b;-e

"

-t

..

(o/

r7\1,

(l-l\r;-tz,

wie fur A gezeigt wurde.

I)iese l.ormeln stiitzen bereits sehr die Uberzeugung,dafi diese Darstellungsweisedes Paulischen AquivalenzverbotesclemWesen cler Sache
entspricht unrl in ihrer weiteren verfolgung zu richtigen Ergebnissen
liihren wird. Die Formeln (5'), (5") stehenn?imlich in enger Beziehung
einerseits zu den Problemen der stofiartigen wechselwirkungen von
Korpuskeln, und andererseits zu den Dichteschwankungen quantenmechanischerGase.
x P. Jorclan,

ZS. f. Pbys. 44, l, L927.

43
ilber tlas Paulische Aquivalenzverbot.

633

$ 2. was zunri,chstdie wechselwirkungen betrifrt. so mag es erraubt

sein, aus einer friiheren Note folgencreszu _wieclerhblen*:rn einem
ab_
geschlossenen
Kasten mOgen (endlich oder unendlich viele) Arten ver_
schieilenerTeilchen (materielle oder Lichtquanten) vorhanden
sein. Die
Dichte cler l-ten Teilchenart pro Zelle im phasenraumsei zao)
(E), wo E
die zu den betrachtetenZellen gehiirige Energie bedeutet. Die
Gesamtzahlen lJ<zl[Integrale der na, (-E) iiber den phasenraum] seien
beliebig
vielen (7 : 7, f, ...) linearenNebenbedinEunEen
)

ci lrro :

ci :

.orr*t

(6)

unterworlen (Beispieled,azaa.a. o.), wo die ci ganzepositive

oder negative Zahlen (oder Null) sind. Dann wird im statistischenGleichEewicht
4{t) (E) :

lr]L i
"

-.-

aj\1) +

,s

-'

(7)

iT

er
+1
wobei das positive oder negative vorzeichen in * 1 zu whhren
ist, je
nachtlem, ob die t-te Teilchenart dom pauriprinzip oder
der Einsteinstatistik gehorcht.
Als wechselwirkungsprozessesind nun natiirlich nur solche
zuzulassen, bei denen die Forderungen(6) nicht verletzt werden.
Eine bestimmte Form eines sorchen Elementaraktes ist zu beschreiben
durch
Angabe der rndizes I uncl der Geschwindigkeitender vor
dem Erementarakt vorhandenenund der nach dem proze' vorhandenen
mitwirkenrlen
Teilchen. Es seien nL nt, ..., ni die zugehiirigenDichten
ne)(E) ftr
diejenigenvor dem Proze} vorhandenenTeilchen, welche
der Einstein_
statistik folgen; und zrr, Ixi, ..., n, die n(D(E) fiir die
vor dem prozefi
vorhandenenmitwirkendenTeilchenpaurischer Art. Entsp'echend
sollen
*t:1.1ri, mt,_..., nt[; rnr, M2,..., mo auf.die nach dem proze_B
iibrig_
gebliebenenbzw. neu erzeugtenTeilchen beziehen. Dann
muB aus stati_
stisch-thermodynamischen
Griinden die wahrscheinrichkeitdes Elementarakts proportional mit

n [ n [ . . . n i n , n 2. . . n ; ( I * m De _ f * i l . . .
. . (1+ m[)(1_ nx,)(r _ m;)... (r _ m;)
angenommen werden;
portional mit

die des inversen Elementarakts entsprechend

m i . . . m i m l . . . r n ;( t *

"f)

.. . (1+ nD e _ n) .. . (r _ ni).

(B)
pro-

(e)

f P . J o r d a n , Z S . f . p h y s . 4 l , 7 I L , 1927. Anmerkung
nach Abschluf der
Arbeit: Dieselbentr'ormelnsind kiirzlich v o n B o t h e , Z S . p h y s .
f.
46,827, Lgzg.
erneut eriirtert worden.

44
P. Jordan untl E' Wigner'
-l

634

usw. bei den Einsteinschen Teilchen

Beziiglich der Faktoren (L-*l
ist nun Von Dirac bei der Untersuchung der Absorption uncl Emission
von Lioht tlurch Atome gezeig!,rvorclen,daB ihre Gestalt unmittelbar folgt
Faktoren in den Formeln (5')' Entaus der Gestalt der entsprechenden
(L - rnt) usw' in (8)' (9) auf (5")
der
Glieder
Form
die
sprechendwird
zuriickzufiihren sein.
anbetrifit, so ist in
was andererseits die Schwankungserscheinungen
A daraul hingewiesen, daB d.asschwankungsquadrat der Teilchendichte
in einemvolumen, welchesmit einemgrollenYolumen beziiglich der zu einem
den
engen Frequenzintervall z u gehi,rigenwellen kommuniziert, nach
bekanntenEinsteinschen I'ormeln einen Wert proportional zu

n,(l I n)

(10')

besitzt. (Fiir klassische Wellen w?ire es proportional m|)' Die von

Pauli berechneteanaloge Grofie bei einem I'ermischen Gase ist aber
proportional

n, (l - n) ;

(10r';

und in (10'), (10") zeigt sich der Unterschiedvom Einsteinschen und

Paulischen Gase wieder in tlerselbenForm wie in (5'), (5")'
von dem Einsteinschen Gas bzw. dem Boseschenwellenfeld besitzt man auf Grund clerArbeiten, die auf S. 631 genanntwurden, bereits
eine weitgehende Kenntnis. Wir bescheftigen uns im folgenden damit,
in iihnlicher weise die in A begriindeteTheorie desPauligaseszu vertiefen.
halber einige in A ge$ 3. Wir wiederholenhier der Deutlichkeit
tlarstellbar tlurch die
sintl
N,,
bnbL
@,
brachte Formeln. Die Grii6en
Matrizen

: (?
3),'I
*: (:?).: ?(?;).
I
u -.- / 0 1 \ ; { ,
"'
\0 0/,

( 11 )

i@,

Hierbei ist jeweils

(an
\a9r

an\

(r2)

a22/r

eine Matrix, deren Zeilen und spalten bezeichnet werden durch eine Reihe
von Indizes, tleren jetler clenWert 0 oder t haben kann; und zwar ist
(12) eineDiagonalmatrix in bezugaul den erstenbis (r.- l)-ten Index
uncl in bezug aui den (r f l)-ten und die folgenden Inclizes'

45
iJber das pauljscheiquivalenzverbot.

63b

Neben den schon in $ 1 besprochenen Greichungen gelten clie Formeln

:

bf,b,: N,; b,bl.- r-Ir,;

JV] -

N,;

(13)

2fii

eh

Man kann alle diese Griifien ausdrticken crurch drei GrdBen klr), k;rr,
6rD, die den Multiplikationsregeln der euaternionen folsen:

:
:{'::;,
(klrr)2:

:
:;::? 1P: II

(nrrjr:flr;r;,-

(14)

-t, J

wobei durch die Punkte die beiden aus d.er angeschriebenenGleichung

durch zyklische Permutation der r,2, B hervorgehenclenGreichunEen
angedeutetsein sollen.
Nemlich:
ik;r) -k{,,
i k;r) k{r>
bn-

hr-

n"--ryi

+
2'

@,-- ! oo;"

(16)

Die Quaternionen &{d, k{\, kg werden dabei selbst dargestellt ilurch

die Matrizen

- (-'?\; k{,: (?;) , ky)-(

kld
'
\ 0,r.,
\av/r

9 1) .

(16)

$ 4. Ebensowie in B fiir die Bosesche statistik ausgefiihrtwurde

kann man auch bei der Fermischen statistik crieHeisenberg-Diracschen Determinantenformeln liir die Herleitung iler antisymmetrischen
schrOdingerschen Eigenfunktionendes Gesamtsystems
aus deuen einos
Einzelatoms iibertragen auf beliebigewahrscheinlichkeitsamplituden. Eine
solche Amplitude sei fiir ein Einzelatom gegebendurch

atfi : @op(F',
e).

(r7)

um die vorzeichen der aus ihr zu bildencrenDeterminanten eindeutig

zu machen, legen wir fiir die Eigenwerte p, von p in beliebiger, aber
ein
fiir allemal bestimmter'weise eine Reihenfolge fest. wir bezeichnen
tUe so defirierte Anordnung fiir zwei spezielle Eigenwerte p,, p,, vor p
durch B' { p" bzw. 0" {
F,, ohne jedoch mit dem Zeichen( notwendig
die Bedeutung ,kleiner alsu zu verbinden. Genau so verfahren wir mit
den Eigenwerten q'von 4 und allgemein mit den Eigenwerten
Q, jeder

46
P. Jordan und E.

636

l
.Wigher,

me8barenGrd8e @beim Einzelatom. Danach kann man jeder Amplitude

(17) fiir das Einzelatom in eindeutigerWeise eine antisymmetrischeAmplitude Vf"fl hrr ein Systemvon lf energetischungekoppeltenTeilchen zuordnen, Wir schreiberr
Yff, :

V o o ( F o , F ( D ,. . . , p ( N ) . q @1 q ( 2i ,. . . , q ( N ) ) ,

(18)

worln

(te)
sein soll; und dann :

,rr*fi:#. )

(n)

r" fI

@op(F@,q@k\),

(20)

k:|

wo die Summeiiber aIIe lf! Permutationenmr,tur,...,ny d.er Zahlen l,

2, ..., N zu erstreckenist, wiihrenil e, gleich f I. ist fiir geradePermutationen und - 1 fiir ungerade.
Nach (20) verschwincletTf$, sobald zwei der Grb8en pG) einander
gleieh werden. Das hei8t physikalisch:Es kommt nicht vor, daB
irgencl eine nichtentartete GriiBe p bei zwei verschiedenen
Teilchen des Systernsgleichzeitig denselben Wert annimmt.
Wehlen wir fiir p insbesonclere
das Systemder Quantenzahlen, so gibt
clieser Satz das Paulische Aquivalenzverbot in seiner urspriinglichen
F a s s u n g . W i r . w o l l e n i m f o i g e n d e nd a s g l e i c h z e i t i g e B e s t e h e n
diesesSatzes liir alle GriiBen p als den eigentlichenInhalt tles PaulischenAquivalenzverbotsbetrachten.
\Vir beschaftigen uns iibrigens im folgenden vorwiegend mit dem
FaIIe, daf jede Grd8e p am Einzelatorn nur endlich viele, sagen wir tr,
Eigenwerte hat. Nur gelegentlich werden wir nli,her hinweisen aul den
Grenziibergang -K -+ oo, der im allgemeinen keinerlei Schwierigkeit
macht. Wir wollen die ,K Eigenwerte jeiler Griifie p numerieren mit
pt, B:t, . . ., 0'r, und zwar so, daB die oben vorausgesetzte
Anordnung tler
Eigenwerte gerade die Form

P ''< P |1 '" 1 0' r

(21)

N'(P'); N'(s.')

(22)

gewlnnt.
$ 5. Die in solcher Weise definierten antisymmetrischenAmplituden
sind nun in-eindeutiger Weise rlarstellbar als Tunktion von Argumenten
mit folgender Bedeutung:N' (p') ist die Anzahl von Atomen' bei ilenen
p den Wert p' hat; ist also B' ein diskreter Eigenwert, so ist nach dem
allgemeinen P a u lischen Aquivalenzverbot

n['(p') -

0 oder1.

(23)

47
ilber das Paulische Aquivalenzverbot.

Liegt dagegenp'in
wir zu schreiben:

637

einem kontinuierlichen Eigenwertgebiet, so haben

(24)
wenn insgesamt-l[' Teilchen vorhanden sind; das rntegral von -ly''(p')
iiber ein Teilsttick des Eigenwertgebietesist dann die Anzahl der Atome,
bei denen die Werte von p in dieses Teilstiick fallen.
wir begniigenuns aber nicht mit der rein mathematischenEinfiihrung
der neuen Grd8en N'(p'), N' (q'), sondern gehen zu einer neuen physi_
kalischen Theorie iiber, indem wir arrehmen, das Gesamtgassei ein
System,das durch ein kanonischesSystem von
4_ZahlgriiBen

u(0'); @(p')

(25)

beschriebenwerden kann, wobei die -lr'(p') gerade die Eigenwerte von

-l[(p') darstel]en. Dann sr'nddie ]I(B,), @(p,) in der in g 3 erleuterten
weise durch Matrizen darzustellenl den verschiedenenEigenwerten p'
entsprechendie verschiedenenwerte der in
$ 3 gebrauchtenrndizes r, s.
Insbesonderegilt fiir diskretes f' die Gleichune

f f ( p ) . [ 1- r ( p ' ) ] : 0 ,

(26)

fiir nicht diskretesp' kann man statt dessenschreiben:

N(p ' ) . t d ( p ' -p ") -N- \(6

r / r"-)t
[ :

r iir
l N (B o)N (B ')f i i r P' + 8",
0':F"

Q7)

wahrend nun die r1-zarienff(p') durch ihre physikalischeBedeurung

viillig definiert sind, ist dasselbenatiirlich nicht der trall fiir die
@(F),
wenn wir von ihnen nur verlangen, daB sie kanonischkonjugiert zu den
l/(p') seien. Man mu8 diese Nichteindeutigkeit natiirrich beseitigen
bzw. beschriinken,wenn man eindeutigeRelationen zwischenden Griifien
N (p'), @(p') und N (S), A (4') erhalten will. Wir v,erdennun im weireren
verlaul unsererBetrachtungensehen:Man kann, nachdemfrir jedeGrii0ep,
q usw' in der oben besprochenen
weise eine Reihenfolgeder Eigenwerte
p' ,,nd q' usw. festgelegfisf, ein gewissesSystemvon konjugieri;enphasen
@(p'), @(4') usw. zu den N(F), N(q,) usw. bestimmen derart, daB eir_
Iache und eindeutigeRelationen zwischenden verschiedenenkanonischen
SystemenN(P'), @$'); N(q'), @(4') usw. entstehen. Man hat dabei
aber noch verschiedene
Mdglichkeitenfiir die Definition d,et @(F\ zu den
-M(p')' und dieseverschiedenen
Mdglichkeitenkdnneneindeutigzugeordnet
werden clenverschiedenenkonjugiertenrmpulseL a zv p. wir bezeichnen

48
P. Jordan uncl E. Wigner,

638

deshalb die q-Zahlgrdfen,

wollen, endgiiltig

deren Theorie wir

im folgenden entwickeln

mit

n (p ); @" (p ' )

(28)

N (q');

(2e)

bzw.
@o(q') usf.

Die gebildeten Verheltnisse besitzen oflenbar die denkbar grd8te

Analogie zu den in B erdrterten Verhaltnissen im Boseschen Falle, soweit man iiberhaupt angesicbtsder tiefgehendenVerschiedenheitbeider
Falle eine Analogie erwarten kann.
$ 6. Die zwei -K Griifen

rr(p), @"(p')
miissen als 4-Zahlen gewisse Funktionen der q-Zablen
Itr(q'), @o@')
soll jetzt besprochenwerclen. Irn
sein; dieser {unktionale Zusammenhang
Bose-Einsteinschen Falle EaIt einfach

b* (0\ :

2 @"o(0', q')bp(q'),
q'

f"(g) :

(30)

)q ' r,i(s)(Dro(e',
F);

gelten nicht

fiir das Paulische Gas. Statt clessen

ao(F) :

*"r 1p',q'1ao(il,

aber diese Formeln

gelten Formeln

: Z [tn> (Doo(q',
a,L@)
0'),I
rvenn wir die Grijfen

(30a)

a, ai durch
ae (e') :

a (q') .bp (q'),

ol(q'): ul(b.o(q');I
a(q'): fltt - 2N(q")\

(31)
(32)

q" 4q'

ist also o (q') das ProduH der Gr0fien | - 2 N (q")

Es ist also o(4) eine
q' und alle vor q'kommenden q".
ttr q".:
deren Diagonalelemente siimtlich gleich { 1 oder - 1
Diagonalmatrix,

clefinieren.

Hier

sind; uncl es wird

: r.
V;.(q')12

(33)

Der vollstandige mathematische Beweis liir die Richtigkeit dieser

X'ormeln(30 a) wird sich in den $$ 8 und 9 ergeben. Hier wollen wir
lediglich die Multiplikationseigenschaftender Grdfen a, ot untersuchen

49
tber das paulischeAquivalenzverbot.

689

unal die rnvarianz dieser Multiplikationseigenschaften gegen Transformationen(30a) nachweisen.

Zuniichst wird
b o @ ' ) . a( q " ) :

b I @ ) . u( q " ):

a (q").b (q')

frir

q'

o (q") .b (q')

liir

q'

a (q") .bf (q')

o (q") .bt (q')

fiir

q'

liir

S'

Sc"'I

=;';l

Beweis ergibt sich leicht daraus, d,a$z. B.

bl(q'l. \r - zlr(q')) :
:
wird.

N(q,)rT

uo'n''
lt -

''o

2rr(s,))

-{I-2N(q)}b[(q')

(35)

Dann wird weiter

ae(q,) oe(q,,) _

ap(4,,)riekL),

(36)

: - 4@\ oI@).
4,@)o!n(q")
Man beweist z. B.
ap(q')ap(q") :
:

a (q')bo(q')o1q,,7bo(e,')
a (q')o (q,,)bp(s)bp(s\ fiir s.
lI a (q,)o(q,,)bn(g,)be(e,,)fiir q'

nun ist aber insbesonderefiir q' :

be(s) bn(q") :
also auch

A-t

q";

(37)

q,':
[bo(q')], :

o,

(38)

[ao(q')]z :

o,

(3e)

womit fiir q' : q" die Formel (86) schon bewiesenist. Man sieht
danach
aus (37), da$ das Produkt (86) in der Tat antisymmetrischin q,, q,,
ist.
Ferner gilt

4@) on@)t oo@\rle;) :

6 (q'_ q',).

(40)

Denn es rvird der links stehendeAusdruck gleich

+ p (q,,)bp(q,,)fo(q,)o
4 @)o (q,)o(s,,')bp(q,,)
(q,)

o (q\ btr@)bp(q")- o (s,,) o (q,)bpfs,,l (il fiir q

a, a,,;I
d
[, fn'>
j o (q')o (q\ul@')bp(q,,)+ a (q,,)a (q')bp
(q,,)dfil r* ;, :;,, 1(4D
l- o (s')o (s) utr@') bp(q',) + a (q,,)o (q')bp(s\ ul,@,) fiir q,; q,,;I

also verschwindeter in der Tat fiir 4'f

q,'und wird fiir q, _

[ o ( q . , ) ] r . t f r @ , ) btiu@
, ) ) f o & , ) l:
o@

r.

q,, gleich

@2)

50
P. Jordanund \ Wigner'

640

Nunmehr zeigen wir, dafi die Gleichungen(36) und (40) wirklich invariant sincl gegen Transformationen (30 a)' Es ergibt sich

a"(0)a,(fl) + a"(p")a"(p')
q'q"

e,(0')+ o,(B\*L(P')
aL(p')
q'q"

Wehrend also die GroBenb, bt im Paulischen Falle ebensowie im

Einsteinschen Falle die Eigenschaft haben, da8 b(B) mit b(B") untl
bt(B') ftir p" + p'vertauschbarist, kommt dena,at dieseEigenschaft
nicht mehr zu. Trotzdem besitzen die a, at clesFermischen Gasesin
gewisser Hinsicht eine engere A,nalogie zu den b, bt cles Einsteingases,
als <Iie b, bi rles Pauligases selbst; man sieht das besonders tleutlich
tlurch die GeEeniiberstellung:

b, (p') b* (9") - bo (f") b (9') :

"

ao(f') ao(f") * a,(9") ao(F) :

bL@)b"(p")- b"(p")bL@')
:6(P'-tr

ol@)

b L @ ' ) b " ( f :' ) N ( F ' ) ;

oll|\o"(f'):

b*(F) :

q')boQ');
2 @"n1p',
s'

o;

a,(F")aL@')
",@\ I

ao(p') :

N(f');
o"n1p" q',)ao(r').

q'

Wir haben diese Gleichungen abgeleitet, indem wir das Paulische

aquivalenzverbotvon vornherein zugrunde legten. Es zeigt sich aber,
da0 umgekehrt tliese 1\Iultiplikationseigenschaften der a, at bereits die
mbglichen Eigenwerte der -l[(p') bestimmen und d,ie vertauschbarkeit
(gleichzeitigeBeobachtbarkeit) von -lI(B) und N(P") nach sich ziehen'
Infolgeilessen ktinnen wir sagen, dafi die Existenz korpuskularer Teilchen
und die Giiitigkeit clesPaulischen Prinzips als eine Folgerung aus clen
Multiplikationseigenschaitender d e B r o gli eschen
quantenmechanischen
Wellenamplituden aufgelafit werden diirfen, da in ilen beiden Gleichungen

n(p)n(p') - N(p")lr(p')- 0,
lf'(p)

0 ocler 1

(45)
(46)

clieseTatsachen vollstiin<Iig ausgeclriickt sind. Die Gleichung (45) Iolgt

sofort. Der Beweis, da8 aueh (46) aus ilen Multiplikationsregeln der
e(F), d (B') folgt, ergibt sich folgenderma8en:

5t
iiber das Paulische Aquiialenzverbot.

641

Auf Grund von

aL(B)a"(F)* a*(p'S
af,1p,1
: r

gilt wegen

[a"(B')]z :

die Gleichung

(47)

0,L(p')a,"(p) aL(B')a" (p')

:

ar"(F) . lL - oto(0,)a" (0)l . a* (p') :

also wird
N(p'). tl - rr(p')l :

a,L(p,)a" (F) ;

a+"@,)
e*(p,).fr _ oL@)a"(p,)l :

(48)

0. (4e)

Es sei nochbetont: Da a(p') aus den ir(p") arieinzu bilden ist (nachdem eine Reihenfolgeder Eigenwertefestgel.egtwurde), so kann man
vermittelst

b"(0'): , (F)a"(0),\

uL(p')
: oItb, til i

(50)

die b, bt eindeutig durch die a, ot ilefinieren.

Man kann arso in der Tat
die a, at als die urspriinglichen
Gr(iBen der Theorie und alle and.eren
Grdfien als Funktionen der a, at betrachten.
Endlich sei hervorgehoben, ilaB die Gesamtzahl -atrder vorhandenen
Teilchen gegeniiber den betrachteten Transformationen invariant
bleibt:

fl :

)tr(p ,):

)a r(s).

(51)

q,

F'

Diese rnvarianz ist offenbar nur ein anderer Ausdruck dafiir. das (30a).
eine unitare Transformationist.
zusaLz bei der Korrektur.
E s z e i g t s i c h d u r c h e i n eS l e n a u e r e
Betrachtung, die im Anhang mitgeteilt wird, dag itie Multiprikationsregeln der a, at niclnt'nur die Eigenwerte der x(B') schon bestimmen,
sontlern iiberhaupt die Matrizen a, ar bis auf eine kanonische 'r.ransformation iler Matrizendarstellung festlegen.
S 7. Fiir ein eindimensionales Kontinuum mit der Schwingungs_
gleichung

d, ,lt
d *':

dr tp
dt';

1P:

t1:@, t)

(52)

und der Rantlbedingung

rl'(0, t) :

{ (1,t) :

(53)

52
t
P. Jordan und E. Wigner'

642

die r?iumliche Teilchenilichte

war in A versuchsweise
durch
korpuskeln ilefiniert
N (n) : t1:rP,

der Wellen(54)

3 . srnr7#r
(oo)
frb,
wo lVn : frb, die Anzahl von Teilchen im r-ten Quantenzustand der
Translation bedeutet.
Wir haben jetzt (55) zu korrigieren, inclem wir die b' durch entrl :

a, ersetzen:
sprechencle
:n
4t:Za7s\trrfi'
r:l

(Do)
t

Die in A durchgefiihrte Berechnung der Dichteschwankurngenkann aber

sofort von (55) aul (56) iibertragen werden und zeigt dann, daB (56)'
wie es sein muB,wirklich die richtige Formel liefert. Es wurde n?imlich
aus (55) erhalten, dall der fragliche quatlratische tr{,ittelwert V p'opo"'
tional sei mit

oli, u;u|: N,.G - ar)

(57)

wo die Querstriche die Mittelung iiber ein infinitesimales Tiequenzgebiet

im Anschlufi an clie Frequenz z, bedeuten, so da6 sich die in $ 2 erw?ihnte Formel
(58)
V - c o n s t . m (. l - n )
ergibt. Rechnet man nun entsprechendmit (56), so wird V
tional mit
Nr. (1 - It),
alar. a,al, :

propcl-

(5e)

d. h. das Endergebnis bleibt ungeiintlert.

$ 8. Wir wollen nun tlen in $ 6 angekiindigten vollstli,ndigen
Beweis fiir die Aquivalenz der Bormeln (30 a) mit den Formeln der gewiihnliehen Darstellung im mehrdimensionalenKoordinatenraum antreten.
Wir miissen uns in diesem Koorclinatenraum auf solche Grdfen (Operatoren) beschrii,nken,die symmetrisch in tlen gleichen Teilchen sind;
auBerdemaber beschriinken wir uns in diesem Paragraphen auf Gr66en,
ilie aus einer'Summebestehen,wo in iedem Summandnur ein Elektron
vorkommt. Von dieser Art ist tlie Energio eines idealen Gases'
Diese Operatoren haben also tlie Gestalt

Y-Vr+%+...]_VN,

(60)

wo die Za immer dieselbe GriiBe darstellen, nur an verschiedenen (am 1-,

2., . . ., -l[-ten) Teilchen gemessen.

53
iiber das Paulische Aquivalenzverbot.

643

IJnsere Wellenfunktion dagegen wird

[$ b, Gleichung (22), (28)]
von den I{'(p;) abhangen. Dies ersc}reintin der Tat vom
Standpunkt
der Quantenmechanikals der naturgemrigeAnsatz, da ja
ein ,,maximaler
versuch" - wegen der Gleichheit der Teilchen - immer
nur bestirnmen
k a n n , w i e v i e l e T e i l c h e ni m Z u s t a n d
F r , 0 r , . . . , F r s i n c l ,w i i h r e n dd i e
Frage, in welchemZustand ein bestimmtes Erektron
ist, nicht entschieden werden kann. rm sinne des paurischen Aquivalenzverbotes
lrabenwir in (23) den Wertbereich der N,(p,n) aul 0,1 beschrankt.
Wir nehmennun noch, wie in
$ 4 bereits betont, der Einfachheit
halber an (was in wahrheit niemals erfiint ist), daf
ein Elekfron nur
endlich viele (sagenwir -K) Zustendeannehmenkann, die
wir also mit
F, Fr, "', F* bezeichneir. Dann hat die im folgenden einzuftihrende
Wellenlunktioa T(-lI,(B), N,(p), ..., N,(F,r)) gerade
-K Argumente
und ist liiir 2r Wertsysteme der Argumente definiert.
I)er Grenz_
iibergang K-'> a scheint keine wesenilichenschwierigkeiten
zu bieten.
Die nun folgenden Betrachtungen lassen sich am einfachsten
aus_
fiihren, wenn man den Zustand eines einzelnen Elektrcns
im mehr_
dimensionalen Koordinatenraum mit einer wellenfunkti,n
beschreibt,
deren Argument p' ist. Das bedeutet, daf beim Einzerelektron
die
Messungeben die Bestimmungder Grii-Be ist, deren wertbereich
B
arso
K Z a h l e np , p i , . . . , 0 ' * u m f a f t .
Haben wir nun im mehrdimensionalen
Koordinatenraum eine anti-Wellenfunktion
symmetrische
von if, Elektronen

,lt(F t, F'', .. ., F r'),

(61)
so bestimmen wir, da' wir diesen Zustanil fortan in
unserem neuen
-ll-Raumedurch die Wellenfunktion?[( f,(pf, N,(p;), ...,
N, fpj.)) t._
schreibenwollen. Dabei sei

ryW'$',),...,
r'(g,*)y:
hf

p,n):
(0,,,...,

(62)

Diese Gleichung ist so zu verstehen, daB p iiberali

0 ist, wo nicht
genau-lIvon den K(K>I{)
ZahlenN,(p,r),..., ff'(p6) gleich 1, die
iibrigen gleich 0 sind. um den -wert an diesen sterlen
zu bestimmen,
setzt man rechts fiir die p,r,
p,lrr
jene
Werte
ein,
fiir die eben
F,r,...,
N'(P;) - 1 ist, und zwar fiir p,r den (im Sinne der in
$ 4 getroffenen
Anordnung) ersten,fw p'z d.enfolgenden,..., fiir
0,r,den letzten.
Wir wollen an dieser ZuordnunEeiner Funktion

TJ(r'(pi), r{' (p;),. . ., r{, (F,r)\

54
P. Jordan und E. Wigner,

6+4

im neuen -ll-Raume zu einer Funktion

tlt(F',0'',..., F'N')
Koordinatenraumeim folgendenimmer (also auch,
im mehrdimensionalen
'wenn keine Wellenfunktion ist) festhalten. Es ist zu beachten,daB
U
es liir dasVorzeichenvonP wichtig ist, in ry'die Bi , B;, ..., p3-in der
einmal festgesetztenReihenlolge

( P ' <P ; 1 " ' { - 0 ' r )

einzusetzen,da nur dadurch das Y-orzeichenvon P eindeutig geregelt
wircl; und nur hierdurch jst die Zuorclnungeiner eindeutigentr'unktion4r
zu der Funktion r/' miiglich.
Umgekehrt wirtl aber auch rf tlurch gt eindeutig bestimmt*: an
gilt, durch (62), iiberall sonst
rlen Stellen, fiir welche B''<...<P'N'
durch die Forderung der Antisymmetrie.
Die einzelnenTeile (2. B Yr) des Operators Z [Gleichung (60)] im
Koordinatenraum sinal im wesentlichen hermiteische
mehrclimensionalen.
Matrizen von K ZeiLen uncl li Spalten. In der v-let Zeile uncl p-ten
Spalte stehe ,EI,,. Dann ist tler ganze Operator Z mit der Matrix
H r t n r . . . r y , ; p t l t z . . l, L 1 g-r
*

H t t p r - d n , rt d ' r , p u ' . ' d * , r " ,

durl,, Hnrur6r"rr" ''' drrv,r"N,+

identisch.

" 1- dnrtrr0rrp,,drrp. "'LfnN, ur\,

(63)

Wir schreiben zur AbkiirzunE

(64)
K

, , l r (p ',,...p :" *,)

! r r , 1 t 2 ,, " ,

pY :

Aus diesem,lt(P't,P'',..., 0'N')bildenwir - genauwie in (62)ein 4r (-lr'(A), ..., -lI'(pp) durch

W ( I { ' ( F r ) , . .f .r ,' $ ' * ) ) : r t , ( p '.' ., . , p ' ^' ) + '

lln't

(6Za)

Wir behaupten nun, dafi

p (ur'(pi),. . ,, I' (0'd): ,taP (lr' @\),. . ., N' (F'd), (66)

K

wo der Operator ,fl

f,J :

Ht|a!,a1

z, 1': 1

ist, mit den a aus (31).

* Wir sstzen voraus, da8 I

wieder iiberall verschwindet, rvo nicht

N, (p\)+ ... + N, (f,r): N,

(66 a)

55
tlber das Paulische Aquivalenzverbot.

Dz+i)

Gleichung (65) ist zuniichst sicher richtig an allen Stellen (fiir alle
Wertsysteme der Argumente), wo die Anzahl der 1 im Argumentsystem
ootr ,l nicht eben gleich -lI' ist. Dann verschwindet nii,mlich die jinke
Seite wegen (62), (62a),

und auch auf der rechten Seite stehen lauter

Nullen, da a!,.a1 die Anzahl der 1 nicht iindert.

An den Stellen aber, wo etwa die

N' (pi,),N' (pi,),. . ., x'(p;,",)

(also genauN) gleich 1 sind, ist /ln {r gleich
.. ., \'ry,\,
i (P'ur,
also gleich
K
2 H r r . . . d N , ; l t t . . . v y ,l b ( F r r , . . . , p ' 1 , 7 0 , )

P1 .'. plvf : r
KK

p2:7

PL:7

... +
> Hry,yp,rt,(pi,,p;r,..., p'p,*)
l.lv, :

r:l

tt:t

das zweite ersieht man aus (63). Unsere Absicht ist nun, die rechte
Seite von (67) durch die T auszudriicken. Zu diesemZweckebemerken
wir, da8 in (67) rechts die pi schon in der richtigen Reihenfolge stehen,
nur das jeweils auftretendeBi ist an der falschenStelle. Ist etwa+

FI,_,{ F',r3 Fto,,

so ktjnnen wir die Reihenlolge der p' zur richtigen machen,indem wir
pj, tiber clie zwischenliegentlen Fi oott der Stelle zwischen
01,_, ,od
Fi, +, an die Stel-lezwischen0i;_, u"a 0r1 verschieben. Dabei multipliziert sich die antisymmetrischeFunktion { mit (-1)",,rro
a clie
Anzahl der zwischen den beiden angegebenen
stelle' stehentlenp; ist.
Wir kiinnen (67) also auch schreiben
tfK

,lt(P;', . . ., Fi.t,)
* Das Gleichheitszeichen kommt nicht in Frage,
fu dann das entsprechende
r,a doch verschwindet.

56
P. Jordan und E. Wigner'

646
u-o natiirlich

noch das Vorzeichen *

von r und p abhiingt,

aber schon

P:r,<"'{F't,<"'<P''
gili.

Wenn wir (62) beachten,kiinnen rvir dies auch*

V (*r...rr) :

xi:l

It:o

* $ t V ( n r , . . . , f r i _t , 0 ,n i 4 r t . . . t f r t r. ,_l , q , . . . , u 6 )

+ 2 H . i i T(t n r ,. . . . n x )

(68)

,j: r

schreiben, u'ie man leicht iiberlegt. In den Summantlen nii,mlich, in (67a)'

wo d, f g, ist [erstes Glied in (68)], sind dieselben Argumente vorhanden
rvie an der linhen Seite, es fehlt nur pi,., was links vorhanclen war
(ri :
7), clagegen ist p|, hinzugekommen, und wir k0nnen annehmen,
0), da sonst rp doch verschwinclen wiirtle.
da8 es nicht da war (r7 p fzweites Glied in (68)], so si:rd rechts in rl.r dieseJ.benArgumente wie links.

fst i, :

Das Vorzeichen in (68) bestimmt sich offenbar daclurch, da.8 man

0 und 1
f oder - setzt, je nachdem zwischen der ausgeschriebenen
einb gerade oder ungerade Anzahl von 1 steht. (Uber ebenso,viete p,:
mu-Bte man das entsprechende Bi, hiniiberschieben.) Dies ist aber die
Anzahl der 1, die links von 17 stehen, vermindert um die Anzahl iler 1,
die links von f,; stehen.
Obrn'ohl jetzt die Richtigkeit

der vorangehenden

Formeln

l<Iar ist, wollen wir diese Gedanken doch zu Ende fiihren.

schon

Wir wissen,

dafi der Wertbereich der Argumente von T ingesamt 2r Stellen umta$t, inilem liir jedes der r1,:
.lI'(B;) entweder f 1 oder 0 gesetzt
kann.
Ein
darauf
wirkender
linearer Operator ist also eine
werden.
Matrix mit 2r Zeilen uncl ebensoviel Spalten. Wir bezeichnen jede Zeile
oder Spalte mit -K Indizes (den or, ..., nK entsprechend), die jeweils 1
oder 0 sein kiinnen.
Der Operator a1 ist entsprechend $ 3 und $ 6 zu definieren (wir
:chreiben der bessoren Ubersicht halber die Indizes als Argumente) durch
ay(rr, fist . . ., tKi

U , t ,U s , . . . , Ur )

:(-f)or*12+"'1'rt-r6r.n,0*rn,...drr-ry,t-rdrr.odr^rdr,*

!t).*1-..drrsr, (69)

und entsprechend ist dann at

-

a f ,( n u . . . , f r K i A r , . . . , , ! r )
(- 1)"* "' * a,-r6rrar... 6*r*rur-r0",

1d'go
r ,. . . 3 r r ' r .

* Wir setzenaus Bequemlichkeitsgriinden

rr fiir N' (p).

(69a)

ijber das paulische Aquivalenzverbot.

647

Mit Hilfe dieser Formeln kann (68) auch so geschrieben werden

;
W (nr, . . ., *x)
K

.2 u;^

t, /-:t

lt..,Ag:9,1
zl. '.2K:n'7

wie man sich mit einiger Miihe iiberregenkann, was aber schwer
hingeschriebenwerden kann. Damit ist (66) gewonnen.
S 9. Wir haben also in $ B folgendesgesehen:Jeder antisymme_
trischen Funktion, vrelche definiert ist in den Koordinatenr?i,umen
mit
allen AnzaLlen ,}tr'( K 'on Dimensionen,entspricht durch (62)
eine
tr'unktion im neuen Raume. Es entspricht dann dem operator
(60)
.]
V - V, ) Ys * ... t Vr fmit der Matrix jn (64\ FI_ .
Koordinatenraum der f)perator ,fJ von (68) ;=;;.';
iiil;",*'#
Operator ,fl ist dabej
.{}:

H,;alo4

(66 a)

xr7:1

mit den a|, at von (69), (6ga).

Es folgt hieraus, dafi einer Eigenrunktion von z eine Eigenfunktion
von ,fJ entspricht'
wenn wir noch zeigen kiinioen, dafi das innere
Produkt zweier Funktionen im Koordinatenraum denselbenwert
hat
wie dasjenige der entsprechendenFunktionen im neuen -r[,-Raum,
so
sind lrir mit dem Beweis fertig. Jm Koordinatenraum ist
PK

(tp) :

.)

r t ' $ ' ' . . .p ' * ' ) q $ ' , . . . l l ' n ' ) ,

F '1 ,. . . ,F 'N ' : F ' r

v/as wegen der Antisymmetrie

(7r)

IJK

(4)E) :
ergibt.

N'l

p'r,...,F,N':Fr
F'I< <F'N'
Andererseits gilt irn neuen Raume

(73)
f,l ,..r,X-:0,1

was mit Riicksicht auf (62) eben (22) ist.

Wir mdchten noch bemerken,daf die q_Zabbelationen (86),
(40)
natiirlich sofor.taus der Irormel (6g) hervorgehen.
s 10. wir miissen schiieflich operatoren betrachten, die keine
Zerlegungmehr in die Gestart (60) gestatten. v.n dieser Forrn
ist crie
Zoitschdft fnr ?hysik.

Bd.4z.

58
P. Jordan und E. Wigner,

648

Energie eines nichtidealen Gases. Wir beschriinken rrns dabei zun?ichst

auf solche, die in Teile zerlegbar sind, die jeweils nut zwei, stets verschiedene, Teilchen enthalten. Die Erledigung clieser Aulgabe ergibt
Formeln fiir di"e Bosesich durch Analogisierung der entsprechenden
Einsteinsche Statistih*. Der Onerator T IaBt sich dann schreiben:
y-

Tit,

(60 b)

i, k:r
j<k

wobei Z die Matrix

Hrr,..

r 1 1 .; , p 1 - . . . t L N l

Erirlrruirr6rtpr'.'6,i-rt'i-'r6ri1rr.7
2
i, k:r
j<k
Es ist dann
entspricht.

Y l t( F ' ' ,. . . , F ' ' ' ) :

d17611t76+r..'d"lr,p,r',
(63b)
11'..dr1-1rr7a-1

4 ,( p ' t ,. . . , 0 '* ' )

(64b)

mit Hilfe von (63b) [ebensowie (65)] zu berechnen. Dann ist wieder
die ,,richtige Reihenfolge" der p auf der rechten Seite herzustellen.
Dabei ktjnnen die pi stehengelassenbleiben, 01, und pj., miissen iiber
eine Anzahl von Bi hiniibergeschoben werden, $'obei sich wieder das
Vorzeichen ilndern kann.
Beachten wir wieder (62), so kdnnen wir wiecler links und rechts
fiir I bzw. r/' einsetzen {r bzw. ep. Unter Beacht,ng von (69) findet
man nun, ila8 dem Operator (60 b) nunmehr der Operator
1K

t-

'

>

Hrr.r, 1.r1,a!,.ral,ra7.ra7,

(66 b)

)1, tr'2:1
zt, z2:l

entspricht.
Es ist befriedigend, da8 die Riickwirkung der 'Ieilchen auf sich
solbst wieder durch die nichtkornmutativen Multiplikationseigenschaften
der Wellenamplituden im dreidimensionalenRaume automatisch ausgeschlossen
wird. Im Bose-Einsteinschen Falle wurde clieserUmstancl
deutlich gemacht durch Formel (40) der Arbeit von Jordan und Klein.
DaB dieselbe Fornrel auch hier gilt, folgt aus cler leicht beweisbaren
Tormel
af,a1,a!
a1- afra!a,*1,: 6t ta!,arr.
Wir wenden uns endlich zu dem Fall von Operatoren, die aus
Summandenbestehen,welchejeweils in ro) 2 feilchen symmetrischsind,
* P. Jordan

und O. Klein.

a. a. O.

59
Uber das Paulische Aquivalenzverbot.

649

w?ihrend in der Summe alre diejenigen summanden

auszurassensind,
welche dasselbeTeilchen zweimal enthalte' (was
eine wechselwirkung
des Teilchensmit sich serbst bedeutenwiirde).
Eine verallgemeinerung
der obigen Betrachtungen fiihrt daurr zu den folgenden
Fo"Jero, welche
analog sind der in B angegebenenVerallgemeinerung*
der trormel von
Jordan und Klein:
1KK

il ^,4:r

tt"'i' nf,'"'aI"nt,"'a7'' (66c)

,,..4:r'""'f;t'i

s 11' wir kdnnen endrich crieerhaltenenErgebnissein einer elwas

anderen Form so aussprechen: Es gibt bei
einem paurischen Mehrkdrperproblem eine wahrscheinlichkeitsamplitude,.welche
die warrrscheinlichkeit dafiir bestimmt, da6, nachdem fiir
die meBbarenGrd,rjen
lf (pi), N(P;), ..., N((d ein gewissesWertsystem
N, (p,r),N,(p;), ...,
N' (A'd gemessenworde' ist, fiir die anderen,
entsprechenddefinierten
G r i i f e nN ( q r ) , N ( , 1 ) , . . . , N ( q ' r ) d i e W e r t eN , ( q r ) ,
Ul(S;),...,li,(q,r) ge_
funden werden.
Eine solche Amplitude wird erhalten durch
N (q')
'b '6\'i:
mN
s'' (F'),

6po) :

0 fiir

> rr'(B) *
F'

und

o!$iif,l!"ory,r- &'! wo,Xtw

f,fZ)
Y'

Ear,fp)

F'
Y,
wohei Q(fl, W!"X aie in $ 4 besprochenenFunktionen
sind.
Die in A in der Form

{)a'"ulu,_w\a:o
angegebeneno"r.tioo"tgreichung fiir die zum
Gesamtsystem gehiirige
Amplitude @ lautet nunmehr bei unserer vorzeichenbestirnmung
ie. i,, @
enthaltenen Determinanten:

l) A, aiau- w] o :

o;

dieseAbanderung ist niitig, weil in A die

vorzeichenzwei.eutigkeitdieser
Determinantennicht ausreichendberiicksichtigt
wurde; die Matrizen a,
unterscheidensich, wie wir wissen, von den
b, nur beziiglich der Vor_
zeichenihrer verschiedenenEremente. Es
scheint sehr befriedigend,daB
die fiir die Bildung des Energieausdrucks
notwendige U*rri"r""_
U*
* Ygl. B, tr'ormel(34).

60
P. Jordan uncl E. Wigner,

650

Grij8en a, at gleichzeitig auch zu einfachenMultiplikationsgesetzen fiihrtet

wie wir in $ 6 gesehenhaben.
Es sei endlich hervorgehoben,da8 die in $ 6 eriirterten Multiplikationsgesetze der gequantelten Amplituden a, (S) it Analogie zu den von
Jordan untl Pauli entwickeltenrelativistischinvariantenMultiplikationsregeln des laclungsfreienelektromagnetischen Teldes leicht relativistisch
verallgemeinertwerden kiinnen, so daf man die dem Paulischen AquivalenzverbotentsprechendeQuantelungtler tle Broglieschen WelIen in
relati'r'istisch invarianter Form erh?ilt. Eine genauere Darlegung soll
jedoch vorlaulig zuriickgeslellt werden.
Z:usal,zbei der Korrekt'ur: Zwischen den 2K Operatorena'
...t ar; al,,aL ..., a! bestehendie Relationen
a,21
&zaz -f atat :
't *

^(

(36)

a,;ai+a)a):uJ
und

-- 6/r.
ol,.o^
+ qdI

(40)

Wir wollen nun zeigen,daf diese{-Zahbelationen die Operatorena, ot

schoneindeutig bestimmen,wenn man sich auf irreduzible Matrizensysteme
beschriinkt uncl Matrizensysteme, clie auseinander durch Ahnlichkeitstransformation hervorgehen, als nicht verschiedenvoneinander ansieht*.
Um dies einzusehen,bilden wir zunii,ohstfolgende Grdfien
a, aK +,

a,. I

a!,-,

1.

T \a'x -

*,1
a';).

(r)

Dte 2 K Matrizen a bestimmen umgekhrt die a eindeutig' Nun

gilt fiir die a, allgemein
GI)
a * N z * d 4 d , , 1: 2 6 1 7 .
Man iiberzeugt sich z. 8., wenn % {K,
a , a t l - & ] . \ t x-

1' < K ist, da8

a I )+ @ 1 + * b . @ , * a I ) -

\o, * d).@iI

26,t.

IIan kann (II) auch schreiben

a?'':
u.a&1:

'I
-

L axa,

fiir

]
,t + 1, I

(II a)

* Dies ist tlie Transformation aller Matrizen a durch dieselbe Matrir s

zu S-1aS, also natrh dem Sprachgebrauch der allgemeinen Quantenmechanik tlie
kanonische Transformation der Matrizendarstellung'

6l
Uber das Paulische Aquivalenzverbot.

651

was aber mit anderenworten so vier bedeutet, dag die

2 K MaLrizenu
zusammenmit der }fatrix _ I eine Gruppe aufspannen.
Wenn z. B.
K : 2 ist, so hat diese Gruppe folgende Elemente
1;

Nt,

dz,

&8,

Nti

d1d9t

dldgt

&1d4t

-7; -w1, -d2t _.,tst-a4; -d.tot2,-&r*3t -af(',

dzd,,

d,2a44t a.a4;

-d,2a;, _oron, _"i"rrl

" otrOl,2dgt ara,3a41t d,rd2clat a20hd4' d,lct2c(3'a4.
j(m)

C 4 , t C l 2 d s t-

1qABA4t -

A1&gd4t

&gd3Ci4t -

ArA,ZABC:,4.

Das sind 32 Elemente, im allgemeinen 22r*1 Elemente.

Das
irreduzible }latrizensystem, cras (II) geniigt, ist sicher
eine irreduzible
Darstellung dieser Gr.ppe (umgekehrt braucht es nicht der
FaIr zu sein,
die rsomorphiekann ja mehrstufigsein). wir werdennur die
irretluziblen
Darstellungenbestimmen.
Unsere Gruppe hat den Normalteiler 1, _ 1 (das Zentrum),
ihre
Faktorgruppe vom Grade 22K is!, abelsch. sie hat also
22r dieser
Abelschen Faktorgruppe entsprechendeirreduzible DarstellunEen
vom
Grade 1, die auch Darstellungen der ganzen Gruppe sind. fod.*..o
kommen sie fiir uns nicht in Betracht, da sie den Gleichungen
rr nicht
gentigen(da sie ja kommutativ sind).
wie viele Klassen hat unsere Gruppe? Die beiden Eremente
I
und - 1 bilden je eine Klasse fiir sich, sonst ist aber
iedes Element /i
mit - 1 .l? in einer Klasse. Besteht n?imlich-E in (rrr) aus
einer ungeradenAnzahl von laktoren, so ist aBa- t - _ 1 .-8,
wenn a jn R
nicht enthalten ist, rvenn -B aus einer geraden Anzahl von Faktoren
besteht,ist aRa-, - - 1.J?, n,enn a in R enthalten ist. Die
Aruahl
der Klassen ist also 22K+r; dies ist auch die Anzahl der vdneiaander
verschiedenenirreduziblen Darstelrungen. Da wir 22r Darstellungen
schon kennen und diese nicht fiir uns in Betracht kommen, kann
es nur
eine einzige, die letzte sein, die die Gleichungen(II) befriedigt,
alle
anderenLtisungenvon (rr) gehendarausdurch Ahnlichkeitstransformation
hervor.
wir bestimmen noch die Anzahl von Zeilen und spalfen,
die
Dimension dieser Darsteilung. (Es mug dabei natiirli ch 2K
herauskommen.) In der Tat ist der Grad der Gruppe ZzK+t gleich
der
summe der Quadrateder Dimensionenihrer Darsteilungen. Es haben r
22
die Dimension 1, die letzte muB die Dimension 2K haben,
damit
(2R)' + 22K . Lz : NzK | 1. Sie stimmt arso tatsiichrich mit
unserern
Matrizensystem(69) oder $ B uncl 6 iiberein.
G o t tin g en, fnslitut iiir theoretischephvsik.

62

P o p e r5

SITZUNGVOM 23.JULI 1934.

iJber die mit der Entstehung von Materie aus Strahlung

verkniipften Ladungsschwankungen
Von
W. Heisenberg

Die Diracsche Theorier) des Positrons hat gezeigt,daB Materie aus Strahlung entstehen kann, inilem z. B. ein Lichtquant sich in ein negatives urrd ein
positives Elektron verwanclelt. Dieses auch experimentell bestii,tigte Ergebnis
hat zur X'olge, daB iiberall dort, wo zur Messung eines physikalischen Sachverhalts gro8e elektromagnetische X'elder beniitigt werd.en, mit einer bisher
nicht beachteten Stiirung des Beobachtungsobjel:tesclurch das Beobachtungsmittel gerechaet werden muB, niimlich mit der Erzeugung von Materie clurch
den MeBapparat. So gering diese Stiirung fiir die iiblichen Experimente auch
sein mag, ihre Beriicksichtigung ist fiir das Verstdnalnis der Theorie tles
Positrons von prinzipieller Becleutung.
Zu ilrer nbheren Untersuchung in einem sehr einJachenX'all betrachten wir
ein quanten-mechauischesSystem von foeien negativen Elektronen, die sich
gegenseitignicht merklich beeinflussen; ihre Anzahl pro ccm sei f;. In einem
Volumen o(nt4V\

wird dann im Mittel die Ladung

e:-il+

(1)

zu finden sein (e ist der Absolutbetrag cler Elementarladung). X'iir clasmittlere Schwankungsquatlrat der Ladung im VqtrFmeno wiirile man nach der
klassischen Statistik den Wert

n':"'n j,

p)

erwarten. Es soll nun gezeigt werden, claB sich nach tler Diracschen Theorie
im allgemeinen ein griiBeres Schwankungsquailrat ergibt. Der Uberschu,E
gegeniiber Gl. (2) ist auf ilie mtigliche Entstehung von Materie bei der Messung
der Ladung im Volumen o zuriickzufiihren.
The principles of Quantum mechanids,. p. 265. Oxforcl 1930. Proc.
1) P. A. Dirac,
Cambr. Phil. Soc. 30, f50, f934.

63
318

W. Heisenberg:

Die Eigenfunktionender Elektronen hiingen vom ort t, der zeit f und der
Spinvariable o ab, sie sollen ot, (t., t, o) hei8en und in einem Volumen Z
(v ) a) normiert sein. Die allgemeinewellenfunktion der Materie wird dann
ry("t.,t,o):1o,u^(r,t,oy,

(B)

wobei wegendes PaulischenAusschlieBungsprinzips

die V.R.

ala*{ a*fi:6n*

(4)

gelten' Darausfolgt
don:Nn;

a*io:r-^r,.

(b)

n'iir die Zustiindenegativer Energie (E* < o) soll noch eingefilhrt werden:

NL:I-N*.

(6)

Es bedeutetdann 1[, die Anzahl der Elektronen im Zustand n, Ni die Anzahl

der Positronen im Zustand zi,.
n'flr die Ladungsdichte ergibt sich nach der Diracschen Theorie der
folgenile Ausdruckl) :

-'4]r|{"d",-uZn;")"*+

)aia*uiu*)'

F)

Fiir die Ladung e im Volumen o erhdlt man daher

e:-e["3J" i,Z{#

(s)
+-Zr
-"Iw 7 {awiQto)u*('dl'

Aus Griinclen,die von Bohr und Rosenfeldz) ausfiilrlich diskutiert wurden, soll der zeitliche Mittelwert von e iiber ein endliches Intervall ? betrachtet werden, wobei auch die Grenzendes Intervalls eventuell noch unscharf gelassen werden. Wir fiilren daher eine X'unl:tion l(t) en, die nur
im Bereich O <tS?
von Null verschiedenist und fiir die

I l(t)dt:r .
Auch die Grenzen des volumens o sollen eventuell unscharf bleiben; es soll
daher g(t) eine X'unktion von r beileuten, die in o bis auf die Umgebung der
Grenzen l ist, au8en verschwindet und fiir dte
Der entsprefd,rg(r):a.
chenclezeitliche und riiumlicho Mittelwert der Laduns e wiril dann
L) Ygl. z. B. W. H. X'urry u. J. R. Oppenheimer, phys. Rev. 4b,245, lgg4.
2) N.3ohr und L. R,osenfeld, Verh,der Kgl, Dbn. Gesellsch.
d. IViss.XII, 8, f 9$.

64
tlber

die mit der Entstehung

319

von Materie usw.

a: - e1,7, " i -,2 ; + +p*,i, *| | at dnZ t(t)s(t)u)(rto)u* (rt'1]'1oI

{
!
Bildet man nun den Erwartungswert z von e fiir denjenigenZustand, bei dem
die Anzahlen y'f, bekannte c-Zahlen'sind, so erhiilt man

(ro)

i:_,18,*"_e,*4u.

in Ubereinstimmungmit Gl. (1). X'iir den Erwartungswert des Schwankungsquadrats ergibt sich jedoch:

(Tf:7-t:ezZ

ZT"fr;^/

n+m n'+n'

d6'

fat[atlar

o')u'*'(r' t' o')

J'dr'l(t) l(t') s O) c U')"*(tt') u*(rto) u,\(t't'

: e Z N"(1-n ) -> [ d'tI dt'I d'r

ao'
n+m

(11)

o)
I dr' t(t)| (t') c Q)s Q'),|Ato) un(t' t' o')ufi(r't' o')u* (r t
:ezpN"(l-N*)J*^.
Diesen Ausdruck kann man in drei Teile zerlegen. Der erste w6re bereits
vorhanden, wenn die Erwartungswerte der If* filt Er) 0 untt N" lidrtEn < 0
alle verschwinden,d. h. im Vakuum (man beachte Jn*: J**):
e2

(12)

E">OtEn<A

Ein zweiter Teil wird, wenn nur negative Ele}:bronenvorhanden sind (N' : 0) :

*F-,*^(F,;F^)t"*'
SchlieBlich bleibt noch als dritter Teil
-a2
N^N*J,*
/

(13)

(14)

E',)>Oi E6>O

iibrig. Dieser dritte Teil enthii,lt jedoch, wie man aus (11) berechnet, den
n'aktor (1)" t u, kann daher gegeniiberclen beid.enerstenvernachliissigtwerden, wenn - wie angenommenwurde - t: <V tst'
X'iir die Berechnung d.eszweiten Teils (13) bemerken wir zuniichst, cla8
/

" t \ ,

/ > - 2 1 " ! - , ( t ' t ""

'o')u*(t.to)
\aSo n-*<o)

(15)

-(r + *#-)
= +t(t-"'o'+:*")
iVn-'''-o"('-',
"*[na-n+'*a''\7.
"B

65
320

W' Ileisenbers:

Es wiril also

s$)se)I #41
('-a,-,ero*:AlilfMJarlar'to tQ)
. u | , 1 r t o 1 u " ! r ' t ' 4[:*

>1{/r -drq!
+y)lj(po-pt)l'
J k"# z r\-

- (r + L!+!:)
Po
wobei

| | @o-t eu l, | | c $ - p")l, bL@)b*(o,),

'ao'

f -

4p"ot

l(Pr): J itt f(q eh'

rn
s $) :J dt g 1r)eie'
h" " - oT')
un(r t o) : b^(o)
'Wellengleichung "*
gesetztist. Aus der
folgt dann weiter
y\./
/ t: ! [ a p l t ( . , - p -T)lf@o-fr),'
Tpi+(mc\z\
,t,)dnn:r J-p ti\t +
\"2^-,
'wenn

- (r-"';!*i*'' rrro,
_F*)
tz.
) + fi)r|tcw

(16)

,r'

die zum Zustancl ro gehdrige wellenliinge k]ein ist gegen die rii,umliche Ausdehnung des Gebiets o und wenn ferner d.ie zeit, iber die gemittelt
werden soll, so Hein ist, daB die Elektronen in dieser zeit n'w strecken durchlaufen, die ebeufalls klein sind im verhii,ltnis zur rii,umlichen Ausdehnu:rg
von o, so ist g(p-pft) als sehr schnell veriinderlich gegeniiberdem Bruch

4+#v

anzusehen,ferner kannindieserA:rnii,herunSll{1po--pt)12-l gesetztwerden.

Dann wircl

("3;#,)r*** +l*tc(F-F")t': | | a's@* ?, (u)

und fiir den zweiten Teil des Schwankungsquadratserhblt man:

*(A,'4'+,

\/
in Ubereinsti-mung mit Gl. (2).
Hierzu kommt nun noch der erste Teil, der auch im Vakuum auftritt:

'-*Als'
Ahnncnwie in Gl. (tb) findet man:

LIBRARY
JARROTLCOLLEGE
HHSNA, ilt0NTAl'lA 5$ffil

(re)

66
Uber die mit der Entstehuns von Materie usw.

32\

- "'o'r-u* ",
drId,r
Id,r'
) |e)|Q')g(r)se')l'#i H'01,
2 ! "y=I^drf

En>>oi En<.o

(r *y2*
\-

'

f--!\ olun-n<'-,t -@"+pbQ-t',1

p'o

u*-#ot!
: l dtldtldldr'l (t)l (t')s(r)s(tI#
l#

)-

- o'tr'-''t- @'+
p6)G-t')l
"|xv

,,,"
fdb fdb , ,,
--JPJPtt\?o-r?o)t"'.lq(b_b,) ppo?o-PP'_-m2cz .
"
popo
scharfumgrenzten
Setztman9(t) : 1 in einemrechteckigen,
Yolumenmit
den SeitenlL,I,z,l,s
u. au8erhalb
Null, sowird
/i

\/l

n
L L r,
d
to'n* onu+pzz)- ( "t; 1-l
e$): I d,s(r)ei-: k. Ih,io,""n
l( +!-l

\/t

er)

\f4!
hP"
t\
/\
eA*6**zg:"ffi!)#
"',,,,0,
\r/ I

prrpr;pZ"---

2h

-'*

2h ""'

Zh'

Begrenzt man dag Zeitinterwall scharf, so wiril

lI

d^.-

f(pi:*[ur,;,""'-#i

-p"cT

"m.
1(po\lz:a

p2)

man
ai"w*tl 1zr
serzt
das
rntegrar
,,"u rrri'i,l,.,r0,
"r, ." u,Jrf,"J

auf der rechten Seite von Gl. (20). Man erkennt dies am einfachsten,inclem
: S einfii}rt; es
man als neue Integrationsvariabeln .p-.p' : f und t+{
-//
tz
\t
tz
wird dann:
-($I1z- Pa4 l -mzcz
+ nx'a'l
yl,'
\ l' S' + +
"
4
4
|

o* P')t''Ic$)t'
' -4 {;:; J#"[#r|@

tl@T.;q4''+

Bei eirrem vorgegebenengroBen W'ert von f (fr > rnn) eryibt die fntegration
zu I g(f )2| ;
iiber $, clie konvergiert, einen X'akborder ungefrihren GrABe
Vf Ty
dann
wesentlichen
iiber
fiihrt
im
auf das fntegral
die Integration
f

dtc" ++
I q#,rq dh,dku
"i"' "*'

fu'lz
u' !z!,

das divergiert. Das Schwankungsquadratvon 7 wiril also unendlich gro8,

werul man das Raum-Zeitgebiet, iiber das man die Mittelung der Laclung ausf.iiihrt, scharf begrenzt. Dieses Ergebnis entspricht den Resultaten, die
sich bei der Untersuchu:rg der Energieschwankuagenin einem Strahlungsfelil
herausgestellt habenl). Auch dort erwies es sich als notwendig, das Raum1) Vgl. W. Heisonborg, Verh. d. S6ohe.Ak. 83, 3, 1931,

(23)

67
322

W. Heisenberg:Uber dio mit der Entstehungvon

Materieusw.

q:bt:t,_- dem_dieBnergieau{gesuchtwerd.ensoll, unscharf zu begrenzen.

X,iir
$1 ladungsschwankungen {er Gl. (20) geniigt es, entweder die Grenzen des
.Weise
Zeitintervalls oder die des Ra,uminf"r-ril]* ir
geeigneter
unscharf zu
wiihlen. Nehmen wir z.B. an, d.agdie Griige g(r)
in einem Gebietd.erBreite b
umgebung des Randes von o etwa nach
de, Art einer Gaugschen
T 1*
Fehlerfunktion von 1 auf 0 abnimmt. Dann
verschwindet g(p) fiir Werte
von 1o)
ebenfalls wie die Fehrerfunktion; nimmt
u
man weiter an, daB fie
Zeit T klem sui gegen-!, , so kann man in geniigender
Approximation den Bruch
in (23) entwickeln ftir /c2q
*r"".
Es
+
ergibt
F,
sich dann

|cG)t'
,3,, {:z; I # f# |t QP)12

2(P2+mzc2)'

Bis auf unwesentliche konstante X'aktoren wird daraus

I rd.r'

F ;4 J ;l s (t)l 't'

f .Lt

4;19:61fi1t61't'

(24)

tu,T<.fr,
TfuT}J-.

nz c"

n'iir die GrtiBenordmrng

des erstenTeilesdes schwankungsquadrats
erhdrt
/
man daher(tii" tr- tr-h:li),

Ag__L I,t:,,4
@d,-

-2

rurr<Z
o+t -

" <',i##;t

*," r>
,=- I
ftt
{*

P5)

Der x'aktor tfr zeigthier deutlich, dag es sich bei diesen

schwankungenum
.
'wi,nden,
einen oberfliicheneffekt handert, der davon herriihrt, daB
an den
die das vorgegebenevolumen o abgrenzen,Materie entstehen
kann. Er wird
um so grd8er, je kleiner die zeit gewiihlt wird, in der d.ie
Messungder Ladung
vorgenommenwerden soll'nd je schri,rferdie Begrenzung
des iolumens ist.
Diese Ergebnissediirften eng zusammenhdngenmit dem
umstand, daB die
fiir die Erzeugung von Materie maBgebendeInhomogenitiit
der Diracschen
Gleichung die zweiten Abreitungen der elektromagnetischen
n'eldsttirken ent_
hiilt, daB also eine unstetigkeit im ergten Differentiarquotienten
der x,eldstii,rken bereits zur Entstehung von unendlich viel
niaterie ,toUn g"m'
kiinnte.
Zusammenfassend
sei festgestelt, daB bei der Messungder Ladung in einem
vorgegebenen
Raum-Zeitgebietschwankungenauftretuo, ai. n d.erliiassischen
Theorie kein Analogon besitzen; sie werden verursacht
durch die Materie, die
an der oberflii,chedes betrachteten Raumgebietsbei
der Mess'ng entsteht.

P o p e r6

68

On the Self-Energy and the Electromagnetic Field of the Electron

V. F. Werssxoen
Uniaersity of Rochester, Rochester, New York
(Received April 12, 1939)
The charge distribution, the electromagnetic field and
the self-energy of an electron are investigated. It is found
that, as a result of Dirac's positron theory, the charge and
the magnetic dipole of the electron are extended over a
finite region; the contributions of the spin and of the
fluctuations of the radiation field to the self-energy are
analyzed, and the reasons that the self-energy is only

logarithmically infinite in positron theory are given. It is

proved that the latter result holds to every approximation
in an expansion of the self-energy in powers of ez/hc. The
self-energy of charged particles obeying Bose statistics is
found to be quadratically divergent. Some evidence is
given that the "critical length" of positron theory is as
(-hc/e2).
smallask/(mc).exp

I. IN:rnoouctroN AND DrscussroNs or'

REsur-ts
-I-HE
self-energyof the electron is its total
I
energy in free space when isolated from
other particles or light quanta. It is given by the
expression

(b) The quantum theory of the relativistic

electron attributes a magnetic moment to the
electron, so that an elbctron at rest is surrounded
by a magnetic field. The energy

W:T-l(1/8")
J

| (H'zlE'z)d.r.

u^,s:(r/81)r r?dt

(1)

Here I is the kinetic energy of the electron; .FI

and E are the magnetic and electric field
strengths. In classical electrodynamics the selfenergy of an electron of radius @ at rest and
without spin is given by W-mczle2f a and consists solely of the energy of the rest mass and of
its electrostatic field, This expression diverges
linearly for an infinitely small radius. If the
electron is in motion, other terms appear representing the energy produced by the magnetic
field of the mcving electron. These terms, of
course,can be obtained by aLorentz transformation of the former expression.
The quantum theory of the electron has put
the problem of the self-energy in a criticalstate.
There are three reasonsfor this:
(a) Quantum kinematics shows that the radius
of the electron must be assumedto be zero. It is
easily proved that the product of the charge
densities at two difierent points, p(r-{/2)
XpG*t/2), is a delta-function d6(t). In other
words: if ooe electron alone is present, the
probability of finding a charge density simultaneously at two different points is zero for every
finite distance between the points. Thus the
energy of the electrostatic field is infinite as

of this field is computed in Section III and the

result is
'

.
U^^e: a2h2
f (6rm2c2a3)

This correspondsto the field energy of a magnetic

dipole of the moment eh/2mc which is spread
over a volume of 'the dimensions a. The spin,
however, does not only produce a magnetic field,
it also gives rise to an altern4ting electric field.
The closer analysis of the Dirac wave equation
has shownl that the magnetic moment of the spin
is produced by an irregular circular fluctuation
movement (Zitterbewegung) of the electron
which is superimposed"tothe translatory motion.
The instantaneous value of the velocity is always
found to be c. It must be expected that this motion will also create an alternating electric field.
The existence of this field is demonstrated in
Section III by the computation of the expression
g"r:(t/8r)

f E"rdr.

There E, is the solenoidalpart (div. Er: 0) of the

etectric field strength created by the electron.
The fact that the above expression does not
vanish for an electron at rest proves the existence
r E. Schroedinger,Berl. Ber. 1930'418 (1930).

W"r:limt"-or-z /a,

72

69
ELECTROMAGNETIC

FIELD

OF

THE

ELECTRON

73

:: a solenoidal field2 apart from the irrotational

=.ectric field of the charge. The energies of the
.-ectric and magnetic fields of the spin are found
:t be equal. The spin movement does not, of
: rurse', give rise to a radiation. The time average
: the Poynting vector is zero.
The electromagnetic figld of the spin does not
:tntribute to the self-energy of the electron. It is
:iown in Section IV, that the charge dependent
:art of the self-energy to a fi_rst approximation is
iven by

has been proveds only for the first approximation

of the self-energy expanded in powers of. e2/hc.
However it will be shown in Section VI that the
divergenceis logarithmic in every approximation.
The maln purpose of this paper is to show the
physical significance of the logarithmic divergence and to demonstrate the reasons of its
occurrence.
Let us .consider the case of one electron embedded in the vacuum as described by the positron theory. The vacuum is represented by the
state in which all negative energy states are
filled with electrons. The charge density of these
"vacuum electrons" is not observable in the
un1
perturbed state of a fi_eld-freevacuum. Ho*tver,
iJere p and i are the charge and current densities,
the differences between the actual density and
c and A are the scalar and vector potential, rethe unperturbed density are observable.
spectively. If the self-energy is expressed in terms
The presence of an electron in the vacuum
,'f the field energres, the electric and magnetic
causesa considerablechangein the distribution
:arts have opposite signs,s so that the contribuof the vacuum electrons becauseof a oeculiar
:ions of the electric and of the magnetic fields of effect of the Pauli exclusion
principle. According
:he spin cancel one another.
to this principle it is impossibleto find two or
(c) The quantum theory of the electromagnetic
more electronsin a single cell of a volume lr3in
:eld postulates the existence of field strength
the phase space. If two electrons of equal spin
luctuations in empty space. These give rise to an
are brought together to a small distance d, their
additional energy, which diverges more strongly
momentum differencemust be at least h/d,.This
rhan the electrostatic self-energy. The following
effect is similar to a repulsive force which causes
rmde calculation may demonstrate how this partwo particles with equal spin not to be found
:icular part of [he self-energy arises: L.i us closertogether than approximately onede Broglie
consider an electron with radius a. The field
waveJength.
fluctuations in a volume aB are of the order
As a consequence
of this we find at the position
B-hc/aa.a The mean frequency of the fluctuaof the electrona "hole" in the distribution of the
vacuum electrons which completely compensates
tions is v-c/a. This field induces the electron to
its charge.But we also find around the electron
perform vibrations with an amplitude x-eE/mv2
a cloud of higher charge density coming from the
and an energy Wno"t-ezEz/my2-e2h/mca2. This
displaced electrons, which must be found one
energy diverges quddratically for infinitely small
radius. The exact value is calculated in Section wave-length from the original electron. The total
effect is a broadening of the charge of the electron
IV and is tl4r"ci:lim(
rntca.2.
":srezhf
over a region of the order hfmc as it is indicated
A new situation is created by Dirac's theory of
schematicallyin Fig. 1. The product p(t-t/Z)
the positron: The self-energy diverges only logaXp(rIE/2) is no longerzero for a finite distance
rithmically with infinitely small radius. This fact
f, and is given by the function

w,: +f (,0-j' ^)',:*/

(E,- rr,)dr

2 A solenoidal electric field is.neces*rily an atternating

field for its time average vanishes in a stationary state]
whereas.the time average of a magnetic field d6es not
vansn lI slatlonary currents are present.
3 This at first sight unfamiliar result is connected with
the
well-known_ fact_t_hat a system of steady currents increases
its magnetic field energy if it performi mechanical work.
whe.reas.a systm oJ ciarges decreases its field energy by
perrormlng mecnanlcal worl,
a The fluctuations are of the order of maqnitude
of the
field-strength of one light quantum with waieJength.

,i
mcl}
-l{oct>(imcl/h)
G(0 : e"= .
h l0l2r
(SectionII). Hels lJgrrr(*)is the Hankel function
of first kind. G({) has still a quadratic singularity
zeits'f' Phvsik8e,27 (1934);s0,817
(risYl.w"b"kopt,

70
74

V.

F.

WEISSKOPF

for {: g. It is shown quantitatively in SectionII,

that this broadening of the charge distribution is
just sufficient to reduce the electrostatic selfenergy to a logarithmically divergent expression.
The broadening effect also changes the magnetic field distribution of the spin moment. In
positron theory the magnetic field energy is
given by
Frc. la. Schematic charge distribution of the electron,

(2rmca2)
U-,*: litn 1,-o1le2h/
- ezmc/(4rh)'ls @/mca)f.

(2)

This is equal to the field energy of a momentum

distribution spread over a finite region, which is
proportional to the spread of charge described
above. The divergence, which is less strong than
in the one-electron theory,6 comes from the
quadratic singularity of the distribution. The
electric field energy of the spin, however, is not
equal to the magnetic field energy becauseof the
following effect, which is again based upon the
exclusion principle. The vacuum electrons which
are found in the neighborhood of the original electron, fluctuate with a phaseopposite to the phase
of the fluctuations of the original electron. This
phase relation, applied to the circular fluctuation
of the spin, decreasesits total electric field by
means of interference, but does not change the
magnetic field of the spins since the latter is due
to circular currents and is not dependent on the
phase of the circular motion. Thus the total
solenoidal electric field energy is reduced by
interference if an electron is added to the vacuum.
The electric field energy U"r of an electron in
positron theory is therefore negati,aesince it is
the difference between the field energy of the
vacuum plus one electron, and the energy of the
vacuum alone. The exact calculations of Section
III give Uer:- [/*,". Thus the contribution of
the spin to the self-energy does not vanish in
positron theory and is by Eq. (2)

Frc.

1b. Schematic charge distribution

of the vacuurn
electrons in the neighborhood of an electron.

the action of the electromagnetic field fluctuations upon the electron. The efiect of an external
field upon an electron in positron theory is to a
first approximation the same as one expects for
an electron with infinitely small radius, since the
effect of the field upon the displaced vacuum
electrons can be neglected. For instance, no
destructive interference effect would occur in the
interaction with a light wave whose wave-length
is smallerthan h/mc.The exclusionprinciple does
not alter the interaction of an electron with the
field as long as one considers that action to a
first approximation to be the sum of independent
actions at every point; it has only an efiect on
the probability of finding one particle in the
neighborhood of another.
The energy Wno"tin positron theory is therefore not difierent from the same quantity in one
electron theory as shown in Section IV. In the
former theory, however, it is balanced by the spin
energy lV"n the most strongly divergent terms of
which are just oppositely equal 1e fi/n""1. The
sum of W"o and l/1,,"t is only logarithmically di(rmcaz)
W : - 2 U-,"- - lim <o-or
fezhf
"p
vergent.
- e2mc
/ (Zrh) . lg h/ (mca)).
Thus according to positron theory the selfof an electron consists of three parts:
energy
The broadening effect cannot, however, be ap(a) The energy trZ"tof the Coulomb field, which
plied to the energy lTrro*, which is the energy o1
divergeslogarithmicallybecauseof the character6 We use the term "one-electron theorv" for the descrioistic spread of charge.
tion of the electron bv means of the Diiac wave equation
(b) The energy W", of the oscillatory motion
without filling up the negative energy states, in oider to
which produces the spin, This energy, although
distinguish it from the "positron theory."

71
ELECTROMAGNDTIC

FIELD

r::c in the one-electrontheory, is negative and

::adratically divergent in the positron theory.
l-:.rs is because of the negative contribution of
.-,: magnetic field and the interference efiect of
'---:electric field of the vacuum electrons.
c) The energy l71ru"1of forced vibrations
-:der the influence of the zero-point fluctuations
:i the radiation field. The energies (b) and (c)
r-mpensateeach other to a logarithmic term.
It is interesting to apply similar considerations
:: the scalartheory of particlesobeying the Bose
':atistics, as has been developed by Pauli and
.:e author.? Here the probability of finding two
:qual particles closer than their waveJengths is
:rger than at longer distances. The effect on the
':lf-energy is therefore just the opposite. The
.:.fluenceof the particle on the vacuum causesa
::gher singularity in the charge distribution
:.stead of the hole which balanced the original
::large in the previous considerations.It is shown
.: SectionV that this giv.esrise to a quadratically
:rvergent energy of the Coulomb field of the
:article. Thus the situation here is even worse
,:ran in the classical theory. The spin term
:rviously does not appear and the energy lVlo"t
,s exactly equal to its value for a Fermi particle.
A few remarks might be added about the
:ossiblesignificanceof the logarithmic divergence
f the self-energy for the theory of the electron.
k is proved in Section VI that every term in the
of the self-energy in powers of e2/hc
"xpansion

w:Ew(")

(3)

liverges logarithmically with infinitely small

electron radius and is approximately given by

OF

THE

ELECTRON

75

which is about 10-58 times smaller than the

classical electron radius. The "critical length" of
the positron theory is thus infinitely smaller than
usually assumed.
The situation is, however, entirely different
for a particle with Bose statistics. Even the
Coulombian part of the self-energydiverges to a
first approximation as W"t-e2h/(mca2) and requires a much larger critical length that is
a:(hc/e2)-t'ft/(mc), to keep it of the order of
magnitude of rncz. This may indicate that a
theory of particles obeying Bose statistics must
involve new features at this critical length, or at
energiescorresponding to this length; whereas a
theory of particles obeying the exclusion principle is probably consistent down to much
smaller lengths or up to much higher energies.
II. TUB Cnencp DrsrnrsurroN on
rgo ElpcrnoN
The charge distribution in the neighborhood
of an electron can be determined from the
expression
f

G({): I p(r-E/z)p(ttt/2)dr;
J

(4)

here p(r) is the charge density at the point

r. G({) is the probability of finding chargesimultaneously at two points in a distance {. If ap.
plied to a situation in which one electron alone
is present, direct information can be drawn from
this expressionconcerningthe chargedistribution
in the electron itself. The charge density is
given by

W o) - z &nc2(e2/ hc)"llg (h/ mca)ft, ta n.

p(r):el**(r)'l'(r)l -",

Here the a" are dimensionless constants which

cannot easily be computed. It is therefore not
sure, whether the series (3) converges even for
nnite o, but it is highly probable that it converges
if 6:e'z/(hc).le (h/mca)(1. One then would get
W:mc2O(6)where 0(6):1 for a value of 6<1.
We then can define an electron radius in the same
way as the classical radits ezfmc2is defined, by
putting the self-energyequal to mc2.One obtains
then roughly a value a-h/(mc).exp (-hc/e,)
-l
W. Fifi and V. Weisskopf,
Helv. Phys. Acta7, 709
(1934).

where ry'(r), the wave function, is a spinor with

four componentsrltr,p:1,2,3,4. We write

(5)

l,l'*tl:D{,*,1,
for the scalar product of two spinors. a is the
charge density of the unperturbed electrons in
the negative energy states which is to be subtracted in the positron theory. In the oneelectron theory o is zero. The wave function ry'
can be expanded in wave functions 9o of the

72
76

V.

F.

WEISSKOPF

momenta p of the states,the following result:

stationarystatesg of a freeelectron:
r!(r):la,e

nQ).

relation holds for the 9o

The following

{e*oQ)eo$)l:11Y'

r e x Di ( {-' o- ) l h
:e26(t). (11)
GG):r,lap-'
grzPt
J

(6)

Thus in the one-electrontheory, G(4) is equal to

( 7 ) the 6-function.
We now apply (10) to the vacuum of the

where 7 is the total volume of the system.We positron theory, that is, we set

denote functions with positive energy values by

gao and with negative energy values by q-o.
We apply the method of quantized waves and
consider the ry''sas operators acting on eigenfunctions c(..'No" ') whose variablesare the
numbers .lIo of electrons in different states q. If
the ry''sare written in the form (6), the o's are
operatorswhich fulfill the well-known relations:
an*ao:Nq,'anao*:1-19o,

a o*&o'a o'*6o
, :Nq(1

(g)

-Nq')'

A1l other combinationsdo not contribute to the

expectationvalue G(!) of G(t) becausethey have
no diagonal elements.We obtain then
G(0 : t'L X,N oNn,* ezL trrq(l - Nq,)
qq'qq'

X | { p n * ( r ' ) p n , ( r 'I)l , p o , x ( rpr )o f t z ) l d r

-2oelN o!o2V.

G,*(0=e'L I

ls -s' J

f { p - 0 , * ( t ' ) p r o ( "|' )
X\p+o*?)

p-o'(dlat.

The fact that this expression is different from

zero and even infinite in the vacuum is closely
connected with the charge fluctuations of the
empty space which have been investigated by
Heisenberg and Oppenheimer.s Heisenberg has
shown that the charge fluctuations are infinite if
the region in which they are measured is sharply
limited. This result is due to the electron pairs
produced when the charge is measured in a
sharply defined region.
We are at present interested in the expression
G({) corresponding to the charge distribution of
one electron. This can be obtained by calculating
G*+r() for the state in which one electron in
the state f qois present (1/"" : 1 all other N+o : 0,
and by subtracting the effect of the
ff-q:l),

^ t

"> [

t:a*".

( 1 0 ) vacuum G"*():

Here and in the following formulas we put

fr: r- 1/2, rz:r*{/2.
We first apply this expression to a single
electron. We then put o:0, and Nn":1 1ot
q:qs, Nr:O forg*qo:
C <tl :

N-o:1,

It is easily seen,that the first, the third and the

fourth term cancel each other' The terms
\
remaining.give

(8)

We now insert (6) into (5) and (5) into (4) and
keep only terms which contain the products of
two a's of the form (8) or the following combinations of four o's:
a q+0.na o'*6 n': N nN o' ,

ff+o:0,

| * q (r1),pq(rt) \ { p o*Q,) p o"(r,) \ i].r.

"*

This expression can be evaluated by inserting

the wave functions of a free electron. If qo is the
state of an electron at rest, one obtains after
replacing the sum over q by an integral over the

" , :
t'( El

uvacr

r \ 1.,

u soc\ l/ :

e qlt)\ l,p,*(rz),pq"(r,r)\d'r.
\,pa,x(rt)
I
"-L)
If one inserts the actual solutions 9o of Dirac's
wave equation of the free electron, this expression
can be readily evaluated. One obtains after replacing the sum by an integral as before:
,'(L*

exPi(E'P)/h
f
(12)
G ( t ) : e ' m c ' l o -p *
t
J
8n3h3E(?)
-l
Akad'86,317(1934);
W. HJr"nb"re,Verh.d. Siichs.

J . R . O p p e n h e i m F i ,e l y s ' R e v . 4 7 , 1 4 4 ( 1 9 3 4 ) .

73
ELECTROMAGNETIC

FIELD

here E(.p1:6,1f*m"c'1t. This integral can be

evaluatedand gives:
mcl6 i
limc \
G(il:e'z= . Ilot')l -'il.
ht|tZn
\ll
/
Hyor(tc)is the Hankel function of first kind;
this function has a logarithmic singularity for
r:0 and falls off exponentially for r))1. We
obtain thus

i*t

G
t):1
" (\s/

mc t
lez -.
f or {41hfmc
lh
Ez
l4r2
I
..-.".
2
/ m""c\'
le'(
| (h/zrLrnce)r' e-ncEttt
\h/
|
|

OF

'

forwhich

77

w * : i JfG\t)
^ot
Tfi- quadratic
^,,.n,.ri^ .i--,,r..i+.,
The
singularity of G() at :0 gives
rise to a logarithmic divergenceof 17"1.By substituting (12) and by performing the integration
over f first' we obtain the result
)
,'n

4n2J

This expression replaces the delta-function of the

one-electron theory and indicates a spread of
charge over a finite region of the order of h/mc.
It is of interest to construct a charge density i(z)

ELECTRON

and gives rise to transitions from any occupied

state q' to any unoccupied state q. These transitions take place quite independently of the ratio
of h/k to the linear dimensions h/mc of. the
spread of charge.
The energy W* of the electrostatic field can
be calculaleddirectly from G(6;:

for l>)h/mc. W*: -l

THE

dP-

mc2

hrE<rtf,

-li^*-.rL*r"WPjg'+y2
rhc

(13)
lnc

**''*
ii"oxoo,l,",*Lf";3/,.'h:Hn:J,f""?*":n

f a{,,)it)or--"{t).

ezh
Wu1- lim 1a:o1-tm2c2lg -,
TnC
tnco

This density is given by

_

f _ / mcz1l expi(l.p) /h

o:'J oP\E@))

u*

IIL

'

and for
lllc
: fi-s-2-stzr-312r-6t2
IL

r<<h/mc

'

tor r))hf mc, ! falls off exponentially.

In order to show that this "spread of charge"
does not reduce the effect of a periodical field
rvith a short wave-length, let us consider the
operator
f

I P(r) e*P ik't d'r,

rvhich represents an interaction energy between

the chargeand a field of wave number t. By inserting (5), this operator can be written in the
form
elao*aq,,
q

Po,:Po*k

TnB Er,pcrnoMAcNErrc FrBr,o or rue

ELecrnoN

We calculate in this section the solenoidalpart,

E" and H, of the electromagnetic field produced
by the electron. It is given by
1 AA"',
E": __ __,
H: curl Ar.
cOt
Here A"' is the solenoidal part of the vector potential A which is given by
I r i ( r ' , l - l r - r ' l ' '/ c'\U t ' .
A ' ( r ,l ) : - ,
cJ
lr_r,l
.4 is primed to indicate that this field is produced by the electron. The current density i is
defined by
i,: ecV*o"9\ ,

etc_

Here cu;are the well-known Dirac matrices. We

consider in our approximation the wave func-

74
78

F.

V.

WEISSKOPF

tions ry'to be the solutions of the wave equations

of the field-free electron. If we expand the wave
functions according to (6) we obtain
E La o*ao'\9o*(r't')a,9o,(r't')l
aq'
A,'(r,t):, I dr'

tt:t-'
.c

lr-r'I

lr-r'l

The wave functions

9o of the free electron are

1l
eo:--tuoexp-(ipo-r-iEot).
vth

(14)

This divergent expressioncorrespondsto the field

ehergy of a magnetic dipole density concentrated
in a sphereof infinitely small radius a. If one now
calculated expression (16) for the vacuum of the
positron theory (ff*o:O, N-a:1) one obtains a
highly divergent expressionwhich representsthe
magnetic field energy U"**(Vac.) produced by the
current fluctuations of the vacuum. We are interested in the 6eld energy of one electron at rest
which is obtained by calculating I/-,*(Vac.*1)
for the state (No.:1, Po,:Q, Eq":mc2 all other
i[+o:0, ff-c: 1) and by subtracting the effect of
the vacuum:
f-*":

po and Eo are momentum and energy of the

state q, I/ is the volume of the space considered,
ao is a normalized spinor. We obtain then for .C,'
2rehzc2

A,(r,t):-22
V

X e x p i [ ( p o ,- p o ) ' r -

(Eo,- E

:2re'zhz(Z-I)hq
+q

-q

{ u q " * a" u , l \ u o * a " u q o l

mz(E o-m2ca)z

Averaging over the spin directions gives:

lu o*a"u o'\a o*a o,

a a'EoP4-ry'cn-c'Po

-I/-,*(Vac.*1) - U*,"(Vac.)

'Po'

(15)

")t7/h.
The field strengths can immediately be computed
from this expression. The time average of the
magnetic field energy, U-,* is found to be

- *TT
vmes-'

:-

e'h' f
|

dp

* J aoth"E(b)

I e2
-tim(p__r
2rmch

mzcz P*Pol
|
ls l.
I PPo-2
mc J
L

(18)

Here Po is definedby Pq: (P2fmzcz)t.l\is quadratically divergent expression is just what one
would expect for the field energy of the magnetic
1f
density of the electron if this density is
dipole
:-e'h'caLL(Po - Po,)','No(1-ffq,)
equal to the charge distribution calculated in
qc'
2
the previous section.
In order to show directly, that this magnetic
lu o*a"u o'l lu o'*o"uol
(16)
X
field
is equal to the "static" field of the magnetic
lE oE o' mzca czpo. p 4f'
moment of the spin, we consider the magnetic
if one usesthe relations (9). a, is the component polarization (dipole density) M,
of c'which is perpendicularto pq- pq,.We apply
eh
this expression first to a single electron at rest
M":_[l/*poro"9l
,
2mc
( / f o : 1 , g : q o ; N o : O , q + q o )|

u*,"=rl/Gu rt A'126,

o
[uoo*a"uolluo*a"uqol
tl^"t:-e2h2Lf
o'-'
?-m2(Eo'm2ca)2
2
One obtains after averaging over the spin
directionsand replacing the sum by an integral:

and calculate the function

ilr) : I wt, - t/ 2).N{(r* E/ z)d'r,

which correspondsto G(f) (see (4)) and which

provides information about the "sprn distribu1
e2h2
e2h2rdp
in the electron. If one evaluatesthis intetion"
(
1
7
)
u^"":"*nJ
g " w : r " l i m 1 ' : o r3 * r r r o "
gral by the method which is used in Section II,

(
I

75
ELECTROMAGNETIC

FIELD

::1e obtains

OF

THE

79

IV. Tus SsLr-ENBncy oF THE Er,pcrnor

3h2

r(f):--G(s),
4 tn2c2

o'hich shows0 that the spin is distributed in

:ractly the same v/ay as the charge. The mag:etic field energy of this distribution is given by
div, M(rr) div. M(rz)
U^ru

trl

::rd can be evaluated by the methods used for the

:iher calcnlations in this section and leads to the
:spressions (17) for the one-electron theory and
:c (18) for the positron theory. Hence we are
:.llowed to consider them as the field energy of
:he magnetic moment.
The energy of the solenoidal electric 6eld
itrength is given by

The self-energy is calculated in this section by

means of a method which is different from the
usual perturbation method, in order to outline the
physical significance of the difierent terms. It is
similar to the method applied to this problem
previously by the author
The Hamiltonian of a system of charged particles and their electromagnetic field can be
written in the form

fi:(#)'.,i,(#):

iC:+

4Gi)'-*r.ao),]ar
1 r
/ o--i'Aldr
+ f (" p
J\

I r /6A"\2
:'"r:-,1-ldr
8rc2J \ 0t /
::

ELECTRON

*cI
iJ

r e2h2
^ tI(Eo,_E)'
2Coqq'

{u o*a"uo'lluo'*a"uol
-ry26e - c2p p
lE oE o,
o. 4fz

ffr,).

I f /;*(".pi*9nc){';ld.r.

The summation in tbe last term is performed over

all particles. The solutions of this Hamiltonian
are restricted by the condition

a0/at+c div. A:0.

-\pplied to a single electron at rest, this expression By introducing the field strengths instead of the
rives
potentials we obtain the expression
e2h2 r

Ua:r-----rt

do

-:

:U^"s.

fnzczJ gT8h8

(le)

*:!-[

-{pplied to an electron at rest in positron theory,

one obtains, however,
Y"r: 6[1(Vac.*1) - U"r(Vac.)
:

Ed.r
<a,+H\dr-!l o.div.
+

[ (,0-'-t.t)a'

2ne2h2
(E-t)(Eo-mc2)2
" +q -q
t1uqr*a

*cIJ
u a q
"u rl I o* "u ul

m2(Eo-m2ct)2

| 9,*(". p* flmc),!
;ld.r.

This is equal to (1) if one uses the relations

div. E:4rp and

and then
e'h' f
dp
: -[J^^".
Uet: -r-f
^J
m
8r|hsE(f)

r :'>
(20)

The interpretation of this result is given in

Section I.
lThillito,
i is s(s*1) for s:i.

ft,-ta. (p- (e/ c)A)* pmcftld.t.

The interaction

energy

f Go-0/c)i'L):eH'

76
80

V.

F.

WEISSKOPF

between matter and field contains the electronic

charge a explicitly as a linear factor, so that in
the above notation f/'is explicitly independent of
e; dHt/6e:0. Let us consider the energy 17" of
a stationary state s of this Hamiltonian. If the
electronic charge e is increased by de the Hamiltonian gets the additionaltermde f1'. According to perturbation theory the increase of W, is
d.e(H')a",where (fl')r is the time average of 11'
in the state s, assuming that the electronic charge
has its original value a. We therefore get

w":w"to)+
f" <r,e)t^"ur,
v0

the relations
1..
66'-.;Q'=

-A'rP,

1..
alt'--A':

-Ari,

and we obtain

- L <i.r,>^ar.
*, : L <<a,
*)d.r
\ u- (H,,)
[
f

We consider now the state s to be the state of an

electron at rest. The charge dependent part W'
(21) of the self-energycan then be written in the form
W':W**W.rlWrn"t,

where l4l"(oris the value of the energy ior e:0,

We now expand H'(e) in a power series of e :

Here

(t)
H' (e): g' <ot
a eHt +' "
and get from (21)
e2
(t
(0)
W s: W s@\
+ e<H' )r"*-(f1' ))A"+., . .

w",:! f
8rJ

lf

upon the sign of a, and we obtain by neglecting

all terms containing e in a higher power than the
second
W':W"-W"$'
e2ef1

:-(It"(r))A": -(H')*:L
22Jc

6: Qo*Q'.

Ao and do are the potentiats of the field when

no electron is present. In empty space,.40is the
potential of the zero-point oscillations and
6o:0. A' and 6' is the field produced by the
electron. We thelr get

w': +[ (oo'r"-l1i'r,')^,)d,

((E"'z)e'- (H'z)^')dx:

'"":

Ua-

U^"u' (23)

uJ

It contains the contribution of the field produced

by the spin and is calculated in the previous
section; Wtu"t ls the energy produced by the
fluctuations of the radiation field,

wrwt: _![i.xar.

| ((pO)^'--(i'A)n)dr.

The potentials can be split into two parts

A:Ao*A',

"",,0,

is the static field energy of the irrotational field

E"r,i W"p is defined by

The second term is zero since W" cannotdepend

Q2)

In order to calculate l/luct, w divide i into

two parts i:ief i', whereio is the current density
for the field-free case. The term Jfio'A&t
vanishes when averaged over the time because
of the absenceof phase relations between io and
Ao. The remaining term

wrrct: -!

[t

. t a,

can be evaluated as follows:

i' is to a first approximation given by

-|[ <''o'>^'o''

i ' : [ 9 0 * c / r ]* { 9 t * c r l o } .

of ffi:J;r:*[:ti:,Ll?,Yil;H::Hil;Xbymeans
Thefirsttermcanbetransformed

(24)

77
ELECTROMAGNETIC

FIELD

tion of the perturbed wave function:

OF

THE

ELECTRON

81

We have

,h:Laoeq'.
go' canbe calculated by means of the ordinary
perturbation method. The interaction energy
with an arbitrary field A is given by

(Af).:

7 rch

(2s)

,J lildk

and we get finally, on replacing lkl by p/h,

- esA.:- aaU,lAk+) expi(k. r{c t t)

e2 rcdo
e2 1
i I
-lim1p--1P2
:.
trVn,,"t:7---tf .'
i
(
k
.
2 n 2 m c 2 hJ l ? l n h cm
* A *e) exp
r * c l t Ir ) 1 .
The sum is taken over all wave numbersk of We now collect
the resultsobtained for the other

an orthogonal system of plane waves in the

volume V. lf we write the wave functions 9" of
lhe free electron in the form (14), we get for 9o'

parts of the self-energyof an electron at rest.

The one-electron theory gives LEqs.(11),

(23),(1e)l

f {u 4*auolI o{-t
I q' : eLp q,l:----:---- --t-e+ icl,tl f
l/"r:limr,:or l,
W,p: (Ja- [/-"*:0.
t
LEo-Eo,lclkl
a
-1
I u 4*auol/ rt- )
ktt
- pq. The positron theory gives (Eqs. (13), (23), (20))
f --e-i't
l, hk:gq,
Eo-Eo,-clkl
I
e2
P*Po
,.
--,
ThisexpresSionis introduced into (24) and gives l/"t:limrp:-r
. mc' lg
Tttc
'nc
for the current
i"t : EEN aIuq*a,u,,1lu o,*au ol

W"p: U6- U^,":

. _ f-.._-..........-.-A , * , e x pi ( k . r f c l i I r )
/\t
L
Eo-Eo,lclhl

-,

A(-)exp-i(k.t*c'klt)1

ar-u"-u,

ltconJ'

We haveretained only terms containingproducts

(8) or (9). It is seen from this expression,that
i'is the sarnein the one-electrontheory and in
the positron theory. In the latter casewe have to
consider d:it (Vac.+l)-l'(Vac.). The actual
value can easily be evaluated for an electron at
rest. One obtains
le2

y:_-4,

which is immediately understood as the forced

vibrations of a point charge under the action of
an oscillating field A. W1u"1is directly obtained
if one replacesA by the field fluctuations Ao of
the vacuum:

wtttct:-!

t.xar:firo,r^,.

e2 1
frn2c2P+P^1
-limcp:-rlPPo-Igjl.
Thcm
L
2
mc J

W"o is partly balanced by Wrru.r. The total

self-energy in positron theory is then given by
3 e2
W':--mc2
zT kc

P-lP,
lim1r:'lB j*finite
rtc

(26)
terms,

The self-energy of a free electron in motion can be

obtained by a Lorentz transformation from (26). The
direct calculation from the above methods is ambiguous
because it leads to a difierence of terms, each of which
diverges quadratically. The factor of the logarithmielly
divergent difference of these terms depends essentially on
the way in which the infinite terms are subtracted. The calculation of the self-energy of an electron at rest is not so
much exposed to these ambiguities because of the spherical
symmetry of the problem, which suggestsonly one natural
way of subtracting two divergent integrals over the
momentum space, namely, the subtraction of the contributions of concentric spherical shells around the center.
It must be expected, that the value of the self-energy of a
moving electron can only be covariant to the value (26)
if one performs the subtraction appropriately. This is why
the expressions for the self-energy obtained in reference 5
are apparently not relativistically covariant.

78
V. F. WEISSKOPF

82

V. TnB SeI,r-ETERGYoF e Penrrcr.e OgBvrwc

and obtain for

BOSB-S:TETISTICS

tUE

lr

It has been shown that the quantization of the

scalar wave equation of Klein and Gordon leads
to a theory of elementary particles with Bose
statistics and charges of both signs. The theory
includes a description of pair creation and of all
related phenomena. The quantitative results are
not very different from the results of Dirac's
posilron theory. The formalism has been recently applied to particles with intrinsic angular
momentum. It will be shown here that the calculation of the self-energy, however, gives results
quite difierent from the positron theory. The
energy of the electrostatic field of the electron is
found to be more strongly divergent than in the
classical theory; the energy of the radiation
field diverges quadratically and is equal to the
corresponding energy of a single electron in the
one-electron theory. The qualitative arguments
for this behavior are given in I. The following
calculation is based on the formulas derived
elsewhere.T
The operator of the charge density is given by
p:ie(9*o* - {r) '

o@:nJ P(r)exP( -is' r)dr

the following

pG):

expression :

E(k)+E(t)
e
-b*(k)b(1)]
[o*(k)o(l)
zv? f"(D"(Df- E(t)
+E(k)
[o(k)6(l)-a*(k)b*(l)],
[E(e)E(')]t-

where l:kfs.
The o(k) and D(k) fulfill the .elations
a*(k)a(k) : l{(k),

a*(k)b(k) : M(k) '

o(k)o*(k) : 1+N(k),

b(k)b*(k): 1+M(k).

The N(k)'s are the numbers of positrons, the

M(k)'s the number of negatrons in the states
with the wave vector k. The electrostatic selfenergy is given by:
tt
( r - E5/
/ 2-/-r\'
) p ( r *'r !rr-/drd{
F\'
f p
w"r:+ t
r'
ltl
p( - s) p(s)

where ry'is the wave function and n its conjugale

operator:
A,t*
":h

1
t:-E
s ( k )e x p i k . r ,
v^ h
e7)
P(k) exP-ik'r'

LZ\-

;s2

x (n(k)tN(l)+ 1l+ M(k)[M0)+ 1])

t(E(k)-E0))'
E(k)E(t)

vrh

Here l/Vt.expzkr form a set of orthogonal

functions in the volume Z.
We further introduce
rE(l')t,

p@):l ___:_:
| (o*(k)+D(k)),
\'2/

E(k): c(h'k2*m2c2)+,

t-

1r(E(fr)*E(l))'
re2
rr,-.:-- tt-l
s
"L E(k)E(t)
2y'i7

We introduce new variables by means of

| 1|
/
o&): _il -I (o*(k) _D(k)),
\28&)/

We obtain by introducing (29) and retaining

only the diagonal terms:ro

*,

|Q)r(r') - t(r'){(r) : 6(r r') '

1
r:-.8

(2s)

(28)

+ uf(k)+ 1l[M(l)+ 1])l

x (N(k)M(l)
This expressiondoes not vanish for the vacuum
for every k). We calculate the
(li/(k):M(k):0
difference
iV

",:

W (Y ac.* 1) - ilz"t(Vac.)
"t

r0 The term s=0 is omitted. It can easily be shown that

this term does not contribute for tr/*e.

79
ELECTROMAGNETIC

FIELD

and assume that the particle is at rest:

plpol
7 p 2 . m z c 2 - ----lg
l.
"
Lh'
h2
mc J

'
\''
\mcal

We now show that the particle does not produce

a solenoidal electric or magnetic field in the ap_
proximation considered here. The current density
is given by Eq. (43) of reference 7:
i:ir*ig,

wrn"t:2 [ Aorg*gdr.
J

By introducing the new variables and retainins

only diagonalelementswe find

e2
nr(k)+M(k)+l
Wn"t:=(Ao')^">_--.--'T
2
E(h\
and finally
f,Vru"t: tr;Zl,c(Vac.* 1) - I4lrr"*(Vac.)

grad. '1,),

the new variables

This is identical with the correspondingexpression for the Dirac electron.

(21) into iy

VI. THn Hrcnon AppnoxruerroNs oF TrrESELFENoncv IN tne TnBony oF THE posrrnor

exp ir . s,

i ( s ) : i 'h c e-il -

We obtain then

e2

it:i.hce(t

ir: Ii(s)

83

:;(Ao')^"
grad. ,!,*-{*

iz: -2e2L{*{.
We introduce
and get

ELECTRON

iz': -2e2Aot*{.

This is an expression which diverges quadratically. By putting P:h/a

one obtains
'"'=\n"(
4

THE

vanishes. The second part i2l is in the required

approximation directly given by

e2h r
l*2m2c2 /h2s2
W.t:_
| ds _- (s21m262/ft211
16ncJ
h r
: e2- - limrp:*l
mc4

OF

k+l

( o * ( k ) (al )* b ( k ) b * ( l )

la1n1a14y

- a ( k ) b ( 1 )- b ( k ) a ( l ) ) ,

l:k*s,

i1(s) is proportional to k*l and ii is therefore

irrotational for all transitions which start or end
with a particle at rest. (kfl is parallel to s if
k:0 or l:0). Thus i1 does not produce a
solenoidalfield. is is proportional to e2so that
its field does not come into consideration.The
particle does not give rise to a solenoidal field as
-long as it is at rest since it has no magnetic
spin moment.
The remaining term of the self-energy is

wru.,: _![

r. ua,.

(22)

i'is defined as the current density produced by

the field A6. Here the first part i1/ can be shown
to be again irrotational. The integral over the
product of i1f and the solenoidal vector Ao

It will be proved in this section that the

successiveapproximations of the self-energy of
the electron vanish in the limit zr+0. Furthermore it is shown that the divergence of the selfenergyis logarithmicin every approximation.rr
We consider the total system containing the
electrons and the radiation field and calculate
the energy W(s) oI the state s of this system.
W(s) can be expanded in a series of approximations W(s):2"14t<">1t1 corresponding to an
expansion in powers of the parameter ezfhc,
Since this proceduredoes not give zero for the
vacuum in Dirac's positron theory, the selfenergy of the electron must be defined as the
difference between the energy I,Iz(Vac.f 1) of the
state in which one electron is present and the
energy lV(Vac.) of the vacuum alone. We confine
ourselvesto the calculation of the electrodynamic
rrRecently_A. Mercier (Helv. Phys.
Acta tZ, 55 (193g))
.
has treated the same problem and has obtained a hisher
d.lvergence.As he dces not compute the numerical factois of
the drvergent expressions,he cannot exclude a factor zero
for the highest divergent terms. The following considerations, howeve-r,show that.the highest nonvanGhing terms
qlverge only loganthmlcally.

80
84

V.

F.

WEISSKOPF

self-energy. The calculation of the electrostatic The only differencebetween the pair (a), (b) and
energy and the mixed terms in higher approxima- the pair (c), (d) consists in the fact that the
specified transitions start from a positive or
tion can be made along the same lines.
We now consider the detailed form of the ath from a negative state, respectively. This fact
approximation Ws@\of the energy of the state s. does not affect the energy differences in the
W,@)is a sum of terms containing a product of denominators in the limit m--+0, as in this limit
2n matrix elements of the interaction energy the energiesof s"'6and s-s are eeuol. lt.remains
whicq correspond to consecutive transitions of to show that the numerators are also unchanged.
the total system from one state to another This can be seen in the following way: the
starting from the state s and returning to it. transition matrix elements appearing in the deThe terms have denominators that are products nominator belong to a chain of consecutive
of energy differencesbetween the original state s transitions starting from and qeturning to the
initial state of the system. Thrls the transition
and intermediate states.
The self-energyof the electron I7(") is given elements from or to s+0or s-o belong to a chain
of transitions of an electron starting from the
by the difference
state s1o(or from s-s, respectively) and returning
Ii/@:W@(Vac.f 1) - il/r")(Vac.). (30)
to this state. The transition elements form the
We now prove that ltr/@:0 for m:0 by com- product:
paring it with the self-energy of a positron 2 a :
'fu'<">
I i l " ( * 0 ) H ' { ( f ' ) \ l , t * @ t ) H r V @ ) | .. .
in the same state:

x \t*@"-,)H"/(+o) ). (33)

fi ' <a : y7a t (\/ ac.- l) - ryt' I (Vac.) : 1fi,tt

"t, 1St)
which is equal to the self-energy of the electron.
There is no loss of generality if we confine our
considerations to the self-energy of an electrouat rest, The state (Vac.{l) is then specifiedby:
every negative energy state and the lowest
positive state sao occupied; (Vac.-l) means:
every negative energy state except the highest
one.s-0is occupied.We now show that

Here -Fleis the interaction energy with the light

quantum which is emitted or absorbed with the
ith transitlon and '!(p;) is the wave function of
the electrlrn with the momentum fr which
performs the transition, ry'(+O) is the wave
function of the state sae or s-6, respectively'
After averaging over the two spin states for
every momentum pr, this product can be written
as trace of the following matrix:

W (") (Y ac.I l) t W <">(Y ac.- l)

:2w(n')(Vac.)
for m:0. (sz) r*:r'"t"ll/,
ttt4 7<"r(Vac.-1)
Comparing ryt"r(!ac.f1)
w'th l4l(r)(Vac.)we notice:
(a) Wr"t(Yac.-l) lacks all terms containing
transitions of the electron in the state s-0.
(b) t/(,)(Vac.f 1) contains additional terms
from transitions of the additional electron in
s+0.
(c) I4zt"r(Vac.-1) contains additional terms
from transitions of one of the vacuum electrons
into the empty state s-0.
(Vac. { 1) lacks terms containing tran(d) I4z<"t
sitions of the vacuum electrons into the state s+o
of the additional electron
We now prove that the missing terms of (a)
and (d) are in the limit m+0 identical with the
additional terms of (b) and (c), respectively.

+(r+1J4)

U'

,(+Y#)...a.+rr*or].
is the energy of the
Here E6: *(b?lm'c2)t
wave function V@t. fi we now go to the limit
v7+0, all terms with B disappear except those
containing the p in the last pbrenthesis. (fli does
not contain the operator B.)12Since the trace of
every expression containing a's but only one B
is zero, we are allowed to omit the last also, and
it becomesevident that P*:p-. From (30), (31)
rr This conclusion does not hold if one or more of the p;'s
As l7r"l is an integral over all possible inter'
are Mc,
mediate momenta pi in the volume I/, the terms with one
contain one or more factors (nc;l'"o ,nu,
or more bi-nc
these contributions should be neglected.

8l
ELECTROMAGNETIC

FIELD

and (32) it follows directly that

=0
1fi7<",

for

OF

THE

ELECTRON

85

tional to xc-ft, x-n-L...rc-2". We get, therefore,

m:O.

2-5n-l

F(kr'...k"'):

We now prove that this result infers a losarithmical divergenceof.,Th, for finite zz. The terms
of W@ contain transitions in lnhich n lisht
quanta are emitted and absorbed.We write
ll/(n) 2s an integral over the wave vectors
kr. . .k, of theselight quanta:

c,x-" for

p>)mc.

z:Zn_1

Not all of tbese c, need to be difierent from zero.

If cs is the first coefficient different from zero,
we can write
F(b'' . ' .k,') :6ryt

=s-r p(kr. . .k")

(35)

u
. .k^) (34)
w*, :,[o'' atr.. .
uo^r(kt.
fo"'u

because we certainly can neglect the terms with

z ) {, which are smaller by the rati,o - (mc
/.pt) "-8.
We are now interested in the function fr<"t(p\.
T h e r e l a r i o n ( 3 5 , ;i s n o t v a l i d i n t h e e n t i r e r e e i o n
and integrate to a finite lirnlt p/h)mc/h
l,n o f i n t e g r a t i o n i n ( 3 a ) . T h e r e g i o n s i n w h i c h
the
order to r,nake ltrr<">finite. The properties of
conditions PD)mc are not fulfilled are restricted
F(kt'.k") are very simple for all p1)mc where
to certain small areas in the 3z-dimensional
P; are as above the momenta of the electrons s p a c e o f t h e w a v e v e c t o r s
kr...k".
The conwhich change their states in the transitions to
tributions of these areas can be neelected for
interrnediate states (except of course the mo_
P))mc. We therefore get

mentum Po:O of.the electron under considera_

tion in its initial state). It can be shown that
_
fPlh
nPlh
W(aQP)=l
dk,,...I
dk,,Flhr,...h^,)
replacing every k 1 (l: I, . . n) by k / : xk 1 gives
vo

F ( k t , .. . k " , ) : x N F ( k r . . k , )

if

=rB"_r. W, (n.)(p) + smaller terms.

pn>>*r,

where .|y'is an integer. This result may be under_

stood in the following way. By means of the
substitution kt':xkt the momenta /i of the
excitedelectronsin rhe intermediate.tut", ur"
also multiplied by a since the pd are sums or
differencesof the momenta of the absorbed or
emitted light quanta. lf now k1))mc,all momenta
pi involved are large compared to mc, and, the
correspondingenergiescan be replacedby clp;1.
This neglect of mc compared to p; has as consequencethat all energy differences.8"-Er be_
tween the initial state and the intermediate
statesare multiplied by_nif one replacesk fty k i .
Since all terms of lT@ have 2n-!
energy
differences in the denominator, the latter is
proportional 1o *2r-1. The numerators consist of
n matrix elements which form expressionslike
(33). From the fact that every }r; is proportional
to &t-i un4 fror,- ihe structure of (33) it follows
that the numerators are sums of lerms propor-

Ju

The additional smaller terms come from the

regions of integration in which these considerations are not applicable and from the neglected
terms. From this relation follows, that

,i,,, =,(;)"
#

(.

:)

.mc2tsmater
".

Here N:3nf, c is a numerical factor and

0=t=n becauseany of the z integrationsmight
give rise to a logarithm. The factors nxc are
appiied in order to make the dimensionsfit. It
was proved that
:g.
liml^-o;'f4t<">
This is only possibleif .^/=0. This is equivalent
to the fact that litr"t does not diverge stronger
than

*,",-(;)"^.(*#)

T[IE0RIE DU POSITRON
P,ln II.

La d6couverte r6cente de l'6lectron positif ou positron a tamen6

l'attention vers une th6orie d6jA ancienne sur les 6tats d'6nergie
n6gative de l'6lectron, les r6sultats exp6rimentaux obtenus jus'
qu'ici se trouvant d'accord avec les pr6visions de cette th6orie.
La question des 6nergiesn6gatives se pose dds que l'on 6tudie
le rnouvement d'une particule conform6ment au principe de
relati'r,it6 resbreinte. Dans la m6canique non relativiste, l'6nergie W
d'une particule est donn6e en fonction de sa vitesse p ou de sa
quantit6 de mouvement p par :
\V:

IItttv!:
tr.

F.,
2ill'

ce qui correspond h un W toujours positif; mais en m6canique

relativiste ces formules doivent tre remplac6es par :
w):

n L 2 c L - +c- 7 p ) ,

ou
w:c

lrrl\'-+p',

,re qui permet h W d'6tre positif ou n6gatif.

On fait d'ordinaire l'hypothise suppl6mentaire que l'6nergie W
{oit toujours 6tre positive. Cela est admissible en th6orie classique of les grandeurs varient toujours de manidre continue et
oir W ne peut par cons6quent jamais passer d'une de ses valeurs
positives, qui doit tre ) mcz, d une de ses valeurs n6gatives
qui doit 6tre S - mcz. Dans Ia th6orie quantique, au contraire,
une variable peut subir des changem'ents discontinus, de sorte
que W peut passer d'une valeur positive h une valeur n6gative'

83
20

STRUCTURE ET PROPRIETfS DES NOYAUX ATOMIQUES.

Il n'a pas 6t6 possible de d6velopper une th6orie quantique relativiste de l'6lectron dans laquelle les transitions d'une valeur.
positive i une valeur n6gative de l'6nergie soient exclues. Il
n'est donc plus possible d'admettre que l'6nergie est toujours
positive sans qu'il en r6sulte des inr:ons6quences
dans la th6orie.
Dans ces conditions, deux possibilit6s nous restent ouvertes.
Ou bien nous devons trouver une signi{ication physique pour les
6tats d'6nergie n6gative, ou bien nous devons admettre que la
th6orie quantiq.e relativiste est inexacte dans la mesurp or'relle
pr6voit des transitions entre les 6tats d'6nergie positive.'et ceux
d'6nergie n6Eative. Or de sernblablestransitions sont en g6n6ral
pr6vues pour tous les processus rnettant en jeu des 6changes
d'6nergie de l'ordre de rnczet il ne semble y avoir aucune raison
de principe contre I'applicabilit6 de la m6canique quantique
actuelle h de semblables6changesd'6nergie. Il est vrai que cette
m6canique ne semble pas pouvoir s'appliquer aux ph6nomines
dans lesquels interviennent des distances de I'ordre du ravorr
classique de l'6lectron
Irirque la th6orie actuelle ne peut
fi,
en aucune fagon rendre compte de la structure de l'6lectron,
mais de telles distances, consid6r6escomme longueurs d'onde
6lectroniques, comespondent d des 6nergies de I'or.dre ryo;,
rncz,
beaucoupplus grandesque les changementsen question. Il semble
donc que la solution la plus raisonnable est de chercher un sens
physique pour les 6tats d'6nergie n6gative.
Un 6lectron dans un 6tat d'6nergie n6gative est un objet tout
i fait 6tranger d notre exp6rience,mais que nous pouvons cepend a n t 6 t u d i e r a u l r o i n t d e v u e l h 6 o r i q r r e n; o u s l r o u v o n s e
, n p a r ti culier, pr6voir son molrvement dans un charnp 6lectromagn6tique
quelconque donn6. Le r6sultat du calcul, e{Iectu6soit en m6canique classique, soit en th6orie guantique, est qu'un 6lectron
d'6nergie n6gative est d6vi6 par le champ exactement comme le
serait un 6lectron d'6nergie positive s'il avait une charge 6lectrique positive * e au lieu de la charge n6gative habituelle - e.
Ce 16sultat suggdre imm6diatement une assimilation entrt
l'6lectron d'6nergie n6gative et le positron. On serait tent6
d'admettre qu'un 6lectron dans un 6tat d'6nergie n6gative constitue pr6cisr4mentun positron, mais cela n'est pas acceptable.

84
T H E o R I ED U P o s I T R o N .

:2o5

parce que Ie positron observ6 n'a certainement pas une 6nergie

cin6tique n6gative.
Nous pouvons obtenir urr meilleur r6sultat en utilisant le
principe cl'exclusionde Pauli, en vertu duquel un 6tat quantique
donn6 ne peut 6tre occup6 par plus d'un 6lectron. Admettons
que dans l'Univers tel que nous le connaissons,les 6tats d'6nergie
n6gative soient presque tous occup6s par des 6lectrons, et que
la distribution ainsi obtenue ne soit pas accessibleh notre observation h causede son uniformit6 dans toute l'6tendue de I'espace.
Dans ces conditions, tout 6tat d'6nergie n6gative non occuir6
repr6sentant une rupture de cette uniformit6, doit se r6v6ler
h I'observation comme une sorte de laoune. Il est possible d'admettre que ces lacunes constituent les positrons.
Cette hypothdse r6sout les dilficult6s principales de l'interpr6tation des 6tats d'6nergie n6gative. Une lacune dans la distribution des 6lectrons d'6nergie n6gative repr6sente une 6nergie
positive, puisqu'elle correspondh un d6faut local d'6nergie n6gative. De plus, le molrvement de cette. lacuue dans un chamJr
6lectromagn6tique guelconque est exactement 1e mdme que
celui de l'6lectron n6cessairepour combler la lacune. Nous pouvons tirer de lA deux conclusions : d'abord que le nrouvement
de la lacune peut 6tre repr6sent6 par une fonction d'onde de
Schrridinger analogue h celle qui repr6sentele nrouvement d'urr
6lectron, et ensuite, que la lacune se comporte dans un cham;r
de la m6me manidre qu'un 6lectron positif d'6nergie positive.
Ainsi la lacune prend exactement l'aspect d'une particule ordinaire 6lectris6epositivement et son identification avec le positrorr
se pr6sente comme tout h fait plausible.
Si notre hvpothdse est correcte,nous devons pouvoir en d6duire
un certain nombre de cons6quencesexp6rimentalement r'6ri{iables. Tout d'abord, la masse du positron doit 6tre exacternent
6gale d celle de l'6lectron et sa chargedoit 6tre exactement6galeet
oppos6eir cellede l'6lectron. De plus nous pouvons pr6voir certains
r6sultats concer,nantla cr6ation et la disparition des positrons.
Un 6lectron ordinaire d'6nergie positive ne peut pas sauter
dans l'un des 6tats occup6sd'6nergie n6gative, en raison du prirrcipe de Pauli; il peut, au contraire, sauter dans trne lacune pour
la combler. Ainsi un 6lectron et un positron peu\.ent se d6ttuire

85
206

S T R U C T U R E T P R O P R I E T ED
SE S N O Y A U XA T O M I Q U E S .

r6ciproquement. Leur 6nergie doit se retrouver sous forme de

photons et il r6sulte des principes de conservation de l'6nergie
et de la quantit6 de mouvement que deux photolls au moins
doivent 6tre produits. On peut calculer la probabilit6 pour qu,un
tel processusait lieu et obtenir ainsi la vie probable d'un positron
se mouvant d travers une distribution donn6e d'6lectrons. Le
r6sultat est une vie moyenne de 3 X ro-z sec pour un positron
en mouvement lent dans l'air h la pression atmosph6rique, cette
dur6e moyenne augmentant avec la vitesse. La valeur ainsi obtenuel
est d'un ordre de grandeur compatible avec l'exp6rience, puis-t
qu'elle est su{Iisante pour permettre h un positron rapide de
traverser une chambre de condensation cle Wilson sans y 6tre
en g6n6ral d6truit, et assez petite cependant pour que les positrons ne soient pas des objets commun6ment pr6sents au laboratoire.
Un 6lectron et un positron peuvent s'annihiler r6ciproquement
en donnant naissance i un seul photon si un noyau atomique
est pr6sent pour absorber la quantit6 de mouvement lib6r6e.
Le processus inverse consiste dans la production d'un positron
et d'un 6lectron par Ia rencontre d'un seul photon d'6nergie
su{Iisante avec un noyau atomique. On peut se le repr6senter
comme un e{Tet photo-6lectrique sur un des 6lectrons d'6nergie
n6gative tl6crivant des orbites hyperboliques au voisinage du
noyau; cet 6lectron 6tant 6lev6 vers un 6tat d'6nergie positive
et apparaissant ainsi comme 6lectron ordinaire, tandis qu'il
laisse deni.dre lui une Jacune se comportant comme un positron.
La probabilit6 d'apparition d'un tel proeessus a 6t6 calcul6e
approximativement par Oppenheimer et ind6pendarnment par
Peierls, et le r6sultat est d'un ordre de grandeur eui concorde
avec les observations relatives ir la production de positrons par
des rayons y durs tombant sur des noyaux lourds.
Pour que Ia conception que nous proposons des 6tats d'6nergie
n6gative se d6veloppe en th6orie compldte, nous devons consid6rer non seulement le mouvement des 6lectrons et des lacunes
dans un champ, mais aussi la manidre dont un.champ 6lectromagn6tique est produit par les 6lectrons et les lacunes. Pour
cela, il est n6cessaired'introduire une hypothdse nouvlle puisque
Ia conception ordinaire que chaque cha"ge - e sur un 6lectron

86
THEORIE DU POSITRON.

207

contribue h produire la densit6 6lectrique p qui d6termine le

champ 6lectrique E conforrn6ment h l'6quation de Maxwell :
4t )

, l i vi : 4 r o

conduirait 6videmment d un champ infini en tout point.

Faisons l'hypothdse que la distribution d'6lectrons dans laquelle
aucun 6tat d'6nergie positive n'est occup6, tandis que tous les
6tats d'6nergie n6gative le sont ne produit aucun champ, et que/
ce sont les 6carts h partir de cette distribution qui d6terminent
les champs conform6ment h l'6quation (r). Dans cette hypothdse,
un 6tat d'6nergie positive occup6 produirait un champ correspondant d une charge n6gative - e etr un 6tat d'6nergie n6gative
non occup6 produirait un champ correspondant h une charge
positive f e. Nous obtenons ainsi une nouvelle propri6t6 des
lacunes qui contribue ir rendre vraisemblable notre assimilation
de ces lacunes avec les positrons.
La nouvelle hypothdse est tout i fait satisfaisante lorsqu'il
s'agit d'une r6gion de I'espace orl n'existe aucun champ, et oir
la distinction entre les 6tats d'6nergie positive et ceux d'6nergie
n6gative est nettement d6finie; mais elle doit 6tre pr6cis6elorsqu'il
s'agit d'une r6gion de I'espace oi le champ 6lectromagn6tique
n'est pas nul pour pouvoir conduire i des r6sultats libres de
toute ambiguit6. Il faut sp6cifier math6matiquement quelle
distribution d'6lectrons est suppos6ene produire aucun chamlr
et donner aussi une rbgle pour soustraire cette distribution de
celle qui existe e{Iectivement dans chaque probldme particulier,
de manidre ir obtenir une di{I6rence finie qui peut figurer dans (r ),
puisque, en g6n6ral, I'op6ration math6matique de soustraction
entre deux in{init6s est ambigu6.
Cette question n'a pas encore 6t6 examin6e ni r6solue pour le
cas g6n6ral d'un champ 6lectromagn6tique arbitraire. Il y a,
cependant, un cas particulier dans lequel les hypothdses n6cessaires semblent assez6videntes : celui d'un champ 6lectrostatique
permanent. Nous allons traiter ici ce cas, en supposant le champ
su{fisamment faible pour qu'une m6thode de perturbation puisse
6tre utilis6e. Nous constaterons que la distribution qui ne produit
aucun champ ne satisfait pas aux 6quations du mouvement. En

87
1)O8

S T R U C T U R E T P R O P R I E T ED
S E S N O Y A U XA T O M I Q U E S .

retranchant cette distribution de celle qui satisfait h ces 6quations

et qui correspond ir un 6tat or) ne sont pr6sents ni 6lectrons ni
positrons, nous obtiendrons une di{f6rence qui pourra 6tre interpr6t6e physiquement comme un effet de polarisation par le
champ 6lectrique de la distribution normale des 6lectrons
d'6nergie n6gative.
Nous emploierons la m6thode d'approximation de HartreeFock qui attribue ir chaque 6lectron sa propre fonction d'onde
individuelle ,1,(C), et nous introduirons la matrice densit6 R
d6finie par
( E ' I t \ l q "t : 2 " V \ q ' ) ' ! ,( q ") ,
Ia sommation s'6tendant ir tous les 6lectrons, c'est-h-dire h tous
les 6tats occup6s. Toute distribution d'6lectrons peut tre oaract6ris6e par une semblable matrice, au degr6 de pr6cision que
comporte la m6thode de Hartree-Fock. Cette repr6sentation n'est
pas relativiste puisque les valeurs g', q" des variables associ6es
ir un 6l6ment de la matrice R correspondent ir deux points diIT6rents de I'espace,mais ir un mdme instant. N6anmoins elle convient
pour notre probldme actuel.
L'6guation de mouvement pour R est (1) :
i i t r \ : r { R- R I I ,

(z)

ori H est l'hamiltonien pour un 6lectron mobile dans le champ :

II -

a e , ( o , p ) - + p t n l . c 2-

eY ,

les p et o 6tant les matrices de spin habituelles et V le potentiel

6lectrostatique. V doit contenir une partie repr6sentant la contribution au ohamp des autres 6lectrons pr6sents. La condition
Irour que la distribution satisfasse au principe d'exclusion est
(3)

ll2 :

lt.

Repr6sentonspar R6la distribution qui est suppos6ene produire

(r) Cl. Drnec, Proc. Cam.b, Phil, Soc., t. 25, rgzg, p. 6z; et 26, r93o,
p.376.

88
THEoRIE DU PosITRoN.

:IOII

aucun charnp. I-'hypothdse la plus irnm6diate pour Ro est

',,-i('-+)

ori W est l'6nergie cin6tique d'un 6lectron :

\\r :

cgr(O, p)r-

93lzc,t.

Ceci signifie que, dans une repr6sentation matricielle ori W est.

diagonale, Ro sera 6galement diagonale et aura pour 6l6ments
diagonaux o ou r suivant que l'6nergie W est positive ou n6gative. C'est l'6nergie cin6tique W qui doit figurer dans (,{) et non
l'6nergie totale H parce que, dans ce dernier cas, I'expression({)
serait modifi6e seulement par I'addition d'une constante au
protentiel 6lectrique V et ne pourrait par cons6quent avoir aucune
signification phvsique.
Consid6rons un 6tat permanent pour lequel l'6quation de
rnouvement (z) se r6duit h :
o:IIR-ltll

(5)

Cette 6quation n'est pas satisfaite par R : Ro ir moins que V

lle soit une constante. Supposonsque V soit une petite quantit6
du premier ordre et cherchons une solutiorr de (3) et (5) de la
forme R : Ru * R, oir R, soit une quantit6 du premier ordre.
En n6gligeantles petites quantit6s du secondordre, l'6quation (5)
donne:
((j)

.r:(W-eV)(Ro+-R,)-(Ilo-fllr)(W-eV)
: W l t ,- R r W - e ( V R 6 - R n V ) .

L'op6rateur I W I peut 6tre d6fini comme Ia racine carr6e positive

de W2 ou m2 c' * cz p2. Ainsi :
Wl:c{r.r":4p:;i.
S i r r o u sp o s o n s

w
l\Y1

-. i'

llous avoDs
I

W :

ci(,elc't4

et aussi
F, o :
lxsrr?uT soLvAY {PHy-*IQUEJ,

I'
-(I-1).

ptl'.t

89
2]O

S T R U C T U R E T P R O P R I E T ED
SE S N O Y A U XA T O M I Q U E S .

L'6quation (6) peut, par cons6quent, sn6crire:

i1

y ( m 2 c 2 + - p r ) - R 1 - R 1 1 ( n r l 6 1 1 p: : ; i
ii,l.\'

0)

-\'t).

L'6quation (3) donne :

(Ro-+Rr)r:Ro-fRr,
RoRr-+RlRs:

qui se r6duit h

R1,

1 R 1- + R 1 1: o .

En utilisant cette relation et l'6quation y2: r, nous d6duisons

d" (y), aprds multiplication des deux membres h gauche par y :
tl

1z z : c 1- r p r ) i R , - + R r ( t t z 1 c 2 -p+.-) T :

ii,\'

- 1\ 1 r.

La quantit6 qui nous int6resse est la densit6 6lectrique correspondant d la distribution \. Pour l'obtenir, nous devons former
la somme diagonale d" R , par rapport attx variables de spin
et prendre ensuite l'6l6ment diagonal g6n6ral, multipli6 par - e,
de la matrice r6sultante par rapport aux variables de position o.
Si D repr6sente la somme diagonale par rappor[ aux variables
de spin, nous avons, aprds un caleul simple :
-!r
( t r t ! c ) - r p : l E D r R r l - 1 -I l ( l l 1 ) ( z r 1 c 1 - + - p r r T

: 129C o < v - y v T )
: r:11''

---l----(lr:c:-;

lrp. \ p ! -+ t,trc2\ ----l------r l.

1 7 1 1 : 3 1 4P : ; ' : )

P:)E

Si nous supposon$maintenant I'emploi d'une repr6sentation dans

laquelle la matrice quantit6 de mouvement p est diagonale et
si (p' ] D (Rt)l p") d6signe,dans ces conditions, l'6l6ment g6n6ral
de la matrice D (Rl), nous avons
lr

( nztcz-+ p't 7t (p' I D ( R, ) | p',) -+-(p' I D ( It, ) | 1t") ( mz ct a p"t)z

PI

: r l ( p ' , V 7 , , r! r - - - - - l - ! _ ,
"

rp'. p, )+- ntlclf ----l-rl

( nzt cz -+-p't 17

ce qui donne
( s ) ( r r 'l D ( R r ) I p " ) :

z 1 @ ' ) l ' tr r " ,

'

(nt2 c2 +- lttt':f I

(9" P") -+ ntct

I m ' c 2 ' +p - ' 1) 2( n t zc 2- + p " t ) t .

( 1azf -4-P'z 17I (nt2 ct -+-P"t 11

90
THEORTE
DU POSTTRON.

2.Ir

Nous pouvons maintenant transformer D (Rr) dans une repr6sentation pour laquelle les variables de position c sont diagonales
et en calculer l'6l6ment diagonal. En utiiisant les lois habjtuelles
de transformation, on ohtient
t,
( r r ) ( . i r lD 1 1 1)' i r ) :
[ [ " - ' , r , n - p ' ) t t ' ( p ' l D ( R)1l p " ) d l t 'r Q : : t " .
n' .J .,1

Maintenant, puisque V n'est fonction que des variables de

position , et pas des quantit6s de mouvement p, (p' I V i p'1)
ne doit d6pendre que de la diff6rencep'-p//.
Par suite, si nous
substituons I'expression donn6e par le second membre de (8)
dans l'int6grale (9), et si nous prenons pour nouvelles variables
d'int6gration p' + p' et p' -ptt, nous pouvons effectuerI'int6gration par rappor[':, p'+ p" en laissant V quelconque.Le
r6sultat contient un infini logarithmique.
On pourrait croire, d premidre vue, que la pr6sence de cet
infini rend la th6orie inacceptable. Cependant, nous ne pouvons
pas supposer que la th6orie s'applique lorsqu'il s'agit d'6nergies
supr6rieuresi I'ordre de r37 tncz, et la manidre de proc6der la
plus raisonnable semble tre de limiter arllitrairement le domaine
d'int6gration i une valeur de Ia quantit6 de mouvement I (p' f p")
correspondant h des 6nergies 6lectroniques de I'ordre indiqu6.
Cela revient, physiquement, h admettre que la distribution concernant les 6lectrons d'6nergie n6gative inf6rieure h un niveau
d'environ - r37 mcz ne donne pas lieu A une polarisation par
le champ 6lectrique de la manidre indiqu6e par notre th6orie.
La place exacte que nous attribuons h ce niveau d'6nergie limite
n'a pas grande importance puisque la valeur de ce niveau figure
seulement dans un logarithme.
Si P est la grandeur du vecteur quantit6 de mouveI
ment 1(p'*

p")

h laquelle nous limitons le domaine d'int6-

gration, le r6sultat final, obtenu aprds une int6gration compliqu6e,

est :

(r,,)

-e(riD(R,)t.r):-"O*$r#-:)t

- ' *4 n
"" lf,
\*)

\r-

r"*

of p est la densit6 6lectrique produisant le potentiel V, de sorte

9I
S T R U C T U R E T P R O P R I E T ED
SE S N O Y A U XA T O M I Q U E S .

2t2

que
VrV: - 4:ip,
et oir les terrnes contenant les d6riv6es de p d'ordre sup6rieur au
second ont 6t6 n6glig6s.
Le secondmembre de (ro) donne la densit6 6lectriqueprovenant
de la polarisation produite par l'action du champ sur la distributiorr des 6lectrons d'6nergie n6gative. Le terme important
est le premier eui, pour 3
o" -*p.

t^

r3,J, est sensiblemefi -#?

Ceci signifie qu'il n'y a de densit6 produite par

polarisation que dans les endroits oir se trouve situ6e la densit6 p

productrice du champ et que la densit6 induite y neutralise une
fractron d'environ

d" la densit6 productrice du champ. Le

;7
second terme dans le second membre de (ro) repr6sente une
correction importante seulement lorsque la densit6 p varie rapidement avec Ia position et change de maniire appr6ciable sur une
d i s l a n c ed e l ' o r d r e d u a .
Comme .o.rr6q.,..r.JT,, .ul",rl pr6c6dent, il semblerait que les
charges 6lectriques normalement observ6es sur les 6lectrons,
protons ou autres particules 6lectris6esne sont pas les charges
v6ritables port6es par ces particules et figurant dans les 6quations
fondamentales, mais sont l6gdrement plus petites dans le rapport
doenviron r36 d r37. Pour des processuscomportani des 6changes
d'6nergie de I'ordre d.e mcz, il n'y aurait probablement pas le
temps, cependant, pour que la polarisation des 6lectronsd'6nergie
n6gative s'6tablisse de manidre compldte, de sorle qu'on doit
s'atbendre h ce que les charges observ6essoient plug voisines des
charges r6elles. Il en r6sulterait des d6viations de I'ordre
de r pour roo dans des expressionstelles que la forrnule de KleinNishina ou la formule de diffusion de Rutherford lorsque des
6nergies de l'ordre d.e mcz sont en jeu. Lorsque la v6rification
exp6rir'entale de ces formules pourra 6tre rendue su{fisarnment
pr6cise, on y trouvera un contr6le de I'exactitude de nos hvpothdses sur le champ produit par la distribution des 6lectrons
d'6nergie n6gative.

P o p e r8

92

UggN DIE ELEKTRODYNAMIKDES

VAKUUMSAUF GRUND DER QUANTENTHEORIE DES ELEKTRONS
voN

V. VEISSKOPF
ines der wichtigsten F'rgebnisse in der neueren Entp
'/
I
wicklung der Elektronentheorie ist die Moglichkeit,
elektromagnetische Feldenergie in Materie zu verwandeln'
Ein Lichtquant

z. B. kann bei Vorhandensein von andern

elektromagnetischen Feldern irn leeren Raum absorbiert und

in Materie verwandelt .rNerden,wobei ein Paar von Elektronen mit entgegengesetzterLadung entsteht.
Die Erhaltung der Energie erfordert, falls das Feld, in
welchem die Absorption vor sich geht, statisch ist, dass das
absorbierte Lichtquant

die ganze z:ur Erzeagung des Elek-

tronenpaares notwendige Energie aufbringt. Die Frequenz

e2
d e r s e l b e nm u s s s o m i t d e r B e z i e h u n g h v : 2 m c 2 * e 1 i geniigen, wobei mcz die Ruhenergie eines Elektrons und e1
und esdie iibrige Energie der beiden Elektronen ist. Diesen Fall
haben wir z. B. bei der Erzeugung eittes Blektronenpaares
durch ein 7-Quant im Coulombfeld eines Atomkerns vor uns.
Die Absorption kann auch in Feldern stattfinden, die
von andern Lichtquanten stammen, wobei die letzteren zur
Energie des Elektronenpaares beitragen kdnnen, sodass in
diesem Falle die Energie 2mcz* e1* e2 der heiden Elektronen gleich der Summe aller bei diesem Prozess absorbierten Lichtquanten sein muss.
Das Ph5nomen der Absorption von Licht im Vakuum

93
4

pr. 6. V. wsrssxopn:

stellt eine '\''vesentliche

Abweichung vor der M.c.xw'rr,'schen
Elektrodynamik dar. Das Vakuum sollte ndmlich unabhAngig
von den dort he'rschenden Feldern fiir eine Lichtrveile frei
durchdringlich sein, da sich verschiede'e Felder nach den
Mlxwrll'schen
Gleichungen infolge der Linearitit derselben
unabhingig iiberlagern kdnnen.
Es ist bereits ohne niheres Eingehen auf die spezielle
Theorie verstdndlich, dass auch in solchen Ferdern, die nicht
die notige Energie besitzen, um ein Elektronenpaar zu
erzeugen, Abrveichungen von der Mlxwnr,r,'schen Elektro_
dynamik auftreten miissen: wenn hochfrequentes Licht in
elektromagnetischen Feldern absorbiert werden kann, so
man fiir Lichtstrahlen, deren FreqLtenz zar paarer_

wird

zeugung nicht ausreicht, eine Streuung oder Ablenkung er_

warten, analog zur Streuung des Lichts an einem Atom.
dessen kleinste Absorptionsfrequenz gr6sser als die des
Lichts ist. Das Licht wird sich also beim Durchgang durch
elektromagnetische Felder so verhalten, als ob das Vakuum
unter der Einwirkung der Felder eine von der Einheit
verschiedene DielektrizitAtskonstante erhalten wiirde.
Um diese Erscheinungen darstellen zu krinnen, muss die
Theorie dem leeren Raum gewisseEigenschaften zuschreiben,
die die ern'iihnten Abrn'eichungen von der Maxwrr,r,'schen
hervorrufen. Tats:ichlich frihrt die relativistische Wellengleichung des Elektrons auch zu derartigen Folgerungen, \ renn man die aus der Dlnac'schen
Elektrodynamik

wellengleichung folgenden Zustfinde mit negativer kinetischer

Energie zur Beschreibung des Vakuums heranzieht.
Die Grundannahme der Drn.qc'schenTheorie des positrons
besteht darin, dass das physikalisc.he Verhalten des Vakuums
im gewissen Sinne beschrieben werden kann durch das Verhalten einer unendlichen Menge von Elektronen, die

94
Uber die Elektrodynamik'

des Vakuums.

Vakuumelektronen -

die sich in den ZustAnden negativer

kinetischer Energie befi.nden und simtliche dieser Zustiinde
besetzthalten. Die ubereinstimmung kann selbstverstandlich
nicht vollkommen sein, da die Vakuumelektronen eine unendliche Ladungs- und Stromdichte besitzen,die sicher keine
physikalische Bedeutung haben darf. Es zeigt sich aber, dass
z. B. die Paarerzeugung(und ihr Umkehrprozess) gut wieder='
gegebenwird als ein Sprung eiues Vakuumelektrons in einen
Zustand positiver Energie unter dem Einfluss elektromages als ein reales Elektron in
Ercheinung tritt, wiihrend das Vakuum um ein negatives
Elektron irmer geworden ist, was sich durch das Auftreten

netischer Felder, wodurch

eines positiven Elektrons dussern muss' Die von diesem

-VerBilde ausgehende Berechnung der Paarerzeugung und
nichtung zeigt eine gute Ubereinstimmung mit der Erfahrung'
Die Berechnung der meisten andern Effekte, die aus der
Positronentheorie folgen, stossen immer auf das Problem'
in welchem Ausmass das Verhalten der Vakuumelektronen
tatsrichlich als das des Vakuums anzusehen ist' Dieses
noch durch den Umstand erschwert' dass
Ladungs-, Strom- und Energiedichte der Vakuutnelektronen
unendlich sind, sodass es sich meistens darum handelt' von

Problern wird

einer unendlichen Summe in eindeutiger Weise einen endlichen Teil abzutrennen und diesem Realitiit zuzuschreiben'
Die Losung dieses Problems wurde von DInlc und HnrsENBERGdadurch duichgefiihrt, dass sie eine wiederspruchsfreie
Methode angaben, den physikalisch bedeutungsvollen Teil
der Wirkungen der Vakuumelektronen zu bestimmen' Es
q,ird im folgenden gezeigt,dass diese Bestimmung weitgehend
frei von jeder Willkiir ist, da sie in konsequenter Weise nur
folgende Eigenschaften der Vakumelektronen als physikalisch bedeutungslos annimmt:

95
Nr.6. V. Wprssxopr:
Die Energie der Vakuumelektronen im feldfreien
Raum.

l;l

Die Ladungs- und Stromdichte der Vakuumelek-

(r)

tronen im feldfreien Raum.

3) Eine rdumlich und zeitlich konstante feldunabhiingige elektrische und magnetische polarisierbarkeit
des Yakuunrs.

Diese Grdssenr beziehen sich nur auf das feldfreie Vakuum,

und es darf als selbstr-erstdndlich angesehenwerden, dass
diese keine phrsikalische Bedeutung haben k6nnen. Alle
drei Gr6ssen er\\'eisen sich nach Sumnrierung der Beitriige
aller Takuumselektronen als divergierende Summen. Es
sei noch hinzugefigt, dass eine konstante polarisierbarkeit
in keiner \\'eise feststellbar r'dre, sondern nur sdmtliche
Ladungs- und Feldstdrkens'erte mit einem konstanten Fak_
tor multiplizieren q-rirde.
q'erden im nichsten Abschnitt auf Grund
dieser
Annahmen die physikalischen Eigenschaften des Vakuums
bei Anrn'esenheit ron Feldern berechnen, die zeitlich und
riumlich langsam rerinderlich sind. Wir verstehen darunter
Wir

solche Felder F, die sich auf Strecken der Liinge ft urrd

in Zeiten der Linge a" .ro. wenig verindern, ,r#"ro-it
den Bedingungen

( t.)

l l e . " o r ' t . . t rr-'rt, . 4 l q 4 l

mc,---r
mczlEtl..

lFl

genigen. Bei Anwesenheit solcher Felder werden im

all_
gemeinen keine Paare erzeugt, da die auftretenden
Licht_
quanten zu geringe Energie haben. Die Extremfiille, in denen
die Strahlungsdichte so hoch ist, um das Zusammenwirken
t Die
Annahmen, l.) oder 2.) oder 3.) als bedeutungslos
anzusehen,
werden im folgenden mit 11, 12 bzw.I3 zitiert.
3 ft ist die
durch 2z geteilte pr,lNcr'sche Konstante.

96
Uber die ElektrodynamikdesVakuums.

von sehr vielen Quanten zu gestatten, oder in denen elektrostatische Felder mit Potentialdifl'erenzen von iber 2mcz
vorhanden sind (in diesem Falle wffrden auf Grund. des
Kr,nrn'schen Paradoxons Paare entstehen) r*'ollen n'ir von
der Betrachtung ausschliessen. Unter diesen Umstinden
lassen sich die elektromagnetischen Eigenschaften des Va=-/
kuums durch eine feldabhiingige elektrische und magnetische
Polarisierbarkeit des leeren Raums darstellen, die z. B. za
einer Lichtbrechung in elektrischen Feldern oder zu einer
Streuung von Licht an Licht fiihrt. Der Dielektrizitfrts- und
Permeabilithtstensor des Vakuums hat dann fiir schu'ichere
Feldstdrken niherungsweise folgende Form , (i, i, i,i
sind die vier elektromagnetischen Feldgrdssenr.)

Dr:
(2) oix: dir,*

-j,

tikDk,Hr: Z p*Bo
1n, - n ldik+ 7BiBft]

"knlz

tnr*:dix.#fu

i: A'
o" t x : \f0l ,,
tI k

- 7E,E*].
lz6, - n 1d,*

Die Berechnung dieser Erscheinungen wurde von Eurrn

u.

Kocxer,e und von HnrsnNsrnc u. Eur,en3 bereits durchgeftihrt. Im nflchsten Abschnitt sollen jedoch bedeutend einfachere Methoden angewendet werden. Ausserdem sollen die
Eigenschaften des Vakuunrs auf Grund der skalaren relativistischen Wellengleichung des Elektrons von Krrrl

u. Gonoox

berechnet werden. Diese Wellengleichung liefert nach Prurr

u. Wnlssropra

die Existenz positiver und negativer Par-

tikel, und ihre Erzeugung und Vernichtung durch elektro1 Es werden im folgenden
nur dort Pfeile iiber Vektorgr6ssen gesetzt, wo Verwechslungen mdglich sind.
t H. Eur,on
u . B . K o c x r r - , N a t u r w i s s . 2 8 , 2 . 1 6 ,1 9 3 b ; H . E u r - n n , A n n .
d. Phys. v.26, 398.
u W. HnrsoNranc

u. H. Eur-an, ZS. f. Phys. iXl, 214, 1936.

a W. Peur,r
u. V. Wussxonr,
Helv. Phys. Acta. ?, Zl0, 1934.

97
Nr. 6. V. Wnrssxopr:

magnetische Felder ohne jede besondere Zusatzannahme.

Jedoch besitzen diese Partikel keinen Spin und befolgen die
Bosestatistik, weshalb diese Theorie nicht auf die realen
E l e k t o n e n a n w a n d b a r i s t . E s i s t i e d o c h b e m e r k e n s w e r t ,d a s s
auch diese Theorie auf Eigenschaften des vakuums fiihrt,
denen keine physikalische Bedeutung zukonrmen kann. So
erhiilt man z. B. ebenfalls eine unendliche rdumlich u'd
zeitlich konstante feldunabhringige polarisierbarkeit des vakuums. Nach Weglassung der entsprechenden Glieder ge_
langt ntan zu ihnlichen Resultaten, wie clie der positronen_
theorie Drnec's. Die physikalischen Eigenschaften des Va_
k u u r n s r u h r e n i n d i e s e r . T h e o r i ev o n d e r > N u l l p u n k t s e n e r g i e <
der Materie her, die auch bei nichtvorhandenen Teilchen
von den iiusseren Feldstiirken abhiingt und somit ein zusatzglied zu der reinen Maxwelr,'schen Feldenergie liefert.
Im 3. Abschnitt behandeln wir die F-olgerungenaus der
Drna,c'schen Positronentheorie fiir den F all allgemeiner dus_
serer Felder und wir zeigen, dass mari auf Grund der ge_
nannten drei Annahmmen uber die Wirkungen der Vakuum_
elektronen stets zu endlichen und eindeutige' Resultaten
kommt. Die HnrsBNerRc'schen Subtraktionsvorschriften er_
weisen sich als identisch rnit diesen drei Annahmen und
erscheinen somit bedeutend weniger willkiirlich als es in der
Literatur bisher angenommen wurde.
Alle folgende Rechnungen beriicksichtigen nicht explizit
die gegenseitigenWechsehvirhungen der Vakuumelektronen
sondern betrachten ausschliesslichjedes einzelneVakuumelek_
tron allein unter der Ei'wirku'g
ei'es vorhandenen Ferdes.
Bei diesem Verfahren sind aber die gegenseitigen Einwirkungen nicht vollkommen vernachlfrssigt,da man das [ussere
Feld gar nicht von dem Feld trennen kann, das von den
vakuumselektronen selbst erzeugt ist, sodass das in die Rech-

98
Uber die Elektrodynamik

des Vakuums.

nung eingehende Feld die Wirkungen der andern Vakuumelektronen zum Teil implizit enthelt. Dieses Vorgehen ist
analog zur Ha,nrnrn'schen Berechnung der Elektronenbahnen
eines Atoms in dem Feld, das von den Elektronen selbst
verdndert wird. Zur expliziten Berechnung der Wechseli
\firkungen

mtisste man

die Quanlenelektrodynamik anwenden, d. h. die Quantelung der Wellenfelder vornehmen.

Dies fiihrt bekanntlich auclr bereits ohne die Annahme unendlich vieler Vakuumselektronen zu Divergenzen und soll
im folgenden nicht nflher berrihrt werden.

II.
In diesemAbschnittsoll die ElektrodynamikdesVakuums
ftir Felder behandeltwerden, die den Bedingungen(l) geniigen. Die Feldgleichungensind durch die Angabeder Energiedichte U als Funktion der Feldstirken festgelegt-Wir bestimmen diese aus der Energiedichtef a"r Yakuumelektronen, die ftir das Verhalten des Vakuums massgebendsein
sollen.
Es ist vorteilhaft, auf die Lagrangefunktion t des etrektromagnetischenFeldes zurrickzugreifen,da diese drrch <Iie
Forderung der relativistischen Invarianz schon weitgehenrl
festgelegtist. ZwiSchen der Lagrangefunktion Z. und der
EnergiedichteU bestehenfolgendeBeziehungen:
(3)

u: Zu,#,-t.

In der Maxwer,l'schen Elektrodl'namik gilt:

L : -*(En- B,), L':

#(ru+F).
Die Zusdlze zu dieser Lagrangefunklion mi-rssenebenso wie
diese selbst relativistische Invarianten sein. Solange rvir uns

99
10

Nr. 6. v. wnrssropr.:

nur auf langsam verinderliche Felder beschrinken, (Bedingung (1)), werden diese Zusf,tze nur von den Werten der
Feldstiirken abhingen und nicht von deren Ableitungen. Sie
krinnen daher nur Funktionen ddr Invarianten (E2 - 82) und
(EB)z sein. Entwickeln wir die Zasdtze nach Potenzen der
FeldstArken bis zur 6. Ordnung, so erhalten lvir:
1

L : +(Er_R )+ L,
8n'
L , : a ( E z _ B z 1 zp+( E B ) r +
+ t (E',- Br),+ e(8, - B\ (nn;z1 . . .
und daher nach (3)
(1

l| U :

(t\ t
r^z

---(82+82)+U'

67t

)I u ' : o ( E ' - B z ) G E 2 + B ' ) + p ( E B ) ' +

+ E ( 8 ,- B r ) r ( 5 8 2 + B \ + e @ B ) r ( } B , - 8 2 ) + . . .
[

Der Zusatz zur Energiedichte ist somit durch die Invarianzeigenschaften weitgehend festgelegt; es wird

also im fol-

genden nur notwendig sein die vorkommenden Konstanten

a(,P,8,E,... zu bestimmen. Diesen Ansitzen liegt schon die
spezielle Annahme zugrunde, dass U' keine Glieder 2. Ordnung in den Feldstirken

enthfllt, sondern nur htihere. Dies

ist gleichbedeutend damit, dass das Vakuum keine von den

Feldern unabhiingige Polarisierbarkeit besitzt.
Die Rechnungen von Eur,nn u. Kocrnr, und von Helsrr.rBERG u. Eur,nn liefern fflr die vier Konstanten die Werte:

": ffi{}u,

f :7o,

I
s

e6hT

ffio"/ -t"*'

13.

s:2s'

Die in (2) angegebenenDielektrizitiits- und Permeabilitiitstensorenergebensich aus den Beziehungen:

too
, Uber die Elektrodynamih des Vakuums.

D,:

AI.
4- .n-f r ,
dE;

11

AL
H
- - ' - - 4 -f 't "AB;

Wir werden im folgenden diese Resultate auf eine wesentlich einfachere Weise herleiten.
)
Der Zasa\z U' zur MAxwer,I,'schenEnergiedichte des
Vakuums soll durch d,en Zusatz D' bestimmt sein, den die
Vakuurnelektronen
beitragen,Die Energiedichtebei Anwesenheit von Elektronen in den ZustAnden l)t,,Vz. . . r/, . . . ist
gegebendurch

U_

s , (82+B\+ fr',

fiu,: f
{v:, l ( " ' f*,uu*,i)+n^elvl
L\

wobei i, P ai" Drnac'schenMatrizen ora i das vektorielle

Potential ist. Der Zusatz t' ,o, Mlxwrr,L'schen Dichte ist
somit nicht gleich der ganzenmateriellen EnergiedichteU*",
(5)

s--f
U*", : ih > .lrtt,., A I
*Vr|

sondern
(6)

fr' : (J^^r-Z{rp,*, eV!)i}

wobei V das skalare Potential ist. Man kann U' als die
kinetischeEnergiedichtebezeichnen.Die gesamtematerielle
Energiedichte U-r* lisst sich, wie wir sehen werden, leicht
berechnen;der zweiteTerm von (6) - die potentielleEnergiedichte- ergibt sich aus U-,, in folgenderWeise: S'enn
x Zwei Eigenfunktionen ry'
und g in geschwungenenKlammern , {rp, r}
bedeutet hier und im folgendendas innere Produkt der beiden Spinozen
q tr. p:
:
rlroi*, wobei ft der Spinindex ist.
{V, ,}
/
k

rol
Nr.6. v. wntssxoPr':

12

konman sich das skalare Potential proportional zu dem

stanten Faktor 2' denkt, so gilt:1

(i)

;\:rv,* ,

eVtPr)dr

: ^#\(J^u,dc

rrobei die Integrationen sich iiber den ganzen Raum erstrecken.Im Grenzfall konstanter Felder, den wir hier wegen
der Bedingungen (1) betrachten wollen, kdnnen wir die
Feldstarke ,E selbst als den konstanten Faktor l' ansehen'
und kdnnen ausserdem die Beziehung (7) auch auf die Energiedichten fibertragen. wir erhalten dann fiir die kinetische

Energiedichte
(i a)

i i , _u

ATI
r at _E--mar.
-r m
AE

Vergleicht man dies mit (S) so sieht man, dass zwischen

der materiellen und der kinetischen Energiedichte dieselbe
- L und U' U-u, kann also
Beziehung besteht, wie zwischen
hier dem durch die Vakuumelektronen hervorgerufenen Zusalz zur Lagrangefunktion

(8)

1- 1
mar

gleichgesetzt rverden:
-f)

ir

Da die Form von U' weitgehend durch die relativistischen

Invarianzforderungen festgelegt ist, so gentigt es, U' fflr ein
1 Der Beweis liiuft folgendermassen: Wenn der Energieoperator 't[ von
II,,'des
einem Parameter I abhiilgig ist, so lndert sich das Diagonalelement
dl
von
Anderung
adiabatischen
infinitisemalen
einer
Energieoperators bei
it um:

l0 H\

| *
| aA,
\oA /ii

dHii:

Wenn wir Dun setzen:

H :

Ho* heV

so gilt dann:

l . ( e v ^) , :

0 H,'
X ^oL

102
Uber die El.:ktrodynamikdesVakuums.

13

spezielles Feld zu hestimmen. Wir wAhlen ein homogenes

(B*,0,0) uud ein dazu paralleles
magnetisches Feld n:
riumlich

periodisches elektrostatisches Feld, dessen Poten-

tial durch
ige

(e)

V:

-_!9e

v o e h+ V o * e n

gegeben ist. Wir vergleichen dann dieses Resultat mit dem

allgemeinen Form (4) und x'erden daraus die Koeffizienten
dieser Form bestilnmen.
HetsBNsnnc u. Eulpn

rn'iihlen im Gegensatz hierzu ein

konstantes elektrisches Feld, wodurch Schwierigkeiten infolge des Kr,nrx'schen Paradoxons entstehen: Jedes noch so
schwache homogene elektrische Feld erzeugt Elektronenpaare, wenn es sich iiber den ganzen Raum erstreckt. Die
Elektronenbesetzung der Energiezustinde ist dann nicht
exakt stationir. In der vorliegenden Rechnung kann durch
die Periodizitit vermieden werden, dass Potentialdifferenzen
ffber 2 mcz vorkommen, sodass keine Paarerzeugungenstattfinden.
Die materielle Energiedichte ist bei voller Besetzung aller
negativen Energiezustiinde gegeben durch

(10)

U-ut :

Zw,{rp,*, rlt}

W, ist die zur Eigenfunktion r/, gehorigeEnergie,summiert

*'ird rlber alle negativeZustflnde.Die Summe ist selbstverstindlich unendlich.WelcherendlicheTeil dieserSummevon
physikalischerBedeutungist, rvird sich eindeutig aus dem
explizitenAusdruck fiir U-., ergeben.
Die Q, befolgendie Wellengleichung:
( 11 )

-0
a,ih"*.4r
*,-+*
{+

r03

ru

Nr.6. V. Wnrssropr:

(t2)

K : auih.f *,1,^*-ilnlo)- u^".

u*

Wir folgen vorl5ufig der Rechnung HnrseunERGSu. Eur,ans

l. c., wobei wir nur unwesentliche Anderungen in der Bedeutung der Variabeln anbringen.
Als Ldsung setzen wir an:

o"' 'u (c)

: =J:ro
,p,
'

(13)

X(p).

V2nh

Der Operator K ergibt, zweimal auf tp angewendet:

K'rl,:

\2

^32
e
o'u - i aoo e h |, r^ , |+ L(r.
+ i I n I a + *' "' .
)
)r/
"=
o,
l-

Wir setzennun

1 . . - 2 P " ht\/ ,

,^t -:

\u+

b ,,

2or,

^ 1-: ? !- !t IrJot r.
1

b ist das Mass des Magnetfeldes.Durch Einfrihrung von ?

erreichen wir, dassff die Form einer Oszillator-Hamiltonfunktion erhilt. Wir setzendaher

u(D: fi^(n)(+o),,,
wobei fi,Q) die n-te aui 1 normierte Oszillator-Eigenfunkund
rion ist. Dann gilt \1" ful l'ac :1

(14)

t(tp :

(
(

+ b
lmz c2"

(n*
\

*))*
'.

/l

6,:

i ,ou,.

Es liisst sich nun eine Darstellung der 4-komponentigenp

wihlen, in der o, diagonal ist:

104
Uber die Elektrodynamik

""-\3
,_(;

00
10
0 -1
00

des Vakuums.

15

3\
i/

I)en ersten beiden Komponenten von r/ entspricht dann ein

positiver, den beiden andern ein negativer Spin in der
c-Richtung. Bei dieser Wahl ze?fiillt die Wellengleichung
(11) in zrvei getrennte Gleichungssysteme fiir die beiden
Komponentenpaare mit

gleichem Spin, sodass wir zv,ei

Wellengleichungen mit zweireihigen Matrizen gewinnen. Der
Operator K l:isst sich dann in der Form K : flK| schreiben,
rvobei I eine zweireihige Matrix ist, die die Bedingung
/2 : L erfrillt und l1{l die gewdhnliche Zahl

^,",+b(,+=)2 t
lKl: lf
y
\
bedeutet, die vom Wert o, des Spins abhiingt. Ebenso ist
die in der Wellengleichung auftretende Matrix a, zweireihig
und ist mit 7 antikommunativ i a, T * f o, : 0, da a, nach
(12) auch mit K antikommutativ ist. Die beiden Wellengleichungen lassen sich dann in der Form

(16)

q,: o
tKt)
ff f,. *,ih,3o-?r*/

schreiben,wobei a, und 7, zweireihige Matrizen sind, die

sich nur auf ein KornponentenpaargleichenSpins beziehen.
Der Unterschied in der Wellengleichung fiir die beiden
Spinrichtungenliegt nur in dem verschiedenen
Wert von lKl.
Nachdemdie Abhnngigkeitvon p von den Variabelny and z
durch (13) bereits festgelegtwurde, stellt (16) eine Wellengleichung ftir die Funktion X(r) allein dar. Bisher ist der

105

16

Nr. 6. V. Wrrssropr:

Rechnungsgang im wesentlichen identisch mit dem Hnrsrn_

B E R G su n d E u r , e n s .
Nun behandeln wir vorerst den Fall V: 0. Die Eigen_
werte und die normierten Eigenfunktionen fiir (16) lauten

(r7) xf+)(r,,):a(+)
@)
^ * ,J:"t{.PP'
l/2nh
(18)rvj(p"): + clg+lxP: rc rt.@
/
Der obere Index (f) oder (-) unterscheidetdie Zustiinde
positiver und negativerEnergie. dr (p) ist ein normierter
2-komponentiger>Spinor<. Die Gleichung (tO) und ihre
L6sungen(17), (18) stellenein eindimensionales
Analogon
zu Drnrc'gleichungdar, in dem ylff lrp statt des Massengliedesf mc'4t steht. Zu einem Impuls p, gehdrenein positiver und ein negativerEnergiewert.(Die beiden andern
Energiewerteliefert die Wellengleichung mit entgegengesetztem Spin).
Setzenwir nun diese Grdssenin die Energiedichte(10)
ein, so erhalten wir
_+t,

.'",",
1{J

_@

!#orp,) |n@p(#)+r
.4'(p,)
r'.
55
rtl

riber P" liefert infolge dp":

I,Er,
:-:._,t::,-"tion,
1x"'\P)1": Zrn
+1

(1e)

a-@

u-ut: *-!,* Z Z \ apw;rr).

1+
n:0
6:-l

Von hier ab schreibenwir p statt p,.

Um die Summation durchzufrihren.bilden n'ir

trru

r06
0ber die Elektrodvnamik

\6:

-|

w;:

n:0

des Vakuums"

\_-r

w ; + 2 .1-J)

t7

w;

n:1

Wir verwenden nun die Eulnn'sche Summenformel fiir

eine Funktion F(r):

:
*''D+rr (a* Nb)
tr',"r+:= F(n
:

r ffo*"u

- 1 e r e)^ B b':'r\FQ"'-"(o
dr
+ Nb)2
; L):,")
ffi>,
_

F\2m

t,(o))

, I|

B,,,,istdie m-te BeRrvour,r,r'sche

Zahl. F"" (*) ist die m-te Ableitung von F(r). Wenn wir dies auf (19) anwenden,erhalten wir:

: ^,t*\*lllo, a*+i
u-o,
ai'

(20)

"

Q)

LtJo

f(r):

*-"-t

-rVp'117f

u'"';#.1-;"'nt2"'-rt
1o;l
s2ls.

In dem Spezialfall eines reinen Magnetfeldes, kann man nach

(7 a) U-u. und fr' gleich setzen. Dieser Ausdruck stellt bereits die Energiedichte dar, in einer Entwicklung

nach

Potenzen der magnetischen Feldstiirke b. Nun ist es sehr

leicht, jenen Teil des Beitrag". fr' d", Vakuumelektronen zu
bestimmen, der fiir das wirkliche Vakuum massgebend sein
soll: Das von b unabhdngige Glied stellt die Energiedichte
des feldfreien Vakuums dar und ist ein divergentes Integral;
da die Energiedichte frir das feldfreie Vakuum verschwinden
muss, kann dieser Ausdruck keine reale Bedeutung haben.
Weiter miissen die (iibrigens auch divergierenden) Glieder
mit

bz weggelassen werden, da die Energiedichte keine

Vldensk. Selsk. Math.-fys. Medd. XIV,6.

t07
18

Nr. 6. v. welssropr:

Glieder zweiter Ordnung in den Feldstiirken besitzen soll.

Das Weglassen dieser Glieder ist durch die Annahme begriindet, dass die Polarisierbarkeit des Vakuums mit verschwindenden Feldern gegen Null strebt. Es sei hervorgehoben, dass die hier vorgenommenen Subtraktionen ausschliesslich auf triviale Annahmen iiber das t'eldlose Vakuum
beruhen.
So erhalten wir ftir denZtsalz zur Mlxwnr,r,'schen Energiedichte:

(21)
u': - +#n +;]' 6"'rs . ( a m - b )
z

+@

dp

,2nr

4 m-3'

(pz l mz cz) z

-a

Diese Potenzreihe l6sst sich leicht durch die Potenzreihenentwicklung des hyperbolischen Ctg darstellen. Man erhilt:

U,:

- r-f *')
ctszab
# ^r (T)'ffr* {za5

wobei !5 die magnetische Feldstiirke gemessen in Einheiten

m'c"
der kritischen Feldstirke - - ,
ISt l
en

eh
*D'

m'c"

Das erste und zweite Glied der Entwicklung liefert:

[J':-

!!.Bn+=
360n2 m 4 C 7 "

'

- 1" 4 q , B 6 + . . .

6}0nz m8c1

Wenn wir dies mit jenen Gliedern von (4) vergleichen, die
das Magnetfeld in 4, und 6. Potenz enthalten, bekommen wir:
*

I
eah
369o2 ^a"7'

6so;P

e6h3
-m%i5'

r08
iiber die Elektrodynamik des Vakuums.

l9

Es werde nun das elektrischeFeld mitberficksichtigt.Zu

diesemZweck l6senwir die Wellengleichung(16) fffr X(c) mit
der BonN'schenNflherungsmethode.Wir ers'arten, dass die
vom Potential V abhiingigenTeile von L'-., in der zweiten,za
V2proportionalen Niiherungerscheinen.Wenn s'ir [.'-r, nach
Potenzenvon y entwickeln: U-,t : tljl^+ Cll,,*... so erhalten wir nach (10):

(22) uSl,:

,;," ( ,/,1)(o)
.
* u'a',(,r,,1)(',
?

w;T' ,(l ,/,lt)(*) sind die k-ten Niherungen in der entsprechenden Entwicklung von W, und I r2,12.llan beachte,dass
(1)'n
W.
dem angegebenenelektrischen Feld rerschwindel
Es llsst sich leicht zeigen, dass

:
i<lv ltt" drdudz o
sodass der rflurnliche Mittelwert von L'-., nur durch das
erste Glied in (22) gegebenist:.

un: zw,,r,(,/,1';,0,.
(l ,/,In)(o) wurde

bereits im Falle des reinen llagnetfeldes

berechnet und wir erhalten somit ganz analog zu (19)

+1

ig
" m a t.: =]_,_;s
g n z h t Lfr L n u f

r*r

,,; ,',(p).
\oo
)1..

(2)
Der Wert von W.
lisst sich mit der Bons'schenNiherungsmethodeberechnen.Mit den Eigenfunktionen(17) ergibt sich:
,.

109

20

Nr'.6. V. Wnrssxopr:

ot-)(p)}
l' *
w;Q)(p): ezlvol,
il{"t*ilptg),
W
Q
)
w
:
(
p
I
0
L
(23)

'@}f
<st-q+i'
* l{:i=.
w"(il_w;(p*s) I*
l

* ( d a s s e l b em i t - q ) .
Der zlvischen den ( )-ftammern stehende Ausdruck stellt
ein skalares Produkt zweier zweikonponentiger Spinoren
dar. Bei der Integration von (28) iiber p fallen die zweiten
Glieder in den [ ]-Klammern \\,eg, \,enn man die Integration
der Glieder mit-g
mit der Variabeln p': p_g ausfiihrt:

(p+ g),ot-)(p)]l'
: erlv^lrf
*
' |
'(P)
" o,
.,u
- w'^*)
w';
(P+ g) '
J
{soo*r"'
(l+)*

*(dasselbe mit -.q).

Dieses Vorgehen ist im allgemeinen keineswegs eindeutig, da

die Integration des zweiten Gliedes in den
[ ]_Klammern von
(Z'l) zu einem diver.genten Resultat fiihrt,
das aber nach
Addition des entsprechend.enGliedes mit - g endlich ge_
macht werden oder, wie in (24), zum Verschwinden gebracht
werden kann, je nachdem in welcher weise man die Integrationsvariabeln wiihlt. Diese willkiir bertihrt aber
ursere
Rechnung nicht, da wir nach Ausfiihrung der Summation
tiber n nur die zv b2,b4,etc.proportionalen Glieder verwenden,
in denen auf Grund der EurnR'schen Summenformel nur
(2)(p)
Ableitungen von
nach n auftreten. Wie man sich
4
leicht iiberzeugen kann, divergieren diese Ableitungen
des
zweiten Gliedes in den [ ]-Klammern nicht mehr bei
der
Integration tiberp, sodassdas Resultat dieser Integration
un_
abhAngig von der Wahl der Integrationsvariabeln ist.
Es ergibt sich weiter aus (24):

tr0
Uber die Elektrodynamik des Vakuums'

27

s;5,o
rotrt" : - e'lvrf
##ht
S
von I
wobei beleits eine Reihenentwicklung nach Potenzen
zweiter
durchgefiihrt wurde und die Glieder hoherer als
wurden. Dies bedeutetdie VernachOrdnung weggelassen
der
Iiissigung der Ableitungen der Feldstiirke auf Grund
ist
Bedingungen(1). Ebenso,wie in der vorigen Rechnung'
,ron Ep", durch (20) gegeben,wenn man setzt:

F(r):-r'lvoft
"##;rt
iiber p

Man erhiilt dann, wenn rnan zuerst

integriert:

: - #* rtrtro'
,Sl,
t5,"4.
-- f
?,,:,

Bn'(-)"'(o':"-t,--=\
oz,,
1
"
m'co*t)*:ol
(2m)l \drt--t

Da dieser Ausdruck

quad'ratisch in

den elektrischen

Feldstiirken ist, erhalten wir fiir die kinetische Energiedicfte

nach (7a)

- uSl,.
fr'(2):

Glieder
Aus den friiher diskutierten Griinden kdnnen erst die
Vakuum
das
4. und hdherer Ordnung in den Feldstiirken fiir
divergierende
von physikalischer Bedeutung sein, sod'assdas
V6 durch die
Integlal wegzulassen ist. Wir ersetzen nun
elektrische Feldstiirke,E:

E :2fitu,r

ilt
22

t{". O. V. Wnrssxopr.:

\Nobei die Querstriche Raummittelungen bedeuten und erhalten ftr die ersteu beiden Glieder:
y 7 r ( 2 )/(25)
otr\

Ut\''

e{/r

o . 2-R g _ 7

lrOJ; itf cr-

"ahs

2 6*0nzffin'Ana...

frir den Grenzfirll schrrach rerinderlichen Felder bei welchem

die Raummittelungen rteggelassen rverden k<innen.
Vergleicht man (25) mit den zu Ez ,B2 und .E2Ba proportionalen Gliedern in (a) so erhfllt man die Beziehungen

t-2a:##,

Br--s':*#"

e6hz
*s ata

und mit den bereits berechneten Werten von d und ,g

i:7o,

r:fq5.

Der in der magnetischen Feldstlrke exakte !.usdruck

fflr f"") ergibt sich zu
1r(21

I
o / m c \ a *l , f - o n - { ( z a S C t g z
E-r),
B-r^r\o/ S""\;,
do

q'obei g:

irt.
*E'
m-c"
Die hdheren Ndherungen in E lassen sich leicht bis auf
einen konstanten Faktor bestimmen. Denken wir die /c-te
Ndherung lI; G)(p) der Energie des durch p und n gegebenen Zustandes bestimmt; sie wird. auf Grund. derWellenglei_
chung (16) die folgende Geslalt hatren:

W r o ,( p ) : g o" o| % l o .G( c ,h , l K l , p )
wobei G eine Funktion ist, in welcher nur die angegebenen
Grdssen vorkommen. Ulo)-o., infolge der Eichinvarianz min-

112
Uber die Elektrodvnamik

des Vakuums.

23

destens lc-ter Ordnung in g sein. Die hdheren Potenzen von

g sind vernachlissigt. Die Energiedichte in k-ter Ordnung
wird dann:
,,{K'

U-,t:
(26)

-1 -

*r%r'tli5!j,.
#e^ffi\;j,).J

e
t
4 7 1 ; 'S

,
\
-^L * r u
nr:1

(A'-1)
Das Integral iiber G muss d.ie Dirnension (Energie)
(Impuls)-(k-1) haben, und darf nur mehr von den Gr6ssen
c,h,lKl

abhiingen, was nur in der Form mdglich ist:

P+*

t:t : f* -Lroywz: fo;-'C#;i'-:r

"t l

wobei fo ein Zahlenfaktor ist.

Wenn man dieses in (zO) einsetzt, so lisst sicn U$),, lis
auf den Faktor f* vollstiindig angeben.
Die Zahlenfaktoren f1 bestimmen sich aber leicht durch
die Uberlegung, dass U-*, nach (8) eine relalivistische Invariante sein rnuss. Da deswegen U-o, nur von E2-82 und
(EB)' abhiingen darf, rnuss z. B. der Koeffizient von Ek
sich von dem Koeffizient von d ttot durch den Faktor
k
,.;
(-)2 unterscheiden. Der letztere Koeffizient wurde bereits
berechnet und ist durch (21) gegeben. Man erhilt dann

fzn
' .:

';::'-" 1:
rl(2rn-l)

u'
und kann damit d"ieDarstellung berechnen,die HstSeNBERG
Eurnn ftrr L'angegeben habenr:
1 In der Frage der Konvergenz dieses Integrals verweisen wir auf die
u' Eur'en S' 729'
diesbeziiglichen Bemerkungen in derArbeit von Helsrxsrnc

II3

24

L,:

Nr. 6. V. \['nrssxopr':
aa*

#-" (T)'

\fr

- r+rf<,e'
- *,1}
,?{zuctez
o.q@cts,;s

g:'t!n,
en

E:^',"'B.
eh

Dieser Ausdruck ist fiir parallele Felder berechnet. Um ihn

auf beliebige Felder zu verallgemeinern, muss man ihn
als Funktion der beiden Invarianten Ez - Bz und (EB)z
schreiben. Dies ist nach HETsTNBERGund Eur,en in ein_
facher Weise mit der Beziehung

C t g a c t g P : - i g- 9 @

cos1/F-Faznp-conj

moglich und man erhiilt

-a5t+ 2l(qq5)+""4+
rr ,t : - ;I , - \e e' l - - - d,nt . : l r i ? z ( E"Do i ? f , S = .
6n' nc
r"
cosqlGt-!09+2r'(qs)-conj
)0
.

2,.t

,/;;--

I''

+5;:+trn-'r|
wegen der Realit:it des Gesamtausdrucksist diesertatsiichlich
nur von Ez - Bz und (EB)z abhiingig.
Die Berechnung der Energiedichte und Lagrangefunktion
des Vakuums ist in der skalaren Theorie des positrons mit
den gleichen mathematischen Hilfsmitteln durchzuffihren.
Eine Energiedichte des vakuums entsteht in dieser Theorie
durch die Nullpunktsenergie d.er Materiewellen. Die Gesamtenergie ist nach P.q,ur,rund Werssropr L c. (Formel (2g))
durch

E_ut: Zw*(Nf +N;+1)

ft

ll4
25

Ober die Elektrodynamik des Vakuumt'

gegeben,wobei l4/ftdie Energie des /c-ten Zustandes ist und Nf,

die Anzahl der Positronen, No die Anzahl der Elektronen ist'
die diesem Zustand angehdren. lrn leerenvakuum bleibt die
Summe iiber alle Energien IVo iibrig, $'obei die Energie Wo
des durch den Impuls p und d.erQuantenzahl n charakterisierten Zustandes in einem Magnetfeld B den Wert hat:

wlu"t{p,n1 : "llo'*

b('+;).
tttzc2+

Die summation iiber alle Zustinde und Division durch das

Gesamtvolumenftihrt zur Energiedichte,die sich leicht analog
zu (19) ergibt:

u-,t :

r--f*'

\a l -apwlu" (p, B).

- -),
nr
tt
07[
" -]ro
a

Der einzige Unterschied gegen die fruhere Rechnung besteht

in dem Wegfallen d'er Summierung riber die beiden Spinr.ichtungen. Nun verifiziert rnan leicht die folgende Beziehung
in der skalaren und der
zwischen der Energie wln"'{l,n)
in der DIna.c'schen Elektronentheorie:
Energie W^(f,B)
+1

,)'r*'
n:0

+1

2N

(p, B)
6:-1

n-g

d:-l

n:0

wir konnen daher die Energiedichte in der skalaren Theorie

0iuu, durch die Energiedichte d'd". Drnac'schen Positronentheorie in folgender Weise ausdriicken:

' 2fr1u",
(B) : fr'(D - 2'if(ttlz)'
Man sieht daran, dass auch hier der von den Feldstirken
unabhiingige und der in ihnen quadratische Anteil unendlich
ist. Der letztere liefert also eine unendliche von den Feld-

il5
Nr. 6. V. Wrrssropr:

stirken unabhengige Polarisierbarkeit. Um ftlr das feldlose

Vakuum ein brauchbares Resultat zu erhalten, muss man
wieder diese beiden Anteile streichen und erhiilt infolge
der Beziehung

cteP-zctgf: -r#,

: - i# ** ("';)' lit-'{, * .*--*- 1+'Lr,rl

L,.r.u,
\
,n-

a,/(o)

Die Durchfiihrung einer analogen Stdrungsrechnung im

elektrischen Feld fiihrt in gleicher Weise zu einem Zusatz zar
Lagrangefunktion des Feldes, der mit dem aus der Drnlc'schen Positronentheorie gewonnenen sehr verwandt ist:

f'
Lskal

-i"';\fr''{

2 i&EB)

cosql/(@2- E') + 2 i(qa5) - conj

- E\\.
+^"^.t-Lgz
'l
e"h" tt'
Fiir die in (4) definierten Koeffizienten a,p erhilt man daher:
7
|
eah
1 6 B 6 o n ,^ n { '

u:

^
P:

1
o'
7

Es sei hier noch auf folgende Eigenschaft der Lagrangefunktion des Vakuums hingewiesen. Frir sehr grosse Feldstdrken .E oder B haben die h6chsten Glieder des ZusatzesZ'
zur Mlxwnr-l'schen

Lagrangefunktion in der Drnnc'schen

Theorie des Positrons die Form

qq

L' .- -

o-

--". - Es lS C
24nzhc-

Bt -lgo q5.
-'
bzw. L' ..r ^ , :*
Z4nohc

Das Verhiiltnis zwischen diesem Z u s a t z l ' u n d d e r M n x 1^

wer-r-'schen Lagrangefunktion Zo : ^ (E'- Bo) ist somit
67r

tl6
Uber die Elektrodvnamihdes vakuums.

27

logarithmisch in den Feldst6rken fiir hohe Werte derselben

multipliziert:
und ist ausserdem rnit dem Faktor !
hc

"u*-jorrt n,*.fi .-Die Nichtlinearititen

5,i1;.rsu'

der Feldgleichungen stellen somit auch

bei Feldstirken, die wesentlich h<iher als die kritische Feldm2 c3

sind, nur kleine Korrektionen dar. Die in der
stflrke T
en
Note von Eur,sn und Kocrnl l. c. und in der Arbeit von
Eur,rR I. c. zitierte Verwandschaft der aus der Positronentheorie folgenden Nichtlinearitiit

der Feldgleichungen

mit der nichtlinearen Feldtheorie von BonN und Iltpst-l'

ist daher nur dusserlich. In der letzteren Theorie sind die
Gleichungen bei der kritischen Feldstiirke
Mlxwnll'schen
-2.4
Fn" e: ' "'"" nam Rande des Elektrons< bereits vollkommen
abgedndert, .n'odurch dann die endliche Selbstenergie einer
Punktladung erreicht wird. Hier hingegen sind die Abu'eichungen von d.en Mlxwnr,l'schen Feldgleichungen frir Felder
d.er Grdsse Fo noch sehr klein und wachsen viel zu langsam
an, um eine ihnliche Rolle in den Selbstenergieproblem zu
spielen. Die Extrapolation der vorliegenden Rechnungen auf
die Felder am ))Rande des Elektrons<<ist allerdings nicht
einwandfrei, da dort die Bedingungen (t) nicht erfiillt sind.
Es ist jedoch nicht wahrscheinlich, dass eine exaktere Betrachtung

in dieser Hinsicht

ein wesentlich verschiedenes

Resultat liefert.
III.
In diesem Abschnitt soll der Einfluss beliebiger Felder
auf das Vakuurn behandelt werden. Wir beschrinken uns
vorerst auf statische Felder. Die stationflren Zustinde des
t [{. Bonn u. L. INner,n, Proc. Roy. Soc.143, 410' 1933.

117
Nr. 6. V. Wnrssxopl.:

Elektrons auf Grund der Drnac'schen Wellengleichung und

ihre Energieeigenwerte werden sich im allgemeinen in zwei
Gruppen einteilen lassen, die bei einer adiabatischen Einschaltung des statischen Feldes aus den positiven bzw. aus
den negativen Energieniveaus des freien Elektrons entstanden sind. Dies trifft z. B. im Coulombfeld eines Atomkernes
zu und bei allen in der Natur vorkommenden statischen
Feldern.
Es sind jedoch auch solche statische Felder angebbar,
in denen eine derartige Einteilung versagt, da infolge der
Felder Ubergiinge von negativen zu positiven Zustinden
vorkommen. Ein bekanntes Beispiel hierfiir ist eine Potentialstufe der Hohe )

2mcz. Diese Ausnahmsfiille sind sta-

tionir nicht behandelbar und miissen als ein zeitabhingiges

Feld betrachtet werden, das zu einer gegebenenZeit eingeschaltet wird. Dies ist umsomehr schon deswegennotv'endig,
da derartige Felder infolge der fortwdhrende Paarentstehung
gar nicht stationlr

aufrechterhalten u'erden k6nnten.

Im Falle dass aber das Eigenwertspektrum sich eindeutig in die beiden Gruppen einteilen liisst, kann man die
Energiedichte U und die Strom-Ladungsdichte i, g der Vakuumelektronen nach den Formeln
ff

?t'

(2e)

o-

*' irrl

t
ih f lrt,,

" ){'!f

v)

->

;-

" / t {p,* "irp)

berechnen, wobei iiber die Zustinde zu summieren ist, die

den negativen Energiezustdnden des freien Elektrons entsprechen. Die angeschriebenenSummen werden divergieren.

tr8
29

Uber die Elektrodynamikdes Vakuums.

Wenn aber die physikalisch bedeutungslosen Teile abgetrennt werden, erhalten wir konvergente Ausdrtcke.
Um diese Teile auf Grund der Annahmen (I) festzulegen,
entn'ickeln wir die Summanden der Ausdriicke (29) nach
Potenzen der iusseren Feldstdrken in der Weise, dass wir
uns die letzteren mit einem Faktor l. multipliziert denken
und nach Potenzen dieses Faktors entwickeln. Dieses Verfahren ist identisch mit einer successivenStorungsrechnung'
die von den freien Elektronen als nullte Niherung ausgeht'
Die Annahmen Ir, I, verlangen vor allem das Verschwinden der von l, unabhiingigen Glieder, die aus den
Beitriigen der vom Felde unabhiingigen ffeien Vakuumvorldufig nur jene freien
p
Vakuumelektronen beriicksichtigen, deren Impuls lp I <
ist, so erhalten wir hierftir folgende Beitrf,ge:1
elektronen bestehen. Wenn wir

tP
uo: -#o'\d;

'tiF+;'.TF'

lPl<P

(30)

Q o:

"

f t

4#F\dP,
lpl<P

--->

io

e (-

+,"';f)anffi
lPl<P

Die Beitriige simtlicher

Elektronen

'-

P-+oo

diver-

gieren natiirlich.
Durch das Abtrennen der von i,'unabhflngigen Glieder
vollstiindig erftrllt'
ist aber die Annahme I, noch licht
Vakuumfeldfreien
Die Ladungs- und Stromdichte gs, iq der
1 Es ist niimlich der zum tmputsI
die Anzahl der Zustinde

l"no:tg"

-!!--..
in Intervall d;',
'
4n3hd

st"o-,

^9-

--

ood

ll9
Nr. 6. V. Wprssropr:

elektronen dussert sich niimlich

auch dadurch, dass sie

bei Anwesenheit von Potentialen V, A einen Zasatz qoV

und (io A) zar Energiedichte liefert, der ebenfalls abgetrennt
werden muss. Diese Zusitze treten auf, da auch die Energie
und der Impuls der von den Feldern noch unbeeinflussten
bei Anwesenheit von Potentialen um
'T
geandert u'ird.
den Betrag eV bzw.

Vakuumelektronen

Die Annahmen I, und I, sind daher erst vollkommen

erfrillt, wenn man die wegzulassendeBeitriige (30) folgendermassen modifiziert:

: -#"\,;l,y 1,*-7^1'
u'o
* *c+,y]
lpl<P

(31)

Qo :

e f ,4;F;p)ap
lpl<P

-r;:
#*\6
lPl<P

"(i+ii)

/Q*?^)'

* mzcz

wobei auch wieder nur der von freien Vakuumelektronen

mit Impulsen lp | ( P herriihrenden Teil angeschrieben ist.
Nun ist noch die Bedingung I, zu erff,llen. Hierzu beachten
wir, dass eine konstante feldunabhringige Polarisierbarkeit zu
Gliedern in Energiedichte U(r) fiihrt, die proportional zu
den Quadrat Ez (c) und B'(*) der Feldstiirken an der
Stelle r sind. Ebenso frihrt sie zu einer Strom- und Ladungsdichte, die zu den ersten Ableitungen der Felder proportional ist, auf Grund der Beziehungen

i :

rotM*qO,

9:

divP

r20
Uber die Elektrodynamikdes Vakuums.

31

worin M und P die magnetischen und elektrischen Polarisationen sind, die im Falle einer konstanten Polarisierbarkeit
zu den Feldern proportional sind. Um die Annahme I, zu
erfiillen, mtissen daher in der Energiedichte U der Vakuumelektronen die zu .Ez und zu Bz proportionalen Glieder
verschwinden und in der Strom-Ladungsdichte die zu den
ersten Ableitungen proportionalen Glieder weggelassen'rn'erden. Es ist praktischer, die Form dieser Glieder nicht explizit anzugeben, sondern dieselben im Laufe der Rechnung
an ihren Eigenschaften ztr erkennen.
Als Erliiuterung berechnen wir die Ladungs- und Stromdichte des Vakuums unter dem Einfluss eines elektrischen
Potentials
i(s r)

(32)

V:VoeT*Vo*e

i (g.)
h

und eines magnetischen Potentials

(33)
mit

-> -- {i,t
A:Aoeh

--> _dn
h,

+Ao*e

-->_>
(Ao,g):0

Hilfe der St6rungstheorie. Diese Berechnungen sind

bereits von HnrssNBERGr und noch viel allgemeiner von

SeRneneund Paur,r u. Rosns durchgeftihrt worden und sollen
hier nur als Illustration

zu unserer phvsikalischen Inter-

pretation der Substraktionsterrne dienen. Die Ladungsdichte

g ist bis zur ersten Ordnung gegeben durch q:

g(0)+Q(1),

e,":"xxry#*conj
irr

t Hnrsnrnnnc,Z. f. Phys.90, 209, 1934.

' R. Snnnrn, Fhys. Rev.48, 49, 1935.
3 W, Peur-r u. M. Rosr, Phys. Rev. 49, 462, 1936.

12r
32

Nr.6. v. wrrssxopr':

wobei die i flber die besetzten. die ft iiber die unbesetzten

Zustinde zu summieren sind, und II,r. das Matrixelement
der St6rungsenergie ist. Setzen wir das Potential (32) als
Stdrung ein, so erhalten u'ir (II/(p) :
( 1 ): - e z t , o f , : 1 $ ' ( p )

t/p"l,FF)

w ( p * g ) - c z( p , p * g ) - m zc + ,

s " r 6 a - '")pl r n p
19
'
+, /dasselbe\l
- s)i '" t cons
\,,ri t

Entwickelt man dies nach Potenzenvon g'so erhiilt man

tni

(1) e2I'n (' ,'

oor';c2(p)'o
e"': ;#
)

cn(ps)'s' _4 tlpdls: _"'(pg)' _ c' sn *2s

'
' . . . I r nnni
8 wu(p)
f
12 w'(p) 4w2(p) t6 t{'n(p)
Welcher Teil dieser Ladungsdichte hat nun physikalische
Bedeutung? Wegen der Annahme I,

muss 96 wegfallen;
in g(t) sind die Glieder mit 92 proportional zur zrveiten
Ableitung von V und somit zur ersten Ableitung der Feldstirken

und mflssen wegen I, weggelassen werden. Man

bemerke, dass auch nur diese Glieder zu Divergenzen ftihren.

Der Rest liefert endliche Integrale und ist nach HusTNBERG
in der Form
.

,r,

(34) e"' :

pz / h\2

i;#;

(;")^

A v * h o h e r eA b l e i t u n g e n v o n v

zu schreiben. Die exakte Ausrechnung der ersten Niherung

q'urde von Snnnnn und P.tulr u. Rosr l. c. geliefert.
Als weiteres Beispiel betrachten wir die Stromdichte i in
der ersten Niherung des Feldes (BB)

iu,-"|ry#!#*conj

122
Uber die Elektrodynamik

33

des Vakuums,

Es ergibt sich

ti,:-*#!ri

{sD
eh

w <P+ g)+ tr (P)+ e (Pil

Iy <P>
w<p*g)w(p)lwe*g)*w(p)l
I
, /dasselbe\)
,
-+
r) -F
conl
' |

\mit - sl)

.->

wobei n der Einheitsvektor in der Richtung A ist. Dieses

ergibt naph g entwickelt:
.(1)
l.:

-#\,,w<P)
1

(35)

*
{t',o,

.Xtffr#*

c'(np)'-

c'g',

3 cn(pg)'

5 c 6( n p ) z( p g ) ' ,

2 -4wr@)-i--wn1oy--

4.u.hoherer
Glieder
o.d,'o.si,.s).

Hier treten auch von g unabhflngige, also nicht eichinauf. Diese sind aber mit den wegzulassenden
variante Glieder
-->
+
Beitrdgren ii aus (31) identisch: Entwickelt man nnmlich i'o
nach A. so erhdlt man:

-,,: #,*!,itffi
*Ra_"Wr.)
+

-?
1
,
f *
: [+ ,cA
(w
'Q) - c2( np) z*.' .].
n
"
,-tp
)d
t
w
"
.o
=
"'

Die Glieder erster Ordnung in 7 stimmen mit dgn von g

unabhiingigenGliedernin (35) iiberein.Die zu 92 proportioder Rest
nalen Gliedervon (35) werdenebenfallsweggelassen,
ergibt das zu (34) entsprechendekonvergierendeResultat:
Vidensk. Selsk. Math.-fys. Medd.xlV, 6.

123
34

Nr. 6. V. Wrrssxopr:

.(r)

ez / h\2

__->

; t: J A AA * h<ihereAbleitungen.
60nz Irc
\mc/

Die beiden Beispiele sollen zeigen, dass bei einer Storungsrechnung die wegzulassendentseitriige unmittelbar erkenntlich sind und dass die iibrigen durch die Annahmen (I)
nicht berfihrten Beitrdge der Vakuumelektronen

bei der

Summierung zu keinen Divergenzen mehr ftihren. Die angefthrten Beispiele beweisen dies zrn'ar nur in erster Ndherung. Die 0berlegungen lassen sich aber ohne weiteres auf
h6here Niherungen ausdehnen.
Die Behandlung zeitabhiingiger Felder ist im wesentlichen nicht von dem obigen Verfahren verschiecien. Es ist
notwendig, die zeitabhiingigen Felder von einem Zeitpunkt
fo an wirken zu lassen, an welchem die Vakuumelektronen
in feldfreien Zustinden waren, oder in solchen stationiren
Zustdnden, die sich einwandfrei in besetzte und unbesetzte
einteilen lassen. Die zeitliche Verdnderung dieser Zustinde
von diesem Zeitpunkt fe, an ldsst sich dann mit Hilfe einer
St6rungsrechnung in Potenzen der AusserenFelder darstellen.
Die Ausdrflcke (31) und die aus der Bedingung (Ir) folgenden Glieder kiinnen dann abgetrennt werden, wobei der
rlbrigbleibende Rest nicht mehr zu Divergenzen fiihrt. Die
Berechnung der Ladungs- und Stromdichte des Vakuums
bei beliebigen zeithdngigen Feldern in erster Nffherung findet
sich bei SennBn l. c. und bei Plur,r u. Rose L c. Die abzuziehenden Teile werden dort aus der HersnNsonc'schen
Arbeit forrnal entnommen. Sie sind aber mit jenen, die aus
den Annahmen I folgen, vollkommen identisch.
Wie iussert sich nun die Entstehung von Paaren durch
zeitabhingige Felder? Die Paare kommen bei der Berechnung
der Energie-, Strom- und Ladungsdichte nicht unmittelbar
zum Ausdruck. Die Paarerzeugung zeigt sich nur in einer

124
Uber die ElektrodynamikdesVakuums'
proportional

35

zur Zeit wachsenden Gesamtenergie, die der

Energie der entstehenden Elektronen entspricht. Die Ladungs- und Stromdichte ist nicht unmittelbar von der
Paarentstehung beeinflusst, da stets positive und negative
Elektronen zugleich erzeugt werden, die die Strom-Ladungsdichte erst dadurch beeirrflussen, dass die Susseren Felder
auf die entstandenen Elektronen je nach der Ladung verschieden einwirken.l
Es ist daher praktischer, die Paarentstehung durch dussere Felder direkt zu berechnen als Ubergang eines Vakuurnelektrons in einen Zustand positiver Energie. Die Entstehungswahrscheinlichkeit des Elektronenpaares ist dann identisch mit der Zunahme der Intensitiit der betreffenden Eigenfunktion positiverEnergie bzw. mit derAbnahme derlntensitiit
der entsprechenden Eigenfunktion negativer Energie infolge
des Einwirkens der zeitabhiingigen Felder auf die Zustf,nde,
die bis ntr Zeit fo geherrscht haben. Die Berechnung wurde
von BBrne u. HrIrr-nnz. Hur,un u. JanceRB u. s, w. ausgeftihrt.
Die Paarvernichtung unter Lichtausstrahlung liisst sich
wie jeder anderer spontane Ausstrahlungsplozess nur durch
Quantelung der Wellenfelder behandeln, oder durch korrespondenzmdssigeUmkehrung des Lichtabsorptionsprozesses.
In

der bisherigen Darstellung wurden

die abzutren-

nenden Teile der Vakuumelektronen nicht explizit angegeben, sondern nur ihre Form und ihre Abhiingigkeit von
t Die von Snnsnn belechnete Strom- und Ladungsdichte bei paarerzeugenden Feldern ist daher dem Mitschwingen der Vakuumelektronen
zuzuschreiben und ist nicht etwa die )s176ug1g Strom-Ladungsdichte<.
Die auftretenden Resonanznenner rrihren daher, dass dieses Mitschwingen
besonders stark ist, wenn die iussere Frequenz sich einer Absorptionsfrequenz des Vakuums nihert.
' H. BnrnB u. W. Hcr:rr.nn, Proc. Roy. Soc. 146, 84, 1934.
u H. R. Hur-uB u. J. C. Jascnn,
,Proc. Roy. Soc.

125

36

Nr. 6. V. WsrssropF,:

den flusseren Feldern bestimmt. Um sie explizit darzustellen

muss man ein etwas anderes Verfahren N,dhlen, da diese
Teile ja .divergente Ausdriicke enthalten. Hierzu eignet sich
die von Dln.q,ceingefiihrte Dichtematrix, die dann vbn Drn.lc
und spezieller von HrlseNnnnc l. c. auf dieses problem
angewendet wurde. Die Dichtematrix -R ist dur.ch folgenden
Ausdruck gegeben:

(r' , k' I Rl r" k") :

,lt: (*' , k') !t,(r,,.k,,)

wobei c'

und r" zwei Raum-Zeitpunkte, /c' und k" zwei

Spinindizes bedeuten. Die Summe soll iiber alle besetzten
ZustAnde erstreckt werden. Aus dieser Matrix kann man dann
leicht die Strom- und Ladungsdichtel g und der EnergieImptrls-Ten sor' (Jf, bilden auf Grund den Beziehungen

i : . lim e|
e:
,,

rt

(")L,p,,(*' k' I lll r" k")

lirne) (*' k' lRlr" k")

_ttt

fi

,,

.l

at

"
u; : .,!f, ,
elrv
rY{r')l}
7x'1+
L*-r-A;,1{ton
aa :

Einheitsmatrix

Die Dichte-Matrix hat den Vorteil, dass fiir r' * r" die
Summation tiber die Vakuumelektronen nicht divergieren,
sondern einen Ausdruck el'geben der fiir s' : s" singulflr
wird.
Man kann nun aus den Annahmen (I) eindeutig angeben,
welche Teile der Dichtematrix der Vakuumelektronen fiir
1 Der vollstdndige Energie-Impuls-Tensor
besteht aus der Summe von
Uf, lu:nd,dem Maxwslr.'schen

Energie-Impuls-Tensor

des Feldes. Oie Ul.

komponerrte ist daher nicht die gesamte materielle Energiedichte, sondern

nur die kinetische.

126
Uber die ElektrodynamikdesVakuums'

37

x;'t in die wegzulassenden Teile iibergehen und gewinnt auf diese weise eine explizite Darstellung dieser Glieder.
Der physikalisch bedeutungslose Teil der Dichtematrix

s' :

rnuss tlann aus jenen Gliedern bestehen, die von den Feldstflrken unabhengig sind' aus denen, die zu Gliedern in
der Stromdichte fiihren, die zu den Ableitungen der Felder
proportional sind und aus denen die zu Gliedern in der
Energiedichte fiihren, die proportional zum Quadrat der
Feldstiirke sind. Ausserdem muss der abzuziehende Teil
der Dichtematrix noch mit dem Faktor

- vat)l
e,ar,
rr': xp
- f,"t
'
fii
)
lnc J*)E
werden, wobei das Integral im Exponenten
etin gerader Linie vom Punkte r' zs dem Punkt r" zt)
strecken ist. Dieser Faktor fiigt zum abzuziehenden Energiemultipliziert

herImpuls-Tensor gerade die Beitrage hinzu, die davon

im
riihren, dass die noch ungestorten Vakuumelektronen
F e l d e i n e Z u s a t z e n e r g i ee V u n d e i n e n Z u s a t z i m p u " ? i
erhalten, und die infolge der Annahme It mit abgezogenwerden sollen.
Da der abzuziehentle Teil der Dichtematrix bis auf den
Faktor a' hochstens zweiter Ordnung in den Feldstdrken
der
ist. ldsst er sich durch eine Storungsrechnung aus
im
Dichtematrix der freien Elektronen gewinnen' Diese
Prinzip einfache, in der Ausfiihrung jedoch sehr komplivon
zierte Rechnung liegt tler Bestimmung dieser Matrix
matheHrtsBunnnc l. c. ztt Grunde. Das Ergebnis liisst sich
jeder Gr6sse
matisch einfacher formulieren' wenn man bei
stets das Mittel bildet aus der Berechnung mit Hilfe der vorliegenden Theorie und aus der Berechnung mit Hilfe einer Theorie in der die Elektronenladung positiv ist, und das negative

127

38

Nr. 6. V. Wnrssxopn:

Elektron als >Loch< dargestellt wird. Das Resultat ist ja

,in beiden Fillen dasselbe. Die Dichtematrix R wird dann
durch R' ersetzt:

(*' k' IR'Id' k") :

(r'
i t; q,* k')vt,(r"k")
(r'k') r/o(a:"k')|,
F r:

wobei die erste Summe iiber die besetzten,die zweite Summe

iiber die unbesetzten Zustdnde zu erstrecken ist.
Der abzaziehende Teil (r'1c'lSlec"/c") hat dann die Form

( * ' k ' l s l r " k " ): &' r^o*'

;
1-Vnr

*"
l 1- 'rby l r ' _C | ' .

Hierbei ist So die Matrix R' fiir verschwindene Potentiale, 7

und b sind Funktionen der Feldstflrken und ihrer Ablei.tungen, C ist eine Konstante. Diese Grossen sind bei HnrsENBERGl. c. und bei HBrsEr.rBERG
u. Eur,rn l. c. explizit
angegeben.
Fiir die Ausfiihrungen spezieller Rechnungen ist es praktischer, nicht auf den expliziten Ausdruck HBrsnNsrnc's
zuriickzugreifen, sondern die wegzulassenden Glieder an
ihrer Struktur zu erkennen. Dies ist vor allem deshalb einfacher, da die rlbrig bleibenden Ausdrrfcke nicht mehr bei
s' : s" singulir werden, sodass man fiir die Berechnung
derselben gar nicht das formale

Hilfsmittel

der Dichte-

matrix bendtigt. Die Summierungen uber alle Vakuumelektronen fiihren hierbei nicht mehr zu divergenten Ausdrticken.
Allerdings eignet sich die explizite Darstellung HrrsnNnnnc's
gut dazu, die relativistische Invarianz und die Giiltigkeit
der Erhaltungssitze in dem Verfahren zu zeigen.
Es ist hieraus ersichtlich, dass die hier beschriebene
Bestimmung der physikalischen Eigenschaften der Vakuum-

128
Uber die Elektrodynamik

des Vakuums.

39

elektronen im wesentlichen keine Willkiir enthiilt, da ausschliesslich nur jene Wirkungen derselben weggelassenwerden, die infolge der Grundannahme der Positronentheorie
wegfallen miissen: die Energie und die Ladung der von
den Feldern ungestorten Vakuumelektronen, und die physikalisch sinnlose feldunabhiingige konstante Polarisierbarkeit
des Vakuums. Alle physikalisch sinnvollen Wirkungen der
Vakuumelektronen werden mitberiicksichtigt und fiihren zu
konvergenten Ausdriicken. Man darf daraus wohl den Schluss
ziehen, dass die L6chtertheorie des Positrons keine wesentlichen Schwierigkeiten fiir

die Blektronentheorie mit sich

gefiihrt hat, solange man sich auf die Behandlung der ungequantelten Wellenfelder beschrdnkt.
Ich mochte an dieser Stelle den Herren Prof. BoHn,
HerseNsnnc und RossNrpro meinen herzlichsten Dank ftir
viele Disskussionen aussprechen. Auch bin ich dem RaskOrsted-Fond Dank schuldig, der es mir ermoglicht hat,
diese Arbeit am Institut for teoretisk Fysik in Kopenhagen
auszufiihren.

lntroduced
lnto the
This paper deals with the rnodiffcatlons
of the vacuum by Dirac's theory of the posltron.
electrodynarnlcs
unarnbi$ously
by
of the vacuurrr can be described
The behaviour
number
of electrons occuthe existence of an lnflnlte
assurning
pylng the negative energy states, provided
that certain well dbut oirly those to whlch
hhed effects of these elecEons are omitted,
can be ascrlbed.
It is obvious that no physical meaning
The results are identical with these of Heisenberg's and Dirac's
in positron
method of obtaininE finite expressions
rnathematical
theory. A simple rnethod is glven of calculating the polarisability
fields.
of the vacuurn for slowly varying

P o p e r9

r29

Note on the Radiation Field of the Electron

F. Brocn nNo A. Nonoslecr*
StanJord University, California
(Received May 14, 1937)
Previous methods of treating radiative corrections in nonstationary processes such as the scattering of an electron in
an atomic field or the emission of a B-ray, by an expansion
i.n powers of e2/hc, are defective in that they predict infinite
low frequency corrections to the transition probabilities.
This difficulty can be avoided by a method developed here
which is based on the alternative assumption that e2afmc3,
hafmc2 and ha/cAp (a:angular
frequency of radiation,
APFchange in momentum of electron) are small compared
to unity. In contrast to the expansion in pow'ers of e2fhc,
this permits the transition to the classical limit fi:0.

I. INrnolucrroN
-fHE

quanlum theory of radiation has been

r
successfully applied 10 radiative emission
and absorption processes. If the methods which
lead to these results are used to obtain more general radiative corrections, a characteristic difficulty arises. This difficulty is clearly visible in the
formulae given by Mott, Sommerfeldl and Bethe
and Heitle12 for the probability of scattering of an
electron in a Coulomb field accompanied by the
emission of a single light quantum. If the emitted
quantum lies in a frequency range r,l to ufda,
this probability is for small frequencies proportional to d.af a independently
of the angle of
scattering. Taking these formulae literally and
asking for the total probability of scattering with
the emission of any light quantum, one therefore
gets by integration over o a result which diverges
logarithmically in the low frequencies. The same
difficulty appears in the radiative correction to
t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f B - d e c a y . 3a n d t o t h a t o f o t h e r
nonstationary processes.
This "infrared catastrophe" is obviously unrelated to the fundamental "ultraviolet" difficulties
of quantum electrodynamics, exemplified by the
divergent result for the self-energy of the electron.
While the latter is already inherent in the class-l-N.ti*tResearchFellow.

External perturbations on the electron are treated in the

Born approximation. It is shown that for frequencies such
that the above three parameters are negligible the quantum
mchanical calculation yields just the directly reinterpreted
results of the classical formulae, namely that the total
probabitity of a given change in the motion of the electron
is unaffected by the interaction with radiation, and that
the mean number of emitted quanta is infinite in such a way
that the mean radiated energy is equal to the energy
radiated classically in the corresponding trajectory.

ical theory, the former has no counterpart there,

There is. however. a feature in the classical
theory rvhich indicates the cause of the difficulty:
If for simplicity one considers only frequencies
which are small compared to the reciprocal of the
collision time, the mechanism of emission may be
described as follows. The amplitude of each
Fourier component of the proper field of the
electron before the impact retains its value after
the impact.a The difference between the new field
and the freld proper to the electron in its new
motion is the emitted radiation. The significant
point is now that 1,, the radiated intensity per
unit frequency interval, does not approach zero5
as @+0. Hence I,f ha, which may be taken as an
estimate of t'he mean number of light quanta
emitted per unit frequency range, tends to infinity as o+0. Since the same result has to be
expected in a rigorous quantum-theoretical treatment, one has to anticipate that only the probability for the simultaneous emission of infinitely
many quanta can be finite; the probability of
emission of any finite number of quanta must
vanish.

t Thi, i. i" strict analogyto the mechanicalmodelof an

o s c i l l a t oirn i ri a l l y h e l da w a y f r o m i t s e q u i l i b r i u mp o s i t i o n
b y a c o n s t a nlto r c e ,t h e v a l u eo f w h i c hs u d d e n l yc h a n g e s .
\ \ e s h a l ls e el a t e rt h a t t h e s a m ea n a l o g yh o l d si n q u a n t u m
mechanics,whereit finds its mathematicalexpressionin
1N. F. Mott., Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 27, 255 (1931); the exnansion
of the wavefunctionof an oscillatorwith one
(1931).
position in terms of the wave functions correAnn.
Physik
11,
257
equililirium
Sommerfeld,
d.
A.
, H. Bethe and W. Heitler, Proc. Roy Soc. A146, 83
sponding
to a new equilibriumposition.
'5
(1934\.
For i chareedoaiticlemovins in a oureCoulombfield,
3J . K . K n i p pan d G . E . U h l e n b e c kP,h y s i c 3a .4 2 51 1 9 3r6; /' - los 1 or a's@+0, where ii the iollision t ime; in a
"
than 1/r2 ior larger, I.
F . B l o c hP
, h y s .R e v . 5 0 , 2 7 2( 1 9 3 6 )s; e ep p . 2 7 6 - 7i n t h e field which falls off more rapidly
approachesa finite value.
latter.

54

t30
RADIATION

FIELD

In these circumstances the ordinary treatment

of the interaction between electron and field by a
consistent expansion in powers of e, the charge of
the electron, is clearly inadequate, for such a
procedure is based on the physical assumption
that the probability of multiple light quantum
emission decreases with ihcreasing number of
emitted quanta. In fact, however, if one considers only frequencies above a certain minimum
frequency oo, the expansion parameter of such a
treatment is e2/hc.(v/c)'zlog E/han (E, tt the
kinetic energy resp. velocity of the electron),6
which in the limit o0+0 violates the original
assumption that it is small.
In order to avoid this expansion, a method is
developed below in which the coupling between
the electron and the electromagnetic waves of
low frequency is not considered as a small perturbation. The method is arfalogous to the classical expansion in powers ol ezotfmC, the ratio of
the electron radius to the wave-length considered,
in which in first approximation the motion of the
electron is treated as given and the reaction of the
field on the electron is taken into account in
higher orders. We shall show how this can be
formulated in quantum mechanics as the solution
in successive approximations of a system of two
simultaneous differential equations; of these approximations only the one of lowest order is here
After thus having
needed and investigated.
treated the system electron plus electromagnetic
field, transitions of this system due to external
forces on the electron can be treated by the
ordinary method of small perturbations.T
II.

Foruure,uoN

oF rsB

MBrsoo

The Hamilton operator of the total system

electron plus electromagnetic field, after elimination of the longitudinal parts of the electric
field, is8
se : c { (a, p - (e/ c) A) | Brncl

Il.
+ (r /s").f 11nt')'z
+1g1)d
6 This is the order of magnitude of the ratio of the probabilities of single quantum emission and radiationless
process,
7 A case in which the action of a sattering field on the
electron is not considered as a small Derturbation. is
treated in the following paper by A. Nordiieck.
8 W. Pauli, Hand.buehder Physik, Yol.24, p.266.

OF

ELECTRON

JJ

We expand the vector potential A in the form

A : 2c(rh/ $\Do,-le,r(P,r
'r

cos (k,, r)
*0'r sin (k" r))'

where Q is the volume within which the cyclical

boundary conditionsare applied, the summation
index s characterizes the direction and circular
frequency o" of the various waves with propagation vector k", tr their state of polarization; and
e,r is a unit vector in the direction of polarization. The dynamical variables P,r and Or are
related to the quantized amplitudes a(I, k) and
@+(I,k)e accordingto
2-r(P,x*iQ,,:,):o(r, k,),
iQ i =o+(tr,k,),
"xand obey the commutation laws
2-t(P

[P,^' 0"',,']: -16""'drr' ;

[p,r, p,,r,]: [0"r, 0,,r,] :0.
We then obtain
tc:c{(e, p- Ea"r[P,r cos (k,, r)
f 0"r sin (k", r)f)*7mcl
1!!(P"r'?*0,f)/to",
where

a"t,:2e(rh/Qo")\e,'r,.

(1)
Q)

The matrix vector a of Dirac is to be interpreted physically as the velocity of the electron
divided by c. If following the procedure in classical theory, we should in first approximation
neglect the reaction of the electromagnetic field
on the electron, we should be led to replace c in
(1) by the c number
v:Y/c,

(3)

where v stands for the (constant) velocity of the

electron in its undisturbed motion. The operator
p has then at the same time to be replaced by
(l-p')\.But
with c numberssubstitutedfor a
and p in (1) the dynamical problem can immediately be solved. Indeed, the presenceof the
interaction energy in (1) then causesno mathee W. Pauli, Hanilb*ch der Physih Yol.24, p. 250 ff.; the
notation used in the presnt paper is es*ruially the sme
as that of G. WentzLl, Hondbrch der Physih Vol. 24, p.

740fr.

t3r
F.

56

BLOCH

AND

matical difficulty, since being closely analogous to

the potential of a given constant force on each
field oscillator, it can be taken into account by
merely adding functions of r to the P,r and 0,r'
Of course, the above replacement is not rigorously justifred. In order to enable one to take into
account the error thus committed by successive
approximations, we proceed as follows. The solution ry'(r, 0"r) of the wave equation

A. NORDSIECK
We accordingly solve the equation
cos (k,, r)

{c(g, p-la,r[P,r

*0"r sin (k", r)))*mc'(l*1I(P,r't0

p'))'

Elu:0.
"x')ho"-

(10)

This can best be done by first making the

canonicaltransformation

(4) P,r: P',r*o"r cos (k", r) ;

\t'l':EV

Q,1:Q,,r*a"r sin(k,,r) ; r:t' ;

p: pt-lhk"a"1[P',1 cos (k", r)

can be uniquely separated into two parts

,! :{+ -trl,-

(5)

rt

by the help of the operator

* Q ' " r s i n ( k " ,r ) { } o , v l '

,{:(c, s)fP(l-p')l

(6)

and the conditions

It{+=*+;

L{-:

-,1,-.

(7)

The correspondingtransformation of the s'ave

function is
u(t,Q"):exp

hB:2(l-p2)t-Blt

X [ 0 ' " r * ] a " r s i n ( k " ,r ) l ] ' u ' ( r , Q ' " x ) . ( 1 2 )

(8)

Choosing

and adding and subtracting Eqs. (4) and

trJa!=879

{ i D o " r c o s( k " , r )
r)r

Using further the relations

tro:2U-c,1;

(11)

o , ^ : ( u , a , r ) / n ( f r " - ( u ,k , ) )

(13)

@a)
one obtains for u' the simple equation

we get
{c(s, p - ! a,rlPrr cos (k,, r) * 0"r sin (k"' r) ])
''
*mc2ll - y\r+iE(P,x2lQ "x2)hu"TEl,l,'
(9)
"r
= -t(u+0, p -mc(l-p2)-lg
- Ea,r[P"r cos(k", r) f Q,1sin (k,, r)])r/-' +

lc(s, p')lmc'z(1

;p (P" "xl Q" "x)hu"

"z;-11
- ( c/ 2 h ) 2 , G , a " ) " / ( k ( v , k " ) ) - E l u ' * o ( r 4 )
"with the generalsolution
u' : "y(v)g-\ exp li I h(mc(l - uz)-tsl E, r) |

xflr-"r(0'"r), (1s)

sl

where the upper sign goes with the first superscript and the lower with the second.
The two functions !+ and{- in Eqs. (9) correspond in the limit as the interaction between
the electron and the field tends to zero, to
motions of the electron in states with momentum
mc(l-pz1-t9 and with energies+rnc2(l-p2)-",
respectively. The approximation mentioned before of first assuming the velocity of the electron
to be a given c number gc is equivalent to an approximate solution of the equations (9) in which
the right-hand sides are neglected and /- is assumed to be zero. The latter assumption is made
to obtain a state in which the energy of the
electron is positive.

E ( g , m , x ,g ) : m c z ( l - p 2 ; - l 1 c ( u , 8 )
*L@
'r

( ro.)
- (cI 2h)E G, a")' / (k - (u, k")).
"
"x* ilh,'t"
3t

Here 7(p) is a noimalizedfour-componentamplitude satisfying the relation A"y: ?.tog is an arbitrary vector introduced so that for a fixed value
of g the functions (15) form a completeorthogonal set. We shall below use only such functions
z' for which 8:0, so that for vanishing interaction between electron and field we have to deal
with an electron of momentum mc(|-pz)-to.
ro .y may be taken to be proportional to any linear combination of the columns of (1*A).

132
RADIATION

FIELD

h^(r) is the normalized solution of the oscillator

equation
h*,, _ tczh*l (Zm* l) h^ : 0.
Going back to the original function a and the
original variables 0"^, u'e have from (11), (12),
and (15)
u(v, *"t):r(u)o-,
tilo"x

J/

transition
of the system between two states
characterized by the velocities v:s,
and w:rc
of the electron and the quantum numb.ers zr"1 and
z8r, respectively. The matrix element of a perturbation tr/ operating'on
the coordinate and spin
variables of the electron is given by

:lf

sin (k,, r)l]

.fIft."r(0"r-o"r sin (k", r)).

ELECTRON

7(U, n"r; v, n"r)

exp {i/h(ntc(I-p'z)-lu, r)

cos (k", r)[0,r-]",i

OF

(1?)

It is to be noted that the approximatevalidity

of this solution is not conditionedby the smallnessof the fine structure constant e2fhc,sincewe
have neglectedonly the recoil of the electron and
can therefore make the solution (17) the more
accurate the larger a mass we assign to the electron. In order to obtain the number which must
be supposedto be small in order to have (17)
valid, one may calculate ry'-in first approximation
and compareits norm rl,'iththe norm of p+, wh'ch
is unity. An estimate of norm (f-) gives
norm (g-) - szc':t/ mc\U G) (hq / m c2)
lg(p)(e'or/mc3)),
where o1 is the highest frequency taken into account, and/ and g are functions of p alone such
that for small,p,f-l l3r, C-ef 9r2)p2and,forlarge
(r - p,)-t, I - ( / 4r) (r - rz), ge (r / 4r") (r - p,),
log (1/(1 -p'z)). That the expansionparameteris
not e2fhc may also be seen by considering the
classical limit, in which D is assumed to be
zeroi in this limit the shifts d,r cos (k", r) and
d"r sin (k", r) of P"r and Q"1expressedin (17) correctly describe the superposition of the transverse
part ol the field produced by the uniformly
moving electron, ofi the field of the external
light waves.rr
IIL ApruceuoN To SMALLPsnrunserroNs oN
THE ELEcTRoN;TnaNsrrroN PRoBABrLrrrEs
AND MEAN ReoTerBp ENBncv
The solution (17) can be used to calculate
transition probabilities due to small external
perturbations acting on the electron. Consider a
u In fact, the quantities o,l can be obtained exactly by
Fourier analysis of the transverse part of the classical
vector potential oI a uniformly moving electron,

e x pt 1 - i / h ( n c ( -l p ' ? ) - t sr,) |

. 7*(u) I/6(v) exp li / h(mc(L- r')-tn, r I

'II1(k"; 6a\ttket,;r"^, z"^), (18)
sI

where r"1 is the same function of r as o,1 is of g

(see(13)), 6(v)is a four-componentamplitude for
the state v corresponding to r(U) for the state
g, and
I(k;o,mtr,n):
J

I d Q h ^ ( Q - os i n ( k , r ) )

c o s( k , r ) Q { l i ( c ' - r ' z )

Xexp {-i(o-z)

Xsin (k, r) cos (k, r)lh"(Q- r sin (k, r))

(19)

:exp l-i(m-n)(k,t)l.K
with
K(o, m ; r, n) : svp I - iG - r)'l
X (m ln !)tl - i2- t (o - r11t^- "t
I

l- +(a- r)'zfr

E
r- (l- r) tr !(lm- nl -t () t

(20)

wherel':m if mfn and l:n otherwise.lzPutting

the value (19) of 1 into (18), we can write the
matrix element in the form
I
(21)
l'(u, -,r ; v, ,"r) :
x,mcxir
tf(q)Il^f G,
">,,n,x),
where

n@1: arexp{ *i(q, r) }7*(s)76(v) (22)

I
and q: (me/lr)l(l -p'z)-4u- (1- /)-lvl
rL(ma,-n")k,.
12The integral over
Q is best evaluated by'using
generating function for the Hermitian polynomials.

(23)
the

r33
BLOCH

F.

58

AND

From (21) follows the probability per unit time of

the transition v, rts\+r, z"r in the form
T(v, m"^ i v, a"r):

NORDSIECK

zero. In order to show this, consider first the case

in which no light quanta are emitted, i.e', where
ever] zu1:Q. We have then from (13) and (2)

Qr/ha')

XDlmc'1(l - Pz)-t -'/nc2(1-

f l e x'p |' - i ( o " r sr

v2)-\

* I(rle"r * z,^)i1o"l I F(q) l'?

X fI j K(a"1, m

"r

'?, (24)
i r"r, z"r) |

where D is Dirac's 6-function.r3

To simplify the discussion we shall from now
on neglect the last (electromagnetic) terms in (23)
and in the argument of D in (24)' We thus consider the changes in energy and momentum of the
electromagnetic field to be small compared to the
energy and the change in momentum of the
electron, an assumption which is clearly justified
for the treatment of the lorv frequencies.la
Furthermore, we consider the state a, lnux for
which all m"x:Ol this means that initially no free
quanta are present. The probability per unit time
for a transition in which nsx quanta of the kind
s, tr are emitted and the electron after the transition moves in a direction within the element of
solid angle sin SilBdq is by (24) and (20)
U(gi,t, ni)

A.

sin &dtd.e

: ( l r'zhaA) sin Sdtde(m2vc / (1- v'z))

2 (25)
x I l . ( d | , I I l K ( c " r , o ; 2 " 1 ,a " 1 ) I
str
: $ l4r2h4a) sin Bdfds(mzr'c/(l - v'z))I F(q) | '

XfI exp{-}(""^-."r)t}

[*(o"r,-

'-i)']""^

(26)

n*1

The result confirms what has been anticipated

in the introduction, namely, that the probability
of the emission of any finite number of quanta is
r3 In the arqument of the d-function there should stand,
risorouslv speaking, E(u, z'r, 0) -Etv, u "r, 0) where the
t i l u e s o i E i r e g i v C n b y ' ( J 6 ) . W e h a v e n e g l e c t e dt h e t e r m
- G / 2 h E { J / - , a : i l ' z l ( 1 . - r U . k " ) ) i n ( 1 6 ) , r e p r e s e n t i n gt h e
kinetic electromaqnetic self-energy of the electron, comoared to the mass term mc2ll - p2)-1.One may, in order to
Le consisrent, imagine the lrequency spectrum to be broken
ofi at an uDper limit or such that ezarlmC1ll. Since we are
here concerned with difficulties arising from the low freouencies, this procedure, although connected with the
fundamental difficulties of electrodynamics, does not affect
our conclusions.
r{ For thL treatment of higher frequencies one may use
an expansion in powers ol e2fhc,

r " r ) ' z 1: e x p 1 ,- Q r e ' / h a 1

I

.',,-{##;-##;l'}
(27)

The exponent becomes, after introducing the

number of modes of vibration O/(2zr)3'dk" in the
interval dk" and carrying out the sum over tr,
f"

-(e,/4r,hc) tim
o e o - l r |o

da"
-"'
,"Jo

r"

f2n

sin d*dr}"I

'[(J;-*)'-(*-+)]

d,e,

,lo

(28)

where f,, p" are the polar angles of k, and p", z,

are the components of g, v along k" and where rve
have cut off the frequency spectrum at an upper
limit or. The integration over the angles gives a
finite positive factor; the integration over os,
however, gives a result which is logarithmically
infinite in the limit o0+0. Hence (27) vanishes. If
a finite number of the a"r in (26) are different
from zero, (26) differs from (27) in only a finite
number of factors, thus remaining zero'
However, the total probability of a transition
g+v of the electron independently of the number
of quanta emitted, which is given by the sum of
(26) over all values of every a"r, is just
(r /4r'zhaa) sin td$de(mzvc/ (1 - v')) | F(q) | ', (29)
rvhich is the result which one would have obtained by neglecting entirely the interaction with
the electromagnetic field. This result had physically to be expected since the change in momentum of the electromagnetic field has been neglected compared to that of the electron.
From the facts that the probability of the
transition u+r accompanied by the emission of a
finite number of light quanta is zero and that the
total transition probability is finite, it follows
that the mean total number of quanta emitted is
infinite.
The mean radiated energy in the frequency
interval d.<,:"and in the angular range d'8", d'9"

134
RADIATION

FIELD

when the electron isdeflected into the element of

solid angle sin 3d,8d,p is given by
(A/ (2rc)s)a"'zdot"sin 8"dO"d.e"

Xt

t
l

n"aho"Usintittd.e (30)

a!tr:o

: (l / r,haQ) sin 8d.3d.,p(m2vc/

(l - vr)) I F(q) | ,
f /
r
' ( . e 2 i ' 4 t 2 c () ;l - - .
L\ 1-9"

e \t
l
1- v"/

p"
," \ tl _
-l /
-_
,
| ldo-sin 3"d.8"d.p". (31)
\ 1 -p"
l- v"/ J

This has beenobtainedby makinguseof (26),

(13)and (2) and of the formula
i ne-,x"/nl:r.
4:0

On account of the extra factor ou in (30), the

mean total energy, unlike the mean total number
of quanta, is finite. Formula (31) is just the total
probability that the electron be scattered into the
element of solid angle sin $iL$dq multiplied by
the amount of energy which it would radiate

OF

ELECTRON

59

classically in such a defldction. The expansion in

powers of e2/hc in the limit of small frequencies,
where alone Formula (31) may be supposed to be
valid, leads to the same result for the mean
energy radiated, though its results are entirely
misleading so far as transition probabilities are
concerned.l5
The above considerations can be applied almost literally also to cases such as the theory of
p-decay, in which the external perturbation does
not act on the electron coordinates, but creates

an electron. The only difference,so far as the

electromagneticfield is concerned, consists in
rgplacinggc by the velocity of the nucleusand vc
by the velocity with which the electron is created.
Here again the total probability
of B-decay is
unaltered by the interaction of thd electron with
the low frequency radiation and the mean radiated energy is in agreement with that calculated
by expanding in powers of e2fhc.
15This remark does not affect the cross section for the
emission of a high frequency quantum as calculated by
Belhe and Heitle-r, and expeiimbntally verified. Howevei,
the cross section so derived has to be interoreted. not ai
t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t r h e h i g h f r e q u e n c yq u a n t u m a l o n e b e
e m i t t e d , b u l a s t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t t h i s h a p p e n sn o m a t t e r
how many other light quanla are emitted.

I35

P o p e rI O

On the Intrinsic Moment of the Electron*

H, M. FoLEYANDP. KuscH
ColumbdaUniaersitl, New York, New Yorh
December26, 1947
f N a previous letterr u-e have reported the observation
zP:rz and zPtr
I
that the ratio of the g.r values of the
states of gallium has the value 2.00344; the value 2 for this
ratio follows from Russell-Saunders coupling and the conventional spin and orbital gyromagnetic ratios. If each of
these states is exactly described by Russell-Saunders coupling, this observation can only be explained by setting
(6s-262,):0.00229+0.00008, where the electron spin g
and the orbital momentum g value is
value is gs:2*6s,
gr:l*6t.
Since each of these atomic states may be separately subject to configuration interaction perturbations,
the interpretation of this result was not entirely clear.
A determination has now been made of the ratio of the
g.r values of Na in the 25; state and of Ga in the 2P+ state,
The e*pe.i-ental procedure was similar to that previously
described.l The known hyperfine interaction constants of
gallium2 and sodiums were employed in the analysis of the
data. We find for this ratio the value 3.00732+0.00018
instead of the value 3. This result can be explained by
making (as - 2az,): 0.00244+0.00006.
The agreement between the values of (6s-262,) obtained
by the two experiments makes it unlikely that one can
account for the effect by perturbation of the states. The
effect of configuration interaction on the g". value of sodium
is presumably negligible.a To explain our observed effect
without modification of the conventional values of gs or gz
introduces the rather unlikely requirement that both states
of galliurn be perturbeC, anci b1'amounts just great enough
to give the agreement noted above.
F rom any experiment in n'hich the ratio of the g"r values
of atomic states is determined, it is possible to de[ermine
only the quantity (6s-262,). If, on the basis of the correspondence principle we set 6, equal to zero, we may state
the result of our first experiment as
gs:2.00229 J.0.00008
and that of our recent experiment as

ss:2'00244L0.00006'
It is not possible, at the present
discrepancy

apparent
conceivable

some

small

give rise to a discrepancy

would

These
gestion
ment

that

between

results

are not

time,

to state whether

these values
perturbation

of

of the indicated

in agreement

by Breit6 as to the magnitude

is real.
the

the
It

is

states

magnitude.

the recent

sug-

of the intrinsic

mo-

with

of the electron.

* Publication assisted by the Ernest Kempton Adams Fund for

Phvsical Researchof Columbia University.
i P . K u s c h a n d H . M . F o l e y , P h y s . R e v . 7 2 , 1 2 5 6( 1 9 4 7 ) .
2 G. E. Becker and P. Kurch, to be published.
r S . M i l l m a n a n d P . K u s c h , P j r r r s .R e v . 5 8 , 4 3 8 ( 1 9 4 0 ) .
I M . P h i l l i p s ,P h y s . R e r ' . 6 0 , 1 0 o ( 1 9 4 1 ) .
a br. J. Sc'hi'inger has verv kindli informed us in advance of publication of his conclusion from theoretical studies that 6, is zero lvtrereas
ds may not vanish.
6 G, Breit. Phys. Rev. 72,984 (1947).

136

Poper I I

Fine Structure of the l{ydrogen Atom by a lVficrowave Method* **

Wrr,lrs E. Laur, Jn. eNn Roeenr C. RersEnronD
Columbia Radintion Laborotory, Department oJ Physics, Columbia University, Neu I'orh. lieu, Yorh
(Received June 18, 1947)

tf-HE

spectrum of the simplest atom, hydrogen, has a fine structuretwhich according

to the Dirac wave equation for an electron
moving in a Coulomb field is due to the combined
efiects of relativistic variation of mass with
velocity and spin-orbit coupling. It has been considered one of the great triumphs of Dirac's
theory that it gave the "right" Iine structure of
the energy levels. However, the experimental
attempts to obtain a really detailed confirmation
through a study of the Balmer lines have been
frustrated by the large Doppler effect of the lines
in comparison to the small splitting of the lower
or n:2 states. The various spectroscopic workers
have alternated between finding confirmationz of
the theory and discrepanciessof as much as eight
percent. More accurate information would clearly
provide a delicate test of the form of the correct
relativistic wave equation, as well as information
on the possibility of line shifts due to coupling of
the atom with the radiation field and clues to the
nature of any non-Coulombic interaction between
the elementary particles: electron and proton.
The calculated separation between the levels
22Psand 22Pztzis0.365 cm-r and corresponds to a
wave-length of. 2.74 cm. The great wartime
advances in microwave techniques in the vicinity
I

of three centimeters wave-length make possible

the use of new physical tools for a study of the
n:2 frne structure states of the hydrogen atom.
A little consideration shows that it would be
exceedingly difficult to detect the direct absorption of radiofrequency radiation by excited Fi
atoms in a gas discharge because of their small
* Publietion assisted by the Ernest Kempton Adarns
Fund for Ph1'sical Research of Colurnbia Llniversit)', New
York.
** Work supported bv the Signal Corps under
contract
number W 36-0.19sc-3200.1.
I For a convenient account, see H. E. \iihite, Inl:roduclion
Lo Alomit Spectra (McGraw-Flill
Book Companl', New
Y o r k , 1 9 3 4 ) ,C h a p . 8 .
'zJ. W. Drinkwater, O. Richardson, and \V. E. Williams,
Prm. Ror'. Soc. 174, l6l (1940).
3W. V. Houston, Phvs. Rev. 5r, 446 (1937); R. C.
W i l l i a m s , P h y s . R e v . 5 4 , 5 5 8 ( 1 9 3 8 ) ; S . P a s t e r n a c k ,P h y s .
Rev. 54, 1113 (1938) has anall'zed these results in terms
of an uprvard shift of the S level bl.about 0.03 cm-r.

population and the high background absorption

due to ^electrons. Instead, we have found a
method depending on a novel property of the
2251 level. According to the Dirac theory, this
state exactly coincides in energy with the 2'P1
state which is the lou'er of the two P states. The S
state in the absence of external electric fields is
metastable. The radiative transition to the
ground state 1'?S1is forbidden by the selection
rule AZ: *1. Calculations of Breit and Tcllcra
have shown that the most probable decay mechanism is double quantum emission with a lifetime
of 1/7 second. This is to be contrasted r.ith a
lifetime of onl1, 1.6X10-e second for the nonmetastable 22P states. The metastability is very
much reduced in the presence of external electric
fields5 owing to Stark effect mixing of the S and P
levels with resultant rapid decay of the combined
state. If for any reason, the 2251 level does not
exactly coincide with the 22P1level, the vulnerability of the state to external fields will be reduced. Such a removal of the accidental degeneracy may arise from any defect in the theory
or ma1' be brought about bl' the Zeeman splitting
of the levels in an external magnetic field.
In brief, the experimental arrangement used is
the following: Molecular hydrogen is thermally
dissociated in a tungsten oven, and a jet of atoms
emerges from a slit to be cross-bombarded by an
electron stream. About one part in a hundred
million of the atoms is thereby excited to the
metastable 22Sr state. The metastable atoms
(with a small recoil deflection) move on out of the
bombardment
region and are detected by the
process of electron ejection from a metal target.
The electron current is measured u'ith an FP-54
electrometer tube and a sensitive galvanometer.
If the beam of metastable atoms is subjected to
any perturbing fields which cause a transition to
any of the 22P states, the atoms will decay while
moving through a very small distance. As a result, the beam current will decrease, since the

241

a H. A. Bethe ir Hantlbuch der Physih, Vol. 2411,

$4.1.
5 C. Breir and E. -feller, Astrophl's.
J. sl, 215 (1910).

137
242

!VILLIS

E.

LA]VIB, JI{.

AND

ROBERT

C.

RETHERFORD

Frc. 1. A llrpiel plot of galvanometer deflection due to

interruption of the microwave radiation as a function of
magnetic field. The magnetic field was calibrated rvith a
flip-coil and ma1, be subject to some error which can he
largely eliminated in a more refined apparatus. The wirlth
of lhe curves is probably due to thc fr,llosing causes:
(1) the radiative line l'idth of about 100 Mc/sec. of the rP
slates, (2) hy'perfine splitting of the 25 state which amounts
to about 88 Mcr'sec., (3) the use of an excessive intensity
of radiation which gives increased absorption in the wings
of the lines, and (4) inhomogeneity of the magnetic 6eld.
have been
No transitions from the state 2251(m= -!)
observed, but atoms in this state mav be quenchbd b-v
stral' electric fields because of the more nearly exact degeneracy with the Zeeman pattern of the'P states.
detector
state.

does not respond

Such

a transition

to atoms in the ground

may

be induced

M A G N E T I CF I E L D - ( G A U S S }

by the

Experimental values for resonance magnetic

Ftc,2.
6.elds for various frequencies are shown by circles. The
solid
show thre
of the theoretimll],
curves
between source and detector.
somewhere
Transishifting
variations, and the broken curyes are obtained by"*O".,"0
tions may also be induced by radiofrequency
these down bl' 1000 Mc/sec. This is done merely for the
sake
and
it
is
not
implied
that
this
would
of
comparison,
radiation for which hr corresponds to the energy
represent a "best fit." The plot covers onll'a small range
difference between one of the Zeeman components
of'the frequency and magnitic field scale covered by oir
of 2251and any component of either 22P1or 22Ps12. data, but a complete plot would not shos up clearly on a
small scale, and the shift indicated by the remainder of
Such measurements provide a precise method for
the data is quite compatible rvith a shift of 1000 Mc.
application

to the

beam

of a static

electric

field

the location of the 2'9S1state relative to the P

states, as well as the distance between the latter
states.
We have observed an electrometer current of
the order of 10-14ampere which must be ascribed
hydrogen atoms. The strong
to metastable
quenching effect of static electric fields has been
observed, and the voltage gradient necessary for
this has a reasonable dependence on magnetic
field strength.
We have also observed the decrease in the
beam of metastable atoms caused by microwaves
in the wavelength range 2.4 to 18.5 cm in various
magnetic fields. In the measurements, the frequency of the r-f is fixed, and the change in the
galvanometer current due to interruption of the
r-f is determined as a function of magnetic field

strength, A typical curve of quenching ?errus

magnetic field is shown in Fig. 1. We have
plotted in Fig. 2 the resonancemagnetic fields for
various frequencies in the vicinity of 10,000
Mc/sec. The theoretically calculated curves for
the Zeeman effect are drawn as solid curves,
while for comparisonwith the observedpoints,
the calculated curves have been shifted downward by 1000 Mc/sec. (broken curves). The
results indicate clearly that, contrary to theory
but in essential agreement with Pasternack's
hypothesis,sthe 2251state is higher than the
22P1byabout 1000Mc/sec. (0.033cm-l or about
9 percentof the spin relativity doublet separation.
The lower frequency transitions 'S{m:l)+
zP{m: *}) have also been observedand agree

138
FINE

STRUC'TURE

OF

2St level. With the

well with such a shift of the
present precision, we have not yet detected any
cliscrepancy between the Dirac theory and the
doublet separation of the P levels. (According to
most of the imaginable theoretical explanations
of the shift, the doublet separation would not be
affected as much as the relative location of the S
and P states.) With proposed refinements in
and
magnetic field homogeneity,
sensitivity,
calibration, it is hoped to locate the S level with
respect to each P level to an accuracy of at least
ten Mc/sec. By addition of these frequencies and
assumption of the theoretical formula 6v:]6a2R
for the doublet separation, it should be possible to
measure the square of the fine structure constant

THE

HYDTTOGEN

ATOM

243

times the Rydberg frequency to an accuracy of

0.1 percent.
By a slight extensionof the method, it is hoped
to determine the hyperfine structure of the 2'?S1
state. Al1 of these measurementswill be repeated
for deuterium and other hydrogen-likeatoms'
A paper giving a fuller account of the experimental and theoretical details of the method is
being prepared, and this will contain later and
more accurate data.
The experimentsdescribedhere were discussed
at the Conferenceon the Foundations of Quantum
Mechanics held at Shelter Island on June 1-3'
1947 which was sponsored by the National
Academy of Sciences.

P o p e rI 2

t39

The ElectromagneticShift of Energy Levels

H. A. Brrnn
Cornell Unia*sity, Ithaca, Nm Yorh
(Receivedlune 27, 1947)

very beautiful experimenrs, Lamb and explained by a nuclear interaction of reasonable

f[Y
U Retherfordr have shown that the fine struc- magnitude, and Uehlings has investigated the
ture of the second quantum state of hydrogen effect of the "polarization of the vacuum" in the
does not agree with the prediction .of the Dirac Dirac hole theory, and has found that this effect
theory. The 2s level, which according to Dirac's also is much too small and has, in addition, the
theory should coincide with the 2p1 level, is wrong sign.
actually higher than the latter by an amount of
Schwinger and Weisskopf, and Oppenheimer
about 0.033 cm-t or 1000 megacycles. This have sugg.estedthat a'possibleexplanation might
discrepancy had long been suspectedfrom spec- be the shift of energy levels by the interaction of
troscopic measurements.2'3However, so far no the electron with the radiation field. This shift
satisfactory theoretical explanation has been comesout infinite in all existing theories, and has
given. Kemble and Present,and Pasternackahave therefore always been ignored. However, it is
shown that the shift of the 2s level cannot be possible to identify the most strongly (lineily)
divergent term in the level shift with an electroI Phys. Rev. 72,241 (1947).
I p.
magnetic rzasseffect which must exist for a bound
Plys. Rev. Sl, 446 (1937).
!.-!!guston,
'R. C. Williams,Phys. Rev. 54, 558 (1938).
as well as for a free electron. This effect should
I E, C. Kemble md R. D, Pre*nt, Phys. Rev. 44. l03l
(1932);S. Pasternack,Phys. Rev. 54, lliJ (f938).
0E. A. Uehling,
Phys.Rev.48,55,(1935).

140
BETHE

340
properly be regarded as already included in the
observed mass of the electron, and we must
therefore subtract from the theoretical expression, the corresponding expression for a free
electron of the same average kinetic energy' The
result then diverges only logarithmically (instead
Actheorl':
in non-relativistic
of linearly)
cordingly, it may be expected that in the hole
theory, in which the aeain term (self-energy of the
electron) diverges only logarithmically, the result
will be conaergent after subtraction of the free
electron expression'o This would set an effective
upper limit of the order of mc2 to the frequencies
of light which effectively contribute to the shift
of the level of a bound electron. I have not
carried out the relativistic calculations, but I
shall assume that such an effective relativistic
limit exists.
The ordinary radiation theory gives the following result for the self-energy of an electron in a
state rn' due to its interaction with
guantum
transverse electromagnetic waves :
gt:

-(2e2/3rhcs)
fK

x I

hdhLlv,-l'/(8"-E,,+k), (1)

mentum, due to the fact that electromagnetic

mass is added to the mass of the electron' This
electromagnetic mass is already contained in the
experimental electron mass; the contribution (3)
to the energy should therefore be disregarded'
For a bound electron, v2 should be replacedby its
expectation value, (v2)-.. But the matrix elements of v satisfY the sum rule
I lv-. I
Therefore
becomes

the relevant

wherc k = hct is the energy of the quantum and v

is the velocity of the electron which, in nonrelativistic theorY, is given bY
v:P/m:

(h/im)v.

(2)

Relativistically, v should be replaced by cc where

c is the Dirac operator' Retardation has been
neglected and can actually be shown to make no
substantial difference.The sum in'(1) goesover
all atomic states n, the integral over all quantum
energiesI up to somemaximum K to be discussed
later.
For a free electron, v has only diagonal
elements and (1) is rePlacedbY

yro: -(2e2/3rVr"'1
f nanu,1n.

(3)

This expression represents the change of the

kinetic energy of the electron for fixed mo6 lt was first suggested b1' Schwinger and Weisskopf rhat
hole theory must be ured to obtain convergence ln thrs
problem.

(4)

Part of the self-energy

2e2

W':W-Wo:

3rhca
rK

lv^"|,(E"- E-)

x I dkL----:-----'
;
J"
E"-E*+h

,_ ,
(s)

This we shall consider as a true shift of the levels

due to radiation interaction.
It is convenient to integrate (5) first over ft'
Assuming K to be large compared with all energy
differencesE*-E^ in the atom,
K

-2e2
W':

Ilv-"1'(E,,-E^)
3rhct

J^

z: (v2)-^.

ln*

-'

(6)

lL"-L^l

"

(lf. E.-E^ is negative, it is easily seen that the

principal value of the integral must be taken,.as
was done in (6),) Since we expect that relativity
theory will provide a natural cut-ofi for the
frequency &, we shall assumethat in (6)
K*mc2.

(7)

(This does not imply the same limit in Eqs' (2)

and'(3).) The argument in the logarithm in (6) is
therefore very large; accordingly, it seems permissible to consider the logarithm as constant
(independent of n) in first approximation'
We therefore should calculate

o:4 o"^:41P,^l'(E"-E^).(8)
This sum is well known; it is

A:DIP" l'(8"-E^):
-p' I g^*vv'v*-',
:+h,
- J fvrw*z2r:2nfuzszz,{r-2(o),

(9)

t4l
ELECTROMAGNETIC

for a nuclear charge Z. For any electron with

angular momentum l*O, the wave function
vanishes at the nucleus; therefore, the sum
24.:0. For example, for the 2p level the negative
contribution .4rgzr balancesthe positive contributions from all other transitions..For a state
with l:0, however,

(10)

V*'(0): (Z/na)8/r,

where z is the principal quantum number and a is

the Bohr radius.
Inserting (10) and (9) into (6) and using
relations between atomic constants, we get for an
S state
81e21t

2a

SHIFT

341

This is in excellent agreement with the observed

value of 1000megacycles.
A relativistic calculation to establish the limit
K is in progress.Even without exact knowledge
of K, however, the agreement is sufficiently good
to give confidencein the basic theory. This shows
(1) that the level shift due to interaction with radiation
is.a real effect and is oT finite magnitude,
(2) that the effect of the infinite electromagnetic mass of
a point electron an be eliminated by proper identifietion
of terms in the Dirac radiation theory,
(3) that an accurate experimental and theoretical investigation of the level shift may establish relativistic effects
(e.g., Dirac bole theorv). These effects will be of the order
of unity in comparison with the logarithm in Eq. (11).

If the present theory

*t;'o(u.-r-h,' (11)should
increase

is correct, the level shift

roughly as Za but not quite so
rapidly, becauseof the variation of (,8,-,8-)1, in
where Ry is the ionization energy of the ground the logarithm. For example, for He+, the shift of
state of hydrogen. The shift for the 2p state is the 2s level should be about 13 times its value for
negligible; the logarithm in (11) is replaced by a hydrogen, giving 0.43 cm-r, and that of the 3s
value of about -0.04. The average excitation level about 0.13 cm-1. For the x-ray levels Ll dnd
energy (8"- E^)^, for the 2s state of hydrogen has LIl, this effect should be superposed upon the
been calculated numerically? and found to be effect of screening which it partly compensates.
17.8 Ry, an amazingly high value. Using this An accurate theoretical calculation of the screen6gure and K:mc2, the logarithm has the value ing is being undertaken to establish this point.
7.63, and we find
This paper grew out of extensive discussionsat
the Theoretical Physics Conference on Shelter
:
(8"W"J 136lnlK/
E*))
Island, June 2 to 4, t947. The author wishesto
:1040 megacycles. (12) expresshis appreciation to the National Academy
of Science which sponsored this stimulating
7 I am indebted to Dr. Stehn and Miss Steward for the
numeriel calculations.
conference.

**':

u\il

P o p e rI 3

142

On Quantum-Electrodynamics a:rd tle

Magnetic Moment of tle Electron
JuLTAN SGNTNGER
E o/!a\d u trild s;tJ, Canbridcc' M assa'hilscltt
Dsember 30' t94?

correctlons

to elec-

The

of-a-radiative

exanple'

simplest

correction

is that

u"'"ttva;- n;ii5y*fjfj:ru'lf
r''"",r'"l"Lio'"-i""n
A',on phenomena
ll

to evaluate

TTEIVIPTS

radiative

,*il':iltJ1fi.n!!1
-*#HilHil'':::ff:li
'ihe
l";;";;;;;;;'n
;:A*1.'iti*T:-*'JTi::i:'s;:d:::E-J"fii "

.ig6!-3i"
;::'",,';:fu:i*:lT"TJ:'J:#i:"mt':.:"*:;t'ffi'l#Tih
ru";Y:T":::
;;#;;;i;;;u.""n.i'*i"piJ'.'io"
l1i$f;*ffihJ'"!lll,1ll;'i,;l'i,1,""'ltTX"J""i-[i:jl5
are subject to modification

ov

from aspectsthat involv.e

"*,

-o."
" -"i""* ""ti"f."to.y

th"o.y,

andaie
"^etgie'

rhi,'{*j:lim
t,u"t*o.thv
tbusrerativery
l;:"f*
transforming the Hamiltonian

o"Iii"

i"p".n""

;;d*;il

splitting

;tut"'iu*''

of the ground states ot atomrc

lT"il:ttt"t

;:H1"tJ:?t*Jl;

oro*
*"::f:lHilJ"',T:*"""T,"1,T;;:;;,i" *o-"n,

l;'i*:lI*#:X*f'.'1":';'""':Xl*T;
l'".,.-::lHi"A;f'3i:"i,'":'::,!.,:f,\T*Tl*1",fi
ii:,:il#":X;'i:
uu"oin"Jo''"i
u'a
;;"';;il
"*t.";o'.
self-energv.of

a free.erectr::-^t1':r:,;

["::lH,*Jlt"'i:"::",]:1T;:..,'*"]'"a"'o"."aa
ttvdtgg!1
to account {or the measured

1T:::;:Til?,';'J:'ilH;"
" ira"7':booi
These
?:ifi*iH.*tr*,*:',""**:**:tT:.,T'i
a"/u: o'oorgr *0'00025' respectively'
;;.Oil;;
cmbinathis
i"""r"e
theoreticalpredicmeaningfulstatementsof .rr" *".r,
u'" not in disagreementwith the
t=tit"'
a
free
of
mass
is provided bv measuretion of masses,which is an" i.o-"r1*"r,"r
iir. U"t" O*"i"e colnformatiot 'irl
,n",
ffi,'"ir**,
electron. It might ,OO".r, ,ri#1i,"
;;;il;,;.";rth.i""t,o.'#,:li':ff+;"S*i*.:1.#
*l*_":t:;,*i?..,i;-il ff3+:ill::i:i

electromagnetic

-;;;;";;.;;;

r*:""fijrug;t1!lll';;,;;;;.r--u,io.o*r"*#*fl
ffi :.{:n'm:n;lt'r:i1Fil:T

**l'iltil:H:,yi*!T:l*:u*l
)::;n'ffi*1;:ru**ry;:'J":$.'"r
lil,',.,.m
th""l".t.o-ugr"ticmassbeasmallcorrection
to the mechaniel mass zo'

of elecatom", and modify the scattring

\-\e'/nc)m0)

i, o"il.l*-iir."
.-i;.;; H^-'tonian
issuprio,;::h::,,f,,:,,]"ixi",J
i:**i:;*n:f,"J1...",",',;H::
fi":,i:'Jil"#::::
inr
values

vielded
ion;'"a helium'5The
essentiallYthre waYs: it
mechaniel mass; il:';;i;;it;:^ta
conjmtured
rron mass,rather rhan ,t" unJi""*"tt"
;iffer.onlv slightlv from those
;;';;;;;
in
only
field
,^a]".;"n
no-'-relativisticcalculation'and
an electron now interacts *t,-f, ii."
is, only an accelerated ;; ffi;;;;;;t..i.
"1
the presenceof an ""t"rr"t n"ia, inut

orabs'rb
;nr111;1*t1g
ii*i-'"""-r'f
i#t"tni:l;;iil"ff ;*Ji;.;'""',1*qq*lq
action energYof an electron
subject to a f,nite radiative.;;.'i;

i."". lit

ct"rtmb

frcld provides a satisfactory termrna-

iiT:T"f
poi.t,I:rr^".,-,i:,il".il.;::n".l:,T';."j.;*
,ha,ast
i::;r'"?l'#il,I-J""",ij"f'.:i
T*j"";31,.?:i3;;";i;;*:ru
n::trlJTi:lH"Ttri
naa3{E:ffli.I;:,ijj',iffi1*l,i*":,?",*T
with
".nnection-

il:i:n:J:-"":li#:i1{x**
"",i".,*""r;ii;*#;l-U'jqffiit,?ffiir:triir
Ho*"t"r,

such a term is
it has long been recognized that

*.ft:*{,{{*rffi,11'*'iiJ$?Ji#i
:H:l",tL1::'itr,ff#I"J[Tffi1::J,]il-,"JJ,l
"Ti1;1Ii]"$i,?{*i,*'iri*;ru*l
\2:';,t1"'nn
*'lij:n:::1#1'li.fl'J::5'irJ:lx'il:iT:iru
il;i;

rh.

"*p"ii-"n.ul

charge.Thus the inte.raction ;'g"J:lt#illm,,i:Rlt"-",311ifi;".*"\.72.r2s6(1e4?),andrurther

lactors'
contained in the renormalization

On Radiative Corrections to
Electron Scattering
I7 a/laill

JULIAN ScgwrNcER
U nio.rsit!, Cambrid.gc, M assaahw.u,
January 21, 1949

ADIATIVE
p
corrmtions to the electromagnetic prop_
l\
erties of the electron produce energy level displace_
ments and modify electron scattering cross sections.
Although the high accuracy of radiofrequency spectroscopy facilitates the measurement of energy level displace_
ments, as in the Lamb-Retherford
experimentl and t}re
evidence on the anomalous magnetic moment pf the electron,t nevertheless the correction to the cross section for
scattering of an electron in a Coulomb field is not without
interest, since it permits a comparison between theory and
experiment in the relativistic region, as compared to the
non-relativistic domain to which the energy level measurements pertain.
The radiative correction to the cross sction for essn_
tially elastic scattering of an electron by a Coulomb field
has been computed with the form of quantum electrodynamics developed in several recent papers.! In addition to the emission and absorption of virtual quanta. we
include the real emission of quanta with maimum energy
-1E, which is small in comparircn with l/:E-mc2.
the
initial kinetic energy of the electron, In other words, we
treat only those inelastic events in which a small fraction
of the original energy is radiated. The contribution of the
remainder of the inelastic proce$es can be derived from
the well-known bremsstrahlung cross section, and is not
of principal interest, The result, expressed as a fractional
decrease in the difierential cross section for rcatterine
ttrrough an angle rl, is
r/
F
\
6:2d/rL\toc;El)(I(0+K,) +iI( o- Kr+'IKz- L
(mc2/E\2
s' , ' 1 - P 2
o^l
sin?d/z"o1'

,\ r" ,

where
Ko: f\/(1{
\r)tl log[(1]Ir)
5,: [(1f \r)/\,](o_
1,
Kr- [(1*\r)/r']Kr_
t,

l11l , \:

(p/mc) sin(s/2),
Q)

and p: pc/8, Note that 6 diverges logarithmically in the

limit AE+0. It is well known that this diflrculty stems froru
the neglect of prcesses involving more than one low frequency quantum.. Actually the eswntially elastic satier"
ing cross section approaches zero as AE*O;
that is, it
never happens that a scattering event is unaccompanied l,t'
the emission of quanta. This is described by replacing tlrtt
radiative correction factor 1-6 with e-6, which has the
proper limiting behavior. The further ternrs in the serics
expansion of a-'express the efiects of higher order proceses
involving the multiple emission of soft quanta. However,
for practical purposs such a refinement is unnecessrv.
The accuracy with which the energy of a particle can be
measured is such that the limit AE*0 cannot be realized,
and d will be small in comparison with unity under presently accessible circumstances.
In the norr-relativistic limit, p<<1,
K

:
(2n * 1)lB' sln'(o / 2),
" lt /
L=l(4/3)(os2-t)-!lp,
sin,(o/D.

("/

| : (8al3r)B? sin, (3 / 2) Uog(mc2/ 2aE) + ( 19130) l,

(6)

and

which increases linearly with the kinetic energy of the

particle. For a slowly moving particle, it is an elementary
matter to include the additional scattering produced by
the real emission of quanta with energies in the interual
from AE to W. One thereby obtains the following fractional decrease in the differential cross section for scattering
through an angle rl, irrespective of the final energy:
6: (8al3r)p'z sinl (o /2)llog(mc2/8W) + (19130)
tan(d/2)f [cos r]/cosr(,]/2))logcsc(o/2)).
*('-,t)

(7)

We may remark, parentJretically, that in the sme nonrelativistic approximation, the radiative correction to the
energy of a particle moving in an external field with po.
tential energy Iz(r) ist
6B : (c/3r) flog(mc2 / 2AW +Gt / 12a)f\h / mc),|v, ff
! (a/2r)(h/2mc)<- ipa.v V)
/c\
= (a / 3 r) (h / mc), l(los (mc2/ 2^W ) + ( t 9/30) ) (v, y)' "/

and

L: (^'+i)67EY
I:tlrs++#- !rgig#]4

{ip.L(r/r)(dv/dr))1,

_*t-"?a),itsff:Ju
)

(3)

y : ll - sin2
(s/ 2)(1- d) ll

(4)

Here

where L is the
in units of i, and
system.l Applied
and, 2zP1 levels

orbital angular momentum operator in

A!/ is an average excitation energy of the
to rhe relative displacement of the 2rS1
of hydrogen, this formula yietds 1051

144
LETTERS

2
mc/*c',

TO

experimental value? of
to be compared with the

ttlttl"TiJ,,ll';"htivistic or(1)is
rimit

THE

EDITOR

;:?rlr':*r4i:Yf
3fl
#;::Hid{,ii*i
determination of theenergy' sal

""'i""'*'"r'.i,".t91"1:*'StbhvJi::':T:i:'T"
' - *"' f h!,1*'i#,'l
n*," t7z)+o(")r' (s) t-'ff:";j;1tlt.',' u *,rn angle,at moderate.energies'
;' rl!;t
an addition of 4.4 104 to 6' I

where

(o/2)
- { sin
6(o)
[4i9P;['"",u,,,

**?$;'']

(9) alone'
with fie a'limptotic formula
t"
*rt*
"itai"d thecondition(f/6s)'z siil(d/2)>>1'vhich
ft".".Jr
""*rts

.lii:ij;l1ji:'#
ll*1":::,';
xp=$677p' tro) ::::lH^[;*;:

i1i*$1
**:;:::""$".1;
Hiltl:ii*j:i1i,

rheinteg^rar,.i"*.::.::.'-il"i*i.ilrJlryrrt?1,";r:;
i::E:#-;,ll:ff
;;;;t;ii"il*

l':: ili;;;;

:'",.'"1;liiu;:Tit:iT+

hasihecorrec'l
which

at small angles'is provided bv

W and AE, the value

6:7.2 !Oa.

t-cos(B /2)

6Q)-O*@nfr+*@ifr
*l.*za=*qar*t-co:(o/2t4t]

(11)

of 6

"1r'-"*,in*,iont
!n"*o"o',liji[?l;"
::$l."t::"f:
valuable conformation for t
,"a-Jii*
"...*tions
the electron.

properties of
to the electromagnetic

l*";t*k*d:i-?$:i":**id;Y,":lxip;[1+T**tt
ttltil
(e)

;$3i;',ic rormura
m:mtt
j:.j;ir"i",,".fft;irr-**$3;*$*$$,3gff
*.a"i.ii'"n",d":'n.",.y,

;trg1l;**+m*,*rff
ftgi;'ffi
17:3.1

Mev, which corresPondt

['ltl,,tft;-"".iq;g1iffirf+i,glm
#;;;;;,,,i*,di,io,"ioJ',;u:u'u.-x".i.'v
:*;" "-r
saei
N.'i,
;g'',::l;%T:'1i1":
*ll;"1;':X
#*i :%;ll

ETECTRON
THEORY
Report to the SolvayConference
for physics
at Brussels,Belgium
September27 to October2, l94g
by f. R.OPPEI{HE|MER
In this report I shall try to give an account of the
deveropments of the
last year in electrodynamics.
It will not be usefur to eirre . complete
presentation of the formalism; rather I shall try to pick
out the essential
logical points of the development, and raise at least
some of the questions
which may be open, and which bear on an evaluation
of the scope of.the
recent developmenrs, and their place in physical theory.
I shall dlvide the
report into three sections: (l) a brief summary of related
past work in
electrodynamics; (2) an account of the rogical and procedural
aspects of'
the recent developments; and (3) a series of remarks
and questions on
applications of these developments to nuclear problems and
on the question
of the closure of electrodvnamics.

t.

History

The problems with which we are concerned go back to

the very beginnings
of the quantum electrodynamics of Dirac, of Heisenberg and pauli.(r)
This
theory, which strove to explore the consequences of complementarity
{br
the electromagnetic field and its interactions with matter,
red to great
successin the understanding ofemission, absorption and scattering
processes,
and led as well to a harmonious synthesis of the description
of Jtatic fields
and of light quantum phenomena.
But it also red, as was armost at once
recognized,(2) to paradoxical results, of which the infinite
displacement of
spectral terms and lines was an example.
one ,ecognirei an analogy
between these results and the infinite electromagnetic inertia
of a point
electron in classical theory, according to which erectrons moving
with
different mean velocity should have energies infinitely displaced. yet
no
attempt at a quantitative interpretation was made, nor was the
question
raised in a serious way of isolating from the infinite displacements
new and
typical finite parts clearly separable from the inertial effects. In
fact such
a program could hardly have been carried through before the
discovery of
pair production, and an understanding of the far_reachinq
differences in
the actual problem of the singularities of quantum electrodynamics
from
the classical analogue of a point electron interacting with its field.
In the

146
J. R. OPPENHEIMER
clearly
former, the field and charge fluctuations of the vacuum-which
on the
whereas
part;
a
decisive
have no such classical counterpart-play
limit
seriously
so
which
prgduction,
pair
of
other hand the very phenomena
compared
small
for
distances
the
electron
of
the usefulness of a point model
they
to its compton wave length hlmc,in some' measure ameliorate, though
and
of
inertia
electromagnetic
infinite
the
do not ,.rolrr., the problems of
first
points
last
These
distribution.
the instability of the electron's charge
were
were made clear by the self-energy calculations of Weisskopf,(3) and
that
to
Sakata,(5)
and
by
Pais,(+)
finding,
by
the
still further emphasized by
the
return)
to
repeatedly
have
shall
we
the order e2 (and to this limitation
and its
electron's self-energy could be made finite, and indeed small,
essentially
and
magnitude
small
of
forces
stability insured, by introducing
arbitrar:ifitsmall range, corresponding to a new field, and quanta of arbitrarily
high rest p255.(6)
b1 th. other hand the decisive, if classically unfamiliar, role of vacuum
in a highly academic situation
fluctuations lvas perhaps first shown-albeit
gravitational energy of the
(infinite)
-by
Rosenfeld's- calculation(7) of the
with the discovery of the
view
into
light quantum, and came prominently
the
current fluctuations of
to
due
of the self-energy of the photon
piobleof the (infinite)
problems
related
the
the electron-positron field, and
of renormalizanotion
the
time
first
for
the
polarizability of that field. Here
refers in fact
vacuum
of
polarization
The infinite
iior, ,rru, introduced.
be possible
should
of
charge
definition
just to situations in which a classical
the linear
finite,
were
polarizarion
slowly varying fields) ; if the
l*.uk,
classically
in
any
measured
nor
constant term could not be measured directly,
charge
induced
gf
and
"true"
interpretable experiment; only the sum
linear
infinite
the
ignore
to
natural
could be measured. Thus it seemed
the
finite
to
significance
attach
tp
constant polarizability of vacuum, but
fields'(a)
in
strong
and
varying
rapidly
deviations from this polarization in
they are in
Direct attempts to measure these deviations were not successful;
Lamb-Retherford
the
describe
do
which
any case intimately related to those
bulk of
level shift,(e) but are too small and of wrong sign to account for the
here
philosophy
and
procedure
renormalization
this observation.(10) But the
appliedtochargewastoprove'initsobviousextensiontotheelectron,s
mass, the starting point for new developments'
have
In their application to level shifts, these developments, which could
the
required
years,
fifteen
last
the
during
been carried out at any time
in
other
Nevertheless,
verify.
and
impetus of experiment to stimulate
identical with
closely related problems, results were obtained essentially
the Schwinger
and
shift
Lamb-Retherford
the
those required to understand
ratio'
gyromagnetic
corrections to the electron's
Thusthereistheproblem-firststudiedbyBloch,Nordsieck,(1r)Pauli
slow electron
and Fierz,(lz) ofthe radiative corrections to the scattering ofa
of
electromagnetic
The
contribution
z.
(of velocity u) by a static potential
2

147
E L E C T R O NT H E O R Y
inertia is readily eliminated in non-relativistic calculations, and involves
some subtlety in relativistic treatment only in the case of spin 1/2 (rather
than spinzero) charges.(13) It was even pointed 6st(1a) that the new effects
of radiation could be summarized by a small supplementary potential

I.

-(+)(fleY
L V l n ( ;)

(where e, li, m, c have their customary meaning) . This of course eives the
essential explanation of the Lamb shift.
on the other hand the anomalous g-value of the electron was foreshadowed by the remark,(15) that in meson theory, and even for neutral
mesons, the coupling of nucleon spin and meson fluctuations would give to
the sum of neutron and proton moments a value different from (and in
non-relativistic estimates less than) the nuclear magneton.
Yet until the advent of reliable experiments on the electron's interaction,
these points hardly attracted serious attention; and interest attached rather
to exploring the possibilities of a consistent and reasonable modification
of electrodynamics, which should preserve its agreement with experience,
and yet, lor high fields or short wave lengths, introduce such alterations as
to make self-energies finite and the electron stable. In this it has proved
decisive that it is zat sufficient to develop a satisfactory classical anaiogue;
rather one must cope directly with the specific quantum phenomena of
fluctuation and pair production.(o)
Within the framework of a continuum
theory, with the point interactions of what Dirac(lc) calls a ,,localizable,,
theory-no
such satisfactory theory has been found; one may doubt
whether, within this framework, such a theory can be formed that is cxpansible in powers of the electron's charge e. on the other hand, as mentioned
earlier, many families of theories are possible which give satisfactory and
consistent results to the order s2.
A further general point which emerged from the study of electrodynamics
is that-although
the singularities occurring in solutions indicate that it is
not a completed consistent theory, the structure of the theory itself gives no
indication of a field strength, a maximum frequency of minimum length,
beyond which it can no longer consistently be supposed to apply.
This
last remark holds in particular for the actual electron-for
the theory of
the Dirac electron-positron field coupled to the Maxwell field. For particles
of lower and higher spin, some rough and necessarily ambiguous indications
of liryiting frequencies and fields do occur.
To these purely theoretical findings, there is a counterpart in experience.
No credible evidence, despite much searching, indicates any departure, in
the behaviour of electrons and gamma rays, from the expectations of theory.
There are, it is true, the extremely weak couplings of p decay; there are the
weak electromagnetic interactions of gamma rays, and electrons, with the
mesons and nuclear matter.
Yet none of these should give appreciable

148
J. R. OPPENHEIMER
of application;
correctionsto the present theory in its characteristicdomains
distances,and
(nuclear)
small
very
fo,
ihut
suggest
they serve merely to
will no longer be
,r.ry t igt energies, .1..i1., theory and electrodynamics
theory of the
separable from other atomic phenomena' In the
,o
an alrnost closed'
"t.u.iy
electron and the electromagnetic field, we have to do with
precisely to the absence
almost complete system,in which however we look
ofcompleteclosuretobringusawayfromtheparadoxesthatstillinhere
in it.

2.
The problem

Procedures

recognize
then is to see to what extent one can isolate'

undportpo.tetheconsiderationofthosequantities'liketheelectron'smass
infinite results-results which'
und .hu.g., for which the present theory gives
iffinite,-couldhardlybecomparedwithexperienceinaworldinwhich
What one can hope to
arbftrary values of the ratio izfhc cannot occt:Lr'
.o*p',.withexperienceisthetotalityofotherconsequencesofthecoupling
need to ask: does theory
of .hurge and field, consequences of which we
and in agreement with
unambiguous
finite,
give for them results which are
experiment ?
as
jlrdg'.d by these criteria the earliest methods musf be characterized
They rested, as have to date all treatrnents
..r""orriugi.rg but inadequate'
notseverelylimitedthroughoutbytheneglectofrelativity'recoil'and
of a, going characteristically to
pair formaiion, on a.t expansiott in powers
out the calculation of the problem in question;
the order ez. One carrij
for the Lamb shift, I,amb and
(for radiative scattering corrections, Lewis{u);
for the electro{r's g-value'
Kroll,trel Weisskopf ulrd F,.""h,(1e) Bethe(zo);
order the electron's electroLuttinger(21)) ; one also calculated to the same
induced by external fields' and
magnetic mass, its charge' and the charge
for the effect of these changes in
the light quantum massl finaily one asked
and sought to delete the
charge and mass on the problem in question'
Such a procedure would
corresponding terms fro* ih" direct calculation'
all quantities involved
cumbersome-were
no doubt be satisfactory-if
ln
In fact, since mass and charge,correctrons are
finite and unambiguous'
outabove
divergent integrals' the
general represented by logarithmically
not necessarily unique or correct'
but
finite,
obtain
to
Iin.d pro".dure serves
an electron in an external field;
reactive corrections for the behaviour of
andaspecialtactisnecessary,suchasthatimplicitinLuttinger'sderivation
oftheelectron'su.tomulot'sgyromagneticratio'ifresultsaretobe'not
sound' Since' in more complex
merely plausible, but unambigt'ot's at'd
straip;htforward
in calculations catried to higher order in a' this
froUt.Inr, and
and the results more depenprocedure becomes more and more ambiguous'
of gauge, more powerful methods
dent on the choice of Lorentz frame and
steps' the first
Their development has occurred in two
are ,.qrrir.d.
Schwinger'(zz)
largely, the second almost wholly, due to

149
ETECTRONTHEORY
The first step is to introduce a change in representation, a contact transformation, which seeks, for a single electron not subject to external fields,
and in the absence of light quanta, to describe the electron in terms of
classically measurable charge a and mass m, and eliminate entirely all
" virtual " interaction with the fluctuations of electromagnetic and pair
fields. In the non-relativistic limit, as was discussed in connection with
Kramer's report,(z3) and as is more fully described in Bethe's,(24)1li5 112n5formation can be carried out rigorously to all powers of e, without expansion;
in fact, the unitary transformation is given by

II.

[/:exp

],f<,Vl

where ,( is the (transverse) Hertz vector of the electromagnetic field minus

the quasi-static field of the electron. When this formalism is applied to
the problem of an electron in an external field, it yields reactive corrections
which do not converge lor frequencies u>mc2fh, thus indicating the need
for a fuller consideration of tvpical relativistic effects.
This generalization is in fact straightlorward; yet here it would appear
essential that the power series expansion in a is no longer avoidable, not
only because no such simple solution as II now exists, but because, owing
to the possibilities of pair creation and annihilation, and of interactions of
light quanta with each other, the very definition of states of single electrons
or single photons depends essentially on the expansion in question.(25)
However that may be, the work has so far been carried out only by treating
e2fhc as small, and essentially only to include corrections of the first order
in that quantity.
In this form, the contact transformation

clearly yields:

(a) an infinite term in the electron's electromagnetic inertia;

(b) an ambiguous light quantum self-energy;
(c) no other effects for a single electron or photon;
(d) interactions of ord.er e2 between electrons, positrons, and photons,
which in this order, correspond to the familiar Moller interactions and
Compton effect and pair production probabilities;
(e) an infinite vacuum polarizability;
(f) the familiar frequency-dependent finite polarizability for external
electromagnetic fields ;
(g) emission and absorption probabilities equivalent to those of the
Dirac theory for an electron in an external e.m. field;
(h) new reactive corrections of order e2 to the effective charge and
current diStribution of an electron, which correspond to vanishing total
supplementary charge, and to currents of the order e:l/fc distributed over

150
J. R. OPPENHEIMER
dimensions of the otd'er hlmc, and which include the supplementary
potential -I, and the supplementary magnetic moment
I

o2 \l

ph\/+\

\na)\r^,)\"
)
as special (non-relativistic) limiting cases'
in e, they
Were such calculations to be carried further, to higher order
to the
mass,
and
of
charge
would lead to still further renormalizations
correcreactive
to
and
interactions,
successive elimination of all "virtual"
to the probabilities of
tions, in the form of an expansion in powers of e2ffrc,
Nevertheless' before
etc'
transitions: pair production, collisions, scattering,
interesting new
physically
the
such a prog.u-^ could be undertakdn, or
The
required'
is
development
a new
t..-,
th; uLo,r. b. taken as correct'
independent
general
in
not
are
reason for this is the following: the results (h)
ofgaugeandLorentzframe.Historicallythiswasfirstdiscoveredby
energy in a uniform
.oripu.iro', of the supplementary magnetic interaction
magnetostatic field 1/

\r;n)\*)\' ')
/

o2 \/

el\/*

z\

withthesupplementary(imaginary)electricdipoleinteractionwhich
appeared*ithu,,electroninahomogeneouselectricfieldEderivedfroma
static scalar Potential
/

"2

\l

ph\

.\

\e;n)\r-,*)iP"\i:E)
a manifestly non-covariant result'
Nowitistruethatthefundamentalequationsofquantum-electrodynamics
But-they have in a strict sense no soluare gauge and Lorentz covariant'
these solutions,
tions expansible in powers of e. If one wishes to explore
no longer
theory,
in a later
bearing in mind that cprtain infinite terms will,
beinfinite,oneneedsacovariantwayofidentifyingtheseterms;andfor
the whole method of
that, not merely the field equations themselves, but
This
covariance'
appro"imation and solution must at all stages preserve
Lorentz
a
fixed
imply
*.url, that the fanriliar Hamiltonian methods, which
Lotentz frame nor gauge
frarne l: constant, must be renounced; neither
a' all terms have been
in
can be specified until after, in a giv-en order
identified,'andthosebearingonthedefinitionofchargeandmassrecognized
andrelegated;thenof.o,,"t,intheactualcalculationoftransitionprobabilitiesandthereactivecorrectionstothem,orinthedeterminationof
static, and in the reactive
stationary states in fields which can be treated as
coordinate system and
corrections thereto, the introduction of a definite
well-defined terms can
gauge for these no longer singular and completely
Iead to no difficultY.

l5r
ETECTRONTHEORY
It is probable that, at least to order e2, r;rore than one covariant formalism
perturbation
can be developed. Thus Stueckelberg's four-dimensional
theory(26) would seem to offer a suitable starting point, as also do the
related algorithms of Feynman.(27) But a method originally suggested by
Tomonaga,(28) and independently developed and applied by Schwinger,{:2)
would seem, apart from its practicality, to have the advantage of very great
generality and a complete conceptual consistency. It has been shown by
Dyson(ze) how Feynman's algorithms can be derived from the Tomonaga
equations.
The easiest way to come to this is to start with the equations of motion
of the coupled Dirac and Maxwell field. These are gauge and Lorentz
covariants. The commutation laws, through which the typical guarltum
features are introduced, can readily be rewritten in covariant lorm to show:
(l) at points outside the light cone from each other, all field quantities
commute; and (2) the integral over an arbitrar2 space-like hypersurface
yields a simple finite value for the commutator of a field variable at avanable
point on the hypersurface, and that ofanother field variable at a fixed point
on the hypersurface.
In this Heisenberg representation, the state vector is of course constant;
commutators of field quantities separated by timeJike intervals, depending
on the solution of the coupled equation of motion, can not be known
a priori; and no direct progress at either a rigorous or an apProximate
But a simple change to a mixed
solution in powers of e has been made.*
Tomonaga
and called .by Schwinger the
in-troduced
by
that
representation,
"interaction representation," makes it possible to carry out the covariant
analogue of the power series contact transformation of the Hamiltonian
theory.
The change of representation involved is a contact transformation to a
system in which the state vector is no longer constant, but in which it would
be constant if there were no coupling between the fields, i.e., if the glementary
The basis of this representation is the solution of the uncoupled
charge a:0.
field equations, which, together with their commutators at all relative
This transformation leads directly to
positions, are of course well known.
of the state vector F:
for
the
variation
the Tomonaga equation

III.

; h b J : - ! ; t ' ' ' , t rL .4' , , ' Y

"'" 6o

c'

Here o is an arbitrary space-like surface through the point P. d I is the

variation in Pwhen a small variation is made il:io,localized near the point
P; do is the four-volume between varied and unvaried surfaces; AOQ) rsthe
* Author's note, 1956. Approximate solutionsof the Heisenbergequationsof motion
were obtainedby Yang and liildman, Ph1ts.Reu.,79,972,1950;and Kdll'6n,ArkiuFi)rF2sik,
2,371,1950.
7

152
J. R. OPPENHEIMER
operator of the four-vector electromagnetic potential at p; jp\et is the
(charge-symmetrized)
operator- of electron-positron four-vector current
density at the same point.
It may be of interest, in judging the range of applicability of these methods,
to note that in the theory of the charged particle of zero spin (the scalar
and not Dirac pair field), the Tomonaga equation does not have the simple
form III; the operator on Fon
the right invoives explicitly an arbitrary
time-like unit vector. (30)
Schwinger's program is then to eliminate the terms of order e, ez, and. so,
in so far as possible, lrom the right-hand side of III.
As before, o'ly the
transitions can be eliminated by contact transformation; the real
"viitual"
transitions of course remain, but with transition amplitudes eventually
themselves modified by reactive corrections.
Apart from the obvious resulting covariance of mass and charge corrections, a new point appears for the light quantum self-energy, which now
appears in the form ol'a product of a factor which must be zero on invariance
grounds, and an infinite factor. As long as this term is identifiable, it must
of course be zero in any gauge and Lorentz invariant formulation; in these
calculations for the first time it is possible to make it zero. yet even here,
if one attemp;ts to evaluate directly the product of zero factor and infinite
integral, indeterminate, infinite, or even finite(er) values may result. A
somewhat similar

situation obtains in the problem, so much studied by

Pais, of the direct evaluation of the stress in the electron's rest system, where
a direct calculation yields the value (-e2f2nhc)mc2, instead of the value
zero which Ibllows at once as the limit of the zero value holding uniformly,
in this order e2, for the theory rendered convergent by the y'quantum
hypothesis, even for arbitrarily highy'quantum
mass. These examples, far
from casting doubt on the usefulness of the formalism, may just serve to
emphasize the importance of identifying and evaluating such terms without
any specialization of cooidinate system, and utilizing throughout the
covariance of the theory.
To order e2, one again finds the terms (a) to (h) listed above ; the covariance
of the new reactive terms is now apparent; and they exhibit themselves
again but more clearly as supplementary currents, corresponding to charge
distribution of order eslhc (but vanishing total charge) extended throughout
the interior of the light cones about the electron's position, and of spatial
dimensions - hlmc; inversely, they may also be interpreted as corrections of
relative order e2fhc and static range hfmc to the external fields. The
supplementary currents immediately make possible simple treatments of the
electron in external fields (where neither the electron's velocity, nor the
derivatives of the fields need be treated small), and so give corrections for
ernission, absorption and scattering processes to the extent at least in which
the fields may be classically described(32); the reactive corrections to the
Moller interaction and to pair production can probably not be derived
8

153
ELECTRONTHEORY
without

carrying the contact transformation to order e4, since for these

typical exchange effects, not included in the classical description of fields,
must be expected to appear.
At the moment, to my best present knowledge, the reactive corrections
agree with the,S level displacements of 11 to about lo/o, the present limit
oi'experimental accuracy. For ionized helium, and for the correction to
the electron's g-value, the agreement is again within experimental precision,
which in this case, however, is not yet so high.

3.

Questions

Even this brief summary of developments will lead us to ask a number

of questions:
(l) Can the development be carried further, to higher powers of a,
(a) with finite results, (b) with unique results, (c) with results in agreement
with experiment ?
(2) Can the procedure be freed of the expansion in a, and carried out
rigorously ?
(3) How general is the circumstance that the only quantities which
are not, in this theory, finite, are those like the electromagnetic inertia of
electrons, and the polarization effects of charge, which cannot directly
be measured within the framework of the theory ? Will this hold for
charged particles of other spin ?
(4) Can these methods be applied to the Yukawa-meson fields of
nucleons ? Does the resulting power series in the coupling constant
converge at all?

Do the corrections improve agreement with experience ?

Can one expect that when the coupling is large there is any valid content
to the Maxwell-Yukawa analogy ?
(5) In what sense, or to what extent, is electrodynamics-the
theory of
Dirac pairs and the e.m. field-"closed"
?
There is very little experience to draw on for answering this battery of
questions. So far there has not yt been a complete treatment of the
electron problem in order higher than e2, although preliminary study(33)
indicates that here too the physically interesting corrections will be finite.
The experience in the meson fields is still very limited.
With the pseudoscalar theory, Case(3a)has indeed shown that the magnetic moment of the
neutron is finite (this has nothing to do with the present technical developments), and that the sum of neutron and proton moments, minus the
nuclear magneton (which is the analogue of the electron's anomalous
g-value) is of the same order as the neutron moment, finite, and in disagreement with experience. The proton-neutron mass difference is infinite and
of the wrong sign; the reactive corrections to nuclear forces, formally

154
J. R. OPPENHEIMER
analogous to the corrections to the Moller interaction, have not been evaluated. Despite these discouragements, it would seem premature to evaluate
the prospects without further evidence.
Yet it is tempting to suppose that these new successeso{'electrodynamics,
which extend its range very considerably beyond what had earlier been
believed possible, can- themselves be traced to a rather simple general
As we have noted, both from the formal and from the physical
feature.
side, electrodynamics is an almost closed subject; changes lirnited to very
small distances, and having little effect even in the typical relativistic domain
p'-7n62,c,o1tld.sufnce to make a consistent theory; in fact, only weak and
remote interactions appear to carry us out of the domain of electrodynamics,
into that of the mesons, the nuclei, and the other elementary particles.
Similar successescould perhaps be expected for those mesons (which may
well also be described by Dir2ic-fields), which also show only weak nonBi-rt for mesons and nucleons generally, we
electromagnetic interactions.
are in a quite new world, where the sp$pial features of almost complete
closure that characterizes electrodynamics are quite absent. That electrodynamics is also not quite closed is indicated, not alone by the fact that for
finite ezlhc the present theory is not after all self-consistent, but equally by
the existence of those small interactions with other forms of matter to which
we must in the end look for a clue, both for consistency, and for the actual
value of the electron's charge.
I hope that even these speculations may suffice as a stimulus and an
introduction to further discussion.

155
ELECTRON
THEORY

References
1. Heisenberg and Pauli, /eits.f. Ph1sik.,56, l, 1929.
2. J, R. Qppenheimer, Ph1ts.Reu.,35, 461, 1930.
3. V. Weisskopf, <eits.f. Ph1sik.,9O, Bl7, 1934.'
4. A. Pais, Verhandelingen
Ro1. Ac., Amsterdam,19, l, 1946.
5. Sakata and,Harz, Progr. Theor.Ph1s.,2,30, 1947
6. For a recent summary of the state of theory, see A. Pais, Deuelopments
in the Theory of
the Electron,Princeton University Press, 1948.
7. L. Rosenfeld, <titt.-f. Ph1sik.,65,589, 1930.
8. General treatments: R. Serber, PhSts.Rea.,48,49, 1938, and V. Weisskopf, Kgl. Dansk.
Vidensk.Selskab.Math.-f2s. Medd., 14,6, 1936.
9. Lamb and Retherford, Ph1ts.Ret.,72,241, l9+7.
10. E. Uehling, Ph1ts.Rea.,48, 55, 1935.
1l. Bloch and Nordsieck, Ph1s.Ret., 52, 5+, 1937.
12. Pauli and Fierz, Il NuouoCimento,f5, i67, 1938.
13. S. Dancofl Ph2s.Reu.,55, 959, 1939; H. Lewis, Ph1ts.Reu.,73, 173, 1948.
14. Shelter Island Conference,June, 1947,
15. Frcihlich, Heitler and Kemmer, Proc. Ro2.,Soc.,A 166, 154, 1938
16. P. Dirac, Ph1ts.Reu.,73, 1092, 1948.
17. H. Lewis, Ph1ts.Reu.,73, 173, 1948.
18. Lamb and Kroll, Pfuts.Rea.,in press.
19. Weisskopf and French, Phys. Reu..in press.
2 0 . H . B e t h e ; P f u t s .R e u . , 7 2 , 3 3 9 , l 9 + 7 .
. eu.,74,893, 1948.
2 1 . P . L u t t i n g e r , . P l g t sR
22. J. Schwinger, Ph1ts.Rer.,74, 1439, l9+8, and in press.
23. Report to the Bth Solvay Conference.
24. Report to the Bth Solvay Conference.
25, This may be seenvery strikingly in writing down an explicit solution for the Tomonaga
equation III below. Formally it is:
;f

:-l juAydnxlV(os)
TILJ

'

In order to define the "exp", we have at present no other resort than to approximate by a
power series,where the ordering of the non-commuting factors for JrAr at different points
of space-time can be simply prescribed (e.g., the later factor to thb left). Cf. especially
F. J. Dyson, Ph1ts.Rea., in press.
26. Stueckelbery, Anfu.derPh1s.,2l, 367, 1934.
2 7 . R . F e y n m a n , P h 2 s .R e a . , 7 4 , 1 4 3 0 , 1 9 4 8 .
28. S. Tomonaga, Progr. Theor.Ph1ts.,1,27,109, 19+6.
29. F. Dyson, Phys. Reu..in press.
30. Kanesawa .id To-orrga, Progr. Theor.'Ph1s.,3, 1, 107, 1948.
31. G. Wentzel. Phys. Rea..74. 1070. 1948.
32. See for insianie resulis reported to this.conference by Pauli on corrections to the
Compton effect for long wave lengths,
33. F. Dyson. Phys. Rea.,in press.
*Author's note, 1956.
Questions l(a) and 1(b) were indeed answered by Dyson, Pi2s.
Reu.,75, 1736,1949.
34. K. Case, Phys. Rea.,74, 1884, 1948.

P o p e rI 6

156

PHYSICS
OF THEORETICAL
PROGRESS
1946
Vol.l, No.2, Aug.-Sept.,
On a RelativisticallyInvariant Formulationof
the QuantumTheorYof Wave Fields*
by S. TOMOIIAGA
L

The formalism of the ordinary quantum

theory of wave fields

Recently Yukawa(1) has made a comprehensive consideration about the

basis of the quantum theory of wave fields. In his article he has pointed
out the fact that the existing formalism of the quantum field theory is not
perfectly relativistic.
yet
'
Let a(rytz) be the quantity specifying the field, and A(x2z) denote its
Then the quantum theory requires commutation
canonical conjugate.
relations of the form:

( lu(x2zt),u(x'1' a't)) -- l).(x1zt), )'(x'1' z't)l : 0

\lu (xyzt),)'(x'7' z't)l : i h6(x x') 6(7 1' ) 6(z z')'

(r)T

but these have quite non-relativistic forms.

The equations (l) give the commutation relations between the quantities
at different points (x7z) and (x'1' z') at the same instant of time l' The concept "same instant of time at different points" has, however, a definite
,n.u.ri.rg only if one specifies some definite Lorentz frame of reference.
Thus this is not a relativistically invariant concept'
Further, the Schrodinger equation for the ?-vector representing the state
of the system has the form:

(a*l],)v:0,

(2)

where r? is the operator representing'the total energy of the field which is

given by the space integral of a function of u and )'' As we adopt here
Ih. S.h.odi.rger picture, a and.)" are operators independent of time. The
vectogep.esenting the state is in this picture a function of the time, and its
dependenceon I is determinedby (2).
* Translated from the paper, Bull. L P. C. R. (Riken-iho), 22 (1943), 545, appeared
in Japanese.
originally
-"i
We assume that the field obeys the Bose statistics. Our consideraii. bl:2b-Ae.
tioiriubplv also to the case of Fermi statistics.
I

157
P R O G R E SOSF T H E O R E T I C APLH Y S I C S
Also the differential equation (2) is no less non-relativistic. In this
equation the time variable f plays a role quite distinct from the space coordinates x, 2 and 1. This situation is closely connectedwith the {bct that
the notion of probability amplitude does not fit with the relativity theory.
As is well known, the vector y has, as the probability amplitude, the
following'physical meaning: Suppose the representation which makes the
field quantity u(x2z) diagonal. Let ylu'(x2d ] denote the representativeof
rp in this representation.* Then the representative yfa'(xyz)l is called
probability amplitude, and its absolute square

Wlu'(xyz)l : lplu'(x7a)llz

(3)

gives the relative probability of u(x1,2) having the specified functional form
u'(ry4 at the instant of time t. In other words: Suppose a planet which
is parallel to the xyz-plane and intercepts the time axis at t. Then the
probability that the field has the specified functional forrn u,(x2z) on this
plane is given by (3).
As one sees, a plane parallel to the x2<-plane plays here a significant
role. But such a plane is defined only by referring to a certain frame of
reference. Thus the probability amplitude is not a relativistically invariant
concept in the space-time world.

'

2.

Four-dimensional form of the

commutation relations

As stated above, the laws of the quantum theory of wave fields are
usually expressed as mathematical relations between quantities having their
meanings only in some specified Lorentz frame of reference. But since it is
proved that the whole contents of the theory are of course relativistically
invariant, it must be certainly possible to build up the theory on the basis
of concepts having relativistic space-time meanings. Thus, in his consideration, Yukawa has required with Dirac(z) a generalization. of the notion of
probability

amplitude to fit with the relativity theory.

we shall now show
below that the generalization of the theory on these lines is in fact possible
to the relativistically necessary and suficient extent. our results are,
*
. Y. use the sqrrarebrackets to indicate a functional. Thus-tpla'(x1tz)]means that g
is a functionalof the variablefunction u'(x24.
( ), a's
.whenweuse ordinary-parentheses
tp,(r'Ql)), we considerg as an o_rdinary
functionof rhe functionut(.U,i). For example:
th.eenergydensityis writtenas.i[(a(xl<\^,
l(xld.).and this is alsoa functionol x.1, anl q,
whereasthe total energyH=J'H(u(x2a),l(x1a))fuis afunctional of a(x1ta)and,),(il2) andii
writtenasHlo(xl<),7(x1z)1.
_f We call.a three-dimensionalmanifold in the four-dimensionalspace-timeworld simply
a "surface."

158
S. TOMONAGA
Dirac and by Yukawa' but are
however, not so general as expected by
is
required by the relativity theory.
it
aS,
far
already sufficiently general i,-' so
are only two fields interacting
there
that
Let us suppose for simplicity
of fields can also be treated
number
greater
with each other. The case of a
specilying.the fields'
quantities
the
denote
Let u1 and af
in the same way.
respectively' Then
)"2
and
)'1
are
The canonically conjugate quantities
relations
between these quantities the commutation

( lu,(x1at), u,(x'2'1't)) :O

r, s:r,2
lii,fitril, ).,(x'2'a't):o
(
:
x'
6
(x
i
hd
t)l
y'
) 1' ! )6(z- z')6"
zt),),,(x'z'
lfr, 1*7
must hold.

('4)

The E-vector satisfies the Schrodinger equation

(s)

(tr,*a,tfrn*ik)r:o

the energy of the first and

In this equation Fi1 and, E2rnean respectively
of u1 and
Er i, gL"'1 by the space integral-of a function
iAa.
,i.'r.l""i
of u2 and' 12' Further' f/12 is the
1r, Firby the space integral ol'a function
of a^funcof thJ field' and is given by the space integral
inl.ru.tion
of H1''
"rl..gy
integrand
the
(i)
that
assume
We
tion of both u,, /.1 and a2, 12'
quantity' and (ii) that the
i.e. the interaction-e.t.,g!- dt'-t'lty, is a scalar
(but at the same instant of time)
energy densities at twoliff""ttt'points
the
In general, these two facts follow from
commute with each other'
in the Lagrangian does not contain
single assumption: the interaction term
u2'
the time derivatives of ul and
then we have
If this energy density is denoted by H t'r,

frrz:[Hp

(6)

dxd2dz.

AsweadoptheretheSchrodingerpicture'thequantitieszrand)'irrHv
of time'
H2 and H1, arc all operators independent
the well-known facts' Now' as
summarized
Thus far we have merely
thefirststageofmakingthetheoryrelativistic'wesupposetheunitary
operator

Q)

u:.*p{!-(Er+trr)r}
'[n
)

andintroducethelbllowingunitarytransformationsofuand)',andthe
corresponding transformation of 9:

!V,:Uu,U,

r, A,:UL"U-|

Y:u,p.

r:1,2

(B)

Asstatedabove'uand,).in(5)arequantitiesindependentoi.time.But
of (B) contain I tlrrough U' Thus
V and Aobtained fiom them by means
thev dePend on / bY

!itii/,:v,Ei,-Fi,v,
\in't.:A,H,-F,A,.
3

r:t,2

(9)

159
PHYSICS
PROGRESS
OF THEORETICAT
These equations must necessarily have covariant forms against Lorentz
transformations,becausethey are just the field equations for the fields when
they are left alone without interacting with each other.
Now, the solutions of these "vacuum equations," the equations which
the fields must satisfywhen they are left alone, together with the commutation relations (4), give rise to the relations of the following forms:

(lV,(x1tzt),V,(x'7'z' t')l : A,,(x- x', ) -J', z - z " t - t ' )

-)', z - 2 " t - t ' )
:
\ lA,(xl<t), A,(x']' <'t')l 8,,(x x', )
-)'
A"(x'1t'
z't')l:C,,(x x', )
, 1- 1" t-t')
llV,(x1tzt),

(10)

where r4,", .B", and C,, are functions which are combinations of the so-called
four-dimensional d-functions and their derivatives.(3) One denotes usually
They are defined
these four-dimensional d-functions by D,(x1<t), r:1,2.

by
I ei(k^,+-tr
D,(x1at):#JJJ
\-

k ^ , r + zz+ck/)
*

ei(k xx+krr+kzz-.*rt).),,

(11)

jdk_ dk, dkz

with

(l 2 )

k,: \/ k*2+ krz+ kzz+x,2,

X, being the constant characteristic to the field r. It can be easily proved

that thesefunctions are relativistically invariant.*
Since (10) gives, in contrast with (4), the commutation relations between
the fields at two different world points (x1tzt)and (*'j'<'t'), it contains no
more the notion of same instant of time. Therefore, (10) is sufficiently
relativistic presupposing no special frame of reference. We call (10)
four-dimensional form of the commutation relations.
One property of D(x2zt) will be mentioned here: When the world point
(xy<t) lies outside the light cone whose vertex is at the origin, then D(xyzt)
vanishesidentically:
D ( r y < t ): 0

(13)

for x2*)2+ z2-c2t2>0.

It follows directly from (13) that, if the world point (x'y'z'l') lies outside
the light cone whose vertex is at the world point (x2zt), the right-hand
*Suppose that a surface in thek*krkrk-space is defined by means of the equation
Then this surface has the invariant meaning in this space, srnce
1rz:1t,zak,2+k,21x2,
is invariant against Lorentz transformations. The area of the surface
kr2+i!2+kz2-,t2
element of this surface is given by

dS:IW
Now, since d,S has the invariant

.,

dk, dk"dk,

dlex drt dKz:x,--T-.

meaning, we can thus conclude ,h^,

invariant, and this implies that the function defined by (ll)

is invariant.

dktdf:dk"
k

i" ^n

160
S. TOMONAGA
sides of (10) always vanish. In words: Suppose two world points P and
P'. When these points lie outside each other's light cones, the field
quantities aI P and field quantities at P' commute with each other.

3.

Generalizationof the Schrodingerequation

Next we observe the vector P obtained from g by means of the unitary

transformation U. We see from (5), (7) and (8) that 'this F, considered as
a function of ,, satisfies

{l

orUrUrtat), A1@7at),
V2Q2zt),
A2Q4zt))
dxd1,dz+!
8r}*:,

(14)

One seesthat I plays also here a role distinct from x, 1 and e: also here a
plane parallel to the x1z-plane has a special significance. So we must in
some way remove this unsatisfactory feature of the theory.
This improvement can be attained in the way similar to that in which
Dirac(a) has built up the so-called many-time formalism of the quantum
mechanics. We will now recall this theory.
The Schrodinger equation for the system containing "Ay'
charged particles
interacting with the electromagnetic field is given by

+!ar}v:0.
!,,s(q.))
{r",* tru,{l,,,

(ls)

Here FI,, means the energy of the electromagnetic field, Hn the energy of
.F1"contains, besides the kinetic energy ofthe zth particle,
the nth particle.
energy
between this particle and the field through q(q,),
the interaction
qn being the coordinates of the particle and s the potential of the field.
p, in (15) means as usual the momentum of the zth particle.
We consider now the unitary operator

z:exp

(; - ''

\io",tI

(16)

and introduce the unitary transformation of o:

2I:uau-r

( r 7)

and the corresponding transformation of g:

@:ug.

(18)

Then we see that @ satisfiesthe equation

t))*!
{lr,f,,0,,w(q^, !r}o:0.

(le)

In contrast with o, which was independent of time (Schrcidinger picture), 2[

contains I through z. To emphasize this, we have written t explicitly as the

l6'l
P R O G R E SOSF T H E O R E T I C APTH Y S I C S
argument of !I. We can prove that 2[ satisfiesthe Maxwell equations in
vacuo (accurately speaking,we need special considerationsfor the equation
div G:0).
The equation (19) is the starting point of the many-time theory. In
this theory one introduces then the function @(qttt, Qztz,' ' '' qN, tN)
containing as many time variables ty t2, . . . ty as the number of the particles
in place of the function @(qt,qz,"',4N,1) containingonly one time
variable,* and supposethat this (D(qrtt,gztz,' ' ',1ytx) satisfiessimultaneously the following .lf equations:
(
h A)..
' ', qNt.il:0
1 H , ( q , ,P , , 2 { ( q n/ ,, ) ) + ;t ;ult @
rl ( q t t t , 8 z t z , '
I

n:lr2r.

. .,N.

(20)

This @(11,t2,. . ., fy), which is a fundamentalquantity in the many-time

theory, is related to the ordinary probability amplitude A(t) by

:q11, t, . . ', t).

<D1t7
Now, the simultaneous equations
when the "1y'2conditions
(H,Hn'-H,'H,)(D(qit-,

(21)

(20) can be solved when and only

qztz,"

',1ytr):0

(22)

are satisfied for all pairs of n and n' . If the world point (g,1,) lies outside
the light cone whose vertex is at the point (q,'tn'), we can prove that
As the result, the function satisfying (20) can exist
H,H;-H,'Hn:o.
in the reeion where

( q , - q , ' ) ' - t 2 ( t , - t , ' ) z> o

(23)

is satisfiedsimultaneouslyfor all values of n and n'.

A c c o r d i n g t o B l o c h ( 5 )w e c a n g i v e @ ( q 1 1 1Q, z t z , " ' , q r t N ) a physical
meaning when its arguments lie in the region given by (23). Namely
W ( q r t r ,Q z t z , .. . , Q w t u ) : l ( D ( q r t t , 4 z t z , '' ,' q N t t i l 2

(24)

gives the relative probability that one finds the value q1 in the measurement
of the position of the first particle at the instant of time 11, the value q2 in
the measurement of the position of the second particle at the instant of
time 12, . . . and the value q]u.in the measurement of the position of the
,Mth particle at the instant of time try.
This is the outline of the many-time formalism of the quantum mechanics.
We will now return to our main subject. If we compare our equation
(14) with the equation (19) of the many-time theory,.we notice a marked
In (19) stands the suffix z, which
similarity between these two equations.
designates the particle, while in (14) stand the variables x,) ar\d e, which
* Here we suppose the representation which makes the coordinates
by a function of these coordinates.
b is represinted
the t
".toi

Thus

8r, Qz, "',4p

diagonal'

r62
S. TOMONAGA
designate the position in space. Further, @ is a function of the "lf independentvariables Qt, Qz,''', QN,g, giving the"position of the zth particle, while
F is a functional of the infinitely many "independent variables" u{x1z)
(x7<)'
and, u2@1tz), ulQyz) and u2Q1tz) giving the fields at the position
'd<
stands
d1
Corresponding to the trr- )F1, in (19) the integral lHpdx
in (14). In this way, to the suffix z in (19) which takes the values 1,2,
3, . ., "ly' correspond the variables x,7 and z which take continuously all
values from - co to + oo.
introduce infinitely many time variables
each for one position (x1z) in the space,
variables, particle times, 11, t2, ' ' ', tv,
difference is that we use in our case
we have used "lf time variables in
whereas
variables
many
time
infinitely
theorY.
many-time
ordinary
the
Corresponding to the transition from the use of the function with one

Such a similarity Suggeststhat we

1,r., which we may call local time,*
just as we have'introduced .M time
The only
each for one particle.

time variable to the use of the function of "ly'time variables, we must now
consider the transition from the use of Y(t) to the use of a functional
Ylt*rr] of infinitely many time variables 1,r..
We now regard t,rz as a function of (x2<) and consider its variation
e,r. which differs from zero only in a small domain I/e in the neighbourhood'
We will define the partial differential coefficient of
of ihe point (roto<d.
Ylt,r") with respect to the variable t,otozoin the following
the functional
manner:

6V
dt,oro,o

,,* Vlt,rrr e,r"f YLt,r"]

u r r r -

lfi,ur

fJ

dx d2 da

(25)

We then generalize (14), and regard

{tr"1"7'

''

tt+l{}v:0,

(26)

the infinitely many simultaneousequationscorrespondingto the.ly'equations

(20), as the fundamental equationsof our theory. In (26) we have written,
')'
f o r s i m p l i c i t y , H r z ( r , ) , 1 , t ) i n p l a c e o f H r r ( V 1 Q 1 z , t ) , V 2 Q 1 z , t ) ,"
write
will
In general, when we have a function F(V, A) of V and A, we
simply F(r, ), a,t) foy F(V(x1tz,t,rr), I (x22, trr)), or still simpler F(P)' P
denoting the world point with the coordinates(x12,t,rr). Thus F(P') means
F(*',J' , q', t') or, more precisely,F(V(x'2'<', tr,r'r'),(,i'<', t*y))'
* The notion of local time of this kind has been occasionallyintroduced by Stueckelberg.t0)

r63
P R O G R E SOSF T H E O R E T I C APLH Y S I C S
We will now adopt the equation (26) as the basis of our theory' For
Vr(P), Vz(P),A1(P) andA2Q) in Hrrthe commutation relations(10) hold,
where D(x2zl), has the property (13). As the consequence,we have
H n ( P ) H n ( P ' , )- H r z ( P ' ,H) r , ( P ) : 0

(27)

when the point P lies a finite distance apart from P' and outside the light
cone whose vertex is at P. Further, from our assumption (ii) the relation
(27) holds also when P and P' are two adjacent points approaching in a
Thus our system of equations (26) is integrable when
space-like direction.
the equations t:t,1a, considering txrz as a function
by
defined
surface
the
of x, y and 1, is spaceJike.
In this way, a functional of the variable surface in the space-time world
is determined by the functional partial differential equations (26). Corresponding to the relation (21) in case of many-time theory, Ylt-rrf reduces
io the ordinary pr(t) when the surface reduces to a plane parallel to the
x1t<-plane.
can be of any (space-like) form
The dependent variable surface t:t,r,
any Lotentz frame of
presuppose
not
need
we
world,and
in the space-time
is a relativistically
this
F[1,r"1
Therefore,
surface.
a
such
to
define
reference
be space-like
rnust
surface
the
that
restriction
The
invariant concept.
or time-like
is
space-like
a
surface
that
property
the
since
makes no trouble,
It is not
system.
reference
of
the
choice
special
on
a
does not depend
also
admit
to
theory,
relativity
of
the
slandpoint
the
from
necessary,
time-like surfaces for the variable surface, as was required by Dirac and by
Thus we consider that Ylt*r"] introduced above is already the
Yukawa.
sufficient generalization of the ordinary ?-vector, and assume that the
state* of the fields is represented by this functional
quantum-theoretical
vector.
Tben F is
Let C denote the surface defined by the equation t:t*tz'
C
we take a
On
v7[C].
as
this
write
we
c.
surface
the
a functional of
C'which
a
surface
suppose
and
(xyz,t,rr),
are
point P, whose coordinates
of
the
volume
denote
P'
We
about
domain
in
a
small
orr..lup, C except
write
may
we
Then
dap'
C'
by
C
and
lying
between
the small world
(25) also in the form:

,Yltt _ r.rnYlc'l-Ylcl.
d(tJp
dLlp

(28)

c' -c

Then (26) can be written in the form:

(2e)

{o,u,,+!{}vra:o
* Trhe word state is here used in the refativisfrcspace.time
(second edition), $ 6.

meani:r$.

cf. Dirac's book

164
S. TOMONAGA
This equation (29) has now a perfect space-time form. In the first
place, H12 is a scalar according to our assumption (i) ;in the secondplace,
the commutation relations between V(P) and A(P) contarned in Hp,has
the four-dimensional forms as (10), and finally the differentiation

,fr

is

defined by (28) quite independently of any frame of reference.

A direct conclusion drawn from (29) is that 9[C'] is obtained from
YlCl by the following infinitesimal transfbrmation:

vg'1 :

{r

-LnH,,(p
) a.,} vyc1.

(30)

When there exist in the space-time world two surfaces C, and C2 a finite
distance apart, we need only to repeat the infinitesimal'transformations
in
order to obtain VIC)
from Ylcrl.
Thus

Ylc,l :V{, -

p) Ytc,l.
;",r(P) da)

(31)

The meaning of this equation is as follows: We divide the world region

lying between C1 and C2 into small elements dap (it is necessary that each
world element be surrounded by two spaceJike surfaces). We consider for
each world element the infinitesimal transformation I -ftHp(P)

do:p.

Then

we take the product of these transformations, the order of the factor being
taken from Ct to Cr. This product transforms then F[C1] into P[Cr].
The surf,aces C1 and C2 must here be both space-like, but otherwise
they may have any form and any configuration.
Thus C2 does not necessarily lie afterward against Ct; Ct and C2 may even cross with each other.
The relation of the form (31) has been already introduced by Heisenberg.(z) It can be regarded as the integral form of our generalized
Schrcidinger equation (29) .

+.

Generalizedprobability amplitude

We must now find the physical meaning of the functional P[C].

As
regards this we can follow a method similar to that of Bloch in the case of
ordinary many-time theory.
Besides the fact that in our case there appear
infinitely many time variables, one point differs from Bloch's case: in (16)
the unitary operator z is commutable with the coordinates ql, Qz, . . ., QN,
while our [/is not commutable with the field quantities u{xyz) and u2@22).
Noting this difference and treating the continuum infinity as the limit of
a denumerable infinity by some artifice, for instance, by the procedure of
Heisenberg and Pauli,(8) Bloch's consideration can be applied also here
almost without any alteration.
We shall give here only the results.
q

165
P R O G R E SOSF T H E O R E T I C APLH Y S I C S
Let us supposethat the fields are in the state representedby a vector
[C]. We supposethat we make measurementsof a functionf (rr' r", 1r 1r)
at every point on a surfaceC1 in the space-timeworld. Let Pl denote the
variable point on C1, then, itf(Pt) at any two "values" of P1 commute
rqith each other, the measurementsofl at each of these two points do not
interfere with each other. Our first conclusion says that in this case the
expectation value ofl(P1) is given by

f ( P r ) : ( ( Y l c l , f ( P r )v t c r l ) )

(32)

where;f(Pt) means-f(Vt(Pr), "') according to our convention on page

'8,
and the symbol ((A, B)) with double parenthesesis the scalar product of
two vectors A and B. It is impossiblein casesof continr:ouslymany degrees
of freedom to represent this scalar product by an integral of the product of
two functions. For this purpose we must replace the continuum infinity by
an at least denumerable infinity.
More generally, we suppose a functional FL"fVr)l of the independent
as a function of P1. Then the
variable function -f(Pr), regarding f(P)
expectation value of this F is given by

F[-f(Pr)]: ((v[cr], Fl"f(Pr)lv[cr])).

(33)

A physically interestingF is the projective operator Mlul'(P), uz'(P);

Vr(P), Vr(Pr)l belongingto the "eigen:value" at'(P), rz'(P) of V{P),
Vr(Pt). Then its expectation value
Mlul'(P), az'(P); V{P), Vr(Pt)J
: ((VICrl, Mlul'(P), uz'(Pr); Vt(P), Vz@r)lytctl))

(3+)

gives the probability that the field I and the field 2 have respectively the
functional form u1'(P1) and u2'(P) on the surface C1. As C1 is assumed
to be space-like,the measurement of the functional M is possible (the
measurementsof Zr(Pr) and V2(P) at all points on C1 mean just the
measurementof M).
Thus far we have made no mention of the representationof YIC). We
use now the special representationin which Vt(Pr) at all points on C1 are
simultaneously diagbnal. It is always possible to make all V1(P) and
Vr(Pr) diagonal when the surface C1 is space-like' In this representation
tr[C1] is representedby a functional Vlul'(Pt),uz'(Pt); C1] of the eigenvaluesur'(P) and ur'(Pr) of V1(P) and V2(P1). The projection operator
M has in this representation such diagonal form that (34) is simplified as
follows

wlu|(p,),,yrrrll,j

(35)

In this sensewe can call Vlu y' (P 1), uz' (P r); C1] the " generalized probability
amplitude."
IO

166

S. TOMONAGA
Generalized transformation functional

5.

We have stated above that between 9[C1] and YlCr) the relation (31)
holds, where C1 and C2 are two space-like surfaces in the space-time world.
We see thus that the transformation operator
:2-/

rlc2;cl:l"l('-;Heaat)

(36)

plays an important role. It is evident that this operator also has a spacetime meaning.
Just as the special representative of the ?-vector, the probability amplitude, has a distinct physical meaning, so there is a special representation
in which the representative of the transformation operator TlC2; C1] has
a distinct physical meaning.
We now introduce the mixed representative of TIC2;C1] whose rows
refer to the representation in which Z1(P1) and V2(P1) at all points on C1
become diagonal and whose column refer to the representation in which
We denote this
Vt(Pr) and V2(P2) at all points on C2 become diagonal.
representation by

l, ," (P r) , uz" (Pz)lTlC r; C lllu 1'(P1), az'(P )1,

(37)"

' )1.
l r t " ( P r ), a z "( P z ) l o r(' P r ) , u z V

(38)*

or simpler:

If we note here the relation (35), we see that we can give the matrix
elements of this representation the following meaning: One measures the
field quantities Z1 and V2 at all points on C2 when the fields are prepared
and ur'(P) at
in such a way that they have certainly the valuesal'(P)
all points on C1. Then
W l u 1 " ( P , ) , , z " ( P r ) ; a r ' ( P t ) , uz ' ( P r ) f
: l l r r " ( P z ) , , z " ( P z ) l o t ' ( P t ) ,u z ' Q ) l l ,

(39)

gives the probability that one obtains the result ur"(Pz) and u2"(P2) in this
In this proposition we have assumed thatC2lies afterward
measurement.
against C1.
From this physical interpretation we may regard the matrix element
(37), or (38), considered as a functional of u1"(P2), uz"(Pz) and u1'(P\),
az' (P t) , as the generalization of the ordinary transformation function
(g,r"lQr,').
As a special case it may happen that C 2lies apart from C1 only in a portion
52 and a portion 51 of C2 and C1 respectively, the other parts of C1 andC2
overlapping with each other.
In this case the matrix elements of TlC2; C1] depend only on the values
of the fields on the portions 51 and 52 of the surfaces Cl and C2. In this
* As the matrix elementsare functionals of a(P), we use here the squarebrackets.
II

167
P R O G R E SOSF T H E O R E T I C APLH Y S I C S
casewe need lor calculating TlC2;Cl to take the product in (36) only in
the closeddomain surrounded by 51 and Sr, thus

z[s2;s1]:tt(r-tor" ^)

(40)

The matrix elements of the mixed representation of this Z is a functional

of u1'(p), a2'(p) and ut"(pr), az"(Pz), wherepl denotes the moving point
of the portion 51, and p2.the moving point on the portion 52. This matrix
is independent on the field quantities on the other portions of the surfaces
Cl and C2.
The matrix element of Z[S2;51] regarded as a functional of ur'(f),
0z'(p) and u1"(p), uz"(Fz) has the properties of g.t.f. (generalized transformation functional) of Dirac.
But in defining our g.t.f. we had to restrict
the surfaces ,S1 and S, to be space-like, while Dirac has required his g.t.f.
to be defined also referring to the time-like,surfaces. As mentioned above,
however, such a generalization as required by Dirac is superfluous so far as
concerns the relativity theory.
It is to be noted that for the physical interpretation of lu1"(P2), rr"(Pz)l
ot'(Pt), uz'(P)l it is not necessary to assume C, to lie alterward against
Cr
Also when the inverse is the case, we can as well give the physical
meaning for W of (39): One measures the field quantities Z1 and Viat aIl
points on C2 when the fields are prepared in such a way that they would
have certainly the values ut'(Pt) and ur'(Pr) at all points on C1 if the fields
were left alone until C1 without being measured before on C2. Then W
gives the probability that one finds the results ut"(Pz) and u2"(P2) in this
measurement on c2.

6.

Concluding remarks

We have thus shown that the quantum theory of wave fields can be
really brought into a form which reveals directly the invariance of the theory
against Lorentz transformations.
The reason why the ordinary formalism
of the quantum field theory is so unsatisfactory is that it has been built up
in a way much too analogous to the ordinary non-relativistic mechanics.
In this ordinary formalism of the quantum theory of fields the theory is
divided into two distinct sections: the section giving the kinematical relations
between various quantities at the same instant of time, and the section
determining the causal relations between quantities at different instants of
time. Thus the commutation relations (l) belong to the first section and
the Schrodinger equation (2) to the second.
As stated before, this way of separating the theory into two sections is
very unrelativistic, since here the concept " same instant of time " plays a
distinct role.

r2

t68
S. TOMONAGA
Also in our formalism the theory is divided into two sections, but now
the separation is introduced in another place. One section gives the laws
of behaviour of the fields when they are left alone, and the other gives the
Iaws determining the deviation from this behaviour due to interactions.
This way of separating the theory can be carried out relativistically.
Although in this way the theory can be brought into more satisfactory
form, no new contents are added thereby.
So, the well-known divergence
difficulties of the theory are inherited also by our theory.
Indeed, our
fundamental equations (29) admit only catastrophic solutions, as can be
seen directly in the fact that the unavoidable infinity due to non-vanishing
zero-point amplitudes of the fields inheres in the operator Hp(P).
Thus,
a more profound modification of the theory is required in order to remove
this fundamental difficulty.
It is expected that such a modification of the theory could possibly be
introduced by some revision of the concept of interaction, because we meet
no such difficulty when we deal with the non-interacting fields. This
revision would then have the result that in the separation of the theory into
two sections, one for free fields and one for interactions, some uncertainty
would be introduced.
This seems to be implied by the very fact that, when
we formulate the quantum field theory in a relativistically satisfactory
manner, this way of separation has revealed itself as the fundamental
element of the theory.

PhysicsDepartment,
Tokvo Bunrika lJniversitv.

References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
B.

H. Yukawa, Kagaku,12,251,282 and322, l9+2.

P. A. M. Dirac, Ph1ts./. U,SSR.,3, 64, 1933.
W. Pauli, Solaa2Berichte, 1939.
P. A. M. Dirac, Proc. Roy. Soc.London, 136, 453, 1932.
F. Bloch, Phjts. /. USSR., 5, 301, 1943.
E. Stueckelberg,Hela. Ph1s.Acta,11,225, $ 5, 1938.
W. Heisenbery, l. Ph2s., 110, 25i, 1938.
W. Heisenberg and W. Pauli, ,/. Ph1s.,56, I, 1929.

r3

P o p e rI 7

Erectro
dvnamic
s.,lll
Quantum

J3:,?:fff;ilfr%:|;,Lfln;"t "'

169

ofthe Erectron

JULIAN SCEWINGER
E araard, Uniorsity, Canbrid gc, LI assachusetls
(ReceivedMay 26,1949)
The discussionof vacuum polarization in the previous paper
of this serieswas confrnedto that produced by the field of a prescribed current distribution. We norv consider the induction of
current in the vacuum by an electron, which is a dynamical system and an eniity indistinguishablefrom the particles associated
n'ith vacuum fluctuations. The additional current thus attributed
to an electlon implies an alteration in its electromagneticproperlies q'hich will be revealed by scattering in a Coulonb field and
by energy level displacements.This paper is concernedwith the
computation of the second-ordercorrectionsto the current operator and the application to electron scattering. Radiative corrections to energylevelswill be treated in the next paper of the series.
Follorving a canonical tmnsformation which efiectively renormalizes the electron mass, the correction to the current operator
produced by the coupling with the electromagneticfield is developed in a power series,of which first- and second-orderterms
are retained. One thus obtains second-ordermodifications in the
current operator which are oI the same general nature as the
previously treated vacuum polarization cu[ent, save for a contribution that has the form of a dipole culrent. The latter implies
a fractional increaseof af2n in the spin magnetic moment of the
electron,The only flaw in ttre second-ordercurrent co[ection is a
logarithmic divergenceattributable to an infru-red catastrophe.
It is remarked that, in the presenceof an external field, the
fiFt-order cuuent correetion rvill introduce a compensating divergence.Thus, the second-ordercorrections to particle electromagnetic properties cannot be completely stated without regard
for the manner of exhibiting them by an erternal field. Accordingly, we consider in the secondsection the interaction of three
systems,t1ie matter field, the electromagneticfield, and a given
current distribution. It is shown that this situation can be described in terms of an external potential coupled to the current

operator, as modified by the interaction rvith the vacuum electromagnetic field, Application is made to the scattering of an electron
by an external freld, in which the latter is regarded as a small
perturbation. It is found convenient to calculate the total rate at
rvhich collisions occur and then identify the cross sections for
individual events. The correction to the cross section for radiationless scattering is determined by the second-order correction
to the current operator, while scattering that is accompanied by
single quantum emission is a consequence of the first-order current
correction. The 6nal object of calculation is the difierential cross
section for scatteing
through a given angle with a prescribed
maximum energy loss, which is completely free of divergences.
Detailed evaluations are given in trvo situations, the esseniially
elastic scattering of an electron, in which only a small fraction
of the kinetic energy is radiated, and the scattering of a slowly
moving electron with unrestricted energy loss. The Appendix is
devoted to an alternative treatmetrt of the polarization of the
vacuum by an external field. The conditions imposed on the induced current by the charge conservation and gauge invariance
requirements are examined. It is found that the fulfillment
of
these formal properties requires the vanishing of an integral that
is not absolutely convergent, but naturally vanishes for reasons
ot symmetry. This null integral is then used to simplify the erpression for the induced current in such a manner that direct
calculation yields a gauge invariant result. The induced curent
contains a logarithmically
divergent multiple of the external current, which implies that a non-vanishing
total charge, proportional to the external charge, is induced in the vacuum. The apparent contradiction witi charge conservation is resolved by showing that a compensating charge escapes to infinity. Finally, the
expression for the electromagnetic mass of t}le electron is treated
with the methods developed in this paper.

COVAnTAUT form of quantum elecrrodynamics

I
/ \ h a s b e e n d e v e l o p e d , a n d a p p l ti e
od
twoelementary
vacuum fluctuation phenomena in the previous articles
of this series.rThese applications were the polarization
of the vacuum, expressing the modifications in the
properties of.an electromagnetic field arising from its
interaction with the matter field vacuum fluctuations,
and the electromagnetic mass of the electron, embodying the corrections to the mechanical properties of the
matter field, in its single particle aspect, that are produced by the vacuum fluctuations of the electromagnetic field. In these problems, the divergencesthat mar
the theory are found to be concealed in unobservable
charge and mass renormalization factors.
The previous discussion of the polarization of the
vacuum was conaerned with a given current distribution, one that is not afiected by the dy'namical reactions
ol the electron-positron matter fi.eld.We shall now consider the more complicated situation in which the origi-

na1current is that ascribed to an electron or positrona dynamical system, and an entity indistinguishable
from the particles associated with the matter field
vacuum fluctuations. The changed electromagnetic
properties of the particle will be exhibited in an external field, and may be compared with the experimental indications of deviations from the Dirac theory
that were briefly discussed in I. To avoid a work of
excessiveiength, this discussion will be given in two
papers. In this paper we shall construct the current
operator as modified, to the second order, by the coupling with the vacuum electromagnetic field. This will
be applied to compute the radiative correction to the
scattering of an eiectron by a Coulomb field.'?The
secondpaper will deal with the efiects of radiative corrections on energy levels.
1. SECOND-ORDERCORRECTIONSTO TI{E
CURRENT OPERATOR
We shall evaluate the second-ordermodifications of

-,1olinn
s"h*iog"r, "euantum Electrodynamics. I,,, phys.
Rev. f,4, 1439 (1948); "Quantum Electrodynamics. II," Phys.
Rev. 75, 651 (1949).

the current operator produced by the coupling between

2A short account of ttre results has already been published,
Julian Schwinger,Phys. Rev. 75,898 (1949).

790

170
OUANTUM

791

ELECTRODYNAMICS.

the matter and. electromagnetic fields. The latter is

describedbY

6vIol
ihc__:_:.:ss1s197r1,

III

obeys the Dirac equation for a

spinor l,Ir-1[c](r)tr/[o]
particle of iiss m: mo* 6m, the experimental mass.of
ihe electron. Accordingly, the expectation value of the
current operator can be computed as

Do(r)

(j,(x)) : (vlcf ,j r(r)v[o]),

(1.6)

mravlof:x(*)vlo),

(1.7)

where

1
rc(x): --j,(r)A,(x).

(1.1)

,ith the understri::i*,

the experimentalelectron

electromagneticmass of the electron, as contalned.,ln massis Lobe employed.

the self-energy operator Kr,o(*). In order to descrtDe
If a solution of th" Iott"r equation is constructed in
the electron in terms of the experimental mass' we the form
(1'8)
ir,[o]: Y|"1Eo,
wrire (1.1) as
6V[ol
;7,, _:-: : (K t.o(.r)+ ff (r)) vl"l,
6o(*)

Ir.zl

K(x):K(x)-'ct'o@)'

/i 2\
\r'rl

where

the expectationvalue oI the current operator becomes

( j,(")) : (v 0,u-tl6l j F@)u[o]v) : ('ro,i"(r) vo)' (1.9)
in which the latter version describes the efiect of the
coupling between the fie1dsby changing the current
into
operator
'

The canonical translormation

v[a]+trV[o]v[o],

j,(r):U-tlo)

j,(x)ulal'

(1.10)

obeys the equation of

6Ivlof
ihcJ__Kr,o@)Wlo7,

(1.4)

6o(*)

then replaces (1.2) with

6Il'Io-l
;7rrlj:i=gr-tS-o)K(x)Wlolelof,
6o(*)

(1.5)

The unitary operator U[o]

motion
6ulo)
" ":y(x)Ulof,
i7,,
6o(:r)

(1.11)

which may be supplementedby the boundary condition

(1'12)
Ul-a):|,

in accordance with the supposition that coupling between the two fields is adiabatically established in the
be_9om.es
while the operator represenring the currentpast'
tll-rto]ru(*)tr42[o]. Now, as rve have shown in II, the remote
The operator ju(*) can now be evaluated by remarking that

: i,@+ a,'
ir@
[" J*rr-'rrt,,(*)ulo'))
=i rA>
a,' (J-Llo'fliu@),x(r'))ulo').
; ["

(1.13)

This processcan be continued according to

"a,'u,7a1g-@),x.(*'))t]
lc'): fuT i,t*),*t*)f
(1'14)
+ !" a,'!" a;' J
*rr-r,"lli,@),x.(r')lu[o"]),

and yields j"(r) in the form of an infinite series,

it'zr'
i.\f"
/
1
(1'1s)
i,t*):v,(*)+(-r)[1;ti,<o,5c(r')]+(-t)
J_:uJ--'u'[[,({)'rc(r')l'ff(*")]*""
symmetrical betrveen past and future' is
An equivalent procedure, which exhibits iu(r) in a form that is more

t7l
SCHWINGER

JULIAN

basedon the followingobservation,

r*6r'6
I d,',lo,o')-(U-tlq'
0a

r-6

\I

U,(x)Ul"' )) : I a,' r-a

Oq

(U-tlo'li,G) ULo'f)
\fi )

+f'a,'*\qLr-Llo'fi,(x)ulq'l):(i,(x)_.j-(r))t(L(r)- u-tlalj,@)ul@l), (1.16)

J*

or

6o,(x,)

i
*
j"(r):10,(rr*s 'j,(as)+(
\ f'0,,,7,,",1u-Llo,)lj,(r),K(x,))uro,l,
\ 2tu,tJ--

(1.12)

where
S:U[],

U[-o]:1

(1.18)

is the collision operator which describesthe real transitions that permanently alter the state of the system. This
processcan be continued and finally yields

i,@): i @,@)-fS-'ftu(r).1),

(1.1e)

in which
/

A,(*):7"(r)* ( -=
\

L\f'

| t da'elo.o'lljr(rS,K6')f

zncl J-

it2n"

\- il

J_

j,(r),x(x')f,x(r"))*''' . (1.20)
d,'du",la,c'
lelo',o"Jll

The further terms in the seriesare not required to compule the second-ordercorrection of the current operator.
The collision operator S can be constructed in a similar manner. Thus,

s-r: f-a,-ltbl:-!f"a,*(irbl,
J_6
6o(r)
hcJ_-

(r.21)

and

u[o]-t(s*r):l f- o.'"7,,r1]=ab'l:-: I a,',lo,o'fx(,'tulo'1,

2r _2hcr_a
60'(r")

o.2z)

rvhence,

| a,r1*;(s+r)+r( - =\'

s-r: |/--)
\

zhcl.l_-

[* a,,t,',7o,o'1x(x)r(r')u[o'].

(1.2i)

2hc/ J *

Continuing in this manner, we obtain

( +)

-:

..
['_a,xo* (- *)' ["-a,a,,ra,o'],r(r)r(x')*

(r.24)

Only the indicated terms need be retained for the desired degreeof approximation. fn view of the absenceof real
first-order effects, as expressedby

f--*av':o'
order:
the leadingtermsin (1.24)areof the second
i r" f
i r'"
S-t
I
-;
= -;(r-.t')[r(.r),rc(x')]do'-rcro(r)l.
^,.
| a.lL 4 h r JI - - e
J

(1.2s)

(1)6)

lltcJ--

J+l

is of no consequence),
According to (II 3.14) and (II 3.71), (the vacuum term 3Co,o

--

t,f"

J_*rt*-

r )[3c(i'),3c(#r)]d@':Kr,o(x)*K,,0(r)*3c',
'(c),

0'27)

rvhence,

;:

* rc''r(*)ld''
o(r)
# I:Fcz'

(1.28)

172
793

III'

ELECTRODYNAMICS.

QUANTUM

quantum. Since we.shall

which describesthe real effects involving either two particles or one particle and a light
quanta, such real
l. .o.r."r.r.a oniy with second-ordereffits referrirg io a single partiile and the absenceof light
"come
into play and S is efiectively.-unity. Consiquently, the current operator is modified only by
p."."rr* a"
""t
future. Thus, to the desired order of
and is iompleteiy symmetrical beiween p"it
p.o."rr.s,
liit*t
"ttd
approximation,

d,u' elo,o'
ll j,(x), c (*)f* !.2h(J(,I r',lo,o'll j, (c),rc',o(*')1

i,(*) :,,)(r) - ..

_^

Zhc

i\2r'
/
- + (
| |

d r' dr" r;o,o' lelo',o" lll; u(t),tc(r')f

2tul r_^

'tc(r" ))'

(t.2e)

The correction to the current operator may now be written

i,(x) -i,(r):

(1.30)

(*)'
6i,or(5)f l7ut'?r

where
xf-

j
6juilr (x) : | do'e(x x' )l uk),j,(x' )lA,(*' ),
zkc'.t_and
--(dl"(,)(-r))1,6:
'

(1.31)

1r'
| da'da"elo,a'lelo',o")llj,(x),j"(r')lA,(x'),jx(x")A1(r")lr,o

4hz(a.t_6

+'

l' (1.32)
I a,'r(r-x')lj,(r),K,.0(r)

2hcJ,-

that we are only

In the latter, the subscriptsemphasize
respectively.
corrections,
are the first- and second-order
(1'32),note that
To
simplily
quanta.
no
light
particle
and
involving
a
single
effects
with
second-order
lon."ro"d
r
llj,(x),j"(a')fA,(x'),jx(r")Ax(x"))',0:ilA"(*'),Ax@"))llir@),j"(*')),jx(*")l
* LI A, (r' ), Ax(r") | ollj,(*),j,(*')l,y^(*")l',
whence
ir*
(07,(r,(x))r.o: _ | dr' dr" 17*- x')D(*' - r") ll j,(r),j "(r')),j,(x" ) | t
+hdr-*
-

(1.33)

(* o,'o,"ela,o'felo',o"lDa)@'-l')llj,(x),j,(x')1,j,(f'D,a!ll, (1'34)
f* a,',{*_ x')l'i,@),lr',vo(*)
2hcJ*
thdJ-^

in consequenceof

- \e(x' - *")lA,(r'),At(*")f-

and

ihc6"xD(r' - r")

(Yt- *' t)'

I A,(x'),Ax@")l o: 766,^P<r)

(1.3s)
(1.36)

The double commutator in (13a) is easily evaluated,

- dcl{'(r)t us(*- r')til'(r') -{(x')7"s(r'

llj,(r),j,(*')f,j,(r")l:

: idc (0(it,S

- x)1u'!@)fi(x")7;l'(r"))

(x- r')t,s (x' - x")t,{@") *{ (r")t,S (r" - x')t,S (u' - x)t,{@)

-{,(x')7,5(r'_

r)1uS(x-x")7,,!t(r")-{,(x")1,5(*"-r)7uS(x-x')t,t@))'

(1'37)

canbeconstructedinthemanneremployedinll.Wehaveonly
T h e o n e - p a r t i c l ep a r t o l l l j r ( r ) , j " ( * ' ) ) , i , ( r " ) l
a non-vanishingvacuum expectationvalue' Thus,
to notice that ljr("),i,(*'))has
\l j,(x),j,(x')f,j,(r")l'-

2lj,(r),j,(*' ))oj,(*" )

r)t,t!(*))',(0(u")t,{G"))']r,
: - dc{(tr'(r)t,S(*-r')t"'1,@')-{'(x')t,S(r'x)t,{@)
: - dC(0@)t,S(**')t,19@);0@")l
otil,@")*{(r")t,l,l'G"),'l@)llrr,S(x'-|(r')t"S(x'-x)t,l{(*),{(*")lov,{(*")1{(*")t,l'l'@')fi@)\o,S(r-r')til(x'))t $'38)

173
JULIAN

SCHWINGER

794

and
ll j,(x),i,(r' )f ,j "(x")l,: 2l i,(r),i,(r' ))oj,(x")
* e3C(p(x)1uS(nst)1,gtr)
(*t- *,)t,g(r,,)-{,1*,1.y,5o(x, _ rt)r"S(rt_r)74/t\r1
fi(r')1"5(*'-r)1,$<tt(r-*")9fl,(x")1{,1r,,1r"S<,t(r,,-r)7,5(*-r,)y,,1,@,))r.
(1.39)
Oninserting(1.37)and(1.39)into (1.34),weobtain
ir| dr' dr" r(r r')l j,(r), j,(r')ls D(.r,- r,,)j,(r,,)
2hc2J__

(6J*'''(r))',o: _
-

id r'
nJ _.a,

;. I

a;'@(n')t,S(x'- r)"yrSttt
(a- *,,)ys!(x,,)*.{t(r,)1,go;
- x)7 uS(r_x,,)7s1,(x,,))1D(r,
(x6,
_ r,,)

da'd@',@(r')z,S(r,-.r)r"S (x- x,,)y,,1,

(1,))1D,t,(r,_ ).,,)

te f'

+ - | d,' (0@).yf1.r-r,)41x,)a 6G')S(x'- J,t,,!(x))t

-

'-[* ar,r{*- r,)({,(tc)l,1,!t(r),lcto*,)fll{@),tc,,o(*,)fiu*(r))x(1.40)

2hJ--

where (seeII (3.78))

0@): -

e' r'

"

do'7,(D(r - x'75 ot(r - r')| Dttt(n- x,)S(*- r,))y

@,)
",1,

:6mc2L@).

(1.41)

The third term of (1.40) is derived from

ld

f'

J ^d.'ar"

1r7o,o')- elo,o"f)elo',c")(f,(r,)7"5(x, - r)1uS(*- *,)7;!(x,,))prD (*, - r,,)

(1.42)

with the aid of the identity

Qlo,a'f-elo,o"))elo',o"1:6lo,o,lelo,o,,l-1,

andthenullvalueof

(1.43)

I a,' a," 1.'1r'17,S(x'-*)7"S(*- i, )7,p@'')),ptrt(*,- *,,)

lr*

:-;l

d a , d u ' , ( { , ( r , ) 7 , 1 , ! , ( r , ) , { ( x ) l y , { , 1 , @ ) , 0 @ , , ) W ^ V ( * , , ) ) r { A , ( * , ) , A x (( r1,.,4) 140) .

The latter is an immddiate conse4t'enceof (1.25), expressingthe absenceof

real first-order transitions.
The insertionof the expressionfor JC1,q(*),(tI (J.i7)),

rct,o(r): * (0@)o
@)* 6@)* (r)),,

11 4ql

enablesthe last two terms of (1.40) to be combined into

de
- (0@)t,xG) * xk)t r{ Qc)),,
2h

where

.<o: [_-a,'fs@- r')oe)-r\(r- x,)l,!,(r),g

(x,)
l,t,@,)f.

(1.46)

(1.4i)

It will first be observed thar the integrand of (1.a7) vanishes, in virtue of

the relation 6@): 6mc2*(r), since
t

-e(x- r' 11,1,1x),9(r')W(x'):

- S(x- x')6mc2,!,(.r,).
2

(1 . 4 8 )

r74
QUC,NTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS.

7g5

On the other hand, integrals of the form

III

f^
I do'S(r-r')9(*..')

(1.4e)

J_6

respectively, obey homogeneousand inhomogeneousequations associated

are divergent, since,y'(r') and s(r-r'),
convenieni io e"p."rs the latter integral as the limit of the finite quantity
It'is
difiereniial'dperaior.
*iir, tr.. in."6
equation satisfied by 'y'(o), in rvhich the mass parameter r is replaced
tf,"
aif"i""tlul
o?
fv
"lteration
""
equations
"fl"i".i
The
difierential
bv x*Dr uod th" 1i-it 6x+0 is taken.

- or,r -rs(r- o'): 51s-'v';,

: 0,
('.fi * -* * ) 0@')
*; r.

.(1rs0)

imply the relation

!lSwhence

o)r,,t(r')l{ 6rS(*-*'){ (r'): 6(x- r')t@),

(1.s1)

n'1
-/(.t).
I ar'S(x- r'),!(.r'):Ljm
6{-0

(1.s2)

6(

J_-

for xk) iI the spinor, oI which (1-'+7)is a linear

It may be inferred that a non-vanishing value will be obtained
xf 6r, and 6r is allowed to approach z e r c . l n parameter
mass
the
with
tirr.
equatiir
;;;;
iu$ffiil;j*
(1.52),
(1.48)
and
dded, according to
r*

xk) : LrTJ d,'S(x-x')(6@)- 6nc\!,(r'))

(1.s3)

:a6-141r)-6mN@D,
ax_0dx
or

I y

e2 c*

(1.s4)
iJ-!,'r,tu1*-x5')$trt(x-l')!D(r)(r-#')S(r-j''\)7"'!(*')-tncztt(x)l'

-(.):l;S;L-

,\ 6/

--l\\

| /,-t\

with an altered mass parameter, {.+*(/'),

A suitable representation of the solution of the Dirac equation
provided
by
is
oi the actualipinot,t,(r'),
d
6r

in terms

(1.ss)

slnce

(1'56)

: - 6o1,,@'),

the validity of (1.5s)to the first orderin dx.The latter is so constructedthat'!"+a'(n):{-(r),

whichestablishes
whence,

-,

_6

-x')lDr1)(tt-tc')S(r-*))r,(q*1r1:L I a''r,(D(o-r')^Scrr(a
ZxJ_

ri);;l(x')'

correctiouto the currentoperatoris

for the second-order
. The resultingexpression
idr*
i r(6J'(,)(r))10::
| ar'a""({,(x')K,(r'-x,x-r")rl(*"))r,
I d,r',(r-x')li,G),i"({fo6A,(x')-"*
2hJ*

(1 57)

(1'58)

tnc"r4

where

and
Here

lr'
D(r- x')j,(r'),
aA,(x): J^au'
Ku(r'- *,x- tc"):I-uo\(x'-

r,*- *tt)! Krtz)(n'- x,r- fr")'

(r)t(t+r)*s(Ov,rs(?)DG)(f+?)h,
D(*r)*s0)(t)z,f
K,o)(,"r):r,(s(t)r*so)(a)

(1.se)
(i.60)
(1.61)

r75
SCHWINGER

JULIAN

796

and
fdla
KuQ)(t,n):-yu6({)----as,(D(4)Jio)(?)+rG)("r)S(,r))y,*:
- - t r r' , ( D ('f-)' S c ) ( { ) * D o , ( ) S ( { ) h , 6 ( ? h , .
2x 6qa
2r0h-

G.62)

An equivalent form can be given in terms of the functions

s1(r): S(r)+1sor1*;,
z
i
D+(*): D(*)+-DQ\(tc).
2

Thus,

(1.63)

Kn(')({,,?): r,(S+()yos+(l)D+(t*'i)
and

-S-()roS_('i) D_(t*d)^y,

(1.64)

ld
1
- D -('r)S_ ("r)
K,Q) (t d : - t ud()
)y,
^ :--z^ .r,( D +(r) S +(q)
zK on^ I

1A
1
- D (i)s -(t))r,6('r)"y".(1.6s)
7zK ;tx1,(D+(OS+({)
Ott\ t
The first term of (1.58) is the current induced by the electromagnetic field that accompaniesa given current distribution, as discussedin II. It is the second part of (1.58), expressingthe additional efiects involved ivhen the
current is associatedwith the matter field, rather than an external sysiem, that merits our attention.
In
we shall substitute Fourier integral representationsfor the various func_ order to evaluate Ku(r'-qr-r"),
tions involved, (II (A.10), (A.31)),
-lrl
S(*):-

S ( r ) ( r ): -

| A h ) e , k ' ( i - y k -K ) - ,
h'l*'
\'211"1
lr
\ z Tr "

( dk ) e t k(, h h * x ) d ( 4 , { x : ) ,

lr1
l @p)4o' -,
(2n)al
k2

D("):

p,,,1,;:-t
\ZT TJ

| {oo)r,r,u{u\,

(1.66)

in which the principal partof 7/(k2!12) andT/k2 is understood. We have employed the simplified notation oD to
denote arbr, the scalar product of two four-vectors. The functions (1.63) have the following Fourier integral
representations,

lr/1
\
t*,*, :,r,ro..| Gk)t' k'rfi k - x) - - - +r i 6(k:-f *)
\
),
D*(-):

r
(WJ

/l
\
@h)e'k,\0,+ria(h,)
).

(1.67)

Theseexpressions
can be written morecompactlyby observingthat

s*:rr,(*-'#)
1
: P-+*;.A(t\

(1.68)

176
797
whence,

III

ELECTRODYNAMICS.

QUANTUM

lrl
*):_
,
S*("v)=_
| 1dk1e,n'{i7k'
PzlxzTit
e"101
l"l
D+(x):,^ * |(dk)etk'-,
(2rf 't
bz+ie

(1.6e)

in which the Iimit e+*0 is understood.

The form obtained for Kro) from (1'61)' is

lr
-'\ (k+ ('ri (k+k') @' ei k" \ ""'
K lt ) (r,t- )t,rc- x,") : | @D {an) @n")
\zr)"r
p 6(E,r*xr)
x t,Qt k' - x)t,(4 n" rh,l
*U
*+

6(kr)
l
r1 -1 1r- * -1 J'
_1
ur*
1a
1u,4
Urp,,z1_,?)
,

It is convenient to replace ku' and ku" by

f u':kulku' ,

, r^,
\ r'' wi

(1 71)

?r":kutku",

is to be multithe Fourier integral. Since KntD(*'-r,x-x")

which enter dir"ciiy i' the coordinate dependenceof
p/ and'p," occur for which
oi
values
.'.r.ft
,o
/
ptied by /(a,), rL@,,) andt"r"g.ii.J*iri'r.-rp".l
""iV
""a7,
0'72)
p'2+ K2:p"2+ K2:0.
As a result of this transformation,
t{,(t}(r,-x,x-x'):*

\zr )""

f uu)lol)tol"leip'|(!'-!teip"(F'")"'/,(i'v(p'-h)-x)t,Qt(p"-h)-x)t'
6(fr'?)
6(hz-2k p")
5(h,-2kp,)
l-

1
* u*,)a*\]'(1i3)

o*

"l*ffi,+
it as
The last factor in (1.73) can be simplified by writing
11

- - 2hp') - 6(p211
(k'?

,, a' - t" )t w'$

that
andobserving

I
- 2hp'')- 6(k'?))
GG'z
I'

(1.74)

t-61nr-znp1-6(e)):r f'ouu,1r":rupu1,
o

(1.7s)

- 2bp''u)f'
- 2kp'u)- 6'(h2
dul6'(k2

(1.76)

2hp
whence (1.74) becomes

-n [,'

This, in turn, can be representedmore compactly as

lnLFl
-| da I udu6,,(k2-k(p'!p"l(p'-

Therefore,'
6 not(tc,- x,x - x", :

I
ur*

f'

2J-r

Jo

ft

J _!, J, "o " J

(r.77)

P")a)u).

. . . t p'(''- r\ p'' (r- r"',

e;
@h)(d p')(dp" ) e

(h2- h (?,+ p" + (p' - p" ) t) u).

xy,Qt @'_ k) - d"y,Ql (p,, k) x)7,6,,
factors in (1'70) and (1'73) are replaced by
If the expression (1.64) is employed for K"{r), the bracketed
11111111
-Irn,i""h'o+c-i*

kt'2+*-ia

-:-lffiP-ie

kz-2k/'-k

,-- .h2-2kq"-'i4

-'
H-i'

( 1.78)

(1.7e)

t77
JULIAN

SCHWINGER

However,

1
1_
1
t
lr(
_'\
h2-2kp' ie k2-2h!"-ie k,- ie 2k(f'- y',)LZ'Bp,\n,-znp,
-ie h,- iel

-' (;,,_r-fr)1,
,'',

and,on extracling
theimaginary
partdividedb-vr, weagainencounter
(1.74).
The secondpart oI Ku, (1.62),canalsobe readilyexpreisedin Fourierintegralform
I

,,.
K,e)(x'-t,x-*"r:

*rJ

..lr .a
/6((k-p')2+K,)
@k)(dp,)(dp,,)e,p'(r'-!reip,,(hr,'rl;l^,;7,fuv,_rr__rr,(:l'-__1__

- p"r+ct
* :# *),,+-,,)r
(/,- ;)-,t^,,
t'fu .@
1a(e . ;# *)1. t,r,,
To evaluate the derivatives with respect to pr, and 1r,,, we observe that

a
px- (w(! - k)* K)(i1,(p- k)- K)f ((p- k),+,\ : Q,
oh

( 1 . 8 2)

where/(r) is d(*) or 1/o. on difierentiating and multiplying to the left by iry@-k)-x.

we obtain

a
-zkp)
JG'z
,,
?x* (ir Q- h)- *)J((?- h)'I n"): (i7Q - k)- x)t7pQ7@- p1- *l-::-.
oh

(1.83)

k2-2hp

Consequently,

nfu,<u
o- nt*0,,(U:!J! . # *)
: -t'Qt(p-'k)=ai,p^,@-k)"'(ry;v-ffi1'
invirtue
ofthederta-function
property
6'(r): -

d(r)

(1's4)
(1.8s)

Furthermore,
6'(k,-2bp\. 6(ft)
a /6(k,_2kp) 6(,r')r
- fl
h2
Jo'a'a"&'-znput'
Qrpy: ,g41\-nt* ):
according
to (1.75).Therefore,
(1.81)becomes
K,Q)(x'- x,.u- x", :

lf'r
frrl' J,

udil

(1'86)

@k)(d p')(dp',)eie'e - i eie"G-r' \

rl

xfa"{n,- zn.p'
ul;,W <f,- nl- r)hp,Q,y
(p,- k)- x)ttyu
+,
The transformation

A'- k)- r)i7p"(i7e" - k)- *h"al

" (k"- zia/ t 14] (1.s7
)
fi "<t,

ku-kr* (?r'* ?r"+ (pu'- p,")r)!

2

(1.88)

6" (k2+\2u2),

(1.8e)

now bringsthe delta-functionof (1.78)into the form

178
QUANTUM

799
where

ELECTRODYNAMICS'

III

^,:r(t*ff,t-"r),

in virtue of the relations

(1.e0)

- p',)
:o
o,(!,p,,)(p,
ef)' . (+)'* *: *

(1.e1)

Asaconsequenceoithistransformation,thefactorinvolvingtheDiracmatricesin(1.78)becomes

p'+p"
/ t
*
o,-rj!---o'
u_f ^r" uo1_.\.,,(r(
r,(;r(l'--,
2
2 / / \ \?-

(1.e2)

-"/
z^0",o\--)t"-nn,.

(1.89), in connection with the I inthe symmetry of.the delta-function

In writing this result we have exploited pr,,irit"
following property of the Dirac
The
uy L6x,k].
*pl".i"gi^t,
tesration, and discarded,..-.i'i""*r-i"
(1.e3)
-itri."t has also been used,
vanish on integration, and
by omitting the terms linear in o, which will
The factor (1.92) can be further simpiified
rearranging the remaining terms to obtan
1-rl
u
1
- + -7'
(?,' - p," ) I 2(!' - P" )\,\t
4x27ue - u - ! u,) t rk21- 2x(u r/i)o,"
"
)

t+A(x(rlutr*
p,")((i1p'lx)- Qt!" _-x))-2(r-*llt;"'
!i.(r- uzt'?)(p,'-

i Pr"a;\!<l''+l''))
-l

1-14

- (it p'I x)t,(itP"+ -)+ ( ^(1+ u)ru* i pu'I i:

(f '' + P*") l4 P"+ *) (1e4)

1'
)

-lJlflrx')*xop"111i"So"'fi{x'-x^'r-tc")'whichannihilates
of the Dirac
Now,aright-handlactori'vll"*risequivalent.to
n annihilaies'y'(*')' As a consequence
f.fr- Uunaiiito, ;tii
Si*if"r'iy,
parts.
by
integration
on
,(r//)
"
equation,therefore,
K!r)(x'-xfi-t"):+

J
(2r)"J-rf'oof'uou[{oul{oo)lot"leip'(r'-r)e;p't(Fr")6"(h2+\'?uz)
Jo

l-d
..- /
r
.
P")\'lt-'+-*
x(u-u')o,,(pi
Pi')+(f'Xl2x\,(7-u-iuz)-Ltnkzl

\l
) l'

(1'9s)

E'*bu* p''u' and

introduced in the two terms of (1'87), namelv
Transformations analogous to (1.g8) can be
Dittt matrices
iht
involving
trtt-i"tt"i'
a"(p'+niu')l J;i;
u
it*
delta rt".il"",
k,,+k,lput'u.Both
"'o^"
simplilY accordingto
1

x)'
- x)7,+_ 2x2(r-u-+u')++k'-(2d(r-u-l\u')*ik"1-1;'vp*"k)
t
t(\"t\(
K
\,(trtp-, b- *)i'7pQ1Q-

(1'e6)

2x

wherefis..'orP"forthetwotermsof(1'87)'InconsequenceoftheDiracequation'therefore'
'
('
K p Q ) ( * t - * " t - n " ) = - @ ' J o " ' " J *u

(a'-d ep"(t't') 5''l(tu2|a2u2)

f @n)(a
' - ' p)(ap")eip'
xrzx2,r(r-u-!42)-!1rk).

(r.e?)
first two

TocombineK,o)andKr(,)'itissufficienttoperformanintegrationbypartswithrespecttooforthe
terms of (1.95), as indicated bY
A
fr
--.
rr
du,-^ 6" (h2*\2u2)'
: 26" (hz+ *'u2)|
I dr6,'(h2+x2u2)
Jr
do
J-r

(1.e8)

179
SCHWINGER

JULIAN
The integated terms precisely cancel-trr(2). If
(1.95), the fr integral t}rus encounteredis

8OO

lle r differentiation is explicitly performed for the

second term of

(dk)h,!r,{u,*^,u,1
",-. J'tai)wu"'{n"+"*,,\:;l
.
: -zI onlyo2+\z7rz1.

(1.ee)

Eence,
...
K,(r'-x,r-*"):_

rr
r
1 f'
f
t
| t u l u d . u l { a \"{ a "f l' {, a' O " ) e i t ( , ' - z ) e i p " ( r " ' , 1 ( p , - ,p-1' ") \, ( t (2r)ttJ-' Jo
J
L"

llaz\
u!-'ozl
4
/

! x(u - uz)o,"(p,, - p,,,) - 2x),(t - * - I O,!]t,

(h,+ ),, ur1. ( 1.I 00)

.o

The integration with respect to k may now be effected. According to the integral representation,

a{n + x,4 : !

wei. t*,+x"u\,
[ _'-d

(1.101)

7r'

:e;-*'
"'f pn1
J {aila"{n'+x'^ ; I _:4,";.x"
rir'
:

--=

2J *

d@-eiu^'u'

l.l
(1.102)

A'U'

flowever, it should be noticed that we are then required to evaluate integrals with respect to a of the form

["'

:1
u*'au {ou)6''(k2+^2u\
u*'ou,
[
f o'

(1.103)

in which n may be 0, I ot 2. For i:0, ttle integral is Iogarithmically divergent.

fn order to ascertain the significanceof this divergenCe,we shall interchinge the operations used in obtaining
_
(1.103), thus producing a more easily interpreted divergent fr integral. Fo. zJ0, (1.10s) reads
l7

r'3

7n

k) du- 6'(k2+\' u2): 1aag 6'* l') - a'1b';1'

J @ J,
Dr',
J

(1.104)

One may expressthis invariant integral, in three-dimensional notation. as

in which the delta-functions de_scribethe.energy-momentum relations of a Iight quantum, and of a particle wit}
mass hi,,/c.On performing the &6integration, (i.105) becomes

:.J ( ;/ r,r.r[*-,-,_,,]
{i, ; *4* )., ],

(1.106)

in which form it is evident that the divergence is.associated with zero frequency light quanta-an,,infra-red
catastrophe." As we-shall later demonstrate, this divergence is entirely spurious, andis removed on properly including the efrectsof 61{tt(*), the first-order correction to the current operator. T'he divergent integrai(t.io6j can

t80
QUANTUM

801

III.

ELECTRODYNAMICS.

as
be expressedin terms of an invariant minimum light quantum wave number, Ami''
I

rl

(1.107)

t/

^;('"tru*+

With the fr and ru integrations thus performed, K u(r' x,*- r" ) becomes

- r"):
- x.x
^ rdp')(dp")*ol,e!! g'-,"r] .-n[;o"- r, Q-!::)]
K,(x,
#, I,' I
K

f(p,_p,,), t+urt

(p,-p,,)r..

-. /.
tos(t+-(t1++

"l?=(roc2-+
+

(?'-p"),

f)" . \ \ - -ic-,
))

ltl

(1'108)
*(Pi - P,"t
Irn*-,,1y u,yt _ r,1'
;*o

in which we have evaluated the third term of (1.100) by writing

((P'- P")'z/4l'z)(r-u'z)

p.art of (1.109), while reversing the inand performing the o difierentiation for the term obtaiileb f.g\ jl:,fr.j,
be observedthat the integrand
tesration by parts for the term producedby t he secondpart of (\rt\9;. It will now
is then useful to introduJe th'elnewvariables
otit.tOA) involves only !x,-t^,,.It
I
I
!\'+Px"
(1.110)
py:px,,_px,,
,^:;,
way, we obtain
since the P integration can be immediately performed, yielding 6(*' r"), In this
11f(
K r(i - x,r- r") : - 4,a{r'
grz

- r"). ['l log

(Fo(*-'v')*lqr('r_2h^i,
x2_ L

r'))
-t

r' )* lG (x -*')l+

* \F o(r- x')I F {r-

i
;a(*'

d
- * ") o u-F o(t - x'),

(1'111)

where
?r

eLrr

r'

p"t..r:Jo
ooo'^ @il
rr,yJ t+tpy+*lrr_',t>

:rcc[,affi^(*,,.)
andr,tTtog(l+(pr/4Kr)(l_

c("):

Finally, then,

J,da(t+d)_ J

(r.rr2)

a,))

@p),,,"

1+(p,/4*,)(r_t\

:,e'
f"'offiI,',
\l#(i-*) -^(#' )]

-'][0,,0,,,rr(x,)K,(x,x,x-*'\vG'\,::t*;,i:,lrFoG_

(1.113)

r')+F{r-x')li,@')da'

+|)e,jUns@-*')!F{r-x')*lG(r-x')fi,(*')d','l1ocu!,fno@-x')m,,(*')d'',

(1'114)

t8l
SCHWINGER

JULIAN

802

:',r'hich
e

(x))1
m,"(r) : - (1,(*)o,,,1,

- ll0 {r) {*)- {,'(x)o,;1,'(r)f.

",rt

(r.l rJl

LK

Expressedin the samenotation, the first term of (1.58)is (seeII (2.44)),

i 7
-|do'e(x,x'r[7"(rr,j,(r';]qdA,(t:)2hc2J

al
r
--I'|[1,,(x-r,)-]Fz(x_x')fj,(x,)da,,
J
4r x2'

:::m which we have omilted the charge renormaliza-,:lf, term, with the understanding that the value of e
: io be correspondingly altered. A rederivation of thrs
:::ult, employing methods akin to those presented in
--:s paper, is given in the Appendix. Evidently the
-,:,r contributions to the one particle current operator,
:-: given in (1.114),are of the same generalnature as
::,e previously consideredefiect, (1.116),with the ex::piion of the last term in (1.114).This is an addition
:l the current vector of the form

oI mu, over the vicinity of that point. If all quantities

are slowly varying, relative to hf mc and hf mc2as units
of length and time, an expansion in ascending powers
of !2 can be constructed, as in II (2.47). For this purpose, it is sufficient to expand the denominator in the
6 r s t l o r m o f ( 1 . 1 1 2 ) ,t h u s o b t a i n i n g
1

r,,(.$:-51*1
tn-r l

(1.117)

c@/0x)"6mu,Q),

'rhere

f
6nu.(x\:af )r I l:nQ-tt)nr,(x')da'.

(1.11S)

-\ current vector of this type can be interpreted as a

::lole current, derived frorn an antisymmetricaldipole
'...::or 6lttp which combines electric and magnetic dir, -: moment densities.The tensor 2", is that char,:-:iistic of the Dirac theory, in which intrinsic dipole
:--omentsare related to the antisymmelrical spin tensor
:-,, the factor of proportionality being

( 1 . 11 6 )

I{ence,

11
fl'6("r)1 "'
(2nll)Qn*3) 2x,
af

0r",(.'): ^-l nu,(x)!-^f2m",(")*.

ZrL
6xz

..

l,
I

(1.120)

(t.t2t)

and, under conditions that permit the neglect of all

but the first term in this series, an electron will act
as though it possessedan additional spin magnetic
moment.
6p: (a/2r)pn.

0.122)

po:e/2x:eh/2mc,
(1.119) The comparison of this prediction with experiment will
be discussedin the sequel to this paper.
::e Bohr magneton.According to (1.118),the correcThe final result for the second-order correction to
::on to the dipole tensor at a point involves an average the one particle current operator is
aKl
tj,t2'(x))r.s:-log+T

'J
LR\nin

[l"o(..-r' t I F'(x- r')]7u(r')do'

K"

q1
*;

;!'
4nx'

f
a
[]1'-' (.r- x') f i F,(x - x') | lG (x - *)l -j,@' ) d.a'-l c- 6mr,(x).
J|
0x"

Lnder conditionsoI slow variation ((l/n)l]rjr,

(,)(r)),,o:
(67,

(1.123)

mr,((.jrmu), this reducesto

-1(.r*4

lp i r{o* L"!-,, r"l*),

(1.124)

-:r virtue of (1.120), and the analogousexpansionof

G(r),

1
G(r): --;15i*1*.

.)("

conservation requirements, and the formal property

that the operator of total charge commutes with ail
at the January,1948meetingof
( 1 . 1 2 s ) 3This resultwasannounced

I! will be noted that the total charge computed from

i.6jl'r@))to is zero, in agreement with evident charge

the American PhysicalSociely.The lormula is misprintedin a

publisbednote,I. Sehwinger,Phys.Rev. 73, 416 (1948).Tbe misprint has unfortunately been copied by L. Rosenfeldin his book,
Nuclear Forces(Intericience Pdblishe;s, Inc., New York, 1949),
p. 438.

182
ELECTRODYNAMICS.

QUANTUM

803

III.

manner of
one-particle operators. The apparent contradictioa be- completely stated without regard for the
tween these siatements and tle existenceof the charge exhibiting them by an external field. We therefore turn
renormalization term is discussed in the Appendix, to a discussion of the behavior of a single particle in
where it is shown that a compensating charge is created an external field, as modified by the vacuum fluctuaat infinity,
tions of the electromagnetic field.
Our result, (1.123),is marred only by the appearance
z. RADTATIVEcoRREcTIoNS To
of the logarithmic divergence associated with zero
ELECTRON SCATTERING
frequency quanta. It should be remarked, however,
thai (6r(')(s))Le is not a.complete descriptionof the
we shall now be concernedwith the interaction of
radiative corrections under discussio",.t:
j:
three systems-the matter field, the electromagnetic
-"^tl".ti
t
l
s
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
l
h
e
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
,
t
o
;
m e a s u r et h e c o r r e c t i o n

nelg
;;;;;" anexternar
irrt.;+iF;;;;;;; ff'k:*.-ffi1;:T:i::*'3:li:T;J}r".'#:l#iJ
sion of quanta, as describedby 07"t"(r), among the :
current distwo situations in which the reactiou on the
tribution may have a negligible effect' A description of
this state of afiairs, in the interaction representation,
is given by

aiiltqtt"ty
effects of which is o .o-p",t.liit'/i"J
vergence.It will be apparent that, as a consequenceof
irr"- ini.u-..a catastiophe,', the second-ordei corrections to particle electromagnetic properties cannot be

:l-:( i*(x)
A,t,lvr"1
* r,(r))
]

*H
-:t

l#

",

- r)(j,(r)
* t (r))ao"]v
[o]: o,
@'

(2.1a)

(2.1b)

system, respectively.
where jr(x) and Jr(r) are the current vectors associatedwith the matter field and the external
by Ar(*)' An equally valid
characterized
field,
as
electromagnetic
to
the
are
coupled
distributions
notfr.ut.*t
matters is in terms of an external electromagnetic field acting on the matter field current
*"y-"irr"ti"g
distribution:

*l!:

6o(r)

lT
rvhere

- i,@)
(r))
(A,(x)
r A,("'
|L 1
].r,tot,
c

(2.2a)

: o'
I.T "'l'r);(*)do']vrol

(2.2b)

-:

I
a2Atk)(tc):-*Jy@'

aA'k)(r)

:O.

(2.s)

(2.1) by a canonical
The equivalenceof the two descriptions is establishedby showing that (2.2) is obtained from
t r a n s f o r m ai lo n , n a m e l Y ,
(2.4)
.v-lol+e-;t@v-7"1,
with J[o] determinedby
1
6lfol
hc : :: --J,(x)A,(r).
c
6o(r)

(2.s)

The {unctional -/[o] is explicitly exhibited as

r,'':-:[
ltc.r

J,(x')A,(x')du' ,

(2.6)

_a

electromagnetic field
in which the choice of lower lirnit corresponrlsto selecting the retarded potentials for the
state vector is
generated by the given current clistribution. The equation of motion satisfied by the new

;hrY4+ inrrur,"'t "t*1"1:

l_.!r,

irr'r]vtoJ
ror* r,neil t'tA pQ()e-

(2.7)

183
JULI.AN

Xow

804

SCHWINGER

ei r to1A y($)r i r t" : A,(*) * iU lol, A,(r)f - iQ lol, t-/trl,.4 ts(r) ll + . . .

lr,
: Ar@)-| D(x-r')J,(r')da'
CJ _q

- A,(r)IA,kt(r),

(2.8)

inwhich the seriesends after two terms since the components ol Ju(*) are mutually commutative, in view of the
prescribednature of this current distribution. It is easily seen that

1,t"t(*) : obeys (2.3). Indeed,

lr"
rJ ^D(x-

(2.e)

r')J,(*')du'

1 6 r " | D k - r ' \ 'J,(r,)do,

.
ll2ANGr(r):__ |
e Ox,J_. |xi
:__

1n
|Db-r')
_1,1*'1
| ao"'______
cJ o

6*i

1
: __J,(tc),
c
and

(2.10)

AA"Gr(x.) | r"
d
:
da,-(D(x-r,)J,(x,))
-d*,
|
cJ+
dtt

:0.
Furthermore,

t,.irtdt
_:hc_:iheeirtal
6o(c)

(2.11)

6Jfol
i.hcr
dJlclr
-+_l
- Jl-al,
l*...
- -'
6o(r) 2 L
6c(tc)
J

: --J,(tc)Ao@) c2c

(2.12)

J o(r)A r(.,(r),

and the transformed equation of motion therefore reads

&:#=l-i,@)(A*(x)rA,k)1*11-f,1161.a,t,k1]vt"1,(2.r3)
describing the self-action of the given current
which is equivalent to (2.2a), since the term -(l/2c)J*(r)Ar<'t(r),
distribution, has no dynamical consequencesand can be omitted.
In a similar way, the supplementary condition (2.1b) is transformed into

L,:

wherein
er r't!
llowever.'

- (i,(r)
r,u .', r,-! @,
: o,
[.o x) * r u@Dao"]v[o]
1f,)

M ) ;.tr",-a A'(*' )
r
*'; I

6*,,

or,,

tnn|D(x'-r")

1n'0

tt,1r'")d^" : -

;J ^

ut

A'(*'

A'(*'

) ] -0
) -;J---l p'
- ol.a
L
6*u,l: t*,

J**(D

aD (*' - x\,

ur,
ln

(*'- r") !,(x"))dot': -

''{*"10'"'

- *)J,(tc)ita,,
"D@,'

(2.14)
(2.1s)
(2.16)

which verifies(2.2b).
One can bitig Q.2) into a form which enables the results of the previous section to be utilized. The mass renormalization transf ormation
f 6wqf
,
(2.17)
vlopWla)vlo),
ihc:-:tcto(x)Wlof,
6ck)

184
805

ELECTRODYNAMICS.

QUANTUM

replaces(2.2a)with

III

6v[al
- lK ('c)+ Jc(')(r) lv[d],
ihc-

(2.18)

6o(*)

where (see(1.3))

(2.1e)

cc(r) : Jc(r) - Jcr.o(r),

1
. . K k ) ( x ): - - j u @ A
) , \ " )( r ) ,

(2.20)

ic

and the Dirac equation for ry'(*) now involves the experimental mass. The further transformation

v[o]: U[o]o[o],

(2.2r)

6Ufa1
ihc -:
r(x)U["], Ul- af:1,

(2.22)

where
6o(x)

of an external6eld,
is the analogoI (1.8),savethat tD[c] variesin the presence
DoIol
:U-llqflcG)(r)U[o]o[o]
ihc
6o(r)
1
-- --jF@),1p@(n)+lqf,

(2.23)

in responseto the coupling with the current operator ju(r). The latter contains the modifications produced by the
vacuum electromagnetic field. The supplementary condition (2.2b) appears as

: o,
u _.t- -,;jlu'raT# bl f "nr*' 1r;a"*]o["1
in consequence of these transformationsr

(2.24)

However,

u7o
"r)
,-,raff ud }# : [_^,,rlr(r,1o,,1aE)
:

n
"r, rr'tluu*,*,''
.n.t*" tli,r*"l ut""r:1,I' 0,"Lo6'!'
* -o,
:

x" JiuG"))

lr

- x\i,(x)do,,
,J,D(x'

(2.2s)

conditionassociated
with (2.23)is simply
so that the supplementary
AA"G')
------o[ol:

(2.26)

dT,

As the first application of (2.23), we shall consider

the scattering of an electron produced by its interaction
with an external field, in which the latter is regarded
as a small perturbation.a We shall restrict the external
potential to be that of a time independent field, which

will ever.rtuallybe specializedto the Coulomb field of a

stationary uucleus.
A solution ol (2.23) can be constructedin the form

r Radiative corrections to scattering have been discussedby

many authors. That a finite correction is obtaioed after a renormalization of charge and mass was indepeqdently observed
hy Z. Koba anJ S. Tomonega,Prog.Theor. Phys. 3, 2o0 (1048);
; n d J . S c h w i n g e rP. h y s .
H . W . L e w i s ,P h y s .R e v . 7 J ,1 7 3( 1 q 4 8 ) a
Rev. 73,416 (1948).Seealso R. P. Feynman,Phys.Rev. 74, 1430
(1948).

6R[ol
" -:
H(r)Rf of,
ihc
6o(x)

a[o]:R[o]or,

Q.27)

where

(2.28)

^-j
R[o]+l,

ot-

@.

(2.2e)

r85
JULIAN

SCHW]NGER

806

The state vector (F1characterizes the initial state of the system, composedof one electron with definite energy
and momentum, and no light quanta. Thetotal probability, per unit time, that a scattering p.o."r. o..ur., .in
be obtained by evaluating the time rate of decreaseof the probability that the system remain-in the initiat state,

, : -, I ^hl (o,,o[d])
l,: -, 1 r,r^,t(o,,R[c]o,
t,.

(2.30)

The integration is extended over the surface'l:const., with dl the three-dimensionalvolume element. Now
6
(o,,R["]o,) lr: (o1,R-,[o]o,) (o1,.F/(s)R[d]o,)_ (o1,R[r]o1) (or,R-,[c]I/(*)o).
ihc-l
6o(*)

(2.31)

In view of the treatment ol H(r) as a small perturbation, it is sufficient to write

Rt,l:1-: f' ,t*,rz,,,p-';"1:111f' u6,7a,,.

hc.t_*
hcJ-_

(2.s2)

It will also be useful to introduce

H' @): n 67- 1or,n(e)or),

(2.s3)

which possesses
a vanishing diagonal matrlr element for the initial state, and obtain

Rr'r:*p[-

; ["_r,wr.,ttrv rl(, ; [' :' G')d,)

(2.s4)

The phase lactor evidently has no effect in (2.31), and can be omitted. The latter is also unafiected if I/(r)
replaced by H' (r), Hence to the accuracy of first-order perturbation theory, we have

and

is

u,r"r
tot r: J (tln,@)
+!*u,a,v,,
I' n,r{ a,,
fr ,,.,,"r,
Ir),

(2.3s)

*: L I a,a,,
.
+f-"' (*,)a.,,u,
(rl*o,I-",, o,ro*0,
arlr)
",

(2.s6)

We may now remark that a diagonal matrix element for a state of definite energy must be invariant with respect to time displacements,whence

and

"'
: I o,o,'(.tltat r,aw;lt),
I a,a,'(rl[ n't'>an'n'<alr)
I "'
*:!f 0,0,,(rl*o[_-r,a,t*rlr).

(2.37)

(2.s8)

This result is perfectly equivalent to the more conventional perturbation formula in which the rate of transition
from the initial state is expressedas a sum of transition rates to all possiblefinal states of equal energy. The dnergy
conservation law is here expressedby the time integration, and the summation over all states oiher than ttre
original is provided for by the removal from I/(r) of the diagonal matrlx element. Our basic formula for calculatins
the transition rate for scattering of a particle by a time independent potential is thus

* : )- [ a,a,,oe(")(rx,(")(il ( tli,a> aw .
f _'_i, ",lr)

(2.3e)

We have not indicated that the diagonal matrix element is to be subtracted from ju(r), since it is suif,cient to remove, in the finai result, those transitions in which no change of state occurs.
We have shown in the first section that, to the secondorder in e,

(r) + 6, ('?)
('),
i,@): j,(r) I 6j,(1)

(2.4o)

t86
807

ELECTRODYNAMICS.

QUANTUM

III.

where

uj,' (.):

j,(r')\A,(r')da'
r')lju@),
h I :@"
- r' t (x')l 0@)t (x'- tc)tu,r@)frA (r')da',
:f
"
"s
[ roor S @ ) ",!

(2.41)

and
(6j,r2t(26))
,o:;s6

l!{r')r,{*-

[*

(2.42)

.
r'),!'(x')l1d'o'

qK\ul

-2"-^E'(4 Fo(.r) * *Fz(r) * l G(x)) - i-o,"- - F s(x)

(
fu(x) : --1u log^E'(Fo(r) * F' x) ) * .
4t r dx'
4r x2
2h^i^ x2
41

(2.43)

It is only the indicated portion of 67*('?)(r),referring to one particle and no light quanta,-that need be retained to
compute ihe second-ordei correction to the scattering cross section for an external field, since only this part of
6jr('?'(r)is coherenLwith lu(*).
The total rate of transition from the initial state can now be written as

(2.44)

1!:W\tWr,

where

7e0:fi[o,ororu,<rx,,")(r')(11(r(r)r(6;,(,)(r))r,o
l [- <i,r.+ai,t',r,rt,,oa,;lr)(2.4s)
describesthe rate of radiationless scattering, while

wpL

I r
/l
rlr
1l6r(r)(r)| 6j,()(*')dr0'11
I dodo'A,<"t1r1A"(")(r')(
|
.t__
\l

hrcJ

(2'46)

l/

accounts for scattering that is accompaniedby single quantum emission.

To indicate the manner in which the perturbation formulas are to be used, we consider the evaluation of

Ii rav' al I r)dx n''

[ --.rt

(2.47)

This can be written as

-acl_-_(11i,(n)t,96)0k)t,,!,(x'|)11)dr:.'|,

(2.48)

induces no change in state.

in which it is understood that one omits the processesin which {(dt@),orlr@')rl,(x')
Now ry'(r') can either annul the original electron, in which caseQ@')'!,(x') causesan electron transition to some
nrat stute, or ry'(r') generatesa positron, in which event ry'(x'){(r') inducesthe creation of a pair' However, the latter
processis'incompaiible with the energy conservation that is enforced by the time integration, and can therefo_re
Le o-itt"d. Henie, it only occurs thit,!(r') annihilates the original electron, whence ry'(r')O1is a multiple of the
vacuum state vector. The samecomment appliesto {t(y)@1:y4!t(r)Or. Therefore,only the vacuum expectation
value of the operator t!t(*){(*') is required i" (2.+S). Furthermore, since only one state of the matter field is ini
tially excited, as described by the wave function ileipt,we arrive at the result

J*

g11,1*11,t*
)lt)d-{:#f

x)^ttuei(rs)'G'-'|),
(dq)a(qoPo)6(q'z!x2)E7,Q1q-

() LO\

on employing the relation

7

r
oee;ut'-'"t
1r,yJ,,ro@rla(g'?*x:)(1"y9-r)
Before further simplifying this expression,we shall consider the analogousevaluations oI
(f"(r)16(r'1)o: -rS"pi')(.r-r'):

r*
t)dro'
i,(r)(6i
| (11
"')(*'))',ol

J_6

(2.s0)

(2.5la)

187
808

SCHWINGER

JULIAN

,/
| (r I ('a:;r,r(r)),oj,Qc,);l)dxo,

(2.s1b)

which describe the radiationless corrections to the scattering process.Now.(2.51a) can be written
r'f
- e2c2 dxo', do" (l p
I @)1al,@)fi(*")t,(*'
|
I
J 4 J

- r")!(*")

(2.s2)

l l),

whicb, according to the arguments presented in connection with (2.47),becomes

f'f

- dc
- *"1ueip(."- x,
170r,7*'
I d*s' I do"aY,(t @),{,(*i'
J4U'
ezcz rt

:fiJ-.0^'J

^"

(2'53)
Joorotodu{o'*x'z)'ilrt'(i'tq-x)r'(tc'-*")uedrcrc'-')'

On introducing the Fourier transform of I,(r):

r lp-c):

,,(rc)xr,('c)(to,

(2.s4)

we obtain

(2.ss)
I"rrrr,urrr,r')(*')),.01L)d.*o':ffifaau;,<*-po)6(dtr,),r.t,Q\q-x)r,(p-q)u
The result of combining (2.49) and (2.55) with the analogousevaluation of (2.51b) is expressedby

*r:

l dr
r
r
d'qo@il6(qo-?dt{d+*l
e;tt-t tA,<"t({)ito'
,-u;.1
1.;ta-at',7,<"t(r)ihtJ
\zTr n'cr

'::#
onperforming
theintegration
withrespect
tosoand,r,, r"

directions of the vector q, other thah the incident direction:

"#;:;"j"

t'")T;

t:fi

J:?

^:*#l*lvlf.-,tn-nt',s,u,61aofrunor.,'tr"kt(/)da,d(tytr,@-.il)Qtc-*)@"*r,(?-d)u.
(2.s7)
This must be interpreted as the rate of transition from the initial state, expressedas tle probability per unit time
for'a deflection into an arbitrary elemgpt of solid angle. A further simplifiiation can be introduc"i Ly averagiog
(2'57) with respect to the.two spin stabbs in which thi incident electrin may ocflrr. For this putpos"ir"
t.qirirJ
the average of.u,ilp for the two polarizition states associated with a given Lnergy and momentum. It can bl inferred from the anticommutator

_I
19"b) fi e@')l: -.5a@- r' ) : -

1r
O* J

ot* "'t,
{aOWt + x)e(p)(i7p- x).uB;

(2.s8)

which exhibits, with equal weight, the contributions of all states of a particle, tJut

(2.5e)

\u"ae\:a6"-'*'*'

for a state with wave number four-vector &. The constant u4is conveniently evaluated for our purpose in terms of
the expectation value of the particle flux vector in the iiritial state,

5<;"t: (1ldc(r/(*)
rl@)),lt)
:icil.(u,

(2.@)

Thus,
Sunc): i c.(pdvc.\rti cA T rftv
--4cAg,

p - x)

(2.6r)

188
809

III,

ELECTRODYNAMICS,

QUANTUM

so that

<""ail:-i

1 l S ( o *')' l
(it\-x)"e.
lpl

(2.62)

This leads to the iollowing expressionfor the total rate of transition from the initial state,
Ze 2
|f
f
'-dz']
ITrl(it?-x)(t+*r-n(q-f))(itq--^)(7n+fn(2-q))1,
f ,Jol f e,rc-ot
J
4rr I
lJ

I e2
no:,-lq5ru',")l
gT2hz(z

(2.63)

in which we have also specializedto the Coulomb potential of a stationary nucleus. We may now infer that the
difierential cross sectiorfor radiationless scattering through the angle r) into a unit solid angle is

y9:tl2]'+r,l{,rt-*ter-trn(q-p'))(itq-K)(14+r4t-q))f.

{2.6+)

L(p- q)'J

dA

The Fourier transform of Ir is conveniently written in the form

r o(p-q): -

t
I
(x)+-1. ip- q)Fo(\)
J,
4,?414x'?,4
af

(2.6s)

where

(2.66)

,r^l:r**-ra(F,(r)+!',(r))++(F0(r)+3P,(r)+G(r)).
*

l p - q l -l p l .
srn-,
tr: -:
2xr2
F .' ( I ) :

da
log((11 tr'?)]rr)
rt
I
(1*xz1l1
Jo 1 Ftr?(l-a,)
fl

Fl(r):J

F,(r):

(2.67)

fdo

1\

(2.68a)
I

(2.68b)

,
1 + x , ( 1 _ d , )( :1 + - / r o ( ^ ) 1

1\
zldo
r'
/
1l-r,/r'(\)--.
Jo1a-q1_,,;: (

(2.68c)

matThe more complicated transform, G(I) is not required in the following development. The trace of the Dirac
ricescontainedin (2.64)is easily computed:
Za
2o
r
\
1"Trl(itp_ x\(tq-llqh_
x ' l ( \ ) , f - - x ' ? X ' ? F o ( I ) (' z . O q )
il'(i"yg-n)(rnrrq(p_ qD):2lpo'z-^'r')(1-whence

(270
ry:(#.-,;)'(,-u,.*,;)1,-':"^^:-;*_o"no,(^)]

is the speedof the particle relative to c.

in which g:lpl/p,
To evaluate ihe rate at which transitions occur accompaniedby radiation, we consider
tl

n*

lr

e4r

/l-

(rlay,u,1"ll' 51,u'1*'1a,j):-: I da"d,"'(tl&(*)r"Sr*-*")t&(x")rli" )rrS(r"-x)7u'p(x)l'

\l
r-6
hzr
\l
l/
xl

t-

l \

(2'71)
dxo'10&)t,51*'-x"'11.,1,1x"')*tr,@")t,Sfx"'-x')t,'!(x')lrA^(x")A"(x"')ll)
l/

value is
Since the state vector iDris characterizedby an absenceof quanta, only the following vacuum expectation
required for the electromagnetic field,
hc
r
''
(2.72)
(dk)a&')"0'n'-""
(Aa(x")A'(x"'))o: ihcS^'DH(n't- r"t): -5^"
|
(2r)3 J xo>o

189
JULIAN

SCHWINGER

8IO

The matter field operators are treated as before, with the result

tl

eahc r

l\

r'

r*

( t l a 7 " ( r ) ( r ) | l j u t t t ( x ' ) d x o ' l lt : - - _

@dAG,+x2t(dk)6(k)l dxo,ei(nr*ttt-,t
|
J-6
\ |
h2(2r1sJoolnrn " "
J_^
| /

x u(I,5 (q+ k)h*rrS(p - e)7,)(it q- O e 3 (p- hh xl nS (q* k)t u. (2.73)

")
itklh)-x
r
S(q+r):J r-'ta'rtr$(x)du:
(2.74)
*
!- k't- x
st!- Pt : -it(
2pk
areFouriertransformsof 8(r). Tle integrationwith respectto ca'imposesthe energyconsrvationlaw

Q'1s)

(2.76)
Po: qo:-,ho,
*'hich is evidently that of a light quantum emissionprocess.The integration with respect to qeand the magnitude
-be
performed, leaving one with an expressionfor ror in the form of an integial extended iver all
!i u 9n now
directions of the scattered electron, and all light quanta, as restricted by energy conservatiJn. On averaging with
respect to the polarization of the incident electron, and specializingto the Cou'ilmb field of a nucleus, orr-.o"btui.r,

'"
an(anup,t
l![.
_ ,l'+r,luro-*)
"r:115,'*,1
r[* o > o
n2
L' "
lpll(p-q-k)'J
h@|_il-*

../

"

(t,

i1(qfa)-x
./ ir|-k)-K
--1^\ .
-)\t^-L
t^-r^-?,)
)r;w-

hQ-k)-*

rou-x-'n--

--

1-l

J.

e.77)

It may then be inferred that the differential cross section for radiative scattering through the angle r9, in which
the energy loss does not exceedA.E, is
dot(S,LE) d

d.

wnere

fko:K.

lqlf

Za

I'

@h)5(h't11l,r-**lirrlthp-rt
",Joo-o

(, ( +_1) *r,5^ r r^]u..,,

(irn-.,(, ^(o^- !'\+",4,,+?.4,^)
8)
)
l, e.7
\
\
q
R
p
k
/
z
q
B
2
p
h
/
"
\
\qk ph/
2qk
2rk / l
K:

(2.7e)

AF/h.

We'shall first consider the simple situation in which the emitted radiation exerts a negligible reaction on the
electron- That is to say, we shall treat-the essentially elastic scattering of an electron, in wtr[tr only a small fractionof the electron kinetic energy is radiated. Under thesecircumstancei, lvhich are expressedby aEi<IZ: E- mc2,
z. /v) srmDllnes
Io
'
dor(8,Lq) / Zo
B1 a lro:r ... . I f
q \,
: ( / d r c s c ' ?. -, t,\fr /

(t-o'?st"';)rnJr,:, uaaol\*-*)'

da

(280)

\ow

and

(L-+\',:+J',."r(|^__L_
l),
\pk qh/ (ph)(qk\

\(pp)fct) (ph),1qp1z/'

I
l\
d
7 rt
/l
-"t
(q-p)k\n-a):;l
ok)Qk):
"-,1(P+1+e=,\k1'

(281)

from which one deduces,on integration by parts, that

L\ 2

'- L:- .,u

:(?k)(qk)- (ph) (qk),
f'
J_

Q'82)

2 / l

'

' "l(T*'+)'l'

(2.83)

190
811

QUANTUM

Therefore,

/b

III.

ELECTRODYNAMICS.

q\2

r,da(@-q)'_a)f(dr)__1fr'l__

| { a l x n\ pl R.,- q.t tl : P - t- t
r

'\

aal J

z*t

'

'1

1t+q

b-q \

'lz

(2.84)

ll;*;')ul

The & integration in the latter equation can be written as

I
a
tp!1+p::,\
_
"l^ak\
2
/p+s,p-

6(k)
- J f@ H - \ - r '

\ , *-7)

\i*Jr')u

:
However,

| /ry*a:,)
' ' l

t''"r
,rylu'u"t
",
"l-'!<ou>t<url'
_&)L
_q)t4_"lo
J,_^,ap^
r+t@
-C;^*'lf
"
1",(ry.r+)r)

-,[ @n)
u'{n): 19 L^*,: t rr#,(Y)* [ ffN-t,

(2.86)

so that

(\y -+)
a\!-il' =t_:,
f oa,

[r*'.-'

r+l(p- q)'z/4K'l(-&)

I l(a*oa'\ lll

, _ _ / . * 1 l f l .( 2 . 8 7
r al l\z
\LU,r
+J ( dr ) _l6( e) l
I f l,
,**_^.- l,

t l\;*-t)- JJI

over the domain 0(&o(K'

*if..which we have discarded terms that obviously vanish on integration
in
becomes
n r, bracketed l"t.grui i" (ZSZ),-whe' etp.es."d in threeldimensional notation,
r@k)dko

fn

[Y::::Nt,-na:r"

dho

(2'88)

tr^,^T:2otos+

quanlum wave number to characterize a logain which we have again introduced an invariant minimum Iight
expressionof the second bracketed inAii-ilut
catastrophei'
the
with
associated
"infra-red
divergence
rithmic
(2'87)
tegral in
Yields.
n

fl

_ lI

r.l
^.-(ry.T)

1 tatlatn'-n')l?-

2o* (p' [(p d'z/ a)(r o'z))*

:'"1'-ia-*4,rt**

1o_ (p'- [(p- q),/4](r-lr))t

Therefore.
(dk)6(h')(p/pk-c/qk)'
J| t 0 - 0

:*

f'./(p-q)'

J" ^ \t

f
,
t- t , o * t *"Fr-t l pE
l'
{+.'lrr aftos-+ zB
n) *t,">y
d\

(2.90)

I9r
SCHWINGER

JULIAN

812

T:ere

B
\l
1-sin,-(l-72) f .
\2/

/
{:1

(2.e1)

\\-e may now employ the identity

'-- I 2P loe(r
l- tst/ | - At)
/ t

1 log(1* [(n - flz/ 4 x2l,1- Ffi

11lb-il'z/adl!-t'z)

log(2ps/x)- 1

r*l(p-q),/4x2f(1-a2)

lfl(p-il,/ax,l,1-1d)

l. r_Bt
-,
:r cast(2.90)into the form

:rhere

*, 1

2
|tog
l+Bt
N'zBEL

l+BE

'oE

1-B

"
(p-- !,1)': *t:r,.'
",1[('"* ^rT * r) to"*F,)+F,++G+H]1,
I r:, ron Nr,,
""
tBt

|.

r+BEl

los,

1--B

I
":('**hJ,aL
** -;l-*;-h;/

r,,,^,r^lroc,

, *rl.*,

(2.e2)
(2.e3)

t+BI

t"cr

l
,_B
I

(1 0/.\

The function Il approachesa constant in the limit oI small velocities,

B<11. 11=_(loez_1)_

(2.es)

s.

\t high energies,11 is approximated by

?o/x))l:':-!t<'1,

(2.e6)

pf

'rith

s, r+t . 1_{l
ttno_

//,e\:-

r,
|

tno_

lr '_z_' -_o 2 i

s i n B f2 J c o t y z )

l-l

|
IIE

at

(2.e7)

) (*-cosz(f1211+

This integral can be performed analytically for 8:r,

(2.e8)

JG):"'/12,

lut must be evaluated numerically for other angles.An approximation in excess,which has the correct asymptotic
iorm at small angles, is provided by

t - (**n*,* *)'['"rz*,.,-*1@*' ]
"

r? 00)

l(r/2):1.167.

(2.100)

This formula is reasonablyaccurate even for rl :r/2,

:he following result of a numerical calculation:

where the value yielded by (2.99) exceedsby only 8.6 percent

The total differential cross section for scattering through the angle rl, in which the energy loss does not exceed

18, is

do@
'^E) -dco.(,)
+o'J!:ou) : ( 1",.*oo-\' (1-B, ,6,1) 11-6(r,^E)),
' '
de
d{t
da
\2lplF z/ \
2/'

(2.101)

where d(r},AE) is the desired fractional decreasein the cross section produced by radiative efiects. For essentially
elastic scattering, we obtain
-l

2q
E
1
1
1
.-tf /
xz/bo,
\.
- I,)
: -s?f o z.'"tL
6(o,^E<<w)
(F0+
Fl)+-Fo-F,a-p,-H+
Q.102)
(.*G
7
; ;ffi
^n, l,

r92
813

QUANTUM

ELECTRPDYNAMICS.

III.

from this
on combining (2.70) with (2.80). It will be noted that lby only a fraction of a percent. It is evident
to scattering
the infra-red catastrophe, as characterized by fr-i" has numerical result that radiative corrections
' cross sections can be quite appreciable. For the pardisappeared. However, it is possible, in principle, to 'ticular
conditions chosen, LE can be materiaily in6
diverge
make
would
which
AZ+0,
limit
the
co.riid"r
creased(but still subject to LE{1W), without seriously
logarithmically. It is well known that this difficulty
kev, 6:6.3 10-'?,
stims from the neglect of processesinvolving more than impairing d. Thus, with AE:40
As to the energy
one low frequency quantum'5 Actually, the essentially while AE:80 kev yields 6:5'1 10-'?.
given accuracy
elastic scattering cross section must approach zero as dependenceof d, we remark that with a
6 varies
AE+0; that is, it never'happensthat a scattering event in the determination of the energy, AE/E,
Thus, with
is unaccompanied by the emission of quanta. This is linearly with the logarithm ol the energy.
10-', an increase in the total
described by replacing the radiative correction factor AE/E:0.O4/3.6:1.1
an addition of
1-6 with ,-0, which has the proper limiting behavior energy by a factor of four produces
2
Mev, and
as AE+0. The further terms in the series expansioq 4.4 l}-'z to D, whence 6:11 10 lor W:74
of e-6 express the efiects of higher order processesin- 6:15 10-' for llz:57 Mev.
The angular dependenceof 6 at relativistic energies
volving the multiple emission of soft quanta. However,
formula
for practical purposes,such a refinement is unnecessary. is not fully described by the asymptotic
(Po/*)sin'l/Z
condition,
(2.105),
underlying
the
since
particle
can
a
of
energy
the
with
which
The accuracy
dimhishing c9' Inbe measured is such that the Iimit A-E+O cannot be (1, cannot be maintained with
deed, 6 is proportional to sirfSf2 at angles such that
realized, and 3 will be small in comparison with unity
(pt/x)sin|/2<<l. However (2.105) can be used over a
under presently accessiblecircumstances'
wide angular range, even at moderate energies.Thus,
For a slowly moving Particle,
which
with lrl:3.1 Mev, AE:40 kev, and 3:r/4,
m(2 l ql
rtf
8a
(po/x)sins/2:2.7, the value of d deto
corresponds
(
2
.
i
0
3
)
g ( < l : 6 ( J , A E ( < l 4 r ) : - d ' s i n ' - l l o"gz-A E * l.
duced Irom (2.105) exceedsby only 2 percent the cor30J
31
2L
rect value, 6:4.2 70-2. We may note that under the
according to (2.95), the limiting form of 11 and the sameenergyconditions,but with S:3r/4, 6:7.2 lO-2'
corresponding limiting form of F":
The angular dependenceof 6 may be particularly suitable foi an experimental test of. these predictions,
I
(2.10+) which involve the relativistic aspects of the radiative
tr((1: F":2nl1
corrections to the electromagnetic properties of the
electron.
We have thus far considered only the essentially
elastic scattering of an electron, in which radiative corrections arise primarily from virtual processes'If we
loB
wish to compute the difierential cross section for scat- sin-))l:
tering with in arbitrary maximum energy loss A, it
x2
2Do t 1\
E
l3l/
+ar/
is only necessary to augment the essentially elastic
loe- sin-- E<<w
6(s,^
): -L (.*;cross section. in which the maximum energy loss is
)
; /t
LE'<<W, by the cross section for scattering with the
d
17 1
I
emissionol a light quanLumin the energy range from
-*(2.10s)
sin'?-/(rl)I,
f
L,E' to LE. The latter processinvolves the well-known
2
J
722
bremsstrahlung cross section which, of course, is the
which has a logarithmic dependence on the particle content of (2.79). This will be illustrated by the calculaenergy. The asymptotic form (2.105) is quite accurate tion of the difierential cross section for the scattedng
LE:10
of a slowly moving electron, irrespective of the final
for eirin moderate energies.Thus, with tl:r/2,
kev and tr{z:3.1 Mev, which corresponds to (?o/x) energy. TLe differintial cross section per unit solid
Xsinfl/2:S, the value of 6 computed from (2'105) angle for scattering of an electron through the angle rl'
differs from the correct value,
in which a light quantum is emitted in the energy
(2.106) range from LE' toWris
6:8.6 10 '?,

The radiative correction thus increases linearly with

the kinetic energy of the particle, In the extreme relativistic region, on the other hand,

q))']'
(n(pq)'; I^::,',"
"T[,{i|l# Ir(p-

(2.107)

accordingtothenon-relativisticlimit of (2.78).Hered.oisanelementof solidangleassociatedwiththedirection

of the unit vector n: k/fr0, and
(2'108)
1ql : (p'z-2rpo)a.
t n-sb.h andA. Nordsieck,
Phys.Rev. 52,54(1937).

193
JULIAN

SCHWINGER

814

I'r performing the.integration over all emissiondirections of the light quantum, and introducing the new variable
( 2 . 1 0 7 )b e c o m e s
: ; i r t e g r a t i o n ,* : l S l / l p l ,
:a / Zq \2

f \t-^E'/w)t

;tmr/l

llf

-2r

2rdr
cos87-lc2

: (rffi**i)"
rL-[ *ffi
|:"i"!lr"
"'

31

(2.10e)

Thus the contribution to d produced by emission of quanta with energiesin the range f.rom LE' to W is
8a
dt
4IV
rJ cosrl
t I
- -F'? sin'?- (r - J) t an
csc-1.
llog*"
Z- *rr S/ 2lo8

(2.r10)

)n adding this to 6(d,AZ'), as given by (2.103),we obtain the desiredresult:

p<<
1: 6(r,rr/):

I +(o-,r),un ;

?:,'^,!rl^
*+

It may be remarked, finally, that the analogous

:eso-nuclear phenomenon, the radiative correction to
:.ucleon-nucleon scattering associated with virtual
:eson emission, will be a relatively more significant
:iect in view of the stronger couplings involved. This
:lay well be the explanation of the discrepancybetween
-,:e observedneutron-proton scattering crosssection for
::gh energy neutrons and the larger theoretical values
:omputed from various assumedinteraction potentials.6

(2.r11)

and Ar(*) is the potential of a prescribed current distribution.

The physical situation can be described as follows. In the remote
past, the matter 6eld is uncoupled from the external electromagnetic 6eld, and the srare vector is that of the vacuum,

v[-

(A.3)

]: v!.

It is supposed that the coupling is adiabatically srvitched on, and

that the extemal field does not induce real pair creation. The
latter restdction implies that the final state of the matter field,
alter the coupling is adiabatically
switched ofi, is simply Vq,
whence

]:(.t-1)vo:0.
v[]-v[A solutionof (A.2),in tle form

APPENDIX
In this section, rve shall 6rst give an alternative treatment of
:e polarization of the vacuum by an external 6eld, employing
::e methods developed in the preceding pages. It is desired to
::mpute the expectation value of 7r(r),

<j p(t)) : (v 0r), j p(e)v La)),

-.!ere Vf']

"**. ; ]

#,

v[c]:

(A.s)

Y;"1E0'

may be constructed,where

( A . 1' )

mffi:-li,a)Au@)urat,
u[- 6 ]:1.

u[o ]:.s,
(4.2)

(4.6)

ano

obeys

n'ffi : -l i,u)lu(r)
r![o],

(A.4)

(4.7)

The current induced in the vacuum is then wdtten as

(j p(x)): (U-1lal j p(r) U laf) 6

(A.8)

\orv

+!]a.',f","' ljrru-,fo'lj,@)

ulo'): u-rlofj,(r) u lof-!(7,(e)f s-!u(r)s),

/a o\

-rhence

u-'Ilaljp@)ulol:,r(:r(r)*.t-'yp(r).s)
+*I:-d.',L",,')u-,lo'fljulr),j,(a')fulc'lA"(r')
o the dght side of (A.10), one obtains the 6rst approxination
Jr placing Ulo'f:1
, acuum as small. Hence.

in a treatment

(A.10)

that regards the disturbance

<i,t,t>: #I--a.' e(t - ! 1li,(x).j

"(t',1't,tr' t,
: vierv of (A.4) and the absence of a current in the unperturhed

vacuum. We shall, for convenience, rvrite this formula as

Gu,@- t') : iTrlSo (r' - e)%S(r- r'h,+S(,'-r)%S(1,(

ihe introduction

(A.11)

<j,(.),:T f G*@- t )A"(r')d.,,

rbere, accordingto II (2.10),

of the Fourier integral representations

iTrtGitk'*r)yu(iryk"l

(A.12)
t - | )t,1.

for the functions ,5(1)and S, combined with the trace evaluation

x)t,*Gitk"t

of the

x)ujtk'*x)t,f:

(A.13)
(see II (2.10))

kp'k,"*h,'ht" - 6,"(k'k"- x2),

6 A summary is given by L. Rosenfeld,Nuclear Forces (IntersciencePublishers,Inc., New York, 1949),pp. 450, 454.

(A.14)

194
III

ELECTRODYNAMICS.

QUANTUM

815

yields the following expressionlor Gp,(r)'

G,"@ :

;,), I

Gk' 114p" 1'u' *'"''6( !"n'l9lk;

k'" + k'' kN"- 6('(k' k" - c)7

by
It is instructive to examinethe conditionsimposedo-nG"lr)
gauge inthe-Jated requirements of charge conservation and
variance.The former evidently demands that

! c',t,t : *=

dty

6r,

@ilr,uf \an',ft,"a(p",+*,), (A.20)

\zr) ' r

where
hu:kr'Jk,i',

f {ad\n""uln'"+*):o'

(A17)

'

or that
n
' ) -: f A .
: 0, (A'18)
- - d i \ ( r'a-'
J #"*tr "'In(r')do'
f c*tr tlffi

(4.22)

the value ol
Althoueh the latter integral is strictly divergent'
limttrng process,In
zero is unambiguously obtained from any
non-slngurar
which the delta-function is replaced by a surtable
In this sense, the requiremenls o[ charge conservatlon
Iuction.
the same
that
noted
be
are satisfied lt may
i"t^ri"tce
ln the unper"J*.t*"
intee-ralls encountered in evaluating lhe current
turbed vacuum, II (1.73),

ttre
in which the absenceof an integrated term is a consequence-of
future'
aiiabatic re-oval of the coupling in the remote past and
Evidently (A.18) is satisfiedin virtue of (A'16), since

T r^yrS tD(o)

\ j r(x)),:'{

*'t,
| 6*"t*;' o{a"'+

: !\

(A 19)

Gu,@):Q*1r1.

(4 21)

rvhich is indeed zero if

The requirement of gauge invariance is that the induced current

be unaliected by the gaugetransformation
Ar(x)-A,(x)-S'

Eh;'6(k"2+x2)
f @n)@*"),""'"

:2f

(A.16)

!c""1,1=o.

\zt)

(A.1s)

(A.23)

which must also be zero

On computingdGs,(r)/6tyfrom (A.15),we obtain

of 6r,(r), andutilizetheffi;
We returnro theevaluation

byt

hh,

624)

p,u,,-*":zu2--\h,+p)T-(la+AT

(k"'lP)6(k"2*x2)'while
no contribution in view of the null value of
to simplify (A.15). The thild term,in the latter explession,makes
the
form'
of
Gr,(r)
of
contribution
produces
a
term
the seiond

(A.2s)

at x2),
<an"l""'$6(k'
! <ao
(A'22)' llence,
which must also be zero, in consequenceof

(f ffi .Y+fle+'!1"u.
G*a): h [ @k
11a*,,

P')
)-(]
- 5u,(kk'

(A.26)

introduced in the text:

The delta-function factor can be simplified in the manner

t#H.'#+!

o* r)'
x))=- *[' a't ( Y "*''' 1u"'
=plp<oto"
+r)- a(*'a*

(A.27)

p", as deined by
The introduction of the new variables l, and

h;:tk,+(!,-;k)
(A 28)

hr":+k,-(e,-;k),
thenbringsGp,(r)into the form
G,,(,):-#[:do(r-t)f(dk)(dP)etb(kpk,-.6pk')6'(t+c+f;o-*l)'

(A'2e)

andfpp' hasbeenreplaced
on lt alone,termslinearin 1uhavebeendiscarded'
of thedelta-function
where,in virtueof thedependence
by lit 12,It is therebYshownthat
(A.30)

G,&): ea,*,- 6,,n)ct,l,

with

c(,):8a,-:-,yI'd,(L-hI@il(dp)atut(o'+*+!o-xl)'
The divergent

and convergent palts oi G(t)

=
G@)
#,{

can be sepanted

(r'1
+ p)t(e)-ri},('
@
t)6'!

by a partial

integration

with

(A.31)

respect to ?'

- *t)
- ao {an)'*"
! {ao)a"Q"+ o+!<t
"(t fl !

(A.32)

t95
TULIAN

816

SCHWINGER

l:: :r.ariant, logarithmically divergent integral that occursin the frrst term of (A.32) can be expressedin three-dimensionalnotation as

- 2.Lt-(r.c{'+I- p"- p): - +f

r>an],ft
il { @+ -'): - [ <a
r'
I@
#-T:
"Nt,"

il:::e

Ps:(I2lP)s'

(A.33)
(4.34)

l:: onvergent second integral of (A.32) is then obtained by difierentiating (A.33)with respectto x' and replacingthe latter by
, : _ . h ,/ 4 ) ( 1 _ 8 ) ,
' :i

f anu'Q"+r +f;o *t): oaa a)(ta)

these evaluations,

(A.3s)

G(r) becomes

r-i-(losP-!tr1),'(.)
rf; ll'r.,i*r io,t,ll,

cr.r: -f*

(A.36)

I ::ie

"{

orlteib

x't:

J,-

tf "dt

Fiaally, we may insert (A.30) into (A.12) and t:::'::":1

h\
J ld t + fpy +*,I 0 _tl.
parts to obtain

(A.38)

(j,{ t)) : 16"a.J G(x - e' t J,k' )d@',

':ete

(A'37)

Jr(r) is the current vector that generatesthe external electromagneticfield. The expressionof G(r) containedin (4.36) thenyields

- r')- t Flr - r'))I r(s')da',

{r"k)): - f rr-( b{}l! - 1)r.@- *io' f <r,<,

(4.39)

: rhich the fi6t term representsthe logarithmically divergent renormalization of charge.

It should be remarked that the existirce of a charge renormalization term would appear to contradict the conservationof charge,
:::ce it implies tlat a non-vanishing total charge is iiduced in the vacuum. Indeed, i iormal evaluation of the total induced charge

zero'
rurd
vierd

!<i,an*,:;^1',1*-*'1lf

7p1a,,,i"a'lfd,ala-'
(A.4o)

:0,
of (fr(r)) as
with the cuEentvectorat an arbitrarypoint.The expression
;:1cethe operatorof the total chargecommutes

:
<i,ra>
fr,ff t e@r)F*,(r')do',

(4.41)

-here
AA
F",:7A,-74,,
dxy
dtp
: formally

(4.+2)

consistent rvith the result since

l1 <i,a>*,

:ti I *u,-* I G(x- r')Fp,(*')

d^'
Q,,
d

ln view of the theorem

(A.43)

(A'44)

[(o",Stav*fi"<"):0.

in
Horvever,it is evident that these formal manipulations are only justified if the integrand in (A.44)-decreasessuEciently rapidly
Jirrctions, which is not ful6ll"d fo, tire field strengths'ginerated by a chargi distributio.n of nm-vanishihg total charge'
rp"l"-fif."
'
total
which-the
This difficulty can be avoided by treating the actual electrimag"neticfield as the limit of a spatially confinedfield, for
to
inducedchargeis zero. A conveniint way tio accomplishthis is to introduce a finite light quantum mass,which is eventually allowed
vanish, We thus mite the potentials generatedby the given charge distribution as

t#
At@):! f D@- r,)r u@)da,,

: r,

a<o:2y*J-dffi<aa.

(4.4s)
(A.46)

The induced curent can then be exhibited in the form

: -#
da',
<ip@))
f G@-r)n''D@' x")Jv(r")da'

:#

*tc k'D(k)4 @- t)@'k)

(4)'
luyf " 6)

(A.47)

in which the secondversion involves the Fourier transforms of the functions, G(x) and D(r),

ptu'(p,+ * +f o -at)
(t - *) <o
GG):
:4*{ Ldr I

D(k):\:I#.

(4.48)

r96
8I7

III

ELECTRODYNAMICS

QUANTUM

The total induced charge can then be calculated in terms of the total external charge,
1o
which expression is independent

(A.4e)

Jlr-{)do,

Q:)
of f. Therefore,

( (d
*
lf <i rtr> r:9*o I G@k,D th)6 h) h)

:Y*oyEffi"at)r,-"
If e is placed equal to zero before evaluating
charge

the Fourier transforms at &ts:0, we obtain the previousiy

(A.s0)
computed non-vanishing

induced

:
6e:X'Qrc
@Dou-o
f;o f rao a'rt +*t

(A.s1)

On the_oth_er
har.rt,if the limiting processr-0 is reservedto the end of the calculation, rve evidently find A0:0.
The implicatio',s of this limiting processmay be further indicated by noting that, in the first term ot (e.:S), fu(r) will be replaced by
Ju@)-e'cA'(x)'

(A 52)

in virtue of the difrerential ecuation

[J,- ads*1: -!41,1

(A.s3)

obeyed by the potential (A.45). Now (A.52) reducesto Ju@) atany point as +0. Yet the total chargecomputed from (A.52)is zero.
This is illustrated by the chargedensity associated,accordingto (A.52), with a point chargeat the origin:

li''(ai4-'l1l'
.,0

(.{.54)

fit/

We may-concludethat in the processof'vacuum polarization, a non-vanishing,and indeed divergent chargeis attached to the original
charge distributiqn, and a compensatingchargeis created at infinity.
We shall finally apply the computational methods of this paper to evaluate the invariant expressionfor the electromagneticmass,

(D : -F2f tulD({- r,)s{')(r-f,,)+ D<D

6*c1,,
(r- r,)S(x- r,)fhr,!,
(r,)du,

(A.ss)

Theinsertionof the Fourierintegralrepresentations

yields

u*ur<,>:-qrfi ,.f (dk)(d.k)exn+*ta-."').y,atk'-*h,(!g:!9+f

9,)*aw,.

(A'.s6)

This becomes

-t
on introducing

k-o.v (t- k)- r,r(ry

*L,I rorro,eb Fe^

ffi)r aw

(4.s8)

Pp: kplkp',

wNch is efiectively subject to the restriction

(A.s7)

.pr+p:0,

(A.se)

2thu)du,
*16(k,-2 lk)- 6(k)1: - Jo
|' 6'(k2'
l?k-

(.{.60)

in view of the wave equation satisfiedby ry'(c,).Now

and

uGt Q - k) - x)tt:

whence

6 mi41'@=
^.

e r.-...- rt.
(dh)(dp)Jod,ueiee/)G^rh-K)6'(hr-2rku),1'@')da',
(WJ

in which we have employed the fact that lTpfr

trunsfolmation

is equivalent Lo Lr(d/Ot/)lr

(A.61)
(A.62)

applied to g(o,) and is thus efiectively equal to zero. The

kt*kr+PFlt

ttren yields
6nc,t (D :

- 2ti1 (t - h) +2K),

(4'63)

@k)(d.fi f I aastoa-a 1i,7pu - x)6,(kz! pu') l, (r,) da,

&1 f

: -

(n)
* rk) (r! u)6'(k ! au,),!,
**- J| [

(A.64)

Hence,

u*/*:-fif"'lt+u)duf @.k)6'(k
+r,uz)--fif

loulo'ro**,1+fifo'e,,+u")dudf
@k)6,,(k,+ca,),

(A.6s)

and

a*n:"ur^('sff-1.
according to tie integrals (A.33) and (A.35).

(4.66)

197

P o p e rI 8
On Infinite Field Reactions in Quantum
Field Theory
l'httts

S,\-rrrRo ]-oMoN^c^
.
lailit.t., l okro Baaliho Doieukr, 7 .kro, Jdloa
Jure r, rq$

thc level-shilt of the hyrJrogen atom in

f \ irilerpreting
I terms of the radiative reaction, Bether proposed a
method of dealing with this problem without touchitrg the
inherent divergency of the curreot quantum field theory.
By bis theory jt has lrccome possible to treat the problem
involving frckl rcactions for the 6rst time in cloe connFtion with the rcliablc cxErimental data. On the othcr
hand, Lewis2 and Epsteins analyzed the infiniries ccurring
cross-sction
in the radiative correction to the sattering
of an electron in an external field of force and found that
als the* infinities could be got over by means of a pro'
cedure similar to Bethe s. In a recent issue of the Psvstar
p6inted out that in these problemSchuiingel
Revrew,
n-as ueful, brthe mettrod oi caoonical transformation
wbich tlle separation from the fields of the parts belonging
was per'
eletrons
to free photons and non-radiating
formed, a method shich can be regarded as a relativistic
generalization of the preedure used by Blch and Nordsicki as well as by Pauli and Fierz6 in tle discussions
about the *lf-6eld of an electron.
Almost the same line of atbck was taken independently
authors also by our Tokyo group aod,
of these.{merican
mme results are now in course of publication in ourEnglisbl
journal, Progress oJ Theoreliol
Pfiysrcs' Irnder the un-,
favorable conditions after uartime, houeler, it qill be al
in print. So l'
long time before these papers *ill apper
should like to give here a brief summary of the state and
views of our investigations.
\Ye lirst treated the eff@t of field reactions in the collithe C-meson
sion problem on the/-field theory of Paist<r
theory of Sakata,3 *'hich had been developed by Sakata
to examiue u'hether this
independently of Fais-intending
r heory which had been put {or*'ard aiming at the eliminarion of.the infinitv mcurring in the slf-energy of charged
partjclcs, \\'as also cairable of cancelling out the in6nitv
closs section of an elrctron.
rrcurring
in the {altering
rva"
\\'c found that thii s'as reall)' the @se: the/-6eld
one part of the inhnitc
of
compensating
I,rured epable
reactions of the radiation field in this phenomenon. The
other part of infinities, that is, of the positron theoretical
by introducing]
origin, however, could not be elimimted
this new field.r
Then thd above mentioned rvork of Bethe dppeared.
Bethe's praedure
in a matheWe triedro to foimulate
more clo*d form by using a relativistic genmatilly
of Pauli and
eralization of the canonical transformation
an infinite term could bet
Fierz, By this transformation
Hamiltonian
density,
and
this
rerm, ue'
in
tbe
sparated
found, had the sme form as tbe mass term in the Diracl
equation, being bilinear in ,t'+ and, !- Because of its suuc- |
rure this in6nire lerm can be amalgamated into the mas.l
tem of the Dirac equation and one can reinterpret thel
elstron mass in such a way that the compound mass isl
just what we ob*Ne, corresponding to the idea of Bethe.l
'l'his
preedure
violates neither the invariance of the
cordition of the generalized
th@ry nor the integrability
Schr6dinger equation.rr In order to investigate the eff@tiveof infinity into the eletron
ness of ihis amalgamation
mass, we applied the method to the problem lying close
at our hand, i.e., tbe radiative corrrction to the *attering
cross wtion
of an elrctron,u We found this amalgamation
was in fact effative in eliminating the non-positron theorctical infinity in this problem, a fact that was pointed
.oilt indepndently by Lewis, It was alp sho*'n that the
inlinity of the positron theoretical origin could be elioicxternal potential
the *attering
,nated by, rcinterpreting
or l)y reinterpreting the elrctron chargc.
i'h! ,esult of ihe canonical translornratiou shoss ou rhc
other hand that there (curs an infinirl of another tYpc, u
tgm containing elctromagoetic
po.rential bilinearly. Be-

caus of this structu.e this infinity is to be attributed to

the vacuum polarization effcr [n or,ler to sec the role to
be played by this effect ln collision phenomena we analyzc(l
the innnities ccurring
in the e2-correction to the KleinNishiqa formula.rs In this problen, we found, besides thc
infinities of the'types meiltioned above, an inl-rnity which
is closely related to the above mentioned vacuum effect.
Infinity of this kind el be, in fact, driven away froor the
cross section when we substract beforehand thc inlinite
term of the vacuum type from the Hamiltonian.
But for
this subtraction we cannot find a reasoning so natuml and
plausible as that used in the case of mass-tlpe and chargetype infrnities, where the subtraction was considered as an
result
amalgamation. This is bcause it would-naes*rily
in-a drastic chaoge of the Maxwell equation for the
radiation.
A way out of this difficulty was suggebted:la it might be
possible to introduce some lields whiqh would give ri* to
the vacuun effect u'ith the opposite sign so that a conrpensation method similar to the /-6eld theory might be
used here, In fact, one 6nds, applying the same method,
6eld has this propert1.16 At
that a Pauli-Weisskop{
possibilitf is Lo consider, in the style of Dirac's
alterutive
theory of the classical electron, that the "original equation"
for the radiaiion contained, in the same way as the "original mass" of the electron, in itself an innnity with the
opposite sign so that, supplemented with the iqnnity
appearing as the result of the interaction, the equation for
the obsewable 6e1d baomes just of the Maxwellian forn.
The calculation of the level-shift of a bound electrol
was also undertaken,ld This work is not yet completed but
it was confirnred that the r'sult converges by virtue of ortr
subtraction prescription. \\'e fourrcl ftlrthcr, in agreelnclrt
rvith Schwinger, that a part of thc radiative correcLiotr'to
the energy can lrc interpreted as caused b1'an anotnalotls
mornent o[ the electrfir the tsislenoe of whit:lt harl been
cxpected by Brait.u
We hope that various postwar difficultics rvill soon be
settled atrd that our results will appear in print id the
near future.
I H. A. Bethe,Phvs Rev.72.339(1947).
t H- w. Lewis.Phvs.Rev.73, 173(194E).
r S. T. EDsrein,Phvs.Rev, 73, 177(1948).

lr.Ti::,;'SlillK'";,1il;ll'fn',,'"i'fl,'].,,*r'0.''.
No. J I (lr)txr'
.w. Pauli and M. tsierz, Nuovo Cimiento, 15.
t A. Pds. Phvs. Rev. 6E, 227 (1946)

l "; ",?5'-!:
Iii"; Lli""i il#?;"?# $'.?i\, *,. phvs.2.2t6.2tt

tt).till?r

t"-onasa,

*u

t*rure at the symposiuh on th th-e-oly

*ijTnl$tr#j;f;"*f
il
$ij*ti,:,:q,,':,:.
".

in.pros.
ll X: lli'.1'ti."il[1'f,'lli"R1'l1l;,nr, to bepubrished

umeswa E lne
I h@!. Phys. It was first Dointed.ou.lbv Sakata and
Narcva U;iversitv that the PaulLweiskopf 6eld giv6 rise.to a rFrne
to
tiva lilf-.nrd of a photon in coDtrast to a nesattve oqe auevrcum
.lrtron field and this would tsult in the comrnsaton ot tne
.fi(t mddond above
'. V- Nambu. to be Dubtisbedln Prog. Theor. Phvq
It G. Breit. Phys.Rev.72, 984 (1947).
.\'ulp oE thc Aboti Lcttt: lil rrailsmirliDg to the i'hysical
l{eview the acconrpaning review by Tomonaga of the remarkable work carried out in Japan in reent y@rs, there
is one trchnical note that may be helpful.
Tomonaga rernarks in the 6fth paragraph from the end
I that in addition to the infinite ternrs which may be recognized as contriloutions to mass and cbarge, there are other
infinities which appear, particularly in the corrections to
forrnula.'l'hese
the Klein-Nishina
have to do with the
familiar problem of the light quantum sdlf-energy. As long
experience and the recent discussions of Schwinger and
others have shown, the very greatest care must be taken
in evaluating snch self-energies lest, instead of the zerq
value which they should have, they give non-gauge'covariant, non-covariant,
in general infinite results. From
manu*ripts

kindly rent by Tomomga, I would conclude

that the difficulties referred to in this note reult from an
insufficiently eutious treatmeit, add therefore inadequate
identi6cation, of light quantum self-energies.
J. [t. OPPENHETMER
Inslitute Jor Advanced Sttd'y
Ptincelon, Nru Jersel

r98

P o p e rI 9

On the Invariant Regulafization in Relativistic

Quantum Theory
W. Paur,r aNu F. Vrr,r;,{ns
SwissFederal Institule oJ Technolog, Zurich, Swilzerland'
(ReceivedMay 10, 1949)
'llheformalmethodof regularization
of sumsof productsof differenttipes
expressions
of mathematical

of 6-functionsis first applied to the exampleof vacuum polarization, It is emphasizedthat only a regularization of the rvhole eipiession without fictoriation leads to gaugeinvariant results. It is further shown,
that for the regularizaiion of the expressionfor the magaetic moment of the electron, a single auiliary
mass is suftcient, provided that difieient functions of the same particle (e.g., the photon functions D and
f{r)) are regularizedin the same ray and that the regularization of products of two electron functions is
never factoiized. The result is then the same as that of using Schwinger'smethod of introducing suitable
panmeters as new integration variables in the argument of 6-functions,rvithout using any auxiliary masses.

by the argument tlat a time-like component of the

current commutes with 7, at ail points of a spaceJike
of the new relativistically
f N spite of many successes
general invariant
I invariant formalism of quantum electrodynamics,r surface.a The specialization of the
form of the commutator to this case, however, gives a
which is based on the idea of "renormalization" of mass
result proportional to
and charge, there are still some problems of uniqueness
left, which need further clarification. The most impor5ttt(s - yt ) (0 Lrtt/ 06),
tant one seemsto us to be the problem of the self-energy
which is indeterminate due to the singularity of
of the photon, which was raised by Wentzel's2 remark
ALD/A*, on the light cone, which has the form
that the formal application of Schwinger's original
-x"/(r"x,).
The whole expression may therefore be
technique of integration to the resulting integral gives
written as
for
this
self-energy.
from
zero
a 6nite result difierent
6(r)(r_x')(0L(L)/6*"),
.
This problem is formally contained in the more general
problem of the gaugeinvariance for the resulting current in agreement with the straightforward computation
due to vacuum-polarization by an arbitrary external (see below).
$2
field (not necessarilyby a light wave). Schwingershas
The occurrenceof products of functions with a 6-type
shown that this current is given by
singularity and with a pole is typical of the new formalism and seemsto be the main source of the remaining
ir
(i,(")) : - | dax' (li r@), j, (x') ])oe(* - .r'),1,*t (a'1
uniquenessproblems.
)J
In order to overcome these ambiguities we apply,in
the following the method of regularization of A-func*n"., .(r) : + t for I ] 0 ;,4,*i(r) is the vector potential
help of an introof the external field and (Ur("), j,(*')l)o is the vacuum tions (or products of them) with the
duction of auxiliary masses.This method has already
expectation vaiue of the commulator of 7u(r) with
j,Qc'),'Ihe condition for the gauge invariance of this a long history. Much work has beeh done to compensate
electron with the
expressionfor (j"(r)) (which includes the vanishing of the infinities in the self-energy of the
help of auxiliary fields corresponding to other neutral
the photon self-energyas a special case) is:
particles with finite rest-massesinteracting with the
aI axI (li u@),i,(r')l)oe(c- r') ) : 6'
electrons.t some authors assumed formally a negative
Schwinger tried to prove the validity of this condi- energy of the free auxiliary particles, while others did
not need these artificial assumptions and could obtain
tion, after reducingit to the form
the necessarycompensationsby using the difierent sign
j,(")l)
(Lj,@),
ol3e(x x' ) / ar,l: 0,
of the self-energy of the electron due.to its interaction
-ii.
Toiln"*", Prog.Theor.Phys.1, 27 (1946).J. Schwinger, with difierent kinds of fields (for instance scalar fields
Pbys.Rev.75,651(1949);Phys. ?s, vector fields). We shail denote these theories, in
Phys.Rev. 74,1439\1948);
are quotedin the following
Rev. 75. 1912(1949).TheseDaDers
as SI, SiI, SIII. Ou; nolationilbllorvascioselyaspossiblethosi which the auxiliary particles with finite masses and
of tbesepaoers.For t}e definitionsand the propertiesof the positive energy are assumedto be observable in princiwith I in SII),anilah)seeparticua, A: (A is idenrical
functions
entering the Hamilof SII. In t}rispapernaturalunitsh:c:l arc ple and are describedby observables
larlytheappendix
F. T. Dvson.Pbvs.Rev.75,486(1949),and
usei tbrodehout.
. SII. Eo. {2.29).
quotedas D[, and
1736(1949).In the following
Phys.Rev."75,
6Compaiefor olderliterature(includinghisowncontributions),
DU.
, G. Wentrel,Phys.Rev.74, 1070(1948).
A. Pais, The Dael.oDment oJ lhe Theory of lhe Eluhon (Princeton
, SII, Eq. (2.19).
University Press, Piinceton, New Jersey, 1948).
sl. INTRODUCTION

L7L

199
435

RELATIVISTIC

QUANTUM

roni4n explicitly as "realistic," in contrast to "formalistic" theories, in which the auxiliary massesare used
merely as mathematical parameters which may final1y
tend to infinity. Recently the "realistic" standpoint
was extended to the problem of the cancellation of
the singularities in the vacuum polarization, due to
virtual electron-positron pairs generated by external
fields, by introducing auxiliary pairs of particles with
opposite electric chargesand massesdifierent from tiat
of the electron.6 It was shown that the signs oI the
polarization effect allow compensation of the singularities only if the auxiliary particles are assumed to
obey Bose-Statistics. Until now it was not possible to
carry through the "realistic" standpoint to include al1
possible efiects in higher order approximations in the
fine-structure constant, nor is it proven that this
problem is not overdetermined. Presumably a consistent "realistic" theory will only be possible if, from
the very beginning, all observablesentering the theory
have commutation rules and vacuum expectation values
free from singularities, i.e., difierent from the A and
A(r) functions which obey a wave equation corresponding to a given mass value. Until now, however, it has
not been possible to carry through such a program.
At the present stage of our knowledge it is therefore
of interest to investigate further the "formalistic" use
of auxiliary masses in relativistic quantum theory.
This was done independently by FeynmanT and by
Stueckelbergand Rivier.6 The latter authors use (more
generally) an arbitrary number of auxiliary masses,
rvhile the former introduces only a single large auxiliary
mass, rvhich was sufficient for his particular problem,
the regularization of the self-energy of the electron.
From the well-known expansions of the A- and A(r)functions near the light cone it can easily be seen (see
$2) that in the linear combinations:
La(r):t,;

cA(r;M r)

and
[pttr (:c): f ; c;AQ(* ;M ;),
the strongest singularities cancel, if
Ltct:o'
and the remaining singularities (finite jumps and
logarithmic singularities) also cancei if in addition the
condition
lac;Mnz:g
holds. If the first condition alone is sufficient to guarantee the regularity of a certain result, it is obvious that
a single auxiliary mass M1 (besidesthe original electron
6G. Rayski,Acta Phys.Polonica
9, 129(1948).(Onlylieht

waves as external electromagnetic6eld are consideredin this

paper.) Umesawa,Yukawa, and Yamada, Prog.Theor. Phys, 3,
No. 3. 317 (1948).
7R. P. Feynman, Pocono Conference 1948; Phys, Rev. 74,
1439(1948).Applicationsby V. F. Weisskopfand J. B. French,
Phys. Rev. 75,'t24o \1949).3 E. C. G. Stueckelberg
and D. Rivier, Phys. Rev. 74,218 and
986 (1948).D. Rivier, Helv. Phys.Acta XXII, 265 (1949).

THEORY

massMs:1n) with cr: -40: - 1 is all that is necessary.

It should not be forgotten, however, that Feynman's
successin using a singie auxiliary mass in the problem
of the self-energyof the electron implies the assumption
that in the corresponding expressionsresulting from
the invariant form of perturbation theory the photon
functions D and Do) have both to be regularized
with the same atxiliary mass. (A formal alternative
would be to leave the photon-functions unchanged, but
to regularize the electron-functions A and A(r) with the
same auxiliary mass, or to regularize the whole expression without factorization and with one auxiliary mass.)
The application of the formal method of massregularization to the problem of vacuum-polarizationro
($4) shows that not only the use of a single auxiliary
mass is here insufficient, but that any regularization of
A- or A(r)-functions as separate factors leads to results
that are not gauge invariant. As was shown by Rayskirr
only the regularization of the whole expressionfor the
resulting current (without factorization) gives satisfactory results in this case. The formal use of continuous
mass distributions is here particularly suited to illustrate the connection between the difierent results of
Wentzel and Schwinger for the photon self-energy.
In $5 the example of the correction to the magnetic
moment of the electron, which is one of the main
results of Schwinger, is treated from the "formalistic"
standpoint of mass regularization. We agree with
Schwinger that the use of auxiliary m&sses is not
necessaryin this caseif the computations in momentum
space are made with sufficient care (see additional
remark A). In any case (difierent from the situation
in the problem of vacuum-polarization), the use of
a single auxiliary mass is here sufficient to avoid any
ambiguity, provided that the same mass is applied
both to the D and the D(r)-functions of the photon,
analogous to Feynman's method for the self-energy
of the electron, or that the regularization is applied
to the products of two A- and A(r)-functions without
factorizationr2 (seereference20).
'SII, Eqr (3.77)ancl(3.82).
roDyson(seeDI I) appliesto thisproblema methodof regularizationwittroutuseof auxiliarymasses,
whichis moresimilarto
the methodsusedin the earlierstaees
of oositrontheorv.
rr Rayskimadethis proposalin tle sunimerof 1948,iuring his

investigations on the photon self-energy of Bosms (see reference

6). With his friendly consent we later resumed his work and
generalizedthe method for arbitrary external fields (not nrcessarily
light waves).
u The problem of the magnetic moment of nucleons due to a
mesonicinteraction, which shows a closeanalogy to tie problem
of the mametic moment of the electron due to elecbomaenetic
interactionl is not treated in this DaDer.Stueckelbere-Rivieisive
(see relerence 8) a formula for'ihe masnetic moirent of-the
neutron which ibey cbaracterize as noileading to a defDite
uumerical value. A justification of t"hismay, in principle, be seen
in the fact that the most general form of regularization with
auiliary masses must always lead to an arbitrary value for
integnls of this tlpe. On the other hand tle mentioned general
analogy between ilie two eses makes it plausible that tbi same
mathdmatical methods which lead to an unambizuous definition
of tbe magnetic moment of the electron witl;ls
lead to an
unique definition of the value of the theoretical results for the
magneticmoments of tle nucleons(at least for rcalar and pseudo-

200
\\T. PAULI

AND

Both groups of authors (Stueckelberg-Rivier8 and

Feynman-Dysonrs) seem to ascribe to a particular
combination of A-functions, which describes outgoing
waves for the future and incoming waves for the past,
an important or even fundamental significance.As this
question can be left open for the purpose of this paper,
rvediscussDyson's expressionfor the magnetic moment
of the electron, in which the function A" for the electron
and D" for the photon alone occur,la only in a brief
additional remark (B; $5)' We believethat in order to
investigate the range of applicability of the particular
function A", the discussion of more complicated examples rvill be necessarY.
Summarizing, one must a.dmit that the additional
rules rvhich the "formalistic" standpoint has to use
(e.g., to apply the same mass values for A- and A(r)futiciion., ind not to factorize the regularization of
prod.ucts of A- and A(1)-functions corresponding to
pairs of charged particles) could be immediately underitood from the "realistic" standpoint and appears as if
borrowed from the latter.15 It seems very likely that
the "formalistic" standpoint used in.this paper and by
other workers can only be a transitional stage of the
theory, and that the auxiliary masseswill eventually
either be entirely eliminated, or the "realistic" standpoint will be so much improved that the theory will not
contain any further accidental compensations.
$2. THE BASIC CONCEPTSOF REGULARIZATION
In an invariant perturbation theory, such as the one
introduced by Schwinger into quantum electrodynamics, the trvo invariant functions, A and A(t), play
an essentialrole, Vacuum expectation values of properly
symmetrizedproducts of field operatorsare expressed
in terms o14{t), rvhile A appearsin connectionrvith the
covariant formulation of commutation rules.
The handling of espressiollsinvolving A- and Air)K
lI
Case, Phys. Rev. 76, 1
scalar mesons). \Ieanthile
'from invariant.perturba1 1 Q 4 Q, o h t r i n s a n u n a m h i q u o u s r e s u l t
rion lheory) for the maenelic nucleon momenls lvhlcn--agrees
t h o s e o f L u t r i n g e r r - H e l v . . P h y s .A c t a X X I , 4 8 J
io*pt"r"t1:sith
1 1 o 4 8 1 ) .H e d o e s n o l g i v e t h e d e l a l l s o l h l s e v a l u a t l o n o l t n e
inteeiils, for which no auxiliary masses are needed.
'to-out"
DI and Dll The lunclion in question is denoted
riLh D. bv Stueckelberg-Rivier, with Dr L,y Dyson and uith Ar
(asi.
ii'e use the n-otation A" and ,. lor lhe corresponding
hv
eiectron and photon functions respectivell'.
la DI. Section X. formula for l.
16The interesting problem of the "self-stress" of the electron
rsee A. Pais. relerince 5: in-an unpubjished letter of last.year
Pais gave the result thal in the lheor)'ol holes tne value oT tnls
s e l f - s i r e s si s f i n ! t e , n a m e l y a / 2 n a t ( a : f i n e - s t r u c L u r e c o n s t a n t l .
but not zero, as special relativill reqrtires lor the.lotal stress ot a
closed system) may lhrorv more light on lhe relallons betseen
rhe t$o strndDoints. Detailed calculations by one ot us (F'v )
cave the result lhat a formal regularization nith auxiliary masses
Eoes not change the 6nite value of Pais for the seli-stress: one
to consider the localization of energy in
has therefore iithe,
ipace und rime as a non-physical concept in quantum lheory and
to admit only the energl-momentum ve'lor {whIch.ls alreaoy
inteerated ouer space timel, or one has to ascrihe to the compens a t i i g a u x i l i a r l m a s s e sa p h ' s i t a l r e a l i t y s u c l t t h a t t h e i r c o n t r i
b u t i o n t o t h e s t r e s s i r l h c i n t e r n l e d i a t e s l a t e s c o m D e n s a t e sl h e
othr part of the self-stress of the electron.

F.

436

VILLARS

functions exhibit some characteristic difficulties, which

may be summarized as follows:
(a) The occurrence of indeluminale
eipressrons as a consewith
qu"n." oI the coincidence of the d-t'?e singularity of Ak)
a properly defined
Only
the pole of A(t)(t) on the light cone
limiting process may give them a definite meaning'
(b) ihe necessity of taking into account, in the course of the
calculation, the "covariance" oI some diverging (however formally
too
covariant) expression in order to'split ofi a 6nite part'.This
may be done'in a proper way only after these expressions have
process.

been made finite by a regulariation

Sinceboth dificulties are connectedwith the singular

features of the A- and A(r)-functions on the light cone,
an invariant elimination oi these singularities may be
helpful in an attempt to escape the above-mentioned
complications. Looking for such a device, one is guided
bv tle dependenceof A and A(r) on the rest mass of the
.o.t".pottdittg field. This dependenceis exhibited in the
integral representations:

Ao)(r) : - (m,/ zfl

!,

al (1/ 4o)1, (la)

da sinl)wz.

A(x): \n2/4r2)|

(lb)

do cosl)tm''o+(l/4")J,

Jo

where

(2)

)t: -ttpxc*,*

which show that both A(D and A are of the {orm:

m2'Ju(\n'2).
From this it follows that 6-t]?e singularities (6(\))
and f,rst order poles (1/I) are independent of ar',
whereas finite jumps and logarithmic singularities are
proportional to zz'. Since these are the only types of
iingularities occurring in A and 6<tr, the! may be
u,rJid"d by introducing the regularized invariant functions An and Afto) is'
Ap:!;

5*trt:l;cA6(Mr),

(3)

cA(M),

where c; satisfiesthe conditions:

(I)

I; cr:0

(Ia)

Z; c;M;2:O'
In order to exhibit more clearly the effrcacy of these
conditions we give the development of A(D and A for
small tr (omitting all terms vanishing for tr:0):
1 t-)

A,r'(r)::l-fn,
4kt \

lllz

log11,n
t r' ) r - ^ - + "
z
2

or,r:1{aor+
(I. )"or}
,-(r):{l}
* l. thJfoilo*iog ta: ias= iJ.

for r?0.

t1

(4)

201
437

RELATIVISTIC

It is easilyseenthat Aa vanishesfor tr:0, such that

L,(x): - 2e(x)h,(x)

without factorization):

no:

is regularizedtoo. Ap(D,however,takes the value

1
-l;crMi2logM;
4r

THEORY

QUANTUM

anpl*1n1A(t)(K/),
ro)(();A(x,),D(())
6' :

for tr:0.

(71216)\,

or we may also regularize F only with respect to the

D-function referring to one tlpe of field, e.g.:

It is the meaning of the regularization prescriptions

that the first term in the series (3) represents the
non-regularizedfunction itself, i.e., that

Fp :

I d x p 1 r 1 F 1 A\ n( t) , D i l , ( K ) ; A ( r r ) , D ( ( ) ) .
J

Whenever in this latter caseF is linear with respect to

the D-function to be regularized, (9) reduces to (3)
and that all M; (i)0) shouldfinally tend to o (accord- (i.e., the introduction of individually regularized Ding to the "formalistic" standpoint, adopted in the functions), but implies the important additional rule
following). The coefficients rr need hereby not remain that the same regulator p(r) has to be applied to both
finite. We shall, however,imposethe condition
D and D(L). If, on the contrary, F is bilinear with respect
to the field in question, all these bilinear terms have to
(
l
c
;
l
(
6
)
Li
/an')-O
be regularized without factorization and with the same
regulator. In this latter case the conditions (I'), (I'a)
rvhich ensuresthat
are then, in general, not suficient to remove all singuif only
Li cF(Mr2)-O
larities from (9). They eliminate however the strongest
lM;'zF(Mt2)1(,4 for all l)0.
ones,especiallythoseof the tlpe 6(I)/\.
The rule (9), interpreted in the above-explainedsense,
For the purposes of a general discussion it may
sometimes be advantageous to replace the discrete will be adopted in the follorving throughout. It is this
spectrum of auxiliary masses by a continuous one rule that assuresthe gauge invariance of the polarization current in the problem of vacuum polarization(including,or course,the discreteas a specialcase):
in contrast to the resultsof (3).
fto
One may object that this prescription sufiers from a
(7\
Ae(x,: I
d(pf(rA(rini. erc.
lack of uniqueness,but this apparent deficiency affects
J__.
only the massand chargerenormalization terms. Hereby
we mean, more precisely, that after mass and charge
where x has the signification of the square of a mass.
terms have been removed, all additional corrective
The conditions(I, Ia) now read:
terms shall beindependentof the way they are regularized,
and.shall, of course,be i,ndefendentof lhe Paramelersci
(r') and.
(or pt(x)+O f or any fnite r).
M; i.n the lim.i.tM
"+a
This is not the caseif in the form F, (9), the individual
summands are regularized independently and difier(r'a) enily:
Ian*r1r1:0.
co:1,

Mn: 7n

Io-ou':o

On writing
the form

p(x) as 6(x-m2)+pl(K)

condition (6) takes

F:FrtFzj

fr
F R : I d K p " ( K ) F : ( x ) f* d r p o ( x ) F z ( x ) ;
JJ

n*
,

dK( plK)t

x)-0.

a)o

(81

J d

An alternative possibility of regularization is contained in the prescription

Fp:

f
J

a quite arbitrary result may then be obtained, as will

be shown later on (see $5, additional remark C). The
charge and mass terms themselves, however, depend
on the way they are regqlarized, since they depend on

l;cilogMi
d x p ( x ) F ( A ' r ' ( xA) (. r t )

(0,

ivhereF representssome (bilinear or higher order) form

in A, A(r), dL/il\, d!a) /d1,.
The use of the prescription (9) needs further explanation: The form F may contain both A-(electron)and
D-(photon) functions. We may then either regularize
the expressionF as a whole (both A- and D-functions

,,

droQ)log*.

(10)

In connection with the use of the Fourier-integral

representationof A and A(t) (as in (1a, b)) for computational purposes, it is convenient to have conditions
(I', I'a) expressedin terms of the Fourier transformed
o f p ( x ):

n1a1: a*p1r1r-,
f

(11)

202
W. PAULI

The conditions(I', I'a) then read

(r")

R(0):0
R'(0):0

F.

AND

(I"a)

Sometimes it may be convenient to separate the

electromagnetic field (and its sources)from the system
under consideration and treat it as a given (c-number)
field :,4 u"*t(r), satisfying :

whilethe integral(10) is transformeditito

-f,f.-Lu'o'''
(e(o):41

438

VILLARS

s121,.*tp6):_J,."r(r).

(21)

As before, "states" are represented by a time-inde-

(10') pendent state vector Vr and a transformation formally

for a?0)'

S3. THE INVARIANT PERTI'RBATION THEORY

analogousto (19), introducing V5, exhibits the change,

induced by the presence ol Ar'*t, in the expectation
value of an operator O.
The transformation zr, (19), shall be written, more
precisely, as
(22)
xa(t):rist(t)Nfi-is2tt)N2"''

Let ,tt(r), 0@):{*@)9 be the quantized operators of

the electron field and ArQc) the four potential representing the radiation f,e\d,.{,0 and Au arc supposed where S1(l) is thought to remove the first-order coupto satisfy the equations of the uncoupled fields:
ling, Sz(l) the remaining second-orderinteraction, etc.
Between these steps may take place renormalization
(12)
lt,@/ar,)-tm)*:0,
transformations 1f, defining new matter field operators
(12a)
@p/ax)1"-nQ:0,
which obey equations with adjusted mass.
According to this program, 51 is defined by:
(13)

l)'A,:0,

Sr:_E

(14)

(0An/6r,)*(t):0,

leaving for V1 the equation of motion

and accordingly, obey the commutation relations:

(1s)

l A r @ ) , A , ( r ' ) f : i 6 , , D( r r ' )

i@vt/ail:0/2lsr,El*..')!rr.
Sz:i/2lsr,

- x')
) | : -s "a@
W"(r),0p@'
1/ a
: . 1 t , ^ - - m \I a ( r - r ' ) .
j\

lA,a1: 13-3a,

dr,

I A ,B l : A B + B A .

a:o+r[s,,o]-;[S'[s',o]l+ds,,ol
^t

o0):o(r)+rI atlu@,s(ul
J_

f
| d3xjr(x)A,(x)

:-;rla'*OG)tg,G).A,kt.

fr

ft

-+ | dl I d{,lHa')wu"
),a(t)ll
JJ
(18)

J
The solution of (17) may be achieved in successive or
approximations by a set of unitary transformations:
{/:e-ds1(t)ilrr:e-ial(,)e-tsr(t)V2: ' . .: U0)Vx,

(24)

Restricting ourselvesto this order of approximation,

a transformed operator fl, according to (20), may be
written as follows:

(17)

Herein fl representsthe interaction energy:

-

E*u

i/21s,,Hl.

The auxiliary condition (14) involves the state vector

!I, of the system, whose equation of motion is given by

H:

Hl-

leading thus to a state vector V2 which is constant in

time up to and including terms in e2,provided a mass
( 1 6 ) renormalization has taken place, removing .8""11from

"o

i(av/at):Hv.

(23)

Then

(19)

where Vr is time-independent in the desired approxi

mation and thus representssome "free-particle"-state.
The change in properties of an operator O referring
say to the field o, due to the interaction of a with the
vacuum of the field D, is then expressedin the vacuum
expectation value (with respect to 6) of the transformed
operator fl:
(20)
(fi)"."(6): ({/-ror)"*(b).

r' ti
I
+ i I dt'l-[s,(/'1,H (t')l- H,(/),{t(t)|
JL2J
fr

o(r):a(r)+i I dtlH (/ ),{t(t)l

J

- | at | (t/'lH\t")lH(t'),a(t)ll
JJ

-i

,JtlH'(t'),a(l)}.(2s)**

** f*Ut
i. this latter form a simpliflcation due to Schwinger
has been used, which employs Jacobi's identity.

203
;,i9

RELATIVISTIC

QUANTUM

With the help of the commutators (15), (16) and the

:::rived relation:
: : t) y +l'(r), 0 @') t',1,@'))
: 1/ i 10Qc)"Y
PS (n - t' ) t

respectto the gauge transformationAu-Au*(0h/0rr)

grves
a

f l:
k' )

-'0 @')t"S(r'"l,
- rh''t'Qc)|, (zo)

::.e transformed operator Q is easily evaluated. To

-,:\'e its expectation value for
a definite state (for
_:stance the vacuum with respect to one of the flelds
---question) we need still know the vacuum expectation
.:lues of the properly symmetrizedproducts:
(l A,(x), A

( a- { )
" ( x ') l ) , : 5 , , P u t

(27),

{{"(r),fre@)l)o:_J"r{r)(*_o/).

dt'\lH"-t (t'), jp('il)o

: -4e
J

'.rhere

I dir.'A,,r.r-.r'rrd.\,,1.r,,r,

which requires:
0K,"(t)

:o

(33)

or,
In momentum space,where (29) reads:

(j ,(p)): - 48K,,(?)A ,(p),

t d a xK' , " ( x - x ' ) A" " * t ( x ' ) ( 2 9 )

K*(p).p":0.

(.33)

On writing:
K,,(1,) : K tpQ,+ K 25,,pxpx.
Equation (33') is equivalent to the condition
Kt: - Kz

j,(r,)])oe (r- x,).

J y""t(1,): (6,,hh - ? u?) A,.*' (?),

condition (36) assuresthat:
<je(D):4dKJ

(30;+xx

61 e'

(b) The d-radiative correction to the expressionfor

:ie current associatedwith the matter field, According
:r (25) this correction is contained in
Fl

An evaluation of K'
and (28) gives:

nl'

'arsn..,,1t),
j,(r)1. (31)

The one particle part (for the defnition of the concept

f the one particle part of an operator, see SII, page
'i 1) ot A,j
r@) includes a term of the form

iu(d (r) : con51.t (i' @)ow,t'@.)),

$4. VACUUM POLARIZATION AND

PITOTON SELT'-ENERGY
In this section the tensor Kr,@-r,)
(30) shall be
.:vestigated. Invariance of the induced current with
*** The factore(c-r') is introducedby writing:
Ft

?F

fb
J -d( : +J- dl 4t_/\ +LJ _ d(.,

ie secondintegral vanishes,if no real transition is induced by

.re external field.

ltu

0x, 6ru

-t,(;

#-

n'^u'^).(3sa)

From the expansions(4, 5) it follows that this expression

is indeterminate on the light cone, due to terms of the
type d(I)/I, and the relation (33) yields, on account of
(I2-ryr)a(r):0,

(fr-zr)A:

- d(r)
;

0K,,(r)
__UO,',r,rr,

(s2)

:escribing an anomalous g-factor of the electron.

aa da(r)

3r,

(37)

F*t(lt).

with the help of relations (26)

dA dac)

K,,(x):-.-+-.-

- | ar I at'6a9")lH(t').j,(x)fl)nn*
-i,(x):
'JJ_
"*

-;

(3s)
(36)

K,,(r- r') : -1D,(x),

(.i4)

the condition (33) is equivalent to

(both Kr and Ke are still functions of the invariant prlr).

Since ,4u"*t and the current -/r""t generating- ihis
external field are connected through

^t

(2s)

.{s exampleswhich wili be discussedlater on, we give:

(a) The current induced in the (matter-) vacuum by
:r external electromagnetic field lu"*t, or its source
_: ert. The desired approximation is achieved with Sr
:rd yields immediately:
',rx : i
D

THEORY

0r,

6xu

which is indeterminate, too.

fn momentum space,where K", is given by
Kp(p\:

7 7
6(hxhxlmr)
---l 2k"k,- k"b,
, d4h-:-,( . h x -p ^ ) r l m ,
(2n)rJ
-k,p,-

6,"(- kxpxlkxkx*mr)l

(JSb)

this ambiguity is less manifest, since

Lf

K,,(p).p,:-'
dokku6(k^hx+nr)
( 2 r ) aJ

(39)

204
W.

AN D F'

PAULI

440

VILLARS

(hereby terms of the form 6(kxkx*n2)'(kxkx*m2) have

been omitted), an expressionwhich may well be put
equal to zero lor symmetry reasons' Since, however,
(r,(p) is represented by a divergent Fourier-integral,
this property may be lost in the course of a direct
computalion of Ku,. Note that conditions (I,I a) are
just those necessary to make the integral (39) convergent !
An evaluation of K", is most conveniently done with
the help of the Fourier-integral representations:16

respect to a and B) with

5ot(p):216(kxkxlm2)

It is at this step that our regularization device comes

by R(afp), acinto play,
-to replicing expli(atfin*)
by
(9) and (11), and m'zexpli(a!ilm'f
cording
(l/i)Ri(q+p).v The regularizedEq' @2) reads then:

rt,
dae:ytlio(hft1ln'?tl
|

(40r

J_

1
^(k): Phxkx*m2
:t
f-

(P:principal

12

x*(n:

+fz,yJJ

e(a{B)

- .,,r),,,ru,.
dadtstetu)

qA

ll

-2oF

x expli;P^P^+ i {" +F)nr'

ll r* r,P,P,
'

/ oA
*,_ \ l (+z)
+a,"(,"*rp^p^_
;u) l.

xo,*,:

12

or2,yJ J

e(a*0)

dada(e,"\+'e(0
)("+Bf

,*r(oLt^o^){ff;r"*ur

l 1)
l * ' o \ r @ , e x p [ r 0 ( [ ^ a ^ * n ' ) (- 4

7 (- p,p,-r6r,Pxe) - u,"l#il,erl rR(a* d)

value). After introducing a new variable

h,: k_ (F/"_til p

-iRl"+B)ll
ri!@j9)
qla

and wrur

Jl

f
= (ir'?/a'\e(a)
I d a f re x P l l a k ^ & n )
J

Expressedin terms of the variables

z:a*g

y: tlz("- il,
: - 6,,(12/ 2o3\e(a)'
l,la k k,h " e-rp(iafr^A^)
we are left

(after

symmetrizing

which give
e(a)!e($:16(2)
with

the integrand

16' lYl=r'

and 0 elsewhere;and
dad'P:llz)dzd'Y

16S. T. Ma tPhys. Rev. 75. 1264 r lq49rt has evaluated.Ku,(p)

bv means oi elemeniary momenlum-space lntegrauons, uslng tne
ar" to Pauli and Rose (Phys'. Rev. 49, 462 (1936)) His
due lo tie
"i.if'.J
results are neither gauge nor Lorentz-invariant.
ot an additionaI constant lerm I- in his expression Ior
oiiiin."
kii ti: l, 2, 3). As a consequence, this term appears also )n the
lrace of Kr,:
-3PPPrKr+31'
Kw:

Ka(!') reads:
12 f-t
f+*dz
f z
I
- e ( z )e x p l ; - ( l - y ' ? \ P x f x f
K a,u",: | ay |
r
*
2
4(2n)al-,
I
l-,rP
x l R(r)j(I2

whereas, according to (35) and (361 K-"u should be proportional

1o (papg). But it is easily shovn thrt the lntroductlon ol a regucalculations makes the addirional lerm r vaoish.
i.t.i''ii'nir
lndeed, we have

1-y2

r
1l
-u,,I^a>
,xtx* n@-iR'(z)ll'(43)
n

(xrrrn-{2r,,;,.,../'d,aar&rartttttff
4o**rr-r).

r? It may DerhaDs be helpful to show how a factorized,regulator

a".trcyi gitige iniariance. Taking a discrele spectrum of auxiliary
masses, we have:

It iollows for a time like vector (px: o,iPi :

: pe'(2r)-32,
(K11)3
",[r'ffi ffi,
_zrz,t
"2,c,!"ff

p,p,-l 6pPxPx)

aK n.- :2r',tlLi 14,,6'u

1 1,4
r'a,i*f
i'' 'Ld+
-!'r,,*,o,o,"'r-araa-4/)

6x'
[o,:(ft,+,4/r,7r].

It is this second term tlat destroys covariance and gauge invariance: but since it can be written as

- (r / (2r)3)D
; c;(I( - trM i')x -we see that it vanishes ou account of the two conditions

OXt

-,u,a,airi"'}
: zc,c,t
u ,;- .vtt
. { MgA.
,dxp o,u,
oxp )
,--.-/Y

(I, Ia)'

which never vanishes identiellY.

e^!

205
I

l 1

RELATIVISTIC

OUANTUM

fhe contribution of the last term in the bracket may

:e rvritten as
rJ

o*1

_.a,"t

-':T)'

:inr,whi,chgives,

J-r

ttze(z)

.J-6

Ed{',:q/2T.m2/lkl

- 2in2

f',

ADDITIONAL RXMARKS

- ilf

r R(z) f

(A) In (38') we may be tempted to omit t}re term

o&uu*J-,0'\; )," tz,f'rol' (44)

-{ccording to our regularization condition (I,,a) this

'erm is equal to zero
and we are therefore leit with an
erpression that has the required form (compare (35)
and (36)):
K o t, o (?) : K r(p^!^) | p,! _ 6u,?xhl
"
rrhereK1 is given by:
_ r, f+* dz

Et(P^lx\:

I / Ih I

which is exactly Wentzel's result,

":lY*'lfo-rt^^ll
:

together with

J dsrlA,(*). A r(r)fnn-orn:
for a photon of momentum I

n*-

,tyl

THEORY

-'htn p1

nr* J--

6G!'+*')
re): f d,h
,t

(hy- p^)ry rnz(hxkxlnz)

which means putting A(r)(-ar!io)(O+mr\o)(r))

equal to zero, or its regularized counterpart:
J

drp(*)tt*;K)(-!rA("(r.

()+d,r)(r; x)):0.

(47)

An evaluation of Ia(p) along the lines of the above

calculations yields:
'l

f z
y,
f*tl_
fz
I
: f{t f+'dz
-Y'tP^?^f'
* J-,0';"*nl'-rr
(4s)I *(p) - J-, o,J_. - <d *p[i(l -l)p^p^j
The first term in the expansionof (45) in powers of
21pr,
K1Q2p):6r<ot:,?xp^,Krt tn. . .

-l

1
J

.JQ

rr+* dz
-e(ztR(z\
*iPxPxl dyyl

l-

!,G)R(z).

zTr_a

JIJ^Z

(46)

x""vfio-rtr^o^f

T!i1 may again be expressed,according to (10) and

1 0 ' ) ,a s
a

ni*

6r: : I dxp(x)toglxl.
JTr _a

(46',)

The connection with Wentzel,s result for the photon

self-energy is now most easily established. Since the
ield of a light wave is not connected with any current,
j,(r))t"o vanishes according to (37), unlessK' has
rroi
:he.required form (35), (36). From (43) and (44) it is
nade clear that in this case the induced current is
siven by
(r,(r)),"o : - 4r". -!P'
(2,)n

Q1A u,^d(*).

The photon self-energy,defined as

(ph)

"",,:

dsxl(i,(x)t;^aA
u , . d( r ) 1 ,n r -o n n

.lecomesthus:
(phj

e2

r: - (
",t

- i R'0)
)

"L(:++e^p^)oaxo'otf

sives the charge renormalization (compare (37)):

6e:aexio':--

t*yz

l/_2

i l r l A , * d ( r ) . . 4 u " . d( r ) . l ,o r _o o n .

(48)

dtR\z)
ffl
f'f z
- tl t^t^t l
exvfltr
J_,o,J_. dze(zt
l:
]l

+f

f+^ dz

J--

f*r

^ 4 2 ) R 't( z ) dl y

Z'

dt

iz

|
t\l
-0 - f) p,p^
x;f r(/ t -..rLl) |
:2R'(0)+0:0

on account of (II"a).

Thus it may be seen that the identity (47) holds only

because of olr.r slronger regularization condition. It is if
special interest to mention that it holds lor a zero
vector (2r2r:0) only if the limit lrA+0
is carried
through after rhe integration. Purting 2^p^:0 ;r.,71o;,
(48), from the very beginninggives rise to an additional
term

[_*-*10,yr14"1*1,1

Since.R'(0) is.zero, the regularized photon self_energy In consequence

of this the non-regularized expression
','anishes,as it should;
without regularization R,(-0) 1(0)- becomes then inf.nite, whereas
1a(0) is ziro only

20,6
W,

PAULI

iI we put:

Ilo,/,'),1,)^{"):o

442

F. VILLARS

AND

the
If, in the second, divergent integral we introduce
regu)ator
sbecial
(49)
| /r
\l

i 'l - - r l l
R(z):1-exP

or

/a*p(*)*

t o g l ^ :l 0 .

(49')

\?@o

/ -l

(which satisfies(r"): R(O):o' but not R'(0):0)'

obtain

-ma1d:,/-t'-t'
-";J:'t''(*o(;'TlHYT,ffiffi:I;,ffilff11$'.*:i:l'#
)-""
thecasep^pi:0 r. a limiting
to consider
morenaturat
noo-r"ro vector' than to introducethe new and thus
;;.;"i;

we

\ ozd II
):E^tl;,\

'"?$'itil$?;itllt*'ltailbrieflvconsiderttrecase.or
tm:3nal2r(lloell/"v'ol**)'
';;,
(SIl
resutt
^(1)(p),
Schwinger's
A(&),
is
;
which
r"
,h:"ffi;;-J.rt".gy.
3fir,(j;l/J;" oo**_
reads:
Aaa
op"'"to.
lt'"
;i;),li;(pi
rn rhis
L. by Feynman.T
,-t*:Hl:1ililT:'T*.t

5*:!_ J a^n6rn+*t

*' ) r+
6(Drfrr) d((&r*gr)'*ru')
a^:- ^')
(##h*uttu'*;1i'^
)
(k^lq)'*m'
"

p(x);
aresuraror
iffi)';ffi"fiff1"".1',.,1,,#j:'-duce

into
This expressionis readily transformed

(tnt)n:

Ln (x),
d.xp(x)

and

-)"-r["(?)'] .
!4"1
*:# [_'_"
[','ar3

-""
am(x)::J-,,"t-',',
t
rila r+t

f1,

"""o["(ir'+''.(?)')
*illlxl'i"".J.1.1;"'lu3;"'1l"o,tJ;i:'::i,"x"li"i
mass

qi'T:ii:,':;#1J1"''(il;
(xisadimensionress
i:t*'frlg:;*yil':""#*"',"'",i.J-i:iil:'i
,:i
the
here'
in tr'"1*""'""'la"red
x; it follows
used;

'rft:'.nfk

R(z)pieviously

iT':fit"fril'ltti:*g

tha'i
i,ffif thererore
;:-"*:'at.:;1fi::?'*":1
*"'"',-*&Tiil

#Jlp"na.n,of

-,,"*(i' +rr+(7)' )
o*(-,: + I.'o,1,
l#ili#'*stu.n'"'x{;*
"^::+i',,a-,t
:# I-'*'-sx]-1)2.(1#;h
!dr<a("*["(?)']-")
Arz shall now be written as

-me
:-.F(()
8r

- 11.
or1..
* Y [ ! <a,," o14
!*'
no regulator is
Since the first integra'l converges)
int-toau."a. With the help of the formula
f+"
- e;')
{a"/
log I a I : - t"
"l,tz)(ek'
J _^
we have at once:

- @o
t a,)fn a,a- rt r.r(7)' : s't''' /+'1

-liThl

of the evaluatton
rltu"tion is exactlythe samein the.case

r(1
1-to*+r(x);*o(x)

F(-):16
x))1'
"*--t+o(1"*-)
With the helP oI one auxiliarY mass:

,ra:ua>-u(--Y)
then
which is sufficient to satisfy (I'), we obtain

4fJ."*ull"lf
il"l#;:it;f
;:i:::x";-:?'i#"li:ii:""::
(which corresPondsto (49'))
2i ctM;tlogMi:0
is again consideredas the
is made, unless this particular ese
limiting care of a non-zero vector'

;"fi;;it;;

*:#("+.:)

which is FeYnman's result'

207
+43

RELATIVISTIC

The d radiative correction A,

given by (31) may be written as

to the current, as

F(pxp) -.
dnq,alp+q6,u1qt
( 2 r \ a JI
1
+G(?t/l)f

^,
I a'q"1pa6rrra(q),
"(2r)al

(50)

:ere u(q),a(q') are the Fourier-amplitudesof ry' and

f respectively,and 1Ie"): + (1F7'-.y,^t p).
Foi small values of p, i andG may'be developedin
powers of 2r2r (note that I is the difierence in momentum ascribed to f and ry',respectively). Whereas F(0)
describes again a charge renormalization, the term
correspondingto G(0) exhibits an extra current, which,
in r-space, has the more familiar form.(32), and de_
scribes the radiative correction to the ele^ctron,smagnetic moment in a homogenerius
externalfield.
From the well-known-decomposition
of the current
due to Gordonre
izu(p! dlru(q):

(fDl is the bracket in (53).) Since

[D]
the two parameters g and q,, or on

depends on

and, Q:q,tr,,
!:q,_,1
7", and V may be written as:
"
T : 6 o* F,P,I t+ Q
",
",1
"Q,I 2
y,:e"Jz.

ln

)j,(p):

THEORY

OUANTUM

!5. TITE MAGNETIC MOMENT OF TIIE ELECTRON

e/2m[(!u{2q,),i,(p* flu(q1
h.a(P*dttu^tu(q)l

All invariants thus introducedare still to be considered

as functions of pr2r (the invariant prQr reduces to the
with thehelpof (51)
3m"t*r913;-(4m',*?xpx))'
a(q')I Qu(q):2ina(q')u(q),
we obtain from (54) and (55):
.iea

a(q)v'pu(q):0

;,t-zi*ltztr(p)-Jr(il)ha(p+(lnru^)a.(q)+-^/p
\zrr
'
thus
yielding

.2me"
C(^h,\:_t)r
u\p^px.:
- -\:tt(f)*Jz0))

and, accordingto (52):

@: e/ar:1/137)

(st)

it is seenthat the radiative correctionto the masnetic

moment may be expresseain terms ;i;;
;;;;";i;;" "
g-factor

(ss)
(55a)

as:-4m'/r(2lz(0)-Jz@))(o/")'

(56)
.
The computation_of the integrals involved in 1z and J:
be carried through in difierent ways. A regular3"{

^g:- @m/e)G(o)
(s2)ffi":;j:nT.
,
,ll",ffi:"if,:ia,:1
i};;n"y"iiiTiT
cluctionof a specialcoordinate
system,characterizedb1,

sincetlre unperturbedelectronis character.izedlly

g:2.
The relevant terms of (31) (containingG(Apr)) can be
rvritten as follows:

p:t),
in which

e:fu,2im)

ff

Iz(0):r/ m'(TtrTu), Jz(0):(1/2m)vt' (s7)

-(ie3/2)
a'ga',1{'Q*t?"[D(6-?)S(f).rrSo1-r,
J| J|
The most convenientregularizationmethod is that
*D(E-a15<')16;?,,S(-?)
whichregularizes
[D] asi*rr"r.,
(lDf)o:Lo colDfn
+r(l)(f -?)S({):'-s(-dl"yV@+d

or,in momentum
(writing
space
q, forp!q),
ie3

-:-to'l
(2")t

t1$:::ti:-",:L"f]#.lH..JflTjionoof

r:k/m,

I a,naS7.SSD61a,&-q)L;o(k-q,)
J

*Dt1,(k)6.(k-q)L(h-q'tlu(q) (s.t,
where
9,(k):2;p,1;n.p-m)-2i(qu,!qt)(it.k)l-tp.

10Compare Handbuch der Physik XXIV/I.

23S.

r
( 1 ' ? ( 0 ) ) R-:

f,
J0

I?.-flrz 2.1_e.:rl,.r:r
--"
r'atI'''{;,"
}rss

(J,tI)JR:L
*art,r*1.
f"
2m2Jo
o'2gl'"

Let us introduce

v": a,nn,So1.
I

a;:(lfr:fp;?)l

we are led to:

+D\t\'t'(k-q)6,(h-q')

r,,: a'nn,n,1o1
!

pi:M;/nL, Q;:(f!p])i,

EQ.(57)in

(54)
/.,^\

(ssa)

Equation (58a) converges without regularization and

yields
Jz(o): r/2tn'
a v a l u e w h i c h r e m a i n su n a l t e r e du n d e r r e g u l a r i z a t i o n ,
20A coritrol calculation,
carried throuch
rvith a resulator
afiecting only the electron A-functions in
[D] gave exacily the
sme results.

208
F.

PAULI.{ND

444

VILL.\RS

since all terms i)0 vanish at least as cif Mi2 (compare Thus 1r(0) is immediatelyisolated:
(6)). This is not the case, however, for (58), which
ftf
becomes
/ r ( U r : . 1 | d u u r l , , , r , t ' k 6 " t k \ k ^ +u i t u : l l l l ' !t

a,Q) ^: #,(zZ,c,- t p',,c,). (se)

The expression(58) proves thus to be convergentwithe e e do n l y p u t r o : 1 , c , ( i ) 0 ) : 0 ,

out regularization;wn
to obtailr
I"(O):r/6m2
rvhereasthe properly regularized expressionyields

(1,(0)) /8m'.
": "
2IzQ)- JzQ): *r/6nt'

Therefore
rvhereas

Jo

/.,\

.+u(
:- I
\M,!/" , 'r

M .2 8n2

The use of a regulator appears to be superfluousin this

case, but from a general point of view it is doubtiul
whether a translormation of variables as needed to
obtain (62) can be justified a priori.
(B) [r] may, accordingto Dyson, alsobe rvrilten as
-lRe(D

2(1,(0))R- l,(0) : - r / 4n 2.

/"1

: 1,. I duu,_
Ja
nt'tr!|
1

"(h)L"(k-

q)t"(k- q'))

where

The regularizedvalue, introducedin (56)' gives

: L F 2 iL : 2 16+ ( h 'I| n ? ) ' ( a n d D : D t t r- 2 i D ) '

"
"(k)
integralion,
(complex)
,t-space
With the elementary
however, one immediately falls back on the formula

ag:

"/"
in agreementwith Schwinger'sresult'21
From this example it should be made clear horv
cautious one should be in handling divergent "covariant" expressions.Indeed, any decomposition, as done
in (55), is by no means "covariant," as long as the
expressionsunder discussion has not been made convergent by some invariant regularization, Once this
has been done, one may quietly enjoy of all the facilities
presented by a properly chosen coordinate system, as
rvasdone in (57).

(s8),(s8a).
(C) Finalty rve illustrate the possibilitl'of obtaining
a quite arbitrary result by regularizing.in-a difierent
rvay difierent terms of a form F(A, A(r)) Let- us just
taie, as an example,the bracket [D], rvhich lor q':q
may be written as follorvs:
1
6(A'Ai)
'"-6'tk^k^-)k^'7rr:f/t']|[/'t,1
IDf -'
(2kxqx)'z kxhx

ADDITIONAL REMARKS
(A) The various possibilities oI evaluating the integrals 1r and -f2 arise from the difierent possibilities of
rewriting the [D]-bracket in (5a), (5aa). It is easily
seenfrom the definitions(40), (41) thattor q:qi,lDl
may be written as
fr

lDl:

l duu6"(kxhx-2hxqxu).22

(60)

vn

The regularization of [D], as a whole, as was done in

the above calculations, consists then in replacing (60)
by
^l

(l Df)o:

I d u u L ; r ; 6 "t h r h t - 2 h g p a M ; 2 t . 1 6 1

We need now only nole that if Rr and -R2are tw{)

r e q u l a l o r sl .h e o p e r a t i o nf t : ] r R ' { R 1 t i ' a r e g u l a t o r
t o i , * h e r " u . F : i 1 R , - R , r i s a n o p e r a t o rc,o r r e s p o r d ing to a mass spectrum rvhich satisfies(I' Ia)' but
co;tains only auiiliary massesMd; rve mav norv rvrite
Rr[Dr]*Rr[D:]

: R[D]+E([r'1-

[l'l)

T h e a d d i t i o n a lr e r m sd e p e n d i n go n , Qa . " b y n o m e a l t s
zero in general, but depend on the structure of 'R
which shall be characterized by a spectrum Mt and
coemcients7;. In evaluating 1r(0) (!1), (55), as an
example,the additional terms due to ,R are:
rf 4m2(ltttu,? logpo-?),

Equation (61) may now be introducedinto (54):

an expressionrvhich is completely indeterminate'

f\?

t
r,6"\hfty-)kvqxu*M,2
(T,,to: I auu I aonn"n,2,
J
Jn
f\f

: I auuI d,krk,k,+u,q,q,t
J
Jn
-i

XIr

rnNuz*M,2). (62)
cr6"(,4r,4r*

. e v . 7 3 , 4 1(b1 q 4 8 / .
. h 1 sR
I . S . l * t i n * " rP
r ;t l [ , .
" i h i s m e r h - oi sdd u er o S c h w i n g er S

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We have to acknowledgeProfessor J. Schwinger,
Dr. F. J. Dyson, ProfessorV. F. Weisskopf,Dr' S' T'
NIa, and Dr. K. M. Case{or making their publications
accessibleto us prior to publication; Dr. G' Rayski for
valuablehelp, and ProfessorE. C. G. Stueckelbergand
Dr. G. Rivier for interestingdiscussions.

On Gauge Invariance and Vacuum polarization

Juuel Scnwrwonr
E arwrd U niorsity, Canbridgc,M ass@huselts
(ReceivedDecember22, 19.50)
This paper is bdsed on the elementary remark that
the ex_
traction of gauge invariant results from a formally gauge invarianl
theory is ensured if one employs methods of
i't ut inrot*
"otutiin
only gauge covariant quantities, We illustrate
this statement in
connectior with the problem of vacuum polarization by
a pe
scribed eleclromagnetic freld. The vacuum current of a
chaiged
6eld..whichcan be expressed in terms of the Green,. iun.fion
lirac
o r r n a t n e t d , l m p l r e sa n a d d i l i o n l o t h e a c l i o n i n l e g r a l o I
the elec_
tromagnetic field. Now these quantities can be related
to tJle
dynamical properries of a,.particle,, with space_lime coorainui"s
that depend upon a proper_time parameter. The proper
time
e q u a l i o n s o [ m o t i o n . i n v o l v e o n l y e l e c t r o m a g n e t i c6 e l d s t r e n g r h s ,
ano provlce a Sultabte gauge invarianl basis for trearing problems.
Rigorous solutions of the equations of motion."n
t oii"ln"Jlo"
a constanl field, and for a plane wave 6eld. A renormalization
"
of
hetd strength and charge..applied to the modilied lagrange
func
tron tor constanl fields, yields a 6nite, gauge invariant iesult
which
implies nmlinear properties for the electromagnetic 6eld
in tlre
vacuum. The contribution
of a zero spin charged field is also
staled. Afrer the same 6eld. strenglh renormalization, the
modi6ed
pnyslcal quanilues descnblng a plane wave in the vacuum
reduce
to lust those oI the maruell 6eld; there are no nonlinear phenomena
lor a single plane wave, of arbitrary slrength and spictral
com_
position. The results obtained for constant rihat is,
slowJy varying
6elds), are then applied to treat the two-photon disinresrutio';-o?

I. INTRODUCTION
electrodynamicsis characterized by
QUaNfUU
-<' severatrormat lnvanance properties,
notably rel_
ativistic and gauge invariance. yet specificcalcul;tions
by conventional methods may yield iesults that violate
these requirements, in consequenceof the diversences
inherent in present field rheories.Such di_fficultieicon_
cerning relativistic invariance have been avoided bv
employing formulations of the theory that are explicitly
invariant under coordinate transformations, a;d b;
maintaining this generality through the course of caiculations. The preservation of giuge invariance has
apparently been considered to be a more formidable
task. It should be evident, however, that the two
pro-blems
are quite analogous,and that gaugeinvariance
difficulties naturally disappearwhen methods of solu_
tion are adopted that involve only gauge invariant
quantities.
We shall illustrate this assertion by applying such a
gauge invariant method to treat several ispect=sof the
problem of vacuum polarization by a prescribedelec_
tromagnetic field. The calcuiation of ttie current asso_
ciated with the vacuum of a charged particle field
involves the construction of the Gre;n,s function for
the particle field in the prescribed electromasnetic
field. This vacuum current can be exhibited is the
variation of an action integral with respect to the
potential vector, which action effectivelyadds to that
of the maxwell field in describingthe behavior of elec_

a spin zero neutral meson arising from the polarization of

the
proton vacuum. We obtain approximate, gauge invariant
ex_
pressrons tor lhe eHeclive interaction between the meson
and the
electromagnetic field, in which tie nuclear coupling may be scalar,
pseudoscalar, or pseudovector in nature. fhe aiiect verification
of equivalence between the pseudoscalar and pseudore.lo. inier
acuons onty requlres a proper slatement of the limiting processes
involved. 'For arbitrarily varying 6elds, perlurbation m""riod.
can
De apptred to the equations of motion, as discussed-in Appendix
A, ot one cal employ an expansion in powers of the poiential
vector. The.latter a_utomatically yields gauge invariani
results,
provroed onty tiat the proper-time integralion is-reserved
lo lhe
last. This indicates that the significant aspecr of the proper_time
method is its isolation of divergences in inlegrals with'respecr
to the proper-time parameter, which is independent of the coordrnale system and of the gauge. The connection beiqeen
lhe
proper-time melhod and the technique of ,,invariant
regularization" is.discussed. Incidentally,
the probability
of actial pair
creation is obtained from the imaginary part oi the electromagnetic
held action integral. Finally, as an application of the Gieen.s
lunctlon tor I conslant field, we construct lhe mass operalor
of an
a. weak, bomogeneous exrernal 6eld, and derive rhe
T
"1::1::"
aoqrronat sprn magnetrc moment of a/2n magnetons by means
of
a perturbation
calculation in which proper-mass pbts the cus_
tomary tole of energy.

tromagnetic fields in the vacuum. We shall relate these

p r o b l e m sl o t h e s o l u l i o no f p a r t i c l ee q u a t i o n so f m o t i o n
wrtn a proper-tlmeparameter.The equationsof motion,
w h i c h _i n v o l v e o n l y e l e c t r o m a g n e l i cf i e l d s t r e n g l h s ,
provide the desired gauge invariant basis for our discusslon.
Explicit solutions can be obtained in the tvrlo situations of constant fields, and fields propagated with the
speedof light in the form of a plane wave.r For constant
(that is, slowly varying) fields, a renormalization
of
field strength and charge yields a modifred lagrange
function differing from that of the maxwell neta Uy
terms that imply a nonlinear behavior for the electromagnetic field. The result agrees precisely with one
obtained some time ago by other methods and a somewhat difierent viewpoint.t The modified physical quantities characterizing the plane wave in the vaiuum
revert to those of the maxwell field after the same field
strength renormalization. For weak arbitrarily varying
fields, perturbation methods can be applied to thi
equations of motion. This will be disiussed in Appendix A.
The consequencesthus obtained are useful in connection with a classof problems in which gauge invarir-fhal

the Dirac equation can be solved exactly, in tle 6eld of

*"r", was recognizedby D. M. Volkow, Z. phvsik 94, 25

irB.!-"ill
Heisenberg
and H. Euler, Z. Physik 98, 714 (1936).
-.2_W._
V. Weisskopf,Kgt. DanskeVidenskab.Selsliabs.Mat.-Iys.Medd.
14,No. 6 (i936).

664

2ro
66s

GAUGE

INVARIANCE

AND

VACUUi\{ POLARIZATION

ance difficulties have been encountered3-the multiple and

1 , ro)'ro'
p h o t o n d i s i n t e g r a l i o no f a n e u t r a l m e s o n . W i t h o u l
/] e\
,(-r-- ' r. - ,),: 1 [
\z'd)
i u r t h e r e r t e n s i v ec a l c u l a t i o nr, v e s h a l l o b t a i n a p p r o x i L Ir ' ae( - #s'| '
mate gauge invariant expressionsfor the interaJtion of
we have
u ,"roipiir, neutral meson t"i;h ;*; ph;;""q *tt"t" ttt"
*o)*o'
o
r
t
h
e
i n t e r m e d i a l en u c l e a ri n l e r a c t i o nm a v b e s c a l a r ,
/( rv." (tr-i \t .rir.t-lt ^ . ,r1
,\ ,",ro ,
l ) . /\(.r-- r - , '\:- 1 { ' " t x l ' I a ? ' ) '
e q u i v a l c n lp s e u d o s c a l a rn d p s e u d o v e c t o. o, r p l i n g s .
ro<;"0,.
\ -Ou6W"fd,
The utility of the proper-time. technique to be ex- There{ore
ploited in this paper, apart from its value in obtaining
(2.10)
rigorous solutions in a few special cases,lies in its
Ll{"(r),0e@)):(,1"@)0e@'))4@-r')lt-",
isolation of the divergent aspects of a calculation in
integrals with respectlo. the proper-time, a parameter provided one takes the average of the forms- obtained
thaimakes no referenceto the coirdinate sysiem or the by letting r'approach r from the future, and from the
per- past. The quantity o{ actual interest here is the expecgauge. Incleed, rve shall show that the customary -the
tation value of lu(r) in the vacuum of the Dirac field,
iurb"ation procedure of expansion in powers of
potential vector does yield gauge invariant results,
(2'11)
(j-(*)):ie trl'G(*' r')ft"'
provided only that the proper-time integration i,
, ,
wnere
reserved to the last. The technique of "invariant
(2'12)
G(x' r'):i(('l'@){(:c'))+)e(tc-r')'
regularization,,arepresentsa partial realizationof this
proper-time method through the use of specially and tr indicates the diagonal sum with respect to the
rveighted integrals over the conjugate quantity, the spinor indices.
square of the proper mass.
The function G(r, r') satisfies an inhomogeneous
Finally, in Appendix B we shall employ the Green's difierential equation which is obtained by noting that
function of an electron in a weak, homogeneous,external field to calculate the seconi-order"electromag- ltGia-eA(x))-lmfG(*r').
(2'13)
:6rl{(t),{(x')l}6(ro-ro')'
netic mass, thereby providing a simple derivation 6f
the second-order correction to the electron magnetic where the right side expressesthe discontinuous change
moment'
in form of G(x, r') as lrois alteredfrom ro'-0 to ro'*0'
According to F'q. (2'2)' therefore, we have
II. .ENERAL THEoRy
(2'14)
l7(ia-eA(r))tmfG(r'r'):6(r-*');
The field equations,commutation relations,and current vector of the Dirac field are given by5
. / \\ '/ \ , ,/ \ ^
7:l-'o^'^-fi{l.:.lY'-,':.f,Y:l:"'
\tdA-eAp\r))v\xt'futmv/\r):u'
{/(r, ro), {(x',*o)l:'yo6(x-x'),

j,(x):iel{,(x),
u{G)1,
where
*bu, t"\:
and

'to: -ila,

(2.1
(2.2)

(2.3) *il','JtJ.ffilffregard
element
G(r,r,) asrhemarrix

- 6.

(2'4)

'to2:1.

(2..5)

The structure of the current operator'

ju@):-rQ)uil*"(i,0e@1,

(2.6)

which arises from an explicit charge symmetrization,

can be relatedto a time symmetrizationby introducing
chronologically ordered operators, Thus, with the
notation
IA(xo)B(tct'), ro]ro'
(z (x6)B(;ri))+: {
lB(ro)A(ri,
xo<ro',

that is, G(r, r') is a Green's function for the Dirac

f i e l d . W e s h a l l n o t d i s c u s sw h i c h p a r t i c u l a r G r e e n ' s
function this is, as specifiedby the associatedboundary
c o n d i t i o n s ,s i n c e n o a m b i g u i r y e n t e r s i f a c t u a l p a i r
creation in the vacuum doesnot occur, which we sha11

of an operator G, in which states are labeled by spacetime coordinates as well as by the suppressedspinor
indices:
G @ ,x , ) : ( r , l c l * , ) .

(2.15)

The defining difierential equations for the Green's

function is then consideredto be a matrix element of
the operator equation
(2'16)

QIItm)G:l'
where
TIP: Pr- eAu

Q'17)

is characterizedby the operator properties

(2.7)

3 H. Iukuda and Y. Miyamoto, Prog. Theor, Phys. 4, 347

( 1949).
aW. Pauli and F. Villars, Revs. Modern Phys.2l,434 (1949).
5 We employ units in which i:c:1.
Note lhat also '!,:,1'170,
since a67',-p:6, 1, 2, 3 form hermitian matdces.

ltcorl"):i6,,,

lr,,tl,1:;tpu,,

(2'18)

o"Au

Q.19)

and
F,,:6uA"-

is the antisymmetrical field strength tensor.

With this symbolism, it is easy to show that the

2tl
JULIAN

SCHWINGER

666

vacuum current vector,

In virtue of the vanishing trace of an odd numberof

(2.20) 7-factors, we have
s obtained from an action integral by variation of ieTry6AG
-{"(:r). This is accomplishedby exhibiting
f*
(j,(r)):i.e tryu@lGlr),

: -T16(zII)riI

J,

6W(n-,

@t)6A,(.r)(j,(x)):ieTry\AG

(2.21)

i1*.- (-yII)')sl
(2.31)

(2.22)

and Tr indicates the complete diagonal symmation,

including spinor indices and the continuous space-time
coordinates.Now

"rO7-

l. f.
I
:t+tJ
dss-rexp[-i(2,-(rn)')']1,

as a total difierential, subject to 6lu(r) vanishing at

infinity. In the secondversion of 6Ul(1),d,4! denotes the
operator with the matrlr elements

(*l aAu!x'S: 51*- *') 6Au@),

dt

which again involves the fundamental trace property

(2.26).Thus,

sttt(x): liJ

f'

dss-rexp(*izr,s)tr(r.lU(s)l.r),
(2.32)

I/(s): e*01-;*tr,

-e764:6(7nlm),

(2.23)

and

where
I

G:

'y*l\+. nl

:i

JC: _ (?[)?: II!2_leo*F*,

f'

I dsexp{- i(7n*rr)sl,
ro

Q.24) and
ar,:iillu,

so that

y").

(2.33)
(2.j4)

We now see that the construction of G(x, x') and

3{tr(r) devolves upon the evaluation of

ie Tr16AG
f f:61 ,
I d s s - ,T r e x p { - i ( 7 n * z ) s l
Lro

(r' I u (s)| r''): (r(s)'|{0)'')

l
l,
I

(2.3s)

( 2 . 2 s ) The latter notation

emphasizes that U(s) may be
regarded as the operator describing the development of
a system governed by the "hamiltonian," JC, in the
in virtue of the fundamental property of the trace,
"time" s, the matrix element of U(s) being the transTrAB:TrBA.
(2.26) formation function from a state in ri'hich 1:u(5:0) has
the value ru" to a state in which ru(s) has the value *r'.
Thus, to within an additive constant,
Thus, we are led to an associateddynamical broblem
i n w h i c h t h e s p a c e - t i m ec o o r d i n a t e so f a " p a r t i c l e "
e'
lV(Lt: i
dss-te-iru Tr exp{ - iylls}
depend upon a proper time parameter, in a manner
I
Jo
(2.27) determined by the equations of motion
dr,/ d.s: - ilt u, lCf : 21,,
dll,/ds: - ilIlu, lt?f: e(F,"n"*n,F,,)
* Leox,(aF x,/ dr) : 2eFu,rr,
_ ie(dF,,/ ar,) |
leox,(aFx,/0*,).

:J (dx)srr)(r),
where the lagrange function Sttr(r) is given by
f*

3(')(r): i I

drr-'.-t'" tr(rl expf- lTns|| *).

(2.28)

An alternative representation, and the one we shall

actually employ for calculations, is obtained by writing
G: (- tII-l n)lnz-

(:.,tt)zf-l
:lm,(1Il121-tG tII*

: i
t

(2.29)

id"(r(s)'j *(0)"): (r(s)'1rc

(2.37)
lr(0)"),
(- i3,'- eAuQc')(r(s')
| o(0)")
: (r(s)'lnu(s)lr(0)"), (2.38)
(i,0," - eAu(x")) (r(s)' Ir(O)" )
: (r(s)'ln"(0)| r(0)"), (2.3e)
and,theboundarycondition

f'

C: (- tIl{. nt)i I
uo

n)

(2.36)

The transformation function is characterized by the

differential equations,6

ds exp[-i(zr,-

(rl])!)sl

d se r p [ - i ( 2 , - ( ? l t ) ! ) s ] ( - 7 r t + r n )

(r(s)'Ir(0)")l--6 : 6(r'- x").

(r.JU)

(2.40)

5 A proper time wave equation, in

conjunction rvith the secondorder Dirac operator, has been discussed by V. Fock. Phr.sik. Z.
Sou.jetynion 12, 4O4 tt937). See also y. Nambu, piog.-Theor.
Phys. 5, 82 (1950).

2r2
INVARIANCE

GAUGE

667

We shall now illustrate, for the elementary situation

Fe,:O, the procedure which will be employed in the
following sections for constructing the transformation
function.
The equations oI motion read

POLARIZATION

and the Green's function is obtained as

r'
i I d,sexp(- im2s)

G(*', *"):

Jn

X ( * ( s )F
'l illm)l*(o)")'

(2.41)

drr/d,s:2l7,,

dllu/ds:0,

VACUUM

AND

: (4r)-zO1rr, *r'1

whence
(2.42)

II,(s):tI,(0),
and
(r,(s)-*"(0))/s:2II,(0).

(2.43)

Therefore

f'

1
Jo

dss-2exp(-iza'?s)

/ (-"x ' - r " ) \ [ ( * ' - r ' ) ' l

(2.s4)
+m exvliL----].
(
)
"
An equivalent,and more familiar procedure,is to
employ the representationlabeledby the eigenvalues
of IIr. Now
(II(s)'I n(0)") : (n (0)'I U(s)| n (0)")
:6(tI'-II") exp(-i["s), (2.55)
"

Jc: il2 : +s-2(tt(s)- *(0))'?: ts-'?[c'z(s)

- 2r(s) r(0) I r'z(0)l* is-'?[r(s), r(0)]
: f, s-zlrz (s)- 2x(s)r(0) * r' (0)I - 2;'-r,

(2.44)

since
- 2;' 5r,, 12.nt,
[*,(s), r, (0)] : [*u(0) * 2sru(0), *"(0)l :
Having ordered the coordinate opera,torsso that *(s)
everywhere stands to the Ieft of *(0), we can immediately evaluate the matrix element of 3c in Eq. (2.37),
thus obtaining
id,(*(s)'I *(0)")
: lf, s-2(r' - r'')z - 2i.s-tf(x(s)' | *(0)"),

while(r(s)'ltI(s)') is determined
by
(_ i6,'_ eAu@,))(r(s),
il(s),)
I
I]n,(.r(s),
I n(s),), (2.56)
and the normalization
condition

(2.46)

the solution of which is

(r(s)' I r(0)//) : 6:(r', r") s-z explil@' - r")2 / sf .
To determine the function C(r',r"),

Q.al)

we note that

(r(s)'ln,(s)|r(0)"): (r(s)'ln,(0)|,(0)")

: ((xrt_ r,t,) f 2s)(r(s),1*(0),,),

(nG)'l*G))(dr')(#(s)'lr(s)"):6(II'-n"), (2.s7)

to be
(r(s)'lnG)'j
fr''l
:(2n)-2 explieI

(2.48)

dxA lexp(ix'Il'). (2.58)

LJo

which, in conjunction with Eqs. (2.3S) and (2.39), Therefore,

implies that

(*(s)'l*(0)")

(-i.\u'-

eA,(r'))C(r' , x")
- eAF(fi't))c(r', r"):9,
: (i,aptt

12.491

or
C(tc',x"):941*',

*"1,

fr''l
Q(r', x"):eYP1i, I
I

(2.s0)

Jn"

{a*) exp(i!x2/ s): | ;

X expli(r'-*")Il' -iII"i],

The line integral in Eq. (2.50) is independent of the

integration path, since F",:0. Finally, the constant C
is fixed by the boundary condition (2.40). It is evident
that Eq. (2.47) does have the character of a deltafunction as s approacheszero, provided

c r-,

(r(s)'I uG)')(drl')(n(s)'
Ir(o)")
X(dr')(r(0)"lr(0)")

: (2r)-4A(*',
*"1 6n,
J

d*1,@) I'
J

(2.sr)

and

(2.59)

G(x', r'' ) : i(2o)-a1 (r', *")

f@f

X I ds | @n') expli(r'-r")fr')
JoJ
X(-

tn' * nr) expl- i(IJ'2!nt')sl,

(2.60)

which reduce to Eqs. (2.53) and (2.54) on performance

of the rI'integration.

that is,
C: -i.(4r)-2.

(2.52)

Therefore,
(r(s)' I *(0) ") : - i(4r)-2y (x', x'') s-2
Xexplif,(r' - x")7s1,

III. CONSTANT flELDS

The equations of motion (2.36) here simplify to

(2.53)

d.*,f ils:2IIu,

d'Ilrf ds:2eFu,Il,,

(3.1)

213
TULIAN
-

*"

+.i-

n^i.

The solution of Eq. (3.15)has the form

f i^h

dr/ ds: 2n,

dfi/ d.s: 2eFll,

(3.2)

c(r,, x,,)

- -.: s1-mbolicsolution of theseequations

--:f ce

II(s): e?'r"[(0)'
r(s) - r(0) : [(e?"F" - 1)/ eFIII(0),

fa"'l

:C(x") expfie I d.r(A(x)llF(x-x" t) l, (3.17)

I
L J",.

(3.3)

, . . i : e F ( e 2 e F s _1 ) - t ( r ( s ) _ * ( 0 ) )

:leFs-"r" sinh-r(eFs)(r(s)-r(o)), (3.a)

:: I
-. it :
leF e"r" sinh-l(eFs)(r(s)- r(0))
: (r(s)-r(0))|eF-eF! sinh-r(eFs). (3.5)

in which the integral is independent of the integration

has a vanishing curl'
path, since Ar(*)*iFu,Qc-r"),
However, by restricting the integration path to be a
straight line connecting x' and *", we may, invirtue of
Eq. (3.6), simply write
CQt" xtt):941'', *'r1,

F:-F,

(Fu,:-F,,).

(3.6)

',i

(*(s)-x(0))K(r(s)-r(0)),
1 1 : r n e z Fsz' n } - r ( ? F s ) .

and, with C a constant, attain the solution of (3.15)

and (3.16).The constantC has the value
/\ ?
" " 7/ \

l: rearranging the order of these operators, the fol.:ring commutator is required:

-t
_:rs), r(0) I : [r (0)t QF) (sz"t " t ) u (o), r(o) ]
:.i(eF)-t(e2eF3_1).
(3.8)
- hus

F: r(s)Kr (s)- 2r(s)Kr(0'#,:lfiij?,,,

:-_i t eo

(3'10)

.rhich follows from Eq. (3.6). The resulting differential

: q u a l r o n( l . J / , ,
j a , ( r ( s ) ' Ir ( 0 ) " ) : l - l e o F \ ( x ' _ r " ) K ( r ' - r " )
-li treF coth(eFs)l(r(s)' I t(0) "),

(3.11)

ras the solution

.r(s)'lr(0)"): f (r' , r")q-tru't5-z
Xexplf,i(r' - x") eF coth(eFs)(x' - r")l
.exp(ileoFs), (3.12)
Z(s):I

C: -i'(4r)-'
since the limiting form of (r(s)'l*(0)")
independent of the external field.
Finally, then

(3.19)
as s-0

(r(s)'| *(0)"): - i(4r)-2a(r' , r'/)e-L(s)s-2

Xexplil @'- r" ) eF coth(eFs) (r' - tc")f
.explileoFsf,

(3.20)

the Green's function G(x', r") is obtained from

(2.30) in the two equivalent forms,
f*

G(r', r"):;

d se x p ( - i z ' ? s )

.lo

X[-r,(r(s)' ] n,(s)| *(0)")

lmQc(s)'lx(0)")f
r'
: i I dsexP(- iz'?s)
r0

x[- (f(s)'In"(o)l'(o)")r,
Fm(r(s)'
l*(0)")1, (3.21)
which will be given explicitly on substituting Eqs.
( 3 . 1 3 ) ,( 3 . 1 4 ) ,a n d ( 3 . 2 0 ) .
The lagrange function 3{tr(*) is now computed as

tr ln[(eFs) t sinh(eFs)].

To determine C(x',r"), we employ

(r(s)' | rl(s) I r(0) rr) : lleF coth(eFs)f eF]
f'
X ( r ' - r " ) ( r ( s ) ' I r ( 0 ) " ) , ( 3 . 1 3 ) A0)(r):+i
I drr-t exp(-int2s)
and
X tr(r (s)'Ir(O)")lt' t' -"
coth(eFs)- eFl
(rG)'l n(0) I r(0)'t):lleF
X(r' - r")(r(s)' Ir(0)"), (3.la)
n'
: (l/32n') | drr-t exp(- iro'?s)
ir conjunctionwith Eq. (3.12),to obtain the differential
.ro
equations
xe-LG) tr exp(ileoFs).
l- id,' eAu(r')- leF,,(r' *tt),]C(r' , r"):9,
-\eFu,(x' - x")"]C(*' , r"): g.
li6u" eAu(r")

is

(3.e) and

Tllere tr again denotes a diagonal summation, and we

:-ave employed the fact that
tr(F):6'

(3.13)

lr''l
o(.r', .v"): expl ie I dxA(t) I'
I
L J,,,

-,re latter form involvesthe fact that

e now consider
'tlleoF:T12(s):

668

SCHWINGER

(3.15)

(3.22)

We may exhibit this more explicitly as a real quantity

(3.16) by a deformation of the integration path, which is

214
669

GAUGE

INVARIANCE

AND

e f f e c t i v e l yt h e s u b s t i t u t i o ns + - i s :
- -(l/32r')
"C(i)(x)

f'

From the eigenvalue equation

and its equivalent accordingto Eq. (3.35),

(3.38)

Fp,+'l',:-(l/F')g,l/r,
(3.23)

l(s) : + tr In[(eFs)-r sin(eFs)].

Indeed, we could have initially employed the integral

we obtain by iteration:
F,xFx,{,: (F')'{,,

(3.39)

F,s*Fx"*{": (l/ (F')')9"{,.

The identity (3.36) then yields the eigenvalue equation

t2 finn

n*
l m z - 1 1 7 t 1 2 1 - r : I d se x p [ - ( r r ' - ( y l l ) ' ) r ] ,
uo

LIau,, ox,l: 6116,.-6r.d,r*leu,l.Ts,

rvhich has the solutions+F(r), +F(2), with

pru:(i/t2)l(5-ttg)++(s-tg)rl,
Fe': (i/\2)l$+ rg)r- (s- tg)rl.

sin(aFtrrs)
e-I(s): (es)zF0)F{2)/sin(eFcr)s)
2(es)2F(t)F(2)

(3.25)

Fr,+:liep,x^Fxu

(3.27)

we have
(!orF )2:

lF *21!7 5F,,Fp*,

(3.28)

thus introducing the fundamental scalar

5:lp*,,:l(H,-E ),

or
e-tG): (es)29/ImcoshesX,

g:|FPFP*:E.H

(loF)'-2(sl76g),

f (r): __"

1r*
I

dss-3exp(- rzrs)

6T. Jo

(3.2e)

Re coshrsX I
r
xl (eslzg_---t
-Im
''
L
coshesX J

(3'44)

(3.30)

in which we have supplied the additive constant necessary to make 8(1) vanish in the absenceof a field. The
first
term in the expansionof 8(r) for weak fields is
(3.31)
e2f*

it follows that loF has the four eigen(+oF)': +(2(ff+ig))+.

(3.43)

where Im designatesthe imaginary part of the following

expression.
The final result for J(1) is

and pseudoscalar

constructed from the field strengths. Since

, (s.42)

- F('z))- coses(F(1)+F(2))
coses(F(r)

(3.26)

and e'r* is 1, or *1, if (prtrr) forms an even, or odd

permutation of (1234), and is zero otherwise. In terms
of the dual field strength tensor,

t\ 2
r l1 \
J rA

Expressed in terms of these eigenvalues,

where
'ts:i'Yr'Yz'ts'tt,'Ys2:-7,

(3'40)

(F')aj2s(P')z-gz:9,
(3.24)

which exists in consequenceof the restriction on real

pair creation. This, horvever, would have obscured the
proper time interpretation.
To evaluate the Dirac matrix trace, we employ the
following spin matrix property:

and |uz: -1,

values

(3.37)

FyQ,: F,{r,
d s s - je r p ( - r ' s )
ye-i("r tr exp(!eoFs),

renrccpn

POLARIZATION

VACUUM

J(r,-__

| drr-' exp(_nrs)S.
l2r2 Jo

(i.45)

(3.32)
On separating this explicitly, and adding the lagrange
function of the maxwell field,

Therefore,
: 4 Re coshes(2(S+ig))l
tr exp($eoFs)
=4 Re coshesX, (3.33)
where Re denotes the real part of the subsequent expression. Note, incidentally, that

x,: (H+iB),.

(3.35)

and
&r*Pr,*-FurFr":26p,5.

(3.36)

(3.46)

we obtain the total lagrange function

(3.34) c :

The eigenvaluesof the matrix F:(Fr") are required

for the construction of exp(-l(s)). They can be obtained with the aid of the easily verifiable relations,
FlrFr,*: - D'9,

sro: _s:|(Ez_H),
fe2r'I

-11+-

1r-

d s s' e x p ( - z ' ? s ) l $

dss-3exp(- zzs!

6T r'o

Re coshesX
f
1
1- !(es)'?r
Xf (es)'-l. (3.47)
I
L
Im coshesX

215
JULIAN

l:,e logarithmically divergent factor that nultiplies the

--::well lagrangefunction may be absorbedby a change
:, :cale for a1l fields, and a corresponding scale change,
:: renormalization, of charge. If we identify the quan: :ies thus far employed by a zero subscript, and intror:ie new units of field strength and chargeaccording to
5 I ig : (l

Ceo')($o*r9o),

ol the form (3.48),with

and a renormalizalion
C:Co+C\
lr'
:_

+_

- 1- 3(es)'s]
X [(es)'9(Re/Im)
lf'

+_
| dss-3exp(_p2s)
7612Jo
X [(es)'?g(1/Im)- 1*i(es)'?$]

Re coshesX
r
I
'9-1 - $ ( e s ) ' ? rI
x l ( e s )-Im
I
L
coshesX

2az (h/mc)3
'
"

: ; ( E , - H 1' + -

2a2 (h/rnc)3

:+(Er-H,)+4J

"

In the latter expansion, the conventional rationalized

units have been reinstated,and q:e2/4nhc.
Incidentally, the addition to the lagrange function
produced by a spin zero charged field is obtained Jrom
Eq. (3.23)by omitting the Dirac trace,and multiplying
by (-2). Thus'

*_

--

' _(E,_H)'+(D. I . .. (3.s4)

H)'l+.
l
J

Tn: 6*t,- (6 e/ d&r)F,r

: - (F,rF,r- 6u:4F x,') (d S / Au)

+d,,(J-s(dsla$)- gat'/ ag). (3.ss)

The maxwell tensor

d s s - 3e x P ( - P z s )

(3'56)

Tula):P*P,^-Ur,rO^*'

Jo

is obtained from J: -5, the weak field approximation

of Eq. (3.49). The next terms in the expansionof 3
yield

in rvhich p designatesthe mass of the spinlessparticle,

and an additive constant has been supplied as in Eq.
(3.4.+).The first term in the expansion for rveak fields is
separatedexplicitly bY rvriting
fou):

[(E2-H')'+7(E.H)']

90 K2L4

ko's -,.l, (3.s0)

"fLIm coshesX I

ez

mc2-

The physical quantities characterizing the field are

comprised in the energy momentum tensor

lr'
IoT.

'

45

a2 (h/pc)3t7

mC"

x[(8,-H)'+7(E.ry'1*. . .. (3.4e)

" p i no ( r ' : -

dss*3exP(-az'?s)

6T. Jo

d s s - te x P ( - z r ' ? s )

I
Jo

6T"

| dss'exp(_z,s), (3.S3)

1r-

f : -$--

dr r-t exp(-nrs),

'.'eobtain the finite, gauge invariant result

1r*

lr'

l2r2 Jo

yields

lr-

- : - 5-:"

dss-r exp(-g2s)

|
48rz Jo

(3.48)

e2: eo2/(1lCeoz),
C: *
|
LZT'JO

670

SCHWINGER

f-

|
48n2 Jo

* -

dss texp(-prs)S

toT'

16 (h/mr)3 \
r
)
4i"' ,*,
2 (h/mc)a
_ 6 u ,_ d z : _ _ , : ( 4 s , + 7 g r ) + .
4J
mC'

exp(-p2s)
f- dss-3

F.:

JuF(l),

f:n,*-

till.n.r-r+lr^)'s]
(rs1)rvherezu is a null vector,

LIm coshesX

nu2:0,

If we take into account the existence of both spin 0

and spin ! charged fields,
8: C(o)+So(D+81(D,

. ..

(J.57)

TV. PLANE WAVE FIELDS

A plane wave, traveling with the speed of light, is
characterized by the field strength tensor

J o

"f.

/
7,,:T,,M\1-

(3.s2)

(4.1)

(4 )\

and F({) is an arbitrary function. The constant tensor

/",, and its dual /",*, are restricted by the conditions
nrlo:0,

nrfr,':O'

/d ll

216
67I

GAUGE

INVARIANCE

AND

Jus*Js,*: -nrn,.

(4.4)

VACUUM

from which are derived

Jrxfx'*:O,

POLARIZATION

On integrating Eq. (a.18) with respect to s, we find that

loJx,:

1
"tr"t dtl2c,eA()-nue2A2(l)

.r,(s)-x"(Q):-,

The latter statement also includes a convention con2(nll)2 J rrot

cerning the scale of /r,.
1 nreF([)laJf{ 2D,s. (4.20)
The proper time equations of motion in this external field,
With the constant D, determined by Eq. (a.20), Eq.
dr,f ds:2f1,,
(4.18)statesthat
(4.s)
d.n,/ ds: 2eF(l) f ,,II,! n,eF' ([)lcpJ u,
(r,(s)-*"(0))
'
.
admit several first integrals. Thus
IIu(s) : -=-d.(nrn,(s))/ ds:0,

(4.6)

d$,,*n,(s))/d,s:o.

(4.7)

(tG)-i(0))

2s

>(lzc,eA (t(s))- n,e2

A2(l(s))| n,eF(l(s))i oJl

and

dg*n"g))/ds:

-n,eF(l)dl/ds,

(4.s)

since
df/ds:2nTt;

(4.9)

We canfinally evaluateCuas

and therefore
d(Ju"rl"lnreA([))/ds:o,

C,: f,"fI,!n,eA
(4.10)

where

dA(o/dt:F(0.

^E(!)

-..
agTzc_e,l1E1
: l
(t(s)- t(0)), Jr(o)
- n,e,A, ([) ] n,er(01"
fl. (4.21)

In addition,

(4.11)

In arriving at Eq. (4.10), it is necessary to recognize

that df/ds commutes with f, in virtue of

x,(0))

f*(x"(s)-

2s

nt

*-l

f lG)

{(s)-t(O) Jr(o)

dtea(d.(4.22)

The commutation properties of these operators are

involved in the construction of the transformation
(4.12) function.
fg,n[l:ln,xnn,Il"]:inp2:0.
As is already indicated in the commutativity
Since zII is a constant of the motion, Eq. (4.9) can of f(s) and f(0), thesecommutation relations are greatly
simplified by the special nature of the external field.
be integrated to yield
Thus to evaluate
r"(s)], we employ F,q. @.21)
(i(s)- f(0))/s:22n,
(4.13) to expressru(0) in[r,(0),
terms of rr(s), ilA(s), {(s), and {(0).
Now
from which we infer that

,-"'
[f(s),
i(0)]:2r[zrr,
{(0)]:0. (4.11) ,l-lt}l",lJ;,t,?_;r'lT,J:[]5
3*;
The constantvector encounteredon integration of Eq. "".,
rr(0)]:[-2sllu(s),
(4.24)
r"(s)]-3;r.
(4.10),

fu,Il,ln,eA(():C,,

(4.15)

has the following evident properties:

n,C,:0,

Ju,+C,:0, Ju,C,: -n,nfl,

Cr2:

(nll)2'

31: ls-:(.r;,(s) - 2r"(s).r,(0){i;r(0)) - 2ts-'

,\ a, ' ,r ^u ',l

The elimination of f,II" from the equation of motion,

with the aid of Eq. (4.15),gives
d.Ir,/ d.s: (d./dl)l2c,eA(t)-

n,e2A2(l)
+nFeF(o+oJf,

(4.17)

flr: ldr,/ ds: (l / 2nn)l2C ,eA (l) - n,e,42 (l)

D,,
!n,eF([)iaJfl

(4.18)

whence

where Du is an integration constant. Note, incidentally,

that
JP*il':

Jp*D4

[rr(s),
No other nonvanishing commutator intervenes in
bringing 3Cto the form

(4.19)

which is independent of s, in agreement with Eq. (4.7).

,"tr'r

f(r) - {(0) Jr(o)

1
f flk)
t2
-?rto:rrrll,LJ-,0,
dteA(d (42s)
l'

in which a constant added to l({) is without effect, as

required by the correspondingambiguity of Eq. (4.11).
The solution of the differential equation (2.37) is
(x(s)'I r(Oj ") : C (!, f' 15-z expfl](x'- x"):/sl
frll
Xexpf-isz(i'-i")
L

dfle,A,-eF[ofll
J|t , ,
J

x*{;,(rza'- t"l ate)'),, g,26)

['',

217
JULIAN
where
t':ttrrr',

V. 1-DECAY OF NEUTRAL MESONS

(/. rJ\

t":nutcu"

In this section we shall apply the results of our

proper-time method to compute the effective coupling
btween a zero spin neutral meson and the electromagnetic field, as produced by the polarization of the
proton vacuum. This interaction manilests itself in a
spontaneous decay of the neutral meson into two
photons.
The lagrange function for a spinless neutral meson

The function C(r', r") is determined by the difierential

equations (2.38) and (2.39), in conjunction with Eq.
( 4 . 2 6 )T
. hus.

l-

- ro,1*'1
- f ,,(x'- e'),-:-(eA
ou,'
-

1
* -t
<

G')

ft'
\ I
atuAQ)
r"):0.
|
' Jrlc(x',
"f"

672

SCHWINGER

field, in scalarinteractionwith the proton-antiproton

(4.28) field,is givenby
s:-+l(d'6)'+p'6'l-cq{L0"tf'

(5 1)

The solution of this equation will be obtained in terms

of a line integral which is independent of the integration
path. Again choosingthe path to be a straight line, rve
find simolv

To find an approximate expression for the resultant

coupling betweenthe neutral mesonfield and the electromagnetic field, rve replace |[r1,9] by its vacuum
expectation value, calculated in the presence of a
homogeneous electromagnetic field. The use of the
I
C{r',r"):C
dr",4,("r)l:Co(*',
x"), (4.2s) latter to represent the photons emitted in the spon"*VlU
[,,',,
taneousneutral meson decay introducesa small error,
which is measured by the square of the meson-proton
in view of the antisymmetry of J*. It is evident that
mass ratio, (p/M)'?:>1/40. On the other hand, by
(4.30) ignoring the efiect of the meson field on the proton
C: -i(lr)-'.
vacuum, we obtain only the initial approximationof a
Only the behavior of the transformation function for
perturbation treatment. Norv
xr't=rr" is of actual interest in applications to vacuum
polarizationphenomena.Now for f'-f",
(\t0@, {(,)f):i
t r G ( x ,r )
-12
7
I
rt'
f
ft'
r'
: -M
t d s e r p ( - i M ? s )t r ( r l U ( s ) l r )
*,
I dtA,(1-l ; I dEA(il|
.-1

and

"t',

L l",
-<
J
"t,,
^+(t' - E")'F',l+(t'
+ t')1, (4.31)

(E'- t")'F": (r'- r")unrF2n,(t'- x")"

: _ (r, _ r,,) uF pxFy"(x,_ r,,)

Jo

- _ aao)(x)/aM,

(5 2)

according
to Eqs.(2.30)and (2.31).Thus,the efiective

(4.32) lagrange function coupling term between the neutral

",
meson and the electromagnetic field is given by
(4.1)
(4.4).
accordingto Eqs.
and
Therefore,for rr'-ru"
(r(s)' I r(o; ";-i(4r)-zo 1s',*r' 1'-z
X exp[i]s-1(r'- r"),(6u,f ](es)'1P"
,fp)(x'- r"),)
Xexp(|ieo,,Fu,s), (1.33)
rvhich is identical with the transformationfunction for
a. constant field, as simplilied by the special characteristics of the field now under consideration;namely,

s'(r): g6@)0ao(r)/aM,
rvhich clearly also follorvs directly from the proton
held equation of motion,
Lt?ia-eA)IM*c6l{:0,

(s.4)

in the approrimation which treats {(r) as a rveak,

slowly varying, prescribedfield. If rve retain only the
G
O-n
(4.34) leading term in the expansionof 8(1) for u'eak fields,
u - vn ,
J-v.
Eq. (3,45),we have
We can conclude,without further calculation, that
r'
the physical quantities characterizing the plane wave
field, the components of the energy-momentum tensor O t ' t ' 0 M > ( e t / 6 n r l M I d s e x p ( - , l f r s ) J
Jn
2",, wi{l be identical in form rvith those of a constant
:(2a/3r)(I/M)s.
(s.s)
field that obeys Eq. (4.34).On referring to Eq. (3.57),
rve see that Tu, Ior a plane wave is just that of the
Therefore the effective coupling term is
maxwell field, rvhich may be simplifred further to
(5.6)
s,':(a/3n)(g/LI)d(H'-D'),
(4.3s)
T u,: F ryF nrn,Pz1E1.
"1:
rvhich describesthe decay of a stationary meson,into
Thus, there are no nonlinear vacuum phenomena for a
two parallel polarizedphotons, at the rate
single plane rvave, of arbitrary strength and spectral
(5.7)
hc)(p/M)'?(pc'/ h).
7/ r : (a2/ 744r3)(g'z/
comDosition.

218
673

GAUGE

INVARIANCE

AND

POLARIZATION

VACUUM

by
A pseudoscalar interaction between the spinless meson and electromagnetic field is given
neutri,l meson field and the proton field is described by
e'(r)=(s/2M)a,6@)((1/2i.)l{'(r),*t,t@)l)..
the term
: (g/2M)a,SQt)tryn,$@,*)

c6@)El0@),%Ur))

in the lagrange function. For our purposes, this is

replaced by

: s6@)
s' (tc)
Gli @),r{ @)l)
:is6@) try6c(,c,
*)
:-s6@)M

nI dsexp(-iM'?s)
ro
Xtrvs(*luG)lr).

-is
The transformation function (3.20)' with
stituted for s, Yields
g, : _ g6M (4r)-,

r'
I

*)1, (5.15)
+ - (g/2M)g(x)6,ftr167,G(*,

(s'8)

where the last version represents the results of integrating by parts. We now remark that this derivative
has the following meaning:

1 (0u" lieA r(n" ))l try 6vrG(r', tc"),

dss-z exp(- Mzs)e-t(a)

tr767,fi(x', *")
en

Xtrzs exp(leoFs). (5.10)

1-i

f^
I ds exp(-M'zs)$
Jo

:(a/r)(g/M)OI"H.

"

1S

tr767uG(r', r")
r/( t t\

:itr75|

ndsexP(-iMzs)
.to

x (*(s)'l](n,(s)- II,(0))| r(0)")

(5' 13)

-tr1lopo

The pseudovector interaction term,

(r/ zi.)l{(x),t *,!(*)f,

k/ 2M)a,g(x)

a'
I
Jo

ds exP(-iI'1'?s)

x(*(s)'l*(n,(s)*II,(0))|*(0)")' (s'18)

(s.14)

is formally equivalent to (5.8) for the problem under

discussion, in the apploximation to which it is being
treated. This is demonstrated by a partial integration,
combined with the use of the Dirac equation (2.1). Yet
it has been found difficults'? to verify the equivalence
in the actual results of calculation. Such discrepancies
between formal and explicit calculations may be produced by insufficient attention to the limiting processes
imolicit in the formalism. We shall demonstrate that,
wi[h appropriate care, the proper equivalence between
the psiudoscalar and pseudovector couplings is indeed
exhibited.
The efiective Dseudovector interaction between the
? J. Steinberger,Phys. Rev. 76, ll80 (1949).

X(r(s)'lr,(0)lr(0)").(s.17)

The result of averaging thesetwo equivalent expressions

This effective coupling terrn implies the decay of a

stationary neutral meson, into trvo perpendicularly
polarized photons, at the rate
1/ r-(a2/64rs)(g'/ hc)(p/ M)'z(pc'z/h).

J^

X (r(s)'lr,(s) | r(0)//)
r: -i trr,"vt'vp
I ds exP(-iM2s)
Jo

(5'11)

In view of Eq. (3.a3), we obtain, without further approximation, simPlY

ds exP(-iM'zs)

Lr757r1"I

"

Now, the eigenvaluesol laF, as related to those of 7s

by Eq. (3.31)' give

g':g6Q2/4r2)M

(5.16)

in which the structure oI the right side is dictated by

( 5 . 9 ) the requirement that only gauge covariant quantities be
employed. We shall verify that the straightforward
sub- evaluition of Eq. (5.16)yields the pseudoscalarcoupling
(5.12), without further dificultY.
According to Eq. (3.21)

Jo

tr76 exp(feoFs) : - 4 Im coshesX'

lim l(0,' - ieAu@'))

6,f tr1 67uG(tc,*)]:

We shall be content to evaluate Eq. (5.18) in the approximation of weak fields. On referring to Eqs' (3'4)'
in
iS.S), ana (3.20), it is apparent that the leading term
this approximation is
lry6yrG(x', r")
- r"),Fx,Q(t', n")
: - (e/ 64r'z) try aaroox*(*'
X I

dss-zexp(-iM2s) erp[il(.r'-*")'?/s]

: (e/ 8 12)F u,a(x' - x" ),Q(r', r" )

X I

dss-2exp(-iM2s) expli'a@'-x")2/

sl,

(5'19)

219
JULIAN

674

SCHW INGER

with the aid of Eqs. (3.25) and (3.27). Since we are

concerned with the behavior of this quantity only for
fi'-lc", we may evaluate the proper time integral by
an appropriate simplification. For x'>:r",

The related operator

dss-'?erp(- iM'?s)erp[i](r'-*")fsl

iq dpterminerl

I/(s): I/o-'(s) t/(s),

(6.6)

U6(s): exp(- irc6s),

(6.7)

where

hv

(6.8)

ia"Z(s): Uo-r(s)ccrUo(s)Z(s)

f'
| d.ss-,e*pUrn(x,_x,')r/sl
Jo

and
(6.e)

v(0): 1.
t*

One can combineEqs. (6.8) and (6.9) in the integral

equation

d(s-') erp[i] (.r,-.r.,,;zr-11

Jo

:4i/ (x'-tc")'.

i/< ?n\

f"

f(s): 1-i I

Jo

Therefore,
try67uG(r', i')
-(ie/2r2)Q(r' , r")Fu,*(r'- r")"(r'-

and construct the solution by iteration:

r't)-2.

(s.21)

To obtain the quantity of actual interest, Eq. ( 5 . 1 6 ) , I / ( s ) : 1 - ;

we observe that

x")
l(0,' - i,eA
u@'))-l (0,"t ieAu@"))16(x',
XF,,*(r'- r"),(r'- x")-2: i.e1(r', x")

F r"* (x' - x"),F ux(x'- tc")7(x'- s")-2,

(3.3s),
Fu,*(r'-r"),Frx(x'-r")a:g(*'-l'12,
- (e2/2r2)g Iim

,Q(x',

s't:s'112,"',

(6.12)

we oDlaln Lneexpansron
U(s): exp(-i3cs)

(a/r)(g/M)6f..H,

i'q ?(l
fl

..
: %(s)+ (- ;s) | du,Uo((l- u,)s)tcrIlo(zrs)*.
ro

VI. PERTURBATIONTHEORY

ft

We shall now discuss the approximate evaluation of

drr -t exp(-iz'?s)TrU(s),

(6.1)

fl

*(-ts)' I ur"-tdut"' l d,"

Jo
Jo
X Uo((1-ar)s)Jcps(u1(l-u)s). . .
X U o ( u t .. . u " - t ( l - u " ) s )

by an expansion in powers of eAu and aFr,. For this

purpose, we write
K:3fo*Kt

(6.2)

where
Ko: Pz

(6.3)

and
Kl:

(6.11)
dr"Llo-'{r")JcJJo(s")+....

s':s,tt,

(5.24)

in completeagreementwith Eq. (5.12).

f*

fo

x")

Thus, Eq. (5.15)yields

W(1):ia I
J0

ds'U0-'(s')JCrU0(s')

( 5 . 2 3 ) O n i n t r o d u c i n g n e w v a r i a b l e s o f i n t e g r a t i olnf ,,r , N z t . . . t
according to

: - (2a/r)9.

e':

f'

Jo

ds'(Js-L(s')K1IJ
+ e D'
s(s')
I,

(5.22)

accordingto Eqs. (3.15)and (3.16).But, in view of Eq.

}ultrysluG(x, r)f:

(6.10)
ds'LIo-t7s'lxcrUr(s')tr/(s'),

- e(pA+ Ap)-leoFle2A2.

(6.13)

Instead of taking the trace of this expressiondirectly,

which would involve further simplification, 'we remark
that
TrU(s)-TrUo(s)

(6.4)

To obtain the expansion of TrU(s) in powers of 3C1,we

observe that U(s) obeys the differential equation

ta"U(s): (3co*3cr)U(s).

XK:Uo(ut.' It"s)+....

: -is

fr
I dr TrFcr exp(-i(Jco*I3cr)s)l

(6.14)

Jo

(6.5) and insert the expansion(6.13) for exp[-i(3co*tr3cr)s].

220
675

GAUGE

INVARIANCE

AND

VACUUM

POLARIZATION

Thus,

Therefore

TrU(s): TrUo(s)f (- rs)tr[rcrUo(s)J

2ie2 r.
I
f
-is
(dk)
W(t\:;::
| . d s s - t e x p ( - z ' r z , s ) l J|
(Zn)aJo
t

f1

* i ( - r'), I tta T rlr JJo((r- u) s)KJto(u,s)l*. . .

Jo
r_.is),+r /.r

+'

fr

I uf-tda"'l

Jo

n*l

Jo

exp(-iP's)
xA,(-k)A,(k) @.P)
J

du"

f L f f

*i(-,t), I la, | @k), (dp)zpFa/-h)

J_L
J
.'

XTr[3iluo((l-zr)s)JCr.' .
XI(IUo(a..'u"s))+....

x exp(- i (pt \ k),1(1- a)sl

(6.15)

x2.?,A,(k) expl- i(p - ik)'zi(1*u)sl

We shall retain only the first nonvanishing field

dependentterms in this expansion:

?L?f

*t(-&), | +a,| @k)| (dp)I tr+oF(-k)

J
J
.)-r
xexpl- i(p-fih)'*(1 - o)sl*rF(ft)

r'
W(L):+ie2 | drr-t exp(-imzs)
Jo

xexpl- i.(f -ik;zi(r+r,)sJ l.

x | -i, r.[l'

t-

exp(-a'r's)l

We thus encounter the elementary integrals

fr

*1(-"s)'

(6.1e)

I id.aTrl(fA-l Ap) exp(- ip'zi$- t)s)

J_1

J@'PexvGif's):-;ort-2,

x (pA+ A p) exp(- ip'?|(1f z)s)l

tl

++(-?s)' I
J 1

(6-20)

| (k'/ 4))st iPhs)

@Dexvl- i(P'z
: -'ir2s-2expl- i(k'?
/ 4)(l- d)sf, (6.21)

lao T:il|,'or
"xp(-ip'z|(1-z)s)
and

x*aF exp(-ip1;(1+,)rll. (6.16)

t

For convenience, the variable zr has been replaced by

*(1*z). The evaluation of these traces is naturally
performed in a momentum representation. The matrix
elements of the coordinate dependent feld quantities
depend only on momentum difierences,

: - exp(- i|ft'?s)(ts)-'@
/ ak,)(a/ak")
x

@D exp(-i|2s+i|kos)

: - iozs-z(- i| s-r6rl lrzkuk

")

(p++klA,l p- +k): (2r)4 @r)e-ik'Au@)

J
=(2r)-'zAr(k),

p)p,p expl- i (p'zI @'1

/ 4))s* i phtsl
@.
"

XexPl- iLk'(I- rf) sf. (6'22)

(6.17)

and

It is convenientto replacethe 6r, term of the last integral by an expression

whichis equivalentto it in virtue
of the integrationwith respectto u. Now

(plA,'l !) : (2r)-a @x)

A,,(*)
J
: (2il-'

@k)AF/-k)A,(k). (6.1s)

idn exvl-irlz(l-o'?)sl
fr

: 1- is|kz
|

J_l

+a*' expl- i.ik'(l-o2)sl'

G.23)

221
JULIAN
rn

SCHWINGER

pfraefirrohr

fhqf

The field strength and charge renormalization con_

tained in Eq. (3.48) then produces rhe finite gauge
mvanant result-6

@il !,?, e*vl- i (|'z+|k )s* iphas

l
: - |rz s-36r"- irz s-2!o2(krk,- 5
r,pz|
Xexpl-

676

w:J

ilkz (r - *) sf .

(6.24)

@HiF,,(-i.)FPG)

o h, f,
t 2 ( 1 - l-t 2 )
..f.
I
- | dr
Xl 1-l.
J
L
4r m2 o
ll(hr/4n )(l_72)l

On inserting the values of the various integrals, and

roticing that

(o.,tor

The restriction which we have thus far imposed. that

no actual pair creation oicurs, correspondsto the
re obtain immediately the gauge invariant form (with requirement that 1lG2/4mr)(1-rr1 never vanishes.
This will be true if -k214m2, for all i, contained in
the fourier representalion
o f t h e f i e l d . T n d e e d .i t i s
evident from energy and momentum considerations
:r'",:-@* roul+o,,t-olr,61fo'
o,{r-o")
that to produce a pair by the absorption of a single
[
quantum the momentum vector of the latter must be
tim.e-likeand must have a magnitude exceeding2ru. We
fd s s- I e x p l- l m z J l h z ( l - z , r l s ] . ( 6 . 2 6 ) shall now simply remark that, to extend our iesults to
XJ
pair-producing fields, it is merely necessaryto add an
i n f r n i t e s i m an
l e g a t i v ei m a g i n a r y c o n s l a n t t o t h e d e _
lnis has been achieved without any special device,
nominator of Eq. (6.30) and inlerpret the positive
::her than that of reserving the proper-time integration
imaginary contribution to l4l lhus obtained wirh rhe
:: the last.
statement that
-{_significant.separation of terms is produced by a
(6.31)
I eiw12: e-2r-v
: ::tial integration with respect to a, according to
represents the probability that no actual pair creation
fr
r'
o c c u r sd u r i n g t h e h i s t o r yo f t h e f i e l d .T h e i n 6 n i l e s i m a l
I aul-t',1 Jo| drr-, exp{-lmz+lk2(l-zr)lsJ
imaginary constant, as employed in
h,k,- 6p"k2)
A N(- k)A'(k) : _ +F p,(_ k)F p(k),

=3

f'

|
Jo

(6.25)

11
lim-_:p_1o;51r;,

rl

dss-rexp(- z2s)-lhz I aaqaz-!"tr1

Jo
X

f_
ds expl-ln2l![r(1-2,)]s].
I

(6.27)

--,'iing the action integral of the maxwell

field, which
: :rpressed in momentum spaceby
w(o):-

.++u t_Ie

tepresents a familiar device for dealing with real processes.We obtain from Eq. (6.30) thai

2r,,,w:+d[@brFp"(-k)Fp"(kt\a*,
I'

@k)iFp"(_h)Fp,(k),

(6.2s)

"('-{),['+

,,: obtain the modified action integral,

f-e'f-l
= -Lt*
a"-'t*01-'"'-,
,u'Jo

x {an)+r,t-n)n,"{n)
[
*L

k)F,.(k)
h,
f toa+r,,(fI

v2(1-Ia2\

x t db-----:--' -. (6.2s)
Jo
m,jf,kz(l-a2)

(6.32)

lo-,,t]

t- DF"(- k)FwG)
" I -r,,!11t
x( r!*t't
\ (-r)/

4 m '\
r
-\'z+
eh\)

(6'33)

For the weak fields that are being considered,Eq. (6.33)

is just the probability that a paii is crearedby tLe 6eld.
It should be noticed, incidenialy, that

-1F,,(- k)F,,(h):+llB(h),- H(p) ,l

I I
I

(6.34)

The corresponding
result for a spin zero charsed6eld is ob.

itrJ',lilif{i'f
iilijiilili::',.??i,i.r'"",;*lfl
"?i,'r",/'ii
rr-ir,,

rD xq. (o.JUJ.

222
GAUGE

677

INVARIANCE

POLARIZATION

AN D VACUUM

regularization."
is actually positive for a pair-generating field. This time method and that of "invariant
the action integral
follows, for example, from the vanishing of the mag- The vacuum polarization addition to
netic field in the special coordinate system where &, has has the general structure
only a temporal component.
k)K!"(k,m')A,(k). (6.42)
w :
An alternative version of Eq. (6.33) is obtained by
"' [ {an).t,(replacing the field with the current required to generate
this field, according to the maxwell equations
The proper-time technique yields the coefficient
ik,Fu'(k): -J'(h)'
/ 6 ? q \ Kn(k, tn2)in the form
hFF,^(k)+ k,F ^u(At| frrFr,(A): 0.
n*
Now
K u ( h ,n ! ) l o : I d se x p ( - i n : s ) K " , ( [ , s ) , ( 6 . 4 3 )
ro
h^2F,,(- h)F,,lk) : 2k,F,,(- h\k$xp(k) /6 16)
:2J,(-k)J,G),
where K",(4, s) is a finite, gauge invariant quantity;
so thate
infinities appear only in the final stage of integrating s
to the origin. In efiect' this method substitutes a lower
z rmw:(o/\m,) [
@ktJ,(-h)JpG)
limit, se, in the proper time integral and reserves the
J -.,,>e^"
limit, so+0, to the end of the calculation. If, on the
X ( 1 - z ) a r * ( 2 * z ) ,$ . 3 7 ) contiary, the proper-time technique is rrot explicitly
introduced, K*(h, m2) will be representedby divergent
where
( 6 . 3 8 ) integrals which lead, in general, to non-gaugeinvariant
1:4m' /(_k ).
resJts. The regulator technique avoids the difficulty by
It is now appropriate to notice that the integral introducing a suitable weighted integration with respect
(3.49), representing the lagrange function for a uniform to the square of the proper mass, thus substituting for
field, hasiingularities,unless9:0, $>0, corresponding K.(k, m2), the quantitY
to a pure mignetic field in an appropriate coordinate
f'
s v s t e m .T h i s i s t h e a n a l y t i ce x p r e s s i oonf t h e f a c t t h a t
(6'44)
K , , ( h , m z ) l p : I d * p ( x ) K , , ( h ,x ) .
pairs are created by a uniform electric field' ln parJ_6
-25:
E')0, which invariantly
iicular, for g,:0,
characterizesa pure electric field, the lagrange function The "regulator" p(x) must reduce to 6(x-m2), in an
proper time integral,
approp.iite limit, and will produce gauge invariant
in this problem if the following integral condiresulti
fditions are satisfied:
g:i|z( l / 8 r ' ) | d r s - 3e x p ( - n 2 s )
Jo
rl"(6 15)
I d * P ( r ) : 0 , J,- . d R K P ( K ) : o '
X [ e d s c o t ( e E s ) -1 * i ( a 6 s ) ' ? ] ' ( 6 . 3 9 )
J-has singularities at
s:s,:nr/eE,

n:1,2,""

Expressed in terms of the fourier transformed quan( 6 . 1 0 ) tities,

If the integration path is considered to lie above the

real axis, which is an alternative version of the device
embodiedin Eq. (6.32),we obtain a positive imaginary
contribution to S,
l @

2ImA:-

! s"*'zexp(-ds")
4n ":r

n(s):

['*a*e-*,oe),

K,,(k,s): lt/zd

(6.46)

x),
!*.au*"Ku@,

we have

r,"@,*'D o:

:X*t,*"*,(#) (641)

s),
!-.dsR(s)K,,(F,

(6.47)

while the conditions on p(x) appear as

This is the probability, per unit time and per unit

volume, that a pair is created by the constant electric
field.
We must now consider, in the framework of this
special problem, the connection between the proper
, e ri-"f" example,to whichthis formulamay b-eapplied,is
j=0--0 transitionJ R oppentrt".l*il,i" oi u pu'i.;nu nuclear
Pbvs.Rev.56,1066(1s3e)'
i;i;;;;"J J. Schwinger,

R(0):0,

R'(0):0,

R(s)+exp(-iz'?s)'

(6'48)

Now observe that the proper time method yields

K,,(h,m2) in the form (6.47)' with
(6'49)
t'O'
K"(fr' s;:g'
and
R(s): saPl-;rzs),
:0,

s) s6
s(si.

(6.s0)

223
JULIAN

S CH W I N G E R

This R(s), and all its derivatives,vanishesat the origin,

thus satisfying the regulator conditions as s0+0. It
appears, then, that regularization is a procedure for
inserting, into a calculation that does not employ it,
enough of the structure provided by the proper time
representation to ensure gauge invariant results.

On averaging the two forms, we find that

QuQ\:

-ef-

X tr(r(s)' | *(tlu(s) * I1,(0)) lr(0)") ]",,,,',

(4.1)

In the absenceof a field, the equations of motions are solved by

IIu(s):IIu(0),

ru(s):ru(O) |2IIu(0)s.

(A.2)

-\s a fi$t approximation for rveak fields, we accordingly write

4t7uG)
/ d.s: le/ (2r)'7f

II,(0) ]
@n)n,,ln) koot,(o)+2il(oh),

+ e/ (2d' f @k) ik ptaxvF\e(k)eik(' (ot+2nrc)"). (A.3)

On integrating rvith respect to s, one obtains

r,(s)-ru(o): [e/(2il,ff Gh)Fu,G)

x f,' d{ 1"'ra o*'n (Dr'),rr,(o)]
+ e/ (2d' f @ilibp+o^,F
x,G)
' < f " d " ' ' * - o ' " n ' o * ' r ' ( A4 )
ylelcls
lntegrahon
i Second
- r.t_" /n\
- n u ( o t + c / t 2 r ) , JG h ' F p t k )
t;'
xf"
*4-

as'1-s 1s11et&('(o)+'tr(0)!'),
11,(0)
|

\zr )' u

(4.9)

exists in the absence of a

(A.10)

and, therefore, only the transformation function in the absence

of a 6eld is required for the first order evaluation of Eq. (A.9).
Now

trau,(r(s)'
I *(nls) -n,(0)) r(o)")
: l2e/ (2dlf @k)(aFp"/ ax")(il s
rt,+d!
r(0)"), (4.11)
X (r(s)'lexp[z'(&r(s)](1*r)*r*(o)](1-a)ll
in which the variable s' has been replaced by r, according to

(4.1.2)

s,: s(rlr) /2.

Theoperators
Ar(s)andtr(0) do not commute:
[A*(s),]r(0)l: zs[&r(0),]r(0)l: -2is]'

(A.13)

We may, however, employ the easily established theorem,

(A.14)

eA+B:eAeBe_u^,R1,
for operators

atd

B that

commute

rvith

their

commutator

ft, Bl. Thus,

exp[i(fr
*(s)1(1*a)]rr(0)i(1- z))l
-r)]
: exp[t,4r(s)+(1
+?)] exp[r,tr(0)4(1
XexPl-ik2\(1-t')sl,

(A.15)

and

tra,,(r(s)'| ] (n,(s)- n,(0))| r(0)")1,,,,,,-"

f dhtik,iat'6t

: l2e/(zi,lf

@k)eitu(aF
u,/dt,)(k)s
f,"ld.t
-t)/(az)'s'?. (4.16)
Xexpl- ik2iQ- z2)sl(

A similartreatmentappliesto

therefore

tr(c(s)'| $(n,(s)f n,(0))l,(0)')1,,,,..-,

'.
(
: ]\
f tan or,,u\s f ldw(x(s'f Iex|[i/&r(sr]tf ot

:(uu(s)f lru(0)
= t ' ( t ) r " u t o ) + , , " , ' l ' 1 a t r r , ,p 1
u
zr

\zr )- v

\zT)-

*rr(0)*(1 - a))l, (c,(s)-r,(0))/2sI I r'(0))1,..,,,,.. (A 17)

" d s ' C - + / l e ' r ' i I 0 ) + 2 r0I r s ' , ,

xJ
n,(0rl

With the aid of the commutation relations,

ur,
f ? i f t r ( 0 ' , ,ur ' . . r , r s ) ] : - f r r f i_ z ) s e i * r ' o r l , t i', r+ur,
fe;h(s)l',+,),f,fo)]= F,(l +?)seitr

+j=
f @ptia,+"rot
\zrt' !
x../"" ar({-

;),'-'"'6'a2s'or').

(A.0)

The induced curlent is equivalently expressedby

j,(r)):

- n,(0)) r(0) ")

l''.,,' -'.
|

Iim (c(s)'lr*(s)-ru(0)lr(0)"):a,
r'-,"-+0

xJ" tar(l-{)'"('(o)+'tr(oF'), (A s)
:rd

d.s exp(-im's)

X trou,(r(s)' | *(r,(s)

It may be noted here that no current

field, since

APPENDIX A

@k)eik,F p"(h)

ds exp(-im2s)

-iefo-

It is our purpose here to use the proper time equations of motion

2.36) for the computation of the current induced in the vacuum
:.. a weak, arbitrarily varying field:

F,,(x) : lr / (2fl \f

678

lr@\

e trTu\rI (7II - z)Jo ds exp(- in s\U (s)| x

)
: eI- ds e*p(-i.^,s) trTu-y,(r(s)'lrr,( s)l*(o)t)1.,,.,,,",
(A'7)

:nd
/ltl\
1,f r))- e tr-rr\* J o ds exp( - i n2s)U Gr{'rn - ut r,)
|
I
: eI- ds e"p(-;.-'s) tra,.yu(r(s)'| II,( o)l s(o)")b.,,,-".
(4.8)

(A.lg)

this reducesto
tr(r(s)' I 4(IIu(s)*II,(0)) | r(0)")1,,,.,.-,
: - l2ie / (2n)z1f 1dk)eik'(aF,, / ax,) (k),
f
XexplWe have thus obtained

ik2!(1 - il)sl( - i)/(4r)'zs'?. (A. 19)

"tarr"

<jp(()>: - (d /2i (2d-, f @k)ett'(dF,,/ a'"){il fo' d.r{r- o,1

XJ'

dss-1expl -[z'+ifr'(1-?'?)]s],

(A.20)

in which the substitution s+-is has again been introduced. This

is precisely the current derived from the action integral I7(r) of
Eq. (6.26), and further discussionproceedsas in Sec.VI.

224
GAUGE

679

INVARIANCE

AND

APPENDD( B

VACUU.M

PO.LARIZATION

which gives

An electronin interactionwith its properradiationfield,and M(*, r') : v0516- r') +le, / (4d\foan external6el{, is desuibedby the modifiedDirac equation,lo
.y,(-i0u-eA,(r)){,1x14 1a{a@, r),r'(r')=0.
f

(8.1)

To the secondorder in a, the massoperator, M(c, r'), is given by

(8.2)
r')|ie27 uG(x, r')1nD*(r-r').
M(r, r'):ao51!Here G(r, *') is tJreGreen'sfunctionof the Dirac equalionin tle
is a photon Green's function, ererternal field, atd Da(r-r')
pressedby
D+(x-rt):

(4il-rf-

du z explillr-/)2/tj.

(8.3)

We shall supposeibe external field to be weak and uniform.

Under these conditions, the transformation function (r(s) | r(0)'),
involved in the construction of G(r, r'), may be approximatedby
(r(s) I r(0)')- -t(ar)-za(r,
il')s-'
XexpUiio - r')2 / s7 exp(iiuF) ; (8.4)
that is, terms linear in the field strengths enter only through the
Dirac spin magnetic moment. The corresppndingsimplification of
the Green's function, obtain by averaging the two equivalent
{orms in Eq. (3.21),is
G(r, r')=(4r)'za(x,

*')Jn

Xexp[dI(*-*')'/r]t

(B.s)

The mass operator is thus approximately represented by

xrii{-rfr+

au-

n, exp(i!eo
fl }^v1, @.6)

lt F i a- eA)* n - p'io Flg : s,

nol @/2in

{-

6rr-'

(8.14)

f"

6.r-,12--

y11
(8.15)

representsthe mass of a free electron, and

p, : (. / 2,) emi
L-

ds
f:

r')

Q.w/ s) (w/ s) (r - zu/ s)

lerp[-jz,(s-a)]

(8.16)

dercribesan additional spin magnetic moment. B-othintegrals-are

conveniently evaluated by introducing
aad roking
(B.g)

(B.ro)

employedhere will be dircussedat lengtl in

(8.17)

u:l_w/s,

@.7)

md employed properties oI the Dirac matrices, notably

'ytoptx:o.
(B.e)
We shall also write
(r - r') u6(r, r' ) expAIk - x')2/ w1
:2u(-iap-eA
p(&)-leF p,(r-r'),)a(*, r') expAi@-r'),/w)
=l2w(-idueAr(*)) -2w,eF r,(-ia"-eA,(r))l

Xo(r, r') eali.iQ-r')2/wl,

(B.13)

we obtain

Xe*pL- im2(t-w)l

as-' ea1- in,'i

10The concepts
later publications.

:exp(in'w)*(rl,

since ry'(r) is an eigenfunction oI 3C, with the eigenvalue -22.

Therefore, on discarding all terms corftaining the operator of the
Dirac equation, which will not contribute to
a.

n:

drr. 2 explt'nk - x')'/wf

fo'
xL- +n - s-t'y(r- l) I Lilt! - x'), ieoPll,
in which we have replaced I by the variable u,
p_r:s_r+r_r,
x f,-

|r (o)')(dr' )o@): f @l u (w)|x')(dr' ),te' )

f @@)

where

or
M (r, x') : 6061*- *') lliaz / (4r)afo(*,

'u (8.12)
tleia-eA),
|oFf:z;"rp1"or.
We now introduce a perturbation procedurein which the mass
operato! assumes the role customarily played by ttre energy. To
evaluate ;f(drt)M(r,*')9@),
we replace {(r') by t}re unperturbed wave function, a solution of the Dirac equation associated
witl tfie massz (we need not distinguish, to this approximation,
between the actual ross z and the mechanical mass uo), The r'
integration can be efiectedimmediately,

(- i.n\) *o
X exp
[ul" O,(1+)]
r -^.t ---'\

in virtue of the relation

f \ai {a4* {")a {r,/ ),t(i),

d.ss-' exp(-inzs)
'l
( _^,t-_-'\
r,exp(r]@F)].
\-ff+

M (x, *') : m66(r- r') *licz / @r)afo(r, { fo- au- f-

dss-' exb(-iro")

x f" aryz*qz - * 1g * ew / s)(t G ia - eA) * m)

- 2ni(l -w / s)iletF - iw(l*w / s)
X It(- i.a- eA)*m, EUF l)(r(u) | x(o)), (B.11)

the replacement s+-rr

which yields

6: 6oa@/2flnf- 6n-,fo'dulL+r) exp(-n2us)

:n"+(s*/4,)mll- a""-'"rp(-.,")*tu],
(8.18)
and
d.s
fo' auuG ut exp(-n2u)
- : (a/ 2r) (eh/ 2nc). (8.r9)
: (, / 2,) (e/ u)
f otd.u(r u)
We tlus derive the spin nagnetic momentof d/2r magnetotrs
producedby second-order
massefiats.
electromagnetic
p' : (a/ z4 en
t-

225

P o p e r2 l

The Theory of Positrons

Departnent

R. P. FevNeN
oJ Physics, Cornell, Uni,wrsity,

Ithaca, Nw

Vorh

(Received April 8, 1949)

The problem of the behavior of positrons and electrons ih given
external potentials, neglecting their mutual interaction, is analyzed
of the soluby replacing the theory of holes by a reinterpretation
iions of the Dirac equation. It is possible to u'rite down a complete
problem
in
the
terms
of
boundary
conditions
on the
solution of
save function, and this solution contains automatically all the
'rossibilities of virtual (and real) pair formation and annihilation
iogether lrith the ordinary scattering processes, including the
correct relative signs of the various terms.
In this solution, the "negative energy states" appear in a form
irhich may be pictured (as b)' Stiickelberg) in space-time as waves
rraveling arvay from the external potential backilards in time.
Experimentally,
such a lvave corresponds to a positron approaching the potential and annihilating the electron. A particle moving
iorward in time (eiectron) in a pote[tia] may be scattered forward
in time (ordinary scattering) or backward (pair annihilation).
\\'hen moving backrvard (positrou) it nray be scattered backrvard

in time (positron scattering) or forward (pair production).

For
such a particle the anplitude
for transition ffom an initial to a
finai state is analyzed to any order in the potential by considering
it to undergo a sequence of such scatterings.
The amplitude for a process involving many such particles is
the product of the transition amplitudes for each particle. The
exclusion principle requires that antisymmetric combinations of
amplitudes be chosen for those complete processes which difier
only by exchange of particles. It seems that a consistent interpretation is only possible if the exclusion principle is adopted. The
exclusion principle need not be taken into account in intermediate
states. Vacuum problems do not arise for charges rvhich do not
interact with one another, but these are analyzed nevertheless in
anticipation of application to quantum eiectrodynamics.
The results are also expressed in momentum-energy
variables.
Equivalence to the second quantization theory of holes is provecl
in an apoendix.

1. INTRODUCTION
as a whole rather than breaking it up into its pieces.
is the first of a set of papersdealing with the It is as though a bombardier flying low over a toad
fUfS
I
s o l u t i o n o fp r o b l e m s i nq u a n i u m e l e c r r o ' d y n a m i c ss. u d d e n l ys e e st h r e e r o a d sa n d i t i s o n l y w h e n t w o o I
The main principie is to deal directly with the solutions them cometogetherand disappearagainthat he realizes
passedover a long switchbackin a
ro the Hamiltonian differential equations rather than that he has simply
rith theseequationsthemselves.Here rve treat simply slngleroao'
This over-all space-timepoint of view leads to conihe motion oi electronsand positronsin given extern;l
problems'one can take
.otentials.rn a secondpaperwe considertfreinteractions siderablesimplificationin many
into account at the same time processeswhich ordiof theseparticles,thai is, quantum eleclrodynamics.
The pioblem of chargesin a fixed potenti;l is usually narily would have to be consideredseparately' For
example,when consideringthe scatteringof an electron
:reated by the method of secondquantization oI the
by a potential one automatically takesinto accounl the
electronield, using the ideas of the theory of holes.
effectsof virtual pair productions'The samequation,
Instead we show that t y u *ituut. .rroi."'."a i"[t
_ r. o. .D; - D i r a c ' s , w h i c h d e s c r i b e s l h e d e f l e c t i o n o l t h e w o r l d i i n
" *nI.n; .e p
l r e l a i l o n o r I n e s o l u u o n so "r ^u,r_r a. -c:s. "e_q.u. a. ;l r, o
of an electronin a nerd,can also describethe denection
;;;;;;
whenit islargeenough
"q,;it;ii,|u.;;;';;;;;.';;iJj=
:undamentally
nomore*-pri.","a ir'"' iir'.oi'i*..;.

Illl ll-il',t l':'l^pl"^l Tiil::t

nerhod
ordearing
withon.",'nio,""puiiiJr...'ir,"
i"'r: ::"1"^:::'-",t1:11:::":,',:,:1,5
L o p a l r a n n l n l n t l o n ' X:ll,llf'::i:T::lt.
vuantum,mecnanlcall)'
rus creation and annihilarion oDerators in the conven-

::"":Ponl

fielrlvieware requiredbecause
the :T".Til:':rur;;"llit"XTi"lli."rl
:iunalelectron

rs repraceo
Dv rne

rumber of particles is not conserved, i'e', pairs may be

This vierv is qrite different from that of the Hamil:reated or destroyed' on the..other hand.charge is tonian method which considersthe future as developing
:onserved which suggeststhat if lve.follow the charge, continuously from out of the past. Here we imagine the
rot the particle, the results can be simplified.
entire soace_timehistorv laid out. and that we iust
I n t h e a p p r o x i m a l i o no l c l a s s i c arl e l a t i v i s t i ct h e o r y b e c o . e a * a r e o f i n c r e a s l n gp o r t i o n so f i t s u c c e s s i v e l y .
:he creation of an electron pair (electron,4, positron B)
fn a scattering problem th]s over-all view of the com_
night be represented by the start of two
lines plete scatteririg processis similar to the S-matrix view_world
:rom the point of creation, 1. The world lines of the point of Heisenberg.The temporal order of events dur:ositron will then continue until it annihilates another lng the scattering, *fri.t is analyzed in such detail by
:lectron, C, at a world point 2. Between the times lr the Hamiltonian difierential equation, is irrelevant. The
:nd l: there are then three world lines, before and after relation of theseviewpoints will be discussedmuch more
rnly one. However, the world lines of C, B, and A fully in the introduction to the secondpaper, in which
:ogether form one continuous line albeit the "positron
the more complicated interactions are analyzed.
rart" -B of this continuous line is directed backwards
The development stemmed from the idea that in non,r time. Following the charge rather than the particles relativistic quantum mechanics the amplitude for a
:orresponds to considering this continuous world line given processcan be consideredas the sum of an ampli749

226
750

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

tude for each space-timepath available.r In view of the

fact that in classicalphysics positrons could be viewed
as electrons proceeding along world lines toward the
past (reference 7) the attempt was made to remove, in
the relativistic case,the restriction that the paths must
proceed always in one direction in time. It was discovered that the results could be even more easily
understood from a more familiar physical viewpoint,
that of scattered waves. This viewpoint is the one used
in this paper. After the equations were worked out
physically the proof of the equivalence to the second
quantization theorY was found.2
First we discuss the relation of the Hamiltonian
difierential equation to its solution, using for an example
the Schrddinger equation. Next we deal in an analogous
way with the Dirac equation and show how the solutions may be interpreted to apply to positrons. The
interpretation seems not to be consistent unless the
electronsobey the exclusionprinciple. (Chargesobeying
the Klein-Gordon equations can be described in an
analogous manner, but here consistency apparently
requires Bose statistics.)3 A representation in momentum and energy variables which is useful for the calcuIation of matrix elementsis described.A proof of the
equivalence of the method to the theory of holes in
second.quantization is given in the Appendix.
2. GREEN'SFUNCTION TREATMENT OF
SCIIRODINGER'SEQUATION
We begin by a brief discussion of the relation of the
non-relativistic wave equation to its solution. The ideas
will then be extended to relativistic particles, satisfying
Dirac's equation, and finally in the succeedingpaper to
interacting relativistic particles, that is, quantum
electrodynamics.
The Schrddinger equation
ia{//At:H{/,

(1)

describes the change in the wave function ,tt in an

infinitesimal time Al as due to the operation of an
operator exp(-iHA't). One can ask also, if ry'(xr'h) is
tlre wave function at xr at time lr, what is the wave
function at time lzll? It can always be written as
V g 2 , t z ) : f X G z , t r ; x r l, r ) * ( x r , / r ) d x r ,
J

(2,

where K is a Green's function for the linear Eq. (1).

(We have limited ourselves to a single particle of coordinate x, but the equations are obviously of greater
generality.) If 11 is a constant operator having eigenvalues.E", eigenfunctions d, so that ry'(x,lr) can be exC"O"(x), then 'y'(x, tr): exp(- iE"(tz- tr))
panded as f
"
XC"O"(x). Sirce C":-f6^*(x)ry'(xr, lr)dxr, one finds
-,
R E F"un.un.Rev.Mod. Phvs.20,367(1948).
.Tbe equivalence of the entire proce,Jure (including photon
interactions, witb the work of Schwinger and Tomonaga has been
demonstrated by F. J. Dyson, Phys. Rev. 75,486 (1949).
a These are speciaiexamples of the general relation of spin and
statistics deducid by W. P1uli, Phys. Rev. 58, 716 (1940).

(where we write 1 for X1,11&rld 2 lor x2, lz) in this case

K (2, l) :t,

d" (x') d"* (x') exp(- i E "(tz- t )),

(3)

f.or tz) ty We shall find it convenient lor tzlh to define

K(2,1)=0 (gq. (Z) is then nol valid for lz(/r). lt is
then readily shown that in general K can be defined by
that solution of

Qa/ab-H,)K(2,r):i6(2,r),

(4)

which is zerof.orlz<.h, where 6(2, 7):6(t2-l)6(*2-r)

and the subscript 2 on I12 means
X6(yz-y)6(zz-z)
that the operator acts on the variables ol 2 ol K(2' l).
When 11 is not constant, (2) and (4) are valid but K is
less easy to evaluate than (3).4
We can call K(2,1) the total amplitude for arrival
at x2, 12starting from x1, 11.(It results from adding an
amplitude,expiS,for eachspacetime path between these
points, where S is the action along the path.I) The
transition amplitude for finding a particle in state
x(xz,tz) at time lr, if at h it was in ry'(x1,l1), is
f

I x*\ztrQ,l

tP(1)d3x1drx,.

(5)

A quantum .Ln"ni.ut sysl-emis describedequally well

by specifying the function K, or by specifying the
Hamiltonian ,E from which it results. For somepurposes
the specifcation in terms of K is easier to use and
visualize. We desire eventually to discuss quantum
electrodynamics from this point of view.
To gain a greater familiarity with the K function and
the point of view it suggests, we consider a simple
perturbation problem. Imagine we have a particle in
a weak potential U(x,l'), a function of position and
time. We wish to calculate K(2,1) if {/ differs from
zero only for I between h and tz. We shall expand K in
increasing powers of [/:
(6)
K ( 2 , 1 ) : K o ( 2 , 1 ) + K ( ' ) ( 2 ' l ) + K ( 2 (' 2 , 1 ) + ' " .
, 0 ( 2 ,l ) . 0
T o z e r o o r d e ri n U , K i s t h a t f o r a f r e e p a r t i c l e K
To study the first brder correction K(D(2, l)' first consider the case that {/ differs from zero only for the
infinitesimal time interval Al: between some time /3
andls+Ah(tL<tg(rr). Then if ry'(l) is the wave function
at x1, 11,the wave function at x3, 13is
'/(3):

r K--o,( 3 ,l ) r y ' ( l ) d 3 x r '

(7)

since from tr to t, tJe particle is free. For the short

interval Als we solve (1) as
,!(x, fi! Att) : exp(- iH Lta){6, ta)
: (l - iE oah- iu at)tlt (x, I z),

aFor a non-relativistic free particle, where C":exp(ip'x),

(3) gives, as is well Lnown
B":p,/2n,
f
,.
t t:
exp[- (ip. x1- ip. x ) - if ( z- r t t 2nf&p(2r\-3
.l
"12,
: (lrin-t (rr h))-t srp(|in(xr- xr)'(tr- t J t)
lor tz)lt atd Ko:O lor lallr

227
THEORY

Ile being the Hamiltonian

where we put H:HstU,
of a free particle. Thus ry'(x,laf Ah) difiers from
rvhat it would be if the potential were zero (namely
(l-iHo\ts){/(x,ls)) by the extra piece
A!:

-iU(.n, tu).,!(4, tu)atx,

(8)

ryhich we shall call the adplitude scattered by the

potential. The wave function at 2 is given by
t l x z , t z \:

751

OF POSITRONS
--><-7r

SdITERO
/slrLl,Lu:q^
-.
rAvL
^6rz.r,

ffii
-*t<)<:{t\

:+ffi:-==
-:SS<=

\-.........R
\ ! \ -\ . . . + \ t -

e
\

xo{4J)CffiAlls\

Yxo(?''l

?8llJi8lq:j)5
>'!
YI
|

{\tilctoENt wAvEs
SPACE
(o, FIRST ORoER,EQ p)
(bl SECONO OROER, Ea.0O)

K o , x , t " , x a ,l r * A 1 r ) * ( x a ,l 3 + A / r ) d x r .

Ftc. 1. The Schriidinger (and Dirac) equation can be visualized

as describing the fact that plane waves are scallered successively
by a potentill. Figure I (a) illustrates the situation in first order.
since after ,r"+or, ,tr" particle is again free. Therefore Ko(2,3) is the amplitude for a free particle starling at point 3
to arrive at 2. The shaded region indicates the presence of the
rhe change in the wave function at 2 brought about by potential 4 which scatters at 3 with amplitude -i,4(3) per
(7)
(8)
(8)
(substitute
into
and
into cm3sec. (Eq. (9)). In (b) is illustrated the second order process
rhe potential is
(Eq. (10)), the waves scattered at 3 are scattered again at 4. Howthe equationfor ry'(xr,lr)):
ever, in Dirac one-electron theory ll(4,3)
would represent electrons
both of positive and of negative energies proceeding from
f
3
4.
This,is
difierent
to
remedied
by
choosing
a
scattedng kertrel
i
Ko(23
, JU 3 ) K o ( 3 , 1) r y ' ( 1 ) d x x : d 3 x r A / r .
LVtz):
I
Ka(4,3), Fig. 2.

In the case ,i", ,ft" potential exists for an extended

rime, it may be looked upon as a sum of effects from
eachinterval Alg so that the total efiect is obtained by
rntegratingover li as well as xr. From the definition (2)
rf ( then, we find

1): -i
1{i,)(2,

r)d.rt, (9)
r,e, s)u(.3)Ko(3,

lhere the integral can now be extended over all space

and time, dr3:f,a*"61".Automatically there will be no
rontribution if la is outside the range lr to lz becauseof
r u r d e f i n i t i o nK
, aQ,1):0 for tz1h.
We can understand the result (6), (9) this way. We
:an imagine that a particle travels as a free particle
:rom point to point, but is scatteredby the potential U.
Thus the total amplitude for arrival at 2 from 1 can
re consideredas the sum of the amplitudes for various
:lternative routes. It may go directly from 1 to 2
amplitude Ko(2, l), giving the zero order term in (6)).
Or (seeFig. 1(a)) it may go from 1 to 3 (amplitude
.\o(3, 1)), get scatteredthere by the potential (scatter:ng amplitude -iU(3) per unit volume and time) and
:hen go from 3 to 2 (amplitude Ks(2,3)). This may
rccur for any point 3 so that summing over these
:lternativesgives (9).
Again, it may be scattered twice by the potential
Fig. 1(b)). It goesfrom 1 to 3 (r(o(3,1)), getsscattered
:here (-iU(3)) then proceedsto some other point, 4,
:n space time (amplitude K0(4, 3)) is scattered again
-iU(4)) and then proceedsto 2 (Ks(2,4)). Summing
rver all possible places and times for 3, 4 find that the
:econd order contribution to the total amplitude
r-c)(2, 1) is
-it"

| | K o ( 2 ,4 ) I ' ( 4 ) K o ( 4 ,J )
X U ( 3 ) K o ( 3 ,\ ) d r & r +

(10)

This can be readily verifieddirectly from (1) just as (9)

was. One can in this way obviously write down any of

the terms of the expansion(6).5
3. TREATMENT OF THE DIRAC EQUATION
We shall now extend the method of the last section
to apply to the Dirac equation. A1l that would seem
to be necessaryin the previous equations is to consider
11 as the Dirac Hamiltonian, ry'as a symbol with four
indices (for each particle). Then Ko can still be defined
by (3) or (4) and is now a 4-4 matrix which operating
on the initial wave function, gives the final wave function. In (10), U(3) can be generalizedto,4r(3)-c'A(3)
where,4a, A are the scalar and vector potential (times e,
the electron charge) and a are Dirac matrices.
To discuss this we shall define a convenient relativistic notation. We represent four-vectors like x, I by
a symbol rr, where p: 1, 2, 3, 4 and u-- t is real. Thus
the vector and scalar potential (times e) A, Aa is Ar.
The four matrices Bc, B can be consideredas transforming as a four vector ?r (ouryu difiers from Pauli's by a
factor i for p: l, 2, 3). We use the summationconvention a rb,: aaba- otbt - azbz- atbt: a' D' In particular if
a" is any four vector (but not a matrix) we write
a:o,"yu so that o is a matrix associatedwith a vector
(a will often be used in place of o, as a symbol for the
vector).The 7, saLisly^tF"t,+'y,"rp:26r, where6q: * 1,
611:f22:f33:-1, and the other 6", are zero. As a
consequenceof our summation convention 6r,au:au
and 6,":4. Note that ab*ba:2a'b and that a2:arar
:a.a is a pure number. The symbol 0f 0r, wlll mean
0/0t lor p:4, and -a/Ax, -d/Ay, -0/62 lor p:1,
2,j. Callg:1,0/0r,:
B 3 / a t + f u . v . W e s h a l li m a g i n e
o We are simplvsolvingby successive
a n integral
approximations
and (4)
equation ldedircibledirictiy from (1) with H:HIFU
with 11:llo).
,r(2): -if KoQ,3)u(3)'t(3)d,s+ KoQ, Dg$)d.xxr,
I
where the 6rst integral extends over all space and all times 4
gleater than the rr appearingin the secondterm, and &)L.

228
R.

lJz

P. FEYNMAN
e x p a n s i o no f t h e i n t e g r a le q u a t i o n

I
II
vl

K+6)(2, 1): K+(2, 1)

-i

(2:!), NEC.E

@*,,",

caraNs oNLr Pos E.

!c!'

e'

(.) VIRTUALPAIR
14>t3

t4< l3

sEooND oRoER,E0. (t4)

The Dirac equation permits another solution Ka(2,1)
fto.2.
if one considers that lvaves scat lered by the poLential can proceed
backwards in time as in Fig. 2 (at. This is interpreted in the second
order processes (b), (c), bv noting that there is now the possi'
bilitv (c) ol virtual pair production al 4, lhe positron going to 3
lo be annihilated. Tbis can be pictured as similar Lo ordinary
scattering (b) except t}lat the electron is scattered backwards in
time from 3 to 4. The waves scattered from 3 to 2'in (a) represent
the oossibility of a positron arriving at 3 from 2'and annihilating
the ilectron from l. This view is proved equivalent to hole tleory:
electrons traveling backwards in time are recognized as positrons.

hereafter, purely for relativistic convenience, that d"*

in (3) is replaced by its adjoint ,6":6""A'
Thus the Dirac equation for a particle, mass m, in an
external field A:Auyuis
(iv-m),!:

Al/,

(11)

and Eq. (4) determining the propagation of a free

particle becomes
(iY z- m)K4(2, l) : i6 (2, 1),

(r2)

the index 2 on V: indicating difierentiation with respect

to the coordinates *ru which are represented as 2 in
K + ( 2 , 1 ) a n d 6 ( 2 ,1 ) .
The function K+(2,1) is defined in the absenceof a
field. If a potential / is acting a similar function, say
K+G) (2, 1) can be defined. It difiers from Ka(2, l) by a
6rst order correction given by the analogue of (9)
namely

K r Q , 3 ) . 4 ( . r ) 1 l , t e ' 113; ,7 " ,

which it ulro sutirJes.

We would now expect to choose,for the special solution of (12), K+:Ko where Ko(2, 1) vanisheslor tzllt
and for lz)lr is given by (3) where d, and.E" are the
eigenfunctions and energy values of a particle satisfying Dirac's equation, and d,* is replaced by d".
The formulas arising from this choice,however, suffer
from the drawback that they apply to the one electron
theory of Dirac rather than to the hole theory of the
positron. For example, consider as in Fig. 1(a) an
electron after being scattered by a potential in a small
region 3 of space time. The one electron theory says
(as does (3) with K+:K0) that the scattered amplitude
at another point 2 will proceed toward positive times
with both positive and negative energies, that is with
both positive and negative rates of changeof phase. No
wave is scattered to times previous to the time of
scattering.Theseare just the propertiesof Ke(2,3).
On the other hand, according to the positron theory
negative energy states are not available to the electron
after the scattering. Therefore the choice K+:Ko is
unsatisfactory. But there are ot-l-rersolutions of (12).
We shall choose the solution defining K-.(2, 1) so that
K+(2,1) Jor lz>.h is lhe sunr oJ Q) overposiliaeenergy
only. Now this new solution must satisfy (12) for
sl.oles
all times in order that the representation be complete,
It must therefore difier from the o1d solution Ki by a
solution of the homogeneousDirac equation. It is clear
is the
from the definition that the difierence Kq-Kf
sum of (3) over all negative energy states, as long as
1z)lr. But this differencemust be a solution of the
homogeneous Dirac equation for all times and must
therefore be representedby the samesum over negative
energy states also for lz(lr. Since Ko:g in this case,
it follows that our new kernel, Ka(2, 1), Jor tzlh is lhe
negatheof the sum (3) oaernegaliw energystales.That is,

K+(2,t) :L posu o"e)6

4 - , r ' 1 2L,- - , 1 n , 1 2 , 3 r . 4 1 3 r K1* rr r3l ,r 3 .( 1 3 )
"e)
Xexp(- iE"(t2- t')) for t2>h
: -Lwne e"6"Q)6"Q)
to go from 1 to 3 as a free

representing the amplitude

Darticle,qet scatteredthere by the potential (now the
matrix CiS) insteadoI U(3)) and continue to 2 as free.
The secondorder correction, analogous to (10) is

(16)

Xexp(-iE"(tz-t))

for

(17)

lz1tr.

With this choice of K+ our equations such as (13) and

(14) will now give results equivaient to those of the
ff
positron hole theory,
K +. @ ( 2 , 1 ) : | l l ( , ( 2 . 4 ) A ( 4 )
That (14), for example, is the correct second order
JJ
expression
for finding at 2 an electron originally at 1
(14)
X K+(4,3)A(3)Kn(3, r)d.rad4,
according to the positron theory may be seenas follows
(Fig. 2). Assume as a special example that l:)lr and
and so on. In general K+(1) satisfies
that the potential vanishes except in interval l:-lr so
l
n
)
K
+
G
)
(
1
5
)
(
2
,
l):i6(2, l) '
(ivr- A(2)
that lr and lr both Iie between h and 12.
First supposelr>ls (FiC. 2(b)). Then (since h)/r)
and the successiveterms (13), (14) are the power series

229
.IHEORY

OF

::e electron assumed originally in a positive energy

::3te propagatesin that state (by Kn(3, 1)) to position
: whereit gets scattered(,4(3)). It then proceedsto 4,
-,:ich it must do as a positive energy electron. This is
:rrrectly describedby (14) for K+(4,3) contains only
: rsitive energy componentsin its expansion,as taltz.
.\iter being scattered at 4 it then proceedson to 2,
,:ain necessarilyin a positive energystate, as lzlle.
In positron theory there is an additional contribution
rje to the possibility of virtual pair production (Fig.
- c)). A pair could be created by the potential.C(4)
::4, the electronoI which is that found later at 2. The
: rsitron (or rather, the hole) proceedsto 3 where it
.:nihilates the electronwhich has arrived there from 1.
This alternative is already included in (14) as con::ibutions for which la(la, and its study will lead us to
.r interpretation of Ka(4,3) for lr(lr. The factor
-:,-(2,4) describesthe electron (after the pair produc::on at 4) proceedingfrom 4 to 2. Likewise K+(3,1)
r.presentsthe electronproceedingfrom 1 to 3. K1(4, 3)
lust therefore representthe propagation of the positron
: hole from 4 1o 3.'lhat it does so is clear. The fact
::rat in hole theory the hole proceedsin lhe manner of
:nd electron of negative energy is reflected in the fact
',nL Ka(4,3) for 1a(1r is (minus) the sum of only
::egative energy components. In hole theory the real
:rergy of these intermediate states is, of course,
'Ihis
is true here too, since in the phases
::,ositive.
.xp(-iE"(ta-tu)) definingK+(4,3) in (17), E" is nega:ive but so is lr-lr. That is, the contributionsvary with
:; as exp(-il.E"l(lr-lr)
as they would if the energy
rf the intermediatestate were i.E"l. The fact that the
:ntire sum is taken as negative in computing K+(4,3)
:s reflectedin the fact that in hole theory the amplitude
:.as its sign reversed in accordancewith the Pauli
:rinciple and the fact that the electron arriving at 2
:as been exchangedwith one in the sea.6To this, and
''o higher orders, all processesinvolving virtual pairs
:rrecorrectly describedin this way.
The expressions
such as (14) can still be describedas
: passageof the electronfrom 1 to 3 (K+(3, 1)), scatter:ng at 3 by .d(3), proceedingto 4 (,(+(.1,.3)),scattering
:gain, ,4(4), arriving finally at 2. The scatteringsmay,
lorvever, be toward both future and past times, an
:lectron propagating backwards in time being recogrizpd

qc a nncifrnn

This therefore suggests that negative energy comronents created by scattering in a potential be con;idered as waves propagating from the scattering point
:oward the past, and that such waves represent the
propagationof a positron annihilaLingthe electron in
the potential.T
6 It has often been moted that the one electron theory apparently
:ives the same matrix elements for this nrocess as does hole theorv.
Thr problem is one oI interprelalion,eipecially in a rvay thar will
give correct results ior other processes,e.g., self-energy.
"1so
7 The idea that positfons can be represented as electrons with
roper rimc reversed relative ro true lime las heen discussed by
he author 3nd others, parricularll Ly Sttickelherg. E. C. C.

POSITI{ONS

/JJ

With this interpretation real pair production is also

described correctly (see Fig. 3). For example in (13) if
the equation gives the amplitude that if at
hltt{tz
time lr one electronis presentat 1, then at time 12just
one electron will be present (having been scattered.at 3)
and it will be at 2. On the other hand if lr is less than lr,
for example, il tr:1t11t, the same expressiongives the
amplitude that a pair, electron at 1, positron a.t 2 w'tll
annihilate at 3, and subsequently no particles will be
present. Likewise if fu and 11exceed13we have (minus)
the amplitude for finding a single pair, electron at 2,
positron at 1 created by ,{(3) from a vacuum. If
(13) describesthe scattering of a positron,
Itlltltz,
A1I these amplitudes are relative to the amplitude that
a vacuum will remain a vacuum) which is taken as
unity. (This will be discussedmore fully later.)
The analogueof (2) can be easily worked out.8 It is,

9P):Ix-p,1)N(1),/(1)rrt'1,

(18)

where d3Ilr is the volume element of the closed 3dimensional surfaceof a region o{ spacetime containing

,'w IW
'w"W
(b)

(c)

(d)

Ftc.3. Several difierent processes can be described by the same

formula depending on the lime reialions of lhe variables /r, lr.
Thus P,lK-r1'(2, l)1, is rhe probability that: (a) An electronar
I will be scrttered at 2 (and no other pairs form in vacuum).
(b) Electron at 1 and positron at 2 annihilatc leaving nothing,
(c) A single pair at 1 and 2 is creared from racuum. (d) A positron
at 2 is scattered to 1. (K+<A)(2,1) is the sum of the efiects of
scattering in the potential to all orde$. P, is a normalizing
constant.)
Sriickelberg, Helv. Phys. Acta 15, 23 (1942); R. P. Feynman,
Phys. Rev. 74. 939 (1948). The fact that classically the action
(proper time) increases continuously as one follows a trajectory
is reflecred in quantum mechanics in the fact lhat the phase, which
is LE,l llr-tr,
a l w a y s i n c r e a s e sa s t h e p a r t i c l e p r o c e e d sf r o m o n e
scattering point to the next.
3 By multiplying
(12) on the ri.ght by (-iYy-n)
and noting
that Vr6(2,1):-V:0(2,1)
show that K*(2,1)
also satisfies
K+{2,1)(-iV-m):i6(2,l),
where the Vr operates on variable
1 in K*(2,1)
but is written after that function to keep the correct
order of the 1 matrices. Multiply rhis equation byry'(1) and Eq.
(11) (with .4:0, calling the variables l) by K,(2,1), subtract
and integrale over a region of space-time. The integral on the lefthand side can be transformed to an intesral over the surface of
the region. The rigbt-hand side is ry'(2Jifthe point 2 lies within
the region, and is zero otherwise, (What happens when the 3sulface contains a light line and hence has no unique normal need
not concern us as these points can be made ro occur so lar away
from 2 lhat their contribulion vanishes.r

230
P.

/.f +

FEYNMAN

point 2, and N(1) is .rtr,(l)"y,where Nu(1) is the inward

drawn unit normal to the surface at the point 1. That
is, the wave function r/(2) (in this case for a free particle) is determined at any point inside a four-dimensional region if its values on the surface of that region
are specified.
To interpret this, consider the casethat the 3-surface
consists essentially of all space at some time say l:0
previous to lz, and of al1 spaceat the time Tllz.The
Lylinder connecting these to complete the closure of the
surface may be very distant from xz so that it gives no
decreasesexpoappreciable contribution (as K{2,1)
'va: B, since
nentially in spaceJike directions). Hence, if
- B,
be
and'
.lf
will
normals
B
drawn
the inward
,1,\2):

K*(2, 1)0*(1)d3xr

tivistic calculations, can be removed as follows. Instead

of defining a state by the wbve function /(x), which it
has at a given time lt:O, we define the state by the
function /(1) of four variablesxr, 11which is a solution
of the free particle equation for all lr and is /(x1) for
lr:0. The final state is likewise defined by a function
g(2) over-all space-time.Then our surface integrals can
6e performed since -fK1(3, 1)p/(xr)d3xr:/(3) and
I g6) B,l}x,K+(2,3) : AQ). There results

-;.[o1)A(3)f(s)d,",

(22)

the integral now being over-all space-time. The transition amplitude to second order (from (14)) is
l"f

- | | stz:nQtx,t2,1\A(ltJJ-)drfi12, (23)
JJ

K , Q . l ' ) p v 1 ' \ d " x 1, ' ( 1 9 ) for the particle arriving at 1 with amplitude /(1) is
scattered (,4(1)), progressesto 2, (K+(2' 1)), and is
w h e r e / 1 : 0 , 1 r , : I . O n l y p o s i t i v e e n e r g y ( e l e c t r o n ) scatteredagain (C(2)), and we ihen ask for the amplicomponents in 'y'(1) contribute to the first integral and tude that it is in state g(2). If g(Z) is a negativeenergy
o n l y n e g a t i v ee n e r g y( p o s i t r o n )c o m P o n e n tosf r y ' ( l ' )t o state we are solving a problem of annihilation of elect h e s e c o n dT. h a t i s , t h e a m p l i t u d ei o r 6 n d i n ga c h a r g e tron in /(1), positron in g(2), etc.
We have been emphasizingscatteringproblems,bur
at 2 is determined both by the amplitude for finding
an electron previous to the measurement and by the obviously the motion in a fixed potential I/, say in a
arnplitude for finding a positron after the measutement' hydrogen atom, call also be dealt with. If it is llrst
This might be interpreted as meaning that even in, a ti.*"d us a scattering problem we can ask for the
problem involving but one charge the amplitude for amplitude, dr(l), that an electron with original free
hnding the charge at 2 is not determined when the only wave function was scatteredfr times in the potential I/
thine known in the amplitude for finding an electron either forward or backward in time to arrive at 1. Then
(or ipositron) at an earlier time. There may have been t h e a m p l i t u d ea f t e r o n e m o r e s c a l L e r i n igs
no electron present initially but a pair was created in
the measurement (or also by other external fields). The
6r+,(2):-iI x*<2,1)/(1)dr(1)drr. Q4)
amplitude for this contingency is specified by the
future.
in
the
positron
a
u-plitrd" for finding
An equation for the total amplitude
fre can also obtain expressionsfor transition amplitudes, like (5). For exampleif at l:0 we have an elecdi(1)
/(1):I
tron present in a state with (positive energy) wave
tr{
function /(x), what is the amplitude for finding it at
for arriving at 1 either directly or after any number of
with the (positive energy) wave function g(x)?
t:I
scatteringsis obtainedby summing (24) over all A Irom
after
anywhere
electron
the
finding
for
The amplitude
0to@;
the
by
ry'(1)
replaced
/(x),
t:0 is given by (19) with
second integral vanishing. Hence, the transition ele, t ( 2 ) :o \ Q ) - i K * Q ,1 ) V ( r ) V 0 ) ( t r 1(.2 s )
I
ment to find it in state g(x) is, in analogy to (5), just
(t2:T, h:o)
Viewed as a steady state problem we may wish, for
example,to find that initial condition do (or better just
I u r * u na . Q , 1) 0 f ( x r ) d l x r d 3 x . , (20)
the 0) which leads to a periodic motion of ,y'. This is
most practically done, of course,by solving the Dirac
since g*: *7B.
eouation,
Ii Jpotential acts somewherein the interval between
(26)
(,v - n\/!):
V(I)t (r) '
first
order
Thus
the
K+(A).
by
0 and ?, K1 is replaced
z,
iVrsides
by
(25)
on
both
(13),
by
operating
from
is,
deducedfrom
efiect on the transition amplitude
thereby eliminating the do, and using (12) This illus- ; I a ( x- , ) t s K , Q , 3 ) / ( 3 l K f ( 3I. r 6 l t x r t d x r d " x , . ( 2 1 ) trates the relation betweenthe points of view.
|"
For many problemsthe total potential AlV may be
fixed one, Z, and another, i4'
Expressions such as this can be simplified and the split convenientlyinto a
If ,(+(1.)is definedas in
a
3-suriace integrals, which are inconvenient for rela- consideredas Derturbation.
|

23r
1'HEOltY

OF

(16) with V f.or A, expressionssuch as (23) are valid

and useful with K1 replacedby K1(r) and the functions
J0), C,(2)replaced by solutions for all space and time
of the Dirac Eq. (26) in the potential I/ (rather than
iree particle wave functions).
4. PROBLEMS INVOLVING SEVERALCHARGES
We wish next to consider the case that there are two
(or more) distinct charges(in addition to pairs they may
produce in virtual states). In a succeedingpaper we
discussthe interaction between such charges. Here we
assume that they clo not interact. In this case each
particle behaves independently of the other. We can
expect that i{ we have two particles o and D, the amplitude that particle o goesfrom xl at lr, to xa at la while
D g o e sf r o m x z a t / z t o x r a L / r i s t h e p r o d u c t
K G , a ; 1 , 2 ) : K + " ( 3 , l ) K + b @ ,2 ) .
The symbols a, D simply indicate that the matrices
appearing in the K.' apply to the Dirac four component
spinorscorrespondingto particle a or 6 respectively(the
wave function now having 16 indices). In a potential
Ka. and Kai, become K*,td) and K.'r(d) where K*o(a)
is defined and calculated as lor a single particle. They
commute.Hereafter the a, 6 can be omitted; the space
time variable appearing in the kernels suffice to define
on what they operate.
The particles are identical however and satisfy the
exclusionprinciple.The principJerequiresonly that one
to get the net
c a l c u l a t eK $ , a ; 1 , 2 ) - K ( 4 , 3 ; 1 , 2 )
amplitude for arrival of chargesat 3, 4. (It is normalized
assumingthat when an integral is performed over points
3 and 4, for example,sincethe electronsrepresentedare
identical, one divides by 2.) This expressionis correct
for positronsalso (Fig. 4). For examplethe amplitude
that an electronand a positron found initially at x1 and
xr (say lr:lr) are later found at xr and xz (with
. : : 1 r ) / r ) i s g i v e nb 1 ' t h es a m ee x p r e s s i o n

T'OSITRONS

/ JJ

m;m
3tt2t43\tZA

5H ORFh'
(b) \/-/

Y-/

3\

A_]\
tlAl,l

v_11
l/

3\

12

\4

oR
(c)

t2

/xC\
( a )

\o/
l/

\4

Ftc. 4. Some problems involving two distinct charges (in addition to virtual pairs they may produce) : P" I K+(trJ(3, 1)K+6)(+,2)
*1{+(d)(4, 1)K+\A)(3,2)1, is the probability that: (a) Electrons
at 1 an,l 2 are scaltered to 3.4 iand no pairs arc fo.med). abt
S t r r t i n g w i t h a n e l e c l r o n a l I a s i n g l ep a i r i s f o r m e d , p o s i l r o n a t 2 ,
electrons at 3, 4. (c) A pair at 1, 4 is found Lt 3,2, etc. The exclusion principle requircs that the amplitudes for processes involving
exchange of two electrons be subtracted.

term (14). We shall see,however,that consideringthe

exclusion principle also requires another change which
reinstates the quantity.
For we are computing amplitudes relative to the
amplitude that a vacuum at lr will still be a vacuum at
12.We are interested in the alteration in this amplitude
due to the presenceof an electronat 1. Now one process
that can be visuaiized as occurring in the vacuum is the
creation of a pair at 4 followed by a re-annihilation of
the samepair at 3 (a processwhich rve shall call a closed
loop path). But if a real electronis presentin a certain
K + ( 1 ) ( 3 ,1 ) K + ( d ) ( 42, ) - K + ( ^ ) ( 4 , 1 ) K + ( 1 ) ( 3 ,2 ) . ( 2 7 )
state 1, those pairs for which the electronwas created
The first term representsthe amplitudethat the electron in state 1 in the vacuum must now be excluded. We
proceedsfrom 1 to 3 and the positron from 4 to 2 (Fig. must therefore subtract from our relative amplitude the
+(c)), while the secondterm representsthe interfering term correspondingto this process.But this just reinamplitude that the pair at 1, 4 annihilate and what is states the quantity which it was argued should not
found at 3, 2 is a pair newly createdin the potential. have been included in (14), the necessaryminus sign
The generalization to several particles is clear. There is coming automatically from the definition of Kn. It is
an additional factor K+(1) for each particle, and anti- obviously simpler to disregard the exclusion principle
symmetriccombinationsare always taken.
completelyin the intermediatestates.
All the amplitudesare relative and their squaresgive
No account need be taken of the exclusionprinciple
in intermediate states. As an example consider again the relative probabilities o{ the various phenomena.
expression(14) for tzlh and supposelr(lr so that the Absolute probabilities result if one multiplies each of
situation represented(Fig. 2(c)) is that a pair is made the probabilities by P,, the true probability that if one
at 4 with the electronproceedingto 2, and the positron has no particles present initially there will be none
to 3 where it annihilates the electron arriving from 1. finally. This quantity P, can be calculated by normalIt may be objected that if it happensthat the electron izing the relative probabililies such that the sum of the
createdat 4 is in the samestate as the one coming from probabilities of all mutually exclusive alternatives is
1, then the processcannotoccurbecauseof the exclusion unity. (For exampleif one starts with a vacuum one can
principle and rve should not have included it in our calculate the relative probability that there remains a

232
756

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

vacuum (unity), or one pair is created, or two pairs, etc.

The sum is P,-r.) Put in this form the theory is complete and there are no divergenceproblems. Real processesare completely independent of what goes on in
the vacuum.
When we come, in the succeedingpaper, to deal with
interactions between charges, however, the situation is
not so simple. There is the possibility that virtual electrons in the vacuum may interact electromagnetically
with the real electrons. For that reasonprocessesoccuring in the vacuum are analyzed in the next section, in
which an independent method of obtaining P, is
discussed.

In addition to these single loops we have the possibility that two independent pairs may be created and
eachpair may annihilate itself again. That is, there may
be formed in the vacuum two closed loops, and the
contribution in amplitude from this alternative is just
the product of the contribution from each of the loops
consideredsingly. The total contribution from all such
pairs of loops (it is still consistent to disregard the
exclusion principle for these virtual states) is Lzf2 Ior
in Z2 we count every pair oI loops twice. The total
vacuum-vacuum amplitude is then
C":l-

L+L,/2- 1a/6*... :exp(-Z),

(30)

the successiveterms representing the amplitude from

zero, one, two, etc., Ioops. The fact that the contribuAn alternative way of obtaining absolute amplitudes tion to C, of single loops is -Z is a consequenceof the
is to multiply all amplitudes by C,, the vacuum to Pauli principle. For example, consider a situation in
vacuum amplitude, that is, the absolute amplitude that which two pairs of particles are created. Then these
there be no particles both initially and finally. We can pairs later destroy themselves so that we have two
assume C,:1 if no potential is present during the loops. The electrons could, at a given time, be interinterval, and otherwise we compute it as follows. It
changed forming a kind of figure eight which is a single
difiers from unity because,for example, a pair could be Ioop. The fact that the interchange must change the
created which eventually annihilates itsell again. Such sign of the contribution requires that the terms in C,,
a path would appear as a closed loop on a space-time appear with alternate signs. (The exclusion principle is
diagram. The sum of the amplitudes resulting from a1l also responsible in a similar way for the fact that the
suchsingleclosedloops we call L. To a first approxima- amplitudefor a pair creationis -Ka rather than f K1.)
tion Z is
Symmetrical statistics would lead to
5. VACUUM PROBLEMS

l rr
LtLr:-_ | lS/[K
2J J

C,:l+L+

( 2 ,1 1 . 4 r 1 '
X KaQ, 2)A(2)fd.rj.r r.

(28)

For a pair could be created say at 1, the electron and

positron could both go on to 2 and there annihilate.
The spur, Sp, is taken since one has to sum over all
possible spins for the pair. The factor I arisesfrom the
fact that the same loop could be consideredas starting
at either potential, and the minus sign results since the
interactors are each - lr4. The next order term would bee

L ' ' ) : * t i / 3 )l l

1 .' , 4 ( l '
f spt,<,(2
r t,
x 1{+(1,3).4(3)1{* (3, 2)A (2)fd r Q.r zd.

etc. The sum of all such terms gives 2.10

gThta
actually vanishes as can be seen as follows. In any
t*a
spur the sign oi all 'y matrices may be reversed. Reversing the
o
f
'
y
i
n
K
1
( 2 . l ) c h a n g s 5 i t l o l h e t r a n s p o s eo f K , ( 1 , 2 ) s o
sign
that the order of all factors and variables is reversed. Since the
integral is taken over all 11, 12, and zs this has no effect and we are
left with (- 1)3 Jrom changing the sign of,4. Thus the spur equals
its negative. Loops rvith an odd number of potential inteructors
give zero. Physically this is because for each loop the electron can
go around one way or in the opposite direction and we must add
tlese amplitudes. 3ut reversing the motion of an electron makes
it behave like a positive charge thus changing the sign of each
Dotential interaction. so that the sum is zero if the number of
inleracllons rs odd. lhls theorem is due to W. H. Furrv. Phvs.
Rev. 51, 125 (1937t.
10A closed expression for Z in terms of K+La) is hard to obtain
because of the factor (!/n). in the zth term. However, the perturbation in Z, At due to a small change in potential A,4, is easy
to expless. The (1/n) is canceled by the fact that A.A can appear

L'/2:exp(*Z).

The quanLity Z has an infinire imaginary part (from

Zo), higher orders are finite). We will discuss this in
connection with vacuum polarization in the succeeding
paper. This has no effect on the normalization constant
for the probabilily lhat a vacuum remainvacuum is
given by
P,:

lC,)'1:exP(-2'real Part of Z),

from (30). This value agrees with the one calculated

directly by renormalizing probabilities. The real part
of Z appearsto be positive as a consequenceof the Dirac
equation and properties of K.. so that P, is less than
and conseone. Bose statistics gives C":exp(fZ)
quently a value of P, greater than unity which appears
meaninglessif the quantities are interpreted as we have
done here. Our choice of 1(1 apparently requires the
exclusion principle.
Charges obeying the Klein-Gordon equation can be
equally well treated by the methods which are discussedhere {or the Dirac electrons. How this is done is
discussedin more detail in the succeedingpaper. The
real part of Z comes out negative for this equation so
that in this caseBose statisticsappear to be required
for consistency.3
aftersunmingoverz by
in.ny of th" z potentials.
The resuLt
(13),(14)andusing(16)is
1)-11+(1,1))ad(1)ldrr. (zs)
^L: -.if Sp((K+(r)(lJ
to zero.
The term1(*(1,1) actuallyintegrates

233
THEORY

OF POSITRONS

6. ENERGY-MOMENTUM REPRESENTATION
The practical evaluation of the matrix elements in
some problems is often simplified by working with
momentum and energy variables rather than spaceand
time. This is because the function K+(2,1) is fairly
complicated but we shall find tbat its Fourier transform
that is
is very simple, namely (i/4t9)(p-nt)-1
f

KJz,l):Q/ar\

(P-n)-'exp(-if

-ru)dal,

Bl)

whete p. r2r:'p' fi 2- p' 11: p **2r- P&tw i : f rI p, and

dap means (2r)-'zd,Pd?zd,!d.fu, the integral over all 2.
That this is true can be seen immediately from (12),
for tlre representation of the operator i,Y-m in energy
(1n) and momentum (2t, 2,r) space is ! - nr and the transform of 6(2, 1) is a constant. The reciprocal matrix
(l-n)-'
can be interpreted as (Iltn)(F-tn2)-r
for
1sa pure number not involving
f-m,:(p-m)(!lm)
7 matrices. Hence if one wishes one can write
K aQ, \ : i(;Y,1, m)I a,(2'1),

t2<*, Er@ is the Hankel function and 6(.f) is the

Dirac delta function of s} It behaves asymptotically
as exp(-im.s), decaying exponentially in spaceJike
directions.12
By means of such transforms the matrix elements
Iike (22), (23) are easily worked out. A {ree particle
wave function for an electron of momentum y'r is
where a1 is a constant spinor satisfying
uexp(-i?t*)
the Dirac equation pih:nt1h
so that !12:77*, lfis
matrix element (22) for going from a state fb ur to a
state of momentum p2, spinor u2, is -4*i(tZ2a(q)u1)
where -we have imagined 14 expanded in a Fourier
rntegral
f

,4(1): I a(q) exp(-iq.x,)daq,

J

and we select the component of momentum e:?z-lr

The second order term (23) is the matrix element
between u1 and u2 of
- a#i

where

757

(a(fz- I,-

q))(1,* q - m)-'a(q)daq, (35)

p,
I +(2, l) : (2r)-, | (f - *,1-' exp(- i p. tcz)da

(32)

since the
of momentum y'r may pick up q from
"i".r.on
the potential
c(q), propagate with momentum y'1f g
is not a matrix operator but a function satisfying
(factor (p1f q-ar)-r) until it is scattered again by the
potential, a(fz-lril,
picking up the remaining mo(
3
3
)
ZrtI+(2,1)-m'zI+(2,1):6(2,1),
mentum, !z-!rQ,
to bring the total to y'2. Since all
-[l:
:
(V,)z (6/ 0rz,) (6/ dxzr).
where
values of g are possible, one integrates over g.
The integrals (31) and (32) are not yet completely
These same matrices apply directly to positron probdefined for there are poles in the integrend when lems, for if the time component ol, say, pl is negative
We can define how these poles are to be the state representsa positron of four-momentum -pr,
l,-rr*:0.
evaluated by the rule that ,n is considered.Io hooe an and we are describing pair production if p2 is an elecinf.nilesimal negoliueimaginary part. That is m, is re- tron, i.e., has positive time component, etc.
placedby ttt - i6 and the limit taken as 6+0 from above.
The probability of an event whose matrix element is
This can be seenby imagining that we calculate K1 by
(a2Mu) is proportional to the absolute square. This
integrating on 1r first. If we call E:+(rn'+pf
may also be writ"ten (ilLMu2)(E2MilL),where M is M
then the integrals involve pr essentially as with the operators written in opposite order and explicit
*?z'*P"1,
1f exp(-ipe(tz-tr))dpn(po'-E)-r which has poles at appearanceof I changedto -i(,41 is B times the complex
pe:tE
and pa: - E. The replacementol mby. m-i6
cbrrrjugatetransposeof BM). For many problems we are
means that -E has a small negative imaginary part; the not concernedabout the spin of the final state. Then we
first pole is below, the secondabove therlal axis. Now can sum the probability over the two z2 corresponding
il t2-11>O the contour can be completed around the to the two spin directions. This is not a complete set besemicirclebelow the real axis thus giving a residuefrom cause,2 has another eigenvalue, -n. To pennit sumpole, or -Qn1-'exp(-iE(t2-t)).
the pl:{E
It
ming over all stateswe can insert the projection operator
lz-h10
the upper semicircle must be used, and (2m)- L(! zl m) and so obtain (2nx)-| (11tM (I 2+ rn)M u )
E at the pole, so that the function varies in each for the probability of transition from 101,u1, to p2 with
!a:
caseas required by the other definition (17).
arbitrary spin. If the incident state is unpolarized we
Other solutions of (12) result from other prescrip- can sum on its spins too, and obtain
tions. For example if 2r in the Iactor (f -m2)-L is con(2nL)-,5pl@ t+ n )M (1,+ rn)M)
(36)
sidered to have a positive imaginary part K.. becomes
replaced by Ks, the Dirac one-electron kernel, zero for for (twice) the probability that an electron of arbitrary
lz(lr. Explicitly the function isrr (x, l:r21,)
spin with momentum pl will make transition to pe. The
/a(x, t) : - (4r)-r6(s)* (m/8rs) H {2t(ms), (34) expressions are all valid for positrons when p's with
J

u If ttre -16 is kept with z here too the function Ia approaches

where s:*(l-xz)l
fs1 p;'*u and s:-i(rr-tr)l
for
lor in6nite positive and negative timc. This may-6e useful
111s(r,l)is (2i)-t(D/x,t)-iD(r,t)) whereD1 andD are the rero
in general-analysesin avoidin-gcomplicationsfrom infinitell
functions
defiredby W. Pauli,Rev.Mod. Phys.13,203(1941). remote surfaces.

234
R,

/.! 6

P.

FEYNMAN

nesative energiesare inserted'and the situation interorJted in accoidancewith the timing relationsdisc"ssed
(''l):1
ibove. 1We have usedfunctions normalizedto
instead of the conventional (uBu):(u+u):1' On our
scale (&Bu):enetgyf m so the probabilities must be
corrected by the appropriate factors')
The author has many people to thank for fruitiul
conversations about this subject, particularly H' A'
Bethe and F. J. DYson.
APPENDIX

the Dirac
Xexp(-i'-fotHdt'). As is well known v(x, l) satisfies
i,iiff"t".tiate v(x, ,) with respectto ' and usecommuta"nrniil..
tion relaiions oI E and 9)
(42)
iavl,t)/0t:(a'(-iV*A)+/a+uB)v(x,')'
{differequation
Dirac
ihe
satisfy
also
must
t)
Consequenllvd(x,
partsr'
e n r i a t e( 4 1 )w i t h r e s p e ctto / . u s e( 4 2 )a n d i n t e g r a t eb y
at trme
That is, if 4(x, t) is thaLsolutionof the Dirac equatron
and
o*:/v*(x)4(x)d3x
r *-rti.r,l! O&) at l:0, and if we define
Oi*:Jfv*(x)+(x, T)d3x then O/*:SO*S-r, or
(43)
so*:o'*s,

a. Deduction from Second Quantization

of this theory with
In this section we sball show the equivalence
lhe lheory ol secono
the hole theory of the positron.2 Acording to
if the electron field in a given potential,!3 the.state
""r"ii-ti". n"ra at any time is represented by a wave function 1
i-ifrir
sacisfying

be
The orinciple on which the proof will be based c&n now
just one electron
illustrated bya simple example.Supposewe have
initially and finallY and ask for
(44)
1: (1o*GSF*xo).
S using (43)'
operalor
the
through
putting
,F*
try
misht
We
w a v el u n c t r o n
sF*=F;*S, *hei"/';n p'*=7'!*1xy'(x)d3xis the
at I arising from /(r) at 0. Then
(xo*F'*GSxo), (45)
;^fGF'*Sxi : fc*(x)/'(x)d3x' C,use of the defiwhere the secondexpressionhas been obtained by
niti.n (:S) of G and the generalcommutation relation
|:

i6Y/01: E Y'
- A) +,4 4* n 9) v (x) d|x
v{.*l
.uld
l"
where fI : Jrv' (x) (a. ( rV
an electron at posirion x while V*(x) is
un op"rutoionniftifating
a siluation
We
contemplate
operator'
creation
ih" io,r".ponding
we have present some electrons in states reprein which at l:0
'.
assumed
sented by ordinary spinor functions /rtx),-/r(x),
as noles ln
orthosonal, and some positrons These are descrlbed
fill the
normally
would
which
rons
eiect
*.rgy sea. the
ii"-n-"?iit.
wati functions pl(xr. p2(xr' " " we ask at time r
;;i;-f,;;i"*
states 3r(x)'
whar is thi amplitude ihat we 6nd electrons in
. Iitheinitialand frnalstate
rruf, ll. onahoiesatq'txt.gr(xt,
we
respectively'
and
are
1,
li
i,".ior, ,aor"tan,ing this situation
wish to calculate the matrix element

GF*+F*G=
f s*$)Ie)d\,

(the others are

which is a consequenceof the properties of v(x)
xo'F'* in the Iast term in
F-G*:-G.Fri.Iiow
;;=-"CFil
(45) is rhe complexconjugateof F'xo' Thus if /'-contarned,only
iotponenti, F'xo would vanishand we wouldhave
io.itiu"
c,.'sut F', as worked.outhere,.d,oe;
i.j*;;;i "n"tev t*t6iii.*
potentlaLa
contain negativeenergycomponentscreatedln tne
and the melhod must be slightly modi6ed'
-"e"f*"'priir"g
thtll
F* throu"ghihe operator.y."
idd,t: l-1
{ 3 7 ) anorheroDeratoiF"* arisinglrom a iunction/"(r) contalnrngo'l'
n:(',-*n(-;;['aa,)',):,',"s''
that the resultins /'
chosen
so
il;;;;;;;;;;
";-pon""t!
we want
ones.ThaL is"na
zero only for times
hasonlv bosiliae
We assume that the potential '4 difiers from
(46)
times'
at
these
be
defrned
can
a
vacuum
that
?
so
between 0 and
S(Fo**f F*""*) : Fp*'*S,
negative energy
lf 1g represents the vacuum state {thal is' all
of the
sign
the
of
'rpos"
reminders
as
serve
and
having
for
where the
"neg"
.*r"t nfi.a, all positive energies emptyl. the amplitude
we can now
ao-po.".,. contained in the operators This
a vacuum at time f, if we had one at l:0, is
".*gy
the
Jorm
in
use
(38)
(47)
c,: (xo*sxo),
SFo."*:Fo."'*S-SF".e"*'
Our problem is to evaluale R and
rel)lacesr by two
suLstitulion
writing 5 lor expl-ijforEdl)
this
problem
eleclron
one
In our
factor lnvolves
show tbat it is a simple factor times C,, and that the
terms
previous sections'
- (1s*GSF"","*xo).
the K+(A) functionJ in the way discussed in the
r: (xo*GFp"",*Sxo)
To io this we first express xr in terms of xo' The operator

o*:J"v*(x)d(x)d,x,

(39)

creates an electron with wave function 4(x) Likewise'!:-fd*(x)

annihilates one with wave lunction d(x)' Hence state
iv(*)a'"
js Gr*Gu* '
PtP,
xo while the 6nal state
rt l. rt:f'-frdefined like 6' in
lOrOr:
a" where Fi. Gi. Pi. Qi are operators
pi, qj replacing d: for the initial.stale would
i.ls),"bu, *i,tt r. 3i.
tt Jt' J2'
result from the vacuum i[ we created the electrons
'
. Hence we must find
noJ annittilated those in pr, pr,
('10)
R:(xo*..
Qr*Qr*"'GzG$Ft*pt*"'P1Pr"'10)'
beTo simplify this we shall have 1o use commutation relations
u o* op"tu,ot and S. To this end consider exp( r"frHdl')o*
*"*
,'ar*r11il'*(x)'
and expand this quantily in terms of
;1;Aal1
(which defines d(x' f))' Now multrply
siving /v*(x)O(x,l)drx,
and find
exp(-i./i'lldl')
bv exp(|i-fstEdr't
iti.
""o,iution

The 6rst of these reducesto

r: f c*G)ln*'$)d'r'c"

rs now zero,while the secondis zerosincethe

as above.for FDo6'x0
p"","- giueszero when acting on the vacuum
;;;;';;."i";
the central idea of
ri.i"-." tif negative e;ergies are full This is
demonstntion.
the
*i;;;;;;il;';sented
a function t""(x)
Given
bv (46) is this:
r, ii."'rj. J n",i the u-outi, /.""", oI negativeenergy.component
ol ulrac's equawhich must be ad,led in order that the solulion
components'
lion at time I will have only positiveenergy
/::s.'
Kernel^+ ' 15
tne
This is a boundary value problemfor wluch
the positiveenergycomponentsinitially' /o"*
i.ti-""d w" t*;
positiveoneshnally are
nnJitt" t.gntiu" onesfinally (zero) The
therefore (using (19))
(48)
Io".'(*")=f K+@(2, 1)9/o*(xt)d3xr'
(41)
v*G, t)o1, t)d.x,
./'**1*y4i*)d3x:f
are
initially
ones
negative
where lr: I, lr:0. Similarly, the
where we have defined v(x, l) by V(x, l)=e1p11;76lEdl')v(x)
(49)
die
1..""(xz1: f X*cx(2, 1)p/p""(x1)d'x,-/p-(xt,
Quontenexample, C. Wentzel, EinJuhtung in
" S*J1943),
ChapLeipzig,
Deuticke,
tFranz
wit*iadiq
The 'f"*(x:) is
tnr*1i-'ai'
where ,2 approacheszero from above, and L:0'
ter V,

235
THEORY

OF

subtracted to keep in /."""(x)

only those waves which return
from the potential and not those arriving directly at l, from the
K*(2,1) part ol K+6)(2, 1), as l*0.
We could also have written
J*!'(xr):

LK*tA)(2, 1) K +(2,1)ll,*(xr)d3xr.

Therefore the one-electron problem, r :/g*(x)fo""'

gives by (48)
r : C,

(50)
(x)d3x. C,,

POSITRONS

759

The value of C,(ro-Aro) arises from the Hamiltonian

l1l6-at6
which difiers from 11,0 just by having an extra potential during
the short interval At6. Hence, to 6rst order in Aro, we have
-//.r\\
=\yo*
C
"(/o-410)

exp\-

R : ( x o * ' ' ' Q r * Q r *" ' G r G 1 F 1 p . " ' * S a r * ' ' P J z ' ' ' x o )
- (xo*'''
Q " * Q t * ' ' ' G : G r S . F r ' " e " * F r * ' 'P f

z''' xd'

In the first term the order of F1u."'* a1d G1 is then interchanged,

producing an additional term ,fg1*(x)1o."'(x)d3x
times an expression with one less electron in initial and final state. Next it is
exchanged with Gr producing an addition --fg,*(x)h"",'(x)dix
times a similar term, etc. Finally on reaching tie Q1* with which
it anticommutes it can be simply moved over to juxtaposition
rvith xo* where it gives zero. The second term is similarly handled
by moving Fr""""*
through anti commuting ar*, etc., until it
reaches Pr. Then it is exchanged with P1 to produce an additional simpler term rvith a tactot T;fp1*(x)1,,"""(x)d3x
or
+ f pr* (.xz)K1(A) (2, 1) 8J1(x)d.3x\dsxrfrom (49), with rr: tr :0 (the
extra /r(xg) in (49) gives zero as it is orthogonai to pr(xr)). This
describes in the expected manner the annihilation
of the pair,
electron l, positron ft. The P""""* is moved in this way successively through the P's until it gives zero when acting on xo. Thus
R is reduced, with the expected factors (and with alternating signs
as required by the exclusion principle), to simpler terms containing
two less operators which may in turn be further reduced by using
F:* in a similar manner, etc. A{ter all the F* are used the Ql's
can be reduced in a similar manner. They are moved through the
S in the opposite dilection in such a manner as to produce a purely
negative energy operator at time 0, using relations analogous to
(a6) to (a9). After all this is done we are left simply with the expected factor times C' (assuming the net charge is the sane in
initial and final state.)
In this way we have written the solution to the general problem
oi the motion of electrons in given potentials. The factor C, is
obtained by normalization. However for photon fields it is desirable to have an explicit form for Co in terms of the potentials.
This is given by (30) and (29) and it is readily demonstrated that
rhis also is correct according to second quanLizalion.

b. Analysis of the Vacuum Problem

We shallcalculateC, from secondquantizationby induction
considering a series of problems each containing a potential distribution more nearly like the one we wish. Suppose we know C,
for a problem like the one we want and having the same potentials
for time , betwen some lo and l, but having potential zero for
times from 0 to ro. Call this C,(r0), the corresponding Hamiltonian
Ftq and the sum of contributions fo; all single loops, Z(ls). Then
for lo:2
*" have zero potential at all times, no pairs can be
produced, Z(T):0
and C,Q):1.
For lo:9 we have the complete problem, so that C,(0) is what is defined as C, in (38).
Generally we have,

)xo)

:(,t

*o(-t[,'

to -udt

)xo)

X ( - a A ( x , , 0 ) + 1 , 1rxo, ; ) v ( x ) d ,xx)l ;

as expected in accordance with the reasoning of the previous sections (i.e., (20) with 1{+(n) replacing,tn).
The proof is readily extended to the more general expression R,
(40), which can be analyzed by induction. First one replaces F1*
by a relation such as (47) obtaining two terms

Hdl

_ r,"H

=(*. *n( ;.fi a,ar)lt-itrofv*,*,

K'(A) (2, t) Af(\1)d3xi3x2,

J c* 6,)

//..T\\
c"(rs)=(ro+
"*p(*,J"

J,

,,a),),

since ,Ero is identical to the constant vacuum Hamiltoniat

Hr lor
I <ro and xo is an eigenfunction of 11r with an eigenvalue (energy
of vacuum) which we en take as zero.

we therefore obtain for the derivative

- dc,,Qo)
/ dto- - i(r,r

;
"*v(- f,

of C, the expression

n,a)

X J f " v + , x . p . 4/rox),v / x l a , x 1 ) , i 5 1r
which will be reduced to a simple factor times C,(to) by methods
analogous to those used in reducing R. The operator V can be
imagined to be split into two pieces gp." and rl".g operating on
positive and negative energy states respectively. The Voo" on xe
gives zero so we are left with two terms in the cuuent density,
vp."*B/v""s
and V""s*0.4V".c.
The latter v"us*8.4{,"os is just
the expectation value of p/ taken over all negative energy states
(minus.F"""B:4V"""* which gives zero acting on xo). This is the
effect of the vacuum expectation current of the electrons in the
sea which we should have subtracted from our original Hamil
tonian in the customary way.
The remaining term il/p."*PlV".s,
or its equivalent Vp."*0,4V
can be considered as V*(x)fo""(x)
where loo"(x) is written for the
positive energy component of the operator p.4V(x). Now this
operator, V*(x)feos(x), or more precisely just the V*(x) part of it,
can be pushed through the exp(-iJnoruil.)
in a manner exactly
analogous to (47) when /is a futrction. (Aa alternative derivation
lesults from the consideration that tie operator V(r, r) which
satishes the Dirac equation also satisfies the linear integral equations which are equivalent to it.) That is, (51) can be written

by (a8),(s0),

-^

-dc,\ro\ldro:-i\xo*.J

x *v(- t
fi

J *'txzlX.'n'tZ,tl

u a) n g7v 1x,1
ax,a"xzy)

//\
+;(x'-""0(-;..f'na)ff v-tx"ttx-,A'(2,l
-f+(2,

1)1,{(1)V(r)d'x1d'x,1s),

where in the first term tz:T,

and in the second t*to:tL'fhe
(-4) in 7(*tet refers to that part of the potential .d after ,0. The
6$t term vanishes for it involves (from the l(+(r)(2,1))
only
positive energy components of V*, which give zero operating into
xot- In the second term only negative components of V*(xz)
appear. If, then V*(xr) is interchanged in order with V(xr) it will
give zero operating on xo, and only the tern,

- dC,(t,)/dt": + i.J s2[(r+(!)(1, 1)

*r+(1, 1)).,1(1)ld3xr.
C,(to), (s2)
will remain, from the usual commutation relation of.I,* and V.
The factor of C,(ro) in (52) times -Als is, according to (29)
(reference 10), just .L(to-Aro)--L(io)
since this difierence arises
during the short time interval
from the extra potential A.4:r4
(d
L(t
dto)
C,(ti so that intesration
Alo. Hence - dC
d.t
o:
o)
*
/
"(6 /
lrom lo= f to lo:0 establishes (30).
Starting from the theory of the electromagnetic field in second
quantization, a deduction of the equations for quantum electrodynamics which appear in the succeeding paper may be worked
out using very similar principles. The Pauli-Weisskopf theory of
the Klein-Gordon equation can apparently be analyzed in essentiallv the same wav as that used here for Dirac electrons,

Paper 22

236

Space-Time Approach to Quantum Electrodynamics

R. P. Frvruu
Defa/lnml. oJ Physics, Cornell Unitasi.ly, Ithaca, Nw York
(ReceivedMay 9, 1949)
In this paper trvo things are done. (1) It is shown that a concan be attained in writing down matrix
siderable simplification
elements for complex processes in electrodynamics.
Further, a
yierv
physical point of
is available rvhich permits them to be
problem,
rvritten dorvn directly for any specific
Being simply a
restatement of conventional electrodynamics, hol'ever, the matrix
elements diverge for complex processes. (2) Eiectrodynamics
is

and presumably consistent, method is therefore available for the

calculation of all processes involving electrons and photons,
The simplification
in rvriting the expressions results from an
emphasis on the over-all space-time view resulting from a study
of the solution of the equations of electrodynamics. The relation
point of view is
of this to the more conventional Hamiltonian
discussed. It would be very dificult
to make the modiflcation
which is proposed if one insisted on having the equations in
Hamiitonian
form.
The methods apply as rvell to charges obeying the Klein-Gordon
equation, and to the various meson theories of nuclear forces.
Illustrative examples are given. Although a modifieiion
like that
used in electrodynamics can make all matrices finite for all of the
meson theories, for some of the theories it is no longer true that
all directly observable phenomena are insensitive to the details of
the modification used.
The actual evaluation of integrals appearing in the matrix
elements may be facilitated, in the simpler cases, by methods
described in the appendix.

modifled by altering the interaction of electrons at short distances.

All matfix elements are now finite, rvith the exception of those
relating to problems of vacuum polarization.
The latter are
evaluated in a manner suggested by Pauli and Bethe, rvhich gives
finite results for these matrices also. The only eftects sensitive to
the modification are changes in mass and charge of the electrons.
Such changes could not be directly observed. Phenomena directll'
observable, are insensitive to the details of the modification used
(except at extreme energies). For such phenomena, a limit can
be taken as the range of the modifrcation goes to zero. The results
then agree rrith

those of Schrvinger. A complete,

unambiguous,

paper shoutd be consideredas a direct confUtS

I
t i n u a t i o n o I a p r e c e d i n go n e r ( [ ) i n w h i c h t h e
motion o{ electrons, neglecting interaction, was analyzed, by dealing directly with the solution of the
Hamiltonian difierential equations. Here the same technique is applied to include interactions and in that way
to expressin simple terms the solution of problems in
quantum electrodynamics.
For most practical calculations in quantum electrodynamics the solution is ordinarily expressedin terms
of a matrix element. The matrix is worked out as an
expansionin powers oI e2/hc, the successiveterms correspondingto the inclusion of an increasing number of
virtual quanta. It appears that a considerablesimplification can be achieved in rvriting down these matrix
elementsfor complex processes.Furthermore, each term
in the expansion can be written down and understood
directly from a physical point of view, similar to the
space-timeview in I. It is the purpose of this paper to
describehow this may be done. We shall also discuss
methods of handling the divergent integrals which
appear in these matrix elements.
The simplification in the formulae resuits mainly from
the fact that previous methods unnecessarilyseparated
into individual terms processesthat were closely related
physically. For example, in the exchangeof a quantum
between two electrons there were two terms depending
on which electron emitted and which absorbed t-he
quantum. Yet, in the virtual states considered,timing
relations are not significant. Olny the order of operators
in the matrix must be maintained. We have seen (I),
that in addition, processesin which virtual pairs are
produced can be combined with others in which only
1 R. P. Feynman,

Phys. Rev. 76,749

(1949), hereafter called I.

positive energy electrons are involved. Further, the

effects of longitudinal and transversewaves can be
combined together. The separations previously made
were on an unrelativistic basis (reflected in the circumstance that apparently momentum but not energy is
conserved in intermediate states). When the terms are
combined and simplified, the relativistic invariance of
the result is self-evident.
We begin by discussingthe solution in spaceand time
of the Schr<idinger equation for particles interacting
instantaneously.The results are immediately generalizable to delayed interactions of relativistic electrons
and we represent in that way the laws of quantum
electrodynamics. We can then see how the matrix element for any processcan be written down directly. In
particular, the self-energyexpressionis written down.
So far, nothing has been done other than a restatement of conventional electrodynamics in other terms.
Therefore, the self-energy diverges. A modification2 in
interaction between charges is next made, and it is
shown that the self-energy is made convergent and
correspondsto a correction to the electron mass. After
the mass correction is made, other real processesare
finite and insensitive to the "width" of the cut-ofi in
the interaction.3
Unfortunately, the modification proposedis not completely satisfactory theoretically (it leads to some difficulties of conservation of energy). It does, however,
seem consistent and satisfactory to define the matrix

"..

2 For a discussionof this modiEcationin classicalpbysicssee

R. P. Feynman, Phys. Rev. 74 939 (1948), hereafter referred
to as A.
3A brief summary of the methods and results will be found in
R. P. Feynnan, Phys. Rev. 74, 1430 (1948), hereafter referred
to as B.

769

237
770

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

element for all real processesas the limit of that com- was still not complete becausethe Lagrangian method
puted here as the cut-ofi width goes to zero. A similar had been worked out in detail only for particles obeying
technique suggested by Pauli and by Bethe can be the non-relativistic Schrtldinger equation. It was then
applied to probletns of vacuum polarization (resulting modified in accordance with the requirements of the
in a renormalization of charge) but again a strict Dirac equation and the phenomenon of pair creation.
physical basis for the rules of convergenceis not knolvn. This was made easier by the reinterpretation of the
After mass and charge renormalizalion, tIe limit of theory of holes(I). Finally for practicalcalculationsthe
zero cut-off width can be taken for all real Drocesses. expressionswere developed in a power seriesin e,,/rr. It
T h e r e s u l t sa r e l h e n e q u i v a l e n t o l h o s eo f S i h u ' i n g e r . was apparent that each term in the serieshad a simple
rvho does not make explicit use of the convergencefac- physical interpretation. Since the result was easierto
tors. The method of Schwinger is to identiiy the terms understandthan the derivation, it was thought best to
corresponding to corrections in mass and charge and, publish the results first in this paper. Considerabletine
previous to their evaluation, to remove them from the has been spent to make these first two papers as comexpressionsfor real processes.This has the advantage plete and as physically plausible as possible without
of showing that the results can be strictly independent relying on the Lagrangian method, because it is not
of particular cut-ofi methods. On the other hand, many generally familiar. It is realized that such a descripticin
of the properties of the integrals are analyzed using cannot carry the conviction of truth which would acIormal properties of invariant propagation functions. company the derivation. On the other hand, in the
But one of the properties is that the integrals are infinite interest of keepingsimple things simple the derivaiion
and it is not clear to what extent this invalidates the will appear in a separatepaper.
demonstrations. A practical advantage of the present
The possible application of these methods to the
method is that ambiguities can be more easily resolved; various meson theories is discussedbriefly. The formusimply by direct calculation of the otherwise divergent las corresponding to a charge particle of zeto spin
integrals. Nevertheless, it is not at all clear that the moving in accordancewith the Klein Gordon equation
convergence factors do not upset the physical con- are also given. In an Appendix a method is given for
sistency of the theory. Although in the limit the two calculating the integrals appearing in the matrix elemethods agree,neither method appearsto be thoroughly ments for the simpler processes.
satisfactory theoretically. Nevertheless, it does appear
The point of view which is taken here of the interthat we now have available a complete and definite action of charges differs from the more usual point of
method for the calculation of physical processesto any view of field theory. Furthermore, the familiar Hamilo r d e ri n q u a n t u me J e cr to d y n a m i c s .
tonian form of quantum mechanics must be compared
Since we can write down the solution to any physical to the over-all space-time view used here. The first
problem, we have a complete theory which could stand section is. therefore. devoted to a discussion of the
by itself. It will be theoreticallyincomplete,however, relations of these viewpoints.
in two respects.First, although each term of increasing
r. COMPARISONWITH THE HAMILTONIAN
order in e2fhc can be written down it rvould be desirable
METHOD
to see some way of expressing things in finite form to
all orders in e2fhc at once. Second, although it will be
Electrodynamics can be looked upon in two equivaphysically evident that the results obtained are equiva- lent and complementary ways. One is as the description
lent to those obtained by conventional electrodynamics of the behavior of a field (Maxwell's equations). The
the mathematical proof of this is not included. Both of other is as a description of a direct interaction at a
rheselimitations will be removed in a subsequentpaper distance (albeit delayed in time) between charges (the
(seealso Dysona).
solutions of Lienard and Wiechert). From the latter
Briefly the genesisof this theory was this. The con- point of view ligbt is consideredas an interaction of the
ventional electrodynamics was expressed in the La- chargesin the sourcewith those in the absorber. This is
grangian form of quantum mechanics described in the an impractical point of view because many kinds of
Reviews of Modern Physics.6The motion of the field sourcesproduce the samekind of efiects.The field point
oscillatorscould be integratedout (as describedin Sec- of view separates these aspects into two simpler probtion 13 of that paper), the result being an expressionof lems, production of light, and absorption of light. On
the delayed interaction of the particles. Next the modi- the other hand, the field point of view is less practical
fication of the delta-function interaction could be made when dealing with close collisions of particles (or their
directly from the analogy to the classical case.2This action on themselves).For here the sourceand absorber
a Schwinger,?hys. Rev. 74, 1439 (1948), Phys. Rev. 75, 651 are not readily distinguishable, there is an intimate
J.
(1949L,A proof of this equivalenceis given by F. J. Dyson, Phys. exchangeof quanta. The fields are so closely determined
by the motions of the particlesthat it is just as well not
Rev. 75. 486 (1949).
6 R . P . F e y n m a nR, e v . M o d . P h y s . 2 0 , 3 6 7( 1 9 4 8 )T. h e a p p l i c a .
to separate the question into ttyo problems but to contion to electrodynamics
is descrihedin detail by H. J. Croenewold,
sider the process as a direct interaction. Roughly, the
Koninklijke Nederlandsche
Akademia van Weresrhannen.Pro
ceedings
Vol. LII,3 (226) 1949.
field point of view is most practical for problems involv-

238
Q Li.\ N TU X{

E L E CT R O D Y N A N,I CS

ing real quanla, while the interaction view is best for

the discussionof the virtual quanta involved. We shall
emphasizethe interaction viervpoint in this paper, first
becauseit is less familiar and thereforerequiresmore
discussion,and secondbecausethe important aspectin
the problems rvith which we shall deal is the effect of
virtual quanta.
The Hamiltonian method is not well adapted to
representthe direct action at a distancebetweencharges
becausethat action is delayed.The Hamiltonian method
representsthe future as developingout of the present.
If the valuesof a compleleset of quantilies are known
norv, their valucs can be computed at the next instant
in time. If particles interact through a delayed interaction, horvever, one cannot predict the future by
simply knorving thc present motion of the particles.
One rvould also have to knorv what the motions of the
particleswerein lhe past in view of the interaction this
ma1' have on the future motions. This is done in the
Hamiltonian electrodynamics,of course,by requiring
that one specify besidesthe present motion of the
oarticles. the values of a host of ncrv variables (the
ioordinatesof the field oscillalors)to keep track of that
aspcct of the past motions of the particles which determinestheir future behavior. The use of the Hamiltonian forces one to choose the lield viewpoint rather
than the interactionvielvPoint.
In many problems,for example,the close collisions
of particles, we are not inlerested in the precisetemporal sequcnceof evenls.It is not of interest to be able
to say horv the situation would look at each instant of
time during a collisionand how it progressesfrom instant to instant. Such ideasare only useful for events
taking a long time anclfor which we can readily obtain
informationduring the interveningperiod.For collisions
it is much easierto treat the processas a lvhole.6The
Mlller interactionmatrix for the the collisionof trvo electrons is not essentiallymore complicaledthan the nonrelativistic Rutherford formula, yeL the mathematical
machinery used to obtain the former from quantum
electrodynamics is vastly more complicated than
Schrcidinger's equation wilh the e2frp inleraction
needeclto obtain the latter. The differenceis only that
in the latter the action is instantaneousso that the
Hamiltonian method rcquiresno extra variabies,while
in the lormer relativistic case it is delal'ed and the
.
Hamiltonian method is very cumbersorne
We shall be discussingthe solutions of cquations
rather than the time differentialcquations{rom which
they come.We shall discoverthat the solutions,because
of the over-all space-timeview that they permit, are as
easv to understand when interactions are delayed as
rvhenthey are instantaneous.
As a further point, relativistic invariancewill be selfevident. The Hamiltonian form of the equations develops the future from the instantaneousprcsent. Ilut
6 This is the viewpoint
bers.

of the theory- oi the S matrix

of }fuisen-

77r

for different observers in relative motion the instantaneous present is different, and corresponds to a
different 3-dimensionalcut of space-time.Thus the
temporal analysesof different observersis different and
their Harniltonian equations are developing the process
in difierent ways. These differencesare irrelevant, howe v e r , f o r t h e s o l u t i o ni s t h e s a m c i t r a n y s p a c et i m e
frame. By forsaking the Hamiltonian method, the
wedding of relativity and quantum mechanics can be
accomplishedmost naturallY.
We illustrate these points in the next section by
equationfor nonstuclyingthe solutionof Schrcidinger's
relativistic particles interacting by an instantaneous
Coulomb potential (Eq. 2). When the solution is modified to include the efiects of delay in the interaclion
and the relativisticpropertiesof the electronswe obtain
an expressionof the laws of quantum electroclynamics
(Eq. 1).
2, THE INTERACTIONBETWEENCHARGES
We study by the samemethodsas in I, the interaction
of two particlesusing lhe samenotation as I' We start
by consideringthe non-relativisticcasedescribedby the
Schrridingerequation (I, Eq. 1). The wave lunction at
a given time is a function /(t., xu, l) of the coordinates
'Ihus
catlK(x", x6,t',x"t,xb',l')
xo and xoof eachparticle.
the amplitude that particle o at xo' at time I' will get
to x" at t while particle b at xb'at l' gets to xb at ,' If the
particlesare free and do not interact this is
K(x", x6,I ; x o', x6', l') : K p"(x t ; x t' ) K ot(xt,I ; xt', t' )
"',
",
where Ko" is the ](o function for particle a considered
as free. In Lhis casewe can obviously define a quantity
like K, but for which the time I need not be the same
f o r p a r t i c l e sa a n d b r l i k e w i s ef o r t ' ) ; e . g . ,
( ')l .
K o ( 3 ,{ ; 1 , 2 ) - K a . ( 3 , 1 ) K o D 2

(l)

can be thought of as the amplitude that particle o goes

from x1 at 11to x3 at 13and that particle D goesfrom x2
ut tz to xt at t+
When the particles do interact, one can only define
t h e q u a n t i t y K ( 3 . 4 : l . l ) p r e c i s e l yi l t h e i n l e r a c t i o n
vanishesbetrveentt and lz and also betweenlr and lr.
In a real physical system such is not the case.There is
such an enormous advantage, however, to the concept
that we shall continueto use it, imagining that rve can
neglect the effect oI interactions between h and 12and
between h ar^d ta. For practical problems this means
choosirrgsuch long time intervals h-lr and tr-lzthat
the extra interactions near the end points have small
relative efiects. As an example, in a scattering problem
it may rvell be that the particles are so well separated
i n i r i a l l y a n d f r n a l l yt h a t t h e i n t e r a c t i o na t t h e s el i m e s
is negligible. Again energy values can be defined by the
averalerate of change of phase over such long time
intervals that errors initially and finally can be neglected. Inasmuch as any physical problem can be defined
in terms of scattering processeswe do not lose much in

239
i72

R.

P. FEYNMAN

o'
+{4,6)

This turns out to be not quite right,T for when this

interaction is representedby photons they must be of
only positive energy, while the Fourier transform of
6(156-rs) containsfrequenciesof both signs.It should
insteadbe replacedby 61(ls6-156)where
r'

6*(
+ (5 ,l )
ELECTRONS
Fro. 1. The fundamental interaction Eq. (4). Exchange of one
quantum between two electrons.

6-(.):

ro

id,Jd r-lim
c-u

(ri)-r
-:6(r)+(rirr-r.

(j)

J_i

This is to be averaged with /b6-t6+(-lse-rro) which

arises when /5(16 and correspondsto a emitting the
quantum which D receives.Srnce
(2r)-\(6.,(t- r) l 6a( t- r)) : 61(P- r,),

this means rro 160s0)is replaceclby da(s662)

where
a general theoretical senseby this approximation. If it
Smz:lda2-rsa2
is the square of the relativistically inis not made it is not easy to study interacting particles
variant interval between points 5 and 6. Since in
relativistically, for there is nothing significant in choosclassicalelectrodynamicsthere is also an interaction
ng h:h if xrlxa, as absolutesimultaneity of events
through the vector potential, the completeinteraction
at a distance cannot be delined invariantly. It is essen(seeA, Eq. (1)) should be (1-(v6.v6)d1(s562),
or in the
tially to avoid this approximation that the complicated
relativistic case,
structure of the older quantum electrodynamics has
been built up. We wish to describe electrodynamics as
(1- o,. ca)6+(ssd)
: 0"0a2",?a,6+(suut).
a delayed interaction between particles. If we can make
Hence
we
for
electrons
have
obeying the Dirac equation,
the approximationof assuminga meaningto K(3, 4; 1, 2)
the results of this interaction can be expressedvery
ff
simply.
K(r'(34
. ; 1 , 2 ) : - ; r z I t K . , ( 3 , 5 t K - r @ ,6 \ - y " , - y t ,
JJ
To see how this may be done, imagine first that the
interaction is simply that given by a Coulomb potential
l) K+b(6,2)d.r6dr6, (4)
X 6+(soer)K+.(5,
e2fr where r is the distance between the particles. Ii this
be turned on only for a very short time Als at time 10, where
loA and 76! are the Dirac matrices applying to
the first order correctionto -K(3,4; 1,2) can be worked the spinor corresponding
to particles a and D, respecout exactly as was Eq. (9) of I by an obvious general- tively (the lactor
0"At being absorbed in the definition,
ization to two particles:
I E q . ( 1 7 ) ,o f K * ) .
This is our fundamentalequationfor electrodynamics.
K ( t ) ( 3 , 4 :1 , 2 ) : - ; r z | | K . , r J , 5 ) A ' ' b ( +6,) / s 6r
It describes the effect of exchange of one quantum
(therefore first order in e2) between two electrons. It
X f o"(5, l) K x6(6,2) d3x5d3x6Lt
n, will serve as a prototype enabling us to write down the
correspondingquantities involving the exchangeof two
where l5:t6:r0. If now the potential were on at all or more quanta betweentrvo eiectronsor the interaction
times (so that strictly K is not defined unlesslr:ta and of an electron with itself. It is a consequenceof conh:tz), the first-order effect is obtained by integrating ventional electrodynamics. Relativistic invariance is
on 16,which we can write as an integral over both lu clear. Since one sums over p it contains the effectsof
and lo if we include a delta-function6(ts-16) to insure both longitudinal and transverse waves in a relaticontribution only when ls:16. Hence, the first-order vistically symmetrical way.
efiect of interaction is (calling 16-16:lb6)'
We shall now interpret Eq. (4) in a manner which
will permit us to write dorvn the higher order terms. It
ff
- ic2
l
can be understood (seeFig. 1) as saying that the ampliK("(3, 4; l. 2\:
|
| 1{0.f3, 5)Kn6(4, 6)156
tude for "a" to go from 1 to 3 and "b" to go from 2 to 4
is altered to first order because they can exchange a
X6(t56)K0.(5, 1)Kob(6, 2)d,rsdra, Q)
quantum. Thus, "o" can go to 5 (amplitude I(+(5,1))
where d,r:d.1xdl.
7 It, and a like term for the effect of a on b, leads to a theory
We know, however, in classicalelectrodynamics,that
the Coulomb potential does not act instantaneously, which, in the classical limit, exhibits interaction through halfadvanced and half-retarded potentials. Classically, this is equibut is delayed by a time 156,taking the speed of light valent to Durely retarded effects within a closed liox from which
as unity. This suggests simply replacing r6;t6fts6) in no lighr e'capei (e.g.. see A, or J. A. Wheeler and I{. P. Feynman,
(2) by something like r5;r6(fu6-lb6) to representthe Rev. Mod. Phys. 17, 157 (1945)). Analogous rheorems exisr in
q-uantum mechanics but it would lead us too far astray to discuss
delay in the efiect ol b ot a.
Inem now.

240
Q U A N T U N { E L E C T R O D Y N A X ,I C S
emit a quantum (longitudinal, transverse,or scalar once (either in emission or in absorption), terms like
(f, Bq. (t+)) occur only when there is more than one
"y.u)and then proceedto 3 (Ka(3,5)). Meantime "0"
goes to 6 (K+(6, 2)), absorbs the quantum (ryru)and quantum involved. The Bose statistics of the quanta
proceedsto 4 (K1(4,6)). The quantum meanwhilepro- can, in all cases,be disregarded in intermediate states.
ceedsfrom 5 to 6, rvhichit doeswith amplitude 6n(su6:). The only effect of the statistics is to change the weight
We must surr over all the possiblequantum polariza- of initiai or linal states.If there are among quanta, in
tions p and positions and times of emission5, and of the initial state, some z rvhich are identical then the
absorption 6. Actually if li>fu it would be better to weight oi the sta.teis (1/n l) of what it would be if these
emits but no attention quanta were considered as dilTerent (similarly for the
say that "o" absorbs
need be paid to thesematters, as all such alternatives final state).
are automaticallycontainedin (4).
PROBLEM
3. THE SELF-ENERGY
The correct terms o{ higher order in d or involving
largernumbcrsof electrons(interactingwith themselves
or in pairs) can be written down by the same kincl of
reasoning.They will be illustrated by examplesas rve
proceed.In a succeedingpaper they rvill all be deduced
f rom conventionalquantum electrodynamics.
Calculation,lrom (,1),of the transition element between positive energy free electron states gives the
M6ller scattering of trvo electrons,rvhen account is
taken of the Pauli principle.
The exclusion prinr:iple for interacting chargcs is
handled in exactly the same*'ay as for non-interacting
charges (I). For example,for two chargesit requires
o n l y t l r a t o n e c a l c u l a t eK ( . 3 , 4 ; t , 2 ) - K ( 4 , 3 ; 1 , 2 ) t o
get the net amplitude {or arrival of chargesat 3 and 4.
It is disregardedin intermediate states. The interferenceeffectsfor scatteringof electronsby positrons
discussedby Bhabha rvill be seen to result directly in
The formulasare interpretedto apply
this formr.rlation.
to positronsin the manner discussedin I.
As our primary conccrn rvill be for processesin which
the quanta are virtual we shall not include here the
detailcd analysisof processcsinvolving real quanta in
initial or 6nal state,and shall content ourselvesby only
stating the rules applying to them.8The result of the
analysisis, as expected,that they can be included by
the same line oI reasoningas is used in discussingthe
providedthe quantitiesare normalized
virtual processes,
in the usual manner to representsingle quanta. For
example, the amplitude that an electron in going from 1
to 2 absorbsa quantum whosevector Ilotential,suitably
normalized,is cuexp(-i,t r):Cu(r) is just the expression (I, Eq..(13)) for scattering in a potential rvith
,4 (3) replacedby C (3). Each quantum interacts only

Having a term representingthe mutual interaction

of a pair of charges, we must inclucle similar terms to
representthe interaction of a charge with itself. For
under some circumstanceswhat appears to be trvo distinct electronsmay, accordingto I, be viervedalso as
a single electron (namely in case one electron was
createdin a pair with a positron destinedto annihilate
the other electron). Thus to the interaction betrveen
such electronsmust correspondthe possibiLityof the
action of an electronon itself,e
This interaction is the heart of the self energy problem. Considerto first order in e'!theaction of an electron
on itse!f in an otherwiseIorcefreeregion.The amplitude
K(z,t) Ior a single particle to get from 1 to 2 difiers
from Kn(2, 1) to first order in e2by a term
ff
K r ' ( 21. ) : ' i i I I K , ( 2 . A ) t u K( , +3. ) y ,

(srt')' (6)
XKa(3, 1)dr3d'rn6.
It arises becausethe electron instead of going from 1
directly to 2, may go (Iiig. 2) first to 3, (Ka(3, 1)), emit
a quantum (.yu),proceed to 4, (Ka(4,3)), absorb it
("yu),and finally arrive at 2 (K1Q,.Q). The quantum
must go from 3 to + (6+(sca')).
This is related to the self-energyof a free electron in
the followingmanncr.Supposeinitially, time lr, \1.ehave
an electron in state /(1) rvhich we imagine to be a positive energy solution o{ Dirac's equation for a free particle. After a long time /:-lr the perturbation will alter

-'
at,lorgh
in the expressions stemming from (4) thc quanta are
virtual, tlis is not actually a theoretical limitation. One rvay to
deduce the correct rules for real quanta from (4) is to note that
in a closed system ali quanta can be consiclerecl as virtual (i.e.,
they have a knorvn source ancl are eventually absorbed) so that
in such a system the present description is complete and erluivalent to the conventional one. In particular.
the relation of the
E i n s t e i n , 4 a n d B c o e l l i c i e n t sr a n b e ' l e , l u c e J . A m o r e p r c c t i c r l
direct deduction of the expressions for rcal quanta rvill be givcn
in the subsequent paper. It might be noted that (4) can be rewritten as describing the action on a, K(I)(3, l):if
K*G,5)
1)d"e of the potential,4 u(5) : e'?-lK+(4, 6)6+(sro'])ru
X l(5)r+(5,
-A'zAp:4rju
arising from Maxwell's equations
XKa(6,2)dr6
from a "current" jr(6\:e2K-(4.6r7u4-r6.2r
p r o r l u c e r Jb y p a r ticle D in going from 2 lo 4. This is virrue oi rhe facr thal 6+
satisfies
- trl6a(s'11'?):{'512' 1;'
(5)

Frc. 2. Intcraclion of an electron ilith itself, Eq. (6).

e These consideratiorrs make it appear unlikely that the conRev. Mod. Plys.
tention of J. A. Wheeler and R. P.-ieynman,
17, 157 (1945), that electrons do not act on themselves, will be a
successful concept in quantum electrodynamics.

241
114

P.

FEYNMAN

the wave function, which can then be looked upon as

a superposition of free particle solutions (actually it
only contains /). The amplitude that g(2) is contained
is calculatedas in (I, Eq. (21)). The diagonalelement
(g:,f) i. therefore
f

f -

I f / ( 2 ) B K ' r ) ( 2 .l 1 B l ( 1 t r t 3 x f i 3 x 2 .

volume. If normalized to volume I/, the result would

simply be proportional to l. This is expected,for if the
efiect were equivalent to a change in energy A.E, the
amplitude for arrival in J at t2 is altered by a factor
exp(-iL,E(t2-tr)),
or to 6rst order by the difierence
-i(AE)I:. Hence, we have

(7)

JJ

L E : e 2" f| , (_u 1 u K , ( 4 . 3 ) 1 u r ) e x p ( i 2 . . r q r ) 6( s, r J ) d r r , ( a )

The time interval T: tz- h (and the spatial volume I/

over u'hich one integrates) must be taken very large,
for the expressionsare only approximate (analogousto
the situation for two interacting charges).l0 This is
because,for example, we are dealing incorrectly with
quanta emitted just before l, which would normally be
reabsorbedat times after 12.
Il Ko(2,1) from (6) is actually substituted into (7)
the surface integrals can be perlormed as was done in
obtaining I, Eq. (22) resulting in

integrated over all space-time drr. This expressionwill

be simplified presently. In interpreting (9) we have
tacitly assumedthat the wave functions are normalized
so that (u*u):(u7au):1. The equation may therefore
be made independent of the normalization by writing
the left side as (LE)(A1 u), or since (rzTrrz): (E/ nx)(Au)
and mLm: ELE, as Am('au) where Lm is an equivalent
change in rnassof the electron. In this form invariance
is obvious.
One can likewise obtain an expressionfor the energy
f f _
- i",
| | l ( a ) y , K - ( a , 3 ) y , / ( 3 ) 6 + ( s o , r r d ' , d ' , . ( 8 ) shift for an electron in a hydrogen atom. Simply replace
K1 in (8), by K+(v), the exact kernel for an electron in
Putting for /(1) the plane wave z exp(-i2.r1) where the potential, V- Be2/r, of the atom, and / by a wave
p" is the energy (1r) and momentum of the electron function (of space and time) for an atomic state. In
general the AE which results is not real. The imaginary
(f:m'),
and ur is a constant 4-index symbol, (8)
part is negative and in exp(-iA-El) produces an exbecomes
ponentially decreasingamplitude with time. This is
becausewe are asking ior the amplitude that an atom
-ir' | | (u1uK*(4,3)7,u)
initially with no photon in the field, will still appear
after time ? with no photon. If the atom is in a. state
X exp(ip' (r a- 4 )) 61(sa3,)dr3dra,which can radiate, this amplitude must decay with
time. The imaginary part ol AE when calculated does
the integrals extending over the volume I/ and time
indeed give the correct rate of radiation from atomic
interval I. Since K".(4, 3) dependsonly on the difference
states. It is zero for the ground state and for a free
of the coordinates of 4 and 3, ra3u, the integral on 4
electron.
gives a result (except near the surfaces of the region)
In the non-relativistic region the expression for AE
independent of 3, When integrated on 3, therefore, the
can be worked out as has been done by Bethe.rr In the
result is of order VT. The effect is proportional to Z,
relativistic region (points 4 and 3 as close together as a
for the wave functions have been normalized to unit
Co{npton waveJength) the K*{rr which should appear
in (8) can be replaced to 6rst order in I/ by K1 plus
K+(D(2,1) given in I, Eq. (13). The problem is then
very similar to the radiationless scattering problem
discussedbelow.

M O M E N T U pM- k ,
F A C T O(R9 - k - m

K,
MOMENTUM
FACTORk-2

TNTERACTTON,T
p
MOMENTUM

4. EXPRESSIONIN MOMENTUM AND

ENERGY SPACE
The evaluation of (9), as well as all the other more
complicated expressionsarising in these problems, is
very much simplilied by working in the momentum and
energy variables, rather than space and time. For this
we shall need the Fourier Transform of 6+(szr2)which is
- 6 - ( s 2 ' 2 ) : a I. f e x p ( - i A ' r z t ) h 2 d 4 h '
I

FrG. 3. Interaction of an electron with itself

Momentum space, Eq. (11).

10This is discussedin reference5 in which it is pointed out that

tie concept of a wave function losesaccuracy il there are delayed
self-actioni;.

fl0)

which can be obtained from (3) and (5) or from I,

Eq. (32) noting that Ia(2,1) Ior mz:O is 61(sr1'?)
from
rrH. A. Bethe,Phys.Rev.72,339(1947).

242
QUANTUM

I lJ

ELECTRODYNAMICS

//

,"fr n-il,'-"
1,,.\,
t,-tt

lP'
a. Eq.lz

,K1

t'-ov
lt'

f',

b. Eql3

c. Eq.l4

Frc. 4 Radiative correction to scat tering, momentum

Frc. 5. Compton
space.

r or more precisely
I, Eq. (3a). The ft-'?means (ft'[)
tile limit as 6+0 of (&'E+tD)-r. Further da& means
(2r)-2dkflkzdhdftr. If we imagine that qxanta are pariic1"s of ,".o mass, then we can make the general rule
that all poles are to be resolved by considering.the
massesof the particles and quanta to have infinitesimal

scattering,

Eq

(15)'

trated in Fig. 4(a), f,nd the matrix:

@/ ri)

s)-\
"t,(P,- h- m)-r s(P'- r-

k'
uk-2da

(rz)

For in this case, firstr2 a quantum of momentum ft is

emitted (rr), the electron then having momentum
(rtt- h- n).-t '
fr- ft and hence propagating with factor
negative imaginary Parts.
it is scatteredby the potential (matrix a) receiving
Next
flsing these results we see that the self-energy (9) is additional momentum g, propagating on then (factor
the mairix element between u and u of the matrix
with the new momentum until the quan(lz-k-m1-tl
tlum is reabsorbed (y"). The quantum propagates from
zd'ak, ( 1 1 ) emission to absorption (lr') and we integrate over all
@/,DI u@- a- m)-'1rk
ouanta (da[), and sum on polarizationp. When this is
intesrated on frr, the result can be shown to be exactly
to the expressions(16) and (17) given-in B for
where we have used the expression(I, Eq' (31)) for the
"quil
proceis, the various terms coming from resithe
self-energy
the
same
for
form
This
K.,.
of
Fourier transform
duesof thl polesof the integrand (12).
is easier to rvork with than is (9).
Or again-iI the quantum is both emitted and reThe equation can be understood by imagining (Fig' 3)
before thJ scattering takes place one finds
that the electron of momentum f emits (7r) a quantum absorbeld
(r'ie.
+(b))
monow
with
its
way
makes
and
ft,
of momentum
mentum p-k to the next event (Iactor (!-h-*)-t)
f
h- m)'t"vpk-2d4k, (13)
which is to absorb the quantum (anothervu)' The
a(p1- m)-\,(IrtC/
I
(There
"D
is a
amplitude of propagation of quanta is k-'?'
lacior d/ri for each virtual quantum)' One integrates
p or if uottt" e-ission and absorption occur after the
over all quanta. The reasonan electron of momentum
scattering, (FiS. a(c))
rs
rethe
operator
this
is
that
propagates as l/(l-m)
iioio.ut oi the Dirac equation operator, and we are
(14)
simply solving this equation. Likewise light goes as
e / rD I t,(b"- h- rn)-'t t(fz- m)-' alrzd4k'
1/H, lor this is the reciprocal D'Alembertian operator
of the wave equation of light. The first ?N represents
t"..rl, are discussedin detail below.
Tl
the current which generatesthe vector potential, while
"." have now achieved our simplification of the lorm
We
potenthe secondis the velocity operator by which this
of writing matrix elements arising from virtual proclial is multiplied in the Dirac equationwhen an external
esses.PrJcessesin which a number oI real quanta is
fleld acts on an electron.
given initially and finally offer no problem (assuming
may
problems
other
reasoning,
of
the same line
Using
"up
normalization). For example, consider the
Iorrect
example,
For
directly in momentum space.
be set
efiect (Fig. 5(a)) in which an electron in state
Compton
considerihe scatieringin a potential A:Ar1yrvarying
a quantum oI momentum q1, polarrzauon
absorbs
fr
^t".tor
in spaceand time as d exp(-iq'r). An electroninitially
so that its interaction is eLp"f
r:eL, and.emits
rr"
in itate of momentum ft:?rr"yu will be deflected to a secondquantum of momentum -92' polarization-e2
The zero-order answer ls
state pz whete bz:Pt*q.
to arrive in final state of momentum pz. The matrix foi
simply the matrix element of c between states 1 and 2'
't F1..,- **,, etc., here reler not to the order in rrue time but to
We next ask for the first order (in e2)radiative correc- ttt. *ii"iti""
ntong the trajectory of the-eleclron' That
iri"tlnit
tion due to virtual radiation of one quantum' There are is, more precisely, to the order of appearance ol the matrlces ln
several ways this can happen. First for the case illus- the expressrons.

243
776

R.

this processis ez(btlqt-m)-re1.

the Compton effect is, then,
er(f tl qr-m)-,et*

er(ltl

P.

FEYNMAN

The total matrix for

qz- m)-tez,

(15)

for propagation of quanta of momentum ft is

- F ' + ( h 2 ) :r ' t ,

f6

(ft-,-(ft,-trr)-r)G(I)dI,

Jo

the secondterm arising becausethe emission of ez may

alsoprecedethe absorptionof e1 (Fig. 5(b)). One takes rather than k-2. That is, writing Fa (H): - r-rp-261p21,
matrix elementsof this between initial and final electron
states (pr-l-qr:02-Qz), to obtain the Klein Nishina
- / - ( s 1 2 2 ) : . - t e x p ( - i i . 1 1 r ) f t - 2 c ( h 2 ) d 4 h .( l o r
for'mula. Pair annihilation with emissionof two quanta,
I
J'
etc., are given by the samematrix, positron states being
those with negative time component of p. Whether Every integral over an intermediate quantum
which
q u a n t aa r ea b s o r b e do r e m i l t e dd e p e n d so n w h e l h e rt h e previously involved a fa"ctordak/
h, is now supplied with
time component of q is positive or negative.
a convergencefactor C(ft,) where
5. THE CONVERGENCEOF PROCESSESWITI{
VIRTUAL QUANTA
These expressionsare, as has been indicated, no more
than a re-expression
of conventionalquantum electrodynamics. As a consequence,many of them are meaningless. For example, tl.re self-energy expression (9) or
(11) givesan infinite resultwhen evaluated.The infinity
arises,apparently, from the coincidenceof the d-function
singularitiesin K*(4,3) and 6*(sa3r).
Only at this point
is it necessaryto make a real departure from conventional electrodynamics, a departure other than simply
rewriting expressionsin a simpler form.
We desireto make a modification of quantum electrodynamics analogous to the modification of classical
eLectrodynamics described in a previous article, A.
There the d(s12')appearing in the action of interaction
s'as replaced by /(srl) where /(r) is a function of small
ividth and great height.
The obvious correspondingmodification in the quantum theory is to replace the 6a(sr) appearing the
quantum mechanical interaction by a nelv function
,/*(s'?). We can postulate that if the Fourier transform of the classical/(srl) is the integral over all ft of
F(h2) exp(-ih.rrz)d.nh, then the Fourier transform of
,f1(s'?)is the same integral taken over only positive frequencies kq for tzlh and over only negative ones for
:2(/1 in analogy to the relation of 6a(sr)to d(sr).The
iunction f(s'?):J@.t) can be written* as
r'6?

.,*.r':(2')'f
v k':o

I sinlAnlxrlr
X c o s ( K .x ) d A a d 3 K g (kk).,

ri'hereg(fr'b) is Eal times the density of oscillatorsand

may be expressedfor positive Aaas (A, Eq. (16))
f'

c(h'):

(6(ft'?)-6(ft,-I?))G(I)dI,

Jo

rtere f-G(tr)dX:l
and G involves values of X large
:ompared to az. This simply means that the amplitude
*.This_relation
is given incorrectlyin A, equationjust pre:eding 16.

c(h\:

I:-),'(ft'?-x)-r6i1;41'

o7)

The poles are defined by replacing ft, by ft?f i6 in the

limit 6-0. That is X, may be assumedto have an infinitesimal negativeimaginary part.
The function ./*(su,) may still have a discontinuity
in value on the light cone.This is of no influencefor the
Dirac electron. For a particle satisfying the Klein
Gordon equation, horvever, the interaction involves
gradientsof the potential tvhich reinstatesthe 6 function if / has discontinuities.The condition that / is to
have no discontinuity in value on the light coneimplies
ft'C(&'?) approaches zero as ft2 approaches iniinity. In
t e r m s o f G ( I ) t h e c o n d i r i o ni s

.f"

x,c1x)ax:0.

(18)

This condition will also be used in discussingthe convergence of vacuum polarization integrals.
The expressionfor the self-energymatrix is now
(e\/rit | 7u(p-h-mt-11ph 2d4kclh?\, (lq)
J
rvhich, since C(ft') falls off at least as rapidly as l/hr,
convergs. For practical purposes we shall suppose
hereafter that C(ft,) is simply -Xr/(ftr-X!) implying
that someaverage(with weight G(I)dX) over valuesof
X may be taken afterwards. Since in all processesthe
quantum momentu.m will be contained in at least one
I representing
extra factor of the form (tr-k-*)
propagation of an electron while that quantum is in
the field, we can expect all such integrals u'ith their
convergencefactors to converge and that the result of
all such processeswill now be finite and definite (excepting the processeswith closedloops, discussedbelotv,
in which the diverging integrals are over the momenta
of the electrons rather than the quanta).
I noting
The integralof (19) withC(e:): -Xr(ftr-tr)
that P2:1n2, X)za and dropping terms of order tnf )r,
is (seeAppendix A)
(e'z
/ 2r) l+m (tn(\,/ n) * il - ! (.tn(x/ n) -l s/ +)1. Q0)

244
QUAN T U M

777

E L E CTRO D Y N A M I CS

When applied to a state of an electron of momentum p

satisfyingpu:nu, it gives for the changein mass (as
in B, Eq. (9))

We must now study the remaining terms (13) and

(1a). The integral on ft in (13) can be performed (after
multiplication by C(ft')) since it involves nothing but
the integrai (19) for the self-energy and the result is
Am:m(e,/2r)(31n(l'/m)Il).
Ql)
allowed to operate on the initial state u1, (so that
prur:mur). Hence the factor following a(p\-nt) | will
6. RADIATIVE CORRECTIONSTO SCATTERING
be just Az. But, if one now tries to expand l/(ft-m)
: (pt+m)/ (br'-m2) one obtains an infinite result,
We can now complete the discussionof the radiative
correctionsto scattering. In the integrals we include the since p12:m2. This is, however, just what is expected
convergence tactor C(E), so that they converge for physically. For the quantum can be emitted and ablarge ft. Integral (12t is also not convergentbecauseof sorbed at any time previous to the scattering. Such a
the well-known infra-red catastrophy. For this reason processhas the efiect of a changein mass of the electron
we calculate (as discussedin B) the value of the integral in the state 1. It therefore changesthe energy by A.E
assumingthe photonsto havea small masstr-i"(rz(X.
and the amplitude to first order in AE by - iLE t where
The integral (12) becomes
I is the time it is acting, which is innnite. That is, the
major effect of this term would be canceledby the efiect
of change of mass An.
( c / r i ) | ^ yp ( p , - h - n ) ' a ( f , - h - m \ -|
The situation can be analyzed in the following
manner. We supposethat the electron approaching the
X 7,(ft?- tr-r"'?)-tdahC(k'z \^;,2'), scattering potential c has not been free for an infinite
timei but at some time far past suffereda scattering by
which when integrated (see Appendix B) gives (e2/2n)
a pdtential b, If we limit our discussionto the effects
times
oI Lrn and of lhp virtual radiation oI one quantum between two sgch iscatterings each of the effects will be
2d \
t /
m
\/
finite, though large; and their differenceis determinate.
I z( tn--1
l( l--)*d rend
/\
Ltn20'/
L \ X-i"
The propagation from b to d is representedby a matrix
+

4ro-l
| atanadalc
Lan20Jo
I
120
*-(qa4m

aq)-tra,
sin20

a(!'-m)

(22)

|b,

(2s)

in which one is to integrate possibly over p' (depending

on detailsof the situation). (If the time is long between
b and a, the energy is very nearly determined so that
p'2 is very near)y m2.)
We shall compare the effect on the matrix (25) of the
virtual quanta and of the changeof massArn. The efiect
of a virtual quantum is

where (qz)\:2* sin0 and u'e have assumedthe matrix to

operatebetweenstatesof momentum fu and Pz: Frl Q
and have neglected terrns of order X;in/2, m/l', and
g'/\'!. Here the only dependence on the convergence
- h- 1n)-,
(e"/ ri)
aQ' - m) ]'yp(.p'I
factor is in the term zc, rvhere
[
)e u(!, - m)-'btt rd4bc(h2), (26)
(23)
/:h(\/m)+9/4-2tn(m/\,";).
As we shall see in a moment, the other terms (13),
(14) give contributions which just cancel the ra term.
The remaining terms give for small q,

while that of a chanse of mass can be written

a(P'-n')-tLm(P'-*)'b'

(27)

and we are interested in the difference (26)-(27). A

tr
3\\
l q- ' /
/l
simple and direct method of making this comparison is
dl ln -1 e ' ? / 4 n 1- t1q a - d g r |
| l , t ) 4 1 just
to evaluate the integral on ft in (26) and subtract
Jn'? \ tr-i" 8/ /
\2n
from the result the expression (27) where Azr is given
which sholvs the change in magnetic moment and the in (21). The remaindercan be expressedas a multiple
-r(p/2) ot the unperturbedamplitude (25);
Lamb shift as interpretedin more detail in B.rl
rsThat the result given in B in Eq. (19) was in error was repeatedly pointed out to the author, in private communication,
by V. F. Weisskopl and J. B. French, as their calculation, completed simultaneously
with the author's early in 1948, gave a
aifferent result. Freuch has finally shown that although the exp r e s s i o nf u r t h c r a , l i c t i o r , l e s s c a l t e r i n g B , E q . ( 1 8 ) o r ( 2 4 ) a b o v e
i s c o r r e c t , i t w a s i r r c o r r e c t l yj o i n c d o n t o B e t h e ' s n o n - r e l a l i v i s t i c
1 = ln),-i" used by the
result. He shows that the relatior ln2i-.=This results io
author should have been ln2A-,*-5/6:lnl-ro.
adding a term - (1/6) to the logarithm in B, Eq. (19) so that the
result now agrees rvith that of J. B. French and V. F. Weisskopf,

-r(p4)a(p'-ry)-LS.

(28)

This has the same result (to this order) as replacing

and
the potentials c and b in (25) by (l-ir(P''))a
**. ZS, l24O(lg4g) anclN. H. Kroll and W. E. Lamb,
Phys.Rev.75,388(1949).Theauthorfeelsunhappilyresponsible
"frr..
[or tbe very considerable delay in the pul,lication of French's
result occasioned Ly this error. This lootnote is appropriately
numberecl.

245
i78

P.

FEYNMAN

(.1-ir(p''))b.
In the limit, then, as 0'2--+tn2the net
effect on the scattering is -|ra where r, the limit of
(assuming the integrals have an infrar(f'2) as f',-m'
red cut-ofi), turns out to be just equal to that given in
(23). An equal term - |rc arisesfrom virtual transitions
after the scattering (14) so that the entire zc.term in
(22) is canceled.
The reasonthat r is just the value oI (12) when q'?:0
can alsb be seenwithout a direct calculation as follows:
Let us call p the vector of length m in the direction oi
p' so that il p'z:1r111r12 we have p': (1f e)1 and we
rake e as very small, being oI order ?-l where I is the
time betrveen the scatterings b and a. Since (p'-m1-t
- (f' * m) / (P'"- m'z)- (p{ m) / 2m'?,the quantity (25)
rs o{ order e-r or T. We shall compute corrections to it
only to its own order (e-t) in the limit e+0. The term
, 27) can be written approximatelyraas
o.

"it

tyu(p-h-n\
I a(p'-nD

X t,(!' - m) t 6 fz ia P(l(h2),

using the expression (79) for Lm. The net of the two
efiects is therefore approximatelyrs
- ( e 2 / r i 1| a l ! ' - m t ' t , l f - h - n )

lef(!-h-

m\-'

Xt ,(P' - m)-rblr2d4kc(k2),
a term now of order 1/e (since (0'-tn)-'=(P+m)
\(2nf e)-t) and therefore the one desired in the limit.
Comparison to (28) gives for r the expression

,:7 * n / hn)

1*(P,- h- *)-' (f p-\) (p; h - m)-l

llrlrzd.akC(h2).

(29)

The integral can be immediately evaluated, since it

is the same as the integral (12), but rvith g:9, 1ot o
rep)acedby Pt/*. The result is therefore r'(!r/m)
q hich when acting on the statear1is jusl r, asPrur:mur
in (29) is
For the same reason the term (!t*m)/2m
efiectively 1 and we are left with -r of {23).t6
In more complex problems starting with a free elec-

tt Th*pr"rrior
of Aft
is not exact because the substitution
r v t h e i n t e g r a l i n r l a t i s . v a l i d o n l ) i f , o p e r a t e so n a . s t a l e b u c h
'ha1
t can be rcplacerl by u. lhe crror, no$ever, ls ol oruer
rvhich is a',t I erp-m^P*m)
a p')n1-tgt-ni11t'-zl-ib
'zm-a.But sincef :12?, ne havePQD-z)
X(Glt)t'*m)!(2e+e)
*n(b-m):
=
(f- z)1
so the ne t result is approximately
arcl is not of order 1/e but smalier, so that its effect
a(!-m)b/4nP
irops out in the limit.
td We have used, to lirst orcler, the general expansion (valid for
any operators ,4, 4]
A-t_ A_|BA t+A 181 tB.|-t_...
ulB)_t:
.,ri1a tr:p-k-m
to expand the difierence of
ancl B:b'-l:e!
t and (b-h-n)-1.
'b ' - k - n \
'u The r.normaliz-ation terms appearing B, Eqs. ( 14 r, (15r wbcn
;ranslated directly into the present notation do not Sive twice
29) but give this expression witi the central rrrt-r factor replaced
'y n1a/Et where E1-pru lor p:4. 1yL"n integraled it thereiore
n)/2nor ra-ra(ntt/Et''(11erves rclQfr I n)/2n\(n1a/fr\
u h i c h g i v e s j u s t r s , s i n c ei t u t : m i l t '
S i n c ef 1 1 a f 1 4 f 1 : 2 E r )

tron the same t)?e oI term arises from the effects of a

virtual emission and absorption both previous to the
other processes.They, therefore, simply lead to the
same factor / so that the expression (23) may be used
directly and these renormalization integrals need not
be computed afresh for each problem.
In this problem of the radiative corrections to scattering the net result is insensitive to the cut-off. This
means, of course, that by a simple rearrangement of
terms previous to the integration we could have avoided
the use of the convergencefactors completely (see for
example LewistT). The problem was solved in the
manner here in order to illustrate how the use of such
convergence factors, even when they are actually unnecessary,may facilitate analysis somervhatby removing the effort and ambiguities that may be involved in
trying to rearrange the otherwise divergent terms.
The replacementof 61 by /* given in (16), (17) is
not determined by the analogy with the classicalproblem. In the classicallimit only the real part of 61 (i.e.,
just 6) is easy to interpret. But by what should the
imaginary part, l/(ris2), of D; be replaced?The choice
we have made here (in defining, as we have, the location
of the poles of (17)) is arbitrary and almost certainly
incorrect. If the radiation resistance is calculated for
an atom, as the imaginary part of (8), the result dependsslightly on the function [. On the other hand the
light radiated at very large distances from a source is
independent of /a. The total energy absorbedby distant
absorbers will not check rvith the energy Ioss of the
source.We are in a situation analogousto that in the
classical theory if the entire / function is made to
contain only retarded contributions (seeA, Appendix).
One desires instead the analogue of (F),"t of A. This
problem is being studied.
One can say therefore, that this attempt to find a
consistent modification of quantum electrodynamics is
incomplete (seealso the question of closedloops, below).
For it could turn out that any correct {orm of /1 which
will guarantee energy conservation may at the same
time not be able to make the self-energyintegral finite.
The desire to make the methods of simplifying the
calculation of quantum electrodynamic processesmore
rvidely available has prompted this publication before
an analysis of the correct {orm for /* is complete. One
might try to take the position that, since the energy
discrepanciesdiscussedvanish in the limit tr+@, the
correctphysicsmight be consideredto be that obtained
by ietting X+o after massrenormalization.I have no
proof of the mathematicalconsistencyof this procedure,
but the presumptionis very strong that it is satisfactory. (It is also strong that a satisfactory form for fi
can be found.)
7. THE PROBLEM OF VACUUM POLARIZATION
In the analysis of the radiative corrections to scattering one type of term was not considered.The potential
u H. w. Lewis,Phys.Rev.73,173(1948).

246
QUANTU

N,I E LE CTRO D YNA

rvhich we can assumeto vary as au exp(-iq'r) creates

-1r. This
a pair ol electrons(seeFig. 6), momenta3.,
, i tt i n g x q u x n t u mQ : f o - ! " '
p a i r t h e nr e a n n i h i l a t eesm
i v h i c hq u a n t u ms c a t t e r st h e o r i g i n r l e l e c l r o nf r o m s l a l c
1 to state 2. The matrir element for this process(and
the others which can be obtained by rearrangingthe
order in time of the various events)is
- ( P / n i ) Q z t u u ' )l S P [ ( r . l q Xt,(P

"-

m)'

a,'
m)-'7 u)daP.Y2C (q'?';

(30)

This is becausethe potential produces the pair with

amplitude proportional to o,"y,, the electronsol moproceedfrom there to annihimerta p" and -(f"*q)
Iate,producinga quantum (factoryu) which propagates
(factor qaC(q'z)) over to the other electron, by which
it is absorbed (matrix element of 7, between states 1
and 2 of the original eleclron (u27ru1)). All momenta p.
and spin states of the virtual electron are admitted,
which means the spur and the integral on dap" are
calculated.
One can imagine that the closed loop path of the
positron-electronproduces a current

(31)

4ri r: J ,,a,,

which is the source cf the quanta which act on the

. he quantity
s e c o n de l e c t r o nT
J , , : - t P , r i I I SP l (P 1 9 - m \ - t
Xt,(F-

m)-'t,fdo ?,

(32)

is then characteristic for this problem of polarization

of the vacuum.
One seesat oncethat J", divergesbadly. The modification of 6 to / alters the amplitude with which the
current j, will afiect the scatteredelectron,but it can
do nothing to prevent the divergenceof the integral (32)
and of its effects.
One way to avoid such diflicultiesis appareut.Iirom
one point of view we are consideringall routesby which
a given electroncan get from one region of space-time
to another, i.e., Irom the source of electronsto the
apparatus which measuresthem. lirom this point of
view the closedloop path leading to (32) is unnatural.
It might be assumedthat the only paths of meaningare
thosewhich start from the sourceand work their rvay
in a continuous path (possibly conlaining many time
reversals)to the detector. Closed loops would be excluded.We have already found that this may be done
for electronsmoving in a fixed potential.
Such a suggestionmust meet severalquestions,holvof the usual
ever. The closedloops are a consequence
hole theory in electrodynamics.Among other things,
they are required to keep probability conserved.The
probability that no pair is produced by a potential is

779

iVI CS

Frc. 6. Vacuurn polarization effcct on scattering, Eq. (30).

po+ !

not unity and its deviation from unity arisesfrom the

imaginary part of J",. Again, with closed loops excludid, a piir of electronsonce createdcannot annihilate one another again, the scatteringoi light by light
lvould be zero, etc. Although rve are not experimentally
sure of these phenomena,this does seem to indicate
that the closei1loops ate necess&ry.To be sure' it is
ahvays possible that these matters of probability conservation. etc., will work themselvesout as simply in
the caseof interacting particles as for those in a fixed
the presumpl o t e n t i a l . L a c k l n gs u c ha d e m o n s t r a t i o n
iion is that the difficulties of vacuum polarization are
not so easily circumvented.18
An alternative procedure discussedin B is to assume
tlrat the functiotr K+(2,1) used above is incorrect and
is to be replacedby a modifiedfunction Ka'having no
singularity on the light cone. The efiect of this is to
p.otid" u convergencelactor C(p2-m2) Iot eaeryinte'
sral over electron momenta.le This will multiply the
integrandof (32) by C(f -m')C((fl
d'-m'), sincethe
and both
integral was originally a6"-Irlq)d'f"day'a
p" and po get convergencefactors. The integral now
converqesbut the result is unsatisfactory'20
One ixpects the current (31) to be conserved,that is
A l s o o n e e x p e c l sn o c u r r e n ti [ c '
qtir:o ot s,J
",:0.
is a gradient, or o,:q, times a constant' This leadsto
the condition Jr"Q,-O rvhich is equivalent to qrJr,:o
since -/", is symmetrical. But when the expression (32)
is integrated with such convergencefactors it does not
satisfy this condition.By altering the kernel from K to
another, K', which doesnot satisfy the Dirac equation
we have lost the gauge invariance, its consequent current conservation and the general consistency of the
theory.
One can see this best by calculating J,q, direclly
from (32). The expression within the spur becomes
rvhich can be written as the
@fS-m)-tq(t-m)-''t,
(pIQ-m)-''vr.
differenceof two terms: (f -"t)-tt,Each of theseterms would give the same result if the
factor, for
r","ga"tt"" dap werewithout a convergence
rs It rvould be very interesting to calculate the
-Lamb shiit
accurateiy enough to be sure that the 20 megacycles expected
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
from vlcuum polarizationare actually
re This technirrue also makes self energy and radlallonless scattering integralsfinitc cven without the modi6cation oi 6..to-/ for
(and the consequent convergence {actor C(ft') for
the riCiation
the auanta). See B.
m Added. to the terms given belorv (33) there is a term
which is not gaugq
for Crfrlr:-tr?tfr'?-tr'ir,
I.^3,2Fr+:q?)iu,
- / o added
inveriant. t ln arl, lirion the charge rcnormallzal ron has
to the losa;ithm.)

247
780

P,

FEYNMAN

the first can be converted into the secondby a shift o{

This doesnot result
the origin of p, namely p':p+5.
in cancelation in (32) however, for the convergence
factor is altered by the substitution.
A method of making (32) convergentrvithout spoiling
the gauge invariance has been found by Bethe and by
Pauli. The convergencefactor for light can be looked
upon as the result of superposition of the efiects of
quanta of various masses (some contributing negatively). Likewise if we take the factor C(p'z-m2)
: -\2(12-m2-\2)-t
so that (Pt-*") tc(p2-tn2)
r we are taking the differ:(pr-nf)-r-(fr-mr-it')
ence of the result for electrons of mass na and mass
(X'+nOr. But we have taken this difference for each
propagation between interactions with photons. They
suggestinstead that once created with a certain mass
the electron should continue to propagate with this
mass through all the potential interactions until it
closesits loop. That is iI the quantity (32), integrated
over some finite range of p, is called J u,(m'?)and the
corresponding quantity over the same range of p, but
with az replaced by (nt+\'z)' is Ju,(il*X?) rve should
calculate

It is zero for a free light quantum (9'?:0). For small q?

it behavesas (2/15)q'(adling -f to the logarithm in
the Lamb effect). For q2)(2m)2 it is complex, the
imaginary part representing the loss in amplitude required by the fact that the probability that no quanta
are produced by a potential able to proCuce pairs
((qt)'>z*) decreaseswith time. (To make the necessary analytic continuation, imagine m to have a small
negativeimaginary part, so that (7-q'/4rn'z)t becomes
-i,(q'/4nf -t)+ as 92 goes from below to above 4m2.
Then 0: r / 2* iu tvhere sinhu: * (q'z/ !,mt- 1);, and
- | / tanl = i tanhu - * i (q"- 4n2)r (q2) +.)
Closedloops containing a number of qulnta or potential interactions Iarger than tlvo produce no trouble.
Any loop with an odd number of intcractionsgiveszero
(I, reference9). Four or more potential interaclionsgive
integrals which are convergent even without a con'Ihe
situation is
vergence factor as is well known.
analogous to that for self-energy, Once the simple
problem of a single closeJ loop is solved there are
n o f u r l h e r d i v e r g e n c ed i l f i c u l r i c s{ o r m o r e c o m p l e x
processes.22

(32')

In the usual form of quantum electrodynlnics the

longitudinal and transversewaves are grven seprr&te

J,"':
'

I
J0

lJ,,1rn'))-Ju,(m?+\')]G(X)dI,

8. LONGITUDINAL

WAVES

G(tr)satisrying.__J*6!
therunctio.
)11:,t"1tl [:?,f;"?1;*J':'1"j"'#3ffiJi,'j.}'.(j#,*]i":i
l-G(r)r'dx:0. Then in 'h"
are *ccesconsiderations

rangeof p integration*4"

:]p1:i:'."-",]31,11,i^
llll

i.e.ent fo.riro suchspecial

of the equation
lury for *e aredealingwith thesorurions
jntegral now converges.The"ll::9"1"t?ilnltY-::.*:
result oI the integratlon "-l)tAu:4ni'
rvith a current i' which is couservec
ur
of
uvs(d(\)
s\/\/
'Br4r
u'ul\
on dl over
using this method is the rntegral

(see-Appendix
c)

iJl"3:;i.,,1;iliJjl::::t.i];::'#;l!:!tt.':u

""0

To show that this is the caselve consider the amplif,,P:tude for emission(real or virtual) of a photon and show
'lhe
that the divergence oI this amplitude vanishes.
t
h
ep
i
n
p
u
h
r
i
z
e
J
p
h
o
t
o
n
s
t
1
l
o
r
l
o
r
e
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
amplirude
l 4 n 2 + 2 q 2/
\
lf
-l -rji)
(1-lll
d i r e c t i o ni n v o l v e sm a t r i x e l e m e n r so f 7 u . T n c r e f o r e
rang'/ 9J)
L 3qt \
w h a t w e h a v e t o s h o wi s r h a t t h e c o r r e s p o n d i t tmga t r i x
elementsof qr"yu:Q vanish. For example' for a first
wit]n q2:4mz sinz9.
order effect n'e would require the matrix element oI q
The gaugeinvarianceis clear,sincequ(quq,-g?6u):0.
Operating (as it always will) on a potential of zero b e t w e e nt w o s t a t e s p , a n d p : = P r * q . l J u t s i n c e
:
divergence the (qpq"-6p,q2)o,is simply -qzau, the Q: Pz- f t and (uzpttt'r) - tn(uzu1) (a, ! 2ut) the matrix
D'Alembertian of the potential, that is, the current pro- elementvanishes,rvhich proves the contention in this
(essenducing the potential. The term -!(ln(),'z/m'z))(q,q, case.It alsovanishesin more complexsituations
-16r)
therefore gives a current proportional to the tially becauseof relation (3'1)'below) (for example,try
current producing the potential. This would have the putttng e2:q2 in the matrix (15) for the Cornpton
sameeffect as a changein charge,so that we would have Effect).
To prove this in general,supposeat' i:1 to -V are a
a difference A(e'?) between e2 and the experimentally observed charge, e2!L(e2), analogous !o the dif- set of plane wave disturbing potentials carryulg moferencebetween m and the observed mass' This charge menta gi (e.g.,somemay be emissionsor absorptionsof
the same or different quanta) and consider a mrtrix for
depends Iogarithmically on the cut-off, L(e2)fe2:
- (2e'z/3r) ln(>,/m). After this renormalization of charge t h e t r a n s i t i o nl r c m a s t e t eo f m o m e n t u t nf o t o 1 r s u c h
is made, no effects will be sensitive to the cut-off.
2 T h e r e c r t l o o p s c o n r t , l c L . l yw i l h o u t c x t e r n e l i n t e ' r c t i o n s F o r
After this is done the final term remaining in (33), e x a m n l e ,a p a i r i s ' c r c r t t i v i r t u r l l y r l o n g s i t h a p h o t o n N c r t t h e y
a
n
n i h i l a i e , i l r s o r l ' i n g t h i s p h o t o n S u c l r l o o p s a r e ' l i s r e g a r ' { e do n
contains the usual effects2lof polarization of the vacuum'
and lrc
c2llx'z
( q u g , - 6 u , 9 ' )- l- l n
T\3m2

21E. A. Uehling, Phys. Rdv. 48, 55 (1935),R. Serber,Phys.

t{ev. 48, 49 (1935).

the crounds Ihet thcv do noL illterrct $lLh anylllllri

t h g l e " b yq q m D l e t e l y u r i o L i c r v r L l e . A n y i n ' l i r c c t r ' f i c c t s t h e y m a y
have vie rh. exrluiion principle have alrcady Leen inclu'led'

248
QUANTU

E L E C T R O D Y N A 1 4I C S

as dr ff ,-rN \ (b r- m)-t a ; whercP i: p i r* gr (and in the

product, terms rvith larger i are written to the left).
The most general matrix element is simply a linear
combination of these. Next consider the matrix between statesp, and pr*Q in a situation in which not
only are the c; acting but also another potential
d exp(- iq.r) wherea: q. This may act previousto all c;,
in n'hichcaseit givesarll(y'i* q-m) ta;(pn!q-m)-Lq
r4rich is equivalent to +dNfl(p,+q-m)-ta;
since
-t(folq-nr)-tq
is equivalent to (po*q-*)-t
pp
as
is equivalent to m. acting on the
X(Fo*q*m)
initial slate. Likervise if it acts after all the potentials
'axll(f
it givesq(pa-m')
rm)-lc; rvhichis equivalent
to - atll(bt-rn)-ra;
sincepryf q - m giveszero on the
linal state. Or again it may act betrveenthe potential
dr and ci+r for each A. This gives
J1

NI

(p;{q-nr)-tai(lrlq-m)-r

o" fI

x q(Pt,- n7)-t ak ii @,* *')-, o,.

78L

Incidentally, the virtual quanta interact through

terms like yu. . .yrh-2dah..
Real processes
correspondto
poles in the formulae for virtual Drocesses.
The oole
o c c u r sw h e n f t ? : 0 , b u t i t l o o k sa t l i r s t a s t h o u g hi n r h e
sum on all four values ol 1r,ol 1 r. . . 7u we would have
four kinds of polarization instead of two. Norv it is clear
that only trvo perpendicular to ft are effective.
The usual elimination of lonsitudinal and scalarvirt u a l p h o t o n st l e a d i n gr o a n i n s l a n t a n e o uCs o u l o m b
potential) can of coursebe performedhere too (although
i t i s n o t p a r t i c u h r l yu s e i u l ) .A t y p i c a l l e r m i n a v i r t u i l
t r a n s i t i o n i s 1 r . . . 1 r h 2 d a hw h e r e t h e . . . r e p r e s e n t
someinterveningmatrices.Let us choosefor the values
of p, the time l, the direction of vector part K, of &,
and two perpendiculardirections 1, 2. We shall not
change the expressionfor these ttvo l, 2 for these are
representedby transversequanta. But we must find
(lr"'7,)-(7r"'7x).
Norv ft -41"y,-K16, where
K: (K.K)1, and we have shownabove that ft replacing
the 7u giveszero.23
HenceK7s is equivalentto AeTrand
(t' "' 1'1- 1",*. . . ^tK) : ((K' - k t')/ K') (t,. . . t ),

Flolvever,

so that on multiplying by h-2d1h:(Jth(h;2-Kt)-t the net

e f f e c ti s - ( 1 t . . . l ) d ' h / K 2 . T h e 7 1 m e a n sj u s t s c a l a r
rvaves,that is, potentialsproducedby chargedensity.
t- (!*tq-m)-r,
(34)
The fact that I/K2 does not contain lr means that Aa
so that the sum breaksinto the differenceof tlvo sums, can be integrated first, resulting in an instantaneous
the {irst of rvhich may be convertedto the other by the interaction, and the d3K/K, is just the momentum
replacementof A by A-1. There remain only the terms representationof the Coulomb potential, 1/r.
Ironr the endsof the rlnge oI summation,
9. KLXIN GORDON EQUATION
'
Qr*q-m)-'q(Fo-ni)
: (!*-m)

+ar

II
;:t

(p;-ttt)-ta;-ay

II

Q+q-il:)-tat.

i:t

These cancelthe t\yo terms originally discussedso that

the entire elTectis zero. Hence any rvave emitted will
satisfy d,1u,/dtu:0. l,ikerviselongitudinal ri,aves(that
is, rvirvesfor rvhich Au-06/3r,
or a:e) cannot be
absorbedand lr,ill have no effcct, for the malrix elements for emission and absorption are similar. (We
havc said little more than that a potential Au:0,pf 0x,
has no ef{ecton a Dirac electronsincea transformation
rl":exp(*ig),!
removes it. It is also easy to see in
coordinaterepresentationusing integrationsby parts.)
'I'his
has a usefui practical consequencein that in
computing probabilities for transition for unpolarized
light one can sum the squared matrix over all four
clirectionsrather than just the two specialpolarization
vectors. Thus supposethe matrix element for some
processfor light polarizedin direction euis euMu. Il lhe
Iight has wave vector q, l'e knolv from the argument
above that QrMu:0. Iior unpolarized light progressing in the z direction ive lvould ordinarily calculate
M ,2| M rz.Butu,e can as well sum M ;,+ lf o2+],[
M t2
"2Ior qrMrimpltes Mt:tr1. since qr:g" for free quanta.
This shows that unpolarizedlight is a relativistically
invariant concept,and permits sornesimplification in
computing crosssections{or such light.

The methodsmay be readily extendedto particlesof

spin zero satisfyingthe Klein Gordon equation,2a
ll\! - m2P: i0 (A,t/')/ 0r,l

iA u|t! / Ax,- A,A,,!.

(35)

'?3A little more care is rcquired rvhen both

ar's act on the same
particle. Dc6ne x:k*r]
Ktr, and consider (4...x)*(x...ft).
Exactly this tern would arise if a system, acted on by potential t
ca.rying moncntum - ft, is clisturbed by an added potential t of
nomentum ffr (the reversed sign of the momenta in the intermecliate factors in the second tein r...ft
has no effect since we
lriil latcr intecrate over all h). IIence as shorvn above the result is
zero, but since (ft...r)+(r...k):kr,6r..t,)-r('(r<...rr)
we can still conclude (16. . . yr) : AIK-z(rr. . ."yJ.
2aThe equations discusseclin this section l.erc deduccd fron the
{ormulation of the Klein Gordon equation given in reference 5,
Section 14.'fhe function / in this section has only one component
and is not a spinor. An alternative formal method of making the
equitions valicl for spin zero and also for spin 1 is (presumably)
by use of the Kemmer-Duihn
matrices B!, satisfying thc commutation relation
p"p,l3
B pB,8'+
*: 6u,l3"I 6",4p.
If rve interpret o to mean ap?p, ralher than op7p, for any au, all
of the equations in momenlum space n'i1l remain formally iclentical
to those for the spin 1/2; rvith thc exception of those in rvhich a
|
denominator (_0-rd-, has becn rationaiized to (!*m)t!'z-n'!)
since p' is no longer equai to a number, f. p. BLrt P3 does equal
(P.P)p so that (j-tn)-t
may now be interpreted as (np{nf
p)(.p p-m'?) tz 1. This implies tiat equatioDs in col!'-f
orclinatc sJrace rvill be valid of the function 1i*(2, 1) is givcn as
K*(2, 1) : [(iV,] n, - rr-r(vf+
n l)li1+(2, 1) lrith v:: BAir,la.rr!.
This is all in virtue of the fact that thc neny compoDcnL \ra!e
function ry' (5 components for spin 0, 10 for spin 1) srtislies
(iv-n)t:
A.l, which is lormally identical to the Dirac Iirluatiotr.
See W. Pauli, ltev. NIod. Phys. 13, 203 (1940).

249
782

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

The important kernel is now 11(2, 1) definedin (I, Eq.

(32)). For a freeparticle,the wave function ry'(2)satislies
+O'z*-1n2{/:O. At a point, 2, insidea spacetime region
it is given by
VQ:

I lV\)aI)(2, 1)/d.t1u
- (0,1,lxr) t
I',,
I
12, 1)ltil,,(1)(i3

sents the possibility of the simultaneousemissionand

absorptionof the samevirtual quantum. This integral
without the C(&'?)divergesquadraticallyand would not
convergeil C(h'): -X':/(fr:-I?). Since the interaction
occursthrough the gradientsof the potential, we must
use a stronger convergencefactor, for example C(ft'?)
:I4(4'?-X) 2, or in general(17) rvith,6-X'!G(X)dX:0.
In this case the self-energyconvergesbut depends
quadratically on the cut-ofi tr and is not necessarily
small compared to m. The radiative corrections to
scatteringafter massrenormalizationare insensitiveto
the cut-off just as {or the Dirac equation.
particlesone can obtain Bose
When there are severaL
statisticsby the rule that if two processeslead to the
same state but with two electrons exchanged,their
amplitudesare to be added (rather than subtractedas
for Fermi statistics). In this case equivalenceto the
secondquantization treatment of Pauli and Weisskopf
in a rvay very much like that
should be demor.istrable
given in 1 (appendix) for Dirac eLectrons.The Bose
statisticsmean that thc sign of contribution of a closed
loop to the vacuum polarizationis the oppositeof what
it is for the Fermi case(seeI). It is (Pu-.futC)

(as is readily shown by the usual method of demonstrating Green's theorem) the integral being over an
entire .3-surfaceboundary of the region (with normal
vector 1y'r). Only the positive frequency components of
/ contribute from the surfaceprececlingthe time correspondingto 2, and only negative frequenciesfrom the
surfacefuture to 2. Thesecan be interpretedas electrons
and positronsin direct analogyto the Dirac case.
The right-hand side of (35) can be consideredas a
sourceof nelv wavesand a seriesof terms written down
o{ increasing
to representmatrix elementsfor processes
order. There is only one new point here, the term in
Autlrby which two quanta can act at the same time.
As an example, supposethree quanta or potentials,
o u e x p ( - i q " . r ) , D ue x p ( - i q o ' * ) , a n d c , e x p ( - i q " ; r ) a r e
e2f
to act in that order on a particle of original momentum
- : I
p ' , , p , , "p . , 2 m
and lrF"lqa;
the final mo- J , " : ^
po1so that !.:/olq"
| L , p " " rf " , ' r I
J
Itlm
mentum being p":p6!q". The matrix element is the
sum of three terms (p2: pr'p; (illustrated in Fig. 7)
X (trr' - m') t - 6,,(f .t - nt't) t
(! cl pt. c)(1t' - m'z)| (Pb'b+ P b)
tld'P.
-6,,(lu'-nf)
"'
".
x (Pa'- m'z)-t(Pa' a! ? o' a) (.16)
t(b'
- (p.' c+
a)
grvlng,
Pu'c)(P* m')
- ( c 'b )( p - m " ) ' ( ? a l ! o 'a ) .
"'
"'
'
t
o'l,.'"'l'
T h e f i r s t c o m e sw h e n e a c h p o t e n t i a la c t s t h r o u g h t h e J , " " - " . ' . v , r , , 6 " , q " JIl' n I - ,
).|,
t
t
O . r uT. h e s eg r a d i e n t
3gt \
trrun,/l
p e r t u r b a t i o ni 0 ( A , , 1 ' \ A x , l i l " O t
r
Lo n2
operators in momentum space mean respectively the
momentum after and before the potential ,4u operates. the notation asin (33).The imaginarypart for (,q')t>2m
The second term comes from D, and a, acting at the is again positive representingthe lossin the probability
same instant and arises {rom the,4u,4u term in (a). of frndingthe final state to be a vacuum,associatedrvith
Togetlrer bu and a, carry monentum qouf q", so that the possibilitiesof pair production. Fermi statistics
or lu
would give a gain in probability (ancl also a charge
alter b.a operatesthe momentum is lolq"*qt
'l'he
final term comesJrom cu and bu operating together renormalizationof oppositesign to tirat expected).
in a similar manner.The term rlrz1uthus permits a new
type of processin which two quanta can be emitted (or
absorbed,or one absorbed,one emitted) at the same
time.'Ihere is no a'c term for the order a, D, c we have
assumed.In an actual problem there rvould be other
terms like (36) but with alterations in lhe order in
which the quanta d, D, c act. In theseterms a'c rvould
ei
/r_o
o.u-.)r
o- r
appear.
I
I
As a further example the self-energyof a particie of
\"
\s"
\e"
momentum 1u is

A'U"
i'

I',"r,

- *21..t
(e"/ z,;m) ]z p - k),((P- P1z
[

x ( 2P- k )p - 6 ,) d 4 h h ' z C( h ' ) ,

rvherethe duu:4 comesfrom the ArArterm and repre-

o.

,/'-"

'(
\'

,/'"

o1/
/v"

hC.

Frc. 7. Klein-Gordon particle in three l)otcntials, Eq. (36).

'fhe
coupling to the electromagnctic iieid is now, for example,
arises, (b), of simultaneous interfa. o+ f.'a, and a \ew possibility 'l'he
propagation factor is now
action with two .iuanta a.6.
(!.f -m") I Ior a particle of momentum 2a.

250
QUANTU

N,I ELE CTRO D YNAM

rO. APPLICATIONTO MESON THEORIES

The theories rvhich have been developed to describe
mesonsand the interaction of nucleonscan be easily
expressedin the languageused here. Calculations,to
lowestorder in the interactionscan be made very easily
for the various theories,but agreementwith experimental results is not obtained. Most likely all of our
presentformulationsare quantitatively unsatisfactory.
We shall content ourselvesthereforervith a brief summary of the methodslvhich can be used.
The nucleonsare usuaily assumedto satisfy Dirac's
equationso that the factor for propagationof a nucleon
of momentump ts (p-M) rwhere M is the massof the
nucleon(which implies that nucleonscan be createclin
pairs). The nuileon is then assumedto interact with
mesons,the various theoriesdiffering in the form assumedfor this interaction.
First, we consiclerthe case of neutral mesons.The
is the theory of vector
theory closestto electrodynamics
mesonswith vector coupling.Here the factor for emission or absorptionof a mesonis 97, rvhenthis mesonis
"polarizecl" in lhe p direction. The factor. g, the
"mesonic charge," replacesthe electric charge e. The
amplitude for propagationof a mesonof momentum q
in intermediatestatesis (92-p') I (rather than,,q-2as it
is for light) wherep is the massof the meson.Ihe necessary integrals are made finite by convergencefactors
C(q'- p') as in electrorlynamics.
For scalarmesonswith
scalarcoupling the only changeis that one replacesthe
7u by 1 in emissionand absorption.There is no longer
a directionof polarization,p, to sum upon. For pseudoscalar mesons, pseudoscalarcoupling replace 7u by
l"or example,the self-energymatrix of
"to:i"t,tfi""tr
a nucleonof momentum p in this theory is
k'/,i)

hQ

h- M) \5d.ak(h- u')'Clw- u,7.

Other types of meson theory result from the replacement of 7, by other expressions (for example by
with a subsequentsum over all ,uand z
i6n,-tt)
for virtual mesons).Scalarmesonswith vector coupling
result from the replacementof 7u by p-1qwhereg is the
final momentum of the nucleon minus its initial momentum, that is, it is the momentum of the meson if
absorbed,or the negativeof the momentum of a meson
emitted. As is well known, this theory with neutral
mesonsgives zero for a[ processes,
as is proved by our
discussionon longitudinal waves in electrodynamics.
mesonswith pseudo-vectorcouplingcorrePseudoscalar
sponds to 7, being replaced by ['luq while vector
mesons with tensor coupling correspond to using
(.2p)-t(trq-qt).
These extra gradients involve the
danger of producing higher divergenciesfor real procFor example,76qgivesa logarithmicallydivergent
esses.
interaction of neutron and electron.25
Althoush these
divergenciescan be held by strong enoughconvergence
?5M. SlotnickandW. Heitler,Phys.Rev.75,1645(1949).

I CS

783

factors,the resultsthen are sensitiveto the methodused

{or convergenceand the size of the cut-ofi values of \.
For low order processesp-r?bq is equivalent to the
pseudoscalarinteraction 2Mp-t-tu becauseif taken between free particle wave functions of the nucleon of
momentap1 anclpz-prlg,
rve have
(u2y5qu)- (nq,(pz- p')ut1- - (urf ,tuut)
(.uz'raf ru) : - 2M (ti zt su,)
since "y5anticommuteswith pt and lt operatinq on the
state 2 equivalent to M as is ,r on the state 1. This
shorvsthat the 75 interaction is unusually weak in the
non-relativisticlimit (for example the expectedvalue
of 7s for a free nucleonis zero), but since au2:1 i5 oo1
s m a l l ,p s e u d o s c r l at hr c o r yg i v e se m o r ei m p o r t a n ti n l e r action in seconclorcler than it does in first. Thus the
pseucloscalar
coupling constant should be chosento fit
nuclear forces incJudingthese important secondorder
processes.:6
The equivalenceof pseudoscalar
and pseudovector coupling which hoLdsfor low order processes
thereforedoes not hold when the pseucloscalar
theory
is giving its most important effects.These theorieswill
thereforegive quite different resultsin the majority of
practical problems.
In calculating the correctionsto scatteringof a nucleon by a neutral vector meson f,eld (.yu)due to the
efiects oI virtual mesons,the situation is just as in
electrodynamics,in that the result convergeswithout
needfor a cut-off and dependsonly on gradientsof the
meson potential. With scalar (1) or pseudoscalar("y)
neutral mesonsthe result divergeslogarithmically and
'Ihe
part sensitiveto the cut-ofi,
so must be cut off.
however, is directly proportional to the meson potential. It may thereby be removedby a renormalization
of mesonicchargeg. After this renormalizationthe results depend only on gradientsof the mesonpotential
and are essentiallyindependentof cut-off. This is in
addition to the mesonicchargerenormalizationcoming
from the productionof virtual nucleonpairsby a meson,
analogous to the vacuum polarization in electrodynamics. But here there is a further difference from
electrodynamicsfor scalar or pseudoscalarmesonsin
that the polarizationalso gives a term in the induced
currentproportionalto the mesonpotentialrepresenting
therefore an additional renormalization ol the mass of
lhe meson which usually depends quadratically on the
cut-off.
Next considerchargedmesonsin the absenceof an
electromagneticfield. One can introduce isotopic spin
operatorsin an obvious way. (Specificallyreplacethe
neutral 7s, say, by r;76 and sum over i:1, 2 where
rr--r++r-, r":i(r+-r-)
and 11 changesneutron to
proton (21 on proton:0) and r- changesproton to
neutron.)It is just as easyfor practicalproblemssimply
to keep track of whether the particle is a proton or a
neutron on a diagram drawn to help write down the
36H. A. Bethe, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 24, 3, Z3 (Washington,
19,19).

251
t-84

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

matrix element. This excludescertain processes.For

example in the scattering of a negative meson from q1
to {z by a neutron, the mesonq2 must be emitted first
(in order of operators,not time) for the neutron cannot
absorbthe negativemesonqr until it becomesa proton.
That is,in comparisonto the Klein Nishinaformula (15),
only the analogueof secondterm (seeFig. 5(b)) rvoutd
appear in the scattedng of negative mesonsby neutrons, and only the first term (Fig. 5(a)) in the neutron
scatteringof positive mesons.
The source of mesons of a given charge is not conserved,for a neutron capableof emitting negativemesons may (on emitting one, say) becomea proton no
longer able to do so. The proof that a perturbation q
gives zero, discussed for longitudinal electromagnetic
waves,fails. This has the consequence
that vector mesons, if representedby the interaction .yu u'ould not
satisfy the condition that the divergenceof the potential is zero. The interaction is to be taken2Tas ^/t- tr-24pe
in emissionand as "y, in absorptionif the real emission
of mesonswith a non-zero divergence of potential is to
be avoided. (The correction lerm p-2t1rqgives zero in
the neutral case.)The asymmetry in emissionand absorption is only apparent, as this is clearly the same
thing as subtracting from the original "yu..."yp,a term
2q' . .q. That is, if the term lr
rr2qu1is omitted the
;esulting theory describesa combination of mesons ol
spin one and spin zero. The spin zero mesons,coupled
by vector coupling q, are removed by subtracting the
: . e r mp 2 q . . . q The two extra gradients9...q make the problem of
diverging integrals still more serious (for example the
interaction between two protons corresponding to the
erchange of trvo charged vector mesonsdepends quadratically on the cut-off if calculated in a straightforward
ray). One is tempted in this {ormulation to choose
simply 7u..'.yu and accept the admixture of spin zero
mesons.But it appears tbat this leads in the conventional formalism to negative energiesfor the spin zero
component. This shorvs one of the advantages of the
27The vector meson fibl<l potentials
- 0 ah(p
/
ep/ ar,-

9, satisfy
3 e"f l-tr) - p2eu: -1rs

u,
'.rhere sr, the source for such mesons, is
the matrix element of
_
p
r
o
r
o
n
.
o
[
s
l
a
t
e
s
n
e
u
t
r
o
n
a
n
,
l
Bv taliinc the,livereence
!-,elween
?Jr, df,, so'rhat
i J r r . o i b o t h s i , l e s ,t n n c l u r l e t h a t . 0 e , a r i : 4 r p
'ie orlglnal equallnn
can I'P reqrrllen aS
E' p p- p' p p: - 4n(s u! uao / or r(os,/ 6t,)\.
T\e riqht henLl side givcs in 6o."n,um
represcltation ?l
- p a q u g , r , t h e l c f t y i e l J s r h c ( q " - u , r t t n d , f in a l l y { h e i n r c r a c ri o n
g
i
v
e
s
t
h
e
L
a
g
r
a
n
g
i
a
n
i
n
thc 1p on ahsorl,rion.
-ou
Proceetling in tlris ray rintl gcnerally rhet prrticlcs of spin one
r n b e r e p r e s e n r c r lL y a i u u r - v e c l o r u , l s h i c h , I o r a f r e e p a r r i c l e
i momenlum g srlisfies g.l-0r.
l'hc propagrLion of virlual
q from state r to p is represented bv
rarticles of momentum
rq,o;)
rullil,lication by the 4 4 matrix 1or tensor/ -fr,:(6!,-p
,..(q2- F2)-t. The 6rst-or,lcr inleracrion (frorn the Proca eouaiion)
: ' i r h a n e l e c t r o m a g n e l i c l o t e n l i a l d c r o ( - i A . . r ) c o r r e s D o n d st o
rultiplication hy the mairix
.Eu:tqz.o1 qt. d)6p-qzya!-q1p,
'lhere qr and qt:qt+h
are (he momenta bclore anrl after the
:rteraction. Finally, two potentials o, b may acr simultaneously,
aith matrix E'u,: -(a.b)6",*b"a,

method of secondquantization of meson fields over the

presentformulation.There such errorsof sign are obvious while here rve seem to be able to write seemingly
innocent expressionswhich can give absurd results.
Pseudovectormesonswith pseudovectorcouplingcorrespond to using "y5(7u-p-zq,q) Ior absorption and.767u
for emissionfor both chargedand neutral mesons.
In the presenceof an electromagneticfield, whenever
the nucleonis a proton it interactswith the field in the
way describedfor electrons.The mesoninteractsin the
scalar or pseudoscalarcase as a particle obeying the
Klein-Gorclonequation.It is important here to use the
method of calculation of Bethe and Pauli, that is, a
virtual mesonis assumedto have the same"mass" during all its interactionswith the electromagneticfield.
The result for mass p and for (p'*tr')! are subtracted
and the differenceintegratedover the function G(X)dX.
A separateconvergencefactor is not provideclfor each
meson propagation betrveen electrornagneticinteractions, otherwisegaugeinvarianceis not insured.When
the couplinginvolvesa gradient,such as 75q whereq is
the final minus the initial momentum of the nucleon,
the vector potential A must be subtracted from the
momentum of the proton. That is, there is an adCitional
coupling *75,4 (plus when going from proton to neutron, minus for the reverse)representingthe new possibitity of a simultaneousemission (or absorption) of
mesonand photon.
Emissionof positive or absorptionof negativevirtual
nesons are representedin the same term, the sign of the
charge being determined by temporal relations as for
electronsand positrons.
Calculationsare very easily carried out in this way
to lorvest order in g2for the various theories for nucleon
interaction, scattering oI mesonsby nucleons,meson
production by nuclear collisionsand by gamma-rays,
nuclearmagneticmoments,neutron electronscattering,
etc., However, no good agreementwith experimentresults, when these are available,is obtained. Probably
all of the formulations are incorrect. An uncertainty
arises since the calculations are only to first order in 92,
and are not valid if g2/hc is large.
The author is particularly indebted to ProfessorH.
A. Bethe for his explanation of a method of obtaining
finite and gauge invariant results for the problem of
vacuum polarization. He is also gratelul for Professor
Bethe's criticisms of the manuscript, and for innumerable discussionsduring the development of this work.
He wishes to thank Professor T. Ashkin for his carelul
reading of the manuscript.
APPENDTX
In this appendixa methodwill be illustratedby rvhichthe
simplerintegralsappearing
in problemsin electrodynamics
can
be directly evaluated. The integrals arising in more complex
processes lead to rather complicated functions, but the study of
the relations of one integral to another and their expression in
terms of simpler integrals may be facilitated by the methods
eiven here.

252
QUA N TU M

E L E CTRO D YNA M I CS

As a tlpical problem consider the integral (12) appearing

the 6rst order radiationiess scattering problem:

J'tu@"

ta(!1-h-n)-t^vuk

h-n)

2d1kc(h2),

in

(1a)

1 and
-I'(h'-tr2)
where rve shall take C(ft'z) to be typically
We first rationalize the -factors
d{} means (2r')-2dhdhzd.hika.
: 1O- h* m) ((l - h)' - n')-1 obtainins,
@ *-n1-'
f

h* n) a(!1-

t y@,-

hl

x) v uh-'d.'hC (h2)

X ((Or-

h'12- ntt l-t 1.(!z- h)' - m'.)-r .

(2a)

The matrix expression may be simplifiecl. It appears to be best to

B BA
do so after the integrations are performed. Since AB:2A
where A - B: A pB p is a number commuting with all matrices, find,
A1rl2Ar,
if iR is any expression, and .d a vector, sitce 1rA:
- 4'uP"*'nO'

arARtr:
Expressions between tlvo'y/'s
tion. Particularly useful are

can be thereby

(3u)
reduced by induc-

1 p " lp : 4
-24
tpAlt:
auARTr:2(ABIBA)=aA'n
tPABCT'= -2691

Qa)

(i.e., linear comu'here -4, B, C are any three vector-matrices

binations of the four 7's).
In order to calculate the integral in (2a) the integral may be
written as the sun of three terms (since &:i"'y),
1 p(Qz* nt) a(i,*

n) t pJ r- f1 p1
1! m) v,
"a(!
! 7 u(!z* m) at ot rfJ zl t fi

"at

n pJ z,

Q;h,;h,k.)h

(7a)

Lt:mt2-!]t
etc., and we can consider dealing
*here A:n2-!2,
rvith cases of greater generality in that the different denominators
need not have the same value of the mass z. In our specific problem (6a), p1':12r s6 that Ar:0, but we desire to rvork rvith greater
generality.
Now for the factor C(h2)/k2 rve shall use -I'(ft'-I')-tft-'!.
This can be written as
-\2/(h,

. )\2)k2: h 2C(k2t: -

O rrUr- ,rn.
J'o^t

r8a)

and at the end inteThus we can.replace h-'C(h2) by (h2-L)n

grate the result with respect to Z from zero to X2. We can for
many practical purposes consider tr2 vety large relative to m2 or !2.
the conWhen the original integral converges even without
vergence factor, it will be obvious since the Z integration rvill then
exists
in the
If
an
infra-red
catastrophe
be convergent to infinity.
integral one can simply assume quanta have a small mass tr',in
and extend the integral on Z from l2-in to \2, rather than lrom
zero to tr2.

where by (1; k'; k'k,) we mean that in the place of this symbol
either 1, or k", or kok, may stand in difierent cases. In more
complicated problems there may be more factors (h'?-24'E-A;)-r
or other powers of these factors (the (P- L)-2 may be considered
Ar:Z)
and Iurther
as a special case of such a factor rvithy'r:0,
factors like io,['lr. . . in the numerator. The poles in all the factors
are made definite by the assumption that r, and the A's have
in6niLesimal negative imaginary parts.
We shall do the integrals of successive complexity by induction.
We start with the simplest convergent one, and sholv

J'a'n&r-

tt 3=(8iz)-1.

(10a)

where the
For this integral is f (2r)-2dkd3K(ta?-K'K-Z)-3
vector K, of magnitude K: (K. K)l is ky kz, kv The integral on
lr shows third order poles at h: * (f'+ l,), and k4: - (K'+ L)'.
Imagining, in accordance rvith our defrnitions, that Z has a small
negative imaginary part only the first is belorv the real axis. The
contour can be closed by an infinite semi-circle below this axis,
without change of the value of the integral since the contribution
from the semi-circle vanishes in the limit. Thus the contour can
be shrunk about the pole .4a: { (K'?fZ)} and the resulting h integraiis
2zl times the rcsidueat thispole.Writing Ar:(l('*Z)l*e
3:e 3(el2(K'*L)l)-3
in powers of
and expanding (h4'-K'-L)
e, the resicluc, belng the coellcient of the term e-1, is seen to be
5 so our integral is
6(2(K,l
Qr1

- $i / 32").1'-1" K'zd
K (K' + L) 6t': (3/ 8i)(r/ 3L)
from

in the

the symmetry

(11a)

$ t J ' ( ; k , ) d ' k ( h - z ) - 3 :( 1 ; o ) r - l

(6a)

That is for -Ir the (1; [d; lo]') is replaced by 1, for "/r by.t", and
lor Jtby h,k".
More complex processes of the first order involve more factors
a corresponding increase in the number
like ((?a-&)'-zf)-rand
Higher
of 4's which nay appear in the numerator, as k"k"k,"'.
ortler processes involving trvo or more virtual quanta involve
instead
similar intcgrais but Eith factors possibly involving A*f
of just &, and the integral extending on h 'zdlhc(h2)ht4d4k'C(k'2).
'l'hey
can be simplified by methods analogous to those used on
the first order integrals.
The factors (p- p1z-roz may be written
(P-k1z--z:Pz-20'U-^'

f o , a " ,n , a , ) a , a v - L ) 4 ( k , - 2 p 1 . k -^ t ) - l
X ( k 2 - 2 P z . k -L r ) t , ( 9 a )

cstablishing (10a).
L)-3:0
We also have fkddtk(HI space. We rvrite these results as

zd4kc(h,)
/' (.Qz- h1t -,,r21-t1(fi 1- k)2 - m2) t.

We then have to do integrals of the Iorm

(5a)

where
Ja;,;i:

/65

where in the Lrackets (1;,1o) and (1;0) corresponding entries are

to be used.
A shows that
Substituting &: &'-p in (1 la), and calling Z-i2:

(sD 0 ; h h(h,- 2p k - ^)-3: (r t P,)(j'p+^)-l. (12a)

J
")d^
both sidesof (12a) with respectto A, or rvith
By cliflerentiating
respect to p" there follorvs directly
Q 4 i t f t | : h . ' , k " h , \ d ' \ k \ h 2 - 2 bh - N

.)

: -(1; !"; P,f,-ir",(r,+a))(l+^)

'. (13a)

successive integrals ingive directly

differentiations
Further
cluding more i factors in the numeratol and higher polvers of
(h'-2p.k-A)
in the denominator.
The integrals so far only contain one factor in the denominator'
To obtain iesults for trvo factors we make use of the identity

o '6-,:

,,

(14a)

fo'd,r(ar*D(1-r))

t s u c q e s t c dL v s o m e \ v o r k o f S c h u i n g e r ' s i n v o l v i n g C a u s s i a n i n t e paraeruii. fni. represcnts the producr of two re.iprocals as a

metric integral over one and will therefore permit integrals with
powers
oI
two factors to be expressed in terms of one. For other
a. D. we make use of all of the identities, such as

o-,6-,: J" 2r,]"lo*-I-D(1- r; ;-s

declucible from (14a) by successive difierentiations
toaorb.
To perform an integral, such as
^.. t.,
.
'8it.J rl:k"d1h(h'?-z\t

h-J,t

(1sa)
respect

with

2\h2-2pth-Lr)'

t,

(l6a)

253
;86

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

-'rite, using(15a),

f,st(l - r) dr ln(x(l -c)i) : - (1/4) find

t
- 2p k - t
2"d.r1lc
k,- 2Ft k - L r)n (H - 2! t. k - t,1-t:
f
".
"1 ",

$, f 0; k,)FC(E)d4k(h'-2p-k)-l

:(rnft+r,n(t#-))

'here
and

!.:rprl(l-r)!z

so that the expression (16a)

3 which may now be

rote that A, is zol equal Lo n2-!,2)

:: (.8i)-fo\2rdtI0;h,)d4k(W-2p,.k-A")
:r'aluated by (12a) and is

(a{:

t'

(17a)

a,:ra'111-t;6r,

(1;p,.)2xd$(l),,+^,)t,

(18a)

; here/,, A, are given in (17a). The integral in (18a) is elenentary,

-eing the integral of ratio of polynomials,
the denominator
of
:econd degree in r. The general expression although readily ob:ained is a rather complicatecl combination of roots and logarithms.
Other integrals can be obtained again by parametric differentiaof (16a), (18a) with respect to
:ion. For example differentiation
l2 or 12' gives
8D

-2pr.k0.i k,; k.k,)d|h(k,

: -

Lt)a(H-2p,.k-

L2)-2

f' $; t *; t *r ", i6',(t.'+^"))

X2x(1* *)dx(!.'*,A")i,

(19a)

again leading to elementary integrals.

As an example,consider the casethat the secondfactor is just
tl.h2-L)a atd in the first put trt:|,
A1:A. Then ,,:rrj
l' :rA* (1-r)2. There results

so that substitutioninto (19) (after the (0-h-*)

1) gives
replacedby (p-hln)(h'-2p.I)

(19): (d / 8n).yNl@I m) (2 h(\, / n ) I 2)

- p(tn(\' /n') - il)t p
: (d/82) [82(ln(I'/n')* 1) *!(2 h(]" /m')*5)f,

rf *p,p,-|a".(*f
fo' 0t .i
X2r(l

B. Corrections

l,r,))
(20a)

Integrals with three factors can be reduced to those involving

two by using (14a) again. They, therefore, Iead to integrals with
tlvo parameteE (e.9., see application to radiative correction to
scattering below).
The methods of calculation given in this paper &re deceptively
simple when applied to the lower order processes. For processes
of increasingly higher orders the complexity
and difiiculty
increases rapidly, and these methods soon become impractical in
their prerent form.

A, Self-Energy

\h, -2pt h) lrhr-2pz h) ,: ro' dlrht-2p,'tl-',

from (14a)where
p!:rt+(-)iL

(e'/rlfau(j-k-m)-tarkad.akC(k2),

(22il: -

(1; *!u,i r2p,opp1

I' I:
-tt',(dtr,\
0 -r)L))2x(r-

- $i) k. h4 d^hc (h2)(h2- 2p I k)-t (h2- 2p2,k) |

r

:z.fo' lo"f;'ar, {z+^)

since(p- k)2-mz: h2-2p. k, Lsf: m2.This is of the form (16a)

pr:O, a':9, P2:P so that (18a) gives, since
rvith Ar:r,
p,:(1-r)P, L,:xL,

or performing

- {sil n,n,n-,a'
(k2- 2pI k)-t(H- zp,-k1-'
nc(h2)
f
: fo'!,"!o,!;'dt-4a.,J" avnlx'p,-)+i6"' (2sa)
The integrals on I give,

- L) 4(h, . 2p. h)-1

-'
6i) . lf ( 't k")d|h(h,

0 ; {t * r) r

x)ds(fiu2* L(r- x))ady.

We now turn to the integrals on I as required in (8a). The 6rst

term, (1), ir (\;k";k"k,) gives no trouble for large Z, but if Z
is put equal to zero there results r 21r-2which leadsto a diverging
integral on r as r*0. This infra-red catastrophe is analyzed by
using tr-i.z for the lower limit of the,L integral. For the last term
the upper limit of Z must be kept as X2.Assuming tr-i"'(lr'((tr2
the r integrals which remain are trivial, as in the *lf-energy case.
One finds

- kl d t d4k(H'|- Da G' - 2 k)-t,

P'
f t u@

(22a1

which s'e will then integrate with respect to y from 0 to 1. Next

we do the integrals(22a)immediately from (20a)with y':y',, d.:0:

(19)

so that it requires that u.e find (using the principle of (8a)) the
integral on I from 0 to tr?of

Qra)

We therefore need the integrals

,_r^t",)-,a,nc,,_^^,,"7!,pr7;:r!,
_(sr/(ft

The self-energrintegral (19) is

'

to Scatlering

The term (12) in the radiationlessscattering,after rationalizing

the matrix denominators and using P12:p22:n2 requires the
integrals (9a), as we have discussed.This is an integral with
three denominators rvhich we do in two stages.First the factors
(h'-2p( k) atd (k'-2p2. k) are combinedby a parametery;

$il J' ( t k"; k"k,)daplpt- 11t1ht-2pu.k)a,

x)dt(fl2-lA,)-'.

rro,

using (4a) to removethe ?p's. This agreeswith Eq. (20) of the text,
and gives the self-energy(21) when f is replacedby z.

B l f 1 0 j h- '" i h- " h , t d 4 h t h , - I ) , \ h , 2 p - k - L ) z
J

: -

I in (19) is

")zutx((l

- x)2m2
| r L) t,

the integral on Z, as in (8),

k)-,
$i) f o; k.)d4kk4c(w)(k,-2p.

:..i['tt; rt -rr1,)z
a, n-\",!!:,u!4
*
\t

xrm'

Assuming now that tr2))rz2 we neglect (1-r),2,

relative to
,X'in
the argument
of the logarithm,
which then becomes
r):1
(\'/m')(x/(l-r)').
Then
since .fold.sln(x(|-x)
and

F
z\:4(n2
f' b,.-rdrln(b..rX-,^
-)
. . . . -sin2
. . - t ) - r l t l n ( uI - i ; ' )
Jo ru
l
-Jo atan.da]'
fo'fu,ru-"or:u{-2sin20)-r(!u*?2,),
fo' !,o,P-!undt

(26a)
(27a)

: 0(2m' sin2l)-t(p ul

?v) (f",1 f,,)

(28a)
0 ctfi),
!y'q,q"(1-

J'ot orrnl^"p,-,;:tn(|,z/n*)r2(t-0ctng).

(29a)

254
QUANTUM

These integrals on Jr'were performed as follows, Sincefi:lr*q

rvhereq is the momentum carded by the potential, it follows irom
L h a l z p t q : - q ' z s o l h a l s i n c el L : h L q ( l - y \ ,
ff:pf=m2
:
b,2= m2 qzlt 1 yt. The substitution2),- I ta nal1an0 where d
is definedby 4z' sin'd: q2is uselul for itmeans rtu2: m2sec2dfsec2q
and rt, zd.y: (m2 sit20)-t4o *n"r" o goes f rom 0 to + 0.
Theseresultsare substituted into the original scatteringformula
(2a), giving (22). It has been simpiified by frequent use of the
fact that p1 openting on the initial state is u, and likewise !z
when it appearsat the left is replacableby z. (Thus, to simplify:
- 2fPP, bY (4a','
i ttrzalfi t:
: - 20 z- d a\Prl il = - 2(n - q\ a(n * c\'
A term like qaq: -q2al2(a'q)g is equivalentto just -q'a since
has zero matlix element ) The renormalization
q:rr-Pt:m-n
term requires the corresponding integrals for the special case
q:o.

C. Vacuum Polarization
The exirressions(32) and (32') lor Ju, in the vacuun polarization problem require the calculation of the integral
J,,(.\

: -:i

s flt u(l - iq+ m) r(! l lq! m)ldap

(32)
x ((l- tq)z- ilP)-t(Q* iq)'- n')-\,
rvhere ne have replacedI by fi'trq to simplify the calculation
somewhat.We shall indicate the method of calculation by studying
the integral,
- n2)-t.
I (,n ) : I p
!(@- rq)'- m')-t(l+rq)z
"p,d'
atd p2!p'q
The factors in the denominator,F-?'q-n'++q2
- mr*tqt are combined as usual by (8a) but for symmetry we
(1-r):{(1-a)
and integrate r; from
substitute ei(*n)'
-1 to+1:
*,'
(30a)
p, p,a' ! (12-,t f ' c - m' I f,q')adn/ 2.
t 6") : f
But the integral on y' will not be lound in our list for it is badly
diversent. Ilowever, as discussedin Section 7, Eq. (32') we do not
We can
wish I(2,) but rather JiilI(m')-I(m'*X')lG(I)dI.
by first calculating the
calculate the difierence l(n2)-I(n2j\2)
derivative f'(m'*L) of I with respect to m2 at m2lL and later
integrating L lrom zero to tr'. By difierentiating (30a), with
respect to 42 find,

where we assume tr2))z? and have put some terms into the arbitrary constant C'which is independent of \' (but in principle could
depend on 4') and which drops out in the integral on G(I)dI. We
have sel q2:41n2 9in20.
In a very similar way the integral with u' in the numerator can
be worked out. It is, of course, necessary to dif{erentiate this z'?
also when calculating I' and 1". There results

- m2)-l
- $l
n a^ pgp- !q)2- nz)-t ((I+ Eq)2
f
: 4n2 (1 - 0 ctnl) - q2/ 3 I 2 (\2 * n2)ln(1" ma + D - C' |)\'),

1
I " (rr" + L) : 3I : r' p ? dn! (.,!'- nI q - n2 - L + L q2)- d11
"
(31a)
+'
- tr6 D-r)d.rt
: - (8ilt
(Lrr2q"q,D-z
f
",
convergesand hasbeen
(whereD: |(a'- 1)q2lnzlL),whichnow
evaluatedby (13a)with/:4nq a\d L:m2+L- 1q'' Now to get
1'we may integrate 1" with respectto t as atr indeinite integral
ttdwe may cltooseany convenientarbi'trart constanl.Thisisbecatse
a constant C in 1' will mean a term -C\2 i\ I(n'z)- I(m2+)\2)
which vanishes since we will integrate the results times G(tr)dr
This meansthat the logarithm appearingon
atrd /i-r,G(\)d^:0.
integrating , in (31a) presentsno problem. We may take
r, (tu + L) : (8il1 f:' l\n q.q,D-'*tt,, rrDfdn* c6.,,
a subsequent integral on Z and finally on 4 presents no new
problems, There results
- @D f
dj prc) - *d' - n')' ((t+ id2 - mz)-L
f "t
4 t n ' z - q ' ( .' d \ , , , \ ' l
- t q 4 q t - r^d t q"' ft tl ' ) itn,ril
3o, \r ,^n011
n-2 + 1)- C']\'),

p')d4p((p- rq)' - n')-L((I + iq)2- m2)-l

: (1,0)(4(1-d ctnd)*2 ln(I'?z-,)). (34a)

- @i) (\
f
'I'he

value of the integral (34a) times z' differs from (33a), of

course,becausethe results on the right are not actually the integrals on the left, but rather equal their actual value minus their
value lor m2:m2l)r2.
Combining these quantities, as required by (32), dropping the
constantsC', C" and evaluating the spur gives (33). The spurs are
evaluated in the usual way, noting that the spur of any odd
number of'y matrices vanishes and S!('1,n1:5p16tr1 1o, urbrtrary A, B. The S2(1):4 and we alsohave
(35a)
LSpl(b,1-m)(Iz- m2)): ?r P2- mtmz,
\S pl(f'*

m') (l r w n))
n,) (!z- n,) (f
"* m rnz)(Pt e- ntm)
= (f r. i2I
- lP t Px- nn) (! z'! t- mztn)
* (f t. lr n'mo)(!r !t- mzm), (36a)

vherc Pi, ni are arbitrary four-vectors and constants,

It is interesting that the terms of orclerX2ln\2 go out, so that
the charge renormalization depends only logarithmically on X'.
1'his is not true for some of the meson theories. Electrodynamics
is suspiciouslyunique in the mildnessof its divergence.
D. More

Complex

Problems

Matdx elements for complex problems can be set up in a

manner analogous to that used for the simpler cases' We give
three illustrations; higher order correctionsto the Mlller scatter-

p - = p .- q

7v
p^ +k

X
/

,Ht rhl, /1t

d.e.t

/1
/

q.

(32a)

(33a)

with another unimportant constant C". The completeproblem requires the further integral,

I' (m'+ D : .1:: p doI(l' - n!' q- m'z- Ll iq\ 3d,t.

"!
This still diverges,but we can difierentiate again to get

* d",[(I,*zl)ln(I'

787

ELECTRODYNAMICS

\
\/

/-< \
n.

\
/

/
l.

Frc. 8. The interaction between two electrons to order (d/hc)'?'

of every figurc involving two virtual
One adds the contribution
quanta, Appendix D,

255
;88

R.

P.

FEYNN,IAN

means that one adds with cqual weight the integrals correspoDding
:-g, to the Compton scattering, and the interaction of a neutron
,.ith an electromagnetic 6eld.
to each topologicaily distinct ligure,
scattering, consider two electrons, one in state
To this same order thcrc arc also the possibilities of Fig. 8d
Ior the Mlller
,: ol momentum ,r and the other in state a2 of momentum .202. which give
-1ter they are found in states a3, p3 and ua, pa. This may happen
:rst orcier in e2/hc) because they exchange a quantum of momen1- h- m)-t11rt)
@/., f @r,(fu- tu- n)-\-yuNp
in the manner of Eq. (4) and lrig. 1.'lhe
:;n q=pr-pz:pa-pz
x(n41!1tr) h-,q-,d!k.
:r3trix element for this process is proportional to (tratrslating (4)
space)

: r momentum

(iqpu2)(hapur)q-'.

(37a)

.', e shall discuss corrections to (37a) to the next order in e,/bc.

There is also thc possibiiity that it is the electron at 2 which
::ally arrives at 3, the electron at 1 going to 4 through the exThe amplitude for this
::ange of quantum of nomentum.iD3-rr.
- :.cess, (i4y pu) (u* puz) (,!rbe subtracted
from
trz)-2, nust
iia) in accordancc rviLh thc exclusiou principle. A similar situa:n exists to each order so that we need consider in detail only
::e corrections to (37a), reserving to the last the subLraction of
r. samc terms rvith 3, 4 exchangec,,
One reason that (37a) is modified is that two quanta may be
::,:changed, in the manner of Fig.8a. The total matrjx element
: :: all exchanges of this type is
..,i)

k-

ei"1,,(p,-

m)-t^1,u,) (uaa,(pz! k-

n)-t\

. h ,(q-

4r,)

h)-,d4k,

(38a)

r.i is clear from the figure and lhe general rule that electrons of
between inter-r -.mentum , contribute in amplitudc (j-z)-1
r::ions .yA, and that quanta of momentum ft contribute &-'z, In
::egrating on d{& and summing over p and /. we add all alterna.es oI th tlpe of Fig.8a. If the time of absorption, ?!, o{ the
.irntum A by electron 2 is later ttran the absorption, a,, of q- k,
being a positron (so
::: corresponcls to the virtual stale fl*k
:t (38a) contains over thirty terms of the conventional method
: analysis).
ir integrating over all thcse alternatives s'e have considered all
::siblc distortions of Fig. 8a which preserve thc ordcr of cvcnts
, ::rg the trajectories. We have not included the possibilities
: ::responding to Fig. 8b, however. Their contribution is
,. ,il

h-m)

@"t,@,-

X (no r(lz*

11uur)
q-

m) tyur)h

k-

2(q- h)'zd,ak, (39a)

:: is readily verified by labeling the diagram. The contributions ol

:. possiblc $.ays that an event can occur are to be added. This

,.(

j,

,/

"/
/)^

L l L t ' *))
-/:./

o.

* 7 vll

,/.d . c

-t

b.

c.

/-&
^t

*J

,/

",/"',al

r*

tl

,/

g.

*,
,/

fr
h.

Frc. 9. Ra.liative correction to the Compton scattering terD

(a) oI Fig.5. Appendix D.

This integral on ft will be seen to be precisely the integral (12) for

thc radiative corrections to scattering, which we have worked out.
The term may be combined with the renormalization terms resulting from the difierence of the efiects of mass change and the Lerms,
Figs. 8f and 8g, Figures 8e, 8h, and 8i are simiiarly analyzcd. -.
Finally the term l"ig.8c is clearly relate,l to our vr(uum
polarization probicm, and u.hen integraterl gives a term proportional to (?ia'rp?,!)(rsa&t)Jp,q a. If the charge is rcnormalizcd thc
term ln(x/rn) in -/1, in (33) is omittcd so thcre is no remaining
clependence on the cut-off.
The only nelv integrals rve recluire are the convergeDt integrals
(38a) and (39a). They can be simplificcl by rationalizing thc c1c'
norninators and combining them Ly (14a). For cxarrple (38a) involves the f actors (h' - 2 p r k) | (h2 + 2 f 2' h) | h-'z(.q' I h2 - 2q h) 2.
The first two may be combinecl by (14a) with a paraDrcter r, and
the second pair by an expression obtainerl by differentiation (1.5a)
rvith respect to 6 ancl calling the parametcr l'.'I'hcre results a
h) a so Lhat thc intcgfais on
Iactor (h2-2p.'k)a(h2ly'q'z-2lq
d1,4now involve two faclors and can bc performed by lhe rncthocls
given earlier in the alrpendix. The subsequent intcgrals on the
paramcters * and 1t are complicatcd ancl have not been rvorked out
in detail.
Working rvith charged mesons there is often a considerable reduction of the nurnber of tcrms. 1'or example, for thc interacti(tr1
between protons resulting from thc cxchange oi tu'o mcsons onlv
the tenn corresponding to Fig. 8b rcmains. Ternr 84, for cxamplc,
is impossibJe, for i{ the 6rst proton emils a positive meson thc
second cannot absorb it directly for only neutrons can absorb
positive mesons.
As a second exanple, consider the radiative correction to the
Compton scattering, As seen from Eq. (15) and Fig. 5 this scattering is represented by two terms, so that we can consider the corrections to each one separately. Figure 9 shows the types of tcrms
arising from corrections to the term of Fig.5a. Calling A tbc
momentum of the virtual quantum, Fig. 9a gives an intcgral
f

t rQr-

h- m) ter(Jpt+ qt-

h- m)-ts rQpr- k-

m)-17 uh-2dah,

convcrgent without cut-off and reducible by the mcthods outlined

in this appendix.
The other terms are relatively easy to evaluate. Terns 6 and c
are closely rclatcd to radiative corrections (although
of Fig.9
somewhat more difficult to evaluate, for one of the states is not
Terms e, f are tetotnalizathat of a free electrot, (!r*Q)21n2).
tion terms. From term d must be subtracted explicitly the efiect
of mass Au, as analyzed in Eqs. (26) and (27) leading to (28)
Terms g, I give zero since the
b:er
s:e2,
rvith p':pr1q,
vacuum polarization has zero efiect on free light quanta, qr'?:0,
gz?:0. The total is inscnsitive to the cut-olT X
The result shows ar infra-red catastrol)he, the largest part
of the cffect. When cut-ofl at tr-i,,, thc effect l)rol)orlional
ln(ru/X",i,) gocs as

@ / r ) lr(u h ^; ") (l 20 cLnzo),

to

(40a)

times the uncorrected amplitude, where (f z- I )2 : 4m' sit20.'fhjs

is the same as for the radiative correction to scattering for a
'fhis
is physically clear since the long wave
deflection ft-br.
quanta are not effected by short-lived intermediate states. The
infra-red effecls arise'3 lrom a 6nal adjustment of the field from
thc asymptotic coulomb fieltl characteristic of the elcctron o[
'!3F. Bloch and A. Nordsieck, Phys. Rev. 52, 54 (1937).

256
789

O U A N T U IVI E L E CT R O D Y N A M I CS
momentum 11 before the collision to that chalacteristic of an
electron moving in a new direction !z after the collision.
The complete expression for the correction is a very complicated
expression involving transcendental integrals.
As a final example we consider the interaction oI a neutron with
an electromagnetic 6eld in virtue of the fact that the neutron may
emit a virtual negative meson. We choose the example of pseudoscalar mesons rvith pseudovector coupling. The change in amplit) determines
rude due to an electromagnetic 6eld A:aexp(-iq
rhe scattering of a neutron by such a 6eid. In the limit of small g
qa-aq
interaction
of a patwhich
represents
the
as
ir rrill vary
ticle possessing a magnetic moment. The first-order interactiotr
betNeen an electron and a neutron is given b)' the same calculation
b1'consiclering the exchange of a quantum between the electron
and the nucleon. In this case o, is g-' times the malrix element of
7a between the initial and 6nal states of the electron, the states
differing in momentum by g.
The intcraction may occur because the neutron of momentum
,r emits a negative meson becoming a proton which proton interacts with the field and then reabsorbs the meson (Fig. 10a). Thc
matrix for this process is @r:fr*{),

p- u)-ta0F h- l|)-t(tsk)(kz- uzltgap.1nrr,

f 0,h)(trit may be the meson which interacts with the 6eld.
Alternatively
We assume that it does this in the manner of a scalar potential
satisfying the Klein Gordon Eq. (35), (Fis. 10b)
-

{",n"){I,-

n,-

M)-1(v5h1)(h22X(kz'a*kt

p2)-\
a)(h?-

p2)-\dahy

(42a)

where we have put tr: ftr*9. The change in sign arises because
the virtual meson is negative. Finally there are two terms arising
from the'yoc part of the pseudovector coupling (Figs. 10c, 10d)
J', G^h)Q"-

A- V)-ttv

!a)(h',- F\-'\dth'

(43a)

and
f

G"o)(t,-n-tt)'(7.h)(h2-p2)-1d1h.

('14a)

Using convergence factors in the manner discussed in the section

theories each integral can be evrluated and the results
on .iron
combined. Expanded in powers of 4 the frrst term gives the magnetic moment of the neutron and is insensitive to the cut-off, the
next gives the scattering amplitude of slow electrons on neutrons,
on the cut-ofi.
and depends logarithmically
and combined somewhat
The expressions may be simplifed
before integration. This makes the integrals a little easier and also
shows the relation to the case of pseudoscalar coupling. For
M)
example in (41a) the 6nal 'ybft can be written as r(kltl
when operating on the initial neutron state' This is
since rr:tf

ilEUTROi

grri

K!'l

"\o:-T4 x9.

\-\\/

,/ 2"
7sh( .
IN,

XESON
k

D
- t -- rkl .I

to

| '/-

val

75\t f

\l

fr, b.
/P"

%-!.fir
%e*Y
'tp

c.

7.9-\
,.-k!

,/,_

' ' - v )!
hd.

Ftc. 10. According to the meson theorl a neutron inleracts witlr

rn electromagnelic fotential c by 6rst emirring a virtual charged
meson. The figure illustrates the case for a pseudoscalar meson
with pseudovector coupling. Appendix D.
since ?r anticommutes rvithrr and ft. The
Qt-h-M)to*2M7s
h- M) 1 and gives a term which just
6rst term cancels the (Itcancels (43a). In a like manner the leading factor ?sfr in (41a) is
-2tr[ls-ts(lt-h-M),
the second term leading to a
written as
factor and combining
simpler term containing ao (Pz-k-M)-t
with a similar one irom (44a), One simplifies the lsftr and 'ys&r
in (42a) in an analogous way. There frnally results terms like
(4la), (42a) but with pseudoscalar coupling 2Mzs instead oI
76fr, no terms like (43a) or (44a) and a remainder, representing
the difierence in efiects of pseudovector and pseudoscalar coupling.
The pseudoscalar terms do not depend sensitively on the cut-off,
The difierbut the difierence term depends on it logarithmically.
interaction but not the
ence term afiects the electron-neutron
magnetic moment of the neutron.
Interaction oi a proton with an electromagnetic potential can
be similarly analyzed. There is an efiect of virtual mesons on the
electromagnetic properties of the proton evn in the case that the
mesons are neutral. It is analogous to the radiative corrections to
the scattering of electrons due to virtual photons. The sum of the
magnetic moments of neutron and proton for charged mesons is
the same as the proton moment calculated for the corresponding
neutral mesons. In fact it is readily seen by comparing diagrams,
q, the scattering matrix to frsl ordu in the
that for arbitrart'
elecbomagnelic Potenti.al, for a proton according to neutral meson
theory is equal, if the mesons were charged, to the sum of the
matrix for a neutron and the matrix for a proton. This is true, for
any t]'pe or mixtures of meson coupling, to all orders in the
coupling (ncglecting the mass difference ol neulron and proton)

P o p e r2 3

Mathematical

Formulation

of the Quantum Theory of Electromagnetic

257

fnteraction

Dep,,nee,of physul:!;,X,"u"I#i#,ity, rthac@,

Nw york
(Received June 8, 1950)
The.validityoftherulesgivcnin-previouspapersforthesolutionofproblemsinquantumelectrodynamics
,
is established. Starting with Fermi's formulation of the field as a sei of harmonii
oscillators, the effect of
lhe oscillators is inlcgraled out in lhe,Lagrangirn- form of rluantum mcchanics.
Therc resulrs rn exlressron
for lhe effect of all virtual photons va.lid to all ordcrs inc/ic-lt
is shown rhat evaluation ol this expressron
as a por-er series h d/hc gives just the terms expected by the aforementionecl rules.
In addition, a relation is established between the amplitude for a given process in an
arbitrary unquantized
potential and in a quantum electrodynamical-field.
This relation"permits
a simple g"r".uiri;t"."nt
of
the laws of quantum electrodynamics.
A description, in Lagrangia.n quantum-mechenical
form, of particles satisfying the Klein-Gordon equatron
is given in an Appendix. It involvcs
use of an extra parameter analogous to proper time to clescribe
-lhe
lhe trajectory oI the narticle in lour dimensions.
A second Appendix discusses, in the special case of photons, the problem of finding
rvhat real processcs
are implied by the formula for virtual processes.
Problems of the divergences of electrodynamics are not discussed.

r. INTRODUCTION

net effect of the field is a delayed interaction of the

particles.It is possibleto do this easilyonly if it is not
necessaryat the same time to analyze completely the
motion of the particles. The only advantage in our
problemsof the form of quantum mechanicsin C is to
permit one to separatethese aspectsof the problem.
T l r e r ea r c a r r u m b e ro f d i s a d v a r r t i g e sh,o w e v e r s, u c ha s
a lack of familiarity, the apparent (but not real)
n e c e s s i t yf o r d e a l i n g w i t h m a t t e r i n n o n - r e i a t i v i s t i c
approximation, and at times a cumbersomemathematical notation and method, as well as the fact that
a great deal of useful information that is known about
operators cannot be directly applied.
It is also possible to separate the field and particle
aspeclsof a problem in a manner which usesoperators
a n d H a m i l t o n i a n si n a w a y t h a t i s m u c h m o r e i a m i l i a r .
One abandons the notation that the order of action of
operatorsdependson their written position on the paper
and substitutessome other convention (such thit ihe
o r d e r o f o p e r a t o r si s t h a t o f t h e t i m e t o w h i c h t h e y
r e f e r ) . T h e i n c r e a s ei n m a n i p u l a t i v e f a c i l i l y w h i c i r
a c c o m p a n i etsh i s c h a n g ei n n o t a t i o nm a k e si t e a s i e rt o
representand to analyzethe formal problems in electrod y n a m i c s .T h e m c t h o d r e q u i r e ss o m ed i s c u s s i o nh, o w ever, and will be described in a succeedingpaper. In
this paper we shall give the derivations of the formulas
of II by means of the form of quantum mechanics
given in C.
'fhe
problem of interaction of matter and 6eld will be
analyzed
by first solving for the behavior of the field in
. N*t
the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena,
terms of the coordinates of the matter, and finallv
California.
r R. P. Feynman,Phys. Rev. 76, 749 (19+q),hereafrcrcalledI.
discussingthe behavior of the matter (by matter is
rnd Phys. Rev. 76, 769 (1949),herealrercallcd II.
, Seein this connectionalso the Datlcrso[ S. Tomonaea.phvs. actually meant the electrons and positrons). 'fhat is to
R e v . 7 4 , 2 2 4 { 1 q 4 8 ) i S . K a n e s a w aa n d S . T o m o n a s : a , ' P r o r . say, we shall 6rst eliminate the fietd
variables from the
T h e o r e t .P h y s .3 , t O l ( 1 q 4 8 ) ;J . S c h w i n g e rP, h y s . n e v . 7 6 , 7 V l
r l q 4 9 ) ; F . D y s o n , P h y s . R e v . 7 5 , 1 7 J 6 ( 1 9 4 9 ) ;W . P a u l i a n d equations of motion of the electrons and then discuss
F. Villars, Rev. Mod.. Phys. 21, 434 (1949). The papers cited
the behavior of the electrons.In this way all of the
-sive referencesto previous work.
r u l e sg i v e n i n t h e p a p e rI I w i l l b e d e r i v e d .
3 R.
Feynman,
(1948),
Rev.
Mod.
Phys.
20,
367
hereafter
_P.
called C.
Actually, the straightforward elimination of the Iield
440
f N two previous papersr rules were given lor the
r c a l c u l a l i o no f t h e m a l r i x e l e m e n tf o r a n y p r o c e s si n
electrodynamics, to each order in e2/hc. No comDlete
proof of the equivalence
o f t h e s er u l c s t o t h e c o n v e n tional electrodynamics was given in these papers.
Secondly, no closed expression was given valid to all
orders in e2/hc. In this paper these formal omissions
s-ill be remedied.2
In paper II it was pointed out that for many problems in electrodynamics the Hamiltonian method is not
advantageous, and might be replaced by the over-all
space-timepoint of view of a direct particle interaction.
It was also mentioned that the Lagrangian form of
quantum mechanics3was useful in this connection. The
rules given in paper II were, in fact, first deduced in
this form of quantum mechanics. We shall give this
derivation here.
The advantage of a Lagrangian form of quantum
mechanicsis that in a system with interacting parts it
permits a separation of the problem such that the
motion of any part can be analyzed or soived first, and
the results of this solution may then be used in the
solution of the motion of the other parts. This separation is especially useful in quantum eiectrodynamics
which represents the interaction of matter with the
electromagnetic field. The electromagnetic field is an
especially simple system and its behavior can be
analyzed completely. What we shall show is that the

258
1'HI]ORY

OF

ELECTROMAGNETIC

variables will lead at first to an expression for the

behavior of an arbitrary number of Dirac electrons.
Since the number of electronsmight be infinite, this
can be useddirectly to find the behaviorof the electrons
accordingto hole theory by imagining that nearly all
the negative energy states are occupied by electrons.
But, at least in the caseof motion in a fixed potential,
it ]ras been shown that this hole theory picture is
equivalent to one in which a positron is representedas
an electron whose space-timetrajectory has had its
time direction reversed.To show that this samepicture
may be used in quantum electrodynamicsrvhen the
potentials are not fixed, a special argument is made
basedon a study of the relationshipof quantum electrodynamics to motion in a fixed potential. Irinally, il is
pointed out that this relationship is quite generaland
might be used for a general statement of the laws of
quantum electrodynamics.
Chargesobeying the Klein-Gordon equation can be
analyzed by a special formalism given in Appendix A.
A fifth parameteris usedto specifythe four-dimensional
trajectory so that the Lagrangian form of quantum
mechanicscan be used. Appendix B discussesin more
detail the relation of real and virtual photon emission.
An equation for the propagation of a self-interacting
electronis given in Appendix C.
In the demonstrationwhich follorvswe shall restrict
ourselvestemporarily to casesin which the particle's
motion is non-relativistic,but the transition of the final
formulas to the relativistic caseis direct, and the proof
c o u l dh a v e b e e l rk e p l r e l a t i v i s t i ct h r o u g h o u t .
The transversepart of the electromagneticfreld will
be representedas an assemblageof independentharmonic oscillatorseach interacling with the particles,
as suggestedby Fermi.aWe use lhe notation of Heitler.5
IN
2, QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS
LAGRANGIAN FORM

INTERACTION

441

same.) The Hamiltonian of the transverse field representedas oscillatorsis

II

lr
: -L L ((PK('))'z+ k'z(qK('))')
" 2r, ,:t

where 2s(d is the momentum conjugate to qK(4. The

longitudinal part of the field has been replacedby the
Coulomb interaction,6

H":+L"L^e"e^/r"As is well known,a when this

where r,",2:(x"-x-)t.
Hamiltonian is quantized one arrives at the usual
theory of quantum electrodynamics.To expressthese
laws of quantum electrodynamicsone can equally well
use the Lagrangian form of quantum mechanics to
describe this set of oscillators and particles. The
classicalLagrangian equivalent to this Hamiltonian is
Lr -

Lf p L If , LLtf

| !.

Lf r/Ir
I

.r.r' lhr !^r.\a

Lo:!1" m"ri,

(2a)

Lr:D" e"x'".Lt'(x")
L : LLs. I, ((4K(")
)')
)' - [' (qK(d
"
L.:-iL"l^e"e,"/r^".

(2b)
(2c)
(2d)

When this Lagrangian is used in the Lagrangian

forms of quantum mechanicsof C, what it leads to is,
of course,rnathematicallyequivalent to the result of
using the Hamiltonian 11 in the ordinary way, and is
therefore equivalent to the more usual forms of quantum
electrodynamics (at least for non-relativistic particles).
We may, therefore, proceed by using this Lagrangian
form of quantum electrodynamics,with the assurance
that the resultsobtainedmust agreervith thoseobtained
from the more usual Hamiltonian form.
The Lagrangian enters through the statement that
the functional which carries the system from one state
to another is exp(iS) where

The Hamiltonian for a set of non-relativisticparticles

(3)
interacting wilh ratliation is, classically,II:Hp*IIr
.t: I zdl:se+.tr+.t"+sr,.
J
+ il "+ II h, whcre II ol II r : L " trm"-' (p"- e"A "(x"))'
is tire H:rmiltonian of the particlcs of massrz,, charge The time integrals must be written as Riemann sums
an, coordirale x, and momentum p" and their inter- with somecare; for example,
action rvith thc transversepart of the electromagnetic
'Ihis
field can be expandedinto plane waves
field.
(4)
S':I
I e"x'"(t)'4"(x"(t))dt
:
A ' " ( x ) ( 8 r ) 1 f , 6 [ e 1 ( 9 6 ( 'c) o s ( K . x ) + q K ( t )s i n ( K . x ) )
+ e r ( g K ( ' !c) o s ( K . x ) + q K ( as) i n ( K . x ) ) l ( 1 ) becomesaccordingto C, Eq. (19)
lvhereer and e: arc two orthogonalpolarizationvectors Sr: I" I; ie"(x", ;+r- x", )' (A"(x", +')*A'"(x", )) (5)
at right anglesto the propagationvector K, magnitude
so that the velocity x',,; which multiplies A"(x",) is
A. The sum over K means,if normalizedto unit volume,
gr(')
be
considered
as
the
(6)
cau
each
d3K/8r3,
and
x',, ;: ]e-l(x", ;1r-x" )*le-l(x", ;- x,, ;-r).
lf
coordinatcof a harmonicoscillator.(The factor I arises
infinitebut must
for the mode correspondingto K and to - K is the --n" t"* in thesum forn:m is obviously
{ E. Ierrni, Ilev. Nlod. I'hys. 1, 87 (19.12).
6 W. lleitler, The Quantunt Tlrcory oJ Rad'ialiox, sccond edition
(Orford UniversityPress,London, 1944).

be included for relativistic invariance. Our problem here is to

re-express the usual (and divergent) form of electrodynamics in
the form siven in II. Modifications for dealing with the divergenccs a.idi..r.."d
in II and we shall not discuss them further
here,

259
t la

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

In the Lagrangian form it is possibleto eliminate the

:ransverscoscillatorsas is discussedin C, Section 13.
i)ne must specify,however,the initial and final state of
:ll oscillators.We shall lirst choosethe special,simple
:asethat all oscillatorsare in their ground statesinitially
:nd finally, so that all photons are virtual. Later we
lo the more general case in which real quanta are
-rresentinitially or iinally. We ask, then, for the amplitude for finding no quanta presentand the particlesin
.rlte x(, at time t", if at time l' tlie particles were in
;ttte r! y and no quanta were present.
The method of eliminating field oscillators is de-.cribedin Section13 of C. We shall simply carry out the
tlimination here using the notation and equationsof C.
Io do this, for simplicity, we first considerin the next
sectionthe case of a particle or a system of particles
interacting with a single oscillator, rather than the
of the electromagneticfield.
entire assemblage
3. FORCED I{ARMONIC OSCILLATOR
We consider a harmonic oscillator, coordinate q,
interacting with a particle
Lagrangian L:i(d-r'q')
or systemof particles,action So, through a term in the
Lagrangian g(l)"y(t) where 'y(l) is a function of the
'Ihe
coordinates (symbolized as r) of the particle.
rrecise form of 7(l) for each oscillator of the electronagnetic field is given in the next section.We ask for
rhe amplitude that at sometime l" the parlicles are in
statexy and the oscillator is in, say, an eigenstaterz
(units are chosensuch that h:c:l)
of energy,(mIil
wher it is given that at a previoustime l/ the particles
\rere in state /r, and the oscillatorin rl. The amplitude
for this is the transition amplitude [see C' Eq. (61)]
sr
\ x v , p ^ l I It L p " ) s p + s +
o
:

ff

) ^ + ( q( , ) e x p i ( S o * S o { . S r )
| | x , , , * G , , ,e
' e"@/){ ( (r t)dx {'dr Ldq('dq I Dr(t) Dq(t)

(7)

rvhere* representsthe variablesdescribingthe particle,

So is the action calculatedclassicallyfor the particles
for a given path going from coordinatefit at tt to r('
at t", Ss is the action f i(4'z*o'zq')dtfor any path of
the oscillator going from qt, at tt to qy at l'", while
sr:
J

I q(t)'y(td,,

(s)

the action of interaction, is a functional of both q(r)

and *(l), the paths of oscilLatorand particles. The
s y m b o l sD x ( 1 ) a n d D g ( 1 )r e p r e s e n at s u m m a t i o no v e r
all possiblepaths of particles and oscillator which go
between the given end points in the sensedefrned in C,
Eq. (9). (That is, assumingtime to proceedin infinitesimal steps, e, an integral over all values of the
coordinates r and, q corresponding to each instant in
time, suitably normalized.)

The problem may be broken in trvo. The result can

be rvritten as an integral over all paths of the particles
only, of (expi.9,).G-":
q " ) s " + s 0 + s r : ( x , , ,I G ^ " W r ) s o

Qu'e^lllt,

(9)

where G-" is a functional of the path of the particles

alone (sinceit dependson 7(l)) given by

c^":(,^l*vi ilt)ilt)atl,c-)
[
,,
:

*sr) p"(q/)dqfiq /,Dq(t)

e^. (,t,,)expl(so

I
:

v ^. (t,) e*pi:;l+,-'

'p

(,]n+' - qn)'- L,' q,'r qt ;l

ta-td(12'''a-rdqi
"(rlo)dqoa-td.q

(10)

where we have written the Dg(r) out explicitly (and

have set a:(2rie)t, t,,-t,:je, q/:q0, qL,:qj). The
Iast form can be rvritten as
G-

k
t" qo,r'),p^(qo\d
qodq
^*
;
": JI' 'e" ' k ) 1q,, ;

(11)

where ft(g;,t"; qa,t') is the kernel [as in I, Eq. (2)] for

a forced harmonic oscillator giving the amplitude for
arrival at q, at time l" if at time l' it was known to be
at qo.According to C it is given by
h(q1,l" ; qo,t'): (2rio-t sino(1"- l'))-i
XexpiQ(q;, t"; qo,t')

(12)

where p(g;, l" ; qo,t') is tire action calculatedalong the

c f a s s i c apl a t h b e t w e e nt h e e r r dp o i n t s q ; .l " i q 0 ,l ' , a n d
is given explicitly in C.7It is
tThat (12) is correct, at least insofar as it depcnds on q0, can
be seerr clirectly as folioivs. LeL q(l) be the classical path rvhich
satisfies the boundary condition q(l'):g0, 4(1"):qj. Thcn in the
integral dcfining I replacc each of the variablcs qi by q;:Tr*!i,
that is, usc the (iisl)lacement 1i from thc classical
Qt:4(tt)),
path q; a5 the coordinatc rathcr than thc absolute posilion.
in the aclion
With the substitution gi:Q;*]ri

, . -^ - ^ I. q)dt
So* Sr:.,1r .(iQ'
1.,q, t
:

t
r f rLA" l-'q' | 1 Qtd I f \lr'? ib?Y'ir

the terms iinear in 1 drop out by intcgrations by parts using thc

equation of motion 4:-o'Q+r(l)
for the classical path, and the
boundary condilions y(t'):yQ"):0.
That this should occur
should occasion no surprisc, for the action functional is an exq(t):q(r)
tremum at
so rhai it will only depencl to seconcl ordcr
in the displacements 1 from this extrcmal ortrit 4(t). Furthcr,
since the action fuoclional is quadratic to bcgin with, it cannot
depend on jr' more than quadratically.
Hence

.',|

So lSr:0

l'ttU'1-+@')P)dt

so that sincc dq;:dy;,

riOl,f *t,(i.f
k1q;, ! " ; qs,t' t : r x1t

t
).
rt u,-.'1,d,)D),(/

The factor following thc expiQ is thc amplitude for a frce oscillator
I and does not thereto proced lfom y:0 at t,:tI Lo !:O at l:l

260
oF

THEoRY

o:

;;r,,,

- nf

INTERACTION

ELECTROMAGNETIC

443

(seeC, Sec. 12). The functional 1, which is given by

(t"'- r')- 2q1q

o
te,'+n,) cosa

ff

I : 1 i @ ' t | | e x p ( - i o l r - s l ) r ( s ) r ( / ) d s d (r 1 5 )
JJ

*2::
*4
-

!,,'"
[,,'"

,al sina(t-t,)dt
- t)rtt
ta) sina(t"

) [,,"' [,,',

<,lr(s)sino(r"-r)
Xsin,(s-l')dsdr].

is complex,howeverI we shall speakof it as the complex

action. It describesthe fact that the system at one
time can affect itself at a different time by means of a
temporary storage of energy in the oscillator. When
there are severalindependentoscillatorswith difierent
interactions,the effect,if they are all in the loweststate
at l'and /", is the product of their separateGoocontributions. Thus the complex action is additive, being
the sum of contributions like (15) for each of the
( 1 3 ) several oscillators.

The solution of the motion of the oscillatorcan now

b e c o m p l e t e db y s u b s t i t u t i n g( 1 2 ) a n d ( 1 3 ) i n t o ( 1 1 )
'I'he
simplest case is for
and performing the integrals.
m, n:O lor which casej
: @/
qoo(qo)

exp(- |rgoe) exp(- liat')

")I
on
so that the intcgrals qo,qr are just Gaussianintegrals.
There results

c* : *p ( - 1,-,

"

uor- i a(t- s))1Q)^t(s)dds)

1,,' 1,,'

4. VIRTUAL TRANSITIONS IN THE

FIELD
ELECTROMAGNETIC
We can now apply these results to eliminate the
transverse fielcl oscillators of the Lagrangian (2). At
first we can limit ourselvesto the caseof purely virtual
transitionsin the electromagneticfield, so that there is
no photon in the field at t' ar'd t". That is, all of the
field oscillators are making transitions from ground
state to ground state.
The "yK(")correspondingto each oscillator gs{') is
found from the interaction term Zr [Eq. (2b)]' substituting the value of A'"(x) given in (1). There results,
for example,

a result oI fundamental importance in the succeeding

r r ( " : ( 8 n ) , I . e , ( e , . x ' " )c o s ( K . x " )
developments.By replacingl-J by its absolutevalue
\/ r1vA' \
jI" e.(er'x sin(K'x")
')
zr(3': (8n)
ll-sl we may integrate both variablesover the entire
range and divide by 2. We will henceforth make the
the correspondingresultsfor ?r(2),?r(n) replacee1by e2'
results more general by extending the limits on the
The complex action resulting from oscillator of
@.
o
wishes
to
Thus
if
one
to
from
*
intesrals
coordinate qr(t) is therefore
with
an
of
interaction
particle
study the effect on a
oscillatorfor just the period l' to l" one may use

iklr-s])(e,.x'"(r))
exp(^, :Y++ I I e,e^

*,:.*(-_1I:I
Xexp(-iolr-sl h(hft)dds)

X ( e r 'x ' - ( s ) ) ' c o s ( K 'x " ( t ) ) c o s ( K 'x - ( s ) ) r l s d r .

(14) The term h(3) exchangesthe cosinesfor sines,so in

imagining in this casethat the interaction 1(l) is zero

outside these limits. We defer to a later section the
discussionof other valuesof ar, z.
SinceGoois simply an exponential,we can write it as
exp(i1), consider that the complete "action" for the
svstem of particles is S:Sot1 and that ore computes
tiansition ilements rvith this "action" instead of So
fore depend on 00, or, or a(/1, lrcing a function only of t"-t'| can bc dcmonstrated
l-Thar it is acturllv i2rid I sinutt"-r'))
Either lrv dircct iniesration oi lhe y varial'les or by using some
normalizirrg property"of lhe kcrnels &. iur exampLethf,t 6@ for
rhe casc 7":i] niusr'equal unity.] The.exprcssion.forQ,given,in
C on page J86 is in crror, the quanllltes g0 and gi snoulc De
interchansed.
8 It is irost convenient to dcfine the state q, rvith the phase
and the 6nal state with the factor
factor expf-io(z*i)l']
qp[-i.(r;+i)rt'l.so,t-hat
the rcsults rvill not depend on lhe
nartlcular tlmes r'. r' cnosen.

the sum 1K(t)+1K(3)the product of the two cosines,

cos.4.cosB is replaced by (cos,4cos3{sin,4 sinB) or
'Ihe
terms 1K(2)+1K(4)give the same
cos(,4--B).
r e s u l t w i t h e 2 r e p l a c i n ge r . T h e s u m ( e 1 ' V ) ( e 1 ' V ' )
' ? ( K ' V ) ( K ' V ' ) s i n c ei t i s
t(e,'V)(e''V') is (V'V')-fr
the sum of the products of vector componentsin two
orthogonaldirections,so that if we add the product in
the third direction (that of K) we construct the complete scalar product. Summing over all K then, since
ilK/873 we find {or the total complex action
|K:+f
of all of the transverseoscillators,

t',:iLL
i

ft'

nJ.,

f('

dt I

J,'

d sI e " e ^ e x p ( - i i l f - s l )
,l

x -(,))l
x'"1r))(K'
x t*'"tl' *-trl - P-r16'
. c o s ( K '( x " ( , ) - x - ( s ) ) ) d , K / 8 r ' z h . ( 1 7 )

26r
114

R..P.

FEYNMAN

Tliis is to be added to So*S" to obtain the complete

action of the system with the oscillators removed.
The term in (K'x'"(l))(K'x'-(s))
can be simplif,ed
by integratioa by parts with respect to I and with
respect to s [note that exp(-lfrlt-sl)
has a discontiruous slope at t:s, or break the integration up into
trvo regions]. One finds
1s,:R-1"f

..r.here

16u,"1"o1

(18)

considered as varying with time). In this case, in the

limit, 1s,u,"i".1is zero.e Hereafter we shall drop the
transient term and considerthe range of integration of
I to be from -o
to *@, imagining, if oni needsa
clefinition,that the chargesvary-with-time and vanish
in the direction of eitheilimit.
To simplify R we need the integral
_
J:

f
exp(_illli)
I

cos(K.R)d3Kl8r,A

fl"rt"r

R:-iLLl
a

ill

mJ(

f*

dsle,e^

J!

: I
'lO

exp(-ifltl) sin(kr)dk/2rr(22)

where r is the length of the vector R. Now

Xexp(-iA Ir-s | )(1-x'"(l). x -(s))
' cosK.(x"(t)-x^(s))d.3K/Sr,h (19)
I

exp(-iA*)dA:

lim (-t(.u-ie)-r)

ro

and

: -ir-t
ft"

/":-|I
n

n J (

/'

I atle",^
(20)

comesfromthediscontinuity in slopeof exp(- ihlt-sl)

at l:s. Since
ff'

-,
I co.(K. R)drKf4#k2 J o
J

& r ) - , s i n ( k r ) d k / r- ( 2 r ) - l

this term 1" just cancelsthe Coulomb interaction term

The term
S":IL.dt.
ltrr.sient: _lle"e*
J

Xl I

r6+(x)

where the equation serues to define dn(:r) fas in II,

nq. (:)].Hence, expandingsin(Ar) in exponentialsfind

X cosK . (x"(r)- x^(t))d3K/4tf k,

l16(r):

r d3K
| ^
+7"R"

J: - (arr)-t((ltl -/)-1-

(lll +/)-,)

r l(_l r ) _ a ( | r l * r ) )
f (a;z)-'(6

: - (2r)-t(t, * 7z)-t+ (2i)-t6(t, - rr)

: -|i6*(t'-r2)

(23)

where we have used the fact that

6 ( t 2 - r ' z ) : ( 2 r ) - t ( 6 ( l t l- r ) f

a(lil f r))

and that 6(ltl*r):0

s i n c eb o t h l t l a n d r a r e n e c e s sarily positive.
Substitution oI theseresultsinto (19) gives linally,
I
R: -:tt

lexp(- ih(r."-r1)cosK.(x,(1")-x^(//)

IJr

r+- r+r,e-(l-x
x
f
I
"(t) ,(s))
Z n m J - 6 J _ 6
X d+((r- s),- (x

texp(-ih(t- t')) cosK.(x,(l)- x^(/)))dt

(x ) - x^(t"))
* (2&)-U[cosK.
"(/'
lcosK' (x"(l')- x-(l'))

"(t)

* x-(s)),) dtds. (24)

The total complex action of the system is thenro

So*R. Or, what amounts to the same thing; to obtain

- 2 exp(-ih(t"-r')) cosK.(x,(l')-"-0',))l
l.
I

e1)

is one which comes {rom the limits of integration at l/

and 1", and involves the coordinatesof the particle at
either one of these times or the other. If t' and t" ate
consideredto be exceedinglyfar in the past and future,
there is no correlation to be expected between these
temporally distant coordinates and the present ones,
so the effects of 11."n"iu,.,will cancel out quantum
mechanically by interference. This transient was produced by the sudden turning on of the interaction of
field and particles at l'and its sudden removal at 1".
Alternatively we can imagine the charges to be turned
on after tr'adiabatically and turned off slowly before l"
(in this case,in the term 2", the chargesshould also be

'O,*
obtain the 6nal result, that the total interaction is
just R, in a formal manner starting from the Hamiltonian from
which the longitudinal oscillators have not yet been eliminated.
There are for each K and cos or sin, four oscillators qlK corresponding to the three components of the vector potential (p:1,
2,3) and the scalar potential (p:.1). It must then be assumecl
that the rvave functions of the initial and final state of the K
oscillators is the function (&/z) exp[- ]&(q1sr*c:rr]-qrdqn:rr)f.
The rvave function suggested here has only formal signi6cance,
of course, because the dependence on qng is not square intcgrable,
and cannot be normalized, If cach oscillator were assumed
actually in the ground state, the sign of the q{K term would be
chuged to positive, and the sign of the frequency in the contribution of these oscillators l,ould be rcversed (they l'ould have
negauve energyJ.
r0 The classical action for this problem is just,t2+R'where
R'
is the real part of the expression (24). In view of the generalization
of the Lagrangian formulation of quantum mechanics suggested
in Section 12 of C, one might havc anticipated that n would have
been simply 1l', This corresponcls, horvcver, to boundary condilions othcr rhrn no quanla l)rFscnt in past an'l Iuture. It is
hardcr to intcrpret physiealll. For a systcrn cnclosedin a light
tight box, hot'ever, it appears likely that both R and R'lead to
the same lesults.

262
THEORY

OF

ELECTROMAGNETIC

INTERACTION

445

transition amplitudes including the efiectsof the field

we must calculatethe transition elementof exp(iR):

can also be evaluated directly in terms of the propagation'kernel K(2, 1) [see I, nq. (Z)] for an electron
m o v i n g i n t h e g i v e np o t e n t i a l .
(2s)
so
r,lexPi'Rlt1'
',)
\x
The term x',.x'1 in the non-relativisticcaseproduces
under tlie action .5, of the particles, excluding inter- an interesting complication which does not have an
action. Expression(24) for R must be considereci
to be analog for the relativistic casewith the Dirac equation.
written in the usual manner as a Riemann sum and the We discussit below, but for a moment consider in
expression(25) interpreted as definedin C [Eq. (39)]. further detail expression (26) but with the factor
(1-x'".x') replacedsimply by unity.
Expression(6) must be used for x'" at time l.
The kernel f(2, 1) is defined and discussedin I.
Expression (25), with (24), then contains all the
effectsof virtual quanta on a (at least non-relativistic) From its definition as the amplitude that the electron
systemaccorclingto quantum electrodynamics.It con- be found at x: at time t2,iI at \ it was at xl, we have
tains the effectsto all ordersin e2/hcin a singleexpresK(xz, tz; x1,t) : (6(x-xr),, | 1 | 6(x-x,),,) I e (27)
sion. If expanded in a power seriesin e2fhc, the various
terms give the expressionsto the correspondingorder that is, more simply K(2, 1) is the sum of exp(rSr) over
obtained by the diagrarns and methods of trI. We all paths which go from space time point 1 to 2.
illustrate this by an examplein the next section.
In the integrations over all paths implied by the
symbol in (26) we can first integrate over all the x;
5. EXAMPLE OF APPLICATION OF EXPRESSION (25)
variables corresponding to times l; from l' to s, not
We shall not be much concerned with the non- inclusive, the result being a factor K(x", s; x,,, l') acrelativistic casehere,as the relativistic casegiven below cording to (27). Next we integrateon the variablesbeis as simple and more interesting.It is, however,very tweens and I not inclusive,giving a factor tri(x1,l; x", s)
similar and at this stageit is worth giving ar.rexample and finally on those between , and i" giving
to show how expressionsresulting from (2.5)are 1o be K(xy', t" ; x1, l). Hence the left-hand term in (26)
interprcted according to the rules of C. For example, excludingthe x'1'x'" factor is
consider the case of a single electron, coordinate x,
either free or in an external given potential (contained -e
a, a'
t")K(xy,,
t, ] x,,t)6+((ts)z
for simplicity in So, not in't R). Its interaction rvith
I I I V*(xy,,
the field producesa reaction back on itself given by R
- ( x , - x " ) ' ? ) . K ( x r , l ; x " , s ) K ( x " ,s x y , t ' )
as in (24) but in which we keep only a single term
;
correspondingto nl:n. Assume the eflect of R to be
Xt(xr, t')d3n,'d\xfi3xd3xy (28)
small and expand exp(ift) as 1*iR. Let us find thc
amplitudc at time l" of finding the electron in a state
ry'rvith no quanta emitted, if at time l' it rvas in thc which in improvcd notation and in the relativistic case
is essentiallythe result given in II.
samestate. It is
We have made use of a special case of a principle
@ t , l I + i R l , l ' ( ) s o : \ { r ' l l l V r ) s e + i ( , ,t , , l R l V) s e
which may be stated more generallyas
where (,y',,,| 1 1ry',,)s,:gvp[- iE(t:'-t)l
if l? is the
( x u , l F 1 * t , \ 1 x 2 , t 2 ; ' ' ' x 7 ,t 6 ) 1 , ! y ) s ,
energyof the state, and
ft"

f/'

, , 1 , ,R
',l,l',)s":-[,'1I dtt
Jr'
J(

J s ( / , .( 1 - x , . x

"r

X d+((l- s)'?- (xr- x")?)] 'y'i).sn. (26)

x.6r,)x(*r,,

t " 1 x 1 , 1 1K) ( x 1 , t . ; x 2 ,t 2 ) .. .

Xd(xr,r, t.p 1; xy, te)K(x4 te; xy, t')

. F (4, 11;xz,tzj . . . xa, te),|,(xy)

Here x":x(s), etc. In (26) rve shall limit the range of
integrationsby assumings(1, and double the result.
d.3xed1xy(29)
Xd3x('d.3xd,3x2.,,
The expressionwithin the brackcls ( )so on the
(26)
can be evaluatedby the methods where P is any function of the coordinatex1 at time lr,
right-hand sideof
describedin C [Eq. (29)]. An expressionsuch as (26) x2 at 12up to x6 tp, and, it is important to notice, we
have assumedt") tt> lr> . ., tr>.t'.
t1 Onc can shorv from (25) horv the correlated effect of many
Expressionsof higher order arising for examplefrom
atoms aL a.listzrnce pro.luces on a given system the effects of an
(24) fielcls thc result that this
cxternal potenliirl. Fornula
R! are more complicatedas thereare quantitiesreferring
potcntial is that obtained from Li6nard and Wiechert by retarded
to severaldifferent times mixed up, but they all can be
waves arising lrom the charges and currents resulting from the
interpretedreadily. One simply breaksup the rangesof
distant aloms making transitions. Assunre the $ave functions
1 ancl ry'can be split into proclucts of wave functions for system
integrationsof the time variablesinto parts such that
a n J ' l i s l r n l r l o m s a n d e \ l , a n , l c x t ) ( i n r a s s u r n i n qt h e c f i c c t o f a n v
in each the order of time of each variable is definite.
in lividual rlislcnl rtom is small. Couloml, porentials arise evcn
from nearby particles if they are moving slorvly.
One then interpretseachpart by formula (29).

263
116

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

As a simple example we may refer to the problem of

lhe transition element

element of

II[](xn+'-xo) f ](x;-x;-)1. A(x;,r)

(*"1[,or,,tlat
! v61s1,oo,ir,,)
arising, say, in the crossterm in U and 7 in an ordinary
secondorder perturbation problem (disregarding radiation) with perturbation potential U(x,t)*V(x,t).
In
the integration on s and I which should include the
entire range of time for each, we can split the range of
.r into two parts, s<l and s)1. In the first case,s(1,
rhe potential I/ acts earlier than U, and in the other
range, vice versa, so that

t lr
r
| \
( x,,'lI u(x,,t)dtI v(x",s)dsll,,
)
\

lr

nltt

: I

^t

at I as I yx(xy,)K(xy,,
t,,;x1,t)

J!'

Jr

XU(4, t)K(a, r; x",s)Z(x",s)

ii

X[4(x;+'-x)*](x;-x;-1)l.B(x;,

+ |
J(

f{'

dt I
JI

(31)

In C it is shown that when converted to operator

notation the quantity (x;-1- r;)f e is equivalent (nearly,
seebelow) to an operator,
(x ; a1- x ;) / e+ i (H.v-

(32)

xH)

operating in order indicated by the time index i (that

is after oi's for /(i and beforeall *1,sfor /)l). In nonrelativistic mechanics i(Hr-rH)
is the momentum
operator 2, divided by the mass rz. Thus in (31) the
e x p r e s s i o [n+ ( x r * r- x , ) + + ( x ; - x ; - 1 ) ] . A ( x ; , / ) b e c o m e s
e(p.Al[.p)/2m.
Here again we must split the sum
into two regionsj(i
and jli so the quantities in the
usual notation will operatein the right order such that
eventually (31) becomesidentical with the rieht-hand
s i d e o f E q . ( 3 0 ) b u t w i t h U ( x 1 ,l ) r e p l a c e db y r h e
operator

. K(x", s x y, t'
;
)tlt (x y) d.3xy, d|x sdax dsxy
ft"

r).

l/1

td\

^' 2 m( \.i ^A. \A ( * ' , l ) + A ( x , , t ) . . 1

i |xt/

ds I x*(x,,,)K(xr,, t',; x,, s)

J

standing in the same place, and with the operator

X 7(x,, s)K(x", s ; x6 t)U (x, t)
7/ld

so that the single expressionon the left is represented

by two terms analogous to the two terms required in
analyzing the Compton effect. It is in this way that
the several terms and their corresponding diagrams
corresponding to each process arise when an attempt
is made to represent the transition elements of single
expressions involving time integrals in terms of the
propagation kernels r(.
It remains to study in more detail the term in (26)
arising from x'(l) . x'(s) in the interaction. The interpretation of such expressionsis considered in detail in C,
and we must refer to Eqs. (39) through (50) of that
paper for a more thorough analysis. A similar type of
term also arises in the Lagrangian formulation in
simpler problems, for example the transition element

/ lr
r
| \
( x , , , 1| x ' ( t ) ' A 1 x ( t ) , |t )*d' (t ' ) . 8 ( * G');,a ' l / , , )
\

lJ

arising say, in the cross term in A and B in a secondorder perturbation problem for a particle in a perturbing vector potential A(x, l)*B(x, t). The time
integrals must first be written as Riemannian sums, the
velocity (see (6)) being replacedby x':|e-I(x;..1-x;)
so that we ask for the transition
*ie-r(x;-x;-r)

d\
r).- I
- | . -.8(x,, s)+-B(x,,

. K (x 4 I ; x x, t' ) rlt(x y) d3xy,d.sxdxx1d3x

y (30)

2m\i

6x"

0x"/

standing in the place of I/(x", s). The sums and factors

e have now become lfdtifds,
This is nearly but not quite correct, however, as there
is an additional term coming from the terms in the sum
correspondingto the specialvalues,j=1, j:ill
and
j:i-l.We
have tacitly assumedfrom the appearance
of the expression (31) that, for a given i, the contribution from just three such special terms is of order e2.
But this is not true. Although the expectedcontribution
of a term like (r;a1-r1)(4a-r)
lor jli
is indeed of
order e2, the expected contribution of (r;ar-r;)2 is
liem-L lC, Eq. (50)], that is, of order e. In nonrelativistic mechanicsthe velocitiesare unlimited and
in very short times e the amplitude difiuses a distance
proportional to the square root of the time. Making
use of this equation then we see that the additional
contribution from these terms is essentially
hn-t el A,(x;,t ;) . B (x ;, t 7): ;p-r f I f
iJ

"trl,

t) . B (x(t), t) dt

when summed on all i. This has the same effect as a

frrst-order perturbation due to a potenlial A,.B/m.
Added to the term involving the momentum operators

264
THEORY

OF

ELECTROMAGNETIC

we therefore have an additional termr2

-

i r'"
f
| d / | x * ( x , , . ) K ( x , , ' ,! " i x 6 / ) A ( x 1 /, ) ' B ( x r , r )
.K(t t, t; xr, t'){'(xy)d3x1,,d.3x1d3xy.
(33)

fn the usual Hamiltonian theory this term arises, of

course, from the term L2/2m h the expansion of the
Hamiltonian
H : (2n)-t (p- L)' : (2m)-t (p'- p. A- A. p{ Az)
while the other term arisesfrom the second-orderaction
of p.A*A.p.
We shall not be interested in nonrelativistic quantum electrodynamics in detail. The
situation is simpler for Dirac electrons. For particles
satisfying the Klein-Gordon equation (discussed in
Appendix A) the situation is very similar to a fourdimensional analog of the non-relativistic case given
here.
6. EXTENSION TO DIRAC PARTICLES
Expressions (24) and (25) and their proof can be
teadily generalized to the relativistic case according to
the one electron theory of Dirac. We shall discuss the
hole theory later. In the non-relativistic case we began
with the proposition that the amplitude for a particle
to proceed from one point to another is the sum over
paths of exp(iSo), that is, we have for example for a
transition element
ff

. r y ' ( x ) d 3 x s d 3 x 1 . . . d 3 x(p3 4 )
where for exp(iSr) we have written Oo, that is more
precisely,
(Do: fI;,4-r expiS(x;a1,x).
As discussed in C this form is related to the usual
form of quantum mechanics through the observation
that
n-t
"xp[4"!(x;a1,

x)]

447

(or 4trX4il if we deal with ly' electrons) but the expression (34) with (36) is still correct (as it is in fact for
any quantum-mechanical system with a suftciently
general definition of the coordinate x). The product
(36) now involves operators, the order in which the
factors are to be taken is the order in which the terms
appear in time,
For a Dirac particle in a vector and scalar potential
(times the electron charge e) A(x, ,), Aa(x, t), the
quantity (xr+r I x').(1) is related to that of a free particle
to the first order in e as
(x;11j x).cir : (yr+r I x;).tor expl- i(eA ag., t ;)
_ (x;a1_x;). A(x;, t;))f. (37)
This can be verified directly by substitution into the
Dirac equation.r3It neglects the variation of A and ,4a
with time and space during the short interval e. This
produces errors only of order e?in the Dirac case for
the expected square velocity (x;a1-x;)2/e2 during the
interval e is finite (equaling the square of the velocity
of light) rather than being of order l/e as in the nonrelativistic case, fThis makes the relativistic case
somewhat simpler in that it is not necessaryto define
the velocity as carefully as in (6); (x;11-x)/e is
sufficiently exact, and no term analogousto (33) arises.]
Thus iDo{erdiffers from that for a free particle, iDrto),
b y a f a c t o r I I r e x p - i ( e , 4 r ( x ; ,l ) - ( x ; 1 1 - x ; ) . A ( x u , l ) )
which in the limit can be written as
(fl

expl- r I lA ^(x(t),4-x'0).A(x(r),
Dldr| (38)
l.tl

( x l t l 9 ) : l i m | " ' I x * ( x " ) o o ( x " , x r - r",' x o )

,aJ

(x;11 | x).:

INTERACTION

(3s)

where (x;a1lx). is the transformation matrix from a

representation in which x is diagonal at time t; to one
in which x is diagonalat time rr+r:rr+e (so that it is
identical to Ks(x;a1,t,a1;x;, tt) for the small time
interval e). Hence the amplitude for a given path can
also.bewritten
Oo: Il;(x;a1lx;).
(36)
for which form, of course, (34) is exact irrespective of
whether (x;1tlx)" can be expressedin the simple form

(3s).

exactly as in the non-relativistic case.

The case of a Dirac particle interacting with the
quantum-mechanical oscillators representing the field
may now be studied. Since the dependenceof iDr(d)on
A, -4a is through the same factor as in the non-relativistic case, when A, la are expressedin terms of the
oscillator coordinates g, the dependence of O on the
oscillator coordinatesq is unchanged.Hence the entire
analysis of the preceding sections which concern the
rcsults of the integration over oscillator coordinates
can be carried through unchanged and the results will
be expression (25) with formula (24) for R. Expression
(25) is now interpreted as
f

Qr,lexpiRlg"):
xfl(o",
-;;fiiJ*tiu"ly,.ote

l i m | 1 * ( x a ' ( r )x, v ' o ' " )

.aJ

. . . d|x,'@)
d3xt"- c@)
"(0)d3x,,,(n)
'exP(zR)ry'(xt'rtr,
x"(2)' ' ')

(39)

that Eq. (37)is exactfor arbitrarilylarge

e if the potential l! is constant. For if the potential in the Dirac

the
equrtion is the qradient of a scalar function,4u-dx/d&
potential may be removed by replacing the wave function by
(gauge
This
alters
the
kernel
by
fl-"
transformation).
t* corresponding
to this for theself-energv
expression /,:sap1-i1)'y''
"
(26) would give an integral over 6+((/-r)r-(x1-x1)r) rvhich is i f a c r b r e x p [ - i ( x ( 2 ) - x ( t ) l ]
owing to Lhechange in the initial
potential
gradlent
is
ln
the
evidently in6nite and leads to the quadraticallydivergent self- and final wave functions. A constant
energy.There is no such term for the Dirac electron,but there ol y=14ur" and can Le completely removed by this gauge trans'
is for Kkin-Gordon particles.We shall not discussthe infinities formation, so that the kernel differs from that of a free particle
(37).
in this paper as they have already been discusscdin II.
by the factor expf- i(A$pr-Arrp)lasi\

For a Dirac electron the (*n*tl*). is a 4X4 matrix

265
4-18

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

;here iDo,,(0),the amplitude for a particular path for

rarticle z is simply the expression(36) where (xt*rlx).
: : t h e k e r n e l K o , , ( x i + r ( " )l,i 1 1 ; x ; ( " ) , l t ) I o r a f r e e e l e c -,ronaccordingto the one electron Dirac theory, with
,he matrices which appear operating on the spinor
::dices correspondingto particle (z) and the order of
:ll operationsbeing determinedby the time indices.
For calculationalpurposeswe can, as before,expand
-R as a power series and evaluate the various terms in
:fe same manner as for the non-relativistic case. In
:rch an expansionthe quantity x'(l) is replaced,as we
:ave seenin (32), by the operator i(l1x-xI1), that is,
:r this case by a operating at the corresponding time.
fhere is no further complicatedterm analogousto (33)
:rising in this case,for the expectedvalue of (rr*t-rn)'
:s now of order e2rather than e.
For example, for self-energyone seesthat expression
28) will be (with other. terms coming from those with
s (t) replaced by c and with the usual B in back of
:ach Ko because of the definition of Ko in relativity
:reory)
" f .! r'' R I tl'v)so: - e2| {rx\x (') K 0(x,", t" ; x 1,t) Ba,
J

There ar:1,

TolB):(xu,l""piPl*r)

(40)

(41)

where
P: -L
^J

/)-x.t"'().8(xt,,(t),t))dt
| [ao1xr,11;,

by (38). We can write this as

P: -I

I Blr,(il(t))iFtil(t)dt
"J

where ra(!):, and i4:1, the other values of p corresponding to space variables. The corresponding amplitude for the same processin the same potential, but
i n c l u d i n ga i l t h e v i r t u a l p h o l o n sw e m a y c a l l ,
T"zln):|r",1"o(iR)

.6..((/-s)r- (x1-x,)r)Kr(x,, t; x", s)Ba,

. Ks(x,, s ; x y, t' ) p,tt(xy) d,3
x y,d,3
x fi,3x x yd.td.
s,
"d,3

the number of electronsis infinite, but that they all

have the same charge,e. Let the states ry',,,Xr,,, represent the vacuum plus perhapsa numberof real electrons
in positive energy states and perhaps also some empty
negative energy states. Let us call the amplitude for
t h e t r a n s i t i o ni n x n c x t e r n i r p
l otentialBr,bul excluding
drlual photons, TnlB), a functional ol BuQ). We have
seen(38)

exp(iP)lt!v).

(42)

Now let us consider the effect on T"zlBl of changing

the coupling e2ol the virtual photons. Differentiating
(42) with respect to e2which appearsonly rain R we find

dr,2,a:ar.u,z and a sum on the repeated

::ii:hli*tl

ll,*i:?I',:*;;';i::?!;dr"ztBt/d(e'?1:(.''l-;++
I.fd,,,,u'"'1,;*u'''

In this manner all of the rules referrins to virtual

o h o t o n s d i s c u s s e di n I I a r e d e d u c e d :b u t w i t h t h e
thal r(o is used instead of K,. and we have
di-fference
rhe Dirac one electron theory with negative energy
;tates (although we may have any number of such
electrons).
7. EXTENSION TO POSITRON THEORY
Since in (39) we have an arbitrary number of elecrrons, we can deal with the hole theory in the usual
manner by imagining that we have an infinite number
of electrons in negative energy states.
On the other hand, in paper I on the theory of
positrons, it was shown that the results of the hole
theory in a system with a given external potential ,4p
were equivalent to those of the Dirac one electron
rheory if one replaced the propagation kernel, Ke, by a
different one, K4, and multiplied the resultant amplitude by factor C, involving ,4r. We must now see how
this relation, derived in the caseof external potentials,
can also be carried over in electrodynamics to be
useful in simplifying expressionsinvolving the infinite
sea of electrons.
To do this we study in greater detail the relation
between a problem involving virtual photons and one
involving purely external potentials. In using (25) we
shall assume in accordance with the hole theory that

. 6*((x (t)- r (5)),)expl(R* rll*,)

"r,t
"L-r

(43)

We can also study the first-order efiect of a change

of B,:

6r "zlB)/ 6B,(r): - r(",,14

a,tpQ)
6a
@"h)(t)- " ",,)

e.r;tn+rtl*,,)(44)
where r". r is the field point at which the derivative with
respect to Bu is takenrs and the term (current density)
-L" I dti F(")(t)Ba(x"t"t
(t) - x". 1) is just 6P/ 68 FG).
The function 6a(x.t"t-*",t7 means 6(rr{"r-rr,t,
la In changing thc charge e2 u'e meao to vary only the degree
to which virtual photons arc important. We do not contemplate
changes in the influcnce of the external potentials. If one wishes,
as e is raised the strength of the potential is dccreased proportimes the charge e, is held
tionally so that -Bs, the potential
consran[.
16The functional derivative is defined such that if ?[B]
is a
number depending on the functions Bu(1), the 6rst order variation
in ? produced by a change from Bp Lo Bp+ABF is given by

68p(1))LBy(r)dt1
rlB + ^Bf- rlB):
J GrlBl/
r*r.
overall four-space
tie integralextending

266
THEORY

OF ELECTROMAGNETIC

X 6(rs(")- *3,r)6(rz("' - xz,t) 6(x{") - rr, r) that is, 6(2, 1)

with ,".2:r"(")(l). A secondvariation of I gives, by
differentiation of (44) with respect to B,(2),
6'T
68uQ)68,(2)
"zlB)/

/lrr
: -( xr,lLL I d/ | dsi!(n(t)i,(-)(s)
\

I"-J

. an6.a:t(t)- x",r)64(n:r(")
(s)-#p, t

xe*p;(n+P)
lP,,).
tf
Comparison of this with (43) shows that
ff

: i;
68 68
dr "zlBl/d(e'z)
J J G'zr"zlaf/ Fg) FQ))
X6+(sn2)d.rdrz

(45)

where srz2: (ru,r - r u,2)(r r, 1- x r, z).

We now proceed to use this equation to prove the
validity of the rules given in II for electrodynamics.
This we do by the following argument. The equation
can be looked upon as a differential equation for I,z[-B].
It determines ?,2[B] uniquely if falBf is known. We
have shown it is valid for the hole theory of positrons.
But in I we have given formulas for calculating tq[B]
whose correctnessrelative to the hole theory we have
there demonstrated. Hence we have shown that the
?,2[B] obtained by solving (45) with the initial condition ?r[B] as given by the rules in I will be equal to
that given for the same problem by the second quantization theory of the Dirac matter field coupled with
the quantized electromagnetic field. But it is evident
(the argument is given in the next paragraph) that the
rulesl6given in II constitute a solution in power series
in e2of the Eq. (45) fwhich for e2:0 reduce to the
?6[8] given in I]. Hence the rules in II must give, to
each order in e2, the matrix element for any process
that would be calculated by the usual theory of second
quantization of the matter and electromagnetic fields.
This is what we aimed to prove.
That the rules of II represent, in a power segies
expansion,a solution of (45) is clear. For the rules
there given may be stated as follows: Suppose that we
have a process to order k in e'z(i.e., having A virtual
photons) and order n in the external potential Bu.
'Ihen,
the matrir eletnentJor the processuith one more
il.rtual pholon and lwo lesspolenlials i.slhat oblained.
Jront
16That is, of course, those rules of II which apDly to the unmodified electrodynamics
of Dirac electrons. (The limitation
excluding real photons in the initial and 6nal stales is removed
in Sec.8.) The same arguments clearly apply to nucleons interacting via neutral vector mesons, vector coupling. Other couplings
require a minor extension of the argument. The modification
to the (xi+r I xi)., as in (37), produced by some couolings cannot
very easily be written without using operators in the exponents.
These operators can be treated as numbers ii their order of operation is maintained to be always their order in time, This idea
will be discussed and applied more generally in a succeeding paper.

INTERACTION

449

the preaious molri.st.by choosingJron lhe n lotentials a

poir, soy B uQ) acting at 1 and.B,(2) acti.ngat 2, replacing
them by i.e26r"6,,(spz),
ad.d.ingthe resull,sfor eachway of
choosing the pair, and. diri.ding by kl1, the presenl
number of photons.The matrix with no virtual photons
(E:0) being given to any n by the rules of I, this
permits terms to all orders in e2 to be derived by
recursion. It is evident that the rule in italics is that of
II, and equally evident that it is a word expressionof
Eq. (45). [The factor ] in (45) arisessince in integrating
over all dr1 and dr2 we count each pair twice. The
division by &fl is required by the rules of II for,
there, each diagram is to be taken only once, while in
the rule given above we say what to do to add one
extra virtual photon to I others, But which one of the
ft*1 is to be identified at the last photon added is
irrelevant. It agreeswith (45) of coursefor it is canceled
on difierentiating with respect to e2 the factot (ez1*+t
for the (fti1) photons.l
8. GENERAIIZED FORMULATION OF QUANTUM
ELECTRODYNAMICS
The relation implied by (4.5) between the formal
solution for the amplitude for a processin an arbitrary
unquantized external potential to that in a quantized
field appears to be of much q'ider generality. We shall
discuss the relation from a more general point of view
here (still limiting ourselves to the case of no photons
in initial or frnal state).
In earlier sections we pointed out that as a consequence of the Lagrangian form of quantum mechanics
the aspects of the particles' motions and the behavior
of the field could be analyzed separately. What we did
was to integrate over the field oscillator coordinates
first. We could, in principle, have integrated over the
particle variables first. That is, we first solve the
problem with the action of the particles and their
interaction with the fleld and then multiply by the
exponential of the action of the 6eld and integrate over
all the field oscillator coordinates. (For simplicity of
discussion let us put aside from detailed special consideration the questions involving the separation of the
longitudinal and transverse parts of the field.e) Now
the integral over the particle coordinates for a given
processis precisely the integral required for the analysis
of the motion of the particles in an unquantized potential. With this observation we may suggest a
generalization to all types of systems.
Let us supposethe formal solution for the amplitude
for some given process with matter in an external
potential -Bu(l) is some numerical quantity T6. We
mean matter in a more general sense now, for the
motion of the matter may be described by the Dirac
equation, or by the Klein-Gordon equation, or may
involve chargedor neutral particles other than electrons
and positrons in any manner whatsoever.The quantity
Io dependsof courseon the potential function Br(1);
that is, it is a functional TolB) ol this potential. We

267
150

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

assumewe have some expressionfor it in terms of B,

'exact,
or to some desired degree of approximation in
rhe strength of the potential).
Then the answer l"z[B] to the corresponding problem in quantum electrodynamicsis In[.4r(1)*Ar(1)]
Xexp(lS) summed over all possible distributions of
wherein 56 is the action for the field
ield lu(l),
So: - (Srd;-'f, F I (@A,/ dt), - (v A t)2)dsxdt the sum
x p carrying the usual minus sign for space comporents.
Il FlAl is any functional of A uQ) we shall represent
nf F [ l ] e x p ( i . 5 ; 6 ) o v e r
: y o l F [ l ] l o t h i s s u p e r p o s i t i oo
ristributions of A, for the case in which there are no
:hotons in initial or final state. That is, we have
T,zlBl:xlTolA].Bflo.

(46)

The evaluation of 6lFft]1, directly from the dedni:ion of the operation ol lo is not necessary. We can
dve the result in another way. We first note that the
lperation is linear,

tions independent of Au. Then by (47)

,lpldll,:J,+ f ,e)nlA,(\lndr1
I
+

where we set 611 | ,: 1 (frorn (48) with /!:0). We can

work out expressionsfor the successivepowers of ,4u
by differentiating both sides of (48) successively with
r e s p e c tt o j u a n d s e t t i n g j u : 0 i n e a c hd e r i v a t i v e .F o r
example, the first variation (derivative) of (48) with
respecttolr(3) gives

I
r
r
\l
l - i A N @e x p\ ( - ir t j " 0 ) A " ( r ) d/ l,o, l l

ol

: - ir'

olPtlA)+F,lAll0: 0lFft ll 0+,1p,lAfl o (+7)

.o that if F is representedas a sum of terms each term
:an be analyzed separately. We have studied essentlally
:re case in which F[,4] is an exponential function. In
:act, what we have done in Section 4 may be repeated
rith slight modification to show that

ff

(s0)
J J f,,0,2)olAFQ)A"(2)lsdrd'r2r-"'

6a(qa2)j,(l)dr a

(s1)
x""v(- +;", i.rtli,rrlu.au,)d,d,,).
[ [
Settingj,:Q

giv".

oI -4,(3)I o: 0.
Differentiating (51) again with respectto j,(4) and
settingT,:0 shows

. "*v(-;I irrt)Are)d,,)|,

ie25p"6+(su2)
ol A J3)A
"(4)l o:

(s2)

="-n(-+;e
(48)3iod;ilJ,Tl"l;ti:m5f;;"*:::;i:T
;,ffi1j:
J J.iue)j,(2)6agn)d,Ld,,)
/

^-r^^

lhere jr(1) is an arbitrary function of position and

:;me for each value of p.
Although this gi'res the evaluation of 6l lo for only
: particular functional of A, the appearance of the
:rbitrary functionju(1) makes it sufficiently general to
:ermit the evaluation for any other functional. For it
: to be expectedthat any functional can be represented
:s a superposition of exponentials with difierent func::ons j,(1) (by analogy with the principle of Fourier
-:tegrals for ordinary functions). Then, by (47), the
:esult of the operation is the corresponding superposi:ion of expressionsequal to the right-hand side of (48)
.;ith the variousT's substituted forjr.
In many applications FlAl can be given as a power
=eriesin ,4u:
- -_ a l : I o f

/f\

16[8]:exp( -i t jp(r)Bp(l)drrl

(s3)

\J/

we have from (46), (48) that

r.ztrl: expf- +ie

z]
i,0)i -(2)6ag,z\d,td,
[ [

*ol-,I i "otu"(t)
d,,f.(s4)

., r.,",,,.,,
J

in (46) is expanded in a power seriesand the successive

terms are computed in this way, we obtain the results
given in II.
It is evident that'(46), (47), (48) imply that ?"2[B]
satisfies the differential equation (45) and conversely
(45) with the definition (46) implies (47) and (48). For
if fo[B] is an exponential

Jt\r)AF\L)arr

Direct substitution of this into Eq. (45) shows it to be a

+ | | f,"(1,2)A/r)A"(2)drtd,,*...
JJ

(4e) solution satisfying the boundary condition (53). Sincethe

','hereJ s, J *(l), J,,Q, 2)' .. are known numerical func-

differential equation (45) is linear, if Z0[B] is a superposition of exponentials, the corresponding superposition of solutions (54) is also a solution.

268
THEORY

OF ELECTROMAGNETIC

Many of the formal representations of the matter

svstem (such as that of second quantization of Dirac
eiectrons) represent the interaction with a fixed potential in a iormal exponential form such as the lefthand side of (a8), except that iu(1) is an operator
instead of a numerical function' Equation (48) may
still be used iJ care is exercisedin defining the order of
the operators on the right-hand side. The succeeding
papei will discussthis in more detail.
bquation (45) or its solution (46), (47)' (48) constitutes a very general and convenient formulation of the
laws of quantum electrodynamics for virtual processes'
Its relativistic invariance is evident if it is assumedthat
the unquantized theory giving Io[B] is invariant..It
has been proved to be equivalent to the usual formulation {or Dirac electronsand positrons (for Klein-Gordon
particles see Appendix A)' It is suggestedthat it is of
wide generality. It is expressed in a form which has
meani;g even if it is impossible to express the matter
svstem in Hamiltonian form; in fact, it only requires
t'he existenceof an amplitude for fixed potentials which
obeys the principle of superposition of amplitudes. If
Io[B] is known in power series in B, calcuLationsof
f .rlEl i" a power seriesof d can be made directly
ur1& In. italicized rule of Sec' 7. The limitation to
virtrial cuanta is removedin the next section.
On thi other hand, the formulation is unsatisfactory
becausefor situations of importance it gives divergent
results, even if f6[B] is finite. The modification proin (45), (48) by/+(su'z)
posedin II of replacing6+(sr:'?)
is not satisfactoryowing to the loss of the theoremsof
conservation of energy or probability discussedin II at
the end of Sec. 6. There is the additional difficulty in
Dositron theory that even 16[8] is infrnite to begin
*ith lrru.uo- polarization). Computational ways of
avoiding these troubles are given in II and in the referencesof footnote 2.

{+J I

INTERACTION

in state zz, n and k is given in (12). The G-" can be

evaluated most easily by calculating the generating
function

(ss)

s(X,Y):L-I,"G^"X^Y"(m!nt)-t

for arbitrary X, Y. fi expression (11) is substituted in

the left-hand side of (55), the expressioncan be simplified by use of the generating function relation for the
eigenfunctions8of the harmonic oscillator
L e"QiY"(nl)-'

: (o/ r)t exP(- !iot')

(1 expl- iot')-

xexpl[oqo'-

(2a)tqo)'f

Using a similar expansion for the 9-* one is left with

the Jxponential of a quadratic function of qs and g;'
The iniegration on {o and g; is then easily performed
to give
(56)
g(X,Y):GooexP(XY{iB*XliBY)
from which expansion in powers of X and I
comparison to (11) gives the final result
Q-,:Qoo(ar.nt)-lt-

and

n!
tnl
-' (n-r)''rl (n-r)lrr'

xrtUB*)*-.(iil"-' (s7)
where Goois given in (14) and
?'

rQ)exv?i,t)dt'

B:Q,1-t I
"

"
f'

0*:(2a)-,r tIt

(58)

u'

t(t) exp(+irt1a4

and the sum on r is to go from 0 to m ot to a whichever

is the smaller. (The sum can be expressedas a Laguerre
but there is no advantage in this')
nolvnomial
'
9. CASE OF REAL PIIOTONS
Formula (57) is readily understandable' Consider
first a simple caseof absorption of one photon' Initially
The casein which there are real photons in the initial
we have one photon and finally none. The amplitude
the
beginning
out
from
be
worked
can
state
final
or the
this is the transition element of Got:iB6oo ot
for
a
case
of
the
first
consider
We
in the same manner.lT
This is the same as would result if we
Qy,li'BGool,l,r).
From
this
svstem interacting with a single oscillator.
element for a problem in
transition
to.
the
result the generalizationwill be evident. This time we "it "a
but there was present a
virtual
are
photons
all
which
shall calcuiate the transition element between an initial
oerturbins potential '(2u)-t7Q) exp(-iol) and we
state in which the.particle is in state ly'/ and the
reouired ihe first-order efiect of this potential' Hence
oscillator is in its zth eigenstate(i.e., there are z photons
photon absorption is like the first order action of a
oscillator
particle
in
with
state
final
x/"
in the field) to a
ootential varving in time as 7(I) exp(-i@') that is with
the
when
in zlth level. As we have already discussed,
positive frequenry (i'e., the sign of the coefficientof,l
coordinates of the oscillator are eliminated the result a
the exponential corresponds to posltlve energyi'
in
is the transition element (xr,, I G-" | 9r) where
The amplitude for emission of one photon ilvolv.es
f
which is the same result except-that the
Grr:il#oo,
G^": I e_*k)k(q;, t,,; qo,t),p"(qo)dqdci (11) ooi.niiut has negative frequency. Thus we begin by
J
interprering iB* is the amplitude lor emissionof one
i0 is the amplitude for absorptionof one'
where g-, g^arc tl:rewave functionss for the oscillator ohoton
'
ior the geneial case oI z photons initially and
Next
r? For an alternative method starting directly from the formula
m finally *. -uy understand (57) as follows' We 6rst
(24) for virtual photons, see Appendix B.

269
452

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

neglect Bose statistics and imagine the photons as

individual distinct particles. If we start with z and end
with az this processmay occur in several difierent ways.
The particle may absorb in total z-r of the photons
and the final zr photons will represent r of the photons
which were present originally plls m-r n"* photon,
emitted by the particle. In this casethe z-r which are
to_beabsorbed may be chosenfrom among the original
n in n!/(n-r)lr
! different ways, and each contributes
a far:tor iB, the amplitude for absorption of a photon.
Which of the m-r photons from among thi m are
emitted can be chosen in ml/(m-r)lr!
difierent wavs
and each photon contributes a factor i0* in amplitude.
The initial r photons which do not interact *ith th"
particle can be re-arranged among the final / in r ! ways.
We must sum over the altematives correspondingto
different values of r. Thus the form of G-" can be
undersiood. The remaining tactor (m!)-\(n!)-l may be
interpreted as saying that in computing probabiiities
(which therefore involves the square of G^^) the
photons may be consideredas independent but that if
m arc actually equal the statistical weight of each of
the states which can be made by rearranging the ar
equal photons is only l/m!. This is the content of Bose
statistics; that m eqtal particles in a given state
represents just one state, i.e., has statistical weieht
unity, rather than the ar! statistical weieht wh'ich
would result if it is imagined that the parlicles and
slates can be identified and rearrangedin ar! difierent
ways. This holds for both the initial and final states of
course. From this rule about the statistical weishts of
states the derivation of the blackbody distribution
law follows.
The actual electromagnetic field is represented as a
host oI oscillatorseachof which behavesindependently
and producesits own factor such as G-,. Tnitial or final
states may also be linear combinations of states in
which one or another oscillator is excited. The results
for this case are of course the corresponding linear
combination of transition elements.
For photons of a given direction of polarization and
for sin or cos waves the explicit expressionfor B can be
obtained directly from (58) by substituting the formulas
(16) for the .y's for the corresponding oscillator. It is
more convenient to use the linear cornbination correspondingto running waves.Thus we 6nd the amplitude
for abso-rptionoI a photon of momentum K, frequency
ft: (K.K)l polarized in direction e is given by including
a factor i times
px,e: (4r)t(2k)-tle"
n

f'

exp(-iftl)

J,,

Xexp(lK.x"(t))e . x.

(Ss)
"(t)dt
in the transition element (25). The density of states in
momentum space is now (2T)-3d3K. The amplitude
for emission is just I times the complex conjugate of

this expression, or what amounts to the same thing,

t"hesarde expressionwith the sign of the four vector i"
reversed.Since the factor (59) is exactly the first-order
efiect of a vector potential
APE: (2n/h)tg exp(-i(ir-

K.x))

of the corresponding classicai wave, we have derived

the rules for handling real photons discussedin II.
_ Y9!.n expressthis directly in terms of the quantity
T""lBl, the amplitude for a given transition withoui
emission of a photon. What we have said is that the
amplitude for absorption of just one photon whose classical wave form is ,4rPn(1) (time variation exp(-iht)
corresponding to positive energy i) is proportional to
the first order (in e) change produced in I",[.8] on
changing B to B+ zAPE. That is, more exactly,
f

(ar"zln)/aB,())AnPH(r)dr1

(60)

is_the amplitude for absorption by the particle system

of one photon, A"". (A superposition argument ihows
the expression to be valid not only for plane waves,
but for spherical waves, etc., as given by the form of
.4Pd.) The amplitude for emissionis the sameexpression
but with the sign of the frequency reversedin ApH,
The amplitude that the system absorbs two photons
with waves Ar'H, and A,ea, i" obtained from the next
derivative,

J J

( a ,r a t n ) / 6B , ( t ) 6B , ( 2 \ \A p pHt ( 1 )A , pH ,( 2 )d r L dr z ,

the same expressionholding for the absorption of one

and emission of the other, or emissionof both depending
on the sign of the time dependenceof APHL and APE2,
Larger photon numbers correspond to higher derivatives, absorption of 11 emission of l, requiring the
(/r*lz) derivaties. When two or more of the photons
are exactfy the same (e.g., ArHr:trPt,) lde same
expressionholds for the amplitude that lr are absorbed
by the system while lr are emitted. However, the
statement that initially z of a kind are present and za
of this kind are present finally, does not imply I1:n
and lr:1n. It is possible that only n-r:h
werc
absorbedby the system aid,m-r:lzemitted,
and that
r remained from initial to final state without interaction.
This term is weighed by the combinatorial coefiicient
, , ,._,/*\(n\
.
u n a s u m m e do v e r t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s
lm:n:)-'\,
)\"/rt
for r as explained in connection with (57). Thus once
the amplitude for virtual processesis known, that for
real photon processescan be obtained by differentiation.
It is possible, of course, to deal with situations in
which the electromagneticfield is not in a definite state
after the interaction. For example, we might ask for
the total probability of a given process, such as a
scattering, without regard for the number of photons
emitted. This is done of course by squaring the ampli-

270
THEORY

tude for the emission of aa photons of a given kind and

summing on all m. Actually the sums and integrations
over thi oscillator momenta can usually easily be
pedormed analytically. For example, the amplitude,
starting from vacuurn and ending with zr photons of a
given kind, is bY (56) just

453

INTERACTION

OF ELECTROMAGNETIC

then have a new type of wave function 9(r, z) a function oI five

variables, r standing for the fourur. It gives the amplitude -for
arrival ai point r, with a certain value of the parameter a We
shall supposetbat this wave function satisies the equation
(24)
i0,p/du--\(id/0rr-Ap)2c

which is seen to be analogousto the time-dePendentSchrodinger

equation, a replacing the time and the lour coordinats of spaceof space'
(61) time r, replacing the usual three coordinates
Q*o-- @!)-tGxnQB*)^.
Sinie t-hepotmtials lp(r) are functions only of coordinatesru
we
and are indipendent of r, the equation is separable in r.r
The square of the amplitude summed on ar requires can uite a specialsolution in the form e:exp(*dn2u){(r) .an{
where
(the
in
the
0
(1A)
expressions
such
7(t)
two
and
the
the oroduct of
o(r). a function of the coordinatesru only, satisfies
of one and in the other wilt have to be kept separately) eigenvalue |z'conjugate to a is related to the mass n of the
oa'rticle. Equation (2A) is therefore equivalent to the Klein'Gordon
simmed on rr:
Eq. (1A) provided we ask in the end only for the solution
:L^
(rnl)-r?-$'*).-,
Goo*Goo'
of (1A) corresponding to the eigenvalue |zt for the quantity
E- G^o*G^o'
:GofGoo' exp(BP'*). conjugate to a.
frJ-uy to* p.o."ed to representEq. (2A) in Lagrangian form
over all oscillators in eenerai and without regard to this eigenvaluecondition' Only
sum
the
In the resulting expression
in'the final solutionsneed we apply the eigenvaluecondition'
is easily done.-Such expressionscan be of use in the
That is, if we have some special solution q(r,u) of (2A) we can
analvsi; in a direct manner of problems of line width, *lect that part correspondingto the eigenvaluelz'1 by calculating

of the Bloch-Nordsieckinfra-red problem, and of staexp(- tdmzu)c(t, u) du

* @) = Itistical mechanical problems' but no such applications
will be made here.
ud t"herebyoblain a solution * of Eq. (IA)' ..
The author appreciates his opportunities to discuss
Since (24) is so closely analogousto the Schriidinger equation'
in C, simply
described
form
Professer
it is easily witten in thi Lagrangian
these matters wilh ProfessorH. A. Bethe and
at one
Mr. M. Baranger with the by working by analogy. For example if 9(*, a) is.known
of
help
the
and
Ashkin,
J.
value of a its value at a slightly larger vatue e+c rs Srven Dy
manuscrrpf,,
:

G' - 1'' )' -!('

-x'' \ (A,(r) -l A'(x'))]

expi,ls (x, a t e) f
APPENDD( A. THE I(IEIN-GORDON EQUATION
(3A)
' c(x', u)dart(2ti'e)-l(- 2tt)J
In this Appendixwe describca formulationof tlte equations
:
d
t
dt i
dx,'
dxz'
rules
(r*
/
the
(r"
x
X'
obtain
firsl
used
to
rr')
\,.
was
(rrr"')' means
r'
where
foia particleof spinzerowhich
"'
ue ''
siven'inII for suchparticles.The completephysicalsignificance and the sign of the normalizing factor- is changed tor ln lrs
hasnot beenanalyzedthoroughlyso that it may component since the component bas the reversed slgn
3i theequations
our
be orefeiableto deriveIhe rulesdirectlyfrom the secondquantr- ou"irutia coe{hcientin the exponential, in accordancewith
otl* for-ulatioo of PautiandWeiskopf'This canbe donein a Jummation convention atbt= atbt- stbr- azbr-c#r' nquation
-nnn". nnttogou*to tle derivationof the rulesfor the Dirac iiA), * *n b" u"tified reaiily as describedin C, Sec' 6, is equivaformulatiod i.nt'io At.t ota.t in , to Eq. (2A). Hence, by repeateduse of this
eiu"n-inI or fromtheSchwinger-Tomonaga
rB
"ooniion
equation the wave function at 40:l can be representedln terms
in'a mannerdescribed,for example,by Rohrlich The formulation
qiven here is tberelore not necessaryior a descrlpuon or sprn of that at z:0 bY:
iero oarticlesbut is givenonly for its own interestasan alternatrve
r ^-- t.3 f/"":--""r)'
e\x".",u\):Jexp-Zlrl\-.,/
to the formulation of secondquantization'
We start with the Klein-Gordon equation
(1.A')
(i'd/aq-Ap)2'!'-m2,
+ e-r(r h i- r h i -) (Ar(a) +'ar(''-') )]
for the wave function ,y'of a particle of massz in a given external
ootential,4u.We shall (ry to renresenlthis in a manneranalogous
io the fotniulation of quanlum mechanicsin C' That is, we try
point.to
io ,"nr.r"nt the amplitudefor a particle to get from-on
^.otb". as a sum over all trajectories of an amplitude exp(tJ)
*i"i" S it the classicalaction lor a given lrajectory' To maintain
the relativisticinvariancein evidencethe idea suggestsrtselt.ot
d.t..ibing a trajectory in space-timeby giving the-four variables
,,ir) ut fin.tiont of somefrfth parameterr (rather than expressing
which
tl)"r, ,r i" lerms of J{). As we expect to rePresentpaths
iltemselvesin time (to representpair production'
-lu-t"t"o"
u. i" I) this is certainly a more convenientrepresentation'
"i..
ru(u) may be consideredas functions of a
iot-'"ii lout'tu".ti""s
.ter u (somewhat analogousto proper time) which increase
iira
i. *" go utong th" trajectory, whether the trajectory is prueeding
t*i"ia
ta"^ia">U or bactward (drq/du<0) in time'Ie We shall
rs F. Rohrlich (to be Published).

.,p(r,.", o)"i @+r/ 41Peil. gL)

That is, roughly, tlle amplitude for getting from -one point.to
another with a given value of zo is the sum over all tr&Jectorles
of exp(iS) where
(sA)
s=-I"'l+(drF/du)'*(dru/du)Au@)Uu,
when sufrcient care is taken to define the quantities, as in C'
i-Ui.-"o-pf"t"" the formulation for particles-in a fixed potential
but a few words of description may be in order'
In the first place in the slrccial case of a free particle we can
uo
define a kernai t(o)(r, uo;' t',0) for arrival from **', 0 to e.pal
ovei all trajectories between these points of
;.- lh; ;texp-i .ft"1;(dxu/du)'da' Then lor this casewe have
(64)
s1r, uol: f k<ot(r,uo; t' ,0) e@',o)d''1'

i
,^':*:flF$i'i,tml:"J;:!"it"'*:$i:,:Jl:i:'1,":18!'.'iTf
L';
:'iT:
Hii:tif'f
f::il'ii;:'l^z:rt::
;?:l'ilt,i,:yB("|

and it is easily verified that &ois given by

ptot(s,uni r' ,0) - (4duo'r)-r exp- i(rp- xp')'/2uo

(1e37).

(7A)

for ao)0 and by 0, by definition, lor un<O' The corresponding

271
154

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

kernel of importance when we select the eigenvalue|2, iso

2iI *(x, {

:
-

nn (*, up; *', 0) exp(- \im2uo)duo

f
f-,

.J o

,,

" u o,
" i)-1
. . _ , exp - t i ( n2 u o* u o- | (r
d u s(4 n2
r-

x r' 12) (8 A)

since le is zero for negative a6)

,the last extends only from r0:0
rhich is identical to the 1+ defined in II.,t This may be seen
:adily
by studying the Fourier transform, for the transform of
ie integrand on the right-hand side is
-f

@ rP u o'i)

-'

exp Qp. x) exp - li (m2u sl r p2f u a)dar.

:exp-+iuo(m2-

pr2)

gives for the transform of f1 just

:o that the t0 integration
'-'(lr,-m")
with the pole defined exactly as in II. Thus we are
representing the positrons as trajectories with the
:utonatically
:ne sense reversed.
is the amplitude for a
If o(0)[r(r)]-exp-if{"t@rJdu)'d'u
.-ven trajectory r,(u) lor a free particle, then the amplitude in
: potential is
c,(r) ['(e)

- i
] : orc) [r (u)) e\p

I"'

@.x! / du) A rQ) du.

(9 A)

i: desired this may be studied by perturbation

methods by
:soanding the exponential in powers of .4u.
the integral in (9A) must be written as a
For interpretation,
!j.emann sum, and if a perturbation expansion is made, care must
quadratic in the velocity, for the effect
with
the
terms
taken
::
is not of order e'but is -l6u,c. The
:l (16;4-rp,)(r,,t+r-cr;)
.;e\ocity" drp/du becomes the momentw
operator pr: +iA f Ob!
.-erating halI beforeand half after,4u. just as in the non-relatiyric Schrddinger equation discussed in Sec.5. Furthermore, in
::actly ttre same manner as in that case, but here in four dimen: tts) a term quadratic in lu arises in the second-order perturba:rn terms from t}re coincidence of two velocitics for the same
. :lue of a,
-\s an example, the kernal p{e)@, uo; x',0) for proceeding from
:- .0 Lo xr, uo in a potntial l* differs from A(0) to first order in
i. by a term
- i

f"'duk<ot

1r, uo; y, u)l(puA r(y) ! A r()

p)ktot (y, u; r', 0)ho

The kernel of importance

:z f, here meanitg
+i,A/A!*
on
r::cting the eigenvalue |z' is obtained by multiplying this by
and integrating us from O to o. The kernel
:-(.-|im2u)
" : ..t, us; y, u) depends only on u' : uo- u aod in the integrals on
. Ad us; -f.-d.u6fdrd.u exp(- !im\h) . .., can be written, on interthe order of integration and changing variables to u
:::nging
. . '. Now the integral on
: ) u' , .fo'd.u,l-f,du' exp(- iim2(uIu'))
" converts k\o)(x, u6; y, u) to 2iI *(1, ) by (8A), while that on I
-_t
(!,
u i r', O) to 2i.I 1(y, r' ), so the result becomes
er ts kQ)
:.

2ir +(x,iepA p+A rpr)I a(y, x')d.ar,

.f
The
sameprincipleworksto any orderso that the
erpected.
:

-- rs for a single Klein-Gordon particle in external potentials

: .:n in II, Section 9, are deduced.
The transition to quantum electrodynamics. is simpte for in
:.{r we aheady have a transition amplitude represented as a
,- (over trajectories, and cventually a6) of terms, in each of
, r:;h the potential appears in exponcntial form. We may make
-:: of the general relation (54). Hence, for example, one finds
:: The factor 2i jn front of 11 is simnly to make the definition
: :- here agree with tbat in I and IL In II it operates with
p as a perturbation. But the pcrturbation coming fron
: \;A
i" in a natural way by expansion, of the cxltonential is

- = ;. p . A * A . n ) .

I Expression (8A) is closely rclated to Schwingcr's parametric

':lral rel)resentation of thcsc functions. For example, (8A)
:: aes formula (45) of F. Dyson, Phys. Rev. 75, 486 (1949) for
-, = t$-2i\=2iJ
+ iI (2d)-t is substituted for 4o-

for the case of no photons in the initial and final states, in the
prcsence of an external potential Br, the amplitudc that a particle
proceeds from (t',0)
to (tr,us) is dre sum over all trajectories
of the quantity

"*

- nl;[,^ (#)' a,+ dfia,6671

au
Jo"'
'+!
dlf
a-{1ru1D*,(u'
*; [,' "fi
))'1
)dildu']. ooA\

This result must be multiplied by exp(-lim2u)

and integrated
on 4o from zero to infinity to express the action of a Klein,Gordon
parLicle acting on itself through virtual photons. The integrals
are interpreted as Riemann sums, and if perturbation expansions
are made, the necessary care is taken with the terms quadratic
in velocity. When there are several particlcs (other than the
virtual pairs already included) onc use a separate a for each,
and writes the amplitude for each set of trajectories as the cxponental of -i times

i?L""'"'(L#)'o*+>!^'"'d"rl"'nu@,<*t(u))du
a
- .-.'t n t - . 6 ' d x y t ^ ( u \ d r y t . \ ( i l t )
latl
l
z ^nvr
du
du'
(u) - srt^: (z/)),)dudu',
X 6l(rr("t
where rr(")(z) are the coordinates
particle.z
The
solution should

(11 A)

of the trajectory of the zth

depend on the a6{") a5

exp(- |irn22 , ao{")) Actually, knorvledge of the motion of a single chargc implies a
great deal about the behavior of several charges. lor a pair
which eventually may turn out to be a virtual pair may appear
in the short run as two "other particles." As a virtual pair, that
is, as the leve6e scction of a very long and complicated single
track we know its behavior by (10A). We can assume that such a
section can be looked at equally well, for a limitcd duration at
least, as being due to other unconnected particles. This thcn
implies a dehnite law of interaction of particles if the self-action
(10A) of a single particle is known. (This is similar to the relation
of real and virtual photon processesdiscusseclin detail in Appendix
B.) It is possible that a detailed analysis of this could show that
(10A) implicd that (11A) was correct for many particles. Thcre
is even reason to believe that the lalv of Bose-Einstein statistics
and the expression for contributions from closerl loops could be
deduced by iollorving this argumcnt. This has not yet been
analyzed completely, however, so we must leave this formulation
in an incomplete form. The expression for closed loops should
come out to be C,:exp*Z
where Z, the contribution from a
2 T h e f o r m ( 1 0 A ) s u g g c s t sa n o l h e r i n r c r e s t i n q p o s s i L i l i t y f o r
avoirling the divcrgences oI qucntum clcctro,lynrmies in 'his
case. The divergences arise from the 6+ function wlrco u:u',
We might rcslrict the intcgration in the doul,le inlegral such that
qhere 6 is some finite quantily, very small comprrcd
lu-u'l>6
with m 2. More generally, rve could keep the rcgion u:u'
lrom
contributing by including in the integrand a factor F(u-u')
(e.g.,
where I(r)+1
for r large compared to some 6, and I(0):0
(Another way might
F(r) acts qualitatively like 1-exp(-e?6-,).
be to replace a by a discontinuous variable, that is, we do not
use the limit in (4,4) as e+0 but set c:6.) The idea is that two
interactions would contribute verv little in amnlitude if thev
followed onc anolhcr too rapidly in r. It is eesily veri6ed rhit
this makes the otherwise divergent integrals finite. But whethcr
the resulting formulas make good physicai sense is hard to scc.
The action of a potential rvould now rlepend on the value of a so
that Eq. (2A), or its equivalcnt, woulcl nol be separab'e in a so
that ]rz'woulcl no ionger lrc a strict eigcnvalue for all disturbanccs.
High energy potentials coulcl excite states corresponding to other
eigenvalues, possibly thercby corresponding to othcr masses. This
note is mcant only as a sDcculation, lor not enough work has
been done in this dircclion to makc sure that a reasonable physical
theory can be developed along these lincs. (What little rvork has
been c.lonervas not promising.) Analogous modifications can also
be made for Dirac electrons,

272
THEORY

OF ELECTROMAGNETIC

singleloop,is
L: 2
J

I (ul exp(- Ainl us)dun/ u s

"where l(ao) is the sum over all trajectories which close on themselves(r,(zo):*r(0)) of exp(zJ) with S given in (5A), and a
final integntion dt.67 ot rp(O) is made. This is cquivalent to
puttrng
(r, uo; r, 0) - k@(x, uo; r, o))dr'
t{uo):
f &<At
The term l(0) is subtracted only to simplify convergenceproblems
(as adding a constant independentof Ap Lo L has no elTect).
APPENDIX

B. THE RELATION OF REAL AND

VIRTUAL PROCESSES

If one has a generalformula for all virtual processeshe should

be able to find the formulas ancl states involveC in real processes.
That is to say, we should be ablc to deducethe formulas of Section
9 directly from the formulation (24), (25) (or its generalized
equivalent such as (46), (48)) without having to go all the way
back to the morc usual formulation. We discussthis problem here.
That this possibility exists can be seen from the consideration
that what looks like a real proccss from one point of view may
as a virtual processoccurring over a more extended time.
appear
'
For examplc, if rve rvish to study a given real process,such as
the scattering oI light, we can, if we wish, include in principle the
source, scatterer, and eventual absorber of the sciittered light in
our analysis.We may imagine that no photon is present initially,
and that the sourcethen emits light (the energy corning say from
kinetic energy in the source). The light is then scattered and
eventually absorbed (becoming kinetic energy in the absorber).
I.rom .this point of view the processis virtual I that is, we start
with no photons and end with none. Thus we can analyze the
processby meansof our formula for virtuai processes,and obtain
ihe formulas for real processesby attempting to break the analysis
into parts correspondingto emission,scattering, and absorption.23
To put the problem in a more general way, considerthe ampli'
tude for some transition from a state empty of photons far in the
(r:1"). Suppose
past
-the (time l') to a similar one far in the future
time interval to be split into three regions o, D, c in some
convenientmanncr,so that region6 is an intervallr>r>rl around
tlre present time that we wish to study. Region a, (hlt)t'),
D, a\d c, (t">r>tr), follows D. We want to seehow it
Drecedes
iornes about that the phenomenaduring b can be analyzed by a
of
transitions
study
8;i(D) between some initial state i at time rl
(which no longer need be photon-free), to some other final state i
at time ,r. The states i atd j are membersof a large classwhich
we will have to find out how to specify. (The single index i is
used to represent a large number of quantum numbers, so that
different values of i will correspondto having various numbers of
various kinds of photons in the field, etc.) Our problem is to
represent the over-all transition amplitude, g(o, D,c), as a sum
over various values of l, j oi a product of three amplitudes,
(18)
g(o,b,c):Z;21 goi(c)gir(D)go(a)
;
6rst the amplitude that during the interval o the vacuum state
makes transition to some state i, then the amplitude that during
t the transition to i is made, and finally in c the amplitude that
the transition from i to some photon-frec state 0 is completed.
23The formulas for real processes deduced in this way are
strictly limited to the case in which the light comes from sources
which'are oriqinally rlark, and thal evenluilly cll light emitted is
ahsorbcd rgain. We can only exlend it to the casc for which these
restriction; do not hold by hypothesis, namely, that the details
o[ the scattering Drocess are independcnt of lhcse charrcteristics
of the liqht sourec rn,l of the eventual disposition ol the scrltcred
lisht. Thc argumenl o[ the text givcs a mcthod for discovering
foirmulas for ieal orocesses when no more thrn thc formula lor
virtual Drocesses is at hand. But with this method bclief in the
general validity o[ the resulting formulas must rest on the physical
ieasonablcness ol the abovc-menLioned hypothesis.

INTERACTION

455

The mathematical problem of splitting g(4,6, c) is nade definite

by the further condition that gi;(6) for given l, j must not involve
the coordioatesof the particles for times correspondingto regions
a or c, gio(a)must involve those only in region a, and 3o;(c)only
in c.
To becomeacquaintedwith what is involved, supposefirst that
we do not have a problem involving virtual photons, but just the
transition of a one-dimensionalSchrddinger particle going in a
long time interval from, say, the origin t to the origin o, and ask
what states i we shall need for intermediary tine intervals. We
must solve the problem (1B) whereg(a,b,c) is the sum over all
trajectories going lrom o at r' to o at l" of explS w6"ts $: if UL
correThe integral may be split into three parts.S:S.*.ll*S"
sponding to the three ranges of time Then exp(iS):exp(iSJ
.ixp(rsi) exp(tsJ and the separation (18) is accomplishedby
taking for gio(o) the sum over all trajectorieslying in a from o to
someind point 11,of exp(iSJ, for g;;(b) the sum over trajectories
in D of exp(iSo) betweenend points rir and r,r, and for gqi(c)the
sum of exp(lS) over the section of the trajectory lying in c and
going from ,,, to o, Then the sum on i atd j can be taken to be
the integrals on itp tt, respectively. Hence the various states i
can be taken to correspond to particles being at various coordinates r. (Of courseany other representationof the states in the
senseof Dirac's transfolmation theory could be used equally well.
Which, one, whether coordinate, momentum' or energy level
representatiotr,is of course just a matter of convenienceand we
cannot determinethat simply from (18).)
We can consider next the problem including virtual photons'
That is, g(a, b, c) now contains an additional factor exp(iR)
over all time. Those
where lQ involves a double integral .fJ
parts of the index I which conespond to the particle states can
Le taken in the same way as though R were absent, We study
now the extra complexities in the states produced by splitting
tJre ft. Let us 6rst (solely for simplicity of the argument) take
the case that there are only two regions @,, separated by time
,o and try to expand
g(a, c) =2t goi?)g;o(a).
The factor exp(dlR)involves R as a double integral which en be
for the -first.of
,-f
split into three parts -f .-f
"+L.f"
"+-f
which both l, s are in o, for the secoudboth are in c, for the third
one is in a the other in c. Writing exp(dR)as exp(rtR-)'exp(d.R-)
.exp(iR-) shows that the factors R", and R"o produce no new
problems for they can be taken bodily into goi(c) and r1(o]
iespectively, However, we must dfuentanglethe variables which
are mixed up in exp(iR.).
The expressionfor Ro" is just twice (24) but with the integral
otr s extetrdingover the range o and that for I extending over c.
Thus exp(lR-) contains the variables for times in o and in c in
a quite;omplicated mixture. Our problem is to wite exp(if"")
as a su- ovit possibly a vast class of states i of the product of
two parts, like hik)ht(a), each of which involves the coordinates
in one interval alone.
This separation may be made in many different ways, conesponding 1o various possible reprsentationsof the state of ihe
electromagneticfield. We choosea particular one. First we can
expand the exponential, exp(iR."), in a power series, as
> i"(nt)-L(R"")". The states i can therefore be subdivided into
subclassescorrespondingto an integer r which we can interpret
as the number of quanta in the field at time ro. The amplitude
for the casez:0 clearly just involves exp(lR.J and exp(z'R*) in
the way that it should if we interpret theseas the amplitudes fo!
regions o and c, respectively, of making a transition between a
state of zero photons and another state of zero photons.
Next consider the caseu: 1. This implies an additional factor
in the transitional element; the factor Ro". The variablesare still
mixed up, But an easy way to perform the separation suggests
in R- as
itself. Namely, expand the d+((r-s)'-(x"(l)-x*(s))')
a Fourier integral as
i f exp(- iklt-

sl) exp(-tK' (x"(r)-x -(s))d3K/4dh.

273
+56

R. P. FEYNMAN

For the exponential can be witten immediately as a product of

exp*l(K.x.(s)), a function only of coordinatesfor times s in a
(supposes(l), and exp-lK.r.(l)
(a function only of coordinates
dudng interual c). The integral on d3K can be symbolized as a
over
states
I
characterized
by
the value of K. Thus the
sum
state with z:1 must be further characterized by specifying a
vector K, interpreted as the momentum of the photon. Finally
in R"" is simply the sum of four parts
.he factor (t-r'"(l).x'-(s))
ach of which is already split (namely 1, and ach of the three
componentsin the vector scalar product). Hence each photon of
nomentum K must still be characterizedby specifying it as one
of four varieties; t}rat is, there are {our polarizations.2aThus in
-dying to representthe efiect of the past e on the future r we are
id to invent photons of four polarizationsand characterizedby
a propagation vector K.
The term for a given polarization and value of K (for z:1)
is clearly just -p"Bo* where tle p" is definedin (59) but with ttre
ime integral extending just over region o, wlile B" is the same
erpressionwith the integration over region c, Hence the amplitude
ror transition during interyal a from a state with no quanta to a
:tate with one i! a given state of polarization and momentum is
calculated by inclusion of an extra f.actor'ip"* in the transition
element.Absorption in region c correspondsto a iactor iB..
We next turn to tie casez:2. This requires analysis of Ro"r.
Ihe t+ can be expandedagain as a Fourier integral, but for each
of the two 6a in jR"oz we have a value of K which may be difierent.
Thus we say, we have two photons, one of momentum K and one
aomentum K' and we sum over all values of K and K'. (Similarly
ach photon is characterizedby its own independentpolarization
rdex.) The factor ] can be taken into account neatly by asserting
:hat we count each possiblepair of photons as constituting just
rne state at time lo. Then the I arisesfor the sum over all K, K'
and polarizations)counts eachpair twice. On the other hand, for
-ie terms representing two identical photons (K:K')
of like
roiarization, the ; cannot be so interpreted. fnstead we invent
ae rule that a state of two like photons has statistical weight I
s great as that calculated as though the photons were difierent,
This, generalized to z identical photons, is tle rule of Bose
.tatistics.
The higher valuesof z ofier no problem. The l/u ! is interpreted
:ombinatorially for difierent photons, and as a statistical factor
rhen some are identical. For example, for all z identical one
rbtains a factor (nl)-t(-P"P"*)" so thar (n!)-t(i.5"*)" can be
iterpreted as t}re amplitude for emission(from no initial photons)
cf z identical photons, in complete agreemetrtwith (61) for Gao.
To obtain the amplitude for tmnsitions in which neither the
ritial nor the final state is empty of photons we must considet
-ie more generalcaseof the division into three time regions (1B).
Ihis time we see that the factor which involves t-hecoordinates
.It is to be
r an entangled manner is expl(R"6{R6}X.").
.sp&nded in the lorm 2i2; lq"k)ki(b)hi@). Again the expan:ion in power series and development in Fourier series with a
:olarization sum will solve tle problem. Thus the exponential is
>, Zh >t, (i.R""),(iR"b)tt(iRb")1,(hl)-L(lr!)-1(r!)-t. tqqry the R are
-rritten as Fourier series,one of the terms containing llflzlr
;ariables K. Since lr*z involve o, lz*r involve c and h*lz
rvolve 6, this term will give the amplitude that lr+r photons
:re emitted dudng the interval o, of those 11are absorbedduring
i but the remaining r, along with 12new ones emitted during b go
rn to be absorbed during the interval c. We have therefore
photonsin the state at time rr when l begins,and u:lr*r
r:Ltr
:. ,, when 6 is over. They each are characterizedby momentum
rectors and polarizations. When tlese are difierent the factors
are absorbed combinatodally. When some are
;!)-t(lr!)-r(/l)-l
:1ual we must invoke ttre rule of ttre statistical weights. For
i Usuallvonlv two polarizationstransverseto the DroDasation
rector K ire uied. This can be accomplishedby a'fuitb-er re:fangement of terms correspondingto tie reverse of the steps
-3ding from (17) to (19). We omit the details here as it is wellsown that either forEulation gives ttre saEe !6ults. See II,
:trtion 8.

example, suppose alI h+l2+/

photons ale identical. Then
Ra:i9a?.*, Rt":ig"lt*, R*:i9"9,*
so tlat our sum is
-r
2 4 2t2 2, (l 1'!l','!r
l) QP)h+r (i0 b)| | (i9 b*)h(ipa*)I:+'.
Putdrg m:lzIr,
n:h*r,
this is the sum on m atd m of
(i il- (n t)- tL2, (m tn !)| ((n - r) !(n - r) lr !)-t
-,
x (i p b*)^ r (dp b)"- / l(n t) (i,F ".
"*)
The last lactor we have seen is the amplitude for emissionof r
photons dudng interval ir, while the first factor is the amplitude
for absorption of z during c, The sum is ttrereforet-hefactor for
transition from z to z identical photons, in accordancewith (57).
We seethe significanceof the simple generatingfunction (56).
We have tierefore found rules for real photons in terms of
those for virtual. The real photons are a way of representingand
keeping track of ttrose mpects of tle past behavior which may
influence the future.
If one starts from a theory involving an arbitrary modification
of the direct interaction 6a (or in more general situations) it is
possiblein this way to discoverwhat kinds of states and pbysical
entities will be involved if one tries to representin the present all
the information needed to predict ttre future. With the Hamiltonian method, which begins by assuming such a representation,
it is difficult to suggestmodifications of a general kind, for one
cannot formulate the problem without having a complete reprsentation of the characteristics of the intermediate states, the
particles involved in interaction, etc. It is quite possible (in the
author's opinion, it is very likely) that we may discover that in
nature the relation of past and future is so intimate for short
duntions that no simple representationof a present may exist.
In such a casea theory could not 6rd expressionin Hamiltonian
form.
An exactly similar analysiscan be made just as easily starting
with the generalforms (46), (48). Also a coordinaterepresentation
of the photons could have been used instead of the familiar
momentum one. One can deduce the rules (60), (61). Nothing
essentially difierent is involved physically, however, so we shall
not pursue the subject furtier here. Since they implyt3 all the
rules for real photons, Eqs. (46), (47), (48) constitute a compact
statement of all the laws of quantum electrodynamics.But ttrey
give divergent results. Can tJ)e result aJter charge and mass
renormalization also be expressedto all orders in d/ic in a simple
way?
APPENDIX

C. DIFFERENTIAL EQSATION
ELECTRON PROPAGATION

F'OR

An attempt has been made to find a difierential wave equation

for the propagation of ar electroninteracting with itself, analogous
to the Dirac equation, but containing terms representing ttre
self-action.Neglecting all efiectsof closedloops,one such equation
has beenfound, but not much has beendone witl it. It is reported
here for whatever value it may have.
An electron acting upon itself is, from one point of view, a
complex system of a particle and a field of an indefaite number
of photons. To frd a difierential law of propagation of such a
system we must ask first what quantities known at one instant
will permit tie calculation of these same quantities an instanl
later. Clearly, a knowledge of the position of the particle is not
enough. We should need to specify: (1) the amplitude that the
electron is at , and there are no photons in ttre field, (2) tle
amplitude the electron is at r and ttrere is one photon of such
and such a kind in the field, (3) the amplitude tiere are two
photons, etc. That is, a series of functions of ever increasing
numbers of variables. Following this view, we shall be led to
tle wave equation of the theory of secondquantization.
We may also take a difierent view. Supposewe hnow a quantity
a.2fB, r), a spinor function of rr, md functional of Bu(l), defined
as the amplitude tlat an electron arrives at r, witl no photon in
the field when it moves in an arbitrary external unquantized
potential Br(1). We allow the electron also to interact with itself,

274
457
but,p.2 is the amplitude at a given instant that there happens
to be tro photons prcscnt. As we have sccn' a complete knowledge
of this functional rvill also tell us the amplitude that the electron
arrives at r and therc is just one photon, of form lrPH(1) present'
r) / 6B u$)) A pPIt (l) dn.
It is, f rom (60), I $,b
"218,
Higher numbers of photons corrcspond to higher functional
derivatives of Q.z. Thcreforc, 6,21]),r) contains all the inform&tion requisite for dcscribing the state of the electron-photon
sl stem, and we may cxPect to frnd a dillcrential equation for it.
Aciually ii. satisfies (V:7udl<1su, B:yuB),
( iv - n) Q,zlB, x):

B (r) o

"zlB,

xl

+i.87uJ 6*G,ilGs "zlB, r)/ 68 u1\d r r (1c)

as may be scen from a physical argument.'5 The operator (iV-z)
operating on the r coordinate of i"r should equal, from Dirac's
equation, the changes in iF.2 as wc go from one position t to- a
."ighlroring position due to thc action of vector potentials' The
term B(r),F"2 is the effect of the external potential. But'0"2 may
,, l-a*"^r"t
vali,litv can also lre,lcmonstra(cdmrthematically
irom r45t. fhc amplitudc for arriving at r with no photons in the
fi.],1 \iith virrurl l,hoton coupling e2 is a transilion amplitude.
r] for any r.
lr rnust.lhcrciore,srtisiy (45r rvirlrf.z[B]=o.z[8,
Hence show Lhat the quantitY
C,zlB, *l:

(iv-nr-B(t))o"zlB

' t)
- i*1,J'a ' rs,r'rla<',zlB, rf/

68t!\drr

in
for f.z[B]
also selisfics Eq. (45) by sul,stitu-ring-C.zfB..rl
sutisfics ('15).IIcnce if
r45) and usinc the lxct thxl 6"zfB,xl

b;i'o,;l -i , f"; -.i[r, ' 1: o ro'-"tt.'i But c.z[g, v 1- 6 q"ant

i r ' t i b . j t f . * t s e r i s f i irsl t t . T h c r c f o r tch, s t s o l u i i o on l [ 8 , r ]

- /, - B( r r r+o[8. *] = 0 (t he prol )f,

of (45) ;hich ;lso sal isfi.s (iV
serion of r iree elcclron rithnut virtttri lrlr,'tonslis a solution of
ilc) or *" wislre,l to shou. Equati,,n tlC) rnay be morc corrvetlicnt lhan (451 for sorne purposes for it does not involve
, l i f f e r c n t i a t i o n w i t h r e s P e c tt o l h e c o u p l i n A c o n s t a n l , a n d i s m o r e
analogous to a wave equatlon.

also change for at the first position r we may have had a photor
that it was emitted &t another point 1 is
present (amplitude
6O.2/68r(1)t which was absorbed at r (amplitude photon released
at 1 gets to , is 6+(i,r2) where s,r2 is the squated invariant distance
Efiects
from I to r) acting as a vector Potential there (factor
"ts).
of vacuum polarizrtion are lcft out.
Expansion of the solution of (1C) in a pouer serics in B and d
starting from a free particle solution for a single electron, produces
a series of terms rvhich agree with the rules of II for action of
potentials and virtual photons to various ordcrs, It is another
matter to use such an equation for the practical solution of- a
problem to all ordcrs in d. It might be possible to represent the
ielf-energy problem as the variational problem for u, stemming
from (1C). The 6a will first have to be modifred to obtain a
convergent result.
We ire not in need of the general solution of (1C). (In fact,
r]
we have it in (46), (a8) in termi of the solution folts]:oL[B,
of the ordinary Dirac equation (iv-m)aofB,rf:BaolB',).
knowledge
for
complete
The general solution is too complicated,
of the motion of a self-acting electron in an arbitrary potential is
essentially all of electrodynamics (because of the kiod of relation
of real and virtual processes discussed for photons in Appendix B,
extended also to real and virtual pairs). Furthermore, it is easy
to see that other quantities also satisfy (1C). Consider a system
of many electrons, and single out some one for consideration,
supposing all the others go from some definite initial state i to
some definite frnal state /. Lel Q"zlB, tl be the amplitude that
the special electron arrives at t, thcre are no photons present'
and the other electrons go from i to / whcn there is an external
potential Bu present (which B! also acts on the other electrons)Then o"2 aiso satisfies (1C). Likewise the amplitude with closed
loops (all other electrons go vacuum to vacuum) also stislies
effects. The various
(1C) inclucling all vacuum polarization
problems correspond to different assumptions as to the d-ependence
of *"zlB, xf on B, in the limit of zero d. The Eq. (1C) without
Iurthei boundary conditions is probably too general to be useful'

Poper 24

275

The Radiation Theories of Tomonaga, Schwinger, and Feynman

F. J. DysoN
Institute for Ad.vanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey
(Received October 6, 1948)
A uni6ed development of the subject of quantum electrodynamics is outlined, crnbodf ing
the main features both of the Tornonaga-Schwinger and of the Feynman radiation
theory. The theory is carried to a point further than that reached b1' thesc arrthors, in the discussion of higher order radiative reactions and vacuum polarization phenomena, Horvever, thc
theory of these higher order processesis a program rather than a definitive theorl', since no
general proof of the convergence of these effects is attempted.
The chief results obtained are (a) a demonstration of the equivalence of the Feynman and
Schwinger theories, and (b) a considerable simplihcation of the procedure involved in applying
the Schwinger theory to particular problems, the simplification being the greater the more
complicated the problem.

I. INTRODUCTION
disI S a resultof the recentand independent
I I coveries of Tomonaga,l Schwinger,2and
Feynman,s the subject of quantum electrodynamics has made two very notable advances.On
the one hand, both the foundations and the
applicationsof the theory have been simplified
by being presentedin a completely relativistic
way; on the other, the divergence difficulties
have been at least partially overcome. In the
reports so far published,emphasishas naturally
been placed on the second of these advances;
the magnitude of the first has been somewhat
obscuredby the fact that the new methods have
been applied to problems which were beyond
the range of the older theories, so that the simplicity of the methods was hidden by the complexity of the problems. Furthermore, the theory
of Feynman differs so profoundly in its formulation from that of Tomonaga and Schwinger, and
so little of it has been published, that its particular advantages have not hitherto been available to users of the other formulations. The
advantagesof the Feynman theory are simplicity
I Sin-itiro Tomonaga, Prog. Theoret. Phys. 1, 27 (1946);
Koba, Tati, and Tomonaga, Prog. Theoret. Phys. 2, 1di
198 (1947); S. Kaneswa aid S. T-omonaga, Prog. Theoret.
Phys- 3, 1, 101 (1948); S. Tomonaga, Phys. Rev.74,224

(1e48).
'Julian Schwinger,
Phys.Rev.73,416 (1948);Pbvs.

Rev..74, 1439.(1948). Several papers, giving.a complete

exposition of the theory, are in cour* of publication.
fR. P. Feynman, Rev. Mod. Phys. 20, 367 (L948);
Phys. Rev. 74,939, 1430 (19a8); J. A. Wheeler and R. P.
Feynman, Rev. Mod. Phys. 17, 157 (1945). These articles
describe erlv stases in the develooment of Fevnman's
rheory, little irf which is yet published.

'I
and easeof application, while those of omonagaSchwinger are generality :rnd theoretical completeness.
The present paper aims to show how the
Schwinger theory can be applied to specific
problems in such a way as to incorporate the
ideas of Feynman. To make the paper reasonably
self-contained it is necessary to outline the
foundations of the theory, following the method
of Tomonaga; but this paper is not intended as a
substitute for the complete account of the theory
shortly to be published by Schwinger. Here thc
emphasis will be on the application of the theory,
and the major theoretical problems of gaugeinvariance and of the divergencies will not be
considered in detail. The main results of the
paper will be general formulas from which the
radiative reactions on the motions of electrons
can be calculated, treating the radiation interaction as a small perturbation, to any desired
order of approximation. These formulas will be
expressed in Schwinger's notation, but are in
substance identical with results given previously
by Feynman. The contribution of the present
paper is thus intended to be twofold: first, to
simplify the Schwinger theory for the benefit of
those using it for calculations, and second, to
demonstrate the equivalence of the various
theories within their common domain of applicability.*
* After this paper was written, the author was shown 2
letter, published in Prosress of Theoretiel Physics 3, 295
(1948)'bv Z. Koba anii G. Takeda. The letter is dated
'ivlav
22.i948, and brieflv describesa method of treatment
of ridiative problems, similar to the method of this paper.

486

276
487

RADIATION

II. OUTLINEOF THEORETICALFOUNDATIONS

Relativistic quantum mechanics is a special
case of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, and
it is convenient to use the usual non-relativistic
terminology in order to make clear the relation
between the mathematical theory and the results of physical measurements. In quantum
electrodynamics the dynamical variables are the
electromagnetic potentials 1u(r) and the spinor
electron-positronfield *"(r); each component of
each field at each point r of space is a separate
variable. Each dynamical variable is, in the
Schriidinger representation of quantum mechanics, a time-independent operator operating
on the state vector aDof the system. The nature
of O (wave function or abstract vector) need not
be specified; its essential property is that, given
the O of a system at a particular time, the results
of all measurementsmade on the system at that
time are statistically determined. The variation
of (F with time is given by the Schrddinger
equation
lt'
I
(1)
ihla/6tla:l
IHG)d,la,
IJ

where fI(r) is the operator representing the total

energy-density of the system at the point r. The
generalsolution of (1) is
Ifl
o(r):expll-it/hf
IJI

I H(r)drlan,

(2)

with Ooany constant state vector.

Now in a relativistic system, the most general
kind of measurement is not the simultaneous
measurement of field quantities at different
points of space. It is also possible to measure
independently field quantities at different points
of space at different times, provided that the
points of space-time at which the measurements
are made lie outside each other's light cones, so
that the measurements do not interfere with
each other. Thus the most comprehensivegeneral
type of measurement is a measurement of field
quantities at each point r of spaceat a time l(r),
Results of the application of the method to a calculation
radiative correction to the Kleinof the rcond-oider
Nishina formula are stated. All the papers of Professor
which have yet been pubhis
associates
and
Tomonaqa
lished wJre completed before the end of 1946' The isolation
of these Iapanese workers has undoubtedly constituted a
erious loss-to theoretical physics.

THEORIES

the locus of the points (r, l(r)) in space-time

forming a 3-dimensionalsurface c which is spacelike (i.e., every pair of points on it is separated
by a spaceJike interval). Such a measurement
will be called "an observation of the system on
a." It is easy to seewhat the result of the measurement will be. At each point r' the field quantities will be measured for a state of the system
with state vector iD(l(r')) given by (2). But all
observable quantities at { are operators which
commute with the energy-density operator 11(r)
-every point
r different from r', and it is a
at
general principle of quantum mechanics that if
B is a unitary operator commuting with ,4, then
for any state (b the results of measurementsof ,4
are the same in the state 6 as in the state BO.
Therefore, the results of measurement of the
field quantities at r'in the state 6(l(r')) are the
same as if the state of the system were
(fl
o(a) : exp,l-b/hf
lJl

I t(r)H(r)dr loo,

(3)

which differs from A(l(r')) only by a unitary

factor commuting with these field quantities.
The important fact is that the state vector O(c)
depends only on o and not on r'. The conclusion
reached is that observations of a system on d
give results which are completely determined
by attributing to the system the state vector
a(o) given by (3).
The Tomonaga-Schwingerform of the Schrddinger equation 'is a differential form of (3).
Suppose the surface o to be deformed slightly
near the point r into the surface o', the volume
of space-time separating the two surfaces being
tr/. Then the quotient
la(a't

-o(a)f/v

tends to a limit as 7--+0, which we denote by

Aa/aa(r) and call the functional derivative of Q
with respect to o at the point r. From (3) it
follows that
(4)
i.hclao/ao(t)l:fr(r)o,
and (3) is, in fact, the general solution of (4).
The whole meaning of an equation such as (4)
depends on the physical meaning which is attached to the statement "a system has a constant
state vector iDo." In the present context, this
statement means "results of measurements of

277
F , J , D YSON
field qqantities at. any given point of space are
independent of time." This statement is plainly
non-relativistic, and so (4) is, in spite of appearances,a non-relativistic equation.
The simplest way to introduce a new state
vector V which shall be a relativistic invariant is
to require that the statement "a system has a
constant state vector V" shall mean "a system
consists of photons, electrons, and positrons,
traveling freely through space without interaction or external disturbance." For this purpose,let

f/(r):rI (r)f/fi(r),

(s)

where IIs is the energy-density of the free electromagnetic and electron fields, and Ii is that of
their interaction with each other and with any
external disturbing forces that may be present.
A system with constant V is, then, one whose f1r
is identically zero;by (3) such a system coriesponds to a iD of the form
o(c):71n;qo,

488

where ffr(*o) is the time-dependent form of the

energy-density of interaction of the two fields
with each other and with external forces. The
left side of (9) representsthe degreeof departure
of the system from a system of freely traveling
particles and is a relativistic invariant; fl(ro)
is also an invariant, and thus is avoided one of
the most unsatisfactory features cjf the old
theories, in which the invariant f/r was added to
the non-invariant Ho. Equation (9) is the starting
point of the Tomonaga-Schwingertheory.
THEORY
III. INTRODUCTIONOF PERTURBATION
Equation (9) can be solvedexpiicitly. For this
purpose it is convenient to introduce a oneparameter family of space-like surfaces filling
the whole of space-time, so that one and only
one member 6:(r) of the family passes through
any given point r. Let oo,ot, d2, "' be a sequence of surfaces of the family, starting with
'steps
steadily into
do and proceeding in small
the past. By
Fa0

I n,@)a"

rG):*p{ -U/il[ li*,(,)d,i. (6)

It is therefore consistent to write generally
o(o):11n;E1o),

(7)

thus defining the new state vector V of any

system in terms of the old A. The differential
equation satisfied by V is obtained from (4), (5),
(6), and (7) in the form
i.hclav/ao(r)f:

(r(o))-rfl(r)I(c)v.

(8)

Now if q(r) is any time-independent field operator, the operator

q(xi : (T(o))-'q(r) I(o)

vI

ol

is denoted the integrBl of I1t(rc) over the 4'

dimensional volume between the surfaces ar and
do;similarly, by

[^ r,{*)o*,!- ,,{*)o*
are denoted integrals over the whole volume to
the past of aoand to the future of o0,respectively.
Consider the operator
Lt: u(od :l

/r'o\
1 -li/hcl
\

./"r

H,(x)dx I
/

is just the corresponding time-dependent operax (t -r;tna n,@)ax).. ., (to)

[",
tor as usually defined in quantum electrodynamics.r It is a functlon of the point rs of spacethe product continuing to infinity and the surtime whose coordinates are (r, ct(r)), but is the
facesao,cr, ' . . being taken in the limit infinitely
same for all surfaces o passing through this
closetogether. Usatisfies the differential equation
point, by virtue of the commutation of I/r(r)
(11)
ihclaU/aa(x)l:Ht@iu,
with Ilo(r') for t'*r. Thus (8) may be written
(9) and the general solution of (9) is
ihcl6v/A6(r;l:
H1(rs)9,
'See, for example, Gregor Wentzel. Einf'frhrungin die
Quantenllnorie der WetrlcnJeldu (Franz Deuticke, Wien,
l94J), pp. l8-26.

v(o): Y1"1Eo'
rvith Vo any constant vector'

(r2)

278
489

RADIATION

Expanding the product

powers of H1 gives a series
fo0

U : 1-l (- i/hc) | H'(x')dx,f

J_6

(10) in

ascending

(- i / hc)'z

THEORIES
small perturbation as was done in the last section.
Instead, I1i alone is treated as a perturbation,
the aim being to eliminate -FIi but to leave H" in
its original place in the equation of motion of
the system.
Operators S(o) and S(o) are defined by replacing Ht by Ht in the definitions of [/(o) and
I/(o). Thus S(o) satisfies the equation

.... (13)
,,(*,)r,(*,)o*,t
" I__*,f'*"

ihclaS/ao(xs)f:.Hr(tro)S.

Further, U is by (10) obviously unitary, and

Suppose now a new type of state vector O(c) to

be introduced by the substitution

(i/hc),
u-1: O: r+61n4 u$xt)d.rt1.
J^
" I_":., I*"

(17)

v(o) :51";s1")'

. .. (r4)
Ht(xz)Ht@)dxz*.

It is not difficult to verify that U is a function

of ao alone and is independent of the family of
surfaces of which o0 is one member. The use of a
finite number of terms of the series (13) and (14),
neglecting the higher terms, is the equivalent in
the new theory of the use of perturbation theory
in the older electrodynamics.
obtained from (10) bv
The operator U(-),
taking cq in the irrfinite future, is a transformation operator transforming a state of the system
in the infinite past (representing, say, converging
streams of particles) into the same state in the
infinite future (after the particles have interacted
or been scattered into their final outgoing distribution). This operator has matrix elements
corresponding only to real transitions of the
system, i.e., transitions which conserve energy
and momentum. It is identical with the Heisenberg S matrix.6
IV. ELIMINATION OF THE RADIATION
INTERACTION
In most of the problem of electrodynamics, the
energy-density -F11(*6)divides into two parts-

H{xs):71t1*i*H"(xi,

(15)

Hi(xs):-lt/cfj,(xs)A,(xo),

(16)

the hrst part being the energy of interaction of

the two fields with each other, and the Second
part the energy produced by external forces.
It is usually not permissible to treat H" as a
6Werner Heisenberg, Zeits. f. Physik 120, 513 (1943),
12O,673 (1943),and Zeits. f. Naturforschung f,608 (1946).

(18)

Bv (9), (15), (17), and (18) the equation of motion for O(o) is
ihcl\o/ ac(x)l:

(S(o))-'Ir"(ro)S(o)o.

(19)

The elimination of the radiation interaction is

hereby achieved; only the question, "How is the
new state vector O(o) to be interpreted?,"
remains.
It is clear from (19) that a system with a constant g is a system of electrons, positrons, and
photons, moving under the influence of their
mutual interactions, but in the absence of external fields. In a system where two or more
particles are actually present, their interactions
alone will, in general, cause real transitions and
scattering processes to occur. For such a system,
it is rather "unphysical" to represent a state
of motion including the effects of the inter'
actions by a constant state vector; hence, for
such a system the new representation has no
simple interpretation. However, the most important systems are those in which only one
particle is actually present, and its interaction
with the vacuum fields gives rise only to virtual
processes. In this case the particle, including the
effects of all its interactions with the vacuum,
appears to move as a free particle in the absence
of external fields, and it is eminently reasonable
to represent such a state of motion by a constant
state vector. Therefore, it may be said that the
operator,
Hy(rn):

(S(o))-'H'(ro)S(a)'

(20)

on the right of (19) represents the interaction of

a physical particle with an external field, including radiative corrections. Equation (19)
describes the extent to which the motion of a

279
F.

J.

single physical particle deviates, in the external

6eld, from the motion represented by a constant
state-vector, i.e., from the motion of an observed "free" particle.
If the system whose state vector is cor.rstantly
g undergoes no real transitions with the passage
g
of time, then the state vector is callecl "steady'"
if, and only if, it
o
is
steady
N{ore precisely,
satisfies the equatiol-r

DYSON

490

mass, and should have been used instead of

Ilo(r) in the definition (6) of I(a)' Consequently'
the second bracket should have been used instead of I1r(r) in Eq' (8).
The definition of S(o) has therefore to be
altered by replacing I/t(r6) bY6

:
rrr(xo): rri(xi t 1's(so)
!"u*)lrr* r r* . (22)
", ",

The value of 6iz catl be adjusted so as to cancel

1 2 1 ) out the self-energy effects in S( o ) (this is only a
formal adjustment since the value is actually
is a general rule, one-particle states are steady
and then Eq. (21) will be valid for
infinite),
and many-particle states unsteady' There are,
no
one-electron states. For the photon self-energy
however, two important qualificatiol-rs to this
such adjustment is needed since, as proved by
rule.
Schrvinger, the photon self-energy turns out to be
First, the interaction (20) itself t'ill almost
identically zero.
alrvays cause transitions from steady to unsteady
The foregoing discussion of the self-energy
consists
state
initial
if
the
states. For example,
is intentionally only a sketch, but it
problem
of one electron in the field of a proton, llr rvill
to be sufficient for practical applicafouncl
be
will
electhe
of
have matrix elements for transitions
theory. A fuller discussion of thc
the
of
tions
tron to a new state with emission of a photon,
underlying this treatassumptions
theoretical
practice'
in
and such transitions are important
be given by Schrvinger
rvill
problem
of
the
ment
Therefore, although the interpretation of the
papers. Moreover, it must be
forthcoming
his
in
posnot
it
is
states,
theory is simpler for steady
be
realized that the theory as a whole cannot
sible to exclude unsteady states from conput into a finally satisfactory form so long as
sideration.
occur in it, however skilfully these
ii.r"rg"lt.i".
Second, if a one-particle state as hitherto deare circumvented; therefore' the
clivergencies
rnust
S(o)
of
fined is to be steady, the definition
should be regarded as justified
y,."."nt
tr*rtment
be moclified. This is because S(m) includes thc
in applications rather than by its
Ly it..uc."..
effects of the electromagnetic self-energy of the
derivation.
theoretical
electron, and this self-energy gives an expectaThe important results of the present paper up
tion value to S(o) which is different from unity
point are Eq. (19) and the interpretation
(and indeed inlinite) in a one-electron state, so to this
vector O. The state vector V ol a
state
the
of
mistake
The
that Eq. (21) cannot be satisfied'
interpreted as a wave function
be
can
system
that has been made occurred in trying to repreamplitude of finding any
probability
the
g-iving
its
electromagsent the observed electron rvith
numbers for the
occupation
of
set
netic self-energy by a rvave lield with the same iarticular
free electrons, positrous'
of
states
possible
the
"bare"
characteristic rest-mass as that of
g of a system with
"a.iou.
and phoions''fhe state vector
electron. To correct the mistake, let 6zz denote
. girren V on a given surface o is, crudely speakthe electromagnetic mass of the electron, i'e',
had in
in!, tn" V which the system would have
the difference in rest-mass between an observed
arrived at the given V on
had
past
if
it
infinite
the
(5),
divithe
and a "bare" electron' Instead of
a under the influence of the interaction f/r(*)
sion of the energy-density 11(r) should have
alone.
taken the form
The definition of Q being unsymmetrical beof state
r/(r): (Ilo(r)* 6nxcv.
@PIGI,]
tween past and future, a new type
- amc"g*
(r)B{G)). vector Ot can be defined by reversing the direcOf
tion of time in the definition of Q' Thus the
The first bracket on the right here representsthe
V
is
the
given
o
a
on
V
given
a
rvith
of a system
energy-density of the free electromagnetic and -l
u*d'
is
tt"." S"t utinger'snotation !:'p*p
electron fields with the observed electron restS(*)a:O.

280
491

RA D I ATIO N THEORIES

which the system would reach in the infinite

future if it continued to move under the influence
of HI(xo) alone. More simply, O' can be defined
by the equation
O/(o):S(o)A(s).

(23)

Since S( rc ) is a unitary operator independent of

a, the state vectors O and g/ are really only the
same vector in two different representations or
coordinate systems. Moreover, for any steady
state the two are identieal by (21).
V. FUNDAMENTAL FORMULAS OF TIIE
SCHWINGER AND FEYNMAN
THEORIES
The Schwinger theory works directly from
Eqs. (19) and (20), the aim being to calculate
the matrix elements of the "effective external
potential energy" .F11'between states specified
by their state vectors O. The states considered in
practice always have O of some very simple kind,
for example, g representing systems in which
one or two free-particle states have occupation
number one and the remaining
free-particle
states have occupation number zero. By analogy
with (13), S(oo) is given by

s(as): 11 1-; Pr1

" I_:.,[__"i

['

n, 6,1d.x1t(-i/ hc),

p,1x,1H,q*)d.xz*.
. ., (24)

and (S(cr))-l by a corresponding expression

analogousto (14). Substitution of these series
into (20) gives at once

satisfactory
agreement with experimental
results. In this paper the development of the
Schwinger theory will be carried no further;
in principle the radiative
corrections to the
equations of motion of electrons could be calculated to any desired order of approximation from
formula (25).
In the Feynman theory the basic principle is
to preserve symmetry between past and future.
Therefore, the matrix elements of the operator
H7 are evaluated in a "mixed representation;"
the matrix elements are calculated between.an
initial state specified by its state vector O1 and
a final state specified by its state vector O2'.
The matrix element of 1{r between two such
states in the Schwinger representation is

(26)

O:*f12'O1: Q2'*S( o )I/rOr,

and therefore the operator which replaces117 in

the mixed representation is
Hp(xs): S(a)H7@s)
: S( o )(S(c))-tf1"(r6)S(c). (27)
Going back to the original product definition of
S(a) analogous to (10), it is clear that S(o)
X(S(o;;-t is simply the operator obtained from
S(c) by interchanging past and future. Thus,
R(o) : S( o) (S(o))-L:r*(-i/hc)
x,

f'

Hl(r)dx*(-i/hc),

Ja

f"

drr

,,d

x I

Hr(xz)Hl(xld.x,f.' .. (28)

"o(r)

The physical meaning of a mixed representation of this type is not at all recondite. In fact,
@
a mixed representation is normally used to defo('d
f'(rr)
Hr@o):D Q/nQ"I
dx, I
dx,. . .
scribe such a process as bremsstrahlung of an
u-0
.t _d
.J _6
electron in the field of a nucleus when the Born
ro(xn-r)
approximation is not valid; the process of
dx*XIHI(x^), 7'.., IHI(xz),
X I
bremsstrahlung is a radiative transition of the
(2s) electron from a state described by a Coulomb
IHI(ry\, }1"(ro)ll...ll.
wave function, with a plane ingoing and a spheriThe repeated commutators in this formula are cal outgoing wave, to a state described by a
characteristic of the Schwinger theory, and their Coulomb wave function with a spherical ingoing
evaluation gives rise to long and rather difficult and a plane outgoing wave. The initial and final
analysis. Uslng the first three terms of the series, states here belong to different orthogonal systems
Schwinger was able to calculate the second-order of wave functions, and so the transition matrix
radiative corrections to the equations of motion elements are calculated in a mixed representaof an electron in an external field, and obtained tion. In the Feynman theory the situation is

281
F,

J.

analogous; only the roles of the radiation interaction and the external (or Coulomb) field are
interchanged; the radiation interaction is used
instead of the Coulomb lield to modify the state
vectors (wave functions) of the initial and final
states, and the external field instead of the
radiation interaction causes transitions between
these state vectors.
In the Feynman theory there is an additional
simplification. For if matrix elements are being
calculated between two states, either of which
is steady (and this includes all cases so far
considered), the mixed representation reduces to
an ordinary representation. This occurs, for
example, in treating a one-particle problem such
as the radiative correction to the equations of
motion of an electron in an external field; the
operator Hp(xo), although in general it is not
even Hermitian, can in this case be considered
as an effective external potential energy acting
on the particle, in the ordinary sense of the
words.
This section rvill be concluded rvith the derivation of the fundamental formula (31) of the
Feynman theory, which is the analog of formula
(25) of the Schwinger theory. If
F1(rcr),

F"(x")

are any operators defined, respectively, at the

points 11, ' ' ' , x* of space-time, then

(2e)
will denote the product of these operators, taken
in the order, reading from right to left, in which
t h e s u r f a c e sd ( x l ) , ' ' . d ( r . ) o c c u r i n t i m e . I n
most applications of this notation F;(r;) rvill
commute with F;(r) so long as .."rrand Jci are
outside each other's light cones; u.'hen this is the
case, it is easy to see that (29) is a function of the
points 11, . ' ., r" only and is independent of the
surfaces o(rr). Consider nou. the integral

t^:I_'-^,..J-"a*-rs"6s,
IfI(x),

H'(x")).

Since the integrancl is a symmetrical function of

the points rr, '' , r,, the value of the integral
is just z! times the integral obtained by restricting the integration to sets of points rr, ' ' ',
r" for which o(rr) occurs after o(r;*1) for each i.

492

DYSOn'

The restricted integral can then be further

divided into (a*1) parts, the j'th part being the
integral over those sets of points with the property that o(:;6) lies between o(rr-1) and o(r;)
(with obvious modifications for j:1
and j:4
*1). Therefore,
i+I

rd(ro)

I^:ntll
i-r

.t _-

?o(

_6

d x , - t . . I.

x I

ttx,

a*,.. 1
J

dx,xlttlx,)"'

ud\x,)

"d(xo)

HI (x;)II"(xo)H'

(x). . . H' (x").

(.30)

Now if the series (24) and (28) are substituted

into (27), sums of integrals appear which are
precisely of the form (30). Hence finally
II e (x o) : T. G i / hc)"lr / n tfl
"

:L,en/r,)"lr/nt
[_'.dx,I:."
XP(H"(xs),

H'(x")).

HI(x),

(31)

By this formula the notation I1p(ro) is justified,

for this operator now appears as a function of
tlie point r0 alone and not of the surface o. The
further development of the Feynman theory is
mainly concerned rvith the calculation of matrix
elements of (31) betu,'eenvarious initial and final
states.
As a special case of (31) obtained by replacing
11'by the unit matrix h (27),

' , , 1 1 " a . .r''f " a - ^

S(-):! 1-i lzcl,tr
s

J_-

a/-6

X P ( H ( ( x 1 1 ," ' , A I @ " ) ) . ( 3 2 )

VI. CALCULATION OF MATRIX ELEMENTS
In this section the application of the foregoing
theory to a general class of problems will be
explained. The ultimate aim is to obtain a set
of rules by which the matrix element of the
operator (31) betrveen two given states may be
written dorvn in a form suitable for numerical
evaluation, immediately and automatically' The
fact that such a set of rules exists is the basis of
the Feynman radiation theory; the derivation
in this section of the same rules from what is

282
493

RADIATION

fundamentally the Tomonaga-Schwinger theory

constitutes the proof of equivalence of the two
theories.
To avoid excessivecomplication, the type of
matrix element considered will be restricted in
two ways. First, it will be assumed that the external potential energY is
H"(xo):-ll/cyu@o)A,"(xi,

(33)

that is to say, the interaction energy of the electron-positron 6eld with electromagnetic potentials,4.,t(rs) which are given numerical functions
of space and time. Second, matrix elements will
be consideredonly for transitions from a state .4,
in which just one electron and no positron or
photon is present, to another state B of the
same character. These restrictions are not essen.
tial to the theory, and are introduced only for
convenience, in order to illustrate clearly the
principles involved.
The electron-positron field operator may be
written

THEORIES
integral of (31); let it be denoted by P". From
(16), (22), (33), and (37) it is seen that P" is a
sum of products of (n-11) operators {", (n+l)
operators {* and, not more than n operators .A'
multiplied by various numerical factors. By 8i
may be denoted a typical product of factors ry'",
{", and Au, not summed over the indices such
as a and p, so that P" is a sum of terms such as
Q", Then 0" will be of the form (indices omitted)

(xt)''''1, @;)'l' @;
Q" : 0 @d V@to){'(x;),1,
")
XA(xi'..A(xi^), (39)
where do, it, . ' ', do is some permutation of the
integers 0, 1, . . ., n, and ju ' ' ' , i^ are some, but
n in
not necessarily all, of the integers l, "',
some order. Since none of the operators ,y' and
)ry'commute with each other, it is especially impbrtq4t to preserve the order of these factors.
'fector
of Q* is a sum of creation and
Each
operators by virtue of (34), (35)'
annihilatioh

Gq, and so Q" itself is a sum of products of

""{
cldation and annihilation operators.'
(34)
Now consider under what conditions a product
{"(x):Z 6""@)a",
of creation and annihilation operators can give a
where the 6""@) are spinor wave functions of non-zero matrix element for the transition ,4+-B.
free electrons and positrons, and the a* are Clearly, one of the annihilation operators must
annihilation operators of electrons and creation annihilate the electron in state -4, one of the
operators of positrons. Similarly, the adjoint creation operators must create the electron in
state B, and the remaining operators must be
operator
(3s)
into pairs, the members of each pair
divisible
{"(x):L 6""@)arespectively creating and annihilating the same
where d, are annihilation operators of positrons particle. Creation and annihilation operators reand creation operators of electrons' The electro- ferring to difierent particles always commute or
(the former if at least one is a
anticommute
magnetic field operator is
photon operator, the latter if both are electron--4
(36)
(A",(x)b,-tA,"*(')6,),
t -(i
positron operators). Therefore, if the two single
operators and the various pairs of operators in
and
where b, and 6, are photon annihilation
the product all refer to different particles, the
The chargecreation operators, respectively.
order of factors in the product can be altered so
current 4-vector of the electron field is
as to bring together the two single operators and
(37)
j,(x):iec0@)t,'l'@);
the two members of each pair, without changing
the
value of the product except for a change of
be
ought
to
strictly speaking,this expression
sign if the permutation made in the order of the
antisymmetrized to the formT
positron operators is odd. In the
(38) electron and
(il
j, (x) : |iec | {t
"e,
"(,c)!e@) ! e@){ "(x) |
case when some of the single operators and pairs
but it will be seenlater that this is not necessary of operators refer to the same particle, it is not
hard to verify that the same change in order of
in the present theorY.

Consider the product P occurring in the a'th

?See Wolfgang Pauli, Rev. Mod. Phvs. f3' 203 (1941)'
Eq. (96), p.224'

factors can be made, provided it is remembered

that the division of the operators into pairs is
no longer unique, and the change of order is to

283
F.

J.

be made for each possible division into pairs and

the results added together.
It follows from the above considerations that
the matrix element of Q"for the transition ,4+B
is a sum of contributions, each contribution
arising from a specific way of dividing the factors
of 0" into two single factors and pairs. A typical
contribution of this kind will be denoted by M.
The two factors of a pair must involve a creation
and an annihilation operator for the same particle, and so must be either one 'y' and one ry' or
two A; the two single factors must be one ,y'and
one ry'.The term M is thus specified by fixing an
integer i, and a permutation r0, rb . . ., r" of the
integers 0, 1, . . ., n, and a division (sr,tr), (sz,tr),
. . ., (sr,lr,) of the integers jr, . . . j- into pairs;
,
has to be an even number; the
clearly m:2h
term M is obtained by choosing for single factors
'{,(xr) and,
and for associated pairs of
t@,r),
f a c t o r s ( r y ' ( r )s ! ( x , ; ) ) f o r i : 0 ,
1, . . ., k-t,
h + 1 , . . . , n a n d ( A ( x " ; ) , A ( x t ; ) )f o r i . : 7 , . . . , h .
In evaluating the term M, the order of factors
in Q" is first to be permuted so as to bring together the two single factors and the two members of each pair, but without altering the.order
of factors within each pair; the result of this
process is easily seen to be
q

"'

: eP ($ (x o),*(x, o)) . . . p (:0

@ ),,1,@,
"))
X P (A (x" ),4 (x t)) . . . P (A (x" 1"),A(xt1")), (40)

a factor e being inserted which takes the value

:E1 according to whether the permutation of 0
and ry' factors between (39) and (40) is even or
odd. Then in (40) each product of two associated
factors (but not the two single factors) is to be
independently replaced by the sum of its matrix
elements for processes involving the successive
creation and annihilation of the same particle.
Given a bilinear operator such as Ar(x)A,(y),
the sum of its matrix elements for processes
involving the successive creation and annihilation of the same particle is just what is usually
called the "vacuum expectation value" of the
operator, and has been calculated by Schwinger.
This quantity is, in fact (note that Heaviside
units are being used)
(A,(x) A,())

DYSON

not be given here, because it turns out that the

vacuum expectation value of P(A,(x),A,(y))
takes an even simpler form. Nameh',
\ P ( 4 , ( x ) , A , ( y ) ) ) s : | l r c 6* " D p ( : r- y ) ,

(41)

where Dp is the type of D function introduced by

Feynman. Do(l) is an even function of r, with
the integral expansion

D,(x) : -li/2,\

I"

expliax2lrla, (42)

where rc2 denotes the square of the invariant

length of the 4-vector r. In a similar way it
follows from Schwinger's results that
\P ({ "(x),'1,e0)))o: }a(r,y)Sr a"@ - y7,
rvhere
Srp"(r) : - Q,@/ox,)*"g)p"Ao(r),
ro is the
electron,
is earlier
function

(43)

(44)

reciprocal Compton u'ave-length of the

,t@,y) is -1 or f 1 according as o(r)
or later than a(1,) in time, and Ar is a
rvith the integral expansion

ao(r) : -l.i/

2rl

expliax2- i rs2
/4alda. (45)

I,

Sqbstituting from (41) and (44) into (40), the

matrix element M takes the form (still omitting
the indicesof the factors 0, rlr,and A of Q")
M :, II (tn @;,x,) Sr (r r - x, ;t t
XII(.ihcD r(x" i - xt )) P ({,(xr),*(x,,)).

(46)

The single factors f (rr) and ,!t(x,1,) are conveniently left in the form of operators, since the
matrix elements of these operators for effecting
the transition ,4+B depend on the wave functions of the electron in the states A and B,
Moreover, the order of the factors 'l@r,) and
ry'(r'p) is immaterial since they anticommute
with each other; hence it is permissible to write
P ('{,(x*),*(x,r)) : n(xo,x,r){(xn)!(x,i.
Therefore (46) may be rervritten
M : e' II (*Sr(rr -r'))fJ
,lk

t ;P (* - y),
n: j h c 6u "I D < t a
|

where D(1) and D are Schwinger's invariant D

functions. The definitions of these functions will

494

with

( l l t c D p ( x "I - x t) )
t

X{(xn),1'(x,r), (47)
e' : ell4(x;,x,;).
i

(48)

284
495

RADIATION

THEORIES

Now the product in (48) is ( - 1)r, where p is the

number oT occasions in the expression (40) on
which the ,l oI a P bracket occurs to the left of
the ry'. Referring back to the definition of e after
Eq. (40), it follows that e'takes the value f 1 or
- 1 according to whether the permutation of tf

ing section it will be shown how this solution-inprinciple can be reduced to a much simpler and
more practical procedure.

and ry'factors between (39) and the expression

Let an integer n and a product P" occurring

in (31) be temporarily fixed. The points ro, rcr,
..., *o may be represented by (zfl)
points
drawn on a piece of paper. A type of matrix
element M as described in the last section will
then be represented graphically as follows' For
with
each associated pair of factors (f(ri),r/(r"))
draw a line with a direction marked in it
ilk,
from the point rc; to the point rr;. For the single
factors ry'(rr), r!(x,p), draw directed lines leading
out from r* to the edge of the diagram, and in
from the edge of the diagram to r'r. For each
draw an unpair of factors (,4(r,;),A(xt)),
directed line joining the points rs; ?nd rri. The
complete set of points and lines will be called
the "graph" of M; clearly there is a one-to-one
correspondence between types of matrix element and graphs, and the exclusion of matrix
lor i+k corresponds to the
elements with rr:;
exclusion of graphs with lines joining a point to
itself. The directed lines in a graph will be called
"electron lines," the undirected lines "photon

'0@it@,0)...9@){(tc,")

(4e)

is even or odd. But (39) can be derived by an

even permutation from the expression

'L@o){(xi"'0@){(x"),

(s0)

of factors between (49)

and the permutation
and (50) is even or odd according to whether the
permutation ro, " ' , rn of the integers 0, " ', z is
even or odd. Hence, finally, e'in (47) is *1 or
- 1 according to whether the permutation 16,
'.., r* is even or odd. It is important that e'
depends'only on the type of matrix element M
xn;
considered, and not on the points xo, "',
therefore, it can be taken outside the integrals
l n (J r , .
One result of the foregoing analysis is to justify
the use of (37), instead of the more correct (38),
for the charge-current operator occurring in 11'
and 11i. For it has been shown that in each
matrix element such as M the factors { arrd {, in
(38) can be freely permuted, so that (38) can be
replaced bV (37), except in the case when the two
factors form an associated pair. In the exceptional case, M contains as a factor the vacuum
expectation value of the operator jr(r;) at some
point 11; this expectation valrre is zero according
to the correct formula (38), though it would be
infinite according to (37); thus the matrix elements in the exceptional case are always zero.
The conclusion is that only those matrix elements are to be calculated for which the integer
and in these
ri differs from i for every i*k,
elements the use of formula (37) is correct.
To write down the matrix elements of (31) for
ft is only necessary to take
the transition A+8,
all the products Q,, replace each by the sum of
the corresponding matrix elements M given by
(47), reassemble the terms into the form of the
P, from which they were derived, and finally
substitute back into the series (31). The problem
of calculating the matrix elements of (31) is
thus in principle solved. However, in the follow-

VII. GRAPHICAL RSPRESENTATION OF

MATRX ELEMENTS

lines."
Through each point of a graph pass two electron lines, and therefore the electron lines together form one open polygon containing the
vertices rck and'tcth, and possibly a number of
closed polygons as well. The closed polygons will
be called "closed loops," and their number
tn
denoted by L Now the permutation tn, "',
of the integers 0, ' ' ', a is clearly composed of
(l*1)
separate cyclic permutations. A cyclic
permutation is even or odd according to whether
the number of elements in it is odd or even.
Hence the parity of the permutation ro, ''', rn
is the parity of the number of even-number
cycles contained in it. But the parity of the
number of odd-number cycles in it is obviously
the same as the parity of the total number (z* 1)
of elements. The total number of cycles being
(l+ 1), the parity of the number of even-number
Since it was seen earlier that
cycles is (l-a).
the e'of Eq. (47) is determined just by the parity
of the permutation

rs, "',

rn, the above argu-

285
F. J, D YSO N
ment yields the simple formula

496

to the identity operator and gives, accordingly,

a zero matrix element for the transition ,4+8.
(s1)
Consequently, the disconnected G for which rr
This formula is one result of the presenttheory and x,p lie in Gz give zero contribution
to the
which can be much more easily obtained by matrix element of (31), and can be omitted
from
intuitive considerations of the sort used by further consideration. When rp and *,1" lie in
Gr,
Feynman.
again the C(G) may be summed over all G conIn Feynman's theory the graph corresponding sisting of the given Gr and all possible
Gz; but
to a particular matrix element is regarded, not this time the connected graph Gr itself is
to be
merely as an aid to calculation, but as a picture included in the sum. The sum of all the
C(G) in
of the physical processwhich gives rise to that this case turns out to be just C(G) multiplied
by
matrix element. For example, an electron line the expectation value in the vacuum of
the
joining rr to 12 represents the possible creation operator S(oo).
But the vacuum state, being a
cf an electron at rcr and its annihilation at x2, steady state, satisfies (21), and so the expecta:ogether with the possible creation of a positron tion value in question is equal to unity. Therezt xz and its annihilation at rt. This interpreta- fore the sum of the C(G) reduces to the single
:ion of a graph is obviously consistent with the term C(G), and again the disconnected graphs
nethods, and in Feynman's hands has been may be omitted from consideration.
rsed as the basis for the derivation of most of
The elimination of disconnected graphs is,
--heresults, of the present paper.
For reasonsof from a physical point of vierv, somewhat trivial,
=pace,these ideas of Feynman will not be dis- since these graphs arise merely from the fact
:ussedin further detail here.
that meaningful physical processes proceed siTo the product Po correspond a finite number multaneously with totally irrelevant fluctuations
rf graphs, one of which may be denoted by G; of fields in the vacuum. However, similar argu:ll possible G can be enumerated without dif- ments will now be used to eliminate a much
iculty for moderate values of n. 'I'o each G more important class of graphs, namely, those
:orresponds a contribution C(G) to the matrix involving self-energy effects. A "self-energy part"
=lementof (31) which is being evaluated.
of a graph G is defined as follows; it is a set of
It may happen that the graph G is discon- one or more vertices not including 16, together
:.ected,so that it can be divided into subgraphs, with the lines joining them, which is connected
.ach of which is connected,with no line joining with the remainder of G (or with the edge of the
: point of one subgraph to a point of another. diagram) only by two electron lines or by one or
-n such a case it is clear from (47) that C(G) is two photon lines. For definiteness it may be
:he product of factors derived from each sub- supposed that G has a self-energy part F, which
:laph separately. The subgraph G1 containing is connected with its surroundings only by one
:ne point 16 is called the "essential part" of G, electron line entering F at xt and another
ire remainder Gz the "inessential part." There leaving F at xz; the case of photon lines can be
:re now two casesto be considered,according to treated in an entirely analogous way. The points
;'hether the points xp and :trp lie in Gz or in Gr rc1dnd. rc2 may or may not be identical. From G
lhey must clearly both lie in the same sub- a "reduced graph" G0 can be obtained by omit;raph), In the first case, the factor C(Gz) ol ting F completely and joining the incoming line
i(G) can be seen by a comparison of (31) and at lc1with the outgoing line at *e to form a single
32) to be a contribution to the matrix element electron line in Go, the newly formed line being
:i the operator S(o) for the transition .4+8.
denoted by ),. Given Go and tr, there is conversely
l{ow letting G vary over all possiblegraphs with a well determined set I of graphs G which are
-re same Gr and different Sr, the
sum of the associated with Go and tr in this way; Go itself.is
,ontributions of all such G is a constant C(G) considered also to belong to f. It will now be
rultiplied by the total matrix element of S(co) shown that the sum C(l) of the contributions
ior the transition A+8. But for one-particle C(G) to the matrix element of (31) from all the
icatesthe operator S(o) is by (21) equivalent graphs G of I reduces to a single term C,(Go).

e,: (- 11t-"

286
RA DIAT I ON THEORIES

497

Suppose,for example, that the line tr in Go with Rr an absolute constant. Therefore the sum
leadsfrom a point rg to the edgeof the diagram. C(f) is in this case just C'(Go), where C'(G6) is
Then C(Go)is an integral containing in the inte- obtained from C(Gs)by the replacement
srand the matrix element of
(s6)
{'(xi+R&(xs).

0"@,)

/c?\

for creation of an electron into the state B. Let

the momentum-energy 4-vector of the created
electron be 2; the matrix element of (52) is of
the form
(s3)
["(xs):a"expl-i(P'x)/hl

In the casewhen the line tr leads into the graph

Go from the edge of the diagram to the point 13,
it is clear that C(r) will be similarly obtained
from C(Go) by the replacement
(57)

g(x")+Rf,!(xs).

There remains the case in which tr leads from

with a" independent of rcr. Now consider the one vertex ,s to another xa of. Go. In this case
sum C(f). It follows from an analysis of (31) C(Go) contains in its integrand the function
that C(f) is obtained from C(G) by replacing
(58)
$q(4,xe)Srp"(ra-xe),
the operator (52) bV
of
the
value
expectation
which is the vacuum
oDerator

/n\ [* av,' t-:t"

i"r -a/nd^t,
'

xP('i,"@a),HI(y), . . ., H'(y")).

P(0"@z),,l,p?c))
(s4)

(This is, of course, a consequenceof the special

character of the graphs of I.) It is required to
calculate the matrix element of (54) for a transition from the vacuum state O to the state B, i.e.,
for the emission of an electron into state E. This
matrix element will be denoted bv Z"; C(l) involves 2, in the same way that C(Go) involves
(53), Now Z" can be evaluated as a sum of
terms of the same general character as (47);
it will be of the form

(se)

according to (43). Now in analogy with (54),

C(r) is obtained from C(Go)by replacing (59) bv

i"er/nd^lr/n\f'_ay,I-:t"
XP({,

Hr (t),''',
"(x),,1,e@n),

HI (y")), (60)

and the vacuum expectation value of this operator will be denoted by

ln @z,xt) S' r o"(x a x t) -

(61)

By the methods of Section VI, (61) can be expanded as a series of terms of the same charf*
acter as (47) ;'tnis expansion will not be disKi"8(1ti-xt)YB\)d'y;,
Z
I
" : L i J-n
cussedin detail here, but it is easy to seethat it
leads to an expression of the form (61)' with
function
Ki
is
a
fact
is
that
where the important
So'(x) a certain universal function of the 4only of the coordinate differences betrveen y,'
r. It will not be possibleto reduce (61) to
vector
(53),
that
this implids
and *a. By
a numerical multiple of (58), as Z" was in the
(ss) previous case reduced to a multiple of f"' InZ":R"e@)Yp(4),
stead, there may be xpected to be a series exFrom
considerations
with R independent of ra.
pansion of the form
of relativistic invariance, R must be of the form
S"o"(r) : (R:* or(!'z - Koz)
+ a2(a2- Ko2)z
(P,t
6a"Rt(P\ *
) e"Rt(f2) ,
'
'
)
S
r
p
"
(
*
)
*
(
b
t
*
b
z(]'z- x0')+''')
*'
where p2 is the square of the invariant length of
X(7,1d / ax,l- rs)BrSr'1"(r), (62)
the 4-vector p. But since the matrix element
(53) is a solution of the Dirac equation,
p, : -hrro2,

(?n )p"Yp:,ih*oY
",

and so (55) reduces to

Z":RtY"Qci,

where !2 is the Dalembertian operator and the

a, b are numerical coefficients. In this case C(f)
will be equal to the C'(Go) obtained from C(Gr)
by the replacement
(63)
Sr'(rr-rr)tS r'(xt-xo).

287
F. J. DYSON

498

Applying the same methods to a graph G with

a self-energy part connected to its surroundings
by two photon.lines, the sum C(I) will be obtained as a single contribution C'(Go) from the
reduced graph Go, C'(Ge) being formed from
C(Go) by the replacement

responding to that term will contain the point r;

joined to the rest of the graph only by two electron lines, and this point by itself constitutes a
self-energy part of the graph. Therefore, all
terms involving f/s are to be omitted from (31)
in the calculation of matrix elements. The inD r(x r - x n)-D p' (xz- x e).
(64) tuitive argument for omitting these terms is
that they were only introduced in order to cancel
The function Drl is defined by the condition that out higher order self-energy terms arising from
(6s) fli, which are also to be omitted; the analysis
lltc6r"D pt(xs-xa)
of the foregoing paragraphs is a more precise
is the vacuum expectation value of the operator
form of this argument. In physical language,the
argument can be stated still more simply; since
6m is an unobservablequantity, it cannot appear
in the final description of observablephenomena.

L,{- o/r,)"1,
t,nI _'jy,. [_'-or,
X P ( A N Q c a ) ,A , ( , c ) , H I ( t l ,

. . ., t{(y")),

(66)

and may be expanded in a series

D s' (x) : (Roa ctar+cz(ar)r*.

. .)D r(x).

(67)

Finally, it is not difficult to seethat for graphs G

with self-energy parts connected to their surroundings by a single photon line, the sum C(I)
will be identically zero, and so such graphs may
be omitted from consideration entirely.
As a result of the foregoing arguments, the
contributions C(G) oI graphs with self-energy
parts can always be replaced by modified contributions C'(Go) from a reduced graph Go. A
given G may be reducible in more than one way
to give various Go,but if the processof reduction
is repeated a finite number of times a Go will be
obtained which is "totally reduced," contains no
self-energy part, and is uniquely determined by
G. The contribution C'(Go) of a totally reduced
graph to the matrix element of (31) is now to be
calculated as a sum of integrals of expressions
like (47), but.with a replacement(56), (57), (63),
or (64) made correspondingto every line in Go.
This having been done, the matrix element of
(31) is correctly calculated by taking into consideration each totally reduced graph once and
once only.
The elimination of graphs with self-energy
parts is a most important simplification of the
theory. For according to (22), flr contains the
subtracted part fls, which will give rise to many
additional terms in the expansionof (31). But
if any such term is taken, say, containing the
factor fls(r) in the integrand, every graph cor-

VIII. VACUUMPOLARIZATIONAND CHARGE

RENORMALIZATION
The question now arises: What is the physical
meaning of the new functions Dp' and Sr', and
of the constant Rr ? In general terms, the answer
is clear. The physical processesrepresented by
the self-energyparts of graphs have been pushed
out of the calculations, but these processesdo
not consist entirely of unobservableinteractions
of single particles with their self-fields, and so
cannot entirely be written off as "self-energy
processes." In addition, these processesinclude
the phenomenon of vacuum polarization, i.e.,
the modification of the field surrounding a
charged particle by the charges which the particle induces in the vacuum. Therefore, the appearanceol Dp', Spt, and R1 in the calculations
may be regarded as an explicit representation of
the vacuum polarization phenomenawhich were
implicitly contained in the processesnow ignored.
In the present theory there are two kinds of
vacuum polarization, one induced by the external field and the other by the quantized electron and photon fields themselves; these will be
called "external" and "internal," respectively.
It is only the internal polarization which is
represented yet in explicit fashion by the substitutions (56), (57), (63), (64); the external
rvill be included later,
To form a concrete picture of the function Dr',
it may be observed that the function Dn(y-z)
represents in classical electrodynamics the retarded potential of a point charge at y acting
upon a point charge at z, together with the re-

288
RADIATION

499

tarded potential of the charge at z acting on the

charge at y. Therefore, Dr may be spoken of
loosely as "the elebtromagnetic interaction between two point charges." In this semiclassical
picture, Dr' is then the electromagnetic interaction between two point charges, including the
which each
effects of the charge-distribution
charge induces in the vacuum.
The complete phenomenon of vacuum polarization, as hitherto understood, is included in
the above picture of the function Dr". There is
nothing left for S"' to represent. Thus, one of
the important conclusions of the present theory
is that there is a second phenomenon occurring
in nature, included in the term vacuum polarization as used in this paper, but additional to
vacuum polarization in the usual sense of the
word. The nature of the second phenomenon can
best be explained by an example.
The scattering of one electron by another
may be represented as caused by a potential
energy (the Mlller interaction) acting between
them. If one electron is at y and the other at z,
then, as explained above, the effect of vacuum
polarization of the usual kind is to replace a
Iactor Dp in this potential energy by Dp'. Now
consider an analogous, but unorthodox, representation of the Compton effect, or the scattering
of an electron by a photon. If the electron is at y
and the photon at a, the scattering may be again
represented by a potential energy, containing
now the operator Sr(y-z) as a factor; the potential is an exchange potential, because after
the interaction the electron must be considered
to be at a and the photon at y, but this does not
detract from its usefulness. By analogy with the
-vector charge-current density ju which interacts with the potential ,F, a spinor Comptoneffect density ua may be defined by the equation
: A ,(x) (t )
,
"e{ eQ)
"(x)
and an adjoint spinor by
u

a"(x) :0p@)Q,)o"A u@).

These spinors are not directly observable quantities, but the Compton effect can be adequately
described as an exchange potential, of magnitude
acting between the
proportional to S.(y-z),
Compton-effect density at any point y and the'
adjoint density at z. The second vacuum polariza-

THEORIES
tion phenomenon is described by a change in
the form of this potential from Sr to Sr'. Therein
fore, the phenomenon may be pictured
physical terms as the inducing, by a given
element of Compton-effect density at a given
point, of additional Compton-effect density in
the vacuum around it.
In both sorts of internal vacuum polarization;
the functions De and. Sr, in addition to being
altered in shape, become multiplied by numerical
(and actually divergent) factors Ra and Rr; also
the matrix elements of (31) become multiplied
by numerical factors such as RrRr*. However, it
is believed (this has been verified only for secondorder terms) that all z'th-order matrix elements
of (31) will involve these factors only in the form
of a multiplier
(eR2RJ)";
this statement includes the contributions from
the higher terms of the series' (62) and (67).
Here a is defined as the constant occurring in
the fundamental interaction (16) bV virtue of
(37). Now the only possible experimental determination of e is by means of measurements of
the effects described by various matrix elements
of (31), and so the directly measured quantity
is not e but aRrRrl. Therefore, in practice the
letter a is used to denote this measured quantity,
and the multipliers R no longer appear explicitly
in the matrix elements of (31) ; the change in
the meaning of the letter e is called "charge
renormalization," and is essential if e is to be
identified with the observed electronic charge.
As a result of the renormalization, the divergent
coefficients Rt, Rr, and Ra in (56), (57), (62)'
and (67) are to be replaced by unity, and the
higher coefficients o, b, and c by expressions involving only the renormalized charge e.
The external vacuum polarization induced by
the potential /u" is, physically speaking, only a
special case of the first sort of internal polarization; it can be treated in a precisely similar
manner. Graphs describing external polarization
effects are those with an "externai polarization
part," namely, a part including the point rcq
and connected with the rest of the graph by
only a single photon line. Such a.graph is to be
"reduced" by omitting the polarization part
entirely

and renaming

with

the label ro the

289
F,

J.

point at the further end of the singlephoton line.

A discussionsimilar to thoseof SectionVII leads
to the conclusion that only reduced graphs need
be considered in the calculation of the matrix
element of (31), and that the effect of external
polarization is explicitly represented if in the
contributions from thesegraphs a replacement
A u"(x)+A u"'(x)

500

DYSON

(68)

is made. After a renormalization of the unit of

potential, similar to the renormalization oI
charge,the modified potential,4.r" takes the form
Au"'(x): (1+rrIr+rr(!z1z-t, . . .)Auc(x), (69)
where the coefficientsare the sameas in (67).
It is necessary, in order to determine the
functions Dp', Sr', and Au'', to go back to formulas (60) and (66). The determination of the
vacuum expectation values of the operators (60)
and (66) is a problem of the same kind as the
original problem of the calculation of matrix
elementsof (31), and the various terms in the
operators (60) and (66) must again be split up'
represented by graphs, and analyzed in detail.
However, since Dr' and Sr' are universal functions, this further analysis has-only to be carried
out once to be applicable to all problems'
It is one of the major triumphs of the
Schwinger theory that it enablesan unambiguous
interpretation to be given to the phenomenon of
vacuum polarization (at least of the first kind)'
and to the vacuum expectation value of an
operator such as (66). In making this interpretation, profound theoretical problems arise, particularly concerned with the gauge invariance of
the theory, about which nothing will be said
here. For Schwinger's solution of these problems,
the reader must refer to his forthcoming papers.
Schwinger'sargument can be transferred without
essential change into the framework of the
presentPaPer.
Having overcome the difficulties of principle,
Schwinger proceeded to evaluate the function
Dr' explicitly as {ar as terms of otder a:(e2/
Arhc) (heavislde units). In particular, he found
for the coefficient q in (67) and (69) the value
(- a/l5rro2) to this order.sIt is hoped to publish
-s.h*irrg".'"
results agree with those of the e-arlier,
theoretieliv unsatisfactor-y trea tment of vacuu m polarizaiion. th" b."t uccount of the earlier work is V. F. Weisskopf,
iigl. Oan"t<e Sels. Math.-Fys. Medd. 14, No. 6 (1936)'

in a sequel to the present paper a similar evaluation of the function Srf; the analysis involved is
too complicated to be summarized here.
IX. SUMMARY OF RESULTS
In this section the results of the preceding
pages will be summarized, so far as they relate
to the performance of practical calculations. In
effect, this summary will consist of a set of rules
for the application of the Feynman radiation
theory to a certain class of problems.
Suppose an electron to be moving in an external field with interaction energy given by
(33). Then the interaction energy to be used in
calculating the motion of the electron, including
radiative corrections of all orders' is

H n@i : L G i / h c ) " 1/1n t l J"

n:0

:L,t-o/ra,u/nt[_'.a*,
I_:."
XP(H"(xi,

Hc(x), "',

Ht(x")),

(70)

with Ilt given by (16), and the P notation as

defined in (29).
To find the effective z'th-order radiative correction to the potential acting on the electron,
it is necessary to calculate the matrix elements ol
J, for transitions from one one-electron state
elements can be
to another. These matrix
written down most conveniently in the form of
an operator K" bilinear in ry'and ry',whose matrix
are the
elements for one-electron transitions
same as those to be determined. In fact, the
operator K" itself is already the matrix' element
to be determined if the 0 and tlt contained in it
are regarded as one-electron wave functions.
To write down K", the integrand P" in J" is
first expressed in terms of its factors {r' 9, and A'
all suffixbs being indicated explicitly, and the
expression (37) used for ju' All possible graphs G
with (z*1) vertices are now drawn as described
in Section VII, omitting disconnected graphs,
graphs with self-energy parts, and graphs with
external vacuum polarization parts as defiued in
Section VIII. It will be found that in each graph
there are at each vertex two electron lines and
one photon line, with the exception of ro at
which there are two electron lines only; further,

290
RADIATION

501

THEORIES

such graphs can exist only for even n. K" is the

sum of a contribution K(G) from each G.
Given G, K(G) is obtained from J" by the
following transformations. First, for each photon
line joining r and y in G, replace two factors
A ,(x)A,(y) in P" (regardless of their positions) by

(7r)

llrc6u,Dr' (x !) ,

u'ith Dr'given by (67) with Rr:1, the function

De being defined bv (a2). Second, for each electron line joining r to y in G, replace two factors
in P" (regardless of positions) b1'
{"@){e0)
(72)

tS'ra"@-Y)

with Sr' given by (62) with Rz:1, the function

Sr being defined bv @D and (45)' Third, replace
in P"
the remaining two factors P({,,(z),t{w))
by {rr(z),t'{w) in this order. Fourth, replace
A u"((o) by A u"'(xo) given bY
A u " ' ( x ): 4

-la/l5rxn')A'A
u"7*)

u"@)

(73)

or, more generally, bv (69). Fifth, multiply the

whole by (-1)t, where I is the number of closed
loops in G as defined in Section VII.
The above rules enable K" to be written down
very rapidly for small values of z' It should be
observed thatil K" is being calculated, and if it
is not desired to include effects of higher order
than tlre z'th, then Dr', Sr', and Au"' nr (71)'
(72), and (73) reduce to the simple functions
Dr, Sr, and Au'. Also, the integrand in /" is a
symmetrical function of rr, ' ' ', r,; therefore,
graphs which differ only by a relabeling of the
vertices xt, '" ' x^ give identical contributions
to K, and need not be considered separately.
The extension of these rules to cover the
calculation of matrix elements of (70) of a more
general character than the one-electron transitions hitherto considered presents no essential
difficulty. All that is necessary is to consider
graphs with more than two "loose ends," representing processes in which more than one particle
is involved. This extension is not treated in the
present paper, chiefly because it would lead to
unpleasantly cumbersome formulas.
X. EXAMPLE-SECOND-ORDER
CORRECTIONS

RADIATIVE

As an illustration of the rules of procedure of

the previous section, these rules will be used for
down the terms giving second-order
writing

radiative corrections to the rnotion of an clectrolt

in an cxternal field. Lct the energy of tlie erternal field be

-lt/cfj,(xo)A,"(xi.

g4)

Then there will be one second-order correction

term
11: la / rS r x o2)11/ cfj u@) if' A," (t o)
arising frorn the subst-itution (73) in thc zcruorder term (7a). This is the well-known vacuum
polarization or Uehling term.'
The ren-raining second-order term arises fronr
the second-order part Jr of (70). Written in expanded form, J2 is

r*
r"
r'(r0).
Jr: ietI dxt I dxrPr.0"(xo)(v^)"p/r(ro)l
J-a
.t-6
&,(x')(t ) 'tL{x)A p(x),
Q"@,)0 ) <{ r (x,)A " (x,)).
Next, all admissable graphs u'ith the three
fi2 are to be drarvn. It is easy to
vertices :tn,'"$1,
see that there are only two such graphs, that G
shown in Fig. 1, and the identical graph with lu1
and rg interchanged. The full lines are electron
lines,the dotted line a photon line. The contribution K(G) is obtained from Jz by substituting
accordingto the rules of Section IX; in this case
l:0, and the primes can be omitted from (71)'
(72), (73) since only second-orderterms are required. The integrand in K(G) can be reassembledinto the form of a matrix product,
suppressingthe suffixesot, "', (. Then, multiplying by a factor 2 to allow for the secondgraph,
the complete second-ordercorrection to (74)
arising from Jz becomes

r(x,-xz)A,"(xo)
L: - iles/vhcl
!1.' I-!.,D
@)'
x{(r,)r,Sr(ro - x )t,S r (xz * o1r,9
A'
Uehling,
(1935);
E'
49
a8,
Rev.
Phys.
RJJS"rb"r,
Phys.Rev.48,55(1935).
-l

29r
F.

J.

This is the term which gives rise to the main

part of the Lamb-Retherford line shift,1o the
anomalous magnetic moment of the electron,ll
and the anomalous hyperfine splitting of the
ground state of hydrogen.l'
The above expression Z is formally simpler
than the corresponding expression obtained by
Schwinger, but the two are easily seen to be
equivalent. In particular, the above expression
does not lead to any great reduction in the labor
involved in a numerical calculation of the Lamb
shift. Its advantage lies rather in the ease with
which it can be written down.
In conclusion, the author would like to express his thanks to the Commonwealth Fund of
New York for financial support, and to Professors Schwinger and Feynman {or the stimulating lectures in which they presented their respective theories.
Notesad.dedin prooJ (To Section II). The argument of
Section II is an over-simplification of the method of
Tomonaga,land is unsound.There is an error in the derivation of (3); derivativesoccurring in 11(r) give rise to noncommutativity between I1(z) and field quantities at /'
when r is a point on o infinitesimally distant from r'. The
10W. E. lamb

24r (1947).

and R. C. Retherford,

Phys. Rev. 72'

rr P. Kusch and H. M. Foley, Phys. Rev. 74, 250 (1948).

uI. E. Nafe and E. B. Nelson, Phys. Rev. 73, 718
(194i|); Aage Bohr, Phys. Rev.73, i109i1948).

DYSON

502

argument should be amended as follows. ,D is defined only

for flat surfaces t(r):t, ^n4 for such surfaces (3) and (6)
are correct. V is defined for general surfaces by (12) and
(10), and is verified to satisfy (9). For a flat surface, iD and
rP are then shown to be related by (7). Finally, since I{r
does not involve the derivatives in 11, the argument leading
to (3) can be correctly applied to prove that for general c
the state-vector v(c) will completely describe results of
observations of the system on o.
(To Section III ). A covariant perturbation theory similar
to that of Section III has previously been developed by
E. C G. Stueckelberg, Ann. d. Phys. 21, 367 (1934);
Nature, 153, 143 (19+4).
'eflective
potential" is not
(To Section V.;. Schwinger's
Ilr given by (25), but is I1r': QHTQ-|. Here Qis a "squareroot" of S(o) obtained by expanding (.9())l by the
binomial theorem. The physical meaning of this is that
Schwinger specifies states neither by O nor by 0', but by
whose delian intermediate state-vector Att:Qtt:Q-rOt,
nition is symmetrical between past and future. f/r'is also
symmetrical between past and future. For one-particle
states, 1{r and Hr' are identical.
Equation (32) can most simply be obtained directly from
the product expansion of S( < ).
(To Section VII). Equation (62) is incorrect. The function
Sr'is well-behaved, but its fourier transform has a logarithmic dependence on frequency, which rokes an expansion
precisely of the form (62 ) impossible.
(To Section X). The term I still contains two divergent
parts. One is an "infra-red catastrophe" removable by
standard methods. The other is an "ultraviolet" divergence, and has to be interpreted as an additional chargerenormalization, or, better, cancelled by part of the chargerenormalization calculated in Section VI I I

292

P o p e r2 5

The S Matrix in Quantum Electrodynamics

F. J. DysoN
Institrute Jar Aduanced. Stud!, princeton,
New Jersey
(Received February 21, 19+9)
The covariant quantum electrodynamics of romonaga, Schwinger, and Feynman is used as the
basis for a general treatment of scattering problems involving electrons, po.it.o.s,
and photons.
Scattering processes, including the creation and annihilation of particles, aie complctell, described
by the S matrix of Heisenbcrg. It is shown that the elements of this matrix can be calcrilated. bv a
consist"nt use of perturbation theory, {u anl de:irpLl order in rhe 6ne-srrucfure con.ranr. D.Lailed
rules are given for carrying out such calculations, and it is shorvn that divergeoces arising from
higher order radiative corrections can be removed from the S matrix by a consistent use of the ideas
of mass and charge renormalization.
Not considered ia this paper are the problems of extending the treatment to include bound-state
phenomena, and of proving the convergrncc of the theory as the ortler of pe.turbatioo itself tends to
infinity.

I. INTRODUCTION

JN a previous paperl (to be referrecl to in what

I f o l l o , u =a s I J i h e r a d i a r i o nt h e o r y o f T o m o n a g a 2
and Schwingeri was appliecl in detaii to the problEm
of the radiative cor."Ctio.,, to the motion oia sinsle
electron in a given external field. It rvas shou'n th-at
the rules of calcr:lation for corrections of this kind
were identical with those rvhich had been derived
by Feynmana from his own racliation theory. For
the one-electron problem the radiative corrections
lvere fully described by an operator H, (Eq. (20)
of I) which appeared is the "effective- potential';
acting upon tire electron, after the intcractions of
the electron with its own self_fielclhad been eliminated by a contact transformation. The differenc"
between the Schwinger and Feynman theories lay
only in the choice oia particulir representation i;
which the matrix elements of IIr were calculated
(Section V of I).
The present paper deals with the relation betrvecn
the Scirwingei and Feynman theories rvhen the
restriction to one-electron problems is removed. In
these more general circumitances the two theories
appear as co;plementary rather than identical. The
Feynman metirod is essentially a set of rules for the
calculation of the elements of the Heisenberg
S matrix corresponcling to any physical process]
and can be appliecl with di.ectreis io all kinas oi

ates radiative corrections by exhibiting them as

extra terms appearing in the Schrodinger equation
o f a s ) s t e m o I p r r t i c l e s a n t l i s > u i r e , le s p c c i . r l l yt o
bolnd-state problems. In spite of tl.re difference of
principle, the two methods in practice involve the
calculation of closely related expressions;moreover,
the theory underlying them is in all casesthe sane.
The systematic technique of Feynman, the erposition of which occupied the second half of I and
occupies the major part of the present paper, is
therefore norv available for the evaluation not only
of the ,S rratrix but also of most of the operators
occurring in the Schwingcr theory.
The promincnt part which the S matrix plays
in this paper is due to its practical usefulnessas the
connecting link between the Feynman technique of
calculation and the Hamiltonian formulation of
quantum electrodynamics. This practical usefulness
remains, rvhether or not one follows Heisenberg in
believing that thc S matrix may eventually replace
the Hamiltoniar.raltogether. It is still an unanswered
question, whether the finiteness of the S matrix
automatically implies the finitenessof all observable
quantities, such as bound-state energy levels,
optical transition probabilities, etc , occurring in
clectrodynamics. An aflirmative answer to the
question is in no way essential to the argr:ments of
this paper. Even if a finite S matrix does not of

probrems'5
scattering
t* t:^1:::^:'method
evaru-[::i:,lliJi,-lilitr",tT.it"u"tL".1,lt'"Tii"T."liiT;
lF
Dvson, Phvs Rev T5'486 (1949)'

J'
2 S i n - l r i r o T o m o n a g a , P r o g . T h e o r . P h v . . l , 2 7 ( 1 9 1 6 ) ; cnite; to verify this, it will be necessary ro repear
li
the analysis of the present paper, keeping all the
Koba, Tati, and lo-monaga] Prog. fhe6r. pil..
z, loi
(1947) qnd 2,-198 (1947); S. Kanesawa^and.S.-Tomon_aga, time closer to the original Schrvinger
theory than
P r o g . T h e o r . P h y s . 3 , 1 ( 1 9 4 8 )a n d 3 , i 0 1 ( 1 9 4 8 ) ;S i n - I t i r o
Tomonaga, Phvs,Rev. 74,224 Qa-48);Ito, Koba, and ro(1946); Nature, I53, 143 (1944); phys. soc. cambridge coomonaga, Prog. Them, Phys. 3, 276 (1918); Z. Koba and ference Report, 199 (19+i); E. C. C. Stueckeiberg-and D.
S.-Tomonaga,Prog. Theor. Phys.3, 290 (1948).
Rivier, Phys. Rev. 74, 218 (1948). Stueckelbergan'ticipatecl
. I J-qlia3. Sg!,Ilngql, Phys. Rev. 73' 416 (194$; 7a, 1439 seyeral feaiures of the Feynman tireory, in partiiular the use
(194-8);75,_651(1949).
of the function Dr (in Sru;ckelberg'snotutioi pc) to represent
a Richard P."Feynman, Phys. Rev. 7.4,1430 (1948).
retarded (i.e., causally transnriried) electronagnetii inter6The idea of using standard elecLrodynamicsas a- starting actions. For a revierv-of the earliei part
of this work, see
point for an explicit calculation of the S matrix has been Gresor Wentzel, Rev. N,Iod.Phvs. l9'. 1 (1947). The use of
previously_developed
by Q Q. G.S!reckelberg, Helv. Phys. masi renormalizationin scaLteringp.oble-" is due to H. W
A c t a , 1 4 , 5 1 ( 1 9 a 1 ) ; 1 7 , 3 ( 1 9 4 1 ) ; 1 8 , 1 9 5 ( 1 9 4 5 ) ; 1 9 , 2 4 2 L e w i s ,p h y s . R e v 7 3 , 1 7 3 ( 1 9 4 8 ) l

l 73 6

293
r737

NIATRIX

IN

QUANTUM

has here bccn possible. There is no reason for

attributing a more fundamer.rtalsignificance to the
S matrix than to other obscrvable quantities, nor
\\'as it Heisenbcrg's intention to do so. In the last
section of this paper, tentative suggestions are
made for a synthesis of the Hamiltonian and
Heisenberg philosophies.

ELECTRODYNAMICS

Here the P notation is as defined in Section V of I,

and
IL(x):

HI(x)*II"(x)

(s)

is the sum of the interaction energiesof the electron

field with the photon field and rvith the external
potentials. The Feynman radiation theory provides
a set of rules for the calculation of matrix elements
MATRIX
THEORY
AS
AN
S
FEYNMAN
THE
II.
of (4), between states composed of any number of
THEORY
ingoing and outgoing free particles. Also, quantities
The S matrix was originally defined by Heisen- contained in (4) are the only ones with which the
berg in terms of the stationary solutions of a scat- Feynman rules can deal directly. The Fcynman
tering problern. A typical stationary solution is theory is thus correctly characterizedas an S matrix
reprcsentecl by a time-inclcpendent s.ave function
theory.
V' rvhich has a lrart representing ingoing r,vaves
One particular way to anal-vzeU( o ) is to use (5)
rvhich are as-vmptotically of the form V1', ancl a to expand (4) in a seriesof terms of ascending order
part reprcsenting outgoing rvaves rvhich are asymp- in 11". Substitution froln (5) into (4) gives
totically of the forrn Vr'. The S matrix is the transformation operator S with the property that
V:' : SiLr'

(1)

for cver)' stationary state V'.

In Scction I I I of I an operator U( o ) rvas defined
and stated to be identical with the S matrix. Since
U( o ) was defineclin terms of time-clependentwave
functions, a little care is needed in making the identification. In fact, the equation
Vr: /(o)V1

Q)
held, where Vr and Vz were the asymptotic forms
of the ingoing and outgoing parts.of a wave function
V in the V-representation of I (the "interaction
representation" of Schwinger3). Now the timeindependent wave function V' corresponds to a
t i m e - d e p e n d e n tw a v e f u n c t i o n
expl(-i/h)Etlv'
in the Schrodinger representation, where -E is the
tbtal energy of the state; and this correspondsto a
wave function in the interaction representation
v:expl(li/h)l(110-E)lv',

(3)

rvhere -F1ois the total free particle Hamiltonian.

However, the asymptotic parts of the wave function
V', both ingoing and outgoing, represent freely
traveling particles of total energy -8, and are therefore eigenfunctions of .I1owith eigenvalue E. This
implies, in virtue of (3), that the asymptotic parts
9r and Vz of V are actually time-independent and
e q u a l , r e s p e c t i v e l y ,t o V 1 ' a n d V r ' . T h u s ( 1 ) a n d
(2) are identical, and I/(o) is indeed the S matrix.
Incidentally, U( o ) is also the "invariant collision
operator" defined by Schwinger.s
There is a series expansion ol U(a) analogous
to (32) of I, namely,

u@:Ea *l_'.*,[_'^d""
xP(I1r(rr), . . ', n'@")). (4)

"
ur4: ^t:,
.t,(;)* o I_-*,
f-

x I
I

d x , , - ^ P ( f i ' ( x , )" ,. , H " ( r ^ ) ,

xHI (x^a), ..', HI(x*"")).

(6)

In this double series, the term of zcro order in H"

is S( o ), given by (32) of I. The term of first order is
f-

Ur:Gi/hc) |

Hr!)dx,

A)

J.*

where -Flr is given by (31) of L Clearly, S( o ) is the

S matrix representing scattering of electrons and
photons by each other in the absenceof an external
potential; Ur is the S matrix representing the
additional scattering produced by an external
potential, rvhen the external potential is treated in
the first Born approximation; higher tcrms of the
series (6) would correspond to treating the external
potential in the second or higher Born approximation. The operator IIp played a prominent part in I,
where it was in no way connected with a Born approximation; however, it rvas there introduced in a
somewhat unnatural manner, ancl its physical
meaning is made clearer by its appearance in (7).
In fact, Hp maj be defined by the statement that
(- i/h) (6t)(aa)H r(r)
is the contribution to the S matrix that would be
produced by an external potential of strength 11",
icting for a small duration 6l and over a small
volume 6o in the neighborhood of the space-time
point r.
The remainder of this section rvill be occupied
with a statement of the Feynman rules for evaluating t/(o). Proofs will not be given, becausethe
rules are only trivial generalizations of the rules

294
F.

J.

which were given in I for the evaluation of matrix

elements of 11r corresponding to one-electron
transitions.
In evaluating U(o) we shall not make any distinction between the external and radiative parts
of the electromagnetic field; this is physically
reasonable since it is to some extent a matter of
convention how much of the field in a given situation is to be regarded as "external." The interaction
energy occurring in (4) is then
H'(r)

: - ieA r@){ (x)t,,l, Qc)- 6mc,F@)'l'@),

(8)

where,4., is the total electrornagnetic field, and the

term in 6m is included in order to allow for the fact
that the interaction representation is defined in
terms of the total mass of an electron including its
"electromagnetic mass" 6m (see Section IV of I).
The first step in the evaluation of U(o) is to substitute from (8) into (4), writing out in full the
suffixes of the operators {r,, ,rp which are concealed
in the matrix product notation of (8). After such a
substitution, (4) becomes

U(*):

*loJ^

1738

DYSON

(9)

where -I, is an z-fold integral with an integrand

which is a polynomial in {", te and .Auoperators.
The most general matrix element of -I" is obtained
by allowing some of the {'", {p and ,4.uoperators to
annihilate particles in the initial state, some to
create particles in the final state, while others are
associatedin pairs to perform a successivecreation
and annihilation of intermediate particles. The
operators which are not associated in pairs, and
which are available for the real creation and annihilation of particles, are called "free"; a particular
type of matrix element of -I" is specified by enumerating which of the operators in the integrand
are to be free and which are to be associatedin pairs.
As described more fully in Section VII of I, each
type of matrix element of J, is uniquely represented
by a "graph" G consisting of z points (bearing the
labels rr, . , ', r") and various lines terminating at
these points.
The relation betlveen a type of matrix element
of -I" and its graph G is as follows. For every assothere is a
ciated pair of operators (0@,{(y)),
directed line (electron line) joining r to y in G. For
every associated pair of operators (A(r)' A(y))'
there is an undirected line (photon line) joining *
and y in G. For every free operator 'y'(r), there is a
directed line in G leading from rc to the edge of the
diagram. For every free operator ry'(*), there is a
directed line in G leading to r from the edge of the
diagram. For every free operator -4(r), there is an
undirected line in G leading from s to the edge of
the diagram. Finally, for a particular type of

matrix element oI J, it is specified that at each

point r; either the part of E{x;) containing -Au(r)
or the part containing dzz is operating; correspondingly, at each vertex ,ci of G there are either
two electron lines (one ingoing and one outgoing)
and one photon line, or else two electron lines only.
Lines joining one point to itself are always forbidden.
In every graph G, the electron lines form a finite
number m of open polygonal arcs with ends at the
edge of the diagram, and perhaps in addition a
number I of closed polygonal loops. The corresponding type of matrix element of J,has m free
operators {, and m free operators ry'; the two end
segments of any one open arc correspond to two free
operators, one ty' and one ry',which will be called a
"{ree pair." The matrix elements of -r" are now to
be calculated by means of an operator -r(O, which
is defined for each graph G of z vertices, and which
is obtained from -I, by making the following five
alterations.
First, at each point r;, 111(:r;)is to be replaced by
either the first or the second term on the right of
(8), as indicated by the presence or absence of a
photon line at the vertex r; of G. Second, for every
electron line joining a vertex r to a vertex y in G,
two operators {r"(x) and {p(y) in -I", regardless of
their positions, are to be replaced by the function

tsra"@-Y),

(10)

as clelined by (44) and (a.5) of I. Third, for every

photon line joining two vertices x and y of G, two
operators.4r(r) and A,(y) in -I,, regardlessof their
positions, are to be replaced by the function
lhc6,,Dr(x-y),

(11)

defined by (42) of I. Fourth, all free operators in -I"

are to be left unaltered, but the ordering by the
P notation is to be dropped, and the order of the
free rf and ry'operators is to be arranged so that the
two members of each free pair stand consecutively
and in the order {tt; the order of the free pairs
among themselves, and of all free -du operators, is
left arbitrary. Fifth, the whole expression -I" is to
be multiplied by
(12)
(_t1"-t-^.
The Feynman rules for the evaluation of U(*)
are essentially contained in the above definition of
the operators -f(O. To each value of z correspond
only i finite number of graphs G, and all possible
mairix elements of {/( o ) are obtained by substituting into (9) for each -/" the sum of all the cort"rpo-tlding J (G). It is necessaryonly to specify how
the matrii element of a given -I(G) corresponding to
a given scattering process may be written down'
The matrix element of J(G) for a given process
mav be obtained, broadly speaking, by replacing

295
1739

MATRIX

IN

QUANTUM

each free operator in -r(G) by the wave function of

the particle which it is supposed to create or annihilaie. More specifrcally, each free rf operator may
either create an electron in the final state or annihilate a positron in the initial state, and the reverse
processes are performed by a free ry' operator.
Therefore, for a transition from a state involving
.4 electrons and B positrons to a state involving
C electrons and D positrons, only operators J(G)
(Bf C) ft"" pairs contribute
containing (A+D):
matrix elements. For each such -r(G), the (.4*D)
free ry' operators are to be replaced in all possible
combinations by the ,4 initial electron wave functions and the D 6nal positron wave functions, and
the (B*C) free ry'operators are to be similarly replaced by the initial positron and final electron
wave functions, and the results of all such replacemtlnts added together, taking account of the antisymmetry of the total wave functions of the system
in the individual particle wave functions. In the
case of the free ,4, operators, the situation is
rather different, since each such operator may either
create a photon in the final state, or annihilate a
photon in the initial state, or represent merely the
external potential. Therefore, for a transition from
a state with,4 photons to a state with B photons,
Iree Au
any J(G) with not less than (AIB)
operators may give a matrix element. If the number
these
of free A, operators in J(G) is (,4.*B*C),
operators are to be replaced in all possible combinations by the (.4 f B) suitably normalized potentials corresponding to the initial and final photon
states, and by the external potential taken C times,
and the results of all such replacements added
together, taking account now of the symmetry of
the total wave functions in the individual photon
states.
In practice cases are seldom likely to arise of
scattering problems in which more than two similar
particles are involved. The replacement of the free
operators in -r(G) by wave functions can usually be
carried out by inspection, and the enumeration of
matrix-elements of I/( o ) is practically complete as
soon as the operators J(G) have been written down.
The above rules for the calculation of U(o)
describe the state of affairs before any attempt has
been made to identify and remove the various
divergent parts of the expressions. In particular,
contributions are included from all graphs G, even
those which yield nothing but self-energy effects.
For this reason, the rules here formulated are
superficially different from those given for the oneelectron problem in Section IX of I, which described the state of affairs after many divergencies
had been removed. Needless to say, the rules are
not complete until instructions have been supplied
for the removal of all infinite quantities from the
theory; in Sections V-VII of this paper it will be

ELECTRODYNAMICS

shown how the formal-structure of the S matrix

makes such a complete removal of infinities appear
attainable.
Another essential limitation is introduced into
the S matrix theory by the use of the expansion (4)'
All quantities discussed in this paper are expansions
of this kind, in which it is assumed that not only
the radiation interaction but also the external
potential is small enough to be treated as a perturbation. It is well known that an expansion in
powers of the external potential does not give a
either in problems
satisfactory approximation,
involving bound states or in scattering problems at
low energies. In'particular, whenever a scattering
problem allows the possibility of one of the incident
particles being captured into a bound state, the
c a p t u r e p r o c e s sw i l l n o t b e r e p r e s e n t e di n U ( o ; ,
since the initial and final states for processes described by U(o) are always free-particle states' It
is the expansion in powers of the external potential
which breaks down when such a capture process is
possible. Therefore it must be emphasized that the
perturbation theory of this paper is applicable only
to a restricted class of problems, and that in other
situations the Schwinger theory will have to be used
in its original form.
III. TIIE S MATRI'( IN MOMENTUM SPACE
Both for practical applications to specific problems, and for general theoretical discussion, it is
convenient to express the S matrix [/( o ) in terms
of momentum variables. For this purpose, it is
enough to consider an expression which will be
denoted by M, and which is a typical example of
the units out of which all matrix elements of I/( o )
are built up. A particular integer n and a particular
graph G of a vertices being supposed fixed, the
operator J(G) is constructed as in the previous
seetion, and M is defined as the number obtained by
substituting for each of the free operators in J(G)
one particular free-particle wave function. More
specifically, for each free operator ry'(a)in J(G) there
is substituted
(13)
{(k)eikr"t,
where fr, is some constant 4 vector representing the
momentum and energy of an electron, or minus the
momentum and energy of a positron, and where
t(k) is a constant spinor. For each free operator
l(*) there is substituted
{,(k'12-;tr''u,

(14)

where ry'(fr')is again a constant spinor. For each free

operator Ar(x) there is substituted
Au(k't)etkr""r'
where Au(k")

(15)

is a constant 4 vector which may

296
F.

J.

7740

DYSON

appear in M a 4 vcctor variable of integration,

which nay be denoted by put,l: 1, ' . . , F. However,
after this substitution is made, the space-time
variables Jrl, ..., Jraoccur in M only in the exponential factors, and the integration over these
variables can be performed. The result of the
integration over rci is to give
(2r)a6(q),
F r G .1 .
represent the polarization vector of a quantum
whose momentum-energy 4-vector is either plus or
minus ,br"; alternatively, Ar(k") ntay represent the
Fourier component of the external potential with a
particular wave number and frequency specified by
the 4 vector h". There is no loss of generality in
splitting up the external potential into Fourier
components of the form (15). When the substitutions (13), (14), (15) are made in -r(Q, the expression M which is obtained is still an z-fold integral
over the whole of space-time, and in addition
depends parametrically upon E constant 4 vectors
in momentum-space, where E is the number of free
operators in "r(G).
The graph C will contain E external lines, i.e..
lines with one end at a vertex and the other end at
the edge of the diagram. To each of these external
lines correspondsone constant 4 vector, rvhich may
be denoted by kr!, ,i:1, ' . ., E, and one constant
spinor or polarization vector appearing in M, either
,l,Gt)or 0&\ or Ar&t).
Suppose that G contains F internal lines, i.e.,
lines with both ends at vertices. To each of these
lines corresponds a Dr or an Sr function 1n M, as
specified by (11) or (10). These functions have been
expressed by Feynman as 4-dimensional Fourier
integrals of very simple form, namely

(20)

where the 6 represents a simple 4-dimensional

Dirac 6-function, anrl qi is a 4 vector formed by
taking an algebraic sum of thc ki and pi 4 vectors
corresponding to those lincs of G which meet at rc7.
The factor (20) in the integrand of M expressesthe
conservation of energy and momentum in the
interaction occurring at the point nr..
The transformation of Minto terms of momentum
variables is now complete. To summarize the
results, ,44 now appears as an F-fold integral over
the variable 4 vectors prd in momentum space, In
the integrand there appear, besides numerical
factors;
(i) a constant spinor or polarization-vector,,!(kt)
or,!(hi) or Au(ki), corresponding to each external
line of G;
(ii) a factor
(2r)
D,(pu):6*((Pt)')
corresponding to each internal photon line of G;
(iii) a factor
S r(pt) : l*ip,utu-

*ol6*((pu')rl *or')

(22)

corresponding to each internal electron line of G;

(iv) a factor
6(qi)
corresponding

(2i)

to each vertex of G;

(t) u zu operator, surviving from Eq. (8), corresponding to each vertex of G at whic.h there is a
,, @):
(16) photon line.
e-- u'.a*(pz)d.p,
* f
The important feature of the above analysis is
that all the constituents ol M are now localized and
t?
associatedwith individual lines and vertices in the
S"(r) :rof
| e-'',,,llipuy,graph G. It therefore becomes possible in an
4rr J
or
X6*(p2! xn2)dp, (17) unambiguous manner to speak of "adding"
"subtracting" certain groups of factors in M, when
where 16 is the electron reciprocal Compton wave- G is modified bv the addition or subtraction of certain lines and vertices. As an example of this
length,
p2:pppt:ptr+pz2+pt2_p02,
( 1 9 ) method of analysis, we shall briefly discuss the
treatment in the S matrix formalism of the "Lamb
and the 6a function is defined by
shift" and associatedphenomena.
Suppose that a graph G, ol any degree of com11r^
plication, has a vertex rr at which two electron
k
'
d
z
.
an(a) .,ra(a){^-:(
1
9
)
| e
lines and a photon line meet. These three lines may
ZTIA
ZT J n
be either internal or external, and the momentum
S u b s t i t u t i n g f r o m ( 1 6 ) a n d ( 1 7 ) i n t o M w i l l 4 vectors associated with them in M may be either
introduce an F-fold integral over momentum space. pi or kil these 4 vectors are denoted by tt, t2, t3 as
Corresponding to each internal line of G, there will indicated in Fig. 1. The factors in the integrand of

297
S

I t4l

MATRIX

iN

QUANTUM

above analysis applies equally to an expression M

M arising from the vertex rr are

- iey
- 1z- 7t',
,
r(2n)t5(1t

the matrix ele(24) which may occur anywhere among

rhe two spinor indices of the 7u being available for

matrix multiplication on both sides with the
factors in .41arising from the two electron lines at :c1.
Now suppose that G' is a graph identical rvith G,
except that in the neighborhood of *r it is modified
by the addition of two new vertices and three new
lines, as indicated in Fig. 2. With the three new
lines, which are all internal, are associated three
4 vector variables P', !', P3, which occur as variables of integration in the expression M' formed
from G'as M is from G. It can be proved, in view of
Eqs. (21), (22), (23), that M' may be obtained from
J4 simply by replacing the factor (24) in M by the
expression
io3

-Lpo1'l I lap,ap,ap'
NC

JJJ

6(11- p' + p3)6(p' - pt - t3)6(p1- p3- t )

o2to xo)t,(I

n(*'i4

i4,tt, - *o)n

a*((2r)r* ro,)61((2')r+ ror)6+((23)r). (25)

(The factorial coemcients appearing in (4) are just
compensated by the fact that the two new vertices
ways,
of G' may be labelled ra, xi in (n!7)(nl2)
where n is the number of vertices in G.) In (25), two
of the 4-dimensional D-functions can be eliminated
at once by integration over pr and p'?,and the third
then reduces to the d-function occurring in Q\.
Therefore M'canbe obtained from Mby replacing
the operator 1u in (24) by an operator
L,: Lr(t', t2)
:2a

I dpltx(*i(po*tot)to-

ELECTRODYNAMICS

xit,

x(+i(p"+t,'h, - ro)yrl
x d+((P+t)'+*o')
Ko')6+(2).Q6)
X6+((P+t'z)'z+
Here o is the fine-structure constant, (e2/4rhc) in
Heaviside units. The operator Zu can without great
difficulty be calculated explicitly as a function of
the 4 vectors t\ and t2, by methods developed by
Feynman.
In the special case when Fig. 1 represents the
graph G in its entirety, M is a matrix element for the
scattering of a single electron by an external potential. Figure 2 then represents G'in its entirety, and
M' is a second-order radiative correction to the
scattering of the electron. In this case then the
operator Lu gives rise to what may be called "Lamb
shift and associated phenomena." However, the

ments of U(o), and may represent any physical

processwhatever involving electrons, positrons and
photons. There will always appear in U(o),
together rvith M, terms ,41' representing secondorder radiative corrections to the same process;
one term M' arises from each vertex of G at which
a photon line ends; and M'is always to be obtained
frorn M by substituting for an operator 7u the same
operator Zn. Furthermore, some higher radiative
corrections to M will be obtained by substituting
Lu for y, independently at two or more of the
vertices of G.
By a "vertex part" of any graph will be meant
a connected part of the graph, consisting of vertices
and internal lines only, which touches precisely two
electron lines and one photon line belonging to the
remainder of the graph. The central triangle of Fig.
2 is an example of such a part. In other words, a
vertex part of a graph is a part which can be substituted for the single vertex of Fig. 1 and give a
physically meaningful result. Now the argument,
by which the replacement of Fig. 1 by Fig. 2 was
shown to be equivalent to the replacement of 7u
by Lu, can be used also when a more complicated
vertex part is substituted for the vertex in Fig. 1.
If G is any graph with a vertex nl as shown in Fig. 1'
and G' is obtained from G by substituting for 11
any vertex part V, and if. M and M' are elements
of I/(o) formed analogously from G and G', then
M'can be obtained from Mby replacing an operator
"y, by an operator
L,:L.(V,

tr, t2),

(27)

dependent only on 7 and the 4 vectors tl, t2 and

independent of G.
To summarize the results of this section, it has
been shown that the S matrix formalism allows a
wide variety of higher order radiative processesto
be calculated in the form of operators in momentum
space, Such operators appear as radiative corrections to the fundamental interaction between the
photon and electron-positron fields, and need only
to be calculated once to be appligable to the
various special problems of electrodynamics.

298
1742

F. J. DYSON
rv. FURTIIER REDucTIoN oF TIIE s MATRD(
It was shown in Section VII of I that, for the
one-electron processesthere considered, only connected graphs needed to U""tuL"" i"tt account' In
no
constructing the S matrix in general, .this is
loneer the case; clisconnectedgraphs give matrix

M by replacing a factoilf (11)by

(30)

0(t))>(W,1t)Sr(11).

a a special case' trZ ma-v consist of a single point;

As
tnen ai this point it is the term in 6m of the interaction (8) *hith it operating' and ) reduces to a

*j-."f."."ntini t*o oi morecol- constant'

#;";;^;ie
among
>(w, t'): -2ri(6ruc/h): -2ri6xo'
ii"i;;'^;;.;"r*. o...,i.ittg simultaneouslv

(31)

."purui" groups of particles, and such.procsses

in a general
permiss..ble to The operator lu'(ll). in (28).describes
have physical reality. lt.;';i;
-f".Utg
o m i t a d i s c o n n e c t e c l g r a p h - h " n o n " o f i t s c o n - w a y t h e s e c o n d - o rto
d ethe
r c ophenomenon
n t r i b r r t i o n tcalled
o t h e e"vacuum
lectron
in.external ,elf-"nergy and
nected compon"nt. i.
in Section VIII of
kind"
second
of
the
potuti'oiio"
"r,ti"iy
will
lines; such a component wrthout exteinal lines
contribution is supposed to be
i. The self-ene-r-9y
lq;!;
give rise only to..o,rr,u'i"ilriilii..ir""
cancelled by (31); the constant 6xo being a power
is
ancl
u(-)
matrlx
every
factor in
","-*i.i
series in o' the linear term only is required to
therefore devoid of physical significance'
cancel the self-energy part of (28)' and the higher
VII
in
Section
t.".t?"nt
On the other hand, the
,,."ri"n".gv
terms are available'for the cancellation of selfparts,,
applies
of I of graphs with
a l m o s t w i t h o u t c h a n g e t o t h e g e n e r a l S m a t r i x e n e r g y e l T.|tr"
e c t sSf r omatrix
m . o p e]ormalism
rators>(W
, t ' ) o f hclear
i g h ethe
r
makes
,,self-energy part,, of a graph is a o.d"i.
formalism. A
>(W'tt)
operators
the
since
that,
fact
i-po.t""t
connecteclpart, consisting Jf vertices an'd internal
of the graph G'
tttl .,-,iaateof are universal operators independent
lines only, which can O" i""".t"i^ini.
sellenergy effects will be formally
itt"
meaningful
gi""
a
..
r.1.
graph
G
a single line of a
"l"tttonby a constant
independent of the
lancelled
'6xo
graph G'.In Fig. 3 i. =tto*nl't"t-umple of tuttiu-tt
effects occur'
the
which
in
situation
physical
t-"t,lr
insertion made in one or t;; li;;;ot rig. t.
Wt
is inserted into a
part
self-energy
.
ivh".t
of the
and M, beexpressionsa"rir"a i., the mJnner
for
example the line
giiph
G'
of
a
line
photon
of which
;
previous section from $" c;il
1"i:C'
i.s"i"a 13in Fig. 1, then-the modification produced
for
Suppose
3.
1
and
rrgs.
1n
shown
Darts are
bv a function l(W"tz)
i" ,tlr rnov be ogiin d-escrib^ed
defrniteness that the 5r" ru'u"il"J ri'i, oi'i"t"rn"t
if the 13 line in G
i;i;;"";;1-G'
contribute
(22)
\twill
.specificallv' ,11 by replacing a
line of G; then according to
from
is
obtained
.lf
iniernal,
is
gv."
to
that
sim,ilar
*gr;ent
a factor Sr(rr) in az.
now factor Da(13) by
f".al"g t" iZO;, it.t.t be shivn that M'may
(32)
bv
so(t')
replacing
M
by
frlom
DFUz)Tr(w',szSDr(t3).
t" ouiuin.j
a
If the ,3 line is external, the replacement is of
factor ,4*(13)by
(33)
Ap(t3)Tr(Wt, tz)DF(13).

5.(1r)I/(t1)Sr(11)
f _ : S r ( / r ) 2 q J dp l t x ( * i t , l P , * / o ' )

- *o)r^l

6+(1')'sr(r1). (28)
x a+((2+,1)'?+ Ko?)
G by
In the same way, if G' were obtained from
then
part
tr/'
self-energy
any
line
li
the
in
irr".titg
*ouid b" obtained from M by replacing Sr(") by
l.|,1,

(2e)

S"(l'))(W, 11)Sr(/'),

W and tl
where ) is an operator dependent only on
rvere an
line
11
if
the
Moreover,
G.
on
not
and
line of G, then ,41'would be obtained from
":tt".not
i
!+,

i'
t'. ----rr- Pt
":t]->--tr --"-

4---^---.-a'

Frc. 3.

--'\

In addition to terms of the forn

appear tcrns such as

(33), there will

A,(t3)t,stplItt(W' , t3)DF(t3);

(34)

g-aug.e
these hor.vever are zero in consequence of the
will
l'31u3
in
terms
Similar
,4,.
by
satisfied
.o"ai,lo"
case
rlro opp"". with the expression (32); in-this
the extia terms can be shown to vanish in conof the equation of conservation of charge
;;;t;;."
satislieclby the electron-positron lield The functions
selfn ( W ; , r " 1 d e s c r i b e t h e p h e n o m e n o no f p h o t o n
a n . l t h s " v l c u u m p o l r r i z a t i o n o - f- t h e f i r t t
"l n
. i"nrJr .:r; o f S t c t i o n Y l l l o f l . F o l l o r v i n g5 c h w t n g e r '
tr." .1o". not explicitly subtract awal' the div-ergent
pt oton ..tt-"n"ig1 eff"crs from the Illl/" tr)' but
o n e t s s c r l s l h r t t h e s e c f f c tl s a r e z c r o a s a c o n s e oi the gauge invariance of electrodynamics'
ou""."
'-it
S".tiot Vff of t, it rvas shown how self-energy
be systematicatly eliminated from all
p".i. -tfa

299
I l+J

MATRIX

IN

QUANTUM

graphs, and their effects described by suitabll'

modifying the functions Dp and Sr. The analysis
was carried out in configuration space, ancl rvas
confined to the one-electron problem. We are now
in a position to extcnd this method to the whole
S m a t r i x f o r m a l i s m ,w o r k i n g i n r r r o m c n t u m. p a , e .
and furthermore to eliminate not only self-energy
parts but also the "vertex parts" defined in the last
section.
Every graph G has a uniquely defined "skeleton"
Go, which is the graph obtained by omitting all
self-energy parts and vertex parts from G. A graph
rvhich is its own skeleton is called "irreducible;"
all of its vertices will be of the kind depicted in
Fig. 1. From every irreducible Go, the G of which
it is the skeleton can be built by inserting pieces in
all possibleways at all vertices and lincs of Go; these
G form a well-defined class l. The terrn "proper
vertex part" must here be introduced, denoting a
vertex part which is not divisible into two pieces
joined only by a single line; thus a vertex part rvhich
is not proper is essentially redundant, being a
proper vertex part plus one or more self-energy
parts. The graphs of I are then accurately enumerated by insertir.rgat some or all of the vertices
of G0 a proper vertex part, and in some or all of the
lines a self-energy part, these insertions being madc
independently in all possible combinations.
Suppose that M is a constituent of a matrix
element of U(a), obtained froln Go as described
in Section III. Then every graph G in f will -vield
additional contributions to the same matrix elenent
of U(a); the sum of all such contributions, including M, is denoted by M u- As a result of the
analysis leading to (27), (29), and (32), and in
r.iew of the statistical independenceof the insertions
made at the different vcrtices and lines of Go, the
sum Ms will be obtained frorn ,41by the following
substitutions. For cvcry internal electron line of Go,
:r firctor ,So(pn)of i/ is replaced by
(35)
s r , ( p t \: 5 , 1 p t , + s a ( p ' ) ) ( 2 ' ) s n ( p ' ) ,

ELECTRODYNAN,{ICS

w h e r e . A , u ( llr:,) i s t h e s u n t o f t h e ^ u ( V , t r , l 2 ) o v e r
all proper vertex parts I,'. The matrix elements of
t / ( o ) t v i l l b e c o r r c c t l y c a l c u l a t e d ,i f o r . r ei n c l u d e s
contributions only frorn irreducible graphs, after
n . r a k i n gi n e a c h c o n t r i b u t i o n t h e r e p l a c e m e n t s( 3 5 ) ,
(36),(37),(38).
To calculate the operators -{u, 2 and II, it is
necessarl,to ri'rite dorvn explicitll' the integrals in
m o m e n t u n s p a c e ,e x a m p l e s b c i n g ( 2 6 ) a n d ( 2 8 ) ,
corresponding to every self-energy part W or
proper vertex part I/. \\'hen considering effects of
higher order than the seconcl,the parts l,tr/and I/
rvill therlselves often be reducible, containing in
their intcrior self-energy and vertex parts. It will
again be convenient to oilrit such reducible I/ ancl
W, and to include their effects by n.raking the substitutions (35) (38) in the ir.rtegralscorresponcling
to irrcducible V and W.ln this u'ay one obtains in
general not explicit formulas, but integral equations, for l\u, ) and II. For example,
A': a1'('\' )' II)

(39)

where 1, is an integral in which l\u, ) and fI occur

e.rplicitly. Fortunatcly, the appearance of c on the
right side of (39) makes it easl' 1e solve such equat i o n s b y a p r o c e s so f s u c c e s s i v es u b s l i t u t i o n , t h e
forrns of Au, ), ancl II being obtained correct to
order a" when values correct to order a"-r are substituted into the integrals.
The functions Dr' and Sr'of (35) and (36) are
the Fourier transfornts of the corresponding functions ir.r I. The interpretation of these functions in
Section VIII of I can be extencled in an obvious
wa1' to inclucle the operator fu. Since Q7,,1,is the
charge-current 4 vector of an clectron rvithout
r a d i e r i v cc o r r e c l i o n s r, y ' f u , m
2 , ' . 1 ' ei n t e r p r r t e da s
a n " c f f e c l i v e . t t r r e n t " c a r r i e d b 1 , a n e l c c t r o t t .i n cluding the elTectsof exchangeinteractions bctrveen
t h e e l e c t r o na n d t h e e l e c t r o n - p o s i t r o n
f i e l d a r o u n c li t .
An additional reduction in thc number of graphs
cffectively contributing to U(o) is obtained from
a theorenr of Furrl'.6'fhe thcorem lvas sholvn by
u'here )(pt) is the sum of the >(tr/, p') over all
Feynman to be an elcgant consequence of his
electron self-energy parts I4l. For every intcrnal
theory. 1n any graph G, a "closed loop" is a closcd
photon line, a factor D o(pu) is replaced by
clectron poll'gon, at the vertices of u'hich a number
D F ' , ( p t :) D F ( p t )+ D r ( p r n ( p i ) D F ( p t ), ( 3 6 ) p of photon lines originate; the loop is called odd or
$'here [(2d) is the sum of the II(i{z', pi) over all even according to the parity of p. If G contains a
photon self-energy parts W'. For every external c l o . e dI o o p .t l r e n t h e r eu ' i l l b o a n o r h e lg r a p h O ' a l s o
line, a factor ,1,(ht)or 0(k') or Au(kr) is replaced by contributing to I/( o ), obtained from G bv reversing
the scnseof the electron lines in the loop. Norv if ,i1,1
v , @ t ) : s F ( k t ) > ( k t ) v ( h t )+ v k t ) ,
r n t l M r r e c o r r t r i L r r t i o n sf l o m C r n d G , M i s
( 3 7 ) cleriveclfrom M by interchanging the roles of elec0'(ht):{6'1>1kt)SF(hr+0(ht),
A , ' , ( h t ): A , ( k t ) r 7 ( . h t ) Dt s ( h t+) A , ( k t ) ,
tron and positron states in each of the interactions
respectively. For every vertex of Gs, rvhere the at the vertices of thc loop; such an interchange is
incident lines carry momentunl variables as shown c a l l e d " c h a r g e c o n j u g a t i o n . " I t w a s s h o w ' n b y
Schs'ingcr that his theory is invariant under charge
in Fig. 1, an operator 7u is replaceciby
I p(tt , t2) : 7 u!

Lu(.tr, t2) ,

(38)

6 \\IenclcllH. Furry, Phys. Rev. 5t, 1,25(1937)

300
1744

F. J. DYSON
conjugation, provided that the sign of a is at the
same time reversed (this is the well-known charge
symmetry of the Dirac hole theory). It is clear
from (8) that the constant, appears once in M for
each of the p loop vertices at which there is a
photon line; at the remaining vertices only the
constant 6zzis involved, and 6ru is an even function
of e. Therefore the principle of charge-symmetry
implies
(40)
M:(-r)eM.

example (26) and (28)) ; in thesecasesitis legitimate

to replace each 6a function by a reciprocal, making
a separate detour in the po integration for each pole
in the integrand, provided that no two poles coincide. Thus every constituent part M of U( o ) can
be written as an integral of a rational algebraic
function of momentum variables, by using instead
of (21) and (22)
1
DF(Pi):-,
2ri(pt)2

(44)

Taking p odd in (40) gives Furry's theorem; all

( i P u ' lu - ^ o )
contributions to U(o) from graphs with one or
(4s)
Jf (r') --more odd closed loops vanish identically.
2
r
i((p')2I ro2)
By an "odd part" of a graph is meant any part,
consisting only of vertices and internal lines, which
This representation of D r and Sr as rational functouches no electron lines, and only an odd number
tions in momentum-space has been developed and
graph.
of photon lines, belonging to the rest of the
extensivell, used by Feynman (unpublished).
The sirnplest type of odd part which can occur is a
There may appear in ,4.{infinities of three distinct
single odd closed loop. Conversely, it is easy to see
kinds. These are (i) singularities caused by the
that every odd part must include within itself at
coincidence of two or more poles of the integrand,
least one odd closed loop. Therefore, Furry's
(ii) divergences at small momenta caused by a
parts
be
graphs
to
all
with
odd
allows
theorem
factor (44) in the integrand, (iii) divergences at
Lr(o).
omitted from consideration in calculating
large momenta due to insu{iciently rapid decrease
of the whole integrand at infinitY.
THE
DTIIERGENCES
IN
OF'
INVESTIGATION
V.
In this paper no attempt ivill be made to explore
S MATRIX
the singularities of type (i). Such singularities occur,
The 61 function defined by (19) has the propertl'
for e-rample. when a many-particle scattering
that, if b is real and /(o) is any function anall'tic process may for special values of the particle
in the neighborhood of b, then
momenta be divided into independent processes
involving separategroups of particles' It is probable
f f O ) a - ( o _D a a : ( / z n 'i J)[ -J r a ) ( t r t-ab ) ) d a , G t )that all singularities of type (i) have a similarly
J""
clear physical meaning; thesesingularities have long
energy dewhere the first integral is along a stretch of the real been known in the form of vanishing
perturbation theory, and
axis including b, and the second integral is along nominators in ordinary
the same stretch of the real axis but with a small have never caused any serious trouble.
A divergence of tf'pe (ii) is the so-called "infradetour into the con.rplexplane passing underneath
to be caused
D. In the matrix elements of I/(o) there appear red catastrophe," and is well knor,vn
by the failure of an expansion in powers of e to
integrals of the forn
describe correctly the radiation of low moment"un.t
quanta. It would presumably be possible to elimidPF(P)6*(P,"
+ c'), (42) nate this divergence fron.r the theory by a suitable
+P,'+Pt"- Po"
I
adaptation of the standard Bloch-NordsieckTtreatintegrated over all real values of pr Pz, Ps, Po. B,r ment; we shall not do this here. From a practical
(41), one may write (42) in the form
point of view, one may avoid the difhculty by
arbitrarily writing instead of (44)

*,1,

F(p)

- Po'+c')
( pt'+ pr'+ P32

(43)

in which it is understood that the integration is

alorrg the real axis for the variables pr, Pz,Pz, and for
2e is along the real axis with two small detours, one
p a s s i n ga b o v e t h e p o i n t + t p 1 r + P " 2 + p , 2 - 1 2 r l ,a t t d
o n e p a s s i n gb e l o r v t h e p o i r ] t - ( P t " * p r ' + p t ' + r ' ) t .
To equate (42) rvith (43) is certainly correct, when
F(p) is analytic at the critical values of po. In
practice one has to deal with integrals (42) in
which F(2) itself involves d1 functions (see for

Dr(D):

2ri((pt)'z*)()

where X is some non-zero momentum, smaller than

an-v of the quantum momenta which are significant
in the particular process under discussion.E
-t
p . 6 1 o " ra. n d . { .N o r d s i e cpkh, y s .R e v . 5 2 , 5(41 9 3 7 r .

3 The device of introducing I in order fo avoid lnlrd-red

divergences must be used with circumspection. Schwinger
lunpu"bli'hed' has shown that a iong -sranding discre-pancy
be$vecn trvo alternative crlculations ol rhe Lamb shllt w3q
due to ca.eiess use of tr in one of them

30r

t74s

S MATRIX

IN

QUANTUM

It is the divergences of type (iii) which have

always been the main obstacle to the construction
of a consistent quantum electrodynamics, and
which it is the purpose of the present theory to
eliminate. In the following pages, attention will be
confined to type (iii) divergences; when the word
"convergent" is used, the proviso "except for possible singularities of types (i) and (ii)" should
always be understood.
A divergent M is called "primiti.ve" if, whenever
one of the momentum 4 vectors in its inteerand is
held fixed, the integration over the remaininq
variables is convergent. Correspondingly, a primitive divergent graph is a connected graph G giving
rise to divergent M,bfi
such that, if any internal
line is removed and replaced by two external lines.
the modified G gives convergent M. To analyze the
divergences of the theory, it is sufficient to enumerate the primitive divergent M and G and to
examine their properties.
Let G be a primitive divergent graph, with z
vertices, .E external and F internal lines. A corresponding ,41will be an integral over F variable pi
of a product of F factors (44) and (45) and n
factors (23). Since G is connected, the d-functions
(23) in the integrand enable (z-1) of the variables
pi to be expressed in terms of the remaining
(F-n-tI)
pi and the constants &t, leaving one
o'-function involving the frt only and expressing
conservation of momentum and energy for the
rvhole system. An example of such integration over
the 6-functions was the derivation of (26) from
25). After this, the integrations in M may be
arranged as folto-ws; the-fourth components of the
F-nll)
independent pi are written

ELtrCTRODYNAMICS
defined in (47). In view of (43), we take the integration variables in (48) to be real variables, with
the exception of a which is to be integrated along
a contour C deviating from the real axis at each of
the 2F poles of R. As a general rule, C will detour
above the real axis for c)0, and below it for a(0;
the reverse will only occur at certain of the poles
corresponding ro denominators (49) for which
(p't)'z+(prt)'+(pto)'*p,{.(cu)t.

(51)

Such poles will be called "displaced." The integration over a alone will always be absolutely convergent. Therefore the contour C may be rotated
in a counter-clockwise direction until it lies alone
the imaginary axis, and the value of 11 will be
unchanged except for residues at the displaced poles.
Regarded as a function of the parameters &i
describing the incoming and outgoing particles, i4
will have a complicated behavior; the behavior
will change abruptly whenever one of the ct has
a critical value for which (51) begins to be soluble,
for pti, Pzi, Pti, and a new displaced pole comes into
existence. This behavior is explained by observing
that displaced poles appear whenever there is sufficient energy available for one of the virtual Darticles involved in M to be actually emittecl is a
real particle. It is to be expected that the behavior
of rl1 should change when the processdescribed by
M begins to be in competition rvith other real
processes. It is a feature of standard perturbation
theory, that when a process .4 involves an intermediate state ,I which is variable over a continuous
range, and in this range occurs a state 11 which is
the final state of a competing process, then the
matrix element for .4. involves an integral over .1
which has a singularity at the position 11. In
p qi : ipsi :,iar ni,
(47) standard perturbation
theory, this improper inte:nd the integration over a is performed first; sub- gral is always to be evaluated as a Cauchv prin:3quently, integration is carried out over the c i p a l v a l u e , a n d d o e s n o t i n t r o d u c e u n y r " r i d i . , " r i n d e p e n d e n t p r i , p r i , p " i , a n d o v e r t h e gence into the matrix element. In the theory of the
i(F-nll)
present paper, the displaced poles give rise to
ratios of the r6t. ,LI then has the form
l-z)
similar improper integrals; these come under the
heading of singularities of type (i) and will not be
ff*
M : I d p t ; d p z t d p t i d r o,i
R a F - " d q , ( 4 9 ) discussedfurther.
u
J-If pri, Pz;, p:t satisfying (51) are held fixed, then
:'here R is a rational function of a, the denominator the value of p4i at the corresponding displaced pole
is fixed by (50). The contribution to M from the
': rvhich is a product of F factors
displaced pole is just the expression obtained by
(Prt)'l (P"t)'I (Pti)2* p2- (oro;lci)2.
(49) holding the 4-vector 2t fixed in the original integral
Il[, apart from bounded factors ; since ,41is primitive
:lcre the constants roi, ci are defined by the con- divergent,
this expression is convergent. The total
::tior that
contribution to M from the I'th disolaced oole is
pj:.ipni:i(arsilci),
j : 1 , 2 , . . . , F . ( 5 0 ) the integral of this expressionover th; finite sphere
(51) and is therefore finite. Strictly speaking, this
lius the ct corresponding to the (F-af
1) inde- argument requires not only the convergence of the
:cndent pd are zero by (47), and the remainder are expression, but uniform convergence in a finite
:ear combinations of the ki; also (n-l) of the 16, region; however, it will be seen that the convergent
:-e linear combinations of the independent ret integrals in this theory are convergent for large

302
t746

F. J. DYSON
momenta by virtue of a sulllcient preponderanceof
large denominators, and convergence produced in
thii way will ahvays be uniform in a finite region'
,41is thus, apart from finite parts, equal to the
,z;a
in (48) and
integral ,11'obtaincd b1' replacing a by
(49). Alternatively, M'is obtained from the original
by substituting for each pot
integral ,i1,1
iPtil (1-i)ci,

(52)

i n c l e p e n d c n t1 u ' ,
anclthen treating the 4(F-z*1)
p : 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , a s o r d i n a r y r e a l v a r i a b l e s 'I n ' t I ' t h e
denominators of the integrand take the form
(.pl)' + (p,i)' + (! {)" t p' t (Pni- (l I i15;'12, (53)
and eire uniformll' large for large values of p"d'
The convergenceof ,il/'can now be cstimated simpll'
by counting powers of prt in numerator and denominator of the integrand. Since M' is knol'n to
converge whenever one of the 2iis hcld fixed and
integration is carried out over thc others, the con,,".g"r." of the whole expression is assured provided that
K:2F-F"-4lF-nl1l)1.

(s4)

Here 2F is the degree of the dcnominator, and F"

that of the nul.nerator, rvhich is by (44) and (45)
equal to the number of intern:rl electron lines in G.
Let E, and Eo be the numbers of cxternal electron
and photon lincs in G, and lct z, be the number of
verti;es rvithout photon lines incident. It follorvs
from the structure of G that

light by light" or the mutual scattering of two

photons. Further, (55) shows that the divergence
ivill. never be more than logarithmic in the third
and fourth cases,more than linear in the 6rst, or
more than quadratic in the second.Thus it appears
that, horvever far quantum electrodynamics is
clevelopedin the discussionof many-particle interactions and higher order phenomena, no essentially
ner- kinds of divergence u'ill be encountered. This
gives strong support to the view that "subtraction
ph-vsics,"of the kind used by Schwinger and Feynnran, will be enough to make quantum electrod1'namics into a consisterlt theor)"
IN THE
!'I, SEPARATIONOF DNTERGENCES
S MATRTX
First it ivill be shown that the "scattering of light
by light" does not in fact introduce any clivergence
into the theorl'. The possible primitive divergent
, l l 1i n t h e c a s eE " : 0 , E o : 4 r v i l l b e o f t h e f o r r n
6(k1+ k, + k3+ k1)A t.(h1)A Jk') A, (k3)A o(ha)I xp o, (56)
rvhere 1;r,, is an integral of the t-vPe

n^,,,{u',k', h3,h4,Pt)d'P",

(s7)

at most logarithmically divergent, and R is a certain

rational function of thc constant kt and thc variable
p t . I n a n y p h y s i c a ls i t u a t i o n l ' h e r e , f o r e x a m p l e ,t h e
A(k) are the potentials corresponding to particular
incident and outgoing photons, there l'ill appear
i n U ( o ) a m a t r i x e l e m e n tr v h i c h i s t h e s u r n o f ( 5 6 )
2F:3n- n"- E"- Ep,
and the 23 similar expressions obtained by per2 uP'
muting the suffrxesof /1u,oin all possible rval's lt
and so the convergencecondition (52) is
may therefore be supposed that at the start R1u,,
( 5 5 ) has been symmetrizedby summation over.all perK:+E"+Ee+n"-4)r.
mutations of suflixes; (56) is then a sum of conThis gives the vital inforrnation that tl.re only tributions lron 24 or ferver (according to the
possible primitive divergent graphs arc those with
clegreeof s)'mmetry existing) graphs G.
E":2, Ep--j,1, and rvith E":0, Ee:l' 2,3' 4.
i f , u n c l e rt h e s i g n o f i n t e g r a t i o ni n ( 5 7 ) , t h e v a l r t e
i s s u b t r a c t e df r o r n
F u r t h e r , t h e c a s e sE " : 0 , E p : 1 ' 3 , d o n o t a r i s e , R ( 0 ) o f R l o r h t : k 2 : h 3 : b a - 0
-t
since these givc graphs rvith odcl parts l'hich x'ere R, the intcgrancl acquires one extr:r porver of I prt l
shog,n to be harmiess in Section l\''. It should be for large I f"rl , and the integral becomesabsolutel-v
observed that the course of the argument has been convergent at infinitlr' Therefore
"if E" and -Eoclo not have certain small values' then
(58)
Ixr"o: Ixu,r(A)l Jx,o,
the integral ,4f is convergent at infinit-v;" there is
integrations
no objection to changing the order of
rvhere /(0) is a possibly divcrgent integral indein ,lf as rvas done in (48), since thc argument pendent of the Ei, and .I is a convergent integral
r e q u i r e st h a t t h i s b e d o n e o n l J ' i n c a s e sl ' h e n M i s ' vanishing rvhen all fri's are zcro. To interpret this
in fact, absolutelY conr.'ergent.
result phl'sicalll', it is cotrvenient to \\'rite (56)
The possible prinitive ciivergent graphs that
a g a i n i n t e r m s o f s p a c e - t i m ev a r i a b l e s ; t h i s g i v e s
have been found arc all of a kind {aniliar to
p h y s i c i s t s .T h e c a s e E " : 2 , E p : 0 c l e s c r i b e s - s e l f , (5q)
uf t ^ ' , " r o s e ^ 1 . r , t , 4 * ( x ) , 4 , r r ) r' 4r ) c 1 r r I y '
tnergy effects of a single electron; E"--0, Ee:2
J
s e l f - e n e r g ye f f e c t so f a s i n g l e p h o t o n ; E " : 2 , E e : l
involving dethe scattering of a single electron in an electromag- rvhere N is a convergent expression
respect to space and
$'ith
,4(t)
of
the
rivatives
o
f
"
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
i
n
g
E
p
:
4
t
h
e
E
,
:
0
,
a
n
d
l
i
e
l
d
;
netic

303
1747

S MATRIX

IN

QUANTUM

time. Now the first term in (59) is physically

inadmissable; it is not gauge-invariant, and implies
for example a scattering of light by an electric field
depending on the absolute magnitude of the scalar
potential, whicl.rhas no physical meaning. Therefore
1(0) must vanish identically, and the whole expression (56) is convergent
The fact that the scattering of light by light is
finite in the lowest order in which it occurs has long
been known.e It has also been verified by Feynman
by direct calculation, using his own theory as
described in this paper. The graphs which give rise
to the lowest order scattering are shorvn in Fig. 4.
It is found that the divergent parts of the corresponding ,44 exactly cancel when the three contributions are added, or, what comes to the same
thing, when the function Rrp,, is symmetrized. It is
probable that the absence of divergence in the
scattering of light by light is in all cases due to a
similar cancellation, and it should not be diffrcult
to prove this by calculation and thus avoid making
an appeal to gauge-invariance.
The three remaining types of primitive divergent
M are, in fact, divergent. Horvever, these are just
the expressionsrvhich have been studied in Sections
III and IV and shorvn to be completely described
by the operators Ar, ), and II. Nllore specifically,
when E":2, Ep:g, M will be of the form

'p(h')>(w,hr)v@\,

(60)

where trZ is some electron self-energy part of a

g r e P h .W h e r rE " : 0 . E p : 2 , M w i l l b e
A,(kt)r(w"

hr)AP&t)'

(61)

with W' some photon self-energypart. When E":2,

Ep:1, tuI will be
{(kt)A,p(V, bl, k'z),|,(k'?)A/ht-k'z),

(62)

with tr/ solne vertex part. Therefore, if some means

can be found for isolating and removing the divergent parts frorr Au, ), and fI, the "irreducible"
graphs defined in Section lV will not introduce any
fresh divergences into the theory, and the rules of
Section IV will lead to a divergence-free S matrix.
), and fI in Section IV it was
In considering -A.u,
found convenient to divide vertex and self-energy
parts thernselves into the categories reducible and
irreducible. An irreducible self-energy part W is
required not only to have no vertex and self-energy
parts inside itself; it is also required to be "proper,"
that is to sa1', it is not to be divisible into two
eH. Euler and B. Kockel, Naturwiss.
23, 246 (1935);
H. Euler, Ann. d. Phys. 26, 398 (1936). In these early calculations of the scattering of light by light, the theory used is the
Heisenberg electrodynamics, in which certain singularities are
eliminated at the start by a procedure involving non-diagonal
elements of the Dirac density matrix. In Feynman's calculation. on the other hand. a fioite result is obtained without
subtractions of any kind,

ELECTRODYNAN{ICS
pieces joined by a single line. In Section IV it was
shown that to avoid redundancy the operator .{,
should be defined as a sum over proper vertex
parts I/ only. By the same argument, in order to
make (35), (36), (37) correct, it is essential to
define 2 and fI as sums over both proper and
improper self-energy parts. However, it is possible
to define Sr'and D7l in terms of proper self-energy
parts only, at the cost of replacing the explicit
definitions (35), (36) by implicit definitions. Let
>*(pt) be defined as the sum of the 2(W, pi) over
proper electron self-energy parts W, and let II*(pi)
be defined similarly. Every W is either proper, or
else it is a proper W joined by a single electron line
to another self-energl' part which may be proper or
improper. Therefore, using (35), Sr' rnay be expressed in the two equivalent forms
S F '( p t ) : S F ( p t )+ S F ( p t ) z +( p t )S F '( p t )
: sr(pu) * s.,(2 t12+(.pt)sr(pt).

(63)

Similarly,
D e'(pt): D e(pt)+D F(pt)il*(pr)DF'(pu)
: D F ( p t )+ D F ' ( p t ) n * ( p t )D F ( p t ) . ( 6 4 )
It is sometimes convenient to work with the ) and
II in the starred form, and sometimes in the unstarred form.
Consider the contribution >(W, tt) to the operator
)*, arising from an electron self-energy part W. It
is supposed that W is irreducible, and the effects of
possible insertions of self-energy and vertex parts
inside I,/ are for the time being neglected. Also it
is supposed that W is not a single point, of which
the contribution is given by (31). Then I4l has an
even number 21.of vertices, at each of which a
photon line is incident; and >(W,fr) will be of the
form

p;1ap,,
e,'f n1t,,

(6s)

where R is a certain rational function of the lr and

pt, and the integral is at most linearly divergent.
The integrand in (65) is now written in the form
R(t', pu): R(o, pu)

/aR
\
+r-,(--(0,D l*n"1t,p,7, (66)
t dlr,

t\r'

ri

''TtJ'

'i

k:i \{

r*i:" l*1

tY
/L<-{

i''*

;ki

k"\

ib

ui\, ir
Frc. 4.

L4\\

304
1748

F. J. DYSON
and for large values of the | 2"il the remainder term
R" will tend to zero more rapidly by two powers
of lputl than R. Therefore, in complete analogy
with (58),

2(w, t'1:

",t7a+B&Fl+2"(W'

tl)f'

(67)

where .1 and.B, ate constant divergent operators,

and Z"(W,lr) is defined by a covariant and absolutely convergent integral. >"(W,t') must, on
grounds of covariance, be of the form
R1((tt)2)lRz((tt)'z)tr1rr

(68)

with Rr and Rz particular functions of (tl)'?;for the

same reason, .8u must be of the form 87, with B
a certain divergent integral. Now if 11happens to be
the momentum-energy 4 vector of a free electron,
(tt)':

- ro',

tutyr:ixo.

(69)

It is convenient to write
>"(W, t 1: a'18'(t,17,-ixn)
+ (tpti F- iio) S(W, tt),

(70)

where .S(l/, tr) is zero for lr satisfying (69), and to

include the first two terms in the constants,4 and
B of. (67).; since all terms in (70) are finite, the
separation of S(W,11) is without ambiguity. Thus
an equation of the form (67) is obtained, with
(71)
tt) : (t,\y,- ixo)S(W, tt).
"(W,
Summing (67) over all irreducible llz and including
(31), gives for the operator 2*,
>

>* (t') : A - 2ri 6xnl B (t*1''o- i *o)

(7 2)
a Q,ty,-4ro)S
"(t1).
Hence by (63) and (a5)

and derive instead of (67)

tr) l. (74)
t1) : e2tlA + B i p1+ C,,tuLt,L+ n
"(w
"
"
The A, Bu, C' are absolute constanc numbers (not
Dirac operators) and therefore covariance requires
that Br:9, Cu,:C5,,. n.(Wt'tr) is defined by an
absolutely convergent integral, and will be an
invariant function of (lr)2 of a form
n (w

TI"(w' ' tt) - (tt)'D(W"

t1),

(7s)

where D(W' , tL) is zero for 11satisfying

(76)

(r')':0

instead of (69). Summing (74) over all irreducible

I4l"s will give
11*11t): Atl

C(tt),+ (tt)rD

"(tt),

(77)

and hence by (64) and (44)

1
D r' (t1 : a' p rTtL)DF' (tr) +-.CD
ZTx

F' (r)
1

D r',(tt).
+ D FQt)+-D
2ni "(tt)

(78)

In (77) and (78), D is zero for lr satisfying (76), and

"
,-''
is divergence free.
The constant A' in (77) is the quadratically
divergent photon self-energy. It *'ill give rise to
matrix elements in t/( o ) of the form
f

M:A'
J

I A,(x)Au(x)ilx,

(79)

which are non-gauge invariant and inadmissable'

Such matrix elements must be eliminated from the
S F '( t 1 ): ( A - 2 r i 6 r ) S r ( l t ) S r ' Q r )
theory, as the first term of (59) was eliminated' by
the statement that A'is zero. The verification of
11
+-Bsr'(rl) +so11)a-s"(/r)Sr'(t1). (73) this statement, by direct calculation of the lowest
2r
21
to A', has been given by
order contribution
Schwinger.s'ro
ln (72) and (73), ,4 and B are infinite constants,
The separation of the divergent part of.Au again
and S".a divergence-free operator which is zero
follows the lines laid down for )x. Since the integral
when (69) holds ; ,4, B, an&S" are power series in e
analogous to (65) is now only logarithmically
starting with a term in e2. In (72) and (73), howdivergent, no derivative term is required in (66)'
ever, effects of higher order corrections to the
and the analog of (67) is
> ( W , t ' ) t h e m s e l v e sa r e n o t y e t i n c l u d e d .
parts
may
be
(80)
A similar separation of divergent
Lu(V, tL, t2): e2rlLu* L,"(V, f , t')),
made for the lI(W',11), when W' is an irreducible
rlp"
and
photon self-energy part. The integtal (65) may now where Zu is a constant divergent operator,
be quadratically divergent, and so it is necessary to is convergent and zero for tr:tz:O. In (80)' Zu can
only be of the form L7u. Also,if tt:t2 and lr satisfies
u s e i n s t e a do f ( 6 6 )
(69), (Lr.will reduce to a finite multiple of 1u which
/ a-_(0,
R
\
can be included in the term L1u. Therefore it may
p)
pn):
R(0,
RU,
P) *'u'(
|
be supposed that 4," in (80) is zero not for lr : 12:0
\ al,r
/
Uut fbi l':p satisfying (69). The meaning of this

pr,
++,1,;(#,(0,p,l) +n"(r',

10Greeor Wentzel. Phvs. Rev. 74, 1070 (1948)' presentsthe

ese agaTnstSchwinger'i treatment of the photon self-energy'

305
1749

S MATRIX

]N

QUANTUM

physically is that.{r" now gives zero contribution

to the energy of a single electron in a constant electromagnetic potential, so that the whole measured
static charge on an electron is included in the term
Z7r. Summing (80) over all irreducible vertex
parts tr/, and using (38),
^p(tt , t2): Lt ul L,"(tt , t2),
ly(t1, t2): (1lL)7,1Lu"Qt,

(81)
t )

(82)

In (81) and (82), effects of higher order corrections

to the tru(I/, t\,t2) are again not yet included.
Formally, (82) differs from (73) and (78) in not
containing the unknown operator I" on both sides
of the equation.
VII. REMOVAL OF DIVERGENCESFROM THE
S MATRD(
The task remaining is to complete the formulas
(73), (78), and (82), which show how the infinite
parts can be separated from the operators f", Su',
and Dp', and to include the corrections introduced
into these operators by the radiative reactions
which they themselves describe. In other words, we
have to include radiative corrections to radiative
corrections, and renormalizations of renormalizations, and so on ad inf,n'itum, This task is not so
formidable as it appears.
First, we observe that -4.r,)x, and II* are defined
by integral cquations of the form (39), which rvill
be referred to in the following pagesas "the integral
equations." \{ore specilically, consider the contribution Lp(V,tt, r'?) to ,,l.! represented bV (80),
arising from a vertex part Ir with (21f 1) vertices,
I photon lines, and 2l electron lines. This contribution is defined by an integral analogous to (65),
with an integrand which is a product of (211-1)
operators 7u, I functions Dr, and 2l operators Sp.
The exact A,p(V,tL,t'?)is to be obtained by replacing
these factors, respectively, by lr, Dr', Sr', as
described in Section IV. Now suppose that Sr/ in
the integrand is represented, to order e2^ say, by
the sum of Sr and of a finite number of finite
products of Sr with absolutely convergent operators
S(W, tt) such as appear in (71); similarly, let Dp'
be represented by Dp plus a 6nite sum of finite
p r o d u c t so f D r w i t h f u n c t i o n sD t W ' , t t ) a p p e a r i n g
in (75); and let fu be represented by the sum of 7,
and of a finite set of nr"(I, t|,t2) from (80). Then
the integral Lp(V,tt,l'!) will be determined to order
s i n c et h e o p e r t l o r sS t f i , t ' , . D l l T ' , 1 t 1 ,
e2n-?/:and
^u,(V,tt,1:) always have a sulficiency of dcnominators for convergence,the tl.reoryof Section V
can be applied to prove that this Lp(V,tl,tz) wlll
not be more than logarithmically divergent. Therefore the new ,,\.u(l/,tt,t2') can be again separated
into the forn (80). The sum of these l\/V,tt,t)
will then be a ll.u(11,
l':) of the form (81), with con-

ELECTRODYNAMICS
qL

a!
s__--->-,
-\-4-l-

L'

Frc. 5.

stant I and convergent operator,4.r, determined to

order e2"*2.Thus (82) provides a new expressionfo
l, determined to order e2"+2.
The above procedure describes the general
method for separating out the finite part from the
contribution to Iu arising from a reducible vertex
part Vp. First, 116 is broken down into an irred_uciblevertex part T/pl us various i nserted pa r ts'W,
W', V; the contribution to lu from tr/ais an integral
M(Vn) which is not only divergent as a rvhole, but
also diverges when integrated over the variables
belonging to one of the insertions W, W', t, the
remaining variables being held fixed. The divergencesare to be removed from M(Vn) in succession,
beginning with those arising from the inserted
parts, and ending with those arising from Iz itself.
This successiveremoval of divergences is a welld e f i n e dp r o c e d u r e ,b e c a u s ea n y t l r o o f t h e i n s e r r i o n s
made in Z are either completely non-overlapping or
else arranged so that one is completely contained
in the other.
In calculating the contribution to )* or II*
from reducible self-energy parts, additional complications arise. There is in fact only one irreducible
photon self-energy part, the one denoted by W'in
Fig. 5; and there is, besides the self-energy part
consisting of a single point, just one irreducible
electron self-energy part, denoted by trZ in Fig. 5.
All other self-energy parts may be obtained by
making various insertions in trZ or W'. However,
reducible self-energy parts are to be enumerated by
inserting vertex parts at only one, and not both,
'W
of the vertices of
or IZ'; otherwise the same
self-energy part would appear more than once in
the enumeration. And the contribution M(Wn) to
)* arising from a reducible part Wn will be, in
general, an integral which involves simultaneously
divergences corresponding to each of the ways in
ivhich I4ln might have been built up by insertions
of vertex parts at either or both vertices of trV.This
complication arises because, in the special case
when two vertex parts are both contained in a
self-energy part and each contains one end-vertex
of the self-energy part (and in no other case), it is
possible for the two vertex parts to overlap without
either being completely contained in the other.
The finite part of It(Wn) is to be separated out
as follows. In a un.ique way, Wn is obtained from
l 4 l b y i n s e r t i n ga v e r t e x p a r t 7 . a r a , a n d s e J f - e n e r g y
parts 17" and W"' in the two lines of trU. From
M(Wn) there are subtracted all divergences arising
l r o n t / " , W " , W i : l e t -t h e r e m a i n d e r a f t e r t h i s s u b -

306
F.

J.

1750

DYSON

Next, l7n is considered as

traction be M'(Wil.
built up f.rom W by inserting some vertex part Vt
at b, and self-energy parts W6 and Wt' in the two
lines of W. The integral M'(Wa) will still contain
arising from 7a (but none from ffa and
divergences
'Wt'),
and these divergences are to be subtracted,
leaving a remainder M"(Wa). The finite part of
M" (Wn) can finally be separated by applying to the
whole integral the method of Section VI, which
gives for M"(Wa) an expression of the form (67),
with )" given by (71). Therefore the finite part of
M(Wd is a well-determined quantity, and is an
operator of the form (71).
The behavior of the higher order contributions to
)* and II* having now been qualitatively explained,
we may describe the precise rules for the calculation
of 2* and II* by the same kind of inductive scheme
as was given for.{u in the second paragraph of this
Section. Apart from the constant term (-2r'i6xo),
2* is just the contribution >(W, tr) from the trZ of
Fig. 5; and >(W,t') is represented by an integral
of the form (65) with l:1. The integrand in (65)
was a product of two operators ?ts,one operator Dr,
and one operator Sr. The exact 2(W,11) is to be
obtained by replacing Dr by Dr', Sr by Sr', and
one only of the factors 7, by lu, say the 7u corresponding to the vertex a of W. Suppose that Srl
in the integrand is represented, to order ez",by the
sum qf Sr and of a finite number of finite products
of Sr with operators S(W,tt) such as appear in
(71);and suppose that De'and I, are similarly
represented. Then >(IZ, 11) will be determined to
order e2"*2. The new Z(W,|L) will be a sum of
integrals like the M'(Wn) of the previous paragraph, still containing divergences arising from
vertex parts at the vertex b of. W, in addition to
divergences arising from the graph IUp as a whole.
When all these divergences are dropped, we have a
>"(W, tt) which is finite; substituting this >"(W, tt)
for )* iri (63) gives an Sr'which is also finite and
determined to the order 42"+2.
The above procedures start from given Sp', Dp'
and Iu represented to order e2" by, respectively, Sr
plus Sp multiplied by a finite sum of products of
S(fr,tt), Dr plus Dr multiplied by a finite sum of
products of D(W',/'), and 7, plus a finite sum of
Lr"(V,tr,l'z). From these there are obtained new
expressions for St' , D r' , fu. In the new expressions
there appear new convergent operators S(W,tr),
D(W', tr), l\r"(V, tr,l'z), determined to order e2"+2i
in the divergent terms which are separated out and
dropped from the new expressions, there appear
divergent coefficients A, B, C, Z, such as occur in
(73), (78), (82), also now determined to order e2"+2.
After the dropping of the divergent terms, the
new l" by (82) is a sum of 7" and a finite set of
LN(V,tt,l'); the new Sr' bV (79) is Sr plus '5r
multiplied by a finite sum of products of S(trf' tr);

and the new Dr'by (78) is Dp plus Dp multiplied

by a finite sum of products of D(W',lr). That is to
say, the nerv lu, Sr', Do'can be substituted back
into the integrals of the form (65), and so a third
set of operators ly, Sp', D p' is obtained, determined
to orderuzn+a, and again with finite and divergent
parts separated. In this way, always dropping the
divergent terrns before substituting back into the
integral equations, the finite parts of lu, Sr', Dr',
may be calculated by a process of successiveapproximation, starting with the zero-order values 7",
Sr, Dr. After n substitutions, the finite parts of
l, S v' , D v' will be determined to order e2".
It is necessary finally to justify the dropping of
the divergent terms. This will be done by showing
that the "true" Iu, Sr', Dr', which are obtained if
the divergent terms are not dropped, are only
numerical multiples of those obtained by dropping
divergences, and that the numerical multiples can
themselves be eliminated from the theory by a
consistent use of the ideas of mass and charge
renormalization. Let l"r(e), .Srr'(e), Dn'(e) be the
operators obtained by the process of substitution
dropping divergent terms; these operators are
power series in e with finite operator coefficients (to
avoid raising the question of the conver$ence of
these power-series, all quantities are supposed
defined only up to some finite order a2x)' Then we
shall show that the true operators fu, Sr', Dr' are
of the form
lu:Zatlut(et)

(83)

Sr':ZrSrt'(et)

(84)

Dr':ZrD"r'(er),

(85)

where Zr Zz, Zsare constants to be determined, and

a1is given by
(86)
er: ZtrZzZs\e'
This er will turn out to be the "true" electronic
charge. It has to be proved that the result of substituting (83), (84), (85) into the integral equations
So', Drl, is to reproduce these exdefining I,
pressions exactly, when Zu Zz, Za, and 6xo are
suitably chosen.
Concerning the I a@) , S rt' (e), D4'(a), it is known
that, when these operators are substituted into
the integral equations, they reproduce themselves
with the addition of certain divergent terms. The
additional divergent terms consist partly of the
terms involving A, B, C, Z, which are displayed in
(73), (7S), (82), and partly of terms arising (in the
case of Sr' and D p' only) from the peculiar behavior
of the vertices b, b' in Fig. 5. The terms arising from
b and, b' have been discussed earlier; they may be
called for brevity b-divergences. Originally, of
course, there is no asymmetry between the divergences arising in )* from vertex parts inserted at

307
775r

MATRIX

IN

QUANTUM

the two ends o and b of W: we have manufactured

an asymmetry by including the divergencesarising
at a in the coefficient Zr I of (83), rvhile at b the
operator 7, has not been replaced by l, and so the
D divergenceshave not been so absorbed. It is thus
to be expected that the effect of the 6 divergences,
like that of the n divergences, will be merely to
multiply all contributions to )* by the constant
Z1-1. Similarly, we expect that divergences at b'
rvill multiply II* by the constant Z;r. It can be
shown, by a detailed argument too long to be
given here, that these cxpectations are justified.
(The interested reader is recommended to see for
hirnself, by considering contributions to 2* arising
from various self-energy parts, how it is that the
finite terms of a given order are always reappearing
in higher order multiplied by the same divergent
coef6cients.) Therefore, the complete expressions
obtained by substituting fur(e), Srr'(e), Det'(e),
into the integral equations defining ,{u, )*, [*, are

Therefore the substitution gives

-2n;6xrSr

Z rZ z*le12,
and the remaining factor of >o(trU) i. explicitll' a
function of e1and not of e. Therefore (90) is
Z122-t2{W, e),

Sr)*
+z,-,(.ne)s,+!; a* !; "r,>),(s8)

D rrIJ (e): r,' (L c fA* l;

(90)

Z.tZzZ3>o(W,

where )n(I4l) is the expression (65) obtained by

s u b s t i t u t i n g f u 1 ( r ) , . S r 1 ' ( e 1, )D t r ' ( e r ) , w i t h o u t t h e
Z factors. Norv the Z factors in (90) combine with
the e2of (65) to give

where )1(trU, e) is the expression obtained by substituting the operators fu1(e), Srr'(a), Dpt'(e) into
>(W, t').Thus the )+(tl), obtained by substituting
from (83)-(85) into (65), is identical with the result
o f s u b s t i t u t i n g t h e o p e r a t o r sl u 1 ( e ) ,S 4 ' ( e ) , D r t ' ( e ) ,
and afterwards changing e to er and multiplying
the whole expression (except for the constant term
(87) in 616)by Z1Z2'r. More exactly, using (88), one can
say that the )* obtained by substituting from
(83)-(85) is given by

ttu1(e) : L u"@) { L (e) 7,,

Sp)1x(a) :

ELECTRODYNAMICS

"A)

(8e)

Here A(e), B(e), C(e), L(e) are well-defined power

series in e, with coefficients which diverge never
more strongly than as a power of a logarithm. The
f i n i t e o p e r a t o r s A u " ( e ) ,S " ( e ) , D " ( e ) , w i l l , w h e n a l l
divergent terms are dropped, lead back to the
f u 1 ( a ) ,S p 1 ' ( e ) ,D " t ' ( e ) , f r o m w h i c h t h e s u b s t i t u t i o n
s t a r t e d ; t h u s , a c c o r d i n gt o ( 3 8 ) , ( 6 3 ) , ( 6 4 ) ,
I ur(e): t ul h*(e) ,

7
Sr''(e): Sr* ^ S"(e)Sp''(e).

(87',)

: - 2ri6roSr

/l1r
+ Z z - ' l A ( e ) S r * - B ( e , ) * - & ( ? r )l . ( 9 1 )
\212n/

Further, the Sr' obtained by substituting from

(83)-(85) into the integral equations is given by (91)
and
(92)

Sr':Sr*Sr)*Se'.

It is now easy to verify, using (88'), that Sr'given

bv (91) and (92) will be identical with (84), provided that
1
Zz:I|-B(e,),

(93)

ZT

(88)

ZT

1
6ro:

Z'-tO"''

'

(94)

2r'i

D rl (e): D oa-P"(e)D p{ (e).

(se')

In a similar way, the Dr' obtained by substituting from (83)-(85) into the integral equations
E q u a t i o n s ( 8 7 ) - ( 8 9 ) , ( 8 7 ' ) - ( 8 9 ' ) , d e s c r i b ep r e c i s e l y can be related with the II1+(e) of (89). This Dr'
the way in which the lpr(a), Sv1'(e), Dp1'(e), when will be identical with (85) provided that
substituted into the integral equations, reproduce
1
themselves with the addition of divergent terms.
(95)
Zs:l|.C(e,).
And from these results it is easy to deduce the
2m
self-reproducing property of the operators (83)-(85),
Finally, the Ip obtained by substituting fronr
rvhen substituted into the same equations.
(83)-(85) can be shown to be
Consider for example the effect of substituting
from (83)-(85) into the term 2(W,11), given by
7u:7u! Z;l.Lrt(e),
(65) with l:1. The integrand of (65) is a product
of one factor lu, one 7r, one Sr', and one Dr'.
with -r1,r(e)given by (87). Using (87'), this l, will
tTx

308
f

terminacy is removed, and one must take

be identical with (83) provided that

Zt:l-L(e).

(96)

Therefore, if Zt Zz, 23, 6xn are defined by (96)'

(93), (95), (94), it is established that (83)-(85) give
ihe'correcl forms of the operators I.u, Sp', Dp',
including all the effects of the radiative corrections
which these operators introduce into themselves and
into each other. The exact Eqs. (83)-(85) give a
much simpler separation of the infinite from the
finite parti of these operators than the approximate
equations(73), (78), (82).
Consider now the result of using the exact
operators (83)-(35) in calculating a constituent M
oi U1*;, where M is constructed from a certain
irreducible graph G6 according to the rules of
Section IV. Go will have, say, F, internal and E"
external electron lines, Fo internal and E" external
ohoton lines, and
4: P"llE":2Fe!fle

t7 52

DYSON

(97)

vertices. In M there will be {E, fac\ors-{'(fri)' }8,

factors {,'(ki) and Eo facLors .4,'(frt) $ver\b4 (37).
In t'(kt), fti is the momenlum-energ\4 vbctor ot
an electron, which satisfies (69), and thE S"(fr') in
(73) are zero at evety stage of the inductive definiiion of Srr'(a). Therefore (84), (35)' (37) give in
turn
S Ft(kt) : Z 25F(kc),
>(k\:2"(2"-t)(h,iy,-ixn),
{sel
{' (ko): V (k') + 2r(Z z 1)S r(ht) (k,ct u- ixit(ht).
The expression (98) is indeterminate, since
(hri1r-ixs) operating on 'lt(kt) gives zero, while
operating on Sr(ftt) it gives the constant (1/2r)'
Thus, aCcording to the order in which the factors
are evaluated, (98) will give for ry''(frc)either the
value /(fri) or the value Zr{(h'). Similarly, 0t(ki) is
indeteiminate betweent(F;) and Z\LG;), and, excluding for the moment .du(ftt) which are Fourier
components of the external potential,. Ar'(kr) is
indeterminate between A,(ki) and Z3Ar(kc). In any
case, considerations of covariance show that the
'!r'(ho), 0' @n), A r' (hi) are numerical multiples of the
,r@\, {'(kd), At (ftt) ; thus the indeterminacv lies onlv
irr a constant factor multiplying the whole expression M.
There cannot be any indeterminacy in the
maenitude of the matrix elements of I/( - ), so long
as ihis operator is restricted to be unitary. The
indeterminacy in fact lies only in the normalization
of the electron and photon wave functions ry'(fti),
'{/(kt), A,(ht), which may or may not be regarded as
altered by the continual interactions of these particles with the vacuum-fields around them. It can be
shown that, if the wave functions are everywhere
normalized in the usual way, the apparent inde'

{/' @c): z r+{/(kt),

{,,(ht) : z.i,(kt) ,
A''(kr):Zt+au1Pt1'

(ee)

It viill be seen that (99) gives just the geometric

mean of the two alternative values of \l/t(ki) obtained from (98).
Wherr Au(frt) is a Fourier component oJ the external poteniial, then in general (hi)z + o' ad A,i \!:)
is not indeterminate but is given by (37) and (85)
in the form
A,', (ki) :2o;2tD F|' (et)(kt)2Au(kr.

(100)

However, the unit in which external potentials are

measured is defined by the dynamical effects which
the potentials produce on known charges; and these
dynimical efficts are just the matrix elements of
U1-; i" which (100) appears. Therefore the factor
Zzin (lO0) has no physical significance,and will be
changed when.C, is measured in practical units' The
which appears when practical
.or.".t
used is 231; this is because the photon
units are"on.tunt
potentials Au in (99) were normalized in terms ot
practical units; and (100) should reduce to (99)
when (Et)'?+O,if the external ,4, and the photon 'dts
are measured in the same units. Therefore the
correct formula fot Ar', covering the cases both of
photon and of external potentials, is
i),
A,' thil : 2ri2 D r r' (er) (ki)' A r(h
A , ' 1 h t 1 : 2 r t n 7 "\
P;])', (fr')'-O.

(frr)' I 0' (
] 101)
J

In M there will appear F, factors S7', Fo factors

Dr', and. z factors f*, in addition to the factors of
the type (99), (101). Hence bv (97) the Z,factors
will occur in M pnly as the constant multiplier
Z;"22"23\n'
By (36), this multiplier is exactly suffi-cient to
convert the factor d", remaining in M from the
original interaction (8), into a factor er". Thereby,
both e and Z factors disappear from M, leaving only
their combination er in the operators lur(er),
Sr1(er), Der'(er), and in the factor ern' If now er is
identified with the finite observed electronic charge,
there no longer appear any divergent expressions
in M, And since M is a completely general constituent of t/(@), the elimination of divergences
from the S matrix is accomPlished.
It hardty needs to be pointed out that the arguments of this section have involved extensive
manipulations of infinite quantities. These manipulations have only a foimal validity, and must be
justiEed a posterioriby the fact that the)'ultimately
iead to a clear separation of finite from infinite
expressions. Such in a posteriori justi6cation of
dubious manipulations is an inevitable feature of

309
f/JJ

.'

MATRIX

IN

ELECTRODYNAMICS

QUANTUM

any theory which aims to extract meaninqful

r e s u l t s f r o m n o t c o m p l e t e l y c o n s i s t e n tp r e m i s e i .
We conclude with two disconnected remarks.
First, it is probable that Zt:2t
identically, though
this has been proved so far only up to the order e2.
If this conjecture is correct, then !ll charge-renormalization effects arise according to (86) from the
coefficient Zz alone, and the arguments of this
paper can be somervhat simplified. Second, Eqs.
(88'), (89'), which define the fundamental operators
Srt', Drr', may be solved for these operators. Thus

equivalent to the following: each factor Sr in M is

replaced by Sp1'(e),each factor Dpby Dp1'(e), each
factor 7, by lr1(e), each factor -4uwhen it represents
an external potential is replaced by
A ur(hi) :2o;p ,y'(e) (hc)2Au(kt),

(102)

factors ry',ry',.1, representing particle wave-functions

are left unchanged, and finally e wherever it occurs
in M is replaced by er. The definition of M is completed by the specification of Srr'(a), Dot'(e),
Iu1(e) ; it is in the calculation of these operators that
the main difficulty of the theory lies. The method of
obtaining these operators is the process of successive
substitution and integration explained in the first
part of Section VII; the operators so calculated are
divergence-free, the divergent parts at every stage
of the calculation being explicitly dropped after
being separated from the finite parts by the
In electrodynamics, the S" and D" are small radi- method of Section VI.
ative corrections, and it will ahvays be legitimate
The above rules determine each contribution M
and convenient to expand (88") and (89") by the to {/( o) as a divergence-freeexpression,which is a
binomial theorem. If, however, the methods of the function of the observed rnass nx and the observed
present paper are to be applied to meson fields, charge e1 of the electron, both of which quantities
with coupling constants which are not small, then are taken to have their empirical values. The diverit will be desirable not to expand these expressions; gent parts of the theory are irrelevant to the calin this way one may hope to escape partially from culation of U(o), being absorbed into the unobthe limitations which the use of weak-coupling servable constants 6m and e occurring in (8). A
approximations imposes on the theory.
place where some ambiguity might appear in M is
in the calculation of the operators Sp1'(e),Dp1'(e),
VI[. SUMMARY OF RXSULTS
Iu1(e), when the method of Section VI is used to
The results of the prcceding sections divicle separate out the finite parts S(W,tt), D(W',tr),
(67), (74), (80).
themselves into ts'o groups. On thc one hand, there ^ ! " ( V , t t , l ' ? ) ,f r o m t h e e x p r e s s i o n s
Even in this place the rules of Section VI give unamis a set of rules by lvhich the element of the S matrix
corresponding to any given scattering process may biguous directions for making the separation; only
question whether some alternative direcbe calculated, rvithout mentioning the divergent there is a
expressions occurring in the theory. On the other tions might be equally reasonable.For example, it is
possible to separate out a finite part from >(W, tt)
hand, there is the specification of the divergent
(67), and not to make the further step
expressions, and the interpretation of these ex- according to
pressions as mass and charge renormalization of using (70) to separate out a finite part S(W, tt)
which vanishes when (69) holds. Actually it is easy
factors.
The first group of results may be summarized as to verify that such an alternative procedure will
not change the value of M,but will only make its
follows. Given a particular scattering problem, with
specified initial and final states, the corresponding evaluation more complicated; it will lead to an
(infinite) part oi the
matrix element of I/(o) is a sum of contributions expression for M in which one
mass and charge renormalizations is absorbed into
from various graphs G as described in Section II.
A particular contribution M from a particular G is the constants 6m and e, while other finite mass and
charge renormalizations are left explicitly in the
to be rvritten down as an integral over nomentum
formulas. It is just these finite renormalization
variables according to the rules of Section III; the
integrand is a product of factors V&t) , |Gt) , Ap(ht), effects which the second step in the separation of
S(14/,tt) and hr"(Y,11,l'?) is designed to avoid.
SF(pt), Di(pt), 6(q), t,, the factors corresponding
Therefore it may be concluded that the rules of calin a prescribed way to the lines and vertices of G.
According to Section IV, contributions M are only culation of U(o) are not only divergence-freebut
to be admitted from irreducible G; the effects of unambiguous.
As anyone acquainted with the history of the
reducible graphs are included by replacing in M
Larnb shiftll knows, the utmost care is required
the factors V, 'tr', A, Sr, Dr, 7u, by the corres p o n d i n g e x p r e s s i o n s( 3 7 ) , ( 3 5 ) , ( 3 6 ) , ( 3 8 ) . T h e s e
trH. A. Bethe, ElectrcmlgneticShilf o.f Energy Leaels,
replacements are then shorvn in Section VII to be Report 1o Solvay Confercnce,"Brus'ets(1048t.

s",'r,t:Ir-5"k1]s",

(88,,)

o,,'at:lt_.!n"at] o,.

(8e,)

3IO
F. J, DYSON

1754

the Ar and B; are logarithmically divergent

before it can be said that any particular rule of where
coefficients, independent ol m and ev
numerical
given
in
this
rules
The
lalculation is unambiguous'
each
thal
sense
the
unambiguous, in
ouo",
IX. DISCUSSIONOT' FURTIIER OUTLOOK
. r " n t i t v"r" t o b e c a l c u l a t e d i s a n i n t e g r a l i n m o al
The surprising feature of the S matrix theory,
mentum-space which is absolutely convergen-t
infinitv: such an integral has always a well-defined as outlined in tiis paper, is its success in avoiding
v a l u e . - H o w e v e r , t h e r u l e s w o u l d n o t b e u n a m - difficulties. Starting from the methods of Tomonaga'
Uigrou" if it were allowed to sptit the integrand.into Schwinger and Fej'nman, and using no new ideas
,"?"..1 putr. and to evaluate the integral by inte- or techiiques, one irrives at an S matrix from which
g r a t i n g ; h e p a r t s s e p a r a t e l ya n d . t h e n a d d i n g t h e the well-known divergences seem to have conspired
results; ambiguities would arlse lt ever Lne parrlat to eliminate themselves. This automatic disapDearanceof divergences is an empirical fact, which
ini"sr^1. were-not absolutely convergent' A splitting
parts m u s t b e g i v e n d u e w e i g h t i n c o n s i d e r i n gt h e f u L u r e
of tf,e integrals into conditionally convergent
in the context of the present prosDects of electrodynamics. Paradoxically op.ry
"""-l,tnnatural
paper,
but occurs in a natural way when.calcuJa- posed to the fini{enessof the S matrix is the second
iact, that the whole theory is built upon a Haqll;
iiol" are ba""d upon a perturbation theory in which
(8)
electron and poiitron states are considered sepa- tonian formalism with an interaction-function
from each other' The absolute convergence rvhi.tt i. infinite and therefore physically meaningrately
'th"
ittt"gtul. in'the present theory is essentially
less.
oi
th" fict that the electron and
The arguments of this paper have been essenconnected'*ith
are
field
electron-positron
tially mathematical in character,being concerneo
oo.itron parts of the
lever separated; this finds its algebraic expression *itn tit" consequencesof a particular mathematical
in the statement that the quadratic denominator in formalism. ln attempting to assessthelr slgnlncance
(4.5) is never to be separated into partial fractions'
for the future, one must pass from the language ot
the absenci of ambiguity in the rules of mathematics to the language of physics' O.ne.m.ust
ift"r"fot"
that the mathematlcal torassume provisionally
caic,llatio" of U(o) is achieved by introducing
'"o.t".ponds
to something existing in
-uli.into ttt" theory what is really a new physical
tylottt".;., namely that the electron-positron field nature, and then enquire to what extent the paraui*uyt u.a. as a unit and not as a combination of Jo"i.ui .".utt. of the formalism can be reconciled
l*o i"putut" fields. A similar hypothesis is made for *ittt t".tt an assumption. In accordance with this
theel"ctrom.gnetic field, namely thal- this field also prografl, we interpret the contrast between the
finite
acts as a unit and not as a sum of one part repre- ii"E g"nt Hamilto;ian formalism and the
qnother part repreS *u?.i" as a contrast between two pictures of the
senting photon emission and
world, seen by two observers having a different
senting
-Photon absorPtion'
it must" bL said that the proof of the choice qf -ea.uri.tg equipment at their disposal'
n"iili,
f i n i t e n e s sa n d u n a m b i g u i t y o f U ( o ) g i v e n i n t h i s itt" nt"t picture ii of a- collection of quantized
by
oaoer makes no pretence of being complete and fields with^localizable interactions, and is seen
general
a fictitious observer whose apparatus has no atomlc
iiglrru". It is most desirable that these
should as soon as possible be supple- structure and whose measurements are llmlteo ln
u.?u-"nt.
only by the existence of the fundamental
mlnted by bn explicit calculation of at least one ;;;t
no
.on"turrt, c ind' h. This observer is able to make
fourth-order radiaiive effect, to make sure that
freedom on a sub-microscopic s9]9
-ittt .o-pf"t"
unforeseen difficulties arise in that order'
ihe recond group of results of the theory is the iti" f.i"J oi observations which Bohr and Rosenfeldr2
(86)'
i" a more restricted domain in their ciassic
identification 6f. im and e bv (94) and
ai.iu".ion of the measurability of field-quantities;
Although these two equations are strictly meaning- "rnotou
as the
i""r, boih sides being infinite, yet it is a satisfactory
and he will be referred to in what follows
feature of the theory that it determines the unob- iid"al" obs"rver. The second picture is of. a.colpower
lection of observable quantities (in the terminology
servable constants 6m and a formally as
real
itt the observable er, and not vice versa' There
of Heisenberg), and is the picture seen by a
ano
""ii""
i, thn" tto objection in principle to identifying e1 observer, whose apparatus consists ol atoms
are
*ittt ttt" bbseived electronic charge and writing
elementary particles and whose measurements
not only by c and I but also by
in
accuracy
limited
(
1
0
3
)
(e,2/4rhc):q:1/137'
olher constants such as a and m' The real observer
(94)
by
(8)
then'
are
in
appearing
The constants
', N. B"ht and L. Rosenfeld,
Kgl. Dansk'Vid'.Sel:,Math paperbv folr.an:
and (86),
- 12,No. 8 (1933).A secondPhvs.Medd.
o,
(104) ir'i""r"ii i. to'bepubiished
6m:m(AplAzq2*'''),
t,:i,
fo1'
l&,f;:,tr u:",Xo;i'
booklet by A. Pais,.DmbPwn

e: e r ( l* B P - l B z a 2 - l ' ' ' ) ,

(1os) (Princeton University Press,Princeton, 1948)'

"i

3ll

I/JJ

MATRIX

IN

QUANTUM

makes spectroscopic observations, and performs

experiments involving bombardments of atomic
systems with various tl'pes of mutu3lly interacting
subatomic projectiles, but to the best of our knowledge he cannot measure the strength of a single
field undisturbed by the interaction of that field
with others. The ideal observer, utilizing his apparatus in the manner described in the analysis of
the Hamiltonian formalism by Bohr and Rosenfeld,l2 makes measurements of precisely this last
kind, and it is in terms of such measurements that
the commutation-relations of the fields are interpreted. The interaction-function (8) will presumably always remain unobservable to the real observer,whoisabletodeterminepositionsofparticles
only with limited accuracy, and rvho must always
obtain finite results from his measurements. The
ideal observer, however, using non-atomic apparatus whose location in space and time is l<nown
with infinite precision, is imagined to be able to
disentangle a single field from its interactjons with
others, and to measure the interaction (8). In conformity with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle,
it can perhaps be considereda physical consequence
of the infinitely precise knowledge of location
allowed to the ideal observer, that the value obtained by him when he measures (8) is infinite.
If the above analysis is correct, the divergencesof
electrodynamics are directly attributable to the
fact that the Hamiltonian formalism is based upon
an idealized conception of measurability. The
paradoxical feature of the present situation does
not then lie in the mere coexistence of a finite S
matrix with an infinite interaction-function. The
empirically found correlation, between expressions
which are unobservable to a real observer and
expressionswhich are infinite, is a physicalll. intelligible and acceptable feature of the theory. The
paradox is the fact that it is necessary in the

ELECTRODYNAMICS

present paper to start from the in6nite expressions

in order to deduce the finite ones. Accordingly,
what is to be looked for in a future theory is not so
much a modification of the present theory rvhich
will make all infinite quantities finite, but rather a
turning-round of the theory so that the finite
quantities shall become primary and the infinite
quantities secondary.
One may expect that in the future a consistent
{ormulation of electrodynamics will be possible,
itself free from infinities and involving only the
ph1'sical constants m and ey, and such that a
Hamiltonian formalism with interaction (8), with
divergent coelficients 6m and e, may in suitably
i d e a l i z e d c i r c u m s t a n c e sb e d e d u c e d f r o m i t . T h e
Hamiltonian formalism should appear as a limiting
form of a description of the world as seen by a
certain type of observer, the limit being approached
more and more closely as the precision of measttrement allowed to the observer tends to infinity.
The nature of a future theory is not a profitable
subject for theoretical speculation. The future
theory rvill be built, first of all upon the results of
future experiments, and secondll' upon an understanding of the interrelations between electrodynamics and mesonic and nucleonic phenomena.
The purpose of the foregoing remarks is merely to
point out that there is now no longer, as there has
seemedto be in the past, a compelling necessity for
a future theory to abandon some essential features
of the present electrodynamics. The present electrodynamics is certainly incomplete, but is no longer
certainly incorrect.
In conclusion, the author rvould like to express
his profound indebtedness to Professor Feynman
for many of the ideas upon which this paper is
built, to Professor Oppenheimer for valuable discussions,and to the Commonwealth Fund of New
York for financial support.

3r2

P o p e r2 6

TIIE LAGRANGIAN IN QUANTUM MECHANICS.

BA P. A. M. D'irac.
(Receivecl November 19, 1932).

Quantum mechanics\ryasbuilt up 0n a foundationof analogy with the Hamiltonian theory of classical mechanics.
This is becausethe classical notion of canonicalcoordinates
and momentawas found to be one with a very simplequantum analogue,as a result of which the whole of the classical Hamiltonian theory, which is just a structure built up
on this notion, could be taken over in all its details into
quantum mechanics.
Now there is an alternative formulation for classical
dynamics, provided by the Lagrangian. This requires one
to work in terms of coordinatesand velocities instead of coordinates and momenta. The two formulationsare, of coursc,
closely related,but there are reasonsfor believing that the
Lagrangian one is the more fundamental.
In the first place the Lagrangian methoclallows one to
collect together all the equationsof motionand expressthem
as the stationary property of a certain action function. (This
action funrrtion is just the time - integral of the Lagrangian).
There is n0 correspon.lingaction principle in terms of
trre eoordinates and momenta of the Hamiltonian theory.
Secondly the Lagrangian method can easily be expressed
lelativistically, 0n account of the action function being
a relativistic invariant; while the Hamiltonian method is
essentially non - relativistic in form, since it marks out a
particular time variable as the canonical conjugate of the
Hamiltonianfunction.
For these rcasonsit would seemdesirableto take up the
questionof what correspondsin the quantum theory to the
Lagrangian methotl of the classical theory. A litile considerationshows,however,that one cannot expectto be able

3r3
P. A. M. Dirac, The Lagrangian in Quantum Mechanics.

65

to take over the classicalLagrangian equationsin any very

direct way. These equations involve partial derivatives of
the Lagrangian with respect to the coordinatesand velocities
and.no meaning can be given to such derivatives in quantum mechanics. The only differentiation process that can
be carried out with respect to the dynamical variables of
quantum mechanicsis that of forming Poisson brackets
and this processleads to the I{amiltoniantheory.t
We must therefore seek our quantumLagrangian theory
in an indirect way. We must try to take over the i d,e a s of
the classicalLagrangiantheory,not the equations of the
.classicalLagrangian theory.
Contact Transf ormations.
I,agrangiantheory is closeiy connectedwith the theory
of contact transformations. We shall thereforebegin with
a discussionof the analogy between classicaland quantum
contact transformations. Let the two sets of variablesbe
pr, .er and Pr, Qr, (r : 1, 2 ... n) and supposethe q's and.
so that any function of the dynaQ's to be all ind,ependent,
mical variables can be expressedin' terms of them. It is well
known that in the classicaltheory the transformationequations for this case can be put in the form
pr:

ds
oq.r,

fD
y :_ _

ds
dQr,

(1)

where S is some function of the q's and Q's.

1 Prouessesfor partial differentiation with respect to matrices have
been given by Born, Heisenberg
a n d J o r d a n ( Z S . f . P h y s i k3 5 ,
561, 1926)but these processes do not give us means of differentiation
with respect to dynamical variables, since they are not independent of
the representation chosen. As an example of the difficulties involved in
differentiation with respect to quantum dynamical variables, consider the
,three components of an angular momentum, satisfying
ffi*ffis-rn1rne-

i,hm",

lN'e have here m, expressed explicitly as a function of nt,* and mu, bat
we can give no meaning to its partial derivative with respect to rnn
or rna.

314
P. A. M. Dirac,

66

In the quantum theory we may take a representationin

which the q's are diagonal, and a secondrepresentationin
which the Q's are diagonal. There will be a transformation
function (q'lQ') connectingthe two representations.
We shall
now show that this transformationfunction is the quantum
analogueof etslh.
If e is any function of the dynamical variables in the
quantum theory, it will have a ,,mixed." representative
@.'I o I Q'), which may be defined in terms of either of the
(q' l"l q"), (Q'l" i 0") by
usual representatives
( q ,l " l Q ' ) : I @ ' i o l q " ) d q , , ( q , , I Q ' ) :@ , I q , , ) d , Q , , l(oQl Q
,,,).
I
these
definitions
From the first of
we obtain

(q'I q, I Q'): q',(q.'I Q')

(2)

(q'Ip,l Q'): - ih
!4;{n,Ia,)

(3)

and from the second

@'I Q,iQ'): Q',(q'

I Q')

@)

@ ' I P , I Q ) : i ' hu *Y r ( q ' l U ) .

(5)

Note the differencein sign in (a) and (r).

Equations(2) and (a) may be generalisedas follows. Let
f(q) be any function of the q's and g(q any functionof the
Q's. Then

r]")dq"(q"i Q')d,Q"
@'i f@)s \01 Q'): I I fr' 1f@)'t
Q' l s (ql Q')
: f (,t')g Q') @'I Q').
X ' u r t h e r ,i f f * ( q ) a n d g n ( Q ) , ( k : 1 , 2 . . . , n t ) d e n o t et y o s e t s
of functions of ghe q's and Q's respectively,
(q' lrn f,,(q)gu(q Q') : Er frc(q')u*(Q').@'I Q).
Thus if a is any function of the dynamical variables and u'e
suppose it to be expressed as a function a (qq of the q's and
- orclered" wB,f, that is, s0 that it consists of
Q's in a ,,wr:11
a sum of tenns of the form f(q)g(Q), we shall have

@'i o (q0 | Q'): o (q' Q')@'I Q).

(6)

315
The Lagrangian in Quantum Mechanics.

67

This is a rather remarkable equation, giving us a connection

between
which is a function 0f operators,
and
"(qQ),
o ( q ' Q ' ) ,w h i c h i s a f u n c t i o n o f n u m e r i c a l
variables.
Let us apply this result for &: gr. Putting
(7\
@'lQ')-eiuth'
where U is a new function - of the q"s and Q"s we get,
from (3)

@,lp,l Q): !!I^q:a)

oe, @,,I Q).
By comparingthis with (6) we obtain
d u(qQ)
Pr:
dq.,
as an equation between operators 0r dynamical variables,
which holds provided dUldq, ts well- ordered. Similarly, by
applying the result (G) for ct- p, and using (b), we get

, g q.
P,: - du
dQ' '

provided duldQ, is well-ordered. These equations are of

the sameform as (t) and show that the U defined by (T) is
the analogueof the classicalfunction S, which is what we
had to proYe.
Incidentally, we have obtained another theorem at the
same time, namely that equations(1) hold also in the quantum theory providedthe right-hancl sidesare suitably interpreted, the variables being treated classicallyfor the purpose of the differentiations and the derivatives being then
well-ordered. This theoremhas been previouslyproved by
1
Jordan by a differentmethod.
The Lagrangian

and the Action Principle.

The equationsof motion of the classicaltheory causethe
dynamicalvariablesto vary in sucha way that tireir valuesq;,
pt at any time t are connectedwith their values er, pr.aL
any other time T by a contact transformation,which may be
put into the form (t) with e, p:et, Ft; Q, P:er, py aod.
S equal to the time integral of the Lagrangianoverthe range
r .l o r d a n, ZS. f. Phys, 38, 518, 1926.

316
P. A. M. I)irac,

68

? to /. In the quantum theory the Qt, pt will still be connected with lhe q7, pr bY a contact transformation and there
will be a transformation function (q.rlqr) connecting the two
representations in which the 8r and the q7 are diagonal respectively. The work of the preceding section now shows that

,i

to exp le Ldtitl ) '

(qr\qr) corresponds
J

(8)

where -L is the Lagrangian. If we take T to differ only infinitely littie from l, we get the result
(9)
to expli'Ldtlhl.
corresponds
(q.t+arlqr)
The transformationfunctions in (8) and (9) are very fundameutal things in the quantum theory and it is satisfactory
to fincl that they have their classicalanalogues,expressible
simply in terms of the Lagrangian. We have here the natural extensionof the well - known result that the phase of
the wave function conespondsto Hamilton's principle function in classical theory. The analogy (9) suggeststhat we
ought to considerthe classical Lagrangian,not as a function
of the coordinatesand velocities,but rather as a function
of the coordinatesat time / and the coordinatesat time t + dt.
in this section
tr'or simplicity in the further d"iscussion
although
freedom,
we shall take the case of a singled.egreeof
the argument applies also to the general case. We shall use
the notation
t

rfl

e x p[ i

Ldtlh]-t(tr),

so that AUf\ is the classical analogue of (q.tlqr).

Suppose we divide up the time interval T --t into a large
number of small sections T-tt, tr-tz, .. ., tm-r't,o, t*--'t hy
the introd,uction of a sequence of intermed.iate times tt,
tz, ... t*. Then

(10)
a(tT) - a(tt*) a (t*t*-i . .. a (trt')a(tJ).
Now in the quantumtheorYwe have
(q.rlq.t)d,q,,(qt
q.*-r)dq.*_'...
(q.rlq.r):l@rlq*) dq^(q.*l
lqr), (tt)

317
The Lagrangian in Quantum Mechanics.

69

where q7,denotesq at the intermed"iate

time tu,(k- 1, 2... m).
Equation (11) at first sight doesnot seem to correspondproperly to equation (10), since 0n the right-hand side of (rr)
we must integrate after doing the multiplication while 0n
the right - hand side of (10) there is no integration.
Let us examinethis discrepancyby seeingwhat becomes
of (t1) when we regard f as extremely small. From the results (8) and (9) we see that the integrand iq (rr) must be
of the form eiFihwhere F is a function of q.r,er, ez. . . e*, et
which remains finite as h tends to zero. Let us now picture one of the intermediate e's, say e*, as varying continuously while the others are fixed. Owing to the smallness
of h, we shall then in general have Fth varying extremely
rapidly. This means that ei,Fthwrll vary periodically with a
very high frequency about the value zero, as a result of
which its integral will be practically zero. The only important part in the domain of integration of q.ois thus that for
which a comparativelylarge variation in Qrcproducesonly
a very small variation in -F. This part is the neighbourhood
of a point for which F is stationary with respect to small
variations in q7r.
We can apply this argument to each of the variables of
integration in the right-hand side of (tr) and obtain.the
result that the only important part in the domain of integration is that for which, r is stationary for small variations
in all the intermediate q's. But, by applying (s) to each of
the small time sections,we see that f' has for its classical
analogue
tt*t2ttt

I rat+ I Ldt+...+ [ rat + I Ld,t: f rat,

tln

tm_t

t;

which is just the action function which classical mechanics

requires to be stationary for small variations in all the intermediate q's. This shows the way in which equation (11)
goes orrer into classical results when h becomes extremely
small.
We now return to the general case when D is not small.
We see that, for comparison with the quantum theory, equa-

3t8
P. A. M. Dirac,

70

tion (10) must be interpreted.in the following way. Each of

the quantities ,4. must be consideredas a function of the q's
at the two times to which it refers. The right - hand,side
is then a function, not only of qr and Qa but also of er, ez,
. .. em, and in order to get from it a function of q., and q;
only, which we can equate to the left - hand side, we must
substitutefor et, ez .. . em their valuesgiven by the action
principle. Thls processof substitution for the intermediate
q's then correspondsto the processof integrationover all
values of these q's in (11).
Equatiou (11) containsthe quantumanalogueof the action
principle, as may be seenmore explicitly from the following
argument. From equation(11) we can extract the statement
(a rather trivial one) that, if we take specifiedvaluesfor q7
and qt, then the importance of our consideringany set of
values for the intermediateq's is determined by the importance of this set of values in the integration on the righthand side of (11). If we now make fu tend to zero,this statement goes over into the classicalstatementthat, if we take
specified. values for er and qr, then the importance of our
q's is zero
considering any set of values for the intermed,iate
unless these values make the action function stationary.
This statement is one way of formulatingthe classicalaction
principle.
Application

to F ield' Dynamics.

'W-e
may treat the problem of a vibrating medium in the
classical theory by Lagrangian methodswhich form a natural generalisationof those for particles. We chooseas our
coordinates suitable field quantities or potentials. Each coordinate' is then a function of the four space- time variables
fr, !/, H, t, conesponding to the fact that in particle theory
it is a function of just the one variable /. Thus the one independentvariable / of particle theory is to be generalised
variablesfr, U, H, t.l
to four intlepend,ent
1 It is customary in field dynamics to regard. the values of a field.
quantity for two different values of (n, y, z) bat, the same value of f as
two differeut coordinates, instearl of as two values of the same coordi-

3r9
The Lagrangian in Quantum Mechanic:i.

7l

We introduce at each point of space- time a Lagrangian

density, which must be a function of the coordinates and
their first derivatives with respect to fr, U, z and. t, correspond"ingto the Lagrangian in particle theory being a function of coordinates and velocities. The integral of the Lagrangian d,ensity over any (four - dimensional)region of spacetime must then be stationary for all small variations of the
coordinates inside the region, provided the coordinateson the
boundary remain invariant.
It is now easy to see what the quantum analogue of all
this must be. If S denotes the integral of the classical Lagrangian density over a particular region of space- time, we
should expect there to be a quantum analogue sf st'stnssvresponding to the (qrl qr) of particle theory. This (qr I q.) i*
a function of the values of the coordinates at the ends of
the time interval to which it refers and so we should expect
the quantum analogue gf si'stnto be a function (really a functional) of the values of the coordinates on the boundary of
the space- time region. This quantum analogue will be a sort
of ,,generalizedtransformation function". It cannot in general be
interpreted, like (qrl q_r),as giving a transformation betwsen
one set of dynamical variables and another, but it is a fourdimensional generalization of (qt t er) in the following sense.
Corresponding to the composition law for (q1lq7)
(12)
q r )d q , ( q r l q . r ) ,
( q , l q r ):
[ @r[

the generalized transformation function (S.t.f.) rvill have

the following compositionlaw. Take a given region of spacetime and divide it up into two parts. Then the g.t.f. for
the whole region will equal the product of the g.t.f.'s for
the two parts, integrated over all values for the coordinates
on the commonboundary 0f the two parts.
Repeatedapplication of (12) gives us (11) and repeated
t g.t.f.'s will enable
nate for two different points in the domain of inrlepenclent variables, antl
in this way to keep to the idea of a single inclepenclent sariable /. This
point of view is necessary for the Hamiltonian treatment, but for the
Lagrangian treatment the point of view atlopted in the text seems preferable on account of its greater space - time symmetry.

320
72

P. A. M. Dirac. The Lagrangian in Quantum Mechanics.

us in a similar way to conneot the g.t.f. for any region

with the g.t.f.'s for the very small sub - regions into which
that region may be divided. This connection will contain
the quantum analogue 0f the action principle applied to
fielcls.
The square of the mod.ulus of the transformation function
(qtlqr) can be inter'preted as the probabllity of an observation of the coordinates at the later time I giving the result
et for a state for which an observation of the coordinates at
the earlier time ? is certain to give the result 4r. A corresponding meaning for the square of the modulus of the
g.t.f. rvill exist only when the g.t.f. refers to a region of
space- time bounded by two separate (three - rJimensional)
surfaces, each extend.ing t0 infinity in the space directions
and lying entirely outsid.e any light - cone having its vertex
on the surface. The square 0f the mod.ulus 0f the g. t. f.
then gives the probability of the coordinates having specified valrres at a1l points 0n the later surface for a state for
which they are given to have definite values at all points
on the earlier surface. The g.t.f. may in this case be considered as a transformation function connecting the values
of the coordinates and momenta 0n one of the surfaces with
their values ou the other.
We can alternatively consider l(q.rlqr)l'as giving the'
probability of any state yielding the rerelatj.ve a pliori
observations 0f the q's are made at'
when
sults er and et
time Z and at time I (account being taken of the fact that the
earlier observation will alter the state and affect the later
observation). Correspondingly we can consider the square
of the modulus of the g.t.f. for any space- time region as.
probability of specified results
giving the relative a priori
being obtained when observations are made of the coordinates at all points on the boundary. This interpretation is
inore general than the preced.ing one, since it does not retluire a restriction on the shape of the space - time regionSt John's College, Cambridge.

Poper 27

32r

Space-Time Approach to Non-Relativistic

Quantum Mechanics
R. P. Fnnnten
Cornell Unhersity, Ithaca, Naa York
Non-relativistic quantum mechanics is formulated here in a difierent way. It is, however,
equivalent to the familiar formulation. In quantum mechanics the probability
mathematielly
of an event which can happen in several difierent ways is the absolute square of a sum of
complex contributions, one from each alternative way. The probability that a particle will be
found to have a path r(l) lying somewhere within a region of space time is the square of a sum
of contributions, one from each path in the region. The contribution from a single path is
postulated to be an exponential whose (imaginary) phase is the classical action (in units of i)
for the path in question. The total contribution from all paths reaching r, ! from the past is the
wave function 'y'(*, r). This is shown to stisfy Schroedinger's equation. The relation to matrix
are indicated, in particular to eliminate the
and operator algebra is discussed. Applietions
coordinates of the field oscillators from the equations of quantum electrodynamics.

classicalactionBto quantum mechanics.A probaamplitude is associated with an entire

bility
fT is a curious historical fact that modern
particle as a function of time, rather
I quantum mechanics began with two quite motion of a
simply
with a position of the particle at a
than
different mathematical formulations: the differparticular time.
ential equation of Schroedinger, and the matrix
The formulation is mathematically equivalent
algebra of Heisenberg. The two, apparently disto the more usual formulations. There are,
similar approaches, were proved to be mathetherefore, no fundamentally new results. Howmatically equivalent. These two points of view
ever, there is a pleasurein recognizing o1dthings
were destined to complement one another and from new point of view. Also, there are proba
to be uitimately synthesized in Dirac's trans- lems for which the new point of view offers a
formation theory.
distinct advantage. For example, if two systems
This paper will describe what is essentially a A and,B interact, the coordinates of one of the
third formulation of non-relativistic quantum systems, say B, may be eliminated from the
theory. This formulation was suggestedby some equations describing the motion of ,4 ' The interof Dirac'sl'2 remarks concerning the relation of
r. INTRODI'CTION

I P, A. M, Dirac, Thz Principles of Quanlum Muhanics

(The Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1935), second edition,
Section 33; also, Physik. Zeits. Sowjetunion 3, 64 (1933).
r P. A. M. Dirac, Rev. Mod. Phys. 17, 195 (1945).

I Throushout this paper the tem "action" will be used

along a path.
for the time integml bf the lagnngian
When this path is the one actuallv taken by a particle'
moving chisically, the integral shiluld more properly be
called Hamilton's first principle function.

367

322
368

P.

Fi.:\'NN{.\N

action with E is represented by a change in the

formula for the probability amplitude associated
with a motion of .4 . It is analogousto the classical
situation in which the effect of B can be represented by a change in the equations of motion
of A (by the introduction of terms representing
forcesacting on,4.). In this way the coordinates
of the transverse, as well as of the longitudinal
field oscillators, may be eliminated from the
equations of quantum electrodynamics.
In addition, there is ahvays the hope that the
new point of view will inspire an idea for the
modification of present theories, a modification
necessaryto encompasspresent experiments.
We first discuss the general concept of the
superposition of probability amplitudes in quantum mechanics. We then show how this concept
can be directly extended to define a probability
amplitude for any motion or path (position us.
time) in space-time. The ordinary quantum
mechanics is shown to result from the postulate
that this probability amplitude has a phaseproportional to the action, computed classically, for
this path. This is true when the action is the time
integral of a quadratic function of velocity. The
relation to matrix and operator algebra is discussedin a way that stays as closeto the language
of the new formulation as possible. There is no
practical advantage to this, but the formulae are
very sugggstirfe if a generalization to a wider
class of action functionals is contemplated.
Finally, we discuss applications of the formulation, As a particular illustration, we show how
the coordinates of a harmonic oscillator may be
eliminated from the equations of motion of a
system with which it interacts. This can be extended'directly for application to quantum electrodynamics. A formal extension which includes
the effects of.spin and relativity is described.
2. THE SUPERPOSITION
OF PROBABILITY
AMPLITUDES

changes in physical outlook required by the

transition from classical to quantum physics.
For this purpose,consider an imaginary experiment in which we can make three measurements
successivein time: first of a quantity 1., then
of B, and then of C. There is really no need for
these to be of different quantities, and it will do
just as well if the example of three successive
position measurementsis kept in mind. Suppose
that a is one of a number of possibleresultswhich
could come from measurementA, D is a result
that could arise from B, and c is a result possible
from the third measurement C.aWe shall assume
that the measurementsA, B, and C are the type
of measurementsthat completely specify a state
in the quantum-mechanical case. That is, for
example, the state for which B has the value b is
not degenerate.
It is well known that quantum mechanicsdeals
with probabilities, but naturally this is not the
whole picture. ln order to exhibit, even more
clearly, the relationship between classical and
quantum theory, we could supposethat classically we are also dealing rvith probabilities but
that all probabilities either are zero or one.
A better alternative is to imagine in the classical
case that the probabilities are in the sense of
classical statistical mechanics (where, possibly,
internal coordinatesare not completely specified).
We define P"6 as the probability that if measurement,4 gave the result o, then measurementB
will give the result b. Similarly, Pu" is the probability that if measurementB gives the result b,
then measurement C gives c. Further, let Po, be
the chance that it A gives o, then C gives c.
Finally, denote by P"6" the probability of all
three, i.e., if ,4. gives o, then ,Q gives b, and C
gives c. If the events between a ar.d,b are independent of those between & and c, then
Pou:PotPu

(1)

The formulation to be presented contains as This is true according to quantum mechanics

when the statement that B is D is a comDlete
its essential idea the concept of a probability
amplitude associatedwith a completely specified specification of the state.
motion as a function of time. It is, therefore,
a For our discussion it is not important that certain
worthwhile to review in detail the quantum- values of a, b, or c misht be excluded bv-For
ouantum mesinplicity,
mechanical concept of the superposition of proba- chanics but not by clissiel mrchanic-s.
assume the values are the sme for both but that the
bility amplitudes. We shall examine the essential probability of certain values may be zero.

323
NON_RELATIVISTIC

OUANTUM

In any event, we expect the relation

p"":l

Pa*

Q)

This is because,if initially measurement.4gives

a and the system is later found to give the result
r to measurement C, the quantity B must have
had some value at the time intermediate to .d.
ar'd C. The probability that it-was D is P"0".
We sum, or integrate, over all the mutually
exclusive alternatives for 6 (symbolized by Ia).
Now, the essential difference between classical
and quantum physics lies in Eq. (2). In classical
mechanics it is always true. In quantum mechanics it is often false. We shall denote the
quantum-mechanical probability that a measurement of C results in c when it follows a measurement of ,4 giving a by P""t. Equation (2) is
replaced in quantum mechanics by this remarkable law:6 There exist cornplexnumbers eab pbct
9o"such that
Pa:lp,ul',

P6":leul',

and P".c:le*l'.

(s)

The classical law, obtained by combining (1)

and (2),
(4)
P"":L PdPb"
b

is replaced by
go":Z

gotg,,",

(5)

lf (5) is correct,ordinarily (4) is incorrect.The

logical error made in deducing (4) consisted, of
course, in assuming that to get from a t6 c the
system had to go through a condition such that
B had to have some definite value, D.
If an attempt is made to verify this, i.e., if B
is measured betweeri the experiments A and C,
then formula (4) is, in fact, correct. More precisely, if the apparatus to measure B is set up
and used,but no attempt is made to utilize the
results of the B measurement in the sense that
only the A to C correlation is recorded and
studied, then (4) is correct. This is becausethe B
measuringmachine has done its job; if wi wish,
we could read the meters at any time without
5 We have assumed 6 is a non-degenerate state, ancl that
therefore (1) is true. Presumably, if in some generalization
of quantum mechanics (1) were not true, even for pure
states 6, (2) could be expected to be replaced by: There
such that Po"= lpd,l'. The anaare complex numbers ,pou"
log of (5) is then eo":Zu e*.

MECHANICS

369

disturbing the situation any further. The experi

ments which gave o and c can, therefore, be
separated into groups dapending on the value
of b.
Looking at probability from a frequency point
of view (4) simply results from the statement
that in each experiment giving a and, c, B had,
some value. The only way (4) could be wrong is
the statement, "B had some value," must sometimes be meaningless. Noting that (5) replaces
(4) only under the circumstance that we make
no attempt to measureB, we are led to say that
the statement, "B had some value," may be
meaningless whenever we make no attempt to
measureB.o
Hence, we have different results for the correlation of a and c, namely, Eq. (a) or Eq. (5)'
depending upon whether we do or do not attempt
to measure B. No matter how subtly one tries,
the attempt to measure B must disturb the
system, at least enough to change the results
from those given by (5) to those of (4).7 That
measurements do, in fact, cause the necessary
disturbances, and that, essentially, (4) could be
false was first clearly enunciated by Heisenberg
in his uncertainty principle. The law (5) is a
result of the work of Schroedinger,the statistical
interpretation of Born and Jordan, and the
transformation theory of Dirac.s
Equation (5) is a typical representation of the
wave nature of matter. Here, the chance of
finding a particle going from o to c through
several different routes (values of D) may, if no
attempt is made to determine the route, be
represented as the square of a sum of several
complex quantities-one for each available route.
6 It does not help to point out that we could' have
measured .8 had we wished. The fact is lhat we did not.
t How (4) actually resrrlts from (5) when measurements
disturb the'system has been studied particularly by J. vorr
Neumann (Mathemtisc he Gr und.logen der Quantennechanik
(Dover Priblietions,
New York; 1943)). The effect of
perturbation of the mmsuring equipment is effectively to
chanse the phase of the interferinq components, by 4,, sy,
so th"at (5)'becomes go":!u eieip"oc*. However, as von
Neumann shows. the ohase shifts must remain unknown
if B is measured so that the resulting probability P* is
the square of 9o. averaged over all phases, da. This results
in (4).
8 II A and B are the operators corresponding to measurements r4 and B, and if tL" and 9a are s6lutioni of A,9': a,1,"
and Ba6:!"u, lhet 9,b: Jixb*{.dx:(x0", 'y'"), Thus, ,p.ais
an element (a lD) of the transfomation matrix for the
in which A is
transfomtion
f.on a.eotesentation
diagonal to one in which B i! diagonal.

324
370

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

Probability can show the typical phenomena

of interference, usually associated with waves,
whose intensity is given by the square of the
sum of contributions from different sources.The
electron acts as a wave, (5), so to speak, as long
as no attempt is'made to verify that it is a
particle; yet one can determine, if one wishes,
by what route it travels just as though it were a
particle; but when one does that, (4) applies and
it does act like a particle.
These things are, of course, well known. They
have already been explained many times.e However, it seemsworth while to emphasizethe fact
that they are all simply direct consequencesof
Eq. (5), for it is essentiallyEq. (5) that is fundamental in my formulation of quantum mechanics.
The generalization of Eqs. (4) and (5) to a
Iarge number of measurements,say A, B, C, D,
. , ., K, is, of course, that the probability of the
a, b, c, d, ' ' ., & is
sequence
Paud...n:I v*"a..*12.

Assume that we have a particle which can

take up various values of a coordinate r. Imagine
that we make an enormous number of successive
position measurements,let us say separated by a
small time interval e. Then a succession of
measurementssuch as A, B, C, . '' might be the
successionof measurements of the coordinate *
times 11,tz,tu ' ' ' , where t;+t: t;* e.
at successive
Let the value, which might result from measurement of the coordinate at time li, be ri. Thus,
if ,4. is a measurement of.x at h then rr is what
we previously denoted by a. From a classical
point of view, the successivevalues, *r, fib xs, ' ' '
of the coordinate practically define a path r(r),
Eventually, we expect to go the limit e-+0.
The probability of such a path is a function
o f .x y x 2 , . . . , l C i , . ' ' , s a y P ( " ' * n , x i + r ,' ' ' ) .
The probability that the path lies in a particular
region R of space-time is obtained classically by
integrating P over that region. Thus, the probability that r; lies between a; and b;, and r;11 lies
betweenoi+r ?nd D+r, etc., is

The probability of the result a, c, k, for example,

it b, d, " . are measured,is the classicalformula:

,,"r:14'..r*"0...r,

(6)
:

while the probability of the same sequenceo, c, &

if no measurements are made between A and C
and between C and K is

frrr...

r c i , t c i +" l ,. ) . ' . d . x " d . x * t . . . ,( s )

the symbol fi meaning that the integration is

to be taken over those ranges of the variables
( 7 ) which lie within the region R. This is simply
P*oo:l!t
"'p"u"o...ol'.
Eq. (6) with a, b, . . . replaced by tc1,tc2,' ' ' and
integration
replacing summation.
probability
pabcd...kw
the
can call
The quantity
In quantum mechanics this is the correct
amplitude for the conditionA:0,, B:b, C:c,
D:d, . ", K:k. (It is, of course,expressibleas formula for the casethat rr, xcz,''', sr' '' ' were
actually all measured, and then only those paths
a product ,p"ugo,p,a'"pio')
lying within R were taken. We would expect the
3. THE PROBABILITYAMPLITUDEFOR A
result to be different if no such detailed measureSPACE.TIMEPATH
ments had been performed. Supposea measure'Ihe physical
ideas of the last section may be ment is made which is capable only of deterreadily extended to define a probability ampli- mining that the path lies somewherewithin R'
The measurement is to be what we might call
tude for a particular completely specified spacetime path. To explain how this,rnay be done, we an "ideal measurement." We suppose that no
shall limit ourselves to a one-dimensional prob- further details could be obtained from the same
lem, as the generalization to several dimensions measurement without further disturbance to the
is obvious.
system. I have not been able to find a precise
definition. We are trying to avoid the extra
e See, for eremple, W. Heisenberg, Thz Physhal Prinuncertainties that must be averaged over if, for
ciples oJ the Quantum Theory (University of Chicago Press,
example, more information were measured but
particularly
IV.
Chapter
Chiego, 1930),

325
NON-RELATIVISTIC

not utilized. We wish to use Eq. (5) or (7) for

all r; and hdve no residual part to sum over in
the manner of Eq. (a).
We expect that the probability that the parricle is found by our "ideal measurement" to be,
rndeed,in the region R is the square of a complex
rumber le@)lt.The number e(R), which we
rray call the probability amplitude for region R
is given by Eq. (7) with a, b, ... replacedby
::;, x41t . , . and summation replaced by in:egration:

QUANTUM

MECHANICS

371

shall be normalized to unity. It may not be best

to do so, but we have left this weight factor in a
proportionality constant in the secondpostulate.
The limit e+0 must be taken at the end of a
calculation,
When the system has several degreesof freedom the coordinate space n has several dimensions so that the symbol r will represent a set of
coordinates (x.(L),x@, . . . , rc(/.))for a system with
E degrees of freedom. A path is a sequence
of configurations for successive times and is
described by giving the configuration rr or
f
( x ; Q ) , y r ( z ) , . . . , x i ( k )i).,e . , t h e v a l u e o f e a c h o f
:(R):Lim I
.--'O
a, R
the D coordinates for each time tr. The symbol dri
X ! D ( .. . r r , r t + r . . . ) . . . d x " d , x . i +. -t.. ( 9 ) will be understood to mean the volume element
in fr dimensional configuration space (at time t).
The complexnumber @(.'.rcu,ri+r. . .) is a func- The statement of the postulates is independent
:ion of the variables r; defining the path. of the coordinate system which is used.
'Ihe
-\ctually, we imagine that the time spacing e appostulate is limited to defining the results
:roaches zero so that i[ essentially depends on of position measurements. It does not say what
-Jreentire path lc(l) rather than only on just the must be done
to define the result of a momentum
'"-aluesof rcl at the particular times l;, rr:x(t).
measurement, for example. This is not a real
iVe might call (Fthe probability amplitude func- limitation, however, because in principle the
:ional of paths r(l).
measurement of momentum of one particle can
.We may summarize these ideas in our first be performed in terms of position measurements
:ostulate:.
of other particles, e.g., meter indicators. Thus,
I. If an id.eal measuremenl is performed, to an analysis of such an experiment will determine
:elermine whethera particle has a path lying in a what it is about the first particle which deter.egion of space-time,then the probability that the mines its momentum.
.esult will, be afi,rmatiae is lhe absolute square of a
4. TIIE CALCIJLATIONOF TIIE PROBABILITY
:um oJ complex contributions, oneJrom eachpath
AMPLITUDEFOR A PATH
in the region.
The statement of the postulate is incomplete.
The first postulate prescribes the type of
.ihe meaning of a sum of terms one for "each" mathematical framework required by quantum
:ath is ambiguous. The precise meaning given mechanics for the calculation of probabilities,
,e Eq. (9) is this: A path is first definedonly by The second postulate gives a particular coRtent
:he positions r; through which it goes at a to this framework by prescribing how to compute
:equenceof equally spaced times,rok:t;-tle.
the important quantity iD for each path:
lhen all valuesof the coordinateswithin R have
II. The paths contribute equal,l,yi,n magnitude,
'fhe
;,r equal weight.
actual magnitude of the but the phase of thei,r contribution is the cl,asshal,
;eight depends upon e and can be so chosen aclion (in units oJ h); i.e,, the t;imeintegral,oJ the
--:ratthe probability of an everit which is certain
Lagrangian taken olong the palh.
That is to say, the contribution O[*(l)] from a
roThere are very interestinq rnathematical oroblems
given path r(l) is proportionalto exp(i/h)Slx(t)1,
:volved in the aftempt to a-void the subdiviiion and
. niting proceses. Some sort of complex measure is beins
where the action S[r(f)]: Jf L@Q),:r(t))dt is the
:-sciated with the space of functions r(l). Finite resulti
:=n be obtained under unexpected circumstances beeuse
time integral of the classical Lagratgian L(i, x)
':e masure is not positive everywhere, but
the contributaken
along the path in question, The Lagrangian,
-:ns from most of the paths largely cancel out. These
which may be an explicit function of the time,
:rrious mathemaliel problems are sidesteppedbv the sub':vision process. However, one feels
as-Cavafieri must
is a function of position and velocity. If we
':ve felt caiculating the volume of a pyramid
before the
:,Yennon ol Glculus.
suppose it to be a quadratic function of the

326
372

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

velocities, we can show the mathematical equivalence of the postulates here and the more usual
formulation of quantum mechanics.
To interpret the first postulate it was necessary
to de6ne a path by giving only the successionof
points r; through which the path passes a(
successivetimes l;. To compute $:f,L(i,x)d,t
we need to know the path at all points, not just
at rr. We shall assume that the function r(l) in
the interval between t; and,t6,r1is the path followed by a classicalparticle, with the Lagrangian
-L, which starting from ru; at ,i reaches x;q1 dt
l;+r. This assumption is required to interpret the
second postulate for discontinuous paths. The
quantity @(...tn, x+y ...) can be normalized
(for various e) if desired, so that the probability
of an event which is certain is normalized to
unity as e+0.
There is no difficulty in carrying out the action
integral becauseof the sudden changesof velocity
encountered at the times ,d as long as Z does not
depend upon any higher time derivatives of the
position than the first. Furthermore, unless Z is
restricted in this way the end points are not
sufficient to define the classical path. Since the
classical path is the one which makes the action
a minimum, we can write
S:E

S(*+r,r),

(10)

where
f';+r

S(xrar,rr) : Min. I
.,

L(i(t), x(t))dt. (11)

ti

Written in this way, the only appeal to classical

mechanics is to supply us with a Lagrangian
function. Indeed, one could consider postulate
two as simply saying, "iF is the exponential of i
times the integral of a real furrction of r(l) and
'fhen
the classical
its first time derivative."
motion
might be derived later as
equations of
the limit for large dimensions. The function of r
and o then could be shown to be the classical
Lagrangian within a constant factor.
Actually, the sum in (10), even for finite e, is
infinite and hence meaningless (because of the
infinite extent of time). This reflects a further
incompletenessof the postulates. We shall have
to restrict ourselves to a finite, but arbitrarilv
long, time interval.

Combining the two postulates and using Eq.

(10), we find
,p(R):Lirrr l'
._-,, Jn

li

dx;rtdxi

xexnf-E,.s1'"',r.)J.'.
A i-

, (12)

where we have let the norrnalization factor be

split into a factor 1/.4 (whose exact value we
shall presently determine) for each instant of
time. The integration is just over those values
)ct,xct+r,. . . which lie in the region R. This
equation, the definition (11) of S(r,4r, r;), and
the physical interpretation of I e(R) l'z as the
probability that the particle will be found in R,
conrpleteour forrnulation of quantum mechanics.
5. DEFINITION OF THE WAVE FUNCTION
We now proceed to show the equivalence of
these postulates to the ordinary formulation of
quantum mechanics.This we do in two steps.
We show in this section how the wave function
may be defined from the new point of view. ln
the next section we shall show that this function satisfies Schroedinger's differential wave
equation.
We shall seethat it is the possibility, (10), of
expressingS as a sum, and hence iDas a product,
of contributions from successivesections of the
path, which leads to the possibility of defining
a quantity having the properties of a wave
function.
To make this clear, let us imagine that we
choosea particular time I and divide the region R
in Eq. (12) into pieces, future and past relative
to l. We imagine that R can be split into: (a) a
region R', restricted in any way in space, but
lying entirely earlier in time than some l', suilt
that tt <ti (b) a region R" arbitrarily restricted
in space but lying entirely later in time than 1",
such that tt'>ti (c) the region between t' and t"
in which all the values of * coordinates are unrestricted, i,e., all of space-time between t' and,1",
The region (c) is not absolutely necessary.It can
be taken as narrow in time as desired.'However,
it is convenientin letting us considervarying I a
little without having to redefine R' and R".
Then le(R',R")1'? is the probability that the

327
NON-RELA'IIVIS'TI

C QUANTUM

i\,{ECHANI CS

J/J

path occupiesR' and R". BecauseR' is entirely

previous to R", considering the time I as the
present, we can expressthis as the probability
.a
JR,
that the path had been in region R' and will be
in regionR". If we divide by a factor, the probar,-r
fi
ldxr i drr-z
':
(l.s)
X e x p f- I S ( . r ; , r , . r |' ; )
bility that the path is in R', to renormalizethe
A
Lhi-*
J A
probability we find : I e(R', R") l' it the (relative)
probability that if the system were in region R' and
r
fi '
it will be found later in R".
c x 1 , l- ! S ( . r , ' ' ,
l):Linr
'lhis
x
*
(
x
u
,
I
is, of course,the important quantity in
",)]
' fr JR"
Ll1 i k
predicting the results of many experiments.We
I d.xpal tlxpy2
prcparethe system in a certain way (e.g.,it was
(16)
in regiolt R') anrl then measurc some other
A
AA
I)roperty (e.g.,will it be found in region R"?).
'fhe
symbol R' is pla<:ed on the integral for ry'
What does (12) say about computing this
quantity, or rather the quantity s(R', R") of to indicate that the coordinates are integrated
over the region R', and, for lr between t' and t,
which it is the square?
Let us suppose in Eq. (12) that the time I over all space. In like manner, the integral for 1t
correspondsto one particular point & of the sub- is over R" antl over all space for those coordinates
corresponding to tinres betweetr t and ,". The
rlivisionof time into steps e, i.e., assumel:lp,
the index &, of course, depending rtpotr the asterisk on 1* denotes contplex conjugate, as it
'fhen,
the exportentialbeing the will be found ntore cottvettient to define (16) as
subdivisione.
cornplex conjugate of some quantity, l.
exponentialof a suttr tnay be split into a product the'Ihe
quantity f depends,or-rly upon the region
of two factors

)-ll,:,,r

R' previous to l, and is completely defined if

that region is known. lt does not depend, in
any way, upon what will be done to the system
'Ihis
I
Ln i:k
latter information is contained
after time l.
ry'and 1 we have separated the
in
Thus,
with
1.
*-r
1
li
."*oL;
s(*r+r,
x)J. (13) past history from the future experiences of the
,l
system. This permits us to speak of the relation
of past and future in the conventional manner'
The first factor contains only coordinates with
Thus, if a particle has been in a region of spaceindex ft or higher, while the second contains only
time R' it may at time I be said to be in a certain
coordinates with inclex ft or lower. This split is condition, or state, determined only by its past
possible because of Eq. (10)' which results essen- and described by the so-called wave functiotr
tially from the fact that the Lagrangian is a ry'(rc,l). This function contains all that is needed
function only of positions and velocities. First,
to predict'future probabilities. For, suppose, in
the integration on all variables x; for 'i)k can another situation, the region R'were different,
be performed on the first factor resulting in a
say r', and possibly the Lagrangian for times
function of rc* (times the second factor). Next,
before I were also altered. Bttt, nevertheless,
the integration on all variables xr f.or i Lk can suppose the quantity fron-r liq. (15) turned out
'fhctr,
at:corrling to (14) the
be performed on the second factor also, giving a to be the same.
function of r7". Finally, the integration oo xk can probability of cn<ling in :rny region R" is the
'fherefore,
future measuresame for R' as for r'.
be performed. That is, e(R', R") can be written
ments will not distinguish whether the system
as the integral over 17, of the product of two
had occupied R' or r'. Thus, the wave function
factors. We will call these y* @n, t) and ,lt(x*, t) :
tlt(x; t) is sufficient to define those attributes
f
past history which determine
( 1 4 ) which are left from
e(R', R"):
I x*(x, t),!(x, t)dx,
future behavior.
J

ti*
c*pl _ I

I
S ( r ' + ' ,. t ) |

328
374

R.

P.

FEYNX{AN

Likewise, the function 7*(x, t) characterizes

the experience, or, let us say, experiment to

which the system is to be subjected.If a different

r" anddifferent
L;;;;;;;il;;;;;;
region,
to give the same 1s*(x,t) ttia Eq. (16), as does
region R", then no matter what the preparation,
r/, Eq. (1a) says that the chance of finding the
system in R" is always the same as finding it
in r". The two "experiments" R" ar^d r" are
equivalent, as they yield the same results. We
shall say loosely that these experimentsare 10
determine with wh:at probability the system is
in state 1. Actually, this terminology is poor.
The system is really in state ry'.The reason we
can associate a state with an experiment is, of
course, that for an ideal experiment there turns
out to be a unique state (whose wave function is
y@, t)) for which the experiment succeedswith
certainty.
Thus, we can say: the probability that a
system in state ry'will be found by an experiment
whose characteristic state is 1 (or, more loosely,
the chance that a system in state ry'will appear
to be in 1) is

t),t@,
lf ur., Ddrl.

we were to compute I at the next instant of time:

t'

rx

9(x*+rtte):J., *oL;,I-

s("'*"
"l
dx* d.r*-r

*n

o'-..(15')

This is similar to (15) except for the integration

over the additional variable ri and the extra
term in the sum in the exponent. This term
means that the integral of (15') is the same
as the integral of (15) except for the factor
(l/A) exp(i/h)S(r;,ar,r*). Since this does not
contain any of the variables x; for i less than i,
all of the integrations on dr; up to drr-r can be
performed with this factor left out. However,
the result of these integrations is by (15) simply
t@6 t). Hence,we find from (15') the relation
t(x*r'

llr)
rfi-l

: |
t)dxr1A. (18)
:S(rr+,,x,,)l,l'@r,
J L h"*pl
I
'fhis

relation giving the development of f with

time will. be shown, for simple examples,with
suitable choice of ,4., to be equivalent to
These results agree, of course, with the prin- Schroedinger'sequation.Actually, Eq. (18) is not
'l'hey
ciples of ordinary quantum mechanics.
are exact, but is only true in the limit e+0 and we
a consequenceof the fact that the Lagrangian shall derive the Schroedingerequation by assumis a function of position,velocity, and time only. ing (18) is valid to first order in e. The Eq. (18)
needonly be true for small e to the first order in e.
6. THE WAVEEQUATION
For if we consider the factors in (15) which carry
To complete the proof of the equivalence with us over a finite interval of time, I. the number
the ordinary formulation we shall have to show of factors is T / e. lf an error of order ezis made in
that the wave function defined in the previous sec- each, the resulting error will not accumulate
tion by Eq. (15) actually satisfiesthe Schroedinger beyond the order e2(T/e) or Ie, which vanishes
wave equation. Actually, we shall only succeed in the limit.
We shall illustrate the relation of (18) to
in doing this when the LagrangianZ in (11) is a
quadratic, but perhaps inhomogeneous,form in Schroedinger's equation by applying it to the
the velocitieso(r). This is not a limitation, how- simple caseof a particle moving in one dimension
ever, as it includes all the cases for which the in a potential Z(rc). Before we do this, however,
Schroedinger equation has been verified by ex- we would like to discusssome approximations to
the value S(r;+r, r;) given in (11) which will be
periment.
The wave equation describesthe development sufficient for expression (18).
The expressiondefinedin (11) for S(r;a1,r;) is
of the wave function with time. We may expect
to approach it by noting that, for finite e, Eq. (15) difficult to calculate exactly for arbitrary e from
permits a simple t'ecursive relation to be de- classical mechanics,Actually, it is only necessary
veloped. Consider the appearance of Eq. (15) if that an approximate expressionfor S(r;."1, *1) be

(r7)

329
NON_REI,A'I'IVISTIC

QUANTUM

375

MECHANICS

For this example, then, Eq. (18) becomes

used in (18), provided the er.rorof the approxi-

o':a)'
iJL'lr:1".:','J#
J,:"1xl1T;T:i""
fi,:l1"J,ff
:
(x,+,,,
e
*
*
)
- L :l
Z t 2!/
\
*l
|
J "
isaquadratic,butperhapsinhomogeneous,form
e
/
in the velocities i(r). As we shall see later, the
paths which are important are those for which
xi+t- x; is of order ei. Under these circumstances,
it is sufficient to calculate the integral in (11)

- I/(r:r1r)
AoUo. frrl
l]vf*r,

overthe classicalpath taken by aJrie particie'lr Let us call ***t:x'i and r1E1-rc4:f so that
Then (23) becomes
the path of a free x*:x-t.
In Cartesiancoord.inatest2
particle is a straight line so the integral of (11)
imt,
f
can be taken along a straight line. Under these t!(x,l-te):
I expJ
e'2lt
circumstancesit is sufficientlvaccurateto replace
rule
by the trapezoidal
the integral
-ieV(x)
Jt
."*pQ4)
h-'PQ-t,t)i.
e /x;a1-x;
\
S(rrpr,xJ: Ll-,xivrl
2\
e
/
The integral on I will converge if t@, t)
falls off sufficiently for large r (certainly if
- '',
*,) (re) f 9*@)'!(x)d.x:1). In the integration on {, since
ri r.(')"
e is very small, the exponential of.itnEz/2heoscil/
2\
t
lates extremely rapidly except in the region
about f:0 (f of order (he/m)t). Since the funcor, if it proves more convenient,
tion ty'(*-f, l) is a relatively smooth function
of f (since e may be taken as small as desired),
/X;+t-X;,rilr+Ji\
rr) : ,Ll S(xr+r,
l. (20) the region where the exponential oscillatesrapidly
\e2/
will contribute very llttle becauseof the almost
complete cancelation of positive and negative
These are not valid itr a general coordinate
contributions. Since only small f are effective,
system, e.g., spherical. An even simpler approximay be expanded as a Taylor series.
{(x-t,l)
mation may be used if, in addition, there is no
Hence,
vector potential or other terms linear in the
1-ieV(x)1
tl'(x,t-le):*o(
velocity (see page 376):
u
/
/x;+t-x;
\
--:, x,*r
S(x,ar, .r;) = cLl'-:l.
t
\
e

Thus, for the simple example of a particle of

mass tn moving in one dimension under a potential V(x), we can set
me f X,,t_

.s(r.1
; a,x , ) = ; ( = - a

X;"

f
x)exp

Ql)

,*%)lro,D-YYl?
.:'J#-

.fotro.(2.5)

Now
f-

-,v.,,,,).

(2thci'ln)t'
(zz) J -"e"oQnt'/2he)d|:

1r It is assumed that the "forces" enter throllgh a scalar

and vector potential and not in terms involving the square
of the veloiity. More generally, what is meant by a free
ymrticle is one for which the Lagrangian is altered by
omission of the terms linear in, and those independent of,
the velocities.
t2 More generally, coordinales for which the terms
quadratic in the velociry in L(r, r) appear with constant
coeflicients.

r' * f , 2he){d| : o,
[ -*.*"*r
I

(26)

exp(inl'z/2h e)t'zdt : (hei/n)(2rh ei/ m)r,

while the integral containing {3 is zero, for like

330
376

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

the one with f it possessesan odd integrand,

This example shows that most of the contribuand the ones with fa are of at least the order e tion to t@*+r,t*e) comesfrom values of 4 in
smaller than the ones kept here.raI{ we expand *(xn, t) which are quite close to ru;..1(distant of
the left-hand side to first order in e, (25) becomes order el) so that the integral equation (23) can, in
the limit, be replaced by a differential equation.
a{@, t)
The "velocities," (rs4r-r*)/e which are im0@,t)*e-portant are very high, being of order (h/me),
at
which
diverges as e+0. The paths involved are,
- i' v (*)
hei/ m)t
therefore, continuous but possessno derivative.
: o(
l?r
'
\
""
They are of a type familiar from study of
h
/
A
Brownian motion.
h e i0 2 ' ! ( x , 4
I
t
It is these .large velocities which make it
(
2
7
)
xl{tx,D+so necessary to be careful in approximating
**
I
S(r;a1,q,) from Eq. (11).15To replace V(xr*r)
In order that both sides may agree to zero order by V(x1")would, of course, change the exponent
in e, we must set
in (18) by ielV(x*) - V(xn+t)f/h which is of order
A: (2trhei./m)t.
(28) e(x*+r-xr), and thus lead to unimportant terms
of higher order than e on the right-hand side
Then expandingthe exponentialcontaining I/(*),
of (29). It is for this reasonthat (20) and (2 1) are
we get
equally satisfactory approximations to ^S(rr+-r,
*;)
av/i,\
when
is
no
potential.
there
vector
A
term,
linear
9&,t)te-,:\r--v(x)
)
in velocity, however, arising from a vector
potential,
as Aid,t must be handled more careltei O\Lt
/
(2e)fully. Here a term in S(r4r, rr) such as A(*o*t)
xl *(*,r+-l.
\
2rn 0x2/
X(x*at-x*) differs from A(tck)(xk+L-tck)by a
term
of order (r41-4)'z,
and, therefore, of
Canceling {t(x, t) lrom both sides, and comorder e. Such a term would lead to a change in
paring terms to first order in e and multiplying
the resulting wave equation. For this reason the
bv -lt/i one obtains
approximation (21) is not a sufficiently accurate
11ha1z
ha{
___ :_l __ | p+v.t*),t,, (30) approximationto (11) and one like (20), (or (19)
from which (20) differs by terms of order higher
i at 2th\i ax/
than e) must be used. If A representsthe vector
which is Schroedinger'sequation for the problem potential and p: (h/i)V, the momentum operin question.
ator, then (20) gives,in the Hamiltonian operator,
The equation for 1* can be developed in the a term (r/2m)(p- (e/c)A). (p- (e/c)A), while
same way, but adding a factor ilecreases
the time (21) gives (r / 2m)(p. p - (2e/ c)A. p { (e'z
/c'z)A.A).
by one step, i.e.,.x* satisfiesan equation like (30) These two expressions differ by (he/2irnc)V.A
but with the sign of the time reversed. By taking
complex conjugates we can conclude that 1 is, there would be no state into which a system may be put
satisfies the same equation as ry',i.e., an experi- for which a pa.rticular experiment gives certainfo' foi a
result. The class of functions 1 is not identical to the class
ment can be defined by tlre particular state 1 to of available states rr, This would result if, for example,
1 mtisfied a different equation than 'y'.
which it corresponds.la
15Equation (18) is
when (11) is used for
tr Rellv, these intesrals are oscillatorv and not defined.
but they may be defiied by using a convergence factor.
Such a factor is automatically provided by {'(x-t,t)
in
(24). lt a more fomal procedure is deired replace ft by
for enmple, where 6 is a small positive number,
h(l-i6),
and then let &*0.
rr Dr, Hartland Snyder has pointed out to me, in private
conversation, the very interdsting possibility thai there
may be a generalization of quantum mechanics in which the
states mesured by experiment ennot be prepared ; that

actually enct
S(*;11, *;) for arbitrary c for eses in which the potential
does not involve * to hieher powers than the second
(e.g., free particle, hamonic osiillator). It is necessary,
however, to use a more accurate value of l. One can
define ,4 in this way. Assume classiel particles with l
degrees of freedom start from the point ri, ti with unifom
density in momentum space. Writti the number of particle
having a given component of momentum in range dp as
p
dp/?owith 1o conslant. a6sn tr:(2rhi/po)bt2p-r,where
is the density in I dimensional coordinate space ri+r of
these particles at time l;ar.

33r
NON_RELATIVISTIC

QUANT'UM

which may not be zero. The question is still

more important in the coemcient of terms which
are quadratic in the velocities. In these terms
(19) and (20) are not sufficiently accurate representations of (11) in general. It is when the
coeflicients are constant that (19) or (20) can be
substituted for (11). If an expressionsuch as
(19) is used, say for spherical coordinates, when
it is not a valid approximation to (11), one
obtains a Schroedinger equation in which the
Hamiltonian operator has someof the momentum
operators and coordinates in the wrong order.
Equation (11) then resolvesthe ambiguity in the
usual rule to replace p and q by the non-commuting quantities (h/D(a/ad and q in the classical Hamiltonian H(P, q),
It is clear that the statement (11) is independent of the coordinate system. Therefore, to
find the differential wave equation it gives in
any coordinate system, the easiest procedrtre is
first to find the equations in Cartesian coordinates
and then to transform the ioordinate system to
the one desired. It suffices,therefore, to show the
relation of the postulates and Schroedinger's
equation in rectangular coordinates.
The derivation given here for one dimension
can be extended directly to the case of threedimensional Cartesian coordinates for any number, K, of particles interacting through potentials
with one another, and in a magnetic field,
described by a vector potential. The terms in
the vector potential require completing the square
in the exponent in the usual way for Gaussian
integrals. The variable , must be replaced by
the set,(r) to r(s.K)where rc(l),)cer,,c(a)are the
coordinates of the first particle of mass rnt, xQ),
r(6r, x<6)of the second of mass mz, etc. The
' ' 'dr<arl, and
symbol dr is replaced by d.xrr)d,v<z)
the integration over d,x is replaced by a 3K-fold
integral. The constant ,4 has, in this case, the
v alueA : (2rh ei/ m t)t (2th.ei./ m z)N. . . (2r h ei,/ mv)t.
The Lagrangian is the classical Lagrangian for
the sameproblem, and (he Schroedingerequation
resulting will be that which - corresponds to
the classical Hamiltonian, derived from this
Lagrangian. The equations in any other coordinate system may be obtained by transformation.
Since this includes all cases for which Schroedinger's equation has been checked with experiment, we may say our postulates are able to

MECHANICS

377

describewhat can be describedby non-relativistic

quantum mechanics, neglecting spin,
7. DISCUSSTON
OF Tr{E WAVEEQUATION
The Classical Limit
This completes the demonstration of tlre equivalence of the new and old formulations. We
should like to include in this section a few remarks about the important equation (18),
This equation gives the development of the
wave function during a small time interval. It is
easily interpreted physically as the expressionof
Huygens' principle for matter waves.'In geometrical optics the rays in an inhomogeneous
medium satisfy Fermat's principle of least t'ime,
We may state Huygenst principle in wave optics
in this way: If the.amplitude of the wave is
known on a given surface, the amplitude at a
iear by point can be consideredas a sum of contributions from all points of the surface. Each
contribution is delayed in phase by an amount
proportional to the time it would take the light to
get from the surface to the point along the ray of
least lime of geometrical optics. We can consider
(22) in an analogous manner starting with
Hamilton's first principle of least action for
classical or "geometrical" mechanics. If the
amplitude of the wave ry'is known on a given
"surface," in particular the "surface" consisting
of.all x at time l; its value at a particular nearby
point at time l{ e, is a sum of contributions from
all points of the surface at L Each contribution is
delayed in phase by an amount proportional to
the action it would require to get from the surface
to the point along the path of least action of
classical mechanics.r6
Actually Huygens' principle is not correct in
optics. It is replaced by Kirchoff's modification
which requires that both the amplitude and its
derivative must be known on the adjacent surface. This is a consequenceof the fact that the
wave equation in optics is second order in the
time. The wave equation of quantum mechanics
is first order in the time; therefore, Huygens'
principle fs correct for matter waves, action replacing time.
ro See in this connection the very interesting
Schroedinger, Ann. d. Physik 79,489 (1926).

remarks of

332
R.

378

P.

FEYNMAN

The equation can also be compared mathematically to quantities appearing in the usual
formulaiions. In Schroedinger'smethod the development of the wave function with time is
given by

-h

at

:w,

First we note that the wave function at x" at

time t't can be obtained from that at r' at time
t'by
f ''' f
*(x", t"): Lim |
I

(31)

fi i-r

s)l
Xextf-! Stx;+r,

i3t
which has the solution (for any e if H is time
independent)
(32)
,!'(x,t* e): exp(-iell/h){(x' t)'

dxo d.h

dx i,r

x'l'@',t')TT' A,

(r5)

:t" -t'
where we ptJt xn=vt arrdx j:-tctt where je
no reassume
we
(between the times t' and t"
striction is being put on the region of integration) '
This can be seen either by repeated applications
of (18) or directly from Eq. (15). Now we ask, as
y'z+0what values of the intermediate coordinates
ri contribute most strongly to the integral? These
will be the values most likely to be found by exoperator equation
periment and therefore will determine, in the
ii-it, th" classicalpath. If h is very small, the
(33)
(ieH/h).
x' :exp(ieE/h)xexP
exponent will be a very rapidly varying function
the positive
The transformation theory of Dirac allows us to of any of its variables:ct.As ri varies,
exponent
the
e)
of
t*
e
'
contributions
'
timetl
negative
at
,rlt(x'
and
considerthe wave function
rcicontributes
which
at
region
representation
The
in
a
nearly
cancel.
state
a
representing
as
-in
phase of the
which r' is diagonal, while 'y'(r, l) represents the most strongly is that at which the
is exponent varies least rapidly with *; (method of
r
which
in
representation
a
in
state
same
in the exdiagonal. They are, therefore, related through the stationary phase). Call the sum
relates
(*'lr).
which
s;
function
Donent
traisformation

Therefore', Eq. (18) expresses the operator

by an approximate integral operexp(-i&l/h)
ator for small e.
From the point of view of Heisenberg one considers the position at time l, for example, as an
operator x. The position x' at a latet time I * e can
bL expressedin terms of that at time I by the

these rePresentations:
f

l'(x',tIe): J

5:

a*'
{*'l*),,1'{*,t)

Therefore, the content of Eq' (18) is to show that

for small we can set
(34)
exPliS(x',x)/h)
(x'lx),:(L/A)
with S(r', r) definedas in (11)'
The close analogy between (r'lr)' and the
pointed out on
ouantity exp(lS(x', x) /h) has been
we now see
fact,
In
Dirac'r
by
occasions
several
quantithat to sufficientapproximationsthe two
to-eachproportional
be
to
taken
be
ties may
oth".. Di.."'" remarks were the starting point of
the present development' The points he makes
concerning the passageto the classical limit Z+0
are very beautiful, and I may perhaps be excused
for brieflY reviewing them here'

S(r4r, r).

(Jo,

i-0

Then the classical orbit passes,approximately,

through those points rr at which the rate of
change of ^Swith rr is small, or in the limit of
small i, zeto, i.e., the classical orbit passes
through the points at which ES/\x;:O for all ri'
Taking the limit e+0, (36) becomes in view
of (11)

s:

I ,,'

L(*(t),x(t))dt

(37)

We see then that the classical path is that for

which the integral (37) suffers no first-order
change on varying the path. This is Hamilton's
principle and leads directly to the Lagrangian
equationsof motion'

333
NON_RELATIVISTIC

8. OPERATORALGEBRA
Matrir Elements

QUANTUM

MECHANICS

379

we discusshow it changeswith changesin'the

preparation R'or the experiment R//.
The state at time l'is defined completely by the
preparation R'. It can be specified by a wave
function t@',t') obtained as in (15), but containing only integrals up to the time t/. Likewise,
the state characteristic of the experiment (region
R") can be defined by a function y(x,,,t,,) obtained from (16) with integrals only beyond t,/.
The wave function {(x",t") at time t,t can, of
course,also be gotten by appropriate use of (15).
It can also be gotten from,lr(r', l') by (35). According to (17) with ,// used instead of t, the
probability of being found in x if prepared in ry'is
the square of what we shall call the transition
amplitude -f x*(x" , t")t(x,, , t,,)d.x,,
. We wish to
expressthis in terms of yat t" and,ry'at l/. This we
can do with the aid of (35).Thus, the chancethat
a system prepared in state tlty at time l' will be
found after t" tobe in a state 1,,, is the squareof
the transition amplitude

Given the wave function and Schroedinger's

equation, of course all of the machinery of
operator or matrix algebra can be developed. It
is, however, rather interesting to express these
concepts in a somewhat different language more
closely related to that used in stating the postulates. Little will be gained by this in elucidating
operator algebra. In fact, the results are simply a
translation of simple operator equations into a
somewhat more cumbersome notation. On the
other hand, the new notation and point of view
are very useful in certain applications described
in the introduction. Furthermore, the form of the
equations permits natural extension to a wider
class of operators than is usually considered
(e.g.,onesinvolving quantities referring to two or
more different times). If any generalization to a
wider class of action functionals is possible, the
formulae to be developed will play an important
role.
ff
We discuss these points in the next three \ x , ' 1 t 1 9 , , 7 " : l ' "f J x * G " , t " )
J
sections. This section is concerned mainly with
definitions. We shall define a quantity which we
(3s)
X c x p ( i S z f r ) r y ' (0xY' ,. . . d 2 6 * ,
call a transition element between two states. It
AA
is essentially a matrix element. But instead of
being the matrix element between a state ry'and
where we have used the abbreviation (36).
another 1 corresponding to the same time, these
In the language of ordinary quantum metwo states will refer to different times. In the
chanics if the Hamiltonian, H, is constant,
following section a fundamental relation between
-tt)H/h}l,@,1') so that (38)
{(x, t"):expl-i(lt
transition elements will be developedfrom which
is the matrix elementof expl-i(t" -t')H/hlbethe usual commutation rules between coordinate
tween states xr,, and {{.
and momentum may be deduced. The same
If F is any function of the coordinates ni for
relation also yields Newton's equation of motion
t'1t;1t", we shall define the transition element
in matrix form. Finally, in Section 10 we discuss
of F between the states { at t' and y at t" Ior the
the relation of the Hamiltonian to the operation
action S as (x" =xi, r'=xo):
of displacement in timel
We begin by defining a transition element in
.rf
terms of the probability of transition from one Q,'1119,'1':
,rgJ J
state to another. More precisely, supposewe have
a situation similar to that described in deriving
X x * ( x " , t " ) F ( x o ,x r , . ' ' x )
i17). The region l? consistsof a region R/ previous
f i i-r
1
dx^ dcc'-,
to t', all spacebetweent' and.t,,and the region R,
.e*pf E s(rr+r,ri)
...-6*t.
1j91
:
IVQ',t) .
af.tert". We shall study the probability that a
Lhi:o
.l
A
A
-rystemin region -R' is later found in region Rrr.
This is given bV (17). We shall discussin this In thelimit e+0, Fis a functional of the path r(l).
.ection how it changeswith changesin the form
We shall seepresently why such quantities are
rf the Lagrangian betweentt and,t',. In Section l0 important. It will be easier to understand if we

334
P.

380

FEYNMAN

stop for a moment to find out what the quantities

correspond to in conventional notation. Suppose
F is simply ,e where & correspondsto, some time
tr:1*. Then on the right-hand side of (39) the
integrals from rcoto xk-l may be performed to
Inlike
produce!(xu t) or expl-i(t-t')H/hj!v.
give
manner the integrals on rci for j)i>k
-t)H/h)xt',1*. Thus, the
7x(x*,t) or {exp[-i(1"
transition elemtnt of rc*,

I x t,,* e-

(i I DH ( t " - t )x e- | i I h)H1t- t' )1lty d.x

t)x'!(x, t)dx
I x*(t,

\ x u ,nl 1 9 , ' 1 " '

/

iei

h,-t

r'

: ( r , , , l F e x pL
- U l x , t, ' ) l V/ rs> $ 2 )
which is obtained from (39).
Incidentally, (41) leads directly to an importan.t perturbation formula. If the effect of [/
is small the exponential can be expanded to first
order in U and we find

Q,'lFW,)u
:

restricted class because the action must remain a

quadratic function of velocities. From one observable functional others may be derived, for
example, by

(40)

s,: (xu'I t1'1'

4"
k y' | | 1,1,,,)
i

tU(x;, t')l'1"'l' (43)

* .\xr'll
is the matrix element o", * ., ,t-" l:l* between
hi
from
t
at
time
r
develop
would
which
{
state
the.
Of particular importance is the case that xt" is a
at t' and, the state which will develop from time I
matrix
element
the
state in which ry's,would not be found at all were
therefore,
lt'tsi
t".
at
to Xt,,
it not. for the disturbance,{/ (i'e., (xr'1t1,1,,'1u
of x(l) between these states.
:0) Then
the
Likewise, according to (39) with F:r*+r,
transition element of rp;r is the matrix element of
1
x(r* e). The transition element of F: (x*+t x*) / e'
-lQr,lL
(44)
) r) sl,
e t l ( s r ,t n W
or oI
h2i
is the matrix element of (x(if e)-x(t))/e
as is easily shown from (a0). We
i(Hr-xE)/h,
is the probabilityof transitionas inducedto first
can call this the matrix element of velocity i(l).
orderby the perturbation.In ordinarynotation,
which
problem
second
a
we
consider
Suppose
differs from the first because, for example, the
(x ," I eU(xa,
t) l'ttv)s
T
potential is augmented by a small amount U (' xt) .
rt r
l.
Then in the new problem the quantity replacing
: | { | xt,,*e-titDE(t"-t)ge-(itilII(t-t')tltydxld.t
S is S':S*I
ie[J(xt,l). Substitution into (38)
'
J IJ
leads directly to
so that (44) reduces to the usual expressionlT for

\ x v ' l r l 9v )s '

time dependent perturbations.

(41)
: (",1*r;t' u@n,r,rl,a,)".

9. NEWTON'S EQUATIONS
The Commutation

Thus, transition elements such as (39) are important insofar as F may arise in some way from
a change 6,5 in an action expression. We denote,
by observable functionals, those functionals F
in
which can be defined, (possibly indirectly)
terras of the changes which are produced by
possible changes in the action S. The condition
be observable is somewhat
that a functional
similar to the condition that an operator be
Hermitian. The observable functionals are a

Relation

In this section we find that different functionals may give identical results when taken
between any two states. This equivalence between functionals is the statement of operator
equations in the new language.
If F depends on the various coordinates, we
0F/0xa
can, of course, define a new functiotal
tt Pi. it4. Dirac, ThePrincipl,esoJ Quantum Mechanics
(The Clarendon Press, Oxford,1935), second edttlon'
Section47, Eq. (20).

335
NON_RELATIVISTIC

MECHANICS

QUANTUM

381

by differentiating it with respect to one of its potential, or force. Then (47) becomes
variables, say cc*(0(& ( j). If we calculate
h dF
f
/xt+t-xt
kr'laF/axelgr,)s by (39) the integral on the
Fl -ml
'i6x*s L
right-hand side will contain |F/Ex*. The only
\

other plabe that the variable r/c appears is in S.

Thus, the integration on rr can be performed
by parts. The integrated part vanishes (assuming wave functions vanish at infinity) and we
are left with the quantity -F(a/drx) exp(iS/h) If F doesnot depend on the variable 16,this gives
in the integral. However, (d/dxt) exp(iS/h) Newton's equations of motion. For example, if F
: (i,/h)(dS/ax*) exp(iSlZ), so the right side repre- is constant, say unity, (aS) just gives (dividing
bv .)
sents the transition elementof -(i/h)F(AS/Ax),
i.e..
lrl / Xp11-.xy
.rt -Jck .r \

-T)

-iQ''l'fflr'\,
("l*l'-),:
(4s)

This very important relation shows that two

different functionals may give the same result for
the transition element between any two states.
We say they are equivalent and symbolize the
relation by
hdF
ds
___eF_,
i |xr s 0x*

(46)

0.: --l
s

e \

-,v,(*)] (4s)

--

- l-'(.rk).

Thus, the transition element of mass times acceleration f(rcaa1-x)f e-(xa-xr)/rJ/u

between
any two states is equal to the transition element
of force -V'(xk) between the same states. This
is the matrix expression of Nervton's law which
holds in quantum mechanics.
What happens if F does depend upon rua?For
example, let F:xx.
Then (48) gives, since
0F/6xr:1,
-

the symbol

emphasizing

the fact that func-

tionals equivalent under one action may not be

equivalent under another. The quantities in (46)
need not be observable. The equivalence is,
nevertheless, true. Making use of (36) one can
write
h AF

f d S ( x p p 1 ,1 6 )

'i 1xt s

arl

dS(x*, :c*_r)l

+-

Ext

l. ({7)

'Ihis
equation is true to zero and first order in e
and has as conrequences the commutation relations of momentum and coordinate, as well as the
Newtonian equations of motion in matrix form.
In the case of our simple one-dimensional
problem, S(rc+r, rui) is given by the expression
(15), so that
dS(rr+r, x*) / 6x*:

- rn(xaa1- x4) e,
/

and
0 S (x*, tcx-) / 6x* : * rn(xr- x t-r) / e- eVt (x r");
where we write

V'Qc) for the derivative

of the

xt, r* f*-r\
- ;lt? ' t -| m t /. -xr,+t.)-u
''(.j,]

or, neglecting terms of order e,

* (r:a,). ^- * (Yi:-:).,,
r". (4s)
In order to transfer an equation such as (49) into
conventional notation, we shall have to discover
what matrix corresponds to a quantity such as
:rhtck+r.It is clear from a study of (39) that if F is
set equal to, say, f(x)g(x*+),
the corresponding
operator in (40) is
e - ( i t i l ( t , , t , z ) Hg ( x ) e r;t n t , uJ ( 1 )e ( i| i l ( t _ t , r l J ,
the matrix element being taken between the
states 1,,, and rlty. The operators corresponding
to functions of *1a1 will appear to the left of the
operators corresponding to functions of 11, i.e.,
the order oJ terms in a matrir operator product
corresponds to an order in time of the conespond.ing
Jactors in a functional. Thus, if the functional can
and is written in such a way that in each term
factors corresponding to later times appear to the

336
R.

382

P,

FEYNMAN

left of factors corresponding to earlier terms, the

corresponding operator can immediately be
written down if the order of the operators is kept
the same as in the functional.lS Obviously, the
order of factors in a functional is of no consequence. The ordering just facilitates translation
into conventional operator notation. To write
Eq. (49) in the way desired for easy translation
would require the factors in the second term on
the left to be reversedin order. We see,therefore,
that it corresPondsto

the derivative of which gives an expression like

(51), But the changein zechangesthe normalizacorresponding to d'xx as
tion constant lfA
well as the action. The constant is changed
67 rot
f,rom (2rhei/m)-t to (zrh"i/m(l|6))-t
effect
total
The
6'
in
order
first
to
*6(2trhei/m)-+
of the change in mass in Eq. (38) to the first
order in 6 is

9r-xP:h/i
where we have written p for the operator mir'
The relation between functionals and the
correspondingoperators is defined above in terms
of the order of the factors in time. It should be
remarked that this rule must be especially carefully adhered to when quantities involving velocities or higher derivatives are involved' The cor'
rect functional to represent the operator (i)2 is
actually (xt"+t-xt")fe' (x1,-x1"4)fe rather than
as
l(xx+t-x*)/e)2' The latter quantity diverges
lf , as ,-0, This may be seen by replacing the
secondterm in (49) by its valuex4tm(x*at-ecx) /e
calculated an instant e later in time. This does
not change the equation to zero order in e' We
then obtain (dividing bY e)

(:y=)""_*;

(s0)

(x,,, I t ariml(x,+t- xn)/ ef'/ h* Eal{ r)'

We expect the changeof order 6 lasting for a time
e to be of order 6e.Hence, dividingby 6ei/h, we
can define the kinetic energy functional as
1{..9:$rnl(x*+t-

x) / elz*h/2ei'

(52)

This is finite as e+0 in view of (50)' By making

useofan equation which results froin substituting
m(x*+t-xn) f e for F in (48) we can also show that
the expression(52) is equal (to order e) to
-

/xr.r-xr\/r*-rr-r\,...,,

t<u.:L.z\-)\

(rr/

That is, the easiest way to produce observable

functionals involving powers of the velocities is
to replace thesepowers by a product of velocities'
each factor of which is taken at a slightly different
time.
rO. TIIE IIAMILTONIAN
Momentum

This gi-es the result expressedearlier that the

'tvelocity" (rx+t-x*)/e
root mean square of the
between two successivepositions of the path is
of order e-i.
It will not do then to write the functional for
kinetic energY, saY, simPlY as
*ml(xx+t-x) /c)'

(51)

for this quantity is infinite as e+0. In fact, it is

not an observable functional.
One can obtain the kinetic energy as an observable functional by considering the first-order
change in transition amplitude occasionedby a
change in the mass of the particle. Let m be
changed to m(lJ-6) for a short time, say e,around
le.The changein the action is Edeml(x*+t-xn)f c]2
rs Dirac has also studied operatorscontaining quantities
referring to different times. Seereference2.

The Hamiltonian operator is of central importance in the usual formulation of quantum

mechanics. We shall study in this section the
functional corresponding to this operator' We
could immediately define the Hamiltonian functional by adding the kinetic energy functional
(52) or (.53)to the potential energy' This method
is artificial and does not exhibit the important
relationship of the Hamiltonian to time' We shall
define the Hamiltonian functional by the changes
made in a state when it is displaced in time'
To do this we shall have to digressa moment to
point out that the subdivision of time into egual'
intervals is not necessary.Clearly, any subdivision into instants li will be satisfactory; the
limits are to be taken as the largest spacing'
t*t- li, approacheszero' The total action 'Smust

337
NON_RELATIVISTIC

QUANTUM

now be representedas a sum

S: E S(*r+r,t41i:t;, t),

(s4)

where
fl

S(ni+r,l;+r ; x;, t;) :

J

L(i(t), x(t))dt,

(55)

[2\l'+r-li/

(xlt l/)u-(xl rl,l,a)sa:

(s7)
,(xlH*l*)s,
here the Hamiltonian
by

functional

dS(r6ar, t41; x1",ta)

S(x4y tat; x;, t)

:l:l

is changedto 5(16.1,t*+tix*, rr-d). The constant

l/A f.or the integration on iltchis also altered to
(2rhi,(tr*t- tt * 6)/rn)+. The effect of these
changeson the transition element is given to the
first order in 6 by
i6

tl

the integral being taken along the classical path

between rt at t; and r;11 at l"11. For the simple
one-dimensional
example this becomes, with
sufficient accuracy,

I m /x;a1-x;\'

383

MECHANICS

I7h:I

l -v(x+')l(r+r-l);

0h

(56)

the corresponding normalization cons,tant for

integration on d.x; is / : (2rhi(t ar- t ;)/ m)-*.
The relation of.H to the changein a state with
displacement in time can now be studied. Consider a state ry'(r)defined by a space-time region
-R'. Now imagine that we consider another state
at time t, {r(t), defined by another region Rr,.
Supposethe region R5' is exactly the same as R,
except that it is earlier by a time 6, i.e., displaced
bodily toward the past by a time d. All the
apparatus to prepare the system for Ro, is
identical to that for R' but is operated a tirne 6
sooner. If Z dependsexplicitly on time, it, too, is
to be displaced, i.e., the state /6 is obtained from
the Z used for state ry'except that the time I in Z6
is replaced by t+6. We ask how does the state ry'a
differ from rlt?In any measurementthe chance of
finding the system in a fixed region R// is different
for R/ and Rr', Consider the change in the
transition element (1l1lrl)sa produced by the
shift 6. We can consider this shift as effected bv
decreasingall valuesof t; by 6 for i ( i and leaving
all l; fixed for i>k, where the time I lies in the
interval between t*+t and ll.re This change will
have no effect on S(r;..1, l;11 ; xt, t;) as defined by
(55) as long as both l;*1 and rdare changedby the
sameamount.On the otherhand,S(*1"a1,fua1;x1,,
t1")
te From the point of view of mathematical
rieor. if 6 is
h.nite, as F0 one gerl into difficulty in that, foi exbmole,
the rnteryal ,i+r-rI is kept finite. This can be straishteiled
out by 9.sslming 6 to vary with time and to be tuined on
moothly belore ,:rr and turned off smoothly aftet t-h.
Inen keeplng the ttme variation of 6 fixed, let e0. Then
seek the trrst-order change as &*0. The result is essentiallv
the same as that of the crude procedure ued above,

f/*

is defined

(58)

2i(th+t-t)

The last term is due to the change in I/A and

servesto keep If4 finite as G-r0. For example, for
the expression (56) this becomes

::(T:)' *
(x
"r
# ^* v *,,),
which is just the sum of the kinetic energy functional (52) and that of the potential energy
V(x,,+r).
The wave f unc tion { 5@,t) represents,of course,
the same state as rl(x, t) will be after time d, i.e,,
{t(r, t} 6). Hence, (57) is intimately related to the
operator equation (31).
One could also consider changesoccasionedby
a time shift in the final state 1. Of course,nothing
new results in this way for it is only the relative
shift of y and { which counts. One obtains an
alternative expression
dS(*1a1,fua1irc;,ta)
h
I7*: -----+__.
dln+t
2i(tpat-l*)

(59)

This differs from (58) only by terms of order e.

The time rate of change of a functional can be
computed by considering the effect of shifting
both initial and final state together. This has the
same effect as calculating the transition element
of the functional referring to a later time. What
results is the analog of the operator equation
h.
-f :Hf -fH.
The momentqm functional pi can be defined in
an analagous way by considering the changes

338
R.

384

P.

FEYNMAN

made by displacements of Position:

7A

(xIr I/)u- (xIr l,l,

t)u:
".
;(xlp*lV>

The state ry'6is prepared from a region Ra'which

is identical to region R/ except that it is moved a
distance A in space. (The Lagrangian, if it depends explicitly on ,t, must be altered to
for times previous to ,.) One
Lt:L(n,*-A)
finds2o
dS(xl+r,rc*)
dS(lrar, rr)
(oui
-b*:_
6xt
dx*at
Sincega(r, l) is equal totlt(x-A,l), the closeconnection between 2& and the r-derivative of the
wave function is established'
Angular momentum operators are related in an
analogousway to rotations.
The derivative with respect to t+t of
S(r;11,l;,'1;*;, li) appearsin the definitionof H;.
The derivative with respect to r41 defines p;.
But the derivative with respect to fr+r of
S(*+r, l+r;r;, l;) is related to the derivative
with respectto x+1, for the function S(r4r, l4r i
rc;,l) defined bV (55) satisfies the HamiltonJacobi equation. Thus, the Hamilton-Jacobi
equation is an equation expressingfll in terms of
the fact that
the pr. In other words, it expresses
time displacementsof states are related to space
displacementsof the same slates. This idea leads
directly to a derivation of the Schroedinger
equation which is far more elegant than the one
exhibited in deriving Eq. (30).

needs, in addition, an appropriate measure for

the space of the argument functions r(l) of the
functionals.lo
It is also incomplete from the physical standpoint. One of the most important characteristics
of quantum mechanics is its invariance under
unitary transformations. These correspondto the
canonical transformations of classicalmechanics.
Of course,the present formulation, being equivalent to ordinary formulations, can be mathematically demonstrated to be invariant under
these transformations. However, it has not been
formulated in such a way that 1t is physicall'y
obvious that it is invariant. This incompleteness
showsitself in a definite way' No direct procedure
has been outlined to describe measurements of
quantities other than position' Measurements of
momentum, for example, of one particle, can be
defined in terms of measurementsof positions of
other particles. The result of the analysis of such
a situation does show the connection of momentum measurementsto the Fourier transform
of the wave function. But this is a rather roundabout method to obtain such an important
physical result. It is to be expected that the
postulates can be generalizedby the replacement
of the idea of "paths in a region of space-timeR"
to "paths of classR," or "paths having property
R." But which properties correspond to which
physical measurementshas not bedn formulated
in a general way.
12.A POSSIBLEGENERALIZATION

The formulation suggestsan obvious generali

zation. There are interesting classical problems
which satisfy a principle of least action but for
The formulation given here suffers from a seri- which the action cannot be written as an integral
ous drawback. The mathematical conceptsneeded of a function of positions and velocities. The
are new. At present, it requires an unnatural and action may involve accelerations, for example'
cumbersome subdivision of the time interval to Or, again, if interactions are not instantaneous,it
make the meaning of the equations clear. Con- may involve the product of coordinates at two
The
siderable improvement can be made through the different times, such as
"fx(t)x(t*T)d't.
use of the notation and concepts of the mathe- action, then, cannot be broken up into a sum of
matics of functionals. However, it was thought small contributions as in (10). As a consequence'
best to avoid this in a first presentation. One no wave function is available to describe a state'
Nevertheless,a transition probability can be demWe did not immediately substitute A from (60).i-nto
(47) because (47) woutd then no longer have been valid to
6ned for letting from a region R' into another
6oth zero order and the first order in c. We could derive
R". Most bf the theory of the transition elements
relations, but not the equations of
ihe commutation
(xu,lF?ulu can be carried over. One simply
motion. The two expressions in (60) represent the momenta
ai Lch end of the interual t; to t;+r. Th-ey differ by eV'(xta)
invents a synrbol, such as (R"lFlR')s by an
e'
rT. INADEQUACIESOF THE FORMULATION

because of the force acting during the time

339
NON-nELA'frvrsTrc

QUANTUM

MECHANTCS

395

equation such as (39) but with the expressions

(19) and (20) for ,! and, y substituted, and
the more general action substituted for S.
Hamiltonian and momentum functionalscan be
definedas in section(10). Further detailsmay be
found in a thesisby the author.2r

could also be eliminated. This presents an almost

insurmountable
problem in the conventional
quantum mechanics. We expect that the motion
of a particle o at one time depends upon the
motion of D at a previous time, and uice aersa. A
wave function {t(x",xt,;l), hr-rwever, can only
describe the behavior of both particles at one
13.APPLICATIONTO ELIMINATE
time. There is no way to keep track of what D did
FIELD OSCILLATORS
in the past in order to determine the behavior of
One characteristic of the present formulation is o. The only way is to specify the state of the set
that it can give one a sort of bird's-eye view of of oscillators at l, which serve to "remember"
the space-time relationships in a given situation, what b (and a) had been doing.
Before the integrations on the rr are performed in
The present formulation permits the solution
an expression such as (39) one has a sort of of the motion of all the oscillators and their comformat into which various F functionals may be plete elimination from the equations describing
inserted. One can study how what goeson in the the particles. This is easily done. One must
quantum-mechanical system at different times is simply solve for the motion of the oscillators beinterrelated. To make thesevague remarks some- fore one integrates over the various variables r;
what more definite, we discussan example.
for the particles. It is the integration over nj
In classical electrodynamics the fields de- which tries to condense the past history into a
scribing, for instance, the interaction of two single state function. This we wish to avoid. Of
particles can be representedas a set of oscillators. course, the result depends upon the initial and
The equationsof motion of theseoscillatorsmay final states of the oscillator. If they are specified,
be solved and the oscillators essentially elimi- t h e r e s u l t i s a n e q u a t i o n i o r ( a y , l l l r l 1 , ) l i k e ( 3 8 ) ,
nated (Lienard and Wiechert potentials). The but containing as a factor, besides exp(iS/h)
interactionswhich result involve relationships'of another functional G depending only on the
the motion of one particle at one time, and of the coordinates describing the paths of the particles.
other particle at another time. In quantum
We illustrate briefly how this is done in a very
electrodynamicsthe field is again representedas a simple case. Suppose a particle, coordinate r(l),
set of oscillators. But the motion of the oscillators Lagrangian L(i, x) interacts with an oscillator,
cannot be worked out and the oscillators elimi- coordinate q(t), Lagr angian | (Q,- o, q,), throu gh
nated. It is true that the oscillators representing a term t@, t)q(t) in the Lagrangian for the
longitudinal waves may be eliminated. The result system. Here 7(r, l) is any function of the
is instantaneous electrostatic interaction. The coordinate r(l) of the particle and the time.22
electrostatic elimination is very instructive as it Suppose we desire the probability of a transition
shows up the difficulty of self-interaction very from a state at time l', in which the particle's
distinctly. In fact, it shows it up so clearly that wave function is /r,and the oscillator is in energy
there is no ambiguity in deciding what term is level n, to a state at t" with the particle in 11,,
incorrect and should be omitted. This entire and oscillator in level m. This is the square of

processis not relativistically invariant, nor is the

omitted term. It would seemto be very desirable
if the oscillators, representing transverse waves,
2! The theory of electromaqnetism
described bv I. A.
Wheeler and R. P, Feynmn, Rev. Mod. phvs. iZ. tSz
(1945) can be expressed in a princiole of leasi action involving the coordinates of particl'es alone. It was an
attempt to quantize rhis theoiy, without reference to the
fields, which led the author t6 study the fomulation
of
quantum mechanics given here. The extension of the
ldeas to cover the case of more qeneral action functions
was developed in his Ph,D. thesisl',The princiole of leasr
action in quantum mechanics" submittid to' princeton
Universitv.1942.

Qr e-l I lt ue*) sr'"so*t,

ff

: t "'I
JJ

p^"(q)x,"*\*t)

X exp-(.S,1Su *Sr)*,, (ro)e^(Co)

h

.'r" 9. . .d2.
AoAa

de,-rd*
re,. (61)

2 The generalization to the case that

7 depends on the
velocity,.t, of the particle presents no problem.

340
386

R.

P.

FEYNMAN

Here p"(g) is the wave function for the oscillator

in state z, So is the action
,--l

Sr(lc;11' 'r;)

be split into Riemann sums and the quantity

7@i, t i) substituted for tQ). Thus, Q dependson
the coordinatesof the particle at all times through
the'y(*i, lt) and on that of the oscillatorat times
l' and t" only. Thus, the quarrtity (61) becomes

calculated for the particle as though the oscillat<-rr

( x * e ^ l 1 l t l , ' e * ) s r + s ur +
,:
were abselt,
[
eo:

i _ r ; - e, z q | a r _ 9 , \ 2

.Su:tl

lj:--|*-9","1
;-oL2\
e

.,1

(where 7;:7(*r, r)) is the action of interaction

between the particle and the oscillator. The
normalizing constant, a, for the oscillator is
(2rei/h)a' Now the exponential depends quadratically upon all the q;. Hence, the integrations
over all the variablesg;Ior 01i1j can easily be
performed. One is integrating a sequence of
Gaussian integrals.
The result of these integrations is, writing
T : t " - t', (2ilh siru':T/ ot)-l expi (Sr' | 0 (at, qi) / h,
where Q(qi, qo) turns out to be just the classical
action for the forced harmonic oscillator (see
reference 15). ExplicitlY it is

- 2qilo
n* aT)(qi' * qo')

;*rf

*+[,',,

tQ) sina(t-t')d't

.?:

f ,:

-:
['

1Q)sina(t"-t)d't

I,:

* r ' * \r )G ^,,

: \ x r ' I G * " W, ) s o
which now contains the coordinates of the
particle only, the quantity G;," being given by

E rrqi
i-0

Q(qi, qo):

,.*'(j,)*,,(*i+!:rd*,

that of the oscillator alone, and

Sr:

"'

- t)
r(r)r(s) sinct(t'"
I
X sino(s- l')dsdl
l.

It has beenwritten as though 7(l) were a continuous function of time. The integrals really should

rf
G^,,-- 12rih sinuT1 u1-t | | e** @)
JJ

Xexp(i.Q(qi,qo)/h) e"@o)dsiso.
Proceeding irr an analogous manner one finds
that all of the oscillators of the electromagnetic
field can be eliminated from a description of the
motion of the charges.
14. STATISTICALMECHANICS
Spin aud RelativitY
Problems in the theory of measurement and
statistical quantum mechanics are often. simplified when set up from the point of view described
here. For example, the influence of a perturbing
measuring instrument can be integrated out in
principle as we did in detail for the oscillator' The
statistical density matrix has a fairly obvious and
useful generalization. It results from considering
the square of (3S). It is an expressionsimilar to
(3S) but containing integrationsover two setsof
variables d'x; and. d'ri. The exponential is replaced by expi(S-S')/h, where S' is the same
function of the *t'as S is of ri. It is required,for
example, to describe the result of the elimination
of the field oscillatorswhere, say, the final state of
the oscillators is unspecifiedand one desiresonly
the sum over all final states zr.
Spin may be included in a formal way. The
Pauli spin equation can be obtained in this way:

341
NON-RELATIVISTIC

One replaces the vector potential interaction

term in S(r4r, rc),

QUANTUM

MECHANICS

J6/

sponding time. The Lagrangian used is

4

ee
(xr+r - xr)' A(x)

2c

f'
f

-(x;1t

-an)

. A(xrar)

2c

| (e/ c)(d.xu
/ dr) A
f(dxr / d.r)'z

"f,

where r4, is the 4-vector potential and the terms

in the sum for p= 1, 2,3 are taken with reversed
sign. If one seeksa wave function which depends
e
upon r periodically, one can show this must
-'-(c' (xir r -x;)) (a.Atx,))
'lhe
satisfy the Klein Gordon equation.
Dirac
2c
e
equation results from a modification of the
* , ( o . A ( r ; + r ) ) ( ' .( x n + , - x ) ) . Lagrangian
used for the Klein Gordon equation,
2c
which is analagous to the modification of the
Here A is the vector potential, xr+r and xd the non-relativistic Lagrangian required for the
vector positions of a particle at times t+t arrd tt Pauli equation. What results directly is the
and c is Pauli's spin vector matrix. The quantity square of the usual Dirac operator.
iF must now be expressedas II; expiS(rc;+t, x t)f h
These results for spin and relativity are purely
for this differs from the exponential of the sum of formal and add nothing to the understanding of
S(r41, r;). Thus, iFis now a spin matrix.
these equations. There are other ways of obThe Klein Gordon relativistic equation can taining the Dirac equation which offer some
also be obtained formally by adding a fourth promise of giving a clearer physical interpretation
coordinate to specify a path. One considers a to that important and beautiful equation.
'fhe
"path" as being specified by four functions
author sincerely appreciates the helpful
'fhe
scGr(r)of a parameter r.
parameter r now advice of Profes'sorand Mrs. H. C. Corben and of
goes in steps e as the variable I went previously. Professor H. A. Bethe. He wishes to thank
The quantities x(t\(t), )cQ)(t),s(3)(r)are the space ProfessorJ. A. Wheelerfor very many discussions
coordinatesof a particle and *(a(l) is a corre- during the early stagesof the work.
arising from expression(13) by the expressiorr

342

P o p e r2 8

The Theory of Quantized Fields. I*

JurreN SqnwNcen
H arwrd Unitasi.ly, Canbridge, M assuhusells
(ReceivedMarch 2. 19.51)
The conventional correspondencebasis for quantum dynamics
is here replaced by a self-containedquantum dynamical principle
from uhich the equationsof motion and the commutation relations
can be deduced. The theory is developedin terms of the model
supplied by localizablefields. A short review is frrst presentedof
the general quantum-mechanicalschemeof operatorsand eigenvectors, in which emphasisis placed on the difierential characterization of representativesand transformation functions by m@ns
of infinitesimal unitary transformations. The fundamental dynamical principle is stated'as a variational equation for the
transforrialion function connecting eigenvectorsassociatedwith
difierent spdaelikesurfaces,which describesthe temporal development of t}le system. The generator of the infinitesimal transformation is the variation of the action integral operator, the spacetime volume integral of the invariant lagrangefunction operator.
The invariance of the lagrangefunction preservesthe lorm of the
dynamical principle under coordinate transformations, with t}te
exception of those transformations which include a reversal in
tle positive senseof time, where a separatediscussionis necessary.
It will be shown in Sec. III that tlte requirement oI invariance
under time reflection imposes a restriction upon the operator
properties of 6elds, which is simply the connection between the
spin and statistics of particles. For a given dlmamical system,
changesin the transformation function arise only lrom alteratiods
of the eigenvectorsassociatedwith tie two surfaces,as generated
by operators constructed from field variables attached to those
surfaces.This yields the operator principle of stationary action,
from which the equations of motion are obtained. Commutation
relations are derived from the generating operator associated
rvith a given surface. fn particular, canonical commutation relations are obtahed for thosefield componentsthat are not restricted

by equations of constraint. The surlace generating operator also

leads to generalizedSchrtidingerequationsIor the representative
of an arbitrary state. Action integral variations rvhich correspond
to changingthe dynamical system are discussedbriefly. A method
for constructing the transformation function is described, in a
form appropriaie to an integral spin field, which involves solv-in-g
Hamil[m-Jacobi equations for ordered opelators. In Sec. III'
t1le excepiional nature of time reflection is indicated by the
remark that the chargeand the energy-momentumvector behavc
as a pseudoscalarand pseudovector,respectively,for time reflection iransformations. This shows, incidentally, that positive and
negative charge must occur symmetrically in a completely
covariant theory. The contrst between the pseudo energymomentum vector and the proper displacement vector then
indicates that time reflection cannot be described within the
unitary transformation framework. This appears most fundamentally in the basic dynamical principle. It is important to
recoenizehere that the contributions to the lagrangefunction of
hallintegral spin freids behave like pseudoscalarswilh respect to
time reflection.The non-unitary transformation required to
representtime reflstion is found to be the replacementof a state
vector by ils dual, or complex conjugatevector, together witll the
transpos-ition of all opirators The fundamental dynamical
orinciole is tien invariant under time reflection if inverting the
order of all operators in t-helagrangefunction leavesan- integral
soin contribuiion unaltered,and reversesthe sign oI a half-integral
siin contribution. This implies the essential commutativity, or
anti-commutativity, oI integral and half-integral field components, respectively, which is the connection between spin and
statistics.

I. INTRODUCTION

tuting a single quantum dynamical principle for the

conv;tional array of assumptions based on classical
hamiltonian dynamics and the correspondenceprinciple.l We shall find it useful, however, first to review
briefly some aspects of the mathematical formalism
that hnd repeated application in the construction of
our theory.
The simultaneous eigenvectorsof some complete set
of commuting hermitian operators, V(a'), provide a
description of the arbitrary state i! by means of the
representative

extensivedevelopmentsin the concepts

f-lE'SeffO
L-t and techniques of the theory of quantized fields,
quantitative successhas been achieved thus far only in
the restricted domain of quantum electrodynamics.
Furthermore, the existence of divergences, whether
concealed or explicit, serves to emphasize that the
present quantum theory of fields must, in somerespect,
be incomplete. It is not our purpose to propose a solution of this basic problem, but rather to present a
geneml theory of quantum field dynamics which unifies
several independently developed proceduresand which
may provide a framework capable of admitting fundamentally new physical ideas.
Quantum mechanics involves two distinct sets of
hypotheses-the general mathematical schemeof linear
operators and state vectors with its associatedprobability interpretation and the commutation relations and
equations of motion for specific dynamical systems. It
is the latter aspect that we wish to develop, by substi-ith"
tle hospitalityof the
uitho. wishesto acknowledge
Brookhaven National Laboratory, which is under the auspicesof
the AEC. The general program of this serieswas initiated there
durine lie earlv summer of 1949,and lhe presentpaper was
largef written it ttris Laboratory during the iummer of 1950.

(a'l):(v(a'), v),

(1'1)

which has the interpretation of a probability amplitude'

Two such representations' associated with difierent
complete sets of commuting operators, are related by

@'D:[@'lB)dP'@'l),
wherc -fd|'indicates

integration

and summation

(r.2)
over

1 Although our attention will be focusedon -6elddynamics,.tle

analogousdevelopment of particle quantum dynamlcs should De
evident.

914

343
THEORY

915

Therefore,

the totality of eigenvaluesB', and

(a' I0'): (v(a'), v(0'))

(1 . 3 )

is the transformation function, .{s a special example o{

E q . ( 1 . 2 ) ,w e h a v e

r.,,"

| \q'l1')dB'(p'i|7'),

@'ll'):

F IELDS

OF QUANTIZED

(1.4)

or

a(a'l) : (i/ h)(v (o'), ?'v) : (i/ h)(c'I r | )'

f

(h/i)6(q'l): | (o'lFlo")da"(q"l),

( 1.13)
(1.14)

which is a difierential equation for the representative

[1llt"]]"1tili'.]1:,iHrui'u'i#H.:]:'.1'jil1".'ll;
rawortransrormation
themurtipricari,".oipo.i,ion
setsc and into a-6o and
the two commuting

functions.
The set of commuting hermitian operators
a:UaU-t,

(1.5)

f"::15"4:"ri*,two

rrom
a withtheaidorthearbirrary
isobtained
which

unitary operator U, has the property that its eigenvalues are identical with those of a, and that its
e i g e n v e c t o rasr e g i v e n b y

v(a'):Us1r''),

(1.6)

where d'and q'are the sameset of eigenvalues.Conversely, two sets of operators that possessthe same
eigenvalue spectrum are related by a unitary trangformation. Noti that the tiansformation function (d'l a")
may also be viewed as the matrix of [/-r in the original
eigenvector system,
(6'Ia'.): (UV(a'), V(c")): (v(a'), U|V(a"))
: (at lU-rlatt).
The unitary

B-dB,
B
infinitesimal generating operators

a<"'ls'llflfffi,riJi]'ilfirtr'' u*(fl)

(r.rr)

or
(h/i)6(d'l7'):

f
("'lr"l q")dd"(a"l9')
|

t"'1fl')a|"@"lFBlB).(1.16)

II. QUANTUM DYNAMICS OF LOCALIZABLEFIELDS

A localizablefield is a dynamical system characterized

by one or more operator functions of the space-time
coordinates, {"(r). Contained in this statement are
the assumptions that the operators tr, representing
(r.7) position measurements,are commutative,
lrr, r,]:0,

operator

(2.r)

( 1 . 8 ) and furthermore, that they commute with the field

u-t:11Q/h)F,
u:r-(i/h)F,
operators,
(2.2)
in which P is an infinitesimal hermitian operator,
l*,, Q"f:O,
induces an infinitesimal transformation in the com- so that
_
(2.3)
muting set of operators,
@l 6" I r, ) : 6(r r, ) 6" @).

(1.e)

The difficulties associated with current field theories

may be attributable to the implicit hypothesis of
( 1 . 1 0 )localizability. However, our development of quantum
Ff.
i.h6a: qF-Fa:lq,
field dynamics will be confined to such fields. It remains
If the system is such that it is possible to obtain
to be seen whether other systems can be included
operators'Da that commute with the complete set d,
within its scope.
one can treat the da as arbitrary, infinitesimal numbers,
The problem of constructing a complete set of comand !I'(d') provides an eigenvector of a with the
muting operators, that is, of simultaneously measurable
to
This
evidently
corresponds
a'*6a.
set
eigenvalue
physical quantities, necessarily involves specific propthe special circumstance of a having a continuous
erties of the fields. Nevertheless,as a general principle
eigenvaluespectrum.
associated with relativistic requirements, we must
The concept of infinitesimal unitary transformation
expect such mutually commuting operators to be formed
can be used to provide a differential characterization
from field quantities at physically independent spacefor the representative of a state, or for a transformation
time points, that is, points which cannot be connected
function. The change in the representative (c'l) when
even by light signals. A continuous set of such points
is
altered
by
the
of
operators
set
the commuting
form a spacelikesurface,which is a geometrical concept
unitary transformation generated by the infinitesimal
independent of the coordinate system. Therefore, a
hermitian operator F, is given bY
base vector system, V(f', c), will be specified by a
6 ( a ' l ) : ( ( a - d a ) ' l ) - ( a ' l ) = ( d ' r ( a ' ) , v ) , ( 1 . 1 1 ) spacelike surface a and by the eigenvalues f' of a
complete set of commuting operators constructed from
where
field quantities attached to that surface. A change of
6*(a')= gs 1"'1- v (a')= - Q/h)Fv(a')' (1.t2) represeotation will correspond,in general, to the introa:udu':d-oq,

where

344
JULIAN

SCHWINGER

cluction of another set of commuting operators on a

clifierent spacelike surface. Of particular importance is
the.transformation12' or+rr, o1,in which fr and f2 are
similarly constructed operator sets which possessthe
same eigenvalue spectrum_andare
_thereforerelated by
a unitary transformation[Eqs. (1.5) and (1.6)],
( r: U u( zU rz-r,
9((1t, o1)-IJtrg(( 1, c"), yr': yr',

(2.4)

so that [Eq. (1.7)]

( l r ' , o t l ; r " , or ) : ( { r ' , o 2 lL lp \ I | 2 " , c 2 ) .

(2.5)

9t6

theinlinitesimalgeneratingopcratorssatisfyanadclitive
law of compositiin.
our basii assumptionis that dllr1, is obtained by
variation of the quantities contained in a hcrmitian
operator l/rz, whi& must have the general form

IV,,: 0/ d
f

(dt)slxf,
"',,

(2.r2)

accordingto the additive requirement(2.11).Individual

systems are described by stating I as an invariant
hermitian function of the fields and their coordinate
derivatives,

A description of the temporal development of a

system is evidently accomplished by stating the relac[r]: c(4"(r), 6,f QD, 6,"G):0,6"@).
(2.r3)
tionship between eigenvectorsassociatedwith difierent
spacelikesurfaces,or, in other words, by exhibiting the In conformity with theL classical analogs, we shall
transformation function (2.5). Accordingly, we may call trtrland I the action integral and lagrange function
expect that the quantum dynamical laws will find their operators, respectively. The invariance of the lagrange
proper expression in terms of the transformation function.and thereforeof the action integral,guarantees
Iunction. A differential formulation of this tvpe will that our fundamental dynamical principle,
now be constructed.
The operator I/12 I describesthe developrnent of the 6 ( ( ' ' , o r l ( r " , o , )
system from d2 to or and involves, not only the detailed
: ( . i / h ) ( f i , o 1 l 6 W e l y 2 ' , ,o 2 )
dynamical characteristics of the system in this spacetime region, but also the choiceof commuting operators,
: (i/ hc)(t{,,,1 a
lr and fr, on the surfaces oy a'rd o2. Any infinitesimal
@*)sl r 2",oz), (2.r1)
[.",,'
change in the quantities on which the transformation
function depends induces a corresponding alteration
is unaltered in form by a change in the coordinate
in {/p-r,
system.An exceptionmust be made,however,for those
d(11, | | 2", oz): ly r', orl 6u u-t I f 2", az). Q.6) coordinate transformations that include a reversal in
"r
the positive sense of time, which require a separate
Now it is a consequenceof the unitary property that
discussion. We shall see that the requirement ol
iUrzEUn-L must be hermitian. Accordingly,we write
invariance under time reflection imposes a general
6U,r-r: (i/ h)U t2-tAWn,
(2.7) restriction upon the commutation properties of fields,
which is simply the connection between the spin and
where 6tr212is an infinitesimal hermitian operator,
statistics of elementary particles.
and obtain
If the parameters of the system are not altered, the
6 ( (r ' , o r l ( 2 " , or ) : ( i / h ) ( l r ' , o L I6 W\ 2 1( 2 , , ,dr ) . ( 2 . g ) variation of the transformation function in Eq. (2.14)
arisesonly from infinitesimal changesof f1, o1and f2, o2.
The composition larv r.rftransformation functions fEq.
Such transformations may be characterized by infini(1.4)1,
tesimal generatingoperators,F(o) and F(o), which
act on the eigenvectorsV(11,
and V(fr", oz), ar.rd
\!r, olll3
' dJ,/
are therefore expressedin terms"r)
of operators associated
lvith the surfaces c1 and d2, respectively. On referring
:
( i r ' , q t l ( , " , o i d f " ( ( r " , o r t! " " ' , o , ) , ( 2 . 9 )
|
t o E q . ( 1 . 1 5 ) ,w e o b t a i nf o r s u c h v a r i a t i o n s ,
imposesa restriction on 6M, the generating operator of
infinitesimal transformations. Thus,

6Wn: F1o'7- Oror.,.

(2.1s)

This is the operator principle of stationary action, for

it states that the action integral operator is unaltered
(ft', otl6I,Yttlf a"', qr)
by infinitesimal variations of the field quantities in the
interior of the region bounded by o1 and o2, being
: | {f r',
a,)dl"(t,", o"lir"', o,)
dependent only on operators attached to the boundary
"rl6wrrl(r",
surfaces. The equations of motion for the field are
o ) d ! " t ( 2 " . o 2 , 6 l l ' 2 i \ ' 3 " 'o, r ) , ( 2 . 1 u ) contained in this orinciole.2
* | (lt',
I
"tllr",
t T n t h e f o l l o r v i n gd i s c u s s i o n so, n e s h o u l , l k e e p i n m i n d r h a t r h e

or
6 I V1 : 6 t Vy l 6 W6 ;

l a g r a n g e f u n c t i o n s o f t h e s i m p l e s y s l e m s u s u a l l y e o n s i d e r e da r e
(2.rr) no
more than quadratic in the comDonents o[ indir idual field".

345
917

THEORY

OF

The evaluation ol 6Wv involves adding the independent efiects of changing the field components at
each point by dod'(c), and of altering the region of
integration by a displacement 6r, of the points on the
boundarv surfaces.Thus.

6Wt : (r/ c)
I

wnere

FIELDS

QUANTlZED

tesimal coordinate transformation

fiu'-

fru:

(2.2r)

5Yr,

where
6*r: er- eui$u, er": - e,u:016r,,

(2,22)

the field components sufier a linear transformation, as

expressedby

6os
"",,(d'c)

+( /,)( f .,-I do,u*

*
") ",

(2.23)

Therefore,
o"' @)- o"@.): a,Q"@)6*,* (i/ h)\e,"s u,"0$0(r), (2'24)

60J : (d s/dd")6 oO"+ @a / a6 f) a t606"

and

: l(as / a0) - aJa8,/ 06f)1606"

(2.r7)
t / 60p")600"f.
+ a Nl{d
This expressionfor 6oJ is to be understoodsymbolically,
since the order of the operators in I must not be
altered in the course of efiecting the variation. Accordingly, the commutation properties bf 6e4" are involved
in obtaining the consequencesof the stationary requirement on the action integral. For simplicity, we shall
introduce here the explicit assumption that the commutation properties of dod" and the structure of the
Iagrange function must be so related that identical
contributions are produced by terms that differ fundamentally only in the position of 60d". We may now
infer the eouations of motion

d,@e/a0,"):ae/a0".

6'@) - 6"@): (i/h)Le,,5,"468(r).

(2.16)

(2.18)

From the resulting lorm of 6Wu we obtain the infinitesimal generating operator F(o), which acts on eigenvectors associatedwith the surface r,

dd"(*) : 8od"(r)* OF"@)6r I

p""Ffg(e). (2.25)
+ (i/ h)+a ,.6xc"S
With the introducl"ion of the total variation, the
infinitesimal generating operator F(o) assumesthe form
F(o) :

I do uln,"6|"+ 0/ c)&6xt-TI f6""6x"

- (i/ zh)nf S\,"PQB}xdr,f, (2.26)

where

(2.27)

cIl,":6 s166u".

To simplify the last term of.Eq. (2.26), we define

7,^, :

fx- : (i / zh)llJ p"S\,"P6E+ rI,"S1u"r40

+IIr".t,!"rdtl,

(2.28)

and obtain
(i / 2h)tt f S\,"8 083 s6r,= J,y"0 x6r
"
":
dr(/,r,6*)a axf4,6x"'

(2.29)

since the last two terms of /"r, are symmetrical in tr and

tt
F ( o ) : ( 1/ c ) a o , l l a s 1a 6 , " ) 6 0 C " *s 6 * " 1 . ( 2 . 1 9 ) r, and therefore do not contribute to Eq. (2.29), in
|
view of Eq. (2.20). We now remark that, in virtue
of Jr7,": -fxr".
is
composed
additively
The total variation, 6@"(*),
(2.30)
of the variation 6od"(c) at the point *, and of the
f ,ao,a^U,^,6*,):0,
change in {"(*) produced by moving from the point *
on o to **dr on o*6a. In evaluating the latter, we
provided/ur,6*, efiectively approacheszero, with suffishall take into account that the field components {"(o),
cient rapidity, at infinitely remote points3 on o. Finally
although stated in terms of some fixed coordinate
then,
in
relation
considered
are
most
advantageously
system,
to the local coordinate system provided by o at the
point e. Only such motions are contemplated that
correspond to a local rigid displacement of the surface
o. This restriction is expressedby
0 '6x": - 6 '5*"

(2'2O)

being the condition that an infinitesimal space vector

on o be mapped into one of equal length on af6o.
The displacement induced change in {'(r) may be
obtained by an alteration in the coordinate system that
reduces, in the neighborhood of *, to the equivalent
local coordinate transformation. Thus, under the infin!

r(o):

I do,[n!"6d"+(1/c)7,,M,f,

(2.31)

where
(t/ c)7,,: (l/ c)s6 p-IIy"e""-

lxfxp,

Q.32)

is the stress tensor operator. As we shall demonstrate,

this tensor has the property of being symmetrical.
T_T
3All

(2.s3)

such characlerizations o[ a spatially closed system, in

terms of an operalor approachiug zerc aL in6nity, are to be
understood as a restrictio;l lo slatea for which the matrix elements
of the operator have this plopetty.

346
IULIAN

as an expression of the conservation of angular momentum.

Conservation laws are associated with variations
that leave the action integral unchanged, since
51ry,r:p(6r)- F(o2):0

918

SCHWINGER

(2.s1)

generating operator is
161(o):

-(ie/hc)

f
| da,Tlu"e"g"6\
Jo

(r/c)QG)6\,

wnere
implies the constancy of the corresponding generating
oDerator. The mechanical conservation laws for an
Q@): (r/c) do,j,
)
isolated system are derived by considering a rigid
displacement of the entire field, or equivalently, of the and
jF: _(iec/h)IlN"c"O".
coordinate system, which is described by a common
infinitesimal translation and rotation of the surfacesor
The implied conservation law,
and o2,
(2.35)
6*r: eu- eu"x", Epe:- GtpT
QG)_QG)=0,

(.2.46)
(2.4i)
(2.48)
()

LO\

combined with the field variation 6d":0. The dis- is that of the total charge in the system.
It is important to notice the ambiguity in the
placement generating operator is then given by
lagrange function that is associated with given equa(2.36)
F u ( t ) : 2 , P , 7 o 1 { . l e , " J, , ( o ) ,
tions of motion. Thus, two lagrange functions that are
where
related by

e"6):1t/)

[,a,,r,",

(2.37)

provide action integral operators that difier by surface

integrals:

and

J ,,(o): (r/c) f do,M^,,,

I

(2.38)
Mar,: xrTp-rcuTst.
Accordingly,
P"(a)- P,(oz):o'
and
Ju,G)-J,"(a,):0,

'E(6",0,"):
s(0",6,")+cAf
,@",O,f) (2.s0)

w,":w,,+(1,,I,)*r"

(2.s1)

Therefore, the principle of stationary action for lTrz is

( 2 . 3 9 ) automatically satisfied by the equations of motion
deduced from I{zrz,a1d
(2.40)
(2.s2)

fr,,!l-(,)-F("t,

l
which are the conservation laws for the energy-momen- wnere
tum vector, and the angular momentum tensor, respec(2.s3)
0"r,.
F: Ftbu. ':
tively. Since the surfaces rr and 12 are arbitrary, we
[
conservation
laws,
difierential
infer the corresponding
(2.4r) Hence, augmenting a lagrange function by the diver0 u Tu , : 0 ,
gence of an arbitrary vector does not affect the equaand
(2.42) tions of motion, but modifiesthe infinitesimal generating
0xMxr,:O,
operator associated with a given surface o. However,
,vhich, in conjunction, imply the symmetry of the stress this ambiguity of the lagrange function corresponds
precisely to the possibility of subjecting the commuting
tensor:
(2.43) set of operators bn o to an arbitrary unitary transforOxMt*:T*-7"':0
mation.
The conservation law oI charge can be obtained from
We verify this statement by specializing the general
the required invariance of the hermitian lagrange func- transformation theory to unitary transformations on a
phase
multitransformations-the
constant
tion under
given surface. Let us introduce i, a new set of complication of mutually hermitian conjugate pairs of field
muting operaton on a, which are obtained from f by a
components by exp(+ir). We consider infinitesimal unita'ry transformation,
phase transformations and, for convenience,write
(2.54)
!t,(i,, o):9E11,, o;,
(2.M)
7:Q/hc)6\,.
where tl is characterized by an infinitesimal hermitian
Thus, we postulate the invariance of t under the generating operator 62, according to
infi nitesimal transformation
(2.S5)
6,u_t: (i/ h),tt_tiw.
66": - (ie/hc)e"6^0",
Q.45)
As the analog of Eq. (2.8) we have, therefore,
where e' is characteristic of the field component C",
(2.56)
6(f', o| 1", i)= (i/h)(l', ol\wl9",
and may assume the values 0, or :t1. The associated
"1;

347
919

THEORY

OF

QUANTIZED

FIELDS

but

To obtain the proper interpretation of F56 or ,F6n,

it is necessaryto recognizethat some of the II. can be
identically equal to zero. Ihis expresses
the possibilitl'
rvhere ,1.anrl Ii are, respectively,the operatorsgenerthat derivativesin timelike directionsof someof the 6"
ating infinitesinraltransformrtions of f and i. 1'his is
just of the fonn (2.53); anrl conversely,b1. enrploying may not occur in the lagrangefunction. Accordingly,
we shall divicle the quantities d" and Il" into two sets:
a particular z, we obtain from Iiq. (2..56)a differential
arld II", called the canonicalvariables,and 6a, II4,
equation to determinethe transformationfunction that d"
termed the constraint variables, in which the second
definesthe new representation.
set is characterizedbv
The commutation relationsof our theory are implicit
j
in the significance of ,F as an infrnitesimal generating
(2.66)
II =0.
operator. We shall consider first those transformations
that do not alter the surface o. so that 6n,:0. It is The name ascribedto the @drefersto tlie fact that, for
these quantities, the equations of motion (2.60) deconvenientto write
generateinto equationsof constraint,
p,7o,
6w: I,'-l',

(2.si)

do u:

(2.s8)

rvherenuis a unit timelikevector and do is the numerical

measure of the surface element. To avoid irrelevant
geometricalcomplicationsin the following discussion,
we shall henceforthrestrict d to be a plane surface,so
that zu is constant on o. Note, incidentally, that
coordinate derivatives can be decomposedinto components normal and tangentialto o,
0r : n u 6 * J 0 4 ,
3o:-nuOu, 64:(iu,fnun")0,,

(2.59)

n pI7p"

null,A- n,II,A : (i/ h)il"S p""A.

(2.60)

We have here introducedthe notation

fI":

(2.6i)

(2.68)

On multiplication with rz,,we obtain from this equation

that

and that the equationsof motion read

A"n":(1/c)@s/ae")-A,;rf,

(.1/c)(A
a/dOa): A*tFA

that is, relationsamong the variableson o. The nature

of these relations can be made more apparent by
exploiting the requirement that Eq. (2 66) be independent of the coordinate system. We shall later show
that the implied restriction on the structure of
"C is
expressedby

(2.61)

for a quantity which, more precisely,should be rvritten

11"(r, o).
The generatingoperatorF now becomes

(2.6e)
wlrich enablesthe constraintequationsto be written
(r/c)(0 s/064):

(i/ h)dil"S p"An,.

(2.70\

We shall now assumethat it is possibleto solve the left

side of Eq. (2.70) lor di, thus exhibiting explicitly the
constraint variables as functions of the canonical varinor:
(2.62) ables. This excludes systems for which the d/ are
fundamentally ambiguous in consequenceof the exIa,n"r,o"
istence of gauge transformations. The latter situation
Another significant form, associatedwith a different will be discussedsubsequentlyin terms of the familiar
basevector system,is obtained from Eq. (2..5.3)
with
example provided by the electromagnetic field.
It is evident from theseconsiderations,
and from the
-rr,"0".
(2.6.\)
I,:
structure of the generatingoperators,
Indeed, we have
ff

E|,ro;1,:-6|,ton"4"
JJ

:-

[0,6"u0"+6n"c9, e.64)

so thal

ror:
Ia,rcw",
ron:- a,awo",
f

(27r)

that only the canonical variables are dynamically

( 2 . 6 . 5 ) independenton o. Accordingly,1i56is to be interpreted
as the generator of that infinitesimal transformation of
[a'an"o"
the commuting operator set f on o which is produced
It should be emphasizedagain that these operator by changingd" into 4"-56". Similarly, F6n is regarded
expressionsare symbolic in the sensethat the actual as generatingthe infinitesimal transformation of I in
p o s i t i o n si n w h i c h D d " a n ( l 6 l l ' a p p e a r r l e p e n du p o n which II" is replacedby Ii'-6II". Thus, S" and IIo are
t h e s t r u c t u r eo f t h e l a g r a n g ef u n c i i o n .
special examples of a set of independent field coordi-

F':Far:-

348
JULIAN

920

SCHWINGER

nates; and the most generalpossibility is implicit in the become

transformatior (2.53). Associated with any such set of
operaton is the conjugate set appearing in F, as II" is
: in6o.(.r),
I a;Lo"trl,tt6(.r')]+6d6(.r.')
conjugate to f', and -d" to II'.
We shall now examine the change in the matrix of G,
'ao'gn"{r1,
an arbitrary function of field variables on o, which is
: o,
tt 6(r')]+adb(x')
f
produced try the infinitesimal transformation generated
by Faa, say. Thus, we have
(2.78)
6((, olGll", o): (v(f/, o),GtV(|", a))
+ (dv(f', o), Gv((" , o))
: - (i/ h)((,
F,+711,,, o). (2.72)
"llG,
On the other hand, we have
6 ( l ' , a l G l l " , o ) : ( ( ' , o l 6 a G l ( " ,o ) ,

(2.73)

f ro'un'(*)[d'(r'), ,,'(x)]+: iiDn'(r').

J"

g'(.r) jr = o,
fao'un o1.r'i;601r''),
where

(2.7q)
where 66Gmeansthe changein G produced on increasing
IA, B)_: AB- BA
6" by 6Q". This simply expressesthe fact that replacing and
(2.80)
lA, B)+: AB+BA.
O" by O"-60" in both G and f leaves the relation
between them, and t}terefore the matrix, unaltered.
Since the 6f' and 6II" are quite arbitrary, we have
We thereby infer the commutation relation,
derived the fundamental commutation relations,
(2'74)
lG, n'r1:;7'5t6'
[4'(r), rlb(r')]a : ih6"$,(x- r'),
(2.81)
n'(r')]*:6.
[0"(*), d'(*')]+:[n'(r),
with its evident generalization in regard to the field
coordinates, including, in particular,
Here d,(r-a') denotes the three-dimensionaldeltafunction, which is defined by
(2'75)
lG' F5"1:;7t5"6'
Of special importance are the results oblaine(l from
Eqs. (2.74)and (2.75)with G:dd and IId:
tfl
I o ' ( r ) , I d 6 ' I r b ( r )' 6 o b ( n ' )l : i h 6 o " ( x ) ,
J.
L
I
Q'76)
I
r
i
I n"{r), I do'n'(r)Dd'(r') l:0,
J"
I
L
and

{"a,

a,1r-r')t1r'):J@),

(2.82)

where/(r) is an arbitrary function. The commutation

properties of the 61 can then be obtained from their
explicit expressionin terms of the canonical variables.
Thus, accordingto Eq. (2.70),
(r / c)ld e / A6AQ), d"(r') l* : a,a * r' ) S, An,, (2.83)
"'
"(r
and
(2.81)
l0s/06a(r),II'(r')l+:0.

f r
I
| | a " ' o n a 1 x ' 1 6 r ( r ' )r,I . ( . r rl : ; i a n " { . ' ; ,

In the requirementthat commutatorsbe employed,

for components of an integral spin field, and anti( 2 ' 7 7 ) commutators for components of a half-integral spin
field, we have the connection between the spin and
r r
1
statistics of particles. We shall note here that the
| | d 6 ' 6 t r b ( x ' ) 6 b ( . rd' ).,( . r ) l : 0 ,
tJI
commutation properties of a Bose-Einstein system,
that is, an integral spin field, can be represented by
in which we have invoked the dynamical independence
meansof difierentialoperators.Accordingto Eq. (1.13),
of the @'and the II'.
a suitable representative of an arbitrary state obeys
To extract explieit commutation relations among the
properties
of 6$"
d" and II" we must know the operator
6 ( r ', o l ) : G / h ) ( l ' , o l F o o l )
and 6II". The requirement that the formalism be
/
| f
l\
invariant with respect to time reflection supplies the
: ( i / h ) 1 l ' , o l t d o n " 5 6I"'l r . l . s s )
desired information. It will be shown in Sec. III that
\
l
l
lr'
6dd(*-') and dIID(r') comrnute with all field quantities
lJ-

o"(r) and I-I"(r), on q, except when both o and, b in which a is not altered. Now the characteristic
designatecomBonentsof fields that possesshalf-integral property o{ an integral spin lield is that d@"commutes
spin, in whic\ event they anti-commute. Accordingly, with all dynamicnl variables and can therefore be
the commutation relations of Eqs. (2.76) and, (2.77) treated as a number, The representation involved in

349
921

THEORY

OF QUANTIZED

Eq. (2.85) is evidently that which is Iabeled by the

continuous eiginvalues of the O"(r) at all points of a.
In terms of the notation
f

6(d" dl): I do66.'kc)(6/66"'(r))(d"

ol), (2.s6)
J.

The contribution of the secondterm to d-/,, is evaluated

as follows,

50/c) @6,rfi-tlo,r"&)
J
:

we obtain
(h/ i) (6/ 66"'Qc))(6', ol) : (6', o | il'(r) | ),

FIELDS

l
ldo"xrAx$l 1"dS')- do,r"d1(Irr"6d")

(2.87)

and similarly,
ih(6/ 6fid (x)) $I', a l) : (rr',

6"@) l).
"1
We shall make further application of the general
commutation relations (2.74) and.(2.75) by successively
placing G:P,, Ju", and Q. According t9 Eq. (2.30),
the Iast term of Eq. (2.32) makes no contribution to
P,, so that

P":-

ff

, don"a"6*0/c) | d.o,s.

doxk*a,- r,dJ(I[r"dd")

J
(2.88)

(2.89)

JJ

+ | @6il,"-do,npr6o"
J

- *,a")
(n.6d9
a's{*,u,

| (n uIr,"- n,rIu") 66r.

Therefore,

Q.g4)

In the evaluation of 6P, we'encounter

f

(1/t) | do"6t:
JJJ

6J-:

.f

tlo 6II"l(x,6,- t,6 p)O"+ Q/h)S*"F 6El

, do,aJnN"6d)= | dop,(nF 6O.)

f

+,

: a,o"tt"to't,
I

d6 l ( n , a , - ' t

(2.e0)

.J

(2.e1)

16"Qc),P"f: (h/ i)6 "6l1c),

ln (r), P,l : (h/ i.)0,T1"(t),

('c,(h/la
r"(h/ | a)6*
"J
Itt", u,l= @u(h/i)a,- r:,(h/la;)rI"-

a,n"l@&,- x,a,)o + e/ h)s p""p

6lf
*0/d

S,,"lf ,
n]s/,b,

! (h/ i) (n,TI - n"r,"),

""
0 : - II",s/""i+ ( lt/ i) (n,It - n
"A "',t7,A),

(t''o)

which exhibit -/u, in the role of the rotation generator

(2.92) and illustrate

the formation of Ju, as the superposition

in virtue of the commutativity of P, with 6d" and 6II",

which is a consequenceof tire fact that half-integrai
spin field components must appear paired in the vector
P,. Incidentally, a commutator [F(t), F(o], which has
been evaluated by considering the efiect on F(2) of the
transformation generated by FG), can equally well be
viewed from the reversestandpoint. Thus, the relations
(2.92) also exhibit P, in the role of the translation
generator.
\
The angular momentum tensor -Ir, is easily brought
into a form analogousto (2.89),

t,,: -

We have thus derived the commutation relations

lO", J *):

The reariangeme4ts of Eq. (2.90) have involved Eq.

(2.17), as simplified by the equations of motion, and
the assumption that the system is spa{ially closed. We
thereby obtain

- Q /h ) T I b S
B,b'

.! n urr,;- n,rru"f66". (2.9.51

whence

5P,:ldo@"il"do"-Dlr"d,d").

" a) n '

6',x,e-do,s,t). (2.e3)

of orbital and spin angular momenta. The third equation of Eq. (2.96), the statement that IId=0 is a
property independent of the coordinate system, has
already been employed in Eq. (2.68).
According to Eqs. (2.47) and (2.48), the charge
operator is given by

O: - U?/h\
I

rorTocata.

(,2.97)

Therefore, rve have

f
6Q:-Qe/h)I a"(,1n..,0"+n"*ao"),
Q.e8)

from'which we obtain the commutation relations

l+,Ql:r,"0., [n,, Q]: -ee"Il". (z.ss)

3s0
IULIAN

These indicate the significance of e as the elementary

charge, and exhibit Q in the role of the phase transformation generator. Note, however, that the derivation
of Eq. (2.99) from the latter viewpoint is not restricted
to the canonical variables, although nothing new is
obtained thereby.
The general infinitesimal operator (2.31) describes
the transformation from the commuting operator set
f, o to f -Df, r{6o, as indicatedbY
v((f - 3f )', o-l 6o): lr - (i / h) Ffv G', o)'

v((r- 6r)" o): 11- (i./h)Fa'lv(r" "), (2.ro2)

F5":Q/e) d.a,r,"6r"
f

0:6.G(6)-(i/h)lG(o),F6.f'

(2.10e)

lc(o),P,):(h/i)5,G(a),

(2.110)

whence

( 2 . 1 0 1 ) and

where F66 induces, via d{". a change in the commuting

operator set defined in relation to the local coordinate
system provided by a lixed o,
while

independent ol o, since the relation between G(o) and

the I on o is unchangedby an alteration of the surface.
The components of Pr(o) referred to axes based on o
are oI this naturel and, consequently, the matrix o{
P"(a) in Eq. (2.107)jr:volves the orientation of o
relative to the coordinate system, but is otherwise
independent of o. Commutation relations between Pu,
J u, and G(a) follow from this property of the G(a)
matrix. Thus, we have

(2'100)

The operator F is additively composedof two parts,

F:FtolFa,,

922

SCHWINGER

(2.103)

generatesthe change in o described by 6r,, for a fixed

set of commuting operators defined relative to o,

lc(a), t *l:

(h/i)6,,G(o).

(2.1rr)

As the first of several illustrations of these commutation relations,we chooseG(o):$"(*). According to

Eq. (2.25), we have
lo"@), P!l:(h/i)]u6"@),

(2.112)

and
16" @), J, "f : (r,(h / i) 0, u(h / il a,) 6" @)
fS,""BSd(r),

(2.113)

which is in agreernentwith Eqs. (2.92) and, (2'96), but

without the restriction of the latter to the components
!r,(f,, o*do) : [t- (i/ h)F *fv((" o). (2.104)
{'. A particularly simple example is provided by
the total charge. Since this operator is
Consistent with our restriction to plane surfaces,we G(t):Q,
consider only rigid displacements of o, for which the independent of o, we have
() 11J\
generating operator has already been given in Eq.
IQ, P,]:IQ, J U'f:O'
(2.36).
Difierential equations that describe the change in which state, inversely, that P, and Ju, are unafiected
the representative of an arbitrary state, as produced by phase transformations. The effect of a displacement
of o on the quantity G(o):P^r^1"1, where el(o) is an
by rigid displacements,are inferred from
arbitrary vector that is rigidly attached to o, comes
(
2
.
1
0
5
)
(
i
/
h
)
(
f
'
,
o
)
,
v
)
:
6 , ( f ' ,o l ) : ( d " v ( ( ' ,
entirely from the rotation of the vector e1(o),
"lF,"l).
In terms of the notation

6"(Prer(a)): - e,,P,e'(o)'

5 , ( f ' , o l ) : 6 u 5 , 1 1o' ,l ) * i e , , 6 , , ( ( ' , o l ) ,

(2.106)

we obtain generalized Schrddinger equalionsa for

translations,
) : (r" o IP,(o) l)
"|

( h / i ) 6/ r "

, l),
| ( g ' , o l P , ( o ) l ( " . o \ d ( " ( ( "o

and rotations,
( h / i . ) 6 , " ( l ' ,o | ) : ( f ' , o I J
:

",(o)

Therefore, we have

(2.11s)
(2.116)

lP,, P,):0,
and
lPx, J -f:ih(6;P,-

6,rP).

(2.117)

where
Our last example, G(o):1^,r^<r11o)a.{2)(o),
( 2 1 0 7 ) both e;{t)(q) a,nde,@(o) are arbitrary vectors rigidly
attached to o, is actually an extension of the type of
operatorunder consideration,since

l)

| (f', olJ,"(o)11",o\,11"((",ol\. (2 108)

I

An operator G(o), which is constructed from field

q u & n t i t i e so n o , h a s a m a t r i x ( l ' , o l c ( o ) | t " , o ) t h a t i s
I Note that these Schrtirlingcr equations have becn obtained
from the Heisenberg picture, in wlrich the arbitrary state vector
is fixed. P. A. M. Dirac, The Principles oJ Sadnlilm Mechunics
(The Clarendon Press, Oxford, 19,17),thir(l edition, Sec.32.

J s^es(t)p,\2) :

f
(1 / c) | d o,lxxe x(') T,^e,(2\

"

-r,e.c)fprdr(r)] (2.118)

involves space-time coordinates, in addition to field

variables.The necessaryrevisionof Eq. (2.109)is
6,G(o): (i/ h)lc(o), F,,l-t 0.G(o),

(2.11e)

where d,G(o) denotes the displacement induced change

in G(o), associated with the explicit appearance of
space-time coordinates. In the example provided by

35r
THEORY

923
Eq. (2.118), d$(o)
not rotation) of a,

OF QUA NTIZED

arises from the translation (but

: (erP. - e,P1)s^{t)e.tz).(2,120)
0,(J peatt)6,<z))
On combiningthis with
(2.121)
2,tzt) : - e,J *e e,e\- epJ x ue{r'e
6 pe stLt
"Q',
"Qt
"(J
we again obtain Eq. (2.117), and'

FIELDS

Now, the difierencebetween the results of the two ways

in which these transformations can be successively
applied may be regardedas the eftect of a third, related
transformation,
_ 6(r)60))!r(r"o)
(6(t)6(r)
: {/((f + (6o)6(r)- d(r)6(t))f
)/, a} (6order 6t,rlor) 6)
-v(l', c)
(2.rzs)
: - (i/h)Flt2tvt,' 6).

lJ t,, J u"l: ih(6r,Jr,* 6irJ.,* 6*J xul 6,,J,x). (2.122) Therefore,

(2.126)
lFor, F(2tl:ihFrtzl
We may remark, as an example of a general procedure
of Eq.
integrability
necessary
to
the
for constructing representations of operator commuta- is a condition
(2.124). A simple illustration of this viewpoint is
tion properties, that the identitY
provided by rigid displacements:

;;4",Jr.l,J -l-ll0", t -t,!ti",lr\,,

leads to analogous commutation rlations for the

representativesof orbital and spin angular momentum
in Eq. (2.113).
In a final comment concerning commutation relations. we observe that the commutators of generating
operators are of significancein connection with integrability conditions for the infinitesimal transformations
generated by these operators.sIf I(I) and F(2) are two
such generators of infinitesimal transformations, we
have
6 ( t ) v ( r / ,o ) : v ( ( i - a u , r r , ,

5(L'2\rr:er(t'2)-el"(t'z)&v,

r pl) (2.123)

6f 6ttro)-v(f" o)
: -(i/DFn\,v((" o).

6a){/(f/, o) : q/((l- ao,rr', 6f f ero)- V(f/, o)

: -(i/h)Fov(r"
o).
6 ( { t ' ,o r l ( r " , 6,):

0.124)

.
slnce

e.l\i\

Fo'(t2t:eatr'2\Pp+rer"02)J!,,

(f {t)f t:) -_ fit2)dtrr)*,-

- e
,,0) e,Q)I

euoQ)
e,Q)

_ ( _ eu^O)
5^,tzl1 cul(2)er,0))*,
:6"1r2)-6u,U21x6,

(2.128)

is another rigid displacement, The ensuing commutal ion

relations are just Eqs. (2.116, (2.117), and' (2.122)'
In our discussions of the variational principle (2.14),
we have dealt with the properties of a given dynamical
system. The principle is also applicable, however, to
variations in which the system is altered, as characterized by a change in the structure of the lagrange
function. For a variation of this type, we have

(i/ hd
(o*)(r,', o1l6 slrfl Y2",
I,",,'

or),

(2.r2e)

or

6 ( f i , o l l , " , o z \ : G / h c t J , , ( r t * U ( f ' ' , o l f " , o ) d y T " , o l d s f . r l l g 6 , 6 ) d ( b ( l h , o 1 f t " , o z \ ,( 2 ' 1 . ] 0 )

variationsof this natureare appliedsuccessivelr'
where the surfaceo containsthe point r. If two independent
we obtain

6 ( : ) 6 ( 1 )o( il,l,y, ' , , , o 7 ) : ( i f l t o f . ' , , ' u . r l l I r , , ( l , " o , l l . ' o ) , 1 1 , ( 1 . ' 6 ] 6 r r r ! [ r ] l f z " ' a z )
+

Cl,orl 6(I)a[ir]lfb,o)dtb6('?)(l',
"ldi', "t]

: {r/ nd, {axlf "taotr,, o,I D(2)s[r']6(r)

slt)llz",
[ "',, /
+

oz)

-cl*' fl l r", or)]'

-8[t]6('?)
) <rl,or I 6(r)
"',rta,

(2'13I )

We shall introduce here a notation for chronologically ordered operators,

A(x)B(t'),

Gk)B(r')),:
Gllli""".nl",

xolro'

(2.ri2)

(.r), .rn') xn,

B("r').4

H. \\ eyLThe Theoryol Grorlt and euanhrtn l[ echanics(E. P. Dutton end Company, Inc., Nerv York, 1931),p 1?7.

3s2
JIILIAN

SCHWINGER

924

which is an invariant conceptprovided tbat the operatorsinvolved commute when r-r'is

a spacelikeinterval
and that the positive senseof tine is preserved.Thus we may write Eq. (2.131)more compactlv as
u l r r , ; {(:i r / , o 1I l : / / , d " ): 6 ( ! ) d (('1) , r ,o , I i r , r , o r )

: U/ rL|' (di ( d x ' ) ( ( i , o 1 l( 6 ( ' ) 3 [ r ] 6 r r r " C [ r ' ] ) *1l , " , o , ) .

1.",,'I,',,'
These results will find frequent application in later
lvork.
We shall conclude this section by indicating, in
connection with a Bose-Einsteinfield, a method for constructing the transformationfunction ((r', qtl(2", qr),
which has as its classicalanalog the Hamilton-Jacobi
theory of field mechanies.The actual motion of the
svstemis implicit in the forn assumedby the variation
of the action integral,

uv,,--l "n"ag.{ e,p ue)

} 1,,,r, "{ df, (2.|34)
[,a
"'",,

(2.133)

quenceof the noncommutativity of the g" on or and on

02 in a manner which depends upon the location of
these surfaces.Thus, if the operator ltrzrris first ordered
and then varied, the result will differ from what is
obtained by ordering 61112.We now turn to the differential characterizationof the transformation function
labelled by eigenvaluesof 6" on oy zlrd o2,
6 ( s ' , o 1 1 6 " ,o 2 )
: ( i / h ) ( 6 ' , a , l a w 1 6 r , a r ; $ 2 , c z ) 1 6 , ,o, . ) , ( 2 . 1 3 6 )
and observe that, in virtue of the ordering in 61V, the
operators d" on or and on q2act directly on their respective eigenvectorsand can be replaced by the associated
eigenvalues:

in which we continue the restriction to plane spacelike

surfaces.It is implied by Eq. (2.13a)that I/u can be
exhibited as a function of o1, c2, and of the do on these 6 ( 6 ' , a 1 l g " , o 2 )
: (i/ h) 6W(Ot, o | ; 0", 62)(6', orl e", o
(2.137)
surfaces,and therefore that the II., P, and ./u, associ").
ated with each surface can also be so exhibited. With
the aid of commutation relations between the @" on The transformationfunction is thereby obtaineclas?
dr and on or, it will be possible to order the operators
@ ', o ' l O " , o , ) : e x p [ ( i / , 4 ) 1 \( t6 ', o y ; g " , o ) 7 , ( 2 . 1 . ] S )
in Eq. (2.13.1)so that the Q" on o1 everyrvherestand to
the left o{ the 0" on or. The differentialexpression,thus rvherethe constant of integration, which is additively
ordered, shall be denoted by 6W(@r,or;dr, or), from containedin 11t,can be determinedfrom the condition
which we obtain difierential equationsconnectingthe
lim,(d', dr]0", or):6(6'-6").
(2.13s)
various ordered operators,
(6/6d.(*D)w:n,(rr),
6utuw:2r1o-;,

(6/66"(r))w:

-n'(rr),

III. TIME REFLECTION

6 p Q ) 7 , 9 : _P p ( q 2 ) , ( 2 . 1 3 5 )

The general physical requirement of invariance with

respect to coordinate transformations applies not only
6p,(2r1V:- J u,Qz),
|ulr)nfi: J r"(o),
to translations and rotations of the coordinate system,
uhere 11 and rs are arbitrary points on a1 arrd o2, but also to reflections o{ the coordinate axes. Among
respectively. In conjunction with the commutation
relations (2.81), theseHamilton-Jacobi operator equa- which should be compared with the hermitian action integral
w D : +wj t : (.n / 2t) (r (t ) - x (t ))'
tions serve to determine the ordered operator
: (n /2t)fr2(t) - 2r(t ) s(t,) | f (.t))- |i.h.
(Cr,
1V
or ; 62, cz), to within an additive constant.
Incidentally, the analog of Eq. (2.138) is
It is important to recognizethat\g lW p, and indeed,
(r', tylr", t,):expl(i/b'W
((', i:', Df
that W is a non-hermitian operator.0This is a conse: (A t)-| exprGm / 2ht) (r' - t, )2),
6 The elementary example of a one-dimensional free particle
sill sullice to illusrrate rhis. The Hamillon-lacobi ecuations lor
the construction of 1Ptrtt,t, *1tzt,!), !:t1-i2,
are

( a / a r ( t , ) ) W : - ( a / a x ( D ) n $: P , - G / a t ) W : f / 2 , ' .
r\ccording

to the solution of the equations of motion,

r(t.t)- i(tr): (t/n.\p,

rre have

Ir(t), r(t,)): -iht/m,

whence
- @/ at)\9 : (m/2t,)(r(,r)-r(,r)),
: (n/2t2)l*(tJ -2x(t)r(t,)+

f(h)f- ilt /2t

The solutionof the Hamilton-Jacobioperatorequationsis
\p : (1n/ 2t)lx2(t1\_ 2r(t) r(t) + i (t')f+ iirl blu t),

rvhere the constant.4 is determined to be

A:2rih/m
{rom the analog of Eq. (2.139),
lim(r' , h r" , h):

66'-

t").

T fhe exponential form of Eq. (2.138) is familiar as a basis for

establishing a correspondence connection with classical HaniltonJacobi particle mechanics. Dirac employed this form in a discussion of unitary transformations and recognized, in part, th&t the
Hamilton-Jacobi
equations are rigorous as relirlions anrong
ordered operators (see the end of the section quoted in reference
4). In Feynman's version of quantum mechanics lR. P. Feynman,
Revs. Ilodern Phys. 20. 3oi (tS48rl, the exponenlial form is
employed for inEniiesimaltime intervais,rith the rerl part of 1V
defined as the classical action integral.

3s3
e23

THEORY

OF QUANTIZED

FIELDS

the latter transformations, time reflection has a singular

position. Its special nature can be indicated by the
transformation properties of some integrated physical
quantities. Thus, the expectation value of the energymomentum vector,

with respect to time reflection.8If we w'ereto consider

only such a half-integral spin field, the basic dynamical
equation would preserve its structure under time
reversal, but at the expense of violating the general
transformation properties of all physical quantities;
charge would remain unaltered, and energy would
reverse sign under time reflection. The latter difficulty
(3.1) simply
<P,>:(l,/c)
indicates that, on inclusion of the contributions
f"d;,g,,),
of integral spin fields, the various parts of I would
is actually a pseudovector with respect to time reflec- transform difierently, thus emphasizing again the
tion. With thd plane surface c chosen perpendicular to general failure of Eq. (2.la) to admit time reflection as
the time axis, the components of (P,) are obtained as a unitary transformation.
'three-dimensional
To aid in investigating the extended class of transforvolume integrals,
mations that is required to include time reflection we
f
shall introduce some notational developments. The
(Po):G/c)
d'o(rsn).
scalar product of two vectors, Vo and V6, can be written
|
(3'2)
(3.4)
(al6) = V"'Va: Voilr.',
t,

(Pt):0/c) aolr*), k:r,2,3,

|

thereby being regarded as ttre invariant combination of

vector Vr with the dual, complex conjugate vector
induces iI,.* We allow operators to act both on the left and on
,"n.ltio.,
tco---fi0, rl-rr
and the ti-"
(P)+(P6), Qrl--(Pr),
according to the transforma- the right of vectots, V and iP*. Thus, an operator
tion properties of tensors. This difiers in sign from a associated with A, the transposed operator .4"; is
proper vector transformation. In particular, the energy defined bys
does not reverse sign. under time reflection. More
(3.5)
A*:tAr,
V*A:Arg',
generally, this property of (P,) is obtained from the
pseudovector character of drr, which expressesthe or by
(3.6)
pseudoscalar nature of a four-dimensional volume
(alAlb):v"'Avt:9uAr9"'.
element with respect to time reflection. Similarly, the
We also define the associated complex conjugate
expectation value of the charge
operator.4",
ff

\Q):0/c)

| dc,(j,):(1/c)

JJ

| d.o(j]

(,4v)..:1-v'.

(3.3)

behavesas a pseudoscalarunder time reflection. Hence,

this transformation interchanges positive and negative
charge, and both signs must occur symmetrically in a
covariant theory. Indeed, for some purposes the requirement of charge slmmetry can be substituted for
the more incisive demand of invariance under time
reflection.
The significant implication of these properties is that
time reflection cannot be included within the general
framework of unitary transformations. Thus, on referring to the Schrddinger equation for translations
(2.107), or the analogousoperator equation (2,110), we
encounter a contradiction between the transformation
properties of the proper vector translation operator du
and of the pseudovector Pu, This difficulty appears
most fundamentally in our basic variational principle
(2.14). With 8 behaving as a scalar and (d.r) as a
pseudoscalar,reflection of the time axis introduces a
minus sign on the right side of this equation. However,
it is important to notice that the scalar nature of S
cannot be maintained for that part of the lagrange
function which describes half-integral spin fields. Indeed, such contributions to 3 behave like pseudoscalars

(3.7)

The connection with the hermitian conjugate operator

,4i is obtained flom the definitioir of the latter,

(,4v)':E'7t,
Iio-*-0"*.n,al

(3.8)

invarianrof a spin | fretdisw:{/.l!{/.

R*, cat
The transformation
that represents time re8ection, {':
be obtained from its equivalence with a rotation through the
Accordingly,
angle r in the (45) plane; R: exp?rtro*):ias.

.9,,9,=9tn-tyon{:-W,

which indiates tle pseudoscalar character of the spia | field

laqranqe function, witi respect to time reflection. The correspondins behavior oI 6eldswith other spin valuescan be obtained
fiom tb6 observationthat a spinor of-rank z contains6elds of
baiic invariant and lime reflection
spin lz, -{z-1,. .".
mnk tr are
operator lor a splnor ol"Th..

W={11ft,0ot9,
and

1"

L .-,

J *..

R:erpl i"| 2" d{"(t) l: fJ idr6*)

Therefore,

{/'*' : {t R-tiI r&' R! : (- r)"6V,

which shows the pseudoxalar nature of the lagrange function for
all haltinteral spin ffelds,
eNote how the familiar property of transposition, (,'18)r
*B"r{?, foflowsfrom dripdefinition:',4B'l!:A(*BT\:\ltBrAr.

354
JULIAN

namely,
t1-

t.T

(3.9)

Conventional quantum mechanics conte;plates

transformations only within the V vector space, and
contragradient transformations within the dual V*
space. We shall now consider transformations that
interchangethe two spaces,as in
(3.10)

!["+V;:i{r"-'
The efiect of Eq. (3.10) is indicated by

( a l a ) :v " - v r : v ; v ; ' : ( 6 l a ) ,

926

SCHWINGER

R will now be chosen to oroduce that linear transformation of the f",

RQ"R-L:R'808,

which compensatesthe efiect of the gradient vector

transformation. Thus. we have

E:(+)er(e"r, A,O.r),

( 6 1A r I e ) .

(J.2J)

where the (+) sign here refers to the fact that the
structure of the lagrange function, for half-integral
(3.11) spin ficlds, can be maintainedonly at.the expenseof a
change in sign. We now see that if

and

( a l A l b ): v j A * a : v ; , 4 i h ' :

(3'22)

(3.r2)

t': e($"r, apo'r'),

(3'24)

the form of our fundamental dynamical equation rvill

have been preserved under time reflection, since Eq.
( 3 . 1 3 ) (3.20) will then differ from Eq. (2.14) only in the
V;-:Rt[",
substitution of {"? for d" as the appropriate field
where R is a unitary operator, we have
variable, and in the interchange of or and o2, which
( 3 . 1 4 ) simply reflects the reversed temporal sense in rvhich
( a l b ) : ( 6 1 d . ) , ( e l A l b ) : ( 6 1A l a ) ,
the dynamical development of the system is to be
in which
traced.
(3.1s) Invariance under time reflection thus requires that
A:1ntp-'1,
inverting the order of all factors in the lagrangefunction
Now, we have
leave a scalar term unchanged,and teverse the sign of
(RAR-')': 8,4, (s.to) a pseudoscalarterm. This can be satisfied, of course,
tn : lAtnn-,1r: (RBR-t)r
by an explicit symmetrization or antisymmetrization ol
and therelore
the various terms in !. When the lagrange function,
(3.17) thus arranged, is employed in the principle of stationary
@llA, nflb): - (6llA, Blld).
action, the variations Dod"will likewise be disposedin a
We have here precisely the sign change that is required symmetrical or antisymmetrical manner. We must now
to preservethe structure of equationslike Eq. (2.110) recall that the equationsof motion (2.18), which do
under time reflection.
not depend explicitly on the nature of the field commuWe now examine whether it is possible to satisfy the tation properlies, have been obtained by postulating
invariance
under
time
reflection
of
by
requirement
the equality of terms in 60"8that difier basically only
means of transformations of the type (3.13). When we in the location of 60d", Since such terms appear with
introduce the coordinate transformation
the same sign in scalar components of 3, and with
( 3 . 1 8 ) opposite signs in pseudoscalarcomponents, we deduce
io:-*0,
ip:16
h:1,2,3,
a correspondingcommutativity, or anticommutativity,
in conjunction with the eigenvector transformation
between 6od" and the other operators in the individual
(3.1e) terms of 6o!.
v-(i', o):Rll(l',
"),
The information concerning commutation properties
the fundamental dynamical equation (2.14) becomes
that has thus been obtained is restricted to qperatorsat
common space-time points, since this is the nature oI
6(i2", orlil', a)
the terms in 8. Commutation relations between field
quantities located at distinct points of a space-like
:(i/ttc)(ti',,,1afatlulfu',
oJ, (i.2u) surface are implied by the general compatibility reI
J
quirement for physical quantities attached to points
"L
with a spacelike interval. Components of integral spin
where
fields, and bilinear combinations o{ the components of
c : (nsR-'; r : 3r ((ROdR-t)r, + A!(Rd"R-) "). (3.21) half-integral spin fields, are the basic physicial quanIn the last statement, the * sign indicates the efiect of tities to which this compatibility condition applies. By
the coordinate transformation (3.18) on the components consideringthe generalpossibilities of coupling between
of the gradient vector, while the notation J"( ) the various fields, we may draw from these two expressymbolizes the reversal in the order of all factors sions of relativistic invariance the consequencethat the
induced by the operation of transposition. The operator variations 64b(r'), and therefore tle eon=jugatevarialVlore generally, if

355
927

THEO,RY OF QUANTIZED

tions 6llt(*f), iommute or anticommute with d"(r),

ll,(a) for all r and *' on a given o, where the relation
of anticommutativity holds when both a and b refer to
componentsof half-integral spin fields. The consistency
of this statement with the general commutation relations that have already been deduced from it is easily
verified. By subjecting the canonical variables in Eq.
(2.81) to independent variations, wei'bbtain

FIELDS

and statistics of particles is implicit in the requirement

of invariance under coordinate transformations.r0

r0The'discussion of ttre spin and statistia connection by W.

Pauli fPhvs. Rev. 58, 716 (1940)l is mmewbat more negative in
charac'ier,although bawd on closelyrelatedphysiel requirements.
Thus, Pauli remarks that Bose-Einstein quantiation of a halfinteeial spin field implie au enerEythat posrcse no lower bound,
and-that Fermi-Diric quantization of an integral spin field leads
to an alcebraic contradiction with the commutativity of physical
oumtitiis located at points wilh a spacelike interval. Anotier
dostulate which bas Leen emploved, that of charge symmetry
g,
i-W. p.uti and F. L Belinhnti, Phvsie 7, 177 (1940)l' suffices
-m
lO"@), d@6(r')la: [II'(r), a4b1r';1*:
determine the niture of tbr commutation relations for suffrci[C{r), 6ilb(r') ]+: [rl'(o), drl6(r')]*: 9, 13.25; entlv simple systems.As we have noticed, it is a consequenceof
timi refleition invariance.The commentsof Feynman on vrcuum
rvhich is valid for all r, d on r. In addition, Eq. (2.81) polarization and statistics [Phys. Rev.76, 749 (lq+9)] aPpearto
suce a
properly states that all physical quantities commute at be an illustration of the charge symmetry requirement,
contradiction is establishedwhen ttre chargesymmetrical concept
distinct points of o.
of t-hevmum is applied to a Bo*-Einstein spin | field, or to a
We conclude that the connection between the spin Fermi-Dinc spin 0 field,

356

P o p e r2 9

The Theory of Quantized Fields. II

JurtaN Scurvttcrn
II qrutrd Unioersil,t,, Canbrid.ge, fufassdchuseils
(ReceivedFebruary 19, 1953)
'Ile
arguments leading to the formulation of the action principle for a general field are presented. In
associationsith the complete reductiou of all numerical matrices into symmetrical and antisymmetrical
parts, the geaeralfield is decomposedinto two sets,which are identified with Bose-Einsteinand Fermi-Dirac
fields. The spin restriction on the trvo kinds of fields is inferred from the time reflection invariance requirement. The consistencyof the theory is verified in terms of a criterion involving the various geireratorsol
infinitesimal transformations.Following a discussionof chargedfields,the electromagneticfield is introduced
to satisfy the postulate of general gauge invarimce. As an aspect of the latter, it is recognizedthat the
electromagneticfield and charged fields are not kinematically independent.After a discussionof the field
strength commutation relations, the independent dynamical variables of the electromagnetic freld are
exhibited in terms of a special gauge.

tfHE

general program oI this seriesl is the conI

struction of a theory oI quantizedfields in terms
of a single fundamental dynamical principle. We shalt
first present a revised account of the developments
containedin the initial paper.
THE DYNAMICAL PRINCIPLE
The transformation functions connecting various
representationshave the two fundamental properties

6W"fi:6W"8;
the infinitesimal operators 6trV"0are Hermitian.
The 6W"p possessanother additivity property referring to the composition of two. dynamically independent systems. Thus, if I and II designate such
systems,
(ot' au' IAt'Fn' ) : (ar' I f.r) (ar' I 9n'),
and if 6ll"pr and 6IV
are the operators characterizing
"6rr
ininitesimal changes of the separate transformation
functions, that of the compositesystem is

("' lt't : I la' lP'\lB'@'11').

@'1ts')*:@'1"');

dll

where{d,B' symbolizesboth integration and summation

over the eigenvaluespectrumi If 6(a'lB') is any infinitesimal alteration of the tr4nsformation function, rve
may write
6(q,lB,):i(q,l6Iy"pll3,),
(1)
which serves as the definition of the infinitesimal operator 6W"p. The requirement that any infinitesimal
alteration maintain the multiplicative composition law
of transformation functions implies an additive composition law for the infinitesimal operators,
'
6W
(2)
"r:51Y "ua51, ur.
If the a and B representations are identical, we infer
that
6W"":0,
which expressesthe fixed orthonormality requirements
on the eigenvectors of a given representation. On
identifying the o and 7 representations,we learn that
6ilrp": -51y"u.
The second property of transformation functions
implies that

-i(d'l6w

or

611'"rtr517"utr.
"6:
Infinitesimal alterations of eigenvectorsthat preserve
the orthonormality properties have the form
6{,(a): -iG.V(q'),
ffI,(a')I:iV(d')1G",

where the generator G" is an infinitesimal Hermitian

operator which possesses
an additivity propery'yfor the
composition of dynamically independent systems.If the
two iigenvectors of a transformation function are varied
independently, the resulting change of the transformation function has the general structure (1), with
6W"e:6"-6u'
The vector
V (a')+6.P (d') : (1- iG

(a'),
")v
can be characterized as an eigenvector of the operator set
a: (l - iG a(1 * iG.) : q- 6a,
")
wrtn ule ergenvalues
d . Ilere
Ea: -ile,

G"l.

This infinitesimal unitary transformation of the eigenvector V(a/) induces a transformation of any operator
F such that
(a'IFIa"): (a'|FIa").

-i(B' l6w
"plp')*:
"ptla')
:i.(9'l6Wp,l q'),

IJ. Schwinger,Phys. Rev. 82, 914 (1951), Part I

,IJ

357
JULIAN

714

SCHWINGEIT
must have the additive form

We write this in the form

(a' I F I a") - (a' I F I a") : (a' | (F - F) | a"),

c : f a o c , o ,J{I"^a,' :, c , r , 1 ,
J,

or, in virtue of the infinitesimal nature of the transformation,

6 ( a ' l F l a ' t ) : ( a ' l 6 FI a " ) ,

where rJo is the numerical measure ol an element of

(*) is to be regarded as the timespace-likearea and G10)
rvhere the left side refers to the change in the eigen- Iike component of a vector in a local coordinate system
vectors for a fixed F, while the right side provides an based on o in order to give the surface integral an
invariant form. If one can interpret Gu@) oll tr1, and
equivalent variation of the operator F, given by
on 02, as the values of a vector defined at all points,
-ilF,G").
6F:F-F:
the difference of surface integrals in (6) can be transIf the change consists in the alteration of some formed into the volume integral
paramete-.rr, upon which the dynamical variables de?6r
pend, and which may occur explicitly in F, we have
(d.r)duG,(r),
6ll'r,: |
J,,
(6F)"
F:F:F+6,F- a.F,
@ u : a / a x , )'
where 6"F is the total alteration in F, from which is
A second type of transformation function alteration
subtracted 0,F, the change in F associated with the is obtained on considering that the transformation conbe
cannot
explicit appearance of r, since the latter
necting f1, o1,and f2, d2 can be constructed through the
produced by an operator transformation. We thereby intermidiary of an inhnite successionof transformations
obtain the "equation of motion" with respect to the relating operators on infinitesimally neighboring surparameter r,
faces.According to the general additivity property (2),
(3)
6,F: a,F+ilF,G,l.
For dynamical systems obeying the postulate of local
action, complete descriptions are provided by sets of
physical quantities, f, associated with spaceJike surfaces,o. An infinitesimal alteration of the general transformation function (fr'orl(r"or) is ch4racterizedby
(4)
""oz).
Here the indices 1 and 2 refer both to the choice of
complete set of commuting operators f, and to the
spaceJike surface o. We can, in particular, consider
transformations between the same set of operators on
difierent surfaces,or between different sets of commuting operators on the same surface, as in
6(lt'orlf z"oz):i(f t'otl6Wplf

6(('oli'c):i.(l'ol6wl('o).

(5)

One type of change of the general transformation

function consistsin the introduction, independently on
rr and on oz, of infnitesimal unitary transformations
of the operators, including displacements of these surfaces. The transformations will be generated by operators G1 and G2, constructed from dynamical variables
o1rd1 &nd d2, respectively' and
6W12:5t-6''

(6)

When the transformation function connects two different sets of operators on the same surface, which are
subiected to infinitesimal transformations generatedby
C ana G, respectively, we have, referring to (5),

oI

6W.rr:2 6W"aa'.,,
a modification of the
where 6tr4/,16",, .hu.".r""iir..
transformation function connecting infrnitesimally differing complete sets of operators on the infinitesimally
separated surfacesa a.nd of-d'a' If the choice of intermediate operators depends continuously upon the surface, we shall have
5W
".,:0,
and, referring again to the dynamical independenceof
phenomenaat points separatedby a space-likeinterval,
with the consequent additivity property, we see that
will have the general form
6W
"+a",,
Votdc

(dr)ac(rt.

6W,va".,: |
Therefore
'al

6tvu: |
,

(dr)6JG).

(s)

The combination of these two types of modifications

is describedby

''
6w,r: 6,- 6r* f

1r*;u"ir,,

(7)
6w:G-G.
which involves dynamical variables on the surlaces o1,
o2, and in the interior of the volume bounded by these
points
on
a
spacephenomena
at
distinct
Since physical
the
like surface are dynamically independent, a generator G surfaces.On the other hand, we can write this as

358
THEORY

OF

QUANTIZED

7t5

FIELDS

where 6llrrr:g(I,trzrz)and the objects of variation here

are 61, 62, and the dynamical variablesof which J is
a function.
{ , / r ' ) [ a u c , f] .+r 6 t ( . f r ] .
6ll'rr: |
The latter statement is the operator principle of
stationaryaction.ft assertsthat l,tr/r:must be stationary
which indicates, conversely,that any part of 6A(r), with respect to variations of the dynamical variables
possessingthe form of a divergence,contributes only in the interior of the region definedby o1 and o2, since
to the generation of unitary transformations on o1 Gr and G: only contain dynamical variablesassociated
with the boundariesof the region.This principle implies
and o2.
The fundamentaldynamicalprinciple is containedin equationsof motion for the dynamical variables,that
the postulatethat there existszrclassof transformation is to say, field equations,and providesexpressions
for
function alterationsfor rvhich the characterizingoper- the generatorsGr ancl Gr. The class of variations to
ators 6llrz are obtained by apyrropriatevariation of a rvhich our postulatereferscan nos, be clefinedthrouglr
the requirementthat this informatior.rconcerninglield
singleoperator IIl12,
equationsand infinitesimalunitary transformationsbe
6lV t':5111t '
self-consistent.
"1
'I'here
existsmuch freedomrvithin this class,as may
Of course,this principle must be implernentedb). the
be inferred from the remark that trvo Lagrange funcexplicit specificationof that class.
tions, difiering by the divergenceof a vector, describe
The operator LIlg, the action integral operator, evi
the same dynamical system. Ihus
dently possessthe form
v^l',hp

intaor'l

?61

c (r): s (r) - d'l" (r)'

'ar

It',,: I

J",

(r.r.
id.r;"e

frn:If

The Hermitian requirementon 6lI/12is satisfiedif IIlr:

is Hermitian, which impliesthe sameproperty for J(r),
the Lagrangefunction operator.In order that relations
betweenstateson or and o2be invariantly characterized,
the Lagrangefunction must be a scalarwith respectto
the transformations of the orthochronous: Lorentz
group, rvhich preservethe temporal order of o1 and a2.
A dynamical system is specified by exhibiting the
Lagrange function in terms of a set of lundamental
dynamical variables in the infinitesimal neighborhood
of the point r. Contained in this Lagrange function
n'ill be certain numerical parameters,rvhich may be
{unctionsof :r. Any changeof theseparametersmodilies
the structure of the Lagrangefunction and is thus an
alteration of the dynamical system. Accordingly, inlinitesimal changesof the dynamiczrlsystem are clescribedby
'or

6ll r' -

1 d . r t 6 lr . r r ,

n'here 6A:6(J),
ancl thc numerical parameters are thc
object of variation. This lorm is in agreement rvith (8).
For a fixed dynamical system, tr/12 can be altered by
displacing the surfaces 6b q2 and by varying the dynamical variables contained in the Lagrange function.
'Ihe
transf ormation function ({ r' o rl l r" o r) describes the
relation bets'een two states of the given system so
that a change in thc transformation functior.i can oniv
arise from alterations of the states on or and or. Hencc,
for a fixed dynamical system we must have
--ff*

yields

6IY tt:1; t- 1;"'

*u.
\ras suggestediry H. J. Bhabha, Revs. ]Iodern
P h y s . 2 1 , 4 5 1( 1 9 4 9 ) .

n'hcrc

n.

n".h

,"- (tTrWz),

(9)

.".f"""
ff

r:ldo,l,-ldoJo.
t-

J 6

. \ c c o r t l i r r g l l ' .t h c . t r L i o n a r y a c t i o n p r i r r , i l ' l c f o r [ - 1 :
is satisfied if it is obeyed b.v ltrl12,since

6W":Gr-G.
Here

6 l l ' , : 6 : , , G , , 6 l lr : 5 . . t ; r ,

dehne dr and dr, rvhich are new generatorsof infinitesimal unitary transformationson 01 i1r]do2Jrespectively. The latter equationspossessthe form (7), and
thus characterizetransformationfunctions connecting
trvo different representationson a cornrnon surface.
Indeed,rvith a suitably elaboralenotalion) t'e recognize
in (9) the additivity property of action operators,
r) : 1l'(iror, fi or)* IIl ((,o,, l ro
"o
")
llt;(ist,
rvhere,{or example,
II/ (f s', i

i:ot),

I t r ' r - 1 Y 1 7 t o r ,f r o r ) : l l " ( f r o r , i r o r ) ,
and
lVz:IL'1.1,or,7rorr.
To be consistentwith the postulalc of local action,
the field equations must be differential equations of
linite order.One can alwaysconvertsuchequationsinto
systemsof iirst order equationsby suitableadjunction
o{ variables.\Ve shall designatethe fundamental dynamical variablesthat obey first-order field equations
by x,(r), which {orm the componentsof tire general
lield operator x(.D. With no lossin generality,rve take

359
7t6

JULIAN

SCHWINGER

ment on I is satisfied if JC is a scalar,

x(r) to be a Hermitian operator,

K(Lil:K(i,

Y'(x)t: Y'(x) '

If the Lagrange function is to yield field equations of
the desired structure, it must be linear in the first
derivatives of the field operators with respect to the
space-time coordinates. Furthermore, if these field
equations are to emerge as explicit equations of motion
for field components,that part of the Lagrange function
containing first coordinate derivatives must be bilinear
in the field components. With these prelimiuary remarks, we write the following general expressionfor the
Lagrange function,
s:l(721,0,y-0ux2lux)-K(x),

(10)

in whiclr a matrix notation is employed,

a2Iuoua: y, (21,),,a,a ".

and if

/irs)lI

-$l

(1J)

Note that ?Iu" and $* also obey Eqs. (12) and (13),
respectively, and that these equations can be combined into
Z-'($ r?I,)Z:r,,(S t?I,),
in view of the nonsingularcharactero{ $.
For an ininitesimal Lorentz transformation,
'

ep,:
tr:'r_
'rr'r*
ep,
The derivative terms have been symmetrized witl.r respect to the operationof integrationby parts, a process
the matrix I can be written
which adds a divergence to the Lagrange function, and
L:l_iie*Sr,,
is thus without efiect on the structure of the dynamical
systm. In order that S be a Hermitian operator, the where
generalfunction JCmust possessthis character,
Sr,*: -Sr,1 u' v:0,

rc(il1:3c(il'
and the numerical matrices ?L,; p-0, 1, 2, 3 (ra:ixs,
? t 4 : t U o Jm u s t b e s k e r v - H e r m i t i a n ,
2 l p 1 : ? I r h x :- \ p t

p:(), 1,2,3.

(12)

Lr"WuL:ru,4,,.

lhe same
\\'e shall supposell)at the source possesses
transformation properties as the field. The condition
for the source term of the Lagrange function to be a
scalar is then siven bv

cvpt

(14)
3.

(15)

The infinitesimalversionof (13) is

- S",h: SSr'$-t-

Su,t

or

(ss!,)1: ($s,,),

in rvhich the cornplex conjugate statements refer to the

Although we are interested in complete dynamical
componentsindicaied in (15). Similarly,
systemsJit is advantageousmathematically to employ
(16)
?I,s,x- ^t,It?Iu:i (6,r?I,-r,,9Ir)
devices based upon the properties of external sources.
Accordingly,rveadd to (10) a term designedto describe and
1 ? 1 ,S, " r ] : i ( 6 u i S ' ? I , - 6 , , . S - ' 9 I x ) .
the generation of the field 1(r) by an exlernal source
[E
f(r), which is to be regardedas a field quantity of the If one viervs'a: (1-i\e
,,5) x as a field in the original
samegeneralnature as 1(r),
coordinate system and thus subject to the same de(i1) pendence upon that coordinate system as 1, it is
s"""""":+(Sx+x$t).
inferred that
if
is
operator
a
Hermitian
matrix,
This is a Hermitian
$
L-rS,,L: r rxr,rSxr.
mi-m
For inlinitesimal transformations, this reads
For the sourceconcept to be meaningful, all componi[^S,,,Sr"] : d,-S,x- 6,^S,x*d,rSr*-durS,-.
ents of 1 must occur coupled with the source components in (11), which requires that E be a nonIn performing the variation of the action integral,
singular numerical matrix.
we shall treat the two types oI quantities, coordinates
An orthochronousLorentz transformation
and ireld variables, on somervhat the same footing,
tx r
although the former are numbers and the latter operr : p , r , + IF ,
ators. We introduce an arbitrary variation of the cort"r:I, ru>-0,
ordinates, 6r!, throughout the interior of the region,
but subjectto the conditionthat the boundariesremain
induces a linear transformation on the lielcl complane surfaces,
ponents,
tr: ['a:aLv,
(r7)
d u d r ,{ d , 6 r ' r : 0 ,
rvhereZ must be a real matrix,
f *- r
'1. The
scalar requireto maintain the Hermiticity of

on o1and or. The field components x,(r) are dependent

both upon the coordinate system and the "intrinsic
field." Ltnder a rotation of the coordinatesystem, the
field components are altered in the manner described

360
THEORY

OF OUANTIZED

by (1a). Accordingly, we write the general variation of

the field as the sum of an intrinsic field variation, and
of the variation induced by the local rotation of the
coordinate system,
6(x) :6x-

where the antisymmetry of S' ensures that only the

rotation part of the coordinate displacementis efiective.
For the source field, a prescribed function of the
coordinates, we have

^f

fanc^r

: +(?1,a,+?{,du).
?{(ua,)
68 : 6x?lrapx- d"x?1"0x- arc+ I (dxSt+ f$6x)
*6rui (xsauE+ a,t$il * a"[] (x?{u61- 61?[u1)].
Hence, on applying the principle of stationary action
to coordinate and field variations, separately, we obtain

(18)

0,T u,: I (yE 6,1* A,fEx),

and

We also remark that

6?,C:6xaplpx- A,x2lu6x++(6xst*f$6x),

6(d*) : (d.r)6 ultc,,

6(0): - (a,6r,)a,,
whence
1 1q \

The Lorentz invariance of 3 produces a significant

simplification, in computing the contribution to d(S)
from the coordinate induced variation of 1. Thus, if
316*,were antisymmetrical and constant, its coefficient
in the variation of the Lagrange function would vanish
identically, save for the source term since the rotation
induced change of f is not present in (18). Accordingly,
for the general coordinate variation of (10), there
remains only those terms in which d"6o, is differentiated,
or occurs in the dilation iombination, 0r6x,!0,6x,.
Both types are contained entirely in (19), which
leadsto
r,! 6,6r)| QA u04- 0,yWu7)
6(r) : 6"c- + (Ap6
- i.L(a
ra,6r)tx(21,,S,^-pS,.t21";"
- r+ (dts6r,)({SS,,x xSu,t$t).

G-

-DxU*r)*1,,6r,]l
| do"[ (\U"6x
J n

The operator 3Cis an arbitrary, invariant function of

the field 1. If its variation is to possessthe form (21),
with D1appearing on the le{t and on the right, the latter
must possesselementary operator properties, characterizing the class of variations to which the action principle refers. Thus, we should be able to displace 01
entirely to the left, or to the right, in the structure of DJC,
6K : 5x(6r\c/ Ox) : @,tc/ dx) 6x,
which defines the left and right derivatives of 5C with
respect to 1. In view of the complete symmetry between
left and right in the processof multiplication, we infer
that the expressionswith dx on the left and on the right
are, in fact, identical. The field equations, therefore,
possessthe two equivalent forms
2AuOuy: (afic/ai-Et,
-ou72A,u:
G,K/ax)-tE,

In virtue of the symmetry of the secondderivative,

(dud,3rr)x (?IuS,r*S,ri?lu)x
: (d" (ddrrf drdr,))1 (21,S,1f S,1t?L)1
+-

where the last step expressesthe result of'an integration

by parts, for which the integrated term vanishes, since
the dilation tensoris zero on the boundaries(Eq. (t7)).
Collecting the coeficients of dudr, into the tensor ?r,,
we have
fol

(dr)[6f+(d,6.r.,)r,,1

d,

fol

and G can be equivalently written

(d,611{ dldr,) ap[x (?l,Srr+^S,r1?I)x],

6(Wn\: |

Ql)

rvhile the surface terms yield, on oy and o2, the infinitesimal generator

and

6 ( d , x ): d u d ( x ) - ( 0* 3 r , ) 0 , y

and we have employed a notation for the s)'rnmetrical

nr"f

The expressionfor df' is

iL(auor,)s",x,

6(f):6*ud,{.

717

FIELDS

(dr)[6"c-6.r,a,ru"lou(7,,6x"\f,

J n,

where
T * : s,6* - t Q\I'1no,1v-o pa{',1v)
-ii(g$S,a-15",t$f)
*lldr[x(9lr,sx,r*sr1,i?I,;)1], Qo)

G:

I rlo,[19i,01f I",6i',]
(2',2)

f a",l-aer,,1f

?u,6r,1.

In keeping with the restriction of the stationary

action principle to fixed dynamical systems, the external sourcehas not been altered. If we now introduce
an infinitesimal variation of f, and extend the argument
of the previous paragraph to df, we obtain the two
equivalent expressionsfor the change induced in tr/12,

6ilu:

fot

J o,

(d:)D$r:

fol

{a';1559.

Jo'

The correspondingmodification in the relation between

36r
718

JULIAN

SCHWINGER

stateson or and on 02 can be ascribedto the individual

states only if one introduces a convention, of the nature
of a boundary condition. Thus, we may suppose that
the state on 02 i: unaffected by varying the external
source in the region between or and qz. In this "retarded" description, Dtltr/r: generates the infinitesimal
transformation of the state on or. An alternative,
-dgtr/12generat"advanced" descriptioncorrespondsto
ing the changein the state on oz,with a fixed state on or.
These are just the simplest of possible boundary
conditions.
The suitability of the designations,retarded and advanced, can be seen by considering the matrlt of an
operator constructed from dynamical variables on some
surface o, intermediate betrveena1 a.\d o2,

to plane spaceJike surfaces,limiting displacements to

infi nitesimal translati4ns and rotations,
6ru: e'!e
"ru'
with the associatedoperators,the energy-momentum
veclor
f

p,:

I rtouT'r,,

and angular momentum tensor

f

J u,: I doxMx,,.
J

Mxuo: :rrTx'* r,Txu.

(.({ o 'l F (a) ll r" 02)

The operator G, evidently generatesthe infinitesimal

produced by the
- | , l i o l f ' o \ d l ' t f ' o F ( o \ l l " q \ ' ' l f " ( f " o 1 2 " o 2 \ . transformation of an eigenvector,
displacement of the surface to which it refers. With the
notation
An ininitesimal change of the source I produces the
aJ, (1,") : (e,6,* |epdu)V (i,o),
following change in the matrix element,
we have
6t(ir'orIF(o)|lz"oz)
l5,v(1/c) : P,!Ir(f/o), -i6,V(f'o) i:{/ (l'o) rP,,
: (11o, | (a f (o) { ibsWuF (6) + iF (6)6rW, 2)| f 2"oz)
: ( r 1 " ' | ( a f ( o ) * i ( F ( a ) 6t w n ) + ) l l z "qz ) ,
and
'")
i6,N (f ' q) : J pN (f ' o), - du,v (f t : v (l' o) tI u,.
in which we have allowed for the possibility that F(o)
may be explicitly dependentupon the source,and introIf F(o) is an arbitrary function of dynamical variables
duced a notation for temporally ordered products. The
on o, and possibly of nondynamical parameters dematrix element depends upon the external source pendent
on o, we use the notation
through the operator F(o), and the eigenvectorson o1
gets
for
various
expressions
6gF(o),
D,F(o): (e,6,1 I e,,6,,)F (o),
and or. One thereby
depending upon the boundary conditions that are
a,F (o) : (e,0,1 1,,,A,) F ("),
adopted. Thus, if the state on a2 is prescribed, we find
to distinguish between the total change on displace6 s f ( o) 1 , " ': 6 , p 1 o ) * i ( F ( o ) D t l Zrr) +- i 6 l / r z F ( o )
( 2 J ) ment, and that occasionedby the explicit appearance
of nondynamicalparameters.On referring to Eq. (3),
: atF (o)* ilF (") , 6Jv ',f,
we seethat
which only involves changesin the source prior to, or
'Ihe
6,F(o): a,F(q)i ilF(c), P,),
opposite convention yields the analogous
on o.
result
6u"F('o): 6,,P 1") -l ilF (o) , l ,'f
12
drF(o)1,a"- dtF(o) {i(F(o)Daltr/r,)1- iF (o)61tr'
The proper interpretation of the generating operator
: atF (o) _ i.lF ("), dy'{'r"].
G, can be obtained by noting its equivalence with an
appropriately chosen inflnitesimal variation of the exNote that
ternal source. Consider the following infinitesimal surdsF(o)1."i-6gF(")1.a": i[P("), 6rII/'r].
face distribution on the negative side of o,
The operator G of Eq. (22) consistsof two parts,
(24)

So:21,ru"u,r,rr,

G:G,*G,,
lvhere

c,:

f"ao,y\t,a": ["rto,6ylr,a,

which is not incompatible with the operator properties

of these variations. We have assumed, for simplicity,
that the equation of the sur{aceo is r:1oy:0.With this
choice,

and

do,T,,a*,:e,P"lle,,J u,
G
": f
of the restriction
The latter form of G, is a consequence

6{v,,:

Gx
d.oa2Iqo16x:
"

The change that is produced in 1 can be deduced from

362
THEORY

OF qUANTIZED

719

FIELDS

decomposition

the variation of the field equatons,

2Wro,62y- 6E(61K/ ai : - E5 t
: -?Irordxd(rror).

?I,:?J*tr)f!1,{:r,
?lro)t- -?IP(t),

E:S(t)+S('?),
$ori.:9u,,
s(2)h: -s(2),

2lP(2)r-?l!(2)'
Evidently there is a discontinuity in 6rx, on crossing
the surfacedistribution 6f, which is given by
The matrices of the first kind are real (p:6, ' '3;,
and those of the second kind are imaginary. We shall
-2116y61.
2?lrordrxl:
not write the distinguishing index when no confusion is
In the retarded description, say, 6g1is zero prior to the possible.
According to this reducibility hypothesis, the field
source bearing surface, so that the discontinuity in 6g1
is the change induced in 1 on (the positive side of) o. equations in the two equivalent forms
Thus, the surface variation of the external source
2?1,0,a: (agt /Ax)-EE,
simulates the transformation generatedby G", in which
-2?It"a &: (A'tc/Ax) -E "t'
on o is replacedby
?[<orx

?Iror
*?Irord
i : 2Irorx
*
:2lrorx- 12[<ordx.

separate into the two sets

(2s)

The matrix ?lrorhas been retained in this statement

since it is a singular matrix, in general. The number of
components of 1 that appear independently in (25)
and this is the number
equalsthe rank of the matrix ?1101,
of independent component field equations that are
equations of motion, in that they contain timelike
derivatives. The expression of (25) in terms of the
generator G* is
[?Irorx,G"]:i]?lrordx.

(a &/ ad : @,K/ ad,

221u6
uq: (arclad)-Sf,
and

Gfic/aV): - (a,K/a{').

221,6u{: (afic/a,!)-En,
Furthermore, the generator
G,:J

f-f
d"vU,q6r:J do( U.",t'6rtv,

decomposesinto G6fG,1, where

Q6)

The factor of ! that appears in this result stems from

the treatment of all componentsof ?Irolxon the same a n d
footing; we have not divided them into two sets of
which one is fixed and the other varied.* If I is an
arbitrary function of ?I1o;1on a, we rvrite

f
-.
od
G ^ : I d o 6 2 ( ,D
JJ

f
l do{?{'0,6d)d.
Q7)

cu:
' J J la,g\ts,a{,:I dor_ltu6,l,t{.

,
lF , C,l:;15n7,: i15P

These resulls reflect the form assumedby the Lagrange

{unction,

in which the componentsof 2lro;x are the objects of

variation. When the field equationsthat are equations
of constraintprove sufficientto expressall components
of 1 in terms of ?{rorx,we can extend (26) into

a,6l++lvah a,vl- K(4,,1,),

J : +{d?I,,
+i{rs,0)*4[4$,*].

lx' G,f:iLax.
Of course,one must distinguish between these variations, in which only the ?lrorxare independent,and the
independent variations of all components of 1 which
produce the equations of constraint from the action
principle.
In order to facilitate the explicit construction of t-he
field commutation relations, we shall introduce a reducibility hypothesis, which is associatedrvith the
Lorentz invariant process of separating the matrices
?[u,S into symmetrical and antisymmetrical parts. We
require that the field and the source decomposeinto
two sets, of the first kind lttr:6, (r):f, and of the
secondkind, x@:V, tQ):n, as a concomitant of the
* Note addedin
hool:-Further discussionof this point rvill be
found in a paper submitted to the PhilosophdcalIlagazine.

The equivalencebetween left and right derivatives

of the arbitrary function 5C,with respect to field components of the first kind, and of the trvo expressionsfor
G6, showsthat D{ commuteswith all fields at the same
point. It is compatible with the field equations to
extend this statementto fields at arbitrary points,

@),66@')f : 0,
lo @),6oG)l : 1,1,
provided the source components are included,
[l(r'), 6d(r')]:

["r(r), ad(r')] : o.

It lollows from (27) that the relation between ry'and

dry'is one of anticommutivity. The opposite signs of the
left and right derivatives of 5Cwith respect to ry'is then
accountedfor by
[ O ( r ) , 6 9 ( r ' ) ] : { , 1 ' Q ) 6, V Q ' ) l : 0 ,
provided only that JC is an even function of the vari-

363
720

JULIAN

SCHWINGER

ables of the second kind. The inclusion of the source

components

which requires that the real, symmetrical matrix

illroy{rr-rO" positive definite.

rr('),De(r')t:{n@),6te)t:0,
coI;:11i.":?1i:Y:::?ISL"J#:o"i*Jf
insures compatibility with the field equations. We have
now obtained the explicit characterization of the class
of variations to which our fundamental postulate refers.
Let us also notice that
"'ra.rlt$"agr*.
rat
-Jd'
'u!'\\us'^'
f

r,r
6twrr: I
td'rq$ag:

'

r".

into6rwnt6,w12,
lvhere
crecomposes
f"t

f"'

6 r l lr : : I

J o t

and

r d . r r 4 t l a EI :

rd.rtr$69'6.

(dr)r/864- |

rtxll-Sta,g.

J o ,

llror(2),must be even, 2n@. Let us imagine that, by a

suitable real transformation, !I1o1o)is brought into
diagonal form. If the number of components in r[ is
odd, the product of all these componentsat a given
point commuteswith t at that point. Thus, as far as
a l g e b r ao I o p e r a l o r sa t a s i v e n p o i n t i s c o n c e r n e d '
:nt

*:H:i'::J'-:,il,1i'?li,.'J^^",:1';.:1'J,1
:l:1*T,i:fri':;:lL:i'.it"::lffii:Lthe

The relation betweeninvariance under time reflection,

and the connectionbetweenspin and statistics,may be
noted here. The time reflection transformation

'
6"1',,: f

assump-

txq:

-14,

tatr:ao,

induces a transformation of the field

We can conclude that source variations have the same
operator properties as field variations, as already exploited in Eq. (2q.
The operatorpropertiesof ?Irotxon a given o can now
be deducedfrom (26), with the results

'x: Ltx'
such that

Lqr.l(tLr- -lI4

La'"!loLr:s5
r,

(2e)

and
ZI"SZ4:E,

K(Lq):K(i,

[Urord("), d(r')?lior]: ri2l10)6"(r- *'),

However, this preservation of the form of the Lagrange

(28)
[ ? I t o r d ( r )9' ( r ' ) 2 1 , 0 , ] : 0 ,
function is only apparent,for fields of the secondkind.
Since -l9l,rtzl is a non-negativematrix, one can only
{?Itor/(r), /(r')?lror} - i}?IrorD,(rc-r'),
satisfy the first equationof (29) rvith an imaginary Zai?)
ir rvhich 6,(r-r') is the three-dimensionaldelta func- rvhich produces skerv-Ifermitian field components '1('!).
tion appropriateto the surfaceo. The numericalforms But the invarianceof the Lagrangefunction is not the
of these commutators and anticommutators insures
c o r r e c tc r i l e r i o n f o r i n v a r i a n c eu n d e r t i m e r e f l e c t i o n .
their consistencywith the operator properties of 6?11qS The reversal of the time senseinverts the order of o1
variables
first
and
The
dynamical
o{
the
6?I1nyry'.
and
and o2, and thus introducesa minus sign in the action
second kind thus describeBose-Einsteinand Fermi- integral, which can only be compensatedby changing
Dirac fields, respectively, rvhich are unified in the the sign of i in (4). We shall describethis as a transgeneral field 1.
formation from the algebra of the operators 1 to the
Since the rank of the antisymmetricalmatrix 2116;(1)complex conjugate algebra of operators
1*. Since the
is necessarilyeven, there are an even number of inde- linear transformation designedto maintain the form of
pendenf field componentsof the first kind, say 2n(L).
s(0, a,O;{, dury') has efiectively replaced a with
One can always arrange the matrix ?l<o,ttl.o ,nu, utt 8(6, AN6;i'l',iA,{'), the criterion for invariancereads
elements are zeto beyond the first 2n\1) rows and
a(:6, 0u6; iV, id,{,)*: s(6+, o ud*;{*, 6r**).
columns.We shall denote this nonsingular submatrix
o{ dimensionality 2n{1)by !I1oy(t),and the associated
The derivative term in I is indeed invariant since the
independentcomponentsof @by $. The hrst commutareal and imaginary, respecmatrices ?{uol
?lu{'l
tion relation of (28) can then be written
"nU this"t"by saying that the theory is
tively. We describe
[ 0 ( r ) , 0 ( r ' ) ] : r ] ! I r o r - 1 d , ( r -r ' ) .
The matrix S(2), associatedwith Fermi-Dirac fields, is
antisymmetricaland nonsingular.Hence the total number of field componentsof the secondkind is even. If
we allow for the possibility that ?{1q(:)may be singular,
and arrange the rou's and columns so that the nonis associatedlr,ith the indesingular submatrix !{qoy(2)
p e n d e n tc o m p o n e n l sr ! . H e o b t a i n
-rl,(r-.r'),
{ r i tr ) , r i ( x ' ) ) : i f ! { , 0

kinematically invariant under time reflection.In order

that it be dynamically invariant, 3Cmust be such that
Jc(0, i,l,)*: ut(6*,,t/*).
Since 3C is an even function of the componentsof ry',
the ialter are to be paired with the aid of imaginary
matrices, characteristicof the variables of the second
kind. The sourceterm is invariant if sourceand field
transform in the same rvay.
The correlationbetweenspin and statisticsenterson

364
THEORY

observing that an imaginary Za is characteristic of halfintegral ipin fields. We can prove this by remarking
thaiall the transformation properties of Z4 are satisfied by
-riS'+)lr,
L+: exp(- tniSu)1-r exp(irrSu) : exp(
where Zq is the matrix describing the reflection of the
irrst space axis. The latter form is a consequenceof

721

FIELDS

OF QUANTIZED
we have

f"l

J *ro1t-J r,(o2\: |

(dxl'Ir51'.,r,-x,d,*i'su,){

Jot

+ (tcu0,- s,0 ut i,S,,)Ex].

In the absenceof an external source,I*, is symmetrical

and P,, Ju, are conserved'.For
and divergenceless,
simplicityfwe shall confine our verification to the situation of no source, in which the infinitesimal 6f is distributed in the region between o1 and o2. Hence

Zr-1S1aZ1:-'!t''
The essential point with regard to the reality oI Ir is
that Su:iSro is a real matrlx, whence

6 a P , G 1 t -:

(dr')a,YSDt.

Jat

and
exP(2riS u) L t'
f"
( d . r tl r u d , - . t , 3 , * i . s " , ) \ 5 6 { .
6 2,J, r o r t : - |
say'
as.9r2'
same
eigenvalues
Now S1amust possessthe
Joz
spin
field,
which implies that /-r is real for an integral
and imaginary for a half-integral spin field. The re- The consistencyrequirement
quiremenl of time reflection invariance thus restricts
fol
(d.rr(6\)$6t:6'G,'
(6Gr),=|
fields of the first (B.E') and second (F.D') kind to
This
corre.
t
.
t
spins,
respectively.
half-integral
integral and
lation is also satisfactory in that it identifies the doublethen demands that
valued, half-integral spin fields rvith fields of the second
- (6x),: ,,0"x|!er'@,0
x"0 u-liS,,)x, (30)
kind, of which I is an even function.
"We have introduced several kinds of generators of
which is indeed true in virtue of the equivalence beinfinitesimal transformations. A criterion for consistency
tween (d1(*)),, induced by the displacement 6f!, and
of
the
evaluations
alternative
the
from
is obtained
' x @ ) - x @ ) , i n d u c e db y the coordinatetransformation
generators,
such
commutator of two
'*r: rri_6xu.
- i (6Gi.
(6G
Alternative forms of P, and /n, are convenient {or
i
G
t:
bl:
lG ",
")
the consistencYof G. and Gr. The following
testing
namely
(6G,)b+(6Gt.:0.
relationsderived {rom (16),
Ir* : exp(riSr) h:

ix (2lI.Sr,- S't2l x)3xx,

y2I r7_ all,a
"7:
"0
- Su't?Il)x,
id rx ( ?IxSu,
0,xll,x:
0 uv2l
"7-

As a first example, we consider the two generators

e , P , ( q ) * | eu , J , " ( . or ) ,

G.:

enableus to write fp, as

and
fo'

G=
J

T. : S6r-

(d'r11$56.

o,

where

in the retardeddescription.In preparationfor the test,

rve remark that
l',to.t ,,t", -

f"'

J.,

syu,: -suy,:if,1(2?I1"Sra*2Srr,i?Irr _
-?|S",-S,,i?[)x,
and

t,1.r\3.1",

r*o,a,rra.ttx),
/"' tr'o+

P,-

"",

1,,:
(dr')[r"3^rr,
- r,01TsulT,"- ' r

7,"- T,u: - i+(tES,,x- xS",i$t),

(1U"a,v- a"r?l,r)*p",1.
| d ou l s : 6 , , - |

but doesenter in

(dx)0xLIx,,
f

: |
Since

p,": -iilS u,x@&/ax)+(a;tt/ax)S,,xl.

In virtue of the antisymmetry of sr* in the first two

indices, drsr", is automatically divergencelessand does
not contribute to the energy-momentum vector P,,

and that
J r,(or)-J r,(or)-

t Q}l u0;x- 3 "x?I,x)I d1s1",{Pp,,

- r,o,l i'9,,)
a ^l- ix}Ix(:c,a,
x
"
!!

(r,0,- x

"0,*iSu)1?Lx*runr,+

r,Pxpl

ra',.*,- tlo,x,\!.
[

365
722

SCHWINGER

JULIAN

The components of P, in a local coordinate

system are

3"(r-r')
and therefore vanish when multiplied by
x1p1*fr1*1t
. Furthermore,

p,o,:
-x?I,*,dt,x- I (t8xix$t)],
I dafK
J

(31)
P 1a ,:

y?I1o'd,*'1{p,6'1p,].

while those oI J,

ti(a fic/ 3y)6,(x- r'),

from which we obtain

llc, N e1Gll: 2ip(or6r : 0.

arc
f
| dor1a,[JC | (19{,,,d,r,t
J

- o utxllutx)* i(fSx* xSt)l

-|i

[rc(*), x (r')]?Iro, : li(a,.tc/ ay)6"(r - x'),

?lror[x(r'), K(r)l:

f
I dolJ

J r o , r * r: * ( n , P m -

and

With this information, the proof is easily extended to

all componentsof pu,.
The consistencyof the generators G, and G* requires
that

f
I do1(2l,ouS1o,ar*Sror.rrtlror)1, (.i2)

i 6 ^ ( e , P , f l e u , J , , ): -

faofa*),?t,o,a*.

or
I o tt,:

t?{to, (*,r' d1ly r11,di*1* t51r114)X

I daf

6\P,:

I do6"y22lq,6x,

- r1i;p1o;11;].
f r1t;p1oy17y
The quantity p", is closely related to the infinitesimal
expression of the scalar character of 3C,
K (y- ii eu"S,,y) -cc (x) : 0.

6\ J u , : ,

do(t,0,- :,0 u|rSu,)1Zlfro,dr,

which can now be verified from the expressions (31)

a n d ( 3 2 ) ,w i t h p 1 o ; i 1 y : 0 .

We can, indeed, conclude that

CHARGEDF'IELDS

pp":0,
if 3C is no more rhan quadralic in the components of
various independent lields. We shall also prove this
without the latter restriction, but, for simplicity, with
the limitation that there are no equations of constraint.
The commutation relations equivalent to (30),

la, P,l:
lx, J -f:

-ia,y,
-i(x,\'-xd,JiS,")v,

imply that
[x, tr'u,]:S,,x,
where

Our considerations thus far specifically exclude the

electromagnetic field (and the gravitational field). We
introduce the concept of charge by requiring that the
Lagrange function be invariant under constant phase
(special gauge) transformations, the infinitesimal version of which is
,r:
11_i.6t6)x.
Here 6X is a constant, and 6 is an imaginary matrix
which can be viewed as a rotation matrix referring to
a space other than the four-dimensional world. The
invariance requirement implies that

N r,: J u,-*uP,!x,Pu.

6i:s6s-1,

This enablesone to expressthe scalar requirement on JC or

in the form
and
[3c' N!"]:o'
The components
and that
d l o r l r r:

I d o '( r 1 r ' r 1 r , ' ) [ f f ( r ' ) I ( r ? [ r i , a , r r ' t

- oai x?Iatld- l(4Sx*x$t)

($a;t:55'
[6, E-l?I,]:

[6, S,,]:0,

3(.(x-i6\Ex)-K(i:0.
We now write the general variation as
6() : 6y - ii @,6x,) Su - i6r.Ey,
"a

where 6tr, characterizing a local phase transformation,

f
- l i d o r ( ? I , o , S , o , , r , * S i o ; 1 r 7 t ? [ , q is
) 1 ,an arbitrary function of r, consistentwith constant
I
values on or and on oz. The additional contribution to
6(a) thereby producedis
do not involve the unknown ptoltrt. According to our
jf dts6l- t; (tS6x- xS6)DX,
simplifying assumption of no constraint equations, the
commutators (anticommutators) of all field components rvhere
at r and *' contain the three-dimensionaldelta function
i ,: - ix?Ir8x

366
THEORY

OF OUANTIZED

is the charge-current vector. The stationary action

principle requires that

(33)

a,jF-i+(tEEx-xE8$,
and yields as the phase transformation generatror
f

I dol*6\:Qdl,

f1:

J"

where p is the charge operator.

The integral stntement derived from (33),

QG,) - QG,) :

[,','

(d.r)diQ8 6t - t8 8x),

becomes th'i conservation gf charge in the absenceof

an external source. If an infinitesimal source is introduced in tne region bounded by o1and o2,we then have,
in the retarded descriPtion,
6g0(",):-,

723

FIELDS

algebras are involved, the field contains particles with

charges0, *a.
To present 6 as a diagonal matrix, we must forego the
choice of Hermitian field components. Thus, for the
example of a charged F.D. fiild, where the field components decomposeinto ry'1i,9(2), corresponding to the
structures (34) and (35), the mutually Hermitian conjugate operators
rlts; : tltss- i9 et, t et : t ot * i{ pt,
are associated with eigenvalues *e and -e' respectively. On introducing these field components, the
derivative term in the Lagrange function, the electric
current vector. and the commutation relations, respectively, read
Il*<-tw,,du*r*rl*1&r+r?Iu, 0r!<-tf,
-iei(tePlr{<+t-{+flIu*<-),

(36)
(37)

and
}
{?Iot! e>@), {c+r (o',)?Iror
:{2t,0),y'1_;(r),/1-,(*')U10,}:0,
(38)
{?I<o
tt u t Qc),! et (r')?Itor}
: lldatl e{x), 9111
(*')2l1oy): i?I1ot6,(n- r').

(ditdi$61

J oz

:ilQ@),Gi'
W'rence

lx,Ql:Ex.
This commutation relation also follows directly {rom
the significanceof G1, indicating the consistency of the
latter with Gs.
We shall supposethat the matrix $ is an element of
the algebra generatedby S-121* and Sr,. It follows that
$ commutes with 6, and therefore that the latter is
explicitly Hermitian,
Et: E.

There is evident symmetry with respect to the substitux+-e'

tionr!6<+!6;
Since/1..yand p1-yare Hermitian conjugate operators'
we can arbitrarily select one as the primary nonHermitian field. We shall write
ca-l9fa u --;^,
'lPt
<

and

te>E:,1,18:0.

to:{,

yields the following forms for (36), (37), and (38):

possesses This

Such an antisymmetrical, imaginary matrix

real eigenvalues which are symmetricaliy distributed
about zero; nonvanishing eigenvalues occur in oppositely signed pairs. Since 6 commutes with all members
of the above-mentioned algebra, the charge-bearing
character of a given field dependsupon the reducibility
of this algebra. Thus, if the algebra for a certain kind
of field is irreducible, the only matrix commuting with
all members of the algebra is the symmetrical unit
matrix. Hence 6:0, and the field is electrically neutral.
If, however, the matrix algebra is reducible to two
similar algebras, as in

,r:(? ;r),

, ^

. r

tL!^t ,, xdpV)-

i . . ^

' l

iLxd tY"t t, V ),

e+10'Yr'!l'

(3e)

and
: I0 @)rtot'/(r"')r<or} : 0,
0 <.il @), t tot{@)l
r40)
:
b <u*@), 0 @')t tttl Y rct6'(* *' )'
To express the now slightly obscured symmetry between positive and negative charge, we call ry'1; the
'charge conjugate field

{": (-s.-').F,

(41)

(34) and state this ryrnmetry as invariance under the substi-

the matrix 6 exists and has the form (with the same
partitioning)
r* """'- o'
/ 0" _ i ", l
(35)
s: r(
)
\i
0 /
This describes a charged field, composed oI particles
with charges +e, the Jigenvaluesof 6. If threi similar

i.:.ttionrlte{", ee-e.
T h e m a t r i c e s" l p i P : 0 , ' ' ' 3 ,

obeY

'Y'i:E7*t-t'
and
?ut':

-S7rS-r,

(42)

since they are purely imaginary matrices' ore sbould

also recall that E is an antisymmetrical, imaginary
matrix. If we were to depart from these special struc-

367
724

JULIAN

SCHWINGER

tures by subjecting all matrices to an arbitrary unitary

trairsformation, we should find that the only formal
changes occur in (41) and (42), where the matrix !]
appears modified by an orthogonal, rather than a
unitary transformation. Hence, in a general representation these equations read
,lr":C{,
"t,r' : - C-11,C ,
where C still exhibits the symmetry of $, appropriate
to the example of a half-integral spin field,

THE ELECTROMAGNETICFIELD
The postulate of general gauge invariance rnotivates
the introduction of the electrornagnetic field. If all
fields and sources are subjected to the general gauge
fra nqfnrm

c tinn

'1: exp(- iI (r)d)x:

x exp(iI(r)6),
the Lagrange function we have been considering alters
in the following manner,
'f : S-firdrX.
The addition of the electromagnetic field Lagrange
function,

The commutation relations (40) are in the canonical

form which corresponds to the division of the independent field components into two sets, such that one
has vanishing anticommutators (commutators, for an
integral spin field) among members of the same set.
The generator of changes in ry'and ry',Eq. (27) in the
notation of the charged half-integral spin field example, is
C hl',{,) : Li I do (0t, 0,6{- a,i't,",V\.

C " ^ r : i U u , A p l - I { F w , . 0N A , - 0 , A u l
++FN'2+JpAp,

(43)

provides a compensating quantity through the associated gauge transformation

'A':Au-3'\'
The term involving the external current -ftsis effectively
gauge invariant if
o'J u:0'

which can be deduced directly from the Lagrange function derivative term (39). Associated with the freedom
of altering the Lagrange function by the addition of a
divergence, are various expressions for generating
operators of changesin the field components. Thus, we
have the following two simple possibilities for the
derivative term and the associatedgenerating operator,

+lh* id,vl,
Ghl'):i
J

and

I d"{to,6*,

-+lidih,"1'f,
_f

Ghlr\: - i I do6,l,tp,{.

since the modification is in the form of a divergence. In

the same sense, there is no objection to employing a
form of the Lag^rngelunction in which the secondterm
of (43) is replacedby
(44)

+ { a p F P "A, , l .
We write the general variation of ,4" in the form

6 ( Au ) : A 1 , - 1 6u ' r " 1 O ,
:6A u- l(3 uin,- A,6r,)A |(0,6t,t 3,5r)A,,
"which ascribesto ,4, the same transformation properties
as the gradient of a scalar, thus preserving the possibility of gauge transfonnations under arbitrary coordinate deformations. In a similar way,
5(F ) : 5Pu,- (dudir;)Fr,- (d,irJF"x.

Evidently G(ry'),for example, in the generator of

alterations in the components z(0)ry',with no change in
f7,r. The associatedcommutation relations,
lt a{, G (,1')f: it ot6,!,
lhat,G(0):0,
are satisfied in virtue of (40), and, conversely, in conjunction with the analogousstatements for G(l), imply
these operator properties of the field components. The
connection with the generator in the symmetrical treatment of all field components is given by

(,1,)
(,1'),
c ({',,r): +G
+ +G
which indicates the origin of the factor (1/2) in the
generalEq. (26).

With .regard to the derivation of the electromagnetic

field equations from the action principle, it should be
noted that general gauge invariance requires that the
sources of charged fields depend implicitly upon the
vector potential -4u. We expressthis dependenceby
?

6 r ! { . r ' ): ,

Gx \ 6 t G ' \ / 6 A , ( r ) ) d l

"(r).

Since the infinitesimal gauge transformation, 6,4r:

-dr6tr, must induce the change6t:-?dtr6f, we learn
that
a,QtQ')/6Au@)): -i8t@)6(x-r',).

(4s)

One obtains the following field equations on varying

368
THEORY

OF QUA NTIZED

If 6"Iuhas the explicitly divergencelessform

F r" and A, in the complete Lagrange function,

F,":3u'4'-0'A,,
3,Fr,: j,!kplJ

p,

FIELDS

(46)
(47)

6J':0'6M"'

M":-M'u'

(s3)

where6Mu, vanisheson o1 atrd 02,we find that

where

^61

ku ( s ' -) ) , I t d r ' r I l a g t r ' t .6 1 , { r r 1 $ x 1 v ' 1

"
lx(r')S(a{(r')/6,a,(r))1,

6tW,,:

|
Joz

(d)'\LbMpr,,,

which makes it unnecessary to introduce an external

is the contribution to the total current vector associated source that is directly coupled to the field strength
tensor Fu,.
with charged field sources.We derive from (45) that
The special nature of the electromagnetic field3 is
a,hr:it(tSEx-xEE0.
apparent in the form of the operator (52) generatilig
Ilut ttie total current vector is divergencelessin conse- changesin the local electric field components.Since one
quenceof the electromagneticfield equations. Therefore of the field equationsis the equation oI constraint

a,ir: -i+(ttb'x-x$49,

d 1 l y F 1 o y 1j lro1r:* k < o t l J < o t ,

(54)

the three variations DFlo;1*;cannot lle arbitrarily aswhich is in agreementwith (33).

A{ter removing the terms in d(8"-) that contribute signed; the electromagnetic field and charged fields are
not kinematically independent. This is evidently an
to the field equations, we are le{t with
aspect of the gauge invariance that links the two types
:
(s"*,
A
6PQ"P6A')|
6
u6'J'6x'
+{6j,, A }
of fields. Alternatively, s'e see from (51) that ,410)is
- \ (6 rbx,! 0
(+
A,j - + lFur, F,r) )
not a dynamical variable subject to independent varia"6r,) U,,
* ( a u 6 r , ) 1 , A , , ( 4 8 ) tions. But there is no field equation that expresses,4loy
in terms of independent dynamical variables, in virtue
in which
of the arbitrariness associated lvith the existence o{
-i6yl/',E{a, A pl: - i{A $ y}2l,Eby.
A
,
l
:
+16j,,
gauge transformations. Furthermore, a variation of
-,1gr in the form o{ a gradient, that is, a gauge transThis term alters the field equations of charged fields,
formation, yields a generating operator which, in con2 2 1 , ( A , x -i , E + l A, , 7 \ ) : ( AL K /A ) - $ L
sequenceof (54), no longer contains electromagnetic
- (auxliL{x, A p}E)2WP: (a,K/a).i- t!3.
field dynamical variables. Thus, in either {orm, (51)
or (52), there are only two kinematically independent
We have anticipated that not all componentsof '4, variations of the electromagnetic field quantities.
is
as
The
tensor
?r,
now
obtained
commute with 1.
We now apply these generators to deduce commuta( 4 9 ) tion properties for the gauge invariant fieid strength
Tp,:...+ilFt^, F,r)- j{jr,, A,Jl-J,A,,
comporlents. According to the efiect of a variation
where .. . stands for (20), but with "8 the complete 61 1r;,upon the local componentsof F' we have
Lagrange function. The action principle supplies the
[ F 1 o ) 1 rG
y ,e ] : 0 ,
difierential equation
A ot),
G
tl: i (d c16A 6 - o s16
at,
lF
tot
(50)
A pa,J,.
auTu,: i(x8a,t*a,tEx)l
whence
'I'he
divergence term in (48) yields the infinitesimal
(55)
generator
[ i ' 1 q 1 r y ( r )i,' 1 0 ) 1 r ) ( r ' ) ] : 0 ,
and

cn: -

ao,n,"aa,:-

(s1)
a'a<o;ro16,4sr,

rvhile the Lagrange function with the derivative term

(44) would give
Qr:

ff
do,oF,,A":

dabFo,,r,Aur.

(52)

The change in the action integral produced by a

variation of the external current _/, is given by

5rw,,:

I', @.r)EJ,A,.

[l'orro (r), Fcorr-r(*')]

- 63r<-rdr.r)6,(r - r').
: i (6rp<,,rdro

(56)

In using Gr, we must restrict the electricfield variation

according to
dllyDFlqlry:0,
w h i c h i s i d e n t i c a l l ys a t i s f i e do n w r i t i n g
6 F< o t t o :3 < t t 6 Z < n p 1Z' 6 1 6 : - Z o t 1 o .
3 Papers dealing tith the situatior peculiar 1o the electromaenetic 6eld are" legion. Of the older literature, the closesl irl
spiiit to our proceduie is {hat of W. Pauli, Handbuch der Physik
(Edwards Brbt}ters, Ann Arbor, 1943), Vol. 24.

369
726

SCHWINGER

JULIAN

Th ic viAl/le f ha fnrm

A changein the external current, of the form (53), yields

-

Qp: I do)2F6s8266.

: 3pOx6M,x-0"3x6Mux, (59)

fr'r
6rF,,(r): if r,"G), |

[ F 1 1 ; 1 aG, r ] : 0 ,
Gp]: idFlo)1ly,
[F1q)11y,

f . .,"
d o l i \ n 1 nD
, F G t1 1- 16 mo , 1 1 , . F 1 0J y. 1 0 ,
J

The alteration produced in the field components follorvs

from the lield Eq. (47), and the {orm of (46) given by

(s8)

Thus,
0e) (6Fo a)- 6Mrorro)= - dordlr 116 | Os16M61pl,
d l o y D F q r:; 1d71; 4 D F 1 s-y 1d;1y1 ; 6 F 1 e 1 1 r ) ,

the

on

c,rrfare

6 F 1 e ; 1 4 ]d- 1 r ; 6 r u 1 r r o ,
6 F& 1e ) f : A( D 6 q o ; 1-r yd 1 r ; 6 m 1 0 y 1 4 .
In the retarded description, these discontinuities are
the actual changes in the field components on o. On
referring to the general formula (23), we obtain
661tn 61s1: ilFrorrzr,G-],
- dlrydm : ilF
d14dzz1o;1ry
G^].
<ot
ut
Lrt'.tt,
In view of the arbitrary values of 6zt' on o, these equations imply field strength commutation relations, which
are identical with (55) and (57).
We give a related procedure which also illustrates the
possibility of evaluating commutators of field quantities
at points in time-like relation. The two field Eqs. (47)
and (58) can be combined into (we incorporate E,
with j,)
- 0x2F
,": 6,1i,4-J ,) - a"(i r+J ,).

( d x . , ) ! 6 M 1 , ( r , ) q y e _x , 1 i

XIF -,(r),1"^,(r')1,
and r11is the discontinuousfunction

for which the associatedgenerator is

which yields the iollorving discontinuities in 6I'

fdt

(s7)

gM u,:6m,A(rp),

rrnscino

(dr')l6M^^(jr )!.'^^(r') |

Jot

where the latter is equivalent to (56).

An alternative derivation employs an infinitesimal
change in the external source,distributed on (the negative side of) d, r(o):0r

dpF,r+A,Fr!+dxF,,:0.

Jot

then provides the commutation properties

^
G^ :

d,/bjr J I

where, in the retarded description

The expressionof changesinducedby 61"1n;11y,

(r')]: g,
[Frnrro(r), l'1,,;1"1
lFcorr.r(r), F utot@')l
: i ( d 1 1 ;d11a- 1- 6 o rr . rd < u ) 6(,r - r ' ) .

o ^'o il r, pe- d u0M J,+

na(r- x'):1,
:0,

5 0 2* o r
fio<r.o'.

We have a similar expressionlor 6xj,(r). On comparing

the coefficientsof 6Mp(x') in (59) (our two treatments
employing external sources are thus distinguished by
surfaceand volume distributionsof 6M ,,, respectively),
1vefind
- 0 f 11
a@- r')ilF, Q), F y"@')f
- 0,a1 - *'
@
)ilj, (r), ry^ (r:')l
* 0q1Q - r' )i,lj" (r), P1-(o')l
: ( 6 , 1 d r d * -D , " d u d 1 - 6 * 1 d , d *
*Du-a,dr)6(r:-*'). (60)
The value oI ilF,"(x), F^.(r')], for equal times, is then
obtained from the coemcient of the difierentiated delta
function of the time coordinate, $'ith the anticipated
result.
In the approximation that neglects the dynamicai
relation between currents and fields at points in timelike relation, the differential Eq. (60) has the solution
q1Q - r' )ilF,,(x), Fr. (s')l
: (6,r4!d.- d,.d,3r - 6rrd,d** 6u-A,a
x)D."t(r:- r-'),
tvhereD""1(r-*/) is the familiar retarded solution oI
- di'D.",:61r-t';

(61)

Had we employed the advanceddescription,4+ would

be replacedby -4 , where
4 (r-r'):0'
:1,

1'n1'o'
r:o(ro',

and the advancedsolution of (61) rvould appcar. Subtracting these trvo results, we find
ilF,,(x), F^"(r')l
: ( 6 , r d t s a _6-, ^ a r d r - d , 1 d , d " f6 g * 3 , d 1 ) D ( . r : - . u , ) ,
in which D(r.-x')
provided by

is the homogeneoussolution of (61)

D: D*t- D.a".

370
THEORY

OF

141

FIELDS

QUANTIZED

'I'he
kinematical relation between the electromagnetic The resulting commutator
lield and charged 6elds, on a given o, is most clearly ilA
t?r
61 @), F10)1a (irl)]
indicated in a special choice of gauge, the so-called
:3ruut6"(x- r') - 0*16si D'(rradiation gauge,
:
(611y1n6"(r;r'))(r),
(62)
3o>Ao>:0'

r')

With this choice, the constraint equation for the electric

Iield reads
d l r v F l o r t r l :- 6 t r t ' A < o t i:< o t I J < o > ,

is also consistentwith the transversenature of '41t1'The

remaining commutation relationsare

so that the scalar potential is completely determined by

the charge densitY,

We shall use the device of the external current to

derive the commutation relations between the electromagnetic field tensor and the displacement generators
P,,-J u". According to (49) and (50),

.,1ro (r) :

-'
(r') ),
f a"' o " (* *' I Uror(*')*J,0,

(")
(r')] : 0'
:
lA 6 Q),,4 1a(r')] [F.,,0, (r), Florcl(")

Jt

rvhere
D,(x-

r') : (l / 4r)l(r1*1- x<ri)27-t.

f6l

P,(qr)-P"(o)-

U*ll" 'lAfi"J^7,

Jcz

does not commute with the components

Evidently, -410y
fo'
of chargid fields. In this gauge, then, the dependence J
(dx)[ " *.4r(r,0"- x,6,)Jx
u,G)- J,"(o,\: |
Joz
of the ilectric field upon the charged fields is made
+A.J,-A,JF],
explicit through the decomposition of the electric field
inio transverse and longitudinal parts,
in which we have indicated only the terms containing
Prortrl: - drol'A
t*1- 0 614P1
the external current. We consider an infinitesimal
: p,o,1py("){F1oy1o(r).
change in the latter possessingthe form (53)' In the
description, lhe resulting changes of P, and
The inference that the transverse fields are the inde- retarf,ed
ate
o1
on
J
u,
pendent dynamical variables of the electromagnetic
held in this gauge is confirmed on examining the generf"t
(dx)tz6Mx"a"Fx,,
ators Ge and Gr. Indeed,
a"P,(a): - |
Jo

ff
doF oxtf)6A o,
daF s0t16Aut: G^: J
J
and
5o:

f
J

6,t. (" ) : -

^-1*ua"- r "0u)Fx,
1a*174tM

[:"'

d o 6 F < o t t t t A -o . | do6F'o"u's'A'r"
J

in view of the transversenature of A61,FQ' (62)' We

can now derive the commutation properties of these
dynamical variables from
lAsl,Gal:i6A6,

*6M x"Fr,-6MxrF,xf.
When expressedin terms of the generator

"

fF1ol1*r(t),Ge]:o'

lArrt,Gr]:0,
fFqoylo("),Grf:i6Fo>ots),
restrictions
the
into
d.ccount
on taking
: 0,
dtll6.4rlr : dr6DF(o)(*)(")

*:

I.',,'

(dx)|6M
x,Fx,

the following commutatorsare encounlered,

ilFx' P,l:a,Fx,,
i.LF*, J u"): (* u6,- x,0)F a^J 6,^F,t
-dp-F,r*6grF* -6"xFv*

oroducedby the transversenature of thesequantities'

The Lagrange multiplier device permits us to deduce
Finally, we remark that the extension of (31) to
electromagnetic field, in the radiation
include'tie
that
gauge,
is
(rr)]: 56rtoD"(r-r')*dro'Ig>'
i.lA 111{i:r),F1oy1;t"r
The divergencelesscharacter of the transverse electric
field supplied the information
6 6t3"(r- r'),
61t,'2)r1*1:
whence

I<tl: - d<*lD'(r-*')'

P\o\:

,,',, , \ , t t t ' (F<orro)'

(Frorror(?,)'*
d6l+
I
fJC-x2lo(do>-i8Ao)x

- J <t>A
(0)-+(Sx+xSf)l'
<*t*L(i p)+"I(0))'4

371
728

JULIAN

SCHWINGER

and

.'

of the independent fields yiel<ls

f

P@:

dol+l\ 0.114(r),
F1*rrrr)-xglrordr*rx].

ln arriving at the expressionfor p1ny,the noncommutivity of lrol with 1 must be taken into consideration,
but producesno actual contribution, A variation of each

ar,:

a"7arru1111e)0sA1p1-6.111116,1,,1n111110)
-6y2[610p1al'

which confirms the consistencyof the translation generator with the various field variation generators.

P o p e r3 0

372

The Connection

Between

Spin and Statisticsl

W. Peur-r
Physikaksches Institul, Eidg. Technischen Hochschule, Zilrich, Switzeildnd
and Institilte for Adtanced, Staly, Princeton, New Jersey
(Received August 19, 1940)
In the following paper we conclude for the relativistically invariant wave equation for free
particles: From postulate (I), according to which the energy must be positive, the necessity
ol Fermi-Dirac statistics for particles with arbitrary half-integral spin; from postulate (II),
according to which observables on different space-time points with a spaceJike distance are
commutable, the necessity ol Einstein-Bose statistics for particles with arbitrary integral spin.
It has been found useful to divide the quantities which are irreducible against Lorentz transformations into four symmetry classeswhich have a commutable multiplication like *l, - 1'
* e. - e with e2: 1.

(e.g. Sr:iSo,
the digit 4 among the i, k, "'
Sr*: lSo*).
the requirements of the relativity
QINCE
Dirac's spinors u rwith p : 1,''', 4have always
u theory and the quantum theory are fundaa Greek index running from 1 to 4, and uoa
mental for every theory, it is natural to use as
means the complex-conjugate of ao in the ordiunits the vacuum velocity of light c, and Planck's
nary sense.
constant divided by 2zr which we shall simply
Wave functions, insofar as they are ordinary
denote by Z. This convention means that all
vectors or tensors, are denoted in general with
quantities are brought to the dimension of the
capital letters, [J;, (J;n.... The symmetry charpower of a length by multiplication with powers
acter of these tensors must in general be added
of. h and,c. The reciprocal length corresponding explicitly: As classical fields the electromagnetic
to the rest mass rn is denoted by r:mc/lt'.
and the gravipational fields, as well as fields with
As time coordinate we use accordingly the rest mass zero, rtake a special place, and are
length of the light path. In specific cases,how- therefore denoted with ,the usual letters pi,
ever, we do not wish to give up the u.se of f ;p: -fm, arrd gik: gki, respectively.
the imaginary time coordinate. Accordingly, a
tensor I;r is so deThe energy-momentum
tensor index denoted by small Latin letters r, fined, that the endrgy-density trZ and the morefers to the imaginary time coordinate and mentum density G7,are given in natural units by
runs from 1 to 4. A dpecial convention for de- W : - T a r a n d ' G * : - i T * a w i t h k : 1 , 2 , 3 .

51. Uxrrs AND NorATroNs

noting the complex conjugate seems desirable.

Whereas for quantities with the index 0 an
asterisk signifies the complex-conjugate in the
ordinary sense(e.g., for the current vector Si the
quantity Sox is the complex conjugate of the
charge density Sn), in general U*;*...signifies:
the complex-conjugateof Ur*... multiplied with
(-1)", where z is the number of occurrencesof

TENSoRS. DsrrNrrrox

$2. InnenucralE

oF SPINs

We shall use only a few general properties of

those quantities which transform according to
irreducible representations of the Lorettz group.2
The proper Lorentz group is that continuous
linear group the transformations of which leave
the form
1

I This paper is part of a report which was prepared by the

Lx*':x'-xo'

..tr'Jri5iiil'"'"s5il;;'i;;;;"
-since "been 1e3eand in whichslight

imorovements have
made. In view of lhe
uniavorable times, the Congress did not take place, and
publication
of the reports has. been postponed for an
the
indehnite lengtl of time. The -retation befreen the pr.esent
discussion of the connection between spin and statistics,
and the somewhat less general one of Belinfante, based on
the concept of charge invariance, has been cleared up by
W. Pauli and F. J. Belinfante, Physica 7, L77 (1940).

k:r
:
rnvariant

and

in

condition

that

they

addition

to

have

the

that

satisfy

determinant

the
*

lSee B. L. v. d. Waerden, Die gruppentheoreLische

Method.einiler Qaantentheorie (Berlin, 1932).

716

373
SPIN

I Ll

AND

and do not reverse the time. A tensor or spinor

which transforms irreducibly under this group
can be characterized by two integral positive
numbers (2, q). (The corresponding "angular
momentum quantum numbers" (j, ft) are then
given by P:2j+1, S:2k+1, with integral or
half-integral j and, k.)* The quantity U(j, fr)
characterized
bv U, k) has p.q:(2j+l)(2k+l)
independentcomponents.Hence to (0,0) corresponds the scalar, to (+, +) the vector, to (1,0)
the self-dual skew-symmetricaltensor, to (1, 1)
the symmetrical tensor with vanishing spur, etc.
Dirac's spinor zo reduces to two irreducible
quantities (],0) and (0, !) each of which consists of two components. lf U(j, &) transforms
according to the representation

ui:

(2i+1\ (2k+1)

L,"u",

l:1

then U*(k, j) transforms according to the complex-conjugate representation rl*, Thus for k:j,
.{*:d. This is true only if the components of
UQ,k) and U(k, j) are suitably ordered.For an
arbitrary choice of the components, a similarity
transformation of ,t and A* would have to be
added. In view of.$1 we represent generally with
U* the quantity the transformation of which is
equivalent to A* if the transformation of U is
equivalent to A.
The most important operation is the reduction
of the product of two quantities
U{jt

k').Uz(j,, kz)

which, according to the well-known rule of the

composition of angular momenta, decomposeinto
several I/(j, &) where, independently of each
otherj, & run through the values
' ' ', lj'-j,l
j:jrIjr,
jtljz-r,
k:krIkz, kt*kz-1, . . ., lkr-krl.
By limiting the transformations to the subgroup of space rotations alone, the distinction
between the two numbersj and I disappearsand
U(j,k) behaves under this group just like the
product of two irreducible quantities U(j)U(k)
which in turn reduces into several irreducible
*. In the spinor.calculus this is a spinor with 2j-undotted
and 2& dotted indices.

STATISTICS

U(l') each having 2llt

components, with

t:j+k,j+k-r, ..., li-kl.

Under the space rotations the t/(l) with
integral I transform according to single-valued
representation, whereas those with half-integral
I transform according to double-valued representations.Thus the unreducedquantities T(j , k)
with integral (half-integral) j*& are singlevalued (double-valued).
If we now want to deterrnine the spin value of
the particles which belong to a given field it
seemsat first that these are given by l:j+n.
Such a definition would, however. not correspond to the physical facts, for there then exists
no relation of the spin value with the number of
independent plane waves, whieh are possible in
the absenceof inteiaction) for given valuesof the
components &r in the phase factor exp i(kx). In
order to define the spin .in an appropriate
fashion.s we want to consider first the case in
which the rest mass m of all the particles is
different from zero. In this case we make a
transformation to the rest system of the particle,
where all the .spacecomponents of. k; are zero,
and the wave function dependsonly on the time.
In this system we reduce the field components,
which according to the field equations do not
necessarilyvanish, into parts irreducible against
spacerotations.To eachsuchpart, with r: 2s* 1
componentsl belong r different eigenfunctions
which under space rotations transform among
themselves and which belong to a particle with
spin s. If the field equations describe particles
with only one spin value there then exists in the
rest systerri only one such irreducible group of
components. From the Lorentz invariance, it
follows, for an arbitrary system of reference,that
r or lr eigenfunctions always belong to a given
arbitrary h. The number of quantities Uff, fr)
which enter the theory is, however, in a general
coordinate system more complicated, since these
quantities together with the vector &i have to
satisfy several conditions.
In the case of zero rest mass there is a special
degeneracybecause,as has been shown by Fierz,
this casepermits a gauge transformation oi the
sSee M. Fierz, Helv. Phys. Acta 12, 3 (1939); also
L. de Broglie, Comptes rendus 208, 1697 (l%9):209,
265 (193e).

374
W.

PAULI

718

We divide the quantities U into two classes:

(1) the "*1
class" with j integral, fr integral;
(2) the "-1
class" with j half-integral, F halfintegral.
The notation is justified because, according to
the indicated rules about the reduction of a
product into the irreducible constituents under
the Lorentz group, the product of two quantities
point of view is concerned because the total
of the *1 class or two quantities of the -1
angular momentum of the field cannot be divided
class contains only quantities of the *1 class,
by
up into orbital and spin angular momentum
whereas the product of a quantity of the i1
measurements. But it is possible to use the
class with a quantity of the - 1 class contains
following property for a definition of the spin.
-1 class. It is important
If we consider, in the q number theory, states only quantities of the
conjugate
I/* for whichj and &
complex
that
the
not
present,
all
then
where only one particle is
are interchanged belong to the same class as [/.
of the square of the
the eigenvalues j(j*l)
angular momentum are possible. But j begins As can be seen easily from the multiplication rule,
tensors with even (odd) number of indices reduce
with a certain minimum value s and takes then
the values s, s*1, " "a This is only the case only to quantities of the *1 class (-1 class).
i s n o t p o s s i b l e The propagation vector ftr we consider as befor m:0. For photons, s:1;i:0
Ionging to the -1 class, since it behaves a{ter
for one single photon.s For gravitational quanta
s : 2 a n d t h e v a l u e s j : Q a n d j : 1 d o n o t o c c u r . multiplication with other quantities like a quantity of the - 1 class.
In an arbitrary system of reference and for
We consider now a homogeneous and linear
arbitrary rest masses, the quantities U all of
equation in the quantities [/ which, however,
which transform according to double-valued
does not necessarily have to be of the Iirst order.
(single-valued) representations with half -integral
Assuming a plane wave, we may put ft1 for
(integral) j*ft describe only particles with half-i0/3xr
Solely on account of the invariance
integral (integral) spin. A special investigation is
the proper Lorentz group it must be of
against
decide
required only when it is necessary to

second kind.* If the field now describes only one

kind of particle with the rest mass zero and a
certain spin value, then there are for a given
value of kr. only trvo states, which cannot be
transformed into each other by a gauge transformation. The definition of spin may, in this
case, not be determined so far as the physical

whether the theory describes particles with one

single spin value or with several spin values'
$3. Pnoor oF THE INoBrtNttB Cnan-lcrnn op
firB Cnenco rN Clse oF INrEcnel aNo
OF THE ENENCY IN CASE OF
SpIN
Heln-INrrcnel
We consider first a theory which contains only
I/ with integral j-lk, i.e., which describes particles with integral spins only. It is not assumed
that only particles with one single spin value
will be described, but all particles shall have

the typical form

(1)
LVU-:LU+.
Lku+:DU-,
This typicalform shallmeanthat theremay be
as many different terms of the same type present,
as there are quantities [/+ and U-. Furthermore,
among the (J+ may occur the [/+ as well as the
([/+)*, whereas other [/ may satisfy reality conditions [/: U*..Finally we have omitted an eaen
number of & factors. These may be present in
arbitrary number in the term of the sum on the
left- or right-hand side of these equations' It is
now evident that these equations remain in-

integral spin.
variant under the substitution
-Ei-*u*"-transformal
- t r a n s f o r m a t i o nion o[ the frrstkind" rveunderU- { ct" U+* U*c-i" wirh an
s t a n d -a
[J++(J+,
ht+-k;.,
[(t/+)*+(I/+)*];
arbitrarvspaceandtime functiona. By "gauge-transformaU-+-U-,
l(U-)*--(U-)*1.
tion of ihe secondkind" we understanda transformation

(2)

of the tYPe
l.da
,pr-et--r6it
a s f o r t h o s e o f t h e e l e c t r o m a g n e t i cp o t e n l i a l s
a T h e g e n e r a lp r o o f f o r t h i s h a s b e e n g i v e n b y X [ . F i e r z .
Helv. Phvs. Acta r3, 45 (1940).
6 See for instance W. Pauli in the article "Wellenmechanik" in the Handbuch der Phvsik, Yol, 24/2, p. 26O'

Let us consider now tensors I of even rank

(scalars, skew-symmetrical or symmetrical tensors of the 2nd rank, etc.), which are composed
quadratically or bilinearly of the U's. They are
then composed solely of quantities with even j

375
719

SPIN

AND

STATISTICS

and even ft and thus are of the typical form

T-LU+U++LU-U-a2Lr+ku-,

(3)

where again a possible even number of & factors

is omitted and no distinction between U and U*
is made. Under the substitution (2) they remain
unchanged, T+I.
The situation is different for tensors of odd
rank S (vectors, etc.) which consist of quantities
with half-integral j and half-integral b. These are
of the typical form

s_uu+ku++Lu_ku_+LU_ (4)
and hence change the sign under the substitution
(2), S+-S.
Particularly is this the case for the
current vector sd.To the transformation k;+-h;
belongs for arbitrary wave packets the transformation xi--xi
and it is remarkable that
from the invariance of Eq. (1) against the
proper Lorentz grolp alone there follows an
invariance property for the change of sign of all
the coordinates. In particular, the indefinite
character of the current density and the total
charge for even spin follows, since to every
solution of the field equations belongs another
solution for which the components of s6 change
their sign. The definition of a definite particle
density for even spin which transforms like the
4-corfponent of a vector is therefore impossible.
We now proceed to a discussion of the somewhat less simple case of half-integral spins.
Here we divide the quantities [/, which have
half-integral j-tk, in the following fashion: (3)
the "*e class" with j integral A half-integral,
(4) the " - e class" withj half-integral A integral.
The multiplication of the classes (1), . ' ., (4),
follows from the rule e2:1 and the commutability of the multiplication. This law remains
unchanged if e is replaced by -..
We can summarize the multiplication
law
between the different classes in the followins
multiplication table:

We notice that these classeshave the multiplication law of Klein's "four-group."

It is important that here the complex-conjugate quantities for whichj and & are interchanged
do not belong to the same class, so that
U+', (U-e)* belong to the f e class
-e class.
U-,, 1U+"1x
We shall therefore cite the complex-conjugate
quantities explicitly. (One could even choose the
[/+' suitably so that oll quantities of the - e
class are of the form (U+")*.)
Instead of (1) we obtain now as typical form

.)*: I u-.+t( u*r*

Lhu+,+Lh(u

Lku,+Lh(u1,)* :lu+,ll1t1-'7*,

(r.)

since a factor k or -i6/0x

always changes the
expression from one of the classes *e or -e into
the other. As above, an even number of & factors
have been omitted.
Now we consider instead of (2) the substitution
ht--k;;
u1c+iu+e.
(u+.)*+-i(ll+c)*.

(u-,)*+i(u,)*.
..
u,--iLI

,t\
\u/

This is in accord with the algebraic requirement

of the passing over to the complex conjugate, as
well as with the requirement that quantities of
the same class as U+,, (tl-e)* transform in the
same way. Furthermore, it does not interfere
with possible reality condftions of the type
U+.:(U-,)*
or U-,: ([/+.)*. Equations (5) remain unchanged under the substitution (6).
\\'e consider again tensors of even rank
(scalars, tensors of 2nd rank, etc.), which are
composed bilinearly or quadratically of the I/
and their complex-conjugate. For reasons similar
to the above they must be of the form

T -LU+, U+,+LU-, U-"+DU+,kU-,+LU+.( U-r*+ t U,(U+")x

a2(U-,)*ku-,

+L(U+,)*ku+,*l(u-,sxp1u+r*+
u-,)*+>(u+r*(u*r*. a)
I ({/-.)*(

Furthermore, the tensors of odd rank (vectors, etc.) must be of the form

x1 2 u-,(g-,sx
s -, u+,ku+"+ L u-,ku-,+ L u+"u-,+ L u+,k(u-,)*+ L u-,k(u+,1
+ >.u+,(u+,)tt
+ L (u-,)*k(u-,)** L tu*,1*,(u+,)*+ r, (u-, *( u+.)*. (s)

376
W.

PAUL I

720

The result oJ the substihr.tion (6) is now the

op|osite oJ the result of the substitution (2): the
tensors of even rank change thei,r sign., the tensors
oJ od.drank remain unchanged:

is an indication that a satisfactory interpretation

of the theory within the limits of the one-body
problem is not possible.* In fact, all relativistically invariant theories lead to particles, which
in external fields can be emitted and absorbed in
T+-T:;
(9)
S+fS.
pairs of opposite charge for electrical particles
In case of half-integral spin, therefore, a and singly for neutral particles. The fields must,
positive definite energy density, as well as a therefore, undergo a second quantization. For
positive definite total energy, is impossible. The this we do not wish to apply here the canonical
latter follows from the fact, that, under the above formalism, in which time is unnecessarilysharply
substitution, the energy density in every space- distinguished from space, dnd which is only
time point changes its sign as a result of which suitable if there are no supplementary conditions
between the canonical variables.? Instead, we
the total energy changesalso its sign.
It may be emphasized that it was not only shall apply here a generalization of this method
unnecessary to assume that the wave equation which was applied for the first time by Jordan
is of the first order,* but also that the question is and Pauli to the electromagnetic field.8 This
left open whether the theory is also invariant method is especially convenient in the absence
with respectto spacereflections (x/ : - x, s6l : aq). of interaction, where all fields (/(") satisfy the
This scheme covers therefore also Dirac's two wave equation of the second order
component wave equations (with rest masszero).
nui, - K2u(,r:0,
These considerations do not Drove that for
integral spins there always exists a definite where
energy density and for half-integral spins a
lAzA2
definite charge density. In fact, it has been shown
_:a__
n
:
t
by Fierz6 that this is not the case for spin )1
b:r atrk2
6xo2
for the densities. Th6re exists, however (in the
c number theory), a definite total charge for half- and r is the rest -u., .lf th" particles in rrnitshfc.
integral spins and a definite total energy for the
An important tool for the secondquantization
integral spins. The spin value ] is discriminated is the invariant D function, which satisfies the
through the possibility of a definite charge wave equation (9) and is given in a periodicity
density, and the spin values 0 and 1 are dis- volume I/ of the eigenfunctions by
criminated through the possibility of defining a
definite energy density. Nevertheless,the present
1
sin &orn
D(x, xJ:--l
exp [i(kx)] -----_-i (10)
theory permits arbitrary values of the spin
vho
quantum nrrmbersof elementaryparticlesas well
as arbitrary valuesof the rest mass, the electric
or in the limit 7+charge, and the magnetic moments of the
particles.
I
r
sin A^r^
D(x, xo): _ * | d3&exp [i(br)]- :
(11)
(2r)BJ
rnB
oF
Frer.os
rN
TnB
Aeho
$4. QuewrrzarroN
sENcEoF INrBnecrroNs. CoNNpcrroN
* The author therefore considers
BBrwBsN SprN anp Starrsrrcs
as not conclusive the
The impossibility of defining in a physically
satisfactory way the particle density in the case
of integral spin and the energy density in the
caseof half-integralspinsin the c-numbertheory
* But we exclude operations like (b2+K2)r, which operate
at finite distances in the coordinate space,
6 M. Fierz, Helv. Phys. Acta 12,3 (1939).

original argument of.Dirjc, according to which the fleld

equatlon must be ol the lirst order.
7 On account of the existence of such conditions
the
canonical formalism is not applicable for spin )1 and
tnerelore tne dtscusslon about the connection between
spin and statistics by J. S. de Wet, Phvs. R.". Si. O+6
(19,1O),which is based on that formalism is not general
enough.
8 The consistent development of this method
leads to
the "many-time formalism" of Dirac, which has been
given.by..P. A..M..Dirac,
Quantun Mechanics (Oxford,
second edition. 1935)-

377

72r

SPIN

AND

STATISTICS

Ry &6 we understand the positive root

hs:l(k2lx2)\.

In

(r2)

D(x,0):9;

it

follows

114
D{x, xn):- - -FJ.r, xi
4rr 0r

The D function is uniquely determined by the

conditions:
llD-rczD:0;

general

f o r x o > .r
lNoli(t{or-rr)+)
F J r, x o): 1 - iH o\I)li K(rz- x o2
)',f f o r r l x o > . - r
for -rlxo.
llroJ"l*oL r=;+;

(#)^=":'o,(13)

(18)

Here -ly'ostands for Neumann's function and

For r:0 we have simply
.I1o(Dfor the first Hankel cylinder function. The
strongest singularity of D, on the surface of the
D ( x , * o ): { 6 ( r - r ) - 6 ( r * x o ) l / 4 r r . ( 1 4 ) light cone is in general determined by (17).
We shall, however, expressively postulate in
This expressionalso determines the singularity
the following that al,l physical, quantities ot f,nite
of.D(x, 16) on the light cone for x{0. But in
d,istances exterior to the light cone (for l*o'-xo"
l
the latter caseD is no longer different from zero
l lx' -x" l) are commutaDle.* It follows from this
in the inner part of the cone. One finds for this
that the bracket expressions of all quantities
regione
which satisfy the force-free wave equation (9)
can be expressed by the function D and (a finite
1A
-F(r, xo)
D(x, xo)
number) of derivatives of it rvithout using the
4nr 3r
function Dr. This is also true for brackets with
with
the f sign, since otherwise it would follow that
gauge invariant quantities, which are constructed
-rr)+)
for xolr
lJol|(xo,
I
bilinearly from the UG>, as for example the
F(r,ro):l 0
f - o r ) x o > -. r
i ( t S ) charge density, are noncommutable in two points
l- Jolr(*or-rr1+1 l o r - r > x &
l
with a space-like distance.lo
The jump from * to - of the function F on
The justification for our postulate lies in the
the light cone corresponds to the d singularity of
fact that measurements at two space points rvith
D on this cone. For the following it will be of a space-like distance can never disturb each
decisive importance that D vanish in the exterior
other, since no signals can be transmitted \,vith
-r).
of the cone (i.e., for rlxo)
velocities greater than that of light. Theories
The form of the factor d7k/kois determined by
which would make use of the Dr function in
the fact that dak/ko is invariant on the hypertheir quantization would be very much different
boloid (i) of the four-dimensional motrrentum
from the known theories in their consequences.
space (k, fr). It is for this reason that, apart
At once we are able to draw further conclusions
from D, there exists just one more function
about the number of derivatives of .D function
which is invariant and which satisfies the wave
which can occur in the bracket expressior.rs,if we
equation (9), namely,
take into account the invariance of the theories
under the transformations of the restricted
7
cos froro
f
Lorentz group and if we use the results of the
Dtk. xo): _
(t6)
| d 3 f te x -p [ ; ( k x ) ] - .
preceding section on the class division of the
(2r)3 J
ko
tensors. We assume the quantities [/(o to be
For r:0 one finds
ordered in such a way that each lield component
is composed only of quantities of the same class.
11
Dr(x, ro)
(17)
* For the canonical quantization formalism this postulate
2r2 f2- rs2
s S e e P , A. N{, Dirac. Proc. Camb. Phil Soc. 30, 150
(1934).

is satisfied implicitly. But this postulate is much more

general than the canonical {ormalism.
r 0 S e eW . P a u l i , A n n . d e l ' I n s t . H . P o i n c a r 66 , 1 3 7 ( 1 9 3 6 ) ,
esp. $3.

378

w.

PAULI

We consider especially the bracket expression of

a field component [/(") with its own comptex
conjugate
f U r ' > ( x ' , x n ' ), U * G )( x t ' , x n " ) f .
We distinguish no'rv the two cases of half-integral and integral spin. In the former case this
expression transforms according to (8) under
Lorentz transformations as a tensor of odd rank.
In the second case, however, it transforms as a
tensor of even rank. Hence we have for halfintegral spin
IUG) (x' , xst), U*t') (xtt , xt")l
:odd number of derivatives of the function
(19a)
D(x' *x" , xo'- ro")
and similarly for integral spin
fUr't(xt, xst), U*t)(xtt, xstt)l
:even number of derivatives of the function
(19b)
D(x'-x",
xot -rcott).
This must be understood in such a way that on
the right-hand side there may occur a complicated sum of expressions of the type indicated.
We consider now the following expression, which
is symmetrical in the two points
t,
t)l
X : l U t >( x ' , x n t ) , U * { , t ( x t x s t

-flUo)(x", xn"), U*{')(x',xn')f. (20)

Since the D function is even in the space coordinates odd in the time coordinate, which can be
seen at once from Eqs. (11) or (15), it follows
number
from the symmetry of X that X:even
of space-like times odd numbers of timelike
derivatives of D(x' -x" , xyt - K1t'). This is fully
consistent with the postulate (19a) for halfintegral spin, but in contradiction with (19b) for
integral spin unless X vanishes. We have therefore the result lor inlegral spin
t)f
)
l(l(,) (x', xn'), U*t (x", xo'
l l U t > ( x t t , x o t t ) ,U * k ( x ' , r i ) ] : 0 .

(21)

So far we have not distinguished between the

two cases of Bose statistics and the exclusion
principle. In the former case, one has the ordinary bracket with the - sign, in the latter case,

722

according to Jordan and Wigner, the bracket

lA, s1:a313a
with the * sign. By insertiag the brackets with the
! sign into (20) tae haztean algebraic contrad'iction,
since the left-hand side is essentially positive for
x':x"
and cannot vanish unless both Uc) and,
I/x(') vanish.*
Hence we come to the result: For integral' spin
the quantization according to lhe excl'usion princ'iple
is not possible. For lhis result,it'is essential, thatr
the use oJ the DlJunction in place of the D Junct'ion
be, for general reasons, d'iscarded.
On the other hand, it is formally possible to
quantize the theory for half-integral spins according to Einstein-Bose-statistics, but according to
the general result of the preceding section the energy
of the system would not be posiLiae. Since for
physical reasons it is necessaiy to postulate this,
we must apply the exclusion principle in connection with Dirac's hole theory.
For the positive proof that a theory with a
positive total energy is possible by quantization
according lo Bose-statistics(exclusionprinciple)
for integral (half-integral) spins, we must refer
to the already mentioned paper by Fierz. In
another paper by Fierz and Paulill the case of an
external electromagnetic field and also the connection between the special case of spin 2 and
the gravitational theory of Einstein has been
discussed.
In conclusion we wish to state, that according
to our opinion the connection between spin and
statistics is one of the most important applications of the special relativity

theory.

* This contradiction may be seen also by resolving I/t":

into eigenvibrations according to
u*c) (x, f,0): v-, 2 r I u +* (k) exp [t J - (kT) +[or,o | ].
* U-(F) exP Li { (kx) - }oro I J I
L I c ) ( x , x 0 ): V - t > k l'U + ( h ) e x p [ i l ( k x ) - ] o x o ] l

417-*(llexo[;{ -(kxt+froro}]}.

The equation (21) leads then, among others, to the relation

I I/**([), U+(k)f+ lu -(b), u-t(fr) ] = 0,

a relation, which is not possible for brackets with the *
sign unless U+(k) and, U+*(E) vanish.
lM.
Fierz and W. Pauli, Proc. Roy. Sc. Ar73, 211
(1939).

-452

PHYSICS: J. SCHWINGER

PROC. N. A. S.

ON THE GREEN'S FUNCTIONS OF QUANTIZED FIELDS. I

By JULIAN SCHWINGER
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

Communicated May 22, 1951

The temporal development of quantized fields, in its particle aspect,

is described by propagation functions, or Green's functions. The construction of these functions for coupled fields is usually considered from the
viewpoint of perturbation theory. Although the latter may be resorted
to for detailed calculations, it is desirable to avoid founding the formal
theory of the Green's functions on the restricted basis provided by the
assumption of expandability in powers of coupling constants. These
notes are a preliminary -account of a general theory of Green's functions,
in which the defining property is taken to be the representation of the fields
of prescribed sources.
We employ a quantum dynamical principle for fields which has been
described elsewhere.1 This principle is a differential characterization of
the function that produces a transformation from eigenvalues of a complete set of commuting operators on one space-like surface to eigenvalues
of another set on a different surface,2

(rl', (T1jr2, 02)

i(r1' 711 afUl (dX) -CI 2,p 0'2)

(1)
Here is the Lagrange function operator of the system. For the example
of coupled Dirac and Maxwell fields, with external sources for each field,
the Lagrange function may be taken as
= -..1/4[P, 'Y;(-ip - eA>)P + m+/] + 1/2[4, 'i] +
Herm. conj. + 1/4F,P2 - 1/4{Fp,, )A, - 6A} + J,A,X, (2)
which implies the equations of motion
'Y;&(-ib - eA,u)# + mi = 71.
= J, +ji,,
F,, = 6g.A4 - ,A,;,
(3)
=

where

j;&

e'/2[l, y4].
(4)
With regard to commutation relations, we need only note the anticommutativity of the source spinors with the Dirac field components.
We shall restrict our attention to changes in the transformation function
that arise from variations of the external sources. In terms of the notation
=

(r1', 'l Ir2 , '2)

= exp iW,

al'I!F(x) |2, '2)/(r1', '711

2,

'2)

(F(x)),

(5)

PHYSICS: J. SCHWINGER

VOL. 37, 1951

453

the dynamical principle can then be written

bW = j;`

(dx)(bc(x)),

(6)

where
= (k(X))5ii(X) + "(x)(#(x)) + (A,(x))6Jp(x).
The effect of a second, independent variation is described by

l(b2(x))

i .J '

(7)

(dx') [((5 e(x)6' e(x')) +) - (5(x))(5'.e(x'))], (8)

in which the notation ( )+ indicates temporal ordering of the operators.

As examples we have

6v(+(*

))=

02j, (dx') [((#(x)7;(x')5n(x')) +)-(t(x))(;(x')5v(x'))], (9)

and

bj(o(x)) = i J:" (dx')[(4,(x)A,(x'))+)

(4/(x))(A;(x'))]5J,(x'). (10)

The latter result can be expressed in the notation

although one may supplement the right side with an arbitrary gradient.
This consequence of the charge conservation condition, 6AJ;, = 0, corresponds to the gauge invariance of the theory.
A Green's function for the Dirac field, in the absence of an actual spinor
souree, is defined by
=
(dx') G(x, x')56(x').
J,0

(12)

According to (9), and the anticommutativity of 65(x') with 4'(x), we have

G(x, x') = i((4,/(x)i(x'))+)E(x, x'),
(13)
. On combining the differential
where E(x, x') = (xo - xo')/ xo equation for (y6(x)) with (11), we obtain the functional differential equation
-e(A,.(x)) + ieb/,Js(x)) + m]G(x, x') = 6(x - x'). (14)
An accompanying equation for (A,(x)) is obtained by noting that
(15)
(j,(x)) = ie tr 'y,sG(x, x')x' x,
in which the trace refers to the spinor indices, and an average is to be taken
of the forms obtained with xo' -- xo h 0. Thus, with the special choice
of gauge, b6(Av(x)) = 0, we have
-62(A (x)) = J,(x) + ie tr y;,G(x, x).
(16)
The simultaneous equations (14) and (16) provide a rigorous description
of G(x, x') and (A,(x)).

xo'l

PHYSICS: J. SCHWINGER

454

PROC. N. A. S.

A Maxwell field Green's function is defined by

&Pv(x, x') = (8/bJ(x'))(Ap(x)) = (515J=(x))(A(x'))

i[((A,(x)A (x'))+)

(A;(x))(A ,(x'))]. (17)

The differential equations obtained from (16) and the gauge condition are
+ ie tr 'y(6/5J,(x'))G(x, x),
-b)2S;,(x, x') = (x-x)
bA9;v(x, x') = 0 (= 6'x).
(18)
More complicated Green's functions can be discussed in an analogous
manner. The Dirac field Green's function defined by

5,72((jt(XI) t(X2)) +) e (XI X2),v

= 0

J91((dxl) ,20/" (dx2')G(xl, X2; XI', X21)5V(XI')5j((X2%) (19)

may be called a "two-particle" Green's function, as distinguished from
the "one-particle" G(x, x'). It is given explicitly by

G(xi, x2; xI', x2') = ((4(x1)4#(x2){(x1')l(x2'))+) E,

e(xI, X2)E(XI', X2')E(Xl, xI')E(xI, x2')e(x2, Xi')e(X2, x2')
(20)
This function is antisymmetrical with respect to the interchange of xi and
X2, and of xi' and x2' (including the suppressed spinor indices). It obeys
the differential equation
W G(x1, x2; xl', X2') = 6(x - xi')G(x2, X2') - (xl -x2')G(x2, x1'), (21)
where 0 is the functional differential operator of (14). More symmetrically written, this equation reads
e

i 1a2G(xi, x2; xi', x2')

5(xi - xl')(x2 - x2')-

6(xi - x2')6(x2- xi'), (22)

in which the two differential operators are commutative.
The replacement of the Dirac field by a Kemmer field involves alterations beyond those implied by the change in statistics. Not all components
of the Kemmer field are dynamically independent. Thus, if 0 refers to
some arbitrary time-like direction, we have
m(l - #02)4, = (1 - #02)rt - Pkk(-i2) - eAk) #o2#,
k= 1,2,3, (23)
which is an equation of constraint expressing (1 - #o2)4, in terms of the
independent field components 13o2#, and of the external source. Accordingly, in computing 5,(4,(x)) we must take into account the change induced in (1 -,o2), (x), whence
G(x, x') = i((4,(x)1(x'))+) + (1/m)(1 - #02)5(x - x'). (24)
The temporal ordering is with respect to the arbitrary time-like direction.

PHYSICS: J. SCHWINGER

VOL. 37, 1951

455

The Green's function is independent of this direction, however, and

satisfies equations which are of the same form as (14) and (16), save for a
sign change in the last term of the latter equation which arises from the
different statistics associated with the integral spin field.
1 Schwinger, J., Phys. Rev., June 15, 1951 issue.
2 We employ units in which h = c = 1.

ON THE GREEN'S FUNCTIONS OF QUANTIZED FIELDS. II

By JULIAN SCHWINGER
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

Communicated May 22, 1951

In all of the work of the preceding note there has been no explicit reference to the particular states on 01 and 01 that enter in the definitions of the
Green's functions. This information must be contained in boundary
conditions that supplement the differential equations. We shall determine these boundary conditions for the Green's functions associated with
vacuum states on both o1 and a2. The vacuum, as the lowest energy state
of the system, can be defined only if, in the neighborhood of a1 and U2,
the actual external electromagnetic field is constant in some time-like
direction (which need not be the same for a1 and a2). In the Dirac one-

particle Green's function, for example,

G(x, x') = i(+i(x);(x')), xo > xo',
= -i(4(x') A(x)), xo < xo',
(25)
the temporal variation of +1(x) in the vicinity of o1 can then be represented
by

(26)
exp [iPo(xo - Xo)]4I(X) exp [-iPo(xo - Xo)],
where Po is the energy operator and X is some fixed point. Therefore,
x -- or: G(x, x') = i(4/(X) exp [-i(Po - Povac)(xo - Xo)];(x')), (27)

O6(x)

in which Povac is the vacuum energy eigenvalue. Now PO -Povac has no

negative eigenvalues, and accordingly G(x, x'), as a function of xo in the
vicinity of a,, contains only positive frequencies, which are energy values
for states of unit positive charge. The statement is true of every timelike direction, if the external field vanishes in this neighborhood.
A representation similar to (26) for the vicinity of 01 yields
X --

02: G(x, x')

-i( (x') exp [i(Po - PoV")(xo - Xo)]1(X)), (28)

456

456 PHYSICS: J. SCHWINGER

PROC. N. A. S.

which contains only negative frequencies. In absolute value, these are

the energies of unit negative charge states. We thus encounter Green's
functions that obey the temporal analog of the boundary condition characteristic of a source radiating into space.' In keeping with this analogy,
such Green's functions can be derived from a retarded proper time Green's
function by a Fourier decomposition with respect to the mass.
The boundary condition that characterizes the Green's functions associated with vacuum states on a, and a2 involves these -surfaces only to the
extent that they must be in the region of outgoing waves. Accordingly,
the domain of these functions may conveniently be taken as the entire
four-dimensional space. Thus, if the Green's function G+(x, x'), defined
by (14), (16), and the outgoing wave boundary condition, is represented
by the integro-differential equation,
yA(-ib - eA+,u(x))G+(x, x') +
(29)
f(dx')M(x, x")G+(x', x') = 6(x - x'),
the integration is to be extended over all space-time. This equation can
be more compactly written as
['y(p - eA +) + M]G+ = 1,
(30)
by regarding the space-time coordinates as matrix indices. The mass
operator M is then symbolically defined by
MG+ = mG+ + iery(S/8J)G+.
(31)
In these formulae, A + and 8/1J are considered to be diagonal matrices,
(xl A +,, x') = 6(x - x')A4+4(x).
(32)
There is some advantage, however, in introducing "photon coordinates"
explicitly (while continuing to employ matrix notation for the "particle
coordinates"). Thus

-jA + J(d{),yQ)A +(t),

(33)

where -y() is defined by

(x,Yr(;)jx')

yp5(x -

)(x - x').

(34)

The differential equation for A +(t) can then be written

-

t2A +(t)

J(Q)

+ ie Tr [y(t)G+],

(35)

where Tr denotes diagonal summation with respect to spinor indices and

particle coordinates. The associated photon Green's function differential
equation is

-at2q+(t, {')

(- ') + ie Tr [-y()(5/6J(t'))G+]-

(36)

PHYSICS: J. SCHWINGER

VOL. 37, 1951

457

To express the variational derivatives that occur in (31) and (36) we

introduce an auxiliary quantity defined by

r(a)

-(61beA +Q))G+-I
- (5/beA+(Q))M.

(37)

ef (d{')G+F(t')G+S+(t' t),

(38)

a()

Thus

(6/5J(Q))G+

from which we obtain

M= m+

ielf(d))(dt'),yQ)G+rw)9+Q1, 0,

(39)

and

-aZ29+Q, {')

f(d t)P( , `)

+(t` ') = 6( P(t, 0') = -je2 Tr ['(y)G+r(Q')G+] (40)

With the introduction of matrix notation for the photon coordinates, this
Green's function equation becomes

(k2 + P)9+

= 1,

[,, k^] =

(41)

and the polarization operator P is given by

P = -ie2 Tr [yG+rG+].

(42)

In this notation, the mass operator expression reads

M = m + ie2 Tp [yG+rS+],

(43)

where Tp denotes diagonal summation with respect to the photon coordinates, including the vector indices.
The two-particle Green's function

G+(xi, x2; xl', x2')

(xi, x2| G121 xl', x2'),

(44)

can be represented by the integro-differential equation

[(Ylr + M)1(77r + M)2

= 112,
(45)
p - eA +,
thereby introducing the interaction operator 112. The unit operator 112 is
defined by the matrix representation
7r =

(X1, X21 1121 XI 1, X2) = (X1 - X1')6(X2

X2')

6(xl - X2')5(X2

x'). (46)

On comparison with (21) we find that the interaction operator can be

characterized symbolically by

458

PROC. N. A. S.

PHYSICS: J. SCHWINGER

12G12 = -ie2 Tp[LYP2S+]GG12 -ie2 Tp[y1G,6/6J]1(112G12)

- -ie2 Tp[Y2riFi+]G12 - ie2 Tp[y2G2i5/J] (I12G12), (47)
where G1 and G2 are the one-particle Green's functions of the indicated
particle coordinates.
The various operators that enter in the Green's function equations, the
mass operator M, the polarization operator P, the interaction operator
112, can be constructed by successive approximation. Thus, in the first
approximation,
M(x, x') = mb(x - x') + ie2ey,GG+(x, x'),y,DD+(x, x'),
PMV(R, i') = -ie2 tr[-yMG+(Q, i')-yvG+(t', c)],
I(xb, x2; X1', X2') = -ie2y,y2,.D+(xl, X2) (X1, x21 1121 Xl', X2'), (48)
where

9;AV Q, 0'

6,D +(,i)

(49)

and the Green's functions that appear in these formulae refer to the 0th
approximation (M = m, P = 0). We also have, in the first approximation,

FJ(t; x, x') = 'yJA(t - x)6(x - x')

-ie2y,,G+(x, t),yG+Q, x')'ypD+(x, x')

(50)

Perturbation theory, as applied in this manner, must not be confused with

the expansion of the Green's functions in powers of the charge. The
latter procedure is restricted to the treatment of scattering problems.
The solutions of the homogeneous Green's function equations constitute
the wave functions that describe the various states of the system. Thus,
we have the one-particle wave equation

(51)

(,rr + M)# = 0,
and the two particle wave equation

[Q(y7r + M)y(77r + M)2 - 112h'12

0,

(52)

which are applicable equally to the discussion of scattering and to the

properties of bound states. In particular, the total energy and momentum
eigenfunctions of two particles in isolated interaction are obtained as the
solutions of (52) which are eigenfunctions for a common displacement of
the two space-time coordinates. It is necessary to recognize, however,
that the mass operator, for example, can be largely represented in its effect
by an alteration in the mass constant and by a scale change of the Green's
function. Similarly, the major effect of the polarization operator is to
multiply the photon Green's function by a factor, which everywhere
appears associated with the charge. It is only after these renormaliza-

VOL. 37, 1951

ZOOLOG Y: ENGSTROM A ND R UCH

459

tions have been performed that we deal with wave equations that involve
the empirical mass and charge, and are thus of immediate physical applicability.
The details of this theory will be published elsewhere, in a series of
articles entitled "The Theory of Quantized Fields."
1 Green's functions of this variety have been discussed by Stueckelberg, E. C. G.,
Helv. Phys. Acta, 19, 242 (1946), and by Feynman, R. P., Phys. Rev., 76, 749 (1949).

DISTRIBUTION OF MASS IN SALIVARY GLAND

CHROMOSOMES
By A. ENGSTROM* AND F. RuCHt
DEPARTMENT FOR CELL RESEARCH, KAROLINSKA INSTITUTET STOCKHOLM

Communicated by C. W. Metz, May 15, 1951

The measurement of the absorption of soft x-rays, 8 to 12 A in wavelength, in biological structures makes it possible to determine the total
mass (dry weight) per unit area of cytologically defined areas in a biological
sample. Knowing the thickness of the sample or structure being analyzed
the percentage of dry substance can be estimated. For theoretical and
technical details see Engstrom' 1950.
Dry substance is an accurate basis upon which to express the results
obtained with other cytochemical techniques, e.g., the amount of specifically absorbing, ultra-violet or visible, substances.
The present investigation is an attempt to determine the- dry weight
(mass) of the different bands in the giant chromosomes from the cells in
the larval salivary glands of the fly Chironomus. The structures to be
observed, however, are just on the border of the resolving power of the
x-ray technique for the determination of mass. The results reported,
therefore, must be interpreted with care.
The specimen intended for x-ray investigation is mounted on a collodion
film circa 0.5 micron thick. This film supports the object in the sample
holder, a brass disk with a slit about 6 mm. long and 0.5 mm. wide. In
the first experiments salivary glands from Chironomus were isolated on a
microscope slide and the chromosomes transferred to the thin carrier
membrane on the sample holder. When examining the x-ray picture of
these chromosomes no details at all could be seen due to shrinkage effects
when the chromosomes were dried.
For the x-ray determination of mass the specimens must be dried before
they are introduced to the high vacuum of the x-ray tube. The water
must also be taken away for another reason: The high absorption of soft

387

P o p e r3 2

Electrodynamic Displacement of Atomic Energy Levels. IIL The Hyperfine

Structure of Positronium
RoBERT KARPf,us etp Aerlsru
Krr:rx
H truud Unitersily, Caubrid,ge, .ll ussltchilset!s
(Received NIay 13, 1952)
integro-difierential
equation for the electronA functional
nositron Green's function is derived from a consideration of the
effect of sources of the Dirac field. This equation contains aD
electron-positron interaction operator from which functional deprocedure. The
by an iteration
rivatives
may be eliminated
ooerator is evaluated so as to include the efiects of one and t*'o
virtual quanta, It contains an interaction resulting from quantum
exchange as well as one resulting lrom virtual annihilation of the
pair. The wave functions of the electron-positron system are the
solutions of the homogeneous equation related to the Green's
function equation. The eigenvalues of the total energy of the

I. INTRODUCTION

system may be found b). a four-dimensional

perturbatiol
teclL
nique. The s1'stem bound bv the Coulomb interactjon is here
treated as the unperturbed situation. Numerical values for tbe
spin-dependent change of the energy from the Coulomb value in
the ground state are finally obtained accurate to order a relative
to the hyperfine structure d2 Rr'. The result for the singlet-triplet
energy difference is
LW n:

la2 Ry-17 /3-

(32/9 12 ln2)a/ ol:

2.0337X 105 Nfc/scc.

Theory and experiment are in agreement.

investigation to be describedin this paper

I
was suggestedby the current theoreticalinterest
in the quantum-mechanical two-body probleml-3 and
the recent accurate measurement of the ground state
hyperfine structure of positronium.a b The system compbsed o{ one electron and one positron in interaction is
the simplest accessible to calculation because it is
purely electrodynamic in nature. Moreover, the success
of quantum electrodynamics in predicting with great
accuracy the properties of a singleparticle in an external
field indicates the absence of fundamental difficulties
from the theory in the range of energies that are significant in positronium.
The discussionof the bound states'of the electrolpositron system is based upon a rigorous functional
difierential equation {or the Green's function of that
system, derived in Sec. II by the method described by
Schwinger.I In order to obtain a useful approximate
form of this equation (and of the associatedhomogeneous equation) we have iterated the implicitly defined
interaction operator) in this way automatically generating to any required order the interaction kernel obtained
from scattering considerations by Bethe and Salpeter.3
In the present case we have included all interaction
terms involving the emission and absorption of one or
two quanta. The latter include self-energyand vacuum
polarization corrections to one-photon exchange processes as rvell as trvo-photon exchange terms. The
particle-antiparticle relationship of electron and positron is represented by terms describing one- and twophoton virtual annihilation of the pair.FE In contrast

to the caseof scattering,only the irreduciblesinteractions appear explicitly.

Our subsequentconcern is llith'the solution of the
associatedhomogeneous
equation.It should be enphasized at the outset that we shall be silent (out of
ignorance)on the questionof the fundamentalinterpretation of a rvave function rvhich refers to individual
timesfor eachof the particles.The possibility,nevertheless, of obtaining a solution to our problem entirely
s'ithin the framework of the present formalism dependson two conditions.The first of theseis that most
of the binding is accountedfor by the instantaneous
Coulombinteraction.Salpetere
has shownthat when the
interaction is instantaneous,the rvaYeequation can be
rigorouslyreducedto one involving only equal times for
the trvo particles. trforeover, the rvave function for
arbitrary individual time coordinates can be expresseci
in terms of that for equal times. This last circumstance
can alsobe exploitedin the der-elopmentof a perturbation theory x'hich yields the contribution to the energ)'
levels of a small non-instantaneousinteraction.eThe
relevant resultsof this treatment are siven in Sec.IIL
The secondcondit ion is thaI I he freJpa rt icleapproximation for all intermediatestatesshall be an adequate
one. Ihe essentialpoint here is that \yhether one derives an expiicit interaction operator by the iteration
procedureadoptedin the presentpaper (tantamount to
an expansion of the intrinsic nonlinearity in terms of
free particle properties)or by a partial summationof a
scattering kernel, the propagation rvhicl.r naturally
enters in intermediate states is that of free particles.
In the treatment of fine-structure effects, the contribu-

I L Schwinger,Proc.Nat. Acad. Sci. US 37,452,455 (1951).

,-lr. cell-Mann and F. Low. Phys. Rev.84,350 (1950.
3 H. A. Betheand E. E. Salpeter,Phys-Rev. 84,1232(1951).
{M.DeutschandS.C.Brou'n,Phys.Rev.85,1047(1952).
6 M. Deutsch, latest result reported at the Washington Meting
oI the American Physical Society, May, 1952. ?hys. Rev. 87,
212(T\ (1952).
u j. lir"nn6, Arch. sci. phys. et nat. 28, 233 (1946);29, 121,
2O7,and 265 (1947).

? V. B. Berestetskiand L. D. Landau, Exptl. Theoret.Phys.

J.
(U.S.S.R.)
(1949).Seealso V. d. Be;estetski,J. blxitl.
'fheoret. 19, 673
Phys. (U.S.S.R.)19, 1i30 (1949).
3 R . A . F e r r e l l ,P h y s , R e v . 8 4 , 8 5 8 ( 1 9 5 1 )a n d P h . D . t i r e s i s
(Princeton, 1951). Dr. Ferrell kindly sent us a copy of his thesis.
'gE. E. Salpeter, Phys. Rev. 87, 328 (1952). We are indebted
to Dr. Salpeter for making available to us a copy of his paper
prior to publication. \\re hive found his ideas very helpful i'n iut
work.

'fHE

848

388
I C
E L E C TRO D Y NA N'1

849

D I SP LA C E M E N T

tion of nonreiativistic intermediate states, lvhere the and satisfy the difierential equations
Coulomb binding cannot be ignored, must then be
eA1,@)*ieal6J rQ))*ml
obtainedin a mannerreminiscentof the first treatments ly r(-i0 uof the Lamb shift.'g This rvill not be necessary in the
XG-(x' r'): a1a- ,"'7 (2'aa)
present paper since rve shall be concernedwith the and
hyperfine (spin-spin)type of interaction to tvhich only
i 0,1 eA+ r@) - ie6/ 6l r@))I mf
relativistic intermediate states contribute to the re- ly,(quired precision.ro
y6+ (t, xt): 6(x- n'), (,2.4b)
The practical goal of this v'ork is to obtain the splitting of the singlet-tripletground-statedoublet of posi- with the outgoing wave boundary condition. They are,
tronium correctto order a3 Ry. Previouscalculations,6-8 of course,relatedby the matrlr C:
accurate to order a2Ry, have included the lowest
(2.5)
G " B + @ , x ' ) : - ( " " , C t B B , G p , " ' - ( rt )' ,.
order contributions of the ordinary spin-spin coupling
arisingfrom the Breitlr interaction (the analogof rvhich
We shall now introduce matrlr notation for the
in hydrogen is responsible for its hyperfrne structure) combinedparticle coordinatesand spinor indices,and
and of the one-photonvirtual annihilation force, char- the combined photon coordinatesand vector indices.
acteristicof the systemof particle-antiparticle.The ex- Becausethe formulaswill get quite involved, the matrix
pressionfor the energyshift given in Sec.III, Eq. (3.6) indices will be erpressedas arguments, by numbers for
yieids these again in lowest approximation and contains l h e p a r t i r l e sa n d b y
! . f ' , " ' f o r t h e p h o l o n sa. n d t h e
as well the matrix elementsof all interactions which summation convention n'ill be understood. Functions
can contribute to the required accuracy.
ol one coordinateare to be diagonalmatrices; quanti
SectionIV is devotedto the detailedevaluatiorrof all ties alfixed with only one matrix index are to be vectors
the matri-r eiementsthat may be looked upon as general- with respect to that index. The arguments of the Dirac
ized Breit interactionsbecausethey dependpurely on matriceswill refer only to the vector and spinor indices
the exchangeof photons between the two particles. of these quantities; they will be unit matrices in the
In Sec. V we consider the annihilation interaction coordinates. Similarly, functions of the coordinates
peculiar to the electron-positronsystem. Fiually, the alone must be understood as multiples of the l)irac
comparisonlvith experimentis given in Sec.\iI.
unit matrix.
As an example, Eqs. (2.4) and (2.5) rvill be tranII. THE WAVE EQUATION
scribed rvith the symbols I and S+ standing for the
A discussionof the one-particleelectronand positron
functional differentialoperatorsin Eq. (2.4):
Green'sfunction associatedr.viththe vacuum state will
a(r,;);
serueas an introduction to this section.If the notation
Q.a'a')
3-(rz)G-(23):
of reference1 is extendedto include the positron field
(2.4'b)
;
[+(rz)c+(23):6(13)
variablesQ'@), {' (") , and their sourcesthat are related
to the electron variablest@),0@), and their sources
G+(t2): _C(Lt')C L(22,)G_(2,1,). (2.5')
by the usual chargeconjugatingmatrix C,
II the mass operator M(12) is defined in the usual way,
cic-t: -t.
c: -4.
c'c:1,
() 1t
(2.6)
M+(lDGrQs):1n+Q2)C;t(2j),
,tr':C,l',,tt':C',1r. n':Crt, r'-C )n.
operator
where !J? is the functional difierential
the Green's functions are defined by the vacuum exDlt(r2): m6(12)+ie7c, 12)6/6t (0 ,
Q.7)
pectation values
^ o\

6l/(r))ol-o:

d a x ' G( x , r ' ) 6 4 ( r ' )

,l oz

and
fo'

( 2 . 2 a ) then the Green'sfunction equations(2.4) can be rvritten

in terms of integro-difierential operators F that are
obtained from the 3 by the replacementof \)l.by M.
A v e r l e v o n e r a t o rf { } - l 2 ) m u s t n o w b e d e f i n e df o r

60,(f'(r))01,,:o:1 dax'G'(x, x')bl(:'), (2.2b)

J62

ecch

(lrcpn'c

frrnefinn

r+ (t,t2) : (6/ 6eA {))

where d4 and 0q/are arbitrary variations of the electron

and positron sources,respectively.The Green'sfunctions can be qxpressedin terms of expectation values by and
,

G-(*, r'):i((!(x){,(x'))*)0.(r,

r')

(2.sa)

a.nd

6+(s, t'): i((!' (x){'(r'))*)0,(r, *')

(2.3b)

10R. Karplus and A. K)ein, Phys. Rev. 85,972 (1952).

11G. Breit, Phys. Rev. 34, 553 (1929);36, 383 (1930);39, 616
(1932).

(G+(r2) )-1
: (6/ 6eA+(0)F+(r2)

I-(f , 12) : - $ / 6eA aQ)) (G- (12))-l

: - $/aeAa({)F-(r2).

(2.8a)

(2.8b)

In the absenceoI an external field thesetrvo quantities

becomeequal becausethen the charge occurs always

389
R.

KARPLUS

to an even power only, and the two difier just in the

sign of the charge.
We now proceed to the two-particle system. The
electron-positron Green's function for the vacuum
state is defined by the relation
d,6,,(Qt(x),1,,(rz)
)*)oI o,,:o.rr,,
:,

?ot
Joc

A.

KLEIN

850

Finally, the equation may be written in the form

lF- (rt')F+(22')- r (12,r' z')fc--+(r'2" 34)

:6(13)6(24), (2.16)
r.here the interaction operator 1(1234)is definedby

",.r

I (12, l' 2')G-+(l',z',,34)

fol

anri I

AND

dnh,G-(rfiz,rih,)

: - F+(22')lyn-Qt')-

Jaz

M-(r|'))G--+(L'2" 34)

XEq(x1')6n'(x2'). (2.9)

-L
+ ie^/(8, | 3/) c (s'2)c (44,) (6/ 6J (0)G (4,s),

Evaluation of the variations with the help of Eq. (9),

reference1, leadsto the explicit er?ression

: - F-(1 1')[IJt+ (zi',) - M+ (22')]G--+(r' 2" 34)

G+(rp2, *1'12')

- iey 22')C(2'1)C-'(33')(6/6"r(
Q,
t))G+(3'4). (2.17)

The secondexpressionarisesrvhen $+ and then F- are

appliedto the Green'sfunction. Theseerpressionsmust
norv be rearrangedso as to yield the interaction operator
e x p l i c i t l y a s a n i n t e g r a l o p e r a r o ru p t o t h e d e s i r e d
x2'). (2.10) order of accuracy.In other rvords,the functionalderivax((0@)0' @z'))a)ne(x1',
As might be expected,this Green'sfunction is related tives may occuronly in terms that contributenegligibly
to a charge conjugate of the two-electron Green's to the effect that is being investigated.The subsequent
function with arguments interchanged properly, by operationss'ill be directedat finding an expressionthat
is suitable for the purposesof this paper. (For other
E q s . ( 1 3 ,2 0 ) , r e f e r e n c e1 :
effects,such as the Lamb shift in positronium,a difierG"Br6+(xg2, lc1'r2')
e n t f o r m o f t h e i n l e r a c t i o no p e r a t o ri s n e c e s s a r ) . )
With the help of the definitiono{ the vertex operator,
= -L 6F'L '66uob'as' (Jlr2, f,rf ?,
Eq. (2.8),the lorvestorder interactionmay be separated
- C pp,C-t ay G p,- (ayx2)G5, (x2'x
as follows:
1'). (2.11)
;
: (@ (",) *, () 0 (x| ) 0, (r z,)) +)oe
")
- ((Un,){' (rr))+)oc(rr rz)

"

'I'he

antisvmmetry of the two-electron Green's function

itssures that both direct and exchange processes are
contained in the electron-positron Green's Iunction;
the second term merely corrects for the fact that the
uncoupled electron-positron system cannot undergo an
exchange process. In this case,
G. y, 6,- (r 6 2', t 1'* r) -4,

( 2 . 12 )

wnence
G'y5+(rp2,
-

34)

: i e'?
t (t, 11')9+(f, ')t' +1.v,22')G' + (I' 2', jl)
_
_
ItJn- ( r, ) = M (1r' )lF + (22,) G-+ (1'2" 34)
*i.e'7(1, 13')C(3'2)g+(t, t')C-t(2' 4')
xt-(t"

r- 7y,ta t' ) G y p,- (x z'x z)

G " e, - ( * t - r r ) G r , r ( r r ' r r ' ) ,

I(12,l'2')G+(1'2"

+' l')G (1',3)G+(2'+).

(2.18)

The secondterm in Eq. (2.18)can be simplifiedb-"*the

use of Eqs. (2.16)and (2.6), rvhenceit becomes
_ i", t (8, 11, (t, t,,
)G_
)16/ 6eJ())

r1'r2')
- Cp
o,C-t t yG.;
: G

(r$t')G y a,- (rz' rz)

(xp1')G 96+(rrr2'),
";

xI(1"2, s'4')G-+(3'4" 3+). (2.t9)

(2.7j)

the proper description for noninteracting particles.

The difierential equation for G+ may be obtained
rvith the help of that for G--, Eq. (21), reference 1,
and of Eq. (2.4'). They yield

3- Qr' )G+ (1'2, 34): 6(13)cf(24)

I i e1 ft , t I' )CQ'2')C-| (M')
xG+(22')(6/6J(0)G-(4'3) (2.14)

and
F+(22')3-01')G+ (1,2,, 31): 6(13)
6(24)

* i et G, Ir' )C(1'2)c-t (44') (6/ 3J(t) )c (4'3). (2.1s)

The last term, finally, is brought into more useful form

rvith the help of the identity
g*(E, l')C-t (2'4')r- (t', 4' t')c- (r' 3)G+(2'4)
: D+(E, E')C-t(2'4')7(1', 1't')6+(1'2' , 34),

(2.20)

rvhich may be verified by iteration of both sides.The

interactionoperator thereforeis given by
I (r2, 31): ie'zYc,13)9+(,t',)r+(t',,24)
* ie't (t, lr')C (1'2)D+(t, t')c-1(41'h (t', 4'3)
- i e \ ( t , n ' ) G ( r ' 1 " ) l ( 6 6 e J( ) ) I ( 1 "2 , s ' a ' )
/

y6-'+(3,4" s"4")lrc- +(3,,+,,,34)l-t. (2.2r)

390
851

ELEC

TRO DYNA

M I C

This, and a correspondingexpressionobtained from the

alternative form of Eq. (2.17) correspondto Eq. (47),
reference1; the only difierencelies in the secondterm
above, rvhich represents the interaction due to the
virtual annihilation of the electron-positronpair. The
last term contains the effects of higher order electrodynamic processes involving more than one virtual
photon, such as multiple photon exchanges and the
corrections that symmetrize the first term in the interaction so that it dependson the vertex operatorof both
the electronand the positron.
We are interested in the effects of one and two
virtual quanta, terms of order I in the interaction- For
this reason, the functional derivative in Eq. (2.21)
needsbe evaluated only to the lowest order,
(s'4" 3" 4")l
l(6 / 6cJ(t))r (1" 2, 3' 4')G--+
XIG- +(3"4" ,34)l-'=-

I(7"2, s'4')

XG-+(3,4,, j,,4,,)16/6eJ(l)f
XIF- (3" 3)F+ (4'' 4)l:

- ie,l^y(E, 7''s')

Xt G', 24')l t (E,7" 2')C(2'2)C-r (4" 2")

x7 (8" 2" 3',)fD+(t,E )G- (3'3")G+(4'4")

D I SPLA CE M ENT

interested,the operatorF(12) is a multiple o{ the Dirac

operator F(72) that depends on the experimental mass
m oI the electron,
Ft(t21:(-aB/2r)

tFt\12),

(2.25)

rvith
l-*(x, *'): 6(r.- r')17 u(- i0,'teA+ u@))*mf. (2.20)
We may now introduce the interaction

Iqrz,s+7:e-aB/r)r(r2,3e,e.27)
which enters the equation of the usual form for the wave
function,

lF- (l t )F+(22,
) - I (12,r'2,)1,t,
Q,2,) : O. (2.28)
To find the energy levels of the system, we seek
solutions of the form
{(rp2):

4rx tu(r) ; X :i@ft

rz), x: rrxz,

(2.29)

that are eigenfunctionsof the total momentum operator

with eigenvalue K. This eigenvalue is the goal of the
calculation. fn the absenceof an external field, the interaction operator conservesthe total momentum, so that
it is possible to write an equation for the function 96(r)
of the relative coordinate *,

X D +(t, t' )l- F+ (4" 4) ^tG', 3" 3)

lF x(nc')- I r(x, *')lea@):s,

(2.30)

t F-(s"3)yQ',a"4)1. (2.22) rvhere

Whenthis expression
is multipliedout, the first of the e ; R X I Fs ( r x ' ) f . B 1 t
four termsis conveniently
includedin a symmetrical
lowestorderinteraction,
and the (.t) superscripts
can
r-71x,X' +
- t"x')
: I F
ix') F'pE\X- ix, X'
be droppedin the limit of vanishingexternalfield.
",(X
This form of the approximateinteractionoperator,
xeiK'x'd4xt,

I (12,3+)=ie'zr(t, 13)9+({,t')r (t', 24)

(2.31)

anrJ,I6(r, r') is similarly related to I(1234). The Dirac

indices in Eq. (2.30) are summed in the same way as
7")t (E,I" 3h (E',24')
those in Eq. (2.24); ,px stillhas two sets of Dirac indices
I (ie')'t G, 11')G(1'
even through it has but one four-vector argument. To
({',
4"
D+(t,
XG(4'4")7
4
{) D*(E,E')
avoid complications in the notation, this matrix notation will be continued; where necessary, superscripts
I Qe')\ (t, 11')G(l'1")y Q, 1"2')C(2'2)D+(tt')
7 and 2 will distinguish Dirac matrices that operate,
4")7 Q', 4"4)
xD+(t, E')lC-1(i3')tG',3'4')G(4'
respectively, on the first and second particle index of
the wave function gs(r).
+ C-' (M')t (E',4'3')G(3'3")1 (l', 3"3)1, Q.23). Before we proceed
to solve Eq. (2.30),_weshall decan be easilyunderstood
in termsof the equivalent composethe first two contributions to 1(1234), Eqs.
(2.23) and (2.27). W\th the help of the expressions!2
Fp'nman
rlleorcm
The wave functions {(12) of the electron-positron
I,(t, 13): z"(f, 13)(11 aB / 2r)
systemare solutionsof the homogeneous
equation,

* ie't G, ll')C (1'2)D+(t, l')C-\ (44')7Q', 4'3)

+
(2,32)
+^A(r(1_' f-3)
l F - ( l 1 ,) F ( 2 2), - I ( t 2 , 7 '2 ') ) , 1(,t ' 2 ') : 0 , ( 2 . 2 4 )
andr2,13
related to Eq. (2.16).It is important to realizethat the
operators-F(12)alsocontainelectrodynamiccorrections. g+,"(t, t): Ql qA/2r)D+(E, t',)6Thesemay be obtainedfrom the corrcctionsto the one*D+Q(t, E')iF", Q.33)
particle Green'sfunction G(12), ol rvhich Ii(12) is the
inverse.IzFor the nonrelativisticstatesin which rve are
13Note that
r2R. Karplus and N. lI. Kroll, Phys. Rev. 77, 536 (1950).

,r:|i,Dr,,

Da=!iDy, D+@:+iDFo.

391
R.

KARPLIIS

AND

,{.

8.52

KLE]N

they become

then given to a sufficient approximation bye

4ni.a7u(f, l3)D+(t, t'h,(t' , 24)

* ie\ r(t, 11')C(r'2)D+(tt')fl (43')y,(l',3'j'
X (1- aB/ r) * 4ria1,(9,1i) U (t, t')

tn: _ t. an*an*'p"(r)
f
X

X t,,tzt12- 1',t' - 4)+ 4r i o^,e,(l - {, E-.i)

X D+(t, t') t,G', 24)! 4ria7 uQ,13)
D,(D(tt).y,G,, 24), (2.34)

l",tr,
{

*/rrat"(x,

(x, x,)
r')l I y21(t,x')l I a2po)

t')l

f
I d a x ' t d a t ' t ' Ix r ( x , x " )

up to termsinvolvingtwo virtual photons.The experiXfF6c(x", x"'))-'I *,(x"',"1],P"1*1, 1.t.0;

mentalvalueof the fine structure--censtant
a hasbeen
l
writtento absorbthe chargerenormalization
factorin
measured
in
the
reference
frame
in
which
the total
r'.q.(2.33),12
4ra: e2(ll oA/2r):4o11i7.O,' . . .

spatial momentum vanishes,

(2..35)

III. PERTURBATIONTHEORY
Salpetere has discussed a method for finding the
eigenvaluesof the total energy of a two-particle system
describedby an equation like Eq. (2.30) if the interaction function does not differ greatly from a local
instantaneousinteraction of the form
6(r-r')6(l)/(r)

(x,:r, t;

i:1,2,3).

K!:

( 0 ,K o ) .

(3.7)

The function 9g@) is the relativistic Coulomb wave

function that is a good approximation to the actual
wave function of the state whoseenergy level is sought.
It is a solution of
lFac(r,r')*Ic(r,x')),pg(x'):0,

(3.8)

whence
AE: Ko- Koc.

(.3.1)
'Ihe

(3.e)

expressionEq. (3.6) is accurate to order c relative

to the {ine structure contribution 161 and further presupposesthat the intermediate states in the secondorder perturbation term, the last in Eq. (3.6), can be
replaced by free particle states. This is the casefor the
IC (r, r')l I 6y(r, x'): Ic (r, *')
spin-spin interaction under investigation.
Before closing this section, we must briefly discuss
I I xn(x, r')! I y1a(x,r,), (3.2)
the wave function pc(r) that enters into'Eq. (3.6).
where
As is the case with the electrodynamic corrections to
Jc(n, r'): -i.a6(x-r')1nt7nz6(t)/r,
(3.3) the magnetic interactions in hydrogen, the contributions
to A-E come mostly from the vicinity of the relative
the Coulomb interaction,and
coordinate origin. The two-photon contributions, therefore, will be at most of the order a,196(0)1,,where
I nn:2ia(2r)-36(xr')
po(r) is the Pauli wave function for the ground state
'Y0t1o2ko21
of positronium. Since this is the smallest magnitude
f
I T''T'
that is being considered, contributions to these terms
\ | d'*ett'1
\-"/
,1
L ku'
hi2ktz l'
that are proportional to the relative momentum
can be neglected. ft therefore sufices to approximate
I a1a: iez(7uC)6(x)6(x')(C-\ ,)(7- aB/ r) / K,z.
(3.5)
pc(")l lp"@') by the product of I esQ)l': (lam)s/r
These include the Breitlt interaction, retardation efiects, and the appropriate spin matrix element, which will be
denoted by ( ). In calculating the effect of 161, which
and the virtual annihilation exchange interaction. All
the contributionsderivablefrom Eqs. (2.23) and,(2.3a) contains contributions of order olpo(0)1, due to the
that are not included in Eqs. (3.2-5) depend on the exchangeof one virtual photon, the relative momentum
appearanceof two virtual quanta. The two-quantum can no longer be neglected. fndeed, corrections of
terms that are includedin Eq. (2.34)will be denotedby relative order a that arise from the larse momentum
162s(r),while those that are explicit in Eq. (2.23) will c o m p o n e n tos f t h e w a v e f u n c t i o nm u s t n o t b e o m i t t e d .
be denotedby I urn(r, rt) or I 6s{2)(a, r,) dependingon As Salpeterehas pointed out, an improvementover the
Pauli wave functions is obtainecl when the intesral
whether they are exchangeor direct interactions.
'l'he
change in energy levels produced by the per- equation,
turbations 161 and 1yq2acting on the electron-positron
vc(x): -io I lF*c(x, *')l-t,pe(r',0)dr'fr', (3.10)
system bound by the Coulomb interaction Eq. (3.3) is
JS-ucha term can indeed be separatedfrom the centcrof-mass transform of the first two contributions o{
Eq. (na), which may be written

392
853

DISPLACEMENT

ELECTRODYNAMIC

The following observationscau now be made about that

part of the energy change which depends on the spin
of both particles. Only large contributions of magnitude
f
a 2 and a-r will be important in the integral. It can be
(3.1
y')l-tqs(r')dr'
r'.
1)
,ps(r)-- ia | [f'^c(x,
/
seenthat only small valuesof the momenta k', k"Sam
make such large contributions. The important region
IV. THE DIRECT INTERACTION
of integration, therefore, extends over small values of
either or of both these momenta. When both momenta
We turn now to the evaluation of the matrix elements
are large, k' and k" -m, the integral becomesnegligible
for the energy shift that was obtained in the previous
for the purposes of the present calculation. A term
section. We shall consider first the contributions A.Er
proportional to k'2 and k"2 in the spin matrlr element,
from
interaction,
arise
direct
which
of those terms
for instance, is negligible becausein its evaluation one
namely, those in which an electron-positron pair is
may neglect (arz)2 compared to h'2 and *"?, so that the
present in each intermediate state. According to Eq.
integral in Eq. (a.3) becomes effectively independent
(3.6) and the definition precedingthis equation,
of a.Ia One may now see that the spin-dependent contribution of the retarded Coulomb interaction involves
i , d 4r c dx4' , p c ( r c ) I r r r ( x x, ' ) 9 6 ( x ' )
A[. B:
one of the cl.k'c2.k' terms of both F(l) operatorsand
I
is therefore a negligible large momentum effect. The
Breit interaction, of course,is important and contributes
t/
-il eo(o)i2 dnilA.v'\lK2Bt2)Q(,
r')
in conjunction rvith only one factor cr'k/cz'k'. Since
J
corrections that involve an additional factor fr"2 are too
small, one may use an approximateexpression

is used Ior au iteration procedure based on the Pauli

wave function,

dLtc"d4x"'I
Ktn(x,x")

F*(r)ry+(1+ a1.k / 2m)(l - ar. k / 2m)

i( z+n) I t!)
tt
Xl(m / E) (e-Nn-n) | ! s-

, r')>
XIF vc(x", :c")l-Ll KIBQ"'I
r
-il p0(0)| rJ daxdar'(I
*'17.
orutr>,1,

l(e-&a

(4'1)

The one-photonpart of the interaction,

AEBL: - i

to evaluate AErr.
The spin matrix
simple,

has now

quite

become

X c r . c r ( l * c , . k , ,/ 2 m ) ( l * a z . k ,/, 2 m ) l
+(at . o2k2- o\ .kc, . k)+3(or . cr)[t,

2qr
(2r)3J

(4.4)

( 0 | . a t . k '/ 2 r n ) ( 1 - a 2. k ' / 2 m )

d'a
x,Ja
x' Pc(x)I x rs(*. x' t,p6(*')

:-

element

nttt -p-i(f In)ltl)]

| d4xd4k\oc(x)eik.

''T'
'

f T' \'

'to''vo'ko'1
"Yo'll'ko'

;_
8,,"
L k,,

*
lpc\x), \+.2)
k;nk,,

R;'ft"'J

(4.5)

and the
since the 0-function implies that k'-k":k,
integrand has the necessary spherical symmetry. The
&6 integration with the usual treatment of the poles
yields

presents the greatest complication becauseit contains

the lowest order hyperline structure as leading term.
When the approximate Coulomb wave function evaluated in the appendix is inserted here, one obtains a
spin matrix element and multiple momentum integral
which is multiplied by the explicit factor c3l 96(0)1'?:

e ikotdk|(kr-k02-it)-t-Tik- t.-;tlt (6)0). (4.6)

The function of time in Eq. (a.3) is therefore even) so

that the time integration may be carried out only over
positive values if a factor of two is supplied' I'he integrals encountered are of the form

Sarl ,po(O)
l'? r
AEBr:

(2n)am2 J
nt2

( P 'zj

dle

,to't^:t"-ikte

- i(k+ L' + E" +m*m)-t,

nf

-6(k-k,+k,)

|2
! a 2n 2 ) 2 ( k t + I a , m 2 ) 2

:!r!!!f,.,a>)(43)
" (,"eolff

i\n"xmtl

since

the

denominator

never

vanishes.

'fhe

(4.7)
energy

)a Detailed examinalion shows that the integral actually is pro

portional to loga in this case. This rJependenie, however, is still
negligible for our purposes.

393
R.

KARPLUS

z
X f ,Jk,/k',1k"6(k-k'ali'11p':
FLa2mzl1(E'fm)(E"!m)
'
ltnqz/ trzl-'?1
h.

mz-E'E"

k
X,

2E'8"

. (E'-m)(E"-nr)

at
d l x d o xe' - i K " \ x- x ' ) d X

kaE'1p"

k
I
-l.
kIE'*D"_l2ml

4EE"

854

: - i l,ps(0)l' (4nia)'
LE Bz(2)

4E'8"

h*E'lE"-2m

KLE]N

of this treatment lies in thc fact that

the sum of the direct interactions is independent of the
cutoff; that a cutofi need not have been introducedat
all if the terms had beengroupedproperly accordingto
the photon momclltum that rnakes the contributiorr
rather tltan lccording to the physicrl processthal is
represenlecl.
'fhe
evaluation of the remainderof Eq. (4.1) is relatively simple.The secondline contributes

A,Epl : *(c1. o2)aa(2r)-3 | pn(O)l,

J

A.

'l'he justification

change has now been reduced to

X(k"2

AND

(+.8)

X {((r*1G1(X*1x, X' jlr')y"t)

X (t

"'G'

(X - ir, X' * L*') t u,))

X D+(X- X' + +(r- r'))D.,(X'- X t i@l x'))

As it stands, the integral in Eq. (4.8) is quite difficult

to carry out. We must remember, however, that at
f
least one of the two variables k', k" must be small comt
f (2t)
l d1kd4k'ei+tpik'!'f kt2kF'2
pared to m, a fact which permits replacement of the
corresponding kinetic energy by the rest energy,
Furthermore, the occurrence of a factor (E'-m) im'
X((T'. r'- yo'r o'(ko2/k;2))Gt(x*lr, X'llx')
plies that the particular term contributes only for
XG'(X - lr' X'-\x'11rt . rz- 1otyo,(ho2/
kir))),
large kt-m, whence &" must be small, and aice uersa.
(4.10)
In such a case, the small momentum may also be
neglected in the argument of the d-function. The an expression
derived from Eqs. (2.23), (2.31), and
remaining integrationcan then be carriedout:
(3.4). When Fourier transforms are introduced for the
Green'sfunctions, the energymay be written
LE 31: -(ot . v2)atQ") -"1 po/n)|,
4-2
Afu"r:'. . . . l e . ( o )i ' l , l o k 1 h , ' 7 ' '

"<Q;Y##",)

|
X (h'2+ +q2n 2)-2(kt 2+ I d2nt')-2
{ ((k - E' ) / 2mE kk'') 6(k-k') (k'' 2+ ia2m2)-2

"\
x(,",!s!:?-'
\
F.,-(n-ko)r

* ((h - E" ) / 2mE" kk"'z)6(k+k") (k' 2+ !azrnzl-21

2r

. ( u , . o .i )l t "' l e o ( u ) Il !l -l
J

4a
r

2q
r

\ZT)'

x I dkdk'dk" | (m,/ ti' E')6(k+k" -k )

"')

G !" - ! -l (T'
"!
T t - ? u ' ? u 'P u
I '1r,"r't
E2- (n- ko)2

tnl

l n' 2_k .^-l 1 . ( + . , )

In the 6rst term both k' and k" are of the order am, in
the secondk'-m, and in the third k"-m. A cutoff ft,,
has here been introduced as a lower limit on the final
momentum integration. Its presenceshows that some
contributions of order a2| ,pr(0)] , to AErr do arise from
small values of momentum, contrary to expectation.
It will be seen, lrowever, that the direct interaction
I xzxQ)'and the second-orr'lereffect of 1{r, also cotrtain
c o n t r i b u t i o n sf r o m s m a l l v a l u e so f t h c m o n t e n t u m : r s
represented by the appearance oI ln(m/2k,,). Just as
here, these are being treated incorrectly because of
the assumption of free intermediate states that is
implicit in the derivation of the interaction operator.

t'(iKC lk)-n
[r-

( T ' ' ' ( ' - " Y o: '' o ' k o/ 'k : )

@+ W

\
),

(4'l | )

where, as before,
Iiz:k2lm2-ie

(e)0),

};Kna>m

(1.12a,)

it nrl
hu't- Pz-Put-1,

(4.121t)

define the treatment of the poles.

Explicit display of the spin matrix element and
spherical averaging wisely precede the momentum

394
855

ELECTRODYNAMI

C DISPLACtrMENT

integration,

only anticipate the result [see Appendix, Eq. (A.3)]

that the latter will contribute a term that renormalizes
the charge occurring in the first-order virtual annihilant
r'
tion from its uncorrected value d to the measured
d
h
o
(
k
p
z
)
z
h
,
d
h
,
xf
value 4ra [see Eq. (2.35)]; to the order consideredin
Jo
J-6
this paper, therefore, all quantities depend on a from
- ? k')lE2 - (/n - h0)21-2
X { (ko'z
nere on,
The first one and last two terms in Eq. (5.1) present
* ik o'lEz- (m.- k o)zf-tlE'z- (rn+46)'?1-') ; (4.13)
some complications since the quantity B is actually a
it depends on the identities
divergent integral.r2 We expect that other divergent
integrals will make the complete result finite, but we
:
(outo
6iiia;i;
(4.14)
2(o''
o').
ni\
7;7 i:
must exercise great care to obtain the correct finite
The evaluation of the integrals is straightforward, result. For purposes oI orientation it is instructive to
except that the same cutofi fr- for small momentum consider briefly the matrix element in Eq. (5.1) for
values must be introduced. The result is
noninteracting, nonrelativistic initial and final states,
because the high energy divergencesmay be expected
(5q 2a n 'l
2r q
: - -(c'. c') | es(0)l, - - *aE B2t2)
1n^- l, (4.15) to be the same in this simpler caseas in the positronium
I
J m'
tZT
ZR^l
T
atom. The wave function ,pg(r) then represents the
and gives the total efiect independent of ,t- of processes initial state plus a co'rrection due to one Coulomb
where all quanta are exchanged between the two scattering, while { lF (r, xt )f-t I x B (r', r" ) s s(0)d4*' d4*"
represents the correction to the initial state due to the
particles,
Breit interaction and retardation effects. The three
2r a
3al
I
A E a t l L E e z ? ) : - ( o t . " r ) l e o ( O ) l ' { 1 - - f . ( 4 . 1 6 ) terms we are now considering, therefore, comprise the
3m2
|
2rl
matrlr element of the virtual annihilation in the initial
trEp2t2): (8a2fr) I ,ro(O;| '1",."t;

The perturbatio\ AEB1G)includes efiects of vacuum

fluctuations on the exchangeof a single quantum. The
spin-dependent corrections to the vertex operator
are contained in the anomalous-magnetic moment
(a/2r)(e/2m) of each particle while the vacuum
polarization has no efiect on the singlet-triplet separation. The added contribution is therefore
2ra
AEB1(D: - -(a1.r,)le6(0)1,{a/nl.
3 rnz

t!

lr

ir

\7
Y
ir

Itr I
b

,. Feynman diagrams for virtual annihilation

electron positron scattering.
"r"-

(4.17)

state plus a correction due to the four-dimensional

interaction representedby one quantum exchange.The
V. EXCHANGE INTERACTION
Feynman diagrams for theseprocesses,Fig. 1, show that
In this section we shall evaluate the matrix elements the electrodynamiccorrections,Fig. 1b, 1c, are just
of the exchange energy, embracing all processes in the correction to the vertex operator, and therefore
which there is an intermediate state with no pairs contain each a contribution (q/2r)B multiplying the
To our order of accuracy,
basic interaction Fig. 1a.r?,16
present. The energy change,according to Eq. (3.6), is
the divergent integrals disappear.
f
With this understandingwe can attempt to evaluate
A E n : - ; I d a x d a xe's ( x ) l y ' ; ( r , r ' ) e 6 ( r ' ) ( 1 - a B / r )
the actual matrlx element in Eq. (5.1). In order to
keep track of the inf,nite quantities, it is very conf
venient to regulate the interaction brought about by
-tl eo(0)l' dardax'(I6ra(x.x'))
I
photon 11 in Fig. 1 with a heavy photon of mass .4..r8
The integral B can be evaluatedto B^,l'?
f
-tl eo(O)
d4)cd4#td4r"d4r'tl
frf
l' t
J
B^:(ir'?\ t I uduldak
Jo

X(I rtn(r, r")lF ac(x" , x"')l-11 s1a(x"', r')

t I rra(x, *")lF 6c(rt' , x"')f-tI yla(x"' , r')
t I ru(r, r" )lF xc (x".,x"' )f-' I x t n(x"', r')).

(.5.1)

Considerationof the virtual two-quantum annihilation

I xzr and of the second-ordersingle-quantumannihilation will be postponed to the end of this section. We

2
X l(kzf m2u2)2- (k2J m2u2
| L2(l - tr))
- 4m2(1- u - lu2) (h2+ m2u2)-3l
:ln(tr/m)!1a*1n(m/2k,,),

(.s.2)

* J.C'.lVr.a,Phys.Rcv.78,182(1950).
16R. P. Feynman,
W. PauliandF.
Phys.Rev.74,1430(1948);
Villars,Revs.ModernPhys.21,434(1949).

395
R.

KARPLUS

AND

where quantities depending inversely on ,4.have been

omitted and the low energy cutofi A- has been introduced [see text following Eq. (a.9)].
The structure of the exchange interaction 161a implies that the energy change corresponding to Fig. 1
can be written

A.

Tr[C-17;e1(0)]
:ll-

(a/2r)B tl Tr[C-12;i,o(0))(- a/rm,)

f*.

LE a1: - v o*-2 o t(O)

"aQ iC)"p

o'opt(o)

"'

h2dk{-?n2E-t(4k2/3} 2n2)

X (kz+ +q2rn2)-2t I (E: r - P- t1t, *z P- s

-h2(h2+ l\2- L4/4rn
)-rl_ (rn2_I.le)
t
X E (4k,/ 3* 2m2)h-4+ + (E-t - E - 1)

(5.3)

where
(C-\)

-1f1.
+ (tnz- + L2)k-2E

p'=TrlC-tttpt(O)l
Here

E _(h2+L2)r,

=lr- (a/zr)B
Trll d.k(rn,/
E)
^12"(2")-,
I
X (h2+ iq2nt2)-2| (l - r. k / Zm)
t
XC-tt i0* r.k/ 2m)l C-t^yft2/ 4*rl

eo0)
l

+ (i/zr)

(5.5)
(5.6)

in the second set of terms, which came from the regulating expression. One can observe that these reduce
to the first set when h:O il am there is neglected with
respect to fr. The integrations are similar to the ones
encountered in connection with Eq. (4.9) but made
more complicated by the regulator. If one erpands the
result in porvers of (m/L)'and keeps only the leading
fprm

nne

nhtqinc

Tr[C-r7;e1(0)]

dak(i ;@- i (],KC* h))

:ll-

XC-ty 1(tn- 7 (! KC- h)h ;- (ks2

/ k;2)
Xto(m- 7(iK"*k))C-tt;(m-

856

integral, Eq. (5.a) becomes

X I

X(C-\ ) y
"',p{o)",0,,

KLEIN

(d/2r)B ^l Tr[C-\2;,po(0)]

x U -f (q/ 2r)Lln(rt/ m)l- +* L- In(m/ 2k-)l

t(iK" - h))tol

: (l- 2a/ r) Tr[C-12;po(0)], (5.7)

(5.2), whence
Xlk p'zl-tlE'- (tn+ ko)'f-Lla, - (m- ho)rl-L,po(o) with Br given by Eq.
LE a1: - (r a/ mr) (1- 4a/ r)

- (i/ 2r) dah{i,@- i G KC* k))

J

XTr[po(0)zF]

XC-t y1(m.- 1 (l KC- k)), Fllh t2+ L'zl-\

Tr[C-r'y;e6(0)],

(5.8)

because7rC is a symmetrical matrlx. When the usual

representation of the charge conjugating matrix

- (n- fr0),1,e0(0)1.
(s.4)
XlEz- (m I ho)zl-'lE2
I
In writing the contribution of the regulating term,
the last in Eq. (5.a), we have taken advantage of the
fact that a very short range potential has no bound
state so that the scattering picture describedby Fig. 1
is applicable. The total energy has been approximated
by 2m everywhere except in the correction to the
Coulomb wave function, rvhich comesfrom Eq. (A.9)
evaluated at the origin. Only a spaceJikepair-producing
Dirac matrix need be taken in Eq. (5.3). The trace is
evaluatedrvith the help of the facts that the Pauli wave
function has only largecomponentsan<1that the chargcconjugating matrix C is an odd Dirac matrix. After
integrating over fro with the usual treatment of the
poles and after spherical averaging of the momentum

C:C-L:

(5.9)

"to"yz

is inserted, the direct product of the Dirac matrices in

Eq. (5.8) can be relabeledso that the operatorsrefer
to the spins of the individual particles:F8
|
Oo(O)" eQ {) e"(C- y ) p'"' p o(0)"' p'--

po*(0)
"B

a po,l,po(0)y
X [86"",68p,+]o
"""
"'

:-

Ieo(0)l'(s'),(s.10)

where S is the total spin of the system,

S:*(a'f

a'z).

( s .1 )

We then obtain the known effect of the virtual annihilationrs plus a large correctionof relative order a,
6 E " ' : ( r a / m 2 ) \ S ' z ) l , p o @ ) l ' 0a- a / r l .

(5.12)

396
857

ELECTRODYNAMIC

DISPLACEMENT

We norv turn to the contribution of the second-order prevents them from contributing. Since the wave funcsinglequantum annihilation,
tions in which the spin matrix elements are evaluated
have only large components,Eq. (5.18) can be simpliaE ^2(\, iTzd2m-,TrIpo(0)roC](C-tr)
Iied to
X[Frc(0, 0)]-'(z,c) Tr[C-I7;e6(0)],

(5.13)

rvith the spin sums as inferred from the derivation of

this expression. In the appendix this efrect is interpreted in terms of the polarization of the vacuum by
the photon produced in the virtual annihilation. The
evaluation given there together with Eq. (5.10) shorvs
that the effect on the singlet-triplet splitting is8
L E A 2 ( D : ( r a / n ) ( S r ) |e o ( 0 ) l , | - 8 q / 9 r ) ,

- 3k,'z\Q orsc)(C- lvorr)) : 3}"'!(("vzro)(rzvo)), (5.19)

where

ia2
A E d r ( r ) : - l 9 o ( 0 )l t

The momentum integration,

?
I d[hk!21k"2+L2l-a:ir2/3L2,

ar

xl
Jo

x((t rltGKc-k)-m)y"C)

| 9r(0) l,

FL

Nt | "a*7*12-y1'-4(r-y)-ief-r
.ro

: - (a' / nf)(2- S'z)l,po$)l'z(2- 2 ln2+ il).

(i KC - k) mft

"
- k) - nl1,\,

(S'rs)

u,herr lourier representationsare iutroduced for the

Green'sfunctions.The spin matrix elementsof the tso
parenthesesis to be taken as trace with the final and
initial state n'ave functions, as in Eqs. (5.3) and (5.a).
The momentum integration is simplified by the usual
procedure of combining the three distinct denominators
accordingto the formula

(5.22)

brings the energy perturbation into the form

LEp{z): -6oz*-r(2-5r)

I C-\,6GKC

(5.21)

3k,z(z-521.

T.

KC - h) \'z+ m'?l' l- L
X Ihe2(K c - k)
"21(+

(5'20)

Rearrangement of indices according to Eq. (5.10)

finally produces the ordinary spin matrix element of a
function of the total spin, Eq. (5.11),

(5.t4)

since the renormalization constant ,4, Eq. (A.3) has

been incorporated already.
The final item to be discussedin this section is the
energy shift associated with tivo-quantum virtual
annihilation given by

x (- C-' t,lt

7s:'Yt"t2"l3"fot^ls2=- l.

(s.23)

The real part of this expression corresponds to the

energy change of the level while the imaginary part
correspondsto the well-knownrTdecay rate of the singlet
s t a t eb y t w o - p h o t o na n n i h i l a t i o n ,
r-1:a3 Ry-:0.804X10ro sec t.

(5.24)

'I'he

total contribution of the virtual annihilation

interaction may be collectedfrom Eqs. (5.12), (5.13),
ano ().rJr,
6B o: (r a/ m2)l,po(0)l,{(S'!)(1- aa/ r - 8a/9r)

f 2(s'- 2)(1-ln2)).(s.2s)

- h)^t* *,1,l-,
, d 4 k ath2 ( K C k ) , r l ( i K "

VI. SUMMARY

:6

'I'he

ftftf

J^

dependenceof the 1tS and 13S stales in positronium on the spin of the system is obtained by the
addition of Eqs. (,1.16),(a.17),and (5.25):

t'dx tuJ a,n

J^
vn

X llk - i Kc (xy -t 2(1 - *))1'?

tE:

{rm2(xy2-4(1- x)(l- y))- i.el-a. (5.16)

T h e d i s p l a c e m e n tk s - h s f n ( y + 2 ( 1 - r ) )
denominator into the form

h2| rm2lx(2*y)'- aQ-il

(2r o/ m'z)l,po(0)l,{t(ar. c')lr-

}a/ rf

+ Xsl[l - (26le| 2 tn2)a/r)1.

brings the

By taking the difierence of the value of these operators

in the singlet and triplet states, one arrives at the
( s . 1 7 )hyperfine splitting

and leavcsthe numerator proportional to

(- c-''v,'r o'r,* C-'r,r,r u)) (5.18)
"t'c)
after hyperspherical averaging and the discarding of
some terms whose deoendenceon the Dirac matrices

LIV 6: (2raf m2)l *oo(0)1'z{7

/3-(32/9+21n2)s/tl
:la'zRy-17

tk x'((t n

-lJ.

/3- (32/9+2 tn2)a/rl

:2.0337X106 Mc/sec.

A5h..t".,Ann. N. Y. Acad.Sci. 48,21g(1946).

397
R,

IiARPLUS

AND

The singlet state is the lower one. It can be seenthat

most of the rather large negative electrodynamiccorrection comesfrom the virtual annihilation interaction.
When the experiment of Deutsch and Browna is
interpreted on the basis of a Zeeman efiect that depends
on the totar magnetic ^. ;;;"G;i;;;,jfi]"7i'"1'"i
each particle, the value of the separationobtained by
them isb

A.

The center-of-masstransform of the noninteracting

Green'sfunction appearsin tire integralequation (3.10).
Its Fourier representation is
,.
[j?xc(r'r')]-t:-)

APPENDIX
The operator [tr.(13)F+(24)]-1:G-(13)G+(24), the
n o n i n t e r a c t i n gl w o - p a r t i c l eG r e e n ' s f u n c t i o n ,a n d i t s
F o u r i e r t r a n s { o r m sa p p e a r s o f r e q u e n t l y t l r a t r h i s
appendlr will be devoted to a discussionof someof its
properties.
fn connection with the second-ordereffect of the
virtual annihilation, there appears the tensor

_
t

dok"ou o'

-. /.{.4\
l m - t t ( i K-c l h ) ) L n' -t-t G K c - h-) f
x- ki'?)
(+Krc
t E2- (LKoctha)zllE'z-

LWh: (2.035+0.003)
105Mc/sec.
Theory and experiment are thus in satisfactory agreement.
We are grateful to V. F. Weisskopffor calling this
p r o b l e mt o o u r a t l e n l i o n .T h e a u t h o r s a r ea l s o
lne
l : db l , e d
t o t h e m e m b e r so f t h e I n s l i t u , t . e , I o r . A d v a n c S
ludy
Princeton,for an informative discussion'

858

KLEIN

when the center of mass is at rest. The quantity -R is

defined by
(A'5)
E-h'zlnf-ie,.
e)0,
5 i n e eF . o ( A 4 ) r e n r e s e n r st h e n o n i n t e r a c t i n gt w o plt'ir"tr.."'='r""Iti""
i " t o u t g o i n gr v a ' e s .T i e i n r e lration over the fourth component of the momentum

i;Ji.IfTJ;.,ilJ.ilIi:,.T]''Jil':,Y;
iltimecoordinafts
,
lFxc(x,r'1f

':i(2r)-3

f
dkr;t r'-"r
J|
X.(hrllqrmr)Filt-t'),

(A.6)

where

(C-1tl)lFxc(0,0)l-'(ry,C)
:,
t

F o Q ) : L 7 s - o t u _ m ) )+t e _ i ( E + n ) t t t )

f2E
d 1x ' e - i K ( x- x ' ) ( c - L ? ; ) " " . G " , s , - ( x ,x ' )

f/

k'l

o,.k\/
o,.k\
|/
Xl I l+l l t * 2* m I
2m / \
[\
/

t h a t a p p e a r si r r t h e v a c u u mp o l a r i z r t i o nt e n s o r . rh2
i s e q u a tl o

(4o;tt"""

otk\

t)l
tt
I !le-ttz-^> t - ri(E+m) 1

x T r t l p - ; . x , ) t , G - ( x , , x ) 1 ,( A . 1 )
l yeq u r n t i t y
b y E q .( 2 . 5 )T. h i si s .h o w e l epr r, e c i s er h

i
--l^..lKc\2-K.cK

o'k\/

xlll+-ll1--l+-l
2 m' l 4 m 2 J
2 m/ \
L\

r
X G " p + ( X , X ' ) ( t , C t ul d, u
n :x ' r - ' n ' * - * ' '

k, /

;,\t*

c\

'

I cr.k-a2.k\l

l't

)l

(A'7)

und the total energyo{ the 1,5state has been inserted,

v,(1- +vr)(Kc),I

xlza+["'dv
m2lf,(KC)'(1_V2) ].

Koc:2m-ta2m.

(A.2)

In the frame where Knc:6, (KC)2--4m2, the tensor

becomes

'#','(;-^-::)
(A.3)

(4.8)

The wave function derived from Eq. (3.11) with the

help of the operator just obtained is

eg\):

(2a/(2n)2)

f
| dketk'n

X (h2!la2m2)-2F{t) eo(O). (A.9)

P o p e r3 3

OF
ONTHEMAGNITUDE
CONSTANTS
THE RENORMALIZATIOI\
EI-.ECTRODYNAMICS
IN QUANTUM
BY

GU){NAR KII,LI'N
\I
lith the aid of an exacl forntulation of the renoimalization method in guantum electrodynamics which has been developed earlier,it is shown that not
VV
all of the renormalization constants can be finite quantities' It must be stressed
theory.
that this statement is here made rrithout any reference to perturbation

Introduction.
In a previous paperl, the author has given a formulation
of quantum electrodynamics in terms of the renormalized Heisenberg operators and the experimental mass and charge of the
electron. The cor^sistency of the renormalization method was
there shown to depend upon the behaviour of certain functions
(II (p'), Dr(p') and Xr(p'z)) for large, negative values of the argument p'. If the integrals

(rr (- o\
\)a)a

de,

f3, (- o)
\

"

do

(i:

1,2)

(1)

converge, quantum electrodynamics is a completely consistent

theory, and the renormalization constants themselves are finite
quantities. This would seem to contradict what has appeared to
be a well-established fact for more than trventy years, but it
rnust be remembered that all calculations of self-energies etc. have
been made with the aid of expansions in the coupling constant
e. Thus what we knorv is really only that, for example, the selfenergy of the electron, considered as a function of e, is not analytic al the origin. It has even been suggested2 that a different
scheme of approximation may drastically alter the results obtained
with the aid of a straightforward application of perturbation
any
theory. It is the aim of the present paper to show-without
attempt at extreme mathematical rigour-that this is actually not
the .case in present quantum electrodynamics. The best v'e can
1 G. KAr,r-6Nn Helv. Phys. Acta 25, 417 (f952), here quoted as I.
' Cl., e.g., W. TurnnrrC, Z.f. Naturf .6a 462 (1951). N. Hu, Phys. Rev. 80,
1109 (1950).
1*

399
4

Nr. 12

hope for is that the renormalized

words, that the integrals

theory is finite or, in other

n'rr(- o).
f},(-")
da, \..
V

o0,

(2)

Jq',)a"

appearing in the renormalized operators, do converge.No discussion of this point, hov.ever, r'ill be given here.

General Outline of the Method.

We start our investigation with the assumption that all the
quantitiesK, (l -l)-1

and * <a. notations,cf. I) are finite ol

lv

that the integrals (1) converge. This will be shown to lead to a

lower bound for I/(p,) u,'hich has a finite limit for - prn *,
thus contradicting our assumption. In this way it is proved that
not all of the three quantities above can be finite.'Our lower
bound for II (pz) is obtained from the formula (cf. I, Eqs. (82)
and (32 a))
r/
\- r,

Ir (p') : :+
1- 1;wt').r;
) , | <oli,1'S 1z
"y-

(3)

p\'): p

It was sho*'n in I that, in spite of the signs appearing in (3), the

sum for II (p') could be written as a sum over only positive terms.
Thus we get a lorver bound for II (pz), if we consider the following
expression

Ir (p')r --+; )l'l aol,i"lq, q')l'.

"r

(4)

ofrp

In Eq. (4), (0 ljrlq, g') denotes a matrix element of the current (defined in I, Bq. (3)) between the vacuum and a state with
one electron-positron pair (for no>- co). The energy-momentum
vector of the electron is equal to g and of the positron is equal
to q'. The sum is to be extended over all states for which q + q' : p.
We can note here that, if we develop the function Z (pr) in
powers of e2 and consider just the first term in this expansion,
only the states included in (a) will give a contribution. For this
case, the sum is easily computed, e. g. in the following way:

) r ' l ( 0t i , 1 " , 1: '

( i : r , , r t 1 1 ; ;"';- t ( 0 t L4t l ' )

400
Nr. 12

(5)

'lhe

for large
function Z(0) (p'z) has lhe constant limit
,{n,
'of values
Oz. This corresponds, of course', to the rvell-knorvn
for
the first-order charge-renormalization.We shall see,
divergence
however, that with the assumptions we have made here the
Iower bound for the complete If (p'), obtained from (4), is rather
similar to IIo (p').

An Exact Expression

for the Matrix

Element

of the Current.

Our next problem is to obtain a formula for (0 lirlq'q'>

rvith which we can estimate the matrix element for large values
of - (S * q')'. ,For this purpope we first compute

= -"!!Jt 3)lip(*),f (3)ldr"'

lir@),rtor(r')l

(6)

- r"
rp(B)idar"' .
I;,!,i ) vnlirt*),
(Cf. I, Eq. (5a).) The last commutator can be computed without difficulty if we,introduce the following formula fot ir(*)
ieNz

i r @ ) : =E,slr)

0 2A " . @ )

+ r _ Ltaiffi-

rvith
6:

6pit- L6r+6i,*

L6p+lAn(r) (7)
(7 a)

and

:
(r)).
s7@)
f;fO<"1,yrp

(7 b)

The expression (7) is rvritten in such a way that the second timederivatives of all the Ar's drop out. With the aid of I' Eqs. (4)(7) we norv get

401
6

Nr. t2

(r),
Lir(,rl,vG11*-,-*:
,'?, utlrt rp(3)l I
: -

-i"')
-=r7,TaT1"V(r)d(F

(8)

It thus follo*'s that

/.x

t i r @ ) , t t o r ( r ' ) J: - N ) j . ( 1 3 ) [ . r p ( ' ) ,f ( 3 ) ] d
-

pIV

t _ tfulS(t

(e)

t)y;rp(x).

We then proceed bv computing

Q l {fj r(r) , ,ro)(r')), Ttor(r")} | o )

ieAf"
(1e
(* i_ Lfui.S ) zr S 2) N ) S-(tl) de""
(r), {?(o)
x [(0lf,rp
(2),/(3)}]lo>-<o l{ti,"@),?-(0)
(2)l, f (( 33a ) )) ll 00(r) 1l .
|,,.,,

If this expression is considered as an identity in r, an

I
r nI d fr'
:t:'
c" ]t
will obviouslv give us a formula for (0 lirlU, A, anr dd fo
for
rilightthl rie
Q l i p I q ' ) . ( C f . I , E q s . ( 6 8 ) a n d ( 7 7 ) . ) \ \ / e t r a n s f o r m the
iht
hand side of (10) in the follo'wing u.ay:
l''"'
(2),/(B)): r)4<rl, /<+l)s (+z)d*w-j
lrtot

9,,7a
1e;+ Iili l si ( 3 2 )

(11)

and, hence,

( o l l i r @ 1 ,{ 7 ( 0 ) ( 2/ () 3
, ) } ll o l :

# r ^ t ( 3 2 ) ( 0l t i r { O , A i ( 3 ) l 0 )

+ u'Iljf'u(ol.jp(*),{/(e),7<+>>ll
0)s (42).

(12)

The last terrn in (10) can be treated in a similar \vay:

f"

oUl

(r}l
L i , , @ ) , ? t o r ( 2: ) Jn - ) j 7 , ( r ) , f ( 4 ) l s ( 1 2 ) d r l v 1
, L _r O G ) y t s ( * z ) E ^ p
and

t i ! -. <
. t 3 ) d x " ' ( o 1 ( F/((' ): ), ) l o 1: - ( 0 1 { o( r ) , t p ({ r, t' )
* 5 " ^ :B" -) ty n , p ( r ) d . r " ' ): l or >
s(r ) -*,]
[t

I
tt*'
j

Nr. 12
Collecting (12), (13) and (14) we get
( 0 | {[J& (0), ,p(o)
(r')), y{o)(r")) | 0 )

i+]+2(N-1)l6r1s(1 r)vf

(r2)

pI

-,

\ s _ 1 r s7; 7 . s ( 3 2d)r " ' ( 0 l l i r { * ) , A i ( 3 ) l | 0 )

(15)

a-h
,.J

-"')jf

FI"'

( / ( B )f, < + l )l lo ) s ( + z )
U f ' " s ( 1 s )< o l l i p ( r ) ,

- N ' ) j j " ' ! j f ' " ( 1 3 ) ( o| { f ( 3 ) ,l iu @ ) , / ( 4 ) l| 0

} )s ( + 2 ) .
'Ihe

second term in (15) can be rewritten lvith the aid of the

frrnctions II (p') ana n (p2).

(0 | li

:
0) dr lv
r , @) ,A ,.(3| 0
)l) ta o {a +l1 oI h1,@) ,i 7@\l
:
ap,'ot''u(p)lptpt- oz6rtJ4\P\
-;t\

(16)

We are, holvever, more interested in the expression

t''"1'[
L'
dPPin,*\w'')
e ( r 3 ) l ( o l t T r ( r ) ,A i ( 3 ) ll o l :
5tr+
e,r). )

(1i)

-t ine(p)n (p,)l+ tr * e(r Dlu#::},

|
lvhere

@(*) :
Obviously, rve have

,,
\-'"/
"fa\a l

dpeip'
u( p)n q') .

(18a)

@(3r):0

ryP:

( 1 7a )

-in(o)d(t-;"')

(18b)

for rld' : ro. It thus follows

a#+9
e '( * B ) o e u o f r l - T
- f r l ' [ e ( r B ) @ ( B r+) ]2 i n ( 0 ) d u * 6 7 . * d ( r 3 )( .t e )
o r:,^r o

403
8

Nr. 12

Using the equation

u u ' ;t ( l 3 ) z l s ( s z ) : o '

weger
(ol

-'

: -

(20)

- f e(r B )]s(1 s)y7 s(8 2 )(o

I t7r ( r ) ,a,( 3) Jlo>dr "'
\ ; [1
J_-

I ine(p)rI @')l
d;f\o*"'too"o*u'(l')7"s(zz)lnQ'z)

(21

t i6r+f-sQ *)yns(r2).
Introclucing(21) into (1b) we obtain
( O| {[7, (r), yt(o)
(ct')], 1p@
(x:,,)>| 0>
nn
t

: re rr"' r - d p i ^ , y e r 3)yps(82)i - rr
er)
\a ' u \ (iLn'nr'or*",s(l
+n@)-ine(p)n(pr)l

-"'

c.r

al-

Pr"'

o * " ' d * r v s ( r s () o l tj r { * ) , ( / ( 3 ) ,f f + > >0l l) s ( 4 2 )

\
*
a.l- o

(r.r\

- r ' \ 0 r , , , \ d . r r v s ( 1 (30) l { f G ) , [ i r G ) , f f + 1 1 1 , 1 0 ) s ( 4 2 )

'-a'*z"g7fr1s(1

r)y,s(*2).
The first ter-m in (22) describes the vacuum polarization and is
quite similar to the corresponding expression for a weak external
field (cf. I, Appendix). The remaining terms contain the ano_
malous magnetic moment, the main contribution to the Lamb shift
etc. Introducing the notation

- N z0(rB ) 0(8 4 )(0

l l i u @),{f (B) ,lf + .r }Ilo>
- LN 20(r 3 )g(r 4 )(0
l {/(3 ), l i u @ ) ,/ta>l}I o>
_ 2 _ ! ( N _ 1 ) , "L 6 1 , n r n. ,(6r 3
n) d(34)
t:

ie

nn

<z'"Ar\\
L'J

arar'tto'',r'+i,(x4tAp(p', p)

(23)

404
9

Nr. 12

o(*):]tt+u(n)1,

( 2 3 a)

rve obtain from (22)

(ol;r,lq,q,>
|
_
- ( 0 l 7 ; l' rq , q ' ) - Z < < n- t q ' ) ' ) +_z ( o-)i n l r ( ( q * q ' ) ' )
lt
*, i _-l I * ie( 0 l,t@l,t') Ar (- q',q)<01
v(o)
| q) .
|

(24)

L)

This is the desired formula for the matrix element of the current.

Analysis of the Function Ap(p',p).

We nov' v'ant to investigate the function Ap(p',p) in some
detail, especially studying its behaviour for large values of
- (q + q')' in (24). For simpliciff, we put p' : k * 4 and study
i eA e ( p ' , p ) :

r'r'
I
(3t'1-ip(r4\
1 s 2 0{ ( r 3 ) 0 ( . r a ) ( 0 1{ / ( 3 ) ,
d*" r'ip'
! \d*"'
[,ru,

U o @ ) , 1 ( 4) )l o
l 1 - 0 ( r 3 ) 0 ( 3 4 ) ( o tl " r r ( " ) , { f ( s f) (, 4 ) i l | 0 ) } '

We treat the two terms in (25) separately. The first vacuum expectation value can be transformed to momentum space with the
aid of the functions

t \ i ' )@ ' , p ): v , : Z ( 0 1 / zl ') ( z ' l j o l r ) ( r l f l o )

(26)

t \ , - () p ' , p ): v ' ) . < 0 l i l t ' ) < r ' l i * l r ) < r l l 1 0 )

(27)

n l !@ ' , 0->- , ' ) i : (0 l / l z ' )( z ' l i l ' >< z l i k l D

(28)

a ? \Q ' , p ): v ' 2 . ( o l , rzo')l ( z 'l f l r >< z l f l l) .

(2e)

ii:,,=i,

It then follows that

( 0 | {/(3), lt^(r), f(4)l ) | 0 ) :

u1,;(
ffi

(3r)+ipr'+}Af)
rip'
@" p)

..
-'iP'(34)
nf)(P"
P)
:,:f.',:( :!.J^i!,'
r';,,.r';;-"

(30)

405

Nr. 12

10

Our discussion started with the assumption that all the renormalization constants and, of course, all the matrix elements of
and /(r) are finite. As this'is a condition on
the operators jr(r)
the behaviour of, for example, the function II (p') for large values
of -p2, and as this function is defined as a sum of matrix elements, it is clear tirat we also have a condition on the matrix
elcments themselves, i. e. on the functions A and B defined in
p ' ) d .T o g e t
and -(p(26)-(29) for large values of -p2,-p'2
more detailed information on this point we consider the expressi<ln

<r l l j p ( d , A f () * ' ) l l , )
L ozD (rc'- r)
_ r,,) D (r, * r,,)
: -' . -d*,,p,,.(*
*'
l L-o xro x,, +f ,\

(31)

u'ith

Frr(r-r")

: 0( " - * " ) < t l l i p ( * ) , i r ( * " ) ) | " )

(32)

(cf. I, Eq. (A. 8) and the equation of motion fol Au (r)). Supposing, for simplicity, that I z ) does not contain a photon u'ith
energy-momentum vector 1c, we have

("ljp(")lz, k)

t'-*r*,(

(') | * ) + i \ dt:"Fp,(*-* ,,)(olnf

o lAto)
{"")l*>.1

\Vriting

Fr1(r- r") : 0(* -.,:"),#

rrt (n)
dp"io@-*")

(34)

and using the formula

e(r-r")

: *"5 41,i,<*^-*"')

(35)

dpein'-t"){FpQ) + inFri.@))

(36)

we get

iFrtt(r- *") :,#

.J

with

F6@) : e \ * r a ( p , p o *i .

(37)

(33)

406

Nr. 12

1l

We further note that from (34) it follo'ws that

F r 1 f u :) v : ( z l i t l z ') ( r ' l iu l z ) - I ' f ( r i p l r ' ) ( z ' l i , . l z ) .( 3 4 )

p,- ,:

t)\- t:

I)'-,+ p

p'-t-D

If every expression appearing in our formalism is finite, the

integral in (37) must converge. This means thatr)

I::.It(P'Po):
Putting p :

A:

o'

( 3e)

fr rve then get frorn (38) and

( 3e)

1i o l " ' ) l ' ( - 1 ) N ! :+r x i : ' r: 0

lim )

|(

lirn )

| ( 1 1 io l " ' > l ' ( - 1 ) N l " ) + N l :" i 0 .

-P
P(t)

"

(.i0 a)

po:>a Dt:'):p(.)+ p

and
Po )

Pl''):

(40 b)

If we first consider a state I z ) rvith no scalar or longitudinal

photons, it can be shorvn with the aid of the gauge-invariance
of the current operator (cf. I, p. 126. Eq. @Z) there can be
verified explicitly rvith the aid of (32) and (33) above) that
only states I z') rvith transversal photons will give a non-vanishing contribution to (a0 a) and (40 b), and these contributions are
all positive. \Ve thus obtain the result

('ljolz')l' : 0
- l i m' t|+ a

(41)

tP\-'-P\o'

if none of the states lz) and lz' ) contains a scalar or a lorrgitudinal photon. Because of Lorenlz invariance which requires that
Eq. ( t) is valid in every coordinate system, it follows, horvever,
that (41) must be valid for all kinds of states. If lve make a
Lotentz transformation, the "transversal" states in the new
coordinate system will in general be a mixture of all kinds of
states in the old system. If (41) were not valid also for the scalar
and longitudinal states in the old system, it could not hold for
the transversal states in the nerv system.
1) The case in which the integrals converge without
will be discussed in the Appendix.

the functions vanishing

407
Nr.12

L2
From equation (41) rve conclude that

lim Al+)(p,,p) : o

@2 a)

-(p-P')"+a

lim B[+)(p,, p) :

(42b)

__pr_>a

rim B[-r (p,,p) : o.

t'2 .>

(a2 c)

It is, of course, not immediately clear that the sum over all the
must vanish because every term vanishes.
terms in (26)-(29)
What really follows from (40) is, however, that the sum of all
must vanish. If the limits in
the absolute values of (zlirlz')
performed
in
such a way that p2 and p'2 are
A and B are then
one of the p2's are kept fixed
kept fixed for ,4 and (p-p')'and
for the B's, equations (42) will follow.
To summarize the argument so far, we have shown that if
we write

( 0 I {f(B), lio@), l(4)l} | o I :

we have

(tP

rz 116\ \dpap'

tim F1(1,, P ):

p) (43)
r'o'Gr)+ip(r4)Fk(p',

o.

(44)

Pa.
,_rr,o)
Fu(p',p) : \:; FkQ

(a5 a)

-(p*p')'>

Introducing

the notations

ar

and

(45 b)

\(p',il:\+r.(p',pter)

(e is a "vector" with the components er : 0 for 1t * 4 and

eo : 1) we find from (44) and the assumption that the integrals
in (45) converge that
lim F* (p' , p) :
-(p-p')'>

(cf. the Appendix).

now rvrite

With

lim Fo(p',p) :

-(p*p')'>

(46)

the aid of the notations (a5) we can

408

Nr.12

t3

0 ( r c 3 )a G a ) ( 0 J{ / ( 3 ) , l j o @ ) ,l ( 4 ) l ) | 0 >
-r
:,r1'"\

fi'
ip(r4)
apap,.'n'(3r)l F - * @ ,p, l
\
tl

(47)

al a)

- n' Fo(p', p) * in (Fo@' p) + F,,(l',1))J .

,
In quite a similar r,vay it can be sholvn that the second term in
(25) can be written in a form analogous b @7) with the aid of
a function Gn(p',p) rvhich also has the pr-operties (44) and (46).
It thus follows

lim tIo(p', p) :

(48)

o.

-(p-p')'->@

It must be stressed that this property of the function Ax(p,, p)

is a consequence of (41) and thus essentially rests on the assumption that all the renormalization constants are finite quantities.
It is clear from (24) that the function ,4, transforms as the
matrix /p under a Lorentz transformation. The explicit verification of this from (23) is somewhat involvcd but can be carried
through with the aid of the identity

0 ( r 3 ) 0 @ a{)f ( 3 ) , l i r @ ) , 1 ( 4 -) 0
l )( * 3 ) 0 ( 3 4 )l i r @ ) , { f ( 3 )f,( 4 ) } l | , . .
) (49)
: 0@a )0@3 ){ f ( 4 ),l l
r@),r(3 )l } 0(r a )0 G3)lj p( ,) , { f( +) ,/( 3) ) l
and the canonical commutators. Eq. (4g) can aiso be usecl to
prove the formula

- c-l Ar(- q', q) c : t[(-

t, u')

(50)

which is, hot'ever, also evident from (24) and the charge invariance of the formalism. From the Lorentz invariance it follows that we can r,vrite

Ar(P' ,p)

* pt,Ga'a
Gr n'* ^)a' lypFa'a
t p*gt'el Qyp * nr)e (;t)

:f
g' : 0,1 p: 0,1

lvhere the functions .F., G and ,FI are uniquely defined and depending only on pr,p'r, (p-p'),
and the signs e(p), e(p,) and
e(p-p').From
(50) it then follows

409

t4

Nr.12
pes'(- p,p) : Fe'p(- p,, p)

(52 a)

Gaa'(- p, p) : Ha'aG- p, , p).

(52 b)

Utilizing (51) and (52) tlv-eget

q ) : (0 l#) lq,q') R( ( q+ qj) ' )

ie( o l P < ol qi ') A r ,(- s',q )(0 | e to rl
(53)
+ , ^ s ( ( q + u )\ (o r- e ') (0 | ? (0I )s' ) ( o Ip' o)
| s)
'where, in vierv of (a8),
I i m R ( ( q * q ' ) r ) : l i m s ( ( s * q ' ) z ): 0 .

- @ + q ' F+ r

* ( q + q ' ) '+ o

(54)

The equations (53) and (54) are the desired result of this paragraph.

Completion

of the Proof.

We are nor*' nearly at the end of our discussion. From the

assumptions made about II (p') (and its consequences for fr (p'),
cf. the Appendix), Eqs. (53) and (54), the limit of Eq. (24)
reduces to

liry.(
{lIi,l
q,q') -: ( oITtor
I q,q')jI + n( 0)+ 2'I-r
r
r -Ll I I

-(q-q')'+q

(55)

:(olffrlq'q')E
Oul inequalitl' (a) nov' gives

n Q\)+

>'i <oIi rlq,q') l'

q+q : p

' .'*'
ZI <oI#'Iq'q')t,(?ry-1),
q+q': p

: n(D(
pz)
(#)
Except
e2 and

for the possibility

mt\
ql

Lt- l

"r"

(56)

(T=-;f

of l/ being exactly
of
| (irra"p"naent
'we have then proved that, if all the renormaliza-

4to
Nr. 12

t5

1
I
and
are finite, the function
(1 _ Z)
N
oo. This is an obvious
II(p') cannot approach zero for -p,contradiction and the only remaining possibility is that at least
one (and probably all) of the renormalization constants is inIinite.
,1
The case ,A/:
; is rather too special to be considered seriously.
tion

constants K,

We can note, hoiever, that N must approach 1 fbr e -> 0 and

that one of the integrals in I Eq. (75) will diverge at the lower
limit for p --."0, independent of the value of e. The constant N
could thus at the utmost be equal to

for some special combina-

tion (or combinations). p zof e2 and 4.

O, pr is an arbitrarily

small quantity it is hardly possible to ascribe any physical

significance to such a solution, even if it does exist.
The proof presented here makes no pretence at being satisfactory from a rigorous, mathematical point of vierv. It contains,
for example, a large number of interchanges of orders of integrations, limiting processes and so on. From a strictly logical
point of view we cannot exclude the possibility that a more
singular solution exists lvhere such formal operations are not
allowed. It would, hov'ever, be rather hard to understand how
the excellent agreement betrveen experimental results and lowest
order perturbation theory calculations could be explained on
the basis of such a solution.

Appendix.
It has been stated and used above that: if

f("):
where /(r)
and fulfills

,\:H-

(/(0) :

0)

(A.1)

is bounded and continuous for all finite values of c

lf (*+u)-

f (r)l(Mlc I

for all c

(^.2)

4il

l6

Nr.l2

anrl if the integral converges,both /(r) and l(r) u.ill vanish for
large values of the argument. This is not strictly true, and in
this appendix we uill study that point in.some detail.
We begin by proving that if the integral in (A. 1) converges
absolutely and if

lim logrl/(r)l:0

(A.3)

I->A

it follows that

lim l(c) : 0.

(A.4)

c->t

o"
(Note that the integral \ =+
is nof convergent ancl that the
n-tog_
e
J
vanishing of f (r) is already implicit in (A. B).) To get an upper
bound for f(c) v'hen c ) 0 we rvrite

:"5,9,,
: (J:"ffn1y,.,,
(A
r)
r(*)
('n

",..,

/f

t'

(? r'

(The limit
o is simpler and need not be discussed explicitly.) The absolute value of the first term in (A. b) is obviously less than
, ('l'

, f"l'

i\trrolldv(const
1\,ffr.*0.
uo
ll

(A.6)

Uo

The last term can be treated in a similar way and vields the
result

It'--,.

I o?-..'

I Ji,n

I uetp

l\#qoul=\l/(Yrlds-0.
"l:l
rru_r
UIB

(A.7)

,\P,.,1:
c)-.r(r-r,,1
\"*,,"*

The remaining term can be written

.Fl'"*y)-,I.5"f
r(,
l,o.,,
|.!:+1,,,-,,
(A. {t)

412

Nr.12

t7

In view of (A. 2) and (A. 3), the three terms in (A. 8) vanish
separately for large values of c. It thus follows
lim l(c) :

t>4

q.e.d.

As the functi<rnII(p') is positive the condition (A. 3) seems

rather reasonable from a physical point of view. On the other
hand, the functions F* in (a5) are not necessarily positive. It
is, however, also possible to construct a more general argument
where (A. 3) is not used, and where even the vanishing of f(r)
is not needed. Instead, We then require that from
n'a

f(') :

ds;f Q) : o for yS o

+q
-'-

"\. ) 0 "

(A.e)

will follow

(A.10)

r(r):-#"\Pr'
where both /(c)
Note that

and f(c)

are finite.

r "fl---er)(z-c)

n2'

#\

-,o-,
I

)!z--

utuz
a',"* * '' tz' "-iw'lx-iw11t

l-t*rl

(A.1t)

.P
:

;\

dwrsi"(u-'):

d(y-c).

It then follows ,r1", ,n" integral

Dt'a,- [!14(')J a,
fT-qtu.r<
llclc

AU

is divergent, because the second term is convergent in view of

(A. 10). This is everything that is needed for the proof.
Drn.Xrt.Fyr.f,edd.27,N.l2,

413
18

Nr. 12

It is, of course, possible to construct functions

f(r) where
(A. 10) does not follow from (A. 9). In that case we are not
allowed to interchange the order of the integrations in (A. 11);
but we have already excluded such cases from our discussion.
For simplicity, the statement that the functions ..vanish,' for
large values of the variables has been used in the text. If a more
careful argument is wanted the phrase
"the functions have the property that the integral
(.*^ , .

t /(r.) '
\'"'

,U

converges" should be substituted for the word "vanish"

places.

in many

The author wishes to express his gratitude to professor

Nrrr,s BoHn, Professor C. Morr,rn, and professor T. Gusra.soN
for their kind interest. He is also indebted to professor M. Rrusz
for an interesting discussion of the problems treated in the appendix.
CERN (European Council lor Nuclear Research\
Theoretical Studg Group at the
Institute lor Theoretical Phgsics, uniuersitg ol Copenhagen,
and
D_ep.artm.entol Mechqnics and. Mathematical phgsics,
Uniuersitg ol Lund..

Indleveret
I.'erdig

til selskabet den 28. februar 1953.

fra t['kkeriet
den 27. maj lgb3.

414

P o p e r3 4

On the Self-Energy of a Bound Electron*

Nonu,llr M. Knoll**
AND WrLLrs E. Leuo, Jn.
Columbia University, Nm York, New York
(Received October 7, 1948)
The electromagnetic shift of the energy levels of a bound electron has been calculafed on the
basis of the usual formulation of relativistic quantum electrodynamics and positron theory.
The theory gives a linite result of 105,1megacycles per second for the shift 2'S1-2'P1 in hydrogen, in close agreement with the non-relativistic calculation by Bethe.

I. INTRODUCTION

1927-1934 formulation of quantum electrodynamics

due to Dirac, Heisenberg, Pauli, and
PETHET has recently discussedthe anomalous
L) fine structure2in hydrogen on the basis of Weisskopf. It will appear from this that the
relativistic invariance of the present
non-relativistic quantum electrodynamics. His formal
theory is to some degree illusory in that all selfresult for the 2254-22Pqdisplacementwas
energies diverge logarithmically, so that the
difference of two energies such as W(2'S) and
AW:W(2'S) -W(z'P\)
: (aiRy/3r) log(K /z), (1) W(z'P), although finite, is not necessarily
unique. The method we have used has a certain
the fine structure con- simplicity in its motivation, however, and the
where a:e2/hc-l/137
stant, Ry the Rydberg energy a2mc2f2, and e results are surprisingly plausiblein their mathean average excitation energy of the atom, calcu- matical appearance.In any case,the calculations
lated to be 17.8Ry. As Bethe's calculation di- may serve as an illustration of the extent to
verged logarithmically, it was necessaryfor him which physical results may be derived from a
to introduce a cut-off energy K for the light divergent field theory.
quanta which could be emitted and reabsorbed
The calculation is incomplete in several well
by the atom. On the basis of speculations as to defined respects. It is only made to order a in
the improved convergenceof a relativistic calcu- the coupling between the electron and the electrolation which included positron theoretic effects, magnetic field, and to fourth order in the ratio
Bethe took K equal to mc2.This led to a value of of the velocity of the atomic electron to the
LW/h:1040 megacyclesper second,which was velocity of light. It is expected that these dein very good agreement with the then available ficiencieswill be made up elsewhere.We will
observationsof 1000 Mc/sec.
make no effort to improve on the low frequency
The purpose of this paper is to show that a part of the calculation as done by Bethe, for this
relativistic calculation of AIl does,in fact, give is essentially a non-relativistic problem.
a convergent answer, and to present the results
II. DERIVATIONOF EQUATIONSFOR
and some details of a calculation based on the
SELF-ENERGY
* Work suooorted bv the Sisnal Corps.
+* Now Niiional RisearchFellow ;t The Institute foi
Advanced Studv.
I H. A. Bethe, Phys. Rev. 72,339 (1947). It may be of
sme interest to obserue that if the non-relativistic theory
is taken seriouslv to such an extent that retardation and
tJre recoil enercy- ir the enerqy denominators are retained,
the dynamic dli-energy diverges only logarithmically, and
tlre S-Pr level shift conilerges,and, in fact, with K determined to be K -2mc2, The iesulting shift of 1134 Mc is in
disagreement with the ob*rations.
z W. E. Lamb, Jr. and R. C. Retherford, Phys. Rev. 72,

We start from the Hamiltonian for a system

of iy' electrons moving in an external static electric potential energy field Tand interacting with
the radiation field. After elimination of the longitudinal and scalar photons in the usual vr'ay, we
obtain the Hamiltonian

24r(re47).

. A lat6r tentative value reported at the April 1948

Society meeting was 1065+20
Washington Physiel
Mc/ec.

388

H:H,^alH*"r*I1i'r,

(2)

u"^:Iax'LNtxhclkl,

(3)

415
389

SELF_ENERGY OF A BOUND
l1-*-I

lcs.;.pti0;mc2+V(rc)1,

e)

1.:1

n/

Hn": -L

nr'nr'

e s ,A
. (r)ti

t L

"r/,o;.

(5)

Here e is the (negative) charge on the electron;

s, A are the'Dirac matrices in the form

":(:

,:(;

;)

-:)

(6)

where c are the usual two-component Pauli

matrices. The vector potential of the radiation
field is expanded in plane ivaves normalized in
the continuous spectrum as
2

A(r):- rtP*1fat |
tr:l

(hc/k)rbw.eux
X exp(lk.r) f conj., (7)

where bp1+, b11 are the creation and destruction

operators for a light quantum of wave vector k
and po,larization type I:1,
2.
In positron theory, because of the indefiniteness of the number of electrons, it is convenient
to use second quantization for the electrons as
well as for the light quanta. Then
II-u,+

| a x r t r * 1 x ;{ c a . p l B n c 2 l

lz(x) lrl:(x),

(8)

H inr+ - | dxq+1x)eo.A(x)t(x)
ff

* | | dxdx',1+6),1,9)(e'/lx-x'l)
JJ
Xt+(x')t(x') :Hr*Hc,

ELECTRON

in state a plus the vacuum electrons" minus

"self-energy of the vacuum electrons alone."
The highly divergent interaction of the extra
electron with the infinite charge density of the
vacuum electrons must still be removed. This
is done by the process of symmetrization 6
in which the calculation is also made using the
equally justified picture that all the electrons in
existence are positively charged, so that the observance of a negatively charged electron in state
a corresponds to a vacancy in the sea of negative
energy states othenvise filled with positively
charged particles. Then the results of the two
methods of calculation are averaged. Since in the
first picture there is one particle present in addition to the vacuum particles, and in the second
picture one partiile fewer, the self-term i:j
in
the electrostatic energy cancels out as does the
direct Coulomb interaction between the bound
electron and the vacuum electrons, insofar as the
latter are not polarized by an external electric
field. The result is an avoidance of all singularities worse than logarithmic, and these may be
plausibly discarded by renormalization of charge6
and mass.
The self-energy to order a consists of the
first-order
Coulomb self-energy Wc and the
second-order electrodynamic self-energy Wo. The
former will split naturally into a direct or vacuum
polarization term Wp and a static exchange term
Ws. The static and dynamic terms trZs and Wo
were first calculated by Weisskopf6 in 1934 for
the case of a free electron.
To calculate Wc we need the expectation
values of the operator

(9)

I cr

where {+(r) and r[(r) are, respectively, creation H":- | | dxdx'r!+(x)r!(x)

2J J
and destruction operators for an electron. We
will expand r!(r) in terms of the eigenfunctions
X(e'/ lx-x' l)q+(x/){(x/) (11)
u"(x) of the potential field Iz

:t

t(x):I

a"u"(x),

(10)

where the coefficients a, are operators corresponding to the destruction of an electron in

state n, etc.
We are concerned with the self-energy of a
"single" electron bound in some stationary state
u"(r) in the potential field Z. In positron theory,
this is taken to mean "self-energy of one electron

I ZEA"uda"+opafo'6,

aFt6

where
1rr
A.tut:- | | dxdx'u"*(x)u6@)
2J J

X (e'/ I,x-x'l)ur*

(x')u6(r'),

'W. Hei*nberg, Zeits.f. Physik 90,209 (1934).

6V. F. Weisskopf,Zeits. f. Physik 90, 817 (1934).
I P. A, M. Dimc, Solvay Congress,1933.

(12)

416
N.
for the states represented
functionals

M.

KROLL

AND

by the Schrtidinger

O ( 0 1 p ; 0 1 " ; 1 1 ' ,i1D) (, 0 ( p ) l c ) ) , s e c o n d p i c t u r e .

E.

390

JR.

L A o ' >< , ' > a ' ) G+' ) I

D A <r><ot<o>tr>

(r) (r';

(13a)

A<,,>ato't<,'t,

*D
(r')

(13b)

Here r denotes any positive energy state, while

a prime indicates the exclusion of the state a
occupied by the bound electron. The letters p,
o denote any negative energy state, while the
indices z, d, P, y, and 6 are to be used for a
complete set of states of any energy whatever.
In the alternate picture, a positive energy state
of a positive particle is represented by (p) and a
negative energy state bV (r), (s), The state whose
vacancy constitutes our electron is denoted by (a).
Consider the expectation value
a " + a B a r + a 5 A . p rO
, (1"0,,1,).

a8+6

The vacuum term is

I

(r) (p)

and the difference

, 4 r o l r , t c , t r-" r L A o a t t o > < " > - 2 L A t a > < " t < o < , t

(')

G)

* Ort,"r,")(')- 2

:
*

A <"tt"t<,tt,t,

represents the self-energy of the electron in state

a as calculated on the basis of the positive particle picture. The wave functions un and uh, are
identical for physical reasons, so that we may
now drop the parentheses. Averaging the two
results. we obtain

L +A""""+L +A"""":Ws*Wp.
The static term

Aoo,o+L A""oo

I A c><ot<e>t'>,

E lot,rr"rro *E

G) (r)

Using the matrix elementsbfor the destruction

and creation operators, we obtain
L 4",,"+L

LAMB,

and obtain
L

o(1.0",1r),6(0,1,), firstpicture,

O*(1"0,,1,) |

w.

(14)

/v^9rs

rP

r I\ -L \ - ,L .rl 'd d o p

- ILLF \ -L ./L .p .f . f . o .

Ws:L

P r'

rf

=+ ? *; J dxdx'u"*(x)u"(x)
X (e,/ lx-x' l)u**(x')u"(x'),(15)

Subtracting ,tr" *ru.unrri,"r-.

\L -L .\--d /d p p t L L / rL p\ f-r \r -t /
poPf

the self-energy of the electron in state a on the

basis of the negative particle picture is
\L l-t a/f r a

r |r \! - L/

lrdapp

-\-/
L

*o"*
nF

by

"*2EA""oo,

use of a Fourier

representation

for

l/lx-x'l
_:
lx-x'l

where the upper or lower sign is to be taken for

a positive or negative energy state, respectively.
The first term represents an exchange term and
diverges only logarithmically. The last term is
the direct Coulomb energy of the electron in
state a interacting with the sea of negative energy
electrons and diverges quadratically.
As mentioned above, the worst part of this diy'ergence
is removed by the process of symmetrization. On
the basis of the alternate picture, we therefore
calculate the expectation value
O*(010"1,,)

and

tf
zLapta

'
:L

+4""""

(1/zr'z) t dk exp(zk.(x-x'))/k2,
r

(16)

may be written as

w s: e,/ao,)
f

d!

T + [ an.*rxl

X exp(ik'x)2,(x) d'x'u^*(x')
f
XexP(- ik' x')u"(x'). (17)
The polarization

tetm WP(a)

w,(o):T-o*-:;

a61+a61a61+a1rl.4t.lrplr"lcrl

(a) G) (z) (;)

(D(0aoy01"111",y),

xl

r'

ezr

axlu"lx)lz

dx'

_I+lz"(x')1'?,
Ix-xln

(18)

417
OF

SELF-ENERGY

39T
may be written

as

BOUND

ELECTRON

gres ls
?

Wptu): I dxlu"(x)l'ett(x),

(1e)

- l df 2k r

wherethe functionl,*, ,. ,n. potentialdue to a

- E"))
( | (/k IH, Io) l' / (8,1-hck

[t

1 l( o kl H , l o )l ' / ( E " * h c k * E " ) )

-5-

charge densityT-e

p ( x ) : ( e / 2 )L + l u " ( x ) | " ' z ,

*2 I ((aIH' I ak)(pkiEtlp)/tuk)f,

(20)
which

induced in the vacuum by the external electrostatic 6eld. The energy trZp vanishes for a free
electron.
The second-order electrodynamic self-energy
Wn@) of the electron in state o, according to the
electron picture, is given by the difference of the
energy Wo(1"0,,1r) for the electron in state o
plus the vacuum electrons and the energy
Wo(0,1,) of the vacuum electrons alone. The
vacuum energy Wo(0,1r) is given by second-order
perturbation theory, and involves the virtual
emission and re-absorption of a light quantum of
wave vector k and polarization type tr. There are
two types of terms, representedby the following
transition schemes:
,/o+r*k1
I
landl
\rlk-p/

may

be written

as

fz

- | dk E tE (+ | (nkllJtla)l'/
J

r-r

( l E " l + h c k + E " ) ) + 2Z , ( ( a l I { r l a k )
x(pkllJrld/hck)1.
affects only

Symmetrization
and gives

the second term,

f2

wo@):-ld.kLL
J

x:t"

v (+ | (zkIr{r | l' / (lE"l *hek+ E"))

")
f2

/p-p+k\
\ofk+o./

1'

+fdktE
Jr-tn

X (+ (alHr lak)(nkllJrlnt/hch).
In the caseof the energy WDQ"0,'1), there are
added
which
the
transitions
additional
some
The last term can be written as
electron can make, and some of the previously
presence
prevented
by
the
are
allowed transitions
f2
(dk/h,)u L
of the atomic electron in state o. One has then
|
J
r:rn
the following types of transitions:
,zo+r'tk1

\r, |-k-p/

t,|

1a+r*k\
\r1-k-a/

/o+o*k1
/n*n-|k1
I
t,|
L
\a*k-a/
\o*k*o,/

r1a+ai-k\
l
\Pfk+P,'/
The difference of the two corresponding ener? See reference a, Eq. (40).
8 E. A. Uehlins, Phys. Rev' 48, 55 (1935), W. Pauli and
M. Rose. Phvs. Rev. 49,462 (1936), and V' F. Weisskopf,
Ksl. Danske Vid. Sels. Math.-Fys' Medd 14, No. 6 (1936).
i R. Serber, Phys. Rev. 48, 49 (1935).

ff

J J

(21)

dxdx'u"*(r)o'errz.(x)

X exp(ik' (x - x'))2"*(x')a'erran(x'),
'rvhichwill be zero if the polarization currentT-e
j(x'):el

+u"*(r')uu"(x')

(22)

is zero, In the absenceof an external vector potential, this current is in fact zero' so that the
last term in Eq. (21) will henceforthbe dropped.
It should be noted that two physically different
k-spacesare involved in the expressionsEq. (17)
and Eq. (21) for Ws and Wo'

418
N,

M.

KROLL

AN D W.

III. COMPUTATION OF THE SELF-ENERGIES

We turn now to the evaluation of the expressions trZs, Wo, Wp for the self-energy. We shall
pay particular attention to the static and dynamic terms Ws and Wo, as the polarization
(Uehling) term Wp is directly related to the
polarization charge density which has been cdmputed by others.T-e
In the calculations to follow, relativistic units
will be used throughout, in which h, m, and c
are taken equal to unity.
Our main interest, of course, is in the case of
an electron moving in a Coulomb field for which
V : - e2/r. The integrals like

E.

LAMB,

392

JR.

The sums over n can be performed, at least

formally, by making use of the completeness of
the solutions of the Dirac equation. Thus I,I/s
can be written in the form
ff
W s: (e2/4r2) | (dk/h\
J

| dxu"* (x)

|
NJ

xexp(ik x)(H/ | u |) u"1x7 dx'u (x')

"*
J
Xexp(-

ik.x')u"(x'),

(23)

where
H:a.p*AlV

Q4)

is the Hamiltonian of the unperturbed electronic

motion, and I 111 the absolute value of the Hamil(nklr.ll a) : - (ie/ zrntl d.xu^*(x)a. ey1
tonian, by which we mean an operator having
I
the same eigenstates and spectrum as the HamilXexp(-zt.x)2"(x)
tonian, except that its eigenvalues are taken to
occur in the theory of the relativistic photo- be positive. It can most conveniently be comelectric effect and have been studied extensively puted by representing it as +(11,);. The equivaby Hall.10Becauseof their complexity, it seems lence of Eqs. (17) and (23) follows from the fact
is f 1 when operating on a positive
hardly likely that we could perform the neces- that H/lHl
energy
state
and - 1 when operating on a negasary further operations on them to evaluate such
tive
energy
state.
Using the completeness of the
expressionsas Wp. Even more must such a direct
u"(x),
we
now
find
attack be ruled out for the case of an electron

moving in a general potential field I/(x), for

rf
which the relativistic eigenfunctionsu^(x) are W 5 : (e2/ 4r2) t| , (dk,/ hr) | dxu"* (x)
not known. The only remaining method of apxexp(i.k. x) (H / | -r1l) exp( -lk . x)u"(x), (25)
proach seems to be to make an expansion of
some kind. We observethat if the electron is free,
so that the problem of computing IZs is reduced
the evaluation of the sums is a comparatively
to that of finding the expectation value of the
simple matter. Thus, if u"(x) is a plane wave of
operator
momentum p, then

r.

I dxu"*u' e exp( ik. x)zr,

(e2/4r2)

| (dk/k'z)

Xexp(-ik.x)(H/ lHl) exp(f zt.x)

is different from zero only if the momentum of
the state a is kfp, and there are only four such for the state o. We first note that for anv.oolvstates.In the caseof a "weakly" bound electron, nomial function f(p, V)
i.e.,for
l@, V) exp(fik.x)2,(x)

h>>(al
lpl la),

one might expect that the matrix element above

would have an appreciable value only when lE" I
is of the order Ep:*(1+p)1.
We take advantage of this fact in the method of calculation used.
r0 H. Hall, Rev. Mod. Phys. 8, 358 (1936).

: exp(f ik. x)/(k-fp, V )u"(x).

This theorem may then be usedfor any function
J6, V) such as H/IHI, for which a seriesexpansion in p and tr/ is valid. We therefore write
(H/|Hl)

exp(tu.x)u"(x)
: exp(tu. x) (H / | H | )y+pu
"(x),

419
393

SELF_ENERGY

OF

where the notation

BOUND

ELECTRON

where

Eh: (r+k')\'
no: lHl -E*,

)r_n

means that the operator p is to be replaced by

kfp everywhereit appearswithin the brackets.
One then has

Do+:BrSP-t,
w":E"-1.

(31)
(s2)
(33)
(34)

is, of course, also necessaryto evaluate A*

ws: @'/a,,\("ll
#r, t"rl,*1,).<iutbyItapplying
the binomial expansion
In an entirely similar manner, one can show that
:

t lr

wo: -Q,/4r')lal I tav.rDE o.eo^

^:r
\
lr'

r/ H
x{l-*1

\ : IH I pay- E1,: (Ey, | 6y)r- E*

:i6t-t(6v" / E) { }6(6v3
/ E*') +,''
"
'lvhere
6r : 2k. p-|p'* 2 V (c.kl- s. p -f 9)
le'aVlV2.

/
l/(lHl+h-E')

(3s)

(36)

t\lr1l //

All expansions indicated are to be carried to

sufficiently high order so as to include all terms
which are effectively of the fourth or lower order
in vfc. The operator p is obviously of 6rst order
The evaluation of the terms trZs and JZo thus in zt/c, V is of second order becauseof the virial
theorem, while k, 0 are of zeroth order. Since
hinges on the expressionof the operators
e.,2:sr2:su2:1, a must be regardedas a zeto'
(r/lijl)*p
and (r/ (lHl lk+E"))v+p
order quantity until the expansionhas beenfully
out.
worked
whose
expectation
values
operators
of
in terms
The expansionof the operatorsin the manner
can be readily obtained.
indicated and the summation over the polatizaTurning now to this task, we write
tion direction I:1, 2 is a straightforward but
( lfll)r+r: ((/1'zf)rap: ((("'p*0* 7)')i)t+o
lengthy matter. This being completed, one is
: ((1*p'*"'p V I Va'Pl2tsV* tr/'z),)11o
left with a sum of expectationvalues of various
: (l + k' +2k -p *p'z-l 2 V(a' k|_o' P+B)
operators
(28)
la'rV*V2)\,
1 , 0 , a . p , 0 o ' p ,p ' , A p ' ,V , A V ,
where rr denotes an operator p which operates
t' nV Xp, a' nV, 8s' *'V, d2V, Vp2,p2V' nV'p'
only on the quantity immediately following it
gn,Bpn,V2,FV2, Va.p, tsVc'9,
( e . g . c, ' p 7 : V t ' 9 * e ' t V ) .
a . p p zw
, : E - 1: c . p * F * V - 1 , w 2 ,B w ,
It is clear that the ratio of (1111)r+pto
combination of some fifty
Q+n'1t approachesunity as & becomeslarge, each multiplied by a
which correspondsto'our previous statement elementary integrals over k. The result of this
regarding the relationship between the magni- calculation is given in Eq. (73) below. Before
tude of the matrix elements and the energy of coming to it, we shall first discuss briefly the
validity of the expansion used and the form in
the state z. Thus we exPand
which the sdlf-energyis expressed'
(r/l/Jl)t+n and (t/ lHl lk+E")t+p
Assuming for the moment that p and tr/ can
be regarded as numbers less than unity (in
as follows:
relativistic units), then the expansionsof

r,r
.(#,-') / tH|+k+E")
|"*;."-^1,)

(r/ lHl)*r:r/(E**^)

- - L / E * - A * / E n ' * L f/ E r x - ' ' ' , ( 2 9 )

(r/(lHl +ft+8,))r+p
:l/(Dk++Lk+w"):1/Do*
-(a*+w")/(D.+)',*' ' ',

(r/lEl)t+o

and (r/(lHl+k+E"))k+,'

(if carried far enough) are valid for all values of

ft, sinceEr approachesunity and D,'- approaches
(30) two as & goes to zero. On the other hand, Dl+

420
N.

M.

KROLL

AND

approaches zero in this limit, so that one should

examine the low ft behavior for this case. It turns
out that that part of
A*-w"'
which does not approach zero as & approaches
zero is of the order (u/c)2.Therefore, in the term
involving Df we shall carry our integrals down
wave number &r,
only to some intermediate
which, for convenience, v/e take to be of order aB.
This term must then be given a separate treatment for the low & region O<k<kt
One rvould
expect that the result is independent of the precise value of &i, and this is indeed the case.
The assumption that p and 7 are always
numbers less than unity is, of course, not valid.
For example, in the case of the Coulomb field
Z(x) becomes infinite at the origin. The region
over which Z is large, however, is small, so that
the contribution to the expectation value from
the region in which the expansion is invalid
should be small. Again, in the case of the Coulomb field, p2rzo(x)becomes large compared to
u"(x) for small x. It should be observed that in
the case of the Coulomb field this circumstance
limits the expansion to the power of. af c here
used, as the expected values of V3, p6, naV, etc.,
diverge for S states of the Coulomb field. Although the error introduced by this phenomenon
is believed to be small, a numerical estimate
would be desirable. We shall not. however. make
such an estimate here as the problem is a purely
non-relativistic one.
In order to simplify the appearance and physical interpretation of our results, r,r'e have found
it convenient to make use of various relationships
between the expectation values of the Dirac
operators which are valid to the order of u/c
required. Thus one can write any solution of the
Dirac eouation as

(32)

".(:),

V ) ) " . p * Z * 1- E ) 4 :

@ : ( r/ ( 1 + E - V ) ) " . p 0 ,

E.

LAMB,

394

JR.

ord,er (a/c)2 is just a non-relativistic two-component Pauli-Schrcidinger wave function. One

can'then see, for example, that

\ a l p '- 0 p ' l a :) 2 | d x \ (1/ ( 1+ E - V ))

I

Xo' p6)ap'z(r / (1+-E - V) )". pQ"

tf

__ | dx6"*p,e"
2J

-i@lp"la),

(40)

since l-E
and V are of order (v/c)2, and
f dx+"pn6" and (a lpa lo) differ only by a quantity
of order (a/c)6. One can therefore simplify the
final result Eq. (73) by expressing all operators in
terms of certain arbitrarily
we have taken to be

chosen ones which

0 , u ' p , V , d 2 V ,B a ' n V ,
Vp2,pa, and V2.
Our reduction is obtained by using the following
relations betrveen expectation values

1+Bf |c.p-$pa{f,pa.dV,

(41\

p'-,r.p**pn*ttsa.zrV,

( a?\

. p p z+ c . p f

|Pc.nI/,

(43)

BV+V-lVp'z-i]r.nV,

(44\

0c'P-0,

//.c\

p2V+Vp2,

(46)

dV'p+-|22V,

(47)

s.rV+0,

148)

'n.-VXp-!a."1't!r2V,
\/s.pnVp2{,ils.*V,
B V a . p +- l B a . n I ; ,
a'PP'+P',

(49)

(s0)
(s1)
(s2)

0pn*pn,

where{ and o are two-componentv,/avefunctions

satisfying
( a ' p ( r /( r - l E -

rv.

s,

133;

(3e)

so that for a positive energy state o is of order

v/c with respect to @, rvhich apart from terms of

rq4)

BV2+V2,
w : H - t_+tc.p+ 7++p'-+Ba. rV,

(55)

- i Vp' - *9a. xV,

Bza+lu. p I V - L"pn

(56)

ze,r-lpr* Vp"+Vr.

(57)

From these relations one finds that the total

421
SELF-ENERGY

395

OF

BOUN D

ELECTRON

contribution of the static and dynamic terms of

the self-energy, apart from the low & contribution
of the term involving D1+, is

is the induced charge density calculated by various authors. To the order required, this is found
to be

(ws* wo)': ("/d (.1(:f,- o,ru;++)s

pqx):(e/6n,)v,Vl

/f\
i+ | G,dk/Ek') |
\.-rt
l(e/60r')vaV,

* * c . p * 3 c . p f t ; ! f , P an. V - ( $ l o g ( 1 / E )

(63)

from which one finds

- ! tog2
| 1r/ 72)",v1"). (s8)

lf\
- (2e'z/3r)l l*

Wp(a):
In order to compute the low i contribution of
the term involving Dr+, it is convenient to take
advantage of the essentially non-relativistic nature of this region and to make use of the previously discussed large and small component reduction Eq. (37). One then readily finds that the
resultant expression has, to the order required,
just the form of the non-relativistic self-energy,
so that Bethe'st calculaticlr may be used up to
the frequency k;. The contribution is

| &'dh/Ef)

\J/

x (al v' la) - 1e/ ts"11alv,v la).

(64)

The prime appearing on tr/' is used to indicate

that the gaugeof Z'has beendeterminedby the
fact that it arises from an expressionof the form
F

-1/4n I dx'vzV(x')/lx-x'1.
I

(65)

We shouldlike to point out that the expression

for p(x') can be readily and neatly calculatedby
- g(losk;/z)n'zV
: (a/r)(al - frp'&;
la). (59) methods very similar to those used above in the
caseof the static and dynamic terms in the selfAdding the t\4'o, and observing that (alp'?lo) is energy. To show this we first evaluate
(au.a)* <r";

the same as (alc.plo) to the order required, we

find for the total contribution of Ws and Wo

p(x',x") : - (e/Z) |
: * (e/2)

us++)a
wstwo: @/d ("1(;{,- row
*(".p/6)*i,6a.rV-

u"*(x')(Hi lHt)u"(x")

44

:-(e/2) I t t @/lgl),,

/l
| * log\E

- ! tog2
rrl /7r)"r1"),

*u"* (x')u"(x")

r:l

Y:l

\,u^r*(x')u*,(x"),

(66)

where the uny, F: l, 2, 3, 4 are the components of

are to be taken
and all operators in H/lHl
with.respect to x". Making use of the completeness relation

(60) un,

and we note that the result is independentof the

joining frequencyfr;.
As previously mentioned,the direct Coulomb
energy term can be expressed in terms of a
polarization charge as follows:

E u"u*?')u",(x"):6u,6(r'-x"),

(67)

we obtain

p(r',x"): - (e/2)L g/ lHl)F6(x'-*")

Wp(a):e I dxla"(x) 'z

: - ( e / 2 ) ( S p u t H / IH I ) " , , 6 ( x ' - x " ) .

(68)

X I d x ' p ( x ' ) / l x - x ' 1 , ( 6 1 ) To evaluate this, we Fourier-analyze the deltafunction

where
p(x'): (e/2) t + l u " ( x ' ) P

( 6 2 ) 6(x'-r" 1: Q /8r3) | dk exp(ik. (r" - x')), (69)

422
N.

KROLL

AND

TesI-p I.

2tsv,

Ouantity

VY
iPs.VV

-1t)

State
2tPVt

22P./,

0
r/6

0
-r/12

and find

p(x',x"):(l/8r3)

dk exp(-lk'x')

X (Spurfl/ lfll) exp(ik.x"),

f

: (t /8r3) dk exp(lk.(r"-x,))
J
X (Spur//l1/l )r+n.1(x"), (70)
when1(r") is a constantequalto one.Since

p(x'):p(x,,x,),

E.

LAMB,

396

JR

where we have made use of the fact that a: -iY .

We obserlre first of all that the worst divergence
is logarithmic, and that the expression is invariant to the gauge of I/.
We next see that the difference of the selfenergies of the states 225; and 2,P1 of the hydrogen atom does converge, since the expectation
values of B, V', (and, therefore, c.p) are, respectively, equal for the two states. (These statements follow from the observation that neither
a small change of charge nor mass of the electron
will remove the degeneracy.) In order to calculate the numerical difference of W(a) for the two
states, we need the values of the expectation
values of the remaining operators in Eq. (73).
These are given in Table Itr in units of a2Ry.
The energy difference is then
A,W : (a'Ry /3r)Uog(r

(7r)

/e) -log2

+(23/24)-+7'(74)

which, using Bethe's revised valuesrz for the con-

we obtain, finally,

Yf,,E9#/i;],ii:i'l#ii;:;,i,".-,',J

p(x,):_
(e/,6rs)
X f akg
' p' u r 1 l l . 1 7 l ) g 1 r . 1 ( r , ) .
J

W.

(72)

The expression can now be readily reduced to the

form Eq. (63) bV expanding

and thus differs from the original guess by only

a small amount. It should be admitted, however,
that one cannot regard this energy difference as
uniquely determined, since one is taking the
difference of two infinite quantities.
With respect to the determination of the abso-

(Spurf/|f1|)tlolutevalueoftheself-energyforastate,itis
convenient to attemDt a phvsical interoretation
in the manner used for the evaluation of the ofthetermsinvolvei.
In thiscontext,ltshould
static and dynamic terms.
be observed that even if the coefficients of the Z'

rv.rNrERpRErArroN
oFRESUr.rs il1'tt'JTff:*T;?.'i-":f::l'::$::#1T:
fact that

The total expression for the self-energy is

w(a)

=@/")("1(:
I aurcsnt)u
-(? awnta,,r++)2,
[
* @ . p / 6 ) - ( i / 4 ) 0 s . vv

+ (* rosfr/O- ] log2

rsl v
+ ( r t/ 72 )-rrU
)v, l a ),

( / J,

they would manifest

themselves as a

u It should be mentioned here that the exoected value

of V, tr/really diverges for the S stares of the Coulomb field,
since it then is equal to the square of the absolute value of
the wave functioi at the origiri. Since, however, our evaluation is being carried only to order (u/c)n, one should be able
to us the spatial dependence of the Schr<idinger wave
functions for the evaluation of ooerators which are them*lves of fourth order. Thus, whire Dirac wave functions
are uwd, the divergent part is of higher order in r/c, and,
its neglect is consistett with the neglect of such divergent
expressions as the expected value of 26. If one rounds off
thi Coulomb potential at a radius ionsiderably smaller
than the classital electron radius, the contributi'on of the
divergent part of (S I v, /l S) is still quite negligible. (lf the
charge is assumed to be evenly distributed over a sphere
of radius o, then the ratio of the expected value of V2V for a
Dirac S s^tate to that for a Schriidinger S state is of the
order a-o'-1 -a2 losa.)
It H. A. Bethe, Poiono Conference, 1948.

423
397

SELF-ENERGY

OF A BOUND ELECTRON

modification in the real charge and mass of the our self-energy expressionmust be found to give
electron, and thus be included in the observed a covariant expressionfor the free electron. We
charge and mass. We shall assume that these proceed by subtracting some free electron operterms have been so included in the observed ator from the operators contained in our selfcharge and mass and drop them from the self- energy expressionsuch that the self-energy of a
energy expression.The term in dpeu'vlzis just free electron is zero, thereby regarding the total
of the form of the interaction of a Pauli-type self-energy as contained in the observed mass.
Such a procedureis, of course,not unique: we
intrinsic magnetic moment with a static potenmake the simplest subtraction, examine the
shall
as
implying
interpreted
be
thus
tial I/ and can
an additional electronic magnetic moment of resultant expression, and then investigate the
a/2r-Bohr magentons, while the term V27 im- nature of the lack of uniqueness.Thus if one
plies a correction to the external potential, or, simply drops the (a/&r)o'p term from the selfmore specifically, an additional short-range inter- energy,one obtains
action between the electron and a point charge.
2e)
:
The term in a 'p is not subject to a direct physical W @) (d/ r) (al iA"' v lry4 + (+ log(1/
interpretation, and, in fact, must be regardedas
(7s)
+ ( 1 1/ 7 2 -t ( r / r s )
having no physical significance. Thus if one ap)
v
v
l
a
)
'
plies the self-energy expression (73) (with the
This expression can be interpreted as arising
B- and V' terms omitted as explained above) to
in the magnetic moment of the
a free electron of momentum p, only the term from an increase
2r'Bohr magnetons and an addiaf
of.
electron
yielding
for
self-energy
the
in c.p contributes,
given by
(a/.6tr)lp'z/(l-lp')il. Now if the electron is to be tional interaction potential
/
\
relativistic
connection
particle,
the
regarded as a
-(r/1s) tvv. (76)
6v.ff:
- I + los(l/2)+(1r/72)
between the momentum and energy of a particle
/
\must be retained, so that the self-energy should
contribute 68 and 983 Mc/sec., respechave the momentum dependence appropriate These
to the level shift.
tively,
-l/(l*p')'
isrs
that
to a mass correction,
with our subtraction prescripIn
accordance
corresponding to the term in p already subhowever, add any linear combinawe
could,
tion
non-covariant
term
of
the
tracted. The presence
operators of order up to
(a/6tr)lp'/(l-lnz;+], which is reminiscentof the tion of free electron
(u/c)a whose expectation value is zero for the free
be
can
self-energy,
stress terms in the classical
electron. There are seven such operators,\6 uiz.,
traced to the fact that the total self-energy is
l, P, p', 9p', a'p, p', Bpn. The condition that a
of
the
in
case
the
infinite. and can be avoided
linear
combination gives zero to order constitutes
free electron by paying proper attention to the
constraints, so that there should be four
three
k-spaces.ra
in
the
various
domains of integration
independent combinations giving zero
linearly
That is, in order to keep the total self-energy
free electron. A possible choice for these
for
the
over
a
finite
integrate
finite it is necessary to
is the following:
region of the light quantum space and the elec(76a)
a
integrates
over
If
one
st":l - 9-tp'-c'P*6P'*8Pa,
tron momentum space.
region which would be spherical for an electron
(76b)
%:pr-Bp,-*Pa,
at rest, a covariant result is obtained. One can(76c)
sl":pa-Fpa,
not, however, apply this prescription to a bound
electron, so that some other means of modifying
-0P2.
(76d)
Oa: a.p
13The enersv of a particle of mass z and morentum p
is (mzlpz)t. If z,is irodified by a quantity 62, then the
energy to nrst oroer rn ou rs
(m2! P2)r! 6m / (mz! Pz)|,
as is appropriate for
and the correction term with n:1,
the electron, is of the form given.
nA. p"is. Verh. d. K. Ned. Akad. v. Wet, Section 1,
19, No. 1 (1947).

The expectation values of phe above combinations are all zero for the lfree electron. Their
effect upon the self-etergy of a bound electron
depends upon their expectation values for a
-lfooFtor"

of odd order in t/c have been ignored, as

there ire all rero for the bound electron'

424
N. M. KROLL.{ND

\\:. E.

L.{MB,

lR.

398

bound electron. Those for go, Oa,and O" are zero,

so that their subtraction would have no physical
On the other hand,
consequences.

electron has been made by Kusch and Foley,l0

who obtain a value in good agreement with the
value a/2zr-Bohr magnetons theoretically computed by Schwinger.lT If we adopt this experi(77)
@laala):-i(al\s'vVla)/2,
mental and theoretical result, the 2254-22P1
which is precisely the form of interaction of a separation Liecomes uniquely determined to be
magnetic moment with a static potential Z. just the value 1051 Mc/sec. obtained above by a
Thus, the lack of uniquenessof the subtraction direct subtraction (74) of thd self-energies for
prescription is just such as to make the magnetic the two states.

moment correction indeterminate, while-the correction to the potential is left uniquely determined. Now a purely magnetic measurement of
the correction to the magnetic moment of the

16P. Kusch and H. M. Foley, Phys. Rev. 74, 250 (1948),

also J. E. Nafe and E. B. Nelson, Phys. Rev. 73,718 (1948).
ItJ. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 73,416 (1948) and Pocono
Conference. 1948.