[Physics] $m$ in Klein-Gordon Equation

field-theoryklein-gordon-equationmassquantum-field-theory

The Klein-Gordon equation is given by
$$
(\square + m^2) \phi(x) = 0
$$

where $\square$ is the d'Alembertian operator, $m \in \mathbb{R}$ and $\phi$ is a scalar field.

Question: What is $m$ in the KG equation? Is it just a real number? How is it related to the scalar field $\phi$?

If $m=0$, then KG equation becomes
$$
\square \phi(x) = 0.
$$

A general solution to this equation is given by
$$
\phi = \int \frac{d^3p}{(2\pi)^3} \left( a_p e^{-ipx} + a_p^* e^{+ipx}\right)
$$

where $p^{\mu}$ is a constant $4$-vector.

In Lorenz gauge condition (i.e.; $\partial_{\mu} A^{\mu} = 0$), Maxwell's equation in free space (i.e., $\partial_{\mu} F^{\mu\nu} = 0$) reduces to
$$
\square A^{\nu} = 0.
$$

$A^{\nu}$, the electromagnetic field, can also be expressed by the same expression for $\phi$. The electromagnetic field is called a massless vector field for each polarization.

Question:
How does the zero mass of photons be related to the form of the equation $\square A^{\nu} = 0$ where $m=0$?

Best Answer

Once you start thinking about relativity, gauge fields, qft, etc, it's easy to forget that the massless KG equation is actually just a fancy name for one of the simplest and most common equations in physics: $$ (\partial_t^2 - \partial_x^2) \, \varphi = 0 , $$ the wave equation!

The most familiar example is waves on a string. Here's the answer in that context:

$$ (\partial_t^2 - \partial_x^2 + m^2) \, \varphi = 0 $$


                          

With $m=0$ you are talking about waves on a string, where each little string segment is coupled only to its neighbors. (We call this the "wave equation".)

With $m\neq 0$ each little string segment has a harmonic restoring force back to its equilibrium displacement, in addition to neighbor coupling. (I'd call this the "wave equation with dispersion").

The value of $m$ tells you the strength of the harmonic restoring force at each point, relative to the strength of neighbor coupling.

Okay, so why "massive" and "massless"? A few reasons.

Look at the dispersion relation $\omega = \sqrt{k^2 + m^2}$.

  1. In quantum mechanics $\omega \sim E$ and $k \sim p$, roughly speaking. Translating, the dispersion relation looks like $E = \sqrt{p^2 + m^2}$ which is the relativistic energy for a particle with rest mass $m$.

  2. Normalized wavepackets have a minimum total energy $m$. (This might not strictly be true but the idea is right. Didn't feel like working out proof. The point is that in Fourier space (at a fixed time) you're summing up energies related to $\omega(k) \geq m$.)

  3. Group velocity of all wavepackets is $c$ (of course $c=1$ here) if $m=0$. If $m>0$ all wavepackets have group velocity less than $c$. In the massive case $m>0$, low energy normalized wavepackets just sit still (all "rest mass" energy, no kinetic energy), whereas very energetic normalized wavepackets move almost at $c$ (high kinetic energy).

When you go quantum, the properties 2 and 3 of classical wavepackets basically translate to the corresponding properties of quantum excitations.

So basically the answer to your second question is: Because the KG dispersion relation corresponds to the relativistic energy equation for a particle of rest mass $m$, and the associated wavepacket dynamics agrees with the analogy as well.

I'm sure there are many more ways to think about this, some mathematically more rigorous, but I think they're all fundamentally related to that basic fact and the properties above.

Related Question