In what follows we will consider rather general field theories. The only guiding principles that we will use in constructing these theories are (a) symmetries and (b) a generalized Least Action Principle.
x! = x
(2.1)
12
x3! = x3
(2.2)
where x0 = ct, x1 = x, x2 = y and x3 = z (note: these are components, not
powers!). If we use the notation = (1 v 2 /c2 )1/2 cosh , we can write
the Lorentz boost as a matrix:
0
0!
x
cosh sinh 0 0
x
x1! sinh cosh 0 0 x1
=
(2.3)
x2! 0
0
1 0 x2
0
0
0 1
x3
x3!
where =
the algebra
(2.4)
[L , L ] = ig L ig L ig L + ig L
(2.5)
where g is the metric tensor for flat Minkowski space-time (see below).
This is the algebra of the group SO(3, 1). Actually any operator of the form
M = L + S
(2.6)
13
The Lorentz group has the defining property of leaving invariant the relativistic interval
x2 x20 x2 = c2 t2 x2
(2.7)
1 0
0
0
0 1 0
0
(2.8)
g = g =
0 0 1 0
0 0
0 1
With this notation the infinitesimal relativistic interval is
(2.9)
2. 4-vectors:
1. x is a contravariant 4-vector, x = (ct, x)
2. x is a covariant 4-vector x = (ct, x)
3. Covariant and contravariant vectors (and tensors) are related through
the metric tensor g
A = g A
4. x is a(vector
in R3
)
E
5. p = c , p is the energy-momentum 4-vector. Hence, p p =
is a Lorentz scalar.
(2.10)
E2
c2
p2
3. Scalar Product:
p q = p q = p0 q0 p q p q g
4. Gradients:
and
x .
(2.11)
1 2
2
(2.12)
c2 t
which is a Lorentz scalar. From now on we will use units of time [T ] and
length [L] such that ! = c = 1. Thus, [T ] = [L] and we will use units like
centimeters (or any other unit of length).
2
14
(2.13)
x0
time-like
x2 > 0
space-like
x2 < 0
x1
Figure 2.1 The Minkowski space-time and its light cone. Events at a relativistic interval with x2 = x20 x2 > 0 are time-like (and are causally
connected with the origin), while events with x2 = x20 x2 < 0 are spacelike and are not causally connected with the origin.
Since a field is a function (or mapping) of Minkowski space onto some other
(properly chosen) space, it is natural to require that the fields should have
simple transformation properties under Lorentz transformations. For example, the vector potential A (x) transforms like 4-vector under Lorentz transformations, i.e., if x! = x , then A! (x! ) = A (x). In other words, A
transforms like x . Thus, it is a vector. All vector fields have this property.
A scalar field (x), on the other hand, remains invariant under Lorentz
transformations,
! (x! ) = (x)
(2.14)
(2.15)
2.2 The Lagrangian, the Action and and the Least Action Principle
15
and
! (x) = S()(x)
(2.16)
or the invariant length ds = c 1 vc2 dt, the proper length. Hence one
writes
+ sf
+ tf ,
v2
2
S = mc
ds = mc
dt 1 2
(2.18)
c
si
ti
L = mc
v2
c2
(2.19)
16
Figure 2.2 The Least Action Principle: the dark curve is the classical trajectory and extremizes the classical action. The curve with a broken trace
represents a variation.
Once the Lagrangian is found, the classical equations of motion are determined by the Least Action Principle. Thus, we construct the action S
.
+
q
(2.20)
S = dt L q,
t
and demand that the physical trajectories q(t) leave the action S stationary,i.e., S = 0. The variation of S is
/
0
+ tf
L
L dq
S =
dt
(2.21)
q + dq
q
dt
ti
dt
dt q
dt dq
q
dt dq
ti
ti
dt
(2.22)
dt
Hence, we get
S =
3tf +
3
q 3 +
dq
L
dt
ti
tf
ti
dt q
L
d
q
dt
L
dq
dt
02
(2.23)
identically. Thus,
d
L
q
dt
L
dq
dt
=0
17
(2.24)
is not an invariant but the Dalambertian 2 is. is also an invariant under a change of the sign of . So, we can write the following simple
expression for L:
1
L = V ()
(2.26)
2
where V () is some potential, which we can assume is a polynomial function
of the field . Let us consider the simple choice
1 2 2
V () = m
2
(2.27)
1 2 2
1
m
2
2
(2.28)
where m
= mc/!. Thus,
L=
This is the Lagrangian density for a free scalar field. We will discuss later
on in what sense this field is free. Notice, in passing, that we could have
added a term like 2 . However this term, in addition of being odd under
, is a total divergence and, as such, it has an effect only on the
18
boundary conditions but it does not affect the equations of motion. In what
follows will will not consider surface terms.
The Least Action Principle requires that S be stationary under arbitrary
variations of the field and of its derivatives . Thus, we get
4
5
+
L
L
4
S = d x
+
(2.29)
Notice that since L is a functional of , we have to use functional derivatives,
i.e., partial derivatives at each point of space-time. Upon integrating by
parts, we get
. +
4
.5
+
L
L
L
4
4
S = d x
+ d x
(2.30)
More explicitly, we find
V
L
=
(2.32)
L
L
=
= = 2
(2.33)
and
V
=0
(2.34)
V
m
2 2
=m
2
2
( 2
)
+m
2 = 0
(2.35)
(2.36)
2
where 2 = c12 t
2 ( . Thus, we find that the equation of motion for the
free massive scalar field is
1 2
(2 + m
2 = 0
c2 t2
(2.37)
19
(2.38)
(2.39)
which means that, for each momentum p, there are two solutions, one with
positive frequency and one with negative frequency. We will see below that,
in the quantized theory, the energy of the excitation is indeed equal to
1
!
|p0 |. Notice that m
= mc has units of length and is equal to the Compton
wavelength for a particle of mass m. From now on (unless it stated the
contrary) I will use units in which ! = c = 1 in which m = m.
The Hamiltonian for a classical field is found by a straightforward generalization of the Hamiltonian of a classical particle. Namely, one defines the
canonical momentum (x), conjugate to the field (the coordinate ) (x),
(x) =
(x)
(2.40)
where
(x)
=
x0
(2.41)
(2.42)
H = (x)(x)
L
1
1
= 2 (x) + ((x))2 + V ((x))
2
2
(2.43)
Hence, for a free massive scalar field the Hamiltonian is
1
1
m2 2
H = 2 (x) + ((x))2 +
(x) 0
(2.44)
2
2
2
which is always a positive definite quantity. Thus, the energy of a plane
wave solution of a massive scalar field theory (i.e., a solution of the KleinGordon equation) is always positive, no matter the sign of the frequency.
20
(2.45)
(2.46)
(2.47)
then, H(pq)
is simply given by
H(p, q) = pq (
mq2
p2
V (q)) =
+ V (q)
2
2m
(2.48)
where
p=
L
= mq
q
(2.49)
The (conserved) quantity H is then identified with the total energy of the
system.
In this language, the Least Action Principle becomes
+
+
S = L dt = [pq H(p, q)] dt = 0
(2.50)
Hence
dt
H
H
p q + p q p
q
p
q
=0
(2.51)
21
(2.52)
which can only be satisfied for arbitrary variations q(t) and p(t) if
q =
H
p
p =
H
q
(2.53)
(2.54)
q p
p q
Let F (q, p, t) be some differentiable function of q, p and t. Then the total
time variation of F is
dF
F
F dq F dp
=
+
+
dt
t
q dt
p dt
(2.55)
dt
t
q p
p q
(2.56)
(2.57)
H
q H
q H
dq
=
=
= {q, H}qp
dt
p
q p
p q
(2.58)
In particular,
since
q
=0
p
and
q
=1
q
(2.59)
dt
q p
p q
q
since
p
q
= 0 and
p
p
(2.60)
= 1. Thus,
dp
= {p, H}qp
dt
(2.61)
22
(2.62)
dH
H
=
+ {H, H}qp = 0
dt
t
(2.63)
{H, H}qp = 0
(2.64)
and
since
Therefore, H can be regarded as the generator of infinitesimal time translations. Since it is conserved for an isolated system, for which H
t = 0, we can
indeed identify H with the total energy. In passing, let us also notice that
the above definition of the Poisson Bracket implies that q and p satisfy
{q, p}qp = 1
(2.65)
L
0 (x)
(2.66)
(2.67)
The Hamiltonian density H(, ) is a local function of (x) and (x) given
by
H(, ) = (x) 0 (x) L(, 0 )
(2.68)
1
( )2 V ()
2
(2.69)
(2.70)
23
The canonical field (x) and the canonical momentum (x) satisfy the
equal-time Poisson Bracket (PB) relations
{(x, x0 ), (y, x0 )}P B = (x y)
(2.71)
(2.72)
for any two functionals A and B of (x) and (x). This approach can be
extended to theories other than that of a scalar field without too much
difficulty. We will come back to these issues when we consider the problem
of quantization. Finally we should note that while Lorentz invariance is
apparent in the Lagrangian formulation, it is not so in the Hamiltonian
formulation of a classical field.
!c
= + mc2 HDirac
t
i
(2.73)
2i = 2 = I
{i , } = 0,
(2.74)
1 0
0 1
(2.76)
24
i = i
(2.77)
0
i
i
0
(2.78)
(2.79)
(2.81)
Using Feynmans slash, we can write the Dirac equation in the form
mc
(i/
) = 0
(2.82)
!
From now on I will use units in which ! = c = 1. Thus energy is measured
in units of (length)1 and time in units of length.
Notice that, if satisfies the Dirac equation, then
(i/ + m)(i/ m) = 0
Also,
/ / = =
= g = 2
(2.83)
.
1
1
{ , } + [ ]
2
2
(2.84)
25
i 0
= m
(2.86)
t
where t = x0 (c = 1). Let us introduce the bispinors and
.
=
(2.87)
= +m
t
i
= m
t
i
(2.88)
The solutions are
imt
1
0
imt
1
0
1 = e
and
1 = e
imt
2 = e
imt
2 = e
0
1
0
1
(2.89)
(2.90)
Thus, the upper component represents the solutions with positive energy
while represents the solutions with negative energy. The additional twofold degeneracy of the solutions is connected to the spin of the particle.
More generally, in terms of the bispinors and the Dirac Equation takes
the form,
1
= m +
(2.91)
i
t
i
1
= m +
(2.92)
t
i
In the limit c , it reduces to the Schrodinger-Pauli equation. The slowly
varying amplitudes and ,
defined by
i
= eimt
= eimt
(2.93)
26
with
small and nearly static, define positive energy solutions with energies
close to +m. In terms of and ,
the Dirac equation becomes
1
=
t
i
(2.94)
1
= 2m
+
t
i
(2.95)
i
i
Indeed, in this limit, the l. h. s. of Eq. (2.95) is much smaller than its r. h.
s. Thus we can approximate
2m
1
i
(2.96)
(2.98)
(2.99)
j = 0
(2.100)
(2.101)
j =
= 0 =
(2.102)
Thus the Dirac equation has an associated four vector field, j (x), which is
conserved and hence obeys a local continuity equation
0 j0 + j = 0
(2.103)
27
(2.104)
(2.105)
such that the transformed Dirac equation has the same form as the original
equation in the original frame, i.e. we will require that
.
.
i
m
(x) = 0,
and
i
m
! (x! ) = 0
!
x
x
(2.106)
Notice two important facts: (1) both the field and the coordinate x change
under the action of the Lorentz transformation, and (2) the -matrices and
the mass m do not change under a Lorentz transformation. Thus, the matrices are independent of the choice of a reference frame. However, they
do depend on the choice of the set of basis states in spinor space.
What properties should the representation matrices S() have? Let us
first observe that if x! = x , then
(
)
x
=
1
!
!
x
x x
x
(2.107)
! (x! ) = i (1 ) (S()(x))
!
x
x
(2.108)
i 1 S() mS () = 0
x
(2.109)
28
Or, equivalently
(
)
S 1 () i 1 S () m = 0
x
(2.110)
(2.111)
Since the set of Lorentz transformations form a group, i.e., the product of
two Lorentz transformations 1 and 2 is the new Lorentz transformation
1 2 and the inverse of the transformation is the inverse matrix 1 , the
representation matrices S() should also form a group and obey the same
properties. In particular,
(
)
S 1 () = S 1
(2.112)
must hold. Recall that the invariance of the relativistic interval x2 = x x
implies that must obey
= g
Thus,
So we write,
(
)
= 1
(
)
S () S ()1 = 1
(2.113)
(2.114)
(2.115)
Eq.(2.115) shows that a Lorentz transformation induces a similarity transformation on the -matrices which is equivalent to (the inverse of) a Lorentz
transformation. For the case of Lorentz boosts, Eq.(2.115) shows that the
matrices S() are hermitean. However, for the subgroup SO(3) of rotations
about a fixed origin, the matrices S() are unitary.
We will now find the form of S () for an infinitesimal Lorentz transformation. Since the identity transformation is = g , a Lorentz transformation
which is infinitesimally close to the identity should have the form
( 1 )
= g +
= g
(2.116)
where is infinitesimal and antisymmetric in its space-time indices
=
= g
(2.117)
29
(2.119)
(2.120)
[ , ] = 2i(g g )
(2.121)
(2.122)
(2.123)
i
S () = exp[ ]
4
(2.124)
with
30
(2.125)
I J + . . . = (I + . . .) (x x + . . .)
2
4
.
i
= I + . . . ( x + . . .)
4
(2.127)
Hence
(x)
=
!
.
i
I + x + . . . (x)
4
(2.128)
(2.131)
J( =
(2.132)
31
The first term is clearly the orbital angular momentum and the second term
can be regarded as the- spin.
. With this definition, it is straightforward to
spin one-half.
2.5.4 Transformation Properties of Field Bilinears in the Dirac
Theory
We will now consider the transformation properties of a number of physical
observables of the Dirac theory under Lorentz transformations. Let
x! = x
(2.133)
be a general Lorentz transformation, and S() be the induced transformation for the Dirac spinors a (x) (with a = 1, . . . , 4):
a! (x! ) = S()ab b (x)
(2.134)
(2.135)
(2.136)
(2.137)
transforms as a vector,
4.
(2.138)
(2.139)
32
(2.140)
Thus, the Dirac algebra provides for a natural basis of the space of 4 4
matrices, which we will denote by
S I,
V ,
T ,
A
5 ,
P = 5
(2.141)
where S, V , T , A and P stand for scalar, vector, tensor, axial vector (or
pseudo-vector) and parity respectively. For future reference we will note here
the following useful trace identities obeyed by products of Dirac -matrices
1.
trI = 4,
tr = tr5 = 0,
tr = 4g
(2.142)
and
tr a/ b/ = 4a b
(2.143)
/ m) 1 i
/ m
L = (i
(2.144)
2
/ (
/) ( )
. This choice satisfies all the requirements.
where
The equations of motion
8 4 are derived in the usual manner, i.e., by demanding
that the action S = d x L be stationary
+
L
L
S = 0 = d4 x [
+
+ ( )]
(2.145)
L
L
= 0
(2.146)
33
/ + m) = 0
(i
(2.147)
L
0
= i(x)
i (x)
0 (x)
(2.148)
= i
= (i + m)
9
:;
<
HDirac
(2.149)
+j =0
t
(2.150)
Given an initial condition, i.e., the values of the electric field E(x) and the
magnetic field B(x) at some t0 in the past, the time evolution is governed
34
by Maxwells equations
E =
B =0
(2.151)
1 E
1 B
B
=j
E +
=0
(2.152)
c t
c t
It is possible to recast these statements in a manner in which (a) the relativistic covariance is apparent and (b) the equations follow from a Least
Action Principle. A convenient way to see the above is to consider the electromagnetic field tensor F which is the (contravariant) antisymmetric real
tensor
0 E 1 E 2 E 3
E1
0
B 3 B 2
F = F =
(2.153)
E2 B3
0
B 1
E 3 B 2 B 1
0
In other words
F 0i = F i0 = E i
F ij = F ji = -ijk B k
(2.154)
0 otherwise
(2.155)
where -
1
F = F = - F
2
is the fourth rank Levi-Civita tensor. In
0 B 1 B 2 B 3
B1
0
E 3 E 2
F =
B 2 E 3
0
E2
3
2
2
B
E
E
0
(2.156)
particular
(2.157)
With these notations, we can rewrite Maxwells equations in the manifestly covariant form
F =j
F =0
(Equation of Motion)
(2.158)
(Bianchi Identity)
(2.159)
(Continuity Equation)
(2.160)
j =0
35
By inspection we see that the field tensor F and the dual field tensor F@
map into each other by exchanging the electric and magnetic fields with each
others. This electro-magnetic duality would be an exact property of electrodynamics if in addition to the electric charge current j the Bianchi Identity
Eq.(2.159) included a magnetic charge current (of magnetic monopoles).
At this point it is convenient to introduce the vector potential A whose
contravariant components are
- 0 . .
A
A (x) =
,A
,A
(2.161)
c
c
where is the scalar potential, and the current 4-vector j (x)
j (x) = (c, j) (j 0 , j)
(2.162)
The electric field strength E and the magnetic field B are defined to be
1
1 A
E = A0
c
c t
B =A
(2.163)
(2.164)
(2.165)
(2.166)
(2.167)
2 A ( A ) = j
(2.168)
which yields
36
This is the wave equation. We can further use the gauge-invariance to further
restrict A (without these restrictions A is not completely determined).
These restrictions are known as the procedure of fixing a gauge. The choice
A = 0
(2.169)
(2.170)
(2.171)
(2.172)
2A = 0
(2.173)
(2.174)
37
(2.177)
We can now derive the equations of motion by demanding that the action
S be stationary, i.e.,
4
5
+
L
L
4
S = d x
A
+
A
=0
(2.178)
A
A
Once again, we can integrate by parts to get
5 +
.5
4
4
+
L
L
L
A + d x A
(2.179)
S = d x
A
A
A
If we demand that at the surface A = 0, we get
.
L
L
=
A
A
(2.180)
Explicitly, we find
L
= j
A
(2.181)
L
= F
A
(2.182)
j = F
(2.183)
j = F
(2.184)
and
Thus, we obtain
or, equivalently
38
where < ij > are nearest neighboring sites on the lattice. In many situations,
!
S(i)
!
S(j)
j
39
A
{}
E[]
exp
T
(2.187)
A
1
(y)
N [A]
(2.188)
yA(x)
where N [A] is the number of sites in A(x). The restricted partition function
is now a functional of the coarse-grained local magnetizations M (x),
B
C D
A
A
1
E[]
M (x)
(y) (2.189)
Z[M ] =
exp
T
N
(A)
x
{}
yA(x)
The variables M (x) have the property that, for N (A) very large, they effectively take values on the real numbers. Also, the coarse-grained configurations {M (x)} are much more smooth than the microscopic configurations
{}.
At very high temperatures the average magnetization /M 0 = 0 since the
system is paramagnetic. On the other hand, if the temperature is low, the
average magnetization may be non-zero since the system may now be ferromagnetic. Thus, at high temperatures the partition function Z is dominated
by configurations which have /M 0 = 0 while at very low temperatures, the
most frequent configurations have /M 0 1= 0. Landau proceeded to write
down an approximate form for the partition function in terms of sums over
smooth, continuous, configurations M (x) which can be represented in the
form
4
5
+
E [M (x), T ]
Z DM (x) exp
(2.190)
T
40
where DM (x) is a measure which means sum over all configurations. If for
the relevant configurations M (x) is smooth and small, the energy functional
E[M ] can be written as an expansion in powers of M (x) and of its space
derivatives. With these assumptions the free energy of the magnet can be
approximated by the Landau-Ginzburg form
F (M )
=
ELG (M )
+ T 4
d
d x
5
1
1
1
2
2
4
K(T )|M (x)| + a(T )M (x) + b(T )M (x) + . . .
2
2
4!
(2.191)
Thermodynamic stability requires that the stiffness K(T ) and the nonlinearity coefficient b(T ) must be positive. The second term has a coefficient
a(T ) with can have either sign. A simple choice of parameters is
K(T ) 2 K0 ,
b(T ) 2 b0 ,
a(T ) 2 a
(T Tc )
(2.192)
(2.193)
(x) = KM (x)
we can write the free energy as
C
B
+
1
2
d
() + U ()
F () = d x
2
(2.194)
m
2 2 4
+ + ...
2
4!
(2.195)
)
b
where m
2 = a(T
K and = K 2 . Except for the absence of the term involving
the canonical momentum 2 (x), F () has a striking resemblance to the
Hamiltonian of a scalar field in Minkowski space! We will see below that
this is not an accident.
Let us now ask the following question: is there a configuration c ($x) which
gives the dominant contribution to the partition function Z? If so, we should
be able to approximate
+
Z = D exp{F ()} exp{F (c )}{1 + }
(2.196)
This statement is usually called the Mean Field Approximation. Since the
integrand is an exponential, the dominant configuration c must be such
41
U ()
T > T0
T < T0
Figure 2.4 The Landau free energy for the order parameter field : for
T > T0 the free energy has a unique minimum at = 0 while for T < T0
there are two minima at = 0
+ j
=0
(2.197)
(x)
j (x)
For the case of the Landau theory the Euler-Lagrange Equation becomes
the Landau-Ginzburg Equation
3
(x)
(2.198)
3! c
The solution c (x) that minimizes the energy are uniform in space and thus
have j c = 0. Hence, c is the solution of the very simple equation
0 = 2 c (x) + m
2 c (x) +
m
2 c +
3
=0
3! c
(2.199)
42
For T > Tc , m
2 is also positive and the only real solution is c = 0. This
is the paramagnetic state. But, for T < Tc , m
2 is negative and two new
solutions are available, namely
,
6|m
2 |
c =
(2.200)
These are the solutions with lowest energy and they are degenerate. They
both represent the magnetized state.
We now must ask if this procedure is correct, or rather when can we expect
this approximation to work. It is correct T = 0 and it will also turn out to be
correct at very high temperatures. The answer to this question is the central
problem of the theory of Critical Phenomena which describes the behavior
of statistical systems in the vicinity of a continuous (or second order) phase
transitions. It turns out that this problem is also connected with a central
problem of Quantum Field theory, namely when and how is it possible to
remove the singular behavior of perturbation theory, and in the process
remove all dependence on the short distance (or high energy) cutoff from
physical observables. In Quantum Field Theaory this procedure amounts to
a definition of the continuum limit. The answer to these questions motivated
the development of the Renormalization Group which solved both problems
simultaneously.
(2.202)
Let us formally carry out the analytic continuation of the time component
x0 of x from real to imaginary time xD
x0 ! ixD
(2.203)
(2.204)
under which
43
where x = ($x, xD ). Under this transformation, the action (or rather i times
the action) becomes
+
+
d
iS i dx0 d x L(, 0 , j ) ! dD x L(, iD , j )
(2.205)
If L has the form
1
1
1
L = ( )2 V () (0 )2 ()2 V ()
2
2
2
then the analytic continuation yields
(2.206)
1
1 $ 2
L(, iD , ) = (D )2 ()
V ()
(2.207)
2
2
Then we can write
4
5
+
1
1
D
2
2
iS(, ) d x
(D ) + () + V () (2.208)
2
2
x0 ixD
This expression has the same form as (minus) the potential energy E()
for a classical field in D = d + 1 space dimensions. However it is also
the same as the energy for a classical statistical mechanics problem in the
same number of dimensions i.e., the Landau-Ginzburg free energy of the
last section.
In Classical Statistical Mechanics, the equilibrium properties of a system
are determined by the partition function. For the case of the Landau theory
of phase transitions the partition function is
+
Z = D eE()/T
(2.209)
8
where the symbol D means sum over all configurations. (We will discuss the definition of the measure D later on). If we choose for energy
functional E() the expression
4
5
+
1
E() = dD x
()2 + V ()
(2.210)
2
where
()2 (D )2 + ()2
(2.211)
44
should have the interpretation of a sum of all possible functions ($x, t) (i.e.,
the histories of the configurations of the field ) weighed by the phase factor
exp{ !i S(, )}. We will discover later on that if T is formally identified
with the Planck constant !, then Z represents the path-integral quantization
of the field theory! Notice that the semiclassical limit ! 0 is formally
equivalent to the low temperature limit of the statistical mechanical system.
The analytic continuation procedure that we just discussed is called a
Wick rotation. It amounts to a passage from D = d+1-dimensional Minkowski
space to a D-dimensional Euclidean space. We will find that this analytic
continuation is a very powerful tool. As we will see below, a number of difficulties will arise when the theory is defined directly in Minkowski space.
Primarily, the problem is the presence of ill-defined integrals which are given
precise meaning by a deformation of the integration contours from the real
time ( or frequency) axis to the imaginary time (or frequency) axis. The
deformation of the contour amounts to a definition of the theory in Euclidean rather than in Minkowski space. It is an underlying assumption that
the analytic continuation can be carried out without difficulty. Namely, the
assumption is that the result of this procedure is unique and that, whatever singularities may be present in the complex plane, they do not affect
the result. It is important to stress that the success of this procedure is
not guaranteed. However, in almost all the theories that we know of, this
assumption seems to hold. The only case in which problems are known to
exist is the theory of Quantum Gravity (that we will not discuss here).