Charged Scalar Field Lagrangian Problem: Hawking, Ellis

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nikos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lagrangian
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the Lagrangian for a charged scalar field as presented in "The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time" by Hawking and Ellis. Participants are examining their results from varying the gauge field \( A_a \) in the Lagrangian and comparing them to the results provided in the text.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to vary \( A_a \) in the Lagrangian but encounters discrepancies between their results and those in the book. Other participants share their calculations and express uncertainty about potential mistakes. Questions arise about the correctness of the Lagrangian's form and whether resources such as quantum field theory texts might clarify the situation.

Discussion Status

Contextual Notes

Nikos
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hi,there! Here is the lagrangian for a charged scalar field http://www.photodump.com/direct/Bbking22/P-meson-Lagrangian.jpg as it can be found in “the large scale structure of space-time” Hawking, Ellis on page 68. It seem’s that I have problem varying Aa on the lagrangian because I get http://www.photodump.com/direct/Bbking22/P-meson-Myresult.jpg , while the result of the book is http://www.photodump.com/direct/Bbking22/P-meson-AmVar.jpg . Does anyone have the same problem? Does anyone gets the book’s result? Thanks for the help. Here are all the results for this example http://www.photodump.com/direct/Bbking22/Example3.jpg .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I seem to get the same result as you. Below are my calculations, which I have done in flat so that I could use familiar notation. I haven't checked my calculations very closely, so I could easily have made a mistake.

Have you looked in a quantum field theory book? Almost all books should include a flat space version of this. I don't have any physics books with me right now, so I can't check.

Regards,
George

[tex] L=-\frac{1}{2}\left( \partial_{a}\psi+ieA_{a}\psi\right) g^{ab}\left(<br /> \partial_{b}\overline{\psi}-ieA_{b}\overline{\psi}\right) -\frac{1}{2}<br /> \frac{m^{2}}{\hbar^{2}}\psi\overline{\psi}-\frac{1}{16\pi}F_{ab}F_{cd}<br /> g^{ac}g^{bd}[/tex]

[tex] \begin{align*}<br /> \frac{\partial L}{\partial A_{f}} & =-\frac{1}{2}ie\delta_{a}^{f}\psi<br /> g^{ab}\left( \partial_{b}\overline{\psi}-ieA_{b}\overline{\psi}\right)<br /> +\frac{1}{2}\left( \partial_{a}\psi+ieA_{a}\psi\right) g^{ab}ie\delta<br /> _{b}^{f}\overline{\psi}\\<br /> & =-\frac{1}{2}ie\psi g^{fb}\left( \partial_{b}\overline{\psi}-ieA_{b}<br /> \overline{\psi}\right) +\frac{1}{2}\left( \partial_{a}\psi+ieA_{a}<br /> \psi\right) g^{af}ie\overline{\psi}<br /> \end{align*}[/tex]

[tex] \begin{align*}<br /> \frac{\partial L}{\partial\left( \partial_{n}A_{f}\right) } & =-\frac<br /> {1}{16\pi}\left[ \frac{\partial F_{ab}}{\partial\left( \partial_{n}<br /> A_{f}\right) }F_{cd}+F_{ab}\frac{\partial F_{cd}}{\partial\left(<br /> \partial_{n}A_{f}\right) }\right] g^{ac}g^{bd}\\<br /> & =-\frac{1}{16\pi}\left[ \frac{\partial}{\partial\left( \partial_{n}<br /> A_{f}\right) }\left( \partial_{a}A_{b}-\partial_{b}A_{a}\right)<br /> F_{cd}+F_{ab}\frac{\partial}{\partial\left( \partial_{n}A_{f}\right)<br /> }\left( \partial_{c}A_{d}-\partial_{d}A_{c}\right) \right] g^{ac}g^{bd}\\<br /> & =-\frac{1}{16\pi}\left[ \left( \delta_{a}^{n}\delta_{b}^{f}-\delta_{b}<br /> ^{n}\delta_{a}^{f}\right) F_{cd}+F_{ab}\left( \delta_{c}^{n}\delta_{d}<br /> ^{f}-\delta_{d}^{n}\delta_{c}^{f}\right) \right] g^{ac}g^{bd}\\<br /> & =-\frac{1}{16\pi}\left[ \left( g^{nc}g^{fd}-g^{fc}g^{nd}\right)<br /> F_{cd}+F_{ab}\left( g^{an}g^{bf}-g^{af}g^{bn}\right) \right] \\<br /> & =-\frac{1}{16\pi}\left[ F^{nf}-F^{fn}+F^{nf}-F^{fn}\right] \\<br /> & =-\frac{1}{4\pi}F^{nf}<br /> \end{align*}[/tex]

[tex] \begin{align*}<br /> 0 & =\frac{\partial L}{\partial A_{f}}-\partial_{n}\frac{\partial L}{\partial\left(<br /> \partial_{n}A_{f}\right) }\\<br /> & =-\frac{1}{2}ie\psi\left( \partial^{f}\overline{\psi}-ieA^{f}\overline<br /> {\psi}\right) +\frac{1}{2}\left( \partial^{f}\psi+ieA^{f}\psi\right)<br /> ie\overline{\psi}+\frac{1}{4\pi}\partial_{n}F^{nf}<br /> \end{align*}[/tex]
 
Thank you very much George!
 
There's no 1/2 in the lagrangian in the first place. For SED in flat spacetime one has the action

[tex]S^{SED}\left[A_{\mu},\phi,\phi^{*}\right]= \int \ d^{4}x \ \left[\left(D^{\mu}\phi\right)\left(D_{\mu}\phi\right)^{*} -\frac{1}{4} F^{\mu\nu}F_{\mu\nu}-\mu^{2}\phi\phi^{*}\right][/tex]

Daniel.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
6K