- #1
albronco1
- 7
- 4
Consider a vector-like lattice gauge theory whose fermion content has Weyl number ≡ 0 (mod 16) i.e. anomaly-free in the sense that admits symmetric mass generation, the 16 of SO(10) / one SM generation being the canonical example tuned near the lower edge of the conformal window. Now switch on a symmetric (mod-16-channel) four-fermion interaction that gaps the "mirror" sector without breaking the chiral symmetries.
My question concerns the nature of the resulting strong-coupling gapped phase:
1. In that phase, is there a genuinely chiral massless survivor — i.e. true *dynamical* decoupling of the mirror or do the mirror two-point-function zeros signal a *kinematically* vector-like spectrum, in the sense of Golterman–Shamir?
2. Does the Golterman–Shamir generalized no-go (their one-particle-Hamiltonian locality/analyticity argument, arXiv:2505.20436) settle this in general, or is there room when the effective one-particle Hamiltonian fails their locality assumptions?
3. What is the current lattice status? Do the SU(2) N_f=4 and SU(3) N_f=8 studies (Catterall, Hasenfratz, et al.) actually distinguish dynamical from kinematic mirror decoupling, or only establish that a symmetric gapped phase exists?
Observables I'd expect to discriminate: the gradient-flow β-function near the edge, the chiral susceptibility (suppressed vs. diverging), the fermion-propagator pole-vs-zero structure, and finite-size scaling of the transition (BKT-type vs. first-order). Pointers to the most current references very welcome.
My question concerns the nature of the resulting strong-coupling gapped phase:
1. In that phase, is there a genuinely chiral massless survivor — i.e. true *dynamical* decoupling of the mirror or do the mirror two-point-function zeros signal a *kinematically* vector-like spectrum, in the sense of Golterman–Shamir?
2. Does the Golterman–Shamir generalized no-go (their one-particle-Hamiltonian locality/analyticity argument, arXiv:2505.20436) settle this in general, or is there room when the effective one-particle Hamiltonian fails their locality assumptions?
3. What is the current lattice status? Do the SU(2) N_f=4 and SU(3) N_f=8 studies (Catterall, Hasenfratz, et al.) actually distinguish dynamical from kinematic mirror decoupling, or only establish that a symmetric gapped phase exists?
Observables I'd expect to discriminate: the gradient-flow β-function near the edge, the chiral susceptibility (suppressed vs. diverging), the fermion-propagator pole-vs-zero structure, and finite-size scaling of the transition (BKT-type vs. first-order). Pointers to the most current references very welcome.
let’s see … i mean maybe this questions are also interesting for them, for the next version of SMG , so nothing to lose ;)