Gauging Poincare to obtain Einstein gravity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the procedure for obtaining gravity from gauged (super)-Poincare algebras, focusing on the steps involved and the implications of gauging the Poincare algebra, particularly the transition from Poincare transformations to general coordinate transformations (gct's).

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines the procedure of gauging the Poincare algebra, noting the emergence of the vielbein and spin connection as gauge fields.
  • The participant expresses confusion regarding the transition from P-transformations to gct's, questioning the identification of parameters and their roles in the tangent space.
  • Another participant mentions a preference for Lorentzian transformations over Poincare transformations, suggesting a difference in robustness in quantum treatments.
  • A later reply emphasizes the need for a thorough understanding of how to obtain General Relativity (GR) from the gauged Poincare algebra, particularly the second step of the outlined procedure.
  • Concerns are raised about the nature of the gauge algebra and whether it will still close on the fields after the transformation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, as there are differing views on the implications of gauging the Poincare algebra and the nature of the transformations involved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential ambiguities in the identification of gauge parameters and their transformation roles, as well as the implications for the closure of the gauge algebra.

haushofer
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
3,077
Reaction score
1,596
Hi,

I'm rather confused about the procedure in which people obtain gravity from gauged (super)-Poincare algebras. Let me outline what this procedure is.

*First you gauge the Poincare algebra with generators P and M
*You obtain two gauge fields: the vielbein (associated with P) and the spin connection (associated with M)
*After that you put the curvature of P, called R(P), to zero: R(P)=0

Now, this R(P)=0 constraint has two effects:

1) The spin connection becomes a dependent field; the number of constraints equals the number of components of the spin connection, and thus it can be solved

2) One can "exchange" the P-transformations for general coordinate transformations (gct's), which is what you want: in a theory of gravity there are no P-transformations, but just gct's and local Lorentz transformations (GR can as such be defined on a tangent bundle with these two transformations as right- and left transformations)

However, this second step is not clear to me. Gauging the Poincare algebra is done a la Yang-Mills, so the algebra is realized on the gauge fields. So the parameter of the P-transformations is NOT a vector lying in the tangent space, right? It's just an internal parameter. However, in the end you want the Local Lorentz transformations to act in the tangent space, so where do you make this identification?

Also, this exchanging of the P-transformations, which is often described in texts about supergravity, is not clear to me. The relation in the Poincare case says that

<br /> \xi^{\lambda}\partial_{\lambda}e_{\mu}^a + \partial_{\mu}\xi^{\lambda}e_{\lambda}^a = \xi^{\lambda}R_{\lambda\mu}^a (P) + \delta_{P}(\xi^{\lambda}e_{\lambda}^b)e_{\mu}^a + \delta_M(\xi^{\lambda}\omega_{\lambda}^{ef})e_{\mu}^a<br />

The LHS is a gct, and so we see that putting R(P)=0 we get a relation between gct's, P-transformations with a gauge parameter involving the vielbein, and a local Lorentz transformation involving the spin connection. However, these are NOT the usual gauge transformations, so how is this "exchange" precisely done?

Also, obviously you change the gauge algebra, and is it guaranteed that it will still close on the fields?

Thanks in forward!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Einstein, and most modern scientists, prefer Lorentzian transforms. Poincaire relies more on semi-classical approaches - which are less robust in quantum treatments.
 
I'm not talking about making things quantum mechanically; I just want a thorough prescription how you obtain GR from the gauged Poincare algebra, and step (2) in my first post is my main obstacle :)

I'm not sure what you mean to say.

The subtlety lies in the fact that you're gauging Poincare in the Yang-Mills way and treat the parameters as lying in some internal space, while in the end ofcourse you want to make an identification to "external transformations" (by which I mean spacetime transformations!), namely gct's.

Ofcourse, you could be just pragmatic, but I have the feeling something fishy is going on here.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K