A question about the Exterior Product in Yang-Mills theory

GoldPheonix
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
Right, so in Yang-Mills theory, the vector potential is modified from:

F = dA​

To:

F = dA + A\wedge A​

However, it is my understanding that the exterior/wedge product is anticommutitive, so that for a given exterior algebra over a vector space, V:

\omega \wedge \omega = 0, \forall \omega \epsilon \Lambda(V)​


Why then is the second term in the curvature, F, not non-zero? I assume I'm missing something, could someone fill me in?


(Sorry, this probably fits better in Topology & Geometry section, but the question technically is a question about multilinear algebra)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Argh! I was almost done a long latex post, but I accidentally closed the window.

A is a Lie algebra-valued one-form. not a "normal" one-form. Roughy, think of A as a matrix of "normal" one-forms, and A \wedge A as matrix multiplication, where exterior products of matrix elements (normal one-forms) are used instead of multiplication of numbers.
 
Thank you George Jones for your reply.

Is there a particular name for the topic of Lie-algebra valued one-forms? (I assume it's actually a differentiable form, i.e. a section of the cotangent bundle). If there is, I would like to study it a little more.I'm assuming there's a little more to it than this. For instance, the Lie algebra here, is it the Lie algebra of the Lie group of diffeomorphisms/isometries on the differentiable manifold/Riemannian manifold (this is the only straight foreword way, that I can imagine, that they'd be matrices)? Or are we assuming the manifold for which our A-field is defined over is also has smooth group structure?
 
Last edited:
GoldPheonix said:
Thank you George Jones for your reply.

Is there a particular name for the topic of Lie-algebra valued one-forms? (I assume it's actually a differentiable form, i.e. a section of the cotangent bundle). If there is, I would like to study it a little more.

They are treated in The Geometry of Physics: An Introduction by Theodore Frankel, and in Geometry, Topology, and Physics by M. Nakahara.
GoldPheonix said:
I'm assuming there's a little more to it than this. For instance, the Lie algebra here, is it the Lie algebra of the Lie group of diffeomorphisms/isometries on the differentiable manifold/Riemannian manifold (this is the only straight foreword way, that I can imagine, that they'd be matrices)? Or are we assuming the manifold for which our A-field is defined over is also has smooth group structure?

A Yang-Mills theory involves a internal (i.e., not spacetime) symmetry group G, and uses a structure called a principal G bundle. The field strength that you gave in the first post is the curvature (again, internal, not spacetime) of the principal G bundle.
 
I own M. Nakahara's book. Is it contained in the section on the theory of connections on fiber bundles?
 
GoldPheonix said:
I own M. Nakahara's book. Is it contained in the section on the theory of connections on fiber bundles?

Nakahar covers this stuff briefly (maybe too briefly, I prefer Frankels's treament) in the section on curvature of fiber bundles.
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top