Constraints on Chiral superfield

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ChrisVer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chiral Constraints
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the constraints necessary for a superfield \Phi(x, \theta, \bar{\theta}) to be classified as chiral. It establishes that the supercovariant derivative must vanish, leading to specific conditions on the component fields. The user proposes a method to derive these constraints more efficiently by transforming a left chiral superfield \Phi_{L}(y, \theta) into the standard representation through a coordinate shift, specifically x → x + i θ σ \bar{θ}. This transformation simplifies the covariant derivative, allowing for the identification of constraints such as ζ(x) = 0, Z(x) = 0, and D(x) = -1/4 ∂μ ∂μ φ.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of superfields and their component expansions
  • Familiarity with chiral superfields and supercovariant derivatives
  • Knowledge of coordinate transformations in supersymmetry
  • Proficiency in manipulating complex variables and derivatives
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of supercovariant derivatives in supersymmetry
  • Learn about the implications of chiral constraints on superfields
  • Explore coordinate transformations in superspace
  • Investigate the relationship between left and right chiral superfields
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, particularly those specializing in supersymmetry, as well as graduate students seeking to deepen their understanding of superfield constraints and transformations.

ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
Suppose we have a superfield \Phi(x,\theta,\bar{\theta}) this can be expanded in component fields in the standard way as:
\Phi(x,\theta,\bar{\theta})= c(x) + \theta \psi(x) + \bar{\theta} \bar{ζ}(x) + \theta^{2} F(x) + \bar{\theta}^{2} Z(x) + \theta \sigma^{\mu} \bar{\theta} u_{\mu}(x) + \theta^{2} \bar{\theta} \bar{λ}(x) + \bar{\theta}^{2} \theta β(x) + \bar{\theta}^{2} \theta^{2} D(x)

In case we want to say that this superfield is chiral, in general we have to impose the constraint that the supercovariant derivative on it will have to vanish (depends on if it's right or left which we choose)... Nevertheless. This will bring some contraints about the component fields in \Phi's expansion above, which you can work by asking for the cov. derivative of it to vanish. However I'd like to ask if there's a faster way to do that, and avoid the tedious calculations... For example I'd take a left chiral superfield:
\Phi_{L}( y, \theta) = \phi(y) + \theta \psi(y) + \theta^{2} F(y)
and bring it from S_{L} repr back to S, by doing a translation in the usual way:
\Phi_{L} (x+ i \theta \sigma \bar{\theta}, \theta)
= \phi(x) + i (\theta \sigma^{\mu} \bar{\theta}) \partial_{\mu} \phi(x) - \frac{1}{2} (\theta \sigma^{\mu} \bar{\theta})(\theta \sigma^{\nu} \bar{\theta}) \partial_{\mu} \partial_{\nu} \phi(x) + \theta \psi(x) + i (\theta \sigma^{\mu} \bar{\theta}) (\theta \partial_{\mu} \psi)+ \theta^{2} F(x)

If I now try to compare the first superfield's components with the last one, shouldn't I get the constraints needed for it to be a chiral superfield?
eg fastly:
\bar{ζ}(x)=0
Z(x)=0
D(x)= -\frac{1}{4} \partial_{\mu} \partial^{\mu} \phi ( because (\theta \sigma^{\mu} \bar{\theta})(\theta \sigma^{\nu} \bar{\theta})=\frac{1}{2} n^{\mu \nu} \theta^{2} \bar{\theta}^{2})
u_{\mu}= i \partial_{\mu} \phi(x)
β(x)=0

etc...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
##x →x+ i \theta \sigma \bar{\theta}## is precisely the shift which makes covariant derivative a simple derivative against ##\bar{\theta}## for left chiral superfield and hence make sure that there is no explicit dependence on ##\bar{\theta}## of the superfield. So it is not in any sense arbitrary. Now if you want to use it to put constraint on Superfield, good for you. (Have to run now)
 
I don't really get the answer...
A shift x\rightarrow x + i \theta \sigma \bar{\theta} is going to change the cov.derivative of the Left repr to the Cov derivative of the S-repr...

\bar{D}_{\dot{A}}= - \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{\theta}^{\dot{A}}}

= - \frac{\partial \bar{\theta}'^{\dot{B}}}{\partial \bar{\theta}^{\dot{A}}} \frac{\partial }{\partial \bar{\theta}'^{\dot{B}}}- \frac{\partial y^{\mu}}{\partial \bar{\theta}^{\dot{A}}} \partial_{\mu}^{(y)}

= - \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{\theta}^{\dot{A}}} + i (θσ^{\mu})_{\dot{A}} \partial_{\mu}^{(y)}

which isn't the same as the cov derivative in the general representation... :confused: any idea?
However I am sure after using it so many times that the coord change above is the one that's supposed to move me from S_{L} \rightarrow S repr...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K