Equation of motion Chern-Simons

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the derivation of the equation of motion from the Maxwell Chern-Simons Lagrangian as presented in "Zee QFT Nutshell." Participants clarify the origin of the factor of 2 in the equation of motion, emphasizing the importance of correctly differentiating terms with respect to the appropriate indices. Key insights include the necessity of differentiating with respect to both \(A_{\mu}\) and \(\partial_{\nu}A_{\lambda}\) to obtain the correct form of the equation. The final equation of motion derived is \(2\epsilon^{\mu\rho\nu} \partial_{\rho}A_{\nu} + J^{\mu} = 0.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian mechanics and field theory
  • Familiarity with tensor calculus and index notation
  • Knowledge of the Chern-Simons theory in quantum field theory
  • Proficiency in differentiating tensor fields with respect to their indices
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equation in the context of field theory
  • Learn about the properties of the Levi-Civita symbol in tensor calculus
  • Explore the implications of Chern-Simons theory in quantum field theory
  • Review the "10 Commandments of Index Expressions and Tensor Calculus" for better understanding of index manipulation
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory, graduate students studying advanced mechanics, and researchers focusing on gauge theories and their applications.

Lapidus
Messages
344
Reaction score
12
The Lagrangian (Maxwell Chern-Simons in Zee QFT Nutshell, p.318)
Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 17.52.27.png

has as equation of motion:
Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 17.52.35.png


Where does the 2 in front come from?

Thank you very much
 

Attachments

  • Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 17.52.27.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 17.52.27.png
    2.1 KB · Views: 844
  • Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 17.52.35.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 17.52.35.png
    1.6 KB · Views: 767
Physics news on Phys.org
You have two ##a## in the ##\gamma## term.
 
Right. And a derivative in front of one a.

Do I get one term from the RHS and one from the LHS of equation of motion and then I add them together?
Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 21.43.17.png
 

Attachments

  • Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 21.43.17.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 21.43.17.png
    2.2 KB · Views: 856
Lapidus said:
Right. And a derivative in front of one a.

Do I get one term from the RHS and one from the LHS of equation of motion and then I add them together?
View attachment 240456
Why don’t you try it and see what you get?
 
I get the equation but without the 2 in front. I do not see how the 2 comes about. How to sum over the indices. I find the indices confusing. Hence my question.
 
Lapidus said:
I get the equation but without the 2 in front. I do not see how the 2 comes about. How to sum over the indices. I find the indices confusing. Hence my question.
We cannot help you unless you show what you actually did. Otherwise we have no way of knowing where you went wrong.
 
I differentiate γεμνλaμνaλ w.r.t. aμ and I get γεμνλνaλ

and γεμνλaμνaλ w.r.t. ∂νaλ which gives γεμνλaμ.

Thus γεμνλνaλ - γεμνλaμ = 0 , which is not 2γεμνλνaμ = 0.
 
You forgot to take the derivative with respect to ##x^\nu## of the derivative with respect to ##\partial_\nu a_\lambda##.

Edit: Also, if you want the equation of motion for ##a_\mu##, you must take the derivative with respect to ##\partial_\nu a_\mu##, not ##\partial_\nu a_\lambda##.
 
L = aμνaλ

∂L/∂aμ - ∂ν (∂L/∂(∂νaμ)) = ∂vaμ - ∂v ?

I do not know what and how to differentiate in the second term. Also, I need to add two identical terms to get the factor two. But there is a minus sign.
 
  • #11
Orodruin, I really appreciate your time and effort. I read carefully all your posts in this thread and the link you gave. But unfortunately, I still can not answer my initial question. Maybe I try somewhere else. Thank you!
 
  • #12
I am sorry you don't feel you have enough. I think you would benefit significantly from showing your computations in more detail instead of just stating what you get and by thinking of each step in terms of what I said in the Insight. I could of course just give you the derivation, but I doubt you would learn as much from that as you would if you present it, clarify exactly in which steps your confusions lie, and get help in seeing how to resolve them.

In particular, I think you are guilty of #8 in the Insight and that this is causing you trouble. However, it is difficult to tell since you have not given us your explicit stepwise computations, just what you think each term should be.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lapidus
  • #13
Lapidus said:
Where does the 2 in front come from?
Thank you very much
Do not differentiate with respect to repeated indices. Write \mathcal{L} = \epsilon^{\sigma\rho\nu} \ A_{\sigma} \ \partial_{\rho}A_{\nu} + A_{\sigma}J^{\sigma}. Now, differentiate with respect to A_{\mu}, and use \frac{\partial A_{\eta}}{\partial A_{\mu}} = \delta^{\mu}_{\eta} to get \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial A_{\mu}} = \epsilon^{\mu\rho\nu} \ \partial_{\rho} A_{\nu} + J^{\mu} . \ \ \ \ \ (1) Next, differentiate \mathcal{L} with respect to (\partial_{\tau}A_{\mu}) and use the identity \frac{\partial (\partial_{\rho}A_{\eta})}{\partial (\partial_{\tau}A_{\mu})} = \delta^{\tau}_{\rho} \ \delta^{\mu}_{\eta} , to obtain \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\tau}A_{\mu})} = \epsilon^{\sigma\tau\mu} \ A_{\sigma} = - \epsilon^{\mu\tau\sigma} \ A_{\sigma}. Thus \partial_{\tau} \left( \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\tau}A_{\mu})} \right) = - \epsilon^{\mu\tau\sigma} \ \partial_{\tau}A_{\sigma} = - \epsilon^{\mu\rho\nu} \ \partial_{\rho}A_{\nu} . \ \ \ (2) Now (1) – (2) = 0 is the E-L equation. It gives you 2 \epsilon^{\mu\rho\nu} \ \partial_{\rho}A_{\nu} + J^{\mu} = 0.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lapidus
  • #14
Fantastic! Thanks Samalkhaiat! Kronecker Deltas from derivatives and indices swapping in the Levi-Civita. Got it.

I must study a little tensor calculus..
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
882
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K