I Equation of motion Chern-Simons

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: 801
  • Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 17.52.35.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 17.52.35.png
    1.6 KB · Views: 751
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: 826
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 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 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..
 
Back
Top