Equation of motion Chern-Simons

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the equation of motion derived from the Maxwell Chern-Simons Lagrangian, specifically focusing on the origin of a factor of 2 in the equation. Participants explore the differentiation process involved in deriving the equations of motion, addressing issues related to indices and terms in the equations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the source of the factor of 2 in the equation of motion derived from the Lagrangian.
  • Another participant points out the presence of two 'a' terms in the equation, suggesting this may relate to the factor in question.
  • Several participants discuss the differentiation process, with some suggesting that terms from both sides of the equation of motion need to be combined.
  • One participant expresses confusion over summing indices and the differentiation process, indicating they do not see how the factor of 2 arises.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of showing detailed computations to identify where misunderstandings may occur.
  • A later reply provides a detailed differentiation process, including the use of Kronecker deltas and identities related to the Levi-Civita symbol, to clarify how the factor of 2 can be derived.
  • One participant expresses appreciation for the guidance but still feels unable to resolve their initial question, indicating ongoing confusion despite the explanations provided.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the origin of the factor of 2, and multiple perspectives on the differentiation process and index handling remain. The discussion includes both attempts to clarify and expressions of confusion, indicating unresolved issues.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding related to the differentiation of terms with respect to repeated indices and the handling of tensor calculus concepts. There are indications of missing assumptions in the differentiation steps that contribute to the confusion.

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: 860
  • Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 17.52.35.png
    Bildschirmfoto 2019-03-17 um 17.52.35.png
    1.6 KB · Views: 777
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: 866
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
938
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · 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
3K