Gauge transformation of Yang-Mills field strength

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the gauge invariance of the Yang-Mills field strength and its implications for the Lagrangian in non-abelian gauge theories. Participants explore the transformation properties of the field strength under gauge transformations and the necessity of the trace in ensuring gauge invariance.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the term ##-1/4 F^2## is gauge invariant, noting that the field strength transforms as $$ F \to UFU^\dagger$$ under gauge transformations.
  • Another participant clarifies that the actual Lagrangian term is the trace of ##F^2##, specifically $$ {\rm tr} (F^{\mu \nu} F_{\mu \nu})$$, which is gauge invariant.
  • A further explanation is provided regarding the decomposition of the field strength matrix into a linear combination of generators, emphasizing that the trace ensures gauge invariance.
  • One participant acknowledges the importance of the trace, suggesting it is more than just compact notation.
  • Another participant proposes that after a gauge transformation, the expression can be seen as $$ UFU^\dagger UFU^\dagger= UF^2U^\dagger$$.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the necessity of the trace for gauge invariance, but there is some uncertainty regarding the implications of the transformation properties of the field strength and the Lagrangian terms.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on the definitions of gauge invariance and the role of the trace in the context of non-abelian gauge theories. There are unresolved questions about the implications of the transformation of the field strength and its terms.

center o bass
Messages
545
Reaction score
2
Hi. I'm reading about non-abelian theories and have thus far an understanding that a gauge invariant Lagrangian is something to strive for. I previously thought that the Yang-Mills gauge boson free field term ##-1/4 F^2 ## was gauge invariant, but now after realizing that the field strength transform homogeneously under gauge transformation U(x) s.t

$$ F \to UFU^\dagger$$

it seems like this term also transform like

$$F^2 \to UF^2U^\dagger.$$

Am I right there? If so isn't this a problem for the physics? Why, why not?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The actual lagrangian term is the trace of ##F^2##:

##{\rm tr} (F^{\mu \nu} F_{\mu \nu})##

This is gauge invariant. Sometimes this gets written as

##F^{a \mu \nu} F^a_{\mu \nu}##

where ##F^a_{\mu \nu}## is defined by ##F_{\mu \nu} \equiv F^a_{\mu \nu} T^a##. Here ##a## is a gauge group adjoint representation index, the ##T^a## are the generator matrices of the adjoint representation and ##F^a_{\mu \nu}## is a set of numbers (not matrices). This is just decomposing the field strength matrix as a linear combination of the generators.

The second form of the Lagrangian is equivalent because ##{\rm tr} (T^a T^b) = \delta^{a b}##. So if you plug the decomposition of ##F^{\mu \nu}## into the first form of the Lagrangian, you get the second form.
 
Last edited:
Ah, that's true. So the trace is actually essential. I've heard that it was nothing but compact notation :)
 
It should most probably be seen like this after gauge transformation
[itex]UFU^\dagger UFU^\dagger= UF^2U^\dagger[/itex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
8K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K