How to Derive Yang-Mills Theories from a Kaluza-Klein Perspective?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BVM
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fields
BVM
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am going through the book "Symmetries in Fundamental Physics" by Kurt Sundermeyer and in his part on deriving Yang-Mills theories from a Kaluza-Klein perspective I seem to be stuck on a small step in the derivation.

Homework Equations


He expands the metric in a typical Kaluza-Klein-like style
## \begin{cases}
&\hat{g}^{0}_{\mu \nu} (x) = W(\phi) g_{\mu \nu} + f(\phi)h_{\iota \kappa} \mathcal{B}^{\iota}_{\mu}\mathcal{B}^{\kappa}_{\nu}\\
&\hat{g}^{0}_{\mu \kappa} (x) = f(\phi) h_{\iota \kappa}\mathcal{B}^{\iota}_{\mu}\\
&\hat{g}^{0}_{\iota \kappa} (x) = f(\phi)h_{\iota \kappa}
\end{cases}##
and derives from it that under diffeomorphism, the B-field should transform as
##\mathcal{B}'^{\iota}_{\mu} = \frac{\partial x^{\nu}}{\partial x'^{\mu}}\left( \frac{\partial \theta'^{\iota}}{\partial \theta^{\kappa}} \mathcal{B}^{\kappa}_{\nu} - \frac{\partial \theta'^{\iota}}{\partial x^{\nu}} \right).##
Now, by considering the isometries infinitesimally
##\theta'^{\iota} = \theta^{\iota} + \epsilon^a(x)K^{\iota}_a(\theta)##
and expanding the B-fields in terms of the Killing vectors
##\mathcal{B}^{\iota}_{\mu} = g K^{\iota}_{a} \mathcal{A}^{a}_{\mu}##
he gets
##g K^{\iota}_{d} \mathcal{A}^{d}_{\mu} = (\delta^{\iota}_{\kappa} + \epsilon^a \partial_{\kappa}K^{\iota}_a) g K^{\kappa}_{b} \mathcal{A}^{b}_{\mu} - K^{\iota}_{a}\partial_{\mu}\epsilon^a.##

This i can follow, but now he claims that via
##K^{\kappa}_{a} \partial_{\kappa} K^{\iota}_{b} - K^{\kappa}_{b} \partial_{\kappa} K^{\iota}_{a} = f_{abc} K^{\iota}_{c}##
he can get
##\mathcal{A}'^{a}_{\mu} = \mathcal{A}^{a}_{\mu} + \frac{1}{g}f^{bca}\mathcal{A}^b_{\mu}\epsilon^c - \frac{1}{g} \partial_{\mu}\epsilon^a.##

3. The attempt at a solution
By just plugging in the relation I can get as far as
##\mathcal{A}'^{a}_{\mu} = \mathcal{A}^{a}_{\mu} + f^{bca}\mathcal{A}^b_{\mu}\epsilon^c + \epsilon^c(K^{\iota}_a)^{-1}K^{\kappa}_{c}(\partial_{\kappa} K^{\iota}_b)\mathcal{A}^b_{\mu} - \frac{1}{g} \partial_{\mu}\epsilon^a##
but I don't see how the extra term cancels or how the ##\frac{1}{g}## appears in the second term.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
BVM said:
By just plugging in the relation I can get as far as
##\mathcal{A}'^{a}_{\mu} = \mathcal{A}^{a}_{\mu} + f^{bca}\mathcal{A}^b_{\mu}\epsilon^c + \epsilon^c(K^{\iota}_a)^{-1}K^{\kappa}_{c}(\partial_{\kappa} K^{\iota}_b)\mathcal{A}^b_{\mu} - \frac{1}{g} \partial_{\mu}\epsilon^a##
but I don't see how the extra term cancels or how the ##\frac{1}{g}## appears in the second term.

Performing the contraction, we find

$$ \epsilon^c(K^{\iota}_a)^{-1}K^{\kappa}_{c}(\partial_{\kappa} K^{\iota}_b)\mathcal{A}^b_{\mu} = \epsilon^a(\partial_{\kappa} K^{\kappa}_b)\mathcal{A}^b_{\mu},$$

but the divergence of a Killing vector vanishes, so this is zero.
 
Oh my god how did I miss this.

Thanks a lot!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top