More precisely, my question is, Is the wilson loop used to calculate the heavy quark potential always positive in the lattice simulation?(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

(i) as we are usually told, wilson loops of the following form are related with

the heavy quark potentials

..........................................

_________ <WC_______.........

|...............................|../\ ...

|WD................../\......|...|....

|...............................|...r....

| \/...................WB....|...|....

|_____WA>__________|..\/....

<------------- t -------------->..

..........................................

<W>=<W_{r,t}> ~ e^{-V( r )*t}

so we expect <W> is always positive(or negative,

any way, it should not change signs we we change t and r)

(ii) but by definition

<W>= <tr[e^{iAa ta} * e^{i Ab tb} * e^{-iAc tc} * e^{-i Ad td}]>

= <tr[WA * WB * WC * WD]>

since in numerical simulations, the link variables WA, WB, WC, WD et al

are random unitary matrix, we cannot expect the trace of their products

is positive.

I encounter this problem because in one of my little exercises to write

lattice QCD codes, I got results just as I explained in (ii), so I cannot extract

the heavy quark potentials, because some times I get W(r,t)>0, some times

W(r,t)<0. Especially worse is, I encounter the case

W(r,t)>0

W(r,t+a)<0

So the proportion W(r,t+a)/W(r,t) ~ e^{-V( r )*a} < 0, this is really a disappointing

outcome.

What key points did I ignored ? Who can tell me or give me some

hints? If you have comments or remarks, please do not hesitate to reply this

thread or write me email, dfzeng2000@hotmail.com

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Is the wilson plaue always positive in the lattice simulation?

Can you offer guidance or do you also need help?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads for wilson plaue always | Date |
---|---|

I Does a field operator always commute with itself? | Jul 13, 2017 |

Wilson Loop and spontaneous symmetry breaking. | Jun 7, 2015 |

Wilson Cloud Chamber and HUP | May 10, 2010 |

Wilson loops (srednicki eqn. 82.37) | Aug 20, 2009 |

Expectation of the Wilson Loop | Jan 24, 2006 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**