Lagrangian and conservations laws

  • Thread starter Thread starter spidey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lagrangian Laws
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between Lagrangian invariance and conservation laws, particularly in the context of spontaneous symmetry breaking. It explains that while the Lagrangian can be invariant at the dynamical level, this does not guarantee that conservation laws hold in the ground state, where symmetry may be spontaneously broken. The distinction is made between the invariance of the action integral and the representation of symmetries in Hilbert space, highlighting that conserved quantities can still exist even when symmetries are not manifest. The conversation emphasizes that the action remains invariant despite the ground state exhibiting broken symmetry. Overall, the conservation laws are maintained at the dynamical level, even if they appear to be violated in specific states.
spidey
Messages
213
Reaction score
0
while studying lagrangian i got this doubt..if the lagrangian is invariant in time,space,rotation, then we have corresponding conservation laws..
In spontaneous symmetry breaking, the lagrangian is not invariant in ground state and the symmetry breaks spontaneously.so, the conserved quantity is now not conserved in ground state. so, are the conservation laws break in ground state?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
somebody please respond...or please move this to appropriate section..
 
spidey said:
while studying lagrangian i got this doubt..if the lagrangian is invariant in time,space,rotation, then we have corresponding conservation laws..
In spontaneous symmetry breaking, the lagrangian is not invariant in ground state and the symmetry breaks spontaneously.so, the conserved quantity is now not conserved in ground state. so, are the conservation laws break in ground state?

You should have posted this in QM or particles forums.
Any way, you are confusing between the two levels in which a symmetry operate. These are:

1) the dynamical level; the invariance of the action integral. This leads to a conserved (Noether) charge:

\delta \int d^{4}x \ \mathcal{L} = 0 \Rightarrow \partial_{a}J^{a}= 0 \Rightarrow \frac{d}{dt}Q = 0

2) the level of the representation of field operators and their action in the Hilbert space. At this level we ask whether the symmetry can be represented by unitary transformations generated by the above conserved charge:

U = \exp \left( i \alpha Q \right)

Here, two things can happen:

i) If U exists, i.e., Q is well-defined Hermitian operator ( say, a^{\dagger}a ), then

Q|0 \rangle \ = \ a^{\dagger}a |0 \rangle = 0

and the symmetry is said to be manifest.

ii) If U does not exist; Q is ill-defind operator, then

Q|0 \rangle \neq 0

and the symmetry is said to be spontaneously broken (hidden). This does not mean that Q depends on the time. The action is invariant even when the ground state is not.

Spontaneous breakdown of symmetry is the lack of degenercy in particle spectra in a SYMMETRIC theory. Or in the language of QFT, it is the breakdown of symmetry at the representation level, not at the dynamical level ( the action is invariant and Q is conserved).

To see that Q is conserved even when the symmetry is hidden, let us consider the theory

\mathcal{L} =(1/2) \partial_{a} \phi \partial^{a} \phi

which is invariant under field translation

\bar{\phi} = \phi + \chi

The corresponding conserved charge is given by

Q = \int d^{3}x \ \partial_{0} \phi (x)

This invariance, however, can not be unitarily represented in Hilbert space; for if we write

\bar{\phi} = \phi + \chi = U(\chi) \phi U^{-1}(\chi )

with

U = \exp \left( i \chi Q \right), \ \ Q = Q^{\dagger} = a^{\dagger}a

i.e., if we assume that the ground state is invariant U |0 \rangle = |0 \rangle, then

\langle 0 |\bar{\phi} |0 \rangle = \langle 0|\phi |0 \rangle + \chi = \langle 0|\phi |0 \rangle

Or, since \langle \phi \rangle = 0,

\langle \bar{\phi} \rangle = \chi = 0

but this can not be right because \chi is arbitrary. Thus the symmetry can not be represented by unitary operator (constructed from the conserved Q) on Hilbert space, i.e., the symmetry of the action is not a symmetry of the ground state.

regards

sam
 
Last edited:
thanks mate for the reply..
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top