dm4b
- 363
- 4
In addition to my Faddeev-Popov Trick thread, I'm still tying up a few other loose ends before going into Part III of Peskin and Schroeder.
I was able to show that the other Lagrangians introduced thus far are indeed invariant under the transformations given. But, I am hung up on what I think should probably be the easiest - the linear sigma model from page 349, Chapter 11:
L_{LSM} = (1/2) ( \partial_{\mu} \phi^{i} )^2 + (1/2)\mu^2 ( \phi^{i} )^2 - (\lambda/4!) ( \phi^{i} )^4
which is invariant under
\phi^{i} --> R^{ij} \phi^{j},
or, the Orthogonal Group O(N).
To show this, I've been using:
\phi^{j} ^2 --> R^{ij} R^{ik} \phi^{j} \phi^{k}
= \delta^{j}_{k} \phi^{j} \phi^{k}
= \phi^{j} ^2
but, I guess I haven't convinced myself. Seems contrived (with the indices)
Any help/clarification would be greatly appreciated.
I was able to show that the other Lagrangians introduced thus far are indeed invariant under the transformations given. But, I am hung up on what I think should probably be the easiest - the linear sigma model from page 349, Chapter 11:
L_{LSM} = (1/2) ( \partial_{\mu} \phi^{i} )^2 + (1/2)\mu^2 ( \phi^{i} )^2 - (\lambda/4!) ( \phi^{i} )^4
which is invariant under
\phi^{i} --> R^{ij} \phi^{j},
or, the Orthogonal Group O(N).
To show this, I've been using:
\phi^{j} ^2 --> R^{ij} R^{ik} \phi^{j} \phi^{k}
= \delta^{j}_{k} \phi^{j} \phi^{k}
= \phi^{j} ^2
but, I guess I haven't convinced myself. Seems contrived (with the indices)
Any help/clarification would be greatly appreciated.
Last edited: