Local lorentz tranformations of fermion action

jdstokes
Messages
520
Reaction score
1
The action for a fermion in curved spacetime is

S = -\int d^4 x \sqrt{- \det(\eta^{ab} e_{a\mu}e_{b\nu})} \left[ i\overline{\psi} e^\mu_a \gamma^a D_\mu \psi + i m \overline{\psi}\psi \right]

where g_{\mu\nu} = \eta^{ab} e_{a\mu} e_{b\nu} and the derivative operator acting on fermions is given by

D_\mu \psi = \partial_\mu \psi - \frac{i}{2} \omega_{ab\mu} S^{ab} \psi

where S^{ab} = -(i/4)[\gamma^a,\gamma^b].

I am failing to show that D_\mu \psi transforms covariantly under local Lorentz transformations.

As far as I understand, the relation \omega_{ab\mu} = e_a^\nu \nabla_\mu e_{b\nu} implies that the following transformation rules

\psi(x) \mapsto \Lambda_{1/2}(x) \psi(x)
e_{a\mu}(x) \mapsto {\Lambda^a}_b(x) e_{b\mu}(x)
\omega_{ab\mu}(x) \mapsto {\Lambda^{\alpha}}_a(x) \omega_{\alpha\beta\mu}(x) {\Lambda^\beta}_b(x) + \eta_{\alpha\beta}{\Lambda^\alpha}_a(x)\partial_\mu {\Lambda^\beta}_b(x).

Plugging these transformations into D_\mu \psi for an infinitesimal Lorentz transformation, for which
{\Lambda^a}_b = \delta^a_b + \theta^a_b
\Lambda_{1/2} = 1 + (i/2)\theta_{ab} S^{ab}
I obtain

D_\mu \psi \mapsto D_\mu' \psi' = (\partial_\mu \Lambda_{1/2})\psi + \Lambda_{1/2} \partial_\mu \psi - \frac{i}{2}\left[{\Lambda^{\alpha}}_a \omega_{\alpha\beta\mu} {\Lambda^\beta}_b + \eta_{\alpha\beta}{\Lambda^\alpha}_a \partial_\mu {\Lambda^\beta}_b \right]S^{ab}\Lambda_{1/2}\psi

In infinitesimal form:

D_\mu' \psi' = \frac{i}{2} \partial_\mu \theta_{ab} S^{ab}\psi + (1 + i/2\, \theta_{ab}S^{ab})\partial_\mu \psi -\frac{i}{2}\left[(\delta^\alpha_a + \theta^\alpha_a)\omega_{\alpha\beta\mu}(\delta^\beta_b + \theta^\beta_b) + \eta_{\alpha\beta} (\delta^\alpha_a + \theta^\alpha_a ) \partial_\mu \theta^\beta_b \right] S^{ab}(1 + i/2\, \theta_{cd}S^{cd})\psi

Ignorning quadratic terms and using the anti-symmetry of \theta_{ab}:

D_\mu' \psi' = (1 + i/2\, \theta_{ab}S^{ab})\partial_\mu \psi -\frac{i}{2} \left( \omega_{ab\mu} S^{ab} + \frac{i}{2} \omega_{ab\mu} \theta_{cd} S^{ab} S^{cd}\right)\psi - \frac{i}{2}\left( \omega_{a\beta\mu} \theta^\beta_b + \omega_{\alpha b \mu} \theta^\alpha_a\right) S^{ab} \psi

The first two terms combine to give (1+ i/2 \, \theta_{cd}S^{cd})(\partial_\mu - i/2\, \omega_{ab\mu}S^{ab})\psi = \Lambda_{1/2} D_\mu \psi as required, but the last term does not have anything to cancel with. Does anyone have any suggestions about where I might be going wrong?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the error lies in the fact that I should be considering the transformation of {\omega^a}_{b} rather than \omega_{ab}. The transformation rule for {\omega^a}_{b} is

{\omega^a}_{b\mu}(x) \mapsto {\Lambda^\beta}_b(x) {\omega^\alpha}_{\beta\mu}(x) {\Lambda_{\alpha}}^a(x) + [\partial_\mu {\Lambda^\alpha}_b(x)]{\Lambda_\alpha}^a(x)

expanding this into infinitesimal form gives extra minus signs because of {\Lambda^a}_b = \delta^a_b + \theta^a_b and {\Lambda_a}^b = \delta^b_a - \theta^b_a. These cause the last term in the expression for D_\mu' \psi' to cancel.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top