Non-abelian Gauge invariance (chapter 15.1 in Peskin/Schroeder)

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
3 replies · 5K views
Stalafin
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I am trying to understand the derivation of the covariant derivative in Peskin/Schroeder (chapter 15.1, page 483).

This is the important stuff:
[tex]n^\mu\partial_\mu\psi=\lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0} \frac{1}{\epsilon}\left[\psi(x+\epsilon n)-\psi(x)\right][/tex]

Scalar quantity: U(y,x):
[tex]U(y,x) \rightarrow e^{i\alpha(y)} U(y,x) e^{-i\alpha(x)}[/tex]

Conditions for zero separation and pure phase:
[tex]U(y,y)=1[/tex]
[tex]U(y,x)=exp[i\phi(y,x)][/tex]

Covariant derivative:
[tex]n^\mu D_\mu \psi = \lim_{\epsilon\rightarrow 0} \frac{1}{\epsilon}\left[\psi(x+\epsilon n)-U(x+\epsilon n,x)\psi(x)\right][/tex]

Expansion of U(y,x) in the separation of the two points:
[tex]U(x+\epsilon n,x) = 1 - i e\epsilon n^\mu A_\mu(x) + \mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2)[/tex]

A_\mu(x) is a new vector field and is the coefficient of the displacement \epsilon n^\mu. Why?! I don't see how the author gets there.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Isn't this just by definition. You expand U in powers of ε nμ, and the coefficient in the linear term, you define that to be Aμ.
 
I thought about making an expansion... This is what I came up with (Peskin expands for epsilon):
[tex]\left. U(x+\epsilon n,x) \right|_{\epsilon=0} = U(x,x) + U'(x,x) n \epsilon + \mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2)[/tex]

So, U(x,x) becomes one from the zero separation condition; what I have trouble understanding is the next part. How does that work out?

[tex]U'(x,x) n \epsilon = - ie\epsilon n^\mu A_\mu(x)[/tex]

Do I use the pure phase condition for that? And how am I supposed to read the n? As a four-vector itself? Or is that:
[tex]n=n^\mu A_\mu(x)[/tex]

Where does the rest come from?
 
The Taylor expansion is
[tex]U(x+\epsilon n,x)=U(x,x)+\epsilon n^\mu\partial_\mu U(x,x) + O(\epsilon^2)[/tex]
Then we define
[tex]A_\mu(x)\equiv (i/e) \partial_\mu U(x,x)[/tex]
Note that, with the factor of i, unitarity of U implies that A is hermitian. And to be precise, the partial derivative actually acts only on the first x.
 
Last edited: