O(2) symmetry breaking trouble

jfy4
Messages
645
Reaction score
3
Hi, I'm going to quote a lot of a book so that I can get some help, brace yourselves...

First, [itex]\phi_{a}[/itex] is my field with [itex]a=0,1[/itex] as internal components and my lagrangian is
[tex] L=\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\phi_a \partial^\mu \phi_a +\frac{1}{2}\mu^2 \phi_a \phi_a +\frac{1}{4}\lambda (\phi_a \phi_a )^2[/tex]
with [itex]U=\frac{1}{2}\mu^2 \phi_a \phi_a +\frac{1}{4}\lambda (\phi_a \phi_a )^2[/itex]
now in Jan Smit's book, "Introduction to Quantum Fields on a Lattice" the page has the following:
The potential
[tex] U=\frac{1}{2}\mu^2 \phi_a \phi_a +\frac{1}{4}\lambda (\phi_a \phi_a )^2 [/tex]
has a "wine-bottle" shape, also called the "mexican-hat" shape, if [itex]\mu^2 <0[/itex]. It's clear that for [itex]\mu^2 >0[/itex] the ground state is unique, but for [itex]\mu^2 <0[/itex] the ground state is infinitely degenerate. The equation [itex]\partial U/\partial \phi^k =0[/itex] for the minima, [itex](\mu^2 +\lambda \phi^2)=0[/itex] has the solution
[tex] \phi_{g}^a =v\delta_{a,0},\quad v^2=-\frac{\mu^2}{\lambda}[/tex]
or any O(2) rotation of this vector. To force the system into a definite ground state we add a symmetry-breaking term to the action
[tex] \Delta S=\int dx \epsilon \phi^0, \quad \epsilon >0[/tex]
The constant [itex]\epsilon[/itex] has the dimensions of mass cubed. The equation for the stationary points now reads
[tex] (\mu^2 +\lambda \phi^2 )\phi^a =\epsilon \delta_{a,0}[/tex]
with the symmetry breaking (the above) the ground state has [itex]\phi_{g}^a[/itex] pointing in the [itex]a=0[/itex] direction,
[tex] \phi_{g}^a=v\delta_{a,0},\quad (\mu^2+\lambda v^2)v=\epsilon[/tex]
My first question: Is that [itex]v[/itex] in the symmetry breaking part the same [itex]v[/itex] we defined above?

Now we go on to expand around [itex]\phi_{g}^a[/itex], and the results in the book are
[tex] (-\partial^2 +m_{\sigma}^2 )\sigma =0,\quad (-\partial^2 +m_{\pi}^2)\pi=0[/tex]
with [itex]\pi=\phi^1[/itex] and [itex]\phi^0=v+\sigma[/itex]
and
[tex] m_{\sigma}^2=\mu^2 +3\lambda v^2=2\lambda v^2+\epsilon /v[/tex]
[tex] m_{\pi}^2=\mu^2+\lambda v^2=\epsilon /v[/tex]
Now the reason I asked the above question is, substituting the first definition of [itex]v^2[/itex] into these mass definitions, [itex]m_{\pi}[/itex] equals zero...

So then, what is [itex]v^2[/itex] in the symmetry breaking equations, why use the same letter IF it's different, and not say so?

Thanks,
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The vacuum expectation value, [itex]v[/itex], is defined by [itex]\phi^a_g = v \delta_{a0}[/itex]. Its value is set by the classical potential to be a root of [itex](\mu^2+ \lambda v^2)v=\epsilon[/itex]. When [itex]\epsilon =0[/itex], it takes the value [itex]v^2 = - \mu^2/\lambda[/itex], but not in general. It should be obvious why the same letter is used when viewed in this way.
 
That helps, thanks.
 
geez, I still can't get that second set of quoted equations. Here are my steps. I am starting with the EOM
[tex] (-\partial^2 +\mu^2 +\lambda \phi^2)\phi^a=\epsilon \delta_{a,0}[/tex]
and I am expanding around [itex]v[/itex] as [itex]\phi^0 =v+\sigma[/itex] and [itex]\phi^1 =\pi[/itex]. That gives me
[tex] (-\partial^2 +\mu^2 +\lambda (\phi^0 \phi^0 + \phi^1 \phi^1))\phi^a =\epsilon \delta_{a,0}[/tex]
[tex] (-\partial^2 +\mu^2 +\lambda (v^2+2\sigma v +\pi^2))\phi^a =\epsilon \delta_{a,0}[/tex]
[tex] (-\partial^2 +\mu^2 +\lambda (v^2+2\sigma v +\pi^2))(v+\sigma)=\epsilon ,\quad (-\partial^2 +\mu^2 +\lambda (v^2+2\sigma v +\pi^2))\pi=0[/tex]
The first equation turns to, using [itex](\mu^2+\lambda v^2)v=\epsilon[/itex]
[tex] -\partial^2 (v+\sigma )+\mu^2 \sigma +\lambda \pi^2 v +\lambda \pi^2 \sigma +3\lambda v^2 \sigma =0[/tex]
and the second
[tex] -\partial^2 \pi +\mu^2 \pi +\lambda v^2 \pi +2\lambda v \sigma \pi =0[/tex]
Both of these have many of the terms I need, plus a number of them that don't show up in the book. Where am I going wrong?

Thanks,
 
jfy4 said:
The first equation turns to, using [itex](\mu^2+\lambda v^2)v=\epsilon[/itex]
[tex] -\partial^2 (v+\sigma )+\mu^2 \sigma +\lambda \pi^2 v +\lambda \pi^2 \sigma +3\lambda v^2 \sigma =0[/tex]
and the second
[tex] -\partial^2 \pi +\mu^2 \pi +\lambda v^2 \pi +2\lambda v \sigma \pi =0[/tex]
Both of these have many of the terms I need, plus a number of them that don't show up in the book. Where am I going wrong?

Thanks,

The terms which are of higher order in the fields are interaction terms. To find the mass we want the terms in the e.o.m. that are linear , so write those as

[tex] -\partial^2 \sigma+(\mu^2 +3\lambda v^2 )\sigma = - \lambda v \pi^2 -\lambda \pi^2 \sigma [/tex]
[tex] -\partial^2 \pi + (\mu^2 +\lambda v^2) \pi = - 2\lambda v \sigma \pi .[/tex]

The terms on the RHS are just [itex]\partial V/\partial \sigma[/itex] and [itex]\partial V/\partial \pi[/itex], where [itex]V(\sigma,\pi)[/itex] is the part of the scalar potential without the mass terms.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K