Proof Scalar action is conformally invariant

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conformal invariance of the Lagrangian density for a massless scalar field. Participants explore the implications of conformal transformations on the Lagrangian and the necessary adjustments to the scalar field to maintain invariance. The scope includes theoretical reasoning and mathematical manipulation related to scalar field theory in curved spacetime.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the Lagrangian density and outlines the effects of a conformal transformation on the metric and Ricci scalar.
  • Another participant notes the necessity of transforming the scalar field alongside the metric but expresses difficulty in demonstrating conformal invariance.
  • A suggestion is made to eliminate terms involving the second derivative of the conformal factor by subtracting a divergence and to rescale the scalar field appropriately.
  • Further adjustments to the determinant and the scalar field transformation are discussed, referencing a source (Birrell and Davies).
  • Participants engage in expanding the Lagrangian and applying the product rule to manipulate terms involving derivatives of the conformal factor.
  • Corrections are made regarding the powers of the determinant and the transformation of the scalar field, indicating ongoing refinements in the calculations.
  • One participant proposes that the total divergence of certain terms can be discarded, leading to a simplified expression for the Lagrangian.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the Lagrangian is conformally invariant, as multiple viewpoints and approaches are presented without resolution. The discussion remains unresolved with ongoing calculations and corrections.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the correct transformations and the implications of their calculations. There are indications of missing assumptions and dependencies on specific definitions that are not fully explored.

LAHLH
Messages
405
Reaction score
2
Hi,

So if we have the Lagrange density for a massless scalar field: [tex]L=\sqrt{-g}\left(-\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu\nu}\nabla_{\mu}\phi\nabla_{\nu}\phi-\frac{(n-2)}{4(n-1)} R\phi^2\right)[/tex]

Then under a conformal transformation [tex]g_{\mu\nu}=\omega^{-2}\tilde{g_{\mu\nu}}[/tex], then the Ricci sclar goes to [tex]R=\omega^2\tilde{R}+2(n-1)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)-n(n-1)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)[/tex]. We also have [tex]g^{\mu\nu}=\omega^2\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}[/tex] and [tex]\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\phi=\nabla_{\mu}\phi[/tex]

Using all these suggests that,

[tex]\tilde{L}=\omega^{-1}\sqrt{-\tilde{g}}\left(-\frac{1}{2}\omega^2 \tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\phi\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\phi-\frac{(n-2)}{4(n-1)} \left[\omega^2\tilde{R}+2(n-1)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)-n(n-1)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\right]\phi^2\right)[/tex]

Which can be written as,


[tex]\tilde{L}=\sqrt{-\tilde{g}}\left(-\frac{1}{2}\omega \tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\phi\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\phi-\frac{(n-2)}{4(n-1)} \omega\tilde{R}\phi^2-\frac{1}{2}(n-2)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\phi^2+\frac{n}{4}(n-2)\omega^{-1}\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\phi^2\right)[/tex]

The statement is that this conformal transformation leaves the scalar field theory invariant, so I was expecting to obtain the same form of the Lagrange density after applying the CT as I had before, but I can't see how the above reduces to this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Seems that I forgot that the field should transform too, but never the less I still can't seem to show that this is conformally invariant, anyone know any books that show this?
 
You can get rid of the term containing the second derivative of ω by subtracting a divergence. Then you need to rescale φ by some power of ω, chosen to cancel the terms with first derivatives of ω.
 
Thanks for the reply, I have tried this and seem to still not be getting the result. Firstly my determinant was off by a power of n so I correct this, and also use [tex]\phi=\omega^{(n-2)/2} \tilde{\phi}[/tex] (Birrell and Davies)

[tex] \tilde{L}=\omega^{-n}\sqrt{-\tilde{g}}\left(-\frac{1}{2}\omega^2 \tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega^{(n-2)/2} \tilde{\phi})\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}(\omega^{(n-2)/2} \tilde{\phi})-\frac{(n-2)}{4(n-1)} \left[\omega^2\tilde{R}+2(n-1)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\m u}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)-n(n-1)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\right](\omega^{(n-2)/2} \tilde{\phi})^2\right) [/tex]

[tex] \tilde{L}=\omega^{-n}\sqrt{-\tilde{g}}\Big(-\frac{1}{2}\omega^2 \tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\left[\frac{(n-2)}{2}\omega^{(n-4)/2}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\phi}+\omega^{(n-2)/2}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}( \tilde{\phi})\right]\left[\frac{(n-2)}{2}\omega^{(n-4)/2}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}(\omega)\tilde{\phi}+\omega^{(n-2)/2}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}( \tilde{\phi})\right][/tex] [tex]-\frac{(n-2)}{4(n-1)} \left[\omega^2\tilde{R}+2(n-1)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\m u}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)-n(n-1)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\right](\omega^{(n-2)/2} \tilde{\phi})^2\right) \Big)[/tex]

I will have to finish this shortly as I need to go somewhere, but then I essentially expand out, and use product rule to get replace the double derivative on omega...
 
So expanding:

[tex]\tilde{L}=\omega^{-n}\sqrt{-\tilde{g}}\Big(-\frac{1}{2}\omega^2 \tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\left[\frac{(n-2)^2}{4}\omega^{(n-4)}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}(\omega)\tilde{\phi}^2+\omega^ {(n-2)}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}( \tilde{\phi})\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}( \tilde{\phi})+(n-2)\omega^{(n-3)}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}(\tilde{\phi})\tilde{\phi}\right][/tex]
[tex] +\left[ -\frac{(n-2)}{4(n-1)}\omega^2\tilde{R}-\frac{1}{2}(n-2)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\m u}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)+\frac{n}{4}(n-2)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\right]\omega^{(n-2)} \tilde{\phi}^2 \Big)<br /> [/tex]


Finally,

[tex]\tilde{L}=\sqrt{-\tilde{g}}\Big(-\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\frac{(n-2)^2}{8}\omega^{-2}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}(\omega)\tilde{\phi}^2-\frac{1}{2}\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}( \tilde{\phi})\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}( \tilde{\phi})-\frac{(n-2)}{2}\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\omega\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}(\tilde{\phi})\tilde{\phi}[/tex]
[tex] -\frac{(n-2)}{4(n-1)}\omega^2\tilde{\phi}^2\tilde{R}-\frac{1}{2}(n-2)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega\tilde{\phi}^2\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\m u}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)+\frac{n}{4}(n-2)\tilde{\phi}^2\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right) \Big)<br /> [/tex]


Now we can use product rule e.g. [tex]\tilde{\phi}^2\tilde{\nabla}_{\m u}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right) =\tilde{\nabla}_{\m u}\left(\tilde{\phi}^2}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\right)-2\tilde{\phi}\tilde{\nabla}_{\m u}\left(\tilde{\phi}\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)[/tex]

But now what?
 
I made a mistake the last line should be:

[tex]\tilde{L}=\sqrt{-\tilde{g}}\Big(-\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\frac{(n-2)^2}{8}\omega^{-2}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu} (\omega)\tilde{\phi}^2-\frac{1}{2}\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\tilde{\phi})\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}( \tilde{\phi})-\frac{(n-2)}{2}\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\omega^{-1}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}(\tilde{\phi})\tilde{\phi}[/tex]
[tex]-\frac{(n-2)}{4(n-1)}\tilde{\phi}^2\tilde{R}-\frac{1}{2}(n-2)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega^{-1}\tilde{\phi}^2\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)+\frac{n}{4}(n-2)\tilde{\phi}^2\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega^{-2}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right) \Big) [/tex]

From which one has the conformally the Lagrangian in the conformal frame, plus a bit I want to get ride of:

[tex]\tilde{L}=L_0+\sqrt{-\tilde{g}}\Big(-\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\frac{(n-2)^2}{8}\omega^{-2}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu} (\omega)\tilde{\phi}^2-\frac{(n-2)}{2}\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\omega^{-1}\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}(\tilde{\phi})\tilde{\phi}[/tex]
[tex]-\frac{1}{2}(n-2)\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega^{-1}\tilde{\phi}^2\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)+\frac{n}{4}(n-2)\tilde{\phi}^2\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega^{-2}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right) \Big) [/tex]

Which looks prettier as:

[tex]\tilde{L}=L_0+\sqrt{-\tilde{g}}\Big(\tilde{g^{\mu\nu}}\omega^{-2}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\tilde{\phi}^2\frac{(n^2-4)}{8} -\frac{(n-2)}{2}\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}\omega^{-1}\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}(\tilde{\phi})\tilde{\phi} <br /> +\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\tilde{\phi}^2\Big) [/tex]
 
I think I have it now:

Take [tex]\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\tilde{\phi}^2= \tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\left[\omega(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)\tilde{\phi}^2\right]-\omega(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)\tilde{\phi}^2-\omega(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)2\tilde{\phi}(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi})[/tex]

If we include [tex]\tilde{g}^{\mu\nu}[/tex] the first term is a total divergence so vanishes. So we are left with:

[tex]\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\tilde{\phi}^2= -\omega(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)\tilde{\phi}^2-\omega(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)2\tilde{\phi}(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi}) (1)[/tex]

Now using the product rule again on the first term:

[tex](\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)\tilde{\phi}^2=\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\tilde{\phi}^2(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)) -(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)2\tilde{\phi}(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi})[/tex]

again if we bring in the external metric the first term here is a total divergence so vanishes leaving:

[tex](\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)\tilde{\phi}^2= -(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)2\tilde{\phi}(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi})[/tex]

Plugging this into (1)

[tex]\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega\right)\tilde{\phi}^2= +\omega(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)2\tilde{\phi}(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi})-\omega(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\omega)2\tilde{\phi}(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi})=0[/tex]

So that takes care of the first term in the undesired Lagrangian density. We also have:

[tex]\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}(\omega)\tilde{\nabla} _{\nu}(\tilde{\phi}) \tilde{\phi}[/tex]

[tex] \left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\tilde{\phi}\right)\tilde{\phi}= -\omega(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\tilde{\phi})\tilde{\phi}-\omega(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\tilde{\phi})(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi})[/tex]
Use product rule again on the first term:

[tex](\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\tilde{\phi})\tilde{\phi}=\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\left[\tilde{\phi}(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\tilde{\phi})\right]-(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi})(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu} \tilde{\phi}) =-(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi})(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu} \tilde{\phi})[/tex]

So we get:


[tex] \left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\omega\right)\left(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\tilde{\phi}\right)\tilde{\phi}= -\omega\left[ -(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi})(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu} \tilde{\phi})\right]-\omega(\tilde{\nabla}_{\nu}\tilde{\phi})(\tilde{\nabla}_{\mu}\tilde{\phi})=0[/tex]

The only other term not yet considered is:

This everything undesired vanishes.

I have used the symmetry of the metric and the divergence theorem to convert total divergences into surface terms that one can set to zero.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K