Quantum Field Theory-Gauge Transformations

jameson2
Messages
42
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Given the Lagrangian density L(\phi^{\mu})=-\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{\mu}\phi^{\nu})(\partial^{\mu}\phi_{\nu}) + \frac{1}{2}(\partial_{\mu}\phi^{\mu})^2+\frac{m^2}{2}(\phi^{\mu}\phi_{\mu})
and gauge transformation \phi^{\mu}\rightarrow \phi^{\mu} + \partial^{\mu}\alpha

(c) Introduce one extra real scalar field \sigma and write some interacting Lagrangian L^{\prime}=L(\phi^{\mu})+L^2(\phi^{\mu},\sigma) which is invariant under the gauge transformation and gives the original L for \sigma=0.

(d) Can we solve (c) with sigma that has a canonical kinetic term -\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{\mu}\sigma)^2

Homework Equations




The Attempt at a Solution


The first parts of the question show that \partial_{\mu}\phi^{\mu}=0 which simplifies the Lagrangian, and also that the initial Lagrangian is not invariant under the gauge transformation. I got those out.
But parts (c) and (d) seems like the kind of thing you either know or you don't, is there a way of working it out?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bumping this because I would also like to know if (c) and (d) can be solved in a way that doesn't involve trial and error or just knowing the answer.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top