Question about holonomy-flux algebra

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kakarukeys
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algebra
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Holonomy-Flux algebra (HF) is generated by cylindrical functions and operators linear in momenta, which leads to the conclusion that the Gauss constraint and Hamiltonian constraint do not belong to HF. This raises a significant issue in Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG) since these constraints are essential for the theory's consistency. The HF algebra is constructed from a free associative algebra using elementary variables such as holonomies and fluxes, but the constraints are not polynomial in the flux operators, complicating their representation within HF.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG)
  • Familiarity with Lie algebras and their representations
  • Knowledge of cylindrical functions and flux operators
  • Basic principles of quantum mechanics, particularly in relation to phase space
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of the Gauss and Hamiltonian constraints in Loop Quantum Gravity
  • Explore the construction and properties of the Holonomy-Flux algebra in detail
  • Study the role of Wilson loops in quantum gravity and their equivalence to holonomies
  • Examine the differences in generator sets as discussed in the papers by Perez and Ashtekar
USEFUL FOR

Researchers and students in theoretical physics, particularly those focused on quantum gravity, Loop Quantum Gravity practitioners, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics.

kakarukeys
Messages
187
Reaction score
0
1. the holonomy-flux algebra (HF) is generated by cylindrical functions and operators linear in momenta, so both the Gauss constraint and Hamiltonian constraint do not belong to HF, is this not a problem?

my understanding:
in quantum mechanics the elementary variables are (1,q_i,p^i). I generate a Lie algebra using all f(q) and g_i(q)p^i. f(q) is seen as multiplication operator, g_i(q)p^i is seen as derivation on space of f(q) (hamiltonian vector fields). http://sps.nus.edu.sg/~wongjian/lqg.html for details. Then I promote them to quantum operators. Then one generate a free associative algebra from the quantum operators. The elementary variables used in LQG are the holonomies and fluxes. The algebra generated in this way is called Holonomy-Flux algebra (HF). Now since an element in HF is at most polynomial in E's. The Gauss constraint and Hamiltonian constraint do not belong to them. Both are not polynomial in E's. If I seek a representation of Holonomy-Flux algebra, the two constraints will not be represented. Is this not a problem?

2. In other reviews (Perez, Ashtekar), HF is simply defined to be the algebra generated by operators of holonomies and fluxes. Holonomies are valued in a Lie group, how do they generate an algebra?

3. some claim that, we can use Wilson loops (trace of holonomies) instead, how is this equivalent to the above?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Question Clarified

:cry: Nobody helps me?

Holonomy-flux algebra (HF) is the kinematical algebra of operators in LQG and is supposed to be the quantum analogue of the algebra of functions on phase space. But Holonomy-flux algebra (HF) is constructed from the free associative algebra generated by the so called elementary variables: cylindrical functions and fluxes (as well as poisson brackets of fluxes, etc).

See
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0302059
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504147

in the second paper, the set of generators is slightly different: it contains variables in this form: f(q) and g_i(q)p^i

The consequence of this construction is that any element of HF is only "polynomial" in flux operators or E's.

The constraints are functions on phase space. So their operators should be in HF, but they are not "polynomial" in E's, both of them contain factors of the square root of determinant of E. So constraint operators do not belong to HF. Is this not a problem?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
8K
Replies
24
Views
8K
Replies
26
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 85 ·
3
Replies
85
Views
34K