Stress energy tensor in extended standard model

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the derivation of the stress-energy tensor in the context of the extended standard model, specifically referencing the paper on CPT violation. The user initially struggles with the formulation of equation (9) from the paper, which presents the stress-energy tensor as Θμν=1/2 i ψ γμνψ. They propose an alternative formulation that includes additional terms, ultimately realizing that equation (9) omits these terms for simplification. The user concludes that the confusion stemmed from neglecting the additional contributions to the tensor.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum field theory concepts, particularly the stress-energy tensor.
  • Familiarity with the Dirac equation and spinor notation.
  • Knowledge of CPT symmetry and its implications in particle physics.
  • Ability to manipulate and interpret Lagrangian formulations in theoretical physics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the stress-energy tensor from the Lagrangian, focusing on the methodology used in the paper referenced.
  • Explore the implications of CPT violation in the standard model and its experimental consequences.
  • Learn about the role of the Dirac matrices and their properties in quantum field theory.
  • Investigate additional terms in the stress-energy tensor and their physical significance in various models.
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, graduate students in particle physics, and researchers interested in quantum field theory and the implications of CPT violation in the standard model.

cbetanco
Messages
133
Reaction score
2
Maybe this is the wrong topic for this forum, but i am reading the following http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9703464
Which is on CPT violation and the standard model.

I do not understand how they get to equation (9), when they write down the stress energy tensor as
[itex]\Theta[/itex][itex]\mu\nu[/itex]=1/2 i [itex]\overline{\psi}[/itex] [itex]\gamma[/itex][itex]\mu[/itex][itex]\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial^\nu}\psi[/itex]

But I get something more like
[itex]\Theta[/itex][itex]\mu\nu[/itex]=[itex]-1/2 i \overline{\psi}\gamma[/itex][itex]\mu[/itex][itex]\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial^\nu}\psi + 1/4 (\sigma^{\mu\nu}+\sigma^{\nu\mu}) \overline{\psi} \gamma^\alpha \stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial_\alpha}\psi+1/2 i (\sigma^{\mu\nu}+\sigma^{\nu\mu})(a_\alpha \overline{\psi} \gamma^\alpha \psi+ b_\alpha \overline{\psi} \gamma_5 \gamma^\alpha \psi)-m\overline{\psi} \psi[/itex]

where [itex]\sigma^{\mu \nu}=-i \gamma^\mu \gamma^\nu[/itex]

But then I get the same equation 10 as they do. Am I missing something? I know this requires you read and calculate this yourself to check (actually, you can just start from the lagrangian in equation 5 and use definition of the stress energy tensor). Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sorry, should have said [itex]g^{\mu \nu}[/itex] instead of [itex]-i/2 (\sigma^{\mu \nu}+\sigma^{\nu \mu})[/itex]
 
never mind, I figured it out. Eq 9 is written neglecting the additional terms.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K