Trouble with Wick rotation in 1+1d abelian Higgs model

rgoerke
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
When solving for instanton solutions in a 1+1d abelian Higgs model, it's convenient to work in Euclidean space using the substitution
x^0 \rightarrow -ix_4^E,\quad x^1 \rightarrow x_1^E
The corresponding substitution for the covariant derivative is
D^0 \rightarrow iD_4^E,\quad D^1 \rightarrow D_1^E
Now, many sources will write out the Euclidean action that you get from this substitution, and I am able to reproduce the gauge kinetic term and the potential term, but I'm doing something stupid with the scalar kinetic term. In real space, we have
\frac{1}{2}\left(D_{\mu}\phi\right)^*\left(D^{\mu}\phi\right)
doing the Wick rotation,
\frac{1}{2}\left(\left(D_0\phi\right)^*\left(D_0\phi\right) - \left(D_1\phi\right)^*\left(D_1\phi\right)\right)
=\frac{1}{2}\left(\left(-iD_4^E\phi\right)^*\left(-iD_4^E\phi\right) - \left(D_1^E\phi\right)^*\left(D_1^E\phi\right)\right)
=\frac{1}{2}\left((i)\left(D_4^E\phi\right)^*(-i)\left(D_4^E\phi\right) - \left(D_1^E\phi\right)^*\left(D_1^E\phi\right)\right)
=\frac{1}{2}\left(\left(D_4^E\phi\right)^*\left(D_4^E\phi\right) - \left(D_1^E\phi\right)^*\left(D_1^E\phi\right)\right)
but in order to reproduce what I see in various sources, I should be getting
-\frac{1}{2}\left|D_{\mu}^E\phi\right|^2
=\frac{1}{2}\left(-\left(D_4^E\phi\right)^*\left(D_4^E\phi\right) - \left(D_1^E\phi\right)^*\left(D_1^E\phi\right)\right)
This is a very straightforward process, clearly I am missing something very obvious or doing something completely wrong, but I've stared at this for a while and I'm just not sure what it is.

Thanks for you help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How, after the Wick rotation, did you get from line 2 to line 3?
Should there be an extra -1 factor ?
 
In addition to what Harry said, you should be careful with your up/down indices, depending on which convention you use you should pay attention to minus signs.
 
Hi, thanks for your responses.

I'm getting from line 2 to 3 by taking the complex conjugate:
\left(-iD_0\phi\right)^* =(-i)^*\left(D_0\phi\right)^*=(i)\left(D_0\phi\right)^*

As for indicies, I have tried to be as careful as possible; if you see a mistake please point it out.

This seems like a stupidly simple thing to get caught-up on, but I just can't figure out how this rotation to Euclidean space works.
 
Well, you have $$D_{0}$$ and $$D^0$$, should they transform the same way (with the same sign)?
 
...should they transform the same way (with the same sign)?

Yes, I believe so. In any case I don't really need to know explicitly how D^0 transforms since I can write everything in terms of D_0,
D_{\mu}D^{\mu} = g^{\mu\nu}D_{\mu}D_{\nu} = D_0D_0 - D_1D_1
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top