Understanding Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking in Quantum Field Theory

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of spontaneous symmetry breaking in quantum field theory, focusing on the necessity of expanding fields around the true vacuum and the implications of using the effective potential versus the bare potential. Participants explore the conditions under which symmetry breaking occurs and the methods for identifying the true vacuum.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the necessity of expanding the field ψ around the true vacuum |Ω> instead of at ψ=0, suggesting a potential simplification.
  • There is confusion regarding the expansion of the E&M potential A, with a participant proposing that it should also be expanded around A=<Ω|A|Ω> rather than A=0.
  • Concerns are raised about the method for finding the true vacuum, specifically whether the derivative of the effective potential V_eff should be used instead of the bare potential V.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of using V_eff to determine symmetry breaking and questions the precision of various presentations in literature.
  • There is a discussion about the potential form V(φ)=-μ²φ²+λφ⁴, with participants debating the significance of the sign of μ² and its dependence on scale.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about simply stating the potential form without addressing how the sign of μ² is determined from the bare Lagrangian.
  • A later reply references Zee's work, indicating that the effective potential is crucial for understanding symmetry breaking.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate potential to use when analyzing symmetry breaking, with some advocating for the effective potential while others question the assumptions made about the bare potential. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these choices.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential limitations in understanding the effective potential and its relationship to the bare potential, as well as the assumptions regarding the sign of μ² and its scale dependence.

geoduck
Messages
257
Reaction score
2
Is there a reason why we have to expand a field ψ about the true vacuum |Ω>? Can't we just do field theory about ψ=0 instead of about ψ=<Ω|ψ|Ω>?

Also, I'm a bit confused about other fields. For the E&M potential, under the true vacuum, wouldn't we need to expand about A=<Ω|A|Ω> instead of A=0?

Also, how do we find the true vacuum anyhow? The way that it seems to be done is to take the derivative of the potential V, and set it equal to zero. The potential V usually has a negative mass or something shifting the true vacuum away from ψ=0. Is this an approximation? Don't we have to take the derivative of the effective potential Veff instead of V?

And how can one show that two derivatives of Veff gives the mass generated? I thought to get the mass generated, you have to shift the fields, and identify the coefficients of terms proportional to the square of the field. But a paper I'm reading claims you can just take two derivatives of Veff to get the mass generated?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, you have to use V_eff. "The way it seems to be done..." Are you referring to some specific book? There are presentations of varying level of precision.
 
DrDu said:
Yes, you have to use V_eff. "The way it seems to be done..." Are you referring to some specific book? There are presentations of varying level of precision.

Most textbooks just state [tex]V(\phi)=-\mu^2\phi^2+λ\phi^4[/tex] as the beginning potential which leads to spontaneous symmetry breaking.

V is not the effective potential, but the potential appearing in the Lagrangian, which is just the tree-level effective potential.

Something feels rotten about just stating that the potential is [tex]V(\phi)=-\mu^2\phi^2+\lambda \phi^4[/tex]. Spontaneous symmetry breaking depends crucially on the sign of μ2, but how do we know the sign of μ2? Aren't these couplings supposed to depend on scale? Is there a scale where the coupling goes back to being negative?

I can see how λ must always be positive at any scale or else your theory doesn't have a ground state at all. But I'm not sure how we know the sign of μ2 by just looking at the bare Lagrangian.
 
I just now saw your reply.
Zee, Quantum field theory in a nutshell explains that the effective potential has to be used to determine whether a symmetry is broken or not.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
3K