Weyl invariant scalar field theory

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the Weyl invariant scalar field theory represented by the action S = ∫ d^d x √g (g^{μν} ∂_μ φ ∂_ν φ + (1/4)((d-2)/(d-1)) R φ²). The scalar field φ and the Ricci scalar R are crucial components, with the theory being invariant under specific scalings of the metric g_{μν} and the scalar field φ. The cancellation of terms in the action under these transformations suggests a deeper geometric significance, potentially linked to the Dirac operator's behavior under conformal rescalings and the structure of the Polyakov action.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Weyl invariance in field theories
  • Familiarity with scalar fields and Ricci scalar in differential geometry
  • Knowledge of conformal transformations and their implications
  • Basic principles of quantum field theory and string theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Weyl invariance in quantum field theories
  • Explore the relationship between the Dirac operator and conformal rescalings
  • Study the Polyakov action and its applications in string theory
  • Investigate nonlinear sigma models and their conformal frames
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory, string theory, and differential geometry, as well as researchers exploring the geometric foundations of field theories.

StatusX
Homework Helper
Messages
2,570
Reaction score
2
I'm not sure if this is the right place for this question, so feel free to move it. Anyway, my question is, is there any good reason why the following field theory should be Weyl invariant in an arbitrary dimension d>1:

[tex]S = \int d^d x \sqrt{g} \left( g^{\mu \nu} \partial_\mu \phi \partial_\nu \phi + \frac{1}{4} \left(\frac{d-2}{d-1}\right) R \phi^2 \right) [/itex]<br /> <br /> Here [itex]\phi[/itex] is a scalar field and [itex]R[/itex] is the Ricci scalar associated to the metric [itex]g_{\mu \nu}[/itex]. By Weyl invariant I mean invariant under the scalings:<br /> <br /> [tex]g_{\mu \nu} \rightarrow e^\Omega g_{\mu \nu}[/tex]<br /> <br /> [tex]\phi \rightarrow e^{\frac{2-d}{4} \Omega} \phi [/itex]<br /> <br /> where [itex]\Omega[/itex] is an arbitrary scalar function. If one calculates the change in the action under this transformation, one finds two separate types of terms have to cancel (one linear and one quadratic in [itex]\Omega[/itex]), and the coefficients seem to miracuously work out so that this happens. I'm guessing there's some simple geometric reason why this has to be so, but I can't think of it. <br /> <br /> It might be related to the fact that the dirac operator commutes with conformal rescalings, and squares to something like [itex]\nabla^2 + \frac{1}{4} R[/itex], but I'm pretty sure the coefficient on R is different here, and in any case, that's an operator on spinors, not scalars.[/tex][/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hmm, good question.

That looks very stringy to me, and I've seen that before someplace. It looks very similar to terms in the Polyakov action + a worldsheet Einstein Hilbert-Dilaton like term (which has the Euler characteristic floating around, which I think is related to the geometrical reason you were looking for). Alternatively it has the form of a nonlinear sigma model written in some sort of conformal frame.

Observe however that

(Delta^2 + 1/2*(d-2)/(d-1) *R)*Phi =0
(factors of 2 might be off)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K