What Does the [A., A.] Term Signify in Non-Abelian Yang-Mills Theory?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter member 11137
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the term [A., A.] in the context of non-Abelian Yang-Mills theory, specifically its definition and physical interpretation. Participants explore its implications for gauge fields and self-coupling among gauge bosons, as well as its relation to the electromagnetic field tensor.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on the meaning of the term [A., A.] and its connection to non-Abelian theories.
  • Another participant explains that the gauge fields are in the adjoint representation and that the non-Abelian nature leads to a non-vanishing commutator, indicating self-coupling between gauge bosons.
  • A participant mentions their interest in a new formulation of the term as a quadratic form of the components of the electromagnetic potential vector and discusses a proposed "extended vector product" operation.
  • Further clarification is provided regarding the physical interpretation of self-coupling, contrasting it with the absence of direct coupling in QED due to its Abelian nature.
  • One participant expresses confusion over the various interpretations of the term in the literature and seeks to understand better in light of their own calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definition and interpretation of the term [A., A.], indicating that multiple interpretations exist without a clear consensus on its meaning or implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various formulations and interpretations in the literature, suggesting that the understanding of the term may depend on specific contexts or assumptions that are not fully resolved in the discussion.

member 11137
In the yang Mils formulation of the EM field (Faraday Maxwell) tensor, what exactly is (means) the complementary term usually written: [A., A.] (see for example the article of Jackiw: 50 years of the Yang Mils theory and my contribution to it) and related to the fact that this theory can be non Abelian? Thanks for your help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Blackforest said:
In the yang Mils formulation of the EM field (Faraday Maxwell) tensor, what exactly is (means) the complementary term usually written: [A., A.] (see for example the article of Jackiw: 50 years of the Yang Mils theory and my contribution to it) and related to the fact that this theory can be non Abelian? Thanks for your help
I am not sure what your question is exactly (do you want to know what the *definition* of this expression is? Or what is the physical interpretation?).

The gauge fields are in the adjoint representation (they are of the form [itex]A_\mu^a \lambda_a[/itex] where the lambda's are the generators of the group. Since the group is non abelian, the commutator does not vanish.

The physical interpretation is that there is self-coupling between the gauge bosons. There is no direct coupling between two photons (because QED is abelian) but there *is* self coupling between gluons or between W's and Z bosons.
 
nrqed said:
I am not sure what your question is exactly (do you want to know what the *definition* of this expression is? Or what is the physical interpretation?).

The gauge fields are in the adjoint representation (they are of the form [itex]A_\mu^a \lambda_a[/itex] where the lambda's are the generators of the group. Since the group is non abelian, the commutator does not vanish.

The physical interpretation is that there is self-coupling between the gauge bosons. There is no direct coupling between two photons (because QED is abelian) but there *is* self coupling between gluons or between W's and Z bosons.

Thanks for your rapid answer. My initial question was about the definition of the brackets. In another article concerning the anomalies and the renormalization of the BF YM theory, a new formulation of this term appears. The proposition for it is a quadratic form of the components of the EM field potential vector (the A 4-vector). I am working myself about a reformulation of this tensor and that was the reason of my question (see independent research forum and my home page). I recently did success to get a new expression of the tensor assuming the existence of a "new" mathematical operation (the extended vector product) and assuming a parallel transport of this A vector by respect for the trajectory. I don't know if it owns a physical signification but the formalism looks interesting.
 
To be clear: my question is not to make publicity for my own and insignifiant research but only motivated by the fact that it seems to exist several propositions and interpretations in the litterature for this complementary term. I was lost. I just try to understand better. The physical interpretation that you give (self coupling between gluons) takes a particular relief when it is confronted with my own calculations which are absolutely not complicated but which are implying a special lecture of the usual formulation of the tensor. Once more time thanks for your help and that was.
 

Similar threads

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