What Does the Shape of the Higgs Potential Tell Us?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kelly0303
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Higgs Potential Shape
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of the Higgs potential in the context of a real scalar field, particularly focusing on the graphical representation of the potential and the implications of field values in relation to spontaneous symmetry breaking. Participants explore the nature of the field, its dependence on space-time variables, and the conditions under which the potential reaches its minima.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the Higgs-like potential as resembling a "Mexican hat" with minima at ##\pm a##, expressing confusion about the x-axis representing the field ##\phi##, which is dependent on space-time variables.
  • Another participant asserts that while the field does not take a single value, for the purpose of analyzing the potential, one can consider a constant field to find the minimum energy configuration.
  • It is noted that the potential density at a point depends on the field value at that point, regardless of whether the field configuration is at the global minimum.
  • A later reply emphasizes that in a vacuum state, the field is assumed to take the same value everywhere, despite gauge invariance allowing for different apparent values at different points.
  • Some participants challenge the notion that the Higgs field can be constant, with one asserting that the discussion pertains to the ground state of the Higgs field, which corresponds to a constant value.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the Higgs field can be considered constant. While some argue that it can be treated as constant in the context of vacuum states, others contest this assertion, leading to unresolved disagreements regarding the nature of the field in this context.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the nature of the field and its representation in the potential graph, as well as the implications of gauge invariance, which remain unresolved.

kelly0303
Messages
573
Reaction score
33
Hello! I am going to talk here about a real scalar field for simplicity. If we have a Higgs-like potential for a real scalar field, the graph of the potential looks like a section of a "Mexican hat", with a bump at 0 and two absolute minima at, say, ##\pm a##. This is the plot I see in any book talking about spontaneous symmetry breaking. Although I understand how the symmetry is broken I am a bit confused about the graph itself (the actual picture of it). The graph has on the y-axis the potential ##V(\phi)## and on the x-axis the field ##\phi##. I am not sure how to think about the x-axis, as the field is not an independent variable, it depends on the space-time variables i.e. ##\phi = \phi(x,y,z,t)##. So if I read on the graph that ##V(a)## is a minimum, this means means that when the value of the field is ##\phi(x,y,z,t)=a##, the potential reaches a minimum. But what does it mean that ##\phi(x,y,z,t)=a##? The field doesn't take a single value. One can have ##\phi(2,7,\pi,12.4)=a## but ##\phi(e,22,0,12.4)=7*a+25##. Do we assume for this plot that the field is constant everywhere? And if so, why do we do this? The field has a kinetic term, so it can have change in time. Do we do it because we want to see the actual minimum value of the vacuum and hence, as we need minimum energy, we set it constant just to discard the kinetic term? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
kelly0303 said:
The field doesn't take a single value.
If you want it to have the minimal energy configuration, it does.

The potential (density) V is a function of the field value. If you want to plot it, then it makes sense to plot it as a function of the field value. Even if you have a field configuration which is not the global minimum, your potential density at an event only depends on the field value at that event (of course, the potential density may then be different at different spacetime events, but this is not the issue here).
kelly0303 said:
Do we do it because we want to see the actual minimum value of the vacuum and hence, as we need minimum energy, we set it constant just to discard the kinetic term?
Yes. The kinetic terms are non-negative and will be zero when the field is constant. The mimimal energy is therefore obtained for a constant field at the bottom of the potential density.
 
kelly0303 said:
Hello! I am going to talk here about a real scalar field for simplicity. If we have a Higgs-like potential for a real scalar field, the graph of the potential looks like a section of a "Mexican hat", with a bump at 0 and two absolute minima at, say, ##\pm a##. This is the plot I see in any book talking about spontaneous symmetry breaking. Although I understand how the symmetry is broken I am a bit confused about the graph itself (the actual picture of it). The graph has on the y-axis the potential ##V(\phi)## and on the x-axis the field ##\phi##. I am not sure how to think about the x-axis, as the field is not an independent variable, it depends on the space-time variables i.e. ##\phi = \phi(x,y,z,t)##. So if I read on the graph that ##V(a)## is a minimum, this means means that when the value of the field is ##\phi(x,y,z,t)=a##, the potential reaches a minimum. But what does it mean that ##\phi(x,y,z,t)=a##? The field doesn't take a single value. One can have ##\phi(2,7,\pi,12.4)=a## but ##\phi(e,22,0,12.4)=7*a+25##. Do we assume for this plot that the field is constant everywhere?

Field which isn't constant everywhere means you have "particles" of this field (perturbations of the field). When you look for a vacuum state, of course this shouldn't be the case.

Therefore, yes, you assume that the field does take the same value everywhere in the vacuum. Modulo gauge invariance: field can have seemingly different values at different points, but if they can be made to be the same value everywhere via a gauge transformation, then it's not a state with particles.
 
The Higgs field cannot be a constant
 
Njogu said:
The Higgs field cannot be a constant
First of all, this thread is two months old. Second, we are discussing the ground state of the Higgs field. Third, the Higgs vacuum does correspond to a state where the Higgs field is constant.

Perhaps you would like to qualify your statement further?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K