DOCSLIB.ORG

An Introduction to Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Introduction to Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 11 (2019) An introduction to spontaneous symmetry breaking Aron J. Beekman1, Louk Rademaker2,3 and Jasper van Wezel4? 1 Department of Physics, and Research and Education Center for Natural Sciences, Keio University, 3-14-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama 223-8522, Japan 2 Department of Theoretical Physics, University of Geneva, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland 3 Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 2Y5, Canada 4 Institute for Theoretical Physics Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Science Park 904, 1098 XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands ? [email protected] Abstract Perhaps the most important aspect of symmetry in physics is the idea that a state does not need to have the same symmetries as the theory that describes it. This phenomenon is known as spontaneous symmetry breaking. In these lecture notes, starting from a careful definition of symmetry in physics, we introduce symmetry breaking and its conse- quences. Emphasis is placed on the physics of singular limits, showing the reality of sym- metry breaking even in small-sized systems. Topics covered include Nambu-Goldstone modes, quantum corrections, phase transitions, topological defects and gauge fields. We provide many examples from both high energy and condensed matter physics. These notes are suitable for graduate students. Copyright A. J. Beekman et al. Received 05-09-2019 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Accepted 04-11-2019 Check for Attribution 4.0 International License. Published 04-12-2019 updates Published by the SciPost Foundation. doi:10.21468/SciPostPhysLectNotes.11 Contents Preface 3 1 Symmetry 6 1.1 Definition6 1.1.1 Symmetries of states6 1.1.2 Symmetries of Hamiltonians7 1.2 Noether’s theorem7 1.2.1 Conserved quantities8 1.2.2 Continuity equations8 1.2.3 Proving Noether’s theorem9 1.2.4 Noether charge 11 1.3 Examples of Noether currents and Noether charges 11 1.3.1 Schrödinger field 11 1.3.2 Relativistic complex scalar field 12 1.3.3 Spacetime translations 13 1.4 Types of symmetry transformations 14 1 SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 11 (2019) 1.4.1 Discrete versus continuous symmetries 14 1.4.2 Anti-unitary symmetries 15 1.4.3 Global symmetries versus local symmetries 15 1.4.4 Active versus passive, and internal versus external symmetries 16 1.5 Gauge freedom 17 1.5.1 Relabelling your measuring rod 17 1.5.2 Superfluous degrees of freedom 18 1.5.3 Distinguishing gauge freedom from symmetry 20 1.6 Symmetry groups and Lie algebras 22 1.6.1 Symmetry groups 22 1.6.2 Lie groups and algebras 24 1.6.3 Representation theory 25 2 Symmetry breaking 27 2.1 Basic notions of SSB 27 2.2 Singular limits 29 2.3 The harmonic crystal 33 2.4 The Heisenberg antiferromagnet 37 2.5 Symmetry breaking in the thermodynamic limit 41 2.5.1 Classification of broken-symmetry states 41 2.5.2 The order parameter 43 2.5.3 The classical state 46 2.5.4 Long-range order 46 2.5.5 The Josephson effect 48 2.6 The tower of states 50 2.7 Stability of states 52 3 Nambu–Goldstone modes 54 3.1 Goldstone’s theorem 55 3.2 Counting of NG modes 57 3.3 Examples of NG modes 59 3.3.1 NG-like excitations 61 3.4 Gapped partner modes 62 3.4.1 The tower of states for systems with type-B NG modes 63 4 Quantum corrections and thermal fluctuations 65 4.1 Linear spin-wave theory 65 4.2 Mermin–Wagner–Hohenberg–Coleman theorem 71 4.2.1 The variance of the order parameter 71 4.2.2 Matsubara summation 72 4.2.3 General NG mode propagator 74 4.2.4 Type-A NG modes 74 4.2.5 Type-B NG modes 75 5 Phase transitions 77 5.1 Classification of phase transitions 77 5.2 Landau theory 78 5.2.1 The Landau functional 78 5.2.2 First-order phase transitions 81 5.3 Symmetry breaking in Landau theory 81 5.3.1 The Mexican hat potential 81 2 SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 11 (2019) 5.3.2 From Hamiltonian to Landau functional 83 5.4 Spatial fluctuations 85 5.5 Universality 88 6 Topological defects 89 6.1 Meaning of topological and defect 90 6.2 Topological melting: the D = 1 Ising model 92 6.3 Berezinskii–Kosterlitz–Thouless phase transition 93 6.4 Classification of topological defects 94 6.5 Topological defects at work 96 6.5.1 Duality mapping 96 6.5.2 Kibble–Zurek mechanism 97 6.5.3 Topological solitons and skyrmions 97 7 Gauge fields 98 7.1 Ginzburg–Landau superconductors 99 7.2 Gauge-invariant order parameter 100 7.3 The Anderson–Higgs mechanism 104 7.3.1 The Meissner effect 105 7.3.2 The Higgs boson 105 7.4 Vortices 107 7.5 Charged BKT phase transition 109 7.6 Order of the superconducting phase transition 110 A Other aspects of spontaneous symmetry breaking 112 A.1 Glasses 112 A.2 Many-body entanglement 113 A.3 Dynamics of spontaneous symmetry breaking 114 A.4 Quantum phase transitions 115 A.5 Topological order 116 A.6 Time crystals 117 A.7 Higher-form symmetry 117 A.8 Decoherence and the measurement problem 118 B Further reading 119 C Solutions to selected exercises 121 References 129 Preface Symmetry is one of the great unifying themes in physics. From cosmology to nuclear physics and from soft matter to quantum materials, symmetries determine which shapes, interactions, and evolutions occur in nature. Perhaps the most important aspect of symmetry in theories of physics, is the idea that the states of a system do not need to have the same symmetries as the theory that describes them. Such spontaneous breakdown of symmetries governs the dynamics 3 SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 11 (2019) of phase transitions, the emergence of new particles and excitations, the rigidity of collective states of matter, and is one of the main ways classical physics emerges in a quantum world. The basic idea of spontaneous symmetry breaking is well known, and repeated in differ- ent ways throughout all fields of physics. More specific aspects of spontaneous symmetry breaking, and their physical ramifications, however, are dispersed among the specialised liter- ature of multiple subfields, and not widely known or readily transferred to other areas. These lecture notes grew out of a dissatisfaction with the resulting lack of a single general and com- prehensive introduction to spontaneous symmetry breaking in physics. Quantum field theory textbooks often focus on the mathematical structure, while only leisurely borrowing and dis- cussing physical examples and nomenclature from condensed matter physics. Most condensed matter oriented texts on the other hand, treat spontaneous symmetry breaking on a case-by- case basis, without building a more fundamental understanding of the deeper concepts. These lecture notes aim to provide a sound physical understanding of spontaneous symmetry break- ing while at the same time being sufficiently mathematically rigorous. We use mostly examples from condensed matter theory, because they are intuitive and because they naturally highlight the relation between the abstract notion of the thermodynamic limit and reality. These notes also incorporate some more modern developments that shed light on previously poorly under- stood aspects of spontaneous symmetry breaking, such as the counting and dispersion relations of Nambu–Goldstone modes (Section 3.2) and the role and importance of the Anderson tower of states (Section 2.6). A relatively new perspective taken in these notes revolves around the observation that the limit of infinite system size, often called the thermodynamic limit, is not a necessary condition for spontaneous symmetry breaking to occur in practice. Stronger, for almost all realistic ap- plications of the theory of symmetry breaking, it is a rather useless limit, in the sense that it is never strictly realised. Even in situations where the object of interest can be considered large, the coherence length of ordered phases is generically small, and a single domain cannot in good faith be considered to approximate any sort of infinite size. Fortunately, even relatively small objects can spontaneously break symmetries, and almost all of the generic physical con- sequences already appear in some form at small scales. The central message of spontaneous symmetry breaking then, is that objects of all sizes reside in thermodynamically stable states, rather than energy eigenstates. We will often switch between different types of symmetry-breaking systems. For example, most of these lecture notes concern the breakdown of continuous symmetries, but the most no- table differences with discrete symmetries are briefly discussed whenever they are arise. Even within the realm of continuous symmetries, many flavours exist, each with different physical consequences emerging from their breakdown. We emphasise such differences throughout the lecture notes, but without attempting to be encyclopaedic. The main aim of these notes is to foster physical understanding, and variations on any theme will be presented primarily through the discussion of concrete examples. Similarly, we will regularly switch between the Hamiltonian and Lagrangian paradigms. Many aspects of symmetry breaking can be formulated in either formalism, but sometimes one provides a clearer understanding than the other. Furthermore, it is often insightful to com- pare the two approaches, and we do this in several places in these lecture notes. For most of the discussion, we adopt the viewpoint that any physicist may be assumed to have a work- ing knowledge of both formalisms, and we freely jump between them, choosing whichever approach is most suitable for the aspect under consideration. These notes are based in part on lectures taught by J.v.W.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Goldstini Can Give the Higgs a Boost
    Goldstini Can Give the Higgs a Boost The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Citation Thaler, Jesse, and Zachary Thomas. “Goldstini can give the Higgs a boost.” Journal of High Energy Physics 2011.7 (2011). As Published http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/jhep07(2011)060 Publisher Springer Berlin/Heidelberg Version Author's final manuscript Citable link http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/72016 Terms of Use Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Detailed Terms http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ Preprint typeset in JHEP style - HYPER VERSION MIT-CTP 4226 Goldstini Can Give the Higgs a Boost Jesse Thaler and Zachary Thomas Center for Theoretical Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: Supersymmetric collider phenomenology depends crucially on whether the lightest observable-sector supersymmetric particle (LOSP) decays, and if so, what the LOSP decay products are. For instance, in SUSY models where the gravitino is lighter than the LOSP, the LOSP decays to its superpartner and a longitudinal gravitino via super- current couplings. In this paper, we show that LOSP decays can be substantially modified when there are multiple sectors that break supersymmetry, where in addition to the grav- itino there are light uneaten goldstini. As a particularly striking example, a bino-like LOSP can have a near 100% branching fraction to a higgs boson and an uneaten goldstino, even if the LOSP has negligible higgsino fraction. This occurs because the uneaten goldstino is unconstrained by the supercurrent, allowing additional operators to mediate LOSP decay.
    [Show full text]
  • The Five Common Particles
    The Five Common Particles The world around you consists of only three particles: protons, neutrons, and electrons. Protons and neutrons form the nuclei of atoms, and electrons glue everything together and create chemicals and materials. Along with the photon and the neutrino, these particles are essentially the only ones that exist in our solar system, because all the other subatomic particles have half-lives of typically 10-9 second or less, and vanish almost the instant they are created by nuclear reactions in the Sun, etc. Particles interact via the four fundamental forces of nature. Some basic properties of these forces are summarized below. (Other aspects of the fundamental forces are also discussed in the Summary of Particle Physics document on this web site.) Force Range Common Particles It Affects Conserved Quantity gravity infinite neutron, proton, electron, neutrino, photon mass-energy electromagnetic infinite proton, electron, photon charge -14 strong nuclear force ≈ 10 m neutron, proton baryon number -15 weak nuclear force ≈ 10 m neutron, proton, electron, neutrino lepton number Every particle in nature has specific values of all four of the conserved quantities associated with each force. The values for the five common particles are: Particle Rest Mass1 Charge2 Baryon # Lepton # proton 938.3 MeV/c2 +1 e +1 0 neutron 939.6 MeV/c2 0 +1 0 electron 0.511 MeV/c2 -1 e 0 +1 neutrino ≈ 1 eV/c2 0 0 +1 photon 0 eV/c2 0 0 0 1) MeV = mega-electron-volt = 106 eV. It is customary in particle physics to measure the mass of a particle in terms of how much energy it would represent if it were converted via E = mc2.
    [Show full text]
  • Melting of the Higgs Vacuum: Conserved Numbers at High Temperature
    PURD-TH-96-05 CERN-TH/96-167 hep-ph/9607386 July 1996 Melting of the Higgs Vacuum: Conserved Numbers at High Temperature S. Yu. Khlebnikov a,∗ and M. E. Shaposhnikov b,† a Department of Physics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA b Theory Division, CERN, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland Abstract We discuss the computation of the grand canonical partition sum describing hot mat- ter in systems with the Higgs mechanism in the presence of non-zero conserved global charges. We formulate a set of simple rules for that computation in the high-temperature approximation in the limit of small chemical potentials. As an illustration of the use of these rules, we calculate the leading term in the free energy of the standard model as a function of baryon number B. We show that this quantity depends continuously on the Higgs expectation value φ, with a crossover at φ ∼ T where Debye screening overtakes the Higgs mechanism—the Higgs vacuum “melts”. A number of confusions that exist in the literature regarding the B dependence of the free energy is clarified. PURD-TH-96-05 CERN-TH/96-167 July 1996 ∗[email protected] †[email protected] Screening of gauge fields by the Higgs mechanism is one of the central ideas both in modern particle physics and in condensed matter physics. It is often referred to as “spontaneous breaking” of a gauge symmetry, although, in the accurate sense of the word, gauge symmetries cannot be broken in the same way as global ones can. One might rather say that gauge charges are “hidden” by the Higgs mechanism.
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamentals of Particle Physics
    Fundamentals of Par0cle Physics Particle Physics Masterclass Emmanuel Olaiya 1 The Universe u The universe is 15 billion years old u Around 150 billion galaxies (150,000,000,000) u Each galaxy has around 300 billion stars (300,000,000,000) u 150 billion x 300 billion stars (that is a lot of stars!) u That is a huge amount of material u That is an unimaginable amount of particles u How do we even begin to understand all of matter? 2 How many elementary particles does it take to describe the matter around us? 3 We can describe the material around us using just 3 particles . 3 Matter Particles +2/3 U Point like elementary particles that protons and neutrons are made from. Quarks Hence we can construct all nuclei using these two particles -1/3 d -1 Electrons orbit the nuclei and are help to e form molecules. These are also point like elementary particles Leptons We can build the world around us with these 3 particles. But how do they interact. To understand their interactions we have to introduce forces! Force carriers g1 g2 g3 g4 g5 g6 g7 g8 The gluon, of which there are 8 is the force carrier for nuclear forces Consider 2 forces: nuclear forces, and electromagnetism The photon, ie light is the force carrier when experiencing forces such and electricity and magnetism γ SOME FAMILAR THE ATOM PARTICLES ≈10-10m electron (-) 0.511 MeV A Fundamental (“pointlike”) Particle THE NUCLEUS proton (+) 938.3 MeV neutron (0) 939.6 MeV E=mc2. Einstein’s equation tells us mass and energy are equivalent Wave/Particle Duality (Quantum Mechanics) Einstein E
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Field Theory*
    Quantum Field Theory y Frank Wilczek Institute for Advanced Study, School of Natural Science, Olden Lane, Princeton, NJ 08540 I discuss the general principles underlying quantum eld theory, and attempt to identify its most profound consequences. The deep est of these consequences result from the in nite number of degrees of freedom invoked to implement lo cality.Imention a few of its most striking successes, b oth achieved and prosp ective. Possible limitation s of quantum eld theory are viewed in the light of its history. I. SURVEY Quantum eld theory is the framework in which the regnant theories of the electroweak and strong interactions, which together form the Standard Mo del, are formulated. Quantum electro dynamics (QED), b esides providing a com- plete foundation for atomic physics and chemistry, has supp orted calculations of physical quantities with unparalleled precision. The exp erimentally measured value of the magnetic dip ole moment of the muon, 11 (g 2) = 233 184 600 (1680) 10 ; (1) exp: for example, should b e compared with the theoretical prediction 11 (g 2) = 233 183 478 (308) 10 : (2) theor: In quantum chromo dynamics (QCD) we cannot, for the forseeable future, aspire to to comparable accuracy.Yet QCD provides di erent, and at least equally impressive, evidence for the validity of the basic principles of quantum eld theory. Indeed, b ecause in QCD the interactions are stronger, QCD manifests a wider variety of phenomena characteristic of quantum eld theory. These include esp ecially running of the e ective coupling with distance or energy scale and the phenomenon of con nement.
    [Show full text]
  • 3. Models of EWSB
    The Higgs Boson and Electroweak Symmetry Breaking 3. Models of EWSB M. E. Peskin Chiemsee School September 2014 In this last lecture, I will take up a different topic in the physics of the Higgs field. In the first lecture, I emphasized that most of the parameters of the Standard Model are associated with the couplings of the Higgs field. These parameters determine the Higgs potential, the spectrum of quark and lepton masses, and the structure of flavor and CP violation in the weak interactions. These parameters are not computable within the SM. They are inputs. If we want to compute these parameters, we need to build a deeper and more predictive theory. In particular, a basic question about the SM is: Why is the SU(2)xU(1) gauge symmetry spontaneously broken ? The SM cannot answer this question. I will discuss: In what kind of models can we answer this question ? For orientation, I will present the explanation for spontaneous symmetry breaking in the SM. We have a single Higgs doublet field ' . It has some potential V ( ' ) . The potential is unknown, except that it is invariant under SU(2)xU(1). However, if the theory is renormalizable, the potential must be of the form V (')=µ2 ' 2 + λ ' 4 | | | | Now everything depends on the sign of µ 2 . If µ2 > 0 the minimum of the potential is at ' =0 and there is no symmetry breaking. If µ 2 < 0 , the potential has the form: and there is a minimum away from 0. That’s it. Don’t ask any more questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Zero-Point Energy in Bag Models
    Ooa/ea/oHsnif- ^*7 ( 4*0 0 1 5 4 3 - m . Zero-Point Energy in Bag Models by Kimball A. Milton* Department of Physics The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio 43210 A b s t r a c t The zero-point (Casimir) energy of free vector (gluon) fields confined to a spherical cavity (bag) is computed. With a suitable renormalization the result for eight gluons is This result is substantially larger than that for a spher­ ical shell (where both interior and exterior modes are pre­ sent), and so affects Johnson's model of the QCD vacuum. It is also smaller than, and of opposite sign to the value used in bag model phenomenology, so it will have important implications there. * On leave ifrom Department of Physics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90024. I. Introduction Quantum chromodynamics (QCD) may we 1.1 be the appropriate theory of hadronic matter. However, the theory is not at all well understood. It may turn out that color confinement is roughly approximated by the phenomenologically suc­ cessful bag model [1,2]. In this model, the normal vacuum is a perfect color magnetic conductor, that iis, the color magnetic permeability n is infinite, while the vacuum.in the interior of the bag is characterized by n=l. This implies that the color electric and magnetic fields are confined to the interior of the bag, and that they satisfy the following boundary conditions on its surface S: n.&jg= 0, nxBlg= 0, (1) where n is normal to S. Now, even in an "empty" bag (i.e., one containing no quarks) there will be non-zero fields present because of quantum fluctua­ tions.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Lifts of Polytopes
    Lecture 5: Lifts of polytopes and non-negative rank CSE 599S: Entropy optimality, Winter 2016 Instructor: James R. Lee Last updated: January 24, 2016 1 Lifts of polytopes 1.1 Polytopes and inequalities Recall that the convex hull of a subset X n is defined by ⊆ conv X λx + 1 λ x0 : x; x0 X; λ 0; 1 : ( ) f ( − ) 2 2 [ ]g A d-dimensional convex polytope P d is the convex hull of a finite set of points in d: ⊆ P conv x1;:::; xk (f g) d for some x1;:::; xk . 2 Every polytope has a dual representation: It is a closed and bounded set defined by a family of linear inequalities P x d : Ax 6 b f 2 g for some matrix A m d. 2 × Let us define a measure of complexity for P: Define γ P to be the smallest number m such that for some C s d ; y s ; A m d ; b m, we have ( ) 2 × 2 2 × 2 P x d : Cx y and Ax 6 b : f 2 g In other words, this is the minimum number of inequalities needed to describe P. If P is full- dimensional, then this is precisely the number of facets of P (a facet is a maximal proper face of P). Thinking of γ P as a measure of complexity makes sense from the point of view of optimization: Interior point( methods) can efficiently optimize linear functions over P (to arbitrary accuracy) in time that is polynomial in γ P . ( ) 1.2 Lifts of polytopes Many simple polytopes require a large number of inequalities to describe.
    [Show full text]
  • Projective Geometry: a Short Introduction
    Projective Geometry: A Short Introduction Lecture Notes Edmond Boyer Master MOSIG Introduction to Projective Geometry Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Objective . .2 1.2 Historical Background . .3 1.3 Bibliography . .4 2 Projective Spaces 5 2.1 Definitions . .5 2.2 Properties . .8 2.3 The hyperplane at infinity . 12 3 The projective line 13 3.1 Introduction . 13 3.2 Projective transformation of P1 ................... 14 3.3 The cross-ratio . 14 4 The projective plane 17 4.1 Points and lines . 17 4.2 Line at infinity . 18 4.3 Homographies . 19 4.4 Conics . 20 4.5 Affine transformations . 22 4.6 Euclidean transformations . 22 4.7 Particular transformations . 24 4.8 Transformation hierarchy . 25 Grenoble Universities 1 Master MOSIG Introduction to Projective Geometry Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Objective The objective of this course is to give basic notions and intuitions on projective geometry. The interest of projective geometry arises in several visual comput- ing domains, in particular computer vision modelling and computer graphics. It provides a mathematical formalism to describe the geometry of cameras and the associated transformations, hence enabling the design of computational ap- proaches that manipulates 2D projections of 3D objects. In that respect, a fundamental aspect is the fact that objects at infinity can be represented and manipulated with projective geometry and this in contrast to the Euclidean geometry. This allows perspective deformations to be represented as projective transformations. Figure 1.1: Example of perspective deformation or 2D projective transforma- tion. Another argument is that Euclidean geometry is sometimes difficult to use in algorithms, with particular cases arising from non-generic situations (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Effective Field Theories, Reductionism and Scientific Explanation Stephan
    To appear in: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics Effective Field Theories, Reductionism and Scientific Explanation Stephan Hartmann∗ Abstract Effective field theories have been a very popular tool in quantum physics for almost two decades. And there are good reasons for this. I will argue that effec- tive field theories share many of the advantages of both fundamental theories and phenomenological models, while avoiding their respective shortcomings. They are, for example, flexible enough to cover a wide range of phenomena, and concrete enough to provide a detailed story of the specific mechanisms at work at a given energy scale. So will all of physics eventually converge on effective field theories? This paper argues that good scientific research can be characterised by a fruitful interaction between fundamental theories, phenomenological models and effective field theories. All of them have their appropriate functions in the research process, and all of them are indispens- able. They complement each other and hang together in a coherent way which I shall characterise in some detail. To illustrate all this I will present a case study from nuclear and particle physics. The resulting view about scientific theorising is inherently pluralistic, and has implications for the debates about reductionism and scientific explanation. Keywords: Effective Field Theory; Quantum Field Theory; Renormalisation; Reductionism; Explanation; Pluralism. ∗Center for Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh, 817 Cathedral of Learning, Pitts- burgh, PA 15260, USA (e-mail: [email protected]) (correspondence address); and Sektion Physik, Universit¨at M¨unchen, Theresienstr. 37, 80333 M¨unchen, Germany. 1 1 Introduction There is little doubt that effective field theories are nowadays a very popular tool in quantum physics.
    [Show full text]
  • Casimir Effect on the Lattice: U (1) Gauge Theory in Two Spatial Dimensions
    Casimir effect on the lattice: U(1) gauge theory in two spatial dimensions M. N. Chernodub,1, 2, 3 V. A. Goy,4, 2 and A. V. Molochkov2 1Laboratoire de Math´ematiques et Physique Th´eoriqueUMR 7350, Universit´ede Tours, 37200 France 2Soft Matter Physics Laboratory, Far Eastern Federal University, Sukhanova 8, Vladivostok, 690950, Russia 3Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Gent, Krijgslaan 281, S9, B-9000 Gent, Belgium 4School of Natural Sciences, Far Eastern Federal University, Sukhanova 8, Vladivostok, 690950, Russia (Dated: September 8, 2016) We propose a general numerical method to study the Casimir effect in lattice gauge theories. We illustrate the method by calculating the energy density of zero-point fluctuations around two parallel wires of finite static permittivity in Abelian gauge theory in two spatial dimensions. We discuss various subtle issues related to the lattice formulation of the problem and show how they can successfully be resolved. Finally, we calculate the Casimir potential between the wires of a fixed permittivity, extrapolate our results to the limit of ideally conducting wires and demonstrate excellent agreement with a known theoretical result. I. INTRODUCTION lattice discretization) described by spatially-anisotropic and space-dependent static permittivities "(x) and per- meabilities µ(x) at zero and finite temperature in theories The influence of the physical objects on zero-point with various gauge groups. (vacuum) fluctuations is generally known as the Casimir The structure of the paper is as follows. In Sect. II effect [1{3]. The simplest example of the Casimir effect is we review the implementation of the Casimir boundary a modification of the vacuum energy of electromagnetic conditions for ideal conductors and propose its natural field by closely-spaced and perfectly-conducting parallel counterpart in the lattice gauge theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Simplicial Complexes
    46 III Complexes III.1 Simplicial Complexes There are many ways to represent a topological space, one being a collection of simplices that are glued to each other in a structured manner. Such a collection can easily grow large but all its elements are simple. This is not so convenient for hand-calculations but close to ideal for computer implementations. In this book, we use simplicial complexes as the primary representation of topology. Rd k Simplices. Let u0; u1; : : : ; uk be points in . A point x = i=0 λiui is an affine combination of the ui if the λi sum to 1. The affine hull is the set of affine combinations. It is a k-plane if the k + 1 points are affinely Pindependent by which we mean that any two affine combinations, x = λiui and y = µiui, are the same iff λi = µi for all i. The k + 1 points are affinely independent iff P d P the k vectors ui − u0, for 1 ≤ i ≤ k, are linearly independent. In R we can have at most d linearly independent vectors and therefore at most d+1 affinely independent points. An affine combination x = λiui is a convex combination if all λi are non- negative. The convex hull is the set of convex combinations. A k-simplex is the P convex hull of k + 1 affinely independent points, σ = conv fu0; u1; : : : ; ukg. We sometimes say the ui span σ. Its dimension is dim σ = k. We use special names of the first few dimensions, vertex for 0-simplex, edge for 1-simplex, triangle for 2-simplex, and tetrahedron for 3-simplex; see Figure III.1.
    [Show full text]