Arxiv:1709.02742V3

Home , Covering group

arXiv:1709.02742v3 [hep-th] 24 Jan 2020 r otie ntecnetdcmoeto nt,tepoe or proper the unity, of SO component connected group the in contained are T P fO(3 of ru O(3 group once opnnso h oet ru,tetasae of translates the group, Lorentz the of components connected oe fSO of cover ftefaebnl,wih ntecneto R snee nodrt order in needed is GR, co gravity. of the to on context coupled group fermions the diffeomorphism of space-time in the which, of action bundle, infinitesimal frame the of Pin group the and praho 6 ,2,8.T neln hspit ehglgtterl o groups. role Pin the admissible highlight we the point, restricting this ot in underline To in group and valid 8]. diffeomorphism Riemannian 20, remain 7, the diffeomorphisms, [6, results space-time of for our approach infinitesimal However, 1] under covariant 3, case. are [16, that Lorentzian in the developed for 18] as gravity, to coupled c.[,5]). [7, (cf. n iervra,oenest xedti oe rmSO from cover this extend to needs one reversal, time and oeso O(3 of covers lobcuetePngopcnaetosral uniissc as such quantities observable affect unde can fields group fermionic Pin the of because behaviour also transformation the determines it eea eaiiy(R moe eeersrcin ntecoc o choice only the that on find restrictions we severe imposes (GR) Relativity General ru O(3 group T Pin aif Λ satisfy o emos h pc-ietasomto eaiu sgovern is behaviour transformation space-time the fermions, For o oos h pc-ietasomto eaiu sgoverne is behaviour transformation space-time the bosons, For edrv hs etitosi h uieslsio udeapproac bundle spinor ‘universal the in restrictions these derive We eetn h orc i rusi motn rmafnaetlp fundamental a from important is groups Pin correct the Selecting nti ae,w hwta h ossetdsrpino fermions of description consistent the that show we paper, this In hsetnini yn en nqe hr r ols than less no are There unique. means no by is extension This abc . hrceie ytepoet htteeeet Λ elements the that property the by characterised , , ) oain n ossaedsrbdb h nqesml connec simply unique the by described are boosts and Rotations 1). h pc-iedffoopimgroup. transfor diffeomorphism gravity space-time to coupled the fermions of space configuration rnfrainbhvoro emosudrprt n time and parity under only fermions that of behaviour transformation Abstract. ↑ , , (3 P 2 1). ↑ ) hc opie orcnetdcmoet.Rttosadb and Rotations components. connected four comprises which 1), (3 , , = ) aiy( Parity 1). )ta ge ihSpin with agree that 1) , ) h pngopSpin group spin the 1), I RUSI EEA RELATIVITY GENERAL IN GROUPS PIN − two two a − hr r ih osbePngop htcnb sdt descri to used be can that groups Pin possible eight are There Λ , fteeaecmail ihgnrlrltvt,i h sens the in relativity, general with compatible are these of Pin = fteegtPngop r disbe h ru Pin group the admissible: are groups Pin eight the of T 2 = P b −−− n iervra ( reversal time and ) n (Λ and h oreo hs etitosi h obecover double the is restrictions these of source The . 1. A JANSSENS BAS P Introduction Λ ↑ ↑ T (3 (3 ) , 2 , )oe SO over 1) 1 ) oee,i re oacutfrparity for account to order in However, 1). = − c where , T r noe nteohrthree other the in encoded are ) ↑ (3 , a ) hyaetePngroups Pin the are They 1). saporaeyunder appropriately ms , P b ↑ (3 and eesl eshow We reversal. n Λ and , SO )t h ulLorentz full the to 1) eight hcrnu Lorentz thochronous c db obecover double a by ed i ru.I fact, In group. Pin f ↑ uha h ‘global’ the as such urns[,2,21]. 22, [4, currents (3 r ihr1or 1 either are eetos–but – reflections r T yteLorentz the by d ntepeec of presence the in fiuainspace nfiguration , e formulations her htthe that e h space-time the f )by 1) covering itntdouble distinct ’frfermions for h’ ito iw– view of oint ethe be n[,1,14, 13, [2, in + banan obtain o e double ted Pin = P , P T oosts ++ and and − − 1 2 BAS JANSSENS

Due to their transparent definition in terms of Clifford algebras, the ‘Cliffordian’ Pin groups Pin(3, 1) = Pin+−+ and Pin(1, 3) = Pin−++ have attracted much attention [10, 4, 17, 19, 9]. Remarkably, the two Pin groups Pin+ and Pin− that are compatible with GR are not the widely used Cliffordian Pin groups Pin(3, 1) and Pin(1, 3).

2. The lorentzian metric In order to establish notation, we briefly recall the frame or vierbein formalism for a Lorentzian metric g on a four-dimensional space-time manifold M. µ A frame ex based at x is a basis ea ∂µ of the tangent space TxM, with basis vectors labelled by a = 0, 1, 2, 3. The space F (M) of all frames (with arbitrary x) is called the frame bundle, and we denote by Fx(M) the set of frames with base point x. Note R a that the group Gl(4, ) of invertible 4 × 4 matrices Ab acts from the right on Fx(M), ′ ′µ µ b sending ex to the frame ex = exA with ea = eb Aa. This action is free and transitive; ′ ′ any two frames ex and ex over the same point x are related by ex = exA for a unique a matrix Ab . For a given Lorentzian metric g, the orthonormal frame bundle Og (M) ⊂ F (M) µ µ ν is the space of all orthonormal frames ea , satisfying gµν ea eb = ηab. Since two or- ′ thonormal frames ex and ex over the same point x differ by a Lorentz transforma- ′ tion Λ, ex = exΛ, the Lorentz group O(3, 1) acts freely and transitively on the set g Ox(M) ⊂ Fx(M) of orthonormal frames based at x. g Specifying a metric g at x is equivalent to specifying the set Ox(M) of orthonormal g frames. Since Ox(M) ⊂ Fx(M) is an orbit under the action of the Lorentz group O(3, 1) on Fx(M), specifying the metric at x is equivalent to picking a point in the orbit space Rx(M) = Fx(M)/O(3, 1). This is the set of equivalence classes [ex] of ′ frames at x, where two frames ex and ex are deemed equivalent if they differ by a ′ Lorentz transformation Λ, ex = exΛ. We denote the bundle of all equivalence classes [ex] (with arbitrary x) by R(M). To describe fermions in the presence of GR, it will be convenient to view a metric g on M as a section of R(M); a smooth map g : M → R(M) that takes a point x to 1 an equivalence class [ex] of frames at x. The configuration space of general relativity can thus be seen as the space Γ(R(M)) of sections of the bundle R(M).

3. Fermionic fields in a fixed background We start by describing fermionic fields on M in the presence of a fixed background metric g. In order to do this, a number of choices have to be made, especially if we wish to keep track of the transformation behaviour of spinors under parity and time reversal. The local transformation behaviour is fixed by choosing one out of the eight possible Pin groups Pinabc, together with a (not necessarily C-linear) representation V that extends the spinor representation of Spin↑(3, 1) ⊂ Pinabc. For example, V consists of n copies of C4 in the case of n Dirac fermions, and it consists of m copies of C2 in the case of m Majorana fermions2.

1In ﬁrst order formalisms such as the Palatini approach, one considers the bigger conﬁguration space of metrics g together with a connection ∇. This amounts to replacing R(M) by J1F (M)/O(3, 1). 2The requirement that V extends to an R-linear Pinabc-representation may place restrictions on a, b and c. For instance, the Spin↑(3, 1)-representation V = C2 (a single Majorana fermion) extends to Pinabc if and only if a = 1 and b = −1. To be consistent with the topological restrictions derived in §5, we therefore need m ≥ 2. PIN GROUPS IN GENERAL RELATIVITY 3

Once a Pin group has been selected, the second choice one has to make is a choice of Pin structure. A Pin structure is a twofold cover u: Qg → Og(M) of the orthonormal frame bundle, equipped with a Pinabc-action that is compatible with the action of the Lorentz group on Og(M). The compatibility entails that if Λ˜ ∈ Pinabc covers g Λ ∈ O(3, 1), then u(qxΛ)˜ = u(qx)Λ for all pin frames qx in Q . A pin frame qx is based g at the same point as its image, the frame u(qx). We denote by Qx the set of pin frames based at x. For a given manifold M and a given Pin group Pinabc, a Pin structure may or may not exist, and if it does, it need not be unique. The obstruction theory for this problem has been completely solved for the Cliffordian Pin groups in [15], and for the general case in [5]. Once a Pin structure Qg has been chosen, one can construct the associated bundle g g abc S = (Q × V )/Pin of spinors. A spinor ψx = [qx, ~v] at x is thus an equivalence g ˜ class of a pin frame qx ∈ Qx and a vector ~v ∈ V , where (qxΛ, ~v) is identified with abc (qx, Λ˜~v) for every element Λ˜ of the Pin group Pin . For a given background metric g, the fermionic fields are then described by sections of the spinor bundle Sg, that is, by smooth maps ψ : M → Sg that assign to each space-time point x a spinor ψx based at x. The configuration space for the fermionic fields at a fixed metric g is thus the space Γ(Sg) of sections of the spinor bundle Sg.

4. Fermionic fields coupled to GR We now wish to describe the configuration space for fermionic fields coupled to gravity. This is not simply the product of the configuration space of general relativity and that of a fermionic field; the main difficulty here is that the very space Sg where the spinor field ψ takes values depends on the metric g. A solution to this problem was proposed in [3, 1] for the Riemannian case, and in [2, 13, 14, 18] for metrics of Lorentzian signature. In order to handle reflections, we need to adapt this procedure as follows. First, we choose a twofold cover of Gl(4, R) that agrees with the universal cover f Gl+(4, R) over Gl+(4, R). In §5 we show that there are only two such covers, which, for want of a better name, we will call Gin+ and Gin−. Having made our choice of Gin±, we choose what one may call a Gin structure; a twofold cover u: Qˆ → F (M) with a Gin±-action that is compatible with the Gl(4, R)-action on F (M). Corresponding to every (not necessarily orthogonal) frame ex, there are thus two gin framesq ˆx and ′ e ± R qˆx. If A ∈ Gin covers A ∈ Gl(4, ), then the two gin frames corresponding to exA e ′ e areq ˆxA andq ˆxA. We denote by Pin± the twofold cover of O(3, 1) inside Gin±. Choosing a Gin structure Qˆ for the group Gin± is equivalent to choosing a Pin structure Qg for the group Pin±. Indeed, for every Gin± structure Qˆ, the preimage Qg ⊂ Qˆ of Og(M) ⊂ F (M) under the map u: Qˆ → F (M) is a Pin±-structure, since the restriction ug : Qg → Og(M) of u to Qg intertwines the Pin±-action on Qg with the action of the Lorentz group O(3, 1) on Og(M). Conversely, every Pin±-structure u: Qg → Og(M) gives rise to the associated Gin±-structure Qˆ = (Qg × Gin±)/Pin±. This is the space of equivalence ± classes [qx, A˜], where (qxΛ˜, A˜) is identified with (qx, ΛÃ˜) for every Λ˜ in Pin . The obstruction theory for Gin±-structures therefore reduces to the obstruction theory for Pin±-structures, which has been worked out in [5]. 4 BAS JANSSENS

In analogy with [18], one constructs the universal spinor bundle Σ = (Qˆ × V )/Pin± using the Gin structure Qˆ. A universal spinor Ψx = [ˆqx, ~v] at x is an equivalence class of a gin frameq ˆx ∈ Qˆx and a vector ~v ∈ V , where (ˆqxΛ˜, ~v) is identified with (ˆqx, Λ˜~v) ± ± for every Λ˜ in Pin . Note that a universal spinor Ψx in Σ = (Qˆ × V )/Pin defines a g g ± metric gµν at x, together with a spinor ψx in the spinor bundle S = (Q × V )/Pin that corresponds with the metric gµν induced by Ψx. Indeed, since the covering map u: Qˆ → F (M) intertwines the Pin±-action on Qˆ with the Gl(4, R)-action on F (M), it identifies the quotient of Qˆ by Pin± with the quotient of F (M) by O(3, 1), which is the orbit space R(M). From a universal spinor Ψx = [ˆqx, ~v] at x, we thus obtain an equivalence class [u(ˆqx)] in Rx(M), and hence a metric gµν at the point x. To obtain not only the metric gµν but also the spinor ψx, recall that the Pin g g structure Q corresponding to gµν is the preimage of O (M) under the double cover g u: Qˆ → F (M). Since Q ⊂ Qˆ contains the gin frameq ˆx, the equivalence class Ψx = ± [ˆqx, ~v] in Σ = (Qˆ × V )/Pin yields an equivalence class ψx = [qx, ~v] in the spinor g g ± g bundle S = (Q × V )/Pin by setting qx =q ˆx. Here, S is the spinor bundle derived from the metric gµν that is induced by Ψ. We conclude that both the metric g and the fermionic field ψ are described by a single section Ψ: M → Σ, a smooth map assigning to each point x of space-time a universal spinor Ψx based at x. The configuration space of fermionic fields coupled to gravity is thus the space Γ(Σ) of sections of the universal spinor bundle Σ.

5. Covering groups Out of the eight Pin groups covering O(3, 1), the only two that are compatible with this formalism are the twofold cover Pin+ of O(3, 1) inside Gin+, and the twofold cover Pin− of O(3, 1) inside Gin−. We show that their coeﬃcients in the sense of §1 are (a,b,c)=(+, +, −) and (a,b,c) = (−, −, −). First we show that there are only two double covers of Gl(4, R) that reduce to the universal cover over Gl+(4, R). Assume that G is such a cover. If ΛT is an element of G that covers the time reversal operator T ∈ Gl(4, R), then the automorphism e e −1 f R −1 AdΛT (A) := ΛT AΛT of Gl+(4, ) covers the automorphism AdT (A) := T AT of R e −1 e Gl+(4, ). By the universal covering property, ΛT AΛT is uniquely determined by A, and it depends neither on the choice of G, nor on the choice of ΛT inside G. Since e e every element of G can be written as either A or BΛT , there are four types of products, e e′ e e e e e e′ e e′ e e′ namely those of the form AA , A(BΛT ), (BΛT )A and (BΛT )(B ΛT ), where A, A , B, B f are in Gl+(4, R). Products of the ﬁrst 2 types are determined by the group structure f R e e e e −1 on Gl+(4, ). This is true for the third type as well, since (BΛT )A = B(ΛT AΛT )ΛT , e −1 e e′ e e′ −1 2 and ΛT AΛT is independent of G. As (BΛT )(B ΛT ) = (B(ΛT B ΛT ))ΛT , the only 2 choice in the product structure on G lies in the sign of ΛT = ±1, yielding the two groups Gin±. The twofold cover Pin+ of O(3, 1) inside Gin+ thus has b = +1, whereas the twofold cover Pin− inside Gin− has b = −1. To establish that both Pin+ and Pin− satisfy c = −1, note that although the central element PT = diag(−1, −1, −1, −1) does not lie in the connected component of unity for the Lorentz group O(3, 1), it does lie in the connected subgroup SO(4) of Gl+(4, R). f As the inverse image of SO(4) under the universal cover Gl+(4, R) → Gl+(4, R) is its ↑ f universal cover Spin (4), the square of ΛP ΛT inside Gl+(4, R) equals its square in PIN GROUPS IN GENERAL RELATIVITY 5

↑ Spin (4). Here, the elements ±iγ5 = ∓γ0γ1γ2γ3 that cover PT square to +1, as one easily derives using the Clifford relations {γµ,γν } = 2δµν for the Euclidean gamma 2 matrices γµ. It follows that (ΛP ΛT ) = 1, and hence c = −1. It remains to show that a = b. For this, note that the restriction of the auto- f R ↑ f R morphism AdΛT of Gl+(4, ) to the simply connected subgroup Spin (4) ⊂ Gl+(4, ) is uniquely determined by its induced Lie algebra automorphism. On Spin↑(4), we thus −1 −1 have AdΛT (u)= γ0uγ0 . As γ0(iγ5)γ0 = −iγ5, we find that ΛT ΛP = AdΛT (ΛP ΛT )= 2 2 2 −ΛP ΛT . As we already established that (ΛP ΛT ) = 1, it follows that ΛP ΛT = −1, and 2 2 hence that a = −ΛP is equal to b = ΛT . We thus conclude that (a,b,c) = (+, +, −) for Pin+, and (a,b,c) = (−, −, −) for Pin−. The groups Pin+ and Pin− are therefore not isomorphic to the Cliffordian Pin µ groups Pin(3, 1) and Pin(1, 3). These are generated by the Clifford elements v γ˜µ µ ν with ηµν v v = ±1, where the Lorentzian gamma matricesγ ˜µ satisfy {γ˜µ, γ˜ν } =2ηµν for Pin(3, 1), and {γ˜µ, γ˜ν } = −2ηµν for Pin(1, 3). Since the group elements covering P and T are ΛP =γ ˜1γ˜2γ˜3 and ΛT =γ ˜0, one readily verifies that (a,b,c)=(+, −, +) for Pin(3, 1), and that (a,b,c) = (−, +, +) for Pin(1, 3) (cf. [7, 5]). In particular, we conclude that the two Pin groups Pin± compatible with GR are not the widely used Cliffordian Pin groups Pin(3, 1) and Pin(1, 3).

6. Transformation under diffeomorphisms In the above derivation of the two admissible Pin groups, a crucial role is played by the continuous covering map u: Qˆ → F (M). This map has physical significance, since it induces an infinitesimal action of the space-time diffeomorphism group Diff(M) on the configuration space of fermions coupled to gravity (cf. [1, 14]). This allows one to formulate a theory which is (up to sign) covariant under general coordinate transformations (cf. [8, 1]), and to construct a Stress-Energy-Momentum tensor via Noether’s theorem (cf. [12, 11], and cf. [2, §6] for an approach using variation of the metric). To construct the infinitesimal action, note that Diff(M) acts by automorphisms on µ µ the frame bundle F (M), a diffeomorphism φ maps ex ∈ Fx(M) to Dφ(ex) := ∂µφ ea in Fφ(x)(M). A one-parameter group φε of diffeomorphisms thus yields a one-parameter group Dφε of automorphisms of F (M). Since u: Qˆ → F (M) is a double cover, this lifts to a unique one-parameter group Dφˆε of automorphisms of Qˆ. On the universal ± spinor bundle Σ = (Qˆ × V )/Pin , we define the lift by Dφˆε[ˆqx, ~v] = [Dφˆε(ˆqx), ~v]. For the infinitesimal variation of the universal spinor field Ψ: M → Σ along φε, this yields d ˆ −1 δΨx = dε |0Dφε(Ψφε (x)).

7. The role of diffeomorphisms in restricting the Pin groups We stress that the above restrictions on the Pin groups are not needed to construct the configuration space for fermions coupled to gravity, but to ensure that it transforms appropriately under space-time diffeomorphisms. Indeed, to construct the configuration space, one could simply choose any principal Pinabc-bundle P → R(M) (for example the trivial one), and construct the universal spinor bundle Σ = (P × V )/Pinabc as in §4. Its sections Ψ ∈ Γ(Σ) can be interpreted as a fermionic field ψ together with a metric g, so Γ(Σ) may serve as a configuration space. This requires no restrictions on the Pin groups, nor on the topology of M. 6 BAS JANSSENS

However, this simple construction leaves the space-time transformation behaviour undetermined. We show that the restrictions on the Pin groups are recovered by im- posing appropriate transformation behaviour on Γ(Σ). Compatibility with the Lorentz group leads to the familiar restrictions on the topology of M, compatibility with infinitesimal diffeomorphisms leads to Pin groups with c = −1, and compatibility with a double cover of the diffeomorphism group requires Pin groups with a = b as well as c = −1.

7.1. Lorentz transformations. The pullback of a bundle E → Y along a map ∗ ∗ f : X → Y is the bundle f E → X with (f E)x := Ef(x). Starting from the principal bundle P → R(M), one thus obtains for every metric g : M → R(M) a principal abc ∗ ∗ Pin -bundle g P → M. Its fibre g Px at x is the fibre Pg(x) of P at g(x) ∈ R(M). The bundle g∗P is not quite a Pin structure, since the action of Pinabc on g∗P is as yet unrelated to the action of O(3, 1) on Og(M). To define the transformation behaviour of Ψ under infinitesimal isometries, we need to choose a Pin structure on each of the bundles g∗P . That is, for any possible metric g ∈ Γ(R(M)), we need to choose a double cover ug : g∗P → Og(M) that intertwines the action of Pinabc on g∗P with the action of O(3, 1) on Og (M). This is where the restrictions on the topology of M arise: if the conditions in [5] are met, then it is possible to endow every single bundle g∗P → M with a double covering map ug : g∗P → Og(M), making it into a Pin structure.

7.2. Infinitesimal diffeomorphisms. The problem is that, in general, these covering maps ug do not depend continuously on the metric g. If we require this to be the case, then we recover the infinitesimal action of the diffeomorphism group on the configuration space, as well as the restriction c = −1 on the Pin groups. This already excludes the ‘Cliffordian’ Pin groups Pin(3, 1) and Pin(1, 3). If we pull back P → R(M) along the evaluation map ev: M × Γ(R(M)) → R(M), defined as ev(x, g) := g(x), we obtain the principal Pinabc-bundle ev∗P → M × Γ(R(M)). It consists of all pairs (p,g) ∈ P × Γ(R(M)) where p lies in g∗P . The maps ug for the different metrics g ∈ Γ(R(M)) then combine to a single map u: ev∗P → F (M), defined by u(p,g) := ug(p). We say that ug depends continuously on g if the map u: ev∗P → F (M) is continuous. If ug depends continuously on g, then we obtain an infinitesimal action of Diff(M) on the configuration space Γ(Σ) of fermions coupled to gravity. Since the (left) action of Diff(M) on F (M) commutes with the (right) action of Gl(4, R), we have an action of Diff(M) on R(M), yielding the usual space-time transformation behaviour gx 7→ Dφgφ−1(x) on the space Γ(R(M)) of metrics. To obtain the transformation behaviour of spinors coupled to gravity, note that since u: ev∗P → F (M) is continuous, it induces ∗ ∗ a double cover from ev P to ev F (M), the space of all pairs (ex,g) ∈ F (M)×Γ(R(M)) g ∗ with ex ∈ O (M). Since Diff(M) acts on ev F (M), it has an infinitesimal action on the double cover ev∗P . This yields an infinitesimal action on ev∗Σ → M × Γ(R(M)), ∗ the space of all pairs ([ˆqx, v],g) ∈ Σ × Γ(R(M)) whereq ˆx is in g P . This yields an infinitesimal action on Γ(Σ), since a section Ψ ∈ Γ(Σ) can be viewed as a map from ∗ M to ev Σ, sending x ∈ M to the pair (Ψx,g), where g is the metric obtained from the section Ψ. To recover the restriction c = −1, consider the case M = R4. Since Gl(4, R) is a subgroup of Diff(R4), it acts from the left on F (R4), and hence on R(R4). Since only the Lorentz group O(3, 1) leaves the Minkowski metric η invariant, we obtain an injective, continuous map σ : Gl(4, R)/O(3, 1) → R4 × Γ(R(R4)) by σ([A]) := (0, Aη). PIN GROUPS IN GENERAL RELATIVITY 7

The pullback bundle σ∗ev∗P is a principal Pinabc-bundle over Gl(4, R)/O(3, 1). Note 4 that ev ◦ σ is a diﬀeomorphism from Gl(4, R)/O(3, 1) to R0(R ), the space of all 4 ∗ ∗ ∗ Lorentzian metrics on the tangent space T0R at the origin, so σ ev P = (ev ◦ σ) P 4 can be identiﬁed with the restriction P0 of P to R0(R ). Since the image of the ∗ ∗ ∗ 4 4 pullback map σ u: σ ev P → F (R ) is the set F0(R ) ≃ Gl(4, R) of frames at the origin, we obtain a continuous double cover P0 → Gl(4, R). As this double cover abc 4 intertwines the (right) Pin -action on P0 with the (right) O(3, 1)-action on F0(R ) ≃ R + R + f R + Gl(4, ), the preimage P0 of Gl(4, ) is the universal covering group Gl(4, ) , and abc f the orientation-preserving subgroup of Pin coincides with the subgroup of Gl(4, R)+ 2 f + that covers SO(3, 1). Since (ΛP ΛT ) = 1 in Gl(4, R) , we recover the restriction c = −1 of §5.

7.3. Double cover of the diffeomorphism group. In the above line of reasoning, + the group structure on P0 stems from its identification with the universal cover of the connected Lie group Gl(4, R)+. Since we lack a group structure on the disconnected space P0, we cannot directly infer that a = b. This does, however, follow from the slightly stronger assumption that the Diff(M)-action on ev∗F (M) lifts to an action by d automorphisms of a double cover [Diff(M) on ev∗P . This yields an action of Diff(M) on ev∗Σ, and by by identifying Ψ ∈ Γ(Σ) with a map from M to ev∗Σ as before, d one obtains an action of Diff(M) on Γ(Σ). Explicitly, φ ∈ Diff(M) acts on ev∗F (M) −1 by taking (ex,g) to (Dφ(ex), Dφ ◦ g ◦ φ ). If this lifts to an automorphism Dφˆ of ∗ ˆ ′ ′ −1 ev Σ, then Dφ maps Ψ ∈ Γ(Σ) to the unique Ψ ∈ Γ(Σ) with (Ψx, Dφ ◦ g ◦ φ ) = ˆ Dφ(Ψφ−1(x),g). To see that this yields the restriction a = b, consider the case M = R4. Then d Gl(4, R) is a subgroup of Diff(R4), and its preimage in Diff(R4) is one of the two Gin groups Gin±. The (left) action of Gin± by automorphisms on ev∗P covers the (left) action of Gl(4, R) by automorphisms on ev∗F (M), so in particular, the (left) action of ± ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ 4 4 Gin on σ ev P = P0 covers the (left) action of Gl(4, R) on σ ev F (R ) = F0(R ). abc This intertwines the (right) action of Pin on P0 with the (right) action of O(3, 1) 4 abc on F0(R ). Since all these actions are free, we can identify Pin with a subgroup of Gin± that covers the Lorentz group O(3, 1). Following the line of reasoning in §5, we thus find a = b as well as c = −1. We conclude that although an infinitesimal action of the space-time diffeomorphism group on the configuration space of fermions coupled to gravity requires c = −1, an action of a double cover of the diffeomorphism group can only be achieved if the Pin group additionally satisfies the relation a = b.

8. Discussion The conclusion that only two of the eight Pin groups are compatible with general relativity, appears to be quite robust. It is based on the elementary observation that the twofold spin cover of the orthonormal frame bundle Og (M) is compatible with a twofold cover of the full frame bundle F (M). Although we derived this from the setting outlined in §4 (going back to [16, 3, 1] in the Riemannian and [2, 13, 14, 18] in the Lorentzian case), the use of double covers of the full frame bundle – and hence our conclusion that only two Pin groups are admissible – is common to many other approaches, such as the more ‘global’ formalism developped in [6, 7, 20, 8]. In fact, 8 BAS JANSSENS the restrictions on the Pin groups are closely linked to the transformation behaviour of fermions coupled to gravity under space-time diffeomorphisms. Since any principal bundle with an infinitesimal action of the space-time diffeomorphism group is associated to a discrete cover of a (higher order) frame bundle [13, 14], we expect that our restrictions on the Pin group are not an artefact of the particular description that we have adopted.

Acknowledgments. I would like to thank Edward Witten for several valuable com- ments. This research is supported by the NWO grant 639.032.734 “Cohomology and representation theory of inﬁnite dimensional Lie groups”.

References

[1] Bernd Ammann, Hartmut Weiss and Frederik Witt, A spinorial energy functional: critical points and gradient flow, Math. Ann. 365(3-4), (2016), 1559–1602. [2] Christian Bär, Paul Gauduchon and Andrei Moroianu, Generalized cylinders in semi- Riemannian and Spin geometry, Math. Z. 249(3), (2005), 545–580. [3] Jean-Pierre Bourguignon and Paul Gauduchon, Spineurs, opérateurs de Dirac et variations de métriques, Comm. Math. Phys. 144(3), (1992), 581–599. [4] Steven Carlip and Cécile DeWitt-Morette, Where the sign of the metric makes a difference, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60(16), (1988), 1599–1601. [5] Andrew Chamblin, On the obstructions to non-Cliffordian Pin structures, Comm. Math. Phys. 164(1), (1994), 65–87. [6] Ludwik Dabrowski, Roberto Percacci, Spinors and diffeomorphisms, Commun. Math. Phys. 106(4), (1986), 691–704. [7] Ludwik Dabrowski, ‘Group actions on spinors’, Monographs and Textbooks in Physical Sci- ence. Lecture Notes, Vol. 9, Bibliopolis, Naples, 1988. [8] Ludwik Dabrowski, Giacomo Dossena, Dirac operator on spinors and diffeomorphisms, Clas- sical Quantum Gravity 30(4), (2013), 015006 (11 pp.). [9] Marcus Berg, Cécile DeWitt-Morette, Shangjr Gwo and Eric Kramer, The Pin groups in physics: C, P, and T, Rev. Math. Phys. 13(8), (2001), 953–1034. [10] Meinulf Göckeler and Thomas Schücker, ‘Differential geometry, gauge theories, and gravity’, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University Press, 1987. [11] Michael Forger and Hartmann Römer. Currents and the energy-momentum tensor in classical field theory: A fresh look at an old problem, Ann. Phys., 309, (2004), 306–389. [12] Mark J. Gotay and Jerrold. E. Marsden. Stress-energy-momentum tensors and the Belinfante- Rosenfeld formula. Contemp. Math., 132 (1992), 367–392. [13] Bas Janssens, Infinitesimally natural principal bundles, J. Geom. Mech., 8(2) (2016), 199– 220. [14] B. Janssens, Generalised spin structures in general relativity, Ann. Henri Poincaré 19 (2018), 1587–1610. [15] Max Karoubi, Algèbres de Clifford et K-théorie, Ann. Sci. Ecole´ Norm. Sup. (4), 1, (1968), 161–270. [16] Yvette Kosmann, Dérivées de Lie des spineurs, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4), 91, (1971), 317– 395. [17] H. Blaine Lawson Jr. and Marie-Louise Michelsohn, ‘Spin geometry’, Princeton Mathematical Series Vol. 38, Princeton University Press, 1989. [18] Olaf Müller and Nikolai Nowaczyk, A universal spinor bundle and the Einstein-Dirac-Maxwell equation as a variational theory, Lett. Math. Phys., 107(5), (2017), 933–961. [19] Schlomo Sternberg, ‘Group theory and physics’, Cambridge University Press, 1994. [20] Timothy Swift, Natural bundles II. Spin and the diffeomorphism group, J. Math. Phys. 34(8), (1993), 3825–3840. [21] Bryce DeWitt, ‘The global approach to quantum field theory’, Volume 1 and 2, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2003. [22] Cécile DeWitt-Morette and Bryce S. DeWitt, Pin groups in physics, Phys. Rev. D (3), 41(6), (1990), 1901–1907. PIN GROUPS IN GENERAL RELATIVITY 9

TU Delft, Mekelweg 4, 2628 CD Delft, The Netherlands E-mail address: [email protected]