DOCSLIB.ORG

Vacuum Energy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Vacuum Energy Vacuum Energy Mark D. Roberts, 117 Queen’s Road, Wimbledon, London SW19 8NS, Email:[email protected] http://cosmology.mth.uct.ac.za/ roberts ∼ February 1, 2008 Eprint: hep-th/0012062 Comments: A comprehensive review of Vacuum Energy, which is an extended version of a poster presented at L¨uderitz (2000). This is not a review of the cosmolog- ical constant per se, but rather vacuum energy in general, my approach to the cosmological constant is not standard. Lots of very small changes and several additions for the second and third versions: constructive feedback still welcome, but the next version will be sometime in coming due to my sporadiac internet access. First Version 153 pages, 368 references. Second Version 161 pages, 399 references. arXiv:hep-th/0012062v3 22 Jul 2001 Third Version 167 pages, 412 references. The 1999 PACS Physics and Astronomy Classification Scheme: http://publish.aps.org/eprint/gateway/pacslist 11.10.+x, 04.62.+v, 98.80.-k, 03.70.+k; The 2000 Mathematical Classification Scheme: http://www.ams.org/msc 81T20, 83E99, 81Q99, 83F05. 3 KEYPHRASES: Vacuum Energy, Inertial Mass, Principle of Equivalence. 1 Abstract There appears to be three, perhaps related, ways of approaching the nature of vacuum energy. The first is to say that it is just the lowest energy state of a given, usually quantum, system. The second is to equate vacuum energy with the Casimir energy. The third is to note that an energy difference from a complete vacuum might have some long range effect, typically this energy difference is interpreted as the cosmological constant. All three approaches are reviewed, with an emphasis on recent work. It is hoped that this review is comprehensive in scope. There is a discussion on whether there is a relation between vacuum energy and inertia. The solution suggested here to the nature of the vacuum is that Casimir energy can produce short range effects because of boundary conditions, but that at long range there is no over- all effect of vacuum energy, unless one considers lagrangians of higher order than Einstein’s as vacuum induced. No original calculations are presented in support of this position. Contents 1 Introduction. 4 1.1 Forward................................... 4 1.2 HistoricalBackground.. 4 1.2.1 The Zero-point Energy of a Harmonic Oscillator. .. 4 1.2.2 The Experimental Verification of Zero-point Energy. .... 6 1.3 Finding, Creating and Exploiting Vacua. ... 7 2 The Quantum Field Theory Vacuum. 9 2.1 TheVacuumStateofQFT’singeneral. 9 2.2 TheQEDVacuum............................. 14 2.3 TheToll-ScharnhorstEffect.. 15 2.4 TheYang-MillsVacuum.. 17 2.5 TheQCDVacuum............................. 20 2.6 TheSUSYVacuum. ........................... 23 2.7 TheSupergravityVacuum. 28 2.8 StringandBraneVacua.. 29 2.9 LatticeModels. .............................. 37 2.10 SymmetryBreaking. 39 2.11 Φ4 TheoryandtheRenormalizationGroup. 44 2.12 InstantonsandΘ-Vacua.. 46 2.13 Solitons, Integrable Models and Magnetic Vortices. ........ 48 2.14 TopologicalQuantumFieldTheory. 50 2.15SAZApproach. .............................. 50 2.16 SuperfluidsandCondensedMatter. 51 2 3 The Casimir and Related Effects. 53 3.1 Introduction. ............................... 53 3.2 HistoryoftheCasimirEffect. 54 3.3 Zero-Point Energy and Statistical Mechanics. ..... 57 3.4 CasimirCalculations.. 65 3.5 TheDynamicalCasimirEffect. 71 3.6 MechanicalAnalogsoftheCasimirEffect. .. 74 3.7 ApplicationsoftheCasimirEffect. 75 3.8 ExperimentalTesting of the Casimir Effect. ... 76 3.9 QuantumFieldTheoryonCurvedSpaces. 76 4 Vacuum Energy on Large Scales. 79 4.1 TheCosmologicalConstant.. 79 4.2 TheAnthropicPrinciple.. 91 4.3 Quintessence. ............................... 93 4.4 Inflation................................... 95 4.5 VacuumEnergyasCriticalDensity. 100 4.6 EquatingVacuumEnergywithDarkMatter. 103 4.7 Sonoluminescence. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 106 4.8 QuantumCosmology. 107 5 Principle of Equivalence 109 6 Energy In General Relativity. 110 6.1 Does Vacuum Energy have Gravitational Effects? . 110 6.2 Various Approaches to Gravitational Energy. 111 7 Inertia. 114 7.1 InertiainGeneral. ............................ 114 7.2 SuperfluidAnalogy.. 118 8 Relativity of Motion in Vacuum. 118 9 The Vision Thing. 120 10 Acknowledgement. 120 11 Referencing Style. 121 3 1 Introduction. 1.1 Forward. In physics there are a great variety of views of what vacuum energy is. It is understood differently in many formalisms and domains of study, and ideas from one area are sometimes used in another; for example a microscopic origin for the cosmological constant is often used to justify its inclusion in cosmology. A narrow view is that vacuum energy is synonymous with the cosmological constant; why this is the case is explained in 2.1 2. A wide § ¶ view is that vacuum energy is just the lowest energy of any system under consideration. Finkelstein [125] (1991) takes an extreme view of what the vacuum is: The structure of the vacuum is the central problem of physics today: the fusion of the theories of gravity and the quantum is a subproblem. In general relativity gravitational energy is hard to calculate, and often am- biguous, especially in non-asymptotically flat spacetimes. Now how vacuum energy fits into gravitation is not straightforward as the gravitational field might have its own vacuum energy, this is discussed in 6. Einstein [111] § (1924) discusses the effect of “ether”, perhaps the ether can be thought of as vacuum energy. Vacuum energy, like any other energy, can be thought of as having an equivalent mass via E = mc2. Moving masses have inertia, and this is one way of looking at how inertia is related to vacuum energy, this is discussed in 7. The principle of equivalence, 5, can be formulated in a § § way which says that the laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames. An inertial frame is thus a primitive concept, and one way of thinking of it is of it occurring because of some property of the vacuum. 1.2 Historical Background. The presentation here of the history of zero-point energy largely follows Sciama [310] (1991), the is also a historical discussion in Lima and Maia [391] (1995). 1.2.1 The Zero-point Energy of a Harmonic Oscillator. Zero-point energy was introduced into physics by Max Planck in 1911. In a renewed attempt to understand the interaction between matter and radi- 4 ation and its relationship to the black body spectrum Planck put forward the hypothesis that the absorption of radiation occurs continuously while its emission is discrete and in energy units of hν, On this hypothesis the average energyε ¯ of a harmonic oscillator at temperature T would be given by 1 ε¯ = hν + B(ν, T ) (1.1) 2 where hν B(ν, T ) . (1.2) ≡ ehν/kT 1 − 1 Thus the oscillator would have a finite zero-point energy 2 hν even at the absolute zero of temperature. When it comes to quantum field theory, there can be thought of as being a quantum oscillation at each point in spacetime, this leads to the zero-point energy giving an overall infinite energy contribu- tion, so that there is a problem in how to adjust this contribution in order to allow quantum field theory to be well defined. Planck abandoned his discrete emission of energy, in units of hν, hy- pothesis in 1914 when Fokker showed that an assembly of rotating dipoles interacting classically with electromagnetic radiation would posses statistical properties (such as specific heat) in conflict with observation. Planck then became convinced that no classical discussion could lead in a satisfactory manner to a derivation of his distribution for black body radiation, in other words the distribution was fundamental and h could not be derived from previously know properties. Nevertheless according to Sciama [310] (1991) the idea of zero-point motion for a quantum harmonic oscillator continued to intrigue physicists, and the possibility was much discussed before its ex- istence was definitely shown in 1925 to be required by quantum mechanics, as a direct consequence of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. The Einstein-Hopf (1910) derivation of the black body radiation spec- trum, requires an expression for zero-point motion. That derivation involved a study of the interchange of energy and momentum between a harmonic oscillator and the radiation field. It led to the Rayleigh-Jeans distribution rather than to Planck’s because of the classical assumptions which were originally used for the harmonic oscillators and the radiation field. In the Einstein-Hopf calculation the mean square momentum of an oscillator was found to be proportional to the mean energy of the oscillator and to the mean energy density of the radiation field. Einstein and Stern now included the zero-point energy of the oscillator in its mean energy, in the hope of deriving the Planck rather than the Rayleigh-Jeans distribution, but found 5 1 that they could do so only if they took hν rather than 2 hν for the zero-point energy. According to Sciama [310] (1991) the reason for this difficulty is their neglect of the zero-point energy of the radiation field itself. It is not a consistent procedure to link together two physical systems only one of which possesses zero-point fluctuations in a steady state. These fluctuations would simply drive zero-point fluctuations in the other system or be damped out, depending on the relative number of degrees of freedom in the two systems. Nerst (1916), first proposed that ’empty’ space was everywhere filled with zero-point electromagnetic radiation. According to Sciama [310] (1991) the main considerations of Einstein and Stern are wrong; when one takes the classical limit kT >> hν for the Planck distribution, one finds 1 hν B(ν, T ) kT hν + hν O , (1.3) 2 kT → − × whereas 1 hν hν + B(ν, T ) kT + hν O . (1.4) 2 → × kT Thus the correct classical limit is obtained only if the zero-point energy is included. Einstein and Stern gave two independent arguments in favour of re- taining the zero-point energy, the first involved rotational specific heats of molecular gases and the second from an attempted, derivation of the Planck distribution itself.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Symmetry and Gravity
    universe Article Making a Quantum Universe: Symmetry and Gravity Houri Ziaeepour 1,2 1 Institut UTINAM, CNRS UMR 6213, Observatoire de Besançon, Université de Franche Compté, 41 bis ave. de l’Observatoire, BP 1615, 25010 Besançon, France; [email protected] or [email protected] 2 Mullard Space Science Laboratory, University College London, Holmbury St. Mary, Dorking GU5 6NT, UK Received: 05 September 2020; Accepted: 17 October 2020; Published: 23 October 2020 Abstract: So far, none of attempts to quantize gravity has led to a satisfactory model that not only describe gravity in the realm of a quantum world, but also its relation to elementary particles and other fundamental forces. Here, we outline the preliminary results for a model of quantum universe, in which gravity is fundamentally and by construction quantic. The model is based on three well motivated assumptions with compelling observational and theoretical evidence: quantum mechanics is valid at all scales; quantum systems are described by their symmetries; universe has infinite independent degrees of freedom. The last assumption means that the Hilbert space of the Universe has SUpN Ñ 8q – area preserving Diff.pS2q symmetry, which is parameterized by two angular variables. We show that, in the absence of a background spacetime, this Universe is trivial and static. Nonetheless, quantum fluctuations break the symmetry and divide the Universe to subsystems. When a subsystem is singled out as reference—observer—and another as clock, two more continuous parameters arise, which can be interpreted as distance and time. We identify the classical spacetime with parameter space of the Hilbert space of the Universe.
    [Show full text]
  • 22 Scattering in Supersymmetric Matter Chern-Simons Theories at Large N
    2 2 scattering in supersymmetric matter ! Chern-Simons theories at large N Karthik Inbasekar 10th Asian Winter School on Strings, Particles and Cosmology 09 Jan 2016 Scattering in CS matter theories In QFT, Crossing symmetry: analytic continuation of amplitudes. Particle-antiparticle scattering: obtained from particle-particle scattering by analytic continuation. Naive crossing symmetry leads to non-unitary S matrices in U(N) Chern-Simons matter theories.[ Jain, Mandlik, Minwalla, Takimi, Wadia, Yokoyama] Consistency with unitarity required Delta function term at forward scattering. Modified crossing symmetry rules. Conjecture: Singlet channel S matrices have the form sin(πλ) = 8πpscos(πλ)δ(θ)+ i S;naive(s; θ) S πλ T S;naive: naive analytic continuation of particle-particle scattering. T Scattering in U(N) CS matter theories at large N Particle: fund rep of U(N), Antiparticle: antifund rep of U(N). Fundamental Fundamental Symm(Ud ) Asymm(Ue ) ⊗ ! ⊕ Fundamental Antifundamental Adjoint(T ) Singlet(S) ⊗ ! ⊕ C2(R1)+C2(R2)−C2(Rm) Eigenvalues of Anyonic phase operator νm = 2κ 1 νAsym νSym νAdj O ;ν Sing O(λ) ∼ ∼ ∼ N ∼ symm, asymm and adjoint channels- non anyonic at large N. Scattering in the singlet channel is effectively anyonic at large N- naive crossing rules fail unitarity. Conjecture beyond large N: general form of 2 2 S matrices in any U(N) Chern-Simons matter theory ! sin(πνm) (s; θ) = 8πpscos(πνm)δ(θ)+ i (s; θ) S πνm T Universality and tests Delta function and modified crossing rules conjectured by Jain et al appear to be universal. Tests of the conjecture: Unitarity of the S matrix.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory
    AN INTRODUCTION TO QUANTUM FIELD THEORY By Dr M Dasgupta University of Manchester Lecture presented at the School for Experimental High Energy Physics Students Somerville College, Oxford, September 2009 - 1 - - 2 - Contents 0 Prologue....................................................................................................... 5 1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 6 1.1 Lagrangian formalism in classical mechanics......................................... 6 1.2 Quantum mechanics................................................................................... 8 1.3 The Schrödinger picture........................................................................... 10 1.4 The Heisenberg picture............................................................................ 11 1.5 The quantum mechanical harmonic oscillator ..................................... 12 Problems .............................................................................................................. 13 2 Classical Field Theory............................................................................. 14 2.1 From N-point mechanics to field theory ............................................... 14 2.2 Relativistic field theory ............................................................................ 15 2.3 Action for a scalar field ............................................................................ 15 2.4 Plane wave solution to the Klein-Gordon equation ...........................
    [Show full text]
  • Pauli Crystals–Interplay of Symmetries
    S S symmetry Article Pauli Crystals–Interplay of Symmetries Mariusz Gajda , Jan Mostowski , Maciej Pylak , Tomasz Sowi ´nski ∗ and Magdalena Załuska-Kotur Institute of Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Aleja Lotnikow 32/46, PL-02668 Warsaw, Poland; [email protected] (M.G.); [email protected] (J.M.); [email protected] (M.P.); [email protected] (M.Z.-K.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 20 October 2020; Accepted: 13 November 2020; Published: 16 November 2020 Abstract: Recently observed Pauli crystals are structures formed by trapped ultracold atoms with the Fermi statistics. Interactions between these atoms are switched off, so their relative positions are determined by joined action of the trapping potential and the Pauli exclusion principle. Numerical modeling is used in this paper to find the Pauli crystals in a two-dimensional isotropic harmonic trap, three-dimensional harmonic trap, and a two-dimensional square well trap. The Pauli crystals do not have the symmetry of the trap—the symmetry is broken by the measurement of positions and, in many cases, by the quantum state of atoms in the trap. Furthermore, the Pauli crystals are compared with the Coulomb crystals formed by electrically charged trapped particles. The structure of the Pauli crystals differs from that of the Coulomb crystals, this provides evidence that the exclusion principle cannot be replaced by a two-body repulsive interaction but rather has to be considered to be a specifically quantum mechanism leading to many-particle correlations. Keywords: pauli exclusion; ultracold fermions; quantum correlations 1. Introduction Recent advances of experimental capabilities reached such precision that simultaneous detection of many ultracold atoms in a trap is possible [1,2].
    [Show full text]
  • Path Integral Formulation of Loop Quantum Cosmology
    Path Integral Formulation of Loop Quantum Cosmology Adam D. Henderson Institute for Gravitation and the Cosmos Pennsylvania State University International Loop Quantum Gravity Seminar March 17 2008 Motivations 1. There have been arguments against the singularity resolution in LQC using path integrals. The canonical quantization is well understood and the singularity resolution is robust, so where do the path integral arguments break down? 2. Recent developements have allowed for the construction of new spin foam models that are more closely related to the canonical theory. It is important to make connections to spin-foams by building path integrals from the canonical theory when possible. 3. A path integral representation of Loop Quantum Cosmology will aid in studying the physics of more complicated LQC models (k = 1, Λ = 0, Bianchi). Using standard path integral techniques one can 6 argue why the effective equations are so surprisingly accurate. Introduction We construct a path integral for the exactly soluble Loop Quantum • Cosmology starting with the canonical quantum theory. The construction defines each component of the path integral. Each • has non-trivial changes from the standard path integral. We see the origin of singularity resolution in the path integral • representation of LQC. The structure of the path integral features similarities to spin foam • models. The path integral can give an argument for the surprising accuracy • of the effective equations used in more complicated models. Outline Standard Construction Exactly Soluble LQC LQC Path Integral Other Forms of Path Integral Singularity Resolution/Effective Equations Conclusion Path Integrals - Overview Path Integrals: Covariant formulation of quantum theory expressed • as a sum over paths Formally the path integral can be written as • qeiS[q]/~ or q peiS[q,p]/~ (1) D D D Z Z To define a path integral directly involves defining the components • of these formal expressions: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Kaluza-Klein Gravity, Concentrating on the General Rel- Ativity, Rather Than Particle Physics Side of the Subject
    Kaluza-Klein Gravity J. M. Overduin Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, P.O. Box 3055, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, V8W 3P6 and P. S. Wesson Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1 and Gravity Probe-B, Hansen Physics Laboratories, Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A. 94305 Abstract We review higher-dimensional unified theories from the general relativity, rather than the particle physics side. Three distinct approaches to the subject are identi- fied and contrasted: compactified, projective and noncompactified. We discuss the cosmological and astrophysical implications of extra dimensions, and conclude that none of the three approaches can be ruled out on observational grounds at the present time. arXiv:gr-qc/9805018v1 7 May 1998 Preprint submitted to Elsevier Preprint 3 February 2008 1 Introduction Kaluza’s [1] achievement was to show that five-dimensional general relativity contains both Einstein’s four-dimensional theory of gravity and Maxwell’s the- ory of electromagnetism. He however imposed a somewhat artificial restriction (the cylinder condition) on the coordinates, essentially barring the fifth one a priori from making a direct appearance in the laws of physics. Klein’s [2] con- tribution was to make this restriction less artificial by suggesting a plausible physical basis for it in compactification of the fifth dimension. This idea was enthusiastically received by unified-field theorists, and when the time came to include the strong and weak forces by extending Kaluza’s mechanism to higher dimensions, it was assumed that these too would be compact. This line of thinking has led through eleven-dimensional supergravity theories in the 1980s to the current favorite contenders for a possible “theory of everything,” ten-dimensional superstrings.
    [Show full text]
  • Geometrodynamics of Gauge Fields on the Geometry of Yang-Mills and Gravitational Gauge Theories
    springer.com Physics : Classical and Quantum Gravitation, Relativity Theory Mielke, Eckehard W. Geometrodynamics of Gauge Fields On the Geometry of Yang-Mills and Gravitational Gauge Theories A comprehensive revision of a classic text relating geometic field theory to modern physics Offers an up-to-date overview of geometrodynamics including minimal topological models Contains new chapters on teleparalelism, Chern-Simons-induced topological 3D gravity and supergravity, quantization via topological ghosts, constrained BF model with SL (5, R) gauge group, and chiral and trace anomalies Provides a detailed exposition of frame bundles in gravity Springer This monograph aims to provide a unified, geometrical foundation of gauge theories of 2nd ed. 2017, XVII, 373 p. elementary particle physics. The underlying geometrical structure is unfolded in a coordinate- 2nd 18 illus., 8 illus. in color. free manner via the modern mathematical notions of fibre bundles and exterior forms. Topics edition such as the dynamics of Yang-Mills theories, instanton solutions and topological invariants are included. By transferring these concepts to local space-time symmetries, generalizations of Einstein's theory of gravity arise in a Riemann-Cartan space with curvature and torsion. It Printed book provides the framework in which the (broken) Poincarégauge theory, the Rainich geometrization Hardcover of the Einstein-Maxwell system, and higher-dimensional, non-abelian Kaluza-Klein theories are Printed book developed. Since the discovery of the Higgs boson, concepts of spontaneous symmetry breaking in gravity have come again into focus, and, in this revised edition, these will be Hardcover exposed in geometric terms. Quantizing gravity remains an open issue: formulating it as a de ISBN 978-3-319-29732-3 Sitter type gauge theory in the spirit of Yang-Mills, some new progress in its topological form is £ 109,99 | CHF 141,50 | 119,99 € | presented.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Supersymmetry As New Mathematics
    old supersymmetry as new mathematics PILJIN YI Korea Institute for Advanced Study with help from Sungjay Lee Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem ~ 1963 1975 ~ Bogomolnyi-Prasad-Sommerfeld (BPS) Calabi-Yau ~ 1978 1977 ~ Supersymmetry Calibrated Geometry ~ 1982 1982 ~ Index Thm by Path Integral (Alvarez-Gaume) (Harvey & Lawson) 1985 ~ Calabi-Yau Compactification 1988 ~ Mirror Symmetry 1992~ 2d Wall-Crossing / tt* (Cecotti & Vafa etc) Homological Mirror Symmetry ~ 1994 1994 ~ 4d Wall-Crossing (Seiberg & Witten) (Kontsevich) 1998 ~ Wall-Crossing is Bound State Dissociation (Lee & P.Y.) Stability & Derived Category ~ 2000 2000 ~ Path Integral Proof of Mirror Symmetry (Hori & Vafa) Wall-Crossing Conjecture ~ 2008 2008 ~ Konstevich-Soibelman Explained (conjecture by Kontsevich & Soibelman) (Gaiotto & Moore & Neitzke) 2011 ~ KS Wall-Crossing proved via Quatum Mechanics (Manschot , Pioline & Sen / Kim , Park, Wang & P.Y. / Sen) 2012 ~ S2 Partition Function as tt* (Jocker, Kumar, Lapan, Morrison & Romo /Gomis & Lee) quantum and geometry glued by superstring theory when can we perform path integrals exactly ? counting geometry with supersymmetric path integrals quantum and geometry glued by superstring theory Einstein this theory famously resisted quantization, however on the other hand, five superstring theories, with a consistent quantum gravity inside, live in 10 dimensional spacetime these superstring theories say, spacetime is composed of 4+6 dimensions with very small & tightly-curved (say, Calabi-Yau) 6D manifold sitting at each and every point of
    [Show full text]
  • Conformal Symmetry in Field Theory and in Quantum Gravity
    universe Review Conformal Symmetry in Field Theory and in Quantum Gravity Lesław Rachwał Instituto de Física, Universidade de Brasília, Brasília DF 70910-900, Brazil; [email protected] Received: 29 August 2018; Accepted: 9 November 2018; Published: 15 November 2018 Abstract: Conformal symmetry always played an important role in field theory (both quantum and classical) and in gravity. We present construction of quantum conformal gravity and discuss its features regarding scattering amplitudes and quantum effective action. First, the long and complicated story of UV-divergences is recalled. With the development of UV-finite higher derivative (or non-local) gravitational theory, all problems with infinities and spacetime singularities might be completely solved. Moreover, the non-local quantum conformal theory reveals itself to be ghost-free, so the unitarity of the theory should be safe. After the construction of UV-finite theory, we focused on making it manifestly conformally invariant using the dilaton trick. We also argue that in this class of theories conformal anomaly can be taken to vanish by fine-tuning the couplings. As applications of this theory, the constraints of the conformal symmetry on the form of the effective action and on the scattering amplitudes are shown. We also remark about the preservation of the unitarity bound for scattering. Finally, the old model of conformal supergravity by Fradkin and Tseytlin is briefly presented. Keywords: quantum gravity; conformal gravity; quantum field theory; non-local gravity; super- renormalizable gravity; UV-finite gravity; conformal anomaly; scattering amplitudes; conformal symmetry; conformal supergravity 1. Introduction From the beginning of research on theories enjoying invariance under local spacetime-dependent transformations, conformal symmetry played a pivotal role—first introduced by Weyl related changes of meters to measure distances (and also due to relativity changes of periods of clocks to measure time intervals).
    [Show full text]
  • The Mechanics of the Fermionic and Bosonic Fields: an Introduction to the Standard Model and Particle Physics
    The Mechanics of the Fermionic and Bosonic Fields: An Introduction to the Standard Model and Particle Physics Evan McCarthy Phys. 460: Seminar in Physics, Spring 2014 Aug. 27,! 2014 1.Introduction 2.The Standard Model of Particle Physics 2.1.The Standard Model Lagrangian 2.2.Gauge Invariance 3.Mechanics of the Fermionic Field 3.1.Fermi-Dirac Statistics 3.2.Fermion Spinor Field 4.Mechanics of the Bosonic Field 4.1.Spin-Statistics Theorem 4.2.Bose Einstein Statistics !5.Conclusion ! 1. Introduction While Quantum Field Theory (QFT) is a remarkably successful tool of quantum particle physics, it is not used as a strictly predictive model. Rather, it is used as a framework within which predictive models - such as the Standard Model of particle physics (SM) - may operate. The overarching success of QFT lends it the ability to mathematically unify three of the four forces of nature, namely, the strong and weak nuclear forces, and electromagnetism. Recently substantiated further by the prediction and discovery of the Higgs boson, the SM has proven to be an extraordinarily proficient predictive model for all the subatomic particles and forces. The question remains, what is to be done with gravity - the fourth force of nature? Within the framework of QFT theoreticians have predicted the existence of yet another boson called the graviton. For this reason QFT has a very attractive allure, despite its limitations. According to !1 QFT the gravitational force is attributed to the interaction between two gravitons, however when applying the equations of General Relativity (GR) the force between two gravitons becomes infinite! Results like this are nonsensical and must be resolved for the theory to stand.
    [Show full text]
  • Charged Quantum Fields in Ads2
    Charged Quantum Fields in AdS2 Dionysios Anninos,1 Diego M. Hofman,2 Jorrit Kruthoff,2 1 Department of Mathematics, King’s College London, the Strand, London WC2R 2LS, UK 2 Institute for Theoretical Physics and ∆ Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Amsterdam, Science Park 904, 1098 XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands Abstract We consider quantum field theory near the horizon of an extreme Kerr black hole. In this limit, the dynamics is well approximated by a tower of electrically charged fields propagating in an SL(2, R) invariant AdS2 geometry endowed with a constant, symmetry preserving back- ground electric field. At large charge the fields oscillate near the AdS2 boundary and no longer admit a standard Dirichlet treatment. From the Kerr black hole perspective, this phenomenon is related to the presence of an ergosphere. We discuss a definition for the quantum field theory whereby we ‘UV’ complete AdS2 by appending an asymptotically two dimensional Minkowski region. This allows the construction of a novel observable for the flux-carrying modes that resembles the standard flat space S-matrix. We relate various features displayed by the highly charged particles to the principal series representations of SL(2, R). These representations are unitary and also appear for massive quantum fields in dS2. Both fermionic and bosonic fields are studied. We find that the free charged massless fermion is exactly solvable for general background, providing an interesting arena for the problem at hand. arXiv:1906.00924v2 [hep-th] 7 Oct 2019 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Geometry near the extreme Kerr horizon 4 2.1 Unitary representations of SL(2, R)..........................
    [Show full text]
  • 5 the Dirac Equation and Spinors
    5 The Dirac Equation and Spinors In this section we develop the appropriate wavefunctions for fundamental fermions and bosons. 5.1 Notation Review The three dimension differential operator is : ∂ ∂ ∂ = , , (5.1) ∂x ∂y ∂z We can generalise this to four dimensions ∂µ: 1 ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ = , , , (5.2) µ c ∂t ∂x ∂y ∂z 5.2 The Schr¨odinger Equation First consider a classical non-relativistic particle of mass m in a potential U. The energy-momentum relationship is: p2 E = + U (5.3) 2m we can substitute the differential operators: ∂ Eˆ i pˆ i (5.4) → ∂t →− to obtain the non-relativistic Schr¨odinger Equation (with = 1): ∂ψ 1 i = 2 + U ψ (5.5) ∂t −2m For U = 0, the free particle solutions are: iEt ψ(x, t) e− ψ(x) (5.6) ∝ and the probability density ρ and current j are given by: 2 i ρ = ψ(x) j = ψ∗ ψ ψ ψ∗ (5.7) | | −2m − with conservation of probability giving the continuity equation: ∂ρ + j =0, (5.8) ∂t · Or in Covariant notation: µ µ ∂µj = 0 with j =(ρ,j) (5.9) The Schr¨odinger equation is 1st order in ∂/∂t but second order in ∂/∂x. However, as we are going to be dealing with relativistic particles, space and time should be treated equally. 25 5.3 The Klein-Gordon Equation For a relativistic particle the energy-momentum relationship is: p p = p pµ = E2 p 2 = m2 (5.10) · µ − | | Substituting the equation (5.4), leads to the relativistic Klein-Gordon equation: ∂2 + 2 ψ = m2ψ (5.11) −∂t2 The free particle solutions are plane waves: ip x i(Et p x) ψ e− · = e− − · (5.12) ∝ The Klein-Gordon equation successfully describes spin 0 particles in relativistic quan- tum field theory.
    [Show full text]