DOCSLIB.ORG

Spin Tensor and Pseudo-Gauges: from Nuclear Collisions to Gravitational Physics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Spin Tensor and Pseudo-Gauges: from Nuclear Collisions to Gravitational Physics Eur. Phys. J. A (2021) 57:155 https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/s10050-021-00455-2 Review Spin tensor and pseudo-gauges: from nuclear collisions to gravitational physics Enrico Speranzaa, Nora Weickgenannt Institute for Theoretical Physics, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Str. 1, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany Received: 30 June 2020 / Accepted: 31 March 2021 / Published online: 3 May 2021 © The Author(s) 2021 Communicated by Laura Tolos Abstract The relativistic treatment of spin is a fundamen- 5 Pseudo-gauges and statistical operator ........ 10 tal subject which has an old history. In various physical con- 6 Spin-polarization effects in relativistic nuclear colli- texts it is necessary to separate the relativistic total angular sions ......................... 11 momentum into an orbital and spin contribution. However, 6.1 Spin hydrodynamics and quantum kinetic theory 12 such decomposition is affected by ambiguities since one can 7 Pseudo-gauge transformations and the relativistic always redefine the orbital and spin part through the so-called center of inertia .................... 14 pseudo-gauge transformations. We analyze this problem in 7.1 External and internal components of angular detail by discussing the most common choices of energy- momentum ................... 15 momentum and spin tensors with an emphasis on their phys- 7.2 Center of inertia and centroids ......... 15 ical implications, and study the spin vector which is a pseudo- 7.3 Belinfante pseudo-gauge ............ 16 gauge invariant operator. We review the angular momentum 7.4 Center of inertia as reference point: canonical decomposition as a crucial ingredient for the formulation of pseudo-gauge .................. 16 relativistic spin hydrodynamics and quantum kinetic theory 7.5 Center of mass as reference point: HW, GLW with a focus on relativistic nuclear collisions, where spin and KG pseudo-gauges ............. 16 physics has recently attracted significant attention. Further- 7.6 Massless particles and side jumps ....... 17 more, we point out the connection between pseudo-gauge 8 Einstein–Cartan theory ................ 18 transformations and the different definitions of the relativis- 8.1 Riemann–Cartan geometry ........... 18 tic center of inertia. Finally, we consider the Einstein–Cartan 8.2 Tetrads and spinors in curved spacetime .... 19 theory, an extension of conventional general relativity, which 8.3 Local Poincaré transformations and conserva- allows for a natural definition of the spin tensor. tion laws ..................... 19 9 Conclusions ..................... 20 A Lorentz transformation properties of hyper-surface- Contents integrated quantities ................. 21 B Matrix element of the Pauli–Lubanski vector .... 23 1 Introduction ..................... 1 References ........................ 24 2 Spin tensor and pseudo-gauge transformations ... 2 2.1 Canonical currents ............... 2 2.2 Belinfante–Rosenfeld currents ......... 4 1 Introduction 2.3 Hilgevoord–Wouthuysen currents ........ 4 2.4 de Groot-van Leeuwen-van Weert currents ... 5 The decomposition of the relativistic total angular momen- 2.5 Alternative Klein–Gordon currents ....... 5 tum into an orbital and spin part is a long-standing prob- 3 Spin vector ...................... 6 lem both in quantum field theory and gravitational physics 3.1 Frenkel theory .................. 6 [1]. The definitions of the energy-momentum and spin ten- 3.2 Pauli–Lubanski vector ............. 7 sors used to construct the total angular momentum density 4 Wigner operator ................... 7 suffer from ambiguities. In fact, one can always redefine them through the so-called pseudo-gauge transformations a e-mail: [email protected] (corresponding author) such that the total charges (i.e., the total energy, momentum 123 155 Page 2 of 25 Eur. Phys. J. A (2021) 57 :155 and angular momentum) do not change. As long as one is inition of spin tensor arises by allowing the spacetime to a only interested in the total charges, this ambiguity is clearly have a nonvanishing torsion. Brief conclusions are given in of no importance. However, in many physical contexts, it is Sect. 9. important to separate the orbital and spin angular momentum We use the following notation and conventions: a · b = μ of the system. The question we would like to address can be a bμ, a[μbν] ≡ aμbν − aνbμ, gμν = diag(+, −, −, −) for 0123 stated as follows: is there a particular choice for the angu- the Minkowski metric, and =−0123 = 1. lar momentum decomposition for a specific system which gives a “physical” local distribution of energy, momentum and spin? Here, by “physical” we mean that such decompo- 2 Spin tensor and pseudo-gauge transformations sition can have some consequences on experimental observ- ables. Although in conventional Einstein’s general relativity The spin tensor is one of the fundamental quantities we will the answer to this question is that the energy-momentum consider in this paper. In this section we give a definition density is measurable through geometry, this issue is cur- starting from Noether’s theorem and discuss the pseudo- rently debated in quantum field theory where spin degrees of gauge transformations which allow a redefinition of energy- freedom are considered. We stress that, in this paper, we do momentum and spin tensors. We review some of the most not aim at finding a physical decomposition which is valid commonly used pseudo-gauge choices in the literature and for all possible systems. Rather, we address this problem explore their physical implications. In this paper we will by studying different contexts, indicating for each of them focus on the Dirac theory. the implications of various pseudo-gauge choices and which decomposition appears to be a physical one. 2.1 Canonical currents The paper is structured as follows. In Sect. 2 we introduce the basic concepts: the spin tensor and pseudo-gauge trans- Let us consider the Lagrangian density for the free Dirac field formations, and discuss some of the most common choices ψ(x) with mass m in the literature. In Sect. 3, we generalize the concept of ih¯ ¯ μ←→ ¯ nonrelativistic spin vector to the relativistic case, discussing LD(x) = ψ(x)γ ∂ μψ(x) − mψ(x)ψ(x), (2.1) 2 the Frenkel theory and the Pauli-Lubanski pseudovector. In ←→μ −→μ ←−μ μ Sect. 4 we consider the Wigner-operator formalism. Further- where ∂ ≡ ∂ − ∂ and γ are the Dirac matrices. more, in Sect. 5 we study the effect of different pseudo-gauge The corresponding action is given by choices in thermodynamics using the method of Zubarev to = 4 L ( ). construct the statistical operator. We show that the local equi- A d x D x (2.2) librium state is in general pseudo-gauge dependent, unlike The equations of motion associated to the Lagrangian (2.1) the global equilibrium one. This leads to the consequence are the Dirac equation for the field and its adjoint that expectation values of observables are in general sen- sitive to different pseudo-gauges for many-body systems μ (ih¯ γ ∂μ − m)ψ(x) = 0, (2.3a) away from global equilibrium. In relativistic heavy-ion colli- ¯ μ←− sions, spin-polarization phenomena related to medium rota- ψ(x)(ih¯ γ ∂ μ + m) = 0, (2.3b) tion have recently attracted significant interest. This is due to experimental observations showing that certain hadrons respectively. Consider the infinitesimal spacetime transla- emitted in noncentral collisions are indeed produced with a tions μ μ μ μ finite spin polarization [2]. The Wigner operator turns out x → x = x + ξ , (2.4) to be particularly suitable to study spin effects in heavy-ion ξ μ collisions and a brief review on some recent applications with a constant parameter. The canonical energy-mo- ˆ μν( ) in the field is given in Sect. 6. In Sect. 7 we make a con- mentum tensor TC x is defined as the conserved current nection between pseudo-gauges and the relativistic center of obtained using Noether’s theorem by requiring the invariance 1 mass which, unlike in the nonrelativistic case, suffers from of the action under the transformations in Eq. (2.4)[4,5]: ambiguities in the definition. In particular, we show that the ∂ ˆ μν = , μTC 0 (2.5) redefinition of the center of inertia can be related to a differ- ent decomposition of orbital and spin angular momentum of where a relativistic system which, in turn, is associated to a specific ∂L ∂L ˆ μν = D ∂νψ + ∂νψ¯ D − μνL spin vector [3]. In the end, in Sect. 8 the physical mean- TC g D ∂(∂μψ) ∂(∂μψ)¯ ing of the energy-momentum tensor in general relativity is discussed. We outline an extension of conventional general 1 For the sake of ease of notation we will omit the x dependence when relativity, called Einstein-Cartan theory, where a natural def- there is no risk of confusion. 123 Eur. Phys. J. A (2021) 57 :155 Page 3 of 25 155 ih¯ ¯ μ←→ν μν h¯ ¯ λ μν = ψγ ∂ ψ − g LD. (2.6) = ψ{γ ,σ }ψ 2 4 h¯ μν λμνα ¯ ˆ =− ψγαγ5ψ. (2.14) Note that TC is not symmetric. Equation (2.5)impliesthat, 2 for any three-dimensional space-like hypersurface Σλ,the total four-momentum operator is given by Inserting Eq. (2.13)into(2.12), we obtain a (non)conservation law for the spin tensor ˆ μ = Σ ˆ λμ = ¯ 3 ψ†∂μψ P d λ TC ih d x (2.7) λ,μν [νμ] Σ ∂ ˆ = ˆ . λ SC TC (2.15) where we assumed that boundary terms vanish and used the ˆ μν Dirac equation in Eq. (2.3). In the second equality we chose Note that, since TC is not symmetric, the spin tensor is not 0 ˆ μν conserved. The conserved charge associated to Eq. (2.12)is the hyperplane at constant x . Since TC is conserved, the total charge is independent of the choice of the hypersurface the total angular momentum integration and it transforms properly as a four-vector under ˆμν = Σ ˆλ,μν Lorentz transformations, for the proof see App.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jhep01(2020)007
    Published for SISSA by Springer Received: March 27, 2019 Revised: November 15, 2019 Accepted: December 9, 2019 Published: January 2, 2020 Deformed graded Poisson structures, generalized geometry and supergravity JHEP01(2020)007 Eugenia Boffo and Peter Schupp Jacobs University Bremen, Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: In recent years, a close connection between supergravity, string effective ac- tions and generalized geometry has been discovered that typically involves a doubling of geometric structures. We investigate this relation from the point of view of graded ge- ometry, introducing an approach based on deformations of graded Poisson structures and derive the corresponding gravity actions. We consider in particular natural deformations of the 2-graded symplectic manifold T ∗[2]T [1]M that are based on a metric g, a closed Neveu-Schwarz 3-form H (locally expressed in terms of a Kalb-Ramond 2-form B) and a scalar dilaton φ. The derived bracket formalism relates this structure to the generalized differential geometry of a Courant algebroid, which has the appropriate stringy symme- tries, and yields a connection with non-trivial curvature and torsion on the generalized “doubled” tangent bundle E =∼ TM ⊕ T ∗M. Projecting onto TM with the help of a natural non-isotropic splitting of E, we obtain a connection and curvature invariants that reproduce the NS-NS sector of supergravity in 10 dimensions. Further results include a fully generalized Dorfman bracket, a generalized Lie bracket and new formulas for torsion and curvature tensors associated to generalized tangent bundles.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Symbols, Notation, and Useful Expressions
    Appendix A List of Symbols, Notation, and Useful Expressions In this appendix the reader will find a more detailed description of the conventions and notation used throughout this book, together with a brief description of what spinors are about, followed by a presentation of expressions that can be used to recover some of the formulas in specified chapters. A.1 List of Symbols κ ≡ κijk Contorsion ξ ≡ ξijk Torsion K Kähler function I ≡ I ≡ I KJ gJ GJ Kähler metric W(φ) Superpotential V Vector supermultiplet φ,0 (Chiral) Scalar supermultiplet φ,ϕ Scalar field V (φ) Scalar potential χ ≡ γ 0χ † For Dirac 4-spinor representation ψ† Hermitian conjugate (complex conjugate and transposition) φ∗ Complex conjugate [M]T Transpose { , } Anticommutator [ , ] Commutator θ Grassmannian variable (spinor) Jab, JAB Lorentz generator (constraint) qX , X = 1, 2,... Minisuperspace coordinatization π μαβ Spin energy–momentum Moniz, P.V.: Appendix. Lect. Notes Phys. 803, 263–288 (2010) DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-11575-2 c Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010 264 A List of Symbols, Notation, and Useful Expressions Sμαβ Spin angular momentum D Measure in Feynman path integral [ , ]P ≡[, ] Poisson bracket [ , ]D Dirac bracket F Superfield M P Planck mass V β+,β− Minisuperspace potential (Misner–Ryan parametrization) Z IJ Central charges ds Spacetime line element ds Minisuperspace line element F Fermion number operator eμ Coordinate basis ea Orthonormal basis (3)V Volume of 3-space (a) νμ Vector field (a) fμν Vector field strength ij π Canonical momenta to hij π φ Canonical
    [Show full text]
  • The Language of Differential Forms
    Appendix A The Language of Differential Forms This appendix—with the only exception of Sect.A.4.2—does not contain any new physical notions with respect to the previous chapters, but has the purpose of deriving and rewriting some of the previous results using a different language: the language of the so-called differential (or exterior) forms. Thanks to this language we can rewrite all equations in a more compact form, where all tensor indices referred to the diffeomorphisms of the curved space–time are “hidden” inside the variables, with great formal simplifications and benefits (especially in the context of the variational computations). The matter of this appendix is not intended to provide a complete nor a rigorous introduction to this formalism: it should be regarded only as a first, intuitive and oper- ational approach to the calculus of differential forms (also called exterior calculus, or “Cartan calculus”). The main purpose is to quickly put the reader in the position of understanding, and also independently performing, various computations typical of a geometric model of gravity. The readers interested in a more rigorous discussion of differential forms are referred, for instance, to the book [22] of the bibliography. Let us finally notice that in this appendix we will follow the conventions introduced in Chap. 12, Sect. 12.1: latin letters a, b, c,...will denote Lorentz indices in the flat tangent space, Greek letters μ, ν, α,... tensor indices in the curved manifold. For the matter fields we will always use natural units = c = 1. Also, unless otherwise stated, in the first three Sects.
    [Show full text]
  • Deformed Weitzenböck Connections, Teleparallel Gravity and Double
    Deformed Weitzenböck Connections and Double Field Theory Victor A. Penas1 1 G. Física CAB-CNEA and CONICET, Centro Atómico Bariloche, Av. Bustillo 9500, Bariloche, Argentina [email protected] ABSTRACT We revisit the generalized connection of Double Field Theory. We implement a procedure that allow us to re-write the Double Field Theory equations of motion in terms of geometric quantities (like generalized torsion and non-metricity tensors) based on other connections rather than the usual generalized Levi-Civita connection and the generalized Riemann curvature. We define a generalized contorsion tensor and obtain, as a particular case, the Teleparallel equivalent of Double Field Theory. To do this, we first need to revisit generic connections in standard geometry written in terms of first-order derivatives of the vielbein in order to obtain equivalent theories to Einstein Gravity (like for instance the Teleparallel gravity case). The results are then easily extrapolated to DFT. arXiv:1807.01144v2 [hep-th] 20 Mar 2019 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Connections in General Relativity 4 2.1 Equationsforcoefficients. ........ 6 2.2 Metric-Compatiblecase . ....... 7 2.3 Non-metricitycase ............................... ...... 9 2.4 Gauge redundancy and deformed Weitzenböck connections .............. 9 2.5 EquationsofMotion ............................... ..... 11 2.5.1 Weitzenböckcase............................... ... 11 2.5.2 Genericcase ................................... 12 3 Connections in Double Field Theory 15 3.1 Tensors Q and Q¯ ...................................... 17 3.2 Components from (1) ................................... 17 3.3 Components from T e−2d .................................. 18 3.4 Thefullconnection...............................∇ ...... 19 3.5 GeneralizedRiemanntensor. ........ 20 3.6 EquationsofMotion ............................... ..... 23 3.7 Determination of undetermined parts of the Connection . ............... 25 3.8 TeleparallelDoubleFieldTheory .
    [Show full text]
  • ROTATION: a Review of Useful Theorems Involving Proper Orthogonal Matrices Referenced to Three- Dimensional Physical Space
    Unlimited Release Printed May 9, 2002 ROTATION: A review of useful theorems involving proper orthogonal matrices referenced to three- dimensional physical space. Rebecca M. Brannon† and coauthors to be determined †Computational Physics and Mechanics T Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, NM 87185-0820 Abstract Useful and/or little-known theorems involving33× proper orthogonal matrices are reviewed. Orthogonal matrices appear in the transformation of tensor compo- nents from one orthogonal basis to another. The distinction between an orthogonal direction cosine matrix and a rotation operation is discussed. Among the theorems and techniques presented are (1) various ways to characterize a rotation including proper orthogonal tensors, dyadics, Euler angles, axis/angle representations, series expansions, and quaternions; (2) the Euler-Rodrigues formula for converting axis and angle to a rotation tensor; (3) the distinction between rotations and reflections, along with implications for “handedness” of coordinate systems; (4) non-commu- tivity of sequential rotations, (5) eigenvalues and eigenvectors of a rotation; (6) the polar decomposition theorem for expressing a general deformation as a se- quence of shape and volume changes in combination with pure rotations; (7) mix- ing rotations in Eulerian hydrocodes or interpolating rotations in discrete field approximations; (8) Rates of rotation and the difference between spin and vortici- ty, (9) Random rotations for simulating crystal distributions; (10) The principle of material frame indifference (PMFI); and (11) a tensor-analysis presentation of classical rigid body mechanics, including direct notation expressions for momen- tum and energy and the extremely compact direct notation formulation of Euler’s equations (i.e., Newton’s law for rigid bodies).
    [Show full text]
  • Spin in Relativistic Quantum Theory∗
    Spin in relativistic quantum theory∗ W. N. Polyzou, Department of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 W. Gl¨ockle, Institut f¨urtheoretische Physik II, Ruhr-Universit¨at Bochum, D-44780 Bochum, Germany H. Wita la M. Smoluchowski Institute of Physics, Jagiellonian University, PL-30059 Krak´ow,Poland today Abstract We discuss the role of spin in Poincar´einvariant formulations of quan- tum mechanics. 1 Introduction In this paper we discuss the role of spin in relativistic few-body models. The new feature with spin in relativistic quantum mechanics is that sequences of rotationless Lorentz transformations that map rest frames to rest frames can generate rotations. To get a well-defined spin observable one needs to define it in one preferred frame and then use specific Lorentz transformations to relate the spin in the preferred frame to any other frame. Different choices of the preferred frame and the specific Lorentz transformations lead to an infinite number of possible observables that have all of the properties of a spin. This paper provides a general discussion of the relation between the spin of a system and the spin of its elementary constituents in relativistic few-body systems. In section 2 we discuss the Poincar´egroup, which is the group relating inertial frames in special relativity. Unitary representations of the Poincar´e group preserve quantum probabilities in all inertial frames, and define the rel- ativistic dynamics. In section 3 we construct a large set of abstract operators out of the Poincar´egenerators, and determine their commutation relations and ∗During the preparation of this paper Walter Gl¨ockle passed away.
    [Show full text]
  • Infeld–Van Der Waerden Wave Functions for Gravitons and Photons
    Vol. 38 (2007) ACTA PHYSICA POLONICA B No 8 INFELD–VAN DER WAERDEN WAVE FUNCTIONS FOR GRAVITONS AND PHOTONS J.G. Cardoso Department of Mathematics, Centre for Technological Sciences-UDESC Joinville 89223-100, Santa Catarina, Brazil [email protected] (Received March 20, 2007) A concise description of the curvature structures borne by the Infeld- van der Waerden γε-formalisms is provided. The derivation of the wave equations that control the propagation of gravitons and geometric photons in generally relativistic space-times is then carried out explicitly. PACS numbers: 04.20.Gr 1. Introduction The most striking physical feature of the Infeld-van der Waerden γε-formalisms [1] is related to the possible occurrence of geometric wave functions for photons in the curvature structures of generally relativistic space-times [2]. It appears that the presence of intrinsically geometric elec- tromagnetic fields is ultimately bound up with the imposition of a single condition upon the metric spinors for the γ-formalism, which bears invari- ance under the action of the generalized Weyl gauge group [1–5]. In the case of a spacetime which admits nowhere-vanishing Weyl spinor fields, back- ground photons eventually interact with underlying gravitons. Nevertheless, the corresponding coupling configurations turn out to be in both formalisms exclusively borne by the wave equations that control the electromagnetic propagation. Indeed, the same graviton-photon interaction prescriptions had been obtained before in connection with a presentation of the wave equations for the ε-formalism [6, 7]. As regards such earlier works, the main procedure seems to have been based upon the implementation of a set of differential operators whose definitions take up suitably contracted two- spinor covariant commutators.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Riemannian Geometry of Phase Space and Nonassociativity
    Demonstr. Math. 2017; 50: 83–93 Demonstratio Mathematica Open Access Research Article Edwin J. Beggs and Shahn Majid* Quantum Riemannian geometry of phase space and nonassociativity DOI 10.1515/dema-2017-0009 Received August 3, 2016; accepted September 5, 2016. Abstract: Noncommutative or ‘quantum’ differential geometry has emerged in recent years as a process for quantizing not only a classical space into a noncommutative algebra (as familiar in quantum mechanics) but also differential forms, bundles and Riemannian structures at this level. The data for the algebra quantisation is a classical Poisson bracket while the data for quantum differential forms is a Poisson-compatible connection. We give an introduction to our recent result whereby further classical data such as classical bundles, metrics etc. all become quantised in a canonical ‘functorial’ way at least to 1st order in deformation theory. The theory imposes compatibility conditions between the classical Riemannian and Poisson structures as well as new physics such as n typical nonassociativity of the differential structure at 2nd order. We develop in detail the case of CP where the i j commutation relations have the canonical form [w , w¯ ] = iλδij similar to the proposal of Penrose for quantum twistor space. Our work provides a canonical but ultimately nonassociative differential calculus on this algebra and quantises the metric and Levi-Civita connection at lowest order in λ. Keywords: Noncommutative geometry, Quantum gravity, Poisson geometry, Riemannian geometry, Quantum mechanics MSC: 81R50, 58B32, 83C57 In honour of Michał Heller on his 80th birthday. 1 Introduction There are today lots of reasons to think that spacetime itself is better modelled as ‘quantum’ due to Planck-scale corrections.
    [Show full text]
  • Principal Bundles, Vector Bundles and Connections
    Appendix A Principal Bundles, Vector Bundles and Connections Abstract The appendix defines fiber bundles, principal bundles and their associate vector bundles, recall the definitions of frame bundles, the orthonormal frame bun- dle, jet bundles, product bundles and the Whitney sums of bundles. Next, equivalent definitions of connections in principal bundles and in their associate vector bundles are presented and it is shown how these concepts are related to the concept of a covariant derivative in the base manifold of the bundle. Also, the concept of exterior covariant derivatives (crucial for the formulation of gauge theories) and the meaning of a curvature and torsion of a linear connection in a manifold is recalled. The concept of covariant derivative in vector bundles is also analyzed in details in a way which, in particular, is necessary for the presentation of the theory in Chap. 12. Propositions are in general presented without proofs, which can be found, e.g., in Choquet-Bruhat et al. (Analysis, Manifolds and Physics. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1982), Frankel (The Geometry of Physics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997), Kobayashi and Nomizu (Foundations of Differential Geometry. Interscience Publishers, New York, 1963), Naber (Topology, Geometry and Gauge Fields. Interactions. Applied Mathematical Sciences. Springer, New York, 2000), Nash and Sen (Topology and Geometry for Physicists. Academic, London, 1983), Nicolescu (Notes on Seiberg-Witten Theory. Graduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2000), Osborn (Vector Bundles. Academic, New York, 1982), and Palais (The Geometrization of Physics. Lecture Notes from a Course at the National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, 1981). A.1 Fiber Bundles Definition A.1 A fiber bundle over M with Lie group G will be denoted by E D .E; M;;G; F/.
    [Show full text]
  • Dual Electromagnetism: Helicity, Spin, Momentum, and Angular Momentum Konstantin Y
    Dual electromagnetism: Helicity, spin, momentum, and angular momentum Konstantin Y. Bliokh1,2, Aleksandr Y. Bekshaev3, and Franco Nori1,4 1Advanced Science Institute, RIKEN, Wako-shi, Saitama 351-0198, Japan 2A. Usikov Institute of Radiophysics and Electronics, NASU, Kharkov 61085, Ukraine 3I. I. Mechnikov National University, Dvorianska 2, Odessa, 65082, Ukraine 4Physics Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1040, USA The dual symmetry between electric and magnetic fields is an important intrinsic property of Maxwell equations in free space. This symmetry underlies the conservation of optical helicity, and, as we show here, is closely related to the separation of spin and orbital degrees of freedom of light (the helicity flux coincides with the spin angular momentum). However, in the standard field-theory formulation of electromagnetism, the field Lagrangian is not dual symmetric. This leads to problematic dual-asymmetric forms of the canonical energy-momentum, spin, and orbital angular momentum tensors. Moreover, we show that the components of these tensors conflict with the helicity and energy conservation laws. To resolve this discrepancy between the symmetries of the Lagrangian and Maxwell equations, we put forward a dual-symmetric Lagrangian formulation of classical electromagnetism. This dual electromagnetism preserves the form of Maxwell equations, yields meaningful canonical energy-momentum and angular momentum tensors, and ensures a self-consistent separation of the spin and orbital degrees of freedom. This provides rigorous derivation of results suggested in other recent approaches. We make the Noether analysis of the dual symmetry and all the Poincaré symmetries, examine both local and integral conserved quantities, and show that only the dual electromagnetism naturally produces a complete self-consistent set of conservation laws.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1903.03835V1 [Gr-Qc] 9 Mar 2019 [15–17] Thus Modifying Significantly the Orbit of 3
    Spinning particle orbits around a black hole in an expanding background I. Antoniou,1, ∗ D. Papadopoulos,2, y and L. Perivolaropoulos1, z 1Department of Physics, University of Ioannina, GR-45110, Ioannina, Greece 2Department of Physics, University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki,54124, Greece (Dated: March 12, 2019) We investigate analytically and numerically the orbits of spinning particles around black holes in the post Newtonian limit and in the presence of cosmic expansion. We show that orbits that are circular in the absence of spin, get deformed when the orbiting particle has spin. We show that the origin of this deformation is twofold: a. the background expansion rate which induces an attractive (repulsive) interaction due to the cosmic background fluid when the expansion is decelerating (accelerating) and b. a spin-orbit interaction which can be attractive or repulsive depending on the relative orientation between spin and orbital angular momentum and on the expansion rate. PACS numbers: 04.20.Cv, 97.60.Lf, 98.62.Dm I. INTRODUCTION bound systems in the presence of phantom dark energy with equation of state parameter w < −1 Even though most astrophysical bodies have [2{4]. In the absence of expansion but in the spins and evolve in an expanding cosmological presence of spin for the test particles it has been background, their motion is described well by ig- shown that spin-orbit and spin-spin interactions noring the cosmic expansion and under the non- in a Kerr spacetime can lead to deformations of spinning test particle approximation for large dis- circular orbits for large spin values [14].
    [Show full text]
  • Teleparallel Gravity and Its Modifications
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by UCL Discovery University College London Department of Mathematics PhD Thesis Teleparallel gravity and its modifications Author: Supervisor: Matthew Aaron Wright Christian G. B¨ohmer Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PhD in Mathematics February 12, 2017 Disclaimer I, Matthew Aaron Wright, confirm that the work presented in this thesis, titled \Teleparallel gravity and its modifications”, is my own. Parts of this thesis are based on published work with co-authors Christian B¨ohmerand Sebastian Bahamonde in the following papers: • \Modified teleparallel theories of gravity", Sebastian Bahamonde, Christian B¨ohmerand Matthew Wright, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 10, 104042, • \Teleparallel quintessence with a nonminimal coupling to a boundary term", Sebastian Bahamonde and Matthew Wright, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 084034, • \Conformal transformations in modified teleparallel theories of gravity revis- ited", Matthew Wright, Phys.Rev. D 93 (2016) 10, 103002. These are cited as [1], [2], [3] respectively in the bibliography, and have been included as appendices. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Signed: Date: i Abstract The teleparallel equivalent of general relativity is an intriguing alternative formula- tion of general relativity. In this thesis, we examine theories of teleparallel gravity in detail, and explore their relation to a whole spectrum of alternative gravitational models, discussing their position within the hierarchy of Metric Affine Gravity mod- els. Consideration of alternative gravity models is motivated by a discussion of some of the problems of modern day cosmology, with a particular focus on the dark en- ergy problem.
    [Show full text]