sign in sign up
<<
Home , Higgs mechanism

arXiv:1702.08871v3 [.gen-ph] 28 Oct 2019 nryis energy eedfie sbigtennzr pta components spatial non-zero the being h as defined were hr ehv denoted have we where ihti odto,i olw that follows it condition, this With o df.Fo h pnsaitc hoe eifralso infer free- we of theorem -statistics that degrees the From independent Fierz-Pauli non-zero (dof). the dom five Consequently only has eliminated. field is freedom of re indices Greek ikwk pc-ie h arnino pn2field spin-2 a the of in Lagrangian h the field The quantum and spin-2 space-time. massless Minkowski equations a wave for gravitational equation wave linear the tween include to the way using a Model, suggest Standard mechanism. we Higgs the quan- 3 in perturbative gravitation section in section Einstein’s In implies next result gravity. the that tum In why and show review derivation. brief we Kraichnan’s a with of below start update We Standard short). (The for Interactions Stan- Model Fundamental for the of search to Model standing implications dard long its the including gravity, to defini- quantum solution a unique offering and renormalizable, tive is Einstein’ theory that implies gravitational equations Einstein’s of derivation the of non-linearity the equations. from the gravitational on singularities investigation story[3], of an the Princeton emergence Kraichnan to Robert at to According suggested by Einstein 1949-1950. Einstein obtained of period assistant first the during an was 2], theory Kraichnan[1, field quantum 2 niae l ml aeLtnidcsrnfo o3.) to 1 from run indices Latin case small all indicated ij µν 2 L ebgnwe riha’ oe h iiaiybe- similarity the noted Kraichnan’s when begin We Kraichnan’s that show to is note this of purpose The spin- the from equations Einstein’s of derivation The .TEGAIAIGQATMFIELDS QUANTUM GRAVITATING THE I. aifigtemnmleeg condition energy minimal the satisfying , h ierz F νρ,µ a rgnlydrvdb ir n al[]a (all as Pauli[4] and Fierz by derived originally was h µν eea nvriyo aab,Dprmn fPyis Joao Physics, of Department Paraiba, of University Federal h − U sasi- ed h ir-al edequations field Fierz-Pauli The field. spin-2 a is µρ,ν auli P ( = edter,icuigtepro fe h icvr fthe of discovery the after period the including theory, field isensnei ent ernraial,adconsistent and renormalizable, be Interactions. to seen is sense Einstein − ,ν... µ, epeeta pae eiwo riha’ eiaino Ei of derivation Kraichnan’s of review updated an present We h = m µν ∂h ∂U 4 1 2 [ h µν h ( nvriyo rsla nttt fPyis rsla709 Brasilia Physics, of Institute Brasilia, of University µν h ,µ u from run µν − = h h ,µ h h h µν = 2 − µν ) h mato h ig nEnti’ Gravity Einstein’s on Higgs the of Impact The h bevbe fsc field such of observables The . h η − µν − νρ,µ h h hη 0 2 µν h )] to µν νρ,µ , n h edpotential field the and h 0 = 3 0 = nesexplicitly Unless . − . 2 h n n degree one and µν ,µ Dtd coe 9 2019) 29, October (Dated: h ,ν adrB Bezerra B. Valdir + ..Maia M.D. (1) s & o fec emo uhprubto iha arbitrary an with perturbation tensor such compari- energy-momentum of conserved the term calculations, each of of son sequence laborious a After euneo ml etrain fteMnosimetric field Minkowski Fierz-Pauli from the the of obtained by perturbations be coordinate small could of specific gravitation sequence a that of suggests refer- independence gauge arbitrary Such an the in frame. (2) to ence identical Eq. becomes equations wave equations Fierz-Pauli wave above the then oprn ihE.() efidta fteabove the if that find we (2), h Eq. with Comparing inlfil.Tu,w r etas ihol v non- five only has with gravitation also Einstein’s left gravita- that are the we of eigenvalues Thus, trivial state vacuum field. the tional to corresponds which h ievleeutoso h uvtr tensor[5]. of curvature solutions the non-zero of real equations the eigenvalue by the given are field itational where elegnaus nldn h rva solution trivial six the to including corresponding eigenvalues, solutions, independent real are six there most 2-forms, at anti-symmetric are eigenvectors these eDne oriaegueare gauge coordinate Donder de field. spin-2 a is it ttoa constant itational h opigcntn ihtesuc sa rirr pro- arbitrary an is factor source portionality the that with difference constant only coupling the the with equations, Einstein’s tained are oesimply come µν nteohrhn,teosralso isensgrav- Einstein’s of observables the hand, other the On h iergaiainlwv qain rte nthe in written equations wave gravitational linear The ( oniewt h pn2fil endb q (2), Eq. by defined field spin-2 the with coincide  ihteSadr oe fFundamental of Model Standard the with 2 X − R ig ehns.Gaiaini the in Gravitation mechanism. Higgs esa 85-0,valdir@fisica.ufpb.br 58051-900, Pessoa, µν µνρσ m  2 r h orsodn ievcos Since eigenvectors. corresponding the are g 2 senseutosfo quantum from equations nstein’s ) µν ψ h X µν µν 090 [email protected] 10-900, ρσ = R 0 = G 0 = λ µν η κ = µν : o eae oteNwoingrav- Newtonian the to related not , ob esrdb h bevr,so observers, the by measured be to − ψ , λX  + n ntemsls aete be- they case massless the in and h 2 1 2 µν δh µν h Rg µν µν , µν as µν osmon sum no 0 = = + = dof h δh . µν κT µν 2 − 5 = µν T + µν , 2 1 ρ hη · · · riha ob- Kraichnan , requivalently, or and µν . . σ, λ 0 = (5) (4) (3) (2) , 2

Such equation is defined in the Minkowski space-time, the Yang-Mills field equations but from this point on, Kraichnan just followed Einstein’s µ µ ∗ geometrization of the gravitational field: Define a new D Fµν =4πJν ,D Fµν =0, space-time whose metric gµν is a solution of Eq. (5) ∗ where Fµν = [Dµ,Dν ] and where F is the dual of F . written in an arbitrary reference frame; introduce the As we see, the values of g can be used as a renormaliza- principles of general covariance and of equivalence; and tion parameter “before” it is committed to the dynamical finally define the observables of the gravitational field equations. (the space-time curvature tensor). On the other hand, in the coupling Notice that we could also have derived directly the 8πG constant has a specific value c4 with physical dimen- Ricci scalar using Kraichnan’s perturbative construction, sions, which was fixed at level of the dynamical equations subsequently obtaining the Einstein-Hilbert Lagrangian R√ g and finally applying the variational principle 1 8πG Rµν Rgµν = Tµν . − − 2 c4 δ (R κ source)√ gdv =0. (6) It follows tat the Einstein gravitational field in GR can- δgµν Z − L − not be perturbatively quantized because the is fixed by the dynamical equations, a conclu- Therefore we may infer that Kraichnan’s result expressed sion reached by Goroff-Sagnotti[13], by Eq. (5) is unique up to the addition of a divergence- However, in the case of the Kraichnan derivation, the free term. It also suggests that the Einstein-Hilbert La- source Tµν and the corresponding coupling constant κ grangian can be regarded as a non-linear version of the were not specified and they depend of the scale of obser- Fierz-Pauli variational principle for massless spin-2 fields. vations, from the range of quantum field theory, to the Similar derivations of Einstein’s gravitation from quan- classical Newtonian level where the sources are predom- tum field theory were also obtained by several authors inantly composed of ordinary matter, up to the cosmo- in the period from 1950-1970, like S. Gupta, showing logical scale where gravitation may also also couple with that the Einstein tensor could be obtained from a per- in the universe. turbation of the Minkowski metric by a quantum field[6]. Following a reasoning similar to that of Goroff- in his Lectures on Gravitation at Cal- Sagnotti, the gravitational field defined by Eq. (5) can tech also attempted to derive Einstein’s gravitation from be written in a form that simulates a gauge field where a spin-2 quantum fields, starting from Feynman’s dia- the covariant derivative is modified to µ = ∂µ + √κΓµ, grams. A comprehensive analysis of these results can be for κ = 0, and simultaneously writing∇ the variational found in the foreword by John Preskill and Kip Thorne principle6 as to Feynman’s Lecture Notes on Gravitation[3]. Along a similar line, it was also suggested that a short 1 δ δ R√ gdv = source√ gdv, (7) range form of gravitation could result from the pertur- κ δgµν Z − δgµν L − bations of the Minkowski metric by a massive spin-2 Consequently, the gravitational field resulting from Eq. field[7, 8], leading to what is known today as massive (5) is renormalizable in the sense of Goroff-Sagnotti. gravity[9]. Accordingly, Einstein’s massless gravitational Notice that in the vacuum case, (κ =0) the equations field would result from the zero limit of such massive Eq. (5) correspond to the non-linear version of the Fierz- gravity. However, it has been argued that such massive Pauli field without any source, whose interpretation may gravity would be plagued with ghosts, which would re- be that of a non-linear quantum spin-2 field. One in- main even after the zero mass limit[10]. A short range teresting example of such quantum field is given by the gravitational field was also suggested as a spin-2 field in- spherically symmetric vacuum solution of Eq. (5), de- dependent of the space-time metric, similar to the elec- scribing a quantum black-hole, with Schwarzschild radius tromagnetic field produced by a local current[11]. In spite 2GM r = 2 , where G is replaced by κ and M cannot be of the ongoing debate on the existence short range grav- Sch c identified with a Newtonian mass. However at the level ity, here we concentrate in the most relevant implication of quantum field theory M can be identified with a quan- of Eq. (5), perturbative . tum of energy M = E0 = ~c/λ, so that the “ quantum Schwarzschild black hole” has the Schwarzschild radius 2κ~ II. QUANTUM GRAVITY r = . Sch cλ The of gauge fields was proved by In principle, such quantum black hole may be experimen- ’tHooft & Veltman[12], but the same procedure did tally detected by adapting the experimental setup previ- not work for the gravitational field of General Relativ- ously proposed to detect black holes from extra dimen- ity. This can be understood from a fundamental dif- sions at the tev energy scale. In that extra dimensional ference between the two theories: In , the case, the existence of tev black holes was justified pre- coupling constant g appears in the covariant derivative cisely because in higher dimensions the Newtonian grav- Dµ = ∂µ + g Aµ, where Aµ is the gauge field, solution of itational constant does not depend on G and it must be 3 replaced by a higher dimensional coupling constant[14– whose solution φ = 0 is naturally excluded, as it rep- 18]. The novelty here is in the fact that such quantum resents an unstable vacuum. Since λ > 0, we obtain black hole is defined in the four dimensional space-time. also an infinite number of non-trivial real and stable vac- uum solutions by choosing µ2 = m2, where m2 is the Higgs mass. Those stable solutions− are represented by the 2 2 2 2 2 III. GRAVITATION IN THE STANDARD points of a circumference φ = φ1 + φ2 = a = m /2λ MODEL located at the bottom of the| | Higgs potential. The exclusion of the false vacuum φ =0 has the math- The derivation of Eq. (5) from quantum field theory ematical implication that the Higgs potential is a gen- implies that the gravitational hierarchy ceases to exist, uine revolution surface, generated by the global rota- and quantum gravity exists at tev. Thus, at least in tion group SO(2) , through the axis U(φ1, φ2), principle gravitation has the right to be explicitly present Higgs global which does not touch the surface. As a revolution sur- in the . face, the Higgs potential can be represented as “cassino After the experimental evidence of the Higgs, the Higgs roulette”, where the bottom circumference is the Higgs mechanism explains how the Higgs and the spin- 0 vacuum. In this case there are two spontaneously broken 1 Z and W ± acquire their . All these symmetries: The first one breaks the global masses belong to the spectrum of eigenvalues of the sec- 2 2 2 SO(2) , associating the Higgs mass m = µ , ond order Casimir operator C = P P µ, where P de- Higgs global µ µ which has the same value for all points of that circumfer-− note the translation operators of the Poincaré group. If ence. This is a consequence of the the nilpotent action of so, then the consistency with the Lie algebra structure the Poincaré translations over SO(2) , imply- of the Standard Model, require that the Poincaré Lie al- Higgs global ing in a zero mass splitting. That is, for any two points gebra 4 should explicitly combine with the gauge field a and b of the vacuum circumference we obtain the same symmetries,P something like Higgs mass: 4 U(1) SU(2) SU(3). P × × × 2 2 2 However, such symmetry combination stumbles in the (∆mHiggs) = (mHiggs a) (mHiggs b) =0. classic problem of high energy physics, the no-go theorem − for the mixing of the Poincaré and gauge symmetries[19]. In short, that theorem tells that the action of 4 over any Secondly, while the global symmetry SO(2)Higgs global re- operator of SU(n) is idempotent, in the senseP that the mains broken, the local gauge symmetry U(1) SU(2) (squared) mass difference of two particles a and b belong- is also broken, without the interference of the nilpotent× ing to the same multiplet of an SU(n) internal symmetry action of the Poincaré translations. vanishes: ∆m2 = m2 m2 = 0, which is a blatant dis- a b The current issue on the possible instabilities of the agreement with the observations.− Such symmetry mix- ing problem has never been solved. At the best it was Higgs vacuum refers to the possible quantum fluctuation of the Higgs potential caused by quantum gravity, pro- averted by replacing the Poincaré Lie algebra by a graded Lie algebra[20]. In the following, we will see why the so- ducing lower energy stable solutions[21, 22]. Such quan- tum gravity interference on the Higgs potential must be lution of such problem is implicit in the structure of the Higgs potential. consistent with the Einstein-Kraichnan quantum gravity and with the standard model, where the Higgs potential Consider the well known interaction of the Higgs with the electroweak field, described by the Lagrangian (here may have lower energy stable vacuum states as surfaces of revolution, looking like a rotating wavelet. for simplicity we take g =1)

1 µν µ † = 4 tr F Fµν + (D φ) (Dµφ) In conclusion, Kraichnan’s derivation of Einstein’s L − − (8) 2 †  † 2 equations is correct and unique, and it has some interest- µ (φ φ)+ λ(φ φ) , λ> 0, ing consequences to the understanding of Einstein’s rela-  tivistic gravitation. Not only because gravitation can be where Dµ = ∂µ + iAµ and Aµ is the electroweak field potential. The Higgs is a complex column generated by a massless spin-2 quantum field, but also be- cause the emergence of quantum black holes, ultimately

φ1 † ∗ ∗ answers Einstein’s question concerning the origin of sin- φ = , φ = (φ1, φ2) . (9)  φ2  gularities: These quantum black holes are evidences that the gravitational singularities emerge from quantum field The Lagrangian Eq. (8) is invariant under the Poincaré theory as shown by Kraichnan. groups and under the electroweak symmetry U(1) × Finally, General Relativity is still with us as a low en- SU(2). The Higgs potential is U(φ1, φ2), so that the minimum energy condition for the Higgs field is ergy limit of the Einstein-Kraichnan Relativistic gravi- tation. In such limit, the sources of the gravitational ∂U 2 † † † field are essentially composed of ordinary matter, with = µ φ +2λ(φ φ)φ =0, 8πG ∂φ κ = c4 . 4

Acknowledgments port of the research project no 305835/2016-5. MDM thanks prof. S. Deser for a valuable comment on a pre- VBB thanks Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento vious version of this report. Both authors wish to add a Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) for partial financial sup- posthumous thanks to prof. Leite Lopes.

[1] R.H. Kraichnan, Special Relativistic Derivation of Gen- Theor A. 20 69 (1974). erally Covariant Gravitation Theory. Phys. Rev. 98, 1118 [13] M. H. Goroff & A. Sagnotti, Quantum Gravity at two (1955). Loops, Physics Letters 180, 81, (1985). [2] R. H. Kraichnan, Possibility of equality gravitational and [14] R. C. Myers & M. J. Perry, Black holes in higher dimen- inertial masses, Phys. Rev. 101, 482 (1956). sional space-times Ann. Phys. 172, 304 (1986). [3] R. Feynman, F. B. Moringo and W. G. Wagner (eds). [15] S. Dimopolous & G. Landsberg Black Holes at the Feynman lectures on gravitation (Addison Wesley Pub- LHC, arXiv:hep-ph/0106295v1 (2001) Phys. Rev. Lett. lishing Company, Menlo Park, Ca, 1995). 87:161602 (2001). [4] M. Fierz and W. Pauli, On Relativistic Wave Equations [16] N. Arkani-Hamed et al, The and new for Particles of Arbitrary Spin in an Electromagnetic dimensions at a millimeter scale. Phys. Rev. Lett. B. . Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 173, 211 (1939). 429, 263 (1998). [5] F. Pirani, On the Physical significance of the Riemann [17] Seong Chan Park, Black Holes at the LHC: A review. tensor. Acta Physica Polonica. 15, 389 (1956). arXiv:1203.4683v1 [hep-ph]. [6] S. N. Gupta, Gravitation and . Phys. [18] A. Chamblin, F. Cooper & G.C. Nayak, Physics Letters Rev. 96, 1683 (1954). B. 672, 147 (2009). Top Production of Black Holes [7] H. Van Dam and M. J. Veltman, Massive and Massless at the CERN LHC . ArXiv:0806:4647v2 [hep-ph]. Yang-Mills and Gravitational Fields. Nucl. Phys B. 22, [19] L. O’Raifeartaigh, Mass Differences and Lie Algebras of 397 (1970). Finite Order. Phys. Rev. Lett. 14, 575 (1965). [8] V. Zakharov, Linearized Gravitation Theory and the [20] S. Coleman and J. Mandula, All Possible Symmetries of Graviton Mass. JETP Lett. 12, 312 (1970). the S Matrix. Physical Review. 159, 1251 (1967). [9] C. de Rham, Massive Gravity, in Living Rev. Relativ. [21] P. Burda, R. Gregory & I. Moss, Gravity and the Stability 17, 7 (2014). of the Higgs Vacuum, JHEP 1606 (2016) 025 Phys. Rev. [10] D. G. Boulware and S. Deser, Can Gravitation Have a Lett. 115, 071303 (2015). Finite Range? Phys. Rev. D. 8, 3368 (1972). [22] A. V. Bednyakov, B. A. Kniehl, A. F. Pikelner & O. [11] C. J. Isham, A. Salam & J. Stradthdee, Phys. Rev. D. 3, L. Veretin, Stability of the Electroweak Vacuum: Gauge 867 (1971). Independence and Advanced Precision, Phys. Rev. Lett. [12] G. ’t Hooft & M. J. G Veltman, One Loop Divergences 115, 201802 (2015). in the Theory of Gravitation, Ann. Poincaré Ins. Phys.