罗曼·杰基和陈-西蒙斯的理论

R. Pisarski
{"title":"罗曼·杰基和陈-西蒙斯的理论","authors":"R. Pisarski","doi":"10.4310/iccm.2021.v9.n1.a3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, the Center of Mathematical Sciences and Applications at Harvard initiated an excellent series of talks on mathematics. In the inaugural talk on March 13, 2020, S.-T. Yau spoke about S. S. Chern as a great geometer of the 20th century [1]. Particularly in the discussion section after the talk, Prof. Yau emphasized the essential role which Roman Jackiw played in bringing Chern-Simons theories into physics. In this note I wish to share some recollections from those times, and especially my interactions with Roman. I do this because I most strongly agree with Prof. Yau’s assessment of Roman’s contribution. In this as other areas, Roman’s work exhibits both the sheer joy of computation, while continually pushing to understand the greater significance of what is truly new and exciting. As a graduate student of David Gross, with Larry Yaffe we computed the fluctuations to one loop order about a single instanton at nonzero temperature [2]. I then went off to Yale University as a postdoc [3], where I worked with Tom Appelquist on gauge theories in three dimensions. Our motivation was to understand the behavior of gauge theories at high temperature, which for the static mode reduces to a gauge theory in three dimensions. We computed the gluon self energy to one and (in part) to two loop order. The gluon self energy isn’t gauge invariant, so the greater significance of our analysis wasn’t clear. But we also computed in an Abelian theory for a large number of scalars, which is a nice soluble model, and from Tom I learned the most useful craft of power counting diagrams. We concentrated on the gluons, since quarks are fermions, and decouple in the static limit. Sometime in the fall of 1980, I went to MIT to give a talk on this work. It was a joint seminar with Harvard, and I remember it well to this day. Talks were then on transparencies, and the evening before I thought I would be clever, and added a comment that while topological charge in four dimensions is quantized classically, perhaps it isn’t quantum mechanically. Sidney Coleman was sitting near the front, in a purple crushed velvet suit which to me looked very much like that of Superfly. When he saw that slide, however, Coleman pounced, and did not let up until I surrendered abjectly, admitting to the idiocy of my suggestion. During the talk and for the entire afternoon after, Roman grilled me about details of the calculation, how gauge theories in three dimensions work, what about gauge invariance, everything. It was very intense and quite exhilarating. Roman and S. Templeton then wrote a paper on theories in three dimensions [4], which because Roman is a superb calculator, appeared as a preprint a few weeks before ours. When their paper came out, I remember looking at it, and thinking, ah, very good, they were spending their time on something irrelevant, two component fermions in three dimensions. Now if you forget about nonzero temperature and just do dimensional reduction, the natural thing is to go from four component fermions in four dimensions to four component fermions in three dimensions. And thus I missed the really new physics, which Roman grasped. The most interesting part of the paper by Roman and Templeton appears a bit pedestrian, at the beginning of Sec. III, Eqs. (3.3) and (3.4). Under the Lorentz (or Euclidean) group in three dimensions, all one needs are two component fermions, since in three dimensions one can just take the Dirac matrices to be the Pauli matrices. What I did not work out is that under the discrete transformations of parity and charge conjugation, that a mass term for a single two component fermion is parity odd! Roman and Templeton discuss in their Ref. (11) [4]: the dimensional reduction of a four component fermion gives two two-component fermions. The masses for these are of equal in magnitude, but opposite in sign. This is how the mass for four dimensional fermions, which is certainly parity even, remains so after dimensional reduction to three dimensions. Thus while if wasn’t present in the original paper by Roman and Templeton, if one computes the gauge self energy for two-component fermions in three dimensions, then a parity mass term for the gauge field will appear immediately. Yes, it has nothing to do with nonzero temperature, but so what? It is an absolutely beautiful, novel, and gauge invariant mass term, special to three dimensions. This was first proposed in two papers by S. Deser, Roman, and Templeton, in a Physical Review Letter [5], and a long paper in Annals of Physics [6]. The year before, Jonathan Schonfeld has proposed the same theory [7]. What Deser, Roman, and Templeton realized, however, and which Schonfeld did not, is that there is something extraordinary about a non-Abelian Chern-Simons term [8]: the ratio of the Chern-Simons mass term to the gauge coupling is an integer,","PeriodicalId":415664,"journal":{"name":"Notices of the International Congress of Chinese Mathematicians","volume":" 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Roman Jackiw and Chern–Simons theories\",\"authors\":\"R. Pisarski\",\"doi\":\"10.4310/iccm.2021.v9.n1.a3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recently, the Center of Mathematical Sciences and Applications at Harvard initiated an excellent series of talks on mathematics. In the inaugural talk on March 13, 2020, S.-T. Yau spoke about S. S. Chern as a great geometer of the 20th century [1]. Particularly in the discussion section after the talk, Prof. Yau emphasized the essential role which Roman Jackiw played in bringing Chern-Simons theories into physics. In this note I wish to share some recollections from those times, and especially my interactions with Roman. I do this because I most strongly agree with Prof. Yau’s assessment of Roman’s contribution. In this as other areas, Roman’s work exhibits both the sheer joy of computation, while continually pushing to understand the greater significance of what is truly new and exciting. As a graduate student of David Gross, with Larry Yaffe we computed the fluctuations to one loop order about a single instanton at nonzero temperature [2]. I then went off to Yale University as a postdoc [3], where I worked with Tom Appelquist on gauge theories in three dimensions. Our motivation was to understand the behavior of gauge theories at high temperature, which for the static mode reduces to a gauge theory in three dimensions. We computed the gluon self energy to one and (in part) to two loop order. The gluon self energy isn’t gauge invariant, so the greater significance of our analysis wasn’t clear. But we also computed in an Abelian theory for a large number of scalars, which is a nice soluble model, and from Tom I learned the most useful craft of power counting diagrams. We concentrated on the gluons, since quarks are fermions, and decouple in the static limit. Sometime in the fall of 1980, I went to MIT to give a talk on this work. It was a joint seminar with Harvard, and I remember it well to this day. Talks were then on transparencies, and the evening before I thought I would be clever, and added a comment that while topological charge in four dimensions is quantized classically, perhaps it isn’t quantum mechanically. Sidney Coleman was sitting near the front, in a purple crushed velvet suit which to me looked very much like that of Superfly. When he saw that slide, however, Coleman pounced, and did not let up until I surrendered abjectly, admitting to the idiocy of my suggestion. During the talk and for the entire afternoon after, Roman grilled me about details of the calculation, how gauge theories in three dimensions work, what about gauge invariance, everything. It was very intense and quite exhilarating. Roman and S. Templeton then wrote a paper on theories in three dimensions [4], which because Roman is a superb calculator, appeared as a preprint a few weeks before ours. When their paper came out, I remember looking at it, and thinking, ah, very good, they were spending their time on something irrelevant, two component fermions in three dimensions. Now if you forget about nonzero temperature and just do dimensional reduction, the natural thing is to go from four component fermions in four dimensions to four component fermions in three dimensions. And thus I missed the really new physics, which Roman grasped. The most interesting part of the paper by Roman and Templeton appears a bit pedestrian, at the beginning of Sec. III, Eqs. (3.3) and (3.4). Under the Lorentz (or Euclidean) group in three dimensions, all one needs are two component fermions, since in three dimensions one can just take the Dirac matrices to be the Pauli matrices. What I did not work out is that under the discrete transformations of parity and charge conjugation, that a mass term for a single two component fermion is parity odd! Roman and Templeton discuss in their Ref. (11) [4]: the dimensional reduction of a four component fermion gives two two-component fermions. The masses for these are of equal in magnitude, but opposite in sign. This is how the mass for four dimensional fermions, which is certainly parity even, remains so after dimensional reduction to three dimensions. Thus while if wasn’t present in the original paper by Roman and Templeton, if one computes the gauge self energy for two-component fermions in three dimensions, then a parity mass term for the gauge field will appear immediately. Yes, it has nothing to do with nonzero temperature, but so what? It is an absolutely beautiful, novel, and gauge invariant mass term, special to three dimensions. This was first proposed in two papers by S. Deser, Roman, and Templeton, in a Physical Review Letter [5], and a long paper in Annals of Physics [6]. The year before, Jonathan Schonfeld has proposed the same theory [7]. What Deser, Roman, and Templeton realized, however, and which Schonfeld did not, is that there is something extraordinary about a non-Abelian Chern-Simons term [8]: the ratio of the Chern-Simons mass term to the gauge coupling is an integer,\",\"PeriodicalId\":415664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Notices of the International Congress of Chinese Mathematicians\",\"volume\":\" 6\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Notices of the International Congress of Chinese Mathematicians\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4310/iccm.2021.v9.n1.a3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Notices of the International Congress of Chinese Mathematicians","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4310/iccm.2021.v9.n1.a3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

最近,哈佛大学数学科学与应用中心发起了一系列关于数学的讲座。在2020年3月13日的就职演讲中,s。邱腾华谈到陈思生是20世纪伟大的几何学家[1]。在讲座后的讨论环节,丘教授特别强调了Roman Jackiw在将陈-西蒙斯的理论引入物理学方面所扮演的重要角色。在这篇文章中,我想分享一些关于那段时间的回忆,尤其是我与罗曼的互动。我之所以这样做,是因为我非常赞同丘教授对罗曼贡献的评价。在这方面和其他领域一样,Roman的工作既展示了计算的纯粹乐趣,又不断推动理解真正新颖和令人兴奋的更大意义。作为David Gross的研究生,我们与Larry Yaffe一起计算了非零温度下单个瞬子的一个环阶波动[2]。然后我去了耶鲁大学做博士后[3],在那里我和Tom Appelquist一起研究三维的规范理论。我们的动机是了解规范理论在高温下的行为,这对于静态模式可以简化为三维规范理论。我们计算了胶子的自能为一环和(部分)为二环。胶子自能不是规范不变的,所以我们的分析的更大意义还不清楚。但我们也用阿贝尔理论计算了大量的标量,这是一个很好的可解模型,从汤姆那里我学到了最有用的功率计数图的技巧。我们关注的是胶子,因为夸克是费米子,在静态极限下解耦。1980年秋天的某个时候,我去麻省理工学院做了一个关于这项工作的演讲。那是一个和哈佛大学的联合研讨会,我至今还记得很清楚。会谈是关于透明度的,前一天晚上,我觉得自己很聪明,补充了一句评论,虽然四维空间的拓扑电荷是经典量子化的,但它可能不是量子力学的。西德尼·科尔曼坐在靠前的地方,穿着一套紫色的碎绒西装,在我看来很像超级苍蝇。然而,当科尔曼看到那张幻灯片时,他突然扑了上来,直到我卑躬屈膝地投降,承认我的建议很愚蠢,他才罢休。在讲座期间以及之后的整个下午,Roman一直追问我计算的细节,三维规范理论是如何工作的,规范不变性是什么,等等。比赛非常激烈,令人振奋。罗曼和S.邓普顿随后写了一篇关于三维理论的论文[4],由于罗曼是一个极好的计算器,这篇论文在我们之前几周就以预印本的形式出现了。当他们的论文发表时,我记得我看着它,心想,啊,很好,他们把时间花在了无关的东西上,二维费米子。现在如果你忘记非零温度,只做维数缩减,很自然的事情就是从四维的四分量费米子变成三维的四分量费米子。因此我错过了罗曼掌握的真正的新物理。在罗曼和邓普顿的论文中,最有趣的部分似乎有点平淡无奇,在第三节等式的开头。(3.3)和(3.4)。在三维的洛伦兹(或欧几里得)群下,我们只需要两个费米子分量,因为在三维中,我们可以把狄拉克矩阵当作泡利矩阵。我没有算出来的是在宇称和电荷共轭的离散变换下,单个双组分费米子的质量项是宇称奇的!Roman和Templeton在他们的Ref.(11)[4]中讨论:四分量费米子的降维得到两个两分量费米子。它们的质量大小相等,但符号相反。这就是四维费米子的质量,当然是宇称的,在降维到三维之后仍然如此。因此,虽然在Roman和Templeton的原始论文中没有出现,但如果计算三维双分量费米子的规范自能,那么规范场的宇称质量项将立即出现。是的,它与非零度温度无关,但那又怎样?它绝对是一个美丽的、新奇的、规范不变的质量项,只适用于三维空间。这首先是由S. Deser, Roman和Templeton在《物理评论快报》[5]和《物理学年鉴》[6]上的两篇论文中提出的。前一年,Jonathan Schonfeld提出了同样的理论[7]。然而,Deser、Roman和Templeton意识到,非阿贝尔的chen - simons项有一些特别之处[8]:chen - simons质量项与规范耦合的比值是一个整数,而Schonfeld没有意识到这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Roman Jackiw and Chern–Simons theories
Recently, the Center of Mathematical Sciences and Applications at Harvard initiated an excellent series of talks on mathematics. In the inaugural talk on March 13, 2020, S.-T. Yau spoke about S. S. Chern as a great geometer of the 20th century [1]. Particularly in the discussion section after the talk, Prof. Yau emphasized the essential role which Roman Jackiw played in bringing Chern-Simons theories into physics. In this note I wish to share some recollections from those times, and especially my interactions with Roman. I do this because I most strongly agree with Prof. Yau’s assessment of Roman’s contribution. In this as other areas, Roman’s work exhibits both the sheer joy of computation, while continually pushing to understand the greater significance of what is truly new and exciting. As a graduate student of David Gross, with Larry Yaffe we computed the fluctuations to one loop order about a single instanton at nonzero temperature [2]. I then went off to Yale University as a postdoc [3], where I worked with Tom Appelquist on gauge theories in three dimensions. Our motivation was to understand the behavior of gauge theories at high temperature, which for the static mode reduces to a gauge theory in three dimensions. We computed the gluon self energy to one and (in part) to two loop order. The gluon self energy isn’t gauge invariant, so the greater significance of our analysis wasn’t clear. But we also computed in an Abelian theory for a large number of scalars, which is a nice soluble model, and from Tom I learned the most useful craft of power counting diagrams. We concentrated on the gluons, since quarks are fermions, and decouple in the static limit. Sometime in the fall of 1980, I went to MIT to give a talk on this work. It was a joint seminar with Harvard, and I remember it well to this day. Talks were then on transparencies, and the evening before I thought I would be clever, and added a comment that while topological charge in four dimensions is quantized classically, perhaps it isn’t quantum mechanically. Sidney Coleman was sitting near the front, in a purple crushed velvet suit which to me looked very much like that of Superfly. When he saw that slide, however, Coleman pounced, and did not let up until I surrendered abjectly, admitting to the idiocy of my suggestion. During the talk and for the entire afternoon after, Roman grilled me about details of the calculation, how gauge theories in three dimensions work, what about gauge invariance, everything. It was very intense and quite exhilarating. Roman and S. Templeton then wrote a paper on theories in three dimensions [4], which because Roman is a superb calculator, appeared as a preprint a few weeks before ours. When their paper came out, I remember looking at it, and thinking, ah, very good, they were spending their time on something irrelevant, two component fermions in three dimensions. Now if you forget about nonzero temperature and just do dimensional reduction, the natural thing is to go from four component fermions in four dimensions to four component fermions in three dimensions. And thus I missed the really new physics, which Roman grasped. The most interesting part of the paper by Roman and Templeton appears a bit pedestrian, at the beginning of Sec. III, Eqs. (3.3) and (3.4). Under the Lorentz (or Euclidean) group in three dimensions, all one needs are two component fermions, since in three dimensions one can just take the Dirac matrices to be the Pauli matrices. What I did not work out is that under the discrete transformations of parity and charge conjugation, that a mass term for a single two component fermion is parity odd! Roman and Templeton discuss in their Ref. (11) [4]: the dimensional reduction of a four component fermion gives two two-component fermions. The masses for these are of equal in magnitude, but opposite in sign. This is how the mass for four dimensional fermions, which is certainly parity even, remains so after dimensional reduction to three dimensions. Thus while if wasn’t present in the original paper by Roman and Templeton, if one computes the gauge self energy for two-component fermions in three dimensions, then a parity mass term for the gauge field will appear immediately. Yes, it has nothing to do with nonzero temperature, but so what? It is an absolutely beautiful, novel, and gauge invariant mass term, special to three dimensions. This was first proposed in two papers by S. Deser, Roman, and Templeton, in a Physical Review Letter [5], and a long paper in Annals of Physics [6]. The year before, Jonathan Schonfeld has proposed the same theory [7]. What Deser, Roman, and Templeton realized, however, and which Schonfeld did not, is that there is something extraordinary about a non-Abelian Chern-Simons term [8]: the ratio of the Chern-Simons mass term to the gauge coupling is an integer,
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信