Wednesday, November 26, 2014

quantum field theory - Lagrangian and grassmann numbers


Why sometimes we remember that "classical" lagrangians of fermions are constructed from grassmann numbers, while sometimes don't?


For example, for Majorana's field in terms of 2-component spinors (you can read about this representation here in details), L=ˉψ(αμνm)ψ,αμ=(σ2K,σ1,σ2,σ3),Kψ=ψ,ˉψ=ψα0, and the mass term become ˉψψ=ψσ2ψ=(ψ1ψ2)σ2(ψ1ψ2)=0 if the fields are "classical". So we must assume their grassmanian nature before making all calculations (there this expression won't be equal to zero).


But when we assume the mass matrix for see-saw type 1 model, we introduce the term Mij(ψTR)iˆCψjR+h.c.,Mij=Mji,ˆC=iγ2γ0. If the fields are grassmann numbers, this expression is equal to zero (don't forget about symmetric mass matrix). So we forget about grassmannian nature of the fields even in "classical" level.


Here "classical" means that we set all of anticommutators to zero. If we set them not to zero, we will have new problems, but it's the other story.



Answer



Classical lagrangians of fermions are always constructed out of Grassmann numbers. No exception.



In both of OP's cases, the mass term is nonvanishing:


In the first case the mass term is proportional to ψ1ψ2ψ2ψ1=2ψ1ψ20.


In the second case, I write in the chiral basis: γ0=(σ0σ0)γ0=(σ2σ2)ˆC=(iσ0σ2iσ0σ2)


So that (picking the diagonal element of the mass matrix i=j as the off-diagonal terms are obviously non-vanishing.)


ψTRˆCψR=(00ψ3ψ4)(iσ0σ2iσ0σ2)(00ψ3ψ4)=(ψ3ψ4)iσ0σ2(ψ3ψ4)=ψ3ψ4ψ4ψ3=2ψ3ψ40 where in the last step I used the Grassmann property of anticommutation.


No comments:

Post a Comment

classical mechanics - Moment of a force about a given axis (Torque) - Scalar or vectorial?

I am studying Statics and saw that: The moment of a force about a given axis (or Torque) is defined by the equation: $M_X = (\vec r \times \...