Wednesday, January 20, 2016

lagrangian formalism - Constrained Hamiltonian systems: spin 1/2 particle


I am trying to apply the Constrained Hamiltonian Systems theory on relativistic particles. For what concerns the scalar particle there is no issue. Indeed, I have the action S=mdτ˙xμ˙xμ

and computing the momentum pμ=m˙xμ˙x2
I see that it satisfies the constraint pμpμ+m2=0. I then proceed to quantize the system with the Dirac method.


I am finding issues with the relativistic massless spin 1/2 particle. Indeed, it is described by the space-time coordinates xμ and by the real grassmann variables ψμ, according to my notes. The action should take the form S=dτ ˙xμ˙xμ+i2ψμ˙ψμ

which exhibits a supersymmetry on the worldline, the supersymmetric conserved charge being Q=ψμpμ. According to the lecturer I should find the constraints H=12p2,Q=ψμpμ
i.e. the dynamics on the phase space should take place on hypersurfaces H=0,Q=0.


My question: How can I derive these constraints? They should arise simply with the definition of momenta, but, having no constants to work with, I'm left with pμ=˙xμΠμ=i2˙ψμ

and I don't know what to do with them. I see that, in principle, the first constraint is obtained by setting m=0 in the constraint of the scalar particle for example, but what if I want to derive it without the previous knowledge? And what about Q?


Edit: By intuition, knowing that the model exhibits a N=1 supersymmetry, I may understand that the dynamics must take place on a surface such that H=const and Q=const (then I could set the constant to zero without lack of generality?), being Q and H conserved charges. Is it the only way to find these constraints? Should I need this previous knowledge about supersymmetry to study the model? I think I should be able to find these constraints just by looking at the Lagrangian itself.



Answer






  1. We consider here the massless case m=0. Let us start from the Lagrangian1 L0 = ˙x22e+i2ψμ˙ψμ

    with an einbein field e, cf. e.g. this Phys.SE post. If we introduce the momentum pμ = L0˙xμ = ˙xμe,
    the corresponding Legendre transformation ˙xμpμ yields a first-order Lagrangian L1 = pμ˙xμ+i2ψμ˙ψμeH,H := p22.
    This explains OP's first constraint H0, which is indirectly due to world-line (WL) reparametrization invariance, cf. this Phys.SE post.




  2. It is unnecessary to introduce momentum for the fermions ψμ as the Lagrangian L1 is already on first-order form, cf. the Faddeev-Jackiw method.




  3. The Lagrangian L1 has a global super quasisymmetry. The infinitesimal transformation δxμ = iεψμ,δψμ = εpμ,δpμ = 0,δe = 0,

    changes the Lagrangian with a total derivative δL1 =  = i˙εQ+i2d(εQ)dτ,Q := pμψμ,
    for τ-independent Grassmann-odd infinitesimal parameter ε.





  4. OP's other constraint Q0 arises by gauging the SUSY, i.e. δL1 should be a total derivative for an arbitrary function ε(τ). On reason to do this is given in Ref. 2 below eq. (3.3):



    Because of the time component of the field ψμ there is a possibility that negative norm states may appear in the physical spectrum. In order to decouple them we require an additional invariance and, inspired by the Neveu-Schwarz-Ramond model, it seems natural to demand invariance under local supergauge transformations.





  5. Concretely, we impose Q0 with the help of a Lagrange multiplier χ. This leads to the Lagrangian L2 = L1iχQ = pμ˙xμ+i2ψμ˙ψμeHiχQ.




  6. Let us mention for completeness that in order to have gauged super quasisymmetry of the new Lagrangian L2, the previous transformation δe=0 needs to be modified into δe = 2iχε,δχ = ˙ε.





  7. An alternative perspective is the replacement L2 = L1|˙xDx

    of the ordinary derivative ˙xμDxμ := ˙xμiχψμ
    with a gauge-covariant derivative Dxμ. Here χ is a compensating gauge field. The gauge-covariant derivative transforms as δDxμ = iε(˙ψμχpμ).




References:




  1. F. Bastianelli, Constrained hamiltonian systems and relativistic particles, 2017 lecture notes; Section 2.2.





  2. L. Brink, P. Di Vecchia & P. Howe, Nucl. Phys. B118 (1977) 76; Below eq. (3.3).




  3. C.M. Hull & J.-L. Vazquez-Bello, arXiv:hep-th/9308022; Chapter 2, p. 7-8.




--


1 Conventions: We use the Minkowski sign convention (,+,+,+) and we work in units where c=1.


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 \...