Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,047 questions , 2,200 unanswered
5,345 answers , 22,709 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
816 active unimported users
More ...

  Determinant of the Dirac operator and discrete eigenvalues

+ 2 like - 0 dislike
1837 views

Consider the determinant of the euclidean form of the Dirac operator:
$$\text{det}(iD), \quad iD = i\gamma_{\mu}(\partial_{\mu}+A_{\mu})$$

It is an elliptic operator, so has a discrete spectrum on compact manifolds. The euclidean manifold  $R^{4}$ is not a compact manifold. However, people typically writes
$$
\text{det}(iD) = \prod_{i = 1}^{\infty}\lambda_{i},
$$

where $\lambda_{i}$ defines the $i$th eigenvalue:
$$
iD\psi_{i} = \lambda_{i}\psi_{i}
$$

Why can they do this?

asked Jan 12, 2017 in Theoretical Physics by NAME_XXX (1,060 points) [ revision history ]

1 Answer

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

If it is done in the framework of QFT, it is usually quite a formal expressions which then must be regularized in some way. The same story as for other determinants, traces, etc.

answered Jan 12, 2017 by Andrey Feldman (904 points) [ no revision ]

But does this regularization imposethe discrete spectrum? Ii rather seems that when computing the Dirac determinant, we regularize alreary discrete spectrum from above. The fact that the spectrum is discrete is unexplained.

@NAME_XXX Usually one replaces a non-compact space by a compact one, which gives the former in the limit of infinite radius (say, $\mathbb{R}$ may be replaced by $S^1$), evaluates the index on this manifold, and then tends the radius to infinity.

@AndreyFeldman : I understand, thank You. It seems that for the case of 4D euclidean theory we replace $R^{4}$ by, say, $S^{4}$, which is compact manifold. But why do we believe that this projection is correct? I.e., does there exist the explanation arguing that we can project the manifold $R^{4}$ of the gauge theory with fermions on the manifold $S^{4}$?

@NAME_XXX It may be a kind of philosophic question. How do we know that the Path Integral is correct? Basically, it is because it works, and in all the experimentally verified situations it works correctly with enormous precision. 

One not only replaces the manifold by a compact one but afterwards takes the infrared limit (infinite radius) that restores the original manifold. Under this limit the spectrum becomes continuous. of course this is not fully rigorous, and for massless fields unexpected things may happen....

@AndreyFeldman : but is there some reason which allows us to do that? All of the theory quantities must be projected on $S^{4}$ coordinates, and corresponding action must be invariant. 

@ArnoldNeumaier : but is there some projection rule? I.e., if I want to construct the theory on $S^{4}$, I need to construct corresponding quantities defined on $S^{4}$.

@NAME_XXX In general, compactification of $\mathbb{R}^4$ to get $S^4$ is subtle -- it may give masses to massless fields, etc. If you are looking for some universal recipe, I'm afraid that it doesn't exist.

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysicsOve$\varnothing$flow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...