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

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

145 submissions , 122 unreviewed
3,930 questions , 1,398 unanswered
4,862 answers , 20,637 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
502 active unimported users
More ...

Chern-Simons on a lattice and the framing anomaly

+ 4 like - 0 dislike
227 views

Can someone make or refer me to the argument for why $U(1)$ Chern-Simons theory in three dimensions cannot be defined by a lattice action? (Unlike Dijkgraaf-Witten theories, which are defined on the lattice.)

Possibly related: what is the "framing anomaly"?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-25 11:25 (UCT), posted by SE-user user151696
asked Aug 24, 2014 in Theoretical Physics by user151696 (55 points) [ no revision ]

1 Answer

+ 0 like - 0 dislike
If one follow this paper, see formula $(6)$, the zero eigenvalues of the kernel (excluding zeroes due to translation invariance), define a set of planes (co-dimension $1$), the consequence being that the CS action is not integrable.This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-25 11:25 (UCT), posted by SE-user Trimok
answered Aug 25, 2014 by Trimok (950 points) [ no revision ]

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$\hbar$ysic$\varnothing$Overflow
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).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




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

Your rights
...