• 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.


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


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,054 questions , 2,207 unanswered
5,347 answers , 22,720 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Chiral current VEV below the QCD scale

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

Let's have pure QCD. I know that after spontaneous symmetry breaking quark bilinear form are replaced by their averaged values:
\bar{q}_{i}q_{j} \to  \langle \bar{q}_{i}q_{j}\rangle \approx \Lambda_{QCD}^3, \quad \bar{q}_{i}\gamma_{5}q_{j} \to  \langle \bar{q}_{i}\gamma_{5}q_{j}\rangle \approx 0

What can be said about VEVs of $\partial_{\mu}\bar{q}_{i}\gamma^{\mu}\gamma_{5}q_{i}$, $(\partial_{\mu}(\bar{q}_{i}\gamma^{\mu}\gamma_{5}q_{i}))^2$ (for example, in terms of the path integral approach)?

More precisely, I've asked about correlator

\int d^4x d^4t \delta (t)\langle 0| T(\partial_{\mu}^{x}J^{\mu}_{5}(x)\partial_{\nu}^{t}J^{\nu}_{5}(t))|0\rangle ,

which appears when we want to calculate axion or axion-like particle mass which is generated during QCD crossover.

It seems that it is zero since no massless states couples to correlator
\int d^{4}x e^{ikx}\langle 0 |T(J_{\mu}^{5}(x)J_{\nu}^{5}(0)) |0\rangle

asked Dec 7, 2015 in Theoretical Physics by NAME_XXX (1,060 points) [ revision history ]
edited Dec 10, 2015 by NAME_XXX

For the first operator, it seems $\langle\partial_{\mu}\bar{q}_{i}\gamma^{\mu}\gamma_{5}q_{i}\rangle=\partial_{\mu}\langle\bar{q}_{i}\gamma^{\mu}\gamma_{5}q_{i}\rangle=\partial_\mu 0=0$. Or is there any reason you have in mind that the partial derivative doesn't commute with taking VEV?

EDIT: Or did you mean $\langle(\partial_{\mu}\bar{q}_{i})\gamma^{\mu}\gamma_{5}q_{i}\rangle$?

@JiaYiyang: It is customary that the derivative operator only applies to the shortest term afterwards for which it makes sense. Thus your second interpretation is the default meaning.

The second example by the OP is syntactically faulty, hence not clearly interpretable. I guess that the first opening parenthesis is spurious; the remaining parentheses then make sense and force the derivative operator to apply to the whole expression. Thus the first half of your remark applies that one can get its expectation as the derivative of the expectation of the square.

@ArnoldNeumaier, in that case I suspect there isn't much that can be easily said about that VEV, after all even the seemingly simpler $\langle\bar{q}q\rangle$ value comes from either phenomenology or numerical lattice study.

@JiaYiyang: It looks like one might be able to give nonrigorous order of magnitude estimates for some of the polynomial expressions, based on dimensional arguments. This would be in the spirit of the question. But I have currently no time to figure this out.

@dimension10 @Dilaton can we import the answer linked by tmshaefer?

@ArnoldNeumaier, given that the SE answer is taken as the right answer by OP, OP's notation of  $\partial_{\mu}\bar{q}_{i}\gamma^{\mu}\gamma_{5}q_{i}$ probably simply means $\partial_{\mu}(\bar{q}_{i}\gamma^{\mu}\gamma_{5}q_{i})$.....

1 Answer

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

By the chiral anomaly equation $$ \partial^\mu \bar{q}_f\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 q_f = \frac{N_f}{16\pi^2} \tilde{G}^a_{\alpha\beta}G^{a\,\alpha\beta} $$ this correlator is proportional to the topological susceptibility $$ \chi_{top}= \frac{1}{V}\frac{1}{(16\pi^2)^2}\int d^4x \int d^4 y \; \langle T\, \tilde{G}^a_{\alpha\beta}G^{a\,\alpha\beta}(x) \tilde{G}^b_{\gamma\delta}G^{b\,\gamma\delta}(y) \rangle $$ The topological susceptibility is zero if one of the quarks is massless, but it is non-zero in general, and of $O(\Lambda^4_{QCD})$ in pure gauge theory or the large $N_c$ limit.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-12-14 11:01 (UTC), posted by SE-user Thomas
answered Dec 10, 2015 by tmschaefer (720 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:
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