• 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.


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

204 submissions , 162 unreviewed
5,026 questions , 2,180 unanswered
5,344 answers , 22,687 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
815 active unimported users
More ...

  Quark chiral condensate v.s. gluon condensate

+ 0 like - 0 dislike

In Wikipedia, it says that "The evidence for QCD condensates comes from two eras, the pre-QCD era 1950–1973 and the post-QCD era, after 1974. The pre-QCD results established that the strong interactions vacuum contains a quark chiral condensate, while the post-QCD results established that the vacuum also contains a gluon condensate."

I believe the quark condensate is a pretty standard story we learn from, for example, any text on QCD (see Dynamics of the Standard Model by Donoghue et all). How about the glon condensate? What is the proper expression and analytic computation of gluon condensate?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:42 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
asked Jun 19, 2017 in Theoretical Physics by annie marie heart (1,205 points) [ no revision ]
Might take a look at 2014 determination.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:42 (UTC), posted by SE-user Cosmas Zachos
The original paper is "Infrared Instability of the Vacuum State of Gauge Theories and Asymptotic Freedom", doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(77)90759-6

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:42 (UTC), posted by SE-user Kostas

1 Answer

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

I think the term gluon condensate" usually means $<F_{\mu\nu} F^{\mu\nu}/4>$. This is not really a condensate however, because it does not break any symmetry. Furthermore, since the operator $F_{\mu\nu} F^{\mu\nu}$ mixes with the identity operator under renormalization, it is a non-universal quantity, so it is not clear what it means physically.

There are various QCD "sum rules" that make use of this quantity, but they depend on a separation of "perturbative" from "non-perturbative" contributions. I've never understood how this can be done rigorously, and I am not alone in this skepticism, however the practitioners of this art claim that they know what they are doing, and I am not expert to argue with them.

This paper: arXiv:hep-ph/9502326v1, seems to have useful things to say about the issue.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-10-29 11:42 (UTC), posted by SE-user mike stone
answered Jun 19, 2017 by mike stone (30 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).
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