# **Group structure** in Chern-Simons theory?

+ 8 like - 0 dislike
59 views

A non-Abelian Chern-Simons(C-S) has the action $$S=\int L dt=\int \frac{k}{4\pi}Tr[\big( A \wedge d A + (2/3) A \wedge A \wedge A \big)]$$

We know that the common cases, $A=A^a T^a$ is the connection as a Lie algebra valued one form. $T^a$ is the generator of the Lie group.

The well-known case is the well-defined SU(2) C-S theory and SO(3) C-S theory.

SU(2) is a compact, simple, simply-connected Lie group.

SO(3) is a compact, simple, connected but not simply connected Lie group.

Question: what is the minimum requirement on the group structure of $A$ in Chern-Simons theory?

Can we have the group of $A$ of C-S theory:

(1) to be NOT a Lie group?

(2) to be NOT compact?

(3) to be NOT connected?

(4) to be a Lie group but NOT a simple-Lie group?

Please could you also explain why is it so, and better with some examples of (1),(2),(3),(4).

ps. Of course, I know C-S theory is required to be invariant under a gauge transformation $$A \to U^\dagger(A-id)U$$ with a boundary derives a Wess-Zumino-Witten term. Here I am questioning the constraint on the group. Many thanks!

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-06 16:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user cycles
I need at least 10-ish reputation to add some more web links on those terms on semi-simple, etc. If someone can help, please...

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-06 16:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user cycles
There is a formulation of $2+1$ gravity as a C-S theory. The groups in this case are $ISO(2,1)$, $SO(3,1)$ and $SO(2,2)$ (depending on the cosmological constant choice). So, I guess that compactness and (semi)simplicity is optional. The reference is: Witten, E. (1988). 2+1 dimensional gravity as an exactly soluble system. Nuclear Physics B, 311(1), 46-78. doi.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-06 16:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user user23660

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-06 16:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user cycles
Another reference is CS theories with a finite gauge groups: Dijkgraaf, R., & Witten, E. (1990). Topological gauge theories and group cohomology. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 129(2), 393-429. doi preprint. So we do not really need the group to be a Lie group.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-06 16:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user user23660
But whether those Dijkgraaf-Witten theory can always be written as a continuous Chern-Simons action? Or may not be? Whether there is always a continuous gauge transformation for those discrete gauge theory?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-06 16:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user cycles
The formulation of D-W theory through C-S action is here: Freed, D. S., & Quinn, F. (1993). Chern-Simons theory with finite gauge group. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 156(3), 435-472. arXiv:hep-th/9111004. There are indeed only trivial gauge transformations for discrete groups.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-06 16:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user user23660
@user23660, can you specify what is your trivial gauge transformations? Do you have both finite and infinitesimal forms of gauge transformations? Thanks.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-06 16:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user cycles

+ 5 like - 0 dislike

The nLab is a great reference for all of these things and seems to answer all of your questions. They do a better job of explaining why than I would probably do.

Their page on Chern-Simons Theory seems to answer questions (2)-(4). They give a method for constructing Chern-Simons theories from generic compact Lie groups in the page listed. They also have a section describing Witten's construction for 2+1 gravity, which should constitute a set of examples.

Dijkgraaf-Witten Theories can be thought of as Chern-Simons theories because they are constructed in the same way Chern-Simons theories are constructed. This can be seen by comparing the two definitions and constructions in the nLab pages linked here. In this sense the DW theories are CS theories constructed from discrete groups.

As to examples, I believe the simplest is the D($\mathbb Z_2$) Dijkgraaf-Witten TQFT, which has a Hamiltonian realization in Kitaev's Toric code model.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-06 16:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Matthew Titsworth
answered Dec 21, 2013 by (200 points)
Since I could only include two references above, the reference for the toric code is arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9707021.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-06 16:49 (UCT), posted by SE-user Matthew Titsworth

 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): Email me at this address if my answer is selected or commented on: 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$\varnothing$OverflowThen 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.