美文网首页理科生的果壳
不正经的规范场介绍

不正经的规范场介绍

作者: 悟空金月饺子 | 来源:发表于2017-02-22 22:52 被阅读24次
    41qqcE5eUpL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

    Gauge fields are inevitable when we require the nature has some symmetries. For example the symmetry among different frames of reference requires the existence of gravitation. The requirement that all the inertial observers are equivalent is the the principle of special relativity and the requirement that all the possible observers are equivalent is the principle of general relativity. Roughly speaking each observer has his own frames to describe all the possible phenomenons and we believe the nature itself is objective. The observation from different observer must be somehow consistent and covariant. In order to compare the different results from different observers we have to introduce some connections to link different frames. There is still arbitrariness to choose this connection. One of the simplest and most natural quantities which could or should be measured is the distance. It would be better and convenient to demand there is some agreement on distance for different observers. This requirement will pick a choice of the connection and define the geometry of the spacetime. Until here we are using some intuition and common sense but not physics yet. Basically physical laws describe how things change. Gravity is one kind of forces which affect motions or changes. So if we postulate that motion in the spacetime depends on the geometry of the spacetime then we have defined some kind of force. Beautifully this is exactly the gravity.

    How about other forces? From the argument of gravity we can see the origin of forces is the requirement of some symmetries. But the symmetry of what? Or what exactly a symmetry is? We can think the existence of a symmetry reflects that we have multiple ways to describe one thing. For gravity the symmetry is that all the possible frames are allowed and on the same footing. The frame is necessary to describe the position and velocity of particles. Particles also have some other important properties needed to describe, say the phase. As we know there is a duality between waves and particles. And phase it important property of wave. So we also need a reference for the phase. Like before different observers can have their own reference. Again we need to introduce a new corresponding connection to link different phase reference. If we postulate that the motion also depends this phase connection then we have defined a another kind of force. It turns out to be the usual electromagnetic force.

    相关文章

      网友评论

      • LostAbaddon:“we have multiple ways to describe one thing”
        这个其实用来说规范场论中的冗余自由度和鬼场更合适,相同的东西在规范固定前可以有多个看上去不同的项来描述。

        对称的本来意义的确是这句所说的,但在规范场论中的规范对称性却和这个意义不大相同,更多是体现出了流的特性,即为了保证守恒在一个操作下会有流为止补充,从而就可以通过这个流与周围的场发生作用。

        所以回到“How about other forces?”我倒觉得答案不是对称,而是守恒,毕竟对称和守恒还是略有不同的。
        LostAbaddon:@悟空饺子的小灾难 从数学技术角度来说并没有本质上的不同,事实上要计算主丛联络就是在李群上计算从而说对称更自然。
        不同只不过是对物理过程的描述上所用的术语侧重点不一样罢了。
        无论底流形的联络还是主丛联络,都可以看作是流形在对称操作下变了的部分的体现,不变的部分比如局部坐标系改变下不变的局部平直度规,并不带来力效应,变了的部分比如联络本身可以带来力效应。
        悟空金月饺子:这本书很有意思,刚刚看完,很薄的一本,看完了之后随便写了一下感受,其实也是给自己写的,很感谢您的评论。
        1. 不太懂你说的流的特性。这里我是从纤维从还有联络的角度去理解的。规范对称和global 的对称的不同点就是,在任何一个时空点,都可以随意选取坐标系或是参考,但是还要比较不同参考系下的观察结果就要引入联络,联络最后也就是规范场。这个联络可能和你说的流异曲同工?
        2. 我是觉得对称和守恒是差不太多,毕竟有Noether's theorem. 这点上觉得没什么必要深究。不过或许你有其他别的理解。在Yang-Mill's theory 的框架下,谈论对称更加自然。也给后面讨论对称自发破缺或是hidden symmtry提供一个统一的描述。

      本文标题:不正经的规范场介绍

      本文链接:https://www.haomeiwen.com/subject/cjkvwttx.html