Physics 344

Problem set 6
Due 3/30/00

1. Our second example of SSB in class was a theory with a spontaneously broken internal
U(1) symmetry. The particle spectrum of the theory contained a massless Golstone
boson θ and a massive neutral scalar ρ0 . Although we did not discuss this in class,
the term in the Lagrangian
1 2 1 1
ρ (∂µ θ)2 = a2 (∂µ θ)2 + aρ0 (∂µ θ)2 + ρ02 (∂µ θ)2
2 2 2
gives rise to the decay of the massive meson ρ into two Goldstone bosons, with an
invariant Feynman amplitude proportional to a−1 . (Note: This is not a misprint.
Before reading decay amplitudes off from the Lagrangian we need to rescale θ to put
its kinetic term in the standard form; otherwise the LSZ procedure will produce extra
factors of a.) Example 7 was the same theory minimally coupled to a massless photon.
Here the Goldstone boson disappeared, and the photon acquired a mass. Now consider
the theory minimally coupled instead to a massive vector boson with mass µ0 (before
SSB). What is the vector boson mass after SSB? Does the Goldstone boson survive?
If it does, what is its mass? What happens to the decay amplitude discussed above?

2. In our class discussion of nonabelian gauge theories, I will show how to find the
transformation laws of the matter fields under a finite gauge transformation

φ → gφ ,

and also under an infinitesimal one, g = 1 + δω,

δφ = δωφ .

For the fields Fµν I will only give the infinitesimal transformations,

δFµν = [δω, Fµν ] .

However, you can show that this implies that under finite transformations,

Fµν → gFµν g −1 .
 The argument is as follows: (1) Every finite transformation can be constructed from
infinitesimal ones. (2) The transformation law under finite transformations that I
state above has “the group property,” in other words the result of applying first
the transformation g1 and then the transformation g2 is the same as the result of
applying the transformation g2 g1 . (3) Expanding the finite transformation above
leads to agreement with the known infinitesimal transformations. (A more technically
complicated way to say this rephrases it in terms of integrating differential equations;
the content is not changed much.) Now

(a) Use similar reasoning to show that

δAµ = [δω, Aµ ]

implies
Aµ → gAµ g −1 + g∂µ g −1 .

(b) Let x(s) be a path in spacetime, where s runs from 0 to ∞. Let’s define a unitary
matrix U(s) as the solution to the differential equation

dU dxµ (s)
= −Aµ (x(s)) U(s) ,
ds ds

with the initial condition U(0) = 1. (Note the similarity to interaction-picture

time evolution operator.) Show that under a finite gauge transformation

U(s) → g(x(s))U(s) (g(x(0))) −1 .

(These objects play an important role in computer simulations of gauge field

theories. In these, one replaces a theory in a continuous spacetime by a theory
defined on a lattice. A first naı̈ve approach may be to to replace the matter fields
in spacetime by matter fields defined on the lattice sites, and then do the same
for the gauge fields. This is a bad idea. The gauge fields should be related to
links connecting lattice sites; this makes it easier to maintain gauge invariance.
This makes sense, the gauge-covariant derivatives involve differences in the values
of the matter fields together with the gauge fields.)

3. Consider the scattering,below the inelastic threshold (the energy at which states with
a different particle content than the incoming state become energetically accessible)
of two distinct spinless particles. A two-particle state with definite total momentum
and vanishing center-of-mass angular momentum is necessarily an eigenstate of the
S-matrix; the associated eigenvalue is defined to be e2iδ where δ is called the s-wave
phase shift. The s-wave scattering length a is defined to be the leading term in the
expansion of δ near threshold
δ = ak + · · · ,

where k is the center-of-mass momentum of (either) particle. Find the relation between
a and the invariant Feynman amplitude A, evaluated at threshold. How (if at all)
does this relation change if the two particles are identical?