Chiral fermions as classical massless spinning particles

C. Duval1∗ , P. A. Horváthy2,3†
Aix-Marseille University, CNRS UMR-7332,
Univ. Sud Toulon-Var 13288 Marseille Cedex 9, (France)
2
Laboratoire de Mathématiques et de Physique Théorique, Université de Tours, (France)
3
Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, (China)
(Dated: June 4, 2014)

Abstract
arXiv:1406.0718v1 [hep-th] 3 Jun 2014

The semiclassical chiral fermion model with a “Berry term” is studied in a symplectic
framework. In the free case, the chiral fermion model carries a zero mass and spin-1/2 Poincaré
symmetry of an unusual form that we explain in terms of its relation to Souriau’s model
of massless relativistic spinning particle. In particular, the Berry term is the classical spin
two-form. This connection allows us to propose a general coupling scheme for any value of the
gyromagnetic ratio g. Our scheme is reminiscent of, but is different from, previously proposed ones.

PACS numbers:

11.15.Kc Classical and semiclassical techniques

11.30.-j Symmetry and conservation laws

11.30.Cp Lorentz and Poincaré invariance

03.65.Vf Phases: geometric; dynamic or topological

11.30.Rd Chiral symmetries

∗
mailto:duval@cpt.univ-mrs.fr
†
mailto:horvathy@lmpt.univ-tours.fr

1
 Contents

1. Introduction 2

2. Symplectic description of the chiral model 3

3. Massless spinning particles 4

4. Poincaré symmetry of the chiral model 8

5. Coupling to an external electromagnetic field 9

A. Minimal coupling of the massless spinning model 10
B. Anomalous coupling 12

6. Conclusion 14

Acknowledgments 15

References 16

1. INTRODUCTION

Massless Weyl fermions have attracted considerable recent interest [1–7]. Sophisticated
quantum calculations are greatly simplified by using (semi)classical models which can be
derived from the Dirac equation [1]. The model in [1, 2] proposes, in particular, to describe
the system by the phase-space action
Z 

dx
dp 
S= p + eA · − |p| + eφ(x) − a · dt, (1.1)
dt dt

which also involves an the additional “momentum-dependent vector potential” a(p) for the
“Berry monopole” in p-space,
pb
∇p × a = b = , (1.2)
2|p|2
where pb is the unit vector pb = p/|p| [8]. Here A(x) and φ(x) are “ordinary” vector and
scalar potentials and e is the electric charge.
The system (1.1)-(2.1) exhibits strong similarities with massive semiclassical models [8, 9],
as well as with their planar counterparts [10, 11].

2
 A remarkable feature of the system (1.1) is its lack of manifest Lorentz symmetry, even
in the absence of an external gauge field [27]. In this paper we show that it does in fact
carry a subtle Poincaré symmetry, derived by comparison with Souriau’s relativistic model
of massless particle with spin [12].
Then we generalize the above model by applying Souriau’s version of minimal coupling
[12, 14] to the massless spinning model which yields a rather strange system, described in
Sect. 5 A. This curious system exhibits a Hall type behavior both for real-space and spin
motion, and cannot be reduced to the chiral fermion.
Then we consider a more general, non minimal coupling scheme, which accommodates
anomalous gyromagnetic ratio, g, by allowing the mass, to depend on the coupling of spin and
field [13, 14]. The resulting, rather complicated system, presented in Section 5 B, combines
the previously studied minimal model which corresponds to g = 0, with new, Stern-Gerlach-
type terms, which involve derivatives of the fields, reminiscent of what is proposed in [7].
The “normal” model, consistent with the Dirac equation [13], corresponds to g = 2 for which
“minimal” terms are switched off. This system is, once again, different form the chiral model
in [1, 2] to which is does not reduce in general.
Throughout this paper we use Souriau’s framework in which motions are described by
curves or even surfaces in some “evolution space” V above Minkowski spacetime. These
so-called “characteristic leaves” are tangent to the kernel of a closed two-form σ on V .
We just mention that this framework can be viewed as a common generalization of both
the Hamiltonian and Lagrangian approaches. The submanifolds defined above can in fact
be viewed as solutions of a generalized variational problem in phase space. The abstract
substitute for the phase space called the “space of motions” is the quotient of V by the
characteristic foliation of σ. For details the reader is invited to consult, e.g., [12, 15].

2. SYMPLECTIC DESCRIPTION OF THE CHIRAL MODEL

Variation of the chiral action (1.1) yields the equations of motion for position x and
momentum p 6= 0 in three-space,

dx


 1 + eb · B dt = pb + eE × b + (b · p)
b eB,
(2.1)


 1 + eb · B dp = eE + epb × B + e2 (E · B) b,

dt

3
where E and B are the electric and magnetic field, respectively. Alternatively and equiva-
lently, the chiral model (1.1) can be described using Souriau’s, framework. We introduce in
fact the seven-dimensional evolution space V 7 = T (R3\{0}) ×R described by triples (x, p, t)
and we endow it with the two-form σ and the Hamiltonian h such that

e
σ = ω − dh ∧ dt, ω = ω0 + ǫijk B i dxj ∧ dxk , h = |p| + eφ, (2.2)
2
1 ijk
ω0 = dpi ∧ dxi − ǫ pi dpj ∧ dpk . (2.3)
4|p|3

The two-forms ω and thus σ are closed since ∇x · B = 0, and ∇p · b = 0. Wherever

det(ωαβ ) = (1 + e b · B)2 6= 0, the kernel of σ is one-dimensional : one shows that a curve


(x(τ ), p(τ ), t(τ ) is tangent to the kernel iff the equations of motion (2.1) are satisfied [28].
At points where det(ωαβ ) = 0 the system is degenerate, and necessitating symplectic alias
“Faddeev-Jackiw” reduction. In the planar case, the vanishing of the analogous determi-
nant, interpreted as the vanishing of an “effective mass”, merely requires fine-tuning of the
magnetic field. In such a case the dynamical degrees of freedom drop from 4 to 2, and the
only allowed motions are those which follow the Hall law; see [10, 11]. In the chiral case
instead the determinant can only vanish in particular singular points of phase space, since
b = b(p) and B = B(x).
Eqs (2.1) exhibit the so-called “anomalous velocity” terms in the first equation, which
has been recognized as the main reason behind “transverse shifts” or “side jumps” in spin-
Hall-type effects [18, 19].

3. MASSLESS SPINNING PARTICLES

Now we consider instead a free relativistic massless spinning particle we describe, fol-
lowing Souriau [12], by a 9-dimensional evolution space V 9 as follows. We start with three
four-vectors in Minkowski spacetime R3,1 with signature (−, −, −, +). Then we put
n  o
V 9 = R, I, J ∈ R3,1  Iµ I µ = Jµ J µ = 0, Iµ J µ = −1 (3.1)

with I future-directed and J past-directed. Thus I and J are lightlike vectors generating
a null 2-plane while R = (Rµ ) represents a spacetime event. An equivalent but for our
purposes more convenient description uses the spin tensor. Renaming P = I (which will be

4
later interpreted as the linear momentum) the latter is defined as,

Sµν = −s ǫµνρσ P ρ J σ . (3.2)

The spin tensor satisfies 21 Sµν S µν = s2 , where s 6= 0 is the scalar spin (also called helicity).
Plainly Sµν P ν = 0. Identifying the tensor S = (Sµν ) with an element of the Lorentz Lie
algebra o(3, 1), the evolutions space (3.1) can also be presented as
 
 1
V = R, P ∈ R , S ∈ o(3, 1)  Pµ P = 0, Sµν P = 0, Sµν S = s .
9 3,1 µ ν µν 2
(3.3)
2
Then V 9 is endowed with the closed two-form borrowed from [12], namely [29]

1
σ = −dPµ ∧ dRµ − 2
dS µλ ∧ S λρ dS ρµ . (3.4)
2s
The dynamics is given by the foliation whose leaves are tangent to the kernel of σ in V 9 ;
a “world-sheet” [or world-line] of the system is obtained by projecting a leaf of the latter
to Minkowski spacetime, yielding its corresponding spacetime track. Calculating the kernel
of (3.4) using also the constraints which define the evolution space shows that a curve
(R(τ ), P (τ ), S(τ )) in V 9 is tangent to ker σ iff


 P Ṙµ = 0,

 µ
Ṗ µ = 0, (3.5)



 Ṡ µν = P µ Ṙν − P ν Ṙµ ,

where the “dot” stands for d/dτ . The spacetime “velocity”, Ṙ, associated to any such curve
is hence orthogonal to the momentum P . Indeed, the distribution defined by Eqs (3.5) can
be integrated using spacetime vectors Z orthogonal to P i.e. such that Pµ Z µ = 0,

Rµ → Rµ + Z µ , P µ → P µ, S µν → S µν + (P µ Z ν − P ν Z µ ). (3.6)

Any point in a leaf of ker σ can be reached by choosing a suitable vector Z. Therefore at
each point of V 9 the kernel of the two-form σ is 3-dimensional and projects to spacetime,
according to (3.5), as an affine subspace of R3,1 spanned by all vectors at R orthogonal
to the linear momentum P . The “motions” of a free massless spinning particle take place
on a 3-dimensional “wave-plane” tangent to the light-cone at each spacetime event R: the
particle is not localized in spacetime [12, 16] [30]. Let us insist that all curves which lie in
a leaf should be considered to be the same motion, left invariant by a “Z-shift” in (3.6).

5
Each (3-dimensional) leaf defines therefore a “motion” of the particle; the space of motions
is the collection M 6 = V 9 / ker σ of those leaves and inherits the structure of a 6-dimensional
manifold (see below). It should be noted that the spin is indeed responsible for this unusual
spacetime delocalization of massless particles.
To obtain down-to earth expressions, we put R = (r, t) where r and t are the position and
time coordinates in a chosen Lorentz frame. The two null-vectors are in turn P = (p, |p|)
and J = (q, −|q|), where p and q are two 3-vectors which satisfy p · q + |p| |q| = 1 by (3.1).
In these terms we have




Sij = ǫijk sk , s = s p|q| + q|p| , Sj4 = s p × q j
= pb × s j . (3.7)

We now label each leaf of ker σ by picking a representative point in each of them. To
this end, we first observe that τ → (R + τ P, P, S) is an integral curve of ker σ for any
given (R, P, S), i.e., a particular “motion”. Next, shifting this curve by Z = (s pb × q, 0) =
(−s × p/|p|2, 0) yields another integral curve lying in the same leaf. Finally, taking τ =
−t/|p| yields the point which has zero time coordinate. This is the point we choose. The
corresponding point on the shifted curve has position R = (r, 0) and its associated quantity
b
q = p/(2|p|) is determined by p alone. Choosing this labelling the spin becomes “enslaved”
to the linear 3-momentum, Sj4 = 0, and

s = s pb . (3.8)

An important observation which follows from (3.7) is that

pb · s = s (3.9)

in general, and not only in the case (3.8). It is thus not length of the 3 vector s but its
projection onto pb which is a constant. In terms of 3+1 variables, Z = (Z, p·Z)
b the “Z-shift”
(3.6) acts as
r → r + Z, p → p, s → s + s(p × Z), (3.10)

which can we used, as we have seen, to “enslave the spin” by putting its fourth compo-
nent to zero. Conversely, attempting to “enslave” the spin by a “Z-shift” requires thus


s + s(p × Z) × p = 0, consistently with our choice above.
Thus, in the free case, the freedom of “Z-shifting” allows us to eliminate the spin as
an independent degree of freedom altogether and the entire leaf can be labelled by x̃ = r

6
and p̃ = p 6= 0, alone. The latter provide us with coordinates on the space of motions
M 6 = V 9 / ker σ, which has therefore the topology of T (R3 \{0}). At last, the two-form σ in
(3.4) descends to the space of motions M 6 as the symplectic two-form
s ijk
ω = dp̃i ∧ dx̃i − ǫ p̃i dp̃j ∧ dp̃k (3.11)
2|p̃|3
which features a canonical symplectic structure on T (R3 \{0}), “twisted” by the area two-
1 ijk
form, 2
ǫ p̂i dp̂j ∧ dp̂k of the 2-sphere, see [12].
Now we establish the Poincaré symmetry of the model. The Poincaré Lie algebra e(3, 1),
spanned by the pairs (Λ, Γ) where Λ = (Λµν ) belongs to the Lorentz Lie algebra o(3, 1), and
Γ = (Γµ ) is a translation in Minkowski spacetime, R3,1 , acts on V 9 by the lift of its action
on Minkowski-spacetime. This action on V 9 reads as follows

δRµ = Λµν Rν + Γµ , δP µ = Λµν P ν , δSµν = Λµρ S ρν − Λνρ S ρµ , (3.12)

and clearly leaves the 2-form (3.4) invariant. It is therefore a symmetry of the system, which
descends to the space of motions (M 6 , ω). The associated Noetherian conserved quantities
are
P µ = I µ, M µν = Rµ P ν − Rν P µ + S µν , (3.13)

which identifies the vector P and the bi-vector M as the conserved linear and angular
momentum, respectively.
To get explicit formulas in a 3 + 1 decomposition, we parametrize the Poincaré Lie
algebra by Λij = ǫijk ω k , Λi4 = β i and Γ = (γ, ε), where ω, β, γ ∈ R3 , ε ∈ R are infinitesimal
rotations, boosts and space- and time-translations, respectively. Then the infinitesimal
action (3.12) projects to Minkowski spacetime as the usual infinitesimal Poincaré action,
δr = ω × r + βt + γ, δt = β · r + ε .
To write down the explicit form of the Poincaré momenta (3.13) in the chosen Lorentz
frame, we present the matrix M = (Mµν ) which belongs to the dual to the Lorentz algebra
as Mij = ǫijk ℓk and Mj4 = g j with ℓ and g two 3-vectors. In terms of the above (3 + 1)-
parametrization we find ℓ = r × p + s (|p|q + |q|p), g = |p| r − pt + s p × q. Then
g
x̃ = = r − pb t + s pb × q (3.14)
|p|
is itself conserved. Working out the action of the full Poincaré Lie algebra (3.12) on the
space of motions (M 6 , ω) [31] provides us with
β × p̃ p̃ p̃
δ p̃ = ω × p̃ + |p̃| β , δ x̃ = ω × x̃ + − β · x̃ + γ − ε . (3.15)
2|p̃|2 |p̃| |p̃|

7
This 10-parameter vector field leaves the free symplectic structure (3.11) invariant, i.e., it
generates a family of symmetries, to which the symplectic Noether theorem [12] associates
10 constants of the motion [32], namely


 ℓ = x̃ × p̃ + spb angular momentum



 g = |p̃| x̃ boost momentum
(3.16)

 p = p̃ linear momentum




E = |p̃| energy

whose conservation follows also directly from the free equations of motions. Note that the
two terms in the free angular momentum ℓ are separately conserved.
The Poisson brackets of the quantities in (3.16) calculated using (3.11),

{ℓi , ℓj } = −ǫkij ℓk , {ℓi , gj } = −ǫkij gk , {ℓi , pj } = −ǫkij pk , {ℓi , E} = 0,

(3.17)
{gi , gj } = ǫkij ℓk , {gi , pj } = −E δij , {gi , E} = −pi , {pi , pj } = 0, {pi , E} = 0,

are those of the Poincaré Lie algebra e(3, 1), as they should be. Calculating the Casimir
invariants
m2 = −p2 + E 2 = 0 , ℓ · pb = s , (3.18)

shows that the Poincaré symmetry we have just found is realized in the zero-mass and
spin-s representation. The reason hidden behind all this is that the (connected) Poincaré
group acts on the space of motions symplectically and transitively. Therefore (M 6 , ω) is a
coadjoint orbit of the Poincaré group by Souriau’s theorem [12]. The symplectic form (3.11)
is, in particular, Souriau’s #(17.145) in [12]. The Z-translations in Eq. (3.6) belong to the
stability subgroup H = SO(2) × R3 of the Poincaré action of a basepoint in the orbit. The
vectors Z are identified as “Wigner translations” [17], as M. Stone pointed out to us.

4. POINCARÉ SYMMETRY OF THE CHIRAL MODEL

Now we return to chiral fermions as described by (1.1) and deduce their Poincaré sym-
metry. Our clue will be the identity of the their space of motion with that of the massless
model.
In the free case E = B = 0 the motions can be determined explicitly; the b-term drops
out from (2.1) which are integrated at once, x(t) = x̃ + pb t, p(t) = p̃ with x̃ and p̃

8
constant vectors. The chiral space of motions M 6 = V 7 / ker σ can, therefore, be described
by x̃ = x(t) − pb t and p̃. But with the fields switched off, in terms of x̃ and p̃, the two-
form ω0 in (2.2) becomes precisely (3.11). Thus the free chiral model has the same space of
motions as the massless spinning particle with s = 1/2 we studied in Section 3, as stated.
It is now straightforward to derive the Poincaré symmetry of the free chiral model : From
the identity of the space-of-motions coordinates (x̃, p̃) we conclude that the position, x, of
the chiral particle and that of the massless Poincaré model are the same, x = r. Then
in terms of the coordinates (x, p, t) on the chiral evolution space V 7 , the strange-looking
Poincaré infinitesimal action (3.15) with s = 1/2 becomes

pb
δx = ω × x + β × + β t + γ, δp = ω × p + |p| β, δt = β · x + ε. (4.1)
2|p|

Equation (4.1) confirms and extends the recently proposed action of its Lorentz subalgebra
[7]. The conserved quantities associated with the Lorentz generators are, in particular,

1
ℓ= x×p + b
p, g = |p| x − pt. (4.2)
2

We have thus established the Poincaré symmetry of the free chiral system. We insist,
however, that this action is not the usual, natural one on ordinary spacetime. In fact it is
not an action on spacetime at all, since it also involves the momentum variable p.

5. COUPLING TO AN EXTERNAL ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD

Conventional “minimal coupling” says the momentum should be shifted by the 4-

potential,
pµ → pµ − eAµ . (5.1)

This is not exactly what is proposed in (1.1), though: while the (5.1) is used for the 4-
momentum (p, h), the p in the “Berry term” b is not shifted. Remarkably, this “half-way-
rule” is instead consistent with Souriau’s prescription [12] which requires working with the
same evolution space as that of a free particle but add the electromagnetic field strength eF
to the free two-form (3.4),
σ → σ + eF. (5.2)

This two-form is still closed, dσ = 0, because F is a closed 2-form of Minkowski spacetime.

9
 The rules (5.1) and (5.2) are equivalent in the spinless case only. Then why should (5.2)
be chosen ? An argument in its favor comes form experience in the plane, where it yielded an
insight into Hall-type phenomena [10, 11, 18, 19], and this is the scheme we use throughout
this paper.

A. Minimal coupling of the massless spinning model

Applying Souriau’s prescription (5.2) to the massless spinning model of Section 3 yields,
on the evolution space V 9 in (3.3), the closed two-form
1 e
σ = −dPµ ∧ dRµ − 2
dS µλ ∧ S λρ dS ρµ + Fµν dRµ ∧ dRν . (5.3)
2s 2
Then a lengthy calculation using the constraints in the definition (3.3) of V 9 shows that the
equations of free motions (3.5) change to [33]


 S µν Fνρ P ρ

 Ṙµ = Pµ + 1 ,

 S·F
 2

Ṗ µ = −eF µν Ṙν , (5.4)







 Ṡ µν = P µ Ṙν − P ν Ṙµ .

assuming that S · F ≡ Sαβ F αβ 6= 0. The dimension of ker σ drops from 3 to 1 : the spin-field
coupling term in the velocity relation breaks the “Z-shift”-invariance. It follows that the
spin degree can not now be eliminated and we are left with a 9 − 1 = 8-dimensional space
of motions (phase space, locally).
Let us now express the equations of motion (5.4) in terms of the 3+1 decomposition we
introduced in the previous section. Assuming, that
1 1
(a) S · F ≡ Sαβ F αβ = s · (B − pb × E) 6= 0, (b) pb · B 6= 0, (5.5)
2 2
a strange cancellation takes place in the velocity relation in (5.4), which becomes
B − pb × E (pb · B)
ṙ = s|p| , ṫ = s|p| . (5.6)
s · (B − pb × E) s · (B − pb × E)
Condition (a) will henceforth assumed to be satisfied.
Condition (b) in (5.5) requires that the momentum should not be perpendicular to the
magnetic field. When it is not satisfied then ṫ = 0, so that while the motion is still along a
curve, it becomes instantaneous [34].

10
 Let us assume that the regularity conditions (5.5) hold; then merging the two equations
in (5.6) provides us with

 dr B − pb × E

 =

 dt pb · B


 dp dr
E·B
= e E+ ×B =e pb . (5.7)

 dt dt pb · B



 b
 ds = p × dr = p × B − p × (p × E)

dt dt pb · B pb · B
We insist on the rather unusual form of these equations. Firstly, the pb one would have
expected on the r.h.s. of the velocity relation cancels out and the electric charge drops out
also. The dynamics of the momentum decouples from the spin as long as the latter does
not vanish; also the scalar spin s 6= 0 disappears from all equations. Eqs (5.7) imply that
b
dp/dt = 0 so that the direction of p is unchanged during the motion. Spin is in fact not
an independent degree of freedom, its (for spacetime dynamics irrelevant) motion is entirely
determined by the other dynamical data.
Let us put, for example, our “massless but charged particle” into perpendicular constant
electromagnetic fields like in the Hall effect, B = B ẑ, and E = E x̂ (say). Then p is itself
a constant of the motion, and so is the angle θ between B and p (which cannot be π/2 for
p · B 6= 0). Let us assume for simplicity that the initial momentum lies in the x-z plane.
Then the equations of motion are solved by,
  E 

 r(t) = (cos θ) −1
ẑ + ŷ t + r0 ,
B
  . (5.8)

 s(t) = |p| − tan θ ŷ + E cos θ x̂ − sin θ ẑ) t + s ,
0
B
Thus, in addition to a constant-speed vertical motion, the “particle” also drifts perpendic-
ularly to the electric field with Hall velocity E/B. The spin vector follows an even more
curious motion perpendicularly to pb so that its projection on pb is still a constant,

s(t) · pb = s0 · p.
b (5.9)

Thus while spin is decoupled, it can not consistently be “enslaved” as in (3.8) since s and pb
do not remain parallel even for such initial condition.
The vertical velocity (cos θ)−1 and the horizontal velocity of its spin both diverge as
θ → π/2; for pb · B = 0 we get instantaneous (i.e. infinite-velocity) motions parallel to the z
axis.

11
 B. Anomalous coupling

The model of Section 5 A is curious but not completely satisfactory, and now we generalize
our minimal coupling scheme. Our clue now is to allow the “mass-square” Pµ P µ to depend
on the coupling of spin to the electromagnetic field as suggested in [13, 14], i.e.,

eg
Pµ P µ = − S · F, (5.10)
2

where we used once again the shorthand S · F ≡ Sαβ F αβ , cf. (5.5). The real constant g will
be interpreted as the gyromagnetic ratio [35]. Generalizing the previous relation P = I as

eg
P µ = Iµ + (S · F )J µ , (5.11)
4

where I and J are still as in (3.1), helps us to implement the equation of state (5.10). The
condition Sµν P ν = 0 is also automatically satisfied. Hence we introduce the novel evolution
space
 
 eg 1
Ve 9 = 3,1  µ ν µν 2
P, R ∈ R , S ∈ o(3, 1) Pµ P = − S · F, Sµν P = 0, Sµν S = s , (5.12)
2 2

endowed with the closed two-form,

1 1
σ = −dPµ ∧ dRµ − 2
dSλµ ∧ Sρλ dSµρ + eFµν dRµ ∧ dRν . (5.13)
2s 2

Note that (5.13) is formally the same as (5.3) up to the mass-shell constraint.
Some more effort is needed to work our the new equations of motion from the kernel of σ
using the constraints which define Ve 9 . We find that a curve (R(τ ), P (τ ), S(τ )) is tangent to
ker σ in (5.13) iff

 µ µ 1 1 h µν ρ µν ρσ
i

 Ṙ = P − (g − 2) S Fνρ P − g S ∂ν Fρσ S ,

 (g + 1) Sαβ F αβ



eg µ
Ṗ µ = −eF µν Ṙν − ∂ Fρσ S ρσ , (5.14)

 4



 h i
 Ṡ µν = P µ Ṙν − P ν Ṙµ + eg S µρ F ρν − S νρ F ρµ .

2
These equations, which reduce to (5.3) for g = 0, constitute the zero-rest-mass counterparts
of the celebrated Bargmann-Michel-Telegdi equations for massive relativistic particles [21],
as well as 4 dimensional analogs of “exotic” anyons in the plane [11]. In the “normal” case
g = 2 resulting from the Dirac equation [13], the previously considered anomalous velocity is

12
canceled but there arises a new, “Stern - Gerlach-type” contribution involving the derivative
of the external electromagnetic field. Thus, an anomalous velocity term shows up for any
value of the gyromagnetic ratio g.
Now we turn to a 3 + 1 decomposition. Things behave as before up to some subtle
differences. Firstly,
p 
R = (r, t), P = (p, E), Sj4 = ×s , (5.15)
E j

where the spin tensor is still defined as in (3.2), but the new dispersion relation generalizes
the last equation in (3.16) [36], namely
r
eg
E= |p|2 − S ·F . (5.16)
2

Decomposing the electro-magnetic field into its electric and magnetic components, the
quantity (5.5) (a) is generalized to

1  p 
S·F = s· B− ×E . (5.17)
2 E

Then a rather tedious calculation yields the following 3 + 1 form of the equations of
motion (5.14), namely
    eg  g − 2 
 3g g−2 s·p  p s

 ṙ = p− B− ×E + E×

 2(g + 1) g+1 S·F E 2 g+1 E



 g  p 

 − s × (S · DF ) − × s (S · Dt F ) ,



 2(g + 1)S · F E



  

 g
g − 2 1

 ṫ = 3|p| 2
− (g + 1)eS · F − (p · B)(s · p)

 2(g + 1)E g+1 ES·F
(5.18)

 eg(g − 2) g 1

 + s · (p × E) − (p × s) · (S · DF ),

 2(g + 1)E 2 (g + 1) E S · F






eg



 ṗ = e E ṫ + ṙ × B + S · DF,

 4



  p  

 ṡ = p × ṙ + eg

×s ×E+s×B ,
2 E
where we introduced the new shorthands
 p   p 
S · Dj F = 2s · ∂j B − × ∂j E , S · Dt F = 2s · ∂t B − × ∂t E . (5.19)
E E

13
 When g = 0 we recover (5.7). To get a better insight we consider g = 2 and assume that
the fields are constant; then the field-derivative terms drop out and the complicated system
(5.18) simplifies to [37]

 dr

 E = p,

 dt

  

dp dr
(g = 2) = e E+ ×B , (5.20)

 dt dt



  p  
 ds = e

× s × E +
s
× B .
dt E2 E
assuming E =
6 0, which acts as a sort of effective mass. In a pure magnetic field momentum
and spin satisfy equations of identical form,

dp e ds e
= p×B, = s×B. (5.21)
dt E dt E

Multiplying these equations by p, s and by B, respectively, imply that

 
 |p| = const 6= 0, p · B = const,  pz = const, sz = const,
⇒ (5.22)
 |s| = const 6= 0, s · B = const  E = p|p|2 − es · B = const,

Choosing z axis in the direction of the magnetic field, B = B ẑ, for example, both the mo-
mentum and spin vectors precess around the z axis with common angular velocity (−eB/E),

p(t) = (p0 e−i(eB/E)t , pz ), s(t) = (s0 e−i(eB/E)t , sz ), (5.23)

where p0 = px + ipy , s0 = sx + isy and therefore

 ip pz 
0
r(t) = e−i(eB/E)t , t + r0 . (5.24)
eB E

In the purely magnetic case, “enslavement” (3.8) can consistently be required, because
for s = s pb the two equations in (5.21) become identical. However, this is manifestly not so
in the presence of an electric field. It follows that the independent spin degree of freedom
can not be switched off in this case.

6. CONCLUSION

In this paper we have shown that the semiclassical chiral fermion model, much discussed
in kinetic theory in connection with the chiral magnetic and chiral vortical effects [1–7], is,

14
in the free case, equivalent to Souriau’s zero mass and spin-1/2 particle model and shares
therefore the Poincaré symmetry of the latter. Our result extends the recently proposed
expression (4.1) for Lorentz boost in [7].
One could argue that this is what one would expect for a relativistic theory. We would
like to stress, however, that this action is not the usual natural one on ordinary spacetime
— on the contrary, it resembles a sort of “dynamical symmetry” in that it also depends
on the momentum. The mystery is explained by our construction, which does start with a
natural Poincaré action.
Using the correspondence with the zero-mass spin-1/2 particle, we also put forward a
novel scheme for minimal/normal/anomalous coupling of our particle to an external scheme.
Our coupled model, obtained by applying Souriau’s principles, is reminiscent of but different
from from those proposed in [1–7] . The main difference is that the usual chiral model (1.1),
proposed in [1, 2] has no independent spin degree of freedom. The only ones are position
and momentum; spin is in fact “enslaved” to the latter in the free case, and this is tacitly
assumed also after coupling the system to an external (electromagnetic or Yang-Mills) field.
Our model has instead two additional degrees of freedom, — namely “unchained” spin.
Then the free system can not be localized [12, 16]: its “motions” fill a 3-plane, rather than
a curve. However, coupling our system to an external field, the particle becomes localized.
Our examples show that spin is “unchained”, except in the in the free case. While the
standard chiral model has a 6-dimensional phase space, ours has, in the coupled case, 8
dimensions.
We presented our theory using a symplectic approach, instead of the usual variational one.
Although the two frameworks are equivalent [12, 15], using the symplectic one is technically
more convenient, because it dispenses us from working with local potentials. It also allows
us to derive all properties in one go. For example, Liouville’s theorem follows at once [9, 12].
The non-Abelian generalization is also straightforward using the framework of [22].

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Mike Stone for calling our attention to this problem, for enlighten-
ing correspondence and for sending us his forthcoming paper [26]. “Information tunneling”
may have mutually influenced our work. We are indebted also to Gary Gibbons, Pengming

15
Zhang and François Ziegler for stimulating discussions.

[1] M. A. Stephanov and Y. Yin, “Chiral Kinetic Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 162001
[arXiv:1207.0747 [hep-th]].
[2] M. Stone and V. Dwivedi, “Classical version of the non-Abelian gauge anomaly,” Phys. Rev. D
88 (2013) 4, 045012 [arXiv:1305.1955 [hep-th]]; “Classical chiral kinetic theory and anomalies
in even space-time dimensions,” J. Phys. A 47 (2013) 025401 [arXiv:1308.4576 [hep-th]].
[3] D. T. Son and N. Yamamoto, “Berry Curvature, Triangle Anomalies, and the Chiral Magnetic
Effect in Fermi Liquids,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 181602 [arXiv:1203.2697 [cond-mat.mes-
hall]]; “Kinetic theory with Berry curvature from quantum field theories,” Phys. Rev. D 87
(2013) 085016 [arXiv:1210.8158 [hep-th]].
[4] K. Fukushima, D. E. Kharzeev and H. J. Warringa, “The Chiral Magnetic Effect,” Phys. Rev.
D 78 (2008) 074033 [arXiv:0808.3382 [hep-ph]]; “Real-Time Dynamics of the Chiral Magnetic
Effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (2010) 212001.
[5] J. -W. Chen, S. Pu, Q. Wang and X. -N. Wang, “Berry Curvature and Four-Dimensional
Monopoles in the Relativistic Chiral Kinetic Equation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 262301
[arXiv:1210.8312 [hep-th]].
[6] J. -W. Chen, J. -y. Pang, S. Pu and Q. Wang, “Non-Abelian Berry phase in a semi-classical
description of massive Dirac fermions,” arXiv:1312.2032 [hep-th].
[7] J. -Y. Chen, D. T. Son, M. A. Stephanov, H. -U. Yee and Y. Yin, “Lorentz Invariance in
Chiral Kinetic Theory,” arXiv:1404.5963 [hep-th].
[8] D. Xiao, M. -C. Chang and Q. Niu, “Berry Phase Effects on Electronic Properties,” Rev.
Mod. Phys. 82 (2010) 1959 [arXiv:0907.2021 [cond-mat.mes-hall]].
[9] C. Duval, Z. Horvath, P. A. Horvathy, L. Martina and P. C. Stichel, “Berry phase correc-
tion to electron density in solids and ’exotic’ dynamics,” Mod. Phys. Lett. B 20 (2006) 373
[cond-mat/0506051].
[10] C. Duval and P. A. Horvathy, “The “Peierls substitution” and the exotic Galilei group.” Phys.
Lett. B 479, 284 (2000) [hep-th/0002233]; “Exotic galilean symmetry in the non-commutative
plane, and the Hall effect,” Journ. Phys. A34, 10097 (2001) [hep-th/0106089].
[11] C. Duval and P. A. Horváthy, “Anyons with anomalous gyromagnetic ratio, & the Hall effect.”

16
 Phys. Lett. B 594, 402 (2004) [hep-th/0402191].
[12] J.-M. Souriau, Structure des systèmes dynamiques, Dunod (1970). Structure of Dynamical
Systems. A Symplectic View of Physics, Birkhäuser, Boston (1997).
[13] C. Duval, Doctorat de 3ème cycle en physique théorique (Université de Provence): “Un modèle
de particule à spin dans un champ électromagnétique et gravitationnel extérieur” (1972) (un-
published); “The General Relativistic Dirac-Pauli Particle: An Underlying Classical Model,”
Annales Poincaré Phys. Theor. 25 (1976) 345.
[14] J.-M. Souriau, “Modèle de particule à spin dans le champs electromagnetique et gravitation-
nel,” Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré, 20, 315 (1974).
[15] P. A. Horvathy and L. Úry, “Analogy between statics and dynamics, related to variational
mechanics,” Acta Phys. Hung. 42, 251 (1977); P. A. Horvathy, “Variational formalism for
spinning particles.” Journ. Math. Phys. 20, 49 (1979).
[16] R. Penrose, “Twistor algebra,” J. Math. Phys. 8 (1967) 345; R. Penrose and M. A. H. Mac-
Callum, “Twistor theory: An Approach to the quantization of fields and space-time,” Phys.
Rept. 6 (1972) 241.
[17] E. Wigner, “On unitary representation of the inhomogeneous Lorentz group,” Ann. Math. 40
149-204 (1939).
[18] P. A. Horvathy, “Anomalous Hall Effect in non-commutative mechanics,” Phys. Lett. A 359
(2006) 705 [arXiv:cond-mat/0606472].
[19] K. Yu. Bliokh and Yu. P. Bliokh, “Topological spin transport of photons: the optical Magnus
Effect and Berry Phase”, Phys. Lett. A 333, 181, (2004): M. Onoda, S. Murakami, and N.
Nagaosa, “Hall Effect of Light”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 083901, (2004) C. Duval, Z. Horváth,
P. A. Horváthy : “Fermat Principle for polarized light,” Phys. Rev. D74, 021701 (2006)
[cond-mat/0509636]; “Geometrical SpinOptics and the Optical Hall Effect,” Journ. Geom.
Phys. 57, 925 (2007) [math-ph/0509031].
[20] M.S. Plyushchay, “Massless Point Particle With Rigidity,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A4 (1989) 837-
847; “Massless particle with rigidity as a model for description of bosons and fermions,”Phys.
Lett. B243 (1990) 383-388.
[21] V. Bargmann, L. Michel and V. L. Telegdi, “Precession of the polarization of particles moving
in a homogeneous electromagnetic field,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 2 (1959) 435.
[22] C. Duval, “On the prequantum description of spinning particles in an external gauge field,”

17
 Proc. Aix Conference on Diff. Geom. Meths. in Math. Phys. Ed. Souriau. Springer LNM 836,
49 (1980); C. Duval and P. A. Horvathy, “Particles with internal structure: the geometry of
classical motions and conservation laws.” Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 142, 10 (1982).
[23] C. Duval, “On the Polarizers of Compact Semisimple Lie Groups: Applications,” Annales
Poincaré Phys. Theor. 34 (1981) 95.
[24] H. Balasin, D. N. Blaschke, F. Gieres and M. Schweda, “Charged relativistic particles in
non-commutative space,” arXiv:1403.0255 [hep-th].
[25] D. Xiao, J. -r. Shi and Q. Niu, “Berry phase correction to electron density of states in solids,”
Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 137204 [cond-mat/0502340].
[26] M. Stone, V. Dwivedi, T. Zhou, “Berry Phase, Lorentz Covariance, and Anomalous Velocity
for Dirac and Weyl Particles,” [arXiv: 1406.0354].
[27] Alternative equations with Lorentz symmetry were proposed in [5, 7], and the model was
generalized to the non-Abelian context [2, 6].
[28] The equations of motion (2.1) are also Hamiltonian, with Hamiltonian h as in (2.3) and
fundamental Poisson brackets given by [9]

−ǫijk bk e ǫijk B k δij + e bi B j

{xi , xj } = , {pi , pj } = , {pi , xj } = .
1 + eb · B 1 + eb · B 1 + eb · B

It follows that the coordinates do not commute, let alone in the free case.
[29] We have chosen energy and helicity to be positive.
[30] Things change dramatically in the presence of an external (gauge or gravitational) field which
localize these massless spinning particles along bona fide 1-dimensional worldlines of spacetime
see Section 5.
[31] One of us (CD) discussed the infinitesimal action (3.15) and the quantities listed in (3.16)
with F. Ziegler long ago (unpublished).
[32] For a massive particle, “boost momentum” would be conserved centre-of-mass.
[33] The system would become singular at those points of V 9 where Sαβ F αβ = 0; this would
change locally the dimension of ker σ, destroying a priori the smooth manifold structure of
the space of motions.
[34] Instantaneous motions with infinite velocity are familiar in non-relativistic optics [19]. In-
triguingly, motion with superluminal velocity also appears in certain higher-order massless
relativistic models [20].

18
[35] Equation (5.10) can be generalized by putting Pµ P µ = f (eSαβ F αβ ) where f is an otherwise
arbitrary function such that f (0) = 0. We refer to [13, 14] for the case of massive spinning
particles non-minimally coupled to an external electromagnetic field.
[36] As S · F itself involves E, Eq. (5.16) is a third-order algebraic equation for E.
[37] dr/dt is the group velocity. Notice the similarity of (5.20) with the velocity-momentum relation
in special relativity.

19