# The gauge invariance and the tree unitarity

+ 3 like - 0 dislike
1879 views

Recently I have decided to study EM processes with massive spin-1 boson represented by a field $\hat {W}_{\mu}$.

At the first time I have used minimally modified lagrangian: $$\tag 1 \hat {L} = |\partial_{\mu}\hat {W}_{\nu} - \partial_{\nu}\hat {W}_{\mu}|^{2} + m^{2}|\hat {W}|^{2} \to \hat {L}_{m} = |\hat {D}_{\mu}\hat {W}_{\nu} - \hat {D}_{\nu}\hat {W}_{\mu}|^{2} + m^{2}|\hat {W}|^{2} + F_{\mu \nu}^2 ,$$ where $\hat{D}_{\mu} = \partial_{\mu} - iq_{e}\hat {A}_{\mu}$.

Then I have decided to observe the $W W^{+} \to \gamma \gamma$ process which is described by three diagramms of the second (the lowest) order of $q_{e}$.

It turned out that the longitudinal photons are involved in the interaction, despite the apparent Lorentz invariance of the theory. After that I have recalled that theory $(1)$ doesn't have the tree-unitarity, while the theory which is given by $$\hat {L} = \hat {L}_{m} -iq_{e}\hat {F}^{\mu \nu}\hat {W}_{\mu}\hat {W}^{\dagger}_{\nu}$$ has the unitarity. Now the $W W^{+} \to \gamma \gamma$ is free of longitudinal photons.

So, the question: does there exist some relation between the unitarity and gauge invariance? I.e. do we need the tree-unitarity (not the renormalizability, I'm not about it) when discuss about Ward identities and its applications for the arbitrary "gauge-invariant candidate" theory?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-29 20:50 (UCT), posted by SE-user Andrew McAddams
@Dox : as for the diagrams, you can see them into the question body. As for me their sum are full (the picture is given from Horejsi's "Introduction to electroweak interactions").

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-29 20:50 (UCT), posted by SE-user Andrew McAddams
@AndrewMcAddams From your notation, the field $W$ seems to be complex (not real). Why do you claim that your first Lagrangian describe a SINGLE massive spin-1 particle"

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-29 20:50 (UCT), posted by SE-user drake
@drake : the W-field describes particle-antiparticle as well as Dirac spinor describes particle-antiparticle, for example. The reason why we include antiparticle as well as particle is important: it's because we predict poincare-covariance and causality of the theory. Here I don't see a trouble which can lead to the problem with the gauge invariance.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-29 20:50 (UCT), posted by SE-user Andrew McAddams

bump ...

I suggested to import this question. Now, I believe that it makes no sense. It is not possible to create photon longitudinal polarizations. The question has been deleted from PSE.

@ACuriousMind It is not clear for me that $W$ is a gauge boson, the gauge boson is $A$. But I don't understand the question either! Are you (Andrew) taking into account all the three tree level diagrams?
 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$\hbar$ys$\varnothing$csOverflowThen 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). Please complete the anti-spam verification