Let us assume some theory which consists of sets of generations of fermions (let us call them A and B). Fermions A have some gauge group GA (for example, SM), while fermions B are charged under another group GB as well as under some subgroup of GA (for example, SU(2)×UY(1)). Group GB (for example, UB(1)) is spontaneously broken by vacuum averaged values vB due to a Higgs-like mechanism (for case of GB isomorphism to UB(1) - with Higgs-like field hB=vBeiθB).
Theories of A and B fermions are anomaly-free separately, while the mixed anomalies are cancelled by fixing charges of B fermions under GB and GA.
Let us then assume that all B fermions are very massive; we thus can integrate them out for getting an effective action Γ that contains an interaction between GA and GB gauge fields. I have a few questions about anomalies in Γ.
- It seems to me that by this naive integration (without introduction of some non-invariant terms) we make the theory anomalous; but if the mother theory is gauge invariant, gauge invariance must hold in the effective theory too. Is this true?
- An effective action, which is derived after integrating out massive fermions, consists of Wess-Zumino terms ΓWZ=c1∫d4xθBFμνA˜FAμν+c2∫d4xθBFμνA˜FBμν,˜Fμν=ϵμναβFαβ,
which are connected with mixed anomalies and arise from triangular diagrams in the correlator ⟨ˉψBγ5ψB⟩. To contract the gauge-variant part of (1) we have to introduce a generalized Chern-Simons counterterm ΔΓCS=c3∫d4xϵμναβAμ(Bν∂αAβ+13eAϵabcAaνAbαAcβ),
which arises from process Bμ→AaμAbν in one-loop approximation. Is this true?
- The coefficients in front of Wess-Zumino terms are determined uniquely (are regularization independent), which is connected with the fact that they collect all anomomaly effects in theory. Is this true?
- Finally, are Wess-Zumino terms the only terms that break unitarity in an effective action Γ before introducing the counterterm? Or is this a completely wrong statement?
Some prehistory
The questions have arisen after reading of article, in which there is an explanation how nontrivial anomaly cancellation in a fundamental theory provides effects of non-decoupling of massive fermions. As example there is the toy-model with two sets of chiral fermions whose Lagrangian has UX(1),UY(1) symmetries; they then are integrated out; after that effective operators unsuppressed by fermions masses arise; look at Eq.(7). I want to know about the nature of these terms; the first two terms I identify as Wess-Zumino terms; they are regularization independent, as is claimed in an article. The last term arises, if I understand correctly, as counterterm which arises for the process A1→A2,A2.
But in some articles (for example, Preskill's Gauge anomalies) Wess-Zumino terms (1) as well as counterterm (2) are interpreted as counterterms which initially aren't included in an effective action (look at page 25 for a detailed discussion of contraction of gauge-variant terms in an effective action of SU(2)×U(1) theory). So there is a bad mix in my head about anomalies contraction in an effective field theory.
An edit
It seems that the following is the case. Let's temporarily turn off GB interactions. This provides that both A,B fermions interact only with GA fields. Then there is the fact that the lepton fermions A anomaly is cancelled by the fermions B anomaly. Let's then integrate B fermions out. The resulting effective field theory must be anomaly-free, so that it must contain some term which is changed as well as B fermions part of mother action under gauge transformation. This term is called the Wess-Zumino term, ΓWZ[U,AL,AR], where AL/R denotes a gauge field that interacts with left or right B fermions 1∓γ52ψB (for example, AL=γ+Z, AR=γ). By denoting the action which consists of A fermions as SA which has anomaly, δSA=Γanomaly,
we have
δanomalous(ΓWZ+SA)=−Γanomaly+Γanomaly=0
Let's then introduce
GB interactions. It seems that only mixed anomalies cancellation is interesting. So maybe it is convenient to introduce
ΓWZ[U,AL+b,AR+b] term, where
b corresponds to a set of
background vector fields corresponding to the adjoint representation of
GB. Then
δanomalous(ΓWZ+SA)=−Γanomaly+Γanomaly+Γanomaly[φ,b,AL,AR]≠0
We need to introduce a counterterm
Γct[b,AL,AR,φ] (if it exists) which has variation equal to
Γanomaly[b,AL,AR]. It is possible, and the sum of
ΓWZ+Γct contains new interactions of type
b∧Z∧∂Z,b∧Z∧Fγ,b∧Z∧∂b
(this is important for the first linked article).
This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-05-11 19:55 (UTC), posted by SE-user Name YYY