Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,082 questions , 2,232 unanswered
5,353 answers , 22,789 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
820 active unimported users
More ...

  Chern-Simons for 2n-dimensional manifolds

+ 6 like - 0 dislike
2257 views

In the literature I can only find Chern-Simons terms for odd-dimensional manifolds. For example, for a $G$-bundle over a 3-dimensional manifold we have $A \wedge dA + A \wedge A \wedge A$ with $A$ being a $\mathfrak{g}$-valued 1-form. Why can't I write such forms for even-dimensional manifolds?


This post imported from StackExchange at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user Daniel

asked Jan 19, 2013 in Theoretical Physics by Daniel 2 (30 points) [ revision history ]
retagged Apr 19, 2014 by dimension10
Cross-listed: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/51603/chern-simons-term

This post imported from StackExchange at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user Chris Gerig
Cross-listed: mathoverflow.net/questions/119353/…

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user Chris Gerig

3 Answers

+ 7 like - 0 dislike

It has to do with the fact that the characteristic classes (over the reals) of a principal $G$-bundle have even degree. We can associate Chern-Simons-like theory to each characteristic class of degree $2k$ together with a $G$-bundle $P$ over a manifold of dimension $2k-1$.

To be a bit more technical a Chern-Simons-like form is asssociated to the following data

1. A homogeneous polynomial $\Phi$ of degree $k$ on the Lie algebra of $G$ invariant under the action of $G$ by conjugation.

2. A principal $G$-bundle $P\to M$ over $M$.

3. A pair of connections $\nabla^0, \nabla^1$ on $P\to M$.

The Chern-Weil theory produces two closed forms

$$ \Phi(\nabla^0),\Phi(\nabla^1)\in \Omega^{2k}(M) $$

and a form

$$ T\Phi(\nabla^1,\nabla^0)\in \Omega^{2k-1}(M), $$

such that

$$ d T\Phi(\nabla^1,\nabla^0)= \Phi(\nabla^1)-\Phi(\nabla^0). $$

(For details see Chapter 8 of these notes.)

The transgression form $T\Phi(\nabla^1,\nabla^0)$ is the one used in Chern-Simons theories. It depends on two connections, but usually $\nabla^0$ is some fixed connection.

This post imported from StackExchange at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user Liviu Nicolaescu
answered Jan 19, 2013 by Liviu Nicolaescu (110 points) [ no revision ]
Of course you can consider Chern-Simons forms on any manifold. But integrating them over the manifold - to get a numerical invariant - only works if the dimension of the manifold equals the degree of the form.

This post imported from StackExchange at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user user15817
+ 6 like - 0 dislike

The starting points for the construction of the Chern-Simons terms are objects called Chern-Pontryagin densities. On a 2n dimensional manifold, these are of the form $$ {\mathcal{P}}^{2n} = \alpha\epsilon^{\mu_1\mu_2...\mu_{2n}}Tr F_{\mu_1\mu_2}...F_{\mu_{2n-1}\mu_{2n}} $$ where F is the curvature 2-form of some G-connection (G is the gauge group). These are gauge-invariant, closed, and their integral over the manifold M (compact, no boundary) is an integer which is a topological invariant. These sorts of invariants are examples of characteristic classes.

Now ${\mathcal{P}}^{2n}$ can be locally expressed as a differential $$ {\mathcal{P}}^{2n} = d({\mathcal{C}}^{2n-1})$$ of a 2n-1 form. $ \ {\mathcal{C}}^{2n-1}$ is the Chern Simons form. (It can be written in the familiar form in terms of the connection form A). It has the remarkable property that if I perform a G-gauge transformation, the action obtained by integrating $ \ {\mathcal{C}}^{2n-1}$ is gauge-invariant. At no point is a metric involved in this construction, so it's a topological theory.

Anyway, getting back to the question, the Chern Pontryagin density ${\mathcal{P}}^{2n}$ which we started with is only defined on a 2n (i.e even) dimensional manifold, so consquently the Chern-Simon's term is only defined on an odd dimensional one.

Edit: Example in which Chern Simon's term in 3d is produced:

The Chern-Pontryagin class is the integral of the C.P. density on a 4d manifold $$ {\mathcal{P}} \propto \int d^4xTr({^*F}^{\mu\nu}F_{\mu\nu})$$ $$ \propto \int d^4x \ \epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}Tr( F_{\mu\nu}F_{\rho\sigma})$$ We can write the C.P. density as the divergence of a 4-current (the Chern Simons current) $$Tr({^*F}^{\mu\nu}F_{\mu\nu}) = \partial_{\mu}C^{\mu}$$ where $$C^{\mu} = \epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} \ tr(A_{\nu}\partial_{\rho}A_{\sigma}+\frac{2}{3}f^{abc}A^a_{\nu}A^b_{\rho}A^b_{\sigma}) $$ If we now pick a local coordinate system (on the 4 manifold) such that $\frac{\partial}{\partial x^0}$ (say) is in the direction of the vector $C^{\mu}$, then we just look at the other components in the epsilon symbol (they're guaranteed to be 1,2,3), then we just freeze the $x^0$ dependence of the $A_{\nu}(x^{\mu})$. We've now got ourselves a 3 form on the three-manifold $x^0$ = constant.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user twistor59
answered Jan 19, 2013 by twistor59 (2,500 points) [ no revision ]
Thanks for the answer but there is something I don't understand. For example, the chern-simons form in 3 dimensions is a 3-form. Wouldn't the exterior derivative be zero since $dw=0$ for $w$ a p-form in a p-dim'l manifold?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user Daniel
The exterior derivative referred to is applied on the 2n dimensional manifold, not on the 2n-1 dimensional one onto which the CS form descends.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user twistor59
again, i appreciate the answer but i am a bit even more confused now. what's the relationship between these two different manifolds you refer to. also, i don't understand how an exterior derivative takes a form from one manifold into another form over another (higher dim'l) manifold.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user Daniel
OK I added some stuff which might help a bit.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user twistor59
great, that's what i thought you initially meant, but i was expecting the answer to be independent of some embedding.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user Daniel
+ 4 like - 0 dislike

When you look at the definition of the Chern–Simons form

$d\omega_{2k-1}={\rm Tr} \left( F^{k} \right)$

one needs to understand that $F$ is a $2$-form. So the right hand side $F^k$ will always be a $2k$-form (with $k \in Z^+$ ). So the exterior derivative $d$ of the Chern–Simons form $\omega$ needs then to be a $2k-1$-form (since the exterior derivative of a $n$-form is a $n+1$-form) and since $k$ is a positive integer $\omega$ needs to be an odd form by definition.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 17:28 (UCT), posted by SE-user ungerade
answered Jan 19, 2013 by ungerade (125 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

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):
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$\varnothing$ysicsOverflow
Then 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




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...