Topological number integral in the Yang-Mills theory in boundary and volume forms
Why is a superposition of vacuum states possible in QCD, but not in electroweak theory?
On the Configuration Space of a Scalar Field in 1+1D
What's the role of the Dirac vacuum sea in quantum field theory?
$CP$ Invariance of Yang-Mills Vacua in Electroweak Theory
Yang-Mills theory in manifolds that are not simply connected
Doubts about the theta angle and the ground state energy density in Euclidean Yang-Mills theory
What defines a large gauge transformation, really?
Trouble with Construction of Sphaleron S
Theta-vacuum in the gauge field theory
Consider Yang-Mills theory (with possible including of fermions). It has a set $\{|n\rangle\}$ of vavua labeled by integer winding number $n$, defined as the Maurer-Cartan topological invariant: For the gauge element $g_{(n)}$ and corresponding unitary large gauge transformation $U(g_{(n)})$ we have
|n\rangle = U(g_{(n)})|0\rangle, \quad n = \frac{i}{24\pi^{2}}\int \limits_{S^{3}} d^{3}\theta \epsilon^{ijk}\text{tr}\big[ g_{(n)}\partial_{i}g_{(n)}^{-1}g_{(n)}\partial_{k}g_{(n)}^{-1}g\partial_{k}g_{(n)}^{-1}\big]
What is the most theory-independent argument that shows that the vacuum structure of the non-abelian gauge theory must correspond to the $\theta$-vacuum state
|\theta\rangle = \sum_{n = -\infty}^{\infty}e^{in\theta}|n\rangle?
Examples of arguments which are not complete as for me
Consider pure YM theory (without fermions). In order to argue why we have to use the $\theta$-vacuum as the ground state, people derive that the Hamiltonian $H$ is non-diagonal in the basis $\{|n\rangle\}$:
\langle n|H|m\rangle \simeq e^{-\frac{8\pi^{2}}{g^{2}}|n - m|}
alternatively, it is shown that vacuum **tunneling** is possible. This requires us to diagonalize the hamiltonian, and the $\theta$-vacuum basis is the diagonal basis.
The first argument, however, is valid only for pure Yang-Mills theory and breaks down when massless fermions are included, since massless fermions suppress the tunneling. People then use an argument based on the **cluster decomposition principle** (or CDP). A detailed argument is shown here. People introduce the conserved operator
\tilde{Q}_{5} =\int d^{3}\mathbf r (J_{0,5} - 2K_{0}) ,
where $K_{0}$ is defined as
G_{\mu\nu,a}\tilde{G}^{\mu\nu}_{a} = 2\partial_{\mu}K^{\mu}.
By using this charge, one shows that the VEV of non-zero 2c chirality operator $B(\mathbf x)$ (i.e., $[\tilde{Q}_{5}, \mathbf B(\mathbf x)] = 2c \mathbf B(\mathbf x)$) show that the VEV
\langle n| B(\mathbf x)B^{\dagger}(0)|n\rangle
doesn't satisfy the CDP
\lim_{|\mathbf x| \to \infty}\langle n| B(\mathbf x)B^{\dagger}(0)|n\rangle = \lim_{|\mathbf x| \to \infty}\langle n|B(\mathbf x)|n\rangle \langle n|B(0)|n\rangle
The $\theta$-vacuum is the solution of this problem.
But the details of this argument depend on the presence of fermions. More specifically, we introduce chirality and operates with the chirality operator $\tilde{Q}_{5}$.
I want some argument (possibly purely mathematical) which shows that we must choose the $\theta$-vacuum as the ground state of the YM theory (if it exists) independently of the precise content of the theory's fields (independent on the fact whether massless fermions are present).
Could You help?
yang-mills
asked Jan 22, 2017 in Theoretical Physics by NAME_XXX (1,055 points) [ revision history ]
I want some argument (possibly purely mathematical) which shows that we must choose the θ-vacuum as the ground state of the YM theory (if it exists) independently of the precise content of the theory's fields (independent on the fact whether massless fermions are present).
Is there a reason making you believe there exists one?
commented Jan 1, 2018 by Jia Yiyang (2,640 points) [ revision history ]
edited Jan 2, 2018 by Arnold Neumaier
You can set it to zero. The term proportional to $\theta$ is a topological term and won't affect the equations of motion. This amounts into setting the second Chern class of the Yang-Mills bundle equal to zero. You can work with arbitrary $\theta$ as well which is better if you want to understand say magnetic-electric duality. But in general really specify your theory you usually choose a Chern character $(r(E), c_1(E), ch_2(E))$.
commented Jan 2, 2018 by conformal_gk (3,625 points) [ no revision ]
@conformak_gk, that's not OP's question, even with $\theta=0$ it is still a $\theta$-vacuum instead of a $|n\rangle$-vacuum, i.e. $\theta=0$ is still not a vacuum of CS charge eigenstate.
commented Jan 2, 2018 by Jia Yiyang (2,640 points) [ no revision ]
I second the first comment by @JiaYiyang : Why would an argument not depending on chiral fermions be expected to exist? A careful account with chiral fermions considered is in arxiv:0907.2522 and the authors stress (p. 3)
the interplay between the topology of the gauge group and the chiral transformations [...] gives rise to a non-trivial vacuum structure is clearly displayed under general assumptions.
commented Jan 3, 2018 by Urs Schreiber (6,095 points) [ no revision ]
Curiously, I was just this morning having a discussion about this with Eduardo Fradkin. We wondered if there is any evidence (beyond Haldane's observation about $\theta0,\pi$ relating to integeger and half integer spin chains) of the effect of $\theta$ on any physical system. In particlular is there any *non-handwaving* calculation of the renormalization group flow of $\theta$?
commented Jan 2, 2019 by Michael Stone [ no revision ]
@MichaelStone I'm not an expert on this, but I think recently 1703.00501 showed $\theta=\pi$ QCD has a quite distinct phase structure compared to $\theta=0$ QCD. As for RG flow, I remember in $N=2$ SUSY people calculated the flow of the complex coupling $\tau=\frac{i\theta}{2\pi}+\frac{4\pi}{g^2}$, which should a fortiori give you the flow of $\theta$.