Take the 2-minute tour ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm just playing around tonight trying to better myself, but I'm having trouble with some indices on my yang-mills lagrangian. I have a gauge group $SU(2)$ and a field strength tensor $$ F_{ab}^{i}=\partial_{a}A^{i}_{b}-\partial_{b}A^{i}_{a}+\epsilon^{i}_{\,\,jk}A^{j}_{a}A^{k}_{b}$$ and a lagrangian $$\mathcal{L}=-\frac{1}{4}F_{ab}^{i}F_{i}^{ab}$$ I have at the end of the exercise that the correct EOM are $$\partial^{a}F_{ab}^{i}+\epsilon^{ij}_{\;\;\;k}A^{a}_{j}F^{k}_{ab}=0$$ I am getting the first term on the left, but the second term I am getting something slightly different, instead, when I hit the lagrangian with $\partial \mathcal{L}/\partial A_{a}^{i}$ I get a term $\epsilon^{i}_{\,\,jk} A_{b}^{k}F_{i}^{ab}$ which leaves a free $j$ index. Now I know summed indices don't matter and can change letters freely, but order and contraction does matter, now I'm not sure how to make it come out with matching indices. When I do $\partial_a \partial \mathcal{L}/\partial (\partial_{a}A_{b}^{i})$ I come out with the typical $\partial_a F^{ab}_{i}$ but my free index there is $i$, not $j$, and I can't get them to match for the life of me.

Please help, Thanks.

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Without seeing the details of how you're taking the derivative, I can't be sure, but my first thought is to wonder whether you're making multiple use of indices. For example, suppose you take the derivative with respect to $A_a^i$; you'll get

$$\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial A_a^i} = -\frac{1}{4}\frac{\partial}{\partial A_a^i}\bigl[F_{\color{red}{ab}}^{\color{red}i} F_{\color{red}i}^{\color{red}{ab}}\bigr] = -\frac{1}{4}\frac{\partial F_{\color{red}{ab}}^{\color{red}i}}{\partial A_a^i}F_{\color{red}i}^{\color{red}{ab}} -\frac{1}{4}\frac{\partial F_{\color{red}i}^{\color{red}{ab}}}{\partial A_a^i}F_{\color{red}{ab}}^{\color{red}i}$$

In the process of evaluating $\frac{\partial F_{\color{red}{ab}}^{\color{red}i}}{\partial A_a^i}$, the indices in the numerator don't contract with the ones in the denominator, but it's going to be easy to miss that if you don't have the colors to distinguish them.

I'd suggest that when you label the field you're differentiating with respect to, use indices that don't show up anywhere in the Lagrangian, like this:

$$\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial A_c^n} = -\frac{1}{4}\frac{\partial F_{ab}^{i}}{\partial A_c^n}F_{i}^{ab} -\frac{1}{4}\frac{\partial F_{i}^{ab}}{\partial A_c^n}F_{ab}^{i}$$

Then there's no danger of accidentally contracting the wrong indices. When you get down to the level of differentiating individual fields, you'll wind up with some Kronecker deltas,

$$\frac{\partial A_a^i}{\partial A_c^n} = \delta_a^c \delta_n^i$$

If you're differentiating a contravariant field, you can use the metric to raise and lower indices as needed,

$$\frac{\partial A_i^a}{\partial A_c^n} = \frac{\partial}{\partial A_c^n}\delta_{im}g^{ad}A_d^m = g^{ac} \delta_{in}$$

$\delta_{im}$ is the metric for $SU(2)$ configuration space, if I remember correctly.

share|improve this answer
    
That was exactly what was going on, thank you very much. –  kηives Feb 7 '12 at 6:18
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.