I'm fine with $U(1)$ symmetry and Noether's Theorem, but struggling with the translations of the field; namely

$$\phi'(x^{\mu})=\phi(x^{\mu}-a^{\mu}),$$ where $a^{\mu}$ constant four-vector


and the Lagrangian density

$${\cal L}=\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\phi^*\partial^{\mu}\phi-V(\phi^*\phi).$$

So a few questions:

  1. I can't show the Lagrangian is invariant under this transformation. Is it just a case that as $a^{\mu}$ is constant then the first term in the Lagrangian will obviously stay the same? But what about $V$? How I can show that's invariant?

  2. Infinitesimally, is the transformation $\phi'(x^{\mu})=\phi(x^{\mu})-a^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}\phi(x^{\mu})?$

  3. If I'm right in point 2., how can I apply Noether's Theorem to this?


1 Answer 1


A translation by $x^\nu \to x^\nu - \epsilon^\nu$ corresponds to an infinitesimal transformation of the fields, by

$$\phi \to \phi + \epsilon^\nu \partial_\nu \phi$$

as we are performing an active rather than passive transformation. The Lagrangian transforms as,

$$\mathcal{L}\to \mathcal{L}+\epsilon^\nu \partial_\nu \mathcal{L}$$

by substituting $\phi$ into the Lagrangian. Notice the change is up to a total derivative, and hence Noether's theorem is applicable to the symmetry. The conserved current density is given by,

$$j^\mu = \frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)}X(\phi)-F^\mu(\phi)$$

where $X=\delta\phi$ and $F^\mu$ is such that $\partial_\mu F^\mu=\delta \mathcal{L}$ infinitesimally. For our case, we obtain the symmetric stress-energy tensor (analogous to that of general relativity),

$$T^\mu_\nu=\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial(\partial_\mu \phi)} \partial_\nu \phi - \delta^\mu_\nu \mathcal{L}$$

where the Kronecker delta is raised with the Minkowski metric. The current satisfies, $\partial_\mu T^{\mu}_\nu = 0$, and the corresponding Noether charge,

$$E=\int \mathrm{d}^3 x \, T^{00}$$

is the total energy of the system, whereas,

$$P^i = \int \mathrm{d}^3 x \, T^{0i}$$

is the $i$th component of the total momentum of the field, where $i=(x,y,z)$ only. A caveat: the stress-energy tensor derived by Noether's theorem is not always symmetric, and may require the addition of a term which satisfies the continuity equation, and ensures symmetry in the indices.

Alternate Method

Recall to obtain the Einstein field equations in general relativity, we may vary the Einstein-Hilbert action,

$$S\sim \int \mathrm{d}^4 x \, \sqrt{-g} \, \left( R + \mathcal{L}\right)$$

Similarly, in quantum field theory, we may promote our Minkowski metric to a generic metric tensor, thereby replacing the kinetic term of the Lagrangian with covariant derivatives. Up to some constants, the stress-energy tensor is given by

$$T^{\mu\nu} \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}} \frac{\partial (\sqrt{-g}\mathcal{L})}{\partial g^{\mu\nu}}$$

evaluated at $g_{\mu\nu}=\eta_{\mu\nu}$, which is precisely the definition we implement when obtaining the Einstein field equations for general relativity.

  • $\begingroup$ I'm not sure why this gap in my physics education exists, but I don't really understand what you mean by passive and active transformation. As in why have you changed signs in the transformation of $x$ and the transformation of $\phi$? So the Lagrangian $\textit{isn't}$ invariant under this translation? And again, when trying to show the transformation of the Lagrangian which you've stated, what I am doing about the $V$ function which we're not given explicitly, just told it's a function of $\phi^*\phi$? $\endgroup$
    – Phibert
    May 17, 2014 at 16:03
  • $\begingroup$ @user13223423: No, the action is definitely invariant under translations. To illustrate the difference between passive and active, consider rotation transformations. If we take our field $\phi$, and literally rotate it, then that is an active transformation. However, if instead we relabel our coordinates, e.g. rotate our coordinate axis, then that's a passive transformation. Back to our case: the field in terms of $x'^\mu=x^\mu-\epsilon^\mu$ means that for it to treat it as the same, untranslated point, we need to add $\epsilon^\mu$, so $\phi \to \phi + \epsilon^\mu \partial_\mu \phi$. $\endgroup$
    – JamalS
    May 17, 2014 at 16:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A passive transformation is where you left the field alone and just move a foot to the left. An active transformation is where you stay fixed and shift the field a foot to the right. $\endgroup$
    – mmesser314
    May 17, 2014 at 16:45

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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