3
$\begingroup$

In Becker, Becker and Schwarz, the point particle action is given in terms of an auxiliary field $e(\tau)$ as: \begin{align} \tilde{S}_0 = \frac{1}{2}\int \,d\tau \left(e^{-1}\dot{X}^2 - m^2e\right) \end{align}

It is then shown that under infinitesimal reparametrizations of $\tau$, the action is unchanged. This allows us to pick a gauge, in particular $e(\tau) = 1$.

I'm not sure I'm understanding this right, but I have a few issues with this.

  1. Doesn't this assume that $e$ takes the value $1$ somewhere?

  2. Although $\tilde{S}_0$ (sorry, not $e(\tau)$) may be reparametrization invariant, I don't see how you could pick a reparametrization that can leave $e$ constant. Such a reparametrization $\tau'(\tau)$ would need to map all $\tau$ to a constant, but then $\frac{d\tau'}{d\tau} = 0$, which can't be the case.

  3. Invariance is only under infinitesimal transformations. This is related to 2: how do we know that an infinitesimal reparametrisation could make $e$ constant?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Is $e$ a gauge field? Or just some field transforming non-trivially under gauge? (If the latter, this is not gauge-fixing) Which gauge are we talking about? $\endgroup$ – ACuriousMind Aug 13 '14 at 18:19
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, $e$ transforms non-trivially, but the action is invariant under infinitesimal reparameterisations of $\tau$. Where I'm confused is why this allows us to pick $e = 1$. $\endgroup$ – Paradox Aug 14 '14 at 5:21
  • $\begingroup$ A while ago I found myself on a situation where a teacher recommended to use the concept of "rep. invariance" for deriving the eq. of motion of a rel. particle under a E-M field. I got the result but never quite understood why I could choose the gauge. Investigating a bit I found some information on a pdf file (that I can't seem to find today) and on the book Methods of Quantization by Latal & Schweiger, p.58, sec 2.1 (you can find it on Google Books). Maybe you can get something out of it, I couldn't get much. $\endgroup$ – Drarp Oct 14 '14 at 0:22
2
$\begingroup$

Comments to the question (v2):

  1. It seems that the resolution to OP's question essentially is that the einbein $e$ is not invariant under world-line reparametrizations $$\tag{1} \tau\longrightarrow \tau^{\prime}=f(\tau),$$ but transforms as a world-line co-vector/one-form, $$\tag{2} e~\mathrm{d}\tau~=~e^{\prime}~ \mathrm{d}\tau^{\prime},$$ cf. e.g. this Phys.SE post. In particular, if we are given an arbitrary einbein $e$ with antiderivative $f$, i.e. $$\tag{3} \frac{\mathrm{d}f}{\mathrm{d}\tau}~=~e,$$ then the world-line reparametrization (1) leads to a new einbein $$\tag{4} e^{\prime}~=~ 1$$ that is equal to one everywhere. [Since we work in units where speed of light in vacuum $c=1$ is one; where the parameter $\tau$ has dimension of time; and the vielbein $e$ has dimension of inverse mass, then eqs. (2) and (4) would literally imply that the new parameter $\tau^{\prime}$ has dimension of time over mass, cf. this Phys.SE post. A less radical approach would probably be to work in a gauge where $e^{\prime}$ is a constant with dimension of inverse mass.]

  2. Let us add for completeness that the einbein $e$ is invariant (a scalar) under target-space reparametrizations, although this is not relevant for the issue at hand.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I mis-wrote. I know that $e$ is not invariant, but that the total action $\tilde{S}_0$ is invariant. The part I don't understand is how $e$ can be chosen to be equal to 1 because of this. $\endgroup$ – Paradox Aug 14 '14 at 5:23
  • $\begingroup$ i updated the answer. $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Oct 14 '14 at 0:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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