8
$\begingroup$

So I have a good appreciation of the non-abelian Yang-Mills story. We take a Riemannian manifold $M$ and a symmetry group $G$ giving rise to an infinite-dimensional gauge group $\mathcal{G}$. In addition, we take a principal $G$-bundle $P$ on $M$, with $\mathcal{A}$ the infinite-dimensional affine space of connections on $P$. Remarkably, $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{G}$ is a finite dimensional space (not in general, but for example in Yang-Mills theory on Riemann surfaces, it's finite dimensional), and the Yang-Mills functional $\rm{YM}(\cdot)$ is a map from this space to $\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}$, whose critical points satisfy the Yang-Mills equations. Then of course, we have the instantons which are self-dual and anti-self dual connections. This part of the story I understand well (I hope!) but I could use some assistance when it comes to the Hermitian Yang-Mills story.

Here, people start discussing a holomorphic vector bundle $E$ over $M$. Well, certainly this isn't the $G$-bundle $P$, and I can only guess that it's meant to be the associated vector bundle to $P$? But doesn't this require picking a particular representation of the group $G$? Moreover, the Hermitian Yang-Mills equation is a second order PDE for the curvature $F$, which seems to be the curvature of a connection on $E$. How does this relate to curvatures of connections in $\mathcal{A}$, if at all? I've heard Kobayashi-Hitchin relates instantons to stable holomorphic vector bundles, so I think they must be related, but I'm not sure how.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Yes, you need a representation. Usually, you pick the adjoint representation. The curvature is related in the obvious way since you first have a Lie algebra valued form which have a basis. $\endgroup$ – user40276 Aug 4 '16 at 10:37
  • $\begingroup$ Where do you find this result for $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{G}$? $\endgroup$ – 54321user Aug 6 '16 at 16:58
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sorry, I think maybe I was too general. If you look on page 3 here (cds.cern.ch/record/260640/files/9403042.pdf) apparently $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{G}$ is finite dimensional in Yang-Mills theory on Riemann surfaces, and a few other settings. In general, it appears not to be finite dimensional. Sorry, I forgot I was mostly thinking about YM on curves! $\endgroup$ – Benighted Aug 6 '16 at 17:02
7
$\begingroup$

As user40276 said, you need a representation to make this constructions. If you want to consider additional fields, you need several of those. I'm certainly no expert in this field, but I try to shed some light on representation-based constructions and hopefully this lifts some of your confusion.

Given a representation $\rho: G \rightarrow Aut(V)$ of $G$ on some vector space $V$, the associated vector bundle $E$ is constructed via $E=P\times_\rho V := \; ^{\textstyle{P \times V}}\big/_{\textstyle{\sim}}$, where $(p,v)\sim(p\cdot g,\rho^{-1}(g)\cdot v)$ for some $g\in G$.

A vector-valued form $\alpha\in\Omega^k(P,V)$ is called $G$-equivariant iff $(R_g)^*\alpha = \rho(g^{-1})\cdot\alpha$ holds $\forall g\in G$ (here $R_g$ is the right action of $G$ on $P$). Given a principle connection $\omega$ on $P$, we can define an exterior covariant derivative on equivariant forms as $$ D\alpha = d\alpha + \omega \wedge_\rho \alpha, $$ where the wedge product is defined as usual as anti-symmetrised product, where the "multiplication" is now taken to be the point-wise action of $\rho_*\circ\omega: TM\rightarrow End(V)$.

As an example, consider the adjoint representation $Ad: G\rightarrow Aut(\mathfrak g)$. Then $\omega$ is an equivariant 1-form with respect to the adjoint representation and the exterior covariant derivative is $$ D\alpha = d\alpha + [\omega \wedge \alpha], $$ which shows Cartan's structure equation for the curvature: $\Omega = D\omega = d\omega + [\omega \wedge \omega]$.

Note that an equivariant $k$-form $\alpha$ can identified with a vector bundle-valued form $\bar\alpha\in\Omega^k(M,E)$ via the fiber-wise identification $i_p: V\rightarrow E_{\pi(p)}, v\mapsto [p,v]$ and the horizontal lifting of vector fields on $M$. Concretely, we have $$ \bar\alpha_x(X_1,\dots,X_k)=i_p\circ\alpha_p(\tilde X_1,\dots\tilde X_k), $$ where the tilde denotes horizontal lifts of vector fields and $x=\pi(p)\in M$.

Then, a connection $\omega$ on $P$ induces an affine connection $\nabla^\omega$ on $E$ via the relation $$ \nabla^\omega \bar\alpha = \overline{D\alpha}. $$ Of course, $\nabla^\omega$ gives rise to a curvature tensor $R^\omega\in\Omega^2(M,End(E))$.

Let us again consider the adjoint representation. The associated bundle is called the adjoint bundle $Ad(P)$. In this case we find two curvature tensors: First, the bar map identifies equivariant forms of adjoint type, like $\omega$ and $\Omega=D\omega$ with $Ad(P)$-valued forms on $M$, so we get $F^\omega:=\bar{\Omega}\in\Omega^2(M,Ad(P))$. Second, we have the induced affine connection $\nabla^\omega$ on $Ad(P)$ and hence we have a curvature tensor $R^\omega\in\Omega^2(M,End(Ad(P)))$. These two are actually the same objects since $ad=Ad_*: \mathfrak g \rightarrow End(\mathfrak g)$ lifts to a bundle map $Ad(P)\rightarrow End(Ad(P))$.

For pure Yang-Mills theory, we need a $G$-equivariant inner product on $\mathfrak g$, i.e. $\langle Ad_gX, Ad_g Y\rangle = \langle X, Y\rangle$, or in other words, a bundle metric on $Ad(P)$. In this way we can define wedge products on $\Omega(M,Ad(P))$ and a Hodge dual and build up the Yang-Mills functional.

Scalar fields are modeled as sections of an associated vector bundle $E$ with respect to a representation of $G$. Covariant differentiation works as introduced above. Spinor fields are a bit more complicated, they are sections of $S\otimes E$, where $S$ is a spinor bundle over $M$, i.e. an associated vector bundle of the spin frame bundle over $M$. In both cases, we again need a bundle metric to build up bilinear forms for the Lagrangian.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the fabulous answer! What exactly is $\omega$ in the equation, $D \alpha = d \alpha + \omega \wedge_{\rho} \alpha$? Is it only dependent on data on the base manifold, or is it bundle dependent too? $\endgroup$ – Benighted Aug 6 '16 at 17:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sorry, I just noticed that I mentioned it nowhere. $\omega$ is a principal connection on the principle bundle $P$. I updated my post. $\endgroup$ – Markus Heinrich Aug 8 '16 at 6:55

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.