Research PapersNo Access

The gluon condensate in an effective SU(2) Yang–Mills theory

CPHT, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, Route de Saclay, 91128 Palaiseau, France

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X19500180Cited by:0 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

We make progress towards a derivation of a low energy effective theory for SU(2) Yang–Mills theory. This low energy action is computed to 1-loop using the renormalization group technique, taking proper care of the Slavnov–Taylor identities in the Maximal Abelian Gauge. After that, we perform the Spin-Charge decomposition in a way proposed by Faddeev and Niemi. The resulting action describes a pair of nonlinear O(3) and $σ$ $σ$ -models interacting with a scalar field. The potential of the scalar field is a Mexican hat and the location of the minima sets the energy scale of solitonic configurations of the $σ$ $σ$ -model fields whose excitations correspond to glueball states.

Keywords:

PACS: 11.10.Gh

You currently do not have access to the full text article.
Recommend the journal to your library today!

References

1. T. H. R. Skyrme, Proc. R. Soc. London A 260, 127 (1961). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
2. Y. M. Cho, Phys. Rev. D 21, 1080 (1980). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
3. L. D. Faddeev and A. J. Niemi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1624 (1999). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
4. G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B 190, 455 (1981). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
5. L. D. Faddeev and A. J. Niemi, Nucl. Phys. B 776, 38 (2007). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
6. L. D. Faddeev, Knots as Possible Excitations of the Quantum Yang–Mills Fields (World Scientific, 2012), pp. 18–28. Google Scholar
7. M. B. Fröb, J. Holland and S. Hollands, J. Math. Phys. 57, 122301 (2016). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
8. A. A. Slavnov, Theor. Math. Phys. 10, 99 (1972). Google Scholar
9. J. C. Taylor, Nucl. Phys. B 33, 436 (1971). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
10. L. D. Faddeev and A. J. Niemi, Nature 387, 58 (1997). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
11. U. Ellwanger, M. Hirsch and A. Weber, Zeit. Phys. C 69, 687 (1996). Web of Science, Google Scholar
12. H. Gies, Phys. Rev. D 63, 125023 (2001). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
13. A. N. Efremov, R. Guida and Ch. Kopper, J. Math. Phys. 58, 093503 (2017). Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. P. Sutcliffe, Proc. R. Soc. London A 463, 3001 (2007). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
15. F. V. Gubarev, L. Stodolsky and V. I. Zakharov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2220 (2001). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
16. K. I. Kondo, Phys. Lett. B 514, 335 (2001). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
17. M. Warschinke, R. Matsudo, S. Nishino, T. Shinohara and K. I. Kondo, Phys. Rev. D 97, 034029 (2018). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
18. A. Codello and R. Percacci, Phys. Lett. B 672, 280 (2009). Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar