Professional Documents
Culture Documents
October 6, 2005
Preface
The main purpose of this thesis is to introduce the various anomalies that arise in quantum
field theories; in particular their connection with topology and geometry. A theory is said to
be anomalous when a classically conserved current is no longer conserved upon quantisation
of the theory. More precisely, if there exists no regularisation procedure that preserves all
the classical symmetries then the theory is said to have an anomaly. A better name for such
anomalies would be quantum mechanical symmetry breaking as all anomalies arise as one
loop corrections to the classical conservation laws.
Anomalies shed much light on the deep nature of quantum field theories. In particular,
anomalies were first calculated within perturbation theory but later shown to be related to
the global topology of the theory via index theorems.
This thesis uses the modern formulation of differential geometry and topology to describe
the various anomalies that can arise in a quantum field theory. Much emphasis is placed on
the methods initiated by Stora, Zumino and Wess [74, 77] who found an algebraic formula-
tion known as the descent equations. We set up the descent equations in Gauge theory via
geometric and topological arguments in particular the Atiyah-Singer index theorem and the
BRST transformations.
It is then explained how the descent equations are related to BRST cohomology and how
one can approach the problem of finding the anomalies in this set up.
The reader is expected to have a good grasp on the basics of quantum field theory, espe-
cially functional methods and perturbation theory. Knowledge of differential geometry and
algebraic topology is assumed. A familiarity with general relativity would also be useful.
The following books were found useful in preparing this thesis; [20, 34, 44, 45, 58, 53, 54,
55, 60].
i
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Dr. P. M. Saffin for support and direction in the undertaking of this
thesis. I would also like to thank Drs. M. B. Hindmarsh and A. Tranberg who have both
enhanced my understanding of quantum field theory. I also wish to thank all the members
of the particle theory group at the University of Sussex all of whom have made my studies
enjoyable.
Sussex.
ii
Conventions and Notation
Throughout we use natural units where c (speed of light) = ~ (Planck’s constant) = 1, un-
less otherwise explicitly stated. Einstein’s summation convention is employed: if the index
appears twice, once as a superscript and once as a subscript, then the index is summed over
all possible values. For example if µ runs over 0 to m, we have,
m
X
Aµ Bµ = Aµ Bµ .
µ=0
The Minkowski metric is given by gµν = ηµν = diag(1, −1..., −1), while the Euclidean metric
is gµν = δµν = diag(+1, +1..., +1). Lower case Greek letters will generically denote indices
running from 0 to m and lowercase Latin letters will denote indices running from 1 to m,
where m is the dimension of the manifold
γ µ† = γ µ ,
{γ µ , γ ν } = 2δ µν .
Unless otherwise stated, the metric will be taken to be Euclidean. Under some assumptions
it has been shown that within perturbation theory the results of the Euclidian theory imply
the results of the corresponding Minkowskian theory. The Minkowskian theory is formally
obtained via the analytic continuation in the complex plane. This is equivalent to replacing
p0 of the 4-momentum by −ip0 . This is known as a Wick rotation.
iii
CONTENTS
1 Introduction 1
iv
5.3 The signature complex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.4 The Invariant Polynomials in Various Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.5 Anomalies in Supergravity Theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.6 Epitome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
6 Conclusion 60
Appendices 61
Bibliography 81
v
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Symmetries and their conservation laws play a huge role in the formulation of modern physics.
This is most acute in the application of quantum field theory to describe the fundamental
forces of nature. However, it is not guaranteed that a classical symmetry will be respected
in the quantum theory.
Indeed, there is little reason to expect the classical symmetry to be a symmetry of the cor-
responding quantum system. Consider the fact that the classical system is on mass-shell
as where the quantum system is necessarily off mass-shell. Hence it is not obvious what
properties of the classical system are shared by the quantum system. A simple example
is that of the vacuum energy of the harmonic oscillator in quantum mechanics. Quantum
mechanically the lowest energy state is greater than zero as where classical it is zero. This
simple and well known fact cannot be seen from the classical Lagrangian and is a quantum
effect.
However, classical symmetries do play an important role in quantum field theories. The most
important classical symmetry in modern quantum field theory is that of gauge symmetry. It
forms the basic backbone of the standard model of particle physics. If one insists on gauge
symmetry in the quantum field theory one is lead to non-trivial constraints on the generating
functionals; known as the Ward-Takahashi identities [70, 67] for QED or the Slavnov-Taylor
identities [63, 68] for Yang-Mills. These identities and hence the gauge symmetry are nec-
essary for the renormalisation of the theory. Without gauge symmetry, renormalisability of
the theory is lost and the theory is inconsistent.
Not all anomalies are as disastrous for the theory as these local gauge anomalies. Generically,
any local symmetry that becomes anomalous makes the theory inconsistent, as where global
symmetries do not place any constraints on the quantum theory. In fact global anomalies
can be phenomenologically welcome.
For example, take the decay of a π meson into two photons. Early calculations by Steinberger
[65] within the pion-nucleon model lead to decay rates that did not agree with experimental
observation.
1
The Feynman graph which represents the decay is the triangle graph in which two photons
couple to an internal fermion loop via two currents. We have the so called V-V-A triangle
which is now known to lead to an anomaly. Bell and Jackiw [19] correctly calculated the
decay rate by taking into account the axial anomaly. Adler [1] discovered a similar result in
QED.
The triangle diagram containing one axial and two vector currents leads to the anomalous
conservation law for the axial current
e2 µναβ
A(x) = Fµν Fαβ . (1.2)
16 π 2
A similar result is found for Yang-Mills fields; Aµ = Aaµ T a and Fµν = Fµν
a
T a . This is the so
called singlet anomaly
1 µναβ
A(x) = ∂ µ jµ5 = TrFµν Fαβ . (1.3)
16π 2
Bardeen [14] discovered that chiral fermions can lead to the break down of gauge symmetry
for non-Abelian gauge fields.
µ 1 1
Ga [Aµ ] = Dµ hj ia = ± 2
Tr Ta κλµν ∂ Aλ ∂µ Aν + Aλ Aµ Aν . (1.4)
24π 2
Where ± corresponds to right and left handed fermions.
It should be noted that the anomalies are not just artifacts of perturbation theory. It was
noticed that the singlet anomaly can be given purely in topological terms by using the
Atiyah-Singer (AS) [7, 8, 9, 10, 11] index theorem. This theorem loosely states that the
index of an operator can be expressed in terms of characteristic classes. The singlet anomaly
is given by
Z
dx A(x) ∝ v+ − v− = ind D+ . (1.5)
The AS index theorem then states that the index of the Dirac operator is given completely
in terms of the Chern character, in 4 dimensions we explicitly have
1
ind D+ = − TrF ∧ F. (1.6)
8π 2
Thus, the singlet anomaly is completely determined on topological grounds only.
Fujikawa [35, 36] noticed that the anomaly would appear as the Jacobian of the path inte-
gral measure. This formulation is non-perturbative in nature and shows most directly the
anomaly’s connection with the global properties of the theory.
Modern differential geometry and algebraic topology can also be used to describe the anoma-
lies. Written as differential forms the singlet and non-abelian anomaly in 4 dimensions are
2
1 2
A = 2
d Tr AdA + A3 (1.7)
4π 3
1 1 3
Ga [A] = ± TrTa d AdA + A . (1.8)
24π 2 2
The non-abelian anomaly can be used to define the Wess-Zumino consistency condition.
Defining
Z
G[η, A] = η a Ga [A], (1.9)
allows the Wess-Zumino consistency condition to be written as
sG[η, A] = 0. (1.10)
Where we have the Faddeev-Popov ghost η = Ta η a and the BRST operator s which is
nilpotent, s2 = 0. The gauge anomaly is understood as a non-trivial solution to the Wess-
Zumino consistency condition. That is a solution not of the form
dQ02n+2 = P2n+2
sQ02n+1 + dQ12n = 0
sQ12n + dQ22n−1 = 0
..
.
sQ2n
1 + dQ0
2n+1
= 0
2n+1
sQ0 = 0. (1.12)
P2n+2 is a symmetric gauge invariant polynomial in F . The lower index refers to the form
degree and the upper the power in η known as the ghost degree. Starting from a symmetric
polynomial all the terms in the descent equation can be explicitly calculated.
The term Q12n is identified as the local form of the gauge anomaly
Z
G[η, A] = N Q12n (η, A). (1.13)
M2n
The normalisation N is not fixed by the descent equations. The normalisation has to be
fixed via perturbation theory or careful topological analysis such as k-theory.
The important question is what symmetric invariant polynomial should be used? This de-
pends on the theory and is directly related to the Atiyah-Singer index theorem for the ellipti-
cal operator in question. For example, if one chooses the symmetrised trace as the invariant
3
polynomial which gives the singlet anomaly, the non-abelian anomaly is the result. Thus, the
singlet anomaly in 2n+2 dimensions is related to the non-abelian anomaly in 2n dimensions.
The normalisation of the non-abelian anomaly requires the use of k-theory. Alvarez-Gaumé
and Ginsparg [4, 5] demonstrated how the anomaly in 2n dimensions is related to the AS
theorem in a (2n + 2) dimensional space. Their method avoids the use of k-theory, but in
some sense it closely resembles it. They showed by using two-parameter families of gauge
potentials that the normalisation of the non-abelian anomaly is
in+1
N = −2πi . (1.14)
(2π)n+1 (n + 1)!
The situation is very similar in gravity. Gravitation can be considered as a gauge theory of
diffeomorphisms and Lorentz transformations. Thus, with minor modification the machinery
developed for gauge theory can be applied to gravitation. It turns out that the two anoma-
lies, diffeomorphic and Lorentz are in fact not independent, but are really two expressions
of the same phenomenon.
Outline
In chapter 2 we explicitly calculate the ABJ anomaly via evaluating the triangle diagram
and Pauli-Villars regularization. Then we examine the singlet and non-abelian anomaly us-
ing Fujikawa’s method and set up the descent equations via the Wess-Zumino consistency
conditions.
We then put the descent equations on strong mathematical ground in chapter 3. We develop
the idea of local cohomology and use it to re-derive the descent equations. Solutions to
the descent equations are presented using several methods. Explicit examples are given for
the Dirac field. Finally in this chapter we set up the descent equations for non-trivial fibre
bundles.
Now armed with the necessary tools to solve the descent equation in general, the question
of gravitational anomalies is tackled in chapter 4. We set up the correct BRST algebra for
gravitational theories with out torsion. It is shown how this resembles the BRST algebra for
gauge theory and so solutions to the descent equations are readily available. Mixed anoma-
lies are briefly introduced in this chapter.
In chapter 5 we address the question of how to pick the invariant symmetric polynomials,
which are also called anomaly polynomials in the literature. We construct the invariant poly-
nomials for the spin-1/2 Dirac, spin-3/2 Rarita-Schwinger and (anti-)self-dual antisymmetric
form fields via the AS index theorem for the relevant complexes. We introduce the necessary
complexes and apply the AS index theorem. Using the so called anomaly polynomials we
show that 10-d supergravity theories are anomaly free.
Chapter 6 we round up the discussion and make our concluding remarks. Several appendixes
have also been included. In appendix A we quickly review Yang-Mills theory and show how
4
the BRST operator arises here. Appendix B outlines the basics of Lie algebra cohomology
and shows how this is related to BRST cohomology. The Atiyah-Singer index theorem and
some characteristic classes are presented in appendix C. These results have been used ex-
tensively throughout the thesis. The bibliography is extensive but by no means exhaustive.
The study of anomalies is huge and as such it would be impossible to list all references on
the subject.
Omissions
Due to time and length restrictions several important topics have been omitted from this
thesis. These include;
1. any detailed discussion about k-theory and the normalisation of anomalies. See [54]
for an accessible account. We do not discuss in any detail the Alvarez-Gaumé and
Ginsparg index procedure. For a nice account see [20].
2. anomalies in the Batalin-Vilkovisky (BV) formulism [16, 17]. See [13, 37].
4. anomalies in non-commutative gauge theories. See [25, 47, 50] for a discussion of
anomalies. For an introduction to non-commutative geometry see [27, 48]. For a short
introduction to non-commutative field theory see [12].
5. branes, M-theory and anomaly inflow. See [21, 22, 26, 33].
5
CHAPTER 2
The Anomalies of Gauge Theory
Here we consider the anomalies that can arise in gauge theory. There are two kinds of
anomaly; global chiral and local gauge. The global chiral anomaly is the quantum break-
down of the chiral symmetry (or a modification to it in the massive case). As it is a global
symmetry is does not affect the renormalisation and consistency of the field theory. It is
indeed welcomed phenomenologically.
When we have a chiral theory, that is the left and right handed fermions do not couple to
the gauge fields in the same way we have the possibility of a gauge symmetry being broken
quantum mechanically. Thus, the local gauge anomaly is catastrophic for a consistent quan-
tum field theory and must be cancelled at all costs.
In this chapter we explicitly calculate the so called ABJ chiral anomaly in QED [1, 19] via
examining the triangle graph and use Fujikawa’s method [36, 35] to determine the generali-
sation of this to Yang-Mills theory and to calculate the non-abelian anomaly in chiral gauge
theory.
Fujikawa’s method of determining the anomalies is the most direct way to see their geomet-
ric and topological nature. The anomalies can be seen as the failure of the regularisation
scheme to preserve the classical symmetry. Fujikawa’s method explicitly shows that this
failure occurs in the path integral measure. This method also directly shows the topological
nature of anomalies.
The non-abelian anomaly is also explained as the lack of BRST invariance of the effective
action. This leads to the so called Wess-Zumino consistency condition. Solutions to this
condition can be found via the descent equations.
6
metry. It should be noted that the anomaly exists for all other regulisation schemes. For
example, when one uses dimensional regulisation we extend the theory to a higher dimen-
sional complex space. As there is no generalistion of γ 5 in these spaces there is no notion of
chirality and so chiral symmetry is spoiled.
We explicitly calculate the chiral anomaly in the simplest gauge theory, QED. Here we
assume a Minkowski metric of signature (1, 1, 1, −1). Consider the fermionic part of the
Lagrangian for QED.
L = ψ(i∂/ − m + eA)ψ.
/ (2.1)
Where we have used the “slashed” notation for ∂/ = γ µ ∂µ and A
/ = γ µ Aµ , with Aµ being the
U (1) gauge field.
←
−
∂ µ jµ = ψ ∂/ ψ + ψ ∂/ψ
/ + iψ(−m + eA)ψ
= iψ(m − eA)ψ /
= 0 (2.3)
←
−
∂ µ jµ5 = ψ ∂/ γ5 ψ + ψ ∂/γ5 ψ
←
−
= ψ ∂/ γ5 ψ − ψγ5 ∂/γ5 ψ
= iψ(m − eA)γ/ 5 ψ − iψγ5 (−m + eA)ψ
/
= 2imP. (2.4)
Equation (2.4) vanishes in the massless limit and then we classically have both vector cur-
rent and axial current symmetry. This is not the case when we quantise the theory as the
divergence of the axial current is non-zero even in the massless case. One needs to examine
the V-V-A triangle graph which breaks the axial symmetry.
For this we consider a Lagrangian with both vector and axial gauge fields Vµ and Aµ respec-
tively.
L = ψ(i∂/ + V/ + Aγ
/ 5 − m)ψ. (2.5)
The lagrangian (2.5) is invariant under local vector gauge transformations
7
ψ → eiθ(x) ψ
ψ → ψe−iθ(x)
Vµ → Vµ + ∂µ θ(x). (2.6)
There is also a local axial gauge transformation which leaves (2.5) invariant
ψ → eiα(x)γ5 ψ
ψ → ψe−iα(x)γ5
Aµ → Aµ + ∂µ α(x). (2.7)
All together the Lagrangian (2.5) is said to have a local UV (1) × UA (1) symmetry.
q q
p−q p p−q p
k2 p − k1 k1 p − k1 k1
k2
ν µ ν µ
FIGURE 1.1: The V-V-A and V-V-P triangle graphs that lead to the anomaly.
Now, examining the V-V-A and V-V-P triangle graphs we see that the corresponding matrix
elements are
Z
Tµνρ (k1 , k2 , q) = d4 xe−ik1 x1 −ik2 x2 +iqx3 h0|T [jµ (x1 )jν (x2 )jρ5 (x3 )]|0i. (2.8)
Z
Tµν (k1 , k2 ) = d4 xe−ik1 x1 −ik2 x2 +iqx3 h0|T [jµ (x1 )jν (x2 )P (x3 )]|0i. (2.9)
Where we have defined d4 x = d4 x1 d4 x2 d4 x3 . Equations (2.8) and (2.9) are essentially multi-
dimensional Fourier transformations. By taking derivatives we derive the important relations
Z
q ρ Tµνρ = ∂xρ3 d4 x e−ik1 x1 −ik2 x2 +iqx3 h0|T [jµ (x1 )jν (x2 )jρ5 (x3 )]|0i
Z
= d4 x h0|T [jµ (x1 )jν (x2 )∂xρ3 jρ5 (x3 )]|0ie−ik1 x1 −ik2 x2 +iqx3
Z
= d4 x [−2mh0|T [jµ (x1 )jν (x2 )P (x3 )]|0i] e−ik1 x1 −ik2 x2 +iqx3
= 2mTµν . (2.10)
8
In order to preserve gauge symmetry we insist that ∂µ j µ = 0 which means that
Calculating the amplitudes Tµνρ and Tµν directly using the Feynman rules one sees that this
does not agree with equation (2.10) and (2.11). The amplitudes are
Z
d4 p i i i
Tµνλ = −i tr γλ γ5 γν γµ
(2π) 4 p/ − m p/ − /q − m p/ − k/1 − m
!
k1 → k2
+ . (2.12)
µ→ν
Z
d4 p i i i
Tµν = −i tr γ5 γν γµ
(2π) 4 p/ − m p/ − /q − m p/ − k/1 − m
!
k1 → k2
+ . (2.13)
µ→ν
With q = k1 + k2 .
The Pauli-Villars regulated amplitude is defined as the difference between the unregulated
amplitude and the amplitude with mass M .
reg
Tµνλ = Tµνλ (m) − Tµνλ (M ). (2.14)
phys
The physical amplitude Tµνλ is then understood as the limit of the regulated amplitude as
the regulator mass tends to infinity, that is
phys reg
Tµνλ = lim Tµνλ . (2.15)
M →∞
phys
The same applies to Tµν , but since Tµν (M ) ∼ 1/M we see that Tµν is convergent and does
not need regularisation
phys
Tµν = lim [Tµν (m) − Tµν (M )] = Tµν (m). (2.16)
M →∞
Then by using equation (2.10) we see that the axial conservation law becomes
phys
q λ Tµνλ = 2mTµν (m) − lim 2M Tµν (M ). (2.17)
M →∞
Then the AJB anomaly is completely described by the second term in equation (2.4).
In order to evaluate equation(2.18) we need to write equation (2.9) in a more useful form.
First we need to introduce the Feynman parameter integral
9
Z 1 Z 1−x1
1 1
=2 dx1 dx2 . (2.19)
abc 0 0 [ax1 + b(1 − x1 − x2 ) + cx1 ]3
Then we can write
Z " #
d4 p i(p/ + m) i(p/ − /q + m i(p/ − k/1 + m)
Tµν = −i 4
tr 2 2
γ5 2 2
γµ γν
(2π) p −m (p − q) − m (p − k1 )2 − m2
Z
d4 p Z 1 Z 1−x1
= −2i dx 1 dx2
(2π)4 0 0
Now we need to explicitly evaluate the trace. Expanding the trace term it is easy to see that
this term reduces to
tr[i(p/ + m)γ5 i(p/ − /q + m)γµ i(p/ − k/1 + m)γν ] = −imtr[γ5 /qγν k/1 γµ ]. (2.21)
Then we have
Z
d4 p Z 1 Z 1−x1
Tµν = 2i dx1
(2π)4 0 0
Then we have
Z
d4 p Z 1 Z 1−x1
im4iαµβν k2α k1β
Tνµ (m) = 2i dx 1 dx 2 2 . (2.24)
(2π)4 0 0 [p3 − 2pk − m 2 ]3
In the above we have included a factor of 2 which arises from k1 → k2 and µ → ν. We have
also defined
10
k = q(1 − x1 − x2 ) + k1 x1 , (2.25)
m 2 = m2 − q 2 (1 − x1 − x2 ). (2.26)
We now use the ’t Hooft-Veltman integral formula [66]
Z
dn p 1−2α n Γ(α − n2 ) 1
2 α
=i π 2 n . (2.27)
2
(p − 2pk − m ) Γ(α) (k + m 2 )α− 2
2
2i π 2 M 2
lim 2M Tµν (M ) = lim 2 2i 4iµναβ k1α k2β
M →∞ M →∞ (2π)4 2i M 2
23 π 2
= 4
4µναβ k1α k2β
(2π)
1
= µναβ k1α k2β . (2.29)
2π 2
Which is the momentum space expression for the anomaly. Hence even in the massless case
(m = 0), a local chiral rotation is not a symmetry of the quantum action.
phys 1
q λ Tµνλ µναβ k1α k2β .
= 2mTµν − (2.30)
2π 2
Then in x space the anomalous conservation law can be written as
1
∂ µ jµ5 = +2miP + µναβ F αβ F µν . (2.31)
16π 2
In the massless case we have
1
A(x) = ∂ µ jµ5 =
2
µναβ F αβ F µν . (2.32)
16π
We call the term A(x) the singlet (or abelian)anomaly.
Expressions (2.30) and (2.31) are equivalent, this can be shown by considering the expecta-
tion value with two external photons with momentum k1 , k2 and polarisation vectors 1 , 2 .
See [2] for details.
So far, we have calculated the singlet anomaly in QED via a one-loop perturbation calcu-
lation. It is important to realise that higher order contributions only renormalise the fields
11
and their couplings, they do not effect the anomaly. Thus all the structure of the singlet
anomaly is contained within the triangle graph. This is known as the Adler-Bardeen theorem
[2]. This theorem has been proved for QED and QCD. However, it is not at all clear if this
theorem holds true in general gauge theories.
The singlet anomaly (2.32) is independent of the regularisation employed. The ’t Hooft-
Veltman dimensional regularisation will yield the same result.
The anomaly also appears in x-space (rather that momentum space) when one considers
current operators. As the product of quantum fields at at the same point in space is infinite,
the axial current
Let ψ be a massless Dirac Field interacting with a non-abelian gauge field Aµ = Aαµ Tα .
Where {Tα } are the generators of some non-abelian group G. The Lagrangian is given by
This is the global chiral symmetry which generates the Noether chiral current j5µ .
12
j5µ (x) = ψ(x)γ µ γ5 ψ(x). (2.37)
Classically we have ∂µ j5µ = 0, however when one considers the quantum effective action the
above conservation law does not hold. This is seen as a non-trivial transformation of the
path integral measure under a chiral rotation. The effective action is defined as
Z R
−W [A] − /
dxψiDψ
e = DψDψe . (2.38)
/ = iγ µ (∂µ + Aµ ).
Where we have used the Feynman slash notation to define iD
The chiral current j5µ can be calculated by considering an infinitesimal chiral transformation.
Now we perform a local chiral rotation of the spinor fields
Under a local chiral rotation, the classical action transforms under this rotation as
Z Z
/
dxψiDψ → dx(ψ + iψαγ 5 )iD(ψ
/ + iαγ 5 ψ)
Z Z
= / +i
dxψiDψ dx[αψγ 5 iDψ
/ + ψiD(αγ
/ 5
ψ)]
Z Z
= / −
dxψiDψ dx[αψγ 5 γ µ (∂µ + Aµ )ψ
+ψγ µ (∂µ + Aµ )(αγ 5 ψ)]
Z Z
= / +
dxψiDψ dxα(x)∂µ j5µ . (2.42)
However, as stated earlier not only does the classical action change under the chiral ro-
tations also the quantum measure changes. To see this define the chiral (infinitesimally)
rotated fields as
X
ψ 0 = ψ + iαγ5 ψ = a0i ψ (2.43)
0 X 0
ψ = ψ + iψαγ5 = bi ψi† . (2.44)
13
Where a,b are anti-commuting Grassmann variables and ψi are eigenspinors of the Dirac
operator
/ i = λi ψi .
iDψ (2.45)
The eigenspinors are normalised such that
Z
hψi |ψj i = dxψi† (x)ψj (x) = δij , (2.46)
which can be achieved provided M is compact, which we assume. This allows us to write
the fermionic quantum measure in terms of the Grassmann parameters a and b. We define
the change in this measure under a chiral rotation as
Z Y Z Y
0
dai dbi → da0i dbi . (2.47)
i i
a0i = hψi |ψ 0 i
= hψi |(1 + iαγ5 )|ψi
X
= hψi |(1 + iαγ5 )aj |ψj i
j
X X
= hψi |ψj i + iαaj hψi |γ5 |ψj i
j j
X X
= δij + iαaj hψi |γ5 |ψj i
j j
X
= Cij aj (2.48)
j
Y Y
da0j = (det[Cij ])−1 dai
Y
= exp[−tr ln Cij ] dai
Y
= exp[−tr ln(1 + iαhψi |γ5 |ψj i)] dai
Y
≈ exp[−tr iαhψi |γ5 |ψj i] dai
" #
X Y
= exp −iα hψi |γ5 |ψi i dai . (2.49)
i
It is the inverse of the determinant that is used in the above as we are dealing with Grassmann
Q 0 Q
numbers. The contribution for bi is identical to a0i . Hence the measure changes overall
as
" #
Y Y X
dai dbi → da0i dbi 0 exp −2α hψn |γ5 |ψn i
i i n
" Z #
Y X
= da0i dbi 0 exp −2i dxα(x) ψn† (x)γ5 ψn (x) . (2.50)
i n
14
Then we have two expressions for the effective action
Z Y Z
−W [A] /
e = dai dbi exp[− ψiDψdx]
i
Z Y Z
= da0i dbi 0 exp[− / − α(x)∂µ j5µ
dx(ψiDψ
i
X
−2iα(x) ψn† γ5 ψn )]. (2.51)
n
The term on the right up to factor of −2i is known as the Abelian anomaly
X
A(x) = ψn† γ5 ψn . (2.53)
n
The above expression for the anomaly is not well defined and requires regularisation. Here
we use the heat kernel method.
X
A(x) = lim ψn† (x)γ5 exp[(iD/M
/ )2 ]ψn (x). (2.54)
M →∞ n
Z " #
d4 k ik.x ∇µ ∇ν + 41 [γ µ , γ ν ]Fµν −ik.x
A(x) = lim tr e γ 5 exp e
M →∞ (2π)4 M2
Z " #
d4 k ik.x −k 2 + 14 [γ µ , γ ν ]Fµν −ik.x
= lim tr e γ5 exp e
M →∞ (2π)4 M2
Z
1 µ ν d4 k − k22
= lim tr γ5 exp [γ , γ ]Fµν e M . (2.59)
M →∞ 4M 2 (2π)4
15
Expanding the first exponential
1 1 1 1
exp [γ µ
, γ ν
]Fµν ≈ 1 + [γ µ
, γ ν
]Fµν + ([γ µ , γ ν ]Fµν )2 . (2.60)
4M 2 4M 2 2 (4M 2 )2
Then using
" #Z
1 1 µ ν 2 d4 k − k22
A(x) = lim tr γ5 ([γ , γ ]F µν ) e M
M →∞ 2 (4M 2 )2 (2π)4
" #
1 1 µ ν 2 M 4π2
= lim tr γ5 ([γ , γ ]F µν )
M →∞ 2 (4M 2 )2 (2π)4
1 1 1 h i
= tr γ5 ([γ µ , γ ν ]Fµν )2
2 162 π 2
4 h i
κ λ µ ν
= tr γ 5 γ γ γ γ F κλ F µν . (2.62)
2 162 π 2
Now use
1
∂µ j5µ = trκλµν Fκλ Fµν
16π 2
1 κλµν 2
= tr ∂κ (Aλ ∂µ Aν + Aλ Aµ Aν . (2.65)
4π 2 3
Which can be regarded as the local version of the Atiyah-Singer index theorem. Notice the
Chern-Simons form that appears in the local form of the anomaly. By local, we mean that
we are not integrating over the manifold as one does in the standard Atiyah-Singer index
theorem.
If one integrates over the manifold we make direct contact with the Atiyah-Singer index
theorem.
Z Z X h i
dxA(x) = dx ψn† γ5 ψn exp −λ2n /M 2 |M →∞ ,
n
X h i
= /
hψn |γ5 exp −(iD/M )2 |ψn i|M →∞ . (2.66)
n
16
Now, suppose we have iD|ψ / n i = λn |ψn i with λn non-vanishing. Then we have another spinor
/ n i = −λn |φn i. To see this we note that
|φn i ≡ γ5 |ψn i such that iD|φ
/ n i = iDγ
iD|φ / 5 |ψn i
= −λn γ5 |ψn i
= −λn |φn i. (2.67)
Then the only possible contribution to the anomaly must be from the zero modes. This
observation directly links the anomaly to an index theorem.
Let |0, ii be zero modes of the Dirac operator, remembering that the Dirac operator is elliptic
on a compact manifold and hence has a finite dimensional kernel and co-kernel. These can
be classified by their eigenvalue of γ 5 as they are not an irreducible representation of the
spin algebra. Then,
Z X
dxA(x) = hψi |γ 5 exp[−(iD/M
/ )2 ]|ψi i|M →∞
X X
= h0, i|0, ii+ − h0, i|0, ii−
i+ i−
/ +.
= υ+ − υ− = indiD (2.71)
Where ν± is the number of positive and negative chirality zero modes. This is precisely the
Atiyah- Singer index theorem.
In the language of differential forms the anomalous conservation law can be written as
1
d∗J =− tr(F ∧ F ) (2.73)
4π 2
17
Where the current one-form is defined as J = jµ5 dxµ , d is the exterior derivative and ∗ is the
Hodge dual.
This result can be generalised to any compact spin-manifold with trivial A-roof genus of
arbitrary (but even) dimension Dim M = 2l as
Z Z
ν+ − ν− = dx∂µ j5µ = chl (F ), (2.74)
M M
which is the AS-index theorem for twisted spin complexes on compact spin-manifolds with
trivial A-roof genus without boundary.
It should be noted that the anomaly is independent of the regularisation used. Instead of
using the exponential function, we could have used any function f which is smooth and
decreases rapidly enough at infinity
!
λn
f , (2.75)
M2
with
We construct an effective action in which the gauge field A couples only to the left-handed
Weyl fermion. ψ also transforms under a complex representation of the gauge group G. The
effective action is
Z Z
−W [A] / +ψ .
e = DψDψ exp − dxψiD (2.78)
18
Where we have defined
1
/ + = iDP
iD / + P± = (1 ± γ 5 ). (2.79)
2
The gauge current is given by
W [A] → W [A − Dv]
Z !
δ
= W [A] − dx tr Dv W [A]
δA
Z δ
= W [A] − dx tr ∂µ v α + fαβγ Aβµ v γ W [A]
δAαµ
Z !
δ
α
= W [A] + dx tr v D W [A]α . (2.82)
δA
We formally overcome this complication by introducing a Dirac spinor ψ and defining the
effective action as
Z Z
−W [A]
e = DψDψ exp dxψiD̂ψ . (2.85)
19
In this construction it is clear that the gauge field only couples to the Dirac spinor of positive
chirality. The eigenvalue problem iD̂ψi = λi ψi is well posed. However, one must note that
iD̂ is not Hermitian and as such λi will be a complex number in general. As such, one needs
to introduce right and left eigenfunctions.
iD̂ψi = λi (2.87)
←−̂
χ†i i D = λi χ†i , (iD̂)† χi = λi χi . (2.88)
As these define a complete set of eigenvectors we can use them to define an orthonormal
basis,
Z
χ†i ψj = δij . (2.89)
However, the eigenvalues λi are not gauge invariant. This is clearly seen as the operator
iD̂ is in fact not gauge invariant. This is not really a problem as we are interested in the
product of all the eigenvalues and this is gauge invariant. We see this using
As the Dirac determinant is gauge invariant so is | det(iD̂)|. Now if we examine the real part
of the effective action Re W [A] we see that it is gauge invariant
We can now evaluate the anomaly by examining the Jacobian of the fermionic measure, as
we did for the abelian anomaly.
We write Weyl fermions in terms of the Dirac spinors which are eigenspinors of D̂.
X
ψ= ai ψi (2.93)
i
X
ψ= bi χ i (2.94)
i
20
Then consider infinitesimal gauge transformations,
A → A − Dv ψ → ψ + vψ+ ψ → ψ − ψ − v. (2.95)
We can thus define the gauge transformed fields as
X
ψ → ψ + v(x)P+ ψ = a0i ψi
i
X
ψ → ψ − v(x)P− ψ = b 0i χi . (2.96)
i
Then we can form the Jacobian in the same way as for the abelian anomaly. We first have
to calculate the transformation properties of the ai and bi .
X
a0i = hψi |ψ 0 i = hψi |1 + v(x)P+ |ψi = hψi |1 + v(x)P+ |ψj iaj . (2.97)
j
Then using the same arguments as before the Jacobian for dai is given by
Y Y
da0j = exp[−tr ln(1 + v(x)hψi |P+ |ψj i)] dai
Y
≈ exp[−tr v(x)hψi |P+ |ψi i)] daj . (2.98)
Then we have
Y Y
db 0j ≈ exp[tr v(x)hψi |P− |χi i] dbj . (2.100)
Then the Jacobian factor in the effective action is given by
Z X
dxtr v(x) hχn |γ 5 |ψn i (2.101)
n
We then pick a representation of the spinors such that hx|ni = ψn (x) and (n|xi = χ†n (x).
Notice that (n| is not the Hermitian conjugate of |ni. This integral is not well defined and
requires regulisation. Again, we use the heat kernel regulisation,
Z X 2
dx lim tr v(x) (x|yiγ 5 hx|e−(iD̂)/M |ni
M →∞ n
Z
2
= dx lim tr v(x)γ 5 e−(iD̂)/M δ(x − y). (2.102)
M →∞
Then as W [A] is gauge invariant, its gauge variation (2.83) must be cancelled by the Jacobian
factor. Thus, we are able to write
21
Z Z !
α δ 2
dx v (x)Dµ α
W [A] = dx lim tr[ v(x)γ 5 e−(iD̂x )/M δ(x − y)]. (2.104)
δAµ M →∞
We now “split” the trace into two pieces depending on their chirality.
2 /M 2 2
tr[v(x)γ 5 e−(iD̂x ) ] = tr[v(x)(P+ − P− )e−(i∂/− iD/ + )−(iD/ − i∂/+ )/M (2.105)
/ D)/M
(i∂i / 2 /
/ ∂)/M
(iDi 2
= tr[v(x)P+ e ] − tr[v(x)P− e ].
This can then be evaluated in the plane wave basis, see [40] for details.
1 Z α κλµν 1
W [A − Dv] − W [A] = dx tr v Tα ∂κ Aλ ∂µ Aν + Aλ Aµ Aν
24π 2 2
1 Z 1 3
= tr v d AdA + A . (2.106)
24π 2 2
Then the anomalous conservation law can be written as
1 1
Gα [A] = Dµ hj µ iα = tr Tα κλµν
∂ κ Aλ ∂ µ Aν + Aλ Aµ Aν . (2.107)
24π 2 2
Notice the difference in the factors in front of the A3 between the abelian and non-abelian
anomaly. This difference has a deep topological origin which will be explained in the next
section and proceeding chapter.
We have calculated the non-abelian anomaly for left chiral spin- 1/2 fermions coupled to
an external Yang-Mills field. The whole calculation could be carried out for right handed
fermions. The final result is that the non-abelian anomaly for the right handed fermions is
identical to the left handed fermions apart from an overall minus sign.
1 1
Gright
α [A] = −Glef t
α [A] =− 2
tr Tα κλµν ∂κ Aλ ∂µ Aν + Aλ Aµ Aν . (2.108)
24π 2
Thus, in a non-chiral theory the two sectors cancel resulting in an anomaly free theory.
22
to be non-invariance under the BRST transformations.
Gα = Dµ hj µ iα , (2.110)
Then we define the global form of the non-abelian anomaly in terms of the BRST transfor-
mations and ghost fields
Z
sW [A] = G[η, A] = dxη α Gα [A] 6= 0, (2.111)
if the effective action is no longer BRST invariant. As s is a nilpotent we have
Now in order to solve the consistency equation one defines a new operator
dˆ = d + s (2.113)
which itself is also a nilpotent and anticommutes with the exterior derivative.
dˆ2 = d2 + ds + sd + s2 = 0. (2.114)
We also define
A ≡ g −1 (A + d)g. (2.115)
From this we define the field strength
F ≡ dA + A2 = g −1 F g. (2.116)
The Faddeev-Popov ghost is identified with
η ≡ g −1 sg. (2.117)
We also define
ˆ = A + η,
A ≡ g −1 (A + d)g (2.118)
ˆ + A2 = F.
F ≡ dA (2.119)
Stora and Zumino constructed solutions to the Wess-Zumino consistency conditions via the
so called decent equations. The Abelian anomaly in (2l + 1) dimensions is given by the
following Chern-Simons form as we have seen
!l+1
1 iF
chl+1 (F) = tr . (2.120)
(l + 1)! 2π
Let Q2l+1 (A, F) be the Chern-Simons form
23
chl+1 (F) = dQ2l+1 (A, F). (2.121)
ˆ A, F) is identical of that of (d, A, F) we have
As the algebraic structure of (d,
ˆ 2l+1 (A, F) = dQ
chl+1 (F) = dQ ˆ 2l+1 (A + η, F). (2.122)
Expanding the above in powers of η
We see that
Where we have explicitly assumed that the manifold has no boundary. Hence, finding the
anomaly becomes a case of finding Q12l . This is further discussed in the next chapter. How-
ever, it should be noted that that this approach to calculating the gauge anomaly has some
unanswered questions: i)the consistency condition does not fix the normalisation of the
anomaly. Hence, the anomaly is not unique. ii) it is not clear why we start form the abelian
anomaly in (m + 2) dimensions.
24
2.5 Epitome
In gauge theory there are two types of anomaly (in 4-dimensions)
1. Singlet anomaly
1 3
A(x) = 2 Trd AdA + A3 (2.129)
4π 2
2. Non-abelian anomlay
1 1
Gα [A] = 2
Trd AdA + A3 . (2.130)
24π 2
These were calculated via Fujikawa’s method in which these anomalies show up as Jacobians
for the path integral measure under a chiral rotation and a gauge transformation for the
singlet and non-abelian anomaly respectively.
In arbitrary, but even dimensions dimM = 2l the singlet anomaly can be calculated via the
Atiyah-Singer index theorem. Considering only manifolds with trivial Â-genus we have
Z Z
/+ =
dxA(x) = ind iD chl (F ). (2.131)
M
The non-abelian anomaly is completely characterised by the Wess-Zumino consistency con-
ditions
sG[η, A] = 0, (2.132)
which directly lead to the descent equations (2.126). The local form non-abelian anomaly
is given by the Q12l term in the descent equations, at least up to normalisation. Thus the
non-abelian anomaly becomes a case of solving the descent equations.
25
CHAPTER 3
BRST Cohomology and the Descent Equations
In this section we are using differential forms and as such the wedge product is understood
when we multiply forms.
Let V(A, dA, η, ζ = dη) be the space of polynomials of differential forms. We define the
one-form gauge connection as A = Ta Aaµ dxµ and the zero-form ghost as η = Ta η a , which
26
can be identified as the Maurer-Cartan form of the gauge group, see [61, 62]. We wish to
compute the various local cohomologies on V(A, dA, η, ζ), first we consider the cohomology
of the exterior derivative.
NA = A , NF = F
N η = η , N ζ = ζ. (3.5)
∂ ∂ ∂
d = dA + dη + dF
∂A ∂η ∂F
∂ ∂ ∂
= (F − A2 ) +ζ + [F, A] . (3.6)
∂A ∂η ∂F
Where we have used the Bianchi identity (A.16) and the definition of the Yang-Mills curva-
ture (A.14).
Now we suppose that the forms Qqp can be expanded in terms of eigenvalues of the filtration
operator
where n = 0, 1.
Where
∂ ∂
d0 = F +ζ . (3.9)
∂A ∂η
We have that
d0 F = 0,
d0 ζ = 0. (3.10)
27
Also it is easy to see that
d0 A = F,
d0 η = ζ. (3.11)
We now use the following general results from homological algebra, see for example [41, 59];
1. d0 is a coboundary operator.
Then from (3.10) and (3.11) it is clear that the cohomology of d0 is trivial. As such, the
cohomology of d on V(A, dA, η, ζ) must be also trivial. This result will be important later
in deriving the descent equations.
sAµ = Dµ η,
1
sη = − [η, η] = −η 2
2
sFµν = [Fµν , η]. (3.12)
The exterior algebra and the BRST algebra (3.12) can be combined into a graded algebra.
This algebra is graded by the total degree Q which is defined as the sum of the form degree
p and the ghost degree q. On this graded algebra both d and s act as antiderivatives and
anticommute
s2 = d2 = {s, d} = 0. (3.13)
These two coboundary operators act on the differential forms Ωqp with their degrees being
(q, p). The action of s increases q by one unit and the action d increases p by one. The
differential forms are given by
1 q
Ωqp = Ω dxµ1 ...dxµp . (3.14)
p! µ1 ...µp
These forms are partitioned into even and odd forms according to the parity of the total
degree (q + p). The coefficients Ωqµ1 ...µp (x) are local polynomials in the fields and their deriva-
tives.
28
.. .. ..
. . .
d- n d- n
··· Ωnm Ωm+1 Ωm+2 ···
s s s
? ? ?
d - n+1 d - n+1
··· Ωn+1
m Ωm+1 Ωm+2 ···
.. .. ..
. . .
Figure 3.1: The BRST bicomplex whose local cohomology is important in the calculation of
possible anomalies in gauge theories.
Then the BRST transformations (3.12) are written in terms of the differential forms A and
F
[A, η] = Aη + ηA
[F, η] = F η − ηF
[η, η] = ηη + ηη = 2η 2 . (3.18)
The BRST algebra (3.16) is independent of any Lagrangian. All that is needed is a principle
gauge bundle over a manifold. The BRST algebra is a fundamental symmetry that any
gauge theory must obey. Thus, in this section and following sections the physical theory is
not fixed by a particular Lagrangian. Only BRST symmetry need be assumed.
We briefly comment that an anti-BRST operator s can also be constructed in a similar way
to the BRST operator s. Here s decreases the the ghost number by one. The anit-ghost η
had ghost number −1. The graded anti-BRST algebra is defined as
sA = −Dη
sF = [F, η]
29
1
sη = − [η, η]
2
s2 = sd + ds = 0. (3.19)
The anti-BRST transformations play no role in the following discussions on the anomalies
and as such will not feature in subsequent sections of this thesis.
As the BRST operator is a nilpotent it can be used to define a cohomology. The BRST
cocycles A are forms that are BRST-closed and hence in the kernel of s,
sΩ = 0. (3.20)
The BRST coboundaries are defined as forms that are BRST-exact (in the image of s) and
as such are also BRST-closed
Ω = sΩ̂. (3.21)
The BRST-cohomology is defined as the quotient space Kers/Ims,
Kers
H(s) = . (3.22)
Ims
An element of H(s) defines an equivalence class of BRST cocycles, where the cocycles are
equivalent if they differ by a BRST coboundary. Note the similarity here with de Rham
cohomology.
The invariant polynomial (3.24) is certainly not the most general expression possible. The
exact form of the invariant polynomial depends on the physical theory in question. Generi-
cally the invariant polynomial will be the sum of products of traces.
dP2n+2 (F ) = 0. (3.25)
30
As the cohomology is trivial we see that
d sQ02n+1 = 0. (3.28)
As the cohomology of d on V(A, dA, η, ζ) is trivial, every closed form is exact. This allows
us to write
sdQ12n = 0. (3.30)
Then by interchanging s and d, and using the triviality of the cohomology of d as before we
arrive at
sQ2l+1
0 = 0. (3.32)
The descent equations are thus given by
dQ02n+2 = P2n+1
sQ02n+1 + dQ12n = 0
sQ12n + dQ22n−1 = 0
..
.
2n 2n+1
sQ1 + dQ0 = 0
2n+1
sQ0 = 0. (3.33)
We define a s-ladder Q as the set of differential forms that satisfy the descent equations.
Thus the problem of solving the descent equations (3.33) is the problem of solving the
cohomology of s mod d. The elements of this cohomology are the solutions of the descent
equations which are not trivial, that is not of the form
31
Qqp = sQ̂q−1
p + dQ̂qp−1 , for p 6= 0,
Q02n+1 = sQ̂2n
0 . (3.34)
Two ladders, Q and Q0 are said to be equivalent if their difference is a trivial latter (3.34).
Elements of the cohomology of s mod d define the corresponding equivalence classes.
Where we have
i Z1 i
Q1 (A, F ) = dt A = Tr(A). (3.38)
2π 0 2π
i 2Z 1
Q3 (A, F ) = dt str(A, tdA + t2 A2 )
2π 0
1 i 2 2 3
= Tr AdA + A . (3.39)
2 2π 3
1 i 3Z 1
Q5 (A, F ) = dt str(A, (tdA + t2 A2 )2 )
2 2π 0
1 i 3 3 3
= Tr A(dA)2 + A3 dA + A5 . (3.40)
6 2π 2 5
The method is then to “feed in” the solution for Q02n+1 (A, F ) and then “descend” the equa-
tions.
32
sQ03 + dQ12 = 0 (3.41)
sQ12 + dQ21 = 0 (3.42)
sQ21 + dQ30 = 0 (3.43)
sQ30 = 0. (3.44)
Also we have
2 1
= Tr AdA + A3 = Tr AF − A3 .
Q03 (3.45)
3 3
Here we have omitted the normalisation of the Chern-Simons form as it is arbitrary as the
descent equations are concerned. Then it is straight forward to verify that
s Q12 = d Tr η 2 A. (3.49)
Then
2 1
Q03 = Tr AdA + A3 = Tr AF − A3 ,
3 3
Q12 = 2
Tr η(F − A ) = Tr ηdA,
Q21 = −Tr η 2 A,
1
Q30 = −Tr η 3 . (3.52)
3
33
Now we consider the n = 2 case which produces the anomaly in 4 dimensions. Again
starting from the Chern-Simons form in 5 dimensions for Q05 , direct computation of the
decent equations gives the ladder
1 1
Q05 = 2
Tr AF − A3 F + A5 ,
2 10
1 3
Q14 = Tr η d AdA + A ,
2
1 2
Q23 = − Tr (η A + ηAη + Aη 2 )dA + η 2 A3 ,
2
1 3
Q32 = Tr −η dA + AηAη 2 ,
2
1
Q41 = Tr η 4 A,
2
1
Q50 = Tr η 5 . (3.53)
10
Notice that dQ05 is the U (1) anomaly in 6 dimensions and that Q14 is the non-Abelian anomaly
in 4 dimensions, up to normalisation.
This method can be applied to any value of n. However, it quickly becomes lengthy and
complicated. A general expression for arbitrary n is developed in the next section.
dˆ = d + s, (3.55)
which is nilpotent. We also introduce a family of gauge one-forms and there curvatures
where
A1 = A + η, A0 = η. (3.57)
34
We define the associated curvature as
ˆ t + A2
F̂t = dA t
= Ft + (1 − t)dη. (3.58)
ˆ 1 + A2 = dA + A2 = F (A),
F̂1 (A1 ) = dA (3.59)
1
From (3.62) the first part of the descent equations can be derived by expanding Q̂2l−1 in
powers of dη and using the transgression formula (3.59).
l−1
l−1
X (l − 1)!
P(A, (Ft + (1 − t)dη) )= (1 − t)k P((dη)k , A, (Ft )l−1−k ), (3.63)
k=0 k!(l − k − 1)!
P(F l ) − dQ02l−1 = 0
sQ02l−1 + dQ12l−2 = 0
..
.
sQl−1
l + P((dη)l ) = 0. (3.65)
35
With 0 ≤ k ≤ l − 1. This formula gives the terms in the descent equations up to k ≤ l − 1
in the power of dη.
For k = 0 we have the definition of the Chern-Simons form Q02l−1 . For k = 1 we have an
explicit solution for the anomaly
Z 1
Q12l−2 = l(l − 1) dt(1 − t)P(dη, A, Ftl−2 ). (3.67)
0
To express the anomaly in terms of η rather than dη we can shift the derivative from η to A
and Ft . This picks up a d-exact term which is irrelevant. Thus the anomaly can be expressed
as
Z 1
Q12l−2 = (l − 1) dt(1 − t)P(η, dA, d(Ft )l−2 ). (3.68)
0
For the higher terms one needs to consider fields of a different homotopy type.
At = tη. (3.69)
In this case we have
A1 = η, A0 = 0. (3.70)
thus
ˆ l−1 ,
P((F̂1 )l ) − P((F̂0 )l ) = dQ (3.73)
with
Z 1
Ql−1 = n dt P(η, (tdη + (t2 − t)η 2 )l−1 ). (3.74)
0
The invariant polynomials in this case can be expanded as
l−1
X (l − 1)!
P(η, F̂tl−1 ) = tl−1−k (t2 − t)k P((dη)l−1−k , η, (η 2 )k ). (3.75)
k=0 k!(n − k − 1)!
Now we expand Ql−1 as
36
Collecting terms in the same order of dη produces the second part of the descent equations
P((dη)l ) − dQll−1 = 0
sQll−1 + dQl+1
l−2 = 0
..
.
2l−2 2l−1
sQ1 + dQ0 = 0
2l−1
sQ0 = 0. (3.78)
From (3.75), after evaluating the integrals in terms of beta functions the terms in chain
(3.78) can be written as
l!(l − 1)!
Ql+k
l−1−k = (−1)
k
P((dη)l−1−k , η, (η 2 )k ), (3.79)
(l − 1 − k)!(l + k)!
with 0 ≤ k ≤ l − 1.
Notice how these terms do not depend on A or F , but just the ghost form η. Although the
chain terms are of different homotopy they do indeed belong to the same chain.
Using equation (3.79) the last term in the chain can be calculated,
l!(l − 1)!
Q2l−1
0 (η) = (−1)l−1 P(η 2l−1 ). (3.80)
(2l − 1)!
In order to compare these results to Section 3.4 the symmetric polynomial P is taken to be
the symmetrised trace. We calculate the ladder for l = 2 explicitly and then compare them
with (3.52). For k = 0 and using (3.66) we immediately get the Chern-Simons form
Z 1
Q03 = 2! dtStr(A, Ft )
0
Z 1
= dtTr(A, tF + (t2 − t)A2 )
0
Z 1
= dtTr tAF + (t2 − t)A3
0
1 1
= Tr AF − A3
2 3
1 2
= Tr AdA + A3 , (3.81)
2 3
which up to normalisation agrees with (3.52). Using (3.68) it is clear that the 2-dimensional
anomaly is
1Z 1
Q12 = (1 − t)Tr(ηdA)
2 0
1
= Tr(ηdA). (3.82)
4
37
Which clearly agrees with the previous analysis again up to normalisation. Now we need to
use formula (3.79) to calculate terms lower in the ladder. It is easy to see that using k = 0
and k = 1
sQ02n+1 = 0. (3.86)
The solution to the above is clearly
s(Q2n 2n 2n+1
1 − dQ̂0 ) + dA0 =0 (3.88)
To solve (3.88)one assumes that a special solution Â2n
1 to the descent equations exists
sÂ2n 2n+1
1 + dA0 = 0. (3.89)
Then we can write
s Q2n 2n 2n
1 − dQ̂0 − Â0 = 0. (3.90)
Thus we are solving for the cohomology of s again. Hence we have,
38
Q2n 2n 2n 2n 2n−1
1 = Â1 + A1 + dQ̂0 + sQ̂1 , (3.91)
where A2n1 is another representative of the cohomology of s. We can continue this procedure
in an iterative manner
Q2n+1−p
p = Â2n+1−p
p + A2n+1−p
p + dQ̂2n+1−p
p−1 + sQ̂2n+1−(p+1)
p , (3.92)
for 1 ≤ p ≤ D − 1, where D is the space-time dimensions. A2n+1−p
p is a representative of the
cohomlogy of s in the sector of forms of degrees (2n + 1 − p, p) and Â2n+1−p
p depends on the
cohomology of s in the sectors of degree less that p − 1. Then the next line up in the descent
equations is
sQ2n+1−(p+1) + d Â2n+1−p
p + A2n+1−p
p − sdQ̂2n+1−(p+1)
p = 0. (3.93)
2n+1−(p+1)
Now assume as before the existence of a special solution Âp+1
2n+1−(p+1)
sÂp+1 + d Â2n+1−p
p + A2n+1−p
p = 0. (3.94)
Then applying (3.92) with p → p + 1
here A2n+1−(p+1) is a representative of the chomology of s in the sector of forms with de-
grees (2n+1−(p+1), p+1). Equation (3.95) is the general solution to the descent equations.
It is worth noting that the condition (3.94) may not be satisfied for all p.
39
5. Magnetic monopoles and the Jacobi identity - Q32n−2
This term is related to the breakdown of the Jacobi identity for velocity operators in
the presence of a magnetic monopole [43].
However, higher order terms in the descent equations have so far lacked any physical inter-
pretation.
s A0 = 0 (3.96)
The anomalous Ward identity becomes
Z
sW [A, A0 ] = G[η, A, A0 ] = η α Gα [A, A0 ]. (3.97)
M
The nilpotency of s produces the Wess-Zumino consistency condition
sG[η, A, A0 ] = 0. (3.98)
Following [49] we a transgression formula for non-trivial bundles
 = A + η
dˆ = d + s. (3.102)
ˆ 2l−1 (A + η, A0 )
dQ2l−1 (A, A0 ) = dQ
Z 1
= ldˆ dtP(A + η − A0 , F̂tl−1 ), (3.103)
0
40
where we have the homotopies
and then collecting terms of the same order produces the descent equations for non-trivial
bundles
with p = 0, 1, ..., 2n − 2.
3.9 Epitome
The local cohomology of the exterior derivative d on the space of form polynomials V(A, F, η, ζ)
is trivial. This allows the descent equations to be derived in a mathematically sound manner.
The descent equations in fact define the local cohomology of s mod d.
Solutions to the descent equations can be obtained by picking an invariant polynomial P2n+2 ,
applying the graded BRST algebra and consulting the descent equations. A “bottom up”
approach also exists.
The remaining question is how to pick the symmetric polynomial P2n+1 ? If the symmetrised
trace is used then one recovers the non-abelian anomaly in 2n dimensions starting from the
singlet anomaly in (2n + 2) dimensions.
41
CHAPTER 4
The Anomalies of Gravity
Here we investigate the anomalies that are present when matter fields are coupled to gravity
as calculated by Alvarez-Gaumé and Witten [3, 6].//
We show that there is a generalisation of the global U (1) chiral anomaly for standard gauge
theory. This is shown to be related to the Dirac genus of the underlying manifold, which
must be of even dimensions. Fujikawa’s method is used to explicitly calculate this anomaly.
There are three kinds of gravitational anomaly each related to the three symmetries of
gravity; Einstein (diffeomorphisms), Lorentz and Weyl. These anomalies destroy the usual
properties of the energy-momentum tensor.
hT ab i − hT ba i =
6 0. (4.1)
∇µ hT µν i =
6 0. (4.2)
3. The Weyl anomaly is equivelent the nonvanishing of the trace of the energy-momentum
tensor and is thus also know as the trace anomaly
hT µµ i =
6 0. (4.3)
We consider only the local Lorentz and Einstein anomalies here. We set up the correct ghost
structure for gravitational theories and construct the correct BRST algebra. Then using the
same arguments as for the gauge theory case the Descent equations are presented and solved.
Using this construction the equivalence of the Lorentz and Einstein anomalies is shown. We
assume that the connection is metric compatible and torsionless.
42
4.1 Chiral U (1) Gravitational Anomalies
We consider a Dirac field coupled to gravity via the Lagrangian
√ i
g ψ iγ α eµα (∂µ − ωµab σab ) ψ.
L= (4.4)
4
The Dirac operator, which is hermitian is defined as
i
iD/ = iγ α eµα (∂µ − ωµab σab ), (4.5)
4
where have the spin connection ωµab and vielbein eµα ∈ GL(m,R). We have also defined
i
σa,b = [γa , γb ], (4.6)
2
A complete orthonormal set of eigenspinors is defined as
Z
√
/ = λn ψn ,
D dm x gψn† (x)ψ(x) = δn,m . (4.7)
In exactly the same way as for the situation in gauge theory, we expand the path integral
measure in terms of these eigenspinors we obtain the following relation
Z
DψDψ exp[S] (4.8)
Z X Z ∞
!
0 √ X
= da0i dbi exp[S + dm x gα(x) Dµ J5µ (x) − 2i lim ψl† (x)γm+1 ψl (x) ].
N →∞
i l=1
The above expression is not well defined and needs to be regulated. As before, we pick the
heat kernel method.
Z N
√ X
dm x gA5 (x) = lim ψl† (x)γm+1 ψ(x)
N →∞
l=1
Z ∞ h i
√ X
= lim dm x g ψl† (x)γm+1 exp −λ2l /M 2 ψ(x)
M →∞
l=1
Z ∞ h i
√ X 2
= lim dm x g ψl† (x)γm+1 exp −D
/ /M 2 ψ(x)
M →∞
l=1
h 2
i
/ /M 2 |ψl i|M →∞ .
= Trhψl |γm+1 exp −D (4.11)
Using the othogonality condition of the eigenspinors the only contribution to the anomaly
comes from the zero modes and hence
43
Z h i
2
dm xA5 (x) = Trhψl |γm+1 exp −D
/ /M 2 |ψl i|M →∞
= v+ − v− .
Where v± are the number of normalisable zero modes of the Dirac operator with positive
and negative chirality.
The above can be expressed in terms of the Pontrjagin classes and hence in terms of the
curvature. For example in 4 dimensions the local form of the anomaly is
i
A5 = Dµ J5µ (x) = − µν
αβλρ Rαβ Rλρµν . (4.14)
348 π 2
There are three BRST operators associated with GR each corresponding to a classical sym-
metry,
Consider just the Lorentz BRST transformation. We define the spin connection one form ω
and the zero form Lorentz ghost α
44
1 ab
ω = L ωab , (4.17)
2
1 ab
α = L αab . (4.18)
2
Both ωab and αab are antisymmetric in their indices. {Lab } are the hermitian generators of
SO(k) in some representation, k is the dimension of the Euclidean space.
Let V(ω, dω, α, ρ = dα) be the space of form polynomials. The local space V has a natural
grading given by the sum of the form degree and the ghost number. ω has ghost number
zero where α has ghost number one. In general any p-form with ghost number q is denoted
Ωqp .
The (Lorentz) BRST transformations on the spin connection and Lorentz ghost are
The BRST operator is a nilpotent, s2L = 0. It is worth comparing these transformations with
the gauge theory case. They are almost identical, which is what we would expect as we are
treating gravity as a gauge theory of the Lorentz group.
R(ω) = dω + ω 2 . (4.20)
Under the Lorentz BRST the curvature two-form transforms as
sE Γ = Lξ Γ − ∇v
1
sE ξ = [ξ, ξ]. (4.24)
2
45
Here ∇ = d + [Γ, ] and [ξ, ξ] is the graded Lie bracket. Lξ is the Lie derivative taken with
respect to the ghost parameter ξ.
It is convenient to shift this BRST operator by the Lie derivative and define a new BRST
operator
sξ = sE − Lξ . (4.25)
It is then also useful to redefine the basic variables as F(Γ, R(Γ), ξ, v), where R(Γ) = dΓ +
Γ2 . Under the new shifted transformations we obtain the “Yang-Mills like” Einstein BRST
transformations
sξ v = −v 2
sξ Γ = −∇v
sξ R(Γ) = [R(Γ), v]. (4.26)
Notice that both the Lorentz and Einstein BRST transformations are now cast in the same
form as the BRST transformations for gauge theory. This means that we can apply the
powerful machinery developed in section 3 to the gravitational case.
sL GL [ω, α] = 0. (4.28)
As discussed in chapter 3, we seek local functionals that are linear in the ghost fields which
are s-closed but not s-exact. The solution can be calculated via the descent equations.
The cohomology of d on V(ω, dω, α, ρ) is important in deriving and solving the descent equa-
tions. As for gauge theory, we use a filtration operator to reduce the calculation to that of a
simpler exterior derivative d0 . It will be continent to change the local variables to (ω, R, α, ρ)
In analogy to the gauge theory case, we define the exterior derivative and a filtration operator
on V(ω, R, α, ρ)
∂ ∂ ∂
d = dω + dα + dR
∂ω ∂α ∂R
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂
N = ρ +α +ω +R . (4.29)
∂ρ ∂α ∂ω ∂R
The exterior derivative decomposes as
46
d = d0 + d1 , (4.30)
with
d0 ω = R; d0 α = ρ
d0 R = 0; d0 ρ = 0. (4.33)
Thus (4.33) shows that d0 has vanishing cohomology and thus d must also have vanishing
cohomology as the cohomology of d is isomorphic to a subspace of the cohomology of d0 .
We start from with an invariant polynomial of degree (2p + 2). All such polynomials are
expressed in terms of sums and products of traces in the curvature R(ω)
dP4n = 0. (4.35)
As the cohomology of d is trivial, P4n must also be d-exact
sL Q04n−1 + dQ14n−2 = 0
sL Q14n−2 + dQ24n−3 = 0
..
.
4n−2 4n−1
sL Q1 + dQ = 0
4n−1
sL Q0 = 0. (4.37)
As an explicit example, lets consider the n = 1 case. The descent equations are
47
sL Q03 + dQ12 = 0 (4.38)
sL Q12 + dQ21 = 0 (4.39)
sL Q21 + dQ30 = 0 (4.40)
sL Q30 = 0. (4.41)
Lets consider the case for the Dirac field. In this instance we have that
2 1
Q03 = Tr ωdω + ω 3 = Tr ωR − ω 3 ,
3 3
1 2
Q2 = Tr α(R − ω ) = Tr αdω,
Q21 = −Tr α2 ω,
1
Q30 = −Tr α3 . (4.47)
3
Higher dimensional examples can be calculated in this way, however it clearly becomes
clumsy and long winded. A general solution can be obtained via the “Russian Formula”
which is presented in a later section.
Again, we stress that the normalisation of the anomaly is not fixed by the descent equations.
48
sE W [e] = GE [ξ, Γ]. (4.48)
This leads to the Einstein consistency condition
sE GE [ξ, Γ] = 0. (4.49)
As for the Lorentz anomaly we want to set up the descent equations and provide a systematic
method of solving them. Notice that the shifted Einstein BRST algebra (4.26) is identical to
the Lorentz BRST algebra (4.19),(4.21) with Γ and v playing the role of the spin-connection
ω and the Lorentz ghost α. Thus the cohomological arguments in section 4.3 also hold on
F(Γ, R(Γ), ξ, v). Thus the structure of the descent equations is identical to (4.37), except
now the invariant polynomials are given in terms of the Gl(2n) curvature.
So, the term in the descent equations relevant for the Einstein anomaly is
Lξ Qqmax = dQq+1
max−1 , (4.52)
thus we recover the consistency condition for the Einstein anomaly.
Z
sE Q12n−2 (v, Γ) = 0. (4.53)
In order to calculate the Einstein anomaly it is sufficient to calculate the Lorentz anomaly
and then replace the spin-connection ω with the Christoffel connection Γ and the Lorentz
ghost α with the ghost variable v. As an explicit example, the two dimensional Einstein
anomaly for the Dirac field viz (4.47) is given by
49
Γ̂ = Γ + v, ω̂ = ω + α, dˆ = d + sξ . (4.56)
We also notice that dˆ is a nilpotent
dˆ2 = 0. (4.57)
Again we start with a symmetric invariant polynomial and use the transgression formula.
Consider for the moment just the Einstein sector.
P(Rl ) − dQ02l−1 = 0
sξ Q02l−1 + dQ12l−2 = 0
..
.
2l−1
sξ Q0 = 0. (4.61)
Z 1
Q12l−1 (v, Γ) = l(l − 1) dt(1 − t)P(v, dΓ, dRtl−2 ) (4.62)
0
Rt = tR(Γ) + (t2 − t)Γ
Z 1
Q12l−1 (α, ω) = l(l − 1) dt(1 − t)P(α, dω, dRtl−2 ) (4.63)
0
Rt = tR(ω) + (t2 − t)ω.
/ = γ a eµa (∂µ + Aµ + ωµ ).
D (4.64)
50
The above operator will in general generate gauge, gravitational and mixed anomalies. These
anomalies are best tackled via the index theorem, which is used to generate the necessary
invariant polynomials needed at the top of the descent equations.
Z
/+ =
ind D ch(F ) ∧ Â(T M )|vol . (4.65)
M
/ +.
Where D+ = iDP
i Z
2 − dim ind D+ = TrF
2π M2
1 Z 1 2 r 2
4 − dim ind D+ = − TrF + TrR (4.66)
(2π)2 M4 2 48
Z
1 i 3 i 2
6 − dim ind D+ = − TrF + TrF TrR .
(2π)3 M6 6 48
Where r is the dimensions of the gauge group representations. The various anomalies can
then be calculated from these invariant polynomials using the methods described earlier.
For other fields coupled to gravity and gauge fields, the correct invariant polynomials can
be constructed (including the correct normalisation) from the Atiyah-Singer index theorem
for the relevant elliptical operator. This is described in the next chapter.
4.7 Epitome
The Dirac field coupled to gravity has a chiral anomaly which is the analogue of the singlet
anomaly in gauge theory. Via Fujikawa’s method and appealing to the AS index theorem
this anomaly is
Z Z
dxA5 = Â(T M )|vol . (4.67)
m
The BRST algebra for both the Lorentz transformations and Einstein differomorpisms have
the same structure as the BRST algebra for gauge theory. This enables us to apply the
machinery of chapter 3 to gravity. As the theory is assumed to be torsion free the curvatures
defined by either the Christoffel connection one-form or the spin-connection are identical.
This allows the Lorentz and Einstein anomalies to be identified.
The “Russian Formula” and transgression formula give an explicit form for the Lorentz
anomaly
Z 1
Q12n (α, ω) =n dt(1 − t)P(α, dω, d(Rt )n−1 ) (4.68)
0
The Einstein anomaly is given by the replacement of ω with Γ and α with v.
If the invariant polynomial P4n is given by the Â-genus then the in complete analogy to the
gauge theory case we recover the gravitational anomaly in terms of the chiral U (1) anomaly
51
for the Dirac field coupled to gravity.
52
CHAPTER 5
The Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem and
Anomaly Polynomials
In the previous chapters the invariant polynomial P2n+2 have been left undetermined except
when explicit calculations were preformed for the Dirac field. In this case we used the chi-
ral anomaly in (2n + 2) as calculated by the Atiyah-Singer index theorem as the invariant
polynomial (ignoring at that stage normalisation).
It is well-known that the only possible fields that can give rise to anomalies are the spin-1/2
Dirac field, the spin-3/2 Rarita-Schwinger field and the (anti-)self-dual antisymmetric tensor
field. The question is what invariant polynomial should be used?
Although the anomaly is not uniquely determined by the descent equations (due to topologi-
cally trivial terms), we propose that the invariant polynomials are fixed including the correct
normalistion if one appeals to the Atiyah-Singer index theorem for the relevant operator in
question. Thus, the anomaly including normalisation is determined.
The mathematical proof of the above statement requires k-theory. For a very accessible
introduction to k-theory (both differential and algebraic) see [72]. For the application of
k-theory to anomalies see [54]. Alvarez-Gaumé and Ginsparg [4, 5] demonstrated how the
anomaly in 2n dimensions is related to the AS theorem in a (2n+2) dimensional space. Their
method avoids the use of k-theory, but in some sense it closely resembles it. See [20, 53] for
a modern account.
In this chapter we present the necessary complexes associated with the Dirac, Rarita-
Schwinger and self-dual tensor fields. We then apply the AS-theorem to generate the invari-
ant polynomials.
We then present the symmetric polynomials for the spin-1/2, spin-3/2 and (anti-)self-dual
tensor field in four, six and ten dimensions. Then the anomaly content of effective super-
garvity theories in ten dimensions are examined. These supergravity theories are of partic-
ular interest as they are the low energy effective theories of the known five consistent string
theories.
53
5.1 Twisted spin complexes
Consider a spin bundle S(M ) over an m-dimensional orientable manifold M . The sections of
this bundle are denoted ∆(M ) = Γ(M, S(M )). A Dirac spinor ψ ∈ ∆(M ) is an irreducible
representation of the Clifford algebra, but is not an irreducible representation of the SPIN(m)
group generated by the Dirac matrices. ∆(M ) can be decomposed in to eigenvectors of γ m+1 ,
with the eigenvalues ±1 being the chirality.
M
∆(M ) = ∆+ (M ) ∆− (M ), (5.1)
The irreducible representations of SPIN(m) are the spinors in ∆± , with
ψ + ∈ ∆+ (M ), ψ − ∈ ∆− (M ). (5.2)
Where we have γ m+1 ψ ± = ±ψ ± . The Dirac operator is defined as
/ = iγ a ea µ (∂µ + ωµ ).
iD (5.3)
ab
ωµ is the spin connection; ωµ = −i/4 ωmu σab . Defining the projection operators as
1 1
P + = (I + γ m+1 ), P − = (I − γ m+1 ), (5.4)
2 2
allows us to define
/ + : ∆+ (M ) → ∆− (M )
D = iDP
/ − : ∆− (M ) → ∆+ (M ).
D† = iDP (5.5)
Z
Td(T M C )
v+ − v− = ch(∆+ (M ) − ∆− (M )) |vol
M e(T M )
Z
= Â(T M )|vol . (5.8)
M
Next we consider the twisted spin complex. A spinor that belongs to a representation of
N
a Lie group G is a section of the bundle S(M ) E, where is the associated vector bundle
P (M, G) in a given representation. The Dirac operator is defined as
54
DE = iγ α eαµ (∂µ + ωµ + Aµ )P + . (5.9)
Where Aµ is the gauge field on E. The AS index theorem for the twisted spin complex is
Z
v+ − v− = Â(T M )ch(E)|vol . (5.10)
M
The twisted Rarita-Schwinger complex is defined in analogy to the spin complex. The spinors
N
are sections of the bundle ∆±
3/2 E. The AS index theorem for the twisted Rarita-Schwinger
complex gives the difference of normalisable zero-modes of the twisted Rarita-Schwinger
operator DRS
Z
3/2 3/2
v+ − v− = ind DRS = [Â(T M )(Tr exp(iR/2π) − 1)ch(E)]|vol . (5.11)
M
In order to define the signature complex we need to introduce an operator that maps Ωp (M )
into Ωn−p ;τ . Here Ωp denotes the space of complex p-forms over M and n is the dimension
of the manifold and is taken to be even. τ is in fact related to the Hodge star ∗,
τ = ip(p−1)+n/2 ∗ . (5.12)
From the definition of τ and using the fact that ∗2 = (−1)p implies that τ 2 = 1 and has
eigenvalues ∓1. The exterior algebra can thus be decomposed into the eigenspaces of τ
M
Ω∗ (M ) = Ωp (M ) = Ω+ ⊕ Ω− . (5.13)
p
Notice that d + d∗ maps Ω+ into Ω− and vice versa. We define the operator d+ as the
restriction of d + d∗ to Ω+ .
d+ : Ω+ → Ω− . (5.14)
It is easy to see that d− is indeed the adjoint of d+ and is the restriction of d + d∗ to Ω− .
We can thus define the two term signature complex
d+
Ω+ (M ) - Ω− (M ) (5.15)
d−
55
The index of d+ is known as the sign of M , Sign(M ). See [54] for a deeper discussion on the
sign of M .
dQ02n+1 = P2n+2
sQ02n+1 + dQ12n = 0. (5.21)
For the three kinds of potentially anomalous matter we have the following symmetric poly-
nomials 1
h i
Â(T M )ch(E)
(1/2)
P2n+2 = (5.22)
vol
h i
Â(T M ) (Tr exp(i/2π R) − 1) ch(E)
3/2
P2n+2 = (5.23)
vol
A 11
P2n+1 = − L(T M ) , (5.24)
24 vol
which correspond to the Dirac field, Rarita-Schwinger and self-dual form field. In the latter
a factor of −1/2 is needed from the duality conditions.
The invariant polynomials can be expanded in terms of Pontrjagin classes. We have in two,
six and ten dimensions the following polynomials
1
String theorists use Iˆ to denote the symmetric polynomials.
56
• Anomaly Polynomials in four dimensions
Only the chiral spin-1/2 fermion can contribute to the anomaly
1 i i
P 1/2 = − TrF 3
+ TrF TrR2 . (5.25)
(2π)3 6 48
• Anomaly Polynomials in six dimensions
All three kinds of fields generate potential anomalies.
1/2 1 4 1 1 1
P = TrF + r TrR4 + (TrR2 )2 − TrR2 TrF 2
4!(2π)4 246 192 4
1 49 43
P 3/2 = TrR4 − (TrR2 )2
4!(2π)4 48 192
1 7 1
PA = TrR4 − (TrR2 )2 . (5.26)
4!(2π)4 60 24
1 1 1 5
P 1/2 = 6
−TrF 6
+ r TrR 6
+ TrR 4
TrR 2
+ (TrR2 )3
6!(2π) 504 384 4608
1 5 5
− TrR4 TrF 2 + (TrR2 )2 TrF 2 − TrR2 TrF 4
16 64 8
1 55 75 35
P 3/2 = − TrR 6
+ TrR 4
TrR 3
− (TrR 2 3
)
6!(2π)6 56 128 512
1 496 7 5
PA = TrR 6
− TrR 4
TrR 2
+ (TrR 2 3
) . (5.27)
6!(2π)6 504 12 72
1 1
P(R) = P A (R) + 2 P 1/2 (R) − P 3/2 (R). (5.28)
2 2
57
Where we have used just the gravitational part of the anomaly for the spin-1/2 fields.
The factor of 1/2 is included as we have Majorana-Weyl spinors and not Dirac spinors.
Thus, P = 0 when we add up all the terms. Type IIB supergravity has no anomalies.
1
P(R, F ) = (P(R)3/2 − P(R)1/2 + P(R, F )1/2 ). (5.29)
2
Here I 1/2 (R) is the term from the pure gravitational anomaly of the gravitino and
I 1/2 (R, F ) is the anomaly polynomial for the super-Yang-Mills gaugino which contains
a gravitational, gauge and mixed part. Using the explicit formula (5.27) we have
−1 496 − r 224 + n 5
P(R, F ) = 6
TrR6 − TrR4 TrR2 + (64 − r)(TrR2 )3
2(2π) 6! 504 384 4608
1 4 2 5 2 2 2 5 2 4 6
+ TrR TrF + (TrR ) TrF − TrR TrF + TrF (5.30)
16 64 8
In order for the anomaly to be cancelled by a local counter term the above anomaly
polynomial has to factorise into a four-form and an eight-form. The term TrR6 does
not allow this factorisation and so it must vanish. Thus we are led to the first condition
on the gauge group
r = 496. (5.31)
1 1
TrF 6 = TrF 4 TrF 2 − (TrF 2 )3 . (5.32)
48 14400
The 496-dimensional Lie groups SO(32) and E8 × E8 have the above property. They
also hold for E8 × U (1)248 and U (1)496 , however no such string theories are known. The
anomaly polynomial reads
1 1 1
P=− 2
TrF 2 − TrR2 X̂, (5.33)
2 (2π) 2! 30
where we have defined
58
1 1 1 1 1 1
X = 4
TrR4 + (TrR2 )2 + TrR2 TrF 2 TrF 4 − (TrF 2 )2 . (5.34)
(2π) 4! 8 32 240 24 7200
5.6 Epitome
The non-abelian anomaly in 2n dimensions G[η, A], is given via the descent equations in
terms of a symmetric invariant polynomial in 2n + 2 dimensions P2n+2 . The exact form
including the normalisation of the invariant polynomial is given by the Atiyah-Singer index
theorem in 2n + 2 dimensions. Thus, classical index theorems completely determine the
quantum anomalies in chiral theories.
The invariant polynomials are calculated by applying the Atiyah-Singer index theorem to
the relevant complexes. We have for spin-1/2 Dirac fermions, spin-1/2 Rarita-Schwinger
fermions and the (anti-)self-dual form field respectively
h i
Â(T M )ch(E)
(1/2)
P2n+2 = (5.35)
vol
h i
Â(T M ) (Tr exp(i/2π R) − 1) ch(E)
3/2
P2n+2 = (5.36)
vol
A 11
P2n+2 = − L(T M ) . (5.37)
24 vol
Using these invariant polynomials one can examine the anomalies in various theories without
knowing the details of the theory. The matter content is all that is needed. For example, it
was shown that the supergravity theories that are the low energy limit of the five consistent
superstring theories are anomaly free after applying the Green-Schwartz mechanism.
59
CHAPTER 6
Conclusion
This thesis addressed the calculation of potential anomalies in quantum field theories. The
main emphasis was on the calculation of consistent anomalies via the Wess-Zumino consis-
tency conditions and the descent equations. This approach was adopted as the graded BRST
algebra and the descent equations do not depend explicitly on a specific Lagrangian, but
are a generic feature of gauge (gravity) theories. The only drawback to this approach is the
normalisation is not fixed. This requires topological analysis or perturbation theory.
This approach is powerful enough to calculate the anomalies that arise when Dirac fermions,
Rarita-Schwinger fermions or (anti-)self-dual form fields are coupled to gauge and/or gravity
fields. Only the symmetric polynomial at the “top” of the descent equations fixes the rest of
the s-ladder. The symmetric polynomial is selected via the Atiyah-Singer index theorem for
the relevant elliptical operator. Amazingly, using the index theorem in (2n + 2) dimensions
gives the correct normalisation of the anomaly in 2n dimensions. Thus, the anomalies can
be calculated with relative ease.
The Alvarez-Gaumé and Ginsparg index procedure relates the singlet anomaly in (2n + 2)
dimensions to the non-abelian anomaly in 2n dimensions, it also gives the correct normalisa-
tion. k-theory is needed to show that the Atiyah-Singer index theorem in 2n + 2 dimensions
gives the correct anomaly in 2n dimensions in general. Due to time and space restrictions
this was not elaborated on in this thesis.
As the anomalies are calculated independently of any lagrangian, only the field content is
need in order to examine the anomalies. This leads means that the potential anomalies in
string theories, supergravity theories etc. can be examined without detailed analysis of the
theory.
60
Appendices
61
APPENDIX A
Non-Abelian Gauge Theory and BRST
Symmetry
[T a , T b ] = f abc T c . (A.1)
Where the f’s are the structure constants of the Lie group G.
For SU (2), the f abc will be equal to abc . Thus in the isospin representation we have
iσ a
Ta = − . (A.2)
2
Where σ a are the Pauli spin matrices.
The gauge potentials are vector fields Aaµ (x). It is often convenient to define matrix valued
vector field Aµ known as the Yang-Mills connection.
Aµ = Aaµ Ta . (A.3)
Where g is the gauge coupling constant.
Let the field φi (which could be fermionic or bosonic) transform under some representation
of G.
62
φi (x) → Λij (x)φj (x). (A.4)
Where Λij ∈ G. We do not restrict ourselves to the fundamental representation. The group
element, which is a function of space-time can be parameterised as
Using the gauge potential it is now possible to construct the covariant derivative Dµ .
Dµ = ∂µ − igAµ . (A.6)
The important point is that the covariant derivative of a field φ is gauge covariant. That is
1
δAaµ = − ∂µ θa + f abc θb Acµ
g
δφ = −igθa T a φ. (A.9)
From the covariant derivative the Yang-Mills field strength tensor is constructed as the
curvature with respect to the Yang-Mills connection. The Yang-Mills field strength tensor
Fµν is defined as
i
Fµν = [Dµ , Dν ]
g
= ∂µ Aν − ∂ν Aµ + g[Aµ , Aν ]
= (∂µ Aaν − ∂ν Aaµ + gf abc Abµ Acν )T a
a
= Fνµ T a. (A.10)
We wish to construct an invariant action out of the field strength tensor. As Dµ is covariant
we have
63
The unique action with only two derivatives is constructed from the trace. However, it
possible to define an action using other functionals. The problem with these are that they
will contain higher derivatives and hence ghosts which spoil the unitary properties needed
to be physical. So we use the functional
1 a
F = F Ta dxµ ∧ dxν
2 µν
1
= Fµν dxµ ∧ dxν
2
= dA + A ∧ A. (A.14)
A = Aaµ Ta dxµ
= Aµ dxµ . (A.15)
DF = dF + [A, F ] = 0. (A.16)
Then in this notation the Yang-Mills action becomes
1Z
S=− T r(F ∧ ∗F ) (A.17)
2 m
Where ∗ is the Hodge dual, which on a Euclidean manifold in local coordinates can be
defined as
1
∗Fµν = µναβ F αβ (A.18)
2
Variation of the action with respect to Aµ produced the field equation
Dµ F µν = 0. (A.19)
Or in form notation
D ∗ F = 0. (A.20)
64
A.2 Instantons
Instantons are self-dual solutions of Yang-Mills theory in a Euclidean space, for which the
field strength tensor is maximal. By dual we mean ∗F = ±F , self-dual is + and anti-self-dual
is −. As instantons mediate between different vacua they are very important in understand-
ing the vacua in gauge theories.
In order to solve the self or anti-self dual equations, one needs to consider the homotopy of
the gauge group G. The boundary conditions are asymptotic conditions which describe how
A behaves at infinity in <4 . The requirement that the action must be finite means that Fµν
must be square integrable.
Fµν (x) → 0,
|x| → ∞. (A.21)
i
Aµ (x) → ∂µ Λ(x)Λ−1 (x),
g
|x| → ∞. (A.22)
Λ(x) can be thought of as being defined by a sphere at infinity in <4 , i.e. on S 3 . Choose
G = SU (2), then for each x, Λ(x) ∈ SU (2) gives a continuous map
Λ : S 3 → SU (2). (A.23)
Such maps fall into homotopy classes and are elements of π3 (SU (2)). But SU (2) is topolog-
ically S 3
Using the language and formalism of principle fiber bundles with group SU (N ), it can be
shown that the instanton winding number is equal to the 2nd Chern class. As k must be an
integer we have 3 possibilities
1. ch1 = 0 = c1 ,
65
2. ch2 = − 8π1 2 T r(F ∧ F ).
1 R
Then the winding number can be expressed in terms of the Chern classes, c2 = 8π 2
T r(F ∧
F ) = −n, therefore
1 Z
n = − 2 T r(F ∧ F ) (A.25)
8π
Using the definitions of the forms in local coordinates, it is straight forward to show
1 Z
n=− T r(Fνµ ∗ Fνµ ) (A.26)
16π 2
It was noticed that the gauge fixed Lagrangian possess a new global symmetry that rotates
the gauge fields into ghosts. This is known as the BRST transformation [15],[69]. This sym-
metry can be used in a similar way to the Gupta-Bleuler constraint to remove unphysical
states from the Fock space. However, there is one potential source of difficulties. We demon-
strate the Gribov ambiguity [39] in the Coulomb gauge means that much of the formalism
developed may not exist outside of perturbation theory.
Feynman in 1962 showed that using standard quantisation methods available at the time,
Yang-Mills theory was not unitary. Feynman also showed that counter terms could be added
that removed the nonunitary parts. These terms are now known as Faddeev-Popov Ghosts.
In gauge theories like Maxwell’s theory or Yang-Mills the path integral is ill-defined due to
the gauge degree of freedom. In these gauge theories both the path integral measure DA
and the action S are gauge invariant and so when we functionally integrate over DA we over
count the degrees of freedom. To see this consider QED. Maxwell’s theory is invariant under
gauge transformations of the form
AΛµ = Aµ + ∂µ Λ, (A.27)
so that when one functionally integrates over both AΛµ and Aµ the integrand is infinity over
counted.
Z
DA eiS = ∞. (A.28)
The problem is that when one starts with a particular configuration Aµ and then consider
all possible gauge equivalent configurations AΛµ we over count the degrees of freedom. Thus
we are sweeping out an orbit in the space of all gauge connections. As Λ changes along the
66
orbits we inevitably over count the path integral an infinite number of times.
The solution to this is to fix the gauge. Traditionally one adds the term
1
LGF = − (∂µ Aµ )2 , (A.29)
2α
to the action. However for the following argument we will fix the gauge by inserting an
arbitrary function of the gauge fields into the integration
However, by inserting a delta function into the path integral we change the functional inte-
gration measure DA. Inserting delta functions always produces an ambiguity in the measure.
To remove this ambiguity we insert 1 into the integral.
Z
1 = ∆F P DΛ δ(F (AΛµ )), (A.31)
here ∆F P is the Faddeev-Popov determinant which gives the correct measure. DΛ =
Q
x dΛ(x) is the invariant group measure. Inserting this into the functional integration we
obtain
Z Z Z
DA ∆F P DΛ δ(F (AΛµ ) exp i 4
d x L(A) . (A.32)
It is important to notice that the Faddeev-Popov determinant is independent of the gauge.
This is clear as by construction we integrate over all gauge factors Λ.
Popov determinant ∆F P and the action S are all gauge invariant. The only part that is not
is F (AΛµ ). The path integral becomes
Z Z Z
4
DΛ DA ∆F P δ(F (Aµ )) exp i d x L(A) . (A.34)
R
Now the infinite part of the integration has been isolated, DΛ = ∞ which is a volume
factor. Hence, simply dividing by this factor renders the integral finite. The gauge condition
is enforced by the delta function δ(F (Aµ )). However, the most important result is that
the Faddeev-Popov determinant ∆F P gives the correct integration measure. The finite path
integral is thus
Z Z
4
DA ∆F P δ(F (Aµ )) exp i d x L(A) . (A.35)
The problem of gauge fixing then becomes one of finding an explicit form of the determi-
nant.The method is to use equation (A.31) and to change variables in the integration from
Λ to F . Thus, the Jacobian is calculated
" #
δF
DF = det DΛ. (A.36)
δΛ
67
Then the Faddeev-Popov determinant can be written as
Z " #
δΛ
∆−1
FP = DF det δF
δF
" #
δΛ
= det . (A.37)
δF F =0
The Grassmann fields η and η † are ghost fields. That is they do not obey the spin-statistics
theorem, in fact they are scalar fields that obey Fermi-Dirac statistics. These fields are
known as the Faddeev-Popov ghosts.
Now we explicitly calculate the Fadeev-Popov ghosts for QED. We choose the Lorentz gauge
condition
F (Aµ ) = ∂ µ Aµ = 0. (A.41)
Clearly under a infinitesimal gauge transformation we have
F (AΛµ ) = ∂ µ Aµ + ∂ µ ∂µ θ. (A.42)
Then the matrix M is given by
68
measure, the Faddeev-Popov determinant is trivial.
The same cannot be said of Yang-Mills theory. Here the Faddeev-Popov ghosts give non-
trivial corrections. This is partly why Yang-Mills theory took so long to quantise. Again we
pick the Lorentz condition
∂ µ Aaµ = 0. (A.45)
Then when placing this condition into the integration we must also include the term
!
δ −1
Ma,b (x, y) = a
∂µ (∂µ θb (y) + gf bcd Acµ (y)θd (y))
δθ (x) g
1 ab µ 4
= −δ ∂ ∂µ δ (x − y) + gf bcd ∂ µ Acµ δ ad δ 4 (x − y)
g
1 ab µ
= −δ ∂ ∂µ + gf abc ∂ µ Acµ δ 4 (x − y). (A.47)
g x,y
After rescaling and preforming the y integrations we see that the term added to the action
is
Z
d4 x η † a (x) δ ab ∂ µ ∂µ − gf abc ∂ µ Acµ (x) η b (x). (A.48)
The ghost fields have some unusual properties:
1. They violate the spin-statistics theorem. They transform as scalars under the Lorentz
group, but have fermionic statistics.
2. They couple only to the gauge field for Yang-Mills theory. They do not appear as
external states and as such cannot be present in tree diagrams. They only appear as
in loop diagrams.
3. They decouple from the physical states and should be viewed as a mathematical trick
of quantisation.
69
We write the gauge fixed action including the Ghost term as
1 1
L = − tr (Fµν F µν ) − (∂.A)2 − η a ∂ µ Dµ η a . (A.49)
2 2α
Before gauge fixing the action was invariant under gauge transformations of the form
1
δAaµ = ∂µ Θa + f abc Abµ Θc . (A.50)
g
Redefining the gauge parameter as
Θa = −η a λ, (A.51)
here η a and λ are Grassmann variables and λ is constant. The gauge fixed action equation
(A.49) is invariant under the global symmetry
1
δAaµ = − (Dµ η a )λ
g
1
δη a = − f abc η b η c λ
2
1
δη a = − (∂ µ Aaµ )λ. (A.52)
αg
It is straight forward to see that the Lagrangian (A.49) is indeed BRST invariant. The
tr(Fµν F µν ) term is clearly BRST invariant as it is just a reparametrisation of the gauge
transformation. Next consider the ghost term
1
δLGF = − (∂ µ Aaµ )∂ ν δAaν
α
1 µ a ν
= (∂ Aµ )(∂ Dν η a )λ. (A.54)
αg
Adding these two contributions together
1 µ a ν
δL = (∂ Aµ )(∂ Dν η a )λ − (δη a )∂ µ Dµ η a − η a ∂ µ δ(Dµ η a )
αg
1 µ a ν 1 µ a
= (∂ Aµ )(∂ Dν η a )λ + (∂ Aµ )λ(∂ ν Dν η a )
αg αg
−η a ∂ µ δ(Dµ η a )
= −η a ∂ µ δ(Dµ η a ). (A.55)
70
δ(Dµ η a ) = δ[∂µ η a + g f abc Aµ η c ]
= ∂µ δη a + g f abc (δAbµ )η c + g f abc Abµ (δη c )
1
= − f abc ∂µ (η b η c )λ − f abc (Dµ η b )λη c
2
g
− f abc f cmn Abµ η m η n λ. (A.56)
2
Now consider the derivative in the first term. It is easy to show that
2
δBRST = 0. (A.62)
From this symmetry a Noether current can be constructed
XδL δBRST φi
Jµ = µ
i δ∂ φi δλ
a ν a g a abc b c
= −Fµν D η − ∂µ η f η η . (A.63)
2
71
Then in the usual way the BRST charge is defined
Z
QBRST = d3 xJ0 , (A.64)
which itself is a nilpotent
Q2BRST = 0. (A.65)
The Fock space of the theory is greatly increased due to the presence of the ghost and anti-
ghost fields. The ghost and anti-ghost stated are unphysical and have to be removed from
the theory. This can be done in a similar way to the Gupta-Bleuler condition in QED by
Given ∇i Aai = 0 it is always possible to find a A0i which is gauge equivalent to Ai (here we
suppress gauge indices) that also satisfies
∇i A0i = 0. (A.67)
This can easily be seen if one explicitly preforms the gauge transformation
i
A0i = ΛAi Λ−1 − (∂i Λ)Λ−1 . (A.68)
g
Notice that the second term is proportional to g −1 . This means that perturbation theory
will never pick up this factor. That is, provided we stay within perturbation theory the
Coulomb gauge will in effect remove the gauge degrees of freedom. Picking SU (2) as a
concrete example, and take Ai to be gauge equivalent to 0.
i
Ai = − (∂i Λ)Λ−1 , (A.69)
g
where we have chosen the field such that ∇i Ai = 0. We parameterise the gauge using radial
coordinates
d2 ω dω
+ − sin(2ω) = 0. (A.71)
dt2 dt
72
Where t = log(r) This is simply the equation for a damped harmonic oscillator in a constant
gravitational field. The solution ω = 0 leads to Ai = 0, which is the solution stated earlier.
However, it is clear that there are many other solutions to the equation with ω 6= 0 and
hence the Coulomb gauge condition is not unique. For non singular solutions all we need is
ω = 0, 2π, 4π, ... when t = −∞. For non-trivial solutions at t = ∞ we have the asymptotic
condition
σ i xi
Λ → ±i . (A.72)
r
As the Coulomb gauge does not fix the gauge completely there is a infinite sequence of fields
which are gauge equivalent that satisfy the Coulomb condition. These copies are known as
Gribov copies [39].
This ambiguity can also be explained by the fact that the matrix M ab (x, y; A) as defined in
equation (??) possess zero modes. Suppose we have non-zero eigenvalues λn
As this determinant vanishes the matrix is non-invertible, thus the formulas stated earlier are
incorrect for the Coulomb gauge. As such the zero modes spoil the possibility of quantising
the system canonically, at least technically. However as long as one stays within perturbation
theory these zero modes will not make any contribution to the quantisation procedure. This
is due to the fact that the zero modes do not couple to the physical states.
Feynman rules are by their very nature pertubative. Perturbation theory is really just the
analytic part of the generating functional as g → 0, thus it is restricted to the first Gribov
copy as all other copies have a factor of 1/g associated with them.
73
APPENDIX B
Basics of Lie Algebra Cohomology
Here we present the basics of Lie algebra cohomology needed to understand the construction
of the BRST operator and it’s cohomology. We follow the conventions of [29], [28] and also
recommend [46] for a mathematical review of Lie Algebra cohomology. For a overview of Lie
algebras from a geometry point of view see [53].
La g = ag. (B.1)
The left-translation La is defined in a similar way. As La is a diffeomorphism from G to G.
This induces a diffeomorphism La? : Tg G → Tag G.
On a Lie group there exists a special class of vector fields defined by their invariance under
group translations. Let X be a vector field a vector field on a Lie group G. X is a left-
invariant vector field if La? X|ag = X|ag .
Let X = X µ ∂/∂xµ and Y = Y µ ∂/∂xµ be vector fields on G. The Lie bracket [X, Y ] is
defined as
74
where f ∈ F (G) and F (G) is the space of smooth functions on G. It is straight forward to
see that [X, Y ] is another vector field. The Lie bracket satisfies the following
1. Bilinearity
[X, c1 Y1 + c2 Y2 ] = c1 [X, Y1 ] + c2 [X, Y2 ] (B.4)
2. Skew-symmetry
If one takes two points g and ag = Lag in G and apply La? to the Lie bracket [X, Y ] of
X, Y ∈ g, we see that
The set of left-invariant vector fields g with the Lie bracket [, ] : g × g → g is the Lie algebra
of the Lie group G.
Ωn : g ∧ ..n . ∧ g → V, (B.9)
1 A
ΩA
n = Ωi1 ...in ω i1 ∧ ... ∧ ω in , (B.10)
n!
{ω (i) } is a basis of g and the upper index A labels the components in V . We denote the
abelian group of all n-cochains as C n (g, V ).
75
n+1
X
A
(δΩn ) (X1 , ..., Xn+1 ) = (−1)i+1 ρ(X1 )A B
B (Ωn (X1 , ..., X̂i , ..., Xn+1 )) (B.11)
i=1
n+1
X
+ (−1)j+k ΩA
n ([Xj , Xk ], X1 , ..., X̂j , ..., X̂k , ...Xn+1 ).
j,k=1 j<k
A n-cochain is a cocycle when δΩn = 0. The group of all n-cocycles is denoted Zρn (g, V ).
If a cocycle can be written as Ωn = δΩ0n−1 then Ωn is a coboundary. The group of all
n-coboundaries is denoted Bρn (g, V ). The n-th Lie algebra cohomology group is defined as
{η i , η j } = 0, (B.14)
where i, j = 1, ..., dim g. The BRST operator s is defined by
1 ∂
s = η i ρ(Xi ) + fiji η i η j k . (B.15)
2 ∂η
From this definition it is straight forward to show that it is indeed a nilpotent.
76
Here the BRST operator s acts on the ghosts as the exterior derivative d acts on the left
invariant one-forms.
77
APPENDIX C
The Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem and some
Characteristic Classes
In this appendix we outline the Atiyah-Singer index theorem for elliptical complexes on com-
pact manifolds without boundary. We follow [53] and also recommend [55].
78
C.1 Elliptic Complexes
Consider a sequence of elliptic operators,
Di−1 Di Di+1 -
··· - Γ(M, Ei−1 ) - Γ(M, Ei ) - Γ(M, Ei+1 ) ··· (C.5)
Here {Ei } is a sequence of vector bundles over M . The sequence (Ei , Di ) is called an elliptic
complex if Di is nilpotent.
If we have a two term complex then index theorem simplifies slightly. Let
D-
Γ(M, E) Γ(M, F ) (C.7)
be a two-term elliptic complex. The index of D is given by
Z
T d(T M C )
ind D = (−1)m(m+1)/2 (chE − chF ) . (C.8)
M e(T M ) vol
For the exact definitions of the various characteristic classes stated in (C.6) and (C.8) see
[53]
Consider a principle fibre bundle P (M, G) over an even dimensional compact manifold M
of dimension 2n without boundary. The group G is taken to be a Lie group. Let E be the
associated vector bundle with dim E = k. Let the curvature be denoted by F .
The total Chern character is defined by
j
iF X 1 iF
ch(F ) ≡ Tr exp = Tr . (C.9)
2π j=1 j! 2π
The jth Chern character chj (F ) is
j
1 iF
chj (F ) = Tr . (C.10)
j! 2π
79
The Â-genus is defined as
n
Y xj /2
Â(R) = . (C.11)
j=1 sinh(xj /2)
Here
(
k/2 if k is even;
[k/2] = (C.13)
(k − 1)/2 if k is odd.
The xj are the eigenvalues of F/2π once it has been diagonalised.
The Â(R)-genus and the Chern character ch(F ) can be expanded in term of traces of cur-
vatures as
1 1 1 1 1
Â(R) = 1 + 2
TrR2 + 4
(TrR2 )2 + TrR4
(4π) 12 (4π) 288 360
1 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 6
+ (TrR ) + TrR R + TrR + ··· (C.14)
(4π)6 10368 4320 5670
2
i 1 i
ch(F ) = k + TrF + + ···. (C.15)
2π 2 2π
The Hirzebruch L-polynomial is defined as
n
Y xj /2
L(M ) = . (C.16)
j=1 tanh(xj /2)
1 1 1 1 7
L(M ) = 1 − 2
TrR2 + 4
(TrR2 )2 − TrR4
(2π) 6 (2π) 72 180
1 1 2 3 7 2 4 31 6
+ − (TrR ) + TrR TrR − TrR + ···. (C.17)
(2π)6 1296 1080 2835
80
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] Stephen L. Adler. Axial vector vertex in spinor electrodynamics. Phys. Rev., 177:2426–
2438, 1969.
[2] Stephen L. Adler and William A. Bardeen. Absence of higher order corrections in the
anomalous axial vector divergence equation. Phys. Rev., 182:1517–1536, 1969.
[4] Luis Alvarez-Gaume and Paul H. Ginsparg. The topological meaning of nonabelian
anomalies. Nucl. Phys., B243:449, 1984.
[5] Luis Alvarez-Gaume and Paul H. Ginsparg. The structure of gauge and gravitational
anomalies. Ann. Phys., 161:423, 1985.
[6] Luis Alvarez-Gaume and Edward Witten. Gravitational anomalies. Nucl. Phys.,
B234:269, 1984.
[7] M. F. Atiyah and I. M. Singer. The index of elliptic operators. 1. Annals Math.,
87:484–530, 1968.
[8] M. F. Atiyah and I. M. Singer. The index of elliptic operators. 3. Annals Math.,
87:546–604, 1968.
[9] M. F. Atiyah and I. M. Singer. The index of elliptic operators. 4. Annals Math.,
93:119–138, 1971.
[10] M. F. Atiyah and I. M. Singer. The index of elliptic operators. 5. Annals Math.,
93:139–149, 1971.
[11] M. F. Atiyah and I. M. Singer. Dirac operators coupled to vector potentials. Proc. Nat.
Acad. Sci., 81:2597–2600, 1984.
81
[13] J. Barcelos-Neto. Axial and gauge anomalies in the bv formalism. Int. J. Mod. Phys.,
A12:5053–5066, 1997.
[14] William A. Bardeen. Anomalous ward identities in spinor field theories. Phys. Rev.,
184:1848–1857, 1969.
[15] Glenn Barnich, Friedemann Brandt, and Marc Henneaux. Local brst cohomology in
gauge theories. Phys. Rept., 338:439–569, 2000.
[16] I. A. Batalin and G. A. Vilkovisky. Gauge algebra and quantization. Phys. Lett.,
B102:27–31, 1981.
[17] I. A. Batalin and G. a. Vilkovisky. Feynman rules for reducible gauge theories. Phys.
Lett., B120:166–170, 1983.
[18] C. Becchi, A. Rouet, and R. Stora. Renormalization of gauge theories. Annals Phys.,
98:287–321, 1976.
[19] J. S. Bell and R. Jackiw. A pcac puzzle: pi0 → gamma gamma in the sigma model.
Nuovo Cim., A60:47–61, 1969.
[20] R. A. Bertlmann. Anomalies in quantum field theory. Oxford, UK: Clarendon (1996)
566 p. (International series of monographs on physics: 91).
[22] Adel Bilal and Steffen Metzger. Anomaly cancellation in m-theory: A critical review.
Nucl. Phys., B675:416–446, 2003.
[23] M. Blagojevic. Gravitation and Gauge Symmetries. Bristol, UK: IOP (2002) 522 p.
[26] Jr. Callan, Curtis G. and Jeffrey A. Harvey. Anomalies and fermion zero modes on
strings and domain walls. Nucl. Phys., B250:427, 1985.
[29] Jose A. de Azcarraga and Jose M. Izquierdo. Lie groups, lie algebras, cohomology and
some applications in physics.
[30] Antonio Dobado and Antonio L. Maroto. Standard model anomalies in curved space-
time with torsion. Phys. Rev., D54:5185–5194, 1996.
82
[31] L. D. Faddeev and V. N. Popov. Feynman diagrams for the yang-mills field. Phys. Lett.,
B25:29–30, 1967.
[32] L. D. Faddeev and Samson L. Shatashvili. Realization of the schwinger term in the
gauss law and the possibility of correct quantization of a theory with anomalies. Phys.
Lett., B167:225–228, 1986.
[33] Dan Freed, Jeffrey A. Harvey, Ruben Minasian, and Gregory W. Moore. Gravitational
anomaly cancellation for m-theory fivebranes. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys., 2:601–618,
1998.
[34] K. Fujikawa and H. Suzuki. Path integrals and quantum anomalies. Oxford, UK:
Clarendon (2004) 284 p.
[35] Kazuo Fujikawa. Anomalous ward identities and path integration. Presented at 20th
Int. Conf. on High Energy Physics, Madison, Wis., Jul 17-23, 1980.
[36] Kazuo Fujikawa. Path integral measure for gauge invariant fermion theories. Phys. Rev.
Lett., 42:1195, 1979.
[37] J. Gomis and J. Paris. Anomalous gauge theories within bv framework. Prepared for
International Europhysics Conference on High- energy Physics, Marseille, France, 22-28
Jul 1993.
[38] Michael B. Green and John H. Schwarz. Anomaly cancellation in supersymmetric d=10
gauge theory and superstring theory. Phys. Lett., B149:117–122, 1984.
[39] V. N. Gribov. Quantization of non-abelian gauge theories. Nucl. Phys., B139:1, 1978.
[42] R. Jackiw. Field theoretic investigations in current algebra. In *Treiman, S.b. ( Ed.)
Et Al.: Current Algebra and Anomalies*, 81-210.
[43] R. Jackiw. Magnetic sources and three cocycles (comment). Phys. Lett., B154:303–304,
1985.
[44] M. Kaku. Introduction to superstrings. NEW YORK, USA: SPRINGER (1988) 568 P.
(GRADUATE TEXTES IN CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS).
[45] M. Kaku. Quantum Field Theory: A Modern Introduction. New York, USA: Oxford
Univ. Pr. (1993) 785 p.
83
[49] Juan Manes, Raymond Stora, and Bruno Zumino. Algebraic study of chiral anomalies.
Commun. Math. Phys., 102:157, 1985.
[50] C. P. Martin. Chiral gauge anomalies on noncommutative minkowski space- time. Mod.
Phys. Lett., A16:311–320, 2001.
[51] O. Moritsch, M. Schweda, and T. Sommer. Yang-mills gauge anomalies in the presence
of gravity with torsion. Class. Quant. Grav., 12:2059–2070, 1995.
[52] Otmar Moritsch, Manfred Schweda, and Silvio P. Sorella. Algebraic structure of gravity
with torsion. Class. Quant. Grav., 11:1225–1242, 1994.
[53] M. Nakahara. Geometry, Topology and Physics. Bristol, UK: Hilger (1990) 505 p.
(Graduate student series in physics).
[54] C. Nash. Differential topology and quantum field theory. London, UK: Academic (1991)
386 p.
[55] C. Nash and S. Sen. Topology and Geometry for Physicists. Academic Press, New
York.
[56] Kazuhiko Nishijima and Masanori Okawa. The becchi-rouet-stora transformation for
the gravitational field. Prog. Theor. Phys., 60:272, 1978.
[57] W. Pauli and F. Villars. On the invariant regularization in relativistic quantum theory.
Rev. Mod. Phys., 21:434–444, 1949.
[60] Lewis H. Ryder. Quantum Field Theory. Cambridge University Press UK, (1996)
487p.
[61] R. Schmid. A few brst bicomplexes. In *Tianjin 1992, Proceedings, Differential geo-
metric methods in theoretical physics* 375-378.
[62] R. Schmid. Local cohomology in gauge theories, brst transformations and anomalies.
Differ. Geom. Appl., 4:107, 1994.
[63] A. A. Slavnov. Ward identities in gauge theories. Theor. Math. Phys., 10:99–107, 1972.
[67] Y. Takahashi. On the generalized ward identity. Nuovo Cim., 6:371, 1957.
84
[68] J. C. Taylor. Ward identities and charge renormalization of the yang- mills field. Nucl.
Phys., B33:436–444, 1971.
[69] I. V. Tyutin. Gauge invariance in field theory and statistical physics in operator for-
malism. LEBEDEV-75-39.
[71] Satoshi Watamura. The brs transformation and the consistent gravitational anomalies
in poincare gravity. RIFP-565.
[73] M. Werneck de Oliveira and S. P. Sorella. Algebraic structure of lorentz and diffeomor-
phism anomalies. Int. J. Mod. Phys., A9:2979–2996, 1994.
[74] J. Wess and B. Zumino. Consequences of anomalous ward identities. Phys. Lett., B37:95,
1971.
[75] Satoshi Yajima. Mixed anomalies in four-dimensional and six-dimensional space with
torsion. Prog. Theor. Phys., 79:535, 1988.
[76] Chen-Ning Yang and R. L. Mills. Conservation of isotopic spin and isotopic gauge
invariance. Phys. Rev., 96:191–195, 1954.
[77] Bruno Zumino, Yong-Shi Wu, and Anthony Zee. Chiral anomalies, higher dimensions,
and differential geometry. Nucl. Phys., B239:477–507, 1984.
85