Jump to content

Is gravitational Chern-Simons action “topological” or not?


Ganesh Ujwal

Recommended Posts

Here are the 2+1D gravitational Chern-Simons action of the connection [latex]\Gamma[/latex] or spin-connection:
[latex]S=\int\Gamma\wedge\mathrm{d}\Gamma + \frac{2}{3}\Gamma\wedge\Gamma\wedge\Gamma \tag{1}[/latex]

 

[latex]S=\int\omega\wedge\mathrm{d}\omega + \frac{2}{3}\omega\wedge\omega\wedge\omega \tag{2}[/latex]

 

Usual Chern-Simons theory is said to be topological, since [latex]S=\int A\wedge\mathrm{d}A + \frac{2}{3}A\wedge A \wedge A[/latex] does not depend on the spacetime metric.

(1) Are they topological or not?

(2) Do they depend on the spacetime metric (the action including the integrand)?

(3) Do we have topological gravitational Chern-Simons theory then? What do (1) and (2) mean in this context?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Classically they are clearly topological. The metric does not appear, and you don't need a metric for integration on manifolds to make sense. Now in dimension 3 you can cast the Einstein-Hilbert action into a Chern-Simons theory as you say. The connection takes it values in the Lie algebra of the Poincare group.

In higher dimensions you need to use higher invariant polynomials, remember you need the integration to make sense. In this way you can get higher dimensional theories and this includes the Einstein-Hilbert action, but also with higher curvature terms.

There is no experimental evidence for the inclusion of this higher curvature terms in gravity. They are however, interesting from a non-perturbative quantum gravity perspective using the renormalisation group flow and the asymptotic safety.


Now, in perturbation quantisation of the Chern-Simons theory you do need a metric to define the path integrals. Witten in 1989 did this [1]. You get a expressions that do depend on this choice of metric, but he then showed how to make this all metric independent by adding another term.

References

[1] Edward Witten, Quantum Field Theory and the Jones Polynomialm, Commun. Math. Phys. 121 (3) (1989) 351–399.

Edited by ajb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.