Ashtekar variables, which were a new canonical formalism of general relativity, raised new hopes for the canonical quantization of general relativity and eventually led to loop quantum gravity. Smolin and others independently discovered that there exists in fact a Lagrangian formulation of the theory by considering the self-dual formulation of the Tetradic Palatini action principle of general relativity.[1] [2] [3] These proofs were given in terms of spinors. A purely tensorial proof of the new variables in terms of triads was given by Goldberg[4] and in terms of tetrads by Henneaux et al.[5]
See main article: Einstein–Hilbert action, Frame fields in general relativity, spin connection and Tetradic Palatini action. The Palatini action for general relativity has as its independent variables the tetrad
\alpha | |
e | |
I |
IJ | |
{\omega | |
\alpha} |
D\alpha
g\alpha=
I | |
e | |
\alpha |
J | |
e | |
\beta |
ηIJ.
{\Omega\alpha
The Ricci scalar of this curvature is given by
\alpha | |
e | |
I |
\beta | |
e | |
J |
{\Omega\alpha
S=\intd4x e
\alpha | |
e | |
I |
\beta | |
e | |
J |
{\Omega\alpha
where
e=\sqrt{-g}
IJ | |
{\omega | |
\alpha} |
D\alpha
\beta | |
e | |
I |
=0
\nabla\alpha
{\Omega\alpha
{R\alpha
\nabla\alpha
\alpha | |
e | |
I |
\beta | |
e | |
J |
{R\alpha
R
R\alpha-{1\over2}g\alphaR=0.
We will need what is called the totally antisymmetry tensor or Levi-Civita symbol,
\varepsilonIJKL
IJKL
0123
\varepsilonIJKL
ηIJ
Now, given any anti-symmetric tensor
TIJ
*TIJ={1\over2}{\varepsilonKL
The self-dual part of any tensor
TIJ
{}+TIJ:={1\over2}\left(TIJ-{i\over2}{\varepsilonKL
with the anti-self-dual part defined as
{}-TIJ:={1\over2}\left(TIJ+{i\over2}{\varepsilonKL
(the appearance of the imaginary unit
i
Now given any anti-symmetric tensor
TIJ
TIJ=
1 | |
2 |
\left(TIJ-
i | |
2 |
{\varepsilonKL
where
{}+TIJ
{}-TIJ
TIJ
P(\pm)={1\over2}(1\mpi*).
The meaning of these projectors can be made explicit. Let us concentrate of
P+
\left(P+T\right)IJ=\left({1\over2}(1-i*)T\right)IJ={1\over2}\left(
I} | |
{\delta | |
K |
J} | |
{\delta | |
L |
-i{1\over2}{\varepsilonKL
Then
{}\pmTIJ=\left(P(\pm)T\right)IJ.
An important object is the Lie bracket defined by
[F,G]IJ:=FIK
J | |
{G | |
K} |
-GIK
J | |
{F | |
K} |
,
it appears in the curvature tensor (see the last two terms of Eq. 1), it also defines the algebraic structure. We have the results (proved below):
P(\pm)[F,G]IJ=\left[P(\pm)F,G\right]IJ=\left[F,P(\pm)G\right]IJ=\left[P(\pm)F,P(\pm)G\right]IJ Eq.2
and
[F,G]=\left[P+F,P+G\right]+\left[P-F,P-G\right].
That is the Lie bracket, which defines an algebra, decomposes into two separate independent parts. We write
ak{so}(1,3)\Complex=
+ | |
ak{so}(1,3) | |
\Complex |
+
- | |
ak{so}(1,3) | |
\Complex |
where
\pm | |
ak{so}(1,3) | |
\Complex |
ak{so}(1,3)\Complex.
We define the self-dual part,
IJ | |
{A | |
\alpha} |
IJ | |
{\omega | |
\alpha} |
IJ | |
{A | |
\alpha} |
={1\over2}\left(
IJ | |
{\omega | |
\alpha} |
-{i\over2}{\varepsilonKL
which can be more compactly written
IJ | |
{A | |
\alpha} |
=\left(P+\omega\alpha\right)IJ.
Define
{F\alpha
{F\alpha
Using Eq. 2 it is easy to see that the curvature of the self-dual connection is the self-dual part of the curvature of the connection,
\begin{align} {F\alpha
The self-dual action is
S=\intd4x e
\alpha | |
e | |
I |
\beta | |
e | |
J |
{F\alpha
As the connection is complex we are dealing with complex general relativity and appropriate conditions must be specified to recover the real theory. One can repeat the same calculations done for the Palatini action but now with respect to the self-dual connection
IJ | |
{A | |
\alpha} |
+R | |
{} | |
\alpha\beta |
-{1\over2}g\alpha{}+R=0.
That the curvature of the self-dual connection is the self-dual part of the curvature of the connection helps to simplify the 3+1 formalism (details of the decomposition into the 3+1 formalism are to be given below). The resulting Hamiltonian formalism resembles that of a Yang-Mills gauge theory (this does not happen with the 3+1 Palatini formalism which basically collapses down to the usual ADM formalism).
The results of calculations done here can be found in chapter 3 of notes Ashtekar Variables in Classical Relativity.[6] The method of proof follows that given in section II of The Ashtekar Hamiltonian for General Relativity.[7] We need to establish some results for (anti-)self-dual Lorentzian tensors.
Since
ηIJ
(-,+,+,+)
\varepsilonIJKL=-\varepsilonIJKL.
to see this consider,
\varepsilon0123=η0Iη1Jη2Kη3L\varepsilonIJKL=(-1)(1)(1)(1)\varepsilon0123=-\varepsilon0123.
With this definition one can obtain the following identities,
\begin{align} \varepsilonIJKO\varepsilonLMNO&=-6
I | |
\delta | |
[L |
J | |
\delta | |
M |
K | |
\delta | |
N] |
&&Eq.3\\ \varepsilonIJMN\varepsilonKLMN&=-4
I | |
\delta | |
[K |
J | |
\delta | |
L] |
=-2\left
I | |
(\delta | |
K |
J | |
\delta | |
L |
-
I | |
\delta | |
L |
J | |
\delta | |
K |
\right)&&Eq.4\end{align}
(the square brackets denote anti-symmetrizing over the indices).
It follows from Eq. 4 that the square of the duality operator is minus the identity,
**TIJ={1\over4}{\varepsilonKL
The minus sign here is due to the minus sign in Eq. 4, which is in turn due to the Minkowski signature. Had we used Euclidean signature, i.e.
(+,+,+,+)
SIJ
*SIJ=iSIJ.
(with Euclidean signature the self-duality condition would have been
*SIJ=SIJ
SIJ
SIJ={1\over2}TIJ+
i | |
2 |
UIJ.
Write the self-dual condition in terms of
U
V
*\left(TIJ+iUIJ\right)={1\over2}{\varepsilonKL
Equating real parts we read off
UIJ=-{1\over2}{\varepsilonKL
and so
SIJ={1\over2}\left(TIJ-{i\over2}{\varepsilonKL
where
TIJ
2SIJ
The proof of Eq. 2 in straightforward. We start by deriving an initial result. All the other important formula easily follow from it. From the definition of the Lie bracket and with the use of the basic identity Eq. 3 we have
\begin{align} *[F,*G]IJ&=
1 | |
2 |
{\varepsilonMN
That gives the formula
*[F,*G]IJ=-[F,G]IJ Eq.5.
Now using Eq.5 in conjunction with
**=-1
*(-[F,G]IJ)=*(*[F,*G]IJ)=**[F,*G]IJ=-[F,*G]IJ.
So we have
*[F,G]IJ=[F,*G]IJ Eq.6.
Consider
*[F,G]IJ=-*[G,F]IJ=-[G,*F]IJ=[*F,G]IJ.
where in the first step we have used the anti-symmetry of the Lie bracket to swap
F
G
Eq.6
*[F,G]IJ=[*F,G]IJ Eq.7.
Then
\begin{align} \left(P(\pm)[F,G]\right)IJ&={1\over2}\left([F,G]IJ\mpi*[F,G]IJ\right)\\ &={1\over2}\left([F,G]IJ+[F,\mpi*G]IJ\right)\\ &=\left[F,P(\pm)G\right]IJ&&Eq.8 \end{align}
where we used Eq. 6 going from the first line to the second line. Similarly we have
\left(P(\pm)[F,G]\right)IJ=[P(\pm)F,G]IJ Eq.9
by using Eq 7. Now as
P(\pm)
(P(\pm))2=P(\pm)
\begin{align} {}(P(\pm))2&={1\over4}(1\mpi*)(1\mpi*)\\ {}&={1\over4}(1-**\mp2i*)\\ {}&={1\over4}(2\mp2i*)\\ {}&=P(\pm)\end{align}
Applying this in conjunction with Eq. 8 and Eq. 9 we obtain
\begin{align} {}\left(P(\pm)[F,G]\right)IJ&=\left((P(\pm))2[F,G]\right)IJ\\ &=\left(P(\pm)[F,P(\pm)G]\right)IJ\\ {}&=[P(\pm)F,P(\pm)G]IJ Eq.10.\end{align}
From Eq. 10 and Eq. 9 we have
\left[P(\pm)F,P(\pm)G\right]IJ=\left[P(\pm)F,G\right]IJ=\left[P(\pm)F,P(\pm)G+P(\mp)G\right]IJ=\left[P(\pm)F,P(\pm)G\right]IJ+\left[P(\pm)F,P(\mp)G\right]IJ
where we have used that any
G
G=P(\pm)G+P(\mp)G
\begin{align} {}\left[P+F,P-G\right]IJ&=0\\ {}\left[P-F,P+G\right]IJ&=0 \end{align}
Altogether we have,
\left(P(\pm)[F,G]\right)IJ=\left[P(\pm)F,G\right]IJ=\left[F,P(\pm)G\right]IJ=\left[P(\pm)F,P(\pm)G\right]IJ
which is our main result, already stated above as Eq. 2. We also have that any bracket splits as
[F,G]IJ=\left[P+F+P-F,P+G+P-F\right]IJ=\left[P+F,P+G\right]IJ+\left[P-F,P-G\right]IJ.
into a part that depends only on self-dual Lorentzian tensors and is itself the self-dual part of
[F,G]IJ,
[F,G]IJ.
The proof given here follows that given in lectures by Jorge Pullin[8]
The Palatini action
S(e,\omega)=\intd4xe
a | |
e | |
I |
b | |
e | |
J |
{\Omegaab
where the Ricci tensor,
{\Omegaab
IJ | |
\omega | |
a |
Db
I | |
e | |
a |
=0.
This determines the connection in terms of the tetrad and we recover the usual Ricci tensor.
The self-dual action for general relativity is given above.
S(e,A)=\intd4xe
a | |
e | |
I |
b | |
e | |
J |
{Fab
where
F
A
\omega
IJ | |
A | |
a |
={1\over2}\left
IJ | |
(\omega | |
a |
-{i\over2}{\varepsilonIJ
It has been shown that
F[A]
\Omega[\omega].
Let
a | |
q | |
b |
=
a | |
\delta | |
b |
+nanb
a | |
E | |
I |
=
a | |
q | |
b |
b | |
e | |
I, |
which are orthogonal to
na
Writing
a | |
E | |
I |
=\left
a | |
(\delta | |
b |
+nbna\right)
b | |
e | |
I |
then we can write
\begin{align} \int&d4x\left(e
a | |
E | |
I |
b | |
E | |
J |
{Fab
where we used
{Fab
nanb
i | |
F | |
ab |
=0
So the action can be written
S(E,A)=\intd4x\left(e
a | |
E | |
I |
b | |
E | |
J |
{Fab
We have
e=N\sqrt{q}
a | |
\tilde{E} | |
I |
=\sqrt{q}
a | |
E | |
I |
An internal tensor
SIJ
*SIJ:={1\over2}{\varepsilonIJ
and given the curvature
{Fab
{Fab
Substituting this into the action (Eq. 12) we have,
S(E,A)=\intd4x\left(-i
1 | |
2 |
\left(
N | |
\sqrt{q |
where we denoted
nJ=
d | |
e | |
J |
nd
a | |
\tilde{E} | |
0 |
=0
nI=
I | |
\delta | |
0 |
nI=ηIJnJ=η00
I | |
\delta | |
0 |
=-
I | |
\delta | |
0 |
\varepsilonIJKLnL=\varepsilonIJK
\varepsilonIJK0=\varepsilonIJK
\begin{align} S(E,A)&=\intd4x\left(-i{1\over2}\left({N\over\sqrt{q}}\right)
a | |
\tilde{E} | |
I |
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
J |
\left({\varepsilonIJ
The indices
I,J,M
1,2,3
IJ | |
A | |
a |
i0 | |
A | |
a |
=-i{1\over2}{\varepsiloni0
where we used
{\varepsiloni0
This implies
\begin{align} {Fab
We replace in the second term in the action
Nnb
tb-nb
l{L}t
i | |
A | |
b |
=ta\partiala
i | |
A | |
b |
+
i | |
A | |
a |
\partialbta
and
l{D}b\left(ta
i | |
A | |
a |
\right)=\partialb\left(ta
i | |
A | |
a |
\right)+\varepsilonijk
j | |
A | |
b |
\left(ta
k | |
A | |
a |
\right)
to obtain
l{L}t
i | |
A | |
b |
-l{D}b\left(ta
i | |
A | |
a |
\right)=ta\left(\partiala
i | |
A | |
b |
-\partialb
i | |
A | |
a |
+\varepsilonijk
j | |
A | |
a |
k | |
A | |
b |
\right)=ta
i. | |
F | |
ab |
The action becomes
\begin{align} S&=\intd4x\left(-i\left({N\over\sqrt{q}}\right)
a | |
\tilde{E} | |
I |
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
J |
{\varepsilonIJ
where we swapped the dummy variables
a
b
\begin{align} \intd4x
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
l{D}b\left(ta
i | |
A | |
a |
\right)&=\intdtd3x
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
\left(\partialb(ta
i) | |
A | |
a |
+\varepsilonijk
j | |
A | |
b |
(ta
k) | |
A | |
a |
\right)\\ &=-\intdtd3xta
i | |
A | |
a |
\left(\partialb
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
+\varepsilonijk
j | |
A | |
b |
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
k |
\right)\\ &=-\intd4xta
i | |
A | |
a |
l{D}b
b \end{align} | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
where we have thrown away the boundary term and where we used the formula for the covariant derivative on a vector density
b | |
\tilde{V} | |
i |
l{D}b
b | |
\tilde{V} | |
i |
=\partialb
b | |
\tilde{V} | |
i |
+\varepsilonijk
j | |
A | |
b |
b | |
\tilde{V} | |
k |
.
The final form of the action we require is
S=\intd4x\left(-2i
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
l{L}t
i | |
A | |
b |
-2i\left(ta
i | |
A | |
a |
\right)l{D}b
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
+2iNa
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
i | |
F | |
ab |
+\left({N\over\sqrt{q}}\right)\varepsilonijk
a | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
j |
k | |
F | |
ab |
\right)
There is a term of the form "
p
q |
a | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
i | |
A | |
a |
\left\{
i | |
A | |
a |
(x),
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
j |
(y)\right\}={i\over2}
b | |
\delta | |
a |
i | |
\delta | |
j |
\delta3(x,y).
Variation of action with respect to the non-dynamical quantities
(ta
i) | |
A | |
a |
Nb
N
l{D}a
a | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
=0,
i | |
F | |
ab |
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
=0,
\varepsilonijk
a | |
\tilde{E} | |
i |
b | |
\tilde{E} | |
j |
k | |
F | |
ab |
=0 Eq.13.
Varying with respect to
N
\sqrt{q}
i | |
A | |
a |
i | |
A | |
a |
={1\over2}{\varepsiloni
and
Eci
0i | |
\omega | |
a |
=
b | |
-q | |
a |
Eci
i0 | |
\omega | |
b |
=
b | |
-q | |
a |
Eciedi\nablab
0 | |
e | |
d |
=
b | |
q | |
a |
d | |
q | |
c |
\nablabnd=Kac
where we used
0 | |
e | |
d |
=η0Igdc
c | |
e | |
I |
=-gdc
c | |
e | |
0 |
=-nd,
therefore
0i | |
\omega | |
a |
=
i | |
K | |
a |
i | |
A | |
a |
=
i | |
\Gamma | |
a |
-i
i | |
K | |
a |
.
This is the so-called chiral spin connection.
Because Ashtekar's variables are complex it results in complex general relativity. To recover the real theory one has to impose what are known as the reality conditions. These require that the densitized triad be real and that the real part of the Ashtekar connection equals the compatible spin connection.
More to be said on this, later.