1: 

2: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

3: \usepackage{epsf,amsfonts,latexsym}

4: \newsymbol\ltimes 226E

5: \newsymbol\rtimes 226F

6: \epsfverbosetrue

7: \textheight=22.5cm

8: \textwidth=16.cm

9: \oddsidemargin=0cm

10: \topmargin=0cm

11: \topskip=0cm

12: \headheight=0cm

13: \headsep=0cm

14: 

15: \def\goth{\mathfrak}

16: \def\double{\mathbb}

17: \def\ccal{\cal}

18: 

19: \def\cc{{\double C}}

20: \def\nn{{\double N}}

21: \def\rr{{\double R}}

22: \def\zz{{\double Z}}

23: \def\qqq{{\double Q}}

24: 

25: \def\llll{{\double L}}

26: 

27: \def\aa{{\cal A}}

28: \def\ccc{{\cal C}}

29: \def\dd{{\cal D}}

30: \def\gg{{\goth g}}

31: \def\hh{{\cal H}}

32: \def\hhh{{{\double H}}}

33: \def\ff{{\cal F}}

34: \def\mm{{{\ccal M}}}

35: 

36: 

37: 

38: \def\aa{{\cal A}}

39: \def\dd{{\cal D}}

40: \def\hh{{\cal H}}

41: \def\ff{{\cal F}}

42: \def\lll{{\cal L}}

43: \def\sss{{\cal S}}

44: \def\jj{{\cal J}}

45: \def\t{{\rm tr}\,}

46: \def\re{{\rm Re}\,}

47: \def\tt{\,{\rm tr}_\omega\,}

48: \def\ddd{{\,\hbox{$\partial\!\!\!/$}}}

49: \def\ddee{{\,\hbox{${\rm D}\!\!\!\!/\,$}}}

50: \def\aaa{{\,\hbox{$A\!\!\!/\,$}}}

51: \def\dee{\hbox{\rm D}}

52: \def\de{\hbox{\rm d}}

53: \def\dt{\,\hbox{$\delta_t$}\,}

54: \def\pa{{\partial}}

55: \def\Box{\,\hbox{$\sqcap\!\!\!\!\sqcup$}}

56: 

57: \def\lb{\left[}

58: \def\rb{\right]}

59: \def\lp{\left(}

60: \def\rp{\right)}

61: \def\la{\left\{}

62: \def\ra{\right\}}

63: 

64: \def\ul{\underline}

65: \def\ot{\otimes}

66: \def\op{\oplus}

67: 

68: \def\bb{\begin{eqnarray}}

69: \def\ee{\end{eqnarray}}

70: \def\eee{\nonumber\end{eqnarray}}

71: \def\pp{\pmatrix}

72: \def\qq{\quad}

73: \def\del{\partial}

74: 

75: \begin{document}

76: 

77: \hsize 17truecm

78: \vsize 24truecm

79: \font\twelve=cmbx10 at 13pt

80: \font\eightrm=cmr8

81: \baselineskip 18pt

82: 

83: \begin{titlepage}

84: 

85: \centerline{\twelve CENTRE DE PHYSIQUE TH\'EORIQUE}

86: \centerline{\twelve CNRS - Luminy, Case 907}

87: \centerline{\twelve 13288 Marseille Cedex 9}

88: \vskip 3truecm

89: 

90: 

91: \centerline{\twelve FORCES FROM CONNES' GEOMETRY}

92: 

93: 

94: \bigskip

95: 

96: \begin{center} {\bf Thomas SCH\"UCKER}

97: \footnote{\, and Universit\'e de Provence\\

98: schucker@cpt.univ-mrs.fr } \\

99: 

100: \end{center}

101: 

102: \vskip 2truecm

103: \leftskip=1cm

104: \rightskip=1cm

105: \centerline{\bf Abstract}

106: 

107: \medskip

108: \noindent

109: We try to give a pedagogical introduction to Connes' derivation

110:  of the

111: standard model of electro-magnetic, weak and strong forces from

112: gravity.

113: 

114: \vskip 2truecm\noindent

115: Lectures given at the  Autumn School ``Topology

116: and Geometry in Physics''\\

117: of the Graduiertenkolleg `Physical Systems with Many Degrees of

118: Freedom'\\ Universit\"at Heidelberg\\

119:  September 2001, Rot an der Rot,

120: Germany\\ Editors: Eike Bick

121: \& Frank Steffen\\

122: Lecture Notes in Physics 659, Springer, 2005

123: 

124: \vskip 1truecm

125:  PACS-92: 11.15 Gauge field theories\\

126: \indent MSC-91: 81T13 Yang-Mills and other gauge theories

127: 

128: \vskip 1truecm

129: 

130: \vskip 1truecm

131: \noindent CPT-01/P.4264\\

132: \noindent hep-th/0111236

133: 

134: \vskip1truecm

135: 

136:  \end{titlepage}

137: 

138: \tableofcontents \vfil\eject

139: 

140: \section{Introduction}

141: 

142: Still today one of the major summits in physics is the

143: understanding of the spectrum of the hydrogen atom. The

144: phenomenological formula by Balmer and Rydberg was a

145: remarkable pre-summit on the way up. The true summit was

146: reached by deriving this formula from quantum mechanics. We

147: would like to compare the standard model of electro-magnetic,

148: weak, and strong forces with the Balmer-Rydberg formula \cite{cls}

149: and review the present status of Connes' derivation of this model

150: from noncommutative geometry, see table 1. This geometry extends

151: Riemannian geometry, and Connes' derivation is a natural extension

152: of another major summit in physics: Einstein's derivation of general

153: relativity from Riemannian geometry. Indeed, Connes' derivation

154: unifies gravity with the other three forces.

155:  \begin{table}[h]

156: \begin{center}

157: \begin{tabular}{ll}

158: atoms&particles and forces\\[1ex]

159: Balmer-Rydberg formula \qq\qq&standard model\\[1ex]

160: quantum

161: mechanics&noncommutative geometry

162: \end{tabular}

163: \end{center}

164: \caption{An analogy}

165: \end{table}

166: 

167: Let us briefly recall four nested, analytic geometries and their

168: impact on our understanding of forces and time, see table 2. {\it

169: Euclidean geometry} is underlying Newton's mechanics as space of

170: positions. Forces are described by vectors living in the same space

171: and the Euclidean scalar product is needed to define work and

172: potential energy. Time is not part of geometry, it is absolute. This

173: point of view is abandoned in special relativity unifying space

174: and time into {\it Minkowskian geometry}. This new point of view

175: allows to derive the magnetic field from the electric field as a

176: pseudo force associated to a Lorentz boost. Although time has

177: become relative, one can still imagine a grid of synchronized

178: clocks, i.e. a universal time. The next generalization is

179: {\it Riemannian geometry} = curved spacetime. Here gravity can be

180: viewed as the pseudo force associated to a uniformly accelerated

181: coordinate transformation. At the same time, universal time loses

182: all meaning and we must content ourselves with proper time. With

183: today's precision in time measurement, this complication of life

184: becomes a bare necessity, e.g. the global positioning system (GPS).

185: 

186: \begin{table}[h]

187: \begin{center}

188: \begin{tabular}{lll}

189: geometry&force & time\\[3ex]

190: Euclidean &$E=\int\vec F\cdot\de \vec x$&absolute\\[1ex]

191: Minkowskian&$\vec E,\epsilon _0\Rightarrow\vec B,\mu

192: _0=\,\frac{1}{\epsilon _0c^2}\, $&universal\\[1ex]

193: Riemannian&Coriolis $\leftrightarrow$ gravity&proper, $\tau$

194: \\[1ex]

195: noncommutative\qq\qq&gravity $\Rightarrow$ YMH, $\lambda

196: ={\textstyle\frac{1}{3}} g_2^2$\qq\qq&$\Delta \tau \sim 10^{-40}$

197:  s

198: \end{tabular}

199: \end{center}

200: \caption{Four nested analytic geometries}

201: \end{table}

202: 

203:  Our last

204: generalization is to Connes'  {\it noncommutative geometry} = curved

205: space(time) with uncertainty. It allows to understand some

206: Yang-Mills and some Higgs forces as pseudo forces associated to

207: transformations that extend the two coordinate transformations

208: above to the new geometry without points. Also, proper time comes

209: with an uncertainty. This uncertainty of some hundred Planck

210: times might be accessible to experiments through gravitational

211: wave detectors within the next ten years \cite{ac}.

212: 

213: \subsection*{Prerequisites}

214: 

215: On the physical side, the reader is supposed to be

216: acquainted with general relativity, e.g. \cite{gr}, Dirac spinors at

217: the level of e.g. the first few chapters in

218: \cite{bd}  and

219: Yang-Mills theory with spontaneous symmetry

220: break-down, for example the standard model, e.g. \cite{or}. I am not

221: ashamed to adhere to the minimax principle: a

222: maximum of pleasure with a minimum of effort. The

223: effort is to do a calculation, the pleasure is when its

224: result coincides with an experiment result.

225: Consequently our mathematical treatment is as

226: low-tech as possible. We do need {\it local }

227: differential and Riemannian geometry at the level of

228: e.g. the first few chapters in

229: \cite{gs}. Local means that our spaces or manifolds can

230: be thought of as open subsets of

231: $\rr^4$. Nevertheless, we sometimes use compact

232: spaces like the torus: only to simplify some integrals.

233: We do need some group theory, e.g. \cite{group}, mostly

234: matrix groups and their representations. We also need

235: a few basic facts on associative algebras. Most of

236: them are recalled as we go along and can be found for

237: instance in \cite{algebra}. For the reader's convenience, a

238: few simple definitions from groups and algebras are

239: collected in the appendix. And, of course, we need some

240: chapters of noncommutative geometry which are developped in

241: the text.  For a more detailed presentation still with particular care

242: for the physicist see \cite{jogi, costarica}.

243: 

244: \section{Gravity from Riemannian geometry}

245: 

246: In this section, we briefly review Einstein's derivation of general

247: relativity from Riemannian geometry. His derivation is in two

248: strokes, kinematics and dynamics.

249: 

250: \subsection{First stroke: kinematics}

251: 

252: Consider flat space(time) $M$ in inertial or Cartesian coordinates

253: $\tilde x^{\tilde \lambda } $.

254: Take as matter  a free, classical point particle. Its dynamics,

255: Newton's free equation, fixes the trajectory $\tilde x^{\tilde

256: \lambda }(p) $:

257: \bb {\frac{\de^2\tilde x^{\tilde \lambda}}{\de p^2}}\,  =0.\ee

258: After a general coordinate transformation, $x^\lambda =\sigma

259: ^\lambda (\tilde x)$, Newton's equation reads

260: \bb {\,\frac{\de^2 x^{

261: \lambda }}{\de p^2}\,}+ \hbox{$ \Gamma

262: ^{

263: \lambda }$}_ {

264: \mu  \nu }( g) {\,\frac{\de x^{

265: \mu  }}{\de p}\,} {\,\frac{\de x^{ \nu

266: }}{\de p}\,}

267:  =0.\label{1}\ee

268: Pseudo forces have appeared. They are coded in the

269: Levi-Civita connection

270: \bb\hbox{$ \Gamma

271: ^{

272: \lambda }$}_ {

273: \mu  \nu }( g)={\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}

274:  g^{ \lambda \kappa}\left[

275: \,\frac{\pa}{\pa x^{ \mu}}\,

276:  g_{ \kappa

277: \nu}+\,\frac{\pa}{\pa x^{ \nu}}\,

278:  g_{ \kappa \mu}

279: -\,\frac{\pa}{\pa x^{ \kappa}}\,

280:  g_{ \mu \nu}\right],\ee

281: where $g_{ \mu \nu}$ is obtained by `fluctuating'

282:  the flat metric $\tilde \eta_{\tilde \mu \tilde \nu }={\rm

283: diag}(1,-1,-1,-1,)

284: $ with the Jacobian of the coordinate transformation $\sigma  $:

285: \bb g_{ \mu \nu}(x)={\jj( x)^{-1\tilde \mu }}_{ \mu}\,

286: \eta_{\tilde \mu \tilde \nu }\,{\jj( x)^{-1\tilde \nu }}_{ \nu},\qq

287: {\jj( \tilde x)^{\mu }}_{\tilde \mu}:=

288: \pa

289:  \sigma ^{ \mu }(\tilde x)/\pa \ \tilde x^{ \tilde \mu }.\ee

290: For the coordinates of the rotating disk, the pseudo forces are

291: precisely the centrifugal and Coriolis forces. Einstein takes

292: uniformly accelerated coordinates, $ct=c\tilde t,\ z=\tilde

293: z+{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} {\textstyle\frac{g}{c^2}} (c\tilde t)^2$

294: with $g=  9.81\ \rm m/s^2$. Then the geodesic equation (\ref{1})

295: reduces to $\de^2z/\de t^2=-g$. So far this gravity is still a pseudo

296: force which means that the curvature of its Levi-Civita

297: connection vanishes. This constraint is relaxed by the

298: equivalence principle: pseudo forces and true gravitational forces

299: are coded together in a not necessarily flat connection $\Gamma $,

300: that derives from a potential, the not necessarily flat metric $g$.

301: The kinematical variable to describe gravity is therefore the

302: Riemannian metric. By construction the dynamics of matter, the

303: geodesic equation, is now covariant under general coordinate

304: transformations.

305: 

306: \subsection{Second stroke: dynamics}

307: 

308: Now that we know the kinematics of gravity let us see how Einstein

309: obtains its dynamics, i.e. differential equations for the metric

310: tensor

311: $g_{\mu \nu }$. Of course Einstein wants these equations to be

312: covariant under general coordinate transformations and he wants

313: the energy-momentum tensor $T_{\mu \nu }$ to be the source of

314: gravity. From Riemannian geometry he knew that there is no

315: covariant, first order differential operator for the metric. But

316: there are second order ones:\\

317: {\bf Theorem:} The most general tensor of degree 2 that can be

318: constructed from the metric tensor $g_{\mu \nu }(x)$ with at most

319: two partial derivatives is

320:  \bb\alpha R_{\mu \nu }+\beta R g_{\mu

321: \nu }+\Lambda  g_{\mu \nu },\qq \alpha ,\ \beta ,\

322: \Lambda \in\rr.\label{tensor}.\ee

323:  Here are our conventions for the curvature tensors:

324: \bb {\rm Riemann\ tensor:}&& {R^\lambda}_{\mu\nu\kappa}=

325: \pa_\nu {\Gamma^\lambda}_{\mu\kappa}

326: -\pa_\kappa {\Gamma^\lambda}_{\mu\nu}

327: +{\Gamma^\eta}_{\mu\kappa}{\Gamma^\lambda}_

328: {\nu\eta}

329: -{\Gamma^\eta}_{\mu\nu}{\Gamma^\lambda}_

330: {\kappa\eta},\\

331: {\rm Ricci\ tensor:}&&

332: R_{\mu\kappa}=

333: {R^\lambda}_{\mu\lambda\kappa},\\

334: {\rm curvature\ scalar:}&&

335: R=R_{\mu\nu}g^{\mu\nu}.\ee

336: 

337:  The miracle is that the tensor (\ref{tensor}) is symmetric just as

338: the energy-momentum tensor. However, the latter is

339: covariantly conserved, $\dee^\mu T_{\mu \nu }=0$,

340: while the former one is conserved if and

341: only if $\beta =-{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}

342: \alpha $. Consequently, Einstein puts his equation

343: \bb  R_{\mu \nu }-{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}  R g_{\mu

344: \nu }-\Lambda _c g_{\mu \nu }={\textstyle\frac{8\pi G}{c^4}} \,

345: T_{\mu

346: \nu }.\ee

347: He chooses a vanishing cosmological constant, $\Lambda_c =0$. Then

348: for small static mass density $T_{00}$, his equation reproduces

349: Newton's universal law of gravity with $G$ the Newton constant.

350: However for not so small masses there are corrections to Newton's

351: law like  precession of perihelia. Also Einstein's theory applies to

352: massless matter and produces the curvature of light. Einstein's

353: equation has an agreeable formal property, it derives via the

354: Euler-Lagrange variational principle

355:  from an action, the famous Einstein-Hilbert action:

356: \bb S_{EH}[g]=\frac{-1}{16\pi G}\,

357: \int_MR\,\de V\ -\,\frac{2\Lambda _c}{16\pi G}\,

358: \int_M\de V,\ee

359: with the invariant volume element $\de V:=|\det

360: g_{\cdot\cdot}|^{1/2}\,\de^ 4x.$

361: 

362:  General relativity has a precise geometric origin: the

363: left-hand side of Einstein's equation is a sum of some

364: $80\,000$ terms in first and second partial derivatives of $g_{\mu

365: \nu }$ and its matrix inverse $g^{\mu \nu }$. All of these terms

366: are completely fixed by the requirement of covariance under

367: general coordinate transformations.  General relativity is verified

368: experimentally to an extraordinary accuracy, even more, it has

369: become a cornerstone of today's technology. Indeed length

370: measurements had to be abandoned in favour of proper time

371: measurements, e.g. the GPS. Nevertheless, the theory still leaves a

372: few questions unanswered:

373: \begin{itemize}\item

374: Einstein's equation is nonlinear and therefore does not allow point

375: masses as source, in contrast to Maxwell's equation that does allow

376: point charges as source. From this point of view it is not satisfying to

377: consider point-like matter.

378: \item

379: The gravitational force is coded in the connection $\Gamma $.

380: Nevertheless we have accepted its potential, the metric $g$, as

381: kinematical variable.

382: \item

383: The equivalence principle states that locally, i.e. on the

384: trajectory of  a point-like particle, one cannot distinguish gravity

385: from a pseudo force. In other words, there is always a coordinate

386: system, `the freely falling lift', in which gravity is absent. This is

387: not true for electro-magnetism and we would like to derive this force

388: (as well as the weak and strong forces) as a pseudo force coming

389: from a geometric transformation.

390: \item

391: So far general relativity has resisted  all attempts to reconcile it

392: with quantum mechanics.

393: \end{itemize}

394: 

395: \section{Slot machines and the standard model}

396: 

397: Today we have a very precise phenomenological description of

398: electro-magnetic, weak, and strong forces. This description, the

399: standard model, works on a perturbative quantum  level and, as

400: classical gravity, it derives from an action principle. Let us

401: introduce this action by analogy with the Balmer-Rydberg

402: formula.

403: 

404: \begin{figure}[h]

405: \label{slot1}

406: \epsfxsize=4cm

407: \hspace{5.5cm}

408: \epsfbox{slot1.ps}

409: \caption{A slot machine for atomic spectra}

410: \end{figure}

411: 

412: One of the new features of atomic physics was the appearance of

413: discrete frequencies and the measurement of atomic spectra

414: became a highly developed art. It was natural to label the discrete

415: frequencies $\nu $ by natural numbers

416: $n$. To fit the spectrum of a given atom, say hydrogen, let us try

417: the ansatz

418: \bb\nu =g_1n_1^{q_1}+g_2n_2^{q_2}.\label{ansatz}\ee

419: We view this ansatz as a slot machine. You input two bills, the

420: integers $q_1$, $q_2$ and two coins, the two real numbers

421: $g_1$, $g_2$, and compare the output with the measured

422: spectrum. (See Figure 1.) If

423: you are rich enough, you play and replay on the slot machine

424: until you win. The winner is the Balmer-Rydberg formula, i.e.,

425: $q_1=q_2=-2$ and $g_1=-g_2=\ 3.289\ 10^{15}$ Hz, which is the

426: famous

427: Rydberg constant $R$. Then came quantum mechanics. It explained

428: why the spectrum of the hydrogen atom was discrete in the first

429: place and derived the exponents and the Rydberg constant,

430: \bb R=\,\frac{m_e}{4\pi \hbar^3}\,\frac{e^4}{(4\pi \epsilon

431: _0)^2}\, ,\ee

432:  from a noncommutativity,

433: $[x,p]=i\hbar 1$.

434: 

435: To cut short its long and complicated history we introduce the

436: standard model as the winner of a particular slot machine. This

437: machine, which has become popular under the names Yang,

438: Mills and Higgs, has

439:  four slots for four bills. Once you have decided which

440: bills you choose and entered them, a certain number of

441: small slots will open for coins. Their number depends

442: on the choice of bills. You make your choice of coins,

443: feed them in, and the machine starts working. It

444: produces as output a Lagrange density. From this density,

445: perturbative quantum field theory allows you to compute a

446: complete particle phenomenology: the particle spectrum with the

447: particles' quantum numbers, cross sections, life times, and

448: branching ratios. (See Figure 2.) You compare the

449: phenomenology to experiment to find out whether your input

450: wins or loses.

451: 

452: \begin{figure}[h]

453: \label{slot2}

454: \epsfxsize=6cm

455: \hspace{4.7cm}

456: \epsfbox{slot2.ps}

457: \caption{The Yang-Mills-Higgs slot machine}

458: \end{figure}

459: 

460: \subsection{Input}

461: 

462: The first bill is a finite dimensional, real, compact Lie

463: group $G$. The gauge bosons, spin 1, will live in its

464: adjoint representation whose Hilbert space is the

465: complexification of the Lie algebra $\gg$ (cf Appendix).

466: 

467: The remaining bills are three unitary

468: representations of $G$, $\rho_L,\ \rho_R,\ \rho_S$,

469: defined on the complex Hilbert spaces, $\hh_L,\

470: \hh_R,\

471: \hh_S$. They classify the left- and right-handed

472: fermions, spin ${\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}$, and the

473: scalars, spin 0. The group $G$ is chosen compact to

474: ensure that the unitary representations are finite

475: dimensional, we want a finite number of `elementary particles'

476: according to the credo of particle physics that particles are

477: orthonormal basis vectors of the Hilbert spaces which carry the

478: representations. More generally, we might also admit multi-valued

479: representations, `spin representations', which would open the

480: debate on charge quantization. More on this later.

481: 

482: The coins are numbers, coupling constants, more

483: precisely coefficients of invariant polynomials. We

484: need an invariant scalar product on $\gg$. The set of

485: all these scalar products is a cone and the gauge

486: couplings are particular coordinates of this cone. If

487: the group is simple, say $G=SU(n)$, then the most

488: general, invariant scalar product is

489: \bb (X,X')={\textstyle\frac{2}{g_n^2}}\t [X^*X'],\qq

490: X,X'\in su(n).\ee

491: If $G=U(1)$, we have

492: \bb (Y,Y')={\textstyle\frac{1}{g_1^2}}\bar YY',\qq

493: Y,Y'\in u(1).\ee

494: We denote by $\bar\cdot$ the complex conjugate and by $\cdot^*$

495: the Hermitean conjugate. Mind the different normalizations, they

496: are conventional. The $g_n$ are positive numbers, {\it the

497: gauge couplings.} For every simple factor of $G$ there

498: is one gauge coupling.

499: 

500: Then we need the Higgs potential $V(\varphi)$. It is

501: an invariant, fourth order, stable polynomial on

502: $\hh_S\owns\varphi$. Invariant means $V(\rho _S(u)\varphi

503: )=V(\varphi )$ for all $u\in G$.  Stable means

504: bounded from below. For $G=U(2)$ and the Higgs scalar in the

505: fundamental or defining representation,

506: $\varphi\in\hh_S=\cc^2$, $\rho_S(u)=u$, we have

507: \bb V(\varphi)=\lambda\,(\varphi^*\varphi)^2-

508: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\mu^2\,\varphi^*\varphi.\ee

509: The coefficients of the Higgs potential are the Higgs

510: couplings, $\lambda$ must be positive for stability. We

511: say that the potential breaks $G$ spontaneously if no

512: minimum of the potential is a trivial orbit under $G$. In our

513: example, if $\mu$ is positive, the minima of

514: $V(\varphi)$ lie on the 3-sphere $|\varphi|=v:=

515: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\mu/\sqrt\lambda$. $v$ is

516: called vacuum expectation value and $U(2)$ is said to

517: break down spontaneously to its little group

518: \bb U(1)\owns \pp{1&0\cr 0&e^{i\alpha }}.\ee

519:  The little group leaves invariant any

520: given point of the minimum, e.g. $\varphi=(v,0)^T$. On the other

521: hand, if $\mu$ is purely imaginary, then the

522: minimum of the potential is the origin, no

523: spontaneous symmetry breaking and the little group is all of $G$.

524: 

525: Finally, we need the Yukawa couplings $g_Y$. They

526: are the coefficients of the most general, real, trilinear

527: invariant on $\hh_L^*\,\ot\,\hh_R\,\ot\,(

528: \hh_S\op\hh_S^*)$. For every 1-dimensional

529: invariant subspace in the reduction of this tensor

530: representation, we have one complex Yukawa

531: coupling. For example $G=U(2)$, $\hh_L=\cc^2$, $\rho _L(u)\psi _L

532: =(\det u)^{q_L}u\,\psi _L,$ $\hh_R=\cc$, $\rho _R(u)\psi _R

533: =(\det u)^{q_R}\psi _R,$ $\hh_S=\cc^2$, $\rho _S(u)\varphi

534: =(\det u)^{q_S}u\,\varphi $. If $-q_L+q_R+q_S\not=0$ there is no

535: Yukawa coupling, otherwise there is one: $(\psi _L,\psi _R,\varphi

536: )={\rm Re} (g_Y\,\psi _L^*\psi _R\varphi )$.

537: 

538: If the symmetry is broken

539: spontaneously, gauge and Higgs bosons acquire masses

540: related to gauge and Higgs couplings, fermions

541: acquire masses equal to the `vacuum expectation value' $v$ times

542: the Yukawa couplings.

543: 

544: As explained in Jan-Willem van Holten's and Jean Zinn-Justin's

545: lectures at this School

546: \cite{van,zinn}, one must require for

547: consistency of the quantum theory that the  fermionic representations

548: be free of Yang-Mills

549: anomalies,

550: \bb\t ((\tilde \rho _L(X))^3)-\t ((\tilde \rho _R(X))^3)=0,\qq

551: {\rm for\ all}\ X\in\gg.\ee

552: We denote by $\tilde \rho $ the Lie algebra representation of the

553: group representation $\rho $. Sometimes one also wants  the mixed

554: Yang-Mills-gravitational anomalies to vanish:

555: \bb\t \tilde \rho _L(X)-\t \tilde \rho _R(X)=0,\qq

556: {\rm for\ all}\ X\in\gg.\ee

557: 

558: \subsection{Rules} \label{rules}

559: 

560: It is time to open the slot machine and to see how it

561: works. Its mechanism has five pieces:

562: 

563: \medskip

564: \noindent

565: {\bf The Yang-Mills action:}

566:  The actor in this piece is

567: $A=A_\mu \de x^\mu $, called connection, gauge potential, gauge

568: boson or Yang-Mills field. It is a 1-form on spacetime $M\owns x$

569: with values in the Lie algebra $\gg$,

570: $ A\in\Omega^1(M,\gg).$

571: We define its curvature or field strength,

572: \bb F:=\de A+{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}[A,A]={\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}

573: F_{\mu \nu }\de x^\mu \de x^\nu \ \in

574: \Omega^2(M,\gg),\ee

575: and the Yang-Mills action,

576: \bb

577: S_{YM}[A]=-{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\int_M(F,*F)

578: =\,\frac{-1}{2g_n^2}\,\int_M\t F^*_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }

579: \de V .\ee

580: The gauge group $^MG$ is the infinite dimensional group of

581: differentiable functions $g:M\rightarrow G$ with pointwise

582: multiplication. $\cdot^*$ is the Hermitean conjugate of matrices,

583: $*\cdot$ is the Hodge star of differential forms. The space of all

584: connections carries an affine representation (cf Appendix)

585: $\rho_V$ of the gauge group:

586: \bb\rho_V(g)A=gAg^{-1}+g\de

587: g^{-1}.\label{inhom}\ee

588: Restricted to $x$-independent (`rigid')

589: gauge transformation, the representation is linear,

590: the adjoint one. The field strength transforms

591: homogeneously even under $x$-dependent (`local') gauge

592: transformations,

593: $g:M\rightarrow G$ differentiable,

594: \bb \rho_V(g)F=gFg^{-1},\ee

595: and, as the scalar product $(\cdot,\cdot)$ is invariant,

596: the Yang-Mills action is gauge invariant,

597: \bb S_{YM}[\rho_V(g)A]=S_{YM}[A] \qq{\rm for\ all}

598: \ g\in \ ^MG.\ee

599: Note that a mass term for the gauge bosons,

600: \bb{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\int_M m^2_A(A,*A)

601: =\,\frac{1}{g_n^2}\,\int_Mm^2_A\t A_\mu ^*A^\mu \de V ,\ee

602: is not gauge invariant because of the inhomogeneous

603: term in the transformation law of a connection

604: (\ref{inhom}). Gauge invariance forces the gauge

605: bosons to be massless.

606: 

607: In the Abelian case $G=U(1)$,  the Yang-Mills Lagrangian is

608: nothing but Maxwell's Lagrangian, the gauge boson $A$ is the

609: photon and its coupling constant $g$ is

610: $e/\sqrt{\epsilon _0}$.  Note however, that the Lie algebra of

611: $U(1)$ is $i\rr$ and the vector potential is purely

612: imaginary, while conventionally, in Maxwell's theory it is chosen

613: real. Its quantum

614:  version is $QED$, quantum electro-dynamics.

615: For $G=SU(3)$ and $\hh_L=\hh_R=\cc^3$ we have

616: today's theory of strong interaction, quantum

617: chromo-dynamics, $QCD$.

618: 

619: \medskip

620: \noindent

621: {\bf The Dirac action:}

622:  Schr\"odinger's action is

623: non-relativistic. Dirac generalized it to be Lorentz

624: invariant, e.g. \cite{bd}. The price to be paid is

625: twofold. His generalization only works for

626: spin ${\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}$ particles and requires

627: that for every such particle there must be an

628: antiparticle with same mass and opposite charges.

629: Therefore, Dirac's wave function $\psi(x)$ takes

630: values in $\cc^4$, spin up, spin down, particle,

631: antiparticle. Antiparticles have been discovered and

632: Dirac's theory was celebrated. Here it is in short for

633: (flat) Minkowski space of signature $+---$,

634: $\eta _{\mu \nu }=\eta ^{\mu \nu }={\rm diag }(+1,-1,-1,-1)$.

635: Define the four Dirac matrices,

636: \bb \gamma ^0=\pp{0&-1_2\cr -1_2&0},\qq \gamma

637: ^j=

638: \pp{0&\sigma _j\cr -\sigma _j&0},\ee

639: for $j=1,2,3$ with the three Pauli matrices,

640: \bb\sigma

641: _1=\pp{0&1\cr 1&0},\qq\sigma _2=\pp{0&-i\cr

642: i&0},\qq\sigma _3=\pp{1&0\cr 0&-1}.\ee

643: They satisfy the anticommutation relations,

644: \bb\gamma^\mu\gamma^\nu+

645: \gamma^\nu\gamma^\mu=2\eta^{\mu\nu}1_4.\ee

646: In even spacetime dimensions, the chirality,

647: \bb \gamma_5:=-{\textstyle\frac{i}{4!}}\epsilon_{

648: \mu\nu\rho\sigma}\gamma^\mu\gamma^\nu

649: \gamma^\rho\gamma^\sigma=

650: - i\gamma^0\gamma^1\gamma^2\gamma^3=\pp{

651: -1_2&0\cr 0&1_2}\ee

652: is a natural operator and it paves the way to an

653: understanding of parity violation in weak interactions.

654: The chirality is a unitary matrix of unit square, which

655: anticommutes with all four Dirac matrices.

656: $(1-\gamma_5)/2$ projects a Dirac spinor onto its left-handed

657: part,

658: $(1+\gamma_5)/2$ projects onto the right-handed part. The

659: two parts are called Weyl spinors. A massless left-handed

660: (right-handed) spinor, has its spin parallel (anti-parallel) to its

661: direction of propagation.

662:  The chirality maps a left-handed spinor

663: to a right-handed spinor. A space reflection or parity

664: transformation changes the sign of the velocity vector and

665: leaves the spin vector unchanged. It therefore has the same

666: effect on Weyl spinors as the chirality operator.

667:  Similarly, there is the charge

668: conjugation, an anti-unitary operator (cf Appendix) of unit

669: square, that applied on a particle $\psi$ produces its

670: antiparticle

671: \bb J={\textstyle\frac{1}{i}}\gamma ^2\circ\,{\rm

672: complex\ conjugation}=\pp{0&0&0&-1\cr  0&0&1&0\cr

673: 0&1&0&0\cr -1&0&0&0}\,\circ\,{\rm c\ c},\ee

674: i.e. $J\psi ={\textstyle\frac{1}{i}} \gamma ^2\

675: \bar\psi $. Attention, here and for the last time $\bar\psi $

676: stands for the complex conjugate of $\psi $. In a few lines we will

677: adopt a different more popular convention. The charge

678: conjugation commutes with all four Dirac matrices times $i$. In flat

679: spacetime, the free Dirac operator is simply defined by,

680: \bb \ddd:=i\hbar\gamma^\mu\pa_\mu.\ee

681: It is sometimes referred to as square root of the wave

682: operator because $\ddd^2=-\Box$.

683:  The coupling of the

684: Dirac spinor to the gauge potential $A=A_\mu\de

685: x^\mu$ is done via the covariant derivative, and called

686: minimal coupling. In order to break parity, we write

687: left- and right-handed parts independently:

688: \bb S_D[A,\psi_L,\psi_R]&=&

689: \int_M\bar\psi_L\left[\ddd+i\hbar

690: \gamma^\mu\tilde\rho_L(A_\mu)\right]

691: \,\frac{1-\gamma_5}{2}\,\psi_L\,\de V\cr

692: &&+\int_M\bar\psi_R\left[\ddd+i\hbar

693: \gamma^\mu\tilde\rho_R(A_\mu)\right]

694: \,\frac{1+\gamma_5}{2}\,\psi_R\,\de V.

695: \label{diracaction}\ee

696: The new actors in this piece are $\psi_L$ and $\psi_R$,

697: two multiplets of Dirac spinors or fermions, that is with values

698: in $\hh_L$ and

699: $\hh_R$. We use the notations,

700: $\bar\psi:=\psi^*\gamma^0$, where $\cdot^*$ denotes the

701: Hermitean conjugate with respect to the four spinor components

702: and the dual with respect to the scalar product in the (internal)

703: Hilbert space

704: $\hh_L$ or $\hh_R$. The $\gamma^0$ is needed for

705: energy reasons and for invariance of the

706: pseudo--scalar product of spinors under lifted

707: Lorentz transformations. The

708: $\gamma^0$ is absent if spacetime is Euclidean. Then

709: we have a genuine scalar product and the square

710: integrable  spinors form a Hilbert space

711: $\lll^2(\sss)=\lll^2(\rr^4)\ot\cc^4$, the infinite dimensional

712: brother of the internal one. The Dirac operator is then self

713: adjoint in this Hilbert space. We denote by

714: $\tilde\rho_L$ the Lie algebra

715: representation in $\hh_L$.

716:  The covariant derivative,

717: $\dee_\mu:=\pa_\mu+\tilde\rho_L(A_\mu)$, deserves

718: its name,

719: \bb

720: \left[\pa_\mu+\tilde\rho_L(\rho_V(g)A_\mu)\right]

721: (\rho_L(g)\psi_L)=\rho_L(g)

722: \left[\pa_\mu+\tilde\rho_L(A_\mu)\right]\psi_L,\ee

723: for all gauge transformations $g\in\, ^M\!G$. This

724: ensures that the Dirac action (\ref{diracaction}) is gauge invariant.

725: 

726: If parity is conserved, $\hh_L=\hh_R$, we may add a mass term

727: \bb -c\int_M\bar\psi_R\, m_\psi

728: \,\frac{1-\gamma_5}{2}\,\psi_L\,\de V\ -\

729: c\int_M\bar\psi_L\, m_\psi

730: \,\frac{1+\gamma_5}{2}\,\psi_R\,\de V

731: \ =\ -c\int_M\bar\psi\, m_\psi

732: \,\psi\,\de V\ee

733:  to the Dirac action. It gives identical masses to all

734: members of the multiplet.

735: The fermion masses are gauge invariant if all

736: fermions in $\hh_L=\hh_R$ have the same mass.  For instance

737:  $QED$ preserves parity,

738: $\hh_L=\hh_R=\cc$, the representation being characterized by

739: the electric charge, $-1$ for both the left- and right handed

740: electron.

741: Remember that gauge invariance forces gauge bosons

742: to be massless. For fermions, it is parity {\it non-}invariance

743: that forces them to be massless.

744: 

745:  Let us conclude by reviewing

746: briefly why the Dirac equation is the Lorentz

747: invariant generalization of the Schr\"odinger

748: equation. Take the free Schr\"odinger equation on

749: (flat)

750: $\rr^4$. It is a linear differential equation with

751: constant coefficients,

752: \bb \left(\,\frac{2m}{i\hbar}\,\frac{\pa}{\pa

753: t}\,-\Delta\right)\psi=0.\label{deB}\ee

754: We compute its polynomial following Fourier and de

755: Broglie,

756: \bb -\,\frac{2m}{\hbar}\,\omega+k^2=

757: -\,\frac{2m}{\hbar

758: ^2}\,\left[E-\,\frac{p^2}{2m}\,\right].\ee

759: Energy conservation in Newtonian mechanics is

760: equivalent to the vanishing of the polynomial.

761: Likewise, the polynomial of the free, massive Dirac

762: equation $(\ddd -cm_\psi)\psi=0$ is

763: \bb {\textstyle\frac{\hbar}{c}}\,\omega\gamma^0

764: +\hbar\,k_j\gamma^j-c\,m1.\ee

765: Putting it to zero implies energy conservation in

766: special relativity,

767: \bb ({\textstyle\frac{\hbar}{c}})^2\,\omega^2

768: -\hbar^2\,\vec k^2-c^2\,m^2=0.\ee

769: In this sense, Dirac's equation generalizes Schr\"odinger's to

770: special relativity. To see that Dirac's equation is really Lorentz

771: invariant we must lift the Lorentz transformations to the space

772: of spinors. We will come back to this lift.

773: 

774: So far we have seen the two noble pieces by Yang-Mills

775: and Dirac.

776: The remaining three pieces are cheap copies of the two noble ones

777: with the gauge boson $A$ replaced by a scalar

778: $\varphi$. We need these three pieces to cure only

779: one problem, give masses to some gauge bosons and to

780: some fermions. These masses are forbidden by gauge

781: invariance and parity violation.  To simplify the

782: notation we will work from now on in units with

783: $c=\hbar=1$.

784: 

785: \medskip

786: \noindent

787: {\bf The Klein-Gordon action:}

788: The Yang-Mills action contains the kinetic term for

789: the gauge boson. This is simply the quadratic term,

790: $(\de A,\de A)$, which by Euler-Lagrange produces

791: linear field equations. We copy this for our new actor,

792: a multiplet of scalar fields or Higgs bosons,

793: \bb \varphi\in\Omega^0(M,\hh_S), \ee

794: by writing the Klein-Gordon action,

795: \bb S_{KG}[A,\varphi]={\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}

796: \int_M (\dee \varphi)^**\dee \varphi

797: =  {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} \int_M(\dee_\mu \varphi )^*

798: \dee^\mu \varphi\, \de V,\ee

799: with the covariant derivative here defined with

800: respect to the scalar representation,

801: \bb\dee\varphi:=\de

802: \varphi+\tilde\rho_S(A)\varphi.\ee

803: Again we need this minimal coupling

804: $\varphi^*A\varphi$ for gauge invariance.

805: 

806: \medskip

807:  \noindent

808: {\bf The Higgs potential:}

809: The non-Abelian Yang-Mills action contains

810: interaction terms for the gauge bosons, an

811: invariant, fourth order polynomial, $2(\de

812: A,[A,A])+([A,A],[A,A])$. We mimic these interactions

813: for scalar bosons by adding the integrated Higgs

814: potential $\int_M*V(\varphi)$ to the action.

815: 

816: \medskip

817: \noindent

818: {\bf The Yukawa terms:}

819: We also mimic the (minimal) coupling of the gauge

820: boson to the fermions $\psi^*A\psi$ by writing all

821: possible trilinear invariants,

822: \bb S_Y[\psi_L,\psi_R,\varphi]:={\rm Re}

823: \int_M*\left(

824: \sum_{j=1}^ng_{Yj}\left(\psi_L^*,\psi_R,\varphi

825: \right)_j+\sum_{j=n+1}^mg_{Yj}\left(\psi_L^*,\psi_R,

826: \varphi^*\right)_j\right)

827: .\ee

828: In the standard model, there are 27 complex Yukawa

829: couplings, $m=27$.

830: 

831: \medskip

832: 

833: The Yang-Mills and Dirac actions, contain three

834: types of couplings, a trilinear self coupling $AAA$, a

835: quadrilinear self coupling $AAAA$ and the trilinear

836: minimal coupling $\psi^*A\psi$. The gauge self

837: couplings are absent if the group $G$ is Abelian, the

838: photon has no electric charge, Maxwell's

839: equations are linear.

840:  The beauty of gauge

841: invariance is that if $G$ is simple, all these couplings

842: are fixed in terms of one positive number, the gauge

843: coupling $g$. To see this, take an orthonormal basis

844: $T_b,\ b=1,2,...\dim G$ of the complexification $\gg^\cc$ of the

845: Lie algebra with respect to the invariant scalar

846: product and an orthonormal basis $F_k,\

847: k=1,2,...\dim\hh_L$, of the fermionic Hilbert space, say

848: $\hh_L$, and expand the actors,

849: \bb A =: A_\mu^b T_b \de x^\mu,\qq

850: \psi=:\psi^kF_k.\ee

851: Insert these expressions into the Yang-Mills and Dirac

852: actions, then you get the following interaction terms, see

853: Figure 3,

854: \bb g\,

855: \pa_\rho A_\mu^aA_\nu^bA_\sigma^c\,f_{abc}\,

856: \epsilon^{\rho\mu\nu\sigma},\qq

857: g^2\,A_\mu^aA_\nu^bA_\rho^cA_\sigma^d\,{f_{ab}}^e

858: {f_{ecd}}\,

859: \epsilon^{\rho\mu\nu\sigma},\qq

860: g\,\psi^{k*}A^b_\mu\gamma^\mu\psi_\ell\,

861: {{t_b}_k}^\ell,\ee

862: with the structure constants ${f_{ab}}^e$,

863: \bb [T_a,T_b]=:{f_{ab}}^eT_e.\ee

864: The indices of the structure constants are raised and

865: lowered with the matrix of the invariant scalar

866: product in the basis $T_b$, that is the identity matrix.

867: The ${{t_b}_k}^\ell$ is the matrix  of the operator

868: $\tilde\rho_L(T_b)$ with respect to the basis $F_k$.

869: The difference between the noble and the cheap actions

870: is that the Higgs couplings, $\lambda$ and $\mu$ in

871: the standard model, and the Yukawa couplings

872: $g_{Yj}$ are arbitrary, are neither connected among

873: themselves nor connected to the gauge couplings

874: $g_i$.

875: 

876: \begin{figure}[h]

877: \epsfxsize=16cm

878: \hspace{.25cm}

879: \epsfbox{couplex.ps}

880: \caption{Tri- and quadrilinear gauge couplings,

881:  minimal gauge coupling to fermions, Higgs selfcoupling and

882: Yukawa coupling }

883: \label{couplings}

884: \end{figure}

885: 

886: \subsection{The winner} \label{winner}

887: 

888: Physicists have spent some thirty years and billions of

889: Swiss Francs playing on the slot machine by

890: Yang, Mills and Higgs. There is a winner, the standard

891: model of electro-weak and strong forces. Its

892: bills are

893: \bb G&=&SU(2)\times U(1)\times

894: SU(3)/(\zz_2\times\zz_3),\label{smgr}\\ \cr

895: \hh_L &=& \bigoplus_1^3\lb

896: (2,{\textstyle\frac{1}{6}},3)\op

897: (2,-{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}},1)

898: \rb  ,\label{hl}\\

899:  \hh_R& = &\bigoplus_1^3\lb

900: (1,{\textstyle\frac{2}{3}},3)\oplus

901: (1,-{\textstyle\frac{1}{3}},3)\op (1,-1,1)

902: \rb,\label{hr} \\

903:  \hh_S &= &(2,-{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}},1)\label{hs},

904: \ee

905: where $(n_2, y, n_3)$

906: denotes the tensor product of an $n_2$ dimensional

907: representation of $SU(2)$, an $n_3$ dimensional

908: representation of $SU(3)$ and the one dimensional

909: representation of $U(1)$ with hypercharge $y$:

910: $\rho(\exp (i\theta)) = \exp (iy\theta) $. For

911: historical reasons the hypercharge is an integer

912: multiple of ${\textstyle\frac{1}{6}}$.

913: This is irrelevant: only the product of the

914: hypercharge with its gauge coupling is measurable and we do not

915: need multi-valued representations, which are characterized by

916: non-integer, rational hypercharges.

917:  In the direct sum, we recognize the three

918: generations of fermions, the quarks are $SU(3)$

919: colour triplets, the leptons colour singlets. The basis

920: of the fermion representation space is

921: \bb \pp{u\cr d}_L,\ \pp{c\cr s}_L,\ \pp{t\cr b}_L,\

922: \pp{\nu_e\cr e}_L,\ \pp{\nu_\mu\cr\mu}_L,\

923: \pp{\nu_\tau\cr\tau}_L\eee

924: \bb\matrix{u_R,\cr d_R,}\qq \matrix{c_R,\cr s_R,}\qq

925: \matrix{t_R,\cr b_R,}\qq  e_R,\qq \mu_R,\qq

926: \tau_R\eee

927: The

928: parentheses indicate isospin doublets.

929: 

930: The eight gauge bosons associated to

931: $su(3)$ are called gluons. Attention, the $U(1)$ is not the one of electric

932: charge, it is called hypercharge, the electric charge

933: is a linear combination of hypercharge and weak

934: isospin, parameterized by the weak mixing angle

935: $\theta_w$ to be introduced below. This mixing is

936: necessary to give electric charges to the $W$ bosons.

937: The $W^+$ and $W^-$ are pure isospin states, while the

938: $Z^0$ and the photon are (orthogonal) mixtures of the

939: third isospin generator and hypercharge.

940: 

941:  Because of the high

942: degree of reducibility in the bills, there are many

943: coins, among them 27 complex Yukawa couplings. Not

944: all Yukawa couplings have a physical meaning and we only remain

945: with 18 physically significant, positive numbers

946: \cite{data}, three gauge couplings at energies corresponding to

947: the $Z$ mass,

948: \bb g_1=0.3574\pm 0.0001,&g_2=0.6518\pm 0.0003,&

949: g_3=1.218\pm 0.01,\label{gaugecoup}\ee

950: two Higgs couplings, $\lambda$ and $\mu$, and

951: 13 positive parameters from the Yukawa couplings.

952: The Higgs couplings are related to the boson masses:

953: \bb m_W&=&{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}g_2\,v

954: \,=\,80.419\pm 0.056\ {\rm GeV},\\

955: m_Z&=&{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{g_1^2+g_2^2}\ v

956: =m_W/\cos\theta_w

957: \,=\,91.1882\,\pm\,0.0022\ {\rm GeV},\\

958: m_H&=&2\sqrt 2\sqrt\lambda\,v\,>\,98\ {\rm GeV},\ee

959: with the vacuum expectation value

960: $v:={\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\mu/\sqrt\lambda$ and the

961: weak mixing angle $\theta_w$ defined by

962: \bb\sin^2\theta_w:=g_2^{-2}/(g_2^{-2}+g_1^{-2})=

963: 0.23117\,\pm\,0.00016.\ee

964:  For

965: the standard model, there is a one--to--one

966: correspondence between the physically relevant part

967: of the Yukawa couplings and the fermion masses and

968: mixings,

969: \bb m_e=0.510998902\pm 0.000000021\ {\rm MeV},&

970: m_u=3\pm 2\ {\rm MeV},&m_d=6\pm 3\ {\rm MeV},

971: \cr

972: m_\mu=0.105658357\pm 0.000000005\ {\rm GeV},&

973: m_c=1.25\pm 0.1\ {\rm GeV},&

974: m_s=0.125\pm 0.05\ {\rm GeV},\cr

975: m_\tau=1.77703 \pm 0.00003\ {\rm GeV},&

976: m_t=174.3\pm 5.1\ {\rm GeV},&

977: m_b=4.2\pm 0.2\ {\rm GeV}.\eee

978: For simplicity, we take massless neutrinos. Then  mixing only

979: occurs for quarks and is given by

980: a unitary matrix, the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa

981: matrix

982: \bb C_{KM}:=\pp{V_{ud}&V_{us}&V_{ub}\cr

983: V_{cd}&V_{cs}&V_{cb}\cr  V_{td}&V_{ts}&V_{tb}}.\ee

984: For physical purposes it can be parameterized by

985: three angles $\theta_{12}$,

986: $\theta_{23}$, $\theta_{13}$ and

987: one $CP$ violating phase $\delta$:

988: \bb C_{KM}=\pp{

989: c_{12}c_{13}&s_{12}c_{13}&s_{13}e^{-i\delta}\cr

990: -s_{12}c_{23}-c_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta}&

991: c_{12}c_{23}-s_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta}&

992: s_{23}c_{13}\cr

993: s_{12}s_{23}-c_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta}&

994: -c_{12}s_{23}-s_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta}&

995: c_{23}c_{13}},\ee

996: with $c_{kl}:=\cos \theta_{kl}$,

997: $s_{kl}:=\sin \theta_{kl}$.

998: The

999: absolute values of the matrix elements in $C_{KM}$ are:

1000: \bb \pp{

1001: 0.9750\pm 0.0008&0.223\pm 0.004&0.004\pm

1002: 0.002\cr

1003: 0.222\pm 0.003&0.9742\pm 0.0008&0.040\pm 0.003\cr

1004: 0.009\pm 0.005&0.039\pm 0.004&0.9992\pm 0.0003}.

1005: \ee

1006: The physical meaning of the quark mixings is the

1007: following: when a sufficiently energetic $W^+$ decays

1008: into a $u$ quark, this

1009: $u$ quark is produced together with a

1010: $\bar d$ quark with probability $|V_{ud}|^2$, together

1011: with a

1012: $\bar s$ quark with probability $|V_{us}|^2$, together

1013: with a

1014: $\bar b$ quark with probability $|V_{ub}|^2$. The

1015: fermion masses and mixings together are an entity,

1016: the fermionic mass matrix or the matrix of Yukawa

1017: couplings multiplied by the vacuum expectation

1018: value.

1019: 

1020: Let us note

1021: six intriguing properties of the standard model.

1022: \begin{itemize}\item

1023: The gluons couple in the same way to left- and

1024: right-handed fermions, the gluon coupling is

1025: vectorial, the strong interaction does not break parity.

1026: \item

1027: The fermionic mass matrix commutes with $SU(3)$, the three

1028: colours of a given quark have the same mass.

1029: \item

1030:  The scalar is a colour singlet, the

1031: $SU(3)$ part of $G$ does not suffer spontaneous symmetry break

1032: down, the gluons remain massless.

1033: \item

1034: The $SU(2)$ couples only to left-handed fermions, its

1035: coupling is chiral, the weak interaction breaks parity

1036: maximally.

1037: \item

1038: The scalar is an isospin doublet, the $SU(2)$ part

1039: suffers spontaneous symmetry break down, the $W^\pm$ and the

1040: $Z^0$ are massive.

1041: \item

1042: The remaining colourless and neutral gauge boson, the photon, is

1043: massless and couples vectorially. This is certainly the most ad-hoc

1044: feature of the standard model. Indeed the photon is a linear

1045: combination of isospin, which couples only to left-handed

1046: fermions, and of a $U(1)$ generator, which may couple to both

1047: chiralities. Therefore  only the

1048: careful fine tuning of the hypercharges in the three input

1049: representations (\ref{hl}-\ref{hs}) can save parity conservation

1050: and gauge invariance of electro-magnetism,

1051: \bb

1052:  y_{u_R}=y_{q_L}-y_{\ell_L}\qq

1053: y_{d_R}=y_{q_L}+y_{\ell_L},\qq

1054: y_{e_R}=2y_{\ell_L},\qq

1055: y_\varphi =y_{\ell_L} ,

1056: \label{4cond}\ee

1057: The subscripts label the multiplets, $qL$ for the left-handed

1058: quarks,

1059: $\ell L$ for the left-handed leptons,

1060: $uR$ for the right-handed up-quarks and

1061: so forth and $\varphi $ for the scalar.

1062: \end{itemize}

1063: Nevertheless the phenomenological success of the standard model

1064: is phenomenal: with only a handful of parameters, it reproduces

1065: correctly some millions of experimental numbers. Most of these

1066: numbers are measured with an accuracy of a few percent and

1067: they can be reproduced by classical field theory, no $\hbar$

1068: needed. However, the experimental precision has become so good

1069: that quantum corrections cannot be ignored anymore. At this point

1070: it is important to note that the fermionic representations of the

1071: standard model are free of Yang-Mills (and mixed) anomalies. Today

1072: the standard model stands uncontradicted.

1073: 

1074: Let us come back to our analogy between the Balmer-Rydberg

1075: formula and the standard model. One might object that the ansatz

1076: for the spectrum, equation (\ref{ansatz}), is completely ad hoc,

1077: while the class of all (anomaly free) Yang-Mills-Higgs models is

1078: distinguished by perturbative renormalizability. This is true, but

1079: this property was proved \cite{renorm} only years after

1080: the electro-weak part of the standard model was published

1081: \cite{gsw}.

1082: 

1083: By placing the hydrogen atom in an electric or magnetic field, we

1084: know experimentally that every frequency `state'

1085: $n$, $n=1,2,3,...$, comes with $n$ irreducible unitary

1086: representations of the rotation group $SO(3)$. These representations

1087: are labelled by

1088: $\ell$,

1089: $\ell=0,1,2,...n-1$, of dimensions $2\ell+1$. An orthonormal basis of

1090: each representation

1091: $\ell$ is labelled by another integer $m$, $m=-\ell,-\ell+1,...\ell$.

1092: This experimental fact has motivated the credo that particles are

1093: orthonormal basis vectors of unitary representations of compact

1094: groups. This credo is also behind the standard model. While $SO(3)$

1095: has a clear geometric interpretation, we are still looking for

1096: such an interpretation of $SU(2)\times U(1)\times

1097: SU(3)/[\zz_2\times\zz_3].$

1098: 

1099: We close this subsection with Iliopoulos' joke \cite{joke} from 1976:

1100: \vfil\eject

1101: \medskip

1102: \noindent{\bf Do-it-yourself kit for gauge models:}

1103: \begin{enumerate}

1104: \item[\bf 1)]

1105: Choose a gauge group $G$.

1106: \item[\bf 2)]

1107: Choose the fields of the ``elementary particles'' you want to

1108: introduce, and their representations. Do not forget to include

1109: enough fields to allow for the Higgs mechanism.

1110: \item[\bf 3)]

1111: Write the most general renormalizable Lagrangian invariant

1112: under $G$. At this stage gauge invariance is still exact and all

1113: vector bosons are massless.

1114: \item[\bf 4)]

1115: Choose the parameters of the Higgs scalars so that spontaneous

1116: symmetry breaking occurs. In practice, this often means to choose

1117: a negative value [positive in our notations] for the parameter $\mu

1118: ^2$.

1119: \item[\bf 5)]

1120: Translate the scalars and rewrite the Lagrangian in terms of the

1121: translated fields. Choose a suitable gauge and quantize the theory.

1122: \item[\bf 6)]

1123: Look at the properties of the resulting model. If it resembles

1124: physics, even remotely, publish it.

1125: \item[\bf 7)]

1126: GO TO \bf 1.

1127: \end{enumerate}

1128: Meanwhile his joke has become experimental reality.

1129: 

1130: \subsection{Wick rotation}

1131: 

1132: Euclidean signature is technically easier to handle than

1133: Minkowskian. What is more, in Connes' geometry it will be vital

1134: that the spinors form a Hilbert space with a true scalar product

1135: and that the Dirac action takes the form of a scalar product. We

1136: therefore put together the Einstein-Hilbert and Yang-Mills-Higgs

1137: actions  with emphasis on the relative signs and indicate the

1138: changes necessary to pass from Minkowskian to Euclidean

1139: signature.

1140: 

1141: In 1983 the meter disappeared as fundamental unit of

1142: science and technology. The conceptual revolution of

1143: general relativity, the abandon of length in favour of

1144: time, had made its way up to the domain of

1145: technology. Said differently, general relativity is not

1146: really  geo-metry, but chrono-metry. Hence our choice of

1147: Minkowskian signature is $+---$.

1148: 

1149: With this choice

1150: the combined

1151: Lagrangian reads,

1152: \bb

1153: &&\{

1154: -\,{\textstyle\frac{2\Lambda _c}{16\pi G}}

1155: \,-\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{16\pi G}}\,R

1156: \,-\,

1157: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2g^2}}\t (

1158: F_{\mu\nu}^{*}F^{\mu\nu})\,+\,

1159: {\textstyle\frac{1}{g^2}}m_A^2\t (

1160: A_{\mu}^{*}A^{\mu})\cr

1161: &&+\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\,(\dee_\mu\varphi)^*

1162: \dee^\mu\varphi

1163: \,-\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\,m_\varphi^2|\varphi|^2

1164: \,+\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\,\mu^2|\varphi|^2

1165: \,-\,\lambda |\varphi|^4\cr

1166: &&+\,

1167: \psi^*\gamma^{0}\,[i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu

1168: \,-\,m_\psi 1_4]\, \psi\}

1169: \ |\!\det g_{\cdot\cdot}|^{1/2}.\ee

1170: This Lagrangian is real if we suppose that all fields

1171: vanish at infinity.  The relative coefficients between

1172: kinetic terms and mass terms are chosen as to

1173: reproduce the correct energy momentum relations

1174: from the free field equations using Fourier transform

1175: and the de Broglie relations as explained after

1176: equation (\ref{deB}). With the chiral decomposition

1177: \bb\psi_L&=&{\textstyle\frac{1-\gamma_5}{2}}\,\psi,

1178: \qq

1179: \psi_R\ =\ {\textstyle\frac{1+\gamma_5}{2}}\,\psi,

1180: \label{project}\ee

1181: the Dirac Lagrangian reads

1182: \bb &&\psi^*\gamma^0\,[i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu

1183: \,-\,m_\psi 1_4]\,

1184: \psi\cr

1185: &&\qq=\psi_L^*\gamma^0\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu\,

1186: \psi_L

1187: \,+\,

1188: \psi_R^*\gamma^0\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu\,\psi_R

1189: \,-\,m_\psi\psi_L^*\gamma^0\psi_R

1190: \,-\,m_\psi\psi_R^*\gamma^0 \psi_L.\ee

1191: The  relativistic energy momentum

1192: relations are quadratic in the masses. Therefore the

1193: sign of the fermion mass

1194: $m_\psi$ is conventional and merely reflects the

1195: choice: who is particle and who is antiparticle. We can

1196: even adopt one choice for the left-handed fermions

1197: and the opposite choice for the right-handed

1198: fermions. Formally this can be seen by the change of

1199: field variable (chiral transformation):

1200: \bb \psi:=\exp(i\alpha\gamma_5)\,\psi'.\ee

1201: It leaves invariant the kinetic term and the mass term

1202: transforms as,

1203: \bb -m_\psi{\psi'}^*\gamma^0[\cos (2\alpha)\,1_4

1204: +i\sin (2\alpha)\,\gamma_5]{\psi'}. \ee

1205: With

1206: $\alpha=-\pi/4$ the Dirac Lagrangian becomes:

1207: \bb

1208: &&{\psi'}^*\gamma^0[\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu\,+i

1209: m_\psi\gamma_5]{\psi}'\cr

1210: &&\qq =

1211: {\psi'}_L^*\gamma^0\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu\,

1212: {\psi}'_L

1213: \,+\,

1214: {\psi'}_R^*\gamma^0\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu\,

1215: {\psi'}_R

1216: \,+\,m_\psi {\psi'}_L^*\gamma^0i

1217: \gamma_5{\psi'}_R

1218: \,+\,m_\psi {\psi'}_R^*\gamma^0i

1219: \gamma_5 {\psi'}_L\cr

1220: &&\qq =

1221: {\psi'}_L^*\gamma^0\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu\,

1222: {\psi}'_L

1223: \,+\,

1224: {\psi'}_R^*\gamma^0\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu\,

1225: {\psi'}_R

1226: \,+\,im_\psi {\psi'}_L^*\gamma^0{\psi'}_R

1227: \,-\,im_\psi {\psi'}_R^*\gamma^0 {\psi'}_L.\ee

1228: We have seen that gauge invariance forbids

1229: massive gauge bosons, $m_A=0$, and that parity

1230: violation forbids massive fermions, $m_\psi=0$. This

1231: is fixed by spontaneous symmetry breaking, where we

1232: take the scalar mass term with wrong sign,

1233: $m_\varphi=0,\

1234: \mu>0$. The shift of the scalar then induces masses

1235: for the gauge bosons, the fermions and the physical

1236: scalars. These masses are calculable in terms of the

1237: gauge, Yukawa, and Higgs couplings.

1238: 

1239: The other relative signs in the combined Lagrangian

1240: are fixed by the requirement that the energy density

1241: of the non-gravitational part $T_{00}$ be positive

1242: (up to a cosmological constant) and that gravity in the

1243: Newtonian limit be attractive. In particular this

1244: implies that the Higgs potential must be bounded from

1245: below,

1246: $\lambda>0$. The sign of the Einstein-Hilbert action

1247: may also be obtained from an

1248: asymptotically flat space of weak curvature, where we

1249: can define gravitational energy density. Then

1250: the requirement is that the kinetic terms

1251: of all physical bosons, spin 0, 1, and 2, be of the same

1252: sign. Take the metric of the form

1253: \bb g_{\mu\nu}=\eta_{\mu\nu}+h_{\mu\nu},\ee

1254: $h_{\mu\nu}$ small. Then the Einstein-Hilbert

1255: Lagrangian becomes \cite{gilles},

1256: \bb -\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{16\pi G}}\,R\,

1257: |\!\det g_{\cdot\cdot}|^{1/2}&=&

1258: {\textstyle\frac{1}{16\pi G}}\{

1259: {\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}\pa_\mu h_{\alpha\beta}

1260: \pa^\mu h^{\alpha\beta}\,-\,

1261: {\textstyle\frac{1}{8}}\pa_\mu{h_\alpha}^\alpha

1262: \pa^\mu{h_\beta}^\beta\cr

1263: &&-\,[\pa_\nu{h_\mu}^\nu

1264: -{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\pa_\mu{h_\nu}^\nu]

1265: [\pa_{\nu'}{h^\mu}^{\nu'}

1266: -{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\pa^\mu{h_{\nu'}}^{\nu'}

1267: ]\,+\,O(h^3)\}.\ee

1268: Here indices are raised with $\eta^{\cdot\cdot}$. After

1269: an appropriate choice of coordinates, `harmonic

1270: coordinates', the bracket $\left[\pa_\nu{h_\mu}^\nu

1271: -{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\pa_\mu{h_\nu}^\nu

1272: \right]$ vanishes and only two independent

1273: components of $h_{\mu\nu}$ remain,

1274: $h_{11}=-h_{22}$ and $h_{12}$.  They represent

1275: the two physical states of the graviton,

1276: helicity $\pm 2$. Their kinetic terms are both positive,

1277: e.g.:

1278: \bb +{\textstyle\frac{1}{16\pi

1279: G}}{\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}

1280: \pa_\mu h_{12}\pa^\mu h_{12}.\ee

1281: Likewise, by an appropriate gauge transformation, we

1282: can achieve $\pa_\mu A^\mu=0$, `Lorentz gauge',

1283: and remain with only two `transverse' components

1284: $A_1,\ A_2$ of helicity $\pm 1$. They have positive

1285: kinetic terms, e.g.:

1286: \bb+{\textstyle\frac{1}{2g^2}}\t (\pa_\mu

1287: A_1^*\pa^\mu A_1).\ee

1288: Finally, the kinetic term of the scalar is positive:

1289: \bb +{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\pa_\mu\varphi^*

1290: \pa^\mu\varphi.\ee

1291: 

1292: An old recipe from quantum field theory, `Wick

1293: rotation', amounts to replacing spacetime by a

1294: Riemannian manifold with Euclidean signature. Then

1295: certain calculations become feasible or easier. One of

1296: the reasons for this is that Euclidean quantum field

1297: theory resembles statistical mechanics, the imaginary

1298: time playing formally the role of the inverse

1299: temperature. Only at the end of the calculation the

1300: result is `rotated back' to real time. In some cases, this

1301: recipe can be justified rigorously. The precise

1302: formulation of the recipe is that the $n$-point

1303: functions computed from the Euclidean Lagrangian

1304: be the analytic continuations in the complex time

1305: plane of the Minkowskian

1306: $n$-point functions. We shall indicate a hand

1307: waving formulation of the recipe, that

1308: is sufficient for our purpose: In a first stroke we pass to the signature

1309: $-+++$. In a second stroke we replace $t$ by $it$ and

1310: replace all Minkowskian scalar products by the

1311: corresponding Euclidean ones.

1312: 

1313: The first stroke amounts simply to replacing the

1314: metric by its negative. This leaves invariant the

1315: Christoffel symbols, the Riemann and Ricci tensors,

1316: but reverses the sign of the curvature scalar.

1317: Likewise, in the other terms of the Lagrangian we get

1318: a minus sign for every contraction of indices, e.g.:

1319: $\pa_\mu\varphi^*\pa^\mu\varphi=

1320: \pa_\mu\varphi^*\pa_{\mu'}\varphi g^{\mu\mu'}$

1321: becomes $\pa_\mu\varphi^*\pa_{\mu'}\varphi

1322: (-g^{\mu\mu'})=-\pa_\mu\varphi^*\pa^\mu\varphi$.

1323: After multiplication by a conventional overall minus

1324: sign the combined Lagrangian reads now,

1325: \bb

1326: &&\{\,{\textstyle\frac{2\Lambda _c}{16\pi

1327: G}}\,-\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{16\pi G}}\,R

1328: \,+\,

1329: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2g^2}}\t (

1330: F_{\mu\nu}^{*}F^{\mu\nu})\,

1331: \,+\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{g^2}}m_A^2\t (A^*_\mu A^\mu )

1332: \cr && +\,

1333: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\,(\dee_\mu\varphi)^*

1334: \dee^\mu\varphi

1335: \,+\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\,m_\varphi ^2|\varphi|^2

1336: \,-\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\,\mu^2|\varphi|^2

1337: \,+\,\lambda |\varphi|^4\cr

1338: &&\qq+\,

1339: \psi^*\gamma^0[\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu

1340: \,+\,m_\psi 1_4\,]\psi\,\}

1341: \ |\!\det g_{\cdot\cdot}|^{1/2}.\label{-+++}\ee

1342: 

1343: To pass to the Euclidean signature, we multiply time,

1344: energy and mass by $i$. This amounts to

1345: $\eta^{\mu\nu}=\delta^{\mu\nu}$ in the scalar

1346: product. In order to have the Euclidean

1347: anticommutation relations,

1348: \bb   \gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu +\gamma ^\nu

1349: \gamma ^\mu =  2\delta ^{\mu \nu }1_4,\ee

1350: we change the Dirac matrices to the Euclidean ones,

1351: \bb \gamma ^0=\pp{0&-1_2\cr -1_2&0},\qq \gamma

1352: ^j= {\textstyle\frac{1}{i}}

1353: \pp{0&\sigma _j\cr -\sigma _j&0},\ee

1354: All four are now self adjoint.

1355: For the chirality we take

1356: \bb \gamma_5:=

1357: \gamma^0\gamma^1\gamma^2\gamma^3=\pp{

1358: -1_2&0\cr 0&1_2}.\ee

1359:  The Minkowskian scalar product for

1360: spinors has a

1361: $\gamma^0$. This $\gamma^0$ is needed for the

1362: correct physical interpretation of the energy of

1363: antiparticles and for invariance under lifted Lorentz

1364: transformations,

1365: $Spin(1,3)$. In the Euclidean, there is no physical interpretation

1366: and we can only retain the requirement of a

1367: $Spin(4)$ invariant scalar product. This scalar

1368: product has no $\gamma^0$. But then we have a

1369: problem if we want to write the Dirac Lagrangian in

1370: terms of chiral spinors as above. For instance, for a purely

1371: left-handed neutrino, $\psi _R=0$ and

1372: $\psi_L^*\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu\, \psi_L$ vanishes

1373: identically because $\gamma_5$ anticommutes with

1374: the four $\gamma^\mu$. The standard trick of

1375: Euclidean field theoreticians \cite{zinn} is fermion doubling,

1376: $\psi_L$ and $\psi_R$ are treated as two

1377: {\it independent}, four component spinors. They are

1378: not chiral projections of one four component spinor

1379: as in the Minkowskian, equation (\ref{project}). The

1380: spurious degrees of freedom in the Euclidean are kept

1381: all the way through the calculation. They are

1382: projected out only after the Wick rotation back to

1383: Minkowskian, by imposing $\gamma_5\psi_L=-\psi_L,

1384: \gamma_5\psi_R=\psi_R$.

1385: 

1386:  In noncommutative

1387: geometry the Dirac operator must be self adjoint,

1388: which is not the case for the Euclidean Dirac operator

1389: $i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu+im_\psi 1_4$ we get from

1390: the  Lagrangian (\ref{-+++}) after multiplication of

1391: the mass by $i$. We therefore prefer the primed

1392: spinor variables $\psi'$ producing the self adjoint

1393: Euclidean Dirac  operator

1394: $i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu+m_\psi\gamma_5$.

1395: Dropping the prime, the combined Lagrangian in the

1396: Euclidean then reads:

1397: \bb

1398: &&\{\,{\textstyle\frac{2\Lambda _c}{16\pi

1399: G}}\,-\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{16\pi G}}\,R

1400: \,+\,

1401: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2g^2}}\t (

1402: F_{\mu\nu}^{*}F^{\mu\nu})\,

1403: \,+\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{g^2}}m_A^2\t (A^*_\mu A^\mu )

1404: \cr && +\,

1405: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\,(\dee_\mu\varphi)^*

1406: \dee^\mu\varphi

1407: \,+\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\,m_\varphi ^2|\varphi|^2

1408: \,-\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\,\mu^2|\varphi|^2

1409: \,+\,\lambda |\varphi|^4\cr

1410: &&+\,

1411: {\psi}_L^*\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu\,

1412: {\psi}_L

1413: \,+\,

1414: {\psi}_R^*\,i\gamma^\mu\dee_\mu\,

1415: {\psi}_R

1416: \,+\,m_\psi {\psi}_L^*\gamma_5{\psi}_R

1417: \,+\,m_\psi {\psi}_R^*\gamma_5 {\psi}_L

1418: \}

1419: \,(\det g_{\cdot\cdot})^{1/2}.\label{++++}\ee

1420: 

1421: \section{Connes' noncommutative geometry}

1422: 

1423: Connes equips Riemannian spaces with an uncertainty principle.

1424: As in quantum mechanics, this uncertainty principle is derived from

1425: noncommutativity.

1426: 

1427: \subsection{Motivation: quantum mechanics}

1428: 

1429: Consider the classical harmonic oscillator. Its phase space is

1430: $\rr^2$ with points labelled by position $x$ and momentum $p$. A

1431: classical observable is a differentiable function on phase

1432: space such as the total energy $p^2/(2m)\,+\,kx^2$.

1433: Observables can be added and multiplied, they form the algebra

1434: $\ccc^\infty(\rr^2)$, which is associative and commutative. To pass

1435: to quantum mechanics, this algebra is rendered noncommutative

1436: by means of the following noncommutation relation for the

1437: generators

1438: $x$ and $p$,

1439: \bb [x,p]=i\hbar 1.\label{heisen}\ee

1440: Let us call $\aa$ the resulting algebra `of quantum observables'. It

1441: is still associative, has an involution $\cdot^*$ (the adjoint or Hermitean

1442: conjugation)  and a unit 1. Let us briefly recall the defining properties

1443: of an involution: it is a linear map from the {\it real} algebra into itself

1444: that reverses the product, $(ab)^*=b^*a^*$, respects the unit,

1445: $1^*=1$, and is such that $a^{**}=a$.

1446:  \begin{figure}[h]

1447: \hspace{5.5cm}

1448: \setlength{\unitlength}{1.0cm}

1449: \begin{picture}(10,6.5)(0.5,0)

1450: \put(3,2){\framebox(1,1)}

1451: \put(0,0.5){\vector(1,0){6}}

1452: \put(0.5,5.3){\parbox[b]{2cm}{$p$}}

1453: \put(0.5,0){\vector(0,1){5}}

1454: \put(6.2,0.4){\parbox{1cm}{$x$}}

1455: \put(4.15,2.7){\parbox{1cm}{$\hbar/2$}}

1456: \put(3.4,2.6){\circle*{0.1}}

1457: \end{picture}

1458: \caption{The first example of noncommutative geometry}

1459: \end{figure}

1460: 

1461:  Of course, there is no space anymore of which

1462: $\aa$ is the algebra of functions. Nevertheless, we talk about such a

1463: `quantum phase space' as a space that has no points or a space with

1464: an uncertainty relation. Indeed, the noncommutation relation

1465: (\ref{heisen}) implies Heisenberg's uncertainty relation

1466: \bb \Delta x\Delta p \geq \hbar /2\ee

1467: and tells us that points in phase space lose all meaning, we can

1468: only resolve cells in phase space of volume $\hbar/2$, see Figure 4.

1469: To define the uncertainty $\Delta a$ for an observable $a\in\aa$,

1470: we need a faithful representation of the algebra on a Hilbert

1471: space,  i.e. an injective homomorphism

1472: $\rho :\aa\rightarrow {\rm End}(\hh)$ (cf Appendix).

1473: For the harmonic oscillator, this Hilbert space is

1474: $\hh=\lll^2(\rr)$. Its elements are the wave functions $\psi (x)$,

1475:  square integrable functions on configuration space. Finally,

1476: the dynamics is defined by a self adjoint observable $H=H^*\in\aa$

1477: via Schr\"odinger's equation

1478: \bb \left( i\hbar \,\frac{\pa}{\pa t}\, -\,\rho (H)\right) \psi

1479: (t,x)=0.\ee

1480: Usually the representation is not written explicitly. Since it is

1481: faithful, no confusion should arise from this abuse.  Here time is

1482: considered an external parameter, in particular, time is not

1483: considered an observable. This is different in the special

1484: relativistic setting where Schr\"odinger's equation is replaced by

1485: Dirac's equation,

1486: \bb\ddd\psi =0.\ee

1487: Now the wave function $\psi $ is the four-component spinor

1488: consisting of left- and right-handed, particle and antiparticle

1489: wave functions.  The Dirac operator is not in

1490: $\aa$ anymore, but

1491: $\ddd\in{\rm End}(\hh)$. The Dirac operator is only formally self

1492: adjoint because there is no {\it positive definite} scalar product,

1493: whereas in Euclidean spacetime it is truly self adjoint,

1494: $\ddd^*=\ddd.$

1495: 

1496: Connes' geometries are described by these three purely algebraic

1497: items, $(\aa,\hh,\ddd)$, with $\aa$ a real, associative, possibly

1498: noncommutative involution algebra with unit, faithfully

1499: represented on a complex Hilbert space $\hh$, and $\ddd$ is a

1500: self adjoint operator on $\hh$.

1501: 

1502: \subsection{The calibrating example: Riemannian spin geometry}

1503: 

1504: Connes'  geometry \cite{book}

1505:  does to spacetime what quantum mechanics does

1506: to phase space. Of course, the first thing we have to learn is how to

1507: reconstruct the Riemannian geometry from the algebraic data

1508: $(\aa,\hh,\ddd)$ in the case where the algebra is commutative. We

1509: start the easy way and construct the triple $(\aa,\hh,\ddd)$

1510: given a four dimensional, compact, Euclidean spacetime $M$. As

1511: before $\aa=\ccc^\infty(M)$ is the real algebra of complex valued

1512: differentiable functions on spacetime and $\hh=\lll^2(\sss)$ is the

1513:  Hilbert space of complex,

1514: square integrable spinors $\psi $ on

1515: $M$. Locally, in any coordinate neighborhood,  we write the

1516: spinor as a

1517:  column vector, $\psi (x)\in\cc^4,\

1518: x\in M$. The scalar product of two

1519: spinors is defined by

1520: \bb (\psi ,\psi ')=\int_M \psi ^*(x)\psi '(x)\,\de V,\ee

1521: with the invariant volume form $\de V:=|\det

1522: g_{\cdot\cdot}|^{1/2}\,\de^ 4x$ defined with the metric

1523: tensor,

1524: \bb g_{\mu \nu }=g\left( \,\frac{\pa}{\pa x^\mu }\,,

1525: \,\frac{\pa}{\pa x^\nu }\,\right),

1526: \ee

1527:  that is the matrix of the Riemannian metric

1528: $g$ with respect to the coordinates $x^\mu $,

1529: $\mu =0,1,2,3.$ Note -- and this is important -- that with

1530: Euclidean signature the Dirac action is simply a scalar product,

1531: $S_D=(\psi ,\ddd\psi )$. The representation is defined by pointwise

1532: multiplication,

1533: $(\rho(a)\,\psi )(x):=a(x)\psi (x),$ $a\in \aa$.

1534: For a start, it is sufficient to know the Dirac operator on a flat

1535: manifold $M$ and with respect to inertial or Cartesian coordinates

1536: $\tilde x^{\tilde \mu} $ such that $\tilde g_{\tilde \mu \tilde \nu

1537: }={\delta ^{\tilde \mu}}_

1538: {\tilde \nu }$. Then we use Dirac's original definition,

1539: \bb\dd=\ddd=i\gamma ^{\tilde \mu} \pa/\pa

1540: \tilde x^{\tilde \mu},\ee

1541:  with the self adjoint $\gamma $-matrices

1542: \bb \gamma ^0=\pp{0&-1_2\cr -1_2&0},\qq \gamma

1543: ^j= {\textstyle\frac{1}{i}}

1544: \pp{0&\sigma _j\cr -\sigma _j&0},\label{diracmat}\ee

1545: with the Pauli matrices

1546: \bb \sigma

1547: _1=\pp{0&1\cr 1&0},\qq\sigma _2=\pp{0&-i\cr

1548: i&0},\qq\sigma _3=\pp{1&0\cr 0&-1}. \label{pauli}\ee

1549:  We will construct the general curved Dirac operator

1550: later.

1551: 

1552: When the dimension

1553: of the manifold is even like in our case, the representation $\rho $

1554: is reducible. Its Hilbert space decomposes into left- and

1555: right-handed spaces,

1556: \bb\hh=\hh_L\op\hh_R,\qq\hh_L=\,\frac{1-\chi }{2}\,  \hh,\qq

1557: \hh_R=\,\frac{1+\chi }{2}\,  \hh.\ee

1558: Again we make use of the unitary chirality operator,

1559: \bb \chi =\gamma_5:=

1560: \gamma^0\gamma^1\gamma^2\gamma^3=\pp{

1561: -1_2&0\cr 0&1_2}.\ee

1562: We will also need the charge conjugation or real structure,

1563: the anti-unitary operator:

1564: \bb J=C:=\gamma ^0\gamma ^2\circ\,{\rm complex\

1565: conjugation}=\pp{0&-1&0&0\cr  1&0&0&0\cr

1566: 0&0&0&1\cr 0&0&-1&0}\,\circ\,{\rm c\ c},\ee

1567: that permutes particles and antiparticles.

1568: 

1569: The five items $(\aa,\hh,\dd,J,\chi )$ form what Connes calls an

1570: even, real spectral triple \cite{tresch}.\\

1571: $\aa$ is a real, associative involution algebra with unit,

1572: represented faithfully by bounded operators on the Hilbert space

1573: $\hh$.\\

1574: $\dd$ is an unbounded self adjoint operator on $\hh$.\\

1575: $J$ is an anti-unitary operator, \\

1576: $\chi $ a unitary one.

1577: 

1578: They enjoy the following properties:

1579: \begin{itemize}\item

1580: $J^2=-1$ in four dimensions (\,$J^2=1$ in zero dimensions).

1581: \item

1582: $[\rho(a),J\rho(\tilde a)J^{-1}]=0$

1583: for all $a,\tilde a\in\aa$.

1584: \item

1585: $\dd J=J\dd$, particles and antiparticles have the same dynamics.

1586: \item

1587: $[\dd,\rho(a)] $ is bounded

1588: for all $a\in\aa$ and $[[\dd,\rho(a)],J\rho(\tilde

1589: a)J^{-1}]=0$ for all $a,\tilde a\in\aa$. This property is

1590: called first order condition because in the calibrating

1591: example it states that the genuine Dirac operator is a

1592: first order differential operator.

1593: \item

1594: $\chi^2=1$ and $[\chi ,\rho (a)]=0$ for all $a\in\aa$. These

1595: properties allow the decomposition $\hh=\hh_L\op\hh_R$.

1596: \item

1597:  $J\chi=\chi J$.

1598: \item

1599: $\dd\chi=-\chi\dd$, chirality does not change under time

1600: evolution.

1601: \item

1602:    There are three more

1603: properties, that we do not spell out, orientability, which relates the

1604: chirality to the volume form, Poincar\'e duality and regularity,

1605: which states that our functions $a\in\aa$ are differentiable.

1606: \end{itemize}

1607: Connes promotes these properties to the axioms defining an even,

1608: real spectral triple. These axioms are justified by his \\

1609: {\bf Reconstruction theorem} (Connes 1996 \cite{grav}): Consider an

1610: (even) spectral triple $(\aa,\hh,\dd,J,(\chi ))$ whose algebra $\aa$ is

1611: commutative. Then here exists a compact, Riemannian spin manifold

1612: $M$ (of even dimensions), whose spectral triple $(\ccc^\infty (M),

1613: \lll^2(\sss),\ddd,C,(\gamma _5))$ coincides with $(\aa,\hh,\dd,J,(\chi ))$.

1614: 

1615: For details on this theorem and noncommutative geometry in

1616: general, I warmly recommend the Costa Rica book

1617: \cite{costarica}. Let us try to get a feeling of the {\it local}

1618: information contained in this theorem. Besides describing the

1619: dynamics of the spinor field $\psi $, the Dirac operator $\ddd$

1620: encodes the dimension of spacetime, its Riemannian metric, its

1621: differential forms and its integration, that is all the tools that we

1622: need to define a Yang-Mills-Higgs model. In Minkowskian

1623: signature, the square of the Dirac operator is the wave operator,

1624: which in 1+2 dimensions governs the dynamics of a drum. The

1625: deep question: `Can you hear the shape of a drum?' has been raised.

1626: This question concerns a global property of spacetime, the

1627: boundary. Can you reconstruct it from the spectrum of the wave

1628: operator?

1629: \begin{description}\item[The dimension of spacetime]

1630: is a local property.

1631: It can be retrieved from the asymptotic behaviour of the spectrum

1632: of the Dirac operator for large eigenvalues. Since

1633: $M$ is compact, the spectrum is discrete. Let us order the

1634: eigenvalues, $...\lambda _{n-1}\leq\lambda _n\leq\lambda

1635: _{n+1}...$ Then Weyl's spectral theorem states that the eigenvalues

1636: grow asymptotically as

1637: $n^{1/{\rm dim}M}$. To explore a local property of spacetime we

1638: only need the high energy part of the spectrum. This is in nice

1639: agreement with our intuition from quantum mechanics and

1640: motivates the name `spectral triple'.

1641: \item[The metric] can be

1642: reconstructed from the commutative spectral triple by Connes'

1643: distance formula (\ref{dist}) below. In the commutative case a point

1644: $x\in M$ is reconstructed as the pure state. The general definition of a

1645: pure state of course does not use the commutativity. A state $\delta  $ of

1646: the algebra $\aa$ is a linear form on $\aa$, that is normalized, $\delta

1647: (1)=1$, and positive, $\delta  (a^*a)\geq 0$ for all $a\in\aa$. A state

1648: is pure if it cannot be written as a linear combination of two states.

1649: For the calibrating example, there is a one-to-one correspondence

1650: between points $x\in M$ and pure states $\delta  _x$

1651:  defined by the Dirac distribution,

1652: $\delta  _x(a):=a(x)=\int_M\delta _x(y) a(y)\de^4 y$. The geodesic

1653: distance between two points $x$ and $y$ is reconstructed from the

1654: triple as:

1655: \bb {\rm sup}\left\{ |\delta _x(a)-\delta _y(a)|;\

1656: a\in\ccc^\infty(M)\ {\rm such \ that}\ ||[\ddd,\rho (a)]||\leq

1657: 1\right\} .\label{dist}\ee

1658: For the calibrating example, $[\ddd,\rho

1659: (a)]$ is a bounded operator. Indeed, $[\ddd,\rho (a)]\psi =i\gamma ^\mu

1660: \pa_\mu (a\psi )-i a\gamma ^\mu  \pa_\mu \psi =i\gamma ^\mu(

1661: \pa_\mu a)\psi $, and $\pa_\mu a$ is bounded as a differentiable

1662: function on a compact space.

1663: 

1664:  For a general spectral triple this

1665: operator is bounded by axiom. In any case,  the operator norm

1666: $||[\ddd,\rho (a)]||$ in the distance formula is finite.

1667: 

1668: Consider the circle, $M=S^1$, of circumference $2\pi $ with Dirac

1669: operator

1670: $\ddd=i\,\de/\de x$. A function $a\in \ccc^\infty(S^1)$ is

1671: represented faithfully on a wavefunction $\psi \in \lll^2(S^1)$ by

1672: pointwise multiplication,

1673: $(\rho (a)\psi )(x)=a(x)\psi (x)$. The commutator $[\ddd,\rho

1674: (a)]=i\rho (a')$ is familiar from quantum mechanics. Its operator

1675: norm is $ ||[\ddd,\rho (a)]||: =\sup_\psi |[\ddd,\rho

1676: (a)]\psi |/|\psi |=\sup_x|a'(x)|$, with $|\psi |^2=\int_0^{2\pi

1677: }\bar\psi (x)\psi (x)\,\de x$. Therefore, the distance between two

1678: points $x$ and $y$ on the circle is

1679: \bb\sup_a\{|a(x)-a(y)|;\,\sup_x|a'(x)|\leq 1\}=|x-y|.\ee

1680: 

1681: Note that Connes' distance

1682: formula continues to make sense for non-connected manifolds, like

1683: discrete spaces of dimension zero, i.e. collections of points.

1684: \item[Differential forms,] for example of degree one like

1685: $\de a$ for a function $a\in\aa$, are reconstructed as

1686: $(-i)[\ddd,\rho (a)]$. This is again motivated from quantum

1687: mechanics. Indeed in a 1+0 dimensional spacetime $\de a$ is just

1688: the time derivative of the `observable' $a$ and is associated with the

1689: commutator of the Hamilton operator with $a$.

1690: \end{description}

1691: Motivated from quantum mechanics, we define a noncommutative

1692: geometry by a real spectral triple with noncommutative algebra

1693: $\aa$.

1694: 

1695: \subsection{Spin groups}

1696: 

1697: Let us go back to quantum mechanics of spin and recall how a

1698: space rotation acts on a spin ${\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} $ particle. For

1699: this we need group homomorphisms between the rotation group

1700: $SO(3)$ and the probability preserving unitary group $SU(2)$. We

1701: construct first the group homomorphism

1702: \bb p:SU(2)&\longrightarrow&SO(3)\cr

1703: U&\longmapsto & p(U).\eee

1704:  With the help of the auxiliary function

1705: \bb f:\rr^3&\longrightarrow&su(2)\cr \cr

1706: \vec x=\pp{x^1\cr x^2\cr x^3}&\longmapsto&-

1707: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} ix^j\sigma _j \, ,\eee

1708: we define the rotation $p(U)$ by

1709: \bb p(U)\vec x:=f^{-1}(Uf(\vec x)U^{-1}).\ee

1710: The conjugation by the unitary $U$ will play an important role

1711: and we give it a special name, $i_U(w):=UwU^{-1}$, $i$ for inner.

1712: Since $i_{(-U)}=i_U$, the projection $p$ is two to one,

1713: Ker$(p)=\{\pm1\}$. Therefore the spin lift

1714: \bb L:SO(3)&\longrightarrow&SU(2)\cr

1715: R=\exp(\omega) &\longmapsto & \exp({\textstyle\frac{1}{8}}

1716: \omega ^{jk}[\sigma_j,\sigma _k]) \label{spi1} \ee

1717: is double-valued.

1718: It is a local group homomorphism and satisfies $p(L(R))=R$.

1719: Its double-valuedness is

1720: accessible to quantum mechanical experiments: neutrons

1721: have to be rotated through an angle of $720^{\circ}$  before

1722: interference patterns repeat \cite{neu}.

1723: 

1724:  \begin{figure}[h]

1725: \setlength{\unitlength}{1.0cm}

1726: \begin{picture}(20,3)(-1.1,0)

1727: \put(0,2.4){\parbox{2cm}{${\rm Aut}_\hh(\aa)$}}

1728: \put(1.8,2.4){\parbox{1cm}{$\hookleftarrow$}}

1729: \put(2.5,2.4){\parbox{4cm}{${\rm Diff}(M)\ltimes

1730: \,^MSpin(1,3)$}}

1731: \put(6.7,2.4){\parbox{1cm}{$\hookleftarrow$}}

1732: \put(7.4,2.4){\parbox{4cm}{$SO(1,3)\times

1733: Spin(1,3)$}}

1734: \put(11.5,2.4){\parbox{1cm}{$\hookleftarrow$}}

1735: \put(12.2,2.4){\parbox{3cm}{$SO(3)\times

1736: SU(2)$}}

1737: 

1738:  \put(0.1,0){\parbox{6mm}{${\rm Aut}(\aa)$}}

1739: \put(1.8,0){\parbox{6mm}{$\hookleftarrow$}}

1740: \put(3.6,0){\parbox{6mm}{${\rm Diff}(M)$}}

1741: \put(6.7,0){\parbox{6mm}{$\hookleftarrow$}}

1742: \put(8.5,0){\parbox{6mm}{$SO(1,3)$}}

1743: \put(11.5,0){\parbox{6mm}{$\hookleftarrow$}}

1744: \put(13.1,0){\parbox{6mm}{$SO(3)$}}

1745: 

1746: \put(0.3,1.4){\parbox{2cm}{\hskip -2mm p\

1747: \parbox{6mm}{

1748: \setlength{\unitlength}{0.4mm}

1749: \begin{picture}(20,10)

1750: \put(0,15){\vector(0,-1){30}}

1751: \put(15,-15){\vector(-1,4){8}}

1752: \put(15,-15){\vector(0,1){33}}

1753: \end{picture}} L }}

1754: 

1755: \put(3.7,1.4){\parbox{2cm}{\hskip -2mm p\

1756: \parbox{6mm}{

1757: \setlength{\unitlength}{0.4mm}

1758: \begin{picture}(20,10)

1759: \put(0,15){\vector(0,-1){30}}

1760: \put(15,-15){\vector(-1,4){8}}

1761: \put(15,-15){\vector(0,1){33}}

1762: \end{picture}} L }}

1763: 

1764: \put(8.8,1.4){\parbox{2cm}{\hskip -2mm p\

1765: \parbox{6mm}{

1766: \setlength{\unitlength}{0.4mm}

1767: \begin{picture}(20,10)

1768: \put(0,15){\vector(0,-1){30}}

1769: \put(15,-15){\vector(-1,4){8}}

1770: \put(15,-15){\vector(0,1){33}}

1771: \end{picture}} L }}

1772: 

1773: \put(13.1,1.4){\parbox{2cm}{\hskip -2mm p\

1774: \parbox{6mm}{

1775: \setlength{\unitlength}{0.4mm}

1776: \begin{picture}(20,10)

1777: \put(0,15){\vector(0,-1){30}}

1778: \put(15,-15){\vector(-1,4){8}}

1779: \put(15,-15){\vector(0,1){33}}

1780: \end{picture}} L }}

1781: \end{picture}

1782: 

1783: \caption{The nested spin lifts of Connes, Cartan, Dirac,

1784: and Pauli}

1785: \end{figure}

1786: 

1787: The lift $L$ was generalized by Dirac to the special relativistic

1788: setting, e.g. \cite{bd}, and by E. Cartan \cite{cartan} to the general

1789: relativistic setting. Connes \cite{bris} generalizes it to noncommutative

1790: geometry, see Figure 5. The transformations we need to lift are

1791: Lorentz transformations in special relativity, and general coordinate

1792: transformations in general relativity, i.e. our calibrating example. The

1793: latter transformations are the local elements of the diffeomorphism

1794: group Diff$(M)$. In the setting of noncommutative geometry, this group

1795: is the group of algebra automorphisms Aut$(\aa)$. Indeed, in the

1796: calibrating example we have Aut$(\aa)$=Diff$(M)$. In order to

1797: generalize the spin group to spectral triples, Connes defines the

1798: receptacle of the group of `lifted automorphisms',

1799: \bb{\rm Aut}_\hh(\aa):=\{U\in {\rm End}(\hh),\

1800: UU^* =U^*U=1,\ UJ=J U,\ U\chi =\chi U,\

1801: i_U\in{\rm Aut}(\rho (\aa))\}.\ee

1802: The first three properties

1803: say that a lifted automorphism $U$ preserves probability,

1804: charge conjugation, and chirality. The

1805: fourth, called {\it covariance property}, allows to

1806: define the projection

1807: $p:\ {\rm Aut}_\hh(\aa)\longrightarrow {\rm

1808: Aut}(\aa)$ by

1809: \bb p(U)=\rho ^{-1}i_U\rho \ee

1810: We will see that the covariance property will protect the locality of

1811: field theory. For the calibrating example of a four dimensional

1812: spacetime, a local calculation, i.e. in a coordinate patch, that

1813: we still denote by $M$, yields the semi-direct product (cf

1814: Appendix) of diffeomorphisms with local or gauged spin

1815: transformations,

1816: ${\rm Aut}_{\lll^2(\sss)}(\ccc^\infty (M))={\rm

1817: Diff}(M)\ltimes \,^MSpin(4)$. We say receptacle because

1818: already in six dimensions,

1819: ${\rm Aut}_{\lll^2(\sss)}(\ccc^\infty (M))$ is larger

1820: than ${\rm Diff}(M)\ltimes \,^MSpin(6)$.

1821: However we can use the lift $L$ with

1822: $p(L(\sigma ))=\sigma   $, $\sigma  \in$Aut$(\aa)$ to correctly

1823: identify the spin group in any dimension of $M$. Indeed we will

1824: see that the spin group is the image of the spin lift

1825: $L($Aut$(\aa))$, in general a proper subgroup of the receptacle

1826: ${\rm Aut}_\hh(\aa)$.

1827: 

1828: Let $\sigma  $ be a diffeomorphism close to the identity. We

1829: interpret

1830: $\sigma  $ as coordinate transformation, all our

1831: calculations will be local, $M$ standing for one chart,

1832: on which the coordinate systems $\tilde x^{\tilde\mu } $ and $

1833: x^{\mu }=(\sigma   (\tilde x))^{\mu }$ are

1834: defined. We will work out the local expression of a lift

1835: of $\sigma $ to the Hilbert space of spinors. This lift

1836: $U=L(\sigma )$ will depend on the metric and on the

1837: initial coordinate system $\tilde x^{\tilde\mu }$.

1838: 

1839: In a first step, we construct a group homomorphism

1840: $\Lambda:{\rm Diff}(M)\rightarrow {\rm

1841: Diff}(M)\ltimes\,^MSO(4)$ into the group of local `Lorentz'

1842: transformations, i.e. the group of differentiable functions from

1843: spacetime into

1844: $SO(4)$ with pointwise multiplication. Let

1845: ${(\tilde e^{-1}(\tilde x))^{\tilde \mu} }_a={(\tilde

1846: g^{-1/2}(\tilde x))^{\tilde \mu} }_a$ be the inverse of the square

1847: root of the positive matrix $\tilde g$ of the metric with respect to the

1848: initial coordinate system

1849: $\tilde x^{\tilde \mu} $. Then the four vector fields $\tilde e_a$,

1850: $a=0,1,2,3$, defined by

1851: \bb \tilde e_a:= {(\tilde e^{-1})^{\tilde \mu} }_a\,\frac{\pa}{\pa

1852: \tilde x^{\tilde \mu }}\,

1853: \ee

1854: give

1855:  an orthonormal frame of the tangent bundle.

1856: This frame defines a complete gauge fixing of the

1857: Lorentz gauge group $^MSO(4)$

1858: because it is the only orthonormal frame to have

1859: symmetric coefficients ${(\tilde e^{-1})^{\tilde \mu} }_a$ with

1860: respect to the coordinate system $\tilde x^{\tilde \mu} $. We call

1861: this gauge the symmetric gauge for the coordinates

1862: $\tilde x^{\tilde \mu} .$ Now let us perform a local change of

1863: coordinates,

1864: $ x =\sigma  (\tilde x)$. The holonomic frame with

1865: respect to the new coordinates is related to the former

1866: holonomic one by the inverse Jacobian matrix of

1867: $\sigma  $

1868: \bb \,\frac{\pa}{\pa x^{ \mu }}\,

1869: =\,\frac{\pa \tilde x^{\tilde \mu }}{\pa x^{\mu }}\,

1870: \,\frac{\pa}{\pa\tilde  x^{\tilde  \mu }}\,=\hbox{${\left(

1871: \jj^{-1}\right) ^{\tilde \mu }}$}_{\mu }\,\frac{\pa}{\pa\tilde

1872: x^{\tilde \mu }},&& {\left(

1873: \jj^{-1}( x)\right) ^{\tilde \mu }}_{\mu

1874: }=\,\frac{\pa \tilde x^{\tilde \mu }}{\pa x^{

1875: \mu }}\,.\ee

1876: The matrix $g$ of the metric  with respect

1877: to the new coordinates reads,

1878: \bb  g_{\mu \nu }( x):=

1879: g\!\!\left.\left(\,\frac{\pa}{\pa x^{ \mu

1880: }}\,,\,\frac{\pa}{\pa x^{ \nu }}\,

1881: \right)\right|_{ x} =\left( \jj^{-1T}( x)

1882: \tilde g(\sigma  ^{-1}( x))\jj^{-1}( x)

1883: \right) _{\mu \nu },\ee

1884:  and the symmetric

1885: gauge for the new coordinates $ x$ is the new

1886: orthonormal frame

1887: \bb  e_b=\hbox{$ e^{-1\mu

1888: }$}_b\,\frac{\pa  }{\pa x^{ \mu

1889: }}\,=\hbox{$ g^{-1/2\,\mu

1890: }$}_b{\jj^{-1\,\tilde \mu }}_{ \mu

1891: }\,\frac{\pa}{\pa \tilde x^{\tilde \mu }}\, ={\left(

1892: \jj^{-1}\sqrt{\jj \tilde g^{-1}\jj^T}\right) ^{\tilde \mu}

1893: }_b\,\frac{\pa}{\pa\tilde  x^{\tilde

1894: \mu}}\,.\ee

1895: New and old orthonormal frames are

1896: related by a Lorentz transformation $\Lambda $,

1897: $ e_b={\Lambda ^{-1\,a}}_b\tilde e_a$, with

1898: \bb\left.\Lambda(\sigma )\right|_{\tilde x}

1899: =\left.\sqrt{\jj^{-1T}\tilde g\jj^{-1}}\right|_{\sigma

1900: (\tilde x)}\left.\jj

1901: \right|_{\tilde x}\left.\sqrt{\tilde g^{-1}}\right|_{\tilde

1902: x}=\sqrt{ g}\jj\sqrt{\tilde g^{-1}}.\ee

1903: 

1904: If $M$ is flat and $\tilde x^{\tilde \mu} $ are `inertial' coordinates,

1905: i.e. $\tilde g_{\tilde \mu \tilde \nu }={\delta ^{\tilde

1906: \mu}}_{\tilde \nu} $, and

1907: $\sigma  $ is a local isometry then

1908: $\jj(\tilde x)\in SO(4)$ for all

1909: $\tilde x$ and

1910: $\Lambda(\sigma  ) =\jj$. In special relativity,

1911: therefore, the symmetric gauge ties together Lorentz

1912: transformations in spacetime with Lorentz

1913: transformations in the tangent spaces.

1914: 

1915: In general, if the coordinate transformation $\sigma

1916: $ is close to the identity, so is its Lorentz transformation

1917: $\Lambda(\sigma  )$ and it can be lifted to the spin

1918: group,

1919: \bb S: SO(4)&\longrightarrow& Spin(4)\cr

1920: \Lambda =\exp\omega &\longmapsto&\exp \left[

1921: {\textstyle\frac{1}{4}} \omega _{ab}

1922: \gamma ^{ab}\right] \label{spin}\ee with $\omega

1923: =-\omega ^T\,\in so(4)$ and $\gamma

1924: ^{ab}:={\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} [\gamma ^a,\gamma ^b]$. With our

1925: choice (\ref{diracmat}) for the $\gamma $ matrices, we

1926: have

1927: \bb \gamma ^{0j}=i\pp{-\sigma _j&0\cr 0&\sigma _j},\qq

1928: \gamma ^{jk}=i\epsilon ^{jk\ell}

1929: \pp{\sigma _\ell&0\cr 0&\sigma _\ell},\qq j,k=1,2,3,\qq

1930: \epsilon ^{123}=1.\ee

1931: We can write the local

1932: expression \cite{lift} of the lift

1933:  $L:{\rm Diff}(M)\rightarrow {\rm Diff}(M)\ltimes \,^MSpin(4)$,

1934: \bb \left( L(\sigma  )\psi \right) (

1935: x)=\left.S\left(\Lambda (\sigma

1936: )\right)\right|_{\sigma  ^{-1}( x)}\psi

1937: ({\sigma ^{-1}( x)})\label{spi2}.\ee

1938: $L$ is a double-valued group homomorphism. For

1939: any $\sigma  $ close to the identity,

1940: $L(\sigma  )$ is unitary, commutes with charge

1941: conjugation and chirality, satisfies the covariance

1942: property, and $p(L(\sigma  ))=\sigma  $. Therefore,

1943: we have locally

1944: \bb L({\rm Diff}(M))\ \subset\  {\rm

1945: Diff}(M)\ltimes\,^MSpin(4)={\rm Aut}_{\lll^2(\sss)}(\ccc^\infty

1946: (M)).\ee

1947: The symmetric

1948: gauge is a complete gauge fixing and this reduction follows

1949: Einstein's spirit in the sense that the only arbitrary choice is the

1950: one of the initial coordinate system

1951: $\tilde x^{\tilde \mu} $ as will be illustrated in the next section.

1952: Our computations are deliberately local. The global

1953: picture can be found in reference \cite{bourg}.

1954: 

1955: \section{The spectral action}

1956: 

1957: \subsection{Repeating Einstein's derivation in the commutative

1958: case}

1959: 

1960: We are ready to parallel Einstein's derivation of general relativity

1961: in Connes' language of spectral triples. The associative algebra

1962: $\ccc^\infty(M)$ is commutative, but this property will never be

1963: used. As a by-product, the lift

1964: $L$ will reconcile Einstein's and Cartan's formulations of general

1965: relativity and it will  yield a self contained introduction to Dirac's

1966: equation in a gravitational field accessible to particle physicists.

1967: For a comparison of Einstein's and Cartan's  formulations of general

1968: relativity see for

1969: example

1970: \cite{gs}.

1971: 

1972: \subsubsection{First stroke: kinematics}

1973: 

1974: Instead of a point-particle, Connes takes as matter a field, the free,

1975: massless Dirac particle

1976: $\psi (\tilde x)$ in the flat spacetime of special relativity. In

1977: inertial coordinates $\tilde x^{\tilde \mu} $, its dynamics is given

1978: by the Dirac equation,

1979: \bb \tilde \ddd\psi =i{\delta ^{\tilde \mu }}_a\gamma

1980: ^a{\,\frac{\pa}{\pa\tilde  x^{\tilde \mu }}}\, \psi =0.\ee

1981: We have written ${\delta ^{\tilde \mu }}_a\gamma

1982: ^a$ instead of $\gamma^{\tilde \mu}$ to stress that the

1983: $\gamma$ matrices are $\tilde x$-independent. This Dirac

1984: equation is covariant under Lorentz transformations.

1985: Indeed if

1986: $\sigma  $ is a local isometry then

1987: \bb L(\sigma  )\tilde \ddd L(\sigma  )^{-1}=\ddd=

1988: i{\delta ^{\mu} }_a\gamma

1989: ^a{\frac{\pa}{\pa  x^{\mu} }}.\ee

1990: To prove this special relativistic covariance, one needs

1991: the identity

1992: $S(\Lambda )\gamma ^a S(\Lambda )^{-1}={\Lambda

1993: ^{-1\,a}}_b\gamma ^b$ for Lorentz transformations

1994: $\Lambda \in SO(4)$ close to the identity. Take a

1995: general coordinate transformation

1996: $\sigma  $ close to the identity. Now comes a long, but

1997: straight-forward calculation. It is a useful exercise requiring only

1998: matrix multiplication and standard calculus, Leibniz and chain

1999: rules. Its result is the Dirac operator in curved coordinates,

2000: \bb L(\sigma  )\tilde \ddd L(\sigma  )^{-1}=\ddd=

2001: i\hbox{$ e^{-1\,\mu}$}_a\gamma^a\left[

2002: \,\frac{\pa}{\pa x^{ \mu}}\,+s(\omega

2003: _{\mu})\right],\label{2}\ee

2004: where

2005: $ e^{-1}=\sqrt{\jj \jj^T}$ is a symmetric matrix,

2006: \bb s: so(4)&\longrightarrow& spin(4)\cr

2007: \omega &\longmapsto&

2008: {\textstyle\frac{1}{4}} \omega _{ab}

2009: \gamma ^{ab} \ee

2010: is the Lie algebra isomorphism corresponding to the

2011: lift (\ref{spin}) and

2012: \bb

2013: \omega_{\mu}(x)=\left.\Lambda\right|_{\sigma ^{-1}(x)}

2014: \pa_{\mu}

2015: \left.\Lambda^{-1}\right|_{x}.\ee

2016: The `spin connection' $ \omega$ is the gauge transform of

2017: the Levi-Civita connection $ \Gamma$, the latter is expressed

2018: with respect to the holonomic frame $\pa_{\mu}$, the former is

2019: written with respect to the orthonormal frame $ e_a=\hbox{$

2020: e^{-1\,\mu}$}_a\pa_{\mu}$. The gauge transformation passing

2021: between them is $e\in\,^MGL_4$,

2022: \bb \omega =e\Gamma e^{-1}+e\de e^{-1}.\ee

2023: 

2024:  We recover

2025:  the well known explicit expression

2026: \bb  {\omega^a}_{b \mu}( e)=

2027: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\left[( \pa_{

2028: \beta}\hbox{$ e^a$}_{ \mu})-

2029: ( \pa_{

2030: \mu}\hbox{$ e^a$}_{ \beta})+

2031: \hbox{$ e^m$}_{ \mu}(

2032: \pa_{\beta  }

2033: \hbox{$ e^m$}_{

2034: \alpha})\hbox{$ e^{-1\,\alpha}$}_a

2035: \right]\hbox{$ e^{-1\,

2036: \beta}$}_b\ -\ [a \leftrightarrow b]\ee

2037:  of the spin

2038: connection in terms of the first derivatives of

2039: $\hbox{$ e^a$}_{ \mu}= {\sqrt{

2040: g}^a}_{

2041: \mu}.$ Again the spin connection has zero curvature

2042: and the equivalence principle relaxes this

2043: constraint. But now equation (\ref{2}) has an

2044: advantage over its analogue (\ref{1}). Thanks to

2045: Connes' distance formula (\ref{dist}), the metric can

2046: be read explicitly in (\ref{2}) from the matrix of

2047: functions

2048: $\hbox{$ e^{-1\,\mu}$}_a$, while in

2049: (\ref{1}) first derivatives of the metric are

2050: present. We are used to this nuance from

2051: electro-magnetism, where the classical particle feels

2052: the force while the quantum particle feels the

2053: potential. In Einstein's approach, the zero connection

2054: fluctuates, in Connes' approach, the flat metric

2055: fluctuates. This means that the constraint $

2056: e^{-1}=\sqrt{\jj

2057: \jj^T}$ is relaxed and $ e^{-1} $ now is an

2058: arbitrary symmetric matrix depending smoothly

2059: on $ x$.

2060: 

2061: Let us mention two experiments with neutrons confirming the

2062: `minimal coupling' of the Dirac operator to curved coordinates,

2063: equation (\ref{2}). The first takes place in flat spacetime. The

2064: neutron interferometer is mounted on a loud speaker and shaken

2065: periodically \cite{bonse}. The resulting pseudo forces coded in the

2066: spin connection do  shift  the interference patterns observed. The

2067: second experiment takes place in a true gravitational field in

2068: which the neutron interferometer is placed \cite{cow}. Here shifts

2069: of the interference patterns are observed that do depend on the

2070: gravitational {\it potential}, ${e^a}_\mu $ in equation (\ref{2}).

2071: 

2072: \subsubsection{Second stroke: dynamics}

2073: 

2074:  The second stroke, the covariant dynamics

2075: for the new class of Dirac operators $ \ddd$ is

2076: due to Chamseddine \& Connes \cite{cc}. It is the

2077: celebrated spectral action.

2078:  The beauty of their

2079: approach to general relativity is that it works

2080: precisely because the Dirac operator $ \ddd$

2081: plays two roles simultaneously, it defines the

2082: dynamics of matter and the kinematics of gravity. For

2083: a discussion of the transformation passing from the metric to the

2084: Dirac operator I recommend the article \cite{lr} by Landi

2085: \& Rovelli.

2086: 

2087: The starting point of Chamseddine \& Connes is the

2088: simple remark that the spectrum of the Dirac operator

2089: is invariant under diffeomorphisms interpreted as

2090: general coordinate transformations. From

2091: $ \ddd\chi=-\chi \ddd$ we know that the

2092: spectrum of

2093: $ \ddd$ is even. Indeed, for every eigenvector $\psi $ of $\ddd$ with

2094: eigenvalue $E$, $\chi \psi $ is eigenvector with eigenvalue $-E$. We

2095: may therefore consider only the spectrum of the positive operator $

2096: \ddd^2/\Lambda^2$ where we have divided by a fixed

2097: arbitrary energy scale to make the spectrum

2098: dimensionless. If it was not divergent the trace $\t

2099:  \ddd^2/\Lambda^2$ would be a general

2100: relativistic action functional. To make it convergent,

2101: take a differentiable function

2102: $f:\rr_+\rightarrow\rr_+$ of sufficiently fast

2103: decrease such that the action

2104: \bb S_{CC}:=\t f( \ddd^2/\Lambda^2)\ee

2105: converges. It is still a diffeomorphism invariant

2106: action. The following theorem, also known as heat kernel expansion, is

2107: a local version of an index theorem \cite{heat}, that as explained in

2108: Jean Zinn-Justin's lectures \cite{zinn} is intimately related to Feynman

2109: graphs with one fermionic loop.\\

2110:  {\bf Theorem:} Asymptotically for high

2111: energies, the spectral action is

2112: \bb S_{CC}=

2113: \int_M

2114: [{\textstyle\frac{2\Lambda_c}{16\pi G}}-{\textstyle\frac{1}{16\pi

2115: G}}R +a(5\,R^2-8\,{\rm Ricci}^2-7\,{\rm

2116: Riemann}^2)]\,\de V \,+\,

2117: O(\Lambda^{-2}), \label{heat}\ee

2118: where the cosmological constant

2119: is $\Lambda_c=

2120: {\textstyle\frac{6f_0}{f_2}}\Lambda^2$, Newton's constant is

2121: $G={\textstyle\frac{3\pi }{f_2}}\Lambda^{-2}$ and

2122: $a={\textstyle\frac{f_4}{5760\pi^2}}$. On the right-hand

2123: side of the theorem we have omitted surface terms, that is

2124: terms that do not contribute to the Euler-Lagrange equations.

2125:  The

2126: Chamseddine-Connes action is universal in the sense

2127: that the `cut off' function $f$ only enters through its

2128: first three `moments', $f_0:=\int_0^\infty uf(u)\de u$,

2129: $f_2:=\int_0^\infty f(u)\de u$ and $f_4=f(0)$.

2130: 

2131: If we take for $f$ a differentiable approximation of the

2132: characteristic function of the unit interval, $f_0=1/2$,

2133: $f_2=f_4=1$, then the spectral action just counts the number of

2134: eigenvalues of the Dirac operator whose absolute values are below

2135: the `cut off' $\Lambda $. In four dimensions, the minimax example

2136:  is  the flat

2137:  4-torus with all circumferences measuring $2\pi$.

2138:  Denote by $\psi_B(x)$, $B=1, 2, 3, 4$,

2139: the four components of the spinor. The Dirac

2140: operator is

2141: \bb \ddd = \pmatrix{

2142: 0&0&-i\pa_0+\pa_3&\pa_1-i\pa_2\cr

2143: 0&0&\pa_1+i\pa_2&-i\pa_0-\pa_3\cr

2144: -i\pa_0-\pa_3&-\pa_1+i\pa_2&0&0\cr

2145: -\pa_1-i\pa_2&-i\pa_0+\pa_3&0&0

2146:  }

2147: .\ee

2148: After a Fourier transform

2149: \bb \psi_B(x)\ =:\ \sum_{j_0,...,j_3\in\zz}

2150: \hat\psi

2151: _B(j_0,...,j_3)\exp(-ij_\mu x^\mu),\quad B=1,2,3,4\ee

2152: the eigenvalue equation $\ddd\psi=\lambda\psi$ reads

2153: \bb \pmatrix{

2154: 0&0&-j_0-ij_3&-ij_1-j_2\cr

2155: 0&0&-ij_1+j_2&-j_0+ij_3\cr

2156: -j_0+ij_3&ij_1+j_2&0&0\cr

2157: ij_1-j_2&-j_0-ij_3&0&0

2158: }

2159: \pmatrix{\hat\psi_1\cr \hat\psi_2\cr \hat\psi_3\cr

2160: \hat\psi_4}\ =\

2161: \lambda

2162: \pmatrix{\hat\psi_1\cr \hat\psi_2\cr \hat\psi_3\cr

2163: \hat\psi_4}. \ee

2164: Its characteristic equation is

2165: $ \lb \lambda^2-(j_0^2+j_1^2+j_2^2+j_3^2)\rb^2=0$

2166: and for fixed $j_\mu$, each eigenvalue

2167: $ \lambda=\pm\sqrt{j_0^2+j_1^2+j_2^2+j_3^2}$

2168: has multiplicity two. Therefore asymptotically for large

2169: $\Lambda$ there are

2170: $ 4B_4\Lambda^4$ eigenvalues (counted with their

2171: multiplicity) whose absolute values are smaller than

2172: $\Lambda$.

2173: $ B_4=\pi^2/2$

2174: denotes the volume of the unit ball

2175: in $\rr^4$. En passant, we check Weyl's spectral theorem.

2176: Let us arrange the absolute values of the

2177: eigenvalues in an increasing

2178: sequence and number them by naturals $n$, taking due account of

2179: their multiplicities. For large $n$, we have

2180: \bb |\lambda_n|\approx

2181: \left({n\over{2\pi^2}}\right)^{1/4}.\ee

2182: The  exponent is

2183: indeed the inverse dimension.

2184:  To check the heat kernel expansion,

2185: we compute the right-hand side of equation (\ref{heat}):

2186: \bb S_{CC}=\int_M\,\frac{\Lambda _c}{8\pi G}\,\de V =(2\pi

2187: )^4\,{\textstyle\frac{f_0}{4\pi^2}}\Lambda^4

2188: =2\pi ^2\Lambda ^4,\ee

2189: which agrees with the asymptotic count of eigenvalues, $

2190: 4B_4\Lambda^4$. This example was the flat torus. Curvature

2191:  will modify the spectrum and this modification can be used

2192: to measure the curvature =

2193: gravitational field,  exactly as the Zeemann or Stark effect

2194: measures the electro-magnetic field by observing how it

2195: modifies the spectral lines of an atom.

2196: 

2197: In the spectral action, we find the Einstein-Hilbert action, which is

2198: linear in curvature. In addition, the spectral action contains terms

2199: quadratic in the curvature. These terms can safely be

2200: neglected in weak gravitational fields like in our solar system.

2201: In homogeneous, isotropic cosmologies, these terms are a

2202: surface term and do not modify Einstein's equation. Nevertheless

2203: the quadratic terms render the (Euclidean) Chamseddine-Connes

2204: action positive. Therefore this action has minima. For instance, the

2205: 4-sphere with a radius of

2206: the order of

2207:  the Planck length $\sqrt G$ is a minimum, a `ground state'.

2208: This minimum breaks the diffeomorphism group

2209: spontaneously \cite{bris} down to the isometry group $SO(5)$.

2210: The little group is the isometry group, consisting of those lifted

2211: automorphisms that commute with the Dirac operator

2212: $ \ddd$. Let us anticipate that the spontaneous

2213: symmetry breaking via the Higgs mechanism will be a

2214: mirage of this gravitational break down.

2215: Physically this ground state seems to regularize the initial

2216: cosmological singularity with its ultra strong gravitational field in

2217: the same way in which quantum mechanics regularizes the Coulomb

2218: singularity of the hydrogen atom.

2219: 

2220: We close this subsection with a technical remark. We noticed

2221: that the matrix $\hbox{$

2222: e^{-1\,\mu}$}_a$ in equation (\ref{2}) is

2223: symmetric. A general, not necessarily symmetric

2224: matrix

2225: $\hbox{$\hat e^{-1\,\mu}$}_a$ can be obtained

2226: from a general Lorentz transformation

2227: $\Lambda\in\,^MSO(4)$:

2228: \bb \hbox{$ e^{-1\,\mu}$}_a {\Lambda^a}_b

2229: =\hbox{$\hat e^{-1\,\mu}$}_b,\ee

2230: which is nothing but the polar decomposition of the

2231: matrix $\hat e^{-1}$. These transformations are the gauge

2232: transformations of general relativity in Cartan's formulation.

2233: They are invisible in Einstein's formulation because of the

2234: complete (symmetric) gauge fixing coming from the initial

2235: coordinate system $\tilde x^{\tilde \mu }$.

2236: 

2237: \subsection{Almost commutative geometry}

2238: 

2239: We are eager to see the spectral action in a noncommutative

2240: example. Technically the simplest noncommutative examples are

2241: almost commutative. To construct the latter, we need a natural

2242: property of spectral triples, commutative or not: The tensor

2243: product of two even spectral triples is an even spectral triple. If

2244: both are commutative, i.e. describing two manifolds, then their

2245: tensor product simply describes the direct product of the two

2246: manifolds.

2247: 

2248: Let $(\aa_i,\hh_i,\dd_i,

2249: J_i,\chi _i)$, $i=1,2$ be two even, real spectral triples

2250: of even dimensions

2251: $d_1$ and

2252: $d_2$. Their tensor product is the triple

2253: $(\aa_t,\hh_t,\dd_t,J_t,\chi_t)$ of dimension $d_1+d_2$ defined by

2254: \bb &&\aa_t=\aa_1\ot\aa_2,\qq

2255: \hh_t=\hh_1\ot\hh_2,\cr

2256: &&\dd_t=\dd_1\ot 1_2\ +\ \chi _1\ot\dd_2,\cr

2257: &&J_t=J_1\ot J_2,\qq\chi _t=\chi _1\ot\chi _2.\eee

2258: The other obvious choice for the Dirac operator,

2259: $\dd_1\ot\chi _2\ +\ 1_1\ot\dd_2$, is unitarily

2260: equivalent to the first one. By definition, an almost commutative

2261: geometry is a tensor product of two spectral triples, the first triple

2262: is a 4-dimensional spacetime, the calibrating example,

2263: \bb\left(

2264: \ccc^\infty(M),\lll^2(\sss),\ddd,C,\gamma_5\right),

2265: \ee

2266: and the second is 0-dimensional. In accordance with Weyl's spectral

2267: theorem, a 0-dimensional spectral triple has a finite dimensional

2268: algebra and a finite dimensional Hilbert space. We will  label

2269: the second triple by the subscript $\cdot_f$ (for finite) rather

2270: than by $\cdot_2$. The origin of the word almost commutative is

2271: clear: we have a tensor product of an infinite dimensional

2272: commutative algebra with a finite dimensional, possibly

2273: noncommutative algebra.

2274: 

2275: This tensor product is, in fact, already familiar to you from the

2276: quantum mechanics of spin, whose Hilbert space is the infinite

2277: dimensional Hilbert space of square integrable functions on

2278: configuration space tensorized with the 2-dimensional Hilbert

2279: space

2280: $\cc^2$ on which acts the noncommutative algebra of spin

2281: observables. It is the algebra $\hhh$ of quaternions, $2\times 2$

2282: complex matrices of the form $\pp{x&-\bar y\cr y&\bar x}\

2283: x,y\in\cc$. A basis of

2284: $\hhh$ is given by $\{1_2,i\sigma _1,i\sigma

2285: _2,i\sigma _3\}$, the identity matrix and the three Pauli

2286: matrices (\ref{pauli}) times $i$.  The group of unitaries of $\hhh$

2287: is

2288: $SU(2)$, the spin cover of the rotation group, the group of

2289: automorphisms of $\hhh$ is $SU(2)/\zz_2$, the rotation

2290: group.

2291: 

2292:  A commutative 0-dimensional or finite spectral triple is just a

2293: collection of points, for examples see \cite{ikm}. The simplest

2294: example is the two-point space,

2295: \bb\aa_f= \cc_L\op\cc_R\owns

2296: (a_L,a_R),\qq

2297: \hh_f=\cc^4,\qq

2298: \rho_f(a_L,a_R)=\pp{a_L&0&0&0\cr

2299: 0&a_R&0&0\cr

2300: 0&0&\bar a_R&0\cr

2301: 0&0&0&\bar a_R},\ee

2302: \bb\dd_f =\pp{0&m&0&0\cr \bar m &0&0&0\cr

2303: 0&0&0&\bar m\cr0&0&m&0

2304: },\ m\in\cc,\qq

2305:  J_f=\pp{0&1_2\cr

2306: 1_2&0}\circ {\rm c\ c},\qq

2307: \chi _f=\pp{-1&0&0&0\cr 0&1&0&0\cr 0&0&-1&0\cr

2308: 0&0&0&1}.\ee

2309: The algebra has two points = pure states, $\delta _L$ and $\delta

2310: _R$, $\delta _L(a_L,a_R)=a_L$.  By Connes' formula (\ref{dist}), the

2311: distance between the two points is $1/|m|$. On the other hand

2312: $\dd_t=\ddd\ot1_4\ +\

2313: \gamma_5\ot\dd_f$ is precisely the free massive

2314: Euclidean Dirac operator. It describes one Dirac spinor of mass

2315: $|m|$ together with its antiparticle.

2316:  The tensor product of the calibrating example

2317: and the two point space is the two-sheeted universe,

2318: two identical spacetimes at constant distance. It was the first

2319: example in noncommutative geometry to exhibit spontaneous

2320: symmetry breaking

2321: \cite{dkm, ccl}.

2322: 

2323: One of the major advantages of the algebraic

2324: description of space in terms of a spectral triple, commutative or

2325: not, is that continuous and discrete spaces are included in the same

2326: picture. We can view almost commutative geometries

2327: as Kaluza-Klein models \cite{kk} whose fifth dimension is

2328: discrete. Therefore we will also call the finite spectral

2329: triple `internal space'. In noncommutative geometry, 1-forms are

2330: naturally defined on discrete spaces where they play the role of

2331: connections. In almost commutative geometry, these discrete,

2332: internal connections will turn out to be the Higgs scalars

2333: responsible for spontaneous symmetry breaking.

2334: 

2335: Almost commutative geometry is an ideal play-ground for the

2336: physicist with low culture in mathematics that I am.

2337: Indeed Connes' reconstruction theorem immediately reduces the

2338: infinite dimensional, commutative part to Riemannian geometry

2339: and we are left with the internal space, which is accessible to

2340: anybody mastering matrix multiplication. In particular, we

2341: can easily make precise the last three axioms of spectral triples:

2342: orientability, Poincar\'e duality and regularity. In the finite

2343: dimensional case -- let us drop the $\cdot_f$ from now on --

2344: orientability means that the chirality can be written as a finite

2345: sum,

2346: \bb \chi = \sum_j \rho (a_j)J\rho (\tilde a_j)J^{-1},\qq a_j,\tilde

2347: a_j\in\aa.\ee

2348: The Poincar\'e duality says that the

2349: intersection form

2350: \bb \cap_{ij}:=\t

2351: \left[\chi\,\rho(p_i)\,J\rho(p_j)J^{-1}

2352: \right]\ee

2353:  must be non-degenerate, where the $p_j$ are a set of

2354: minimal projectors of $\aa$. Finally, there is the regularity

2355: condition. In the calibrating example, it ensures that the algebra

2356: elements, the functions on spacetime $M$, are not only continuous

2357: but differentiable. This condition is of course

2358: empty for  finite spectral triples.

2359: 

2360:  Let us come back to our finite, commutative

2361: example.  The two-point space is orientable, $\chi =\rho

2362: (-1,1)J\rho (-1,1)J^{-1}$. It also

2363: satisfies Poincar\'e duality, there are two minimal

2364: projectors, $p_1=(1,0)$, $p_2=(0,1)$, and the intersection form is

2365: $\cap=\pp{0&-1\cr -1&2}$.

2366: 

2367: \subsection{The minimax example}

2368: 

2369: It is time for a noncommutative internal space, a mild

2370: variation of the two point space:

2371: \bb\aa= \hhh\op\cc\owns

2372: (a,b),\qq

2373: \hh=\cc^6,\qq

2374: \rho(a,b)=\pp

2375: {a&0&0&0\cr

2376: 0&\bar b&0&0\cr

2377: 0&0& b1_2&0\cr

2378: 0&0&0&b},\ee

2379: \bb\tilde \dd =\pp{0&\mm&0&0\cr \mm^* &0&0&0\cr

2380: 0&0&0&\bar \mm\cr0&0&\bar\mm^*&0

2381: },\qq \mm=\pp{0\cr m},\qq m\in\cc,\ee\bb

2382:  J=\pp{0&1_3\cr

2383: 1_3&0}\circ {\rm c\ c},\qq

2384: \chi =\pp{-1_2&0&0&0\cr 0&1&0&0\cr 0&0&-1_2&0\cr

2385: 0&0&0&1}.\ee

2386: The unit is $(1_2,1)$ and the involution is $(a,b)^*=(a^*,\bar b),$

2387: where $a^*$ is the Hermitean conjugate of the quaternion $a$.

2388: The  Hilbert space now contains one massless,

2389: left-handed Weyl spinor and one Dirac spinor of mass $|m|$ and

2390: $\mm$ is the fermionic mass matrix. We

2391: denote the canonical basis of $\cc^6$ symbolically by $(\nu

2392: ,e)_L,e_R,(\nu^c ,e^c)_L,e^c_R$. The spectral triple still describes

2393: two points,

2394: $\delta _L(a,b)={\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}

2395: \t a$ and

2396: $\delta _R(a,b)=b$ separated by a distance $1/|m|$. There are still

2397: two minimal projectors, $p_1=(1_2,0)$, $p_2=(0,1)$ and the

2398: intersection form $\cap=\pp{0&-2\cr -2&2}$ is invertible.

2399: 

2400: Our next task is to lift the automorphisms to the Hilbert space and

2401: fluctuate the `flat' metric $\tilde \dd$. All automorphisms of the

2402: quaternions are inner, the complex numbers considered as

2403: 2-dimensional real algebra only have one non-trivial

2404: automorphism, the complex conjugation. It is disconnected from

2405: the identity and we may neglect it. Then

2406: \bb {\rm Aut}(\aa)=SU(2)/\zz_2\owns \sigma _{\pm u},\qq

2407: \sigma _{\pm u}(a,b)=(uau^{-1},b).\ee

2408: The receptacle group, subgroup of $U(6)$ is readily calculated,

2409: \bb {\rm Aut}_\hh(\aa)=U(2)\times U(1)\owns U=

2410: \pp{U_2&0&0&0\cr 0&U_1&0&0\cr 0&0&\bar U_2&0\cr 0&0&0&\bar

2411: U_1},\qq U_2\in U(2),\ U_1\in U(1).\ee

2412: The covariance property is fulfilled, $i_U\rho (a,b)=\rho

2413: (i_{U_2}a,b)$ and the projection, $p(U)=\\ \pm (\det

2414: U_2)^{-1/2}\,U_2$, has kernel $\zz_2$. The lift,

2415: \bb L(\pm u)=\rho (\pm u,1)J\rho (\pm u,1)J^{-1}=

2416: \pp{\pm u&0&0&0\cr 0&1&0&0\cr 0&0&\pm \bar u&0\cr 0&0&0&1},

2417: \label{mmlift}\ee

2418: is double-valued. The spin group is the image of the lift, $L({\rm

2419: Aut}(\aa))=SU(2)$, a proper subgroup of the receptacle ${\rm

2420: Aut}_\hh(\aa)=U(2)\times U(1)$.

2421: The fluctuated Dirac operator is

2422: \bb\dd:=L(\pm u)\tilde \dd L(\pm u)^{-1}=

2423: \pp{0&\pm u\mm&0&0\cr (\pm u\mm)^*&0&0&0\cr

2424: 0&0&0&\overline{\pm u\mm}\cr 0&0&\overline{(\pm u\mm)^*}

2425: &0}.\ee

2426: An absolutely remarkable property of the fluctuated Dirac

2427: operator in internal space is that it can be written as the flat Dirac

2428: operator plus a 1-form:

2429: \bb \dd=\tilde \dd+\rho (\pm u,1)\,[\dd,\rho (\pm u^{-1},1)]+

2430: J\,\rho (\pm u,1)\,[\dd,\rho (\pm

2431: u^{-1},1)]\,J^{-1}.\label{mmcov}\ee

2432: The anti-Hermitean 1-form

2433: \bb (-i)\rho (\pm u,1)\,[\dd,\rho (\pm u^{-1},1)] =(-i)

2434: \pp{0&h&0&0\cr h^*&0&0&0\cr 0&0&0&0\cr 0&0&0&0},\qq

2435: h:=\pm u\mm-\mm\ee

2436:  is the

2437: internal connection. The fluctuated Dirac operator is the

2438: covariant one with respect to this connection. Of course, this

2439: connection is flat, its field strength = curvature 2-form vanishes, a

2440: constraint that is relaxed by the equivalence principle. The result

2441: can be stated without going into the details of the reconstruction

2442: of 2-forms from the spectral triple:

2443: $h$ becomes a general complex doublet, not necessarily of the

2444: form $\pm u\mm-\mm$.

2445: 

2446: Now we are ready to tensorize the spectral triple of spacetime with

2447: the internal one and compute the spectral action. The algebra

2448: $\aa_t=\ccc^\infty(M)\ot \aa$ describes a two-sheeted universe.

2449: Let us call again its sheets `left' and `right'. The Hilbert space

2450: $\hh_t=\lll^2(\sss)\ot\hh$ describes the neutrino and the electron

2451: as genuine fields, that is spacetime dependent. The Dirac operator

2452: $\tilde \dd_t=\tilde

2453: \ddd\ot 1_6

2454: \,+\,\gamma _5\ot\tilde \dd$ is the flat, free, massive Dirac

2455: operator and it is impatient to fluctuate.

2456: 

2457: The automorphism group close to the identity,

2458: \bb {\rm Aut}(\aa_t)=[{\rm Diff}(M)\ltimes

2459: \,^MSU(2)/\zz_2]\,\times\,{\rm Diff}(M)\ \owns ((\sigma _L,

2460: \sigma _{\pm u}),\sigma _R),\ee

2461: now contains two independent coordinate transformations $\sigma

2462: _L$ and $\sigma _R$ on each sheet and a {\it gauged}, that is

2463: spacetime dependent, internal transformation $\sigma _{\pm u}$.

2464: The gauge transformations are inner, they act by conjugation

2465: $i_{\pm u}$. The receptacle group is

2466: \bb{\rm Aut}_{\hh_t}(\aa_t)={\rm Diff}(M)\ltimes

2467: \,^M(Spin(4)\times U(2)\times U(1)).\ee

2468: It only contains one coordinate transformation, a point on the left

2469: sheet travels together with its right shadow. Indeed the covariance

2470: property forbids to lift an automorphism with $\sigma _L\not=

2471: \sigma _R$. Since the mass term multiplies left- and right-handed

2472: electron fields, the covariance property saves the locality of field

2473: theory, which postulates that only fields at the same spacetime

2474: point can be multiplied. We have seen examples where the

2475: receptacle has more elements than the automorphism group, e.g.

2476: six-dimensional spacetime or the present internal space. Now we

2477: have an example of automorphisms that do not fit into the

2478: receptacle. In any case the spin group is the image of the

2479: combined, now 4-valued lift $L_t(\sigma ,\sigma _{\pm u})$,

2480: \bb L_t({\rm Aut}(\aa_t))={\rm Diff}(M)\ltimes

2481: \,^M(Spin(4)\times SU(2)).\ee

2482: The fluctuating Dirac operator is

2483: \bb \dd_t=L_t(\sigma ,\sigma _{\pm u})\tilde \dd_t L_t(\sigma

2484: ,\sigma _{\pm u})^{-1}=

2485: \pp{\ddd_L&\gamma _5\varphi   &0&0\cr

2486: \gamma _5\varphi   ^*&\ddd_R&0&0\cr

2487: 0&0&C\ddd_LC^{-1}&\gamma _5\bar\varphi   \cr

2488: 0&0&\gamma _5\bar\varphi  ^*&C\ddd_RC^{-1}},\ee

2489: with

2490: \bb e^{-1}=\sqrt{\jj \jj^T},

2491: && \ddd_L=i\hbox{$

2492: e^{-1\,\mu}$}_a\gamma^a[

2493: \pa _{ \mu}+s(\omega (e)_{\mu})+A_\mu ],

2494: \\ A_\mu =-\pm u\,\pa_\mu (\pm u^{-1}), &&

2495: \ddd_R=i\hbox{$ e^{-1\,\mu}$}_a\gamma^a[

2496: \pa _{ \mu}+s(\omega (e)_{\mu}) ], \\ \varphi =\pm

2497: u\mm.&&\ee

2498: Note that the sign ambiguity in $\pm u$ drops out from the

2499: $su(2)$-valued 1-form

2500: $A=A_\mu \de x^\mu$ on spacetime. This is not the case for the

2501: ambiguity in the `Higgs' doublet

2502: $\varphi $ yet, but this ambiguity does drop out from the spectral

2503: action. The variable

2504: $\varphi $ is the homogeneous variable corresponding to the

2505: affine variable $h=\varphi -\mm$ in the connection 1-form on

2506: internal space. The fluctuating Dirac operator $\dd_t$ is still flat.

2507: This constraint has now three parts, $e^{-1}=\sqrt{\jj(\sigma )

2508: \jj(\sigma )^T},\ A=-u\de (u^{-1}),$ and $\varphi =\pm

2509: u\mm$. According to the equivalence principle, we will take $e$ to

2510: be any symmetric, invertible matrix depending differentiably on

2511: spacetime, $A$ to be any $su(2)$-valued 1-form on spacetime and

2512: $\varphi $ any complex doublet depending differentiably on

2513: spacetime. This defines the new kinematics. The dynamics of the

2514: spinors = matter is given by the fluctuating Dirac operator

2515: $\dd_t$, which is covariant with respect to i.e. minimally coupled

2516: to gravity, the gauge bosons and the Higgs boson. This dynamics is

2517: equivalently given by the Dirac action $(\psi, \dd_t \psi )$ and

2518: this action delivers the awkward Yukawa couplings for free.

2519: The Higgs boson

2520: $\varphi $ enjoys two geometric

2521: interpretations, first as connection in the discrete direction. The

2522: second derives from Connes' distance formula:

2523: $1/|\varphi (x) |$ is the -- now

2524: $x$-dependent -- distance between the two sheets. The calculation

2525: behind the second interpretation makes explicit use of

2526: the Kaluza-Klein nature of almost commutative geometries

2527: \cite{mw}.

2528: 

2529: As in pure gravity, the dynamics of the new kinematics derives

2530: from the Chamseddine-Connes action,

2531: \bb S_{CC}[e,A,\varphi ]&=&\t

2532: f(\dd_t^2/\Lambda ^2)\cr &=&\int_M

2533: [\ {\textstyle\frac{2\Lambda_c}{16\pi G}} -{\textstyle\frac{1}{16\pi

2534: G}}R +a(5\,R^2-8\,{\rm Ricci}^2-7\,{\rm

2535: Riemann}^2)\cr

2536: &&\qq\qq + {\textstyle\frac{1}{2g_2^2}} \t F^*_{\mu \nu} F^{\mu

2537: \nu } +{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} (\dee_\mu \varphi )^*\dee^\mu

2538: \varphi

2539: \cr &&\qq\qq + \lambda |\varphi |^4-{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} \mu

2540: ^2|\varphi |^2+{\textstyle\frac{1}{12}} |\varphi |^2R\

2541:  ]\,\de V \,+\,

2542: O(\Lambda^{-2}), \label{mmsp}\ee

2543: where the coupling constants are

2544:  \bb \Lambda_c=

2545: {\frac{6f_0}{f_2}}\,\Lambda^2,\qq

2546: G={\frac{\pi}{2f_2}}\,\Lambda^{-2},\qq

2547: a={\frac{f_4}{960\pi^2}},\qq

2548: g^2_2={\frac{6\pi ^2}{f_4}},\qq

2549: \lambda ={\frac{\pi ^2}{2f_4}} ,\qq

2550: \mu ^2={\frac{2f_2}{f_4}}\, \Lambda ^2.\ee

2551:  Note the

2552: presence of the conformal coupling of the scalar to the curvature

2553: scalar, $+{\textstyle\frac{1}{12}} |\varphi |^2R$. From the fluctuation

2554: of the Dirac operator, we have derived the scalar representation, a

2555: complex doublet $\varphi $. Geometrically, it is a connection on the

2556: finite space and as such unified with the Yang-Mills bosons, which

2557: are connections on spacetime. As a consequence, the Higgs self

2558: coupling $\lambda $ is related to the gauge coupling $g_2$ in the

2559: spectral action, $g_2^2=12\,\lambda $. Furthermore the spectral action

2560: contains a negative mass square term for the Higgs

2561: $-{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} \mu ^2|\varphi |^2$ implying a non-trivial

2562: ground state or vacuum expectation value

2563: $|\varphi |=v=\mu (4\lambda )^{-1/2}$ in flat spacetime. Reshifting

2564: to the inhomogeneous scalar variable $h=\varphi -v$, which

2565: vanishes in the ground state, modifies the cosmological constant by

2566: $V(v)$ and Newton's constant from the term

2567: ${\textstyle\frac{1}{12}}v^2R$:

2568: \bb\Lambda_c=

2569: 6\left( 3{\textstyle\frac{f_0}{f_2}} -

2570: {\textstyle\frac{f_2}{f_4}}\right) \Lambda^2,\qq

2571: G={\frac{3\pi }{2f_2}}\Lambda ^{-2}.\ee

2572:  Now the cosmological constant can have either sign, in particular it

2573: can be zero. This is welcome because experimentally the cosmological

2574: constant is very close to zero, $\Lambda _c\ <\ 10^{-119}/G$.

2575:  On the other

2576: hand, in spacetimes of large curvature, like for example the ground

2577: state, the positive conformal coupling of the scalar to the curvature

2578: dominates the negative mass square term $-{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} \mu

2579: ^2|\varphi |^2$. Therefore the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs

2580: vanishes, the gauge symmetry is unbroken and all particles are

2581: massless. It is only after the big bang, when spacetime loses its

2582: strong curvature that the gauge symmetry breaks down

2583: spontaneously and particles acquire masses.

2584: 

2585: The computation of the spectral action is long, let us set some

2586: waypoints. The square of the fluctuating Dirac operator is

2587: $\dd_t^2=-\Delta +E$, where $\Delta $ is the covariant

2588: Laplacian, in coordinates:

2589: \bb \Delta &=&g^{\mu\tilde\nu}\left[\left(

2590: \frac{\partial}{\partial x^\mu} 1_4\ot 1_\hh+

2591: {\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}\omega_{ab\mu}\gamma^{ab}

2592: \ot 1_\hh+1_4\ot [\rho(A_\mu)+J\rho(A_\mu)J^{-1}]\right)

2593: {\delta^\nu}_{\tilde\nu}-{\Gamma^\nu}_{\tilde

2594: \nu\mu}1_4\ot1_{\hh}\right]

2595: \cr &&\qq\qq\qq\times\left[

2596: \frac{\partial}{\partial x^\nu} 1_4\ot 1_\hh+

2597: {\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}\omega_{ab\nu}\gamma^{ab}

2598: \ot 1_\hh+1_4\ot [\rho(A_\nu)+J\rho(A_\nu)J^{-1}]\right],\ee

2599: and where

2600: $E$, for endomorphism, is a zero order operator, that is

2601: a matrix of size

2602: $4\dim\hh$ whose entries are functions

2603: constructed from the bosonic fields and

2604: their first and second derivatives,

2605: \bb E&=&{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\left[

2606: \gamma^{\mu}\gamma^\nu

2607: \ot1_\hh\right]\rr_{\mu\nu} \\ \cr &&\,+\,

2608: \pp{

2609: 1_4\ot \varphi \varphi ^*&-i\gamma_5\gamma^\mu\ot

2610: \dee_\mu\varphi &0&0\cr

2611: -i\gamma_5\gamma^\mu\ot (\dee_\mu\varphi )^*&

2612: 1_4\ot\varphi ^*\varphi &0&0\cr

2613: 0&0&1_4\ot \overline{\varphi

2614: \varphi ^*}&-i\gamma_5\gamma^\mu\ot

2615: \overline{\dee_\mu\varphi }\cr 0&0&

2616: -i\gamma_5\gamma^\mu\ot \overline{(\dee_\mu\varphi )^*}&

2617: 1_4\ot\overline{\varphi ^*\varphi }

2618: }\label{E}.\eee

2619: $\rr$ is the total curvature, a 2-form with values in

2620: the (Lorentz $\op$ internal) Lie algebra represented

2621: on (spinors $\ot\ \hh$). It contains the curvature

2622: 2-form

2623: $R=\de\omega+\omega^2

2624: $ and the field strength 2-form $F=\de

2625: A+A^2$, in components

2626: \bb\rr_{\mu\nu}={\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}

2627: R_{ab\mu\nu}\gamma^{a}\gamma^b\ot 1_\hh+

2628: 1_4\ot[\rho(F_{\mu\nu})+J\rho(F_{\mu\nu})J^{-1}].\ee

2629: The first term in

2630: equation (\ref{E}) produces

2631: the curvature scalar, which we also (!)

2632: denote by $R$,

2633: \bb

2634: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\left[{e^{-1\,\mu}}_c\,{e^{-1\,\nu}}_d\,

2635: \gamma^{c}\gamma^d\right]

2636: {\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}R_{ab\mu\nu}\gamma^{a}\gamma ^b

2637: = {\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}R1_4.\ee

2638: We have also used the possibly dangerous notation $\gamma ^\mu

2639: ={e^{-1\,\mu }}_a\gamma ^a$.

2640:  Finally $\dee$ is the covariant derivative appropriate

2641: for the representation of the scalars.

2642: The above formula for the square of the Dirac operator is also

2643: known as Lichn\'erowicz formula. The Lichn\'erowicz formula with

2644: arbitrary torsion can be found in \cite{att}.

2645: 

2646: Let $f:\rr_+\rightarrow\rr_+$ be a positive, smooth

2647: function with finite moments,

2648: \bb f_0={\textstyle \int_0^\infty} uf(u)\,\de u,&

2649: f_2={\textstyle \int_0^\infty} f(u)\,\de u,&

2650: f_4=f(0),\\

2651: f_6=-f'(0),&

2652: f_8=f''(0),&...\ee

2653: Asymptotically, for large $\Lambda$, the

2654: distribution function of the spectrum is given in

2655: terms of the heat kernel expansion \cite{egbv}:

2656: \bb S=\t f(\dd_t^2/\Lambda^2)=

2657: \frac{1}{16\pi^2}\,\int_M[\Lambda^4f_0a_0+

2658: \Lambda^2f_2a_2+f_4a_4+\Lambda^{-2}f_6a_6+...]\,

2659: \de V, \label{master}\ee

2660: where the $a_j$ are the coefficients of the heat kernel

2661: expansion of the Dirac operator squared \cite{heat},

2662: \bb a_0&=&\t (1_4\ot1_\hh),\\

2663: a_2&=&{\textstyle\frac{1}{6}}R\,\t (1_4\ot1_\hh)-\t

2664: E,\\ a_4&=&{\textstyle\frac{1}{72}}R^2\t

2665: (1_4\ot1_\hh)-

2666: {\textstyle\frac{1}{180}}R_{\mu\nu}R^{\mu\nu}

2667: \t (1_4\ot1_\hh)+

2668: {\textstyle\frac{1}{180}}R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}

2669: R^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\t (1_4\ot1_\hh)\cr &&+

2670: {\textstyle\frac{1}{12}}\t (\rr_{\mu\nu}

2671: \rr^{\mu\nu})

2672: -{\textstyle\frac{1}{6}}R\,\t E+

2673: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\t E^2 + {\rm surface\ terms}.\ee

2674: As already noted, for large

2675: $\Lambda$ the positive function

2676: $f$ is universal, only the first three

2677: moments, $f_0,\ f_2$ and $f_4$

2678: appear with non-negative powers of $\Lambda $.

2679: For the minimax model, we get (more details can be found in

2680: \cite{rom}):

2681: \bb a_0&=&4\dim\hh=4\times 6,\\

2682: \t E&=&\dim\hh\, R + 16 |\varphi|^2,\\

2683: a_2&=&{\textstyle\frac{2}{3}}\dim\hh\, R-\dim\hh\, R

2684: -16|\varphi|^2=

2685:  -{\textstyle\frac{1}{3}}\dim\hh\, R

2686: -16|\varphi|^2,\\

2687: \t \left( {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}

2688: [\gamma^{a},\gamma^b]

2689: {\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}

2690: [\gamma^{c},\gamma^d]\right)&=&

2691: 4\left[\delta ^{ad}\delta ^{bc}-\delta ^{ac}\delta ^{bd}\right],\\

2692: \t \{\rr_{\mu\nu}\rr^{\mu\nu}\}&=&

2693: -{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\dim\hh\,

2694: R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}R^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\cr &&\qq\qq

2695: -4 \,\t

2696: \{[\rho(F_{\mu\nu})+J\rho(F_{\mu\nu})J^{-1}]^*

2697: [\rho(F^{\mu\nu})+J\rho(F^{\mu\nu})J^{-1}]\}\cr

2698: &=&-{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\dim\hh\,

2699: R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}R^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}

2700: -8\,\t

2701: \{\rho(F_{\mu\nu})^*

2702: \rho(F^{\mu\nu})\},\\

2703: \t E^2&=&{\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}\dim\hh\, R^2+

2704: 4\,\t\{ \rho(F_{\mu\nu})^*\rho(F^{\mu\nu})\}\cr &&+

2705: 16|\varphi|^4+

2706: 16(\dee_\mu\varphi)^*(\dee^\mu\varphi)

2707: +8|\varphi|^2R,

2708: \ee

2709: Finally we have up to surface terms,

2710: \bb a_4 &=& {\textstyle\frac{1}{360}}\dim \hh\,

2711: (5\,R^2-8\,{\rm Ricci}^2-7\,{\rm

2712: Riemann}^2)+

2713: {\textstyle\frac{4}{3}}

2714: \t \rho(F_{\mu\nu})^*\rho(F^{\mu\nu})\cr &&+

2715: 8|\varphi|^4+

2716: 8(\dee_\mu\varphi)^*(\dee^\mu\varphi)

2717: +{\textstyle\frac{4}{3}}

2718: |\varphi|^2R.\ee

2719: We arrive at the spectral action with its conventional

2720: normalization, equation (\ref{mmsp}), after a finite

2721: renormalization $|\varphi |^2\rightarrow {\textstyle\frac{\pi

2722: ^2}{f_4}} |\varphi |^2$.

2723: 

2724: Our first timid excursion into gravity on a noncommutative

2725: geometry produced a rather unexpected discovery. We stumbled

2726: over a Yang-Mills-Higgs model, which is precisely the electro-weak

2727: model for one family of leptons but with the $U(1)$ of hypercharge

2728: amputated. The sceptical reader suspecting a sleight of

2729: hand is encouraged to try and find a simpler, noncommutative

2730: finite spectral triple.

2731: 

2732: \subsection{A central extension}

2733: 

2734: We will see in the next section the technical reason for the absence

2735: of  $U(1)$s as automorphisms: all automorphisms of finite spectral

2736: triples connected to the identity are inner, i.e. conjugation by

2737: unitaries. But conjugation by central unitaries is trivial. This

2738: explains  that in the minimax example, $\aa=\hhh\op\cc$, the

2739: component of the automorphism group connected to the identity was

2740: $SU(2)/\zz_2\owns (\pm u,1)$. It is the domain of definition of

2741: the lift, equation (\ref{mmlift}),

2742: \bb L(\pm u,1)=\rho (\pm u,1)J\rho (\pm u,1)J^{-1}=

2743: \pp{\pm u&0&0&0\cr 0&1&0&0\cr 0&0&\pm \bar u&0\cr

2744:  0&0&0&1}.\ee

2745:  It is

2746: tempting to centrally extend the lift to all unitaries of the algebra:

2747: \bb \llll(w,v)=\rho (w,v)J\rho(w,v)J^{-1}=

2748: \pp{\bar vw&0&0&0\cr 0&\bar v^2&0&0\cr 0&0& v\bar w &0\cr

2749: 0&0&0&v^2},\qq (w,v)\in SU(2)\times U(1).

2750: \label{mmext}\ee

2751: An immediate consequence of this extension is encouraging: the

2752: extended lift is single-valued and after tensorization with the one from

2753: Riemannian geometry, the multi-valuedness will remain two.

2754: 

2755: Then redoing the fluctuation of the Dirac operator and

2756: recomputing the spectral action yields gravity coupled to the

2757: complete electro-weak model of the electron and its neutrino with a

2758: weak mixing angle of $\sin^2\theta _w=1/4$.

2759: 

2760: \section{Connes' do-it-yourself kit}

2761: 

2762: Our first example of gravity on an almost commutative space leaves

2763: us wondering what other examples will look like. To play on the

2764: Yang-Mills-Higgs machine, one must know the classification of all

2765: real, compact Lie groups and their unitary representations. To play

2766: on the new machine, we must know all finite spectral triples. The

2767: first good news is that the list of algebras and their representations

2768: is infinitely shorter than the one for groups. The other good news

2769: is that the rules of

2770: Connes' machine are not made up opportunistically to suit the

2771: phenomenology of electro-weak and strong forces as in the case of the

2772: Yang-Mills-Higgs machine. On the contrary, as developed

2773: in the last section, these rules derive naturally from geometry.

2774: 

2775: \subsection{Input}

2776: 

2777: Our first input item is a finite dimensional, real, associative

2778: involution algebra with unit and that admits a finite dimensional

2779: faithful representation. Any such algebra is a direct sum of simple

2780: algebras with the same properties. Every such simple algebra is an

2781: algebra of $n\times n$ matrices with real, complex or

2782: quaternionic entries, $\aa=M_n(\rr)$, $M_n(\cc)$ or

2783: $M_n(\hhh)$. Their unitary groups $U(\aa):=\{u\in\aa,\,

2784: uu^*=u^*u=1\}$ are $O(n)$, $U(n)$ and $USp(n)$. Note that

2785: $USp(1)=SU(2)$. The centre

2786: $Z$ of an algebra $\aa$ is the set of elements $z\in\aa$ that

2787: commute with all elements $a\in\aa$. The central unitaries form

2788: an abelian subgroup of $U(\aa)$. Let us denote this subgroup by

2789: $U^c(\aa):=U(\aa)\cap Z$. We have

2790: $U^c(M_n(\rr))=\zz_2\owns\pm 1_n$,

2791: $U^c(M_n(\cc))=U(1)\owns\exp (i\theta ) 1_n$, $\theta \in

2792: [0,2\pi )$,

2793: $U^c(M_n(\hhh))=\zz_2\owns\pm 1_{2n}$.

2794: All

2795:  automorphisms of the real, complex and quaternionic matrix

2796: algebras are inner with one exception,

2797: $M_n(\cc)$ has one outer automorphism, complex conjugation,

2798: which is disconnected from the identity automorphism. An inner

2799: automorphism $\sigma

2800: $ is of the form $\sigma (a)=uau^{-1}$ for some $u\in U(\aa)$ and

2801: for all $a\in\aa$. We will denote this inner automorphism by

2802: $\sigma =i_u$ and we will write Int($\aa$) for the group of inner

2803: automorphisms. Of course a commutative algebra, e.g. $\aa=\cc$,

2804: has no inner automorphism. We have Int$(\aa)=U(\aa)/U^c(\aa)$,

2805: in particular

2806: Int$(M_n(\rr))= O(n)/\zz_2,\ n=2,3,...,$

2807: Int$(M_n(\cc))= U(n)/U(1)=SU(n)/\zz_n,\ n=2,3,...,$

2808: Int$(M_n(\hhh))= USp(n)/\zz_2,\ n=1,2,..$. Note the apparent

2809: injustice: the commutative algebra $\ccc^\infty (M)$ has the

2810: nonAbelian automorphism group Diff$(M)$ while the

2811: noncommutative algebra $M_2(\rr)$ has the Abelian automorphism

2812: group $O(2)/\zz_2$. All

2813: exceptional groups are missing from our list of groups. Indeed they

2814: are automorphism groups of non-associative algebras, e.g. $G_2$ is

2815: the automorphism group of the octonions.

2816: 

2817: The second input item is a faithful representation $\rho $ of the

2818: algebra $\aa$ on a finite dimensional, complex Hilbert space

2819: $\hh$. Any such representation is a direct sum of irreducible

2820: representations.

2821: $M_n(\rr)$ has only one irreducible representation, the

2822: fundamental one on $\rr^n$,

2823: $M_n(\cc)$ has two, the fundamental one and its complex

2824: conjugate. Both are defined on $\hh=\cc^n\owns \psi $ by $\rho

2825: (a)\psi =a\psi $ and by $\rho (a)\psi =\bar a\psi $. $M_n(\hhh)$ has

2826: only one irreducible representation, the fundamental one defined

2827: on

2828: $\cc^{2n}$. For example, while $U(1)$ has an infinite number of

2829: inequivalent irreducible representations, characterized by an

2830: integer `charge', its algebra $\cc$ has only two with charge plus

2831: and minus one. While $SU(2)$ has an infinite number of

2832: inequivalent irreducible representations characterized by its spin,

2833: $0,{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} ,1,...$, its algebra $\hhh$ has only one,

2834: spin ${\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} $. The main reason behind this

2835: multitude of group representation is that the tensor product of two

2836: representations of one group is another representation of this

2837: group, characterized by the sum of charges for $U(1)$ and by the sum

2838: of spins for $SU(2)$. The same is not true for two 

2839: representations of one associative algebra whose tensor product

2840: fails to be linear. (Attention, the tensor product of two

2841: representations of two algebras does define a representation of the

2842: tensor product of the two algebras. We have used this tensor

2843: product of Hilbert spaces to define almost commutative geometries.)

2844: 

2845: The third input item is the finite Dirac operator $\dd$ or

2846: equivalently the fermionic mass matrix, a matrix of size

2847: dim$\hh_L\,\times\,$dim$\hh_R$.

2848: 

2849: These three items can however not be chosen freely, they must still

2850: satisfy all axioms of the spectral triple \cite{tkmz}. I do hope you

2851: have convinced yourself of the nontriviality of this requirement for

2852: the case of the minimax example.

2853: 

2854: The minimax example has taught us something else. If we want

2855: abelian gauge fields from the fluctuating metric, we must centrally

2856: extend the spin lift, an operation, that at the same time may reduce

2857: the multivaluedness of the original lift. Central extensions are by

2858: no means unique, its choice is our last input item \cite{fare}.

2859: 

2860: To simplify notations, we

2861: concentrate on complex matrix algebras $M_n(\cc)$ in the following

2862: part. Indeed the others, $M_n(\rr)$ and $M_n(\hhh)$,

2863: do not have central unitaries close to the identity. We have already

2864: seen that it is important to separate the commutative and

2865: noncommutative parts of the algebra:

2866: \bb\aa=\cc^M\oplus

2867: \bigoplus_{k=1}^N M_{n_k}(\cc)\ \owns

2868: a=(b_1,...b_M,c_1,...,c_N),\qq n_k\geq 2.

2869: \label{algebra}\ee

2870: Its group of unitaries is

2871: \bb U(\aa)=U(1)^M\times

2872: \matrix{N\cr \times\cr {k=1}} U(n_k)\

2873: \owns\ u=(v_1,...,v_M,w_1,...,w_N)\ee

2874: and its group of central

2875: unitaries

2876: \bb U^c(\aa)=U(1)^{M+N}\

2877: \owns\ u_c=

2878: ( v_{c1},...,v_{cM},w_{c1}1_{n_1},...,w_{cN}1_{n_N}).\ee

2879: All automorphisms

2880: connected to the identity are inner,

2881: there are outer automorphisms, the complex conjugation and, if

2882: there are identical summands in $\aa$, their permutations.

2883: In compliance with the minimax principle, we disregard the discrete

2884: automorphisms.  Multiplying a unitary $u$ with

2885: a central unitary

2886: $u_c$ of course does not affect its inner automorphism

2887: $i_{u_cu}=i_u$. This ambiguity distinguishes

2888: between `harmless' central unitaries $v_{c1},...,v_{cM}$ and

2889: the others, $w_{c1},...,w_{cN}$, in the sense that

2890: \bb {\rm Int}(\aa)=U^n(\aa)/U^{nc}(\aa),\label{inntrue}\ee

2891: where we have defined the group of noncommutative unitaries

2892: \bb U^n(\aa):=\matrix{N\cr \times\cr {k=1}} U(n_k)\

2893: \owns\ w\ee

2894: and $U^{nc}(\aa):=U^n(\aa)\cap U^c(\aa) \owns w_c$.

2895: The map

2896: \bb i:U^n(\aa)&\longrightarrow&{\rm Int}(\aa)\cr

2897: w&\longmapsto&i_w\ee

2898:  has kernel Ker$\,i=U^{nc}(\aa)$.

2899: 

2900: The lift of an inner

2901: automorphism to the Hilbert space has a simple closed

2902: form

2903: \cite{tresch}, $L=\hat L\circ i^{-1}$ with

2904: \bb \hat L(w)=\rho(1,w)J\rho(1,w)J^{-1}.\ee

2905: It satisfies $p(\hat L(w))=i(w)$.

2906: If the kernel of $i$ is contained in the kernel of $\hat L$, then

2907: the lift is well defined, as e.g. for $\aa=\hhh$,

2908: $U^{nc}(\hhh)=\zz_2$.

2909: \begin{eqnarray}

2910: &&{\rm Aut}_\hh(\aa)\nonumber \\

2911: && \hskip -2mm p\

2912: \parbox{6mm}{\begin{picture}(20,10)

2913: \put(0,15){\vector(0,-1){30}}

2914: \put(15,-15){\vector(-1,4){8}}

2915: \put(15,-15){\vector(0,1){33}}

2916: \end{picture}}

2917:  L

2918: \parbox{8mm}{\begin{picture}(20,10)

2919: \put(30,-15){\vector(-1,2){16}}

2920: \put(32,-10){$\hat{L}$}

2921: \end{picture}}

2922: \parbox{12mm}{\begin{picture}(20,10)

2923: \put(65,-15){\vector(-2,1){67}}

2924: \end{picture}}

2925: \ell

2926: \\[4mm]

2927: &&{\rm Int}(\aa)\stackrel{i}{\longleftarrow}

2928: U^n(\aa)\begin{array}{c}\\[-3mm]

2929: \hookleftarrow \\[-5mm]

2930: \stackrel{\vector(1,0){15}}{\mbox{\footnotesize $\det$}}

2931: \end{array}

2932: U^{nc}(\aa) \nonumber

2933: \end{eqnarray}

2934: For more complicated real or

2935: quaternionic algebras, $U^{nc}(\aa)$ is finite and the lift $L$

2936: is multi-valued with a finite number of values. For

2937: noncommutative, complex algebras, their continuous family of

2938: central unitaries cannot be eliminated except for very special

2939: representations and we face a continuous infinity of values.

2940: The solution of this problem follows an old strategy: {\it `If

2941: you can't beat them, adjoin them'.} Who is {\it them?} The

2942: harmful central unitaries $w_c\in U^{nc}(\aa)$ and adjoining

2943: means central extending.

2944:  The central extension (\ref{mmext}), only concerned a discrete

2945: group and a harmless $U(1)$. Nevertheless it generalizes naturally

2946:  to the present setting:

2947: \bb

2948:  \llll:{\rm Int}(\aa)\times U^{nc}(\aa)&\longrightarrow&

2949: \qq\qq{\rm Aut}_\hh(\aa)\cr

2950: (w_\sigma ,w_c)\qq \qq &\longmapsto &

2951: (\hat L\circ i^{-1})(w_\sigma )\,\ell(w_c)\ee

2952: with

2953:  \bb\ell(w_c)&:=&\rho\!\! \left(

2954: \prod_{j_1=1}^N(w_{cj_1})^{q_{1,j_1}},

2955: ...,\prod_{j_M=1}^N(w_{cj_M})^{q_{M,j_M}},\right.\\ &&

2956: \left.\qq

2957: \prod_{j_{M+1}=1}^N(w_{cj_{M+1}})^{q_{{M+1},j_{M+1}}}

2958: 1_{n_1},

2959: ...,\prod_{j_{M+N}=1}^N(w_{cj_{M+N}})^{q_{{M+N},j_{M+N}}}

2960: 1_{n_N}

2961: \right)

2962:  J

2963: \rho (...)

2964: \,J^{-1}

2965: \label{ell}\eee

2966: with the $(M+N)\times N$ matrix of charges $q_{kj}$. The

2967: extension satisfies indeed

2968: $p(\ell(w_c))=1\in{\rm Int}(\aa)$ for all $w_c\in

2969: U^{nc}(\aa)$.

2970: 

2971: Having adjoined the harmful, continuous central unitaries, we

2972: may now stream line our notations and write the group of

2973: inner automorphisms as

2974: \bb {\rm Int}(\aa)=\left(

2975: \matrix{{N} \cr \times \cr k=1} SU(n_k)\right) /\Gamma

2976: \owns[w_\sigma] = [(w_{\sigma 1},...,w_{\sigma N})]\

2977: {\rm mod}\

2978: \gamma \label{innfake} ,\ee

2979: where $\Gamma $ is the discrete group

2980: \bb\Gamma=\matrix{{N}\cr \times\cr

2981: {k=1}}\zz_{n_k}\ \owns\ (z_11_{n_1},...,z_N1_{n_N}),\qq

2982: z_{k}=\exp[-m_{k}2\pi i/n_k],\ m_k=0,...,n_k-1

2983: \label{discrete}\ee

2984: and the quotient is factor by factor. This way to write inner

2985: automorphisms is convenient for complex matrices, but not

2986: available for real and quaternionic matrices. Equation

2987: (\ref{inntrue}) remains the general characterization of

2988: inner automorphisms.

2989: 

2990: The lift $L(w_\sigma )=(\hat L\circ i^{-1})(w_\sigma )$, $w_\sigma =

2991: w\ {\rm mod}\ U^{nc}(\aa)$,

2992: is multi-valued with, depending

2993: on the representation, up to $ |\Gamma |=\prod_{j=1}^N n_j$

2994: values. More precisely the multi-valuedness of $L$ is indexed

2995: by the elements of the kernel of the projection $p$ restricted

2996: to the image $L({\rm Int}(\aa))$. Depending on the choice of

2997: the charge matrix

2998: $q$, the central extension $\ell$ may reduce this

2999: multi-valuedness. Extending harmless central unitaries is

3000: useless for any reduction. With

3001: the multi-valued group homomorphism

3002: \bb (h_\sigma ,h_c) : U^n(\aa)&\longrightarrow &

3003: {\rm Int}(\aa)\times U^{nc}(\aa)\cr

3004: (w_j) & \longmapsto &((w_{\sigma j} , w_{cj}))=((w_j(\det

3005: w_j)^{-1/n_j},(\det w_j)^{1/n_j}))\label{isom},\ee

3006:  we can write the two lifts

3007: $L$ and

3008: $\ell$

3009: together in closed form

3010: $\llll:U^n(\aa)\rightarrow

3011: {\rm Aut}_\hh(\aa)$:

3012: \bb\llll(w)&=&L(h_\sigma (w))\,\ell(h_c(w))\cr \cr

3013: &=&

3014: \rho\!\! \left(

3015: \prod_{j_1=1}^N(\det w_{j_1})^{\tilde q_{1,j_1}},

3016: ...,\prod_{j_M=1}^N(\det w_{j_M})^{\tilde

3017: q_{M,j_M}},\right.\cr &&\left.\qq

3018: w_1\prod_{j_{M+1}=1}^N(\det w_{j_{M+1}})^{\tilde

3019: q_{{M+1},j_{M+1}}}, ...,w_N\prod_{j_{N+M}=1}^N(\det

3020: w_{j_{N+M}})^{\tilde q_{{N+M},j_{N+M}}}\right)%\cr

3021: \nonumber\\[2mm]

3022: &&\times\,

3023: J \rho (...) J^{-1}.\ee

3024: We have set

3025: \bb\tilde q:=\left( q-\pp{0_{M\times N}\cr\cr  1_{N\times

3026: N}}

3027: \right) \pp{n_1&&\cr &\ddots&\cr &&n_N}^{-1}.\ee

3028: Due to the

3029: phase ambiguities in the roots of the determinants, the

3030: extended lift

3031:  $\llll$ is multi-valued in general. It is single-valued if the

3032: matrix

3033: $\tilde q$ has integer entries, e.g.

3034: $q=\pp{0\cr 1_N}$, then $\tilde q=0$ and

3035: $\llll(w)=\hat L(w)$. On the other hand, $q=0$ gives

3036: $\llll(w)=\hat L(i^{-1}(h_\sigma (w)))$, not always well

3037: defined as already noted. Unlike the extension

3038: (\ref{mmext}), and unlike the map $i$, the extended lift $\llll$ is

3039: not necessarily even. We do impose this symmetry

3040: $\llll (-w)=\llll (w)$, which translates into

3041: conditions on the charges, conditions that depend on the

3042: details of the representation $\rho $.

3043: 

3044: Let us note that the lift

3045: $\llll$ is simply a representation up to a phase and as such it is

3046: not the most general lift. We could have added harmless central

3047: unitaries if any present, and, if the representation

3048: $\rho $ is reducible, we could have chosen different charge

3049: matrices in different irreducible components. If you are not

3050: happy with central extensions, then this is a sign of good taste.

3051: Indeed commutative algebras like the calibrating example have no

3052: inner automorphisms and a huge centre. Truly noncommutative

3053: algebras have few outer automorphism and a small centre. We

3054: believe that almost commutative geometries with their central

3055: extensions are only low energy approximations of a truly

3056: noncommutative geometry where central extensions are not an

3057: issue.

3058: 

3059: \subsection{Output}

3060: 

3061: From the input data of a finite spectral triple, the central charges

3062: and the three moments of the spectral function, noncommutative

3063: geometry produces a  Yang-Mills-Higgs model coupled

3064: to gravity. Its entire Higgs sector is computed from the input

3065: data, Figure 6. The Higgs representation derives from the

3066: fluctuating metric and the Higgs potential from the spectral

3067: action.

3068: 

3069: \begin{figure}[h]

3070: \label{slot3}

3071: \epsfxsize=8cm

3072: \hspace{4.1cm}

3073: \epsfbox{slot3.ps}

3074: \caption{Connes' slot machine}

3075: \end{figure}

3076: 

3077: To see how the Higgs representation derives in general from the

3078: fluctuating Dirac operator $\dd$, we must write it as `flat' Dirac

3079: operator

3080: $\tilde \dd$ plus internal 1-form $H$ like we have done in

3081: equation (\ref{mmcov}) for the minimax example without

3082: extension. Take the extended lift $\llll (w)=\rho (w) J\rho

3083: (w)J^{-1}$ with the unitary

3084: \bb w&=&\prod_{j_1=1}^N(\det w_{j_1})^{\tilde q_{1j_1}},

3085: ...,\prod_{j_M=1}^N(\det w_{j_M})^{\tilde

3086: q_{Mj_M}},\cr

3087: &&w_1\prod_{j_{M+1}=1}^N(\det w_{j_{M+1}})^{\tilde

3088: q_{{M+1},j_{M+1}}}, ...,w_N\prod_{j_{N+M}=1}^N(\det

3089: w_{j_{N+M}})^{\tilde q_{{N+M},j_{N+M}}}.\ee

3090: Then

3091: \bb\dd&&= \llll\tilde \dd\llll^{-1}\cr &&=

3092: \left(\rho(w)\,J\rho(w)J^{-1}\right)\,

3093: \tilde \dd\,

3094: \left(\rho(w)\,J\rho(w)J^{-1}\right)^{-1} =

3095: \rho(w)\,J\rho(w)J^{-1}

3096: \tilde \dd\,

3097: \rho(w^{-1})\,J\rho(w^{-1})J^{-1} \cr

3098: &&=

3099: \rho(w)J\rho(w)J^{-1}(\rho(w^{-1})\tilde \dd+

3100: [\tilde \dd,\rho(w^{-1})])J\rho(w^{-1})J^{-1}\cr

3101: &&=

3102: J\rho(w)J^{-1}\tilde \dd J\rho(w^{-1})J^{-1}

3103: +\rho(w)[\tilde \dd,\rho(w^{-1})]=

3104: J\rho(w)\tilde \dd \rho(w^{-1})J^{-1}

3105: +\rho(w)[\tilde \dd,\rho(w^{-1})]\cr

3106: &&=

3107: J(\rho(w)[\tilde \dd ,\rho(w^{-1})]+\tilde \dd)J^{-1}

3108: +\rho(w)[\tilde \dd,\rho(w^{-1})]\cr

3109: &&=\tilde \dd\,+\,H\,+\,JHJ^{-1},

3110: \label{fluct}\ee

3111: with the internal 1-form, the Higgs scalar, $H=\rho (w)[\tilde

3112: \dd,\rho (w^{-1})]$. In the chain (\ref{fluct}) we have used

3113: successively the following three axioms of spectral

3114: triples, $[\rho(a),J\rho(\tilde a)J^{-1}]=0$, the first

3115: order condition $[[\tilde \dd,\rho(a)],J\rho(\tilde a)J^{-1}]=0$

3116: and $[\tilde \dd,J]=0$. Note that the unitaries, whose

3117: representation commutes with the internal Dirac operator, drop

3118: out from the Higgs, it transforms as a singlet under their

3119: subgroup.

3120: 

3121: \begin{figure}[h]

3122: \label{versus}

3123: \epsfxsize=11cm

3124: \hspace{2.1cm}

3125: \epsfbox{versus.ps}

3126: \caption{Pseudo forces from noncommutative geometry}

3127: \end{figure}

3128: 

3129: The constraints from the axioms of noncommutative geometry are

3130: so tight that only very few Yang-Mills-Higgs models can be derived

3131: from noncommutative geometry as pseudo forces. No left-right

3132: symmetric model can \cite{florian}, no Grand Unified Theory can

3133: \cite{fedele}, for instance the $SU(5)$ model needs 10-dimensional

3134: fermion representations, $SO(10)$  16-dimensional ones, $E_6$ is

3135: not the group of an associative algebra. Moreover the last two

3136: models are left-right symmetric. Much effort has gone into the

3137: construction of a supersymmetric model from noncommutative

3138: geometry, in vain \cite{kw}. The standard model on the other

3139: hand fits perfectly into Connes' picture, Figure 7.

3140: 

3141: \subsection{The standard model}

3142: 

3143: The first noncommutative formulation of the standard model was

3144: published by Connes \& Lott \cite{ccl} in 1990. Since then it

3145: has evolved into its present form \cite{book, tresch, grav, cc}

3146: and triggered quite an amount of literature \cite{stand}.

3147: 

3148: \subsubsection{Spectral triple}

3149: 

3150: The internal algebra $\aa$ is chosen as to reproduce

3151: $SU(2)\times U(1)\times SU(3)$ as subgroup of

3152: $U(\aa)$,

3153: \bb \aa=\hhh\op\cc\op

3154: M_3(\cc)\,\owns\,(a,b,c).\ee

3155: The internal Hilbert

3156: space is copied from the Particle Physics Booklet

3157: \cite{data},

3158: \bb \hh_L&=&

3159: \left(\cc^2\ot\cc^N\ot\cc^3\right)\ \op\

3160: \left(\cc^2\ot\cc^N\ot\cc\right), \\

3161: \hh_R&=&\left(\cc\ot\cc^N\ot\cc^3\right)\

3162: \op\ \left(\cc\ot\cc^N\ot\cc^3\right)\

3163: \op\ \left(\cc\ot\cc^N\ot\cc\right).\ee

3164:  In each summand, the first factor

3165: denotes weak isospin doublets or singlets, the second

3166: denotes

3167: $N$ generations, $N=3$, and the third denotes colour

3168: triplets or singlets.

3169: Let us choose the following basis

3170: of the internal Hilbert space, counting fermions and

3171: antifermions (indicated by the superscript $\cdot^c$ for `charge

3172: conjugated') independently,

3173: $\hh=\hh_L\op\hh_R\op\hh^c_L\op\hh^c_R

3174: =\cc^{90}$:

3175: \bb

3176: & \pp{u\cr d}_L,\ \pp{c\cr s}_L,\ \pp{t\cr b}_L,\

3177: \pp{\nu_e\cr e}_L,\ \pp{\nu_\mu\cr\mu}_L,\

3178: \pp{\nu_\tau\cr\tau}_L;&\cr \cr

3179: &\matrix{u_R,\cr d_R,}\qq \matrix{c_R,\cr s_R,}\qq

3180: \matrix{t_R,\cr b_R,}\qq  e_R,\qq \mu_R,\qq

3181: \tau_R;&\cr  \cr

3182: & \pp{u\cr d}^c_L,\ \pp{c\cr s}_L^c,\

3183: \pp{t\cr b}_L^c,\

3184: \pp{\nu_e\cr e}_L^c,\ \pp{\nu_\mu\cr\mu}_L^c,\

3185: \pp{\nu_\tau\cr\tau}_L^c;&\cr\cr

3186: &\matrix{u_R^c,\cr d_R^c,}\qq

3187: \matrix{c_R^c,\cr s_R^c,}\qq

3188: \matrix{t_R^c,\cr b_R^c,}\qq  e_R^c,\qq \mu_R^c,\qq

3189: \tau_R^c.&\eee

3190: This is the current eigenstate basis, the representation

3191: $\rho$ acting on

3192: $\hh$ by 

3193: \bb \rho(a,b,c):=

3194: \pp{\rho_{L}&0&0&0\cr

3195: 0&\rho_{R}&0&0\cr

3196: 0&0&{\bar\rho^c_{L}}&0\cr

3197: 0&0&0&{\bar\rho^c_{R}}}\ee

3198: with

3199: \bb\rho_{L}(a):=\pp{

3200: a\ot 1_N\ot 1_3&0\cr

3201: 0&a\ot 1_N},\qq

3202: \rho_{R}(b):= \pp{

3203: b 1_N\ot 1_3&0&0\cr 0&\bar b 1_N\ot 1_3&0\cr

3204: 0&0&\bar

3205: b1_N}, \label{repr1}

3206: \ee\bb

3207:   \rho^c_{L}(b,c):=\pp{

3208: 1_2\ot 1_N\ot c&0\cr

3209: 0&\bar b1_2\ot 1_N},\qq

3210: \rho^c_{R}(b,c) := \pp{

3211: 1_N\ot c&0&0\cr 0&1_N\ot c&0\cr

3212: 0&0&\bar b1_N}.  \label{repr2}

3213: \ee

3214:  The

3215: apparent asymmetry between particles and

3216: antiparticles -- the former are subject to weak, the

3217: latter to strong interactions --  will disappear after

3218: application of the lift $\llll$ with

3219: \bb J=\pp{0&1_{15N}\cr 1_{15N}&0}\circ

3220: \ {\rm complex\ conjugation}.\ee

3221:  For the sake of

3222: completeness, we record the chirality as matrix

3223: \bb \chi=\pp{-1_{8N}&0&0&0\cr 0&1_{7N}&0&0\cr

3224:  0&0&-1_{8N}&0\cr 0&0&0&1_{7N} }.\ee

3225: The

3226: internal Dirac operator

3227: \bb \tilde \dd=\pp{0&\mm&0&0\cr

3228: \mm^*&0&0&0\cr

3229: 0&0&0&\bar\mm\cr

3230: 0&0&\bar\mm^*&0}\ee

3231: is made of the fermionic mass matrix of the standard

3232: model,

3233: \bb\mm=\pp{

3234: \pp{1&0\cr 0&0}\ot M_u\ot 1_3\,+\,

3235: \pp{0&0\cr 0&1}\ot M_d\ot 1_3

3236: &0\cr

3237: 0&\pp{0\cr 1}\ot M_e},\ee

3238: with

3239: \bb M_u:=\pp{

3240: m_u&0&0\cr

3241: 0&m_c&0\cr

3242: 0&0&m_t},&& M_d:= C_{KM}\pp{

3243: m_d&0&0\cr

3244: 0&m_s&0\cr

3245: 0&0&m_b},\\[2mm] && M_e:=\pp{

3246: m_e&0&0\cr

3247: 0&m_\mu&0\cr

3248: 0&0&m_\tau}.\ee

3249: From the booklet we know that all indicated fermion

3250: masses are different from each other and that the

3251: Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix  $C_{KM}$ is

3252: non-degenerate in the sense that  no quark is

3253: simultaneously mass and weak current eigenstate.

3254: 

3255: We must acknowledge the fact -- and this is far from trivial --

3256: that the finite spectral triple of the standard model satisfies all of

3257: Connes' axioms:\\

3258: $\bullet$ It is orientable, $\chi = \rho (-1_2,1,1_3)J\rho

3259: (-1_2,1,1_3)J^{-1}.$\\

3260: $\bullet$ Poincar\'e duality holds. The standard model

3261: has  three minimal

3262: projectors,

3263: \bb p_1=(1_2,0,0),\qq p_2=(0,1,0), \qq p_3=

3264: \left(0,0,\pp{1&0&0\cr 0&0&0\cr 0&0&0}\right)\ee

3265: and the intersection form

3266: \bb \cap=-2N\pp{0&1&1\cr 1&-1&-1\cr 1&-1&0},\ee

3267: is non-degenerate. We note that Majorana masses are forbidden

3268: because

3269: of the axiom $\tilde \dd\chi=-\chi\tilde \dd.$ On the other hand if

3270: we wanted to give Dirac masses to all three neutrinos we would

3271: have to add three right-handed neutrinos to the standard model.

3272: Then the intersection form,

3273: \bb \cap=-2N\pp{0&1&1\cr 1&-2&-1\cr 1&-1&0},\ee

3274: would become degenerate and Poincar\'e duality would fail.\\

3275: $\bullet$ The first order axiom is satisfied precisely because of the

3276: first two of the six ad hoc properties of the standard model

3277: recalled in subsection \ref{winner}, colour couples vectorially and

3278: commutes with the fermionic mass matrix, $[\dd,\rho

3279: (1_2,1,c)]=0$. As an immediate consequence the Higgs scalar =

3280: internal 1-form will be a colour singlet and the gluons will remain

3281: massless, the third ad hoc property of the standard model in its

3282: conventional formulation.\\

3283: $\bullet$

3284: There seems to be some arbitrariness in the choice of the

3285: representation under $\cc\owns b$. In fact this is not true, any

3286: choice different from the one in equations

3287: (\ref{repr1},\ref{repr2}) is either incompatible with the axioms of

3288: spectral triples or it leads to charged massless particles

3289: incompatible with the Lorentz force or to a symmetry breaking

3290: with equal top and bottom masses. Therefore, the only flexibility

3291: in the fermionic charges is from the choice of the central charges

3292: \cite{fare}.

3293: 

3294: \subsubsection{Central charges}

3295: 

3296: The standard model has the following groups,

3297: \bb U(\aa)\ =&\ SU(2)\times U(1)\times U(3)\qq& \owns

3298: u=(u_0,v, w),\\

3299: U^c(\aa)\ =&\ \zz_2\times U(1)\times U(1)\qq&\owns

3300: u_c=(u_{c0},v_{c}, w_{c}1_3),\\

3301: U^n(\aa)\ =&SU(2)\qq\times\qq U(3)\qq&\owns\qq\qq\

3302: (u_0,w),\\

3303: U^{nc}(\aa)\ =&\zz_2\qq\times\qq U(1)\qq&\owns\qq\qq\

3304: (u_{c0},w_{c}1_3),\\

3305: {\rm Int}(\aa)\ =&\ [SU(2)\qq\times\qq SU(3)]/\Gamma

3306: &\owns u_\sigma =(u_{\sigma 0}, w_{\sigma }),\\

3307: \Gamma \ =&\zz_2\qq\times\qq \zz_3\qq&\owns\gamma =

3308: (\exp[-m_02\pi i/2],\exp[-m_22\pi i/3]),\label{disstan}

3309: \ee

3310: with

3311: $m_0=0,1$ and $m_2=0,1,2$.

3312: Let us compute the receptacle

3313: of the lifted automorphisms,

3314: \bb {\rm Aut}_{\hh}(\aa)=

3315: [U(2)_L\times U(3)_c&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\times U(N)_{qL}

3316: \times U(N)_{\ell L}\times U(N)_{uR}

3317: \times U(N)_{dR}]/[U(1)\times U(1)]\cr &&

3318: \times U(N)_{eR}.\label{smrecept}\ee

3319: The subscripts indicate on which

3320: multiplet the

3321: $U(N)$s act. The kernel of the projection down to the

3322: automorphism group Aut($\aa)$ is

3323: \bb{\rm ker}\,p=

3324: [U(1)\times U(1)&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\times U(N)_{qL}

3325: \times U(N)_{\ell L}\times U(N)_{uR}

3326: \times U(N)_{dR}]/[U(1)\times U(1)]\cr &&

3327: \times U(N)_{eR},\ee

3328: and its restrictions to the images of the lifts are

3329: \bb {\rm ker}\,p \cap L({\rm Int}(\aa))=\zz_2\times\zz_3,\qq

3330: {\rm ker}\,p \cap \llll(U^n(\aa))=\zz_2\times U(1).\ee

3331: The kernel of $i$ is $\zz_2\times U(1)$ in sharp contrast to

3332: the kernel of $\hat L$, which is trivial.

3333: The isospin $SU(2)_L$ and the

3334: colour $SU(3)_c$ are the image of the lift $\hat L$.

3335: If $q\not=0,$ the image of

3336: $\ell$ consists of one

3337: $U(1)\owns w_c=\exp [i\theta ]$ contained in the five

3338: flavour

3339: $U(N)$s. Its embedding depends on $q$:

3340: \bb \llll(1_2,1,

3341: w_c1_3)=\ell(w_c)=&&\\

3342: {\rm diag}\,(&\!\!\!\!u_{qL}1_2\ot1_N\ot1_3,

3343: u_{\ell L}1_2\ot1_N,u_{u R}1_N\ot1_3,u_{d

3344: R}1_N\ot1_3,u_{e R}1_N;&\cr  &\!\!\!\!\bar u_{qL}1_2\ot1_N\ot1_3,

3345: \bar u_{\ell L}1_2\ot1_N,\bar

3346: u_{u R}1_N\ot1_3,\bar u_{d R}1_N\ot1_3,\bar u_{e R}1_N)&\eee

3347: with $u_j=\exp[iy_j\theta ]$ and

3348: \bb

3349: y_{qL} = q_{2},\qquad

3350: y_{\ell L}= -q_{1},\qquad

3351: y_{u R} = q_{1}+q_{2} ,\qquad

3352: y_{d R} = -q_{1}+q_{2}, \qquad

3353: y_{e R} = -2q_{1}. \label{y}

3354: \ee

3355: Independently of the embedding, we have indeed {\it

3356: derived} the three fermionic conditions of the hypercharge fine

3357: tuning (\ref{4cond}). In other words, in noncommutative

3358: geometry the massless electroweak gauge boson necessarily

3359: couples vectorially.

3360: 

3361: Our goal is now to find the minimal extension $\ell$ that

3362: renders the extended lift symmetric,

3363: $\llll(-u_0,-w)=\llll(u_0,w)$, and that renders

3364:  $\llll(1_2,w)$ single-valued. The first requirement means \{

3365: $ \tilde q_{1}=1$ and

3366: $\tilde q_{2}=0$ \} modulo 2,

3367: with

3368: \bb \pp{\tilde q_1\cr \tilde q_2}

3369: =\,{\textstyle\frac{1}{3}} \left( \pp{ q_1\cr  q_2}

3370: -\pp{0\cr 1}\right).\ee

3371:  The second requirement means that

3372: $\tilde q$ has integer coefficients.

3373: 

3374:  The first extension which comes to mind has

3375: $q=0$, $\tilde q=\pp{0\cr -1/3}$. With respect to the

3376: interpretation (\ref{innfake}) of the inner

3377: automorphisms, one might object that this is not an

3378: extension at all. With respect to the {\it generic}

3379: characterization (\ref{inntrue}), it certainly is a

3380: non-trivial extension. Anyhow it  fails both tests. The most

3381: general extension that passes both tests has the form

3382: \bb \tilde q=\pp{2z_1+1\cr 2z_2},\qq

3383: q=\pp{6z_1+3\cr 6z_2+1},\qq

3384: z_1,z_2\in\zz.\ee

3385: Consequently, $y_{\ell_L}=-q_1$  cannot vanish, the neutrino

3386: comes out electrically neutral in compliance with the Lorentz

3387: force. As common practise, we normalize the hypercharges to

3388: $y_{\ell_L}=-1/2$ and compute the last remaining hypercharge

3389: $y_{q_L}$,

3390:  \bb

3391: y_{q_L}=\,\frac{q_{2}}{2q_{1}}\,

3392: ={\frac{{\textstyle\frac{1}{6}}+z_2 }{

3393: 1+2z_1  }}.\ee

3394: We can change the sign of $y_{q_L}$ by

3395: permuting

3396: $u$ with $d^c$ and $d$ with $u^c$. Therefore it is

3397: sufficient to take $z_1=0,1,2,...$

3398: The minimal such extension, $z_1=z_2=0$,

3399: recovers nature's choice $y_{q_L}={\textstyle\frac{1}{6}}$.

3400: Its lift,

3401: \bb \llll(u_0,w)=\rho (u_0,\det w,w)J

3402: \rho (u_0,\det w,w)J^{-1},\ee

3403: is the anomaly free fermionic

3404: representation of the standard model considered as

3405: $SU(2)\times U(3)$ Yang-Mills-Higgs model. The

3406: double-valuedness of

3407: $\llll$ comes from the discrete group $\zz_2$ of central

3408: quaternionic unitaries

3409: $(\pm 1_2,1_3)\ \in\  \zz_2\ \subset\ \Gamma\ \subset\

3410: U^{nc}(\aa) $.  On the other hand, O'Raifeartaigh's \cite{or}

3411: $\zz_2$ in the group of the standard model (\ref{smgr}),

3412: $\pm (1_2, 1_3)\ \in\ \zz_2\ \subset\ U^{nc}(\aa)$, is not a

3413: subgroup of

3414: $\Gamma $. It reflects the symmetry of

3415: $\llll$.

3416: 

3417: \subsubsection{Fluctuating metric}

3418: 

3419: The stage is set now for fluctuating the metric by means of the

3420: extended lift. This algorithm answers en passant a long standing

3421: question in Yang-Mills theories: To gauge or not to gauge? Given a

3422: fermionic Lagrangian, e.g. the one of the standard model, our first

3423: reflex is to compute its symmetry group. In noncommutative

3424: geometry, this group is simply the internal receptacle

3425: (\ref{smrecept}). The painful question in Yang-Mills theory is

3426: what subgroup of this symmetry group should be gauged? For us,

3427: this question is answered by the choices of the spectral triple and of

3428: the spin lift. Indeed the image of the extended lift is the gauge

3429: group. The fluctuating metric promotes its generators to gauge

3430: bosons, the $W^\pm$, the $Z$, the photon and the gluons. At the

3431: same time, the Higgs representation is derived, equation

3432: (\ref{fluct}):

3433: \bb H=\rho (u_0, \det w, w)[\tilde\dd,\rho (u_0, \det w,

3434: w)^{-1}]=\pp{0&\hat H&0&0\cr \hat H^*&0&0&0\cr 0&0&0&0\cr

3435: 0&0&0&0}\ee

3436: with

3437: \bb \hat H=

3438: \pp{\pp{h_1M_u&-\bar h_2M_d\cr h_2 M_u&\bar h_1M_d}\ot

3439: 1_3 &0\cr

3440:  0&\pp{-\bar h_2M_e\cr \bar h_1M_e}\cr

3441: }\ee

3442: and

3443: \bb \pp{h_1&-\bar h_2\cr h_2&\bar h_1}=\pm u_0

3444: \pp{\det w&0\cr 0&\det\bar w}-1_2.\ee

3445: The Higgs is characterized by one complex doublet, $(h_1,h_2)^T$.

3446: Again it will be convenient to pass to the homogeneous Higgs

3447: variable,

3448: \bb \dd&=&\llll\tilde \dd\llll^{-1}=\tilde \dd +H+JHJ^{-1}\cr\cr

3449: &=&\Phi +J\Phi J^{-1}=\pp{0&\hat\Phi &0&0\cr \hat \Phi ^*&0&0&0

3450: \cr 0&0&0&\bar{\hat\Phi} \cr 0&0&\bar{\hat\Phi} ^*&0}\ee

3451: with

3452: \bb \hat \Phi =

3453: \pp{\pp{\varphi _1M_u&-\bar \varphi _2M_d\cr \varphi _2

3454: M_u&\bar \varphi _1M_d}\ot 1_3 &0\cr

3455:  0&\pp{-\bar \varphi _2M_e\cr \bar \varphi _1M_e}\cr

3456: }=\rho _L(\phi )\mm\ee

3457: and

3458: \bb\phi = \pp{\varphi _1&-\bar \varphi _2\cr \varphi _2&\bar

3459: \varphi _1}=\pm u_0

3460: \pp{\det w&0\cr 0&\det\bar w}.\ee

3461: 

3462: In order to satisfy the first order condition,

3463: the representation of

3464: $M_3(\cc)\owns c$ had to commute with the Dirac operator.

3465: Therefore the Higgs is a colour singlet and the gluons will remain

3466: massless. The first two of the six intriguing properties of the

3467: standard model listed in subsection \ref{winner} have a geometric

3468: {\it raison d'\^etre}, the first order condition.

3469: In turn, they imply the third

3470: property: we have just shown that the Higgs $\varphi

3471: =(\varphi _1,\varphi _2)^T$ is a colour singlet. At the same time

3472: the fifth property follows from the fourth: the Higgs

3473:  of the standard model is an isospin doublet

3474:  because of the parity violating

3475: couplings of the quaternions $\hhh$.

3476:  Furthermore, this Higgs has

3477: hypercharge

3478: $y_\varphi =-{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} $ and the last fine tuning of

3479: the sixth property (\ref{4cond})  also derives from Connes'

3480: algorithm: the Higgs has a component with vanishing electric

3481: charge, the physical Higgs, and the photon will remain massless.

3482: 

3483: In conclusion, in Connes version of the standard model there is

3484: only one intriguing input property, the fourth: explicit parity

3485: violation in the algebra representation $\hh_L\oplus\hh_R$, the

3486: five others are mathematical consequences.

3487: 

3488: \subsubsection{Spectral action}

3489: 

3490: Computing the spectral action $S_{CC}=f(\dd_t^2/\Lambda ^2)$ in

3491: the standard model is not more difficult than in the minimax

3492: example, only the matrices are a little bigger,

3493: \bb \dd_t=\llll_t\tilde \dd_t \llll_t^{-1}=

3494: \pp{\ddd_L&\gamma _5\hat\Phi    &0&0\cr

3495: \gamma _5\hat\Phi ^*&\ddd_R&0&0\cr

3496: 0&0&C\ddd_LC^{-1}&\gamma _5\bar{\hat\Phi }   \cr

3497: 0&0&\gamma _5\bar{\hat\Phi }^*&C\ddd_RC^{-1}}.\ee

3498: The trace of the powers of $\hat\Phi $ are computed from the

3499: identities $\hat\Phi = \rho_L (\phi )\mm$ and $\phi ^*\phi =\phi

3500: \phi ^*= (|\varphi_1|^2+|\varphi _2|^2)1_2=|\varphi |^21_2$ by

3501: using that $\rho _L$ as a representation respects multiplication

3502: and involution.

3503: 

3504: The spectral action produces the complete action of the standard

3505: model coupled to gravity with the following relations for coupling

3506: constants:

3507: \bb g_3^2=g_2^2={\textstyle\frac{9}{N}}  \lambda\label{smconstr}

3508:  .\ee

3509: Our choice of central charges, $\tilde q=(1,0)^T$, entails a further

3510: relation, $g_1^2={\textstyle\frac{3}{5}} g_2^2$, i.e. $\sin^2\theta

3511: _w=3/8$. However only products of the Abelian gauge coupling

3512: $g_1$ and the hypercharges $y_j$ appear in the Lagrangian. By

3513: rescaling the central charges, we can rescale the hypercharges

3514: and consequently the Abelian coupling $g_1$. It seems quite moral

3515: that noncommutative geometry has nothing to say about Abelian

3516: gauge couplings.

3517: 

3518: \begin{figure}[h]

3519: \label{merge}

3520: \epsfxsize=11cm

3521: \hspace{2.2cm}

3522: \epsfbox{merge.ps}

3523: \caption{Running coupling constants}

3524: \end{figure}

3525: 

3526: Experiment tells us that the weak and strong couplings are

3527: unequal, equation (\ref{gaugecoup}) at  energies

3528: corresponding to the $Z$ mass, $g_2=0.6518\pm

3529: 0.0003,\ g_3=1.218\pm 0.01.$ Experiment also tells us that the

3530: coupling constants are not constant, but that they evolve with energy.

3531: This evolution can be understood theoretically in terms of

3532: renormalization: one can get rid of short distance divergencies in

3533: perturbative quantum field theory by allowing energy depending

3534:  gauge, Higgs, and Yukawa couplings where the theoretical evolution

3535: depends on the particle content of the model. In the standard model,

3536: $g_2$ and $g_3$ come together with increasing energy, see Figure

3537: 8. They would become equal at astronomical energies,

3538: $\Lambda =10^{17}$ GeV, if one believed that

3539: between presently explored energies,

3540: $10^2$ GeV, and the `unification scale' $\Lambda $, no new

3541: particles exist. This hypothesis has become popular under the name

3542: `big desert'

3543:  since Grand Unified Theories.

3544: It was believed that new gauge bosons, `lepto-quarks' with masses of

3545: order $\Lambda $ existed. The lepto-quarks together with the $W^\pm$,

3546: the $Z$, the photon and the gluons generate the simple group $SU(5)$,

3547: with only one gauge coupling,

3548: $g_5^2:=g_3^2=g_2^2={\textstyle\frac{5}{3}} g_1^2$ at

3549: $\Lambda $. In the minimal $SU(5)$ model, these lepto-quarks

3550: would mediate proton decay with a half life that today is excluded

3551: experimentally.

3552: 

3553: If we believe in the big desert, we can imagine that -- while almost

3554: commutative at present energies -- our geometry becomes truly

3555: noncommutative at time scales of

3556: $\hbar /\Lambda \sim 10^{-41}$ s. Since in such a geometry smaller

3557: time intervals cannot be resolved, we expect the coupling constants to

3558: become energy independent at the corresponding energy scale

3559: $\Lambda $. We remark that the first motivation for

3560: noncommutative geometry in spacetime goes back to

3561: Heisenberg and was precisely the

3562: regularization of short distance divergencies in quantum field

3563: theory, see e.g. \cite{jackiw}. The big desert is an opportunistic

3564: hypothesis and remains so in the context of noncommutative

3565: geometry. But in this context, it has at least the merit of being

3566: consistent with three other physical ideas:

3567: \begin{description}\item[Planck time:]

3568: There is an old hand waving argument

3569: combining Heisenberg's uncertainty relation of phase

3570: space with the Schwarzschild horizon to find an

3571: uncertainty relation in spacetime with a scale

3572: $\Lambda$ smaller than the Planck energy $(\hbar

3573: c^5/G)^{1/2}\sim 10^{19}$ GeV: To measure a position with a

3574: precision

3575: $\Delta x$ we need, following Heisenberg, at least a momentum

3576: $\hbar/\Delta x$ or, by special relativity, an energy

3577: $\hbar c/\Delta x$.  According to general relativity,

3578: such an energy creates an horizon of size $G\hbar

3579: c^{-3}/\Delta x$. If this horizon exceeds $\Delta x$ all

3580: information on the position is lost. We can only

3581:  resolve positions with $\Delta x$ larger than the Planck length,

3582: $\Delta x> (\hbar  G /c^{3})^{1/2}\sim 10^{-35}$ m. Or we can only

3583: resolve time with  $\Delta t$ larger than the Planck time,

3584: $\Delta t> (\hbar  G /c^{5})^{1/2}\sim 10^{-43}$ s. This is

3585: compatible with the above time uncertainty of $\hbar /\Lambda \sim

3586: 10^{-41}$ s.

3587: \item[Stability:]

3588: We want the Higgs self coupling $\lambda $ to remain positive

3589: \cite{cmpp} during its perturbative evolution for all energies up to

3590: $\Lambda $. A negative Higgs self coupling would mean that no

3591: ground state exists, the Higgs potential is unstable. This requirement

3592: is met for the self coupling given by the constraint (\ref{smconstr})

3593: at energy

3594: $\Lambda $, see Figure 8.

3595: \item[Triviality:]

3596: We want the Higgs self coupling $\lambda $ to remain

3597: perturbatively small  \cite{cmpp} during its evolution for

3598: all energies up to

3599: $\Lambda $ because its evolution is computed from a

3600: perturbative expansion. This requirement as well is met for

3601: the self coupling given by the constraint (\ref{smconstr}), see

3602: Figure 8. If the top mass was larger than 231 GeV or if there were

3603: $N=8$ or more generations this criterion would fail.

3604: \end{description}

3605: Since the big desert gives a minimal and consistent picture we are

3606: curious to know its numerical implication. If we accept the constraint

3607: (\ref{smconstr})  with $g_2=0.5170$ at the energy

3608: $\Lambda=0.968\ 10^{17}$ GeV

3609: and evolve it down to lower energies using the perturbative

3610: renormalization flow of the standard model, see Figure 8, we

3611: retrieve

3612: the experimental nonAbelian gauge couplings $g_2$

3613: and $g_3$  at

3614: the $Z$ mass  by construction of

3615: $\Lambda $. For the Higgs coupling, we obtain

3616: \bb \lambda =0.06050  \ \pm\  0.0037\qq  {\rm at}\qq  E=m_Z.\ee

3617: The indicated error comes from the experimental error in the top

3618: mass,

3619: $m_t= 174.3\pm 5.1\ {\rm GeV}$, which affects the evolution of the

3620: Higgs coupling. From the Higgs coupling at low energies we compute

3621: the Higgs mass,

3622: \bb m_H=4\sqrt 2 \,{\frac{\sqrt\lambda }{ g_2  }}\,m_W=171.6\

3623: \pm\ 5\ \rm GeV.\ee

3624: For details of this calculation see \cite{bridge}.

3625: 

3626: \subsection{Beyond the standard model}

3627: 

3628: A social reason, that made the Yang-Mills-Higgs machine

3629: popular, is that it is an inexhaustible source of employment. Even

3630: after the standard model, physicists continue to play on the machine

3631: and try out extensions of the standard model by adding new

3632: particles, `let the desert bloom'. These particles can be

3633: gauge bosons coupling only to  right-handed fermions in order to

3634: restore left-right symmetry. The added particles can be lepto-quarks for

3635: grand unification or supersymmetric particles. These models are

3636: carefully tuned not to upset the phenomenological success of the

3637: standard model. This means in practice to choose Higgs representations

3638: and potentials that give masses to the added particles, large enough

3639: to make them undetectable in present day experiments, but not too

3640: large so that experimentalists can propose bigger

3641: machines to test these models. Independently there are always short

3642: lived deviations from the standard model predictions in new

3643: experiments. They never miss to trigger new, short lived models with

3644: new particles to fit the `anomalies'. For instance, the literature

3645: contains hundreds of superstring inspired Yang-Mills-Higgs models,

3646: each of them with hundreds of parameters, coins, waiting for the

3647: standard model to fail.

3648: 

3649: Of course, we are trying the same game in Connes' do-it-yourself kit.

3650: So far, we have not been able to find one single consistent extension of

3651: the standard model \cite{florian, fedele, kw,beyond}. The reason is

3652: clear, we have no handle on the Higgs representation and potential,

3653: which are on the output side, and, in general, we meet two problems:

3654: light physical scalars and degenerate fermion masses in irreducible

3655: multiplets. The extended standard model with arbitrary numbers of

3656: quark generations, $N_q\geq 0$, of lepton generations, $N_\ell\geq

3657: 1$, and of colours $N_c$, somehow manages  to avoid both problems

3658: and we are trying to prove that it is unique as such. The minimax

3659: model has

3660: $N_q=0,\ N_\ell=1,\ N_c=0$. The standard model has

3661: $N_q=N_\ell=:N$ and $N_c=3$ to avoid Yang-Mills anomalies

3662: \cite{zinn}. It also has 

3663: $N=3$ generations. So far, the only realistic extension of the standard

3664: model that we know of in

3665: noncommutative geometry, is the addition

3666: of right-handed neutrinos  and of  Dirac masses in one or two

3667: generations. These might be necessary to account for observed neutrino

3668: oscillations \cite{data}.

3669: 

3670: \section{Outlook and conclusion}

3671: 

3672: Noncommutative geometry reconciles Riemannian geometry and

3673: uncertainty and we expect it to reconcile general relativity with

3674: quantum field theory. We also expect it to improve our still incomplete

3675: understanding of quantum field theory. On the perturbative level

3676: such an improvement is happening right now: Connes,

3677: Moscovici, and  Kreimer discovered a subtle

3678: link between a noncommutative generalization of the index

3679: theorem and perturbative quantum field theory. This link is a

3680: Hopf algebra relevant to both theories \cite{cmk}.

3681: 

3682: In general, Hopf

3683: algebras play the same role in noncommutative geometry as Lie

3684: groups play in Riemannian geometry and we expect new examples of

3685: noncommutative geometry from its merging with the theory of Hopf

3686: algebras. Reference \cite{shahn} contains a simple example where

3687: quantum group techniques can be applied to noncommutative particle

3688: models.

3689: 

3690: The running of coupling constants from perturbative quantum field

3691: theory must be taken into account in order to perform the high

3692: precision test of the standard model at present day energies.

3693: We have invoked an extrapolation of this running to astronomical

3694: energies to make

3695: the constraint $g_2=g_3$ from the spectral action compatible with

3696: experiment. This extrapolation is still based on quantum loops  in

3697: flat Minkowski space. While

3698:  acceptable at energies below the scale

3699: $\Lambda $ where gravity and the noncommutativity of space seem

3700: negligible, this approximation is unsatisfactory from a conceptual

3701: point of view and one would like to see  quantum fields

3702: constructed on a noncommutative space. At the end of the nineties

3703: first examples of  quantum fields

3704: on the (flat) noncommutative torus or its non-compact

3705:  version, the Moyal plane, were

3706: published \cite{ncqf}. These examples came straight from the

3707: spectral action. The noncommutative torus is motivated from

3708: quantum mechanical phase space and was the

3709: first example of a noncommutative spectral triple \cite{nct}.

3710: Bellissard \cite{belliss} has shown that the noncommutative torus is

3711: relevant in solid state physics: one can understand the quantum Hall

3712: effect by taking the Brillouin zone to be noncommutative. Only

3713: recently other examples of noncommutative spaces like

3714: noncommutative spheres where uncovered \cite{coladu}. Since 1999,

3715: quantum fields on the noncommutative torus are being studied

3716:  extensively including

3717: the fields of the standard model \cite{msm}. So far, its internal part

3718: is not treated as a noncommutative geometry and Higgs bosons and

3719: potentials are added opportunistically.

3720: This problem is avoided naturally by considering the tensor

3721: product of the noncommutative torus with a finite spectral triple,

3722: but I am sure that the

3723: axioms of noncommutative geometry can be rediscovered by playing

3724: long enough with model building.

3725: 

3726: In quantum mechanics and in general relativity, time and space play

3727: radically different roles. Spatial position is an observable in

3728: quantum mechanics, time is not. In general relativity, spacial

3729: position loses all meaning and only proper time can be measured.

3730: Distances are then measured by a particular observer as (his proper)

3731: time of flight of photons going back and forth multiplied by the

3732: speed of light, which is supposed to be universal. This definition of

3733: distances is operational thanks to the high precision of present day

3734: atomic clocks, for example in the GPS. The `Riemannian' definition of

3735: the meter, the forty millionth part of a complete geodesic on

3736: earth, had to be abandoned in favour of  a quantum mechanical

3737: definition of the second via the spectrum of an atom. Connes'

3738: definition of geometry via the spectrum of the

3739: Dirac operator is the precise counter part of today's experimental

3740: situation. Note that the meter stick is an extended (rigid ?) object. On the

3741: other hand an atomic clock is a pointlike object and experiment tells us

3742: that the atom is sensitive to the potentials at the location of the clock,

3743: the potentials of all forces, gravitational, electro-magnetic, ... The

3744: special role of time remains to be understood in noncommutative

3745: geometry

3746: \cite{rov} as well as the notion of spectral triples with Lorentzian

3747: signature and their 1+3 split \cite{kal}.

3748: 

3749: Let us come back to our initial claim: Connes derives the standard model

3750: of electro-magnetic, weak and strong forces from noncommutative

3751: geometry and, at the same time, unifies them with gravity.  If we say

3752: that the Balmer-Rydberg formula is derived from quantum mechanics,

3753: then this claim has three levels:\\

3754: {\bf Explain the nature of the variables:} The choice of the discrete

3755: variables

3756: $n_j$,

3757:  contains already a -- at the time revolutionary -- piece of

3758: physics, energy quantization. Where does it come from?\\

3759: {\bf Explain the ansatz:} Why should one take the power law

3760: (\ref{ansatz})?\\

3761: {\bf Explain the experimental fit:} The ansatz comes with discrete

3762: parameters,

3763:  the `bills' $q_j$, and continuous parameters, the `coins' $g_j$, which are

3764: determined by an experimental fit. Where do the fitted values, `the

3765: winner', come from?

3766: 

3767:  How about deriving gravity from Riemannian geometry?

3768: Riemannian geometry has only one possible variable, the metric $g$.

3769: The minimax principle dictates the Lagrangian ansatz:

3770: \bb S[g]=\int_M [\Lambda ^c-{\textstyle\frac{1}{16\pi G}} R^q

3771: ]\,\de V.\ee

3772: Experiment rules on the parameters: $q=1$, $G=6.670\cdot 10^{-11}\ \rm

3773: m^3s^{-2}kg$, Newton's constant, and $\Lambda ^c\sim 0$. Riemannian

3774: geometry remains silent on the third level. Nevertheless, there is

3775: general agreement, gravity derives from Riemannian geometry.

3776: 

3777: Noncommutative geometry has only one possible variable, the Dirac

3778: operator, which in the commutative case coincides with the metric. Its

3779: fluctuations explain the variables of the additional forces, gauge and

3780: Higgs bosons. The minimax principle dictates the Lagrangian ansatz:

3781: the spectral action. It reproduces the Einstein-Hilbert action and the

3782: ansatz of Yang, Mills and Higgs, see Table 3. On the third level,

3783: noncommutative geometry is not silent, it produces lots of constraints,

3784: all compatible with the experimental fit. And their exploration is not

3785: finished yet.

3786: 

3787: \begin{table}[h]

3788: \begin{center}

3789: \setlength{\unitlength}{1.0cm}

3790: \begin{picture}(10,4.8)(0,1)

3791: \put(0,5){\parbox{2cm}{\rm Riemannian geometry}}

3792: \put(3.5,5){\vector(1,0){2,5}}

3793: \put(4,5.5){\parbox[b]{2cm}{\rm Einstein}}

3794: \put(7,5){\parbox{2cm}{\rm gravity}}

3795: \put(1.1,4){\oval(0.2,0.6)[t]}

3796: \put(1,4){\vector(0,-1){2}}

3797: \put(0,1){\parbox{2cm}{\rm noncommutative geometry}}

3798: \put(3.5,1){\vector(1,0){2.5}}

3799: \put(4,1.5){\parbox[b]{2cm}{\rm Connes}}

3800: \put(7,1){\parbox{5cm}{\rm gravity +

3801: Yang-Mills-Higgs}}

3802: \put(-0.7,3){\parbox{2cm}{\rm Connes}}

3803: \end{picture}

3804: \end{center}

3805: \caption{Deriving some

3806: YMH forces from gravity}

3807: \end{table}

3808: 

3809:  I hope to have convinced one or the other reader that

3810: noncommutative geometry contains elegant solutions of long

3811: standing problems in fundamental physics and that it proposes

3812: concrete strategies to tackle the remaining ones.

3813: I would like to conclude our outlook with a sentence by Planck who tells

3814: us how important the opinion of our young, unbiased colleagues is.

3815: Planck said, a new theory is accepted, not because the others are

3816: convinced, because they die.

3817: 

3818: \vspace{1cm}\noindent

3819: It is a pleasure to thank Eike Bick and Frank Steffen for the

3820: organization of a splendid School. I thank the participants for their

3821: unbiased criticism and Kurusch Ebrahimi-Fard, Volker Schatz, and

3822: Frank Steffen for a careful reading of the manuscript.

3823: 

3824: \section{Appendix}

3825: 

3826: \subsection{Groups}

3827: 

3828: Groups are an extremely powerful tool in physics. Most symmetry

3829: transformations form a group. Invariance under continuous

3830: transformation groups entails conserved quantities, like energy,

3831: angular momentum or electric charge.

3832: 

3833: A group G is a set equipped with an associative, not necessarily

3834: commutative (or `Abelian') multiplication law that has a neutral

3835: element 1. Every group element $g$ is supposed to have an inverse

3836: $g^{-1}.$

3837: 

3838: We denote by $\zz_n$ the {\it cyclic group} of $n$ elements. You can

3839: either think of $\zz_n$ as the set $\{0,1,...,n-1\}$ with

3840: multiplication law being addition modulo $n$ and neutral element

3841: 0. Or equivalently, you can take the set $\{1,\exp(2\pi i/n),\exp(4\pi

3842: i/n),..., \exp((n-1)2\pi i/n)\}$ with multiplication and neutral element

3843: 1.

3844: $\zz_n$ is an Abelian subgroup of the permutation group on $n $

3845: objects.

3846: 

3847: Other immediate examples are matrix groups: The {\it general linear

3848: groups}

3849: $GL(n,\cc)$ and

3850: $GL(n,\rr)$ are the sets of complex (real), invertible $n\times n$

3851: matrices. The multiplication law is matrix multiplication and the

3852: neutral element is the $n\times n$ unit matrix $1_n$. There are

3853: many important subgroups of the general linear groups:

3854: $SL(n,\cdot)$,

3855: $\cdot=\rr$ or

3856: $\cc$, consist only of matrices with unit determinant. $S$ stands for

3857: special and will always indicate that we add the condition of unit

3858: determinant. The {\it orthogonal group} $O(n)$ is the group of real

3859: $n\times n$ matrices $g$ satisfying $gg^T=1_n$. The {\it special

3860: orthogonal group}

3861: $SO(n)$ describes the rotations in the Euclidean space $\rr^n$. The

3862: {\it Lorentz group} $O(1,3)$ is the set of real $4\times 4$ matrices $g$

3863: satisfying $g\eta g^T=\eta $, with $\eta =$diag$\{1,-1,-1,-1\}$. The

3864: {\it unitary group} $U(n)$ is the set of complex $n\times n$ matrices

3865: $g$ satisfying $gg^*=1_n$. The {\it unitary symplectic group}

3866: $USp(n)$ is the group of complex $2n\times 2n$ matrices $g$

3867: satisfying

3868: $gg^*=1_{2n}$ and $g {\cal I} g^T={\cal I}$ with

3869: \bb {\cal I}:=

3870: \pp{\pp{0&1\cr -1&0}&\cdots&0\cr

3871: \vdots&\ddots&\vdots\cr 0&\cdots&\pp{0&1\cr -1&0}}.\ee

3872: 

3873: The {\bf center} $Z(G)$ of a group $G$ consists of those elements in

3874: $G$ that commute  with all elements in $G$, $Z(G)=\{z\in G, zg=gz\

3875: {\rm for\ all}\ g\in G\}$. For example, $Z(U(n))=U(1)\owns

3876: \exp (i\theta )\,1_n, $ $Z(SU(n))=\zz_n\owns \exp (2\pi i k/n)\, 1_n$.

3877: 

3878: All matrix groups are subsets of $\rr^{2n^2}$ and therefore we can

3879: talk about {\bf compactness} of these groups. Recall that a subset of

3880: $\rr^N$ is compact if and only if it is closed and bounded. For

3881: instance,

3882: $U(1)$ is a circle in

3883: $\rr^2$ and therefore compact. The Lorentz group on the other

3884: hand is unbounded because of the boosts.

3885: 

3886: The matrix groups are {\it Lie groups} which means that they contain

3887: infinitesimal elements $X$ close to the neutral element:

3888: $\exp X=1+X+O(X^2)\in G.$ For instance,

3889: \bb X=\pp{0&\epsilon &0\cr -\epsilon &0&0\cr 0&0&0},

3890: \qq\epsilon

3891: \ \rm small,\ee

3892: describes an infinitesimal rotation around the $z$-axis by an

3893: infinitesimal angle

3894: $\epsilon $. Indeed

3895: \bb \exp X=\pp{\cos\epsilon &\sin\epsilon &0\cr

3896: -\sin\epsilon &\cos\epsilon &0\cr 0&0&1}\ \in SO(3),\qq

3897: 0\le\epsilon <2\pi ,\ee

3898: is a rotation around the $z$-axis by an

3899: arbitrary angle $\epsilon $. The infinitesimal transformations

3900: $X$ of a Lie group $G$ form its {\bf Lie algebra} $\gg$. It is closed

3901: under

3902:  the commutator $[X,Y]=XY-YX$.

3903: For the above

3904: matrix groups the Lie algebras are denoted by lower case letters.

3905: For example, the Lie algebra of the special unitary group $SU(n)$ is

3906: written as

3907: $su(n)$. It is the set of complex $n\times n$ matrices $X$

3908: satisfying $X+X^*=0$ and $\t X=0$. Indeed,

3909: $1_n=(1_n+X+...)(1_n+X+...)^*=1_n+X+X^*+O(X^2)$ and

3910: $1=\det\exp X =\exp\t X$. Attention, although defined in terms of

3911: complex matrices, $su(n)$ is a {\bf real} vector space. Indeed, if a

3912: matrix $X$ is anti-Hermitean, $X+X^*=0$, then in general, its complex

3913: scalar multiple

3914: $iX$ is no longer anti-Hermitean.

3915: 

3916:  However, in real vector spaces,

3917: eigenvectors do not always exist and we will have to {\bf complexify}

3918: the real vector space $\gg$: Take a basis of $\gg$. Then $\gg$ consists

3919: of linear combinations of these basis vectors with real coefficients.

3920: The {\bf complexification} $\gg^\cc$ of $\gg$ consists of linear

3921: combinations with complex coefficients.

3922: 

3923: The {\it translation group} of $\rr^n$ is $\rr^n$ itself. The

3924: multiplication law now is vector addition and the neutral element is

3925: the zero vector. As the vector addition is commutative, the

3926: translation group is Abelian.

3927: 

3928: The {\it diffeomorphism group} Diff$(M)$ of an open subset $M$ of

3929: $\rr^n$ (or of a manifold) is  the set of differentiable maps

3930: $\sigma $ from

3931: $M$ into itself that are invertible (for the composition $\circ$) and

3932: such that its inverse is differentiable. (Attention, the last condition is

3933: not automatic, as you see by taking $M=\rr\owns x$ and $\sigma

3934: (x)=x^3$.) By virtue of the chain rule we can take the composition as

3935: multiplication law. The neutral element is the identity map on $M$,

3936: $\sigma =1_M$ with

3937: $1_M(x)=x$ for all $x\in M$.

3938: 

3939: \subsection{Group representations}

3940: 

3941: We said that $SO(3)$ is the rotation group. This needs a little

3942: explanation. A rotation is given by an axis, that is a unit eigenvector

3943:  with unit eigenvalue, and an angle. Two rotations can be

3944: carried out one after the other, we say `composed'. Note that the

3945: order is important, we say that the 3-dimensional rotation group is

3946: nonAbelian. If we say that the rotations form a group, we mean that

3947: the composition of two rotations is a third rotation. However, it is not

3948: easy to compute the multiplication law, i.e., compute the axis and

3949: angle of the third rotation as a function of the axes and angles of the

3950: two initial rotations. The equivalent `representation' of the rotation

3951: group as

3952: $3\times 3$ matrices is much more convenient because the

3953: multiplication law is simply matrix multiplication. There are several

3954: `representations' of the

3955: $3$-dimensional rotation group in terms of matrices of different

3956: sizes, say $N\times N$. It is sometimes useful to know all these

3957: representations. The $N\times N$ matrices are linear maps,

3958: `endomorphisms', of the

3959: $N$-dimensional vector space $\rr^N$ into itself. Let us denote by

3960: End$(\rr^N)$ the set of all these matrices. By definition, a

3961: representation of the group $G$ on the vector space

3962: $\rr^N$ is a map $\rho :G\rightarrow {\rm End}(\rr^N)$

3963: reproducing the multiplication law as matrix multiplication or in

3964: nobler terms as composition of endomorphisms. This means

3965:  $\rho (g_1g_2)=\rho (g_1)\,\rho (g_2)$ and $\rho (1)=1_N$.

3966: The representation is called {\bf faithful} if the map $\rho $ is

3967: injective. By the minimax principle we are interested in the faithful

3968: representations of lowest dimension. Although not always unique,

3969: physicists call them  fundamental representations. The

3970: fundamental representation of the $3$-dimensional rotation group

3971: is defined on the vector space $\rr^3$. Two $N$-dimensional

3972: representations

3973: $\rho _1$ and $\rho_2$ of a group $G$ are {\bf equivalent} if

3974: there is an invertible $N\times N$ matrix $C$ such that $\rho

3975: _2(g)=C\rho _1(g)C^{-1}$ for all $g\in G$. $C$ is interpreted as

3976: describing a change of basis in $\rr^N$. A representation is called

3977: {\bf irreducible} if its vector space has no proper invariant subspace,

3978: i.e. a subspace

3979: $W\subset\rr^N$, with $W\not=\rr^N, \{0\}$ and $\rho (g)

3980: W\subset W$ for all $g\in G$.

3981: 

3982: Representations can be defined in the same manner on complex

3983: vector spaces, $\cc^N$. Then every $\rho (g)$ is a complex,

3984: invertible matrix. It is often useful, e.g. in quantum mechanics, to

3985: represent a group on a Hilbert space, we put a scalar product on the

3986: vector space, e.g. the standard scalar product on $\cc^N\owns

3987: v,w$, $(v,w):=v^*w$. A {\bf unitary} representation is a

3988: representation whose matrices $\rho (g)$ all respect the scalar

3989: product, which means that they are all unitary. In quantum

3990: mechanics, unitary representations are important because they

3991: preserve probability. For example, take the {\bf adjoint

3992: representation} of

3993: $SU(n)\owns g$. Its Hilbert space is the complexification of

3994: its Lie algebra $su(n)^\cc\owns X,Y$ with scalar product $(X,Y):=\t

3995: (X^*Y)$. The representation is defined by conjugation, $\rho

3996: (g)X:=gXg^{-1}$, and it is unitary, $(\rho (g)X,\rho (g)Y)=(X,Y)$. In

3997: Yang-Mills theories, the gauge bosons live in the adjoint

3998: representation. In the Abelian case, $G=U(1)$, this representation is

3999: 1-dimensional, there is one gauge boson, the photon, $A\in

4000: u(1)^\cc=\cc.$ The photon has no electric charge, which means that

4001: it transforms trivially, $\rho (g)A=A$ for all $g\in U(1)$.

4002: 

4003:  {\bf Unitary equivalence} of representations is

4004: defined by change of orthonormal bases. Then $C$ is a unitary matrix.

4005: A key theorem for particle physics states that all irreducible unitary

4006: representations of any compact group are finite dimensional. If we

4007: accept the definition of elementary particles as orthonormal basis

4008: vectors of unitary representations, then we understand why Yang and

4009: Mills only take compact groups. They only want a finite number of

4010: elementary particles. Unitary equivalence expresses the quantum

4011: mechanical superposition principle observed for instance in the

4012: $K^0-\bar K^0$ system. The unitary matrix $C$ is sometimes

4013: referred to as mixing matrix.

4014: 

4015: Bound states of elementary particles are described by tensor

4016: products: the tensor product of two unitary representations $\rho

4017: _1$ and

4018: $\rho _2$ of one group defined on two Hilbert spaces $\hh_1$

4019: and $\hh_2$ is the unitary representation $\rho _1\ot\rho _2$

4020: defined on

4021: $\hh_1\ot\hh_2\owns \psi _1\ot \psi _2$ by $(\rho _1\ot\rho

4022: _2)(g)\,(\psi _1\ot \psi _2):=\rho _1(g)\,\psi _1\ot \rho

4023: _2(g)\,\psi _2$.  In the case of electro-magnetism,

4024: $G=U(1)\owns\exp(i\theta )$ we know that all irreducible unitary

4025: representations are 1-dimensional,

4026: $\hh=\cc\owns\psi $ and characterized by the electric charge $q$,

4027: $\rho (\exp(i\theta ))\psi =\exp(i q\psi )\psi $. Under tensorization

4028: the electric charges are added. For $G=SU(2)$, the irreducible

4029: unitary representations are characterized by the spin,

4030: $\ell=0,{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}} ,1,...$ The addition of spin from

4031: quantum mechanics is precisely tensorization of these

4032: representations.

4033: 

4034: Let $\rho $ be a representation of a Lie group $G$ on a vector

4035: space and let $\gg$ be the Lie algebra of $G$. We

4036: denote by

4037: $\tilde\rho $ the Lie algebra representation of the group

4038: representation $\rho $. It is defined on the same vector space by

4039: $\rho (\exp X)=\exp(\tilde \rho (X))$. The $\tilde \rho (X)$s are

4040: not necessarily invertible endomorphisms. They satisfy

4041: $\tilde\rho ([X,Y])=[\tilde \rho (X),\tilde \rho (Y)]:=\tilde \rho

4042: (X)\tilde \rho (Y)-\tilde \rho (Y)\tilde \rho (X).$

4043: 

4044: An {\bf affine} representation is the same construction as above, but

4045: we allow the

4046: $\rho(g)$s to be invertible affine maps, i.e. linear maps plus

4047: constants.

4048: 

4049: \subsection{Semi-direct product and Poincar\'e group}

4050: 

4051: The direct product $G\times H$ of two groups $G$ and

4052: $H$ is again a group with multiplication law: $(g_1,

4053: h_1)(g_2,h_2):=(g_1g_2,h_1h_2).$ In the direct product, all

4054: elements of the first factor commute with all elements of the second

4055: factor: $(g,1^H)(1^G,h)=(1^G,h)(g,1^H).$ We write $1^H$ for the

4056: neutral element of $H$. Warning, you sometimes see the misleading

4057: notation

4058: $G\ot H$ for the direct product.

4059: 

4060: To be able to define the semi-direct product $G\ltimes H$ we

4061: must have an action of $G$ on $H$, that is a map $\rho:

4062: G\rightarrow {\rm Diff}(H)$ satisfying $\rho _g(h_1h_2)=

4063: \rho _g(h_1)\,\rho _g(h_2)$, $\rho _g(1^H)=1^H$,

4064: $\rho _{g_1g_2}=\rho_{g_1}\circ\rho _{g_2}$ and $\rho

4065: _{1^G}=1_H$. If $H$ is a vector space carrying a representation or

4066: an affine representation $\rho $ of the group $G$, we can view

4067: $\rho $ as an action by considering $H$ as translation group.

4068: Indeed, invertible linear maps and affine maps are diffeomorphisms

4069: on

4070: $H$.  As a set, the semi-direct product

4071: $G\ltimes H$ is the direct product, but the multiplication law

4072: is modified  by help of the action:

4073: \bb(g_1,h_1)(g_2,h_2):=(g_1g_2,h_1\,\rho _{g_1}(h_2)).\ee

4074: We retrieve the direct product if the action is trivial, $\rho

4075: _g=1_H$ for all $g\in G$.

4076: Our first example is the invariance group of electro-magnetism

4077: coupled to gravity ${\rm Diff}(M)\ltimes

4078: \,^MU(1).$ A diffeomorphism $\sigma(x)$ acts on a gauge function

4079: $g(x) $ by $\rho _\sigma (g):=g\circ\sigma ^{-1}$ or more

4080: explicitly

4081: $(\rho _\sigma (g))(x):=g(\sigma ^{-1}(x))$. Other examples come

4082: with other gauge groups like $SU(n)$ or spin groups.

4083: 

4084: Our second example is

4085: the Poincar\'e group, $O(1,3)\ltimes \rr^4$, which is the isometry

4086: group of Minkowski space. The semi-direct product is important

4087: because Lorentz transformations do not commute with translations.

4088: Since we are talking about the Poincar\'e group, let us mention the

4089: theorem behind the definition of particles as orthonormal basis

4090: vectors of unitary representations: The irreducible, unitary

4091: representations of the Poincar\'e group are characterized by

4092: mass and spin. For fixed mass $M\geq 0$ and spin $\ell$, an

4093: orthonormal basis is labelled by the momentum $\vec p$ with

4094: $E^2/c^2-\vec p^2=c^2M^2$,

4095: $\psi =\exp(i(Et-\vec p\cdot\vec x)/\hbar)$ and the

4096: $z$-component $m$ of the spin with $|m|\leq\ell$, $\psi

4097: =Y_{\ell,m}(\theta ,\varphi )$.

4098: 

4099: 

4100: \subsection{Algebras}

4101: 

4102: Observables can be added, multiplied and multiplied by scalars. They

4103: form naturally an associative algebra $\aa$, i.e. a vector space

4104: equipped with an associative product and neutral elements 0 and 1.

4105: Note that the multiplication does not always admit inverses, $a^{-1}$,

4106: e.g. the neutral element of addition, 0, is not invertible. In quantum

4107: mechanics, observables are self adjoint. Therefore, we need an

4108: involution

4109: $\cdot^*$ in our algebra. This is an anti-linear map from the algebra

4110: into itself,

4111: $(\lambda a+b)^* =\bar\lambda a^*+b^*, \ \lambda \in\cc,\

4112: a,b\in\aa,$ that reverses the product,

4113: $(ab)^*=b^*a^*$, respects the unit,

4114: $1^*=1$, and is such that $a^{**}=a$. The set of $n\times n$ matrices

4115: with complex coefficients, $M_n(\cc)$, is an example of such an

4116: algebra, and more generally, the set of endomorphisms or operators

4117: on a given Hilbert space $\hh$. The multiplication is matrix

4118: multiplication or more generally composition of operators, the

4119: involution is Hermitean conjugation or more generally the adjoint of

4120: operators.

4121: 

4122: A representation $\rho $ of an abstract algebra $\aa$ on a Hilbert

4123: space

4124: $\hh$ is a way to write $\aa$ concretely as operators as in the last

4125: example,

4126: $\rho :\aa\rightarrow {\rm End}(\hh)$. In the group case, the

4127: representation had to reproduce the multiplication law. Now it has to

4128: reproduce, the linear structure:

4129: $\rho (\lambda a+b)=\lambda \rho (a)+\rho (b),\ \rho

4130: (0)=0,$ the multiplication: $\rho (ab)=\rho (a)\rho (b),\ \rho (1)=1,$

4131: and the involution:  $ \rho (a^*)=\rho

4132: (a)^*.$ Therefore the tensor product of two representations $\rho

4133: _1$ and $\rho _2$ of $\aa$ on Hilbert spaces $\hh_1\owns\psi _1$

4134: and

4135: $\hh_2\owns\psi _2$ is not a representation: $((\rho _1\ot\rho

4136: _2)(\lambda a))\,(\psi _1\ot\psi _2)=(\rho _1(\lambda a)\,\psi_1) \ot

4137: (\rho _2(\lambda a)\,\psi _2)=\lambda ^2 (\rho _1\ot\rho

4138: _2)(a)\,(\psi _1\ot\psi _2)$.

4139: 

4140: The group of unitaries $U(\aa):=\{u\in\aa,\,

4141: uu^*=u^*u=1\}$ is a subset of the algebra $\aa$. Every algebra

4142: representation induces a unitary representation of its group of

4143: unitaries. On the other hand, only few unitary representations of

4144: the group of unitaries extend to an algebra representation. These

4145: representations describe elementary particles. Composite particles

4146: are described by tensor products, which are not algebra

4147: representations.

4148: 

4149: An anti-linear operator $J$ on a Hilbert space $\hh\owns\psi,\tilde

4150: \psi $ is a map from $\hh$ into itself satisfying $J(\lambda \psi

4151: +\tilde \psi )=\bar\lambda J(\psi )+J(\tilde \psi ).$ An anti-linear

4152: operator $J$ is anti-unitary if it is invertible and preserves the

4153: scalar product, $(J\psi ,J\tilde \psi )= (\tilde \psi ,\psi )$. For example,

4154: on $\hh=\cc^n\owns \psi $ we can define an anti-unitary operator $J$

4155: in the following way. The image of the column vector $\psi $ under

4156: $J$ is obtained by taking the complex conjugate of $\psi $ and then

4157: multiplying it with a unitary $n\times n$ matrix $U$, $J\psi

4158: =U\bar\psi $ or $J=\, U\,\circ$ complex conjugation. In fact, on a

4159: finite dimensional Hilbert space, every anti-unitary operator is of this

4160: form.

4161: 

4162: \begin{thebibliography}{47}

4163: 

4164: \bibitem{cls}

4165: A. Connes, A. Lichn\'erowicz \& M. P. Sch\"utzenberger, {\it

4166: Triangle de Pens\'ees}, O. Jacob (2000), English version: {\it Triangle

4167: of Thoughts}, AMS (2001)

4168: \bibitem{ac}

4169: G. Amelino-Camelia, {\it Are we at the dawn of

4170: quantum gravity phenomenology?}  Lectures given at

4171: 35th Winter School of Theoretical Physics: From

4172: Cosmology to Quantum Gravity, Polanica,

4173: Poland, 1999, gr-qc/9910089

4174: \bibitem{gr}

4175: S. Weinberg, {\it Gravitation and Cosmology}, Wiley (1972)\\

4176: R. Wald, {\it  General Relativity}, The University of

4177: Chicago Press (1984)

4178: \bibitem{bd}

4179: J. D. Bj\o rken \& S. D. Drell, {\it

4180: Relativistic Quantum Mechanics}, McGraw--Hill (1964)

4181: \bibitem{or}

4182: L. O'Raifeartaigh, {\it Group Structure of

4183: Gauge Theories}, Cambridge University Press (1986)

4184: \bibitem{gs}

4185: M. G\"ockeler \& T. Sch\"ucker, {\it Differential

4186: Geometry, Gauge Theories, and Gravity}, Cambridge

4187: University Press (1987)

4188: \bibitem{group}

4189: R. Gilmore, {\it Lie Groups, Lie Algebras and Some of Their

4190: Applications}, Wiley (1974)\\

4191: H. Bacry, {\it Lectures Notes in Group Theory and Particle Theory},

4192: Gordon and Breach (1977)

4193: \bibitem{algebra}

4194: N. Jacobson, {\it Basic Algebra I, II}, Freeman (1974,

4195: 1980)

4196: \bibitem{jogi}

4197: J. Madore, {\it An Introduction to Noncommutative

4198: Differential Geometry and Its Physical Applications},

4199: Cambridge University Press (1995)\\

4200: G. Landi, {\it An Introduction to Noncommutative

4201: Spaces and Their Geometry}, hep-th/9701078,

4202: Springer (1997)

4203: \bibitem{costarica}

4204: J. M. Gracia-Bond\'\i a, J. C. V\'arilly \& H. Figueroa,

4205: {\it Elements of Noncommutative Geometry},

4206: Birkh\"auser (2000)

4207: \bibitem{van}

4208: J. W. van Holten, {\it Aspects of BRST quantization}, hep-th/0201124,

4209: in this volume

4210: \bibitem{zinn}

4211: J. Zinn-Justin, {\it Chiral anomalies and topology}, hep-th/0201220,

4212: in this volume

4213: \bibitem{data}

4214: The Particle Data Group, {\it Particle Physics Booklet}

4215: and { http://pdg.lbl.gov}

4216: \bibitem{renorm}

4217: G. 't Hooft, {\it Renormalizable Lagrangians for massive

4218: Yang-Mills fields}, Nucl. Phys. B35 (1971) 167\\

4219: G. 't Hooft \& M. Veltman, {\it Regularization and renormalization

4220: of gauge fields}, Nucl. Phys. B44 (1972) 189\\

4221: G. 't Hooft \& M. Veltman, {\it Combinatorics of gauge fields}, Nucl.

4222: Phys. B50 (1972) 318\\

4223: B. W. Lee \& J. Zinn-Justin, {\it Spontaneously broken gauge

4224: symmetries I, II, III and IV}, Phys. Rev. D5 (1972) 3121, 3137, 3155,

4225: Phys. Rev. D7 (1973) 1049

4226: \bibitem{gsw}

4227: S. Glashow, {\it Partial-symmetries of weak interactions}, Nucl.

4228: Phys. 22 (1961) 579\\

4229: A. Salam in Elementary Particle Physics: Relativistic Groups and

4230: Analyticity, Nobel Symposium no. 8, page 367, eds.: N.  Svartholm,

4231: Almqvist \& Wiksell, Stockholm 1968\\

4232: S. Weinberg, {\it A model of leptons}, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967) 1264

4233: \bibitem{joke}

4234: J. Iliopoulos, {\it An introduction to gauge theories}, Yellow Report,

4235: CERN (1976)

4236: \bibitem{gilles}

4237: G. Esposito-Far\`ese, {\it Th\'eorie de

4238: Kaluza-Klein et gravitation quantique}, Th\'ese de

4239: Doctorat, Universit\'e d'Aix-Marseille II, 1989

4240: \bibitem{book}

4241:  A. Connes, {\it Noncommutative Geometry}, Academic

4242: Press (1994)

4243: \bibitem{tresch}

4244: A. Connes, {\it Noncommutative

4245: geometry and reality},  J. Math. Phys. 36 (1995) 6194

4246: \bibitem{grav}

4247: A. Connes, {\it Gravity coupled with

4248: matter and the foundation of noncommutative

4249: geometry}, hep-th/9603053, Comm. Math. Phys. 182

4250: (1996) 155

4251: \bibitem{neu}

4252: H. Rauch, A. Zeilinger, G. Badurek, A. Wilfing, W. Bauspiess \&

4253: U. Bonse, {\it Verification of coherent spinor rotations of

4254: fermions}, Phys. Lett. 54A (1975) 425

4255: \bibitem{cartan}

4256: E. Cartan, {\it Le\c cons sur la

4257: th\'eorie des spineurs}, Hermann (1938)

4258: \bibitem{bris}

4259: A. Connes, {\it Brisure de sym\'etrie spontan\'ee et g\'eom\'etrie du

4260: point de vue spectral}, S\'eminaire Bourbaki, 48\`eme ann\'ee, 816 (1996)

4261: 313\\

4262: A. Connes, {\it Noncommutative differential geometry and

4263: the structure of space time}, Operator Algebras and Quantum Field

4264: Theory, eds.: S. Doplicher et al., International Press, 1997

4265: \bibitem{lift}

4266: T. Sch\"ucker, {\it Spin group and almost

4267: commutative geometry}, hep-th/0007047

4268: \bibitem{bourg} J.-P. Bourguignon \& P. Gauduchon,

4269: {\it Spineurs, op\'erateurs de Dirac et variations de

4270: m\'etriques}, Comm. Math. Phys. 144

4271: (1992) 581

4272: \bibitem{bonse}

4273: U. Bonse \& T. Wroblewski,

4274: {\it Measurement of neutron quantum interference in

4275: noninertial frames}, Phys. Rev. Lett. 1 (1983) 1401

4276: \bibitem{cow}

4277: R. Colella, A. W. Overhauser \& S. A. Warner, {\it Observation of

4278: gravitationally induced quantum interference}, Phys. Rev. Lett.

4279: 34 (1975) 1472

4280: \bibitem{cc}

4281:  A. Chamseddine \& A. Connes, {\it The

4282: spectral action principle}, hep-th/9606001,

4283: Comm. Math. Phys.186 (1997) 731

4284: \bibitem{lr}

4285: G. Landi \& C. Rovelli, {\it Gravity from Dirac

4286: eigenvalues}, gr-qc/9708041,

4287: Mod. Phys. Lett. A13 (1998) 479

4288: \bibitem{heat}

4289: P. B. Gilkey, {\it Invariance Theory, the Heat Equation,

4290: and the Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem}, Publish or

4291: Perish (1984)\\

4292: S. A. Fulling, {\it Aspects of Quantum Field Theory in

4293: Curved Space-Time}, Cambridge University Press

4294: (1989)

4295: \bibitem{ikm}

4296: B. Iochum, T. Krajewski \& P. Martinetti, {\it Distances

4297: in finite spaces from noncommutative geometry},

4298: hep-th/9912217, J. Geom. Phys. 37 (2001) 100

4299: \bibitem{dkm}

4300: M. Dubois-Violette, R. Kerner \& J.

4301: Madore, {\it Gauge bosons in a noncommutative

4302: geometry}, Phys. Lett. 217B (1989) 485

4303: \bibitem{ccl}

4304: A. Connes, {\it Essay on physics and noncommutative

4305: geometry}, in {\it The Interface of Mathematics and

4306: Particle Physics}, eds.: D. G. Quillen et al., Clarendon

4307: Press (1990)\\

4308: A. Connes \& J. Lott, {\it Particle models and noncommutative

4309: geometry}, Nucl. Phys. B 18B (1990) 29\\

4310:  A. Connes \& J. Lott, {\it The metric

4311: aspect of noncommutative geometry}, in the

4312: proceedings of the 1991 Carg\`ese Summer Conference,

4313: eds.: J. Fr\"ohlich et al., Plenum Press (1992)

4314: \bibitem{kk}

4315: J. Madore, {\it Modification of Kaluza Klein theory},

4316: Phys. Rev. D 41 (1990) 3709

4317: \bibitem{mw}

4318: P. Martinetti \& R. Wulkenhaar, {\it Discrete Kaluza-Klein from

4319: scalar fluctuations in noncommutative geometry}, hep-th/0104108,

4320: J. Math. Phys. 43 (2002) 182

4321: \bibitem{att}

4322:  T. Ackermann \& J. Tolksdorf, {\it A generalized

4323: Lichnerowicz formula, the Wodzicki residue and

4324: gravity}, hep-th/9503152, J. Geom. Phys. 19 (1996) 143

4325: \\

4326:  T. Ackermann \& J. Tolksdorf, {\it The generalized

4327: Lichnerowicz formula and analysis of Dirac

4328: operators}, hep-th/9503153, J. reine angew. Math. 471

4329: (1996) 23

4330: \bibitem{egbv}

4331: R. Estrada, J. M. Gracia-Bond\'\i a \& J. C. V\'arilly,

4332: {\it On summability of distributions and spectral

4333: geometry}, funct-an/9702001, Comm. Math. Phys. 191 (1998) 219

4334: \bibitem{rom}

4335: B. Iochum, D. Kastler \& T. Sch\"ucker, {\it

4336: On the universal Chamseddine-Connes action:

4337:  details of the action computation}, hep-th/9607158,

4338: J. Math. Phys. 38 (1997) 4929\\

4339: L. Carminati, B. Iochum, D. Kastler \& T.

4340: Sch\"ucker, {\it On Connes' new principle of general

4341: relativity: can spinors hear the forces of space-time?},

4342: hep-th/9612228, Operator Algebras and Quantum Field

4343: Theory, eds.: S. Doplicher et al., International Press,

4344: 1997

4345: \bibitem{tkmz}

4346: M. Paschke \& A. Sitarz, {\it Discrete spectral triples

4347: and their symmetries}, q-alg/9612029,

4348: J. Math. Phys. 39 (1998) 6191 \\

4349: T. Krajewski, {\it

4350: Classification of finite spectral triples}, hep-th/9701081, J. Geom.

4351: Phys. 28 (1998) 1

4352: \bibitem{fare}

4353: S. Lazzarini \& T. Sch\"ucker,

4354: {\it A farewell to unimodularity}, hep-th/0104038,  Phys.Lett. B 510

4355: (2001) 277

4356: \bibitem{florian}

4357: B. Iochum \& T. Sch\"ucker, {\it A left-right symmetric

4358: model \`a la Connes-Lott}, hep-th/9401048, Lett. Math.

4359: Phys. 32 (1994)  153\\

4360:  F. Girelli, {\it Left-right symmetric models

4361: in noncommutative geometry? } hep-th/0011123, Lett. Math. Phys. 57

4362: (2001) 7

4363: \bibitem{fedele}

4364: F. Lizzi, G. Mangano, G. Miele \& G. Sparano, {\it Constraints on

4365: unified gauge theories from noncommutative geometry},

4366: hep-th/9603095, Mod. Phys. Lett. A11 (1996) 2561

4367: \bibitem{kw}

4368:  W. Kalau \& M. Walze, {\it Supersymmetry and

4369: noncommutative geometry}, hep-th/9604146,

4370: J. Geom. Phys. 22 (1997) 77

4371: \bibitem{stand}

4372: D. Kastler, {\it Introduction to noncommutative geometry

4373: and Yang-Mills model building}, Differential geometric

4374:  methods in

4375: theoretical physics, Rapallo (1990), 25\\

4376: ${}$   --- , {\it A detailed account of Alain

4377: Connes' version of the standard model in

4378: non-commutative geometry, I, II and III}, Rev. Math. Phys.

4379: 5 (1993) 477, Rev. Math.

4380: Phys. 8 (1996) 103  \hfil\break

4381:  D. Kastler

4382: \& T. Sch\"ucker, {\it Remarks on Alain Connes'

4383: approach to the standard  model in non-commutative

4384: geometry}, Theor. Math. Phys. 92 (1992) 522, English

4385: version, 92 (1993) 1075, hep-th/0111234\\

4386: ${}$   --- , {\it A detailed account of Alain Connes'

4387: version of the standard model in non-commutative

4388: geometry, IV}, Rev. Math. Phys. 8 (1996) 205\\

4389: ${}$   --- , {\it The standard model \`a la

4390: Connes-Lott}, hep-th/9412185, J. Geom. Phys. 388

4391: (1996) 1 \\

4392: J. C. V\'arilly \&  J. M. Gracia-Bond\'\i a,

4393: {\it Connes' noncommutative differential geometry and

4394: the standard model}, J. Geom. Phys. 12 (1993) 223

4395: \hfil\break

4396: T. Sch\"ucker \& J.-M. Zylinski, {\it Connes' model

4397: building kit}, hep-th/9312186, J. Geom. Phys. 16 (1994)

4398: 1 \\

4399: E. Alvarez, J. M. Gracia-Bond\'\i a \& C. P. Mart\'\i n,

4400:  {\it Anomaly cancellation and the gauge group of the

4401: Standard Model in Non-Commutative Geometry},

4402: hep-th/9506115, Phys. Lett. B364 (1995) 33\\

4403: R. Asquith, {\it Non-commutative geometry and the

4404: strong force}, hep-th/9509163, Phys. Lett. B 366 (1996)

4405: 220

4406: \\

4407: C. P. Mart\'\i n, J. M. Gracia-Bond\'\i a \& J. C. V\'arilly,

4408: {\it The standard model as a noncommutative geometry:

4409: the low mass regime},

4410:  hep-th/9605001, Phys. Rep. 294 (1998) 363 \\

4411: L. Carminati, B. Iochum \& T. Sch\"ucker, {\it

4412: The noncommutative constraints on the standard

4413: model \`a la Connes}, hep-th/9604169, J. Math. Phys. 38

4414: (1997) 1269\\

4415: R. Brout, {\it Notes on Connes' construction of the standard model},

4416: hep-th/9706200, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 65 (1998) 3

4417: \\

4418: J. C. V\'arilly, {\it Introduction to noncommutative

4419: geometry}, physics/9709045, EMS

4420: Summer School on Noncommutative Geometry and

4421: Applications, Portugal, september 1997, ed.: P.

4422: Almeida \\

4423: T. Sch\"ucker, {\it Geometries and forces},

4424: hep-th/9712095, EMS

4425: Summer School on Noncommutative Geometry and

4426: Applications, Portugal, september 1997, ed.: P.

4427: Almeida\\

4428: J. M. Gracia-Bond\'\i a, B. Iochum \& T. Sch\"ucker,

4429: {\it The Standard Model in Noncommutative Geometry

4430: and Fermion Doubling}, hep-th/9709145, Phys. Lett. B

4431: 414 (1998) 123\\

4432: D. Kastler, {\it Noncommutative geometry and basic

4433: physics},

4434:  Lect. Notes Phys. 543 (2000) 131\\

4435: ${}$   --- , {\it Noncommutative geometry and

4436: fundamental physical interactions: the Lagrangian

4437: level},  J. Math. Phys. 41 (2000) 3867\\

4438: K. Elsner, {\it Noncommutative geometry: calculation of the standard

4439: model Lagrangian}, hep-th/0108222, Mod. Phys. Lett. A16 (2001) 241\\

4440:  F. Scheck, W. Werner \& H. Upmeier (eds.), {\it

4441: Noncommutative Geometry and the Standard Model of Elementary

4442: Particle Physics},  Lecture

4443: notes in physics 596, Springer (2002)\\

4444: \bibitem{jackiw}

4445: R. Jackiw, {Physical instances of noncommuting coordinates},

4446: hep-th/0110057

4447: \bibitem{cmpp}

4448: N. Cabibbo, L. Maiani, G. Parisi \& R. Petronzio, {\it

4449: Bounds on the fermions and Higgs boson masses in

4450: grand unified theories}, Nucl. Phys. B158 (1979) 295

4451: \bibitem{bridge}

4452: L. Carminati, B. Iochum \& T. Sch\"ucker, {\it

4453: Noncommutative Yang-Mills and noncommutative

4454: relativity: A bridge over troubled water},

4455: hep-th/9706105, Eur. Phys. J. C8 (1999) 697

4456: \bibitem{beyond}

4457: B. Iochum \& T. Sch\"ucker, {\it

4458: Yang-Mills-Higgs versus Connes-Lott},

4459: hep-th/9501142, Comm. Math. Phys. 178 (1996) 1\\

4460: I. Pris \& T. Sch\"ucker, {\it Non-commutative

4461: geometry beyond the standard model}, hep-th/9604115,

4462: J. Math. Phys. 38 (1997) 2255\\

4463: I. Pris \& T. Krajewski, {\it Towards a $Z'$ gauge boson

4464: in noncommutative geometry}, hep-th/9607005, Lett.

4465: Math. Phys. 39 (1997) 187\\

4466: M. Paschke, F. Scheck \& A. Sitarz, {\it Can (noncommutative)

4467: geometry accommodate leptoquarks?} hep-th/9709009, Phys . Rev. D59

4468: (1999) 035003\\

4469:  T. Sch\"ucker \& S. ZouZou, {\it Spectral action beyond the

4470: standard model}, hep-th/0109124

4471: \bibitem{cmk}

4472: A. Connes \& H. Moscovici, {\it Hopf Algebra, cyclic

4473: cohomology and the transverse index theorem}, Comm.

4474: Math. Phys. 198 (1998) 199\\

4475: D. Kreimer, {\it On the Hopf algebra structure of

4476: perturbative quantum field theories}, q-alg/9707029,

4477: Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 303\\

4478: A. Connes \& D. Kreimer, {\it Renormalization in

4479: quantum field theory and the Riemann-Hilbert

4480: problem. 1. The Hopf algebra structure of graphs and

4481: the main theorem}, hep-th/9912092,

4482: Comm. Math. Phys. 210 (2000) 249\\

4483: A. Connes \& D. Kreimer, {\it Renormalization in

4484: quantum field theory and the Riemann-Hilbert

4485: problem. 2. the beta function, diffeomorphisms and

4486: the renormalization group}, hep-th/0003188,

4487: Comm. Math. Phys. 216 (2001) 215 \\

4488: for a recent review, see

4489: J. C. V\'arilly, {\it Hopf algebras in noncommutative geometry},

4490: hep-th/010977

4491: \bibitem{shahn}

4492: S. Majid \& T. Sch\"ucker, {$\zz_2\times\zz_2$ \it Lattice as

4493: Connes-Lott-quantum group model}, hep-th/0101217, J. Geom. Phys. 43

4494:  (2002) 1

4495: \bibitem{ncqf}

4496: J. C. V\'arilly \& J. M. Gracia-Bond\'\i a,

4497: {\it On the ultraviolet behaviour of quantum fields over

4498: noncommutative manifolds}, hep-th/9804001, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A14

4499: (1999) 1305\\

4500: T. Krajewski, {\it G\'eom\'etrie non commutative et interactions

4501: fondamentales}, Th\'ese de

4502: Doctorat, Universit\'e de Provence, 1998, math-ph/9903047\\

4503: C. P. Mart\'\i n \& D. Sanchez-Ruiz, {\it The one-loop UV divergent

4504: structure of U(1) Yang-Mills theory on noncommutative $\rr^4$},

4505: hep-th/9903077, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 476 \\

4506: M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, {\it Renormalizability of the supersymmetric

4507: Yang-Mills theories on the noncommutative torus}, hep-th/9903107,

4508: JHEP 9906 (1999) 15 \\

4509: T. Krajewski \& R. Wulkenhaar, {\it Perturbative quantum gauge

4510: fields on the noncommutative torus}, hep-th/9903187, Int. J. Mod.

4511: Phys. A15 (2000) 1011\\

4512: S. Cho, R. Hinterding, J. Madore \&  H. Steinacker, {\it Finite field

4513: theory on noncommutative geometries}, hep-th/9903239,

4514: Int. J. Mod. Phys. D9 (2000) 161

4515: \bibitem{nct}

4516:  M. Rieffel, {\it  Irrational Rotation $C^*$-Algebras}, Short Comm.

4517: I.C.M. 1978\\

4518:  A. Connes, {\it $C^*$ alg\`ebres et g\'eom\'etrie

4519: diff\'erentielle}, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Ser. A-B (1980) 290, English

4520: version hep-th/0101093\\

4521:  A. Connes \& M. Rieffel, {\it Yang-Mills for non-commutative

4522: two-tori,} Contemp. Math. 105 (1987) 191

4523: \bibitem{belliss}

4524: J. Bellissard, {\it $K-$theory of $C^*-$algebras in solid state physics},

4525: in: Statistical Mechanics and Field Theory: Mathematical Aspects,

4526: eds.: T. C. Dorlas et al., Springer (1986)\\

4527: J. Bellissard, A. van Elst \& H. Schulz-Baldes, {\it The

4528: noncommutative geometry of the quantum Hall effect}, J. Math.

4529: Phys. 35 (1994) 5373

4530: \bibitem{coladu}

4531: A. Connes \& G. Landi, {\it Noncommutative manifolds, the instanton

4532: algebra and isospectral deformations}, math.QA/0011194, Comm.

4533: Math. Phys. 216 (2001) 215\\

4534: A. Connes \& M. Dubois-Violette, {\it Noncommutative

4535: finite-dimensional manifolds I. Spherical manifolds and related

4536: examples}, math.QA/0107070

4537: \bibitem{msm}

4538: M. Chaichian, P. Pre\v snajder, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari \& A. Tureanu,

4539: {\it Noncommutative standard model: model building},

4540: hep-th/0107055\\

4541: X. Calmet, B. Jur\v co, P. Schupp, J. Wess \& M. Wohlgenannt,

4542: {\it The standard model on non-commutative space-time},

4543: hep-ph/0111115

4544: \bibitem{rov}

4545: A. Connes \& C. Rovelli, {\it Von Neumann algebra

4546: automorphisms and time-thermodynamics relation in

4547: general covariant quantum theories}, gr-qc/9406019,

4548: Class. Quant. Grav. 11 (1994) 1899\\

4549:  C. Rovelli, {\it Spectral noncommutative geometry

4550: and quantization: a simple example}, gr-qc/9904029, Phys.

4551: Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 1079\\

4552: M. Reisenberger \& C. Rovelli, {\it Spacetime states and covariant

4553: quantum theory}, gr-qc/0111016

4554: \bibitem{kal}

4555: W. Kalau, {\it Hamiltonian formalism in

4556: non-commutative geometry}, hep-th/9409193,

4557: J. Geom. Phys. 18 (1996) 349\\

4558: E. Hawkins, {\it Hamiltonian gravity and

4559: noncommutative geometry}, gr-qc/9605068, Comm. Math. Phys. 187

4560: (1997) 471\\

4561:  T. Kopf \& M. Paschke, {\it A spectral quadruple for the De Sitter

4562: space}, math-ph/0012012\\

4563: A. Strohmaier, {\it On noncommutative and semi-Riemannian

4564: geometry}, math-ph/0110001

4565: 

4566: \end{thebibliography}

4567: 

4568:  \end{document}