1: \documentclass{appolb}
2: %\usepackage{epsfig}
3: %------------------------------------------------------
4: % Include epsfig package for placing EPS figures in the text
5:
6: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
7: % %
8: % BEGINNING OF TEXT %
9: % %
10: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
11: \begin{document}
12: %\date{\today}
13: \pagestyle{plain}
14: %% uncomment the following line to get equations numbered by (sec.num)
15: %\eqsec
16: \newcount\eLiNe\eLiNe=\inputlineno\advance\eLiNe by -1
17: \title{{\footnotesize \hfill IFUP-TH/2003/21} \\
18: REVIVAL OF NON-ABELIAN MONOPOLES AND CONFINEMENT IN QCD
19: }
20: \author{Kenichi KONISHI
21: \address{Dipartimento di Fisica, ``E.Fermi", Universit\`a di Pisa, \\
22: Via Buonarroti, 2, Ed. C \\
23: 56127 Pisa, Italy}}
24: \maketitle
25:
26: \begin{abstract}
27:
28: Central role played by certain non-Abelian monopoles (of Goddard-Nuyts-Olive-Weinberg type)
29: in the infrared dynamics in many confining vacua of softly broken ${\cal N}=2$ supersymmetric gauge theories, has recently
30: been clarified. We discuss here the main lessons to be learned from these studies for the confinement nechanism in QCD.
31:
32: \end{abstract}
33:
34: \section{Introduction}
35:
36: Non-Abelian monopoles in spontaneously broken gauge theories have remained a rather obscure
37: object for some time now. Apart from the often discussed applications in conformally invariant ${\cal N}=4$ theories
38: few field theory models were known where such objects play an important role. A class of ${\cal N}=1$ theories exhibit
39: well-known Seiberg's duality; the origin of the ``dual quarks" however remains somewhat mysterious.
40:
41: Recent series of work on softly broken ${\cal N}=2 $ gauge theories based on gauge groups $SU(n_c)$, $USp(2n_c)$ and $SO(n_c)$
42: and with various numbers of flavors, has changed the situation considerably \cite{CKMP}. It turns out that certain ``dual quarks"
43: appearing as the low-energy effective degrees of freedom and carrying various non-Abelian charges, have the right properties of the
44: ``semiclassical" non-Abelian monopoles studied earlier, most notably by Goddard, Nuyts, Olive and by E. Weinberg \cite{GNO}.
45:
46: For example, in softly broken ${\cal N}=2 $ $SU(n_c)$ theories with $n_f$ flavors, confining vacua are labelled by an integer $r$, $r=0,1,\ldots,
47: [{n_f \over 2}]$, which have low-energy effective $SU(r) \times U(1)^{n_c-r} $ gauge theory description. The infrared degrees of freedom contain
48: ``dual quarks" carrying charges in the fundamental representation of the effective $SU(r) $ gauge group, as well as in the fundamental
49: representation of the flavor
50: $SU(n_f)$ group. They carry also a common Abelian charge with respect to one of the $U(1)$ factors.
51:
52:
53: These are precisely the properties expected for the Goddard-Nuyts-Olive-Weinberg monopoles, becoming light due to quantum effects,
54: as has been shown recently \cite{BK}. One crucial lesson is that quantum behavior of non-Abelian monopoles
55: depends on the massless
56: flavors in the original theory, in an essential manner.
57:
58:
59: \section{Confinement as non-Abelian dual superconductor}
60:
61: The importance of the above observation lies in the fact that in {\it most } of the ${\cal N}=1$ vacua, confinement is caused by the
62: condensation of these non-Abelian monopoles. Exceptionally ($r=0$ or $r=1$ vacua of $SU(n_c)$ theory) the low-energy theory is an
63: Abelian magnetic gauge theory and confinement is described as a dual Meissner effect, as proposed by 't Hooft for QCD \cite{TH}.
64: However, confinement in generic $r$-vacua is a dual superconductivity of non-Abelian variety.
65:
66:
67:
68: The fact that such $r$-vacua appear only for $r < {n_f \over 2}$ can be understood as an effect of renormalization: only for these
69: vacues of $r$, the low-energy $SU(r)$ gauge group is infrared free, with the monopoles carrying flavor charges of the fundamental quarks.
70: The beta function of the dual, magnetic theory has an opposite sign with respect to that of the electric $SU(n_c)$ theory,
71: \begin{equation} b_0^{(dual)} \propto - 2 \, r + n_f > 0,
72: \qquad b_{0} \propto - 2 \, n_c + n_f < 0,
73: \label{betafund} \end{equation}
74: and this reflects a particular property of ${\cal N}=2$ gauge theory with a small coefficient ($2$) in front of the color multiplicity in
75: $b_0$.
76:
77:
78: \section{Deformed conformal vacua and confinement }
79:
80: For this reason, it is not surprising that the most typical set of vaua in confinement phase in the class of models studied in
81: \cite{CKMP} turn out to be based, rather, on a nontrivial superconformal theory \footnote{In contrast, the generic $r$-vacua are trivial -
82: infrared free - superconformal theories.}. Examples are the
83: $r={n_f \over 2}$ vacua of
84: $SU(n_c)$ theory and {\it all} of confining vacua of $USp(2n_c)$ and $SO(n_c)$ theories with vanishing bare quark masses.
85: ${\cal N}=1$ perturbation - nonzero adjoint matter mass which triggers dual Higgs mechanism - gives a deformation
86: of such infrared fixed-point theories.
87: Low-energy effective theory contains relatively non-local set of gauge and matter fields carrying non-Abelian charges,
88: and no simple local field theory description is available. This makes the analysis of these vacua a difficult task.
89: A first step to study
90: these cases more closely was undertaken in
91: \cite{AGK}, by considering a concrete example of
92: $r=2$ vacua of softly broken $SU(3)$ gauge theory with four quark flavors. This study indicates that the confinement
93: is a dual (non-Abelian) superconductor, but that the condensation of the monopoles is a strong interaction phenomenon, rather than
94: a (dual) perturbative mechanism as in the $r < {n_f \over 2}$ vacua.
95:
96:
97: \section{QCD}
98:
99: What can one learn from these studies in supersymmetric theories about the confinement mechanism in the real-world QCD?
100: Here we know
101:
102: \noindent {(i)} that no dynamical Abelianization occurs;
103:
104: \noindent {(ii)} that, on the other hand, in QCD with $n_f$ flavor, the original and dual beta functions have the first coefficients
105: ($n_c=3$, ${\tilde n}_c=2,3$)
106: \begin{equation} b_0= - 11 \, n_c + 2 \,n_f \quad {\hbox {\rm vs}} \quad {\tilde b}_0 = - 11 \, {\tilde n}_c + n_f:
107: \end{equation} they have the same sign because of the large coefficient in front of the color multiplicity ({\it cfr.}
108: Eq.(\ref{betafund})).
109:
110:
111:
112:
113:
114: Barring that higher loops change the situation, this leaves us with the option of strongly-interacting non-Abelian monopoles,
115: somewhat like in the cases discussed in 3. Is it possible that non-Abelian monopoles (perhaps certain composite
116: theirof) carrying nontrivial flavor
117: $SU_L(n_f)\times SU_R(n_f)$ quantum numbers condense
118: yielding the global symmetry breaking such as
119: $ G_F = SU_L(n_f)\times SU_R(n_f) \Rightarrow SU_V(3), $
120: observed in Nature?
121: How are 't Hooft's Abelian monopoles related to these non-Abelian monopoles? These are the questions to be studied further.
122:
123: A more detailed account of these discussions appeared in \cite{Konishi}.
124:
125:
126: \begin{thebibliography}{100}
127:
128: \bibitem{CKMP} G. Carlino, K. Konishi and H. Murayama,
129: {\bf Nucl. Phys. B590} (2000) 37, hep-th/0005076;
130: G. Carlino, K. Konishi, P. S. Kumar and H. Murayama,
131: hep-th/0104064, {\bf Nucl. Phys. B608} (2001) 51.
132:
133:
134: \bibitem{GNO} P. Goddard, J. Nuyts and D. Olive, {\bf Nucl. Phys. B125}
135: (1977) 1, E. Weinberg, {\bf Nucl. Phys. B167} (1980) 500; {\bf Nucl. Phys. B203} (1982) 445;
136: ``Massive and Massless Monopoles and Duality", hep-th/9908095.
137:
138:
139: \bibitem{BK} S. Bolognesi and K. Konishi, {\bf Nucl. Phys. B645 } (2002) 337, hep-th/0207161.
140:
141:
142: \bibitem{TH} G. 't Hooft, {\bf Nucl. Phys. B190} (1981) 455;
143: S. Mandelstam, {\bf Phys. Lett. 53B } (1975) 476.
144:
145:
146: \bibitem{AGK} R. Auzzi, R. Grena and K. Konishi, {\bf Nucl. Phys. B653 } (2003) 204, hep-th/0211282.
147:
148: \bibitem{Konishi} K. Konishi, ``Who Confines Quarks? - On Non-Abelian Monopoles and Dynamics of Confinement", hep-th/0304157.
149:
150:
151:
152: \end{thebibliography}
153:
154:
155: \end{document}
156:
157:
158: