Quantum anomaly and geometric phase; their basic differences
Kazuo Fujikawa
Abstract
It is sometimes stated in the literature that the quantum anomaly is regarded as an example of the geometric phase. Though there is some superficial similarity between these two notions, we here show that the differences bewteen these two notions are more profound and fundamental. As an explicit example, we analyze in detail a quantum mechanical model proposed by M. Stone, which is supposed to show the above connection. We show that the geometric term in the model, which is topologically trivial for any finite time interval T, corresponds to the so-called ``normal naive term'' in field theory and has nothing to do with the anomaly-induced Wess-Zumino term. In the fundamental level, the difference between the two notions is stated as follows: The topology of gauge fields leads to level crossing in the fermionic sector in the case of chiral anomaly and the failure of the adiabatic approximation is essential in the analysis, whereas the (potential) level crossing in the matter sector leads to the topology of the Berry phase only when the precise adiabatic approximation holds.
Create a lesson
Related papers
Proof of the AGT Conjecture at Generic β
Le-Feng Chen, Kilar Zhang
Casimir operators of 4D\,, N=2 supersymmetry in the harmonic approach
Egor Eremeev, Evgeny Ivanov
Doubly-scaled planar N = 4 SYM \& Carroll Holography
Arjun Bagchi, Prateksh Dhivakar, Alok Laddha et al.
Quantum Selection of Classical Histories
Omer Guleryuz
Wess-Zumino gauge for analytic prepotentials of off-shell N=2 supergravity: bosonic sector
Nikita Zaigraev, Julia Zernina
Testing holographic computation of entanglement pseudo-entropy in dS3/ICFT2
Liang Li