2017
DOI: 10.1103/physrevd.95.084053
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

General invertible transformation and physical degrees of freedom

Abstract: An invertible field transformation is such that the old field variables correspond one-to-one to the new variables. As such, one may think that two systems that are related by an invertible transformation are physically equivalent. However, if the transformation depends on field derivatives, the equivalence between the two systems is nontrivial due to the appearance of higher derivative terms in the equations of motion. To address this problem, we prove the following theorem on the relation between an invertib… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
52
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
3
52
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…as long as Ω(Ω − XΩ X − X 2 Γ X ) = 0, so that the transformation is invertible [38,39]. This is consistent with the fact that an invertible transformation does not change the number of DOFs [39,40]. The class Ia of quadratic DHOST theories is known to be recast into the Horndeski class via conformal/disformal transformation [17,32].…”
Section: A the Actionsupporting
confidence: 54%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…as long as Ω(Ω − XΩ X − X 2 Γ X ) = 0, so that the transformation is invertible [38,39]. This is consistent with the fact that an invertible transformation does not change the number of DOFs [39,40]. The class Ia of quadratic DHOST theories is known to be recast into the Horndeski class via conformal/disformal transformation [17,32].…”
Section: A the Actionsupporting
confidence: 54%
“…The transformation is invertible unless F 3/2 2 / √ F 2 − XA 1 ∝ X. Therefore, in contrast to generic DHOST theories, this subclass has only two physical DOFs, and the system of EL equations is equivalent to those in general relativity [39]. This means that one cannot determine all A, B, and X in this subclass: Any of them remains an arbitrary function of r. Similarly, there would also be a subtlety in BH solutions in the cuscuton theory [48] and its extension [49] having only two propagating DOFs when φ µ is timelike.…”
Section: B Reduction Of Background Equationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Actually, the extension of our analysis to field theories with arbitrary higher-order derivatives is quite interesting, for example, scalar (and vector) fields in the Minkowski background, scalar-tensor theories, vector-tensor theories, scalar-vector-tensor (TeVeS) theories, and even a theory with fermionic degrees of freedom. Especially, it is challenging to find a healthy theory with higher-order derivative terms, which cannot be transformed to a theory with only up to first order derivatives by invertible transformation [29]. We also leave all of these topics as future work.…”
Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this simple case, one can show that the spin-2 degrees of freedom (the gravitons, perturbations of the metric tensor) do propagate in the initial metric g µν . To simplify this example even further, one may actually consider it in flat spacetime, i.e., without any graviton, while universally 5 References [56][57][58] used similar arguments, and accordingly obtain too restrictive conditions for stability.…”
Section: Causal Cones and Hamiltonian In A General Coordinate Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%