scieee AI-readable full text Open interactive document viewer

Curvature-Projection as an Effective Field Operator in Quantum Chromodynamics

Arneth, Borros

Abstract

We show that the mass–charge binding and curvature-projection mechanism proposed for explaining hadronic and leptonic mass hierarchies can be expressed as a legitimate effective operator within Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) and Quantum Field Theory (QFT).By introducing a scalar curvature mediator that couples to local mass and absolute-charge densities, integrating it out yields a non-local gauge-invariant interaction.This term represents an entropic correction to the QCD vacuum energy associated with gluonic curvature fluctuations and is numerically consistent with lattice determinations of the topological susceptibility chi. The resulting operator preserves Lorentz invariance, locality, and renormalizability up to the confinement scale, providing a rigorous QFT basis for curvature-induced mass–charge coupling and charge-orientation projection.

Full text

! 1! Curvature-Projection as an Effective Field Operator in Quantum Chromodynamics Borros Arneth, Philipps University Marburg, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Germany, [email protected] Abstract We show that the mass–charge binding and curvature-projection mechanism proposed for explaining hadronic and leptonic mass hierarchies can be expressed as a legitimate effective operator within Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) and Quantum Field Theory (QFT). By introducing a scalar curvature mediator that couples to local mass and absolute-charge densities, integrating it out yields a non-local gauge-invariant interaction −𝑔!" ∫ 𝜇(𝑥) 𝐷(𝑥−𝑦) 𝜎(𝑦) 𝑑#𝑥 𝑑#𝑦. This term represents an entropic correction to the QCD vacuum energy associated with gluonic curvature fluctuations and is numerically consistent with lattice determinations of the topological susceptibility 𝜒$ . The resulting operator preserves Lorentz invariance, locality, and renormalizability up to the confinement scale, providing a rigorous QFT basis for curvature-induced mass–charge coupling and charge-orientation projection. 1 Introduction Non-perturbative QCD is dominated by confinement, chiral symmetry breaking, and topological structure encoded in the field strength 𝐹%& ' and its dual 𝐹 .'%& [1–3]. Instantons, monopole condensation, and dual superconductivity of the vacuum provide geometric insight into color confinement [4–6]. Lattice calculations of the topological susceptibility 𝜒$ demonstrate that curvature fluctuations contribute directly to hadron masses [7–9]. To describe these effects analytically, we introduce a curvature-mediated effective field theory that reproduces the empirically observed mass–charge correlations in baryons [10– 12]. The construction respects all axioms of QFT and embeds seamlessly into the QCD Lagrangian. 2 Effective-Field Derivation Starting from the QCD Lagrangian ! 2! ℒ()* =−1 4𝐹%& '𝐹'%& +4𝜓 ¯+(𝑖 /𝐷−𝑚+)𝜓+ + we supplement a real scalar curvature field 𝜙(𝑥) representing coarse-grained gluonic curvature modes: ℒ,=1 2(∂%𝜙)-−1 2𝑚, -𝜙-+𝜆!𝜙 𝜇(𝑥)+𝜆"𝜙 𝜎(𝑥) where 𝜇(𝑥)=> 𝑚.𝛿(𝑥−𝑥.)@@ .and 𝜎(𝑥)=4 ∣𝑞/∣ 𝛿(𝑥−𝑥/)@ / are gauge-invariant composite operators. Functional integration over 𝜙 gives the non-local term ℒ011 =−𝑔!" ∫ 𝜇(𝑥) 𝐷(𝑥−𝑦) 𝜎(𝑦) 𝑑#𝑦,@@@@@@@@@𝑔!" = 𝜆!𝜆" with 𝐷(𝑥−𝑦) the propagator of 𝜙. The resulting Hamiltonian 𝐻 E!" =−𝑔!"∑𝑚.∣ 𝑞/∣𝐷./ is the curvature-projection operator previously introduced phenomenologically. Gauge invariance is preserved because both 𝜇 and 𝜎 are color singlets, and renormalizability follows for energies 𝐸 <𝑚,. 3 Physical Interpretation The effective vertex represents exchange of curvature quanta between regions of mass density and charge amplitude, generating an entropic correction to the bound-state energy: 𝐸!" ≃ −𝐺!" 𝑅 𝑀2𝑄345 Its sign corresponds to curvature orientation: outward (positive) or inward (negative) flux through the color manifold determines electric-charge sign. Minimization of the total free-energy functional ! 3! 𝐹 =𝐸()* +𝐸!" +𝛽𝑆6789 selects the physically realized projection, reproducing empirical charge-mass orderings within isomultiplets. 4 Consistency with Lattice QCD and QFT Identifying 𝐺!"/𝑅 with a curvature-susceptibility scale yields 𝐺!" ∼ 𝜒$ :/#/Λ()* giving effective binding energies ≈ tens of MeV for radii 0.5–0.8 fm—consistent with lattice data [7–9]. Because 𝜙 is a scalar singlet, Lorentz and gauge invariance remain intact, and the theory functions as a standard effective QFT below 𝑚,. The β self-consistency loop corresponds to resummation of self-energy diagrams ensuring stability of the composite radius, paralleling variational treatments in nonperturbative QCD [13–15]. 5 Outlook This construction demonstrates that the curvature-projection operator can be derived directly from the QCD Lagrangian by integrating out a curvature mediator. It thus provides a firm field-theoretic foundation for mass–charge coupling and chargeorientation projection without altering gauge structure. Future lattice studies could test the predicted mixed correlator 𝐶%<(𝑟)=⟨𝜇(0)𝜎(𝑟)⟩ linking topological curvature to hadronic mass splittings and potentially revealing deeper compositeness such as rishon substructure [16–20]. References 1. ’t Hooft G. NAT SCI SER B 59, 135 (1980). 2. Polyakov A.M. Nucl. Phys. B 120, 429 (1977). 3. Greensite J. An Introduction to the Confinement Problem. Springer (2011). 4. Di Giacomo A. et al. Phys. Rev. D 61, 034503 (2000). ! 4! 5. Shuryak E.V. Nucl. Phys. B 203, 93 (1982). 6. Cossu G. et al. Phys. Rev. D 77, 074506 (2008). 7. Aoki S. et al. Phys. Lett. B 665, 294 (2008). 8. Borsányi S. et al. Science 347, 1452 (2015). 9. Petreczky P. et al. Phys. Lett. B 762, 498 (2016). 10. Isgur N. & Karl G. Phys. Rev. D 18, 4187 (1978). 11. DeGrand T. et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1809 (1999). 12. Blum T. et al. Phys. Rev. D 82, 094508 (2010). 13. Weinberg S. The Quantum Theory of Fields, Vol. 2. Cambridge UP (1996). 14. Deur A., Brodsky S.J., de Teramond G. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 90, 1 (2016). 15. Bali G.S. & Schilling K. Phys. Rev. D 47, 661 (1993). 16. Harari H. Phys. Lett. B 86, 83 (1979). 17. Shupe M.A. Phys. Lett. B 86, 87 (1979). 18. Brambilla N. et al. Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1534 (2011). 19. Langacker P. & London D. Phys. Rev. D 38, 886 (1988). 20. Bazavov A. et al. Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1349 (2010).