Communications in Mathematical Physics

, Volume 265, Issue 3, pp 585–616 | Cite as

Carnot-Carathéodory Metric and Gauge Fluctuation in Noncommutative Geometry

Article

Abstract

Gauge fields have a natural metric interpretation in terms of horizontal distance. The latest, also called Carnot-Carathéodory or subriemannian distance, is by definition the length of the shortest horizontal path between points, that is to say the shortest path whose tangent vector is everywhere horizontal with respect to the gauge connection. In noncommutative geometry all the metric information is encoded within the Dirac operator D. In the classical case, i.e. commutative, Connes’s distance formula allows to extract from D the geodesic distance on a riemannian spin manifold. In the case of a gauge theory with a gauge field A, the geometry of the associated U(n)-vector bundle is described by the covariant Dirac operator D+A. What is the distance encoded within this operator? It was expected that the noncommutative geometry distance d defined by a covariant Dirac operator was intimately linked to the Carnot-Carathéodory distance dh defined by A. In this paper we make precise this link, showing that the equality of d and dH strongly depends on the holonomy of the connection. Quite interestingly we exhibit an elementary example, based on a 2 torus, in which the noncommutative distance has a very simple expression and simultaneously avoids the main drawbacks of the riemannian metric (no discontinuity of the derivative of the distance function at the cut-locus) and of the subriemannian one (memory of the structure of the fiber).

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Chamseddine A.H., Connes A. (1996). The Spectral Action Principle. Commun. Math. Phys. 186:737–750MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Connes A. (1994). Noncommutative geometry. Academic Press, London-New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Connes A. (1996). Gravity Coupled with Matter and the Foundation of Noncommutative Geometry. Commun. Math. Phys. 182:155–176CrossRefADSMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Connes A., Lott J. (1992). The metric aspect of noncommutative geometry. In: Fröhlich J. et al. (eds) Proceedings of 1991 Cargèse summer conference. Plenum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Doubrovine D., Novikov S., Fomenko A. (1982). Géométrie contemporaine, méthodes et applications. Mir, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Iochum B., Krajewski T., Martinetti P. (2001). Distance in finite spaces from non commutative geometry. J. Geom. Phys. 37:100–125CrossRefADSMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kadison R.V. (1983). Fundamentals of the theory of operator algebras. Academic Press, London-New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kastler D., Testard D. (1993). Quantum forms of tensor products. Commun. Math. Phys. 155:135–142CrossRefADSMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kobayashi S., Nomizu K. (1963). Foundations of differential geometry. Interscience, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lang S. (1995). Algebra. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MAGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lazzarini S., Schucker T. (2001). A Farewell To Unimodularity. Phys. Lett. B510:277–284CrossRefADSMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lichnerowicz A. (1962). Théorie globale des connexions et des groupes d’holonomie. Edizioni Cremonese, RomeGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martinetti P., Wulkenhaar R. (2002). Discrete Kaluza Klein from scalar fluctuations in non commutative geometry. J. Math. Phys. 43:182–204CrossRefADSMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Montgomery R. (2002). A tour of subriemannian geometries, their geodesics and applications. AMS, Providence, RIMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schelp, R.: Fermion masses in noncommutative geometry. Int. J. Mod. Phys. B14, 2477–2484, (2000); Martinetti, P.: A brief introduction to the noncommutative geometry description of particle physics standard model. http:arxiv.org/list/math-ph/0306046Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vanhecke F.J. (1999). On the product of real spectral triples. Lett. Math. Phys. 50(2):157–162CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre de Physique ThéoriqueMarseille Cedex 9France

Personalised recommendations