Paper detail

Abelian monopole or non-Abelian monopole responsible for quark confinement

We have pointed out that the $SU(3)$ Yang-Mills theory has a new way of reformulation using new field variables (minimal option), in addition to the conventional option adopted by Cho, Faddeev and Niemi (maximal option). The reformulation enables us to change the original non-Abelian gauge field into the new field variables such that one of them called the restricted field gives the dominant contribution to quark confinement in the gauge-independent way. In the minimal option, especially, the restricted field is non-Abelian $U(2)$ and involves the non-Abelian magnetic monopole. In the preceding lattice conferences, we have accumulated the numerical evidences for the non-Abelian magnetic-monopole dominance in addition to the restricted non-Abelian field dominance for quark confinement supporting the non-Abelian dual superconductivity using the minimal option for the SU(3) Yang-Mills theory. This should be compared with the maximal option which is a gauge invarient version of the Abelian projection in the maximal Abelian gauge: the restricted field is Abelian $U(1) \times U(1)$ and involves only the Abelian magnetic monopole, just like the Abelian projection. In this talk, we focus on discriminating between two reformulations, i.e., maximal and minimal options of $SU(3)$ Yang-Mills theory for quark confinement from the viewpoint of dual superconductivity. For this purpose, we measure the distribution of the chromoelectric flux connecting a quark and an antiquark and the induced magnetic-monopole current around the flux tube.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.