Sunday, 17 July 2016

mathematical physics - Weyl anomaly in 2d CFT (string theory lectures by D.Tong)


In his lectures on String Theory (http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/string.html), Tong gives a proof of the Weyl anomaly, using equation (4.36). It seems wrong to me.


Here he uses the OPE between the stress-energy tensors TzzTww obtained when trace vanishes, i.e. Tzˉz=0: this implies that they are holomorphic functions Tzz=Tzz(z). But in this proof he starts from the fact that Tzˉz0 (we want to proof this thing after all) and so Tzz is not a holomorphic function anymore! In the OPE (4.36) I should have also terms with (ˉzˉw).


I can't also understand why he uses in the rest of the proof only the singular term (zw)4, neglecting the other ones (zw)2, (zw)1.


(The same proof is given in these lectures https://arxiv.org/abs/1511.04074 on conformal field theory, equation (6.9)).


I'll be really thankful if someone could explain me this proof :)



Answer





TL;DR. The main point is that Tong only needs to identify the leading singularity in order to determine the Weyl anomaly Tαα = c12R(2). It is indeed unclear how to properly account for subleading terms in Tong's approach.



Let us introduce a regulator ε>0 in the XX OPE


RX(z,ˉz)X(w,ˉw) = α2ln(|zw|2+ε) + :X(z,ˉz)X(w,ˉw):


to better identify the singular structure. The XX OPE becomes:


RzX(z,ˉz)wX(w,ˉw) (4.22)= α2(ˉzˉw)2(|zw|2+ε)2 + :zX(z,ˉz)wX(w,ˉw): .


The stress-energy-momentum tensor is


Tzz  = 1α:zXzX: .


The TT OPE becomes


RTzz(z,ˉz)Tww(w,ˉw) (4.23)+(4.25)= c2(ˉzˉw)4(|zw|2+ε)42α(ˉzˉw)2(|zw|2+ε)2:zX(z,ˉz)wX(w,ˉw): + .



We next use the energy conservation


zTˉzz+ˉzTzz = 0


to calculate1


RzTzˉz(z,ˉz)wTwˉw(w,ˉw) (4.35z)= RˉzTzz(z,ˉz)ˉwTww(w,ˉw) (4.28)= ˉzˉw[c2(ˉzˉw)4(|zw|2+ε)4+] = ˉw[2cε(ˉzˉw)3(|zw|2+ε)5+] = 10cε2(ˉzˉw)2(|zw|2+ε)6+4cε(ˉzˉw)2(|zw|2+ε)5+ = c12zw[6ε2(|zw|2+ε)44ε(|zw|2+ε)3]+ = c12zwzˉwε(|zw|2+ε)2+,


which leads to the sought-for OPE


RTzˉz(z,ˉz)Twˉw(w,ˉw) (4.36)= c12zˉwε(|zw|2+ε)2+ (4.2d)= cπ12zˉwδ2(zw,ˉzˉw)+.


Here we use the following representation of the 2D Dirac delta distribution2


δ2(zw,ˉzˉw) := δ(Re(zw)) δ(Im(zw)) = limε0+1πε(|zw|2+ε)2.


Now proceed as in Tong's notes.


References:




  1. D. Tong, Lectures on String Theory; Subsection 4.4.2.


--


1 Tong's trick (4.36) suggests another route: Let us instead consider the XˉX OPE


RzX(z,ˉz)ˉwX(w,ˉw) = RˉzX(z,ˉz)wX(w,ˉw) = α2ε(|zw|2+ε)2+ (4.2d)= απ2δ2(zw,ˉzˉw)+.


It is comforting that the regularization ε>0 correctly predicts that the leading singularity is a 2D Dirac delta distribution. Then the TˉT OPE becomes


RTzz(z,ˉz)Tˉwˉw(w,ˉw) = c2ε2(|zw|2+ε)4+2αε(|zw|2+ε)2:zX(z,ˉz)ˉwX(w,ˉw): + .


The leading singularity is given by double contractions, which are proportional to the square of the 2D Dirac delta distribution. This is ill-defined, cf. e.g. this Phys.SE post.


Nevertheless, let us now formally apply Tong's trick: Using the energy conservation (4.35z) leads to



RzTzˉz(z,ˉz)ˉwTwˉw(w,ˉw) (4.35z)= RˉzTzz(z,ˉz)wTˉwˉw(w,ˉw),


so that the sought-for OPE leads to the square of the 2D Dirac delta distribution as well


RTzˉz(z,ˉz)Twˉw(w,ˉw) = c2ε2(|zw|2+ε)4+ (4.2d)= cπ22δ2(zw,ˉzˉw)2+.


There might be a way to resolve the square of the 2D Dirac delta distribution, and argue that the leading singularity is given by (4.38), although we shall not pursue the matter here.


2 Note that there is a factor of 2 in Tong's definition of the 2D Dirac delta distribution, cf. the end of Section 4.0.1.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Understanding Stagnation point in pitot fluid

What is stagnation point in fluid mechanics. At the open end of the pitot tube the velocity of the fluid becomes zero.But that should result...