This question is relevant in my former question State-operator map, and scalar fields and https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/215060/. (which was wrong, corrected one was states in R×S to operator in R2)
First what i know from Ginsparg's applied conformal field theory the state in R×S1, cylinder and operator in R2, plane, there is a one-to-one map. i.e, following conformal map we can make one to one map between them. ξ=t+ix,z=exp[ξ]=exp[t+ix]
How about in R×SD−1 to RD? (From Tong's lecture notes on string theory, section 4.6, i know there is a State operator map between them.) Is it okay just set ξ=t+i(x1+x2+⋯xD−1),z=exp[ξ]
Answer
This is not a state-operator correspondence map. The 2D state-operator correspondence is given by a map between the Hilbert space of states H with a PSL(2,C)-invariant vacuum Ω and fields ϕ:C→U(H) explicitly given by {fields}→H, ϕ↦limz→0ϕ(z,ˉz)Ω
By this correspondence, the state-operator correspondence holds for every 2D conformal field theory that possesses a conformal map to the plane. This is one of the motivating reasons for using radial quantization for the cylinder R×S1, where it is mapped to the plane by the map you mention, which makes the radial coordinate the time.
This state-operator correspondence crucially relies on the existence of a conformal map between the cylinder and the plane, but it is not the same. We need the plane to be able to talk about limz→0, but we need the cylinder to have a reason to have the radial coordinate be the time direction, and hence the limit point z→0 be a spatial slice in the infinite past instead of just some point in the plane.
Now, in higher dimensions for CFTs, this still works - we keep a conformal map between the "cylinder" R×Sd−1 and the Rd that is given by R×Sd−1→Rd,(t,Φ)↦(et,Φ)pol
One can show that this suffices to give a higher-dimensional analogue of the 2D state-operator correspondence. However, let me stress again that is it not the case that states live on the cylinder and operators on the plane. The states at a time are associated to the spatial slice at that time of the spacetime, i.e. to the Sd−1-slices, regardless of whether we are on the cylinder or the plane, and the state-operator correspondence map is more than just the conformal mapping of the cylinder to the plane.
Also, one has to note that the maps R×Sd−1→Rd are not bijections - they are precisely not surjective onto 0∈Rd, which should not be surprising, since that corresponds to the infinite past, and −∞ is not in R, either. The conformal map is precisely what allows us to make the limit towards the infinite past well defined as a limit towards a single point - the origin - in Rd.
No comments:
Post a Comment