• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

174 submissions , 137 unreviewed
4,308 questions , 1,640 unanswered
5,089 answers , 21,602 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
635 active unimported users
More ...

  String theory $bc$ system CFT

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

$bc$ CFT is an example of free-field CFTs. action is

$$S = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int d^2 z b \bar{\partial} c$$

How can we obtain equation of motion? Polchinski-volume 1-page 50 writes that

$$\bar{\partial}c(z) = \bar{\partial}b(z)=0$$, $$ \bar{\partial} b(z) c(0) = 2\pi \delta^2 (z,\bar{z})$$

If this is true so the action will become zero.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-04-28 15:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user farhad
asked Apr 28, 2015 in Theoretical Physics by farhad (5 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Apr 28, 2015
I'm curious why you are reading about CFT without knowing about the Euler-Lagrange equations.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-04-28 15:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user Danu

1 Answer

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

First of all, the variation of the action produces the equations of motion. Inserting the solution of the equations of motion into the action simple provides you with the value of the action when evaluated on the solution. There's no problem with it being zero. However, when you do this, you should always worry about boundary terms, these are irrelevant for the equations of motion, but they do affect the value of the action when evaluated on a solution (i.e. on-shell).

Secondly, to derive the equations of motion, take the usual variation of the action:

$$ 2\pi \delta S = \int d^2z \left( \delta b \bar{\partial} c + b \bar{\partial} \delta c \right) = \int d^2 z \left( \delta b \bar{\partial} c - \left(\bar{\partial} b \right) \delta c \right),$$

where in the second line we have integrated by parts. Therefore the variation $\delta S/\delta b = 0$ leads to the equation $\bar{\partial} c = 0$, and the variation $\delta S /\delta c = 0$ leads to $\bar{\partial} b = 0.$

The last equation you write is not an equation of motion. The $\delta$ function is just the usual contact term.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-04-28 15:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user Surgical Commander
answered Apr 28, 2015 by Surgical Commander (155 points) [ no revision ]

Please log in or register to answer this question.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights