Quantcast
  • 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.

News

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

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

145 submissions , 122 unreviewed
3,930 questions , 1,398 unanswered
4,851 answers , 20,616 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
501 active unimported users
More ...

Operator product expansion energy momentum tensor

+ 2 like - 0 dislike
77 views

We have the following equation from Polchinski (2.4.6) $$ T(z)X^{\mu}(0) \sim \frac{1}{z}\partial X^{\mu}(0) , \tag{2.4.6} $$ where $T(z)$ is defined as $T(z) = -\frac{1}{\alpha'} :\partial X^{\mu} \partial X_{\mu}:\tag{2.4.4}$ and : : is the normal ordering defined by $$:X^{\mu}(z,\bar{z}): = X^{\mu}(z,\bar{z})\tag{2.1.21a}$$ and $$:X^{\mu}(z_{1},\bar{z_{1}})X^{\nu}(z_{2},\bar{z_{2}}): = X^{\mu}(z_{1},\bar{z_{1}})X^{\nu}(z_{2},\bar{z_{2}}) + \frac{\alpha'}{2}\eta^{\mu \nu}\ln|z_{12}|^{2}.\qquad \tag{2.1.21b}$$

How exactly do we arrive at equation 2.4.6 from these definitions? I understand the previous assertions in the chapter where they simply taylor expanded in the normal ordering, but I can't see how the above is derived.

In particular, from http://arxiv.org/abs/0812.4408 (exercise 2.7), how is it concluded that $$T(z)\partial X^{\mu}(0) \sim \frac{1}{z^{2}}\partial X^{\mu}(z) \tag{18}$$

Edit: Just one more question: We have the expansion $$:F::G: = exp(-\frac{\alpha'}{2}\int d^{2}z_{1}d^{2}z_{2}ln|z_{12}|^{2}\frac{\delta}{\delta X^{\mu}_{F}(z_{1},\bar{z_{1}}}\frac{\delta}{\delta X_{G\mu}(z_{2},\bar{z_{2}})}):FG:, \tag{2.2.10}$$

given in Polchinski.

Is there any relation between this and the Ward Identity given by Polchinski (2.3.11) $$Res_{z \to z_{0}}j(z)A(z_{0},\bar{z_{0}}) + \bar{Res}_{\bar{z}\to \bar{z_{0}}}\tilde{j}(\bar{z})A(z_{0},\bar{z_{0}}) =\frac{1}{i\epsilon}\delta A(z_{0},\bar{z_{0}}), \tag{2.3.11}$$

Do these give two different ways to compute the weight of a given operator?

The reason for this question is when I attempt to compute the above following the answer given here Identity of Operator Product Expansion (OPE) , I can't seem to find how equation (18) would follow. It seems as if the solutions manual somehow concludes rhs of equation (18) and then taylor expands which gives $\frac{1}{z^{2}} \partial X^{\mu}(0) + \frac{1}{z} \partial^{2}X^{\mu}(0)$. If one were to follow the computation given in the above link, wouldn't one automatically arrive at this?

Thanks!

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-06-29 21:00 (UTC), posted by SE-user combustion1925
asked Jun 27, 2015 in Theoretical Physics by combustion1925 (10 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Jun 29, 2015

1 Answer

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

Equation (2.4.6): $T(z)X^\mu(0)\sim \frac{1}{z}\partial X^\mu(0)$ means that the RHS is the most singular term of the LHS. $T(z) = -\frac{1}{\alpha'} :\partial X^{\mu} \partial X_{\mu}:\tag{2.4.4}$ So \begin{align*} T(z)X^{\mu}(0) & =-\frac{1}{\alpha'}:\partial X^{\nu}(z)\partial X_{\nu}(z):X^{\mu}(0)\\ & =-\frac{2:\partial X^{\nu}(z):}{\alpha'}\left\langle \partial X_{\nu}(z)X^{\mu}(0)\right\rangle \\ & \sim-\frac{2\partial X^{\nu}(z)}{\alpha'}\partial\left(-\eta_{\nu}^{\ \mu}\frac{\alpha'}{2}ln\left|z\right|^{2}\right)\\ & \sim\partial X^{\mu}(z)\partial\left(lnz+ln\bar{z}\right)\\ & \sim\frac{\partial X^{\mu}\left(z\right)}{z}\\ & \sim\frac{1}{z}\partial X^{\mu}(0) \end{align*}

where the second line is from Wick's Theorem (Equation 2.2.9 of Polchinski's book), and the factor 2 is because you have two ways of contraction. And the last line is from Taylor expansion.

I'm learning this chapter now, too, so some places may not be clear in my calculation.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-06-29 21:00 (UTC), posted by SE-user HChen
answered Jun 28, 2015 by HBChen (35 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysicsOverfl$\varnothing$w
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




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

Your rights
...