Zwiebach string theory quesiton

In summary, Zwiebach's light-cone gauge has equations 9.63 and 9.71 in which X^+ and X^- are given by completely different expressions. I am not sure why this makes sense physically since we can interchange X^+ and X^- just by moving to coordinate system in which X^1' = -X^1. So, shouldn't it be arbitrary which coordinate is X^+ and X^- and if it is arbitrary and coordinate-system dependent, how can physics depend on which way we choose our coordinate system? However, the assumption he made was just above equation (9.61) where he defines the light-cone gauge as imposing conditions (9.27, page
  • #1
ehrenfest
2,020
1

Homework Statement


One thing that has been bothering me about the light-cone gauge that Zwiebach uses is that we have equations such as 9.63 and 9.71 in which X^+ and X^- are given by completely different expressions.

I am not sure why this makes sense physically since we can interchange X^+ and X^- just by moving to coordinate system in which X^1' = -X^1. So, shouldn't it be arbitrary which coordinate is X^+ and X^- and if it is arbitrary and coordinate-system dependent, how can physics depend on which way we choose our coordinate system?


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
ehrenfest said:
One thing that has been bothering me about the light-cone gauge that Zwiebach uses is that we have equations such as 9.63 and 9.71 in which X^+ and X^- are given by completely different expressions.

I am not sure why this makes sense physically since we can interchange X^+ and X^- just by moving to coordinate system in which X^1' = -X^1. So, shouldn't it be arbitrary which coordinate is X^+ and X^- and if it is arbitrary and coordinate-system dependent, how can physics depend on which way we choose our coordinate system?
[itex]X^+[/itex] and [itex]X^-[/itex] are not 'physics', they are coordinates. [itex]L_0^{\perp}[/itex] on the other hand, is physics. Equation (9.77) shows that changing [itex]X^1[/itex] with [itex]-X^1[/itex] has no effect on the physics.
 
  • #3
OK. I see your point.

But I guess my point is that there is no reason why the light cone +'s and -'s in 9.63 and 9.71 should not be reversed. Somewhere Zwiebach must have just made some assumption that arbitrarily distinguished X^- from X^+ . Obviously he is free to do this but I am just looking for the point where X^+ and X^- "diverge".
 
  • #4
ehrenfest said:
But I guess my point is that there is no reason why the light cone +'s and -'s in 9.63 and 9.71 should not be reversed. Somewhere Zwiebach must have just made some assumption that arbitrarily distinguished X^- from X^+ . Obviously he is free to do this but I am just looking for the point where X^+ and X^- "diverge".
I'm not sure if this is the answer you are looking for, but here goes anyway. The assumption he made was just above equation (9.61) where he defines the light-cone gauge as imposing conditions (9.27, page 155) with a vector n that gives [itex]n\cdot X = X^+[/itex], i.e. [itex]n = (\frac{1}{\sqrt2}, \frac{1}{\sqrt2}, 0, ...)[/itex].
Edit - What follows is garbage. I will correct it in a later post.
So what would happen if he went the other way and imposed the conditions (9.27) with a vector n that gives [itex]n\cdot X = X^-[/itex], i.e. [itex]n = (\frac{1}{\sqrt2}, \frac{-1}{\sqrt2}, 0, ...)[/itex]? I don't know because I haven't worked it out. However, the easy guess is that nothing would happen except for swapping + and - signs here and there.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
OK.

The sentence above 9.61 says that "Selecting the light-cone gauge means imposing the conditions (9.27) with a vector n^mu that gives nX = X^+"

So, is this where he arbitrarily chose a + sign instead of a minus sign? If the sentence had read:

"Selecting the light-cone gauge means imposing the conditions (9.27) with a vector n^mu that gives nX = X^-"

would that have contradicted something he said previously about the light-cone guage?
 
  • #6
ehrenfest said:
The sentence above 9.61 says that "Selecting the light-cone gauge means imposing the conditions (9.27) with a vector n^mu that gives nX = X^+"

So, is this where he arbitrarily chose a + sign instead of a minus sign?
Yes. He was defining the meaning of the phrase 'light-cone gauge'.

ehrenfest said:
If the sentence had read:

"Selecting the light-cone gauge means imposing the conditions (9.27) with a vector n^mu that gives nX = X^-"

would that have contradicted something he said previously about the light-cone guage?
Edit - What follows is garbage. I will correct it in a later post.
I don't see how it could. I think this is the first place in the book that the light-cone gauge is mentioned. The index gives no earlier reference. Again, this is a definition, not an observation.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
I'm sorry Ehrenfest, but my responses have been wrong. Note that on page 150 he discusses the properties of the vector n. It needs to be either timelike, or null so that the string is spacelike. In order to define [itex]n\cdot X = X^-[/itex] as the light-cone gauge, he would be using [itex]n = (\frac{1}{\sqrt2}, \frac{-1}{\sqrt2}, 0, ...)[/itex] and this n is spacelike. I'm sorry for wasting your time in this speculation.
 
  • #8
jimmysnyder said:
I'm sorry Ehrenfest, but my responses have been wrong. Note that on page 150 he discusses the properties of the vector n. It needs to be either timelike, or null so that the string is spacelike. In order to define [itex]n\cdot X = X^-[/itex] as the light-cone gauge, he would be using [itex]n = (\frac{1}{\sqrt2}, \frac{-1}{\sqrt2}, 0, ...)[/itex] and this n is spacelike. I'm sorry for wasting your time in this speculation.

I'm confused? I thought both of the light-cone vectors were light-like i.e. null?
 
  • #9
ehrenfest said:
I'm confused? I thought both of the light-cone vectors were light-like i.e. null?
I speak of the vector n, it must be timelike or null. I'm not sure what you mean by both of the light-cone vectors.
 
  • #10
I was thinking that because the light-cone was the boundary between spacelike and time-like vectors, every vector on the light cone must be null.

Is that a contravariant expression for n? If you plug that into equation 2.8, it seems like it is null as well as the + version of n. Maybe that's not right though because equation 2.8 has deltas.
 
  • #11
jimmysnyder said:
I speak of the vector n, it must be timelike or null. I'm not sure what you mean by both of the light-cone vectors.

Can you show me explicitly why is is timelike or null and why the n for X^+ is spaceline?
 
  • #12
I think it actually comes from even earlier in the book. On page 21, he says that "we will take x^+ to be the light-cone time coordinate" and he admits that this is completely arbitrary in the paragraph above.

Another weird thing, though. On page 27, he says "In light-cone coordinates, p_+ appears together with the light-cone time x^+"

I am not sure what "appears together" means?
 
Last edited:
  • #13
ehrenfest said:
I think it actually comes from even earlier in the book. On page 21, he says that "we will take x^+ to be the light-cone time coordinate" and he admits that this is completely arbitrary in the paragraph above.

Another weird thing, though. On page 27, he says "In light-cone coordinates, p_+ appears together with the light-cone time x^+"

I am not sure what "appears together" means?
He means that in equation (2.85) the two are factors in the same term, just as [itex]p_0[/itex] and [itex]x^0[/itex] are in equation (2.84).
I think though, that you are confusing light-cone coordinates with the light-cone gauge. The first sentence in section 9.5 on page 160 says:
Zwiebach said:
The light-cone solution of the equations of motion involves using light-cone coordinates to represent the motion of strings, and imposing a set of conditions that defines the light-cone gauge.
Later on the page he explains what 'selecting the light-cone gauge' means.
 

1. What is Zwiebach string theory?

Zwiebach string theory is a type of theoretical physics that attempts to unify the four fundamental forces of nature (gravitation, electromagnetism, strong nuclear force, and weak nuclear force) by describing them in terms of one-dimensional strings rather than point particles.

2. How does Zwiebach string theory differ from other string theories?

Zwiebach string theory differs from other string theories in that it incorporates a type of symmetry called T-duality, which allows strings to transform into one another. It also includes the concept of open strings, which have endpoints that can move freely in space.

3. What is the significance of closed strings in Zwiebach string theory?

Closed strings are important in Zwiebach string theory because they represent the fundamental building blocks of matter and energy. They have no endpoints and therefore cannot interact with anything else, making them the most basic and fundamental objects in the theory.

4. Is Zwiebach string theory supported by experimental evidence?

Currently, there is no experimental evidence to support Zwiebach string theory. It is still a theoretical framework and has not been proven through experiments. However, it is a popular and well-studied theory among physicists and is a promising avenue for further research.

5. What are the potential implications of Zwiebach string theory?

If Zwiebach string theory is proven to be a valid description of the universe, it would have profound implications for our understanding of the fundamental laws of nature. It could potentially explain phenomena such as gravity and unify all the forces in the universe into one cohesive theory. It could also have applications in fields such as quantum computing and cosmology.

Similar threads

  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
395
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
933
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
47
Views
4K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top