Conformal Field Theory: Questions & Answers

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on conformal transformations and their mathematical representation in conformal field theory (CFT). Key points include the relationship between transformation rules for quasi-primary fields as outlined in P. Ginsparg's "Applied CFT," specifically how to derive equations 1.10 and 1.12. The conversation also touches on the Jacobian's role in field transformations and its connection to the volume element, particularly regarding the determinant of the metric. Additionally, the implications of odd-dimensional spacetime on determinant calculations are clarified, emphasizing the use of absolute values in these contexts. Overall, the discussion provides insights into the intricacies of conformal transformations within the framework of CFT.
Ace10
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

my question is rather a simple one and regards conformal transformations. On "Applied CFT" by P.Ginsparg, http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9108028.pdf , on page 10, gives the transformation rule of a quasi primary field and relates the exponent of 1.12 to the one of 1.10. My first question is how can I obtain 1.10 and secondly, how the first equation of 1.11 is related to the one of 1.12..

I know that under dilatations: x'→λx , but how can I write this for a field? It has to do with the Jacobian 1.10? Is this somehow related to the volume element? (I see the determinant of the metric in the denominator and I think that is related to the volume element but I'm not sure..)
Thank you very much in advance for your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ace10 said:
Hi all,

my question is rather a simple one and regards conformal transformations. On "Applied CFT" by P.Ginsparg, http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9108028.pdf , on page 10, gives the transformation rule of a quasi primary field and relates the exponent of 1.12 to the one of 1.10. My first question is how can I obtain 1.10 and secondly, how the first equation of 1.11 is related to the one of 1.12..

I know that under dilatations: x'→λx , but how can I write this for a field? It has to do with the Jacobian 1.10? Is this somehow related to the volume element? (I see the determinant of the metric in the denominator and I think that is related to the volume element but I'm not sure..)



Thank you very much in advance for your help.

The defining relation of the conformal group C ( 1 , n - 1 ) is given by \bar{g}_{a b} ( x ) = \frac{\partial \bar{x}^{c}}{\partial x^{a}} \frac{\partial \bar{x}^{d}}{\partial x^{b}} \ \eta_{c d} = S( x ) \ \eta_{a b} . \ \ \ (1) Taking the determinants and assuming even-dimensional space-time with signature (1 , n - 1), we find ( - \bar{g} ) = | \frac{\partial \bar{x}}{\partial x} |^{2} = S^{n} , or \frac{1}{\sqrt{- g}} = S^{- \frac{n}{2}} = | \frac{\partial x}{\partial \bar{x}} | . From this, we obtain \frac{1}{\sqrt{S( x )}} = | \frac{\partial x}{\partial \bar{x}} |^{\frac{1}{n}} . \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ (2) In order to understand how the fields transform, you really need to study the representation theory of the conformal algebra. You can find more details in
www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=172461
However, we can do it loosely in here. Let us rewrite (1) in the form \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} \frac{\partial \bar{x}^{c}}{\partial x^{a}} \right) \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} \frac{\partial \bar{x}^{d}}{\partial x^{b}} \right) \eta_{c d} = \eta_{a b} . Therefore, it is clear that the matrix \Lambda ( x ) \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} \frac{\partial \bar{x}}{\partial x} , is an element of the Lorentz group SO(1,n-1). Moreover, this \Lambda (x) forms a linear representation of the conformal group. This is because both \frac{ \partial \bar{x}^{a}}{\partial x^{b}} and \sqrt{S}=| \frac{\partial \bar{x}}{\partial x}|^{\frac{1}{n}} are themselves linear representations. This allows us to extend any linear representation of the Poincare group to the full conformal group. Therefore, given the finite-dimensional (matrix) representation \Lambda \rightarrow D(\Lambda) , \ \forall \Lambda \in SO(1,n-1), the conformal transformation x \rightarrow \bar{x} can be represented by \mathcal{C}(\frac{\partial \bar{x}}{\partial x})= \left( \sqrt{S(x)} \right)^{ - \Delta} \times D( \Lambda(x)) = \left( \sqrt{S(x)} \right)^{ - \Delta} \times D( \frac{1}{\sqrt{S(x)}}\ \frac{\partial \bar{x}}{\partial x} ) , where \Delta is a real number (the scaling dimension) if D(\Lambda) is irreducible (Schur's lemma), otherwise a matrix satisfying [\Delta,D(\Lambda)]=0. Indeed, all finite-dimensional representations of C(1,3) are completely specified by the finite-dimentional irreducible representations (j_{1},j_{2}) of the Lorentz group SO(1,3) and those of the non-compact group of pure dilatations SO(1,1) labelled by the scaling dimension \mathcal{R}(\sqrt{S(x)}) = \left(\sqrt{S} \right)^{- \Delta}. For example, if V^{a}(x) is a field transforming in the vector representation of the Lorentz group: \tilde{V}^{a}(\tilde{x}) = \Lambda^{a}{}_{b} \ V^{c}(x) ; \ x^{a}\rightarrow \tilde{x}^{a} = \Lambda^{a}{}_{c} \ x^{c}, then, under a conformal transformation x \rightarrow \bar{x}, we have \bar{V}^{a} ( \bar{x} ) = \mathcal{C}^{a}{}_{c} ( \frac{\partial \bar{x}}{\partial c} ) \ V^{c} ( x ) , \ \ \ \ (3) where \mathcal{C}^{a}_{c} ( \partial \bar{x} / \partial x ) = \left( \sqrt{S} \right)^{- \Delta} \ D^{a}{}_{c}( \frac{1}{\sqrt{S(x)}} \ \frac{\partial\bar{x}}{\partial x} ) = \left( \sqrt{S} \right)^{- \Delta - 1} \frac{\partial \bar{x}^{a}}{\partial x^{c}} . \ \ \ (4) So, under pure dilatations; \bar{x}^{a} = e^{-\alpha}\ x^{a}, we have \frac{\partial \bar{x}^{a}}{\partial x^{c}} = e^{- \alpha} \delta^{a}_{c} , \ \ \Rightarrow \ | \frac{\partial \bar{x}}{\partial x} | = e^{- n \alpha} , \ \ \ (5) and, therefore \left( \sqrt{S} \right)^{- \Delta - 1} = | \frac{\partial \bar{x}}{\partial x} |^{\frac{- \Delta - 1}{n}} = e^{\alpha \Delta + \alpha} . \ \ \ (6) Putting eq’s (4), (5) and (6) in equation (3), we find \bar{V}^{a}( \bar{x} ) = e^{\alpha \Delta} \ V^{a} ( x ) \equiv | \frac{\partial x}{\partial \bar{x}} |^{\frac{\Delta}{n}} V^{a} ( x ) .

Sam
 
Wow Sam, thank you very much for your detailed reply! I realized I was treating the representations the wrong way! Thank you very much!

By the way, just to ask, if we have an odd dimensional spacetime, say:
g=diag{...-1... , ...+1...} (n-times -1 with n odd),
then we use absolute value at the deteminant under the squareroot, right? So one can say that in general case we follow the notation with the absolute value?
 
For (p,q) signature in n = |p| + |q| dimensions, you have \det (g_{ab}) = (-1)^{|q|} |g| = (-1)^{n} (-1)^{- |p|} |g| . So
\det(g_{ab}) = (-1)^{|p|} |g| , \ \ \mbox{for} \ \ n = 2k , \det(g_{ab}) = (-1)^{|p| + 1} |g| , \ \ \mbox{for} \ \ n = 2k + 1 .
 
Right, thank you very much! :wink:
 
Hi everyone, I am doing a final project on the title " fundamentals of neutrino physics". I wanted to raise some issues with neutrino which makes it the possible way to the physics beyond standard model. I am myself doing some research on these topics but at some points the math bugs me out. Anyway, i have some questions which answers themselves confounded me due to the complicated math. Some pf them are: 1. Why wouldn't there be a mirror image of a neutrino? Is it because they are...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K