How Do We Determine the Dependence of 2-Point Correlators in CFTs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter earth2
  • Start date Start date
earth2
Messages
82
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,

i'm studying Conformal Field Theory using the big yellow book by Senechal et al. So far everything has been a smooth ride. I'm a bit stuck at the point where they derive the 2- and 3-point correlator for spinless fields.

Based on invariance under rotations and translations the correlator should depend only on the relative coords of the quasi primary fields and moreover - because of scaling invariance - this dependence should be of the type

f(|x_1-x_2|)\sim \lambda^{\Delta_1+\Delta_2}f(\lambda|x_1-x_2|) where λ is the scaling and Δ the conformal weight.

But then those guys say that this is nothing but

\langle \phi(x_1)\phi(x_2)\rangle \sim \frac{1}{|x_1-x_2|^{\Delta_1+\Delta_2}}

which is cannot follow. How do they know that the dependence is in the denominator and where does the exponent come from explicitely?
Any help is appreciated!
Thanks,
earth2
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello! I don't know whether I have understood what you have written; but in the case in which \langle \phi(x_1)\phi(x_2)\rangle = f(|x_1-x_2|) and the behavior you have written is not just a behavior but an equality, then in my opinion you can try the following mathematical trick: the equation
\lambda^{-\Delta_1-\Delta_2}f(|x_1-x_2|)=f(\lambda |x_1-x_2|)
is valid for every λ; you can, furthermore, subtract f(|x_1-x_2|) and then divide by \lambda -1 both sides of the equation. In the limit \lambda\rightarrow 1 you can find a differential equation: if I didn't make any mistake it has the following form
-\frac{(\Delta_1+\Delta_2)}{|x_1-x_2|}f(|x_1-x_2|)=f'(|x_1-x_2|)
The solution of this differential equation is the solution you have written with up to the multiplication of an unknown constant coefficient which depends on the border conditions.
I hope I have been clear.
 
Thank you for your answer! That is a nice way to understand this! From the book however I have the impression that the conclusion is much simpler to get and follows 'for free' from the invariance statements. But thanks a lot anyways!

earth2

P.s. you were right, the \sim should be an equality in the first equation
 
earth2 said:
Hi guys,

i'm studying Conformal Field Theory using the big yellow book by Senechal et al. So far everything has been a smooth ride. I'm a bit stuck at the point where they derive the 2- and 3-point correlator for spinless fields.

Based on invariance under rotations and translations the correlator should depend only on the relative coords of the quasi primary fields and moreover - because of scaling invariance - this dependence should be of the type

f(|x_1-x_2|)\sim \lambda^{\Delta_1+\Delta_2}f(\lambda|x_1-x_2|) where λ is the scaling and Δ the conformal weight.

But then those guys say that this is nothing but

\langle \phi(x_1)\phi(x_2)\rangle \sim \frac{1}{|x_1-x_2|^{\Delta_1+\Delta_2}}

which is cannot follow. How do they know that the dependence is in the denominator and where does the exponent come from explicitely?
Any help is appreciated!
Thanks,
earth2

Poincare invariance implies
<br /> \langle \Phi_{\Delta_{1}}(x_{1})\Phi_{\Delta_{2}}(x_{2}) \rangle = F(|x_{1}- x_{2}|).<br />
Scale invariance;
<br /> \Phi_{\Delta_{i}}(x_{i}) \rightarrow \lambda^{\Delta_{i}} \ \Phi_{\Delta_{i}}(\lambda x_{i}), \ \ i = 1,2 ,<br />
leads to
<br /> F(|x|) = \lambda^{\Delta}F(\lambda |x|), \ \ (1)<br />
where
|x| = |x_{1} - x_{2}| \ \ \mbox{and} \ \Delta = \Delta_{1} + \Delta_{2}.
Eq(1) tells you that F(|x|) does not depend on \lambda and it admits the following (most general) solution,
F(|x|) = \frac{C(\Delta_{1}, \Delta_{2})}{|x|^{\Delta_{1} + \Delta_{2}}} \ \ (2).
(Put F(|x|) \propto |x|^{N} in eq(1), you find N = -\Delta)

Finally, demanding invariance under special conformal transformation, we find
<br /> F(|x|) = \frac{C \ \delta_{\Delta_{1}, \Delta_{2}}}{|x|^{\Delta_{1} + \Delta_{2}}}<br />
Where C is a constant depends on the type of the field. Thus, in order to have a non-vanishing two point function, the fields must have the same scaling dimension.
If it is not obvious to you that eq(2) is the most general solution to eq(1), then do the following; write
\lambda = 1 + \epsilon , \ \ |\epsilon| \ll 1,
then, expanding to first order in \epsilon, eq(1) gives you
|x| \frac{dF(|x|)}{d|x|} = - \Delta F(|x|)
This you can solve to find eq(2).

Sam
 
Last edited:
Yupp, thank you for your answer!
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
26K
Replies
28
Views
6K
4
Replies
175
Views
25K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top