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

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter earth2
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of 2-point correlators in Conformal Field Theory (CFT), specifically addressing the dependence of these correlators on the relative coordinates of spinless fields. Participants explore the implications of invariance under rotations, translations, and scaling, as well as the mathematical reasoning behind the form of the correlators.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how the correlator's dependence is established as being in the denominator with a specific exponent, questioning the derivation presented in the source material.
  • Another participant suggests a mathematical approach involving a differential equation derived from the scaling behavior of the correlator, proposing that this leads to the form of the correlator with an unknown constant coefficient.
  • A later reply acknowledges the previous participant's method as a valid understanding but indicates that the book presents a simpler derivation based on invariance principles.
  • Further contributions elaborate on the implications of Poincaré invariance and scaling invariance, leading to a general solution for the correlator that includes a constant dependent on the fields' scaling dimensions.
  • One participant provides a detailed derivation of the correlator's form, emphasizing the necessity for the fields to have the same scaling dimension for a non-vanishing two-point function.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the derivation of the correlator's form. There are multiple approaches and interpretations presented, with some participants favoring a more straightforward derivation while others explore a more complex mathematical reasoning.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions regarding the scaling dimensions and the nature of the fields are not explicitly stated, and the discussion includes various mathematical steps that remain unresolved or are contingent on specific conditions.

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!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
27K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
7K
  • · Replies 175 ·
6
Replies
175
Views
27K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K