Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Operator algebra of chiral quasi-primary fields

  1. Apr 25, 2013 #1
    Studying conformal field theory, I tried to derive general expression for the commutation relations of the modes of two chiral quasi-primary fields.
    At first, I expressed the modes [itex] \phi_{(i)m} [/itex] and [itex] \phi_{(j)n} [/itex] as contour integrals over each fields, and took commutation relation. I used ansatz, [tex] \phi _i(z)\phi_j(w)=\sum_{k,n\geqslant 0}C^k_{ij}\frac{a^n_{ijk}}{n!}\frac{1}{(z-w)^{h_i+h_j-h_k-n}}\partial ^n\phi_k(w) [/tex], to calculate the commutation relation, [tex] \left [ \phi_{(i)m},\phi_{(j)n} \right ]. [/tex] [itex] h_i, h_j, [/itex] and [itex] h_k [/itex] are conformal dimension of the fields, [itex] \phi_i(z), \phi_j(z), [/itex] and [itex] \phi_k(z) [/itex], respectively.
    Finally, I obtained the result, [tex] \left [ \phi_{(i)m},\phi_{(j)n} \right ]=\sum_{k\geq 0}C^k_{ij}P(m,n;h_i,h_j,h_k)\phi_{(k)m+n}+d_{ij}\delta _{m,-n}\binom{m+h_i-1}{2h_i-1} ,[/tex] where [tex] P(m,n;h_i,h_j,h_k)=\sum_{r=0}^{h_i+h_j-h_k-1}\binom{m+h_i-1}{h_i+h_j-h_k-1-r}\frac{(-1)^r(h_i-h_j+h_k)_{(r)}(m+n+h_k)_{(r)}}{r!(2h_k)_{(r)}} [/tex]. [tex] (x_{(r)}\equiv \Gamma (x+r)/\Gamma (x)). [/tex] I took advantage of two and three point functions to get the result.
    I think my calculation is right. In many textbooks on CFT, however, [tex] \left [ \phi_{(i)m},\phi_{(j)n} \right ]=\sum_{k\geq 0}C^k_{ij}P(m,n;h_i,h_j,h_k)\phi_{(k)m+n}+d_{ij}\delta _{m,-n}\binom{m+h_i-1}{2h_i-1} [/tex], where [tex] \sum_{r,s\in \mathbb{Z},r+s=h_i+h_j-h_k-1}\binom{m+h_i-1}{r}\binom{n+h_j-1}{s}\frac{(-1)^r(2h_k-1)!}{(h_i+h_j+h_k-2)!}\frac{(2h_i-2-r)!}{(2h_i-2-r-s)!}\frac{(2h_j-2-s)!}{(2h_j-2-r-s)!} .[/tex] This result looks different from my result, but two result should be the same. I don't know how to obtain the formula in textbooks and how the two results are the same. Please, teach me with explicit calculation procedures.
    Thanks.
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2013
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 25, 2013 #2

    fzero

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    I don't have the patience to go through this step by step, but you should first note that this isn't really a double sum because of the constraint that ##r+s=h_i+h_j-h_k-1##. So the first step would be to eliminate ##s## using this constraint. It looks like both expressions are then sums over the same index ##r## and same range. So you can compare the expressions term-wise, for fixed ##r##.

    Convert all short-cut notation like the binomial coefficients, the ##x_{(r)}## notation, and the factorials into ##\Gamma## functions. Some common coefficients are already obvious in what you've wrote down so far, if you go a bit further, I expect things to be a bit more clearer. Simplify as much as you can and then post back if you still have questions.
     
  4. Apr 26, 2013 #3
    Thanks, fzero :)

    Even though eliminate one variable by using the constraint you said, it still remains different term. See below.

    1. My result
    [tex]\left [ \phi_{(i)m},\phi_{(j)n} \right ]=\sum_{k\geq 0}C^k_{ij}\sum_{r=0}^{h_i+h_j-h_k-1}\frac{(-1)^{h_i+h_j-h_k-1-r}(m+n+h_k+r-1)!(m+h_i-1)!(2h_k-1)!(2h_i-2-r)!\phi_{(k)m+n}}{(m+n+h_k-1)!(h_i+h_j-h_k-1-r)!(m+h_i-1-r)!r!(h_i-h_j+h_k-1)!}.[/tex]

    2. The result in many textbooks
    [tex]\left [ \phi_{(i)m},\phi_{(j)n} \right ]=\sum_{k\geq 0}C^k_{ij}\sum_{r=0}^{h_i+h_j-h_k-1}\frac{(-1)^{r}(n+h_j-1)!(m+h_i-1)!(2h_k-1)!(2h_i-2-r)!(h_j-h_i+h_k-1-r)!\phi_{(k)m+n}}{(n-h_i+h_k+r)!(h_i+h_j-h_k-1-r)!(m+h_i-1-r)!r!(h_i+h_j+h_k-2)!(h_j-h_i+h_k-1)!(h_i-h_j+h_k-1)!}.[/tex]

    I abbreviated the term includes [itex]\delta _{m,-n}[/itex] which is matche each other.
     
  5. Apr 27, 2013 #4

    fzero

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    I had a chance to look at this a bit more. I was able to reproduce your result

    but I haven't been able to show that this is equal to the textbook result. I had a few ideas about how to manipulate this, but I'm still left with some strange factors. Maybe you'll be able to straighten things out further.


    We need the identities

    $$
    \binom{n}{k} = \binom{n}{n-k} = \frac{\binom{n}{h} \binom{n-h}{k}}{\binom{n-k}{h}} = \sum_{j=0}^k \binom{m}{j} \binom{n-m}{k-j},$$
    where in the 4th term, we can choose any ##m## that we want. We can use the 4th identity to write

    $$
    \begin{split} (m+n+h_k)_{(r)} & = r! \binom{m+n+h_k+r-1}{r} \\
    & = \sum_{t=0}^r r! \binom{m+h_k-h_j+r}{t} \binom{m+h_j-1}{r-t} .\end{split}
    $$

    Under the sum over ##r##, we can shift the index to ##s=r-t##, so that

    $$ (m+n+h_k)_{(r)} \longrightarrow \sum_{s} r!\binom{m+h_k-h_j+r}{r-s} \binom{m+h_j-1}{s}$$


    Set ##r+s= h_i+h_j-h_k-1##, we can use the 3rd identity to write

    $$\binom{m+h_i-1}{h_i+h_j-h_k-1-r} = \binom{m+h_i-1}{s} = \frac{\binom{m+h_i-1}{s} \binom{m+h_i-r-1}{s}}{\binom{m+h_i-s-1}{r}} . $$

    Furthermore,

    $$(h_i-h_j+h_k)_{(r)} = \frac{(2h_i-r-2)!}{(2h_i-r-s-2)!} \frac{r!\binom{2h_i-s-2}{r}}{\binom{2h_i-r-2}{s}}.$$

    We can therefore write

    $$P(m,n;h_i,h_j,h_k) = \sum_{r,s} (-1)^r \binom{m+h_i-1}{s} \binom{n+h_j-1}{s} \frac{(2h_i-r-2)! }{(2h_i-r-s-2)! } \frac{(2h_j-s-2)! }{(2h_j-r-s-2)! } p_{r,s} $$

    where

    $$p_{r,s} = \frac{\binom{m+h_k-h_j+r}{r-s} \binom{m+h_i-r-1}{s}}{\binom{m+h_i-s-1}{r}}
    \frac{\binom{2h_i-s-2}{r}}{\binom{2h_i-r-2}{s}\binom{ 2h_j-s-2}{r}} .
    $$

    We can use the 3rd identity a couple of times to write this as

    $$p_{r,s} = \frac{\binom{m+h_k-h_j+r}{r-s} }{\binom{ 2h_j-s-2}{r}} \frac{\binom{m+h_i-1}{r}}{\binom{m+h_i-1}{s}}
    \frac{\binom{2h_i-2}{s}}{\binom{2h_i-2}{r}} .
    $$

    There are some obvious cancellations, but I haven't been able to get all of the factors to cancel in order to recover the textbook answer. Maybe you'll have better luck and/or turn up some mistake that I made.
     
  6. May 10, 2013 #5
    Thank you, fzero

    I proved two formulas are the same each other using general version of the identities you introduced. Thank you again, fzero.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Operator algebra of chiral quasi-primary fields
  1. Chiral superfield (Replies: 2)

Loading...