A Solving Almheriri's Dilaton-Gravity Model in AdS##_2##

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Fgard
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ads/cft Model
Fgard
Messages
15
Reaction score
1
I am going through Almheriri's article about " Models of AdS##_2## and I am stuck on a derivation. I think they make some kind of assumption which I don't understand.

What I am trying to do, is to compute the equation of motion by varying the action with respect to the metric. Unfortunately I am stuck; I know what the answer is, but it is not what I get. I'll describe first what I have done, firstly I have computed the Ricci scalar from the conformal gauge
$$ ds^2=-e^{2\omega}dx^-dx^+$$
which is ##R=8e^{-2\omega}\partial_+\partial_-\omega##. The action is
$$I=\int d^2x\sqrt{-h}(\Phi^2R+\lambda(\partial\Phi)^2-U(\Phi^2/d^2)) $$
where, ##\Phi^2## is the dilation, and ##U## is an arbitrary potential. To highlight the metric dependence of the action I have written as
$$I=\int d^2x\sqrt{-h}(\Phi^2h^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta}+\lambda h^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi-U(\Phi^2/d^2)). $$
Then I have the variation is
$$ \delta I=\int d^2x\left[\delta(\sqrt{-h})(\Phi^2h^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta}+\lambda h^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi-U(\Phi^2/d^2))+\sqrt{-h}(\Phi^2R_{\alpha\beta}\delta(h^{\alpha\beta})+\lambda \partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi\delta(h^{\alpha\beta})) \right]$$
where I have used that the boundary is static, and I have that the variation of ##\delta(\sqrt{-h})=-\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{-h}h_{\alpha\beta}\delta(h^{\alpha\beta}).##
Plugging that in,
$$-\frac{1}{2}h_{\alpha\beta}(\Phi^2h^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta}+\lambda h^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi-U(\Phi^2/d^2))+\Phi^2R_{\alpha\beta}+\lambda \partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi=0, $$
then I could replace ##h^{\alpha\beta}h_{\alpha\beta}=\delta^{\alpha}_{\beta}##. But the problem is that I know that the answer is supposed to be just
$$ -e^{2\omega}\partial_+\left(e^{-2\omega}\partial_+\Phi^2 \right)=0,$$
and I don't see how I should get that. Especially, I don't understand how they get rid of the potential term.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Fgard said:
I am going through Almheriri's article about " Models of AdS##_2## and I am stuck on a derivation. I think they make some kind of assumption which I don't understand.

What I am trying to do, is to compute the equation of motion by varying the action with respect to the metric. Unfortunately I am stuck; I know what the answer is, but it is not what I get. I'll describe first what I have done, firstly I have computed the Ricci scalar from the conformal gauge
$$ ds^2=-e^{2\omega}dx^-dx^+$$
which is ##R=8e^{-2\omega}\partial_+\partial_-\omega##. The action is
$$I=\int d^2x\sqrt{-h}(\Phi^2R+\lambda(\partial\Phi)^2-U(\Phi^2/d^2)) $$
where, ##\Phi^2## is the dilation, and ##U## is an arbitrary potential. To highlight the metric dependence of the action I have written as
$$I=\int d^2x\sqrt{-h}(\Phi^2h^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta}+\lambda h^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi-U(\Phi^2/d^2)). $$
Then I have the variation is
$$ \delta I=\int d^2x\left[\delta(\sqrt{-h})(\Phi^2h^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta}+\lambda h^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi-U(\Phi^2/d^2))+\sqrt{-h}(\Phi^2R_{\alpha\beta}\delta(h^{\alpha\beta})+\lambda \partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi\delta(h^{\alpha\beta})) \right]$$
where I have used that the boundary is static, and I have that the variation of ##\delta(\sqrt{-h})=-\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{-h}h_{\alpha\beta}\delta(h^{\alpha\beta}).##
Plugging that in,
$$-\frac{1}{2}h_{\alpha\beta}(\Phi^2h^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta}+\lambda h^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi-U(\Phi^2/d^2))+\Phi^2R_{\alpha\beta}+\lambda \partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi=0, $$
then I could replace ##h^{\alpha\beta}h_{\alpha\beta}=\delta^{\alpha}_{\beta}##. But the problem is that I know that the answer is supposed to be just
$$ -e^{2\omega}\partial_+\left(e^{-2\omega}\partial_+\Phi^2 \right)=0,$$
and I don't see how I should get that. Especially, I don't understand how they get rid of the potential term.

I guess you missed some terms in ##\delta R##
$$\delta R=R_{\alpha\beta} \delta g^{\alpha\beta}+g_{\alpha\beta} \delta R^{\alpha\beta}=R_{\alpha\beta} \delta g^{\alpha\beta}+g_{\alpha\beta}\nabla^2 \delta g^{\alpha\beta}-\nabla_\alpha \nabla_\beta \delta g^{\alpha\beta}$$
 
A quick remark: you have double indices, so your expression in the OP becomes probably

Fgard said:
I am going through Almheriri's article about " Models of AdS##_2## and I am stuck on a derivation. I think they make some kind of assumption which I don't understand.

Plugging that in,
$$-\frac{1}{2}h_{\alpha\beta}(\Phi^2h^{\mu\nu}R_{\mu\nu}+\lambda h^{\mu\nu}\partial_{\mu}\Phi\partial_{\nu}\Phi-U(\Phi^2/d^2))+\Phi^2R_{\alpha\beta}+\lambda \partial_{\alpha}\Phi\partial_{\beta}\Phi=0, $$
then I could replace ##h^{\alpha\beta}h_{\alpha\beta}=\delta^{\alpha}_{\beta}##. But the problem is that I know that the answer is supposed to be just
$$ -e^{2\omega}\partial_+\left(e^{-2\omega}\partial_+\Phi^2 \right)=0,$$
and I don't see how I should get that. Especially, I don't understand how they get rid of the potential term.

Your remark about the contraction between your metric and inverse metric then becomes wrong (which is wrong anyway; a total contraction becomes 2, the trace of the identity matrix in 2 dimensions).
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top