Why is holomorphic = left moving?

  • Thread starter Thread starter maverick280857
  • Start date Start date
maverick280857
Messages
1,774
Reaction score
5
Hi,

Why does "holomorphic" have to be identified with "left-moving" (and not right-moving) in Polchinski's book, in chapter 2 (page 34)? The way I see it, a function of \sigma^0-\sigma^1 is like a function of x-vt so it should be "right moving". Am I missing something here?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That statement is made in eq. 2.1.13, and he comments on it in the sentence that follows. It is just a convention, and depends on how you choose to define the direction of increasing values in the coordinate system. If the direction of increasing values is towards the left, then the terminology makes sense.
 
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2503.09804 From the abstract: ... Our derivation uses both EE and the Newtonian approximation of EE in Part I, to describe semi-classically in Part II the advection of DM, created at the level of the universe, into galaxies and clusters thereof. This advection happens proportional with their own classically generated gravitational field g, due to self-interaction of the gravitational field. It is based on the universal formula ρD =λgg′2 for the densityρ D of DM...
Many of us have heard of "twistors", arguably Roger Penrose's biggest contribution to theoretical physics. Twistor space is a space which maps nonlocally onto physical space-time; in particular, lightlike structures in space-time, like null lines and light cones, become much more "local" in twistor space. For various reasons, Penrose thought that twistor space was possibly a more fundamental arena for theoretical physics than space-time, and for many years he and a hardy band of mostly...
Back
Top