Why Is the Central Charge Equal to the Number of Dimensions in String Theory?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the relationship between the central charge and the number of dimensions in string theory, particularly in the context of the Virasoro algebra and its implications for conformal field theory (CFT).

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the definition of the Virasoro algebra and its operators, questioning how the central charge relates to the dimensions of spacetime. There are attempts to connect this relationship to the structure of Vertex Operator Algebras and the implications of different conformal vectors.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided references and insights that suggest a connection between the central charge and the number of bosons representing spacetime dimensions. However, there is no explicit consensus on the interpretation of these relationships, and further scrutiny of the assumptions is encouraged.

Contextual Notes

Participants note a potential lack of clarity in the definitions and relationships discussed, particularly regarding the equivalence of different approaches and the implications of normalization choices in the context of CFTs.

giulio_hep
Messages
104
Reaction score
6

Homework Statement


I'd like to better understand why the central charge is assumed to be equal to the number of dimensions in the spacetime background.

Homework Equations


By definition of Virasoro algebra and its operators:
[Lm,Ln]=(m−n)Lm+n+c/12(m3−m)δm+n,0

The Attempt at a Solution


The commutator relation among the modes satisfying the string worldsheet-equation gives rise to the Virasoro relation with c=D. But I'm missing the details of exactly how it happens.
As another attempt to answer my question, I think that maybe c=D can follow from the definition of the Vertex Operator Algebra where D is the rank of space of states (but again I'm unclear if this second approach is equivalent to the first one ... and if/how the VOA is related with the first quantization of the bosonic string theory...)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The closest reference I've found to answer my question is "Characters of Modules of Irrational Vertex Algebras" of Antun Milas, pag 9 to 11.
In particular pag 11 says "we can transport the structure of a Virasoro algebra module to VL with the grading given by the action of L(0)" and "We keep the same conformal vector so the central charge of VL is rank(L)".
Maybe the last sentence answers my question but is too synthetic for me and I'm unable to expand and elaborate it more.
Also from the same source, in a later, more advanced example of a "root lattice of ADE type" (pag 23), they choose a conformal vector that is different from the "standard (quadratic) Virasoro generator" and they note that - only without the linear term - the central charge is rank(L).
So, in conclusion, I think that the assumption (made in string theory) of a central charge equal to the spacetime dimensions deserves some closer scrutiny and challenge.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Unfortunately the best answer I've found till now is a very trivial and shallow one from Lubos Motl:

Basically
1) If your CFT is made of "d" bosons - describing
spacetime dimensions - then its central charge is "c=d", more or less by
definition. The central charge of the sum of two CFTs is the sum of the
central charges.
and
2) the normalization is chosen in such a way that a single boson
has c=1

In fact the only relevant math point made by Lubos is here

Note that the commutators like [L_2,L_{-2}] are always a sum over "mu", and therefore they're proportional to the number of bosons (dimensions) - therefore "c" is proportional as well.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K