World sheet EM tensor in complex coordinates

da_willem
Messages
594
Reaction score
1
In my Book (Becker, Becker, Schwarz) it is stated (eq 3.23) that the holomorphic component of the EM tensor is given by

T_X(z)=T_{zz}=-2 : \partial _z X \cdot \partial _z X :

Now why is the expression for the (holonorphic, zz, component of the) energy momentum tensor in complex coordinates?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
da_willem said:
In my Book (Becker, Becker, Schwarz) it is stated (eq 3.23) that the holomorphic component of the EM tensor is given by

T_X(z)=T_{zz}=-2 : \partial _z X \cdot \partial _z X :

Now why is the expression for the (holomorphic, zz, component of the) energy momentum tensor in complex coordinates?

I do not really understand the question, what is wrong with using complex coordinates?

nonplus
 
See e.g. E. Kiritsis, hep-th/9709062, page 44.
Essentially, you introduce new coordinates z=x+iy and \bar{z}=x-iy and then transform the components of the energy-momentum to new coordinates by the usual rules of tensor transformation.
If your question is why complex coordinates are introduced at the first place, the answer is because the requirement of 2-dimensional conformal invariance is particularly easy to achieve with complex coordinates. See e.g. (6.1.6) and (6.1.7) in the reference above.
 
Last edited:
Hmm, they were so short about it in the book that I think they presumed the relation should be intuitively clear or common knowledge or something. Well, I tried the transformation to complex coordinates:

T(z)= T_{zz} = (\frac{\partial x^0}{\partial z})^2T_{00} + (\frac{\partial x^1}{\partial z})^2T_{11}

As the off-diagonal elements are zero. Now using x^0=\frac{1}{2}(z+/bar{z})[/tex] and x^1=\frac{i}{2}(z-/bar{z})[/tex] we get that <br /> <br /> T(z)=\frac{1}{4}(T_{00} -T_{11}<br /> <br /> which is zero, as the terms are equal. This is the correct result, the ws em tensor should vanish, but leaves me blank as to how they got that expression...
 
da_willem said:
This is the correct result, the ws em tensor should vanish, but leaves me blank as to how they got that expression...
The same way you did. :smile:
 
This is an alert about a claim regarding the standard model, that got a burst of attention in the past two weeks. The original paper came out last year: "The electroweak η_W meson" by Gia Dvali, Archil Kobakhidze, Otari Sakhelashvili (2024) The recent follow-up and other responses are "η_W-meson from topological properties of the electroweak vacuum" by Dvali et al "Hiding in Plain Sight, the electroweak η_W" by Giacomo Cacciapaglia, Francesco Sannino, Jessica Turner "Astrophysical...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top