text
stringlengths 0
44.4k
|
---|
8. K. T. Phelps. A general product construction for error corre cting codes. SIAM J.
|
Algebraic Discrete Methods , 5(2):224–228, 1984.
|
9. K. T. Phelps. A product construction for perfect codes over a rbitrary alphabets.
|
IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory , 30(5):769–771, 1984.
|
10. V. N. Potapov and D. S. Krotov. On the number of n-ary quasigroups of finite order.
|
Submitted. ArXiv:0912.5453
|
11. V.N.PotapovandD.S.Krotov. Asymptoticsforthenumbero fn-quasigroupsoforder
|
4.Sib. Math. J. , 47(4):720–731, 2006. DOI: 10.1007/s11202-006-0083-9 tran slated
|
from Sib. Mat. Zh. 47(4) (2006), 873-887. ArXiv:math/0605104
|
O. Heden
|
Department of Mathematics, KTH
|
S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
|
email:[email protected]
|
D. Krotov
|
Sobolev Institute of Mathematics
|
and
|
Mechanics and Mathematics Department, Novosibirsk State Univer sity
|
Novosibirsk, Russia
|
email:[email protected]
|
8
|
arXiv:1001.0002v2 [hep-th] 9 Mar 2010Gravity duals for logarithmic conformal field theories
|
Daniel Grumiller and Niklas Johansson
|
Institute for Theoretical Physics, Vienna University of Te chnology
|
Wiedner Hauptstrasse 8-10/136, A-1040 Vienna, Austria
|
E-mail:[email protected], [email protected]. ac.at
|
Abstract. Logarithmic conformal fieldtheories with vanishingcentra l charge describe systems
|
withquencheddisorder, percolation ordiluteself-avoidi ngpolymers. Inthesetheories theenergy
|
momentum tensor acquires a logarithmic partner. In this tal k we address the construction of
|
possible gravity duals for these logarithmic conformal fiel d theories and present two viable
|
candidates for such duals, namely theories of massive gravi ty in three dimensions at a chiral
|
point.
|
Outline
|
Thistalk isorganized asfollows. Insection 1werecall sali ent featuresof2-dimensionalconformal
|
field theories. In section 2 we review a specific class of logar ithmic conformal field theories where
|
the energy momentum tensor acquires a logarithmic partner. In section 3 we present a wish-list
|
for gravity duals to logarithmic conformal field theories. I n section 4 we discuss two examples
|
of massive gravity theories that comply with all the items on that list. In section 5 we address
|
possible applications of an Anti-deSitter/logarithmic co nformal field theory correspondence in
|
condensed matter physics.
|
1. Conformal field theory distillate
|
Conformal field theories (CFTs) are quantum field theories th at exhibit invariance under angle
|
preserving transformations: translations, rotations, bo osts, dilatations and special conformal
|
transformations. In two dimensions the conformal algebra i s infinite dimensional, and thus
|
two-dimensional CFTs exhibit a particularly rich structur e. They arise in various contexts in
|
physics, including string theory, statistical mechanics a nd condensed matter physics, see e.g. [1].
|
The main observables in any field theory are correlation func tions between gauge invariant
|
operators. There exist powerful tools to calculate these co rrelators in a CFT. The operator
|
content of various CFTs may differ, but all CFTs contain at leas t an energy momentum tensor
|
Tµν. Conformal invariance requires the energy momentum tensor to be traceless, Tµ
|
µ= 0,
|
in addition to its conservation, ∂µTµν= 0. In lightcone gauge for the Minkowski metric,
|
ds2= 2dzd¯z, these equations take a particularly simple form: Tz¯z= 0,Tzz=Tzz(z) :=OL(z)
|
andT¯z¯z=T¯z¯z(¯z) :=OR(¯z). Conformal Ward identities determine essentially unique ly the form
|
of 2- and3-point correlators between thefluxcomponents OL/Rof theenergy momentum tensor:∝an}b∇acketle{tOR(¯z)OR(0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=cR
|
2¯z4(1a)
|
∝an}b∇acketle{tOL(z)OL(0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=cL
|
2z4(1b)
|
∝an}b∇acketle{tOL(z)OR(0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht= 0 (1c)
|
∝an}b∇acketle{tOR(¯z)OR(¯z′)OR(0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=cR
|
¯z2¯z′2(¯z−¯z′)2(1d)
|
∝an}b∇acketle{tOL(z)OL(z′)OL(0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=cL
|
z2z′2(z−z′)2(1e)
|
∝an}b∇acketle{tOL(z)OR(¯z′)OR(0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht= 0 (1f)
|
∝an}b∇acketle{tOL(z)OL(z′)OR(0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht= 0 (1g)
|
The real numbers cL,cRare the left and right central charges, which determine key p roperties of
|
the CFT. We have omitted terms that are less divergent in the n ear coincidence limit z,¯z→0 as
|
well as contact terms, i.e., contributions that are localiz ed (δ-functions and derivatives thereof).
|
If someone provides us with a traceless energy momentum tens or and gives us a prescription
|
how to calculate correlators,1but does not reveal whether the underlying field theory is a CF T,
|
thenwecanperformthefollowing check. Wecalculate all 2- a nd3-point correlators of theenergy
|
momentum tensor with itself, and if at least one of the correl ators does not match precisely with
|
the corresponding correlator in (1) then we know that the fiel d theory in question cannot be a
|
CFT. On the other hand, if all the correlators match with corr esponding ones in (1) we have
|
non-trivial evidence that the field theory in question might be a CFT. Let us keep this stringent
|
check in mind for later purposes, but switch gears now and con sider a specific class of CFTs,
|
namely logarithmic CFTs (LCFTs).
|
2. Logarithmic CFTs with an energetic partner
|
LCFTs were introduced in physics by Gurarie [2]. We focus now on some properties of LCFTs
|
and postpone a physics discussion until the end of the talk, s ee [3,4] for reviews. There are two
|
conceptually different, but mathematically equivalent, way s to define LCFTs. In both versions
|
there exists at least one operator that acquires a logarithm ic partner, which we denote by Olog.
|
We focus in this talk exclusively on theories where one (or bo th) of the energy momentum
|
tensor flux components is the operator acquiring such a partn er, for instance OL. We discuss
|
now briefly both ways of defining LCFTs.
|
According to the first definition “acquiring a logarithmic pa rtner” means that the
|
Hamiltonian Hcannot be diagonalized. For example
|
H/parenleftbigg
|
Olog
|
OL/parenrightbigg
|
=/parenleftbigg
|
2 1
|
0 2/parenrightbigg/parenleftbigg
|
Olog
|
OL/parenrightbigg
|
(2)
|
Theangularmomentum operator Jmay ormay not bediagonalizable. Weconsider onlytheories
|
whereJis diagonalizable:
|
J/parenleftbigg
|
Olog
|
OL/parenrightbigg
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.