Snyder noncommutative space-time from two-time physics

Transcription

1 arxiv:hep-th/ v1 25 Aug 2004 Snyder noncommutative space-time from two-time physics Juan M. Romero and Adolfo Zamora Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Apartado Postal , México DF, México Abstract We show that the two-time physics model leads to a mechanical system with Dirac brackets consistent with the Snyder noncommutative space. An Euclidean version of this space is also obtained and it is shown that both spaces have a dual system describing a particle in a curved space-time. PACS numbers: Nx, Gh, d sanpedro@nuclecu.unam.mx zamora@nuclecu.unam.mx 1

2 1 Introduction Inspired by a conformal field theory, R. Marnelius [1] built a classical mechanics model having the conformal group as the global symmetry and the symplectic group S P 2 as the local one. This model has got interesting unusual properties. One of them is that it must have two time coordinates. That is why it is normally called the two-time physics 2T model. By imposing different gauge conditions on this, one can obtain systems such as the relativistic particle with mass and the massless free particle in the AdS space-time. In this sense the 2T model can be used as a toy model for unification. Supersymmetric extensions of the 2T model can be found in Ref. [2]. Recently, I. Bars and co-workers reinvented the 2T model in string theory [3] and carried out several extensions in different contexts see Refs. [4, 5] and references therein. In another work, M. Montesinos, C. Rovelli and T. Thiemann proposed a classical mechanics model simulating the gauge structure of general relativity. In this model the gauge group is SL2, R [6] and, since SL2, R is isomorphic to S P 2, this model is analogous to the 2T. As it can be seen, the 2T model has got several interesting properties one would like to see in a realistic model. From different results in string theory [7], the possibility that the spacetime at short distances is noncommutative has been extensively studied recently. R. Snyder [8] investigated these ideas first and built a noncommutative Lorentz invariant discrete space-time: the so called Snyder space. We show in this investigation how by imposing an alternative gauge condition on the 2T model one gets to a mechanical system with Dirac brackets consistent with the commutation rules of the Snyder noncommutative space. Using other gauge conditions, we also show that an Euclidean version of the Snyder space can be obtained. Then, by exploiting the symmetries of the Hamiltonian, we conclude that each system has got a dual. For the Snyder space the dual system is the massless particle in the AdS space, but for the Euclidean Snyder it is the non-linear sigma model in one dimension. The work in this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 a brief introduction to the 2T model is provided. Then, in Section 3 the gauge conditions to get to the Snyder space are given. The analogous conditions, but to obtain the Euclidean Snyder space are determined in Section 4. In Section 5 we show that both of these spaces have a dual system; and finally in Section 2

3 6 we summarize our results. 2 The 2T model Let us consider the 2T action and its symmetries T action The action for the 2T model is defined as the Hamiltonian action τ2 S = dτ [Ẋ P λ 11 τ 1 2 P 2 + λ 2 X P + λ 31 ] 2 X2, 1 with the Hamiltonian given by H 2T = λ 11 2 P 2 + λ 2 X P + λ 31 2 X2. 2 From this, one can obtain the equations of motion Ẋ M = λ 1 P M + λ 2 X M, 3 P M = λ 2 P M λ 3 X M, 4 P 2 = X 2 = X P = 0. 5 Here we consider the Poisson brackets {X M, P N } = η MN and zero otherwise, with η MN being a flat metric. Now, by defining it can seen that the algebra φ 1 = 1 2 P 2, φ 2 = X P, φ 3 = 1 2 X2, 6 {φ 2, φ 3 } = 2φ 3, {φ 2, φ 1 } = 2φ 1, {φ 1, φ 3 } = φ 2, 7 holds. That is, all the constraints are first class. Eq. 7 represents the Lie algebra of the S P 2 group which is formed by the 2 2 matrices with determinant one. If one redefines variables as H 1 = φ 1, H 2 = φ 3, D = φ 2, 8 3

4 the Lie algebra of the SLR, 2 is obtained. This has been already proposed as a toy model simulating the gauge group of general relativity [6]. Now, if we consider the Euclidean or Minkowski metrics as the background space, the surface defined by Eq. 5 is trivial. Therefore, the simplest metric giving a non-trivial surface is the flat metric with two time coordinates. Throughout this work we will assume this metric only. If the configuration space has dimensionality D = d + 2, a flat metric η MN with signature sigη =,, +,, +, 9 must be used. The coordinates of the phase space can be taken as X M = X 0, X 1, X 0, X i, P M = P 0, P 1, P 0, P i, i = 1,...,d 1, 10 where the two zeroes are associated with the time coordinates. In principle the phase space of the system has got 2d + 2 independent coordinates. However, as there are three first-class constraints, six degrees of freedom must be subtracted. Therefore, there are 2d 1 effective degrees of freedom and so the configuration space has got d 1 independent coordinates. 2.2 Symmetries The equations of motion 3 and 4 can be rewritten as d X M dt P M = At X M P M with At = λ 2 λ 1 λ 3 λ By performing a gauge transformation with an arbitrary matrix of Sp2, XM P M = Ut X M P M with Ut = a b c d, ad bc = 1, 12 one gets to the transformed equations of motion d XM dt P M = Āt XM P M, 13 4

5 where Āt = UtAtUt 1 Ut dut dt It can be easily seen that At transforms as a connection under the gauge transformation Ut and that the equations of motion 11 are invariant under this gauge transformation as well. Now, the action in Eq. 1, when rewritten in terms of the transformed variables, takes the form τ2 S = dτ [Ẋ P λ 11 τ 1 2 P 2 + λ 2 X P + λ 31 2 X2 τ2 [ d X = dτ τ 1 dτ P λ1 1 2 P 2 + λ 2 X P 1 + λ3 2 X 2 + d ab 1 dτ 2 P 2 + bc X P dc 1 2 X ] 2, 15 where λ i is given in Eq. 14. Thus, up to a boundary term, the action in Eq. 1 is invariant under the gauge transformations 12 and 14. On the other hand, the quantities X P, X 2, P 2 and Ẋ P are clearly invariant under global transformations Λ that satisfy Λ T ηλ = η, 16 with the signature η defined in Eq. 9. Thus, the action in Eq. 1 is invariant under global transformations of SO2, d. It can be shown that in phase space the generators of this symmetry are L MN = X M P N X N P M, 17 which satisfy the conformal algebra [9] and are conserved quantities. Moreover, they satisfy {L MN, φ i } = 0, i.e. they are gauge invariant. 3 Snyder space Let us consider the gauge conditions to get the Snyder space P 1 = L = const., X 1 =

6 Substituting them into the equations of motion 3 and 4 we obtain λ 2 = λ 1 = By using Eq. 5 it can be seen that the independent reduced equations of motion are Ẋ µ = 0, 20 P µ = λ 3 X µ, 21 φ 3 = 1 2 G µνx µ X ν P µ P ν = 0, G µν = η µν, 22 P α P α + L 2 with the dependent variables given by P 0 = P µ P µ + L 2, X 0 = P µ X µ Pµ P µ + L After performing an integration by parts and substituting the dependent variables into Eq. 1 one obtains [ ] S = dτ G µν X µ P ν λ3 2 G µνx µ X ν. 24 This dynamics might seem little interesting. However, to quantize this system with the canonical formalism, the Dirac brackets [10, 11] must be constructed. In this process the Dirac brackets are replaced by commutators. Now, let us consider χ 1 = P 1 L, 25 χ 2 = X 1, 26 χ 3 = P X, 27 χ 4 = 1 2 P 2, 28 φ = 1 2 X2. 29 A straightforward calculation shows that Eq. 29 is a first-class constraint while the others are second class. For the later ones we find 0 1 L L C αβ {χ α, χ α } = L L 0 0 6

7 From which, C αβ 1 L L L In general, given two functions A and B in phase space, the Dirac brackets are defined as {A, B} = {A, B} {A, χ α }C αβ {χ β, B}. 32 In particular, for the phase space coordinates {X µ, X ν } = 1 L 2 X µp ν X ν P µ, 33 {X µ, P ν } = η µν + 1 L 2P µp ν, 34 {P µ, P ν } = These Dirac brackets are the classic version of the commutation rules of Snyder space [8]. Therefore, after quantizing the system we have the Snyder space as the background. Now, by defining X µ = G µν X ν, the pair X µ, P µ satisfies the Dirac brackets {X µ,x ν } = 0, {X µ, P ν } = δ µν, {P µ, P ν } = That is, with the variables X µ, P µ, the usual Poisson brackets are obtained. Nevertheless, at the quantum level the definition of X µ is ambiguous. 4 Euclidean Snyder space Other gauge conditions from which a noncommutative space can be obtained are χ 1 = P 0 1, χ 2 = X 0 = In this case the independent equations of motion are Ẋ i = 0, 38 P i = λ 3 X i, 39 φ 3 = λ3 2 g ijx i X j, g ij = δ ij + P ip j, 1 P k P k 40 7

8 and, as can be easily seen, the second-class constraints given by χ 1 = P 0 1, 41 χ 2 = X 0, 42 χ 3 = P X, 43 χ 4 = 1 2 P From a straightforward calculation it can be observed that in this case the matrix C αβ {χ α, χ α } is minus the matrix in Eq. 30 with L = 1. Using this, we find for the phase space coordinates {X i, X j } = P i X j P j X i, 45 {X i, P j } = δ ij P i P j, 46 {P i, P j } = Thus, after quantizing the reduced system, a noncommutative space in the coordinates is obtained. By defining the variable X i = g ij X j, it can be seen that the pair X i, P j satisfies {X i,x j } = 0, {X i, P j } = δ ij, {P i, P j } = Now, as the only gauge transformations permitted are of the type of Eq. 12, there is no gauge transformation which takes the Snyder space to this system. In this sense they are different physical systems. 5 Od + 1 non-linear sigma model in one dimension It can be seen that the Hamiltonian H 2T from Eq. 2 is invariant under the transformations X M, P M P M, X M, λ 1, λ 2, λ 3 λ 3, λ 2, λ And so, a result analogous to the original one is obtained when the Xs and P s are swapped in both gauge conditions. Nevertheless, the physical 8

9 interpretation is different. As an example, by performing this swap in the gauge conditions of the Euclidean Snyder space from Eq. 37, one obtains χ 1 = X 0 1 and χ 2 = P In this case the independent reduced equations of motion are Ẋ i = λ 1 P i, i = 1,...,d 51 P i = 0, 52 φ 1 = g ij P i P j, g ij = δ ij + X ix j, 53 1 X k X k with dependent variables given by X 0 = X i X i 1, P 0 = P i X i Xi X i Now, rewriting Eq. 1 in terms of the independent variables we get [ ] τ2 S = dτ g ij Ẋ i P j λ1 τ 1 2 g ijp i P j. 55 From this expression one gets the equations of motion Now, substituting Eq. 51 into Eq. 55 and eliminating P i as a dynamic variable we get S = 1 τ2 dτ g ijẋi Ẋ j τ 1 λ 1 Eq. 56 can be interpreted as the action of a massless free particle in a space with metric g ij, but non-relativistic massless particles are not natural. In a better interpretation, for λ 1 = 1, this equation represents the action of the Od + 1 non-linear sigma model in one dimension [12]. The Dirac brackets for the phase space coordinates, in this case, are {X j, X i } = 0, 57 {X i, P j } = δ ij X i X j, 58 {P i, P j } = P i X j P j X i. 59 However, using the coordinates X i, P i = g ij P j one gets to {X j, X i } = 0, {X i, P j } = δ ij, { P j, P j } =

10 By performing the change of variables X, P P, X in the gauge conditions for the Snyder space, Eq. 18, one obtains the gauge conditions X 1 = L = const., P 1 = In Refs. [1] and [5] it is shown that, using the gauge condition from Eq. 61, the massless particle in the AdS space is obtained. This can also be easily verified by repeating the calculation with the gauge conditions of Eq. 50. It is remarkable that in the 2T model both dynamics in noncommutative spaces have as dual a dynamics in a curved space-time. 6 Summary In this work we study a mechanical system with two times and gauge freedom called the two-time physics. It is shown that considering a particular gauge one gets a mechanical system with Dirac brackets consistent with the commutation rules of the Snyder noncommutative space. Using other gauge conditions an Euclidean version of the Snyder space is obtained. By exploiting a symmetry of the Hamiltonian we show that these noncommutative systems have a dual system. For the Snyder space, the dual is a massless particle in the AdS space, while for the Euclidean Snyder the dual is the non-linear sigma model in one dimension. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank J. D. Vergara for discussions. References [1] R. Marnelius and B. Nilsson, Equivalence between a massive spinning particle in Minkowski space and a massless one in a de Sitter space, Phys. Rev. D 20, ; R. Marnelius, Manifestly conformally covariant description of spinning and charged particles, Phys. Rev. D 20,

11 [2] W. Siegel, Conformal Invariance Of Extended Spinning Particle Mechanics, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 3, ; U. Martensson, The Spinning Conformal Particle and its BRST Quantization, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 8, [3] I. Bars and C. Kounnas, Theories with Two Times, Phys. Lett. B 402, , hep-th/ ; I. Bars and C. Kounnas, String and particle with two times, Phys. Rev. D 56, , hep-th/ [4] I. Bars, Twistor Superstring in 2T-Physics, hep-th/ ; I. Bars, Hidden Symmetries, AdS D S n, and the lifting of one-time-physics to two-time-physics, Phys. Rev. D 59, , hep-th/ [5] I. Bars, Two-Time Physics, hep-th/ [6] M. Montesinos, C. Rovelli and T. Thiemann, SL2,R model with two Hamiltonian constraints, Phys. Rev. D 60, , gr-qc/ [7] N. Seiberg and E. Witten, String Theory and Noncommutative Geometry, JHEP 9909, , hep-th/ [8] H. S. Snyder, Quantized Space-Time, Phys. Rev. 71, [9] O. Aharony, S. S. Gubser, J. Maldacena, H. Ooguri and Y. Oz, Large N Field Theories, String Theory and Gravity, Phys. Rept. 323, , hep-th/ [10] P. A. M. Dirac, Lectures on Quantum Mechanics Dover, New York, [11] M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim, Quantization of Gauge System Princeton University Press, USA, [12] J. Zinn-Justin, Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena Oxford University Press, UK,