arxiv: v4 [hep-th] 19 May 2018

Transcription

1 Prepared for submission to JHEP The T T deformation of quantum field theory as a stochastic process arxiv: v4 [hep-th] 9 May 08 John Cardy a,b a Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley CA 9470, USA b All Souls College, Oxford OX 4AL, UK cardy@berkeley.edu Abstract: We revisit the results of Zamolodchikov and others on the deformation of twodimensional quantum field theory by the determinant det T of the stress tensor, commonly referred to as T T. Infinitesimally this is equivalent to a random coordinate transformation, with a local action which is, however, a total derivative and therefore gives a contribution only from boundaries or nontrivial topology. We discuss in detail the examples of a torus, a finite cylinder, a disk and a cone. For the cone we show that the eigenvalues of the modular hamiltonian satisfy a similar equation to those of the hamiltonian on the cylinder. In all cases the partition function evolves according to a linear diffusion-type equation, and the deformation may be viewed as a kind of random walk in moduli space. We also suggest a generalization of the whole formalism to higher dimensions.

2 Contents Introduction Equivalence to a random metric problem 4 3 Cylinder and torus A small lemma 8 3. Equivalence to Zamolodchikov s method 0 3. Finite cylinder 3.3 Solution for the partition function. 4 4 Domains with boundaries 6 4. Disk and cone 6 4. Polygonal domains. 8 5 Interpretation as stochastic dynamics 9 6 Higher dimensions 0 7 Summary Ffor a cone Introduction In a remarkable unpublished paper in 004 Zamolodchikov [] obtained simple analytic results for the expectation value of the operator T zz T z z Tz z in any two-dimensional quantum field theory, where the T µν denote the components of the (euclidean) energy-momentum, or stress, tensor in complex coordinates. In particular he showed that it is well-defined by point-splitting, and that its vacuum expectation value is proportional to T µ µ. Furthermore, Zamolodchikov [] showed that, when the field theory is compactified on a spatial circle of circumference R, the expectation value of the above operator in any eigenstate of energy and momentum is simply related to the expectation values of T ν µ itself. This leads to a simple differential equation for how the energy spectrum at finite R evolves on deforming the action by a term T T. This has become known as the T T deformation of the original two-dimensional local field theory, and in recent years has become the object of some attention, one reason being that it turns out to be an example of a local field theory perturbed by irrelevant (nonrenormalizable) operators which nevertheless has a sensible UV completion, a phenomenon termed asymptotic fragility. Dubovsky, Flauger and Gorbenko [] argued that an example corresponds to an exponential dressing of a free boson S-matrix by CDD factors which

3 describes world-sheet scattering for the Nambu-Goto string, and Dubovsky, Gorbenko and Mirbabayi [3] gave an expression for such a dressing of the full S-matrix in the more general non-integrable case also. (That irrelevant operators should generate CDD factors was also pointed out by Mussardo and Simon [4].) Dubovsky, Gorbenko, and Mirbabayi [5] argued that the deformation corresponds to the dressing of the theory by Jackiw-Teitelboim [6, 7] gravity, a correspondence which has recently been demonstrated explicitly by the exact computation of the torus partition function by Dubovsky, Gorbenko, and Hernández- Chifflet [8]. The connection between this and the T T deformation was established by Caselle, Fioravanti, Gliozzi and Tateo [9], who pointed out that the spectrum of states on a circle of a T T deformed CFT, first obtained in [], when applied to a free boson is that of the Nambu-Goto string. Smirnov and Zamolodchikov [0] also pointed out that the deformation corresponds to the modification of an integrable S-matrix by a CDD factor, and extended these ideas to deformations built out of higher spin currents. A different generalization involving a U() current was studied by Guica []. Cavaglià, Negro, Szécsényi and Tateo [] rederived and extended these results and verified them in the case of some integrable models. They also suggested a generalization of Zamolodchikov s results on the spectrum to the case open boundaries. McGough, Mezei and Verlinde [3] studied the holographic interpretation (see also more recent Refs. [4 7]). Cardy [8], and McGough et al. [3] considered the effect of the deformation on signal propagation in a non-trivial background. The hydrodynamics of adding such a term has been considered by Bernard and Doyon [9]. However, it has remained something of a puzzle as to why this particular deformation of a two-dimensional field theory is in some sense solvable, and to derive other results beyond those for the spectrum and S-matrix. In this paper we give a simple explanation of this fact, re-derive some of the known results and uncover some new ones. First, we point out that the infinitesimal deformation of the action is in fact proportional to the determinant det T of the stress tensor, which reduces to T T only in the limit of a conformal field theory (CFT). (However we shall continue to use the term T T deformation as a shorthand, in line with the existing literature.) In two dimensions, det T is quadratic in T ij, and this term in the action may therefore be decoupled by introducing an auxiliary field h ij coupled linearly to T ij, itself with a local quadratic action also proportional to det h. For an infinitesimal deformation this corresponds to an infinitesimal change in the metric g ij g ij + h ij. Thus adding an infinitesimal term det T may be thought of as coupling the theory to a random, locally correlated metric. However, we show that (a:) it is sufficient to restrict this to flat metrics, which correspond to infinitesimal diffeomorphisms x i x i + α i (x), and (b:) The resulting quadratic action for α i is then a total derivative. It is this simple fact which is at the root of the solvability of the deformation. Since only h ij, rather than α i, needs to be single-valued, it implies that contributions to the total action for h ij can only occur if the domain D has non-trivial topology, as for the cylinder or torus, or if D has a boundary. In the cases where D has continuous spatial symmetries,

4 such as the torus or disk, the measure on h ij then turns out to be concentrated on spatially uniform metrics, making the integration over them straightforward. This leads to linear differential equations for the evolution, parametrized by a coupling t, of the partition function Z (t) under the deformation. In fact it turns out that the equations satisfied by the partition function per unit area, Z (t) Z (t) /A are simpler. As an example we quote (3.6) for a torus formed by identifying opposite edges of a parallelogram whose vertices lie at ( (0, 0), (L, L ), (L, L ), (L + L, L + L )) : Z (t) t ( = L L which may be expressed more compactly as L L ) Z (t), (.) t Z = ( L L ) Z. (.) In particular, (.) is equivalent to known results for the deformation of the spectrum on a cylinder [, 0]. Similarly (3.48) for a finite cylinder of circumference L and length L t Z = L L Z, (.3) where now Z = Z/L, and (4.) for a cone of radius R and opening angle χ, with Z = Z/χ. t Z = (/R) χ R Z, (.4) Although equations like (.,.3,.4) are very simple, because of the non-trivial initial and boundary conditions they turn out to have interesting solutions. Since they are linear they may be solved by Green s function methods, but the choice of the integration domain and contour is to some extent arbitrary. For the case of the torus and the finite cylinder, we know the form of the solution as an eigenstate expansion. Remarkably, in both these cases the correct solution appears by applying the saddle-point approximation to the elementary heat kernel solution, and is one-loop exact. In particular, the solutions in general have essential singularities as t 0+, for example of the form e R /t for the disk, as well as regular terms. Indeed, it may be checked that a solution as a formal power series expansion in t is divergent. This suggests that the deformed theory with t < 0 (in our convention, which corresponds to α < 0 in [0] and µ < 0 in [3]) may have some difficulties. However, it was also shown in Refs. [3, 8] that t, α, µ > 0 leads to superluminal signal propagation at finite energy density, so may not correspond to a sensible UV completion in Lorentzian signature. For t R, the partition functions all become independent of the size of D, indicating that the theory ultimately In an earlier version of this paper, this factor of the area was overlooked, as was the factor of R in the case of the disk. 3

5 completely delocalizes. However, not all solutions have the form expected of partition functions. In fact, in the three cases discussed above, we expect that Z (t) may be written as a sum of terms of the form e LE(t) (L ) for the torus and finite cylinder, and e χe(t) (R) for the cone. In all these cases we then find that the functions E (t) satisfy the inviscid Burgers equation, as noted in the first case by Zamolodchikov [, 0] and also Cavaglia et al. [] for the finite cylinder. These special solutions also appear to arise by solving the PDE using the heat kernel with a saddle point method, but in these cases the initial conditions then allow the one-loop approximation to be exact. This has been noted for the torus in Ref. [8]. Equations like (.,.3) may obviously be interpreted as arising from a stochastic process in the space of parameters of the domain. The deformed partition function in the original domain is the same as the undeformed partition function in the evolved domain, averaged over the stochastic process: Z (t) (D 0 ) = Z (0) (D t ). (.5) However the random walk interpretation is tricky as some of the noises turn out to be imaginary. This is related to the contour deformations necessary to define the integral over random metrics. Nevertheless one may argue that these domains evolve towards a more symmetrical shape, as they, on average, shrink. Finally, we suggest a straightforward extension of our methods to higher dimensions, although the deformation in this case turns out to be a non-local functional of the stress tensor and so possibly less interesting. Once again the partition functions satisfy linear PDEs, albeit of higher order. Equivalence to a random metric problem We consider a sequence of two-dimensional euclidean field theories T (t), parametrized by t 0. It is assumed that they each possess a local stress tensor T (t) ij with the usual property of generating infinitesimal local changes in the metric. In this paper we consider only compact manifolds which may be endowed with a flat metric. If they are not simply connected, we dissect them into simply connected components D. For a theory assumed to be translationally and rotationally invariant T (t) ij is thus conserved and symmetric. T (0) is assumed to be a conventional QFT with a UV limit corresponding to a CFT. To deform the theory infinitesimally from T (t) to T (t+δt) we formally add a term ( δt O (t) = 6δt det T (t) ) d x (.) to the action. Less formally, we define the deformation of a correlation function as δ Φ (t) (x )Φ (t) (x ) = δt O (t) Φ (t) (x )Φ (t) (x ) (t) c, (.) The sign and factors of are chosen so that our parameter t matches the α of Refs. [, 0], using our normalization of T. 4

6 and of the free energy as δ log F (t) = δ log Z (t) = δt O (t) T (t). (.3) Note that t has dimension (length), so that the deformation is irrelevant in the IR, and conversely relevant in the UV. [] In Cartesian coordinates, det T = T T T. This is minus Zamolodchikov s operator T T Θ = T zz T z z T z z = 4[ (T T it )(T T + it ) (T + T ) ], (.4) but since we shall largely work in Cartesian coordinates the expression is more useful. det T = ɛ ikɛ jl T ij T kl (.5) It is very important [0] that the infinitesimal deformation is defined in terms of the stress tensor T (t) of the deformed theory. The result is not the same as adding a term t ( det T (0)) d x with a finite coupling t to the action of T (0). The perturbation of the action (.), which is quadratic in T (t), may as usual be decoupled by a gaussian integral (Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation): e 8δt D ɛ ikɛ jl T ij T kl d x [dh]e (/3δt) D ɛ ikɛ jl h ij h kl d x+ D h ijt ij d x, (.6) where we have used ɛ ik ɛ jl ɛ km ɛ ln = δ im δ jn, and suppressed the t-dependence of T (t). The integral is over a tensor field h ij, of which the antisymmetric part decouples. As we shall only need to consider the saddle point solution and the relative gaussian fluctuations about this, we can afford to be cavalier about the precise integration contours. Since it will turn out that 3 h ij = O(δt), by the definition of T ij the second term is equivalent to an infinitesimal change in the metric g ij = δ ij + h ij. In two dimensions this has a decomposition h ij = i α j + j α i + δ ij Φ, (.7) where α i (x) is a vector field and Φ is a scalar field. The first two terms correspond to an infinitesimal diffeomorphism x i x i + α i (x) of the euclidean metric, and e Φ is an infinitesimal change in the conformal factor. This is not completely unique: if Φ Φ + Φ where k k Φ = 0, the change may be absorbed into a shift in α, because only the curvature k k Φ is an invariant property of the manifold in two dimensions. This is most easily seen in complex coordinates: k k Φ = 0 implies that we may write Φ = f (z) + f ( z), which may be compensated by shifting α z α z f( z), α z α z f(z), without affecting h zz or h z z. Moreover, since only the symmetric combination i α j + j α i enters in h ij, we may 3 We may always assume this since we only ever consider infinitesimal δt, with a new T (t) ij at each step. 5

7 restrict α i to be irrotational: that is if we decompose in general α i = i φ + ɛ ik k ψ, then k k ψ = 0. (.8) In principle the integration in (.6) is over all metrics infinitesimally close to euclidean, including those with non-zero curvature. However, it turns out that because h ij couples to a conserved tensor T ij, this is not the case: we may restrict the integration to flat metrics, corresponding to integrating over only α and not Φ. It turns out then that the action for α is a total derivative and therefore receives contributions only from the boundary D. This we now show. 4 Substituting (.7) into the action density for h on the right hand side of (.6), which is proportional to ɛ ik ɛ jl h ij h kl, (.9) we find a sum of several terms. The first is 4ɛ ik ɛ jl ( i α j )( k α l ) = 4 i [ɛ ik ɛ jl α j k α l ], (.0) which is a total derivative so may be integrated out to the boundary D. The remaining terms are 4ɛ ik ɛ jl ( i α j )(δ kl Φ) + ɛ ik ɛ jl (δ ij Φ)(δ kl Φ) = 4( k α k )Φ + 4Φ. (.) The first term may be written, using (.8), 4( k α k )Φ = 4( k k φ)φ = 4 k [( k φ)φ φ( k Φ)] + 4φ k k Φ. (.) The first term is again a total derivative. So is the term coupling α i to the stress tensor in (.6): i α j T ij = i [α j T ij ]. Hence the only term in the action involving the values of φ in the interior of D is the last one on the right hand side of (.). Integrating freely over this then enforces the zero curvature condition k k Φ = 0. Thus, because of the form of the action and the fact that h couples to a conserved quantity, the integration is over flat metrics only. Moreover, because in that case the last term in (.7) may be absorbed into a shift in α, we may set Φ = 0 everywhere, and the last term in (.) also disappears. To summarize, the entire action on the right hand side of (.6) may be written as a boundary term (/8δt) ɛ ik ɛ jl (α j k α l )dn i α j T ij dn i, (.3) D D where dn i is the outward pointing normal line element, or equivalently (/8δt) ɛ jl (α j k α l )ds k α j T ij ɛ ik ds k, (.4) D where ds k is the tangential line element. The fact that the effective action for α is a total derivative is, from this point of view, at 4 A simpler argument based on the conservation of T ij shows that the saddle-point metric is flat, but we need to show also that the gaussian fluctuations are localized on flat perturbations. D 6

8 the heart of the property that the T T deformation is solvable, even when the undeformed theory is not integrable. As we shall show, many of the known results follow from this, as well as new ones in situations where arguments based on translational invariance fail. 3 Cylinder and torus Although the local action for α is a total derivative, since only h, not α, needs to be single-valued, there can be a non-trivial contribution when the topology allows for α to increase by a constant amount around a cycle. As an example consider the flat torus formed by identifying opposite edges of a parallelogram with vertices at 0, L, L, L + L where L = L + il, L = L + il. We may integrate the action for α out the boundary of the parallelogram, giving a contribution from each edge proportional to ɛ jl α j k α l ds k, where ds k is the line element. For clarity suppose the edge is parallel to the x axis, so we have (α + α + α+ α + )dx (α α α α )dx, (3.) where ± are the values on the upper and lower boundaries respectively. Since α k is continuous, if we write α + k α k = [α k], we see that [α k ] = 0, so that (3.) simplifies to [α ] α dx [α ] with a similar contribution from the other pair of edges. α dx = [α ] [α ] [α ] [α ], (3.) The fact only the discontinuities in α contribute to the action, and that they are constant along each edge, shows that in fact only constant flat metrics h ij contribute. It is then simpler to go back to (.6) and write e δto = (δt/a) i,j= dh ij e (A/6δt)(h h h )+Ah ijt ij, (3.3) where we have incorporated some inessential factors into the measure, and A is the total area of the torus. Thus if F (t) ({g ij }) = log Z (t) ({g ij }) is the reduced free energy, we have e F (t+δt) ({δ ij }) = A dh ij e (A/6δt)(h h h ) F (t) ({δ ij +h ij }). (3.4) δt i,j For δt small, we can use the method of steepest descent, expanding F (t) in powers of h. The calculation is straightforward, but in order to understand the form of the result, it is useful to consider the following general integral which will serve as a template for all subsequent similar calculations. 7

9 3.0. A small lemma Suppose we have an integral over N variables {X j } of the form e F (t+δt) ({X}) = (4πδt) N/ (det M) / j dx j e (/4δt) ij x im ij x j F (t) ({X+x}), (3.5) where, if the matrix M is not positive definite, we suitably deform the contours to make the integral well-defined. For small δt we may use the method of steepest descents, expanding F (t) so that the exponent is F (t) ({X}) (/4δt) ij x i M ij x j j x j Xj F (t) x i x j Xi Xj F (t) + (3.6) The saddle is at x i = δt j M ij X j F (t), at which point the expression above becomes i,j F (t) ({X}) + δt ij M ij ( X i F (t) )( Xj F (t) ) + O(δt ). (3.7) However, the fluctuation matrix is now shifted according to (/4δt)M ij (/4δt)M ij + X i Xj F (t) = (/4δt)M ij + H ij, (3.8) so that the prefactor is modified according to (det M) / (det M) / det (M + δt H)) / (3.9) = (det ( + δt M H) ) / = e δt Tr(M H)+O(δt ). (3.0) Thus t F (t) = ij Mij ( X i F (t) )( Xj F (t) ) + ij M ij ( X i Xj F (t) ). (3.) Note that same matrix M occurs in both terms. The equation for the partition function Z (t) = e F (t) is even simpler: t Z (t) = ij M ij ( X i Xj Z (t) ). (3.) Of course this could have been found directly by writing Z (t+δt) ({X}) = (4πδt) N/ (det M) / j dx j e (/4δt) ij x im ij x j Z (t) ({X + x}), (3.3) and Taylor expanding the last factor. 8

10 Going back to the torus we have or, for the partition function ( t F = A F ɛ ik ɛ jl F h ij h kl F h ij h kl ), (3.4) t Z = A Z ɛ ik ɛ jl, (3.5) h ij h kl Computing the second variation of F or Z with respect to the metric turns out to be rather subtle. There is explicit dependence through the lengths (L, L ) which shift according to L L + δl, where δl = h L + h L, δl = h L + h L, (3.6) and similarly for L. However it also has intrinsic dependence through the fact that a metric is required to define the renormalized theory, and this appears at second order, as we now argue. It is clearer to proceed by realizing that the first-order response of F to a uniform shift in the metric is given by the integral of the stress tensor: thus hkl F = T kl (x) d x = (/)(L k Ll + L k L )F, (3.7) l so that, by translational invariance, T kl (0) = (/A)(L k Ll + L k L )F. (3.8) l In general, for any local operator O, hkl O(0) = T kl (x)o(0) c d x = (/)(L k Ll + L k L ) O(0). (3.9) l Hence hij hkl F = T ij (x)t kl (x) c d xd x = A T ij (x)t kl (0) c d x = A(L i Lj + L i L j )(/A)(L k Ll + L k L )F. (3.0) l It is the appearance of the factors of A and (/A) which modify this result from what we would find by expanding F to second order in h ij taking into account only the explicit dependence through δl and δl. 5 (3.4) then gives t F = ɛ ik ɛ jl [(L i Lj + L i L j )(/A)(L k Ll + L k L l )F ((L i Lj + L i L j )F )((/A)(L k Ll + L k L l )F ) ], (3.) 5 This factor was omitted in an earlier version of the present paper. 9

11 or, equivalently for the partition function t Z = ɛ ik ɛ jl (L i Lj + L i L j )A (L k Ll + L k L )Z (3.) l [ = (L L + L L )A (L L + L L ) (L L + L L )A (L L + L L ) ] +(L L + L L )A (L L + L L ) (L L + L L )A (L L + L L ) Z (3.3) Now write Z = A Z where A = L L L L and use (L L +L L )A = (L L +L L )A = A, (L L +L L )A = (L L +L L )A = 0. (3.4) This gives [ t Z = (/A) (L L + L L )(L L + L L ) (L L + L L )(L L + L L ) ] +(L L + L L ) Z + ( ). (3.5) The last term is now canceled by the terms we get moving the derivatives to the right in the second term, so finally t Z = (/A)(L L L L )( L L L L ) Z = ( L L ) Z. (3.6) We also record the equation satisfied by Z: t Z = ( L L L L )Z (/A)[(L L + L L ) + (L L + L L )]Z, (3.7) which may also be written, using (3.8), t Z = ( L L )Z Θ Z. (3.8) where Θ is the trace T jj. Although (3.6) is a simple PDE with constant coefficients, and therefore soluble by elementary methods, it hides some complexity. This is because the torus partition function depends not on four real variables, but only three, typically taken to be the length of one of the edges and the complex dimensionless modular parameter τ. In terms of these parameters it is more complicated. It is invariant under a common rotation of the vectors L and L, and the deformation differential operator preserves this. 3. Equivalence to Zamolodchikov s method We now discuss how our method compares with that of Ref. []. To O(δt), the correction to the free energy is, up to a constant, δf = δt ɛ ik ɛ jl T ij (x)t kl (x) d x. (3.9) 0

12 Zamolodchikov [] argued that in fact ( / y m )ɛ ik ɛ jl T ij (x)t kl (x + y) is a total derivative with respect to x, and therefore is expectation value vanishes in translational invariant geometries. This is straightforward to show in Cartesian coordinates, using the identity ( / y m )ɛ ik = ɛ mk ( / y i ) + ɛ im ( / y k ). (3.30) The derivative in the second term vanishes on T ij (x)t kl (x + y) by conservation, and the first is T ij (x)( / y i )T kl (x + y) = T ij (x)( / x i )T kl (x + y) = ( / x i )[T ij (x)t kl (x + y)], (3.3) again by conservation. This implies that ɛ ik ɛ jl T ij (x)t kl (x) = ɛ ik ɛ jl T ij (x)t kl (x ), (3.3) for all x, in any translationally invariant geometry, such as the torus. By inserting a complete set of eigenstates n of the generators (E, P ) of translations along and around the cylinder, Zamolodchikov [] argued that this implies ɛ ik ɛ jl n T ij T kl n = ɛ ik ɛ jl n T ij n n T kl n. (3.33) From this he was able to deduce the deformation equation for the energy eigenvalues where l is the circumference of the cylinder. t E (t) n (l) = E (t) n (l) l E (t) n (l) P n/l, (3.34) However, another way to proceed from (3.3) is to average the right hand side over x, giving t F = A ɛ ik ɛ jl T ij (x)t kl (x ) d xd x, where A is the area of the torus. We recognize T ij (x)d x as the response of the free energy to a uniform change in the metric, so that or, for the partition function ( t F = A F ɛ ik ɛ jl F h ij h kl which is equivalent to our (3.4, 3.5) above. F h ij h kl ), (3.35) t Z = A Z ɛ ik ɛ jl, (3.36) h ij h kl Despite the formal equivalence of the two approaches, it is in fact quite laborious to deduce Eq. (3.34) for the deformation of the energy eigenvalues from (3.7). This we now show. The torus partition function may be written in a standard way by quantizing on a circle

13 passing through the vertices at 0 and L. The circumference is L = L + L, and the periodic imaginary time is A/ L. An individual term in the eigenstate expansion of Z is then z = e (A/ L )E( L,t)+i(P/ L )(L L +L L ) = e (A/ L )E( L,t)+i(k/ L )(L L +L L ), (3.37) where E( L, t) and P = k/ L (k Z) are the eigenvalues of the hamiltonian and momentum respectively. Without loss of generality we can orient the parallelogram so that L L. Since the differential operator in (3.7) is first order in L, we need keep only terms up to O(L ), whence (3.37) becomes so that z = e (L (L L /L ))E(L,t)+i(k/L )(L L +L L ). (3.38) Then, setting L = 0 after differentiating, L L z = ( L E(L, t)) z + ( E(L, t))( L L E(L, t) ik(l /L )) z, (3.39) L L z = ((/L )E(L, t)) z + (ik/l )((L /L )E(L, t) + ik(l /L )) z, (3.40) ( L L L L )z = (L E L E + k (L /L 3 )) z + ( L E (/L )E) z. (3.4) The remaining terms in (3.37) are (/L L )(L L + L L )z = (/L L )( L L L E ikl /L )z (/L L )(+ikl /L )z = L E z, (3.4) and (/L L )(L L + L L )z = (/L L )( L E)z = (/L )E z (3.43) These cancel the last two terms in (3.4). We should now equate the result with t z L te z. This yields Zamolodchikov s equation (3.34). 3. Finite cylinder A similar analysis may be applied to an L L cylinder with open boundaries along x = 0, L. In that case, the cycle around x allows α to have a discontinuity, but this is no longer the case along x. Instead, writing α (x ) = h x + α (x ), where α (x ) is periodic modulo L, the total derivative integrates up to boundary term L 0 (α α α α ) dx. (3.44) If the boundary is invariant under reparametrizations of x, the boundary free energy is

14 independent of α, so integrating over this implies that α = 0. Therefore the integration over h ij is concentrated on constant metric deformations h and h, the main difference from the torus being that now h = 0. We could have found the same result by assuming that the integration is over only constant metrics h ij, but that h decouples if we assume the conformal boundary condition T = 0. 6 Thus, comparing with (3.4), we have t F = A F = A T (x)t (x ) c d xd x. (3.45) h h The calculation is similar to that of the torus except that we have to be careful about assuming translational invariance. Reflection symmetry under x x implies that T (x) = T (x) = 0, and hence conservation implies that x T (x, x ) = 0. Together with translational symmetry in x this means that T (x) is constant, and so we may write T (0) = A T (x) d x = (/LL )L L F, (3.46) and therefore, from (3.45), Thus, for the partition function, t F = L L [(/LL )L L F ]. (3.47) t Z = L L [(/L) L Z] = ( L (/L) ) L Z (3.48) Note that this equation is asymmetrical between L and L, as is allowed by the geometry. The second term can be simply removed by setting Z = L Z. If we write Z as a sum over eigenstates of translations along x, it is a trace, and each term gives t e LE(L,t) = L( t E)e LE(L,t) = ( L (/L) ) L e LE(L,t) = (E L E)e LE(L,t), (3.49) giving Zamoldochikov s equation (3.34) with P set equal to zero. On the other hand, writing Z as a sum over eigenstates of translations along x, it is a sum of terms of the form f(l, t)e L E(L,t) where f is a projection (squared) onto the boundary state. After some algebra we find that E again satisfies (3.34) with P = 0, and furthermore t f = ( L (/L) ) (fe). (3.50) Once again, f/l satisfies a simpler equation. When L L, the leading term in the partition function has the form Z e sa+s b L E 0, (3.5) 6 Note that, despite its name, this boundary condition also makes sense in the non-conformal case. In space-time it corresponds to zero momentum flux across the boundary. 3

15 where now E 0 is the ground state energy. For a CFT, s a,b are universal constants depending only on the (conformal) boundary conditions, the Affleck-Ludwig boundary entropies []. They each satisfy t s = E 0 L s ( L (/L))E 0. (3.5) Since at t = 0 the s a,b are independent of L, it follows that s a,b (t) s a,b (0) is a universal function, depending only on c but not the type of boundary condition. We note that (3.34) with P set to zero was shown to be true for the case of free fermions and conjectured to be more generally valid in []. They also derived a result equivalent to (3.50). However we stress that this is in fact the case only for conformal boundary conditions. In principle the boundary free energy could depend on ( α ), for example. If we assume that Z (t) has the leading form e (ftll +σ tl+ ), then (3.34) implies that t f t = ft as before, but also that t σ t = f t σ t. This shows that in a deformed CFT, when we can consistently set f t = 0, the surface tension σ t does not evolve. 3.3 Solution for the partition function. We now discuss the solution of (.). Since the equation is linear we may use a standard Green function method. We may write (.) more compactly as t Z = ( L L L L )Z = ( L L )Z. (3.53) This is to be solved in the domain A = L L > 0, with the initial condition Z (0) = Z (0) /A where Z (0) is the partition function of a local QFT. The elementary Green s function (heat kernel) is then (π) 4 and the general solution may be expressed in the form Z (t) (L, L ) = L L 4π t e t(k k ) e ik.l+ik.l d kd k = 4π t e (l l )/4t, (3.54) + L L 4π t l l >0 l l <0 e ((L l) (L l )/4t Z(0) (l, l ) l l d ld l (3.55) e ((L l) (L l )/4t Y (l, l ) l l d ld l, (3.56) where the function Y is to some extent arbitrary, corresponding to different choices of boundary condition on l l = 0. Note that if we use only (3.55) to express Z (t+δt) (L, L ) in terms of Z (t) (L, L ), for small δt we may simply use steepest descents to argue that this will give back (.), or equivalently term by term (3.34), up to corrections which are exponentially small like e (L L )/δt. The question is whether there are problems arising near the boundary. It is instructive to consider first the simpler case of the finite L L cylinder, (3.48), which when expressed in terms of Z = Z/L satisfies a linear PDE with constant coefficients t Z = L L Z. This is to be solved in the domain L, L > 0. We note that although the 4

16 right hand side is not an elliptic operator, the equation is well-behaved as a function of L+L, and for fixed L+L the domain in L L is bounded. It should therefore be possible to specify a unique solution given appropriate boundary conditions. The elementary heat kernel is (π) e tkk e ikl+ik l dkdk = /t πt e ll, (3.57) with a suitable choice of contours. A formal solution for Z itself is then Z (t) (L, L ) = L πt l>0,l >0 e (L l)(l l )/t Z(0) (l, l ) dldl +, (3.58) l where the additional terms represent possible sources outside (l > 0, l > 0), corresponding to varying the boundary conditions. First, we point out that if we use the same kernel to relate Z (t+δt) to Z (t) for infinitesimal δt, the saddle point calculation becomes exact and we recover (3.48), which we have already argued is equivalent to Zamolodchikov s equation (3.34) for the eigenvalues. Thus other choices of the integration domain and other boundary conditions must merely lead to other solutions of this equation which do have the required form of partition functions, that is an infinite sum of positive terms of the form e le n(l ) or e l E n(l). Indeed, we now argue that the correct prescription is to take the full heat kernel solution Z (t) (L, L ) = L πt e (L l)(l l )/t Z(0) (l, l ) dldl, (3.59) l only with an appropriate choice of contours. To see this, consider a single term f(l, t)e l E (0) (l) in the expansion, where f is a matrix element (squared) to the boundary state. The exponent is then linear in l, and integrating this over an appropriate contour enforces the constraint (L l)/t = E (0) n (l). (3.60) This specifies l as a function of L and t, at which point the integrand becomes f(l, 0)e E(0) n (l)l /l. (3.6) Thus E (t) (L) = E (0)( L te (t) (L) ). (3.6) which is Eq. (5.5) of Ref. [0], the P = 0 solution to Zamolodchikov s equation (3.34). Moreover it may be shown after some algebra that the saddle point fluctuations, along with the factor of L/l, give the flow equation (3.50) for the matrix elements f(l, t). We therefore come to the rather striking conclusion that the saddle-point evaluation of (3.59) is exact for the solutions of the PDE (3.48) which we are seeking. A similar analysis, although more complicated, may be carried out for the torus. That is, if we simply take the heat kernel integral in (3.55) and insert the eigenstate decom- 5

17 position, then, in the correct set of variables, two of the integrations may be performed exactly, and the remaining integrals, in a saddle-point evaluation, again lead to a solution to Zamolodchikov s equation, this time with P 0. Since this computation has been presented in detail recently in Ref. [8] we do not repeat it here. 4 Domains with boundaries 4. Disk and cone In this section we consider examples where the domain D has a boundary D. We first consider the simplest case when D is the disk x R. As will emerge, it is necessary to consider this as a special case of a cone of general opening angle. In this case, polar coordinates are most simple, but we should be careful in writing derivatives of vector fields like α. The action for α from (.0) is i A i where, in Cartesian coordinates, In polar coordinates A i = ɛ ik ɛ jl α j k α l = (δ ij δ kl δ il δ kj )(α j k α l ) = α i ( k α k ) (α k k )α i. (4.) and integrating this R 0 rdr π 0 dθ gives j A j = (/r) r (ra r ) + (/r) θ A θ, (4.) R dθa r r=r, (4.3) where 7 A r = α r [(/r) r (rα r ) + (/r) θ α θ ] [α r r α r + α θ (/r) θ α r (/r)α θ ] (4.4) = (/r)[α r + α θ + α r θ α θ α θ θ α r ]. (4.5) The additional terms as compared with the flat boundary (3.44) come from the rotation of the coordinate frame. We could also write the action as [α r θ α θ α θ θ α r ]dθ, (4.6) where θ denotes the material derivative along the curve. Note that the disk is topologically equivalent to a semi-infinite cylinder (and an annulus is equivalent to the finite cylinder considered in Sec. 3.. Therefore we should consider the possibility of a winding mode for α θ, which must be rθ to maintain flatness. This has the effect of introducing a conical singularity at r = 0, so that the polar angle θ should be identified mod(χ) with, in general, χ π. Note (see below) that despite this singularity, the action (.6) is finite. Thus we should consider this class of geometries from the outset. The winding in α θ has the effect of changing χ χ + δχ. 7 We use the convention that α r and α θ have the same dimensions. Thus an infinitesimal shift in θ is (/r)α θ. The term α θ was omitted in an earlier version of this paper. 6

18 Writing α θ = R(δχ/χ)θ + α θ, reparametrization invariance then gives, from (4.6), θ α r = 0, so that the radial component α r is constant when transported along the boundary. Thus the measure is concentrated on uniform rescalings of the metric components h rr = α r /R and h θθ = δχ/χ. Having realized this, as for the torus and finite cylinder it is simplest to go back to the action (.6) which in polar coordinates has the form (A/6δt)h rr h θθ h rr T rr (r, θ)rdrdθ h θθ T rr (r, θ)rdrdθ. (4.7) The calculation now parallels that for the finite cylinder in Sec. 3.. We have F t F = (/A) = T θθ (r, θ)t rr (r, θ ) c rdrdθr dr dθ (4.8) h θθ h rr Conservation and rotational symmetry in θ implies that r T rr (r, θ ) is independent of r and θ, and so r T rr (r, θ ) = (/χr) r T rr (r, θ ) dr dθ = (/χr)r R F, (4.9) and T θθ (r, θ)r T rr (r, θ ) c rdrdθ = χ χ r T rr (r, θ ) = χ χ [(/χ) R F ]. (4.0) Integrating over r and θ, and dividing by the area, we get a factor /R. Taking into account the disconnected piece, as before, we then have for the partition function t Z (t) (R, χ) = (/R)χ χ [(/χ) R Z]. (4.) Note that if we assume the leading behavior Z e (χr /)f t, then t f t = f t, as before. If we substitute χ = L, R /4 = L, then (4.) has precisely the same form as (3.48) for the finite cylinder. Thus we may immediately take over the analysis there. It follows that (4.) has solutions of the form Z (t) (R, χ) = n e χe(t) n (R), (4.) where t E (t) n (R) = (/R)E (t) n (R) R E (t) n (R), (4.3) which is Zamolodchikov s equation (3.34) (with P = 0) if we set l = R /4. Thus the solutions satisfy E n (t) (R) = E n (0) ( (R /4 te (t) n (R)) /). (4.4) The form (4.) is to be expected if we write Z = Tr e χĥ where Ĥ = R 0 rt θθ(r, 0)dr is 7

19 the modular hamiltonian, that is the generator of Euclidean rotations or of Lorentz boosts in Minkowski signature. For a massive QFT, or for a CFT in finite volume, we expect Ĥ to have a discrete spectrum. However, for a CFT as R at fixed χ, we have instead [0] Z (0) (R, χ) R (c/6)(χ/π) R (c/)((π/χ) (χ/π)) = R (c/)((π/χ)+(χ/π)). (4.5) The first term in the exponent comes from integrating the contribution to the trace anomaly along the boundary r = R, and the second comes from the conical singularity. This comes about [0] from a condensation of eigenvalues which scale like E (0) n (R) (c/4π) log R + O( n / log R), (4.6) where the n are boundary scaling dimensions. For n = 0 (4.4) then gives, for t R E (t) 0 (R) (c/48π) log t. (4.7) We also note, from the correspondence between (4.) and (3.48), that there are also solutions of the form Z = f (t) (χ)e E(t) (χ)r /4, (4.8) where again E (t) (χ) satisfies Zamolodchikov s equation (3.34). It would be interesting to understand the physical nature of these solutions, which are in general exponentially subleading in the area. 4. Polygonal domains. The analysis of Sec. 4. may be repeated for a more general simply connected domain, by integrating the action (4.) for α up to the boundary. However there is still redundancy in this description owing to reparametrization invariance of the boundary. This is most easily understood when the boundary is piecewise linear, i.e. a polygon. For each linear segment of the boundary, taken without loss of generality to be the interval a < x < b along x = 0, (4.) gives b a (α α α α )dx = [α α ] b a b a (α α )dx. (4.9) Let α = α x + α, where α (a) = α (b). Boundary reparametrization invariance implies that the free energy does not depend on α (x ), so we may freely integrate over it, giving the constraint α = 0. The right hand side of (4.9) then becomes α [α ] b a. Thus the measure is concentrated on deformations in which each edge is moved normal to itself by an amount α and stretched by [α ] b a. In particular this means that the angles between adjacent edges are preserved. If, in complex notation, the edges are l j e iθ j with j =,..., N, then each l j may vary independently subject to l j e iθ j = 0. (4.0) j 8

20 (4.0) gives real constraints for N real quantities. In addition a global rotation is allowed. For N = 3 there is only a global rescaling and rotation. For N = 4 there is a -parameter family of deformations, plus rotations. These correspond to a uniform deformation of the metric h ij, just as for the torus and finite cylinder. The second variation of the free energy may again be expressed in terms of a double integral of the -point function of the stress tensor over the domain. However, unlike those cases, we do not have enough translational symmetry to write this as a second variation with respect to the edge lengths. 5 Interpretation as stochastic dynamics In all the examples we have considered so far, the partition function satisfies a linear PDE which is first order in time and second order in the parameters specifying the domain D, and is therefore of diffusion type. The partition function may then be viewed as being proportional to the probability distribution function for a kind of Brownian motion of a particle moving in the parameter space. As the simplest example, consider Eq. (.3) for the partition function of the finite cylinder, which, in terms of Z (t) = Z (t) /L is which is associated with the Brownian motions 8 t Z (t) (L, L ) = L L Z (t) (L, L ), (5.) t L t = η(t), t L t = η (t), (5.) where η(t )η (t ) = δ(t t ), and the other variances vanish. The equivalence follows from expanding to second order Z (t+δt) (L t, L t) = Z (t) (L t + t+δt t η(t )dt ), L t + t+δt t η (t )dt ). (5.3) Iterating, Z (t) (L 0, L 0) = Z (0) (L t, L t ). (5.4) Thus we may view the evolution of the partition function in a finite L L cylinder (scaled, in this case, by a factor of L) as the mean of the original partition function in a disk of a random size L t L t. Alternatively, we could have considered the equation for F = log Z as arising from a stochastic process t F (t) = ( L F (t) L F (t)) + L L F (t) (5.5) t L t = L F (t) + η(t), t L t = L F (t) + η (t) (5.6) with the same noise correlations. (5.6) is a typical relaxation process with the noise satisfying the Einstein relation at temperature kt =, except that the force is due to the 8 We use physicists notation rather the more correct language of stochastic differential equations. 9

21 instantaneous free energy function. Although the perimeter L t + L t executes a simple Brownian motion, the behavior of the area A t = L t L t is rather more complicated. In fact the mean behavior of the area follows from F f t A 0 f 0 A t. It follows from t f t = ft that, on average A t decreases with t, approaching zero like /t. This behavior is universal. At the same time the shape fluctuations (L t L t) actually shrink with increasing t, indicating that domains become more symmetrical. We have belabored this simple example because it extends straightforwardly to the other cases. As an example consider the evolution of the partition function Z (t) (L, L, L, L ) of the torus as given by (.) may formally be viewed as a set of Brownian motions t L = η, t L = η t L = η, t L = η, (5.7) with now η (t )η (t ) = η (t )η (t ) = δ(t t ), (5.8) and all other correlations zero. In terms of the combinations X ± = L ± L, Y ± = L ± L, (5.9) t X ± = η ± t Y ± = ξ ±, (5.0) we have η(t ) ± η(t ) ± = ±δ(t t ) ξ(t ) ± ξ(t ) ± = ± δ(t t ). (5.) This means that while X + and Y execute conventional Brownian motions, X and Y + do the opposite: their variance shrinks with increasing t. This implies that the parallelogram approaches a square. However, the area A = L L L L behaves according to the law: where the variance of the noise is t A = η L η L + L η L η, (5.) (η L η L + L η L η )(η L η L + L η L η ) = A. (5.3) 6 Higher dimensions Much of the earlier discussion may be extended to higher dimensions, with some caveats. For clarity we consider d = 3, but the more general case is a straightforward generalization. We define the infinitesimal evolution of the partition function by the generalization of (.6): e δt O(t) = [dh] e (/4(δt) ) ɛ ikm ɛ jln h ij h kl h mnd 3 x+ h ij T ij d 3x, (6.) where suitable contours are chosen so as to make the integral converge. The steepest descent integral may be carried out point-wise in x by going to a diagonal basis for T ij, whence we 0

22 may assume that h ij is also diagonal at the saddle point, so the integral at each point x becomes dh dh dh 33 e (/4(δt) )h h h 33 +h T +h T +h 33 T 33. (6.) The saddle point is at h h 33 = 4(δt) T +permutations, with the solution h = (δt)(t T 33 /T ) / +permutations. Thus the deformation is (δt)o (t) = 4δt (T T T 33 ) / = 4δt (det T ) /. (6.3) Of course, this is non-polynomial in T ij, but the deformation is well-defined by (6.). We would now like to restrict the integral over h ij to flat metrics such that we may write h ij = h ij = i α j = j α i. We might hope this to be the case for the same reason as in d =, since h ij couples to a conserved quantity. However a direct generalization of the argument of Sec. runs into difficulties, because not all metrics are conformally flat. In fact, the higher dimensional generalization of (.7) reads, locally h ij = i α j + j α i + 3 R ikjlx k x l + O(x 3 ), (6.4) which follows from using local geodesic normal coordinates plus an infinitesimal diffeomorphism. Substituting this into the action in (6.) gives a total derivative plus a term proportional to ɛ iab ɛ jcd α i α j R abcd, and, in constrast to d, integrating over α does not constrain the curvature to vanish. Otherwise, and less satisfyingly, we may define the deformation by (6.) with h replaced by h. Modulo this important caveat, many of the d results may be generalized. For example, consider an 3-torus formed by identifying opposite faces of a parallelopiped spanned by integer combinations of 3-vectors (L, L, L ). After suitably normalizing t, we then find the evolution equation t Z (t) (L, L, L ) = ɛ ijk Li L j L k Z(t) (L, L, L ), (6.5) where now Z = Z/V where V is the 3-volume. Note that this is second order in t. If we insert the decomposition into eigenstates of energy Z = n d n e E(t) n (l,l )l+, (6.6) we should find the three dimensional version of Zamolodchikov s equation t E (t) n = E n ( l E n )( l E n ) + (6.7) where the neglected terms involve the momenta and the generator of spatial shear of the state. In general dimension d, the deformation operator O (t) (det T ) /(d ), and the evolution equation for the partition function is a linear PDE of order d in time and of order d in the linear dimensions of the domain.

23 7 Summary In this paper we have treated the T T (more correctly, the det T ) deformation of a local d quantum field theory using the path integral approach, decoupling the quadratic term in T ij by a gaussian integral over an auxiliary field h ij, which may be viewed as a random metric. For an infinitesimal deformation this is equivalent to an infinitesimal diffeomorphism of flat space, and the action for this is then a total derivative, which then only gives a contribution if there is non-trivial topology, or boundaries. Our method leads to linear PDEs for partition functions which are of diffusion type: first order in the deformation parameter and second order in the linear parameters of the manifold. The solution of these by heat kernel methods yields results in agreement with known ones, for example, the evolution of the energy eigenvalues on the cylinder, as long as one evaluates the heat kernel integral in a one-loop approximation. However, other solutions may also have an essential singularities as t 0+. It would be interesting to understand the physical significance of these, if any. We pointed out that in all cases the evolution of the partition function may be interpreted as that of the distribution function of a kind of Brownian motion in the moduli space of the domain, in the sense that the deformed partition function in the original domain is given by the expectation value of the partition function in the domain evolved under the stochastic process. In general the parameters of the domain move towards a more symmetrical configuration as the overall size on average shrinks. The origin of this behavior is in the form of the local action (.6) for the infinitesimal metric deformation, which is proportional to (h + h ) (h h ) 4h. (7.) The first term is a local dilatation and the fact that it comes with a positive sign means that, locally, scales try to execute a Brownian motion and therefore their fluctuations grow. However, the second and third terms correspond to local shear: they carry the opposite sign and therefore their fluctuations shrink. Of course, this picture is oversimplified since the local fluctuations in h ij are not independent, as evidenced by the fact that the measure is in fact a total derivative. Our methods may also be applied to non-simply connected domains with boundaries, with application, for example, to entanglement entropy. By considering the deformed theory on an annulus with different boundary conditions, we gain access to information about correlations. This will be described in a follow-up paper. A further step is to apply this method to the actual correlation functions of deformed local operators. This will be difficult, as our approach implies that it is essential to consider conical deformations of the geometry at the locations of the operators. Another interesting extension is to manifolds which do not admit a flat metric, for example S, and to general curvilinear boundaries. Finally we suggested a way of generalizing the whole set-up to higher dimensions. This, in particular, shows that this kind of deformation of local field theory has little to do with integrability and is more related to topological nature of the effective action.

24 Acknowledgments This work was supported in part through funds from the Simons Foundation. The author is particularly grateful to S Dubovsky and V Gorbenko for drawing attention to important errors in the first versions of this paper: the factors of the area in Eq. (.), and in the argument that this should be equivalent to (3.34). He also thanks Y Jiang and S Datta for pointing out a term in (4.5) which was omitted in the first version, as well B le Floch and M Mezei for useful comments. References [] A. B. Zamolodchikov, Expectation value of composite field T anti-t in two-dimensional quantum field theory, arxiv:hep-th/04046 [hep-th]. [] S. Dubovsky, R. Flauger, and V. Gorbenko, Solving the Simplest Theory of Quantum Gravity, JHEP 09 (0) 33, arxiv: [hep-th]. [3] S. Dubovsky, V. Gorbenko, and M. Mirbabayi, Natural Tuning: Towards A Proof of Concept, JHEP 09 (03) 045, arxiv: [hep-th]. [4] G. Mussardo and P. Simon, "Bosonic-type S-matrix, vacuum instability and CDD ambiguities," Nucl. Phys. B 578 [FS] (000) 57, arxiv:hep-th/ [5] S. Dubovsky, V. Gorbenko and M. Mirbabayi, Asymptotic Fragility, Near AdS Holography and T T, J. High Energ. Phys. (07) 07: 36, arxiv: [hep-th]. [6] R. Jackiw, Lower Dimensional Gravity, Nucl. Phys. B5 (985) 343?356. [7] C. Teitelboim, Gravitation and Hamiltonian Structure in Two Space-Time Dimensions, Phys. Lett. B6 (983) 4?45. [8] S. Dubovsky, V. Gorbenko, and G. Hernández-Chifflet, T T Partition Function from Topological Gravity, to appear. [9] M. Caselle, D. Fioravanti, F. Gliozzi, and R. Tateo, Quantisation of the effective string with TBA, JHEP 07 (03) 07, arxiv: [0] F. A. Smirnov and A. B. Zamolodchikov, On space of integrable quantum field theories, Nucl. Phys. B95 (07) 363, arxiv: [hep-th]. [] M. Guica, An integrable Lorentz-breaking deformation of two-dimensional CFTs, arxiv: [hep-th]. [] A. Cavaglià, S. Negro, I. M. Szécsényi, and R. Tateo, T T -deformed D Quantum Field Theories, JHEP 0 (06), arxiv: [hep-th]. [3] L. McGough, M. Mezei, and H. Verlinde, Moving the CFT into the bulk with T T, arxiv: [hep-th]. [4] A. Giveon, N. Itzhaki and D. Kutasov, T T and LST, arxiv: [hep-th]. [5] V. Shyam, Background independent holographic dual to T T deformed CFT with large central charge in dimensions, J. High Energ. Phys. (07) 07: 08, arxiv: [hep-th]. [6] G. Giribet, T T -deformations, AdS/CFT and correlation functions, arxiv:7.076 [hep-th]. 3