Skip to the Main Content

Note:These pages make extensive use of the latest XHTML and CSS Standards. They ought to look great in any standards-compliant modern browser. Unfortunately, they will probably look horrible in older browsers, like Netscape 4.x and IE 4.x. Moreover, many posts use MathML, which is, currently only supported in Mozilla. My best suggestion (and you will thank me when surfing an ever-increasing number of sites on the web which have been crafted to use the new standards) is to upgrade to the latest version of your browser. If that's not possible, consider moving to the Standards-compliant and open-source Mozilla browser.

November 20, 2004

Chiral Superstring Measure

After their breakthrough with the genus-2 superstring measure, D’Hoker and Phong plow along on the road to genus-3. Their observation was that, if one used super-period matrices as coordinates, one could show that the supermoduli space for genus-2 was is, in fact, a split-supermanifold. They could, therefore, integrate over the odd directions and obtain a measure on the ordinary moduli space which, for h3h\leq 3 is a domain in the Siegel upper half-plane.

The formula for the vacuum amplitude takes the form

(1)A= h(detImΩ) 5 δ,δc δ,δdμ δ(Ω)dμ δ(Ω)¯ A = \int_{\mathcal{M}_h} (det Im \Omega)^{-5} \sum_{\delta,\delta'} c_{\delta,\delta'} d\mu_{\delta}(\Omega)\overline{d\mu_{\delta'}(\Omega)}

Where the sum is over independent even spin structures, c δ,δc_{\delta,\delta'} are some constant phases , and dμ δ(Ω)d\mu_{\delta}(\Omega) is the chiral measure which, at one-loop takes the familiar form,

(2)dμ δ(Ω)Θ[δ](0,Ω) 4/η(Ω) 12 d\mu_{\delta}(\Omega)\propto \Theta[\delta](0,\Omega)^4 / \eta(\Omega)^{12}

At genus-2, they found, for an even spin structure, δ\delta,

(3)dμ δ(Ω)=Θ[δ](0,Ω) 4Ξ 6[δ](Ω)16π 6Ψ 10(Ω) 1ij2dΩ ij d\mu_{\delta}(\Omega) = \frac{\Theta[\delta](0,\Omega)^4 \Xi_6[\delta](\Omega)}{16 \pi^6 \Psi_{10}(\Omega)}\prod_{1\leq i\leq j\leq2}d\Omega_{ij}

Here Ψ 10(Ω)= δevenΘ[δ](0,Ω) 2\Psi_{10}(\Omega)= \prod_{\delta \text{even}}\Theta[\delta](0,\Omega)^2. The formula for Ξ 6[δ](Ω)\Xi_6[\delta](\Omega) requires a bit of notation.

If we fix a marking of Σ\Sigma, then a spin structure, δ\delta, can be identified with a 2h2h-vector of half-characteristics,

(4)δ=(δ,δ),δ,delt{0,1/2} h \delta =(\delta',\delta''),\quad \delta',\delt''\in \{0,1/2\}^h

δ\delta is even or odd, depending on the sign of e 4πiδδe^{4\pi i\delta'\cdot\delta''}. For a pair of spin structures, one can define a relative signature,

(5)δ 1|δ 2=e 4πi(δ 1δ 2δ 2δ 1) \langle\delta_1|\delta_2\rangle = e^{4\pi i (\delta'_1\cdot\delta''_2 - \delta'_2\cdot\delta''_1)}

This is not quite modular-invariant. Under an Sp(2h,)Sp(2h,\mathbb{Z}) transformation of the form (I B 0 I)\textstyle{\left( \array{I & B\\ 0 & I} \right)},

(6)δ 1|δ 2δ 1|δ 2e 2πi(δ 1δ 2) tdiagB \langle\delta_1|\delta_2\rangle \to \langle\delta_1|\delta_2\rangle e^{2\pi i (\delta'_1-\delta'_2)^t \text{diag} B}

At genus-2, there are 10 even spin structures and 6 odd ones. It is a peculiar fact that the even spins structures are in 1-1 correspondence with partitions of the odd spin structures into two groups of 3. Denoting the odd spin structures by ν i\nu_i, let

(7)δ=ν 1+ν 2+ν 3=ν 4+ν 5+ν 6 \delta =\nu_1+\nu_2+\nu_3=\nu_4+\nu_5+\nu_6

Using this, one can write Ξ 6[δ](Ω)\Xi_6[\delta](\Omega) as

(8)Ξ 6[δ](Ω)= 1ij3ν i|ν j k=4,5,6Θ[ν i+ν j+ν k](0,Ω) 4 \Xi_6[\delta](\Omega) = \sum _{1\leq i\leq j \leq 3} \langle\nu_i|\nu_j\rangle\prod_{k=4,5,6}\Theta[\nu_i+\nu_j+\nu_k](0,\Omega)^4

This formula depends heavily on peculiarities of h=2h=2. What D’Hoker and Phong propose in their new paper is a new formula for Ξ 6[δ](Ω)\Xi_6[\delta](\Omega), which does generalize to higher genus, and so provides a guess for the h=3h=3 amplitude.

Actually, they come up with two rewritings of Ξ 6[δ](Ω)\Xi_6[\delta](\Omega), but only one, written in terms of sums of squares of even Θ\Theta-functions, has the requisite factorization properties (to be shown in a followup paper) to be a candidate for the genus-3 measure.

So what’s all this good for?

String perturbation theory is still the only detailed quantitative tool we have. It’s wonderful to be able to say that theory “A” is dual to theory “B.” But, if we want to extract numbers, we ultimately need to be able to compute in one or the other. And, until someone comes up with the string equivalent of lattice gauge theory, string perturbation theory is the only tool we’ve got.

There aren’t too many quantities that we need to know to two-loop (let alone 3-loop) precision, but there are some. And it’s not clear that the ones we’re interested in will be amenable to perturbation theory. But still…

Now, the formulæ above are for the vacuum amplitude in 10-d flat space. But, they (along with the genus-hh green’s functions) can be straightforwardly used to compute hh-loop parity-conserving scattering amplitude. If you don’t like 10-d flat space, the formulæ naturally generalize to toroidal compactifications and orbifolds thereof. More general CFTs are harder, but you need to know the answer for flat space before you can tackle a more general background.

An interesting project would be to extend these formulæ to the odd spin structures, which do not contribute to the vacuum amplitude, but which do contribute to parity-violating amplitudes.

Posted by distler at November 20, 2004 2:03 AM

TrackBack URL for this Entry:   http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/cgi-bin/MT-3.0/dxy-tb.fcgi/472

0 Comments & 1 Trackback

Read the post Two-Loop Superstring Amplitudes
Weblog: Not Even Wrong
Excerpt: Eric D'Hoker and D.H. Phong this past week finally posted two crucial papers with results from their work on two-loop superstring amplitudes. The first one shows gauge slice independence of the two-loop N-point function, the second shows that, for N...
Tracked: January 29, 2005 11:02 AM

Post a New Comment