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.

September 15, 2008

Tidbit

One concept emphasized in Harry Collins’s talk at the Science in the 21st Century Conference was that of “tacit knowledge,” something brought home to me, later in the week, in a conversation with Rob Myers. He and collaborators noticed that, in AdS/CFT backgrounds which admit (at most) 𝒩=2\mathcal{N}=2 supersymmetry in the UV, curvature-squared terms are allowed in the effective bulk supergravity, and that this modifies the lower bound on the ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density, η/s\eta/s, in the boundary theory. They found ηs14π(14λ GB) \frac{\eta}{s}\geq \frac{1}{4\pi} (1-4\lambda_{\text{GB}}) where λ GB\lambda_{\text{GB}} is the coefficient of the Gauss-Bonnet density in the bulk effective action. They also argued that

(1)λ GB9100\lambda_{\text{GB}}\leq \frac{9}{100}

because, otherwise, one finds acausal behaviour in the boundary SCFT.

What I didn’t know was that this bound was related to familiar bounds on the central charges a,ca,c of the SCFT. In a curved background, these are given by Tμ μ=c16π 2(Weyl) 2a16π 2(Euler) \tensor{T}{_{\mu}_^{\mu}} = \frac{c}{16\pi^2} {(\text{Weyl})}^2 -\frac{a}{16\pi^2} (Euler) where (Weyl) 2 =R μνλρ 22R μν 2+13R 2 (Euler) =R μνλρ 24R μν 2+R 2 \begin{aligned} {(\text{Weyl})}^2 &= R_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}^2 -2 R_{\mu\nu}^2 +\tfrac{1}{3} R^2\\ (\text{Euler}) &= R_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}^2 -4 R_{\mu\nu}^2 + R^2 \end{aligned} In a supersymmetric gauge theory, the coefficients, aa, cc are one-loop exact, being related by supersymmetric Ward identities to certain R-current anomalies. For an 𝒩=2\mathcal{N}=2 gauge theory, with gauge group, 𝒢\mathcal{G}, and hypermultiplets in representation R hyperR_{\text{hyper}},

(1)a =124(5dim(adj)+dim(R hyper)) c =112(2dim(adj)+dim(R hyper)) \begin{aligned} a &= \tfrac{1}{24}\left(5 dim(adj) + dim(R_{\text{hyper}})\right)\\ c &= \tfrac{1}{12}\left(2 dim(adj) + dim(R_{\text{hyper}})\right) \end{aligned}

and, for an 𝒩=1\mathcal{N}=1 gauge theory, with gauge group, 𝒢\mathcal{G}, and chiral multiplets in representation R chiralR_{\text{chiral}},

(2)a =148(9dim(adj)+dim(R chiral)) c =124(3dim(adj)+dim(R chiral)) \begin{aligned} a &= \tfrac{1}{48}\left(9 dim(adj) + dim(R_{\text{chiral}})\right)\\ c &= \tfrac{1}{24}\left(3 dim(adj) + dim(R_{\text{chiral}})\right) \end{aligned}

In each case, dim(R)dim(R) and dim(adj)dim(adj) are non-negative numbers. Hence we have inequalities

(3)12ac54\begin{aligned} \frac{1}{2} \leq \frac{a}{c} \leq \frac{5}{4} \end{aligned}

for 𝒩=2\mathcal{N}=2 and

(4)12ac32\begin{aligned} \frac{1}{2} \leq \frac{a}{c} \leq \frac{3}{2} \end{aligned}

for 𝒩=1\mathcal{N}=1.

While I stated the results for supersymmetric gauge theories, the bounds (3) and (4) follow from superconformal Ward identities, as shown in Appendix C of Hofman and Maldacena (see also Shapere and Tachikawa). For 𝒩=1,2\mathcal{N}=1,2, these bound are saturated by free field theories (the lower bound, by free abelian vector multiplets, the upper bound by free massless chiral/hyper multiplets). If this continues to hold for 𝒩=0\mathcal{N}=0, we can write

(5)13ac3118\frac{1}{3} \leq \frac{a}{c} \leq \frac{31}{18}

where the lower limit comes from free scalar field theory and the upper limit from free Maxwell theory.

The connection that I didn’t make was that a,ca,c also depend on the coefficient of the curvature-squared terms in the bulk theory and, for Gauss-Bonnet gravity, one has

(6)a (3(14λ GB) 1/22) c (14λ GB) 1/2\begin{aligned} a&\propto \left(3(1-4\lambda_{\text{GB}})^{1/2}-2\right)\\ c&\propto (1-4\lambda_{\text{GB}})^{1/2} \end{aligned}

so that the lower limit a/c1/2a/c\geq 1/2 corresponds to λ GB9/100\lambda_{\text{GB}}\leq 9/100, as above.

Posted by distler at September 15, 2008 10:47 AM

TrackBack URL for this Entry:   http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/cgi-bin/MT-3.0/dxy-tb.fcgi/1796

0 Comments & 0 Trackbacks

Post a New Comment