text:
# Spherically symmetric model atmospheres for low mass pre-Main Sequence stars with effective temperatures between 2000 and 6800 K

## 1 Introduction

In a recent paper (Hauschildt et al., 1999, hereafter: NG-giant) we have presented a grid of spherically symmetric model atmospheres for stars with $`\mathrm{log}(g)3.5`$ and in the temperature range $`3000T_{\mathrm{eff}}6800\mathrm{K}`$. In this paper, we present an update of the NG-giant grid tuned for young pre-MS (PMS) stars. This PMS grid spans the parameter range $`2000\mathrm{K}T_{\mathrm{eff}}6800\mathrm{K}`$ and $`2.0\mathrm{log}(g)3.5`$ for solar abundances. The models were calculated for very low mass stars with $`M=0.1\text{ M}\text{}`$ but in the parameter range considered the mass of the star changes the synthetic spectra and the atmospheric structure only marginally. A major difference from our NextGen grids of model atmospheres Hauschildt, Allard, & Baron (1999); Hauschildt et al. (1999) is the replacement of TiO and H2O line lists with the newer line list calculated by the NASA-AMES group, Schwenke (1998) for TiO (about 175 million lines of 5 isotopes) and Partridge & Schwenke (1997) for H2O (about 350 million lines in 2 isotopes).

In the next section we give a brief overview over the model construction and the differences from the NextGen grids. Then we discuss some results, in particular the effects of the new line lists and we end with a summary of the paper.

## 2 Model calculations

We have calculated the models presented in this paper using our multipurpose model atmosphere code PHOENIX, version 10.7. Details of the code and the general input physics setup are discussed in Hauschildt, Allard, & Baron (1999); Hauschildt et al. (1999) and Hauschildt & Baron (1999) and references therein. The model atmospheres presented here were calculated with the same general input physics as in NG-giant. However, the change of the line lists has some impact on the model structure and synthetic spectra (see below). Our combined molecular line list includes about 550 million molecular lines. These lines are treated with a direct opacity sampling technique where each line has its individual Voigt (for strong lines) or Gauss (weak lines) line profile (see Hauschildt, Allard, & Baron, 1999, and references therein for details). The number of lines selected by this procedure depends on the the model parameters. Typically, the smallest amounts of molecular lines are selected at the cool and hot ends of the grid, e.g., about 75 million for $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=2000\mathrm{K}`$, $`\mathrm{log}(g)=3.5`$ and 80 million for $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=4000\mathrm{K}`$, $`\mathrm{log}(g)=2.0`$. The maximum number of selected molecular lines is about 215 million at $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=3000\mathrm{K}`$, $`\mathrm{log}(g)=2.0`$ (all data are for solar abundances).

## 3 Results

We have calculated a grid of solar abundance (table 5 of Jaschek & Jaschek, 1995) model atmospheres and grids with enhanced metallicities $`[\mathrm{M}/\mathrm{H}]=+0.3`$ as well as reduced metallicities, $`[\mathrm{M}/\mathrm{H}]=0.3`$. The models span a range of $`2000\mathrm{K}T_{\mathrm{eff}}6800\mathrm{K}`$ and $`2.0\mathrm{log}(g)3.5`$. These models were originally intended to be used for low mass stellar evolution models (Baraffe et al, in preparation) and thus assume a mass of $`0.1\text{ M}\text{}`$ for the stars. In the parameter range (mainly $`\mathrm{log}(g)`$) considered here, the synthetic spectra can also be applied to other masses. Most of the basic results have been described in Hauschildt et al. (1999), so we are concentrating here on comparison with the NG-giant models.

### 3.1 Comparison with NG-giant models

The largest change from the input physics of the NG-giant models is due to the different and larger line lists for TiO and water vapor. In Figures 1 and 2 we compare NG-giant models (dotted lines) to the PMS grid. The main difference between these models is the selection of the input line lists, we used the same version of PHOENIX and the same thermodynamical and opacity data (other than TiO and water vapor) for the calculations. Both sets of models were iterated to convergence with their respective setups, so the differences in the spectra are the results of both direct opacity changes and changes in the structure of the model atmospheres due to the different opacities. In the optical spectrum, the result is generally weaker TiO bands for the PMS models compared to the NG-giant models at $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=3000\mathrm{K}`$ but slightly stronger TiO bands at $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=4000\mathrm{K}`$. The situation is slightly different for the water bands shown in Figure 2. The NextGen-type models show stronger H2O bands with less inter-band opacity than the PMS models. More importantly, the shape of some water bands are noticeably different between the two setups. The reason for this behavior is the changes in the structure of the atmosphere caused by the different degree of completeness of the water vapor line lists used (see Allard, Hauschildt & Schwenke, submitted). For low $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, the strengthening of the overall water opacity going from the NG-giant models to the PMS models produces weaker TiO bands due to changes in the structure of the atmospheres. However, in hotter models the water bands are not as important as the TiO bands and the net effect of the overall slightly stronger TiO lines produces stronger TiO bands in the optical. These effects are more pronounced for higher gravities (water opacity is relatively more important for larger gravities at the same effective temperature).

In general, the PMS setup applied to M dwarfs produces somewhat better fits to field stars Leggett et al. (1999); Leinert et al. (1999), although the water bands are still not perfectly reproduced by the models Allard, Hauschildt, & Schwenke (1999). One reason for this are problems with the water line lists, but other opacity sources (such as dust formation in very cool models) as well as the treatment of convection in optically thin layers are additional sources of uncertainty.

### 3.2 Effects of metallicity changes

The effects of metallicity changes on low resolution synthetic spectra are shown in Figs. 58 for models with $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=3400\mathrm{K}`$ and $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=2400\mathrm{K}`$ for the extreme values of the gravity in our grid. For the higher effective temperature, Figs. 5 and 6, the effects of metallicity are most pronounced in the optical (reduced metallicity causes increased flux due to decreased TiO opacity) and in region from 1 to $`1.5\mu `$m (the reaction of the atmosphere causes reduced flux in this region to compensate for the larger flux in the optical). The water band get stronger with reduced metallicity due to these redistribution effects. For lower effective temperatures, Figs. 7 and 8, the effects of metallicity of the spectra are significantly smaller, in particular for the lower gravity shown in Fig. 7. Here the temperatures are so low that the bands are saturated and thus will not change much within the range of metallicities considered here (larger changes will eventually affect the spectra). Significant changes occur only in localized bands, e.g., the metal hydrides and other non-saturated bands such as VO.

### 3.3 Formation of radiative and convective zones

Typically, a cool stellar atmosphere has only one convective zone at the bottom of the atmosphere whereas the top of the atmosphere is (and has to be) in radiative equilibrium. The convective zone at the bottom of the atmosphere connects to the convective envelope of the interior of the star. However, our calculations indicate that the convective region at the bottom of the atmosphere can be disrupted by the onset of an isolated radiative zone within specific parameter ranges. These ranges are illustrated in Fig. 3. Each symbol represents a model with multiple convective and radiative zones. The plot shows that a continuous and not an arbitrary parameter range exhibits this behavior.

We investigated the cause of this effect and found it to be due to the relative strengths of H- absorption and H2O absorption. H- absorption is strongest in the inner part of the atmosphere whereas H2O absorption is strongest in the outer part. The maximum of the H2O absorption is in layers of the atmosphere with electron temperatures of roughly 2500 to 3500 K. If in this region the H- absorption is weak enough so that the slope with depth of the overall absorption coefficient is significantly affected by H2O absorption, an inner radiative zone forms. In that case the total absorption coefficient drops fast enough toward the outer boundary to make the atmosphere transparent enough to form a radiative zone. As soon as water forms and the H2O absorption becomes strong enough, the energy is more efficiently carried by convection until the final radiative zone forms at the very outside of the atmosphere.

For the hottest models with the lowest log(g) (i.e. the models left and below the “multiple zone strip” in Fig. 3) the single convective zone at the bottom of the atmosphere is substantially different from that of the models right above the “multiple zone strip”. For the hot models with low log(g), the water absorption will never become strong enough to change the slope of the total absorption and the intermediate radiative zone becomes large enough to remove the intermediate convective zone. In the cool models with high log(g), the water absorption is strong already deep inside the atmosphere and dominates the slope of the total absorption coefficient.

This behavior is demonstrated in Fig. 4 where the most important continuous absorption coefficients have been plotted against optical depth. In the top graph the water absorption changes the steep slope of the total absorption already in the innermost part. In the middle two plots, water forms further out and leaves a steep enough slope in the absorption coefficient to produce an intermediate radiative zone. In the graph at the bottom, the water absorption can no longer change the slope imposed by the H- absorption (they are almost parallel in the outer regions) and the energy is transported by radiation.

## 4 Summary and Conclusions

In this paper we presented a grid of spherically symmetric model atmospheres for pre-MS stars. The main change with respect to the NG-giant grid is the use of new TiO and water vapor line lists. In the parameter range considered for the PMS models the changes in the structures of the atmospheres compared to similar models with the NextGen setup are relatively small but the differences of the optical and IR spectra are noticeable. We provide the model structures, spectra and broad-band colors in standard filters through the WWW and anonymous FTP for general use, see http://dilbert.physast.uga.edu/~yeti or ftp://calvin.physast.uga.edu/pub/PMS. In a forthcoming paper we will discuss dust formation for cool dwarfs and giants that incorporate the opacities used in this paper, and will explore separately the effects of the present PMS models on evolution tracks for pre-main sequence stars.

This work was supported in part by the CNRS, INSU and by NSF grant AST-9720704, NASA ATP grant NAG 5-8425 and LTSA grant NAG 5-3619, as well as NASA/JPL grant 961582 to the University of Georgia, NASA LTSA grant NAG5-3435 and NASA EPSCoR grant NCCS-168 to Wichita State University. This work was supported in part by the Pôle Scientifique de Modélisation Numérique at ENS-Lyon. Some of the calculations presented in this paper were performed on the CNUSC IBM SP2, the IBM SP2 and SGI Origin 2000 of the UGA UCNS, on the IBM SP of the San Diego Supercomputer Center (SDSC), with support from the National Science Foundation, and on the Cray T3E of the NERSC with support from the DoE. We thank all these institutions for a generous allocation of computer time.

## 5 Figures


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Couplings on D-branes to RR potentials played an important role in the developments of the last few years. Since the early days of D-branes, it has been known that by virtue of non-trivial gauge field configurations on the brane worldvolume, a Dp-brane couples not only to a $`p+1`$-form Ramond-Ramond potential, but also to lower Ramond-Ramond potentials enabling it to carry charges corresponding to smaller branes . It was later found that non-trivial gravitational backgrounds can also induce charges on a Dp-brane worldvolume coupling it to lower Ramond-Ramond potentials . Finally, it was shown in  that topologically non-trivial normal bundles also induce RR charges. The existence of these couplings can be checked both by anomaly cancellation arguments, as well as by microscopic string computations.

We start with a very brief review of D-brane couplings. Let $`f:𝒲X`$ be the embedding of the D$`p`$-brane worldvolume into space-time (See footnote $`4`$ for the notation). We will denote the tangent bundles by $`𝒯𝒲`$ and $`𝒯X`$, respectively. The normal bundle $`𝒩(𝒲,X)`$ is then defined by

$$0𝒯𝒲\stackrel{f_{}}{}𝒯X𝒩(𝒲,X)0.$$
(1.1)
The (anomalous) coupling on the worldvolume of $`N`$ coincident D-branes may be written in the form

$$I_{WZ}^{(p)}=_𝒲𝒞𝒴(,g),$$
(1.2)
where $`𝒲`$ is the $`p+1`$-dimensional worldvolume of the brane, $`𝒞=f^{}C`$ is the pullback of the total RR potential $`C`$, $`=f^{}B`$ where $`B`$ is the NS-NS 2-form potential, $``$ is the field strength of the $`U(N)`$ gauge field on the brane, and $`g`$ is the restriction of the space-time metric to the brane. Defining $`\mathrm{ch}(E)=\mathrm{tr}_N\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{}{2\pi }\right)`$, the final formula for $`𝒴`$ is of the form

$$𝒴(,g)=\mathrm{ch}(E)e^{\frac{1}{2}d}\sqrt{\frac{\widehat{A}(𝒯𝒲)}{\widehat{A}(𝒩)}}.$$
(1.3)
Here $`d`$ is a degree two class defining a $`Spin^c`$ structure on $`𝒲`$ and in case of (almost) complex manifolds $`d=c_1(𝒩)`$.

One of the important features of (1.2) is that it can be written in terms of the bulk data (via the so-called $`K`$-theoretic Gysin map $`f_!`$) and be brought to a form

$$_XCY=_XC\mathrm{ch}\left(f_!E\right)\sqrt{\widehat{A}(𝒯X)},$$
(1.4)
thus leading to an interpretation of the RR charges $`\mathrm{ch}\left(f_!E\right)\sqrt{\widehat{A}(𝒯X)}`$ as elements ($`x=f_!E`$) of $`K`$-theory of space-time $`K(X)`$ . Moreover as turns out similar formulae and thus similar interpretations can be possible for the RR potentials themselves .

As mentioned already, one of the outcomes of the physics of WZ couplings (starting from refs  has been the observation that the higher brane physics is influenced by the lower branes. This logic has an obvious drawback of not being T-duality invariant, under which lower and higher branes can be easily interchanged. Indeed, consider a Dp-brane carrying a Dp-brane charge for $`p>p^{}`$. Since T-duality can interchange $`p`$ and $`p^{}`$, one expects that a Dp-brane should also carry charges corresponding to higher D-branes. The form of the Dp-brane coupling to higher RR forms, when the WZ term in the worldvolume action does not contain gravitational interactions, was obtained in  in the static gauge. The higher brane charges are induced by the transverse non-Abelian scalars on the D-brane worldvolume which are T-dual to the worldvolume gauge fields. The presence of these interactions, which are required by T-duality can also be checked by Matrix theory calculations  as well as by microscopic string calculations . It is expected that analogous couplings should also be induced by gravitational backgrounds.

A generic formula that contains both the standard gauge WZ terms (wedge products) as well as terms involving contractions (inner products) was given in  in the static gauge and is of the form

$$I_{WZ}^{(p)}=\mathrm{Str}_𝒲\left(\mathrm{exp}\iota _\mathrm{\Phi }\iota _\mathrm{\Phi }𝒞\right)\mathrm{ch}(E),$$
(1.5)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }^i`$ ($`i=p+1,\mathrm{},9`$) are the transverse scalars and the usual pull-backs $`_\mu X^i`$ are replaced by the gauge covariant derivatives $`D_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^i`$ (as we will see later, this should also include a normal bundle connection). $`\iota _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ denotes a contraction with $`\mathrm{\Phi }^i`$ and $`(\iota _\mathrm{\Phi })^n𝒞=\frac{1}{n!}\mathrm{\Phi }^{i_1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Phi }^{i_n}C_{i_1\mathrm{}i_njkl\mathrm{}}`$. This coupling serves a dual purpose of restoring T-duality covariance and incorporating the D-brane scalars. One can however ask questions about the inclusion of gravitational contributions and the possibility of a systematic and coordinate independent description of the new D-brane couplings to RR backgrounds, on par with the case when the inner product couplings are absent. We will concentrate on these issues in this paper. This is, in particular, important for understanding the influence of the new interactions on the $`K`$-theory interpretation of D-brane charges.

The structure of the paper is as follows: In section 2, we use T-duality to obtain the general form of the D-brane couplings to RR potentials and write down a constraint on the form of the generalized brane charges. We also point out the appearance of a normal bundle connection and describe how a flat $`SO(1,9)`$ metric enters in the calculations. In section 3 we show that the couplings can be described in a systematic and coordinate independent way by Clifford multiplication with respect to a flat metric. The formulation is based on a flat $`SO(1,9)`$ Clifford algebra. We also discuss the from of the gravitational contributions to the generalized charges and show that, besides reproducing the known couplings, the formalism predicts a host of new coupings not considered before, but expected from T-duality in the presence of gravity. In section 4 we describe an alternative formulation based on the $`SO(10,10)`$ Clifford algebra which leads to the same results. In section 5, as an application, we consider a simple example of the new couplings which gives rise to the gravitational version of Myer’s dielectric effect . Section 6 contains some comments and a summary of the results.

## 2 Dp-brane coupling to higher RR potentials from T-duality

In this section, following , we start with the WZ term in the non-Abelian D9-brane action and use T-duality to write down the generic form of Dp-brane couplings to RR potentials. One of the main results in these references was the realization that, besides coupling to $`C^{(p+1)}`$ and lower forms, Dp-branes also couple to higher form RR potentials through charges induced on the worldvolume by non-trivial configurations of the transverse scalars. The treatment below is general and applies to non-trivially embedded branes and to D-brane charges with both Yang-Mills as well as gravitational origins, though the explicit form of the coupling to transverse gravitational fields will not be discussed in detail. The action obtained in this way is in the static gauge and contains terms which are no-longer in the standard WZ form. In the next section we give a systematic, coordinate independent formulation of the D-brane couplings in terms of Clifford algebra valued RR-potentials and D-brane charges. This formulation is also valid in cases where T-duality can no longer be used to obtain the associated Dp-branes from D9-branes, that is, in the absence of isometries in the transverse directions. An important feature of our formalism is that the Clifford algebra in which the brane charges take their values is always defined with respect a flat metric, even when the D-brane is placed in curved space. Though at first sight this may look puzzling, a closer examination shows that the flat-space Clifford algebra arises naturally in the T-duality transformations of RR potentials to which the D-brane charges couple. We will briefly describe this below, before considering the couplings required by T-duality.

Since the appearance of a flat-space Clifford algebra is central to our formulation of the D-brane couplings, we begin by describing how it arises in the context of T-duality transformations of the RR potentials, using some results in . Denoting the RR field strengths by $`F^{(n)}`$, there exist two alternative sets of RR potentials $`C^{(n)}`$ and $`C^{(n)}`$ defined by

$$F=dCHC,C^{}=Ce^B.$$
(2.1)
Here, $`H=dB`$ and we use the notation $`F=_nF^{(n)}`$, and similarly for the potentials. The potentials $`C^{(n)}`$ are invariant under $`B_{MN}`$ gauge transformations while $`C^{(n)}`$ are not. From the form of the WZ term in the D-brane worldvolume action one can see that it is the latter set of potentials to which D-brane charges couple. Let us now consider the non-trivial elements of the T-duality group $`O(d,d)`$ which are contained in a subgroup $`O(d)\times O(d)/O(d)_{diag}`$. The action of these elements on the RR potentials was studied in  where it was shown that the potentials $`C^{(n)}`$ transform as a Lorentz spinor and their transformation depends on the NS-NS backgrounds $`G_{MN}`$ and $`B_{MN}`$. Furthermore, it was shown that the transformation of $`C^{(n)}`$ is independent of $`G_{MN}`$ and $`B_{MN}`$ and can be obtained from that of $`C^{(n)}`$ by substituting a flat metric $`\widehat{\eta }_{MN}`$ for $`G_{MN}`$ and setting $`B_{MN}`$ to zero in the transformation equations111We use a hat to distinguish the flat metric $`\widehat{\eta }`$, which appears in the definition of the duality group $`O(d,d)`$, from the flat space-time metric $`\eta `$.,222This independence is manifest in an alternative approach where components of $`C^{(n)}`$ transform as spinors of the T-duality group $`O(d,d)`$.. In other words, since the T-duality rotations of $`C^{(n)}`$ do not depend on the NS-NS backgrounds, they have the same form in curved space as in flat space (defined by the flat metric $`\eta _{MN}`$ and vanishing $`B_{MN}`$ field). This is the origin of the flat-space Clifford algebra appearing in the next section. Though the transformation can be directly read off from , we give a simple derivation below to make the discussion self-contained. The reader not interested in the details can skip to equation (2.4).

As stated above, to obtain the transformation of $`C^{(n)}`$ under the action of non-trivial elements of the T-duality group, it suffices to consider the flat space case. The non-trivial elements of the T-duality group can be parametrized by a matrix $`RO(d)O(1,9)`$ which acts (in flat space) on the left-moving parts of space-time coordinates and worldsheet fermions as $`_+\stackrel{~}{X}=R_+X`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_+=R\psi _+`$; leaving the right-moving parts unchanged. In the Ramond sector, the zero modes of $`\sqrt{2}\psi _+^M`$ and $`\sqrt{2}\psi _{}^M`$ satisfy the Clifford algebra $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }^M,\mathrm{\Gamma }^N\}=2\eta ^{MN}`$ and the transformation of the zero modes of $`\psi _+^M`$ can be re-written as $`R_N^M\psi _{o+}^N=\mathrm{\Omega }^1\psi _{o+}^M\mathrm{\Omega }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the spinor representation of the rotation matrix $`R`$. This relative rotation of the two Clifford algebras originating in the left- and right-moving sectors of the worldsheet can be absorbed by the corresponding spin fields $`S_+`$ and $`S_{}`$ (which generate the Ramond ground states from the corresponding Neveu-Schwarz ground states), giving rise to their T-duality transformation,

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_+=\mathrm{\Omega }S_+,\stackrel{~}{S}_{}=S_{}.$$
(2.2)
Let us now restrict ourselves to the case of a single discrete T-duality transformation, say, along the $`X^1`$ direction for which $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_+^1=\psi _+^1`$. In this case one can easily construct the spinor representation as $`\mathrm{\Omega }=a_{(if)}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$. Here, $`a_{(if)}`$ denotes a sign ambiguity that could depend333We would like to thank A. Sen for a discussion on this issue. on the initial theory i and the final theory f. For a T-duality from IIA to IIB, we choose $`a_{(AB)}=+1`$ and for one from IIB to IIA, we set $`a_{(BA)}=1`$. The relative sign between these two cases is fixed by the requirement that T-duality squares to $`+1`$ on the Ramond sector, and the overall sign is fixed such that the WZ term in the worldvolume action does not change sign under T-duality.

Let us now consider the RR vertex operator in flat space, $`V_{RR}=\overline{S}_+^s\overline{)\text{F}}_{ss^{}}S_{}^s^{}`$, where $`\overline{)\text{F}}_{}`$ denotes the RR bispinor in flat space. For the sake of definiteness, we take $`S_{}`$ to have negative chirality in both IIA and IIB theories. Invariance of $`V_{RR}`$ under T-duality leads to the transformation of $`\overline{)\text{F}}_{}`$ which, after taking the above sign conventions into account, takes the form $`\stackrel{~}{\overline{)\text{F}}}_{}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\overline{)\text{F}}_{}`$. In flat space the RR potentials $`C^{(n)}`$ and $`C^{(n)}`$ both reduce to $`C_{}^{(n)}`$, given by $`F_{}=dC_{}`$, the transformation of which under the above T-duality can be easily worked out as $`\stackrel{~}{\overline{)\text{C}}}_{}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\overline{)\text{C}}_{}`$. Here, $`\overline{)\text{C}}_{}`$ stands for the bispinor constructed out of the flat-space RR potentials. Using the result for a single T-duality, the transformation of $`C_{}^{(n)}`$ under $`d`$ T-dualities along $`X^1,X^2,\mathrm{},X^d`$ (in that order) can be easily written as

$$\stackrel{~}{\overline{)\text{C}}}_{}=(1)^{d(d+1)/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_d\overline{)\text{C}}_{}.$$
(2.3)
The transformation of the components $`C_{}^{(n)}`$ can be worked out by using the expression $`\overline{)\text{C}}_{}=_m((1)^m/m!)C_{M_1\mathrm{}M_m}^{(m)}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{M_1\mathrm{}M_m}`$ in (2.3) and observing that the product $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_d`$ implements Hodge duality in $`d`$ dimensions. Now, if the NS-NS backgrounds $`G_{MN}`$ and $`B_{MN}`$ are switched on, the transformation of $`C^{(n)}`$ develops a dependence on the backgrounds, while that of $`C^{(n)}`$ retains the flat-space form above. Thus we can simply replace $`C_{}^{(n)}`$ by $`C^{{}_{}{}^{}(n)}`$ in the component form of the transformation and obtain

$$\stackrel{~}{C}_{i_{r+1}\mathrm{}i_d\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _m}^{{}_{}{}^{}(m+dr)}=\frac{(1)^{r(r+1)/2+d(d1)/2+rd}}{r!}C_{i_1\mathrm{}i_r\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _m}^{{}_{}{}^{}(m+r)}ϵ_{i_{r+1}\mathrm{}i_d}^{i_1\mathrm{}i_r}.$$
(2.4)
Note that though this equation is valid in curved space, the indices on the epsilon-tensor are raised and lowered using a flat metric $`\widehat{\eta }`$ that appears in the definition of the T-duality group $`O(d,d)O(10,10)`$, and not the space-time metric $`G_{MN}`$. In fact, the transformation of $`C^{(n)}`$ in curved space can still be written in the form (2.3) provided the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices used are no longer associated with the space-time Lorentz group, but are defined with respect to an auxiliary flat metric $`\widehat{\eta }`$. This applies not only to the discrete T-dualities discussed above, but to all non-trivial elements of the T-duality group. Though equation (2.4) could also be obtained in other ways, the derivation presented above emphasizes the existence of an associated $`SO(1,9)`$ Clifford algebra defined with a flat metric. This feature will be used in the next section.

We now get back to the derivation of Dp-brane couplings to $`n`$-form RR potentials using T-duality. Following the approach in , we start with the WZ term in the non-Abelian D9-brane action which has no room for coupling to higher branes444In general, unless otherwise stated, we will use calligraphic symbols $`𝒞,𝒴,𝒜,,`$ etc. to denote worldvolume quantities, including pull-backs, while the straight symbols $`C,Y,A,F,`$ etc. are reserved for the bulk quantities.

$`I_{WZ}^{(9)}`$ $`=`$ $`T_{(9)}\mathrm{Str}{\displaystyle _{𝒲^{(10)}}}𝒞^{}𝒴()`$ (2.5)
$`=`$ $`T_{(9)}\mathrm{Str}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n!(10n)!}}{\displaystyle _{𝒲^{(10)}}}𝒞_{\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _n}^{(n)}𝒴_{\alpha _{n+1}\mathrm{}\alpha _{10}}^{(10n)}𝑑\xi ^{\alpha _1}\mathrm{}d\xi ^{\alpha _{10}}.`$
The coordinates $`\xi ^\alpha `$ parameterize the D-brane worldvolume and $`𝒞^{}=_n𝒞^{(n)}`$ contains the pull-backs to the worldvolume of RR potentials $`C^{(n)}`$ defined in (2.1). $`𝒴=𝒴^{(m)}`$ denotes the lower brane charges555Of course, the change from $`C`$ to $`C^{}`$ affects (1.2). In order not to clutter the notation too much, we do not introduce $`𝒴^{}`$; hopefully this will not lead to a confusion. induced on the D9-brane by worldvolume gauge fields $`𝒜_\alpha `$ and background gravitational fields $`G_{MN}`$ and $`B_{MN}`$. Explicitly, in the absence of non-trivial gravitational contributions, $`𝒴()=e^{}`$, where $``$ is the non-Abelian gauge field strength . In the presence of gravitational interactions, but with $`H=dB=0`$, the induced charges are given by $`𝒴=e^{}\sqrt{\widehat{A}(𝒯𝒲)}`$ . This expression receives $`H`$ dependent contributions the exact forms of which are not known. By absorbing the usual $`e^B`$ factor in the RR potentials, we have lost the manifestly gauge invariant combination $``$, but have gained on other fronts: First, note that now there is a clear split between the worldvolume and space-time quantities; while $`C^{(n)}`$ are intrinsically space-time forms pulled back to the brane worldvolume, $`𝒴^{(m)}`$ are forms that live on the brane worldvolume. Second, note that the $`C^{(n)}`$ used above are pure Ramond-Ramond forms in the sense that under the T-duality group they do not mix with the NS-NS fields. This is not the case with the alternative RR potentials $`C^{(n)}`$. This property will play an important role in the next section.

Let us split the $`10`$-dimensional space-time coordinates $`X^M`$ into the $`d`$ coordinates $`X^i`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{}d`$) and the remaining $`10d`$ coordinates $`X^\mu `$. Assuming that the fields are independent of the coordinates $`X^i`$, we perform T-dualities along these directions to obtain the general form of the $`(p=9d)`$-brane action, including its couplings to higher RR potentials. Choosing the static gauge, the D9-brane WZ term can be written in form suitable for T-duality as

$`I_{WZ}^{(9)}`$ $`=T_{(9)}\mathrm{Str}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{r}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{(nr)(dr)}}{n!(10n)!}}{}_{}{}^{n}C_{r}^{}{}_{}{}^{10n}C_{dr}^{}{\displaystyle _{𝒲^{(10)}}}𝒴_{i_{r+1}\mathrm{}i_d\mu _{nr+1}\mathrm{}\mu _{10d}}^{(10n)}`$ (2.6)
$`\times C_{i_1\mathrm{}i_r\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _{nr}}^{(n)}ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_d}dX^1\mathrm{}dX^ddX^{\mu _1}\mathrm{}dX^{\mu _{10d}},`$
where $`{}_{}{}^{n}C_{r}^{}`$ is the combinatorial factor $`n!/r!(nr)!`$. T-duality along $`d`$ directions converts the D9-brane worldvolume action to a D(9-d)-brane action and replaces all fields by their duals. Using (2.4) in (2.6), and integrating over the transverse space (assumed to be compact of volume $`V_{(d)}`$), one can easily obtain the generalized WZ term for the D(p=$`9d`$)-brane as

$$I_{WZ}^{(p)}=T_{(p)}\mathrm{Str}\underset{s,t}{}\frac{1}{t!s!u!}_{𝒲^{(p+1)}}\stackrel{~}{C}_{\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _ti_s\mathrm{}i_1}^{(t+s)}\stackrel{~}{𝒴}_{\mu _{t+1}\mathrm{}\mu _{p+1}}^{(s+u)i_1\mathrm{}i_s}𝑑X^{\mu _1}\mathrm{}dX^{\mu _{p+1}},$$
(2.7)
where $`T_{(p)}=T_{(9)}V_{(d)}`$ and $`u=p+1t`$. It should be emphasized that the indices $`i_1\mathrm{}i_s`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{𝒴}`$ are raised using the flat metric $`\widehat{\eta }_{MN}`$, and not the space-time metric $`G_{MN}`$. The $`s=0`$ term is the standard WZ Lagrangian which is responsible for a Dp-brane carrying Yang-Mills and gravity induced charges corresponding to smaller branes. The important feature of the action, however, is the presence of $`s0`$ terms, noted in  for the pure Yang-Mills case, that couple Dp-branes to higher RR potentials. Note that the contractions run only over the directions transverse to the brane which, in general, need not be compact.

Below we will discuss some features of the above action in more detail. Let $`\lambda ^a`$ denote the set of variables on which $`𝒴`$ could depend, for example, the gauge fields, the scalars, the metric, the NS-NS 2-form, etc. In the above we have assumed that $`\stackrel{~}{𝒴}`$ is the same as $`𝒴`$ but now expressed in terms of the dual variables,

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒴}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^a)=𝒴(\lambda ^a(\stackrel{~}{\lambda })).$$
(2.8)
This is a constraint on the form of $`𝒴`$ imposed by the requirement of compatibility of the worldvolume action with T-duality. Though this constraint is automatically satisfied in the pure Yang-Mills case, it can be used to obtain $`B`$-dependent corrections in the gravitational couplings.

Let us first consider the pure Yang-Mills case $`𝒴_{i_1\mathrm{}i_s\mu _{ns}\mathrm{}\mu _n}=(e^{})_{i_1\mathrm{}i_s\mu _{ns}\mathrm{}\mu _n}`$. This case has been extensively discussed in the literature . Here we emphasize a subtlety regarding the identification of the transverse scalars, which is often ignored though it is crucial for the validity of our coordinate independent formulation of the brane couplings in the next sections. If we start with gauge fields $`𝒜_i`$ with constant background values, then after T-duality we can identify the transverse scalars on the resulting D(9-d)-brane as $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^j=𝒜_i\widehat{\eta }^{ij}`$. Strictly speaking, the discussion in the literature mostly applies to this case. However, if the $`𝒜_i`$ depend on $`X^\mu `$ before T-duality, then the resulting D(9-d)-brane after duality is non-trivially embedded in space-time and the directions spanned by the coordinates $`X^i`$ are not globally transverse to it. Therefore, the transverse scalars have to be defined locally as sections of the normal bundle. Let $`a_M^I`$ ($`I=9d,\mathrm{}9`$) span a frame in the normal bundle. Then, the transverse scalars are defined as $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^I=𝒜_M\widehat{\eta }^{MN}a_N^I`$ and the $`_{\mu i}\widehat{\eta }^{ij}`$ in $`𝒴`$ gives

$$D_\mu 𝒜_i\widehat{\eta }^{ij}=_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^Ia_I^j\left(_\mu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^I+\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mu J}^I\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^J+[\stackrel{~}{𝒜}_\mu ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^I]\right)a_I^j,$$
(2.9)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{\mu J}^I=a_N^I_\mu a_J^N`$ is the connection on the normal bundle to the brane. The appearance of this connection, which is required by the covariant formulation of the next section, can also be checked by applying T-duality to the DBI part of the action and constructing the kinetic energy terms for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^I`$. Perhaps the easiest way of seeing the above is from point of view of supersymmetry and appearance of the connection on the normal bundle in the context of the gauged $`R`$-symmetry. Similar covariantizations were used for description of normal bundles both for M5, M2 and D-branes .

Now, roughly speaking, the factors of $`_{\mu \nu }=\stackrel{~}{}_{\mu \nu }`$ in $`𝒴`$ will combine into $`e^\stackrel{~}{}`$, while $`_{ij}`$ will give rise to $`[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^I,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^J]`$ which will contract the indices on $`\stackrel{~}{C}^{(n)}`$ through the $`a_I^i`$. The factors $`_{\mu i}\widehat{\eta }^{ij}`$ will couple to $`C^{}(n)`$ as a generalized “pull-back” which corresponds to replacing the ordinary pull-back $`_\mu X^i`$ by $`_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^Ia_I^j`$, as in , though now with the connection $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ included. Although the appearance of the generalized pull-back in the theory may look appealing, it seems to suffer from two drawbacks: 1) By construction the expression is obtained in the static gauge and is not covariant, 2) The geometric meaning of the pull-back, in terms of the embedding of the brane in space-time, is lost. The covariant formulation in the next sections cures both these problems and yields the generalized pull-back in the static gauge.

While equation (2.8) can be easily verified for the Yang-Mills case, it can be used as a constraint for the gravitational part of the interaction, to find correction to (1.3). First, since the metric mixes with the antisymmetric tensor field under T-duality, it is clear that this form should be modified when $`dB0`$. Second, in branes smaller than D9-brane, the action also contains couplings which involve contractions between the RR potentials and the transverse components of gravitational fields, which can give raise to the gravitational version of the dielectric effect discussed in . We will discuss this in an example in section 5. In principle, once one finds the correct $`B`$-dependence for the gravitational interactions of the D9-brane, one can find the form of the corresponding terms for the lower branes by T-duality. We will not address this issue here, but hope to return to it in a future publication.

## 3 D-brane charges as $`SO(1,9)`$ bispinors - Minimal formalism

We have seen that, besides coupling to $`C^{(q+1)}`$ forms for $`qp`$, a Dp-brane also couples to $`C^{(q+1)}`$ forms for $`q>p`$ through the excitations of the transverse scalars on the worldvolume, as well as through gravitational fields transverse to the brane. The expression for these new couplings, obtained by T-duality, is always in the static gauge. However, since these couplings should survive even when the Dp-brane is not related to a D9-brane by T-duality, it is clear that these interactions should have a more general coordinate invariant form. Furthermore, the new interactions can no longer be expressed neatly as a wedge product between RR potentials $`C^{}`$ and the generalized brane charges $`Y`$. It is desirable to find a formulation which allows us to again express the couplings as some kind of product between the RR potentials and the complete set of brane charges. We show that both these problems can be resolved by considering the brane charges as taking values in a Clifford algebra and replacing the wedge product by Clifford multiplication (by which here we simply mean the multiplication of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices).

The presence of both anti-symmetrized products as well as inner products in (2.7) suggests the use of Clifford multiplication to couple $`C^{}`$ and $`Y`$, however, the metric with respect to which the algebra is defined is not the most obvious one. The Clifford algebra that naturally appears in the theory is the one associated with the $`SO(1,9)`$ space-time Lorentz group which is defined with respect to the space-time metric $`G_{MN}`$: $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_M,\mathrm{\Gamma }_N\}=2G_{MN}`$. In string theory, the RR field strengths $`F^{(n)}`$ and potentials $`C^{(n)}`$ come as bispinors of this Clifford algebra. However, one can easily check that this is not the correct candidate (see footnote 6 below). The Clifford algebra that appears in the minimal formulation of the D-brane couplings is an $`SO(1,9)`$ Clifford algebra defined with a flat metric $`\widehat{\eta }_{MN}`$,

$$\{\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_M,\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_N\}=2\widehat{\eta }_{MN}.$$
(3.1)
We use a hat to emphasize the fact that we are using flat space quantities even in curved space. Though, at first, this may look un-natural, we noted that a result of , described in the previous section, shows that such an algebra arises naturally in the T-duality transformations of $`C^{}=Ce^B`$, which is the quantity that appears in the D-brane worldvolume action. We will see below that this structure survives in the general situation even when T-duality is not applicable. In the next section we will describe a non-minimal formulation of the D-brane couplings in terms of an $`SO(10,10)`$ Clifford algebra. The minimal formalism of this section can also be understood as a “gauge-fixed” version of this non-minimal formalism.

Let us introduce flat $`SO(1,9)`$ bispinors $`\overline{)\text{C}}^{}`$ and $`\overline{)\text{Y}}`$ corresponding to RR potentials $`C^{(n)}`$ and a space-time version (the meaning of which will be made more precise below) of the generalized D-brane charges $`Y^{(n)}`$,

$`\overline{)\text{C}}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^m}{m!}}C_{M_1\mathrm{}M_m}^{(m)}\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}^{M_1\mathrm{}M_m},`$ (3.2)
$`\overline{)\text{Y}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{n!}}Y_{N_1\mathrm{}N_n}^{(n)}\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}^{N_1\mathrm{}N_n}.`$ (3.3)
The space-time quantities $`Y^{(n)}`$ are introduced in order to obtain a coordinate independent description of the couplings and are defined such that their restriction to the brane worldvolume gives the generalized D-brane charges. For example, the worldvolume gauge fields $`𝒜_\alpha (\xi )`$ and the transverse scalars $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I(\xi )`$ can be combined into a ten dimensional space-time field $`A_M(X)`$ such that

$$𝒜_\alpha (\xi )=A_M(X(\xi ))X^M/\xi ^\alpha ,\mathrm{\Phi }^I(\xi )=A_M(X(\xi ))\widehat{\eta }^{MN}a_N^I.$$
(3.4)
Here, $`X^M(\xi )`$ give the embedding of the brane in space-time and $`X^M/\xi ^\alpha `$ and $`a_I^M`$ span, respectively, the tangent and normal bundles to the worldvolume. In general, on the worldvolume, $`Y_{M_1\mathrm{}M_n}^{(n)}`$ restricts to $`𝒴_{\alpha _{s+1}\mathrm{}\alpha _n}^{(n)I_1\mathrm{}I_s}`$, though we will not give an explicit construction for the gravitational contributions. We will return to this point later in this section. This space-time picture is consistent both with T-duality as well as with the $`K`$-theory interpretation of the D-brane charges (in the absence of the inner product terms in the action) and gives a covariant way of defining the generalized charges.

The product $`(\overline{)\text{C}}^{}\overline{)\text{Y}})`$ can now be easily evaluated using the formula for the product of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices given in the appendix, which is essentially what we refer to as Clifford multiplication. To restrict the resulting formula to a Dp-brane worldvolume and eliminate the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices in it, we should find the correct projection operator. To this end, note that the dimension of a D-brane worldvolume decreases (increases) under T-dualities performed along (transverse to) the brane. This is very similar to how RR forms pick up or lose components under the transformation, showing that the Dp-brane worldvolume forms transform very similar to $`C^{(n)}`$ in (2.4). From this we infer that the Dp-brane worldvolume forms, for all $`p`$, could also be combined into a flat $`SO(1,9)`$ bispinor,

$$\overline{)\text{V}}=\underset{q}{}\overline{)\text{V}}^{(q)}=\underset{q}{}\frac{(1)^q}{(q)!}T_{(q1)}\mathrm{d}X^{L_1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{d}X^{L_q}\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{L_1\mathrm{}L_q}.$$
(3.5)
When restricted to a given Dp-brane worldvolume defined by the embedding $`X^M(\xi ^\alpha )`$, the term $`\overline{)\text{V}}^{(p+1)}`$ takes the form

$$\overline{)\text{V}}^{(p+1)}=\frac{(1)^{p+1}}{(p+1)!}T_{(p)}\left(\frac{X^{L_1}}{\xi ^{\alpha _1}}\mathrm{}\frac{X^{L_{p+1}}}{\xi ^{\alpha _{p+1}}}\mathrm{d}\xi ^{\alpha _1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{d}\xi ^{\alpha _{p+1}}\right)\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{L_1\mathrm{}L_{p+1}},$$
(3.6)
For convenience we have inserted the couplings $`T_{(p)}`$ as part of the volume bispinor. It is now easy to write the general covariant form of a Dp-brane coupling to all RR potentials (including the higher ones) in terms of a Clifford product,

$$I_{WZ}^{(p+1)}=\mathrm{Str}_{𝒲^{(p+1)}}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}\overline{)\overline{\mathrm{V}}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}\overline{)\text{C}}^{}\overline{)\text{Y}}\right),$$
(3.7)
where $`\mathrm{Str}`$ is the symmetrized gauge trace and $`\mathrm{Tr}`$ is a trace over the spinor index normalized to unity. $`\overline{)\overline{\mathrm{V}}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }^0\overline{)\text{V}}^T\mathrm{\Gamma }^0`$ is the Dirac conjugate of $`\overline{)\text{V}}`$ and, along with the trace, converts bispinors to forms. The factors of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}`$ are inserted to get the correct relative sign in IIA and IIB theories and are not unexpected since we are dealing with Majorana-Weyl bispinors. The integral over $`𝒲^{(p+1)}`$ restricts the expression to the Dp-brane worldvolume and picks up the contribution from the term $`\overline{)\text{V}}^{(p+1)}`$ of (3.5) alone.

The $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrix multiplication and tracing can be carried out using the formulae in the appendix leading to the component form for the generalized WZ action,

$`I_{WZ}^{(p+1)}`$ $`=`$ $`T_{(p)}\mathrm{Str}{\displaystyle \underset{s,t}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{s!t!u!}}{\displaystyle _{𝒲^{(p+1)}}}C_{L_1\mathrm{}L_tN_s\mathrm{}N_1}^{(t+s)}Y_{L_{t+1}\mathrm{}L_{p+1}}^{(s+u)N_1\mathrm{}N_s}`$ (3.8)
$`\times _{\alpha _1}X^{L_1}\mathrm{}_{\alpha _{p+1}}X^{L_{p+1}}\mathrm{d}\xi ^{\alpha _1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{d}\xi ^{\alpha _{p+1}},`$
where $`u=p+1t`$. The indices on $`Y`$ are raised using the flat metric $`\widehat{\eta }`$. Since the indices $`L_1,\mathrm{},L_{p+1}`$ are pulled-back to the brane worldvolume, antisymmetry in the indices implies that $`N_1\mathrm{},N_s`$ are automatically restricted to the directions transverse to the brane. Of course, for this to happen, it is crucial that $`C^{}`$ and $`Y`$ are contracted by the flat metric 666If one uses the curved space $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_M`$ instead of the flat-space ones $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_M`$, one still gets (3.8) but now with $`C^{}`$ and $`Y`$ contracted by the space-time metric $`G_{MN}`$. This is of course incorrect since the indices $`N_1\mathrm{},N_s`$ are no longer restricted to the transverse space. This is a reflection of the fact that the natural bispinors appearing in the theory are the ones constructed out of $`C^{}=Ce^B`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_M`$ (as seen in the previous section) or $`C`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_M`$. A bispinor containing $`C^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_M`$ does not arise in the theory.. In the static gauge, $`X^\mu =\xi ^\mu `$ and $`X^i=X^i(\xi )`$, (3.8) reduces to (2.7). Note that the interactions in (3.8) explicitly preserve the geometric nature of the embedding of the brane worldvolume in space-time through the appearance of the pull-backs $`X^M/\xi ^\alpha `$. The generalized pull-backs discussed in section 2 appear as part of the restriction of $`D_MA_N`$ to the worldvolume which, using (3.4), contains

$$\frac{X^M}{\xi ^\alpha }(D_MA_N)\widehat{\eta }^{NP}a_P^I=_\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }^I+\mathrm{\Theta }_{\alpha J}^I\mathrm{\Phi }^J+[𝒜_\alpha ,\mathrm{\Phi }^I].$$
(3.9)
The appearance of the normal bundle connection $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{\alpha J}^I=a_M^I_\alpha a_J^M`$ here is a reflection of the covariance of the formalism.

To summarize, the product $`(\overline{)\text{C}}^{}\overline{)\text{Y}})`$ yields a series of even (odd) forms encoding certain couplings for IIB (IIA) theory, while multiplication by $`\overline{)\text{V}}^{(p+1)}`$ and tracing restricts these to a Dp-brane worldvolume. Clifford multiplication can also be formulated abstractly, independent of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices, as an operation on differential forms. Given a vector $`v`$ we can define a contraction $`\iota _v`$, using again the flat metric, and thus an isomorphism $`\sigma _v=v\iota _v:\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{even}}X\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{odd}}X`$ corresponding to $`v/:S^+S^{}S^{}S^+S^+S^+S^{}S^{}`$. This is a Clifford multiplication by a vector $`v`$, and can be straightforwardly generalized to any form $`C^{}`$ with the combinatorial factors simply given by those of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrix multiplication (see appendix). In this notation, (3.7) can be written in a more conventional form as,

$$L_{WZ}^{(p+1)}=\sigma _C^{}(Y)|_{𝒲_{p+1}}.$$
(3.10)
Note that $`\left(\sigma _C^{}(Y)\right)_{10}=(C^{}Y)_{10}`$ and as expected there are no contractions for D9-branes. Of course, by design (3.7) or (3.10) correctly reduce to the covariant form of the coupling (1.5) in the case of flat space, including the normal bundle contribution to the covariant derivatives. However, up to now we have not really specified the “generalized brane charge” $`Y`$ for the curved space, other than by outlining the generic constraints imposed on it by T-duality. When the NS-NS $`B`$-field is set to zero, choosing $`Y`$ in the form

$$Y(dB=0)=\mathrm{ch}(x)\sqrt{\widehat{A}(𝒯X)},$$
(3.11)
ensures that at least the part $`C^{}Y`$ of (3.10) restricts to the expected coupling (1.2) as given by (1.3) following the calculations of . Thus we conjecture that this form of $`Y`$ should not change and taking into account the (non-Abelian) dynamics of D-branes amounts to replacing the wedge product $`C^{}Y`$ by Clifford product $`\sigma _C^{}(Y)`$. This form also predicts a series of new couplings containing the curvature of the space transverse to the D-brane. It is not easy to check these predictions explicitly for arbitrary worldvolume $`𝒲_q`$ and arbitrary embedding, since many of the couplings have not been calculated on the worldvolume yet. However, for simple embeddings it shows that the transverse curvature form can enter via contractions with the transverse components of RR fields, quite similar to those involving the scalars, namely terms of the form

$$_𝒲\mathrm{Tr}_R_{pq}_{rs}𝒞^{pqrs\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}.$$
(3.12)
Note that the flat metric is used only for the contractions, and the (transverse) space is curved. This formula is somewhat symbolic and appropriate restrictions to the worldvolume are assumed here. Furthermore, there are no contractions between the transverse scalars and the transverse components of the curvatures. We will return to this in section 5, where the existence of such interactions will be demonstrated more explicitly in a case of trivial embedding, and consider a simple example of D-brane polarization where non-trivial gravitational background and thus (3.12) play some role.

## 4 D-brane charges as $`SO(10,10)`$ bispinors - Non minimal formalism

The formalism in the previous section is suggested by the fact that the action of non-trivial elements $`O(d)\times O(d)/O(d)_{diag}`$ of the T-duality group on the RR fields can be written in terms of $`SO(1,9)`$ spinors . As we saw, the generalized D-brane charges are then forms in a 10 dimensional space. One could also try to use an alternative formalism based on the full T-duality group $`O(d,d)O(10,10)`$. As we will see below, a formulation in terms of $`SO(10,10)`$ spinors is possible provided the space of charges is formally enlarged to a 20 dimensional space, though the physical content, of course, remains 10 dimensional. For this reason we refer to this as the non-minimal formalism.

To understand the origin of the formal enlargement of the space of charges, we consider the Yang-Mills sector in flat space. The charges are related to the $`p+1`$ gauge fields $`𝒜_\alpha `$ and the $`9p`$ transverse scalars $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$, which were combined into a 10 dimensional space-time vector $`A_M`$ (3.4). In the open string picture of a Dp-brane, the worldvolume gauge fields are associated with the $`p+1`$ canonical momenta along the brane, while the transverse scalars are associated with the $`9p`$ variables, $`_\sigma X`$, that one could refer to as “windings” or “length densities”. However, in the bulk closed string theory the phase space is spanned by 10 canonical momenta $`P_M`$ and 10 string “length densities” $`_\sigma X^M`$. Thus one may formally promote both the worldvolume gauge fields as well as the transverse scalars to 10 component fields $`\underset{¯}{\text{A}}_M`$ and $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^M`$ (which can further combined into a 20-dimensional vector) such that the Dirichlet boundary conditions defining the D-brane projects these onto $`𝒜_\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$ that carry all the physical content. This, in fact, is an alternative way of defining the D-brane charges in a coordinate independent way.

It has been known that, in toroidal compactifications, the components of RR potentials $`C^{(n)}`$ can be arranged into spinors of the T-duality group . As in the previous section, one can now go beyond T-duality and develop a formalism based on the Clifford algebra associated with the $`SO(10,10)`$ group which, in the off-diagonal basis, is written as

$$\{\gamma ^m,\gamma ^n\}=2J^{mn},J=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \widehat{\eta }\\ \widehat{\eta }& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(4.1)
where $`m,n=1\mathrm{}20`$. Let us denote the first 10 values of the index by $`\widehat{m}`$ and the remaining 10 by $`\stackrel{ˇ}{m}`$. Then,

$$\{\gamma ^{\widehat{m}},\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{m}}\}=2\widehat{\eta }^{\widehat{m}\stackrel{ˇ}{n}}.$$
(4.2)
One can see that $`\gamma ^{\widehat{m}}/\sqrt{2}`$ and $`\gamma _{\widehat{n}}/\sqrt{2}`$ (where, $`\gamma _{\widehat{n}}=\eta _{\widehat{n}\stackrel{ˇ}{m}}\gamma ^{\stackrel{ˇ}{m}}`$) satisfy the Heisenberg algebra and can be used to construct the spinor representation of the algebra (we will not distinguish between the raising and lowering operators and their matrix representations). Now we combine the the RR potentials into an $`SO(10,10)`$ Majorana-Weyl spinors and the volume forms into the adjoint spinor,

$`|\mathrm{C}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{n!}}C_{\widehat{m}_1\mathrm{}\widehat{m}_n}^{(n)}\gamma ^{\widehat{m}_1\mathrm{}\widehat{m}_n}|0,`$ (4.3)
$`\mathrm{V}|`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{p+1}}{(p+1)!}}0|\gamma _{\widehat{m}_{p+1}\mathrm{}\widehat{m}_1}dX^{\widehat{m}_1}\mathrm{}dX^{\widehat{m}_{p+1}}|_{𝒲^{(p+1)}}T_{(p)},`$ (4.4)
where, $`dX^{\widehat{m}}|_𝒲=X^{\widehat{m}}/\xi ^\alpha d\xi ^\alpha `$. Note that the indices on $`C^{(n)}`$ and the space-time coordinates always run from 1 to 10 and are not affected by the enlargement of the space of charges. Furthermore, the D-brane charges can be combined into an $`SO(10,10)`$ bispinor,

$`\underset{¯}{\text{Y}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^q}{q!}}\underset{¯}{\text{Y}}_{m_1\mathrm{}m_q}\gamma ^{m_1\mathrm{}m_q}`$ (4.5)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{r}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^q}{q!}}{}_{}{}^{q}C_{r}^{}\underset{¯}{\text{Y}}_{\widehat{m}_1\mathrm{}\widehat{m}_r\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_{r+1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_q}\gamma ^{\widehat{m}_1\mathrm{}\widehat{m}_r\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_{r+1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{ˇ}{m}_q}.`$ (4.6)
For example, in terms of differential forms, in the pure Yang-Mills case we have $`\underset{¯}{\text{Y}}=e^{\underset{¯}{\text{F}}}`$ with $`\underset{¯}{\text{F}}_{\widehat{m}\widehat{n}}=D_{[\widehat{m}}\underset{¯}{\text{A}}_{\widehat{n}]}`$, $`\underset{¯}{\text{F}}_{\stackrel{ˇ}{m}\stackrel{ˇ}{n}}=\{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\stackrel{ˇ}{m}},\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\stackrel{ˇ}{n}}\}`$, and $`\underset{¯}{\text{F}}_{\widehat{m}\stackrel{ˇ}{n}}=D_{\widehat{m}}\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\stackrel{ˇ}{n}}`$. The generalized WZ term can now be written as

$$I_{WZ}^{(p)}=\mathrm{Str}_{𝒲^{(p+1)}}\mathrm{V}|\underset{¯}{\text{Y}}|\mathrm{C}^{}.$$
(4.7)
Only the $`p`$-form term in (4.4) contributes to the integral and on identifying $`\widehat{m}`$ with the space-time coordinate label $`M`$, the component form of this expression reduces to equation (3.8).

## 5 An application: D0-D6 system

We present here the simplest case when the non-trivial gravitational background influences the D-brane polarization. In , D0-branes in the background of $`C_3`$ potential with a constant field strength were considered and it was shown that due to (1.5), a system of D0’s expands into a fuzzy two-sphere. Lets consider a minimal extension of the D2-D0 system that includes gravity. Since in essence our discussion closely follows that of , we will be rather brief here.

We consider here a system of D0-branes in the background of a seven-form potential $`C_7`$ with a constant field strength and a curved four-dimensional manifold $`X`$, let say $`X=K3`$ for sake of concreteness. We take the field strength of the $`C_7`$ to be of the form

$$F_{0ijkpqrs}=ϵ_{ijk}ϵ_{pqrs}$$
(5.1)
with $`i,j,k=1,2,3`$ and the indices $`p,q,r,s=1,2,3,4`$ spanning $`X`$. Following the general discussion of section 3 (see (3.12)), we can consider a coupling of D0-branes to the RR seven-form potential

$$\mathrm{Tr}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^i\mathrm{\Phi }^j\mathrm{\Phi }^k\right)\mathrm{Tr}_RR^{pq}R^{rt}C_{ijkpqrt}$$
(5.2)
Note that the embedding (the normal bundle) is trivial and we are not distinguishing between the pull-backed and bulk quantities; we are also dropping the primes on RR since $`B`$-field is turned off. These couplings can be seen explicitly by starting from a D6-brane with a worldvolume $`𝒲_7=𝒲_3\times X`$ in a presence of a RR three-form field. Since this is the only RR filed switched on, there is just a WZ coupling on the brane

$$_𝒲𝒞_3\mathrm{Tr}_RR^2$$

that can be T-dualized along $`X`$ to a more familiar D2-brane transverse to $`X`$ (even if, like for $`X=K3,`$ there are no isometries, we can follow our rules for T-duality). Recalling that the action on RR fields amounts to Hodge duality along $`X`$, and since $`C_3`$ is transverse to $`X`$ it gets rotated into the seven-form (5.1), while the wedge product is replaced by contractions. Following  for the gauge part we arrive at (5.2).

The rest of the story directly follows , and performing the non-Abelian Taylor series expansion of the RR potential looking at the minima of the potential we arrive at the condition

$$[[\mathrm{\Phi }^i,\mathrm{\Phi }^j],\mathrm{\Phi }^j]+\mathrm{Tr}_RR_{pq}R_{rs}ϵ^{pqrs}ϵ^{ijk}[\mathrm{\Phi }^j,\mathrm{\Phi }^k]=0.$$
(5.3)
This has a solution in the form

$$[\mathrm{\Phi }^i,\mathrm{\Phi }^j]=P_Xϵ^{ijk}\mathrm{\Phi }^k$$

where $`P_X=\mathrm{Tr}_RR_{pq}R_{rs}ϵ^{pqrs}`$. Thus as expected we get and equation for a fuzzy two-sphere, however we see that its radius depends on the curvature forms of the transverse manifold $`X`$. Following the work , further polarization effects have been discussed in literature. We believe it is of some interest to expand these discussions to the cases involving non-trivial backgrounds and embeddings.

## 6 Conclusions and Discussion

It is well known that worldvolume gauge field configurations and gravitational backgrounds induce charges on a Dp-brane corresponding to lower dimensional branes. These charges couple to the corresponding RR potentials by wedge products. If the background gravity contribution to the brane charges is neglected, then T-duality arguments, as well as Matrix theory calculations and microscopic string calculations show that Dp-branes can also carry charges corresponding to higher dimensional branes by virtue of non-trivial configurations of the transverse scalars on the brane worldvolume.

We consider generic D-brane charges, which may contain both Yang-Mills and gravitational contributions, and employ the construction based on T-duality to write down the form of their couplings to RR potentials. Though the full gravitational contributions to the charges are not explicitly constructed, their forms are strongly constrained by T-duality covariance. It also shows that, similar to the transverse scalars, background gravity can induce charges on the worldvolume that couple a Dp-brane to higher RR potentials.

The generalized interactions obtained in this way have three main features: 1) the couplings can no-longer be described in a systematic way by a wedge product of D-brane charges and RR potentials, 2) the couplings are obtained in the static gauge and do not have a coordinate independent form, 3) the usual pull-backs to the worldvolume are replaced by the covariant derivatives of the transverse scalars. Though this is an appealing way of encoding some worldvolume interactions, the generalized pull-back does not have a geometric meaning in terms of the embedding of the brane. For non-trivial embeddings of the brane, the covariant derivative of the scalars also contains a normal bundle connection that is often missed in the discussions of D-brane T-duality.

We show that the generalized D-brane couplings to RR potentials can be formulated in a covariant and systematic way, essentially by replacing the wedge product by Clifford multiplication. There are two alternative formulations based on $`SO(1,9)`$ and $`SO(10,10)`$ Clifford algebras. The minimal formulation is based on $`SO(1,9)`$ which is defined with respect to a flat metric and does not coincide with the space-time Lorentz group, except in the flat space. In this formalism, the generalized D-brane charges, the RR potentials and the brane volume forms are all combined into Majorana-Weyl bispinors of the flat $`SO(1,9)`$ Clifford algebra. In the non-minimal $`SO(10,10)`$ formulation, the space of charges is formally enlarged so that they fit into bispinors of the $`SO(10,10)`$ Clifford algebra while the RR potentials and volume forms, each combine into $`SO(10,10)`$ spinors. The appearance of both Clifford algebras can be understood in terms of the T-duality group, though our results are independent of T-duality and remain valid even in the absence of isometries. From the T-duality group point of view, the minimal formalism can be regarded as a gauge fixed version of the non-minimal formalism.

Both formalisms lead to the same coordinate invariant form for the generalized WZ interactions on Dp-brane worldvolume,

$$L_{WZ}^{(p+1)}=\sigma _C^{}(Y)|_{𝒲_{p+1}},$$
(6.1)
where $`\sigma _C^{}`$ denotes Clifford multiplication by $`C^{}`$, defined as an operation on forms, with respect to a flat metric. $`Y`$ is a space-time version of the D-brane charges, the form of which is explicitly known in the absence of gravitational contributions. The restriction of the Clifford product to a Dp-brane worldvolume then reproduces the correct covariant form of the known couplings, including the effective generalized pull-backs with respect to the covariant derivatives of the transverse scalars. The covariant derivatives now contain both the gauge as well as the normal bundle connection.

The full complete gravitational contribution to $`Y`$ is not known though, its form is constrained by T-duality. However, it reduces to the known form  when the NS-NS 3-form field strength is set to zero,

$$Y(dB=0)=\mathrm{ch}(x)\sqrt{\widehat{A}(𝒯X)}.$$
(6.2)
All the novelty then simply comes down to replacing the wedge product in (1.4) by Clifford multiplication of $`Y`$ by RR form $`C^{}`$. Then (6.1) correctly reproduces, at least formally, the known gravitational couplings (1.2) while encoding many interactions that have not yet been tested directly. We have not explicitly constructed these new interactions in the general case, though some special situations have been discussed. Of course, it is important to verify some of the new worldvolume terms by microscopic calculations. Obtaining a T-duality invariant form of $`Y`$ with a non-trivial $`B`$-field is another direction of further research. Our results should also be useful for obtaining a full non-Abelian $`\kappa `$-symmetric action for D-branes.

We would like to conclude this section with a comment on RR charges which, in principle can be derived from the equations of motion, in a way manifestly consistent with our formulation. We do not pursue this here, however, in view of the formalism developed here, it is clear that one arrives at a formula similar to the one in the introduction compatible with the interpretation of RR charges as element of $`K`$-theory of space-time.

## Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the Erwin Schrödinger Institute for hospitality. This work was supported in part by EEC contract HPRN-CT-2000-00122.

## Appendix A $`𝚪`$-matrix multiplication

We use the metric signature $`\{1,+1,\mathrm{},+1\}`$ and define the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices such that,

$$\{\mathrm{\Gamma }^a,\mathrm{\Gamma }^b\}=2\eta ^{ab},$$
(A.1)
In the Majorana-Weyl representation all $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^a`$ are real, with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^0`$ antisymmetric and others symmetric. To fuse products of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices into antisymmetrized ones, we use the identity (See for example, )

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{a_1\mathrm{}a_i}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{b_1\mathrm{}b_j}=\underset{k=|ij|}{\overset{i+j}{}}\frac{i!j!}{s!t!u!}\delta _{[a_i}^{[b_1}\mathrm{}\delta _{a_{t+1}}^{b_s}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{a_1\mathrm{}a_t]}^{b_{s+1}\mathrm{}b_j]},$$
(A.2)
with

$$s=\frac{1}{2}(i+jk),t=\frac{1}{2}(ij+k),u=\frac{1}{2}(i+j+k).$$

In the summation, only those values of $`k`$ appear for which $`s`$, $`t`$ and $`u`$ are integers, i.e., $`k=|ij|,|ij|+2,\mathrm{},i+j2,i+j`$. The trace of products of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-matrices is given by

$$\mathrm{Tr}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{a_1\mathrm{}a_l}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{b_1\mathrm{}b_k}\right)=2^5\delta _{kl}(1)^{k(k1)/2}k!\delta _{[b_1}^{[a_1}\mathrm{}\delta _{b_k]}^{a_k]}.$$
(A.3)
All antisymmetrizations are with unit weight. This trace is not normalized to unity.


text:
# Hausdorff dimension of critical fluctuations in abelian gauge theories

\[

## Abstract

The geometric properties of the critical fluctuations in abelian gauge theories such as the Ginzburg-Landau model are analyzed in zero background field. Using a dual description, we obtain scaling relations between exponents of geometric and thermodynamic nature. In particular we connect the anomalous scaling dimension $`\eta `$ of the dual matter field to the Hausdorff dimension $`D_H`$ of the critical fluctuations, which are fractal objects. The connection between the values of $`\eta `$ and $`D_H`$, and the possibility of having a thermodynamic transition in finite background field, is discussed.

\] Anderson has proposed the breakdown of a generalized rigidity associated with proliferation of defect structures in an order parameter as a general means of characterizing phase transitions . In the context of three-dimensional superfluids and extreme type-II superconductors, such ideas have recently been put on a quantitative level . It has been explicitly demonstrated that in three spatial dimensions abelian gauge theories such as the Ginzburg-Landau theory describing type-II superconductors, suffer a continuous phase transition driven by a proliferation of topological defects in the order parameter, which are closed loops of quantized vorticity . These loops are induced by transverse phase fluctuations in a complex scalar order parameter. Such fluctuations are prominent in, for instance, doped Mott-Hubbard insulators .

In this paper, we investigate the non-trivial geometric properties of these critical fluctuations, and give a geometric interpretation of the anomalous scaling dimension of the condensate order parameter both for a charged and neutral condensate. In addition, we discuss the connection between the geometric properties of the zero-field critical fluctuations and the possibility of having a thermodynamic finite-field phase transition involving unbinding of loops of quantized vorticity.

We emphasize that the main results to be presented are quite general, and apply to the static critical sector of any theory of a complex scalar matter field coupled to a fluctuating gauge-field in three spatial dimensions , provided the symmetry group of the theory is abelian.

The Hamiltonian for the system is given by

$`H(q,u_\varphi )=m_\varphi ^2\left|\varphi \right|^2+{\displaystyle \frac{u_\varphi }{2}}\left|\varphi \right|^4+\left|D_\mu \varphi \right|^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}F^2,`$ (1)
where $`F^2=F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }`$, $`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu h_\nu _\nu h_\mu `$, $`D_\mu =_\mu iqh_\mu `$, and $`\varphi =|\varphi |\mathrm{exp}(i\theta )`$ is a complex matter field coupled to a massless gauge field $`𝐡`$ with coupling constant $`q`$. The $`|\varphi |^4`$-term mediates a short-range repulsion, while the gauge-field $`𝐡`$ mediates long range interactions. $`m_\varphi `$ is the massparameter for the $`\varphi `$-field, and $`u_\varphi `$ is a self coupling.

Consider Eq. 1 representing a $`3D`$ condensate with charge $`q0`$ sustaining stable topological objects in the form of closed vortex loops. Then the theory with $`q=0`$ is a field-theoretical description of the ensemble of these stable topological objects, constituting a dual description of the original theory . The theory with $`q=0`$ is also a direct field-theoretical description of a neutral condensate. Thus, in $`3D`$, the gauge-theory $`H(q0,u_\varphi )`$ describing a charged condensate has field-theoretical description of its critical fluctuations or topological defects in terms of a theory isomorphic to $`H(q=0,u_\varphi )`$ describing a similar but neutral condensate, and vice versa . In this sense, a charged condensate has neutral vortices with only short-ranged steric interactions, while a neutral condensate has charged vortices with long-ranged interactions. In the former case, the long-ranged interactions between vortex segments are rendered short-ranged by fluctuations of the gauge-field in the original theory, i.e. the dual gauge-field is massive with mass given by the charge of the original problem .

The anomalous dimension $`\eta `$ for the $`\varphi `$ field is defined via the relation

$$G(𝐱,𝐲)=\varphi (𝐱)\varphi ^{}(𝐲)=\frac{𝒢(|𝐱𝐲|/\xi )}{\left|𝐱𝐲\right|^{d2+\eta }},$$
(2)
where $`𝒢(z)`$ is some scaling function, $`\xi `$ is a correlation length, and $`d`$ is the spatial dimension of the system. This correlation function has a geometric interpretation, yielding the probability amplitude of finding any particle-path connecting $`𝐱`$ and $`𝐲`$. In the present work, the particle trajectories correspond to vortex lines.

For a random walk of length $`N`$ in $`d=3`$, the probability of going from $`𝐱`$ to $`𝐲`$ is given by

$$P(𝐱,𝐲;N)=\left(\frac{3}{2\pi N}\right)^{3/2}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\left(𝐱𝐲\right)^2}{2N}\right].$$
(3)
The correlation function $`G(𝐱,𝐲)`$ of the corresponding gaussian field theory is found by summing up $`P(𝐱,𝐲;N)`$ for all $`N`$

$$G(𝐱,𝐲)=\underset{N}{}P(𝐱,𝐲;N)\frac{1}{\left|𝐱𝐲\right|}.$$
(4)
Comparing this with Eq. 2, we find $`\eta =0`$, as expected. The random walker traces out a fractal path with Hausdorff dimension $`D_H`$. Moreover, in general the distance between two points $`𝐱`$ and $`𝐲`$ $`N`$ walks apart is given by

$$\left|𝐱𝐲\right|^2N^{2\mathrm{\Delta }},$$
(5)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the wandering exponent which for the gaussian $`3D`$ case is $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1/2`$. Inverting Eq. 5, we find that the total length of the random walker scales with linear size as $`L^{1/\mathrm{\Delta }}`$, hence the Hausdorff dimension of the random walker is given by $`D_H=1/\mathrm{\Delta }`$. If we set $`𝐱=𝐲`$ in Eq. 3 we find that the unnormalized distribution $`D(N)`$ of loops of perimeter $`N`$, at the critical point, is given by

$$D(N)\frac{1}{N}\underset{𝐱}{}P(\mathrm{𝟎};N)N^\alpha ,$$
(6)
with $`\alpha =5/2`$ for purely random walkers. The extra factor $`N^1`$ in Eq. 6 comes from the arbitrariness in defining the starting position along the loop. Hence, for the case of strict random walkers in $`3D`$, described by a gaussian field theory $`H=m_\varphi ^2|\varphi |^2+|\varphi |^2`$, the corresponding set of values for the two geometric and one thermodynamic exponents is given by $`(\mathrm{\Delta },\alpha ,\eta )=(1/2,5/2,0)`$.

Beyond the gaussian case, exact exponents can not be obtained analytically, however we will derive scaling relations for them. When Eq. 5 is invoked, a generalized probability function $`P(𝐱,𝐲;N)`$ may be written on the form

$$P(𝐱,𝐲;N)\frac{1}{N^\rho }F\left(\frac{\left|𝐱𝐲\right|}{N^\mathrm{\Delta }}\right),$$
(7)
where $`F(x)`$ is a scaling function, and normalizability of $`P`$ implies $`\rho =d\mathrm{\Delta }`$. From Eq. 6, we find that $`P(𝐱,𝐲;N)`$ should scale with $`N`$ as $`N^{1\alpha }`$, which yields the scaling relation $`\rho =\alpha 1`$. Conversely, summing over all $`N`$ in Eq. 7 to find the correlation function $`G(𝐱,𝐲)`$, we obtain

$$G(𝐱,𝐲)=\underset{N}{}P(𝐱,𝐲;N)\frac{1}{\left|𝐱𝐲\right|^{\frac{\rho 1}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}},$$
(8)
giving the scaling relation $`\eta =\frac{\rho 1}{\mathrm{\Delta }}+2d`$. Combining the above, we find

$$\eta +D_H=2,D_H=\frac{d}{\alpha 1}.$$
(9)
A computation of the geometric exponent $`\alpha `$ yields the thermodynamic exponent $`\eta `$ and the Hausdorff dimension $`D_H`$. Note that both $`\eta `$ and $`D_H`$ are sensitive functions of $`\alpha `$, $`\eta /\alpha =D_H/\alpha =d/(\alpha 1)^2`$, such that a precise determination of $`\eta `$ and $`D_H`$ requires great precision in the determination of $`\alpha `$. The above reinforces the statement that a geometric transition of the vortex tangle at criticality of the gauge theory Eq. 1 can be assigned a genuine thermodynamic order parameter via a dual formulation of the original theory in three spatial dimensions . The random walker is represented by a gaussian theory, Eq. 1 with $`(u_\varphi =0,q=0)`$, for which $`\eta =0`$. This corresponds to $`D_H=2`$, such that the random walker in three dimensions traces out a path that precisely fills a cross-sectional area of the system. Note that $`D_H<2\eta >0`$, while $`D_H>2\eta <0`$.

The Hamiltonian Eq. 1 with $`(u_\varphi 0,q0)`$ has a dual field theory corresponding to Eq. 1 with $`q=0`$ describing the neutral vortex tangle of a charged superconductor . The $`\left|\varphi \right|^4`$-term in Eq. 1 represents a steric repulsion, i.e. the vortex loops can not overlap, leading to a random walk problem with self-avoiding links (but not necessarily self-avoiding sites), in the sense that parallel vortex segments repel, perpendicular vortex segments can cut , while antiparallel vortex-segments can annihilate. Hence, this is not a standard self-avoiding path problem. However, we expect $`\mathrm{\Delta }>1/2`$ or equivalently $`D_H<2`$, since steric repulsion should result in a vortex-loop tangle packing space less densely than for the non-interacting case, so that $`\eta >0`$. The repulsive interaction between parallel vortex segments also leads to a more efficient suppression of long loops than for the non-interacting case, so that $`\alpha >5/2`$.

Consider next Eq. 1 with $`(u_\varphi 0,q=0)`$ for $`d=3`$, which has a dual field theory corresponding to Eq. 1 with $`q0`$ describing the charged vortex tangle of a neutral condensate . A long-ranged (anti) Biot-Savart interaction is mediated by the gauge-field. This is a relevant perturbation, in renormalization group sense, to a steric contact repulsion. The geometric properties of the charged vortex tangle are a result of a balance between attractive forces mediated by the gauge field, and the steric repulsion. As the numerical simulations show, we find $`\mathrm{\Delta }<1/2`$, corresponding to $`D_H>2`$ which means that the vortex tangle is more compact than the ensemble of pure random walkers, due to the fact that an attractive long-ranged Biot-Savart interaction between oppositely oriented vortex segments overcompensates the steric repulsion so as to contract the vortex-loop tangle not only compared to the pure $`|\varphi |^4`$-case, but even compared to the noninteracting case. The tangle thus packs space so that it more than fills a cross-sectional area of the system.

The fluctuation-dissipation theorem provides a bound on $`\eta `$ via the susceptibility $`\chi _\varphi =d^dxG(x)\xi ^{2\eta }`$, which is bounded by the volume $`L^d`$ of the system, $`L^{2\eta }=L^dL^{2d\eta }<L^d`$, so $`\eta >2d`$. Eq. 9 gives a geometric interpretation of this bound. Specializing to $`d=3`$, $`\eta =1`$ corresponds to topological excitations with $`D_H=3`$, an upper limit.

For $`d=3`$, the continuous phase transition in a superfluid or extreme type-II superconductor has recently been demonstrated to be driven by a proliferation of vortex loops . From the above, $`\eta =1`$ means that a single vortex loop at $`T_c`$ packs space completely, i.e. its perimeter $`N`$ scales as $`NL^3`$, implying that the vortex-tangle collapses on itself, rendering the transition discontinuous. This may be been seen from the standard scaling relation $`\beta =\nu (d2+\eta )/2`$ for critical exponents. Formally, this implies that the limit $`\eta (2d)^+`$ corresponds to the limit $`\beta 0^+`$, characteristic of a discontinuous transition. More informally, a collapse of a vortex tangle may be viewed as mediated by an effective attractive vortex interaction, a situation akin to what is known in type-I superconductors. Deep in the type-I regime, it is known that superconductors suffer a weakly discontinuous transition .

Monte Carlo simulations have been performed on the lattice version of Eq. 1 in the phase-only approximation, to determine precise values of $`\alpha `$, both for $`q=0`$ and $`q0`$. We have also performed simulations on pure random walkers described by the theory $`H(q=0,u_\varphi =0)`$. They reveal that a determination of $`\alpha `$ is less fraught with finite-size effects than a determination of $`D_H`$. Thus, we focus on determining $`\alpha `$. The model we consider is

$`H=J{\displaystyle \underset{<i,j>}{}}\mathrm{cos}(\theta _i\theta _jq_\mathrm{C}h_{ij})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\times 𝐡)^2,`$ (10)
where the site-variable $`\theta _i`$ is the phase of the complex matter field $`\varphi =|\varphi |\mathrm{exp}(i\theta )`$ of Eq. 1, when the system is discretized, $`J`$ is essentially a bare phase-stiffness, and the link-variable $`h_{ij}=_i^j𝑑𝐥𝐡`$. The charge $`q_\mathrm{C}`$ is the (original) charge entering in the simulations. Up to this point we have considered a general charge $`q`$ irrespective of whether it couples to the original condensate or the resulting vortex tangle. The numerical simulations are performed on the phase of the condensate, hence the concept of original and dual are fixed in terms of the numerical simulations. Consequently we introduce the charges $`q_\mathrm{C}`$ for the condensate and $`q_\mathrm{V}`$ for the vortices.

¿From the phase distributions of the matter field we can extract vortex loops. These loops have charge $`q_\mathrm{V}`$ and are described by the field theory $`H(q_\mathrm{V},u_\varphi )`$ . Hence, we can study the critical properties of the charged field theory $`H(q_\mathrm{V},u_\varphi )`$ by considering the geometric properties of the thermally excited vortex-loop tangle at the critical temperature in the 3DXY model. Conversely, the geometric properties of the vortex tangle with $`q_\mathrm{C}0`$ yield the critical properties of the neutral field theory $`H(q_\mathrm{V}=0,u_\varphi )`$ of Eq. 1.

The simulations with $`q_C=0`$ are described elsewhere, while for $`q_C0`$ the simulations proceed as follows. For every site on the lattice a phase change $`\theta _i\theta _i^{}`$ is attempted, and accepted or rejected according to the Metropolis algorithm. Then a change in $`h_{ij}h_{ij}+\delta h`$ is attempted, and accepted or rejected according to the Metropolis algorithm. When updating $`h_{ij}`$ we update all the link variables on a randomly oriented elementary plaquette containing $`h_{ij}`$ as one of its four edges. Updating of $`𝐡`$ in this fashion guarantees that the gauge-fixing condition $`𝐡=0`$ is enforced at all times. For $`q_\mathrm{C}=0`$, the simulations were performed for a system of size $`L\times L\times L`$ with $`L=180`$, while those for $`q_\mathrm{C}0`$ were performed with $`L=64`$.

During the simulations we have sampled the distribution function $`D(N)`$, Eq. LABEL:loop\_distr, obtaining $`\alpha `$. The results are shown in Fig. 1 and listed in Table I. The value of $`\alpha `$ obtained for $`q_C0`$ (dual neutral), which is the hardest system to simulate, gives a value for $`\eta `$ in good agreement with high-precision results for $`\eta `$ of the pure $`\varphi ^4`$-theory . This serves as a useful benchmark on our method of extracting $`\eta `$. For $`q_C=0`$ we have simulated much larger systems than for $`q_C0`$. The deviation from the gaussian value $`\alpha =5/2`$ is substantial, and of opposite sign compared to $`q_C0`$. Given the size of the system we consider for $`q_C=0`$, it is unlikely that this is a finite-size artifact. An $`\alpha <5/2`$ guarantees $`\eta <0`$ for the $`q_C=0`$ (dual charged) case, contrary to the value of $`\eta >0`$ for $`q_C0`$ . In particular, the inset of Fig. 1 lends strong support to the proposition that $`\eta (q_C0)>0`$, while $`\eta (q_C=0)<0`$.

The value $`\eta <0`$ obtained for the original neutral, dual charged case, is significant: It implies that $`D_H>2`$ for this case. Whether $`D_H>2`$ or $`D_H<2`$ is of great import to the possibility of having a genuine phase-transition driven by a vortex-loop unbinding even in the presence of a finite background field such as magnetic induction in type-II superconductors. A vortex system accesses configurational entropy more easily if it is compressible than if it is incompressible. For the charged case the gauge-field fluctuations render the system compressible. In the neutral case, the system expands screening strings of closed vortex loops to a larger extent than for the charged case, as substitutes for the gauge-field fluctuations. This is why $`D_H(q_\mathrm{C}=0)>D_H(q_\mathrm{C}0)`$. There is an infinitely larger amount of screening vortex-strings in the neutral case (dual charged) than for the charged case (dual neutral), which is the true significance of the fact that $`\eta `$ is smaller for $`q_\mathrm{C}=0`$ than for $`q_\mathrm{C}0`$. The possibility of the zero-field vortex-loop blowout transition surviving the presence of a finite field is much greater in a neutral superfluid or an extreme type-II superconductor, than in a charged condensate with a priori good screening.

Given the significance of $`D_H>2`$, we elaborate on the fact that for the neutral (dual charged) case, we find $`\eta <0`$. The Lehmann-representation of the Fourier transform $`\stackrel{~}{G}(p)`$ of Eq. 2, is sometimes used to argue that $`\eta `$ obeys the strict inequality $`\eta >0`$. The Lehmann-representation of $`\stackrel{~}{G}(p)`$ is given by

$`\stackrel{~}{G}(k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\mu ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\rho (\mu ^2)}{k^2+\mu ^2}},`$ (11)
where $`1=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\mu ^2\rho (\mu ^2)`$, and $`\rho (\mu ^2)=Z\delta (\mu ^2m_\varphi ^2)+\sigma (\mu ^2)`$. The propagator for the gaussian case would be $`\stackrel{~}{G}(k)=1/(k^2+m_\varphi ^2)`$, where $`m_\varphi ^2`$ refers to the bare massparameter in Eq. 1. Thus, $`\eta >0`$ follows if $`0<Z<1`$, which holds for a uniformly positive $`\rho (\mu ^2)`$. However, in theories with a local gauge symmetry, the two-point correlation function is a gauge-dependent quantity. Thus, $`\sigma (\mu ^2)`$ may in principle be made negative for certain values of $`\mu `$ by a gauge-transformation. This invalidates the reasoning leading to the strict inequalities $`Z<1`$ and $`\eta >0`$. A negative $`\eta `$, as found here and in other simulations  all representing basically exact results, agrees with a recent non-perturbative RG calculation , which also gives $`\nu =\nu _{3DXY}`$ at the charged critical point.

At the critical point, the relevant fluctuations are transverse phase-fluctuations, or vortices . Ignoring amplitude fluctuations yields an effective Hamiltonian governing the transverse $`\theta `$-fluctuations, whose Fourier-transform $``$ we denote by $`𝐒_k`$, $`((\theta )_T)=𝐒_k=2\pi i(𝐤\times 𝐧_k)/k^2`$, where $`𝐧_k`$ is the Fourier-transform of the local vorticity. We find, after integrating out the transverse gauge-field, that $`H=\mathrm{\Xi }^2(k)𝐒_k𝐒_k`$, where $`\mathrm{\Xi }^2(k)=k^2/(k^2+2q^2)`$. For $`q=0`$, we have $`\mathrm{\Xi }^2(k)=1`$, while $`lim_{k0}\mathrm{\Xi }^2(k)k^2`$ for $`q0`$. The coupling to a fluctuating gauge field softens the transverse phase-fluctuations, providing the effective phase-stiffness with an extra power $`k^2`$ compared to the $`q=0`$-case. Thus, $`\stackrel{~}{G}^1(k,q=0)=k^2+\mathrm{\Sigma }(k)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{G}^1(k,q0)=k^4+\mathrm{\Sigma }(k)`$. In both cases, the $`k0`$-limit of the self-energy $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(k)`$ is given by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(k)k^{2\eta }`$. We thus have $`lim_{k0}\stackrel{~}{G}^1(k)k^{2\eta }`$ provided $`\eta >0`$ for $`q=0`$ and, when invoking the absolute lower bound, $`\eta >1`$ for $`q0`$. For a pure $`|\varphi |^4`$-theory, the Lehmann-representation coupled with positive-definiteness of $`\rho (\mu ^2)`$, holds.

This work was supported by the Norwegian Research Council via the High Performance Computing Program, and by Grant 124106/410 (S.M. and A.S). (J. H.) thanks NTNU for support. Communications with F. S. Nogueira and Z. Tešanović, are gratefully acknowledged.


text:
# Action, Hamiltonian and CFT for 2𝐷 black holes

## 1 Introduction

Gravity in $`2D`$ is a very rich and much investigated subject (a review of early work is in the TASI lectures by Ginsparg-Moore). Under the spell of modern string theory, there has been recently a lot of activity aiming to understood the subtle aspects of AdS/CFT correspondence in $`2D`$ gravity (even two dimensional de Sitter space has been understood as a variant of AdS/CFT correspondence).
A consistent piece of work in $`2D`$ gravity has always been to understand $`AdS_2`$ black holes. Most researches almost invariably focused on the asymptotic symmetries of $`AdS_2`$ gravitating system. It seems instructive, and to some extent important, to look instead at the near horizon symmetries, and the purpose of this letter is to do this in the Hamiltonian framework of AdS gravity (see  for applications to AdS/CFT correspondence). We first determine the regularity (as opposed to boundary) conditions near the horizon. We then proceed to find the corresponding Hamiltonian. A new term at the horizon will be found, which can be interpreted as a shift in energy due to a central charge in the diffeomorphism algebra. This will be used to evaluate the entropy, which will then be compared with the standard thermodynamics of black holes, finding complete agreement (no $`\sqrt{2}`$ discrepancy).

## 2 Action and Hamiltonian

The theory we will consider is the one defined by the Jackiw-Teitelboim’s action

$`I={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle |g|^{1/2}\eta (R+2\lambda ^2)}`$ (2.1)
which leads to the equations of motion

$`R+2\lambda ^2=0,g_{ab}\mathrm{}\eta _a_b\eta =\lambda ^2g_{ab}\eta `$ (2.2)
Black holes in this model have been studied in a number of papers. The standard black hole solution is the linear dilaton vacuum, with metric

$`ds^2=(\lambda ^2x^2a^2)dt^2+(\lambda ^2x^2a^2)^1dx^2`$ (2.3)
and dilaton $`\eta =\eta _0\lambda x`$, where $`a`$ and $`\eta _0`$ are integration constants. The event horizon is located at $`x=x_0=\lambda ^1a`$. Given that the solution is uniquely determined by (i), existence of a timelike $`U(1)`$ isometry and (ii), asimptotically AdS behaviour, one may wonder why the black hole should exhibit any thermodynamics property at all.
To better understanding this point, we are going to discuss how big is the phase space of the black hole, and to this aim we need the Hamiltonian. We start then with a general metric

$`ds^2=N^2dt^2+\sigma ^2(dx+Vdt)^2,|g|^{1/2}=N\sigma `$ (2.4)
and define $`U=\dot{\sigma }+(\sigma V)^{^{}}`$, where a prime means derivative w.r.to $`x`$. A calculation shows that

$`I`$ $`=`$ $`I(\mathrm{bulk})\underset{X\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle 𝑑t\eta (\sigma ^1N^{^{}}N^1VU)}\left[{\displaystyle _{x_0}^X}𝑑x\eta N^1U\right]_{t_2}^{t_1}`$ (2.5)
$`+`$ $`\underset{xx_0}{lim}{\displaystyle 𝑑t\left(\eta \sigma ^1N^{^{}}N^1\eta VU\right)}`$
with

$`I(bulk)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{x_0}^X}({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\eta }\dot{\sigma }}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{^{}}N^{^{}}}{\sigma }}+{\displaystyle \frac{V(V\sigma )^{^{}}\eta ^{^{}}}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\sigma }V\eta ^{^{}}}{N}}`$ (2.6)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\eta }(\sigma V)^{^{}}}{N}}\lambda ^2N\sigma \eta )d^2x`$
Of course, in doing so one is concerned with the evolution in the exterior region, marked by $`X>x>x_0=a\lambda ^1`$, where $`X`$ will be taken to infinity when necessary. To simplify things let us set $`V=0`$ from now on. We also omit the limits of spatial integration, leaving it understood that the range is actually $`x[x_0,X]`$. Under a small change of the metric and dilaton, the action has a variation

$`\delta I`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}\mathrm{terms}\mathrm{giving}\mathrm{equations}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{motion}^{\prime \prime }{\displaystyle 𝑑x\left[N^1\dot{\eta }\delta \sigma \right]_1^2}`$ (2.7)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑t\left[\sigma ^1\eta ^{^{}}\delta N\right]_{x_0}^X}{\displaystyle 𝑑t\left[\eta \delta \left(\frac{N^{^{}}}{\sigma }\right)\right]_{x_0}^X}+{\displaystyle 𝑑x\left[\eta \delta \left(\frac{\dot{\sigma }}{N}\right)\right]_1^2}`$
Before going any further, a crucial issue will be to decide what kind of regularity conditions have to be imposed near the black hole horizon (see  for a discussion in four dimensions). This is the place where the $`U(1)`$ isometry of time translation has a fixed point. We also require that near the horizon the geometry be isometric to a flat disk, so that the Euler characteristic will be $`\chi =1`$. Both conditions can be met by111They were also discussed in thermodynamics ensembles by J. D. Brown and collaborators.

$`N(x_0)=0,(\sigma ^1N^{^{}})_{|x=x_0}=\kappa `$ (2.8)
where $`\kappa `$ is the surface gravity of the black hole. We also needs to fix the metric, the lapse and $`\eta `$ at $`t_1`$, $`t_2`$ and infinity222Because we are going to discuss the canonical ensemble.. Looking at (2.7), we see that we have to refine the action to read

$`I_{NEW}=I+{\displaystyle 𝑑t(\sigma ^1\eta N^{^{}})_{|X}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\left[N^1\eta \dot{\sigma }\right]_1^2}`$ (2.9)
Even without bothering about boundary terms, we can write a canonical Hamiltonian associated with $`I`$333A rather general treatment of phase space formulations of $`2D`$ gravity models can be found in , and references therein.. After standard manipulations, we obtain

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑xN\left[P_\sigma P_\eta +\left(\frac{\eta ^{^{}}}{\sigma }\right)^{^{}}\lambda ^2\sigma \eta \right]}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{^{}}N}{\sigma }}\right)_{|X}`$ (2.10)
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{^{}}N}{\sigma }}\right)_{|x_0}+\left({\displaystyle \frac{\eta N^{^{}}}{\sigma }}\right)_{|X}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\eta N^{^{}}}{\sigma }}\right)_{|x_0}`$
where $`P_\sigma =N^1\dot{\eta }`$, $`P_\eta =N^1\dot{\sigma }`$ and $`P_N=0`$. The first two boundary terms have appeared because we wrote the Hamiltonian in a form that displays the constraint

$`_{}=P_\sigma P_\eta +\left({\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{^{}}}{\sigma }}\right)^{^{}}\lambda ^2\sigma \eta `$ (2.11)
The last term in (2.10) is the crucial one, that will be related to a Virasoro’s central charge. It is clear that it exists only because we wanted to predict the outer region of the black hole. The Hamiltonian on a geodesically complete spatial section of the black hole would not have any horizon term. In this respect it makes sense to interpret it as a sort of classical entanglement of states. It is a very peculiar feature of gravity, because only gravity has the Hamiltonian which on-shell is given by pure boundary terms.
The variation of $`H`$ becomes

$`\delta H=\left[\sigma ^1\eta ^{^{}}\delta N\sigma ^1\eta \delta N^{^{}}+\sigma ^2\eta N^{^{}}\delta \sigma \right]_{x_0}^X`$ (2.12)
plus bulk terms giving the equations of motion. So again we should define

$`H_{NEW}=H\left(\sigma ^1\eta N^{^{}}\right)_{|X}`$ (2.13)
and this will be suitable to our boundary conditions. Notice that the $`\delta \eta `$ never appears on the horizon, so we need not a boundary condition for $`\eta `$ at $`x_0`$. Finally

$`H_{NEW}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{constraint}\mathrm{term}\left(\sigma ^1\eta N^{^{}}\right)_{|x_0}+N(X)[(\sigma ^1\eta ^{^{}})_{|B}(\sigma ^1\eta ^{^{}})_{|X}]`$ (2.14)
$`+`$ $`\left(\sigma ^1\eta ^{^{}}N\right)_{|x_0}`$
the last term being really zero for a dilaton regular on the horizon. We also included a background subtraction, labelled by the subscript $`{}_{}{}^{\prime \prime }B_{}^{\prime \prime }`$, to insure the convergence of the limits as $`X\mathrm{}`$. The natural ground state would be in the same topology class as the black hole and would have zero temperature. This identifies it as the metric (2.3) with $`a=0`$. The horizon boundary term in $`H_{NEW}`$ is an instance of a general result pertaining to spacetimes with degenerate foliations.
We are now in position to describe the (reduced) phase space of the black hole (2.3). With a linear dilaton, the constraint implies $`\sigma ^2=(\lambda ^2x^2a^2)^1`$, but leaves undetermined the lapse and sets the momentum variables to zero. However, the horizon regularity conditions (2.8) fix the behaviour of $`N`$ near the horizon to have the form

$`N^2={\displaystyle \frac{2\kappa ^2}{\lambda a}}(xa/\lambda )+\beta (t)(xa/\lambda )^2+O_3`$ (2.15)
and near infinity to be of order $`\lambda ^2x^2`$, but leaves $`N`$ otherwise arbitrary. So, roughly speaking, there are as many metrics with a given surface gravity as there are analytic functions on the disk, vanishing in the origin and satisfying (2.15). Certainly this includes the full conformal group in $`2D`$, as this also is generated by analytic functions on the disk.

## 3 Thermodynamics and CFT

The boundary term at infinity in $`H_{NEW}`$ can be easily evaluated, and leads to identify the mass as

$`M={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\eta _0\lambda a^2`$ (3.1)
The boundary term on the bifurcation point of the horizon is new, and has the effect to shift the mass to a lower value. In the spirit of CFT, we interpret then the Hamiltonian as

$`H_{NEW}=\kappa \left(L_0+\stackrel{~}{L}_0{\displaystyle \frac{c+\stackrel{~}{c}}{24}}\right)`$ (3.2)
The other Virasoro’s generators $`L_n`$, $`\stackrel{~}{L}_n`$, would be just the on shell value of the Hamiltonians $`H[\xi _n]`$, $`H[\stackrel{~}{\xi }_n]`$ for surface deformations generated by vector fields respecting the horizon regularity conditions near the bifurcation point. We may use the time inversion symmetry of the solution to infer that, in fact, $`c=\stackrel{~}{c}`$. This stems from the fact that static black holes do have indeed a pair of classical Virasoro algebras connected with the canonical realizations of symmetries on the phase space, but these are linked to the future and past sheet of the horizon, respectively.
Since the horizon term in $`H_{NEW}`$ is $`\kappa \eta _{hor}=\kappa \eta _0a`$, this gives a central charge

$`c=12\eta _0a`$ (3.3)
What’s about $`L_0`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{L}_0`$? In a Lorentzian world there are in fact two horizons, but in the canonical Euclidean picture there is only one, the axis of the Euclidean section. It is natural to consider the sector of the CFT in which all Virasoro generators of the past horizon, $`\stackrel{~}{L}_n`$, vanish for $`n0`$444The generators $`\stackrel{~}{L}_n`$, $`n>0`$ vanish too, because they correspond to spacetime diffeomorphisms having a zero of order $`n`$ in $`(xx_0)`$.. This means imposing that white holes have no entropy. But then $`L_0=\eta _0a/2`$ and Cardy’s formula gives the entropy as

$`S=2\pi \sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{cL_0}{6}}}=2\pi \eta _0a`$ (3.4)
We may confirm this simply comparing $`T_HdS`$ with $`dM`$, where $`T_H=(2\pi )^1\lambda a`$ is the Hawking’s temperature of the black hole. Or we may evaluate the off-shell Euclidean action (a la Gibbons-Hawking), which is of independent interest, choosing as a reference background the zero temperature state (the extreme black hole metric with $`a=0`$). Then we obtain

$`I_E={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle |g|^{1/2}\eta (R+2\lambda ^2)}+\underset{X\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle _0^\beta }𝑑\tau [N\eta _BN_B^{^{}}\sigma ^1\eta N^{^{}}]_{|X}`$ (3.5)
and we have also included the background subtraction. We recall that this has the same dilaton $`\eta _B=\eta _0\lambda x`$ and $`N_B=\lambda x`$. Using the Gauss-Bonnet theorem for a disk we obtain

$`I_E={\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^2\eta _0}{\lambda \beta _H}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^2\eta _0}{2\lambda \beta _H^2}}\beta `$ (3.6)
where $`\beta _H=2\pi \lambda ^1a^1`$ is the Hawking’s inverse temperature of the black hole (2.3) and $`\beta `$ is arbitrary. Since $`\mathrm{log}Z=I_E`$, this leads to a mass $`M=2^1\eta _0\lambda a^2`$ and entropy $`S=2\pi \eta _0a`$, as expected from the Hamiltonian and the black hole first law, respectively.
The on shell action is $`I_E`$ for $`\beta =\beta _H`$, that is

$`I_E\mathrm{log}Z={\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi )^2\eta _0}{2\lambda }}\beta _H^1`$ (3.7)
This is the tipical behaviour of the partition function of a scale invariant theory in $`2D`$, and again gives $`M`$ and $`S`$ in agreement with Cardy’s formula, solving also the $`\sqrt{2}`$ puzzle.
The partition function of AdS black holes in higher dimensions also has the high temperature behaviour of scale invariant theories, $`\mathrm{log}ZC\beta ^{(D1)}`$ , but this is now understood as a consequence of duality with a gauge theory. In $`AdS_2`$ the question of the dual field theory is harder, although recently a definite proposal has been made, which also solves the $`\sqrt{2}`$ puzzle. We do not rely, however, on microscopic details. The more puzzling remains the Schwarzschild black hole, which has $`\mathrm{log}Z\beta ^2`$, not that of a scale invariant theory, but that nevertheless has a horizon central charge555Since the horizon boundary term in the Hamiltonian must be present. matching its entropy, if one uses Cardy’s formula with the same assumptions made here on the Virasoro spectrum.

## 4 Conclusion

It is certainly amusing that thermodynamics and Cardy’s formula match each other to such a high degree. What we find even more remarkable is that a knowledge of the classical Hamiltonian is sufficient to determine the central charge of a quantum Virasoro algebra without appealing to any symmetry consideration. This result is not limited to two dimensional models and will be further discussed in a separate paper. Due to these facts, we have confidence that our assumptions on the spectrum of the Virasoro algebra correctly describe $`2D`$ black holes. It also implies that white holes have no entropy. That the central charge appears in the classical hamiltonian for the outer region of the black hole, while it is absent for a complete Cauchy surface, can be interpreted as the classical limit of a sort of entanglement of states.