text:
# The 𝛽-term for 𝐷^∗→𝐷𝛾 within a heavy-light chiral quark model

## I Introduction

Strong and electromagnetic interactions involving heavy and light mesons and photons may be described by heavy-light chiral Lagrangians itchpt . Such Lagrangians are determined by chiral symmetry in the light sector in addition to heavy quark symmetry. However, the coupling constants of the terms in the Lagrangian are in general unknown. In this paper we focus on the so called $`\beta `$-term for $`D^{}D\gamma `$, which is studied in Amund ; Stewart ; Cheng . This term in the Lagrangian is also relevant for calculation of processes like $`D^02\gamma `$ FSZ1 , and $`D^0e^+e^{}\gamma `$ FSZ2 .

Within chiral perturbation theory alone, the value of $`\beta `$ is not determined. In this paper we will calculate the $`\beta `$-term to order $`1/m_c`$ within a Heavy-Light Chiral Quark Model (HL$`\chi `$QM) developed recently ahjoe . This model belongs to a class of quark loop models chiqm ; Bijnens ; barhi  where the quarks couple directly to the mesons at the scale of chiral symmetry breaking $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi `$ of order 1 GeV. In contrast to most other versions of such models, our version also incorporates soft gluon effects in terms of the gluon condensate with lowest dimension ahjoe ; ahjoeB ; EFZ ; pider ; epb ; BEF ; EHP . At quark level the Lagrangian of our model ahjoe  includes the Lagrangian for Heavy Quark Effective Field Theory (HQEFT) neu . This means that $`1/m_c`$ corrections can be calculated within the model. It has been problematic to pin down a precise value for $`\beta `$, and chiral loop contributions to $`D^{}D\gamma `$ are sizeable Amund ; Stewart ; Cheng . This may indicate that the chiral expansion will be problematic for $`\beta `$.

## II The value of $`\beta `$ extracted from experiment

The width of the $`D_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$ meson has been measured very accuratelyana  :

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(D_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+})=(96\pm 26)\text{ keV}$$
(1)
from this value of the width it is possible to extract a value for the $`D^{}D\pi `$ couplingana

$$g_{𝒜}^{}{}_{}{}^{D^{}D\pi }=0.59\pm 0.08.$$
(2)
From (1) we find the following radiative decay rate :

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(D_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}D^+\gamma )=(1.54\pm 0.56)\text{ keV},$$
(3)
where we have used the branching ratio $`Br(D_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}D^+\gamma )=(1.6\pm 0.4)\%`$pdg . To one-loop in the chiral expansion and to order $`1/m_c`$ we have Amund ; Cheng  :

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(D_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}D^+\gamma )=\frac{\omega ^3\alpha }{3M_D^{}}\sqrt{M_D^{}M_D}\left[\frac{1}{3}\beta _d+\frac{2}{3}\frac{1}{m_c}+\frac{g_{𝒜}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{8\pi }\frac{m_\pi }{f^2}\right]^2,$$
(4)
where $`f`$ is the bare pion decay constant $`f=86`$ MeVCheng , and $`\omega `$ is the photon energy $`\omega =(M_D^{}^2M_D^2)/(2M_D^{})`$. The term $`1/m_c`$ is due to photon emission from the c-quark. The bare coupling $`g_𝒜`$ is related to $`g_{𝒜}^{}{}_{}{}^{D^{}D\pi }`$. In the Heavy-Light Chiral Quark Model ahjoe , described to a certain extent in the next section, it is estimated to be $`g_𝒜=0.57\pm 0.05`$. This estimate includes chiral corrections to one loop and $`1/m_Q`$ corrections ahjoe . This value is very close to (2), in the following we will use the experimental value as the bare coupling. The quantity $`\beta _d`$ is the effective, renormalized $`\beta `$ including chiral corrections for the case $`D^+`$ when the $`D^{}`$ and $`D`$ mesons contain a $`d`$-quark Cheng :

$`\beta _d=\beta \left\{1+g_{𝒜}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{9}{2}}\epsilon _\pi +3\epsilon _K+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\epsilon _{\eta _8}\right)+3\left(\epsilon _\pi +{\displaystyle \frac{g_{𝒜}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\epsilon _\pi +\epsilon _K+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\epsilon _{\eta _8}\right)\right)\right\},`$ (5)
where we have used the notation :

$`\epsilon _X={\displaystyle \frac{m_X^2}{32\pi ^2f^2}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi ^2}{m_X^2}},X=\pi ,K,\eta _8.`$ (6)
Eq. (5) includes vertex corrections for the $`\beta `$-term and field renormalization. Combining equation (3) and (4), we find two possible solutions for $`\beta _d`$ :

$`\beta _d=(0.7\pm 0.5)\text{ GeV}\text{-1},\beta _d=(4.1\pm 0.2)\text{ GeV}\text{-1},`$ (7)
where we have used $`m_Q=m_c=1.4`$ GeV. These values correspond to the bare values

$`\beta =(0.7\pm 0.4)\text{ GeV}\text{-1},\beta =(2.7\pm 0.2)\text{ GeV}\text{-1}.`$ (8)
Dropping the chiral corrections in (4) ($`\beta _d=\beta `$) would give the result:

$`\beta =(0.1\pm 0.3)\text{ GeV}\text{-1},\beta =(3.0\pm 0.3)\text{ GeV}\text{-1}.`$ (9)
The values in (8) and (9) are consistent with those obtained in FSZ1 . Both the first values of $`\beta `$ in equations (8) and (9) are too low in order to agree with $`D_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{0}`$ data FSZ1 . Thus, we are left with the second values of (8) and (9).

## III The heavy light chiral quark model

In this section we will give a short description of the Heavy-Light Chiral Quark Model (HL$`\chi `$QM) to be used in this paper. The model is based on Heavy Quark Effective Theory (HQEFT), which is a systematic expansion in $`1/m_Q`$ neu  (where $`m_Q`$ is $`m_c`$ in our case). The heavy quark field $`Q(x)`$ is replaced with a “reduced” field, $`Q_v(x)`$, which is related to the full field the in following way:

$$Q_v(x)=P_+e^{im_Qvx}Q(x),$$
(10)
where $`P_\pm `$ are projection operators $`P_\pm =(1\pm \gamma v)/2`$. The reduced field $`Q_v`$ annihilates heavy quarks. The Lagrangian for heavy quarks is :

$$_{\text{HQEFT}}=\overline{Q_v}ivDQ_v+\frac{1}{2m_Q}\overline{Q_v}\left(C_M\frac{g_s}{2}\sigma G+(iD_{})_{\text{eff}}^2\right)Q_v+𝒪(m_Q^2)$$
(11)
where $`D_\mu `$ is the covariant derivative containing the gluon field (eventually also the photon field), and $`\sigma G=\sigma ^{\mu \nu }G_{\mu \nu }^at^a`$, where $`\sigma ^{\mu \nu }=i[\gamma ^\mu ,\gamma ^\nu ]/2`$, $`G_{\mu \nu }^a`$ is the gluonic field tensors, and $`t^a`$ are the colour matrices. This chromo-magnetic term has a factor $`C_M`$ which is one at tree level, but slightly modified by perturbative QCD effects below $`m_Q`$. It has been calculated to next to leading order (NLO) neub ; GriFa . Furthermore, $`(iD_{})_{\text{eff}}^2=C_D(iD)^2C_K(ivD)^2`$. At tree level, $`C_D=C_K=1`$. Here, $`C_D`$ is not modified by perturbative QCD, while $`C_K`$ is different from one due to perturbative QCD corrections GriFa .

The Lagrangian for the HL$`\chi `$QM is

$$_{\text{HL}\chi \text{QM}}=_{\text{HQEFT}}+_{\chi \text{QM}}+_{\text{Int}}.$$
(12)
The first term is given in equation (11) (Note however, that only soft gluons are considered to be included in (12) ) . The light quark sector is described by the Chiral Quark Model ($`\chi `$QM) chiqm , having a standard QCD term and a term describing interactions between quarks and (Goldstone) mesons:

$$_{\chi \text{QM}}=\overline{\chi }\left[\gamma ^\mu (iD_\mu +𝒱_\mu +\gamma _5𝒜_\mu )m\right]\chi \overline{\chi }\stackrel{~}{M_q}\chi .$$
(13)
Here $`m`$ is the (SU(3)-invariant) constituent light quark mass and $`\chi `$ is the flavour rotated quark fields given by: $`\chi _L=\xi ^{}q_L`$ and $`\chi _R=\xi q_R`$, where $`q^T=(u,d,s)`$ are the light quark fields. The left- and right-handed projections $`q_L`$ and $`q_R`$ transforms after $`SU(3)_L`$ and $`SU(3)_R`$ respectively. The quantity $`\xi `$ is a 3 by 3 matrix containing the (would be) Goldstone octet ($`\pi ,K,\eta `$). In terms of $`\xi `$ the vector and axial vector fields $`𝒱_\mu `$ and $`𝒜_\mu `$ in (13) are given by:

$$𝒱_\mu \frac{i}{2}(\xi ^{}_\mu \xi +\xi _\mu \xi ^{}),𝒜_\mu \frac{i}{2}(\xi ^{}_\mu \xi \xi _\mu \xi ^{}),\xi \mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{\Pi }/f)$$
(14)
where $`f`$ is the bare pion coupling, and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is a 3 by 3 matrix which contains the Goldstone bosons $`\pi ,K,\eta `$ in the standard way. In (13) the quantity $`\stackrel{~}{M}_q`$ contains the current quark mass matrix $`_q`$ and and the Goldstone fields through $`\xi `$:

$`\stackrel{~}{M_q}\stackrel{~}{M}_q^V+\stackrel{~}{M}_q^A\gamma _5,\text{where}`$ (15)
$`\stackrel{~}{M}_q^V{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\xi ^{}_q^{}\xi ^{}+`$ $`\xi _q\xi )\text{and}\stackrel{~}{M}_q^A{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\xi ^{}_q^{}\xi ^{}\xi _q\xi ).`$ (16)
The interaction between heavy meson fields and heavy quarks are described by the following Lagrangian :

$$_{Int}=G_H\left[\overline{\chi }_a\overline{H_a}Q_v+\overline{Q_v}H_a\chi _a\right],$$
(17)
where $`G_H`$ is a coupling constant, and $`H_a`$ is the heavy meson field containing a spin zero and spin one boson ($`a`$ is a SU(3) flavour index):

$`H_a`$ $`P_+(P_\mu ^a\gamma _\mu iP_5^a\gamma _5),\overline{H_a}\gamma ^0(H_a)^{}\gamma ^0.`$ (18)
The fields $`P^a`$ annihilates a heavy meson containing a heavy quark with velocity $`v`$.

Integrating out the quarks by using by using (11), (13) and (17), the lowest order chiral Lagrangian up to $`𝒪(m_Q^1)`$ can be written as itchpt ; ahjoe

$$=Tr\left[\overline{H_a}iv𝒟_{ba}H_b\right]g_𝒜Tr\left[\overline{H_a}H_b\gamma _\mu \gamma _5𝒜_{ba}^\mu \right],$$
(19)
where $`i𝒟_{ba}^\mu =i\delta _{ba}D^\mu 𝒱_{ba}^\mu `$ and the axial coupling $`g_𝒜`$ is of order 0.6. Eqs. (19) and (14) will be used for the chiral loop contributions. (Note that the eqs. (17) and (19) both contain an additional term ahjoe  . These are, however, irrelevant in the present paper).

To obtain (19) from the HL$`\chi `$QM one encounters divergent loop integrals, which will be quadratic-, linear- and logarithmic divergent. Thus $`G_H^2`$ times linear combinations of these divergent integrals have to be put equal to 1 (the normalization) and $`g_𝒜`$ respectively. For details, see the Appendix. Within our model, the values for the regularized versions of the quadratic-, linear-, and logarithmic divergent integrals are determined by the physical values of $`𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾`$, $`g_𝒜`$, and $`f`$ respectively. The effective coupling $`G_H`$ describing the interaction between the quarks and heavy mesons can be expressed in terms of $`m`$, $`f`$, $`g_𝒜`$, and the mass splitting between the $`1^{}`$ state and $`0^{}`$ state. Using the equations (35), (37), (39), and (40) in the Appendix, one finds the following relations between this mass-splitting and the gluon condensate via the chromomagnetic interaction in (11) ahjoe  :

$$𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾=\frac{16f^2}{\pi \eta }\frac{\mu _G^2}{\rho },G_H^2=\frac{2m}{f^2}\rho ,\eta \frac{(\pi +2)}{\pi }C_M(\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi ),$$
(20)
where

$$\rho \frac{(1+3g_𝒜)+\frac{\mu _G^2}{\eta m^2}}{4(1+\frac{N_cm^2}{8\pi f^2})},\mu _G^2(H)=\frac{3}{2}m_Q(M_H^{}M_H).$$
(21)
When calculating the soft gluon effects in terms of the gluon condensate, we follow nov . The gluon condensate is obtained by the replacement :

$$g_s^2G_{\mu \nu }^aG_{\alpha \beta }^b\frac{4\pi ^2}{(N_c^21)}\delta ^{ab}𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾\frac{1}{12}(g_{\mu \alpha }g_{\nu \beta }g_{\mu \beta }g_{\nu \alpha }).$$
(22)
Soft gluons coupling to a heavy quark is suppressed by $`1/m_Q`$, since to leading order the vertex is proportional to $`v_\mu v_\nu G^{a\mu \nu }=0`$, $`v_\mu `$ being the heavy quark velocity. We observe that the mass-splitting between $`H`$ and $`H^{}`$ sets the scale of the gluon condensate. Within the pure light sector, the gluon condensate contribution obtained by using (22) has apriori an arbitrary value. One may assume that it has the same value as in QCD sum rules, or it has to be fitted to some effect, in our case the mass splitting between pseudoscalar and vector heavy mesons.

The $`1/m_Q`$ corrections to the strong Lagrangian have been calculated in ahjoe . They may formally be put into spin dependent renormalization factors. This means that (19) is still valid with the replacement $`HH^\text{r}=H(Z_H)^{\frac{1}{2}}`$, where $`Z_H`$ and the renormalized (effective) coupling $`\stackrel{~}{g}_𝒜`$ are defined as:

$`Z_H^1`$ $`=`$ $`1+{\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon _12d_M\epsilon _2}{m_Q}},`$ (23)
$`\stackrel{~}{g}_𝒜`$ $`=`$ $`g_𝒜\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_Q}}(\epsilon _12d_𝒜\epsilon _2)\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{m_Q}}(g_1d_𝒜g_2),`$ (24)
where

$$d_M=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}3}\text{for}0^{}\hfill & \\ 1\text{for}1^{}\hfill & \end{array}d_𝒜=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}1}\text{for}H^{}H\text{coupling}\hfill & \\ 1\text{for}H^{}H^{}\text{coupling}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(25)
and :

$`\epsilon _1`$ $`=`$ $`m+G_H^2({\displaystyle \frac{𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾}{4m}}+f^2+{\displaystyle \frac{N_cm^2}{16\pi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{C_K}{16}}({\displaystyle \frac{𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾}{m}}f^2)`$ (26)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{128m^2}}(C_K+83\pi )𝒽{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}G^2𝒾),`$
$`g_1`$ $`=`$ $`mG_H^2({\displaystyle \frac{𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾}{12m}}+{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{6}}+{\displaystyle \frac{N_cm^2(3\pi +4)}{48\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{C_K}{16}}({\displaystyle \frac{𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾}{m}}+3f^2)`$ (27)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{64m^2}}(C_K2\pi )𝒽{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}G^2𝒾),`$
$`g_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\pi +4)}{(\pi +2)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _G^2}{6m}},\epsilon _2={\displaystyle \frac{g_2}{2}}.`$ (28)
## IV The $`\beta `$ term for $`D^{}D\gamma `$

The chiral Lagrangian $`\beta `$-term has the form Stewart :

$$_\beta =\frac{e\beta }{4}Tr[\overline{H}H\sigma FQ^\xi ],$$
(29)
where $`Q^\xi =(\xi ^{}Q\xi +\xi Q\xi ^{})/2`$, $`Q=diag(2/3,1/3,1/3)`$, and $`F`$ is the electromagnetic filed tensor. The $`\beta `$ term can be calculated in HL$`\chi `$QM, by considering the diagrams in figure 1.

These diagrams will be calculated following nov , both for the gluon and the electromagnetic field. The first diagram without gluons is logarithmically divergent. Performing the calculation of the rest of the diagrams we used the algebraic program FORM FORM . We obtained the following expression :

$$\beta _{LO}=\frac{G_H^2}{2}\left\{4iN_cI_2+\frac{N_c}{4\pi }\frac{1}{4m^4}\left(\frac{32+3\pi }{144}\right)𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾\right\}.$$
(30)
Using the relation (39) for the logarithmic divergent integral $`I_2`$, we obtain:

$$\beta _{LO}=\frac{G_H^2f^2}{2m^2}\left\{1+\frac{N_cm^2}{4\pi f^2}\frac{1}{4f^2m^2}\left(\frac{56+3\pi }{144}\right)𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾\right\}.$$
(31)
As seen from figure 4, $`\beta `$ depends strongly on the constituent light quark mass $`m`$, especially for $`m`$ below 250 MeV. There is a partial cancellation between large terms in (31), and for values of $`m`$ smaller than about 200 MeV, $`\beta _{LO}`$ turns negative. Note also that if the gluon condensate is dropped in (31), $`\beta `$ would be too big, as seen from figure 4.

Apriori one might hope that $`1/m_Q`$ corrections stabilizes $`\beta `$ for values of $`m`$ in the range 190 to 250 MeV used in ahjoe . However, as seen in the following, this will not be the case. The $`1/m_Q`$ corrections to $`\beta `$ can be found by calculating the diagrams in figures 2 and 3.

We find that the kinetic term in (11) give a negative contribution to $`\beta `$, and the chromomagnetic term a positive contribution. However, the kinetic term dominates in absolute value, and in total, $`1/m_Q`$ corrections give a negative contribution to $`\beta `$ for $`m`$ below 250 MeV.

Combining the leading order and the $`1/m_Q`$ corrections we find :

$`\beta =`$ $`\sqrt{Z_HZ_H^{}}\beta _{LO}+{\displaystyle \frac{\tau _\beta }{m_Q}},\text{where}`$ (32)
$`\tau _\beta =`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}(1g_𝒜){\displaystyle \frac{G_H^2}{4m}}\{2f^2{\displaystyle \frac{m^2N_c}{2\pi ^2}}+[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{192}}`$
$`C_M{\displaystyle \frac{(\pi +4)}{72}}]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m^2}}𝒽{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}G^2𝒾C_K(f^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{36m^2}}𝒽{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}G^2𝒾)\}.`$
where $`\tau _\beta `$ contains the result of the diagrams in the figures 2 and 3. A plot of $`\beta `$ is shown in figure 5. As we see, the result varies significantly with $`m`$. This is in contrast to other quantities studied in ahjoe ; ahjoeB . We observe that the quantities studied in ahjoe ; ahjoeB  have contributions of zeroth order in $`m`$. In contrast, $`\beta `$ is of order $`1/m`$, which means that $`\beta `$ is expected to be more sensitive to variations of $`m`$.

The $`1/m_Q`$ corrections are not sizeable, even if the charm quark is not very heavy. However, they pull in the wrong direction compared to the experimental value of order 2-3 GeV-1.

To obtain a value closer to the experimental value for $`\beta `$, we need a value for $`m`$ higher than used in ahjoe ; ahjoeB . However, this will lead to values of $`f_B`$ and $`f_D`$ which are too small . This can be compensated by using a higher value of the quark condensate $`𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾`$ than the one obtained in QCD sum rules, which was the one used in ahjoe ; ahjoeB . This might be acceptable because it is not clear that our model dependent quantities $`𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾`$ and $`𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾`$ should be exactly those obtained in QCD sum rules. Taking a higher quark condensate and making a new fit we obtain the result given in the tables I and II. Note that the curve for $`\beta `$ itself as a function of $`m`$ does not change, but we are now allowed to go to higher values for $`m`$ at the curve.

Chiral Lagrangian terms with extra current quark mass can be obtained by taking the derivative of the expression for $`\beta `$ in (30) with respect to $`m`$, when keeping $`G_H`$ and $`𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾`$ fixed. This gives:

$$_{FM}=\frac{e\stackrel{~}{\alpha }}{8}Tr\left[\overline{H}H\sigma F\left(Q^\xi \stackrel{~}{M}_q^V+\stackrel{~}{M}_q^VQ^\xi \right)\right],$$
(33)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\frac{G_H^2}{4m}\left\{\frac{N_c}{\pi ^2}+\left(\frac{32+3\pi }{72m^4}\right)𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾\right\}.$$
(34)
This term is unimportant for $`D^{}D\gamma `$ because of the small current quark masses for the $`u,d`$ quarks, but it gives a sizeable contribution to $`D_s^{}D_s\gamma `$.

## V Conclusion

We have calculated the quantity $`\beta `$ and found that it depends significantly on the constituent light quark mass $`m`$. To obtain a value close to the experimental one has to pick values on the high side ($`m`$= 250 to 300 MeV, say) compared to the values in ahjoe ; ahjoeB , where $`m=220\pm 30`$ MeV were used. We have redone the fits in ahjoe ; ahjoeB  at the price of a higher value of the quark condensate $`𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾`$ in the range $`(`$250 to 270 MeV$`)^4`$. The results are given in the tables I and II. For the case $`D^{}D\gamma `$ we have found that (the bare) $`\beta =(2.5\pm 0.6)`$ GeV-1 to be compared with $`\beta =(2.7\pm 0.20)`$ GeV-1 extracted from experiment.

Acknowledgments

We thank Svjetlana Fajfer for fruitful discussions. J.O.E. is supported in part by the Norwegian research council and by the European Union RTN network, Contract No. HPRN-CT-2002-00311 (EURIDICE)

## Appendix A The limit $`m0`$

In this Appendix we will discuss the limit of restauration of chiral symmetry, i.e. the limit $`m0`$. In order to do this, we have to consider the various constraints obtained when constructing the HL$`\chi `$QM ahjoe .

To obtain (19) from the HL$`\chi `$QM one encounters divergent loop integrals, which will in general be quadratic-, linear- and logarithmic divergent. For the kinetic term we obtain the identification:

$$iG_H^2N_c\left(I_{3/2}+2mI_2+i\frac{(3\pi 8)}{384m^3N_c}𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾\right)=1,$$
(35)
and for the axial vector term

$$iG_H^2N_c\left(\frac{1}{3}I_{3/2}+\frac{im}{12\pi }+2mI_2+i\frac{(3\pi 8)}{384m^3N_c}𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾\right)=g_𝒜.$$
(36)
Combining (35) and (36), the strong axial coupling $`g_𝒜`$ may be written:

$$g_𝒜=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\delta g_𝒜,\text{where}\delta g_𝒜=\frac{4}{3}iG_H^2N_c\left(I_{3/2}\frac{im}{16\pi }\right).$$
(37)
Here the term 1 for $`g_𝒜`$ corresponds to the normalization (35) and the term $`\delta g_𝒜`$ is a dynamical deviation from this. It should be noted that also within other models CoFaNa ; DoXu , $`g_𝒜`$ may be written as $`g_𝒜=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\delta g_𝒜`$, but the expression for $`\delta g_𝒜`$ is model dependent . We observe that the (formally) linear divergent integral $`I_{3/2}`$ is related to the strong axial coupling $`g_𝒜`$. Analogously, within the pure light quark sector (the $`\chi `$QM), it is well known that the quadratic and logarithmic divergent integrals are related to the quark condensate and $`f`$, respectively chiqm ; pider ; epb ; BEF :

$`𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾`$ $`=4imN_cI_1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12m}}𝒽{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}G^2𝒾,`$ (38)
$`f^2`$ $`=i4m^2N_cI_2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24m^2}}𝒽{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}G^2𝒾.`$ (39)
Eliminating $`I_{3/2}`$ from the eqs. (35) and (37) and inserting the expression for $`I_2`$ obtained from (39) we find the following expression for $`G_H`$ :

$$G_H^2=\frac{m(1+3g_𝒜)}{2f^2+\frac{m^2N_c}{4\pi }\frac{\eta _1}{m^2}𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾},\text{where}\eta _1\frac{\pi }{32}.$$
(40)
The divergent integrals $`I_1,I_2`$ and $`I_{3/2}`$ are (for $`N=1,2`$):

$`I_N{\displaystyle \frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^d}\frac{1}{(k^2m^2)^N}},I_{3/2}{\displaystyle \frac{d^dk}{(2\pi )^d}\frac{1}{(vk)(k^2m^2)}},`$ (41)
where $`I_{3/2}`$ is proportional to the cut-off in primitive cut-off regularization:

$`I_{3/2}=i{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{16\pi }}\left(1+𝒪({\displaystyle \frac{m}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}})\right),`$ (42)
where the cut-off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (which we only have used in the qualitative considerations in this Appendix) is of the same order as the chiral symmetry breaking scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi `$. In contrast, $`I_{3/2}`$ is finite and proportional to $`m`$ in dimensional regularization. Within our model, the values for the regularized integrals $`I_1,I_2`$ and $`I_{3/2}`$ are determined by the numerical values of $`𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾`$, $`f`$ and $`g_𝒜`$, respectively.

Looking at the equations (38) and (39), one may worry EdR  that $`𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾`$ and $`f`$ behaves like $`1/m`$ in the limit $`m0`$ unless one assumes that $`𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾`$ also go to zero in this limit. We should stress that the exact limit $`m=0`$ cannot be taken because our loop integrals will then be meaningless. Still we may let $`m`$ approach zero without going to this exact limit. In the pure light sector (at least when vector mesons are not included) there are no restrictions on how $`𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾`$ might go to zero. In the heavy light sector we have in addition to (38) and (39) also the relations (35), (37), and (40) which put restrictions on the behavior of the gluon condensate $`𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾`$ for small masses. As $`𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾`$ has dimension mass to the fourth power, we find that $`𝒽\overline{q}q𝒾`$ and $`f^2`$ may go to zero if $`𝒽\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }G^2𝒾`$ goes to zero as $`m^4`$ or $`m^3\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (eventually combined with $`\mathrm{ln}(m/\mathrm{\Lambda })`$). However, the behavior $`m^3\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is inconsistent with the additional equations (20) and (21). Still, from all equations (35)- (40) and (20), (21), we find the possible solution

$`𝒽{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}G^2𝒾=\widehat{c}N_cm^4K(m)\text{, where}K(m)(4iI_2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi }}),`$ (43)
and $`\widehat{c}`$ is some constant. Then we must have the following behavior for $`G_H^2`$, $`g_𝒜`$ and $`\mu _G^2`$ when $`m`$ approaches zero:

$`G_H^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N_c\mathrm{\Lambda }}},(1+3g_𝒜){\displaystyle \frac{m}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}K(m),\mu _G^2{\displaystyle \frac{m^3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}K(m),`$ (44)
with some restrictions on the proportionality factors. Here, the regularized $`I_2`$ is such that for small $`m`$, $`K(m)=(c_1+c_2\mathrm{ln}m/\mathrm{\Lambda })`$, $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$ being constants. The behavior of $`G_H^2`$ is in agreement with Nambu-Jona-Lasinio models Bijnens . Note that in our model, $`\delta g_𝒜4/3`$ (corresponding to $`g_𝒜1/3`$) for $`m0`$, in contrast to $`\delta g_𝒜2/3`$ in CoFaNa  for a free Dirac particle with $`m=0`$. Note that in ahjoe  we gave the variation of the gluon condensate with $`m`$ for a fixed value of $`\mu _G^2`$. For the considerations in this Appendix, we have to let $`\mu _G^2`$ go to zero with $`m`$ in order to be consistent. When $`m0`$, we also find that $`\beta 1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, provided that the coefficient $`\widehat{c}`$ in (43) is fixed to a specific value ( which is $`\widehat{c}=576/(3\pi +32)(1.93)^4`$).

Before closing this section, we will shortly comment that in the limit where only the leading logarithmic integral $`I_2`$ is kept ahjoe , when $`g_𝒜\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$ itchpt  and $`\rho \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$, we obtain from equation (31) the non relativistic quark model result Stewart ; itchpt  :

$$\beta \beta _{\text{NR}}=\frac{1}{m}.$$
(45)


format: text

text:
# The Length of the Day: A Cosmological Perspective

## I Introduction

According to Mach’s principle the inertia of an object is not a mere property of the object but depends on how much matter around the object. This means that the distant universe would affect this property. Owing to this, we would expect a slight change in the strength of gravity with time. This change should affect the Earth-Moon-Sun motion. It is found that the length of the day and the number of days in the year do not remain constant. From coral fossil data approximately 400 million years (m.y.) ago, it has been estimated that there were little over 400 days in a year at that time. It is also observed that the Moon shows an anomalous acceleration (Dickey, 1994). As the universe expands more and more matter appears in the horizon. The expansion of the universe may thus have an impact on the Earth-Moon-Sun motion. Very recently, the universe is found to be accelerating at the present time (Peebles, 1999, Bahcall et al., 1999). To account for this scientists suggested several models. One way to circumvent this is to allow the strength of gravity to vary slightly with time (Arbab, 2003). For a flat universe, where the expansion force is balanced by gravitational attraction force, this would require the universe to accelerate in order to avoid a future collapse. This can be realized if the strength of the gravitational attraction increases with time (Arbab, 1997, 2003), at least during the present epoch (matter dominated). One appropriate secure way to do this is to define an effective Newton’s constant, which embodies this variation while keeping the ‘bare’ Newton’s constant unchanged. The idea of having an effective constant, which shows up when a system is interacting with the outside world, is not new. For instance, an electron in a solid moves not with its ‘bare’ mass but rather with an effective mass. This effective mass exhibits the nature of interaction in question. With the same token, one would expect a celestial object to interact (couple) with its effective constant rather than the normal Newton’s constant, which describes the strength of gravity in a universe with constant mass. We, therefore, see that the expansion of the universe affects indirectly (through Newton’s constant) the evolution of the Earth-Sun system. Writing an effective quantity is equivalent to having summed all perturbations (gravitational) affecting the system. With this minimal change of the ordinary Newton’s constant to an effective one, one finds that Kepler’s laws can be equally applicable to a perturbed or an unperturbed system provided the necessary changes are made. Thus one gets a rather modified Newton’s law of gravitation and Kepler’s laws defined with this effective constant while retaining their usual forms. In the present study, we have shown that the deceleration of the Earth rotation is, if not all, mainly a cosmological effect. The tidal effects of the Earth deceleration could, in principle, be a possible consequence, but the cosmological consequences should be taken seriously.
The entire history of the Earth has not been discovered so far. Very minute data are available owing to difficulties in deriving it. Geologists derived some information about the length of the day in the pats from the biological growth rhythm preserved in the fossil records (e.g., bi-valves, corals, stromatolites, etc). The first study of this type was made by the American scientist John Wells (1963), who investigated the variation of the number of days in the year from the study of fossil corals. He inferred, from the sedimentation layers of calcite made by the coral, the number of days in the year up to the Cambrian era. Due to the lack of a well-preserved records, the information about the entire past is severely hindered. The other way to discover the past rotation is to extrapolate the presently observed one. This method, however, could be very misleading.

## II The Model

Recently, we proposed a cosmological model for an effective Newton’s constant (Arbab, 1997) of the form

$$G_{\mathrm{eff}.}=G_0\left(\frac{t}{t_0}\right)^\beta ,$$
(1)
where the subscript ‘0’ denotes the present value of the quantity: $`G_0`$ is the normal (bare) Newton’s constant and $`t_0`$ is the present age of the Universe. Here $`G_{\mathrm{eff}.}`$ includes all perturbative effects arising from all gravitational sources. We remark here that $`G_0`$ does not vary with time, but other perturbations induce an effect that is parameterized in $`G_{\mathrm{eff}.}`$ in the equation of motion. Thus, we don’t challenge here any variation in the normal Newton’s constant $`G_0`$. We claim that such a variation can not be directly measured as recently emphasized by Robin Booth (2002). It can only be inferred from such analysis. We remark here that $`\beta `$ is not well determined ($`\beta >0`$) by the cosmological model. And since the dynamics of the Earth is determined by Newton’s law of gravitation any change in $`G`$ would affect it. This change may manifest its self in various ways. The length of day may attributed to geological effects which are in essence gravitational. The gravitational interaction should be described by Einstein’s equations. We thus provide here the dynamical reasons for these geological changes. We calculate the total effect of expansion of the universe on the Earth dynamics.

The Kepler’s 2nd law of motion for the Earth-Sun system, neglecting the orbit eccentricity, can be written as

$$G_{\mathrm{eff}.}^2[(M+m)^2m^3]T_{\mathrm{eff}.}=2\pi L_{\mathrm{eff}.}^3,$$
(2)
where $`m`$, $`M`$ are the mass of the Earth and the Sun respectively; $`L_{\mathrm{eff}.}`$ is the orbital angular momentum of the Earth and $`T_{\mathrm{eff}.}`$ is the period (year) of the Earth around the Sun at any time in the past measured by the days in that time. $`T_{\mathrm{eff}.}`$ defines the number of days (measured at a given time) in a year at the epoch in which it is measured. This is because the length of day is not constant but depends on the epoch in which it is measured. Since the angular momentum of the Earth about the Sun hasn’t changed, the length of the year does not change. We however measure the length of the year by the number of days which are not fixed. The length of the year in seconds (atomic time) is fixed. Thus one can still use Kepler’s law as in eq.(2)(which generalizes Kepler’s laws) instead of adding other perturbations from the nearby bodies to the equation of motion of the Earth. We, however, incorporate all these perturbations in a single term, viz. $`G_{\mathrm{eff}.}`$. Part of the total effect of the increase of length of day could show up in geological terms. We calculate here the total values affecting the Earth dynamics without knowing exactly how much the contribution of each individual components.

The orbital angular momentum of the Earth (around the Sun) is nearly constant. From equation (2), one can write

$$T_{\mathrm{eff}.}=T_0\left(\frac{G_0}{G_{\mathrm{eff}.}}\right)^2,$$
(3)
where $`T_0=365`$ days and $`G_0=6.67\times 10^{11}\mathrm{Nm}^2\mathrm{kg}^2`$.
Eqs.(1) and (3) can be written as

$$T_{\mathrm{eff}.}=T_0\left(\frac{t_0t_p}{t_0}\right)^{2\beta },$$
(4)
where $`t_0`$ is the age of the universe and $`t_p`$ is the time measured from present time backward. This equation can be casted in the form

$$x=\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{T_{\mathrm{eff}.}}{T_0}\right)=2\beta \mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{t_0t_p}{t_0}\right),$$
(5)
or equivalently,

$$t_0=\frac{t_p}{\left(1\mathrm{exp}(x/2\beta )\right)},$$
(6)
To reproduce the data obtained by Wells for the number of days in a year (see Table.1), one would require $`\beta =1.3`$ and $`t_011\times 10^9`$ years. This is evident since, from (Arbab, 2003) one finds the Hubble constant is related to the age of the Universe by the relation,

$$t_0=\left(\frac{2+\beta }{3}\right)H_0^1=1.1H_0^1,$$
(7)
and the effective Newton’s constant would vary as

$$G_{\mathrm{eff}}=G_0\left(\frac{t_0t_p}{t_0}\right)^{1.3}.$$
(8)
This is an interesting relation, and it is the first time relation that constrained the age of the Universe (or Hubble constant)from the Earth rotation. However, the recent Hipparcos satellite results (Chaboey et al 1998) indicate that the age of the universe is very close to 11 billion years. Hence, this work represent an unprecedented confirmation for the age of the universe. One may attribute that the Earth decelerated rotation is mainly (if not only) due to cosmic expansion that shows up in tidal deceleration. Thus, this law could open a new channel for providing valuable information about the expansion of the Universe. The Hubble constant in this study amounts to $`H_0=97.9\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$. However, the Hubble constant is considered to lie in the limit, $`50\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1<\mathrm{H}_0<100\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$. Higher values of $`H_0`$ imply a fewer normal matter, and hence a lesser dark matter. This study, therefore, provides an unprecedented way of determining the Hubble constant. Astronomers usually search into the space to collect their data about the Universe. This well determined value of $`\beta `$ is crucial to the predictions of our cosmological model in Arbab, 2003. We notice that the gravitational constant is doubled since the Earth was formed (4.5 billion years ago).
From eqs.(3) and (8) one finds the effective number of days in the year ($`T_{\mathrm{eff}.}`$) to be

$$T_{\mathrm{eff}.}=T_0\left(\frac{t_0}{t_0t_p}\right)^{2.6},$$
(9)
and since the length of the year is constant, the effective length of the day ($`D_{\mathrm{eff}.}`$) is given by

$$D_{\mathrm{eff}.}=D_0\left(\frac{t_0t_p}{t_0}\right)^{2.6},$$
(10)
so that

$$T_0D_0=T_{\mathrm{eff}.}D_{\mathrm{eff}.}.$$
(11)
We see that the variation of the length of day and month is a manifestation of the changing conditions (perturbation) of the Earth which are parameterized as a function of time ($`t)`$ only. Thus, equation (7) guarantees that the length of the year remains invariant.

## III Discussion

The Wells’s fossil data is shown in Table 1 and our corresponding values are shown in Table 2. In fact, the length of the year does not change, but the length of the day was shorter than now in the past. So, when the year is measured in terms of days it seems as if the length of the year varies. Sonett et al. (1996) have shown that the length of the day 900 m.y ago was 19.2 hours, and the year contained 456 days. Our law gives the same result (see Table 2). Relying on the *law of spin isochronism* Alfvén and Arrhenius (1976) infer for the primitive Earth a length of day of 6 hours (p.226). Using coral as a clock, Poropudas (1991, 1996) obtained an approximate ancient time formula based on fossil data. His formula shows that the number of days in the year is 1009.77 some 3.556 b.y. ago. Our law shows that this value corresponds rather to a time 3.56 b.y. ago, and that the day was 8.7 hours. He suggested that the day to be 5 - 7 hours at approximately 4.5 b.y. ago. Ksanfomality (1997) has shown that according to the principle of isochronism all planets had an initial period of rotation between 6 - 8 hours. However, our model gives a value of 6 hours (see Table 2). Berry and Baker (1968) have suggested that laminae, ridges and troughs, and bands on present day and Cretaceous bivalve shells are growth increments of the day and month, respectively. By counting the number of ridges and troughs they therefore find that the year contains 370.3 days in the late Cretaceous. According to the latest research by a group of Chinese scientists (Zhu *et al*.), there were 15 hours in one day, more than 540 days, in a year from a study of *stromatolite* samples. We however remark that according to our law that when the day was 15 hours there were 583 days in a year 1.819 billion years ago. The difference in time could be due to dating of their rock.
Recently, McNamara and Awramik (1992) have concluded, from the study of stromatolite, that at about 700 m.y. ago the number of days in a year was $`435`$ days and the length of the day was $`20.1`$ hours. In fact, our model shows that this value corresponds more accurately to $`715`$ m.y. ago. Vanyo and Awramik (1985) has investigated stromatolite, that is 850 m.y. old, obtained a value between 409 and 485 days in that year. Our law gives 450 days in that year and 19.5 hours in that day. This is a big success for our law. Here we have gone over all data up to the time when the Earth formed. We should remark that this is the first model that gives the value of the length of the day for the entire geologic past time.
The present rate of increase in the length of the day is $`0.002\mathrm{ms}/\mathrm{century}`$. Extrapolating this astronomically determined lengthening of the day since the seventeenth century leads to 371 days in the late Cretaceous (65 m.y. ago). The slowing down in the rotation is not uniform; a number of irregularities have been found. This conversion of Earth’s rotational energy into heat by tidal friction will continue indefinitely making the length of the day longer. In the remote past the Earth must have been rotating very fast. As the Earth rotational velocity changes, the Earth will adjust its self to maintain an equilibrium (shape) compatible with the new situation. In doing so, the Earth should have experienced several geologic activities. Accordingly, one would expect that the tectonic movements (plate’s motion) to be attributed to this continued adjustment.
We plot the length of day (in hours) against time (million years back) in Fig.(1). We notice here that a direct extrapolation of the present deceleration would bring the age of the Earth-Moon system t a value of 3.3 billion years. We observe that the plot deviates very much from straight line. The plot curves at two points which I attribute the first one to emergence of water in huge volume resulting in slowing down the rotation of the Earth’s spin. The second point is when water becomes abundant and its rate of increase becomes steady. These two points correspond to 1100 m.a. and 3460 m.a., and their corresponding lengths of day are 18.3 and 8.9 hours, respectively. As the origin of life is intimately related to existence of water, we may conclude that life has started since 3.4 billion years ago, as previously anticipated by scientists.

## IV Conclusion

We have constructed a model for the variation of length of the day with time. It is based on the idea of an effective Newton’s constant as an effective coupling representing all gravitational effects on a body. This variation can be traced back over the whole history of the Earth. We obtained an empirical law for the variation of the length of the day and the number of days in a year valid for the entire past Earth’s rotation. We have found that the day was 6 hours when the Earth formed. These data pertaining to the early rotation of the Earth can help paleontologists to check their data with this findings. The change in the strength of gravity is manifested in the way it influences the growth of biological systems. Some biological systems (rythmites, tidalites, etc) adjust their rhythms with the lunar motion (or the tide). Thus any change in the latter system will show up in the former. These data can be inverted and used as a geological calendar. The data we have obtained for the length of the day and the number of days in the year should be tested against any possible data pertaining to the past’s Earth rotation. Our empirical law has been tested over an interval as far back as 4500 m.y. and is found to be in consistency with the experimental data so far known. In this work we have arrived at a generalized Kepler’s laws that can be applicable to our ever changing Earth-Moon-Sun system.

## Acknowledgements

I wish to thank the University of Khartoum for providing research support for this work, and the Abdus salam International Center for Theoretical Physics (ICTP) for hospitality where this work is carried out.

## V References

Alfvén, H and Arrhenius, G., 1976. *Evolution of the solar system*, NASA, Washington, USA
Arbab, A.I., 1997. Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 29, 61.
Arbab, A.I., 2003. Class. Quantum. Gravit. 20, 93.
Bahcall, N.A., et al. 1999. Science 284, 1481.
Berry, W.B. and Barker, R.M., 1968. Nature 217, 938.
Chaboyer, B. et al., 1998. Astrophys. J., 494,96.
Dickey, J.O., et al., 1994. Science 265, 482.
Ksanfomality, L.V., 1997. Astrophys.Space Sci. 252, 41.
McNamara, K.J, Awramik, S.M., 1992. Sci. Progress 76, 345.
Pannella, G., 1972. Astrophys. Space Sci. 16, 212.
Peebles, J., 1999. Nature 398, 25.
Poropudas, H. K. J., 1996. Harrastelijan ajatuksia p iv n, kuukauden ja vuoden pituudesta muinaisina aikoina. Geologi, 4-5, 92.
Poropudas, H. K. J., 1991. http://www.cs.colorado.edu/ lindsay/creation/coral-clocks.txt.
Booth Robin, http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0203065
Sonett, C.P., 1996. Kvale, E.P., Chan, M.A. and Demko,T.M., Science, 273, 100.
Vanyo, J. P. and Awramik, S. M., 1985. Precambrian Research, 29, 121.
Wells, J.W., 1963. Nature, 197, 948.
Zhu, S.X. Huang, X.G. and Xin, H.T., 2002. *Proceedings of the 80th Anniversary of the Chinese Geological Society*, Geology Publishing House, Beijing.


text:
# Brane running and AdS/CFT

## 1 Introduction

The full dynamical content of the AdS/CFT correspondence  (for a review ) can be summarized by an equivalence between two path integrals , :

$$Z[\varphi _0]=_{\varphi \varphi _0}𝒟\varphi \mathrm{exp}(S[\varphi ])=<\mathrm{exp}_{M_d}d^dx\varphi _0𝒪>_{CFT}$$
(1.1)
Here $`\varphi `$ represents the fields propagating on Anti-de Sitter space (AdS) and $`𝒪`$ are the dual gauge invariant operators in the Conformal Field Theory (CFT). $`Z[\varphi _0]`$ is the partition function on (Euclidian) AdSd+1, computed with the boundary condition that the field $`\varphi `$ approaches $`\varphi _0`$ at the boundary of AdS. The right-hand side of (1.1) is the generating functional of the correlation functions of the dual CFT living on the boundary $`M_d`$ of AdSd+1. In the limit where classical field theory is a good description of the physics on AdS (corresponding to the large $`N`$ limit and large ’t Hooft parameter on the CFT side),

$$Z[\varphi _0]=\mathrm{exp}(S_{cl}[\varphi _0])$$
(1.2)
where $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$ is the on-shell value of the classical action for fields that satisfy the condition $`\varphi \varphi _0`$ at the boundary of AdS. In order to compute $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$ typically one first reconstructs, using the classical equations of motion, the on-shell value of $`\varphi `$ with the required boundary behavior and then substitute in the action. This can be done iteratively using bulk-to-boundary and bulk-to-bulk propagators.

The goal of this paper will be to show how to compute $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$ using the method of brane running. In principle, no explicit knowledge of bulk-to-boundary an bulk-to-bulk propagators is required. This approach was originally proposed in  and extended in  to gauge fields and gravity, to compute effective field theories of a brane-localized observer in the Randall-Sundrum scenario with two branes (RS1) . As in that paper, we will consider the compactification of AdS on an orbifold $`S_1/_2`$ with fixed points at $`z_{UV}`$ (the ultraviolet brane) and at $`z_{IR}`$ (the infrared brane), where $`z`$ is the radial coordinate of AdS. In the context of the full AdS/CFT correspondence, this geometry should be simply regarded as a regularization: the $`UV`$ brane modifies AdS near the boundary and the $`IR`$ brane cuts the space in the direction of the horizon. In the RS1 scenario instead, two physical branes placed at the fixed points end the space. In  the authors were interested in computing effective theories of an observer localized on the $`IR`$ brane, while here we will use the brane running method to compute the on-shell action as a function of the fields at $`z_{UV}`$.

The basic idea is that the dependence of the on-shell value of the action on the fields at $`z_{UV}`$ can be obtained integrating out bulk degrees of freedom. Specifically, we consider theories with different locations of the $`IR`$ brane. Effective brane actions are generated which guarantee that $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$ does not change. By moving the $`IR`$ brane up to $`z=z_{UV}`$, by construction $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$ equals the effective $`IR`$ brane action. Using (1.1), the couplings of the effective $`IR`$ brane action can be identified with the correlation functions of the CFT. The couplings on the effective brane ”run” in a way that resembles an ordinary renormalization group (RG) flow. In particular, in the limit where the physical $`IR`$ brane is at infinity, corresponding to the RS2 scenario , all the brane couplings flow to a non-local fixed point. Notice that the running of the brane couplings should not be confused with the RG flow of the observables in the dual field theory (see for example ), since we are keeping the cutoff, represented by the location of $`UV`$ brane, fixed.

This formalism appears particularly appropriate for computations in the RS1 scenario. In the holographic interpretation, this model is dual to a CFT with a cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=1/z_{UV}`$, where conformal invariance is also broken in the infrared by the $`IR`$ brane at the energy scale $`1/z_{IR}`$. Since conformal invariance is broken, the couplings on the effective brane are now not at their fixed points but, at energies $`E>1/z_{IR}`$, we can consider this as a small deviation from conformality. Brane actions can be included with ease, they simply modify the initial condition for the flow at $`z_{IR}`$.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we present the general techniques in the case of the $`2`$point function of a scalar field and reproduce well known results. In Section 3 we extend the procedure to $`3`$ and $`4`$point functions and consider the general structure of higher-point functions. In Section 4 we apply the brane running method to holographic computations in the RS1 model. Section 5 contains the conclusions. A more detailed analysis of the $`2`$point function is left to the Appendix.

## 2 $`2`$point functions

We start considering a bulk scalar field propagating in an RS1-type geometry. We will work in Euclidean AdSd+1 with the metric in Poincaré coordinates:

$$ds^2=\frac{L^2}{z^2}(d^dx^2+dz^2)$$
(2.1)
where $`L`$ is the radius of AdSd+1. The radial dimension $`z`$ is compactified on an orbifold $`S_1/_2`$ with fixed points located at $`z_{UV}`$ (the ultraviolet brane) and at $`z_{IR}`$ (the infrared brane). One can think of this configuration as a regularization of the full AdS, which can be recovered in the limit $`z_{UV}0`$ and $`z_{IR}\mathrm{}`$.

The Euclidean action of a free scalar of mass $`m`$ is:

$$S=S_{bulk}+S_{UV}+S_{IR}$$
(2.2)
where:

$`S_{bulk}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle d^dx𝑑z\sqrt{G}(G^{MN}_M\varphi _N\varphi +m^2\varphi ^2)}`$
$`S_{UV}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle d^dx\sqrt{g_{UV}}\varphi \frac{\lambda _{UV}}{L}\varphi }`$
$`S_{IR}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle d^dx\sqrt{g_{IR}}\varphi \frac{\lambda _{IR}}{L}\varphi }`$ (2.3)
$`g_{UV}`$ and $`g_{IR}`$ are the induced metrics on the branes. We will consider $`\lambda _{UV}`$ and $`\lambda _{IR}`$ to be derivative couplings. These are the most general brane actions quadratic in the fields and compatible with $`d`$dimensional Poincaré invariance.

Henceforth we take $`L=1`$. We systematically use the Fourier transform of the field $`\varphi `$ in the directions parallel to the brane:

$$\varphi (x,z)=d^dpe^{ipx}\varphi (p,z)$$
(2.4)
In momentum space, the equation of motion is given by:

$$[z^2_z^2+(1d)z_zp^2z^2m^2z\delta (zz_{UV})\lambda _{UV}(p)z\delta (zz_{IR})\lambda _{IR}(p)]\varphi (p,z)=0$$
(2.5)
The brane actions imply boundary conditions on the fields at $`z_{UV}`$ and at $`z_{IR}`$. Assuming that field $`\varphi `$ is even on the orbifold we have222Alternatively one can always impose Dirichlet boundary condition. This corresponds to a different definition of the theory.:

$$z\frac{}{z}\varphi (p,z)|_{z_{IR}}=\frac{\lambda _{IR}}{2}\varphi (p,z_{IR})$$
(2.6)
Since we are interested in computing $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$, we consistently impose Dirichlet boundary conditions on the $`UV`$ brane:

$$\varphi (p,z_{UV})=\varphi _0(p)$$
(2.7)
In the AdS/CFT correspondence, the on-shell value of the action on AdS as a function of the boundary values of the fields is the generating functional of the correlation functions of the gauge invariant operators of the CFT. In particular, a bulk scalar field of mass $`m`$ is dual to a scalar operator of the CFT with conformal dimension $`\mathrm{\Delta }=d/2+\sqrt{(d/2)^2+m^2}`$.333In certain situations the dimension of the operator in the CFT is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }=d/2\sqrt{(d/2)^2+m^2}`$ . This case can be obtained by adding appropriate brane actions on the $`UV`$ brane but we will not pursue this possibility here. One popular way to compute the on-shell action is to consider a Dirichlet boundary problem at $`z=z_{UV}`$  and use solutions of the wave-equation (for the two $`2`$point function, $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$ depends only on the asymptotic behavior of the solutions near the boundary; explicit wave-functions are necessary to compute higher-point functions).

We will now see how the dependence of the on-shell action on the boundary values of the fields can be obtained by flowing in the space of theories with different sizes of the extra-dimension. For applications to the AdS/CFT correspondence, we are only interested in the effective action seen by an observer living on the $`UV`$ brane. We consider a new theory with an effective $`IR`$ brane located at $`a<z_{IR}`$. Requiring that the original theory and the theory with the effective $`IR`$ brane at $`a`$ have precisely the same solutions in the overlapping region leaves any observable on the $`UV`$ brane unchanged. Technically this program is accomplished including brane actions on the effective $`IR`$ brane which provide the same boundary conditions at $`a`$ as the one implied by the original brane action at $`z_{IR}`$. This construction is equivalent to requiring that $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$ is invariant. Since the whole information about the CFT is contained in $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$, the AdS theory with the effective $`IR`$ brane at $`a`$ describes the same CFT.

At the quadratic level the necessary effective brane action is:

$$S_b(a)=\frac{\pi }{a^d}d^dpd^dp^{}\delta (p+p^{})\varphi (p^{},a)\lambda _2(a)\varphi (p,a)$$
(2.8)
A few remarks are in order. The coupling $`\lambda _2(a)`$ has an explicit $`a`$ dependence and an implicit one from the momentum (this follows from $`d`$dimensional Poincaré invariance). If the original brane action at $`z_{IR}`$ is local, i.e. it has an expansion polynomial in $`p`$, the flow respects such a property. However, when the physical $`IR`$ brane is removed to infinity, as in the full AdS/CFT or in the RS2 model, non-local terms will also be generated. This is easily understood from a field-theoretic point of view. When AdS extends to infinity we have a continuum of $`d`$dimensional particles which generates branch cuts in the effective action seen by an observer located on the $`UV`$ brane.

These non-local terms are crucial since they reproduce the correlation functions of the CFT at non-coincident points. Therefore we consider brane actions which contain local and non-local terms:

$$\lambda _2(a)=\lambda _2^{loc.}(a)+\lambda _2^{n.loc.}(a)$$
(2.9)
$`\lambda _2^{loc.}`$ has a polynomial expansion in momentum:

$$\lambda _2^{loc.}(a)=\underset{j}{}\lambda _2^{(2j)}(a)(g_a^{\mu \nu }p_\mu p_\nu )^j$$
(2.10)
where $`g_a^{\mu \nu }`$ is the induced metric at $`z=a`$. The precise form of $`\lambda _2^{n.loc.}`$ depends on the value of the bulk mass.

The flow of the brane couplings, as a function of the radial coordinate $`a`$, can be cast in a form that resembles an ordinary RG flow. In the theory with the brane action (2.8), the boundary condition at $`a`$ is:

$$a\frac{}{a}\varphi (p,a)=\frac{\lambda _2(a)}{2}\varphi (p,a)$$
(2.11)
In order to compute the differential flow of $`\lambda _2`$, we take the logarithmic derivative with respect to $`a`$ of (2.11). Since by hypothesis the solutions remain unchanged in the overlapping region, we use the bulk equation of motion to eliminate the second derivatives of the fields. Requiring that the resulting equation is satisfied for any value of $`\varphi `$, we obtain the flow equation of $`\lambda _2`$:

$$a\frac{d}{da}\lambda _2=\frac{\lambda _2^2}{2}+d\lambda _22m^22a^2p^2$$
(2.12)
This is the main equation of this section. It contains the same information about the CFT as does the original action. One can integrate this equation with the boundary condition:

$$\lambda _2(z_{IR})=\lambda _{IR}$$
(2.13)
to obtain the couplings of the effective brane at $`a`$.

Solving (2.12) allows one to compute the on-shell value of the action in terms of the values of the fields at $`z_{UV}`$. Explicitly, ”running” the effective brane all the way down to the $`UV`$ brane, $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$ is simply given by the sum of the $`UV`$ and the effective brane actions, because the bulk contribution goes to zero. Assuming for simplicity that $`\lambda _{UV}=0`$, we have from (2.8):

$$S_{cl}[\varphi _0]=S_b(z_{UV})=\frac{\pi }{z_{UV}^d}d^dp\delta (p+p^{})\varphi _0(p^{})\lambda _2(z_{UV})\varphi _0(p)$$
(2.14)
The flow equation (2.12) has a fixed point in the sense $`a_a\lambda _2(a)=0`$ (that is, the coupling depends on $`a`$ only through the dependence on momentum):

$$\lambda _2^{f.p.}(pa)=(2\nu d)+2pa\frac{K_{\nu 1}(pa)}{K_\nu (pa)}$$
(2.15)
where $`K_\nu `$ is the modified Bessel function of order $`\nu =\sqrt{(d/2)^2+m^2}`$. In the limit where the $`IR`$ brane is at infinity, the physics on the $`UV`$ brane does not depend on the $`IR`$ brane. In this case (see Appendix) the coupling $`\lambda _2(a)`$ is a function of $`pa`$ only: it is at its fixed point. In other words, choosing the brane coupling at the fixed point (2.15) is equivalent, from the point of view of an observer living on the $`UV`$ brane, to removing the $`IR`$ brane to infinity. In the Appendix we show that the flow equation (2.12) has in general a line of fixed points, but these correspond to solutions of the wave-equation which are not regular at infinity, so they are rejected. One can check that, in the limit $`z_{IR}\mathrm{}`$ and zero brane actions, $`\lambda _2(a)`$ approaches the fixed point (2.15).

According to the AdS/CFT prescription (1.1), $`\lambda _2(z_{UV})`$ is, up to a normalization, the $`2`$point function of a scalar operator of the CFT of dimension $`\mathrm{\Delta }=d/2+\nu `$ (in the large $`N`$ limit and strong ’t Hooft parameter). In fact, with $`\lambda _2`$ at the fixed point (2.15), the brane action evaluated at $`z_{UV}`$ coincides up to a factor of two (coming from working in the orbifold covering space) with the standard AdS/CFT on-shell action computed, for example, in . The expansion of (2.15) for integer $`\nu `$ is:

$$\lambda _2^{f.p.}(pa)=2\nu d+\frac{p^2a^2}{\nu 1}+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_2^{(2\nu )}(pa)^{2\nu }\mathrm{log}pa+\mathrm{}$$
(2.16)
where the coefficient $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_2^{(2\nu )}`$ depends on $`\nu `$ only. For non-integer $`\nu `$ one finds a similar expansion with first non-analytic term $`(pa)^{2\nu }`$. Notice that, as promised, the brane action necessary to reproduce the infinite space limit is non-local. In AdS/CFT computations one then proceeds taking the limit $`z_{UV}0`$ in (2.14). The divergent local terms in $`S_{cl}[\varphi _0]`$ need to be renormalized away . The non-local term $`p^{2\nu }\mathrm{log}p`$ reproduces the $`2`$point function at non-coincident points of a scalar operator with conformal dimension $`\mathrm{\Delta }=d/2+\nu `$.

## 3 Interactions

Higher-point functions can be computed in a very similar way to the $`2`$point functions, by integrating out bulk degrees of freedom.

### 3.1 $`3`$point functions

As an example we will consider the case of cubic interactions. The bulk action in momentum space contains:

$$S_{int}=2\pi \sigma ^{ijk}\sqrt{G}𝑑zd^dpd^dqd^dk\delta (p+q+k)\varphi _i(p,z)\varphi _j(q,z)\varphi _k(k,z)$$
(3.1)
where $`\varphi _i(x,z)`$ are scalar fields of mass $`m_i`$ and $`\sigma ^{ijk}`$ is symmetric in the indexes. The bulk equation of motion reads:

$$[z^2_z^2+(1d)z_zz^2p^2m^2)]\varphi _i(p,z)3\sigma ^{ijk}d^dq\varphi _j(pq,z)\varphi _k(q,z)=0$$
(3.2)
In this case the effective brane action also contains cubic and higher order terms:

$$S_b(a)\frac{2\pi }{a^d}d^dpd^dqd^dk\delta (p+q+k)\lambda _3^{ijk}(p,q,k)\varphi _i(p,a)\varphi _j(q,a)\varphi _k(k,a)$$
(3.3)
The boundary condition at $`a`$ becomes:

$$a\frac{}{a}\varphi _i(p,a)=\frac{\lambda _2^i(p)}{2}\varphi _i(p,a)\frac{3}{2}d^dq\lambda _3^{ijk}(p,pq,q)\varphi _j(pq,a)\varphi _k(q,a)$$
(3.4)
where $`\lambda _2^i`$ is the quadratic brane coupling of the field $`\varphi _i`$.

To compute the flow equation for the coupling $`\lambda _3^{ijk}`$, we proceed by taking the logarithmic derivative of (3.4), as in the case of the $`2`$point function. We then use the bulk equation of motion and require that the equation is satisfied for any value of the fields. With a cubic brane action this can be done up to order $`\varphi ^2`$ in the fields. Of course, this is because a cubic interaction generates higher-point functions as well. The important point is that, at the classical level, lower order point functions do not mix with higher orders ones, so the flow of the coupling $`\lambda _i`$ depends only on the couplings $`\lambda _j`$ with $`ji`$.

The equation for $`\lambda _3^{ijk}`$ is:

$$a\frac{d}{da}\lambda _3^{ijk}(p,pq,q)=2\sigma ^{ijk}+d\lambda _3^{ijk}(p,pq,q)+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _3^{ijk}(p,pq,q)[\lambda _2^i(p)+\lambda _2^j(pq)+\lambda _2^k(q)]$$
(3.5)
While this equation can be difficult to solve in general, it can be solved perturbatively expanding in powers of momenta, as explained in the Appendix for the case of the $`2`$point function.

In the infinite AdS case, each brane coupling should be set at the fixed point, so they do not depend explicitly on $`a`$. One can check that the fixed point in this case is given by:

$$\lambda _3^{ijk}(p,pq,q)=2\sigma ^{ijk}a^d_a^{\mathrm{}}𝑑z\frac{1}{z^{d+1}}\left(\frac{z}{a}\right)^{\frac{3d}{2}}\frac{K_{\nu _i}(pz)K_{\nu _j}((pq)z)K_{\nu _k}(qz)}{K_{\nu _i}(pa)K_{\nu _j}((pq)a)K_{\nu _k}(qa)}$$
(3.6)
Notice that, since the $`\beta `$function for $`\lambda _3^{ijk}`$ is linear in $`\lambda _3^{ijk}`$, the fixed point is completely determined by $`\lambda _2^{f.p.}`$. The fixed point (3.6) is just the $`3`$point function in the limit $`z_{IR}\mathrm{}`$, computed with bulk-to-boundary propagators .

### 3.2 Higher-point functions

The method of brane running is completely general and can be extended to arbitrary order point functions. The computation of $`4`$ and higher-point functions is complicated in the AdS/CFT correspondence because it involves bulk-to-bulk AdS propagators. In our case, the structure of the differential equations for the higher-point functions is similar to the case of the $`3`$point function and can be readily understood in a diagrammatic way.

In order to compute the $`4`$point function we need to include a quartic brane action:

$$S_b(a)\frac{1}{a^d}d^dx\lambda _4^{ijkl}\varphi _i\varphi _j\varphi _k\varphi _l$$
(3.7)
Following the same steps as for the $`3`$point function, one obtains:

$`a{\displaystyle \frac{d}{da}}\lambda _4^{ijkl}=d\lambda _4^{ijkl}+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _4^{ijkl}}{2}}[\lambda _2^i(p)+\lambda _2^j(pqk)+\lambda _2^k(q)+\lambda _2^l(k)]+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{8}}[\lambda _3^{imk}(p,pq,q)\lambda _3^{mjl}(qp,pqk,k)+\lambda _3^{ijm}(p,pqk,q+k)\lambda _3^{mlk}(qk,q,k)]`$
(3.8)
In the previous equation, the momentum dependence of the coupling is $`\lambda _4(p,pqk,q,k)`$. The fixed point of (3.8) is, up to normalization, the amplitude for the $`4`$point function in the AdS/CFT which can be expressed in terms of bulk-to-bulk and bulk-to-boundary propagators.

We now analyze the general structure of the $`\beta `$functions for the couplings. We consider in particular the $`4`$point function but the same considerations hold for higher-point functions. Schematically, the diagrams contributing to the $`4`$point function when brane actions are included are represented in the figure below.

To move the brane from $`a`$ to $`ada`$, we need to provide counter-terms for the degrees of freedom which have been integrated out. As a consequence, the infinitesimal variation of $`\lambda _4`$ contains a contribution proportional to $`\lambda _3^2`$, a contribution proportional to $`\lambda _2\lambda _4`$ as well as a contribution linear in $`\lambda _4`$. A quartic bulk interaction would act as a source in the $`\beta `$function of $`\lambda _4`$. The dependence on the momenta can be worked out as in ordinary Feynman diagrams.

## 4 Applications

In this section we apply the brane running method to the Randall-Sundrum scenario . We take $`d=4`$.

In the full AdS/CFT correspondence, a theory on AdS is equivalent to a pure conformal field theory living on the boundary. In the previous analysis the $`UV`$ brane and the $`IR`$ brane should be understood as regulators of the theory so the physical quantities are extracted in the limit $`z_{UV}0`$ and $`z_{IR}\mathrm{}`$. As we have argued, the second limit (corresponding to the geometry of the RS2 model) implies that all the couplings on the effective brane are at their fixed points. In the RS1 scenario, five dimensional AdS is truncated by two physical branes parallel to the boundary, placed at the fixed points of an orbifold. Since small values of the coordinate $`z`$ correspond to the ultraviolet of the CFT, the presence of the $`UV`$ brane represents a cutoff applied to the CFT. On the other hand, the $`IR`$ brane modifies the space only at large $`z`$ so naively it corresponds, in the holographic picture, to breaking (spontaneously) conformal invariance in the infrared, at a scale $`1/z_{IR}`$. It should be clear from the present paper that this conclusion may not hold when brane actions are included: theories with different size of the extra-dimension can have the same CFT dual. Since for phenomenological applications one takes $`z_{IR}/z_{UV}10^{15}`$, the theory should appear approximately conformal for a large range of energies, namely $`1/z_{IR}<E<1/z_{UV}`$.

To any order in the fields, the dependence of the action on the boundary values of the fields can be computed integrating the flow equations presented in the previous sections. This can be done perturbatively in $`p`$ as shown in the Appendix for the $`2`$point function. In particular it is straightforward, even for higher-point functions, to compute the zero momentum dependence of the coupling $`\lambda _n`$. The leading dependence on the external momentum is also not hard to compute. Since the $`IR`$ brane breaks conformal invariance in the infrared, the brane couplings are not at a fixed point, but acquire an explicit dependence on the scale $`a`$.

In the case of the $`2`$point function, equation (2.12) can be solved explicitly, the solution being:

$$\lambda _2(a)=2\nu 4+2pa\frac{K_{\nu 1}(pa)+CI_{\nu 1}(pa)}{K_\nu (pa)CI_\nu (pa)}$$
(4.1)
The integration constant $`C`$ is determined by the boundary condition at the $`IR`$ brane, namely $`\lambda _2(z_{IR})=\lambda _{IR}`$. This allows the inclusion in a simple and systematic way of arbitrary brane actions. For example, for a massless scalar and $`\lambda _{IR}=0`$, corresponding to ordinary Neumann boundary condition, the result is:

$$\lambda _2(a)=2pa\frac{I_1(pz_{IR})K_1(pa)I_1(pa)K_1(pz_{IR})}{I_2(pa)K_1(pz_{IR})+I_1(pz_{IR})K_2(pa)}$$
(4.2)
For $`a=z_{UV}`$ this is just the analytic continuation to Euclidean AdS of the inverse of the brane-to-brane propagator of a massless scalar computed in . In general, $`\lambda _2(z_{UV})`$ is the inverse of the brane-to-brane propagator, so the zeros in $`p`$ of $`\lambda _2(z_{UV})`$ correspond to the masses of the Kaluza-Klein (KK) modes.

For $`pz_{IR}<1`$ one can expand $`\lambda _2(a)`$ in powers of $`p`$. The expansion is now completely polynomial in momentum. Technically this happens because if the boundary condition is local, this property will be preserved by the flow. From the CFT point of view, this fact is simply the statement that below the scale $`1/z_{IR}`$, conformal symmetry is completely broken, and in particular, a mass gap is generated. On the AdS side we have a discrete set of $`4D`$ particles whose mass scale is set by $`1/z_{IR}`$.444For the case $`d^2/4m^2<0`$, i.e. tachyons satisfying the lower bound on the masses of scalars in AdSd+1, the KK spectrum also contains a single tachyon whose mass squared is $`O(1/z_{UV}^2)`$ . This discrete set of particles gives rise to isolated poles in the propagator but no branch cuts. Therefore, at energies below the masses of the KK modes, this system should be describable in terms of a local action.

At energies above $`1/z_{IR}`$, conformal invariance is approximately restored. For $`pz_{UV}<1`$, i.e. energies below the cutoff of the CFT, we can expand $`\lambda _2(z_{UV})`$ around $`z_{UV}=0`$. In the case of the massless scalar (4.2) we have:

$$\lambda _2(z_{UV})=p^2z_{UV}^2+\frac{1}{2}(\gamma +\mathrm{log}\frac{pz_{UV}}{2})p^4z_{UV}^4\frac{K_1(pz_{IR})}{2I_1(pz_{IR})}p^4z_{UV}^4+O(z_{UV}^6)$$
(4.3)
In the limit $`z_{IR}\mathrm{}`$ we recover the expansion of the fixed point. This should be expected since in this limit all the couplings flow to their fixed points. Using the asymptotic expansion of the Bessel functions, it is easy to see that the deviation from $`\lambda _2^{f.p.}`$ becomes exponentially small at energies greater that $`1/z_{IR}`$. Since for large momenta the presence of the $`IR`$ brane represents a small deviation from conformality, all the brane couplings are close to the fixed point. In this regime it is useful to simplify the flow equation expanding to linear order around $`\lambda _2^{f.p.}`$:

$$a\frac{d}{da}\alpha _2=\alpha _2\lambda _2^{f.p.}+d\alpha _2$$
(4.4)
where $`\alpha _2=\lambda _2\lambda _2^{f.p.}`$. To leading order, for $`pa>1`$, the solution of the previous equation is simply $`\alpha _2=Cae^{2pa}`$, independently on $`\nu `$. As we move the effective brane to smaller $`a`$, $`\alpha _2(a)`$ becomes exponentially suppressed. Similar manipulations can be done for higher-point functions.

Localized fields can be naturally included in this formalism. This case is important for phenomenological applications. For example, in the original proposal by Randall and Sundrum, in order to solve the hierarchy problem, the Standard Model fields were localized on the $`IR`$ brane. For fields localized on the $`UV`$ brane, it is obvious that their action should be added to the effective action. From the CFT point of view, fields living on the $`UV`$ brane are interpreted as fields external to the CFT and coupled to gauge invariant operators of the CFT so it is natural to add the action of the CFT and that of the external fields. In the case of fields localized on the $`IR`$ brane, or in the bulk, the analysis is more intricate because these fields couple only indirectly to the $`UV`$ brane. As an example, following , we consider a free scalar field coupled to an external source $`j`$ localized at $`z=z_0`$. In $`d+1`$ dimensions, the AdS action contains:

$$Sd^dx𝑑z\sqrt{G}j\varphi z\delta (zz_0)$$
(4.5)
Consistency requires the brane action:

$$S_b(a)=\frac{1}{a^d}d^dx\lambda _1\varphi +\frac{1}{2a^d}d^dx\varphi \lambda _2\varphi $$
(4.6)
The running of $`\lambda _1`$ is given by:

$$a\frac{d}{da}\lambda _1=d\lambda _1+\frac{\lambda _1\lambda _2}{2}$$
(4.7)
while the $`\beta `$function of $`\lambda _2`$ remains unchanged. Notice that only in this particular case a coupling depends on higher order ones.555If bulk interactions are included the $`\beta `$function of the coupling $`\lambda _i`$ will depend on the couplings up to $`\lambda _{i+1}`$. For a localized source in the case where the $`IR`$ brane is at infinity, $`\lambda _2`$ will still be at its fixed point (2.15). It is not hard to check that the solution of (4.7) is:

$$\lambda _1=(\frac{a}{z_0})^{d/2}\frac{K_\nu (pz_0)}{K_\nu (pa)}j(p)$$
(4.8)
A tadpole for the field $`\varphi `$ is generated in the effective field theory of an observer on the $`UV`$ brane. On the CFT side, this corresponds to an expectation value for the dual operator.

## 5 Conclusions and Outlook

In this paper we have shown how to compute the value of the on-shell AdS action of a scalar field by flowing in the space of theories with a different size for the extra-dimension. By integrating out bulk degrees of freedom, we generate effective brane actions which reproduce exactly the same physics in the restricted region. To any order in the fields, the dependence of the on-shell action on the boundary values of the fields at $`z_{UV}`$ is obtained by solving the flow equations for the couplings on the effective brane. In principle, this procedure does not require the knowledge of the bulk-to-boundary and bulk-to-bulk propagators. The values of the couplings are related in a simple way to the correlation functions of the CFT. In the case of infinite AdS or RS2, the brane couplings are at their fixed points, corresponding to an unbroken CFT.

This formalism is particularly appropriate for holographic computations in the RS1 model. Here the couplings on the effective brane are not at the fixed points but acquire an explicit dependence on the radial coordinate. At energies much above the scale set by the $`IR`$ brane, corresponding to the scale where conformal invariance is broken, the couplings are very close to the fixed points so we can simplify the flow equations.

Gauge fields and fluctuations of the metric can be included in a very similar way. The relevant steps are presented in , where the brane running is used to compute the effective field theory of an observer living on the $`IR`$ brane. The extension to fermionic fields is non-trivial because the wave-equation is a first order differential equation in this case.

More in general, the method of brane running can be used in geometries which contain a Poincaré invariant subspace. The structure of the $`\beta `$functions for the couplings would be similar to the one in the present paper. In this case though, the brane couplings, even in the infinite space limit, will not be at a fixed point.

## Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Kaustubh Agashe and Jon Bagger for reading the manuscript. This work was supported in part by the U.S. National Science Foundation, grant NSF-PHY-9970781 and NSF-PHY-0099468.

## Computation of the $`2`$point function

In this Appendix we give a self-contained derivation of the flow equation for the coupling $`\lambda _2`$ and carefully study the solutions.

The boundary condition at $`a`$ determined by the brane action is:

$$z_z\varphi (p,z)|_a=\frac{\lambda _2(a)}{2}\varphi (p,a)$$
(.1)
The bulk equation of motion is:

$$(z^2_z^2+(1d)z_zp^2z^2m^2)\varphi (p,z)=0$$
(.2)
We are interested in the differential flow of the coupling $`\lambda _2`$. By assumption the solution of the equations of motion do not depend on the location of the brane. This physical condition determines a (classical) flow for $`\lambda _2`$. Taking the logarithmic derivative of (.1) with respect to $`a`$ we obtain:

$$(a\frac{d}{da}\lambda _2+\lambda _2a_a+2a_a+2a^2_a^2)\varphi (p,a)=0$$
(.3)
Using the bulk equation of motion to eliminate the second derivative and requiring that this new equation is satisfied for any value of the field $`\varphi (p,a)`$, we find the flow equation:

$$a\frac{d}{da}\lambda _2=\frac{\lambda _2^2}{2}+d\lambda _22m^22p^2a^2$$
(.4)
The solutions of this equation are functions of $`pa`$. The boundary condition at $`z_{IR}`$ introduces a dependence on $`pz_{IR}`$. A quick way to find the solutions of (.4) is to use explicit wave-functions and substitute in (.1). The solution of the bulk equation of motion is:

$$\varphi (p,z)=z^{d/2}(AK_\nu (pz)+BI_\nu (pz))$$
(.5)
where $`I_\nu `$ and $`K_\nu `$ are Bessel’s functions of order $`\nu =\sqrt{(d/2)^2+m^2}`$. Plugging in (.1) and using properties of the Bessel’s functions we find:

$$\lambda _2(a)=2\nu d+2pa\frac{AK_{\nu 1}(pa)BI_{\nu 1}(pa)}{AK_\nu (pa)+BI_\nu (pa)}$$
(.6)
The coefficients $`A`$ and $`B`$ have a dependence on $`pz_{IR}`$ determined by the $`IR`$ brane. Particularly important for the applications to the AdS/CFT are the solutions of this equation which depend on $`pa`$ only. We call these solutions fixed points because the couplings in the expansion of $`\lambda _2`$ are independent on $`a`$ in this case. From (.6) we see that the flow equation has a line of fixed points depending on the ratio $`A/B`$ (with $`A/B`$ independent of $`p`$). Setting $`\lambda _2`$ at a fixed point is physically equivalent, for an observer living on the $`UV`$ brane, to removing the $`IR`$ brane to infinity. Regularity at infinity selects the wave-function $`K_\nu `$ so the relevant fixed point corresponds to $`B=0`$.

For illustrative purposes we now show an alternative method to compute the fixed points of (.4). The same technique could be used to solve the equations for the higher order couplings or to study the $`2`$point functions in backgrounds which are only asymptotically AdS.

Equation (.4) can be solved iteratively expanding in powers of $`p`$. Notice that for the fixed points the momentum expansion is the same as the expansion around $`a=0`$, that is a near boundary analysis. For simplicity, we will consider the case of $`\nu `$ integer which is the most common in the string theory literature. We start with the following ansatz for the solution:

$$\lambda _2(a)=\lambda _2^{(0)}(a)+\lambda _2^{(2)}(a)(pa)^2+\mathrm{}..+\lambda _2^{(2\nu )}(a)(pa)^{2\nu }+\mathrm{}.$$
(.7)
Substituting in the flow equation we obtain a set of coupled differential equations for the coefficients $`\lambda _2^{(2i)}`$:

$`a_a\lambda _2^{(0)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\lambda _2^{(0)})^2}{2}}+d\lambda _2^{(0)}2m^2`$
$`a_a\lambda _2^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _2^{(2)}\lambda _2^{(0)}+(d2)\lambda _2^{(2)}2`$
$`a_a\lambda _2^{(2n)}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _2^{(2n)}(\lambda _2^{(0)}+d2n)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i+j=n}{}}\lambda ^{(2i)}\lambda ^{(2j)}`$ (.8)
For the fixed points all the derivatives are equal to zero so we have a set of algebraic equations. The solution of the first equation in (.8) is:

$$\lambda _2^{(0)}=d\pm 2\nu $$
(.9)
The solution with the $``$ sign corresponds to the fixed point with $`I_\nu `$ only. This solution has an expansion purely polynomial in momentum. In position space this generates only contact interactions. With the choice of the $`+`$ sign we can solve (.8) iteratively only up to the order $`2\nu `$. This equation is inconsistent. In order to find a solution we need to include a term $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_2^{(2\nu )}(qa)^{2\nu }\mathrm{log}qa`$ in the expansion of $`\lambda _2`$. Now the equation $`(2\nu )`$ determines the coefficient $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_2^{(2\nu )}`$ while $`\lambda _2^{(2\nu )}`$ remains unconstrained. The fact that $`\lambda _2^{(2\nu )}`$ is undetermined is of course related to possibility of choosing $`A/B`$ in (.6).