Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Oliver Jahn
and
Philippe de Forcrand
ETH Zürich
Lattice 2003
Motivation
building on:
Lüscher, Symanzik, Weisz: NPB 173 (1980) 365,
Lüscher: NPB 180 (1981) 317,
Lüscher, Weisz: JHEP 0207 (2002) 049.
Recall mesonic potential
q̄
q
1
• Higher-order terms in S do not affect term → universal.
L
Baryonic potential
~
e1 3
X
σ ~
eα = 0
α=1
L3
2π
L1 =
⇒ ∠(~
eα , ~
eβ ) = .
3
L2
¡ ¢
ξ~α t, Lα + ~ µ(t) = µ
eα·~ ~ ⊥α(t)
t
ξ~α (t, s) t µ
~ (t)
µ
~ ⊥α (t)
s
s = Lα + ~
eα ·~
µ(t)
Expand action to second order:
Z Z
1X ³
1 ˙ 2
´
S = Sk + ∂ξα·∂ξα + m T + 2 dt |µ
~|
2 α Γα
(m = self-energy of junction)
Xµ Z ¶
Sk = σ Lα T + dt ~
eα·~
µ(t) = σLY T
α
So
1
Vqqq = − lim ln Z
T →∞ T
Z R 2 Y 3 Z R
−(σLY +m)T −m | ˙|
µ
~ − ~α |2
1 |∂ ξ
Z=e Dµ e 2 Dξα e 2
α=1 (µ)
| {z }
1. Integrate over ξ for fixed µ Ã Zα(~
µ)
2. Integrate over µ.
Blade fluctuations for fixed junction
R
− 21 |∂ ξ~min |2 ¯¯ ¡ ¢ ¯ − D−2
Zα(~
µ) = e det −∆Γα ¯ 2
Roughly:
~ 1 X ⊥ sinh(ωs) iωt 2
• ξmin = √ µ
~ω e + O(µ )
T ω sinh(ωLα)
where µ
~ ω are the Fourier components of µ
~ (t). So
Z X
2 ⊥ 2 3
1
2 |∂ ξ~min | = 1
2 ω coth(ωLα) |~
µω | + O(µ )
ω
• After regularisation:
Conformally map Γα to rectangle L0 × T of same area
Conformal map
z f (z )
f
T T
L0 Lα + ~
eα ·~
µ(t)
f (i )= i
0 2
f (L + it)= Lα + ~
eα·~
µ(t) + it + O(µ ) .
1
Note: area cannot be changed: L0 = L + √ ~
eα·~
µ0 .
T
2L0
→ modular parameter τ = of cylinder.
T
Final result:
k ⊥ −2
Vqqq = σrLY + mr + V1/L + (D−3)V1/L + O(L )
Z∞ · X ¸
k π X 1 dω
V1/L =− + ln 13 coth(ωLα) coth(ωLβ )
24 α Lα 2π α<β
0
Z∞ · X ¸
⊥ π X 1 dω
V1/L =− + ln 13 coth(ωLα)
24 α Lα 2π α
0
k
• V1/L comes from fluctuations in plane of qqq,
⊥
• V1/L from fluctuations perpendicular to it.
k,⊥
• Note: V1/L are homogeneous in Lα.
A check: splitting the mesonic string
q̄
q
L2
L1
⊥ k
V = σr(L1 + L2) + mr + (D−2)V1/L (no V1/L)
where
³ 1 ´ Z∞ h i
⊥ π 1 dω ¡ ¢
V1/L =− + + ln 21 coth(ωL1) + coth(ωL2)
24 L1 L2 2π
|0 µ {z ¶ }
π 1 1 1
+ −
24 L1 L2 L1 + L2
π 1
=−
24 L1 + L2
Works fine.
Special cases
• Equilateral case:
π
V1/L = 0 − (D − 3)
16L
1
D = 3: no term for equilateral geometry!
L
³X ´
• Expand about equilateral case: Lα = (1 + εα)L εα = 0
α
µ ¶
π X 2 π 2X
V1/L =+ ε − (D−3) 1+ εα
144L α α 16L 9 α
D = 3:
– Positive, so Vqqq is not concave as a function of the scale L,
but has an inflection point!
Vqqq
c
σL +
L
– This is true for all geometries:
L
3
1
L2
24LY
V1/L(1, L1, L2)
1 π
L2
0 0 1
0 1 3 L1
L1
D = 4:
– Always negative, so V is concave:
3
-4.5
L2
24LY
V1/L(1, L1, L2)
1 π
-5.5
0
0 1 3
L1
– Absolute value much larger than in 3d (≈ 4.5 vs. . 0.5).
– Geometry-dependence smaller (note: same scale in plots).
– Equilateral result coincides with sum of Lüscher terms of
“half mesonic sheets”:
X1
VLüscher (2Lα)
α
2
1 small
large
off-axis
0 on-axis
σ LY - b2/LY + c2
σqqbar LY - b3/LY + c3
-1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
LY [fm]
large
0.06 small
c - b/LY
0.05
Vqqq - σqqbar LY - cqqbar
0.04
π inflection
0.03 +1.84(20)
24LY point!
0.02
π
0.01
+1.69(16)
24LY
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
LY [fm]
π
• Expected sign, but too large (theory: 0.39 ).
24LY
• String picture inadequate? V1/L not universal? (junction → new scale)
• Small qqq geometries: shortest blade . 0.4 fm !
• Very sensitive to estimate of σqq̄.
Conclusions
LGT:
Outlook
• SU(N )
– Compare with large-N prediction.