0
$\begingroup$

According to equation 5.2.5 in Polchinski :-

$$\int d^2 \sigma~ \delta^{'}g_{ab} \times [-2(P_1 \delta \sigma)_{ab} +(2\delta w - \Delta \cdot \delta \sigma)g^{ab}]=0$$

The assumption here is that " Moduli correspond to variation $\delta^{'}g_{ab}$ of the metric that are orthogonal to all variations of DiffxWeyl type given by the quantity in []"

My question is that why are we imposing that orthogonality ? How can variation in the metric due to moduli be orthogonal to variation due to other Diff x Weyl ?

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

You may think to a inner product $(T, T')$:

$(T,T') = \int d^2\sigma \sqrt{g} \,T. T'$

where $T$ and $T'$ are tensors of equal rank, and $T.T'$ corresponds to a contraction on the tensor indices.

Now, your expression is simply, that, for all the Diff-Weyl variations $\delta g_{DW}$, and for all the moduli variations $\delta g_M$, you have :

$(\delta g_M, \delta g_{DW})= 0$

So the space of the moduli variations is orthogonal to the space of the Diff-Weyl variations (you may think at "vectorial" spaces).

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the clarification but is there any reason to take the space of moduli variation to be orthogonal ? $\endgroup$ – sol0invictus Aug 28 '14 at 16:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @sol0invictus : It is, in some sense, the definition of the moduli, the moduli space (see $5.2.2$) is the "quotient" of space metrics by Diff Weyl redundancy. For instance, the quotient of $SO(4)$ by $SU(2)$ is $SU(2)$ because the two $SU(2)$ are "orthogonal" (independent). But the quotient of $S^3$ by $S^2$ is not $S^1$. There is a local fiber $S^1$, but it is not a global one, and there is not global $S^1$ and $S^2$ which are orthogonal. $\endgroup$ – Trimok Aug 29 '14 at 8:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.