Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Local bulk operators in AdS/CFT correspondence: A boundary view of horizons and locality

Alex Hamilton1,*, Daniel Kabat1,†, Gilad Lifschytz2,‡, and David A. Lowe3,§

  • 1Department of Physics, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027, USA
  • 2Department of Mathematics and Physics and CCMSC, University of Haifa at Oranim, Tivon 36006 Israel
  • 3Department of Physics, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island 02912, USA

  • *Email address: hamilton@phys.columbia.edu
  • Email address: kabat@phys.columbia.edu
  • Email address: giladl@research.haifa.ac.il
  • §Email address: lowe@brown.edu

Phys. Rev. D 73, 086003 – Published 6 April, 2006

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.73.086003

Abstract

We develop the representation of local bulk fields in anti-de Sitter (AdS) space by nonlocal operators on the boundary, working in the semiclassical limit and using AdS2 as our main example. In global coordinates we show that the boundary operator has support only at points which are spacelike separated from the bulk point. We construct boundary operators that represent local bulk operators inserted behind the horizon of the Poincaré patch and inside the Rindler horizon of a two-dimensional black hole. We show that these operators respect bulk locality and comment on the generalization of our construction to higher dimensional AdS black holes.

Article Text

References (45)

  1. J. M. Maldacena, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 231 (1998); Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38, 1113 (1999).
  2. O. Aharony, S. S. Gubser, J. M. Maldacena, H. Ooguri, and Y. Oz, Phys. Rep. 323, 183 (2000).
  3. V. Balasubramanian, P. Kraus, and A. E. Lawrence, Phys. Rev. D 59, 046003 (1999); V. Balasubramanian, P. Kraus, A. E. Lawrence, and S. P. Trivedi, 59, 104021 (1999).
  4. T. Banks, M. R. Douglas, G. T. Horowitz, and E. J. Martinec, hep-th/9808016.
  5. For a recent treatment see D. Marolf, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2005) 042.
  6. A. Hamilton, D. Kabat, G. Lifschytz, and D. Lowe (unpublished).
  7. V. Balasubramanian, S. B. Giddings, and A. E. Lawrence, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (1999) 001.
  8. I. Bena, Phys. Rev. D 62, 066007 (2000).
  9. K. H. Rehren, Ann. Henri Poincaré 1, 607 (2000); Phys. Lett. B 493, 383 (2000).
  10. G. T. Horowitz and N. Itzhaki, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (1999) 010; D. Kabat and G. Lifschytz, 05 (1999) 005; S. B. Giddings, Phys. Rev. D 61, 106008 (2000); J. P. Gregory and S. F. Ross, 63, 104023 (2001); V. E. Hubeny, M. Rangamani, and S. F. Ross, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2005) 037.
  11. E. Witten, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 253 (1998).
  12. S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov, and A. M. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. B 428, 105 (1998).
  13. In Witten’s approach one can relate expectation values of local operators in the CFT to the normalizable boundary behavior of fields in AdS space [14, 15].

  14. D. Z. Freedman, S. D. Mathur, A. Matusis, and L. Rastelli, Nucl. Phys. B546, 96 (1999).
  15. I. R. Klebanov and E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B556, 89 (1999).
  16. For certain masses there are inequivalent sets of normalizable modes, a complication analyzed in [15, 17] which we will not consider further here.

  17. P. Breitenlohner and D. Z. Freedman, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 144, 249 (1982).
  18. To see this, use the AdS invariance to set τ=ρ=0, work in light-front coordinates x±=τ±ρ, and write the step function as θ(x+)θ(x)+θ(x)θ(x+).

  19. We could have chosen the left part of the light cone. In either case, this step is not possible in higher dimensions.

  20. I. Gradshteyn and I. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals Series and Products (Academic Press, New York, 1994).
  21. The smearing function defined in (17) does not transform nicely under AdS isometries. One can see this, for example, by doing the sum explicitly for a massless field. Fortunately the nonuniqueness of the smearing function allowed us to construct an AdS-covariant expression.

  22. It is perhaps not so surprising that the Poincaré mode sum automatically vanishes at timelike separation: the Poincaré boundary field involves a complete set of functions eiωT with ωR, so the expression (25) for the Poincaré smearing function is unique.

  23. U. H. Danielsson, E. Keski-Vakkuri, and M. Kruczenski, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (1999) 002.
  24. M. Spradlin and A. Strominger, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (1999) 021.
  25. One blob if the bulk point is inside the Poincaré patch or any of its images under ττ+2π, two blobs otherwise.

  26. In fact, it is the dimensional reduction of a BTZ black hole [27].

  27. A. Achucarro and M. E. Ortiz, Phys. Rev. D 48, 3600 (1993).
  28. In fact, this expression is valid for any P. However, if P is in the left Rindler wedge it is simpler to work with a smearing function that is nonzero only at spacelike separation on the left boundary.

  29. For a bulk point in the right Rindler wedge or any of its images under ττ+2π one gets a single blob on the right boundary. For a bulk point in the left wedge or any of its images it is more natural to use a smearing function with a single blob on the left boundary.

  30. W. Israel, Phys. Lett. A 57, 107 (1976).
  31. Despite appearances, the Hartle-Hawking state is independent of M. In fact, the global vacuum, the Poincaré vacuum and the Hartle-Hawking state are identical [23, 24, 32].

  32. G. Lifschytz and M. Ortiz, Phys. Rev. D 49, 1929 (1994).
  33. J. M. Maldacena, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2003) 021.
  34. A similar property held in the Poincaré patch: the signal of the Poincaré horizon was that the smearing function extended to Poincaré time T±.

  35. Equivalently one needs an operator that acts both at real time t and at complex time t+iβ/2.

  36. P. Kraus, H. Ooguri, and S. Shenker, Phys. Rev. D 67, 124022 (2003).
  37. L. Fidkowski, V. Hubeny, M. Kleban, and S. Shenker, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2004) 014.
  38. D. A. Lowe and L. Thorlacius, Phys. Rev. D 60, 104012 (1999).
  39. O. Aharony, M. Berkooz, and B. Katz, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2005) 097.
  40. G. W. Gibbons and P. K. Townsend, Phys. Lett. B 454, 187 (1999).
  41. M. Cadoni and S. Mignemi, Nucl. Phys. B557, 165 (1999).
  42. V. de Alfaro, S. Fubini, and G. Furlan, Nuovo Cimento Soc. Ital. Fis. A 34, 569 (1976).
  43. Positive frequency only in the sense that they multiply annihilation operators in the mode expansion of the field. They do not transform by a definite phase under a Kruskal time translation.

  44. This is the same prescription used in Rindler space [45] or, more generally, on a bifurcate Killing horizon [30].

  45. N. D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies, Quantum Fields in Curved Space, (Cambridge, Cambridge, England, 1982).

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation