Abstract
We show that the proper interpretation of the cocycle operators appearing in the physical vertex operators of compactified strings is that the closed string target is noncommutative. We track down the appearance of this non-commutativity to the Polyakov action of the flat closed string in the presence of translational monodromies (i.e., windings). In view of the unexpected nature of this result, we present detailed calculations from a variety of points of view, including a careful understanding of the consequences of mutual locality in the vertex operator algebra, as well as a detailed analysis of the symplectic structure of the Polyakov string. We also underscore why this non-commutativity was not emphasized previously in the existing literature. This non-commutativity can be thought of as a central extension of the zero-mode operator algebra, an effect set by the string length scale — it is present even in trivial backgrounds. Clearly, this result indicates that the α′ → 0 limit is more subtle than usually assumed.
Highlights
Classical structure of compact stringWe review various details of the free bosonic string. The majority of this material is standard fare, and we use this section to set-up our conventions, following closely the notation in ref. [1]
We show that the proper interpretation of the cocycle operators appearing in the physical vertex operators of compactified strings is that the closed string target is noncommutative
In view of the unexpected nature of this result, we present detailed calculations from a variety of points of view, including a careful understanding of the consequences of mutual locality in the vertex operator algebra, as well as a detailed analysis of the symplectic structure of the Polyakov string
Summary
We review various details of the free bosonic string. The majority of this material is standard fare, and we use this section to set-up our conventions, following closely the notation in ref. [1]. Our work will show that this traditional point of view can be misleading and that is not a generic message of string theory We emphasize that such an interpretation relies heavily on an assumed structure for the zero modes of the string, namely that they can be thought of as coordinates on T , along with their conjugate variables. It is often assumed that the zero mode x plays a preferred role, being interpreted as a coordinate in the target space, while xis immaterial as it does not appear in the action. Neither x nor xappear in the abelian currents dX and the string action density They do enter the theory in the vertex operator algebra, and so we are led to study them more carefully. It is implicit in this analysis that (xL, xR) (equivalently (x, x)) are independent; it is only in the R → ∞ (R → 0) limit that a projection p → 0 (p → 0) on the spectrum is induced, at which point x (x) decouples
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
