The S-matrix Bootstrap for the 2d O(N) bosonic model M. Kruczenski - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

the s matrix bootstrap for the 2d o n bosonic model
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

The S-matrix Bootstrap for the 2d O(N) bosonic model M. Kruczenski - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The S-matrix Bootstrap for the 2d O(N) bosonic model M. Kruczenski Purdue University Work in collaboration w/ Yifei He and A. Irrgang. Gr Great t La Lakes s 2018, Chicago, IL Summary Introduction and Motivation Define a field theory


slide-1
SLIDE 1

The S-matrix Bootstrap for the 2d O(N) bosonic model

  • M. Kruczenski

Purdue University Gr Great t La Lakes s 2018, Chicago, IL Work in collaboration w/ Yifei He and A. Irrgang.

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Summary

  • Introduction and Motivation

Define a field theory by a maximization problem in the space of allowed S-matrices Simple example of S-matrix bootstrap: coupling as a functional Maximizing linear functionals in convex spaces: vertices Should apply to theories without continuous parameters (or parameters are fixed)

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3
  • The 2d O(N) model from S-matrix bootstrap

The O(N) model (exact S matrices) The O(N) model from a convex maximization problem.

  • CDD factors and zero modes

More detailed structure of the space of theories.

  • Conclusions

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

S-matrix bootstrap The S-matrix satisfies constraints from analyticity, unitarity and crossing. In the allowed space one can consider a functional and define a theory by the S-matrix that maximizes such functional. A standard example is the coupling between a particle and its bound states (whose spectrum is assumed fixed). There is a maximum coupling because increasing the coupling further adds more bound states. Paulos, Penedones, Toledo, van Rees, Vieira 2d O(N) model has no bound states ….

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

Example: (Paulos, Penedones, Toledo, van Rees, Vieira) 2d theory, two species of particles of masses 𝑛 and 𝑛" = 2𝑛 sin (

") where 𝛿 is a real parameter.

Poles at 𝑡" = 𝑛"

  • and 𝑡- = 4𝑛- − 𝑛"
  • . (t=4m2-s)

𝑇 = 𝑕 𝑨 − 𝑗𝑏 − 𝑕 𝑨 + 𝑗𝑏 + 𝑇 7 𝑨 , 𝑏 = cos 𝛿 8 1 + sin 𝛿 8 , 𝑕 ∶ coupling constant. 𝑇 𝑨 ≤ 1 at the boundary of the disk. p1 p2=-p1 p1 p2=-p1 m m1 m

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

s

4m2

q

ip

z

i

  • i
slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

If, under those constraints, we maximize the parameter 𝑕 we obtain a simple result: 𝑕?@A = 1 − 𝑏B 2𝑏 , 𝑇 7?@A 𝑨 = 𝑗𝑏-, 𝑇𝑛𝑏𝑦(𝑨) = 𝑗 1 + 𝑏-𝑨- 𝑨- + 𝑏- = sinh θ + 𝑗 sin 𝛿 8 sinh θ − 𝑗 sin 𝛿 8 Quite interestingly, 𝑇?@A 𝑨 saturates the bounds and matches the S-matrix

  • f

two elementary particles associated with the scalar field in the sine-Gordon

  • model. Thus, we see the S-matrix of a well-known model

arising from such a simple maximization problem.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

Maximizing linear functionals in convex spaces: vertices Maximizing a linear functional in a convex space is

  • easy. There is only one local=global minimum and it is
  • ne of the vertices. Which one depends on the direction
  • f the gradient.
slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

The 2d O(N) model: N species of bosons w/ mass m S-matrix p1, a p2, b p4, d p3, c

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

Exact result using YBE (Zamolodchikov-Zamolodchikov)

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

General properties of the S matrix Unitarity Considering a subspace D in a subspace or, equivalently, Defines a convex space

  • f allowed SD matrices
slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

Here: Crossing With a linear constraint the space remains convex s>4m2

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

In this space we consider a linear functional: Maximize F subject to the crossing constraints and unitarity bounds. We do not use factorization (YBE).

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 4 5

Re 3

  • 1
  • 0.5

0.5 1

ReSI ReS+ ReS-

maximization result vs integrable model on the physical line

  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 4 5

Re 3

  • 1
  • 0.5

0.5 1

ImSI ImS+ ImS-

N=5

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 4 5

Re 3

  • 1
  • 0.5

0.5 1

ReSI ReS+ ReS-

Maximization result vs integrable model on the physical line

  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 4 5

Re 3

  • 1
  • 0.5

0.5 1

ImSI ImS+ ImS-

N=20

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 4 5

Re 3

  • 1
  • 0.5

0.5 1

ReSI ReS+ ReS-

Maximization result vs integrable model on the physical line

  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 4 5

Re 3

  • 1
  • 0.5

0.5 1

ImSI ImS+ ImS-

N=100

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

Vertex: Absence of zero modes

Convex polygon

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

A= Fluctuations has no zero modes

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

Iterative improvement of maximization functional A general maximization functional is of the form Starting from we can refine wA by taking an average of the normals: converges fast.

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

Analytical solution from numerics (example N=8) From crossing, the position of the zeros, and the S-matrix can be found exactly.

/4 /2 3 /4

  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1

/4 /2 3 /4

  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

CDD factors and zero modes (Castillejo-Dalitz-Dyson) Have free parameters, it has 6 zero modes.

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Conclusions The S-matrix bootstrap provides a very interesting way to define a field theory as the maximum of a functional in the space of allowed S-matrices. We argued that such space is convex and therefore, if a linear functional is maximized, the maximum is at the boundary and easily found by standard numerical methods. Certain field theories have no free parameters and should be found at a vertex of such convex space This works well for the 2d O(N) model.

22