1: \section{The induced charge-charge correlator, or ``real correction''}
2:
3: We are now prepared for the explicit calculation of the
4: coefficients in the RGE, to be completed
5: in this and the following section. The one-loop quantum calculation
6: will be performed fully in the LC-gauge ($a^+_c={\cal A}^+_c=0$),
7: %--- both for the quantum gluons
8: %($a^+_c=0$) and for the background fields (${\cal A}^+_c=0$) ---,
9: by using the retarded $i\epsilon$ prescription
10: discussed in Sect.~\ref{FRULES}. The corresponding background field
11: propagator is given explicitly in Appendix A.
12: The ensuing expressions for $\chi$ and $\sigma$, which
13: are gauge-covariant functionals of the background fields,
14: will be then rotated to the COV-gauge for the background fields
15: (cf. eq.~(\ref{tildesc})), which is the only gauge which
16: allows for explicit non-linear calculations.
17:
18: In particular, the calculation of the ``real correction''
19: in this section will be organized
20: as follows: We shall first compute $\hat \chi(\vec x, \vec y)$ by
21: evaluating the matrix elements in the r.h.s. of eq.~(\ref{chi2}),
22: then we shall derive $\chi({x}_\perp,{ y}_\perp)$
23: by integrating out the longitudinal structure of
24: $\hat \chi(\vec x, \vec y)$, cf. eq.~(\ref{chi1}).
25: The result will be subsequently rotated to the (background) COV-gauge,
26: to give $\tilde\chi({x}_\perp,{y}_\perp)$, cf. eq.~(\ref{tildesc}).
27: Finally, the coefficient $\eta(x_\perp,y_\perp)$ in the RGE for
28: $W_\tau[\alpha]$ will be obtained according to eq.~(\ref{etadef}).
29:
30:
31: \subsection{Non-linear effects and their dependence upon
32: the gauge-fixing prescription}
33: \label{chinon}
34:
35: By substituting the expressions (\ref{LCG}) for the gluon propagator
36: in eq.~(\ref{chi2}) for $\hat \chi(\vec x, \vec y)$, one obtains,
37: after simple algebra,
38: \be\label{CHIFIN}
39: {1 \over g^2} {\hat \chi} (\vec x,\vec y) & = &
40: i 2{\cal F}^{+i}_x\, \acute G^{ij}(x,y)\,2{\cal F}^{+j}_y\nonumber\\
41: &{}&
42: +(2 {\cal F}^{+i} {\cal D}^i+\rho)_x {1 \over i \partial^+}
43: {\acute G}^{+j}(2 {\cal F}^{+j})_y
44: -(2 {\cal F}^{+i})_x {\acute G}^{i+} {1 \over i \partial^+}
45: (2 {\cal D}^{\dagger j} {\cal F}^{+j}+\rho)_y \nonumber\\
46: &{}&
47: +i\,
48: (2 {\cal F}^{+i} {\cal D}^i+\rho)_x
49: {1 \over i \partial^+} {\acute G}^{++} {1 \over i \partial^+}
50: (2{\cal D}^{\dagger j} {\cal F}^{+j}+\rho)_y \nonumber\\
51: &\equiv& {1 \over g^2}\Bigl( {\hat \chi}_1 (\vec x,\vec y)\,+\,
52: {\hat \chi}_2 (\vec x,\vec y)
53: \,+\,{\hat \chi}_3(\vec x,\vec y)\Bigr),\ee
54: where the equal-time limit $y^+=x^++\epsilon$ is implicit, and
55: ${\hat \chi}_1 $, $ {\hat \chi}_2$, and ${\hat \chi}_3$
56: refer, respectively, to the terms in the first, second and third line.
57: %of the above equation.
58:
59: In these expressions, ${\cal D}^i\equiv\partial^i -ig{\cal A}^i$ and
60: ${\cal D}^{\dagger j}=\partial^{\dagger j} +ig{\cal A}^j$
61: (with the derivative $\partial^{\dagger j}$ acting on the
62: function on its left) are covariant derivatives constructed
63: with the background field ${\cal A}^i$. Furthermore,
64: $\acute G^{\mu\nu}_{ab}(x,y)$ is the
65: gluon propagator in the {\it temporal} gauge $\acute a^-_c=0$,
66: and is presented in Appendix A.3. It is a non-linear functional of
67: the background field $\alpha(\vec x)$, via the Wilson lines $V$ and
68: $V^\dagger$ (see, e.g., eqs.~(\ref{G++c})--(\ref{G++n})).
69: What is however remarkable, and will be demonstrated in what
70: follows, is that all the non-linear
71: effects encoded in $\acute G^{\mu\nu}$ drop out
72: in the calculation of the matrix elements in eq.~(\ref{CHIFIN}).
73: That is, the final result for $\hat \chi(\vec x, \vec y)$ is
74: the same as obtained by evaluating
75: the r.h.s. of eq.~(\ref{CHIFIN}) with the {\it free}
76: temporal-gauge propagator $\acute G^{\mu\nu}_0$.
77: This simplification is a consequence of our specific $i\epsilon$
78: prescription in the LC-gauge propagator, as we explain now.
79: Consider the following matrix element:
80: \be\label{me1}
81: \langle
82: x| {1 \over i\partial^+}
83: {\acute G}^{++}
84: {1 \over i\partial^+}|y\rangle
85: \ee
86: which enters the r.h.s. of eq.~(\ref{CHIFIN}). Our ``retarded''
87: prescription in $ G^{\mu\nu}$
88: implies that, on the left of ${\acute G}^{++}$ in eq.~(\ref{me1}),
89: ${1 \over i \partial^+}\equiv {1 \over i \partial^+ + i \epsilon}$
90: should be retarded, while on the right
91: ${1 \over i \partial^+}\equiv {1 \over i \partial^+ - i \epsilon}$
92: should rather be advanced (cf. eqs.~(\ref{delRA})--(\ref{+RA})).
93: Thus, eq.~(\ref{me1}) is the same as
94: \be\label{matriz2}
95: \int dz_1^-\, \int dz_2^-\,
96: \langle
97: x^-| {1 \over i \partial^+ + i \epsilon} |z_1^-
98: \rangle \,
99: \langle
100: x^+, z_1^-, x_{\perp} | \ {\acute G}^{++} \ |y^+, z_2^-, y_{\perp}
101: \rangle \,
102: \langle
103: z_2^- | {1 \over i \partial^+ - i \epsilon}| y^-
104: \rangle
105: \nonumber\\
106: %&{}&
107: =
108: \int dz_1^-\, \int dz_2^-\,
109: \theta(x^- - z_1^-)\ {\acute G}^{++} (z_1^-,z_2^-)\
110: \theta(y^- - z_2^-) \ ,
111: \ee
112: where in the second line
113: only the longitudinal coordinates have been shown explicitly.
114: In eq.~(\ref{CHIFIN}), this matrix element is sandwiched
115: between $\rho(\vec x)$ and $\rho(\vec y)$. Since $\rho(\vec x)$
116: is localized at small$x^-$ ($x^- \simle x^-_\tau$, cf. eq.~(\ref{xtau})),
117: while $G^{\mu\nu}(x,y)$
118: is relatively slowly varying as a function of $x^-$ and $y^-$
119: (since this is the propagator of the semi-fast gluons, with
120: $p^+ \ll \Lambda^+$), one can effectively
121: replace $x^-\simeq 0$ and $y^-\simeq 0$ in
122: eq.~(\ref{matriz2}) [and everywhere else in
123: eq.~(\ref{CHIFIN}); recall that the electric field
124: ${\cal F}^{+i}$ is as localized as $\rho$].
125: This gives, for $x^+=y^+$,
126: \be
127: \label{matriz3}
128: \langle
129: x^-\simeq 0, \,x_{\perp}
130: | {1 \over i \partial^+} {\acute G}^{++} {1 \over i \partial^+}\,|
131: y^-\simeq 0, \,y_{\perp}
132: \rangle
133: =
134: \int dz_1^-\int dz_2^-\,
135: \theta(- z_1^-) {\acute G}^{++}(z_1^-,z_2^-) \theta(- z_2^-) \ ,
136: \ee
137: which shows that both external points $z_1^-, z_2^-$ in ${\acute G}$ are
138: negative, so ${\acute G}$ must be non-crossing.
139: (Recall that ``crossing'' and ``non-crossing'' refer to
140: whether the gluon has propagated or not accross the surface at $x^- =0$,
141: where the color source is located; see Sect. 6 of Paper I
142: and Appendix A in this paper.)
143: Moreover, the non-crossing piece of ${\acute G(z_1^-,z_2^-)}$
144: at {\it negative}
145: $z_1^-, z_2^-$ is the same as the corresponding
146: piece of the {\it free} propagator. Thus, the matrix element
147: (\ref{matriz3}) singles out that particular piece of
148: ${\acute G}$ which is not affected by the background field.
149:
150: A similar conclusion applies to the other terms in
151: the r.h.s. of eq.~(\ref{CHIFIN}), which involve the following
152: matrix elements
153: \be\label{me}
154: \langle x|\acute G^{ij}|y
155: \rangle,\qquad
156: \langle x| {1 \over i\partial^+} {\acute G}^{+i}|y
157: \rangle,\qquad \langle x| {\acute G}^{i+}{1 \over i\partial^+}|y
158: \rangle,
159: \ee
160: evaluated at $x^-\simeq y^-\simeq 0$ and $y^+=x^++\epsilon$.
161: For instance, in the first term above, one can use
162: the continuity of ${\acute G}^{ij}$ at $x^-=0$ and $y^-=0$
163: (cf. Appendix A) to approach these points from $x^-<0$ and
164: $y^-<0$, i.e., from the domain where ${\acute G}^{ij}$
165: coincides with the corresponding free propagator
166: ${\acute G}^{ij}_0$. We thus deduce that
167: \be
168: \label{matriz4}
169: \langle 0, x_{\perp}
170: | \acute G^{ij}| 0, y_{\perp}
171: \rangle
172: =
173: \langle 0, x_{\perp}
174: | \acute G_0^{ij}| 0, y_{\perp}
175: \rangle\,,\ee
176: and similarly for the other matrix elements in eq.~(\ref{me}).
177:
178: For the previous arguments, it has been essential that
179: the retarded prescription has been used systematically in
180: the LC-gauge, both in the classical solution and in the
181: quantum propagator: ({\it a})
182: The retarded boundary condition on the classical solution has insured
183: that the background field ${\cal A}^i$ is non-vanishing only at $x^->0$,
184: or $z<t$. That is, the classical field sits behind its source,
185: the (fast degrees of freedom of the) hadron, which is located
186: at $z=t$. ({\it b}) The retarded $i\epsilon$ prescription
187: in the gluon propagator has implied that the semi-fast gluon
188: exchanged within $\hat\chi$ (cf. Fig. \ref{CHIFIG}) is confined at
189: negative $x^-$, where there is no background field.
190: Thus, this quantum gluon propagates freely
191: from $\vec y$ to $\vec x$, with $x^-\simeq y^-\simeq 0$.
192:
193: Note, however, that this property of a free propagation
194: holds only for the {\it temporal} gauge
195: gluon $\acute a^\mu$ (with $\acute a^-=0$), which
196: does not couple directly to the singular color source $\rho$
197: \cite{PI}. Because of that, its propagator
198: $\acute G^{\mu\nu}(x,y)$ is continuous at $x^-=0$ and $y^-=0$,
199: and the associated non-linear effects drop out in
200: the calculation of $\hat\chi$, as argued before.
201: By contrast, the {\it light-cone} gauge propagator $ G^{\mu\nu}(x,y)$
202: is sensitive also to the discontinuous gauge rotations at the
203: end points $x^-$ and $y^-$, via the
204: covariant derivatives ${\cal D}^i_x$ and ${\cal D}^{\dagger j}_y$
205: (which technically enter via the gauge rotation from the temporal
206: gauge to the LC gauge; cf. eq.~(\ref{GLC})).
207: As obvious on eq.~(\ref{CHIFIN}), the non-linear effects
208: associated with the fields within
209: ${\cal D}^i_x$ and ${\cal D}^{\dagger j}_y$ do
210: subsist in the final result for $\hat \chi$.
211: Thus, while it is correct to replace the {\it temporal} gauge
212: propagator $\acute G^{\mu\nu}$ in eq.~(\ref{CHIFIN})
213: by its free counterpart, such a replacement would not be legitimate
214: for the {\it light-cone} gauge propagator $G^{\mu\nu}$
215: in eq.~(\ref{chi2}).
216:
217: By inspection of the previous arguments, it should be
218: also clear that they would still hold, {\it mutas mutandis},
219: after replacing everywhere the retarded prescription
220: with an advanced one: The corresponding classical field
221: ${\cal A}^i$ would have support only at negative $x^-$,
222: while the semi-fast gluon exchanged within $\hat\chi$
223: would freely propagate at positive $x^-$.
224:
225: In Refs. \cite{MQ,K96,KM98}, where the
226: advanced prescription has been used extensively,
227: one has found similar simplifications in the calculation
228: of Feynman graphs for, e.g., the scattering of a
229: quark or a gluon off a hadronic target.
230: As shown there, it is only with this prescription
231: that one can ignore the final state interactions of
232: the struck quark (or gluon) in deep inelastic scattering,
233: which is essential if the produced jet is to be used as
234: an indicator of the hadron wavefunction.
235: Our present analysis corroborates the conclusions in
236: Refs. \cite{MQ,K96,KM98} that
237: retarded and advanced LC-gauge prescriptions
238: are special in that they not only lead to
239: technical simplifications, but also allow for
240: a more transparent physical interpretation of the results.
241: With more symmetrical prescriptions like principal
242: value PV$\,1\over p^+$ or Leibbrandt-Mandelstam,
243: one cannot avoid the overlap between the classical fields
244: and the quantum fluctuations, and thus neither the
245: final/initial state interactions.
246: %In fact, we have explicitly computed $\hat\chi$
247: %and $\hat\sigma$ with a PV prescription, but the
248: %corresponding results are rather opaque and significantly more
249: %involved than those obtained with the retarded prescription,
250: %to be presented below. Because of that, we shall not discuss
251: %the PV-results in this paper.
252:
253: To summarize, when computing ${\hat \chi}$ with a retarded prescription,
254: one can replace ${\acute G}^{\mu\nu}$ in eq.~(\ref{CHIFIN})
255: by the corresponding {\it free} propagator ${\acute G}^{\mu\nu}_0$.
256: This calculation will be presented in the following subsection.
257: For completness, in Appendix B we shall verify, on the example
258: of $\hat \chi_3$, that a lengthier calculation using the full propagator
259: ${\acute G}^{\mu\nu}$ leads eventually to the same result.
260:
261: \subsection{Explicit calculation of
262: $\hat \chi(\vec x, \vec y)$}
263: \label{sect:comp_chi}
264:
265: With ${\acute G}^{ij}$ replaced by the free propagator
266: ${\acute G}^{ij}_0=\delta^{ij}G_0$
267: the first term ${\hat \chi}_1 $ in the r.h.s. of eq.~(\ref{CHIFIN})
268: has been already computed in Sect. 5.2 of
269: Paper I, with the following result:
270: \be\label{chi1final}
271: {\hat \chi}_1=
272: {g^2 \over \pi} \ln(1/b)\
273: {\cal F}^{+i}_x\ {\cal F}^{+j}_y\
274: \int {d^2p_\perp \over (2 \pi)^2}\,
275: {\rm e}^{ip_{\perp}\cdot(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})}\,.
276: \ee
277: Consider now the matrix element (\ref{me1}) which enters
278: ${\hat \chi}_3 $. With ${\acute G}^{++}\rightarrow {\acute G}^{++}_0$,
279: cf. eq.~(\ref{TGPROP}), this gives (for $y^+=x^+$, and
280: $x^-\simeq y^-\simeq 0$)
281: \be
282: \label{A00}
283: \langle 0, x_{\perp}| {1 \over i \partial^++ i \epsilon}\,
284: {\acute G}^{++}_0 {1 \over i \partial^+- i \epsilon}| 0, y_{\perp}
285: \rangle\,=\,\qquad\qquad\qquad\nn
286: \,=\,\int_{strip} {dp^-\over 2\pi}\int {dp^+ \over 2 \pi}
287: \int \frac{d^2 p_\perp}{(2\pi)^2}\,{\rm e}^{ip_\perp\cdot (x_\perp-y_\perp)}
288: \,\frac{1}{p^++ i \epsilon}\,\frac{2p^+}{p^-}\,G_0(p)\,
289: \frac{1}{p^+- i \epsilon}\,,\ee
290: %\,=\,\nn \,=\,
291: %\int_{strip} {dp^-\over 2\pi} \,\,\frac{2}{p^-}
292: %\int {dp^+ \over 2 \pi}\,%{\rm e}^{-ip^+(x^--y^-)}\,
293: %\int \frac{d^2 p_\perp}{(2\pi)^2}\,{\rm e}^{ip_\perp\cdot (x_\perp-y_\perp)}
294: %\,{\rm PV}\,\frac{1}{p^+}\,G_0(p)\,
295: %\ee
296: where the integral over $p^-$ is restricted to the strip
297: (\ref{strip-}). The various factors of $p^+$ in the integrand
298: can be combined into a PV prescription in $1/p^+$ :
299: \be
300: \frac{2p^+}{(p^++ i \epsilon)(p^+- i \epsilon)}\,=\,
301: \frac{1}{p^++ i \epsilon}\,+\,\frac{1}{p^+- i \epsilon}\,=\,
302: 2{\rm PV}\,\frac{1}{p^+}\,.\ee
303: Then, the integral over $p^+$ is easily computed by contour techniques:
304: \be\label{intp+1}
305: \int {dp^+ \over 2 \pi}\,%{\rm e}^{-ip^+(x^--y^-)}\,
306: {\rm PV}\,\frac{1}{p^+}\,
307: \frac{1}{2p^+p^- - p_\perp^2 +i\epsilon}\,=\,\frac{-i\epsilon(p^-)}
308: {2p_\perp^2}\,,\ee
309: where $\epsilon(p^-)\equiv \theta(p^-)-\theta(-p^-)$ is the
310: sign function. The restricted integral over $p^-$ generates
311: the expected logarithmic enhancement (below, $\Lambda\equiv
312: \Lambda^-$, cf. eq.~(\ref{strip-})) :
313: \be\label{LOGX}
314: \int_{strip} {dp^-\over 2\pi} \,\,\frac{\epsilon(p^-)}{p^-}\,\equiv\,
315: \left(\int_{-\Lambda/b}^{-\Lambda}+\int_{\Lambda}^{\Lambda/b}
316: \right){dp^- \over 2 \pi}\,{\epsilon(p^-)\over p^-}
317: \,=\,{1 \over \pi}\,\ln (1/b)\,.\ee
318: The final result reads
319: \be
320: \label{A00final}
321: \langle 0, x_{\perp}| {1 \over i \partial^++ i \epsilon}\,
322: {\acute G}^{++} {1 \over i \partial^+- i \epsilon}| 0, y_{\perp}
323: \rangle\,=\,{-i \over \pi} \ln(1/b)\,
324: \int {d^2p_\perp \over (2 \pi)^2}\,{1 \over p_{\perp}^2}\,
325: {\rm e}^{ip_{\perp}\cdot(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})}\,,\ee
326: which immediately implies:
327: \be\label{chi3final}
328: {\hat \chi}_3=
329: {g^2 \over \pi} \ln(1/b)\ \int {d^2p_\perp \over (2 \pi)^2}\,
330: {1 \over p_{\perp}^2}\
331: (2 {\cal F}^{+i} {\cal D}^i+\rho)_x\
332: {\rm e}^{ip_{\perp}\cdot(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})}\
333: (2{\cal D}^{\dagger j} {\cal F}^{+j}+\rho)_y \ .
334: \ee
335: A similar calculation yields:
336: \be\label{A0jfinal}
337: \langle 0, x_{\perp}| {1 \over i \partial^++ i \epsilon}\,
338: {\acute G}^{+i} | 0, y_{\perp}\rangle&=&
339: \langle 0, x_{\perp}|{\acute G}^{i+}
340: {1 \over i \partial^+- i \epsilon}| 0, y_{\perp}
341: \rangle\,\nn
342: &=&{-i \over 2\pi} \ln(1/b)
343: \int {d^2p_\perp \over (2 \pi)^2}\,{p^i \over p_{\perp}^2}\,
344: {\rm e}^{ip_{\perp}\cdot(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})}\,,
345: \ee
346: which allows us to also compute ${\hat \chi}_2$ :
347: \be\label{chi2final}
348: {\hat \chi}_2=
349: {- g^2 \over \pi} \ln(1/b) \int {d^2p_\perp \over (2 \pi)^2}\,
350: {1 \over p_{\perp}^2}\
351: \biggl\{
352: (2 {\cal F}^{+i} {\cal D}^i+\rho)_x\
353: {\rm e}^{ip_{\perp}\cdot(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})}\
354: (2 \partial^{\dagger j}{\cal F}^{+j})_y\,+\,
355: \nonumber\\\,\,\,\,
356: +\, (2 {\cal F}^{+i} \partial^i)_x\
357: {\rm e}^{ip_{\perp}\cdot(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})}\
358: (2 {\cal D}^{\dagger j} {\cal F}^{+j}+\rho)_y
359: \biggr\}
360: \ee
361: The previous results for
362: ${\hat \chi}_1 $, $ {\hat \chi}_2$, and ${\hat \chi}_3$
363: are conveniently combined as:
364: \be\label{HATCHI}
365: {\hat \chi}(\vec x,\vec y)&=&
366: {g^2 \over \pi} \ln{1\over b}\,\Biggl\{
367: {\cal F}^{+i}_x\, \delta^{ij}_{\perp}(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})\, {\cal F}^{+j}_y\,
368: +\, \nn &{}&\qquad \,\,\,\,+\,
369: \biggl[2 {\cal F}^{+i} \biggl({\cal D}^i - {\partial^i \over 2}\biggr)
370: +\rho\biggr]_x\,\langle
371: x_{\perp} | {1 \over -\grad_{\perp}^2} | y_{\perp}
372: \rangle\,
373: \biggl[2\biggl({\cal D}^{\dagger j} - {\partial^{\dagger j} \over 2}\biggr)
374: {\cal F}^{+j}+ \rho\biggr]_y\Biggr\}\ ,
375: \ee
376: which is our final expression for ${\hat \chi}$.
377: The following notations have been used:
378: \be\label{deltaT}
379: \delta^{ij}_{\perp}(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})&=&
380: \int {d^2p_\perp \over (2 \pi)^2}\,
381: \left(\delta^{ij}- {p^i p^j \over p_{\perp}^2}\right)\
382: {\rm e}^{ip_{\perp}\cdot(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})}\,,\\
383: \langle
384: x_{\perp} | {1 \over -\grad_{\perp}^2} | y_{\perp}
385: \rangle &=&
386: \int {d^2p_\perp \over (2 \pi)^2}\, {1 \over p_{\perp}^2}\
387: {\rm e}^{ip_{\perp}\cdot(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})} \,.
388: \label{invdelta2}
389: \ee
390:
391:
392: \subsection{The two-dimensional correlator
393: $\chi(x_\perp,y_\perp)$}
394:
395:
396: In eq.~(\ref{HATCHI}), both $\rho$ and ${\cal F}^{+i}$ have
397: support near the LC, at $x^- \simle x^-_\tau\equiv 1/\Lambda^+$.
398: Thus, although induced by quantum modes with relatively large
399: longitudinal wavelengths $\Delta x^- \gg 1/\Lambda^+$,
400: the charge-charge correlator appears to be as localized in the
401: longitudinal direction as the original source at the scale $\Lambda^+$.
402: This is so because the vertices responsible
403: for this quantum effect are explicitly proportional to
404: $\rho$ or ${\cal F}^{+i}$ (cf. eq.~(\ref{rho10})).
405: Thus, $\hat\chi(\vec x, \vec y)$ is manifestly sensitive
406: to the internal structure of the source, and also to the structure
407: of the background field at small distances $x^- \simle x^-_\tau$.
408: (Note, in particular, that eq.~(\ref{HATCHI}) involves
409: the product ${\cal F}^{+i}(\vec x){\cal A}^i(\vec x)$,
410: and thus the field ${\cal A}^i(\vec x)$ within the support
411: of $\rho$.)
412:
413: If this was also true for the two-dimensional density
414: $\chi(x_\perp,y_\perp)$, which is the quantity
415: which enters the RGE (\ref{RGE}), this would spoil the separation
416: of scales assumed by the effective theory, and thus the validity
417: of the latter. Note that, the simple fact that
418: $\chi(x_\perp,y_\perp)$ is obtained from
419: $\hat\chi(\vec x, \vec y)$ after integrating out $x^-$ and $y^-$,
420: cf. eq.~(\ref{chi1}), is by itself not sufficient
421: to guarantee that the physical information about small
422: $x^-$ or $y^-$ is truly irrelevant.
423: For instance, the following integrated quantity
424: \be
425: \int dx^- {\cal F}^{+i}(\vec x){\cal A}^i(\vec x),\ee
426: although a function of $x_\perp$ alone, is nevertheless
427: sensitive to the values of ${\cal A}^i(\vec x)$ at
428: $x^- \simle x^-_\tau$, since the electric field
429: ${\cal F}^{+i}(\vec x)$ has its support there (cf. eq.~(\ref{UTAF})).
430: On the other hand, the following quantity
431: (recall that ${\cal A}^i(x^-\to\infty)={\cal A}^i_\infty$, while
432: ${\cal A}^i(x^-\to -\infty)=0$)
433: \be
434: \int dx^- {\cal F}^{+i}(\vec x)\,=\,
435: \int dx^- \partial^+{\cal A}^i\,=\,{\cal A}^i_\infty(x_\perp)\ee
436: is not sensitive to the
437: structure of ${\cal A}^i(\vec x)$ around the origin, but only to
438: its asymptotic value at large $x^-$.
439:
440: As we shall demonstrate now, this latter situation applies
441: also to $\hat\chi(\vec x, \vec y)$, which, like the electric field
442: ${\cal F}^{+i}(\vec x)$, is a total derivative with respect to
443: its longitudinal arguments $x^-$ and $y^-$:
444: \be\label{dervative}
445: {\hat \chi} (\vec x,\vec y) = \partial^+_x\partial^+_y\
446: {\cal C}(\vec x,\vec y) \ .
447: \ee
448: To see this, note the following identities, which hold
449: for an arbitrary function $\Phi(x_{\perp})$,
450: \be\label{derivatives}
451: (2 {\cal F}^{+i} {\cal D}^i+\rho)_x\ \Phi(x_{\perp})&=&
452: i \partial^+_x {\cal D}^2_x \Phi(x_{\perp}),\nn
453: \Phi(y_{\perp}) (2{\cal D}^{\dagger j} {\cal F}^{+j}+\rho)_y&=&
454: -i \Phi(y_{\perp}) {\cal D}^{\dagger 2}_y \partial^+_y\,\ee
455: (with $\partial^+_y$ in the second line acting on the
456: function on its left). These identities rely on the classical
457: equation of motion (\ref{cleq0}), that is,
458: \be\label{eom}
459: \partial^i {\cal F}^{+i} - i g[{\cal A}^i,{\cal F}^{+i}]=\rho\,.\ee
460: For instance, one can obtain the first identity by writing:
461: \be
462: \partial^+ {\cal D}^2 \Phi(x_{\perp})&=&\partial^+ \Bigl((\partial^i
463: -ig{\cal A}^i)(\partial^i\Phi-ig{\cal A}^i\Phi)\Bigr)\nn
464: &=&-i({\cal F}^{+i}\Phi)-i{\cal F}^{+i}\partial^i\Phi
465: -ig({\cal F}^{+i}{\cal A}^i+{\cal A}^i{\cal F}^{+i})
466: \Phi\nn &=& -i\Bigl\{\partial^i{\cal F}^{+i}+ig
467: ({\cal F}^{+i}{\cal A}^i-{\cal A}^i{\cal F}^{+i})+
468: 2 {\cal F}^{+i} {\cal D}^i\Bigr\}\Phi\nn
469: &=&-i(\rho + 2 {\cal F}^{+i} {\cal D}^i)\Phi\,\ee
470: where in writing the second line we have used $\partial^+\Phi=0$
471: and $\partial^+{\cal A}^i={\cal F}^{+i}$, and the last line follows
472: from the previous one after using (\ref{eom}).
473:
474: By using eqs.~(\ref{derivatives}) and (\ref{HATCHI}),
475: one deduces that $\hat\chi(\vec x, \vec y)$ is indeed
476: of the total-derivative form (\ref{dervative}), with
477: \be\label{Cderi}
478: {\cal C}(\vec x,\vec y)\,=\,{g^2 \over \pi} \ln{1\over b}\
479: \left\{
480: {\cal A}^i_x\ \delta^{ij}_{\perp}(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})\ {\cal A}^j_y
481: + ({\cal D}^i {\cal A}^i)_x
482: \langle
483: x_{\perp} | {1 \over -\grad_{\perp}^2} | y_{\perp}
484: \rangle
485: ({\cal A}^j {\cal D}^{\dagger j})_y\right\} \ .
486: \ee
487: Then, the integrations over $x^-$ and $y^-$ in eq.~(\ref{chi1})
488: become trivial, and yield
489: \be\label{CHIFINALDEVT}
490: {\chi}(x_{\perp},y_{\perp})= 4 %{g^2 \over \pi} \ln{1\over b}\
491: \biggl\{
492: {\cal A}^i_{\infty}(x_{\perp})\
493: \delta^{ij}_{\perp}(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})
494: {\cal A}^j_{\infty}(y_{\perp})
495: +
496: ({\cal D}^i_{\infty} {\cal A}^i_{\infty})_{x_{\perp}}
497: \langle
498: x_{\perp} | {1 \over -\grad_{\perp}^2} | y_{\perp}
499: \rangle
500: ({\cal A}^j_{\infty} {\cal D}^{\dagger j}_{\infty})_{y_{\perp}}
501: \biggr\}
502: \ee
503: (with
504: ${\cal D}^i_{\infty} \equiv \partial^i - ig {\cal A}^i_{\infty}(x_{\perp})$)
505: which is sensitive only to the asymptotic fields.
506: %From now on,
507:
508: The gauge rotation (\ref{tildesc}) of eq.~(\ref{CHIFINALDEVT})
509: to the background COV-gauge is straightforward.
510: By using ${\cal A}^i_\infty(x_\perp)
511: =(i/g)V_x \del^i V^\dagger_x$
512: (cf. eq.~(\ref{APM})), one immediately finds
513: \be\label{tchi}
514: \tilde \chi(x_\perp,y_\perp)\,=\,{4\over g^2}
515: \,\biggl\{\partial^iV^{\dagger}_x\,
516: \delta^{ij}_\perp(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp}) \partial^jV_y\,+\,
517: \partial^i_x\biggl(\Bigl(\partial^iV^{\dagger}\Bigr)_x
518: \langle x_\perp|\,\frac{1}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle
519: \Bigl(\partial^j V\Bigr)_y\biggr)\partial^{\dagger j}_y\biggr\},\,\,\ee
520: where $V^{\dagger}_x\equiv V^{\dagger}(x_\perp)$, cf. eq.~(\ref{v}),
521: and the derivatives not included in the brackets act on all the
522: functions on their right (or left).
523:
524: \subsection{From $\chi$ to $\eta$}
525: \label{etachi}
526:
527: Eq.~(\ref{tchi}) provides $\tilde \chi(x_\perp,y_\perp)$
528: as an explicit functional of the field $\alpha(\vec x)$,
529: via the asymptotic Wilson lines $V(x_\perp)$ and $V^\dagger(x_\perp)$.
530: It is therefore more
531: convenient to write down the evolution equation in terms of
532: $\alpha$ rather than ${\tilde \rho}$. The appropriate transformation
533: $\tilde \chi \rightarrow \eta$ is shown in eq.~(\ref{etadef}),
534: and will be worked out in detail in what follows.
535:
536: We shall do that in two steps, corresponding to the two terms
537: in the r.h.s. of eq.~(\ref{tchi}), which we write as
538: $\tilde \chi=\tilde \chi_1+\tilde \chi_2$. Correspondingly,
539: $\eta=\eta_1+\eta_2$ with (we omit the factor of
540: $4/g^2$ at intermediate steps)
541: \be\label{eta1}
542: \eta_1(x_\perp,y_\perp) & \equiv &
543: \int d^2z_\perp \int d^2u_\perp
544: \langle x_\perp| \frac{1}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|z_\perp\rangle
545: \,\Bigl(\partial^i_z \partial^j_u \left \{ V^{\dagger}_z
546: \delta^{ij}_{\perp}(z_{\perp}-u_{\perp}) V_u \right \}\Bigr)
547: \langle u_\perp|\frac{1}{-\grad^2_\perp}|y_\perp\rangle
548: \nonumber \\
549: & = & - \int d^2z_\perp \int d^2u_\perp
550: \langle x_\perp| \frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp}|z_\perp\rangle
551: \,V^{\dagger}_z\,
552: \langle z_\perp|
553: \delta^{ij}- {\partial^i \partial^j \over \grad^2_\perp}
554: \,|u_\perp\rangle\, V_u \,
555: \langle u_\perp| \frac{\partial^j}{-\grad^2_\perp} |y_\perp \rangle,
556: \ee
557: where the second line follows after some integrations by parts,
558: and we have written
559: \be\label{delog}
560: \langle x_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle\,
561: \equiv\,\partial^i_x\, \langle
562: x_\perp|\,\frac{1}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle\,
563: =\int {d^2p_\perp \over (2 \pi)^2}\, {-i\,p^i \over p_{\perp}^2}\,
564: {\rm e}^{ip_{\perp}\cdot(x_{\perp}-y_{\perp})}\, .
565: \ee
566: Similarly,
567: \be
568: \eta_2(x_\perp,y_\perp) &= &
569: - \int d^2z_\perp \int d^2u_\perp
570: \langle x_\perp| \frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp} |z_\perp\rangle
571: (\partial^i V^{\dagger}_z)
572: \langle z_\perp| \frac{1}{-\grad^2_\perp} |u_\perp\rangle
573: (\partial^j V_u)
574: \langle u_\perp| \frac{\partial^j}{-\grad^2_\perp}|y_\perp\rangle
575: \nonumber \\
576: \noindent
577: & = & - \int d^2z_\perp \int d^2u_\perp
578: V^{\dagger}_z V_u \, \partial^i_z \partial^j_u
579: \langle x_\perp| \frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp} |z_\perp\rangle
580: \langle z_\perp| \frac{1}{-\grad^2_\perp} |u_\perp\rangle
581: \langle u_\perp| \frac{\partial^j}{-\grad^2_\perp} |y_\perp\rangle.
582: \ee
583: By using
584: \be
585: \partial^i_x
586: \langle x_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle\,
587: =\,-\delta^{(2)}(x_\perp-y_\perp), \ee
588: this can be further transformed as
589: \be
590: \eta_2(x_\perp,y_\perp)&=&
591: V^{\dagger}_x\,\langle
592: x_\perp|\,\frac{1}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle\,
593: V_y\, \nonumber \\
594: &{}&\,\,+\, \int d^2u_\perp\, V^{\dagger}_x\,
595: \langle x_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^j}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|u_\perp\rangle\,
596: V_u\,
597: \langle u_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^j}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle\,
598: \nonumber \\
599: &{}&\,\,+ \int d^2z_\perp\,
600: \langle x_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|z_\perp\rangle\,
601: V^{\dagger}_z\,
602: \langle z_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle\,
603: V_y\,
604: \nonumber \\
605: &{}&\,\,+ \int d^2u_\perp\, \int d^2z_\perp\,
606: \langle x_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|z_\perp\rangle\,
607: V^{\dagger}_z\,
608: \langle z_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^i
609: \partial^j}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|u_\perp\rangle\,
610: V_u
611: \langle u_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^j}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle\, .
612: \ee
613: The last term in the above expression is non-local in both
614: $u$ and $z$, but
615: it cancels against the similar term that contributes to $\eta_1$,
616: eq.~(\ref{eta1}). So we arrive at
617: \be
618: \eta(x_\perp,y_\perp)&=&
619: (1\,+\,V^{\dagger}_x V_y)\, \langle
620: x_\perp|\,\frac{1}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle\,\nn
621: &{}&\,+\,\int d^2z_\perp\,
622: \langle x_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|z_\perp\rangle\,
623: \langle z_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle\,
624: (V^{\dagger}_x V_z\, +\, V^{\dagger}_z V_y)\, .
625: \ee
626: By also using
627: \be
628: \int d^2z_\perp\,
629: \langle x_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|z_\perp\rangle\,
630: \langle z_\perp|\,\frac{\partial^i}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp\rangle\,
631: =\,
632: -\langle x_\perp|\,\frac{1}{-\grad^2_\perp}\,|y_\perp \rangle\,
633: \ee
634: we finally express $\eta$ as (below, we reintroduce the overall
635: factor $4/g^2$)
636: \be\label{ETA}
637: \eta_{ab}(x_\perp,y_\perp)\,=\,{4\over g^2}
638: \int {d^2z_\perp\over (2\pi)^2}\,
639: \frac{(x^i-z^i)(y^i-z^i)}{(x_\perp-z_\perp)^2(y_\perp-z_\perp)^2 }
640: \Bigl\{1+ V^\dagger_x V_y-V^\dagger_x V_z - V^\dagger_z
641: V_y\Bigr\}_{ab}\, .
642: \ee
643: The kernel in this equation has been written in coordinate space
644: by using eq.~(\ref{delog}) and
645: \be\label{kernel}
646: \int {d^2p_\perp \over (2 \pi)^2}
647: \int {d^2k_\perp \over (2 \pi)^2}\,\,
648: {p_{\perp} \cdot k_{\perp} \over p_{\perp}^2 k_{\perp}^2}\,\,
649: {\rm e}^{ip_{\perp}\cdot(x_{\perp}-z_{\perp})}\,
650: {\rm e}^{ik_{\perp}\cdot(z_{\perp}-y_{\perp})}\,=\,{1\over (2\pi)^2}\,
651: \frac{(x^i-z^i)(y^i-z^i)}{(x_\perp-z_\perp)^2(y_\perp-z_\perp)^2 }\,
652: .\ee
653: Eq.~(\ref{ETA}) is our final result for the ``real correction'', to
654: which we shall return in Sect. \ref{sect:PROP}.