1: % Open string field theory without open strings

2: % by Ellwood and Taylor

3: 

4: % v2: reference added

5: 

6: %\documentstyle[12pt,psfig]{}article}

7: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

8: %\input epsfig.sty

9: \usepackage{epsfig}

10: 

11: \font\blackboard=msbm10 at 12pt

12: %\font\blackboard=msbm12

13: \font\blackboards=msbm7

14: \font\blackboardss=msbm5

15: \newfam\black

16: \textfont\black=\blackboard

17: \scriptfont\black=\blackboards

18: \scriptscriptfont\black=\blackboardss

19: \def\bb#1{{\fam\black\relax#1}}

20: \def\BZ{\bb Z}

21: \def\br{\bb R}

22: \def\bff{{\bf F}}

23: \def\bfx{{\bf X}}

24: \def\bfy{{\bf Y}}

25: 

26: \def\Re{{\rm Re\ }}

27: \def\Im{{\rm Im\ }}

28: 

29: \newcommand{\junk}[1]{}

30: 

31: \newcommand{\ba}{\begin{array}}

32: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{array}}

33: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}

34: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}

35: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}

36: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}

37: \newcommand{\beas}{\begin{eqnarray*}}

38: \newcommand{\eeas}{\end{eqnarray*}}

39: 

40: \font\cmss = cmss12

41: \def\half{{1 \over 2}}

42: \def\identity{{\rlap{1} \hskip 1.6pt \hbox{1}}}

43: \def\integer{{\rlap{\cmss Z} \hskip 1.8pt \hbox{\cmss Z}}}

44: \def\laplace{{\kern1pt\vbox{\hrule height 1.2pt\hbox{\vrule width

45: 1.2pt\hskip

46:   3pt\vbox{\vskip 6pt}\hskip 3pt\vrule width 0.6pt}\hrule height

47:   0.6pt}

48:   \kern1pt}}

49: \def\scriptlap{{\kern1pt\vbox{\hrule height 0.8pt\hbox{\vrule width

50:   0.8pt

51:   \hskip2pt\vbox{\vskip 4pt}\hskip 2pt\vrule width 0.4pt}\hrule height

52:   0.4pt}

53:   \kern1pt}}

54: \def\slash#1{{\rlap{$#1$} \thinspace /}}

55: \def\roughly#1{\raise.3ex\hbox{$#1$\kern-

56: .75em\lower1ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}

57:  

58: \def\complex{{\hbox{\cmss C} \llap{\vrule height 7.0pt

59: width 0.4pt depth -.4pt \hskip 0.5 pt \phantom .}}}

60: \def\real{{\hbox{\cmss R} \llap{\vrule height 7.1pt width 0.4pt

61: depth -.1pt \hskip 0.6 pt \phantom .}}}

62: \def\projectiveB{{\hbox{\cmss P} \llap{\vrule height 7.1pt width 0.4pt

63: depth -.1pt \hskip 0.6 pt \phantom .}}}

64: 

65: \def\I{{\hbox{\cmss I}}}

66: \def\IA{\mbox{{\hbox{\cmss IA}}}}

67: \def\IB{\mbox{{\hbox{\cmss IB}}}}

68: \def\II{\mbox{{\rlap{\cmss I} \hskip 0.7 true pt \hbox{\cmss I}}}}

69: \def\IIA{\mbox{{\rlap{\cmss I} \hskip 0.7 true pt \hbox{\cmss IA}}}}

70: \def\IIB{\mbox{{\rlap{\cmss I} \hskip 0.7 true pt \hbox{\cmss IB}}}}

71: 

72: \def\gym{g^2_{\scriptscriptstyle YM}}

73: 

74: \def\str{{\rm STr} \,}

75: \def\sym{{\rm Sym} \,}

76: 

77: \def\tr{{\rm Tr} \,}

78: \def\trl{{\rm Tr}_L}

79: \def\trg{{\rm Tr}_G}

80: 

81: \def\ab{{\bar{\alpha}}}

82: \def\bb{{\bar{\beta}}}

83: \def\bm{{\bar{\mu}}}

84: \def\bn{{\bar{\nu}}}

85: \def\ha{{\hat{a}}}

86: \def\hb{{\hat{b}}}

87: 

88: 

89: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

90: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%

91: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

92: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

93: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%

94: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

95: %

96: 

97: 

98: \textheight=9.2in

99: \textwidth=6.5in

100: \headheight=0in

101: \headsep=0in

102: \topmargin=0in

103: \oddsidemargin=0in

104: 

105: \newcommand{\NP}{{\em Nucl.\ Phys.\ }}

106: \newcommand{\AP}{{\em Ann.\ Phys.\ }}

107: \newcommand{\PL}{{\em Phys.\ Lett.\ }}

108: \newcommand{\PR}{{\em Phys.\ Rev.\ }}

109: \newcommand{\PRP}{{\em Phys.\ Rep.\ }}

110: \newcommand{\CMP}{{\em Comm.\ Math.\ Phys.\ }}

111: \newcommand{\MPL}{{\em Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ }}

112: \newcommand{\PRL}{{\em Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ }}

113: \newcommand{\IJMP}{{\em Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ }}

114: 

115: \newcommand{\um}[1]{\"{#1}}

116: %\newcommand{\tr}{{\rm Tr}}

117: \newcommand{\re}{{\rm Re}}

118: \newcommand{\im}{{\rm Im}}

119: \newcommand{\lag}{{\cal L}}

120: \newcommand{\newcaption}[1]{\centerline{\parbox{6in}{\caption{#1}}}}

121: \newcommand{\fslash}{F\!\!\!\!/\ }

122: \newcommand{\inn}{\!\cdot\!}

123: 

124: \newcommand{\gone}[1]{}

125: \begin{document}

126: \pagestyle{plain}

127: \setcounter{page}{1}

128: 

129: \baselineskip16pt

130: 

131: \begin{titlepage}

132: 

133: \begin{flushright}

134: MIT-CTP-3096\\

135: NSF-ITP-01-17\\

136: hep-th/0103085

137: \end{flushright}

138: \vspace{13 mm}

139: 

140: \begin{center}

141: 

142: {\Large \bf Open string field theory without open strings}

143: %\vspace{3mm}

144: 

145: \end{center}

146: 

147: \vspace{7 mm}

148: 

149: \begin{center}

150: 

151: Ian Ellwood and Washington Taylor\footnote{Current

152: address:

153: Institute for Theoretical Physics,

154: University of California,

155: Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4030; {\tt  wati@itp.ucsb.edu}}

156: 

157: \vspace{3mm}

158: {\small \sl Center for Theoretical Physics} \\

159: {\small \sl MIT, Bldg.  6} \\

160: {\small \sl Cambridge, MA 02139, U.S.A.} \\

161: {\small \tt iellwood@mit.edu, wati@mit.edu}\\

162: \end{center}

163: 

164: \vspace{8 mm}

165: 

166: \begin{abstract} Witten's cubic open string field theory is expanded

167: around the perturbatively stable vacuum, including all scalar

168: fields at levels 0, 2, 4 and 6.  The (approximate) BRST cohomology of

169: the theory is computed, giving strong evidence for the absence of

170: physical open string states in this vacuum.  \end{abstract}

171: 

172: 

173: %\vspace{2cm}

174: \vspace{1cm}

175: \begin{flushleft}

176: March 2000

177: \end{flushleft}

178: \end{titlepage}

179: \newpage

180: 

181: \section{Introduction}

182: 

183: The 26-dimensional open bosonic string has a tachyon in its spectrum

184: with $M^2 = -1/\alpha'$.  The presence of this tachyon indicates that

185: the perturbative vacuum of the theory is unstable.  While some early

186: work \cite{ks-open} indicated the

187: possible existence of a more stable vacuum at lower energy (see also

188: \cite{Bardakci-Halpern-tachyon,Bardakci-tachyon}), until

189: fairly recently the significance of this other vacuum was not

190: understood, and the tachyon was taken to be an indication of

191: fundamental problems with the open bosonic string.

192: 

193: In 1999, Sen suggested that the open bosonic string should be

194: interpreted as ending on an unstable space-filling

195: D25-brane \cite{Sen-universality}.  Sen argued that the condensation of

196: the tachyon should correspond to the decay of the

197: D25-brane, and that it should be possible to give an analytic

198: description of this condensation process using the language of

199: Witten's cubic open string field theory \cite{Witten-SFT}.  In

200: particular, Sen made three concrete conjectures:

201: 

202: \begin{enumerate}

203: \item[a)] The difference in the action between the unstable vacuum and

204: the perturbatively stable vacuum should be $\Delta E =VT_{25}$, where

205: $V$ is the volume of space-time and $T_{25}$ is the

206: tension of the D25-brane.

207: \item[b)] Lower-dimensional D$p$-branes should be realized as soliton

208: configurations of the tachyon and other string fields.

209: \item[c)] The perturbatively stable vacuum should correspond to the

210: closed string vacuum.  In particular, there should be no physical open

211: string excitations around this vacuum.

212: \end{enumerate}

213: 

214: Conjecture (a) has been verified to a high degree of precision in

215: level-truncated cubic open string field theory

216: \cite{Sen-Zwiebach,Moeller-Taylor} and has been shown exactly using

217: background independent string field theory

218: \cite{Gerasimov-Shatashvili,kmm,Ghoshal-Sen}.  Conjecture (b) has been

219: verified for a wide range of single and multiple D$p$-brane

220: configurations, using both the cubic and background independent

221: formulations of SFT (see \cite{Harvey-Komaba} for a review and further

222: references).  To date, however, little concrete evidence has been put

223: forth either for the decoupling of open strings in the perturbatively

224: stable vacuum or for the interpretation of this state as the closed

225: string vacuum.  In this note we explicitly compute the scalar open string

226: spectrum in the cubic open string field theory expanded around the

227: perturbatively stable vacuum, using the level-truncation

228: approximation.  

229: The results of this computation give strong evidence

230: that there are no physical open string states in this vacuum, and that

231: the open strings are removed from the spectrum by purely classical

232: effects in the string field theory.

233: 

234: \section{String Field Theory in the Stable Vacuum}

235: 

236: We begin with a brief summary of Witten's cubic formulation of open

237: bosonic string field theory \cite{Witten-SFT} (see

238: \cite{lpp,Gaberdiel-Zwiebach} for reviews).  The string field

239: $\Phi$ contains an infinite family of space-time fields, one field

240: being associated with each state in the open string Fock space.

241: Physical fields are associated with states in the Hilbert space of

242: ghost number one.  The string field may be formally written as

243: \begin{equation}

244: \Phi = \phi (p)| \hat{0}; p \rangle+

245: A_\mu (p) \alpha^\mu_{-1}| \hat{0}; p \rangle + \cdots

246: %\nonumber

247: \end{equation}

248: where $| \hat{0} \rangle$ is the ghost number one vacuum related to

249: the $SL(2,R)$-invariant vacuum $| 0 \rangle$ through $| \hat{0} \rangle=

250: c_1| 0 \rangle$.   

251: Witten's cubic string field theory action is

252: \begin{equation}

253: S = - \frac{1}{2}  \int \Phi \star Q \Phi - \frac{g}{3}  \int \Phi \star

254: \Phi \star \Phi

255: \label{eq:SFT-action}

256: \end{equation}

257: where $Q$ is the BRST operator of the string theory and the ``star

258: product'' $\star$ is defined by dividing each string evenly into

259: two halves and ``gluing'' the right side of one string to the left side

260: of the other through a delta function interaction.  The action

261: (\ref{eq:SFT-action}) is invariant under the stringy gauge

262: transformations

263: \begin{equation}

264: \delta \Phi = Q \Lambda + g \left( \Phi\star \Lambda -

265: \Lambda\star \Phi \right)

266: \label{eq:gauge}

267: \end{equation}

268: where $\Lambda$ is a ghost number zero string field.

269: 

270: While there are an infinite number of component fields in the string

271: field $\Phi$, for any  particular component fields

272: the quadratic and cubic interactions in

273: (\ref{eq:SFT-action}) and the related terms in the gauge

274: transformations (\ref{eq:gauge})

275: can be

276: computed in a straightforward fashion using a Fock space

277: representation of the BRST operator $Q$ and the star product

278: \cite{Gross-Jevicki-12,cst,Samuel}.

279: It has been found \cite{ks-open,WT-SFT} that truncating the theory by

280: including only fields up to a fixed level $L$ is an effective

281: approximation technique for many questions relevant to the tachyon

282: condensation problem.  (By convention the tachyon is taken to have

283: level zero).  At fixed level $L$, the theory can be further simplified

284: by only considering interactions between fields whose levels total to

285: some number $I < 3L$.  Empirical evidence

286: \cite{ks-open,Moeller-Taylor} indicates that truncating at level $(L,

287: I) = (L, 2L)$ is the most effective cutoff to maximize accuracy for a

288: fixed number of computations and that calculations at truncation

289: level $(L, 2L)$ give similar results to calculations at truncation

290: level $(L, 3L)$.

291: 

292: Sen's conjecture states that there is a Lorentz invariant

293: solution $\Phi_0$ of the full string field theory equations of motion

294: \begin{equation}

295: Q \Phi_0 = -g \Phi_0 \star \Phi_0\,

296: \label{eq:SFT-EOM}

297: \end{equation}

298: corresponding to the closed string vacuum without a D25-brane.  The

299: existence of a nontrivial solution to (\ref{eq:SFT-EOM}) has been

300: analyzed in the level-truncated theory

301: \cite{ks-open,Sen-Zwiebach,Moeller-Taylor}.  In the level (0, 0)

302: truncation, the tachyon potential is simply $-\frac{1}{2}\phi^2 +g

303: \kappa \phi^3$, where $\kappa$ is a numerical constant.  This

304: potential gives a locally stable vacuum at $\phi_0 = 1/(3g \kappa)$.

305: Evaluating the potential at this point gives 68\% of Sen's conjectured

306: value $T_{25}$ for the energy gap between the unstable vacuum and the

307: perturbatively stable vacuum.  When other scalar fields are included

308: in the string field by raising the level at which the theory is

309: truncated, many of these fields couple to the tachyon $\phi$ and take

310: expectation values when $\phi$ becomes nonzero, but similar solutions

311: to the level-truncated string field theory equations of motion

312: continue to exist.  In the level (4, 8) truncation, the energy gap

313: between the two vacua becomes $98.6\%$ of the predicted value

314: \cite{Sen-Zwiebach}, and in the level (10, 20) truncation the energy

315: gap becomes $99.91\%$ of the predicted value \cite{Moeller-Taylor}.

316: As the level of truncation is increased, the vacuum expectation values

317: of the scalar fields converge rapidly, so that the level (10, 20)

318: values for the field values in the vacuum appear to be within less

319: than $1\%$ of their exact values for low-level fields.  These results

320: provide us with a close approximation to a field $\Phi_0$ satisfying

321: (\ref{eq:SFT-EOM}), which we can use to study the perturbatively

322: stable vacuum in the level truncated theory.

323: 

324: We can describe the physics around a nontrivial vacuum $\langle\Phi

325: \rangle = \Phi_0$ satisfying the equation (\ref{eq:SFT-EOM}) by

326: shifting the string field

327: \begin{equation}

328: \Phi = \Phi_0 + \tilde{\Phi}\,.

329: %\nonumber

330: \end{equation}

331: In terms of the new field $\tilde{\Phi}$, the action becomes 

332: \begin{equation}

333: S = S_0 - \frac{1}{2}  \int \tilde{\Phi} \star \tilde{Q} \tilde{\Phi} -

334: \frac{g}{3}  \int \tilde{\Phi} \star 

335: \tilde{\Phi} \star \tilde{\Phi}

336: \label{eq:SFT-t-action}

337: \end{equation}

338: where the new BRST operator $\tilde{Q}$ acts on a string field $\Psi$ of

339: ghost number $n$ through

340: \begin{equation}

341: \tilde{Q} \Psi= Q \Psi +  g \left(

342: \Phi_0 \star \Psi - (-1)^n \Psi \star \Phi_0 \right)\,.

343: \label{eq:tq}

344: \end{equation}

345: The identity

346: \begin{equation}

347: \tilde{Q}^2 = 0

348: \label{eq:q2}

349: \end{equation}

350: for the new BRST operator follows from (\ref{eq:SFT-EOM}).

351: The BRST invariance of the level-truncated approximation to the vacuum

352: $\Phi_0$ was studied in \cite{Hata-Shinohara}

353: 

354: We are interested in studying the physics of the new string field

355: theory defined through (\ref{eq:SFT-t-action},\ref{eq:tq}).  According

356: to Sen, the vacuum $\Phi_0$ should be the closed string vacuum, and

357: should not admit open string excitations.  To study the spectrum of

358: excitations of the theory, we need to explicitly calculate the

359: quadratic terms in the action, or equivalently to compute the action

360: of the new BRST operator (\ref{eq:tq}) on a general string field.

361: This requires us to compute all cubic couplings in the original string

362: field theory of the form

363: \begin{equation}

364: t_{ijk} (p) \;\phi_i (0) \phi_j (-p) \phi_k (p)\, .

365: \label{eq:0pp-form}

366: \end{equation}

367: In this letter we restrict attention to scalar excitations, so we need

368: to compute all terms of the form (\ref{eq:0pp-form}) where $\phi_i,

369: \phi_j$ and $\phi_k$ are scalar fields.  Because $\phi_j, \phi_k$ are

370: momentum-dependent, we must include among these fields longitudinal

371: polarizations of all higher-spin tensor fields as well as the

372: zero-momentum scalars $\phi_i (0)$ which can take nonzero vacuum

373: expectation values in $\Phi_0$.  We restrict attention in this letter

374: to scalars at even levels, which decouple from odd-level scalars at

375: quadratic order due to the twist symmetry of the theory

376: \cite{ks-open,Sen-Zwiebach}.

377: 

378: With the assistance of the symbolic manipulation program {\it

379: Mathematica} we have computed all 58,481 scalar interactions of the form

380: (\ref{eq:0pp-form}) in the level (6, 12) truncation of the theory.

381: There are 160 scalar fields $\phi_j (p)$ at even levels $\leq 6$, including

382: longitudinal polarizations of tensor fields, and 31

383: momentum-independent scalar fields $\phi_i (0)$, each of which takes a

384: nonzero value in the vacuum $\Phi_0$.  (Actually, the vacuum lies in

385: a subspace ${\cal H}_1$ of the full scalar field space

386: \cite{Sen-universality}, but we do not use this decomposition in our

387: analysis).  As a check on our calculations we have also computed all

388: the coefficients associated with gauge transformations

389: (\ref{eq:gauge}) where one of the three fields involved has vanishing

390: momentum.  We have verified that our terms of the form

391: (\ref{eq:0pp-form}) give rise to an action (in the perturbative

392: vacuum) which is invariant at order $g^1$ under arbitrary

393: momentum-independent gauge transformations and a random sampling of

394: momentum-dependent gauge transformations.

395: 

396: Using the complete set of terms of the form (\ref{eq:0pp-form}) in the

397: level (6, 12) truncation, we have calculated all the quadratic terms

398: for even-level scalars

399: in the action (\ref{eq:SFT-t-action}) around the perturbatively stable

400: vacuum.  The details of this action are far too lengthy to appear in

401: print, but will be made available in the future in electronic form.

402: In the remainder of this note we summarize the results of using this

403: quadratic action to study the spectrum of open string states in the

404: theory (\ref{eq:SFT-t-action}).  Earlier attempts to study the

405: spectrum of physical states in a subset of the level (2, 6) truncation

406: appeared in \cite{ks-open,Hata-Teraguchi}.

407: 

408: 

409: 

410: \section{BRST Cohomology}

411: 

412: The spectrum of physical states in the theory (\ref{eq:SFT-t-action})

413: is given by the BRST cohomology

414: \begin{equation}

415: {\rm Ker}\,\tilde{Q}_1/{\rm Im}\,

416: \tilde{Q}_0,

417: \label{eq:}

418: \end{equation}

419: where $\tilde{Q}_n$ describes the action of the BRST

420: operator $\tilde{Q}$ on a string field of ghost number $n$.

421: {}From (\ref{eq:q2}), it follows that $\tilde{Q}_1 \tilde{Q}_0 = 0$ in

422: the full string field theory.

423: The

424: states associated with vanishing eigenvalues of the kinetic operator

425: $\tilde{Q}_1$ at a fixed value of $p^2$  are the $\tilde{Q}$-closed states in the

426: theory.  Two $\tilde{Q}$-closed states are physically equivalent if they differ by

427: a $\tilde{Q}$-exact state $\tilde{Q}_0\Lambda$ where $\Lambda$ is a

428: string field 

429: of ghost number 0.  

430: 

431: Level truncation of the open string field theory  breaks the general

432: gauge invariance (\ref{eq:gauge}) at order $g^2$, although gauge

433: invariance is preserved at order $g^0$ and $g^1$.  This breaking of

434: gauge invariance means that the level-truncated BRST operator no

435: longer squares to zero.  In other words,

436: \begin{equation}

437: \tilde{Q}^{(L, I)}_1 \tilde{Q}^{(L, I)}_0 \neq 0\,

438: \label{eq:q10n}

439: \end{equation}

440: where $\tilde{Q}^{(L, I)}_n$ is the level $(L, I)$ truncated

441: approximation to $\tilde{Q}_n$.

442: The inequality (\ref{eq:q10n})

443: means that $\tilde{Q}$-closed states which are also $\tilde{Q}$-exact in the full string

444: field theory (\ref{eq:SFT-t-action}) will be approximated in the level

445: truncated theory by $\tilde{Q}$-closed states which are not precisely $\tilde{Q}$-exact.  This

446: fact makes the identification of physical states in the theory only

447: possible in an approximate sense.

448: 

449: We have systematically computed $\tilde{Q}$-closed states in the level-truncated

450: theory by finding values of $M^2 = -p^2$

451: where

452: \begin{equation}

453: \det \tilde{Q}^{(L, I)}_1= 0

454: \label{eq:determinant}

455: \end{equation}

456: and then computing the eigenvectors associated with the vanishing

457: eigenvalues.   

458: 

459: As an example of this computation, consider the level (0, 0)

460: truncation of the theory, which includes only the tachyon field

461: $\phi$.  The quadratic term for the tachyon field in the nontrivial

462: vacuum is

463: \begin{equation}

464: \phi (-p) \left[ \frac{p^2 -1}{2}  + g \kappa

465: \left( \frac{16}{27} \right)^{p^2}

466: \cdot 3 \langle \phi \rangle \right] \phi (p)\,.

467: %\nonumber

468: \end{equation}

469: The determinant of $\tilde{Q}^{(0, 0)}_1$ is simply the quantity

470: in square brackets.  This quantity does not vanish for any real value

471: of $p^2$, so there are no $\tilde{Q}$-closed states in the spectrum at this level

472: \cite{ks-open}.

473: 

474: In the level (2, 6) truncation there are seven scalar fields to be

475: considered, associated with the Fock space states

476: \begin{eqnarray}

477: | 0; p \rangle, &  &  \left( \alpha_{-1} \cdot \alpha_{-1} \right)| 0; p

478: \rangle, \nonumber\\

479: \left( \alpha_0 \cdot \alpha_{-2} \right) | 0; p \rangle, &\hspace*{0.5in} & 

480: \left( \alpha_0 \cdot \alpha_{-1} \right)^2 | 0; p \rangle,

481: \label{eq:2-states}\\

482: b_{-1} c_{-1}| 0; p \rangle, &  & 

483: \left( \alpha_0 \cdot \alpha_{-1} \right) b_{-1} c_{0} | 0; p \rangle,

484: \nonumber\\ 

485: b_{-2} c_{-0}| 0; p \rangle & & \nonumber

486: \end{eqnarray}

487: At this level of truncation, using the vacuum expectation values

488: determined in \cite{Moeller-Taylor} with the level (10, 20)

489: truncation, we found five values of $p^2$ where 

490: $\det \tilde{Q}^{(2, 6)}_1 = 0$, associated with states having

491: \begin{equation}

492: M^2 = 0.9067, \;\;\;2.0032, \;\;\;12.8566, \;\;\;13.5478,

493: \;\;\;16.5998

494: %\nonumber

495: \end{equation}

496: in units where $M^2 = -1$ for the tachyon\footnote{Note: a similar

497: calculation was done at level (2, 6) in Feynman-Siegel gauge by

498: Kostelecky and Samuel \cite{ks-open}.  They did not check, however,

499: whether their spectrum was associated with physical or exact states.

500: Our calculation can be restricted to this gauge, where it agrees for

501: the most part (but not exactly) with their calculation.}.  At level

502: (4, 12) we found 18 $\tilde{Q}$-closed states with $M^2 < 20$, of which the

503: lightest has $M^2 = 0.58817$.  At level (6, 12) we found 33 $\tilde{Q}$-closed

504: states with $M^2< 20$, of which the lightest has $M^2= 0.85562$.  The

505: complete set of $\tilde{Q}$-closed states we found\footnote{Our algorithm for

506: locating momenta associated with $\tilde{Q}$-closed states proceeded by

507: calculating the determinant of $\tilde{Q}^{(L, I)}_1$ at equally spaced values

508: of $p$ (with $\Delta p = 0.0001$) and looking for changes of sign in

509: the determinant.  The spacing of our $p$ values was significantly less

510: than the smallest distance we observed between $\tilde{Q}$-closed states (0.0039),

511: so we believe that we have found all the $\tilde{Q}$-closed states at $M^2 < 20$.

512: Some possibility remains that we have missed pairs of $\tilde{Q}$-closed states

513: which are very close in momentum.  It is remotely possible that

514: physical  states are hiding in such closely spaced pairs of $\tilde{Q}$-closed

515: states.} is graphed in Figure~\ref{f:spectrum}.

516: \begin{figure}

517: \epsfig{file=spectrum.eps,width=15cm}

518: \caption[x]{\footnotesize Spectrum of $\tilde{Q}$-closed states in level

519: truncations (0, 0), (2, 6), (4, 12) and (6, 12).  States below the

520: cutoff $M^2 = L-1$ lie mostly in the exact subspace, confirming Sen's

521: conjecture}

522: \label{f:spectrum}

523: \end{figure}

524: 

525: To test the $\tilde{Q}$-exactness of a given $\tilde{Q}$-closed state at level $(L, I)$, we

526: computed $\tilde{Q}^{(L, I)}_0 \Lambda_i$ for each ghost number zero

527: field $\Lambda_i$ with level $\leq L$.  The span of the fields

528: $\tilde{Q}^{(L, I)}_0 \Lambda_i$ gives an approximation to the

529: subspace of $\tilde{Q}$-exact states at each level.  Suppose that $\{e_i\}$ is an

530: orthonormal basis for this subspace and $s$ is one of the $\tilde{Q}$-closed

531: states we found.  We can then measure the extent to which a state is

532: $\tilde{Q}$-exact by the norm squared of its projection onto the $\tilde{Q}$-exact subspace.

533: Explicitly,

534: \begin{equation}

535: {\rm  fraction\ in\ exact\ subspace} = \frac{\sum_{i} (s \cdot e_i)^2 }{s

536: \cdot s} \, .

537: \label{eq:p-exact}

538: \end{equation}

539: There is no natural positive definite inner product defined on the

540: single string Hilbert space ${\cal H}$, so to compute

541: (\ref{eq:p-exact}) we had to make an ad hoc choice of such an inner

542: product.  We did the calculation using two choices for this inner

543: product, and found similar results in both cases.  The first choice,

544: which seems most natural, is to take the  inner

545: product $\langle s | s \rangle$ with $p  \rightarrow | p |$

546: in the matter sector and a Kronecker

547: delta function in the ghost sector.  The second inner product we tried

548: was simply defined by a Kronecker delta function on a basis of states

549: spanned by all possible scalar products of matter and ghost operators

550: (such as (\ref{eq:2-states}) at level (2, 6), giving a unit

551: normalization to each of these states).  Using these two definitions

552: of the inner product, we find for example that the $\tilde{Q}$-closed

553: state at $M^2 =0.9067$ found in the (2, 6) truncation lies $97.90\%$

554: in the exact subspace using the first inner product, and $95.24\%$ in

555: the exact subspace using the second inner product.  In the remainder

556: of this note all calculations use the first definition of the inner

557: product.

558: 

559: In the full string field theory, there are continuous families of

560: $\tilde{Q}$-closed states which are also $\tilde{Q}$-exact at all $p$,

561: given by states of the form $\tilde{Q}_0| s; p \rangle$.  In the level

562: truncation approximation we expect these continuous families to be

563: replaced by a discrete spectrum of almost-exact states, approaching a

564: continuous distribution as the level of truncation is increased.  

565: The

566: extent to which we see a continuous distribution of $\tilde{Q}$-exact

567: states arising in the level-truncation approximation to the theory

568: around the vacuum $\Phi_0$ is a measure of how well level truncation

569: works in the new vacuum, and how close the level-truncation

570: approximation comes to giving a BRST operator satisfying $\tilde{Q}_1

571: \tilde{Q}_0 = 0$.  A complete list of $\tilde{Q}$-closed states at

572: $M^2 < 20$ and the exactness of these states is given in

573: Table~\ref{t:table}; qualitative results for the exactness of all

574: $\tilde{Q}$-closed states are depicted in Figure~\ref{f:spectrum}.  As

575: we would hope, as the level of truncation is increased we see a

576: discrete distribution of almost-exact states which become both more

577: exact and more closely spaced as the level of truncation is lifted.

578: We interpret these almost-exact states as the remnant in the

579: level-truncated theory of the continuous families of $\tilde{Q}$-exact

580: states in the full theory.

581: 

582: Physical states in the theory correspond to $\tilde{Q}$-closed states

583: satisfying $\tilde{Q}_1| s; p \rangle = 0$ which are not

584: $\tilde{Q}$-exact.  Because states in the cohomology of $\tilde{Q}$

585: will not be removed by a generic small perturbation, all physical

586: states in the theory should appear in the level truncation as

587: $\tilde{Q}$-closed states with $-p^2$ approaching some fixed value

588: $M^2$ as the level of truncation is increased.  To verify Sen's

589: conjecture, we would hope to find that the states lying below the

590: cutoff $M^2 = L-1$ are all approximately $\tilde{Q}$-exact, to the

591: precision allowed by the level-truncation approximation, so that no

592: physical states appear in the limiting theory.  Indeed, we find that

593: beyond the level (2, 6) truncation all states below the cutoff lie

594: more than $99\%$ in the exact subspace, using either choice of inner

595: product described above.  For example, the lowest lying states

596: mentioned above in the level truncations (2, 6), (4, 12) and (6, 12)

597: lie 97.90\%, 99.990\% and 99.997\% in the exact subspace.  We would

598: expect physical states in the theory to appear consistently in each

599: level truncation as states with significant components outside the

600: exact subspace, since the average state in the level-truncated space

601: lies less than $35\%$ in the exact space.  We see no sign in our data

602: of such physical open string states at low levels, even up to values

603: of $M^2$ several times larger than the cutoff.  We interpret this

604: result as strong evidence for Sen's conjecture that there are no

605: physical open string excitations around the vacuum $\Phi_0$, and that

606: this string field configuration should be identified with the closed

607: string vacuum.

608: 

609: It may seem surprising that we expect to see the physical states in

610: the cohomology of $\tilde{Q}$, which form a set of measure zero in the

611: full space of $\tilde{Q}$-closed states, through this approach.  The

612: difference between the behavior of physical and exact states under

613: level truncation of $ \tilde{Q}$ can be understood by considering the

614: behavior of the zeros of the functions $f (x) = x-1$ and $g (x) = 0$

615: under a small perturbation by a noise function $\eta (x)$.  In the

616: first case, generically $f (x) + \eta (x)$ will have a single zero

617: near $x = 1$.  In the second case, $g (x) + \eta (x)$ will develop a

618: discrete spectrum of randomly spaced zeros.  The physical states in

619: the cohomology of $\tilde{Q}$ are controlled by functions like $f

620: (x)$, while the continuous families of exact states are controlled by

621: functions like $g (x)$.  While this argument suggests that physical

622: states should indeed continue to be present in the level-truncation

623: approximation, as a check on our methodology we have used the same

624: method we used to compute the approximate cohomology of $\tilde{Q}$ to

625: compute the approximate cohomology of the BRST operator $Q$ in the

626: perturbative vacuum, after adding a small random perturbation $\hat{Q}

627: = Q + \eta$.  We find that unless the perturbation $\eta$ is large

628: enough to dominate the system ({\it e.g.}, by pushing the exactness of

629: a generic $\hat{Q}$-closed state below $90\%$), the physical states at

630: $M^2 = -1$ and $M^2 = 3$ are easily distinguishable in a level (4, 12)

631: truncation of the theory.

632: \begin{table}

633: \begin{center}

634: \begin{tabular}{|| c | | c || r| r | | c || r | r| | c | | r | r | |}

635: \hline

636: \hline

637: $(L, I)$ &\hspace*{0.05in}& $M^2$&\% exact &\hspace*{0.05in} & $M^2$&\% exact

638: &\hspace*{0.05in}& $M^2$&\% exact \\

639: \hline

640: \hline

641: & & & & & & & & &\\

642: \hline

643: \hline

644: (2, 6)& & 0.9067 & 97.90\% &  &

645: 2.0032 &93.79\%&

646: &12.8566 & 64.17\%\\

647: && 13.5478 & 5.50\% & & 16.5998 & 2.56\% &  &

648: &\\

649: \hline

650: \hline

651: & & & & & & & & &\\

652: \hline

653: \hline

654: (4, 12) & &

655: 0.5882 &99.99\% & &

656:  2.9412 &99.94\% & &

657:  3.1163 &99.97\% \\

658: & & 3.9757 &98.51\% & &

659:  4.3462 &98.92\% & &

660:  4.5429 &99.07\% \\

661: & & 5.7318 &98.28\% & &

662:  10.1466 &80.96\% & &

663:  10.6907 &98.06\% \\

664: & &12.7265 &73.42\% & &

665:  13.0284 &52.71\% & &

666: 13.4834 &37.09\% \\

667: & & 13.9911 &12.86\% & &

668: 15.2853 &58.25\% & &

669:  16.2490 &66.20\% \\

670: & &17.0407 &13.88\% & &

671:  17.7912 &14.72\% & &

672: 19.2337 &35.80\% \\

673: \hline

674: \hline

675: & & & & & & & & &\\

676: \hline

677: \hline

678: (6, 12) & &

679:   0.8632& 99.997\% & &

680:   2.0525& 99.982\% & &

681:   2.3355& 99.976\% \\

682: & &  2.9664& 99.997\% & &

683:   3.1800& 99.998\% & &

684:   4.0961& 99.999\% \\

685: & &  4.2023& 99.999\% & &

686:   4.5645& 99.999\% & &

687:   4.5869& 99.999\% \\

688: & &  4.7265& 99.999\% & &

689:   4.7841& 99.993\% & &

690:   4.9703& 99.994\% \\

691: & &  5.4552& 99.984\% & &

692:   5.5382& 99.976\% & &

693:   5.6285& 99.992\% \\

694: & &  5.8999& 99.988\% & &

695:   6.3008& 99.986\% & &

696:   6.3204& 99.265\% \\

697: & &  6.5285& 99.986\% & &

698:   6.7381& 98.328\% & &

699:   7.6480& 97.672\% \\

700: & &  8.2205& 99.936\% & &

701:   8.2441& 98.748\% & &

702:   8.6604& 96.683\% \\

703: & & 11.5289& 98.958\% & &

704:  11.7778& 99.652\% & &

705:  12.1027& 99.529\% \\

706: & & 13.3346& 88.497\% & &

707:  14.5313& 94.919\% & &

708:  16.3295& 52.298\% \\

709: & & 16.9177& 90.786\% & &

710:  16.9991& 79.305\% & &

711:  18.2649& 86.453\% \\

712: \hline

713: \hline

714: \end{tabular}

715: \end{center}

716: \caption[x]{\footnotesize Masses and exactness of all $\tilde{Q}$-closed states

717: found in level truncations (2, 6), (4, 12), and (6, 12) with $M^2 < 20$.}

718: \label{t:table}

719: \end{table}

720: 

721: \section{Discussion}

722: 

723: We have explicitly calculated the quadratic terms in the open string

724: field theory action around the nonperturbative vacuum $\Phi_0$ in the

725: (6, 12) level truncation.  We computed the BRST cohomology by

726: computing all closed states under the truncated BRST operator

727: $\tilde{Q}^{(L, I)}_1$, and comparing with the subspace of exact

728: states formed by the operator $\tilde{Q}^{(L, I)}_0$.  We found

729: evidence that all $\tilde{Q}$-closed states in the theory become

730: $\tilde{Q}$-exact in the limit when fields of all levels are included.

731: 

732: There are several directions in which it would be interesting to

733: proceed, given the results in this letter.  For one thing, it would be

734: very nice to have a better conceptual understanding of the decoupling

735: of open string states in the perturbatively stable vacuum.  While some

736: interesting perspectives on this phenomenon have been given

737: \cite{Yi-membranes,bhy,WT-mass,Sen-fundamental,Gerasimov-Shatashvili,Gerasimov-Shatashvili-2,kls,Chalmers},

738: a convincing picture which explains the classical decoupling of open

739: strings in the cubic string field theory picture has yet to be given.

740: An intriguing suggestion for the form of the string field theory in

741: the nontrivial vacuum was made in \cite{rss,rss2}, where it was

742: suggested that the new BRST operator $\tilde{Q}$ can be related

743: through a field definition to a pure ghost operator such as $c_0$ or

744: more generally $ \sum a_n (c_n + (-1)^nc_{-n})$.  It would be very

745: interesting to use the explicit form of $\tilde{Q}$ which we have

746: computed in level truncation to prove or disprove this conjecture.

747: Finally, a question of fundamental importance is to what extent the

748: cubic open string field theory in the perturbatively stable vacuum

749: contains closed string excitations.  Sen's conjectures suggest that

750: it might be possible to give a direct description of asymptotic closed

751: string states in terms of the open string field theory degrees of

752: freedom in the vacuum $\Phi_0$.  If such a description could be made

753: explicit, it would lead to new insight into the nature of closed

754: string field theory and the structure of D-branes as closed string

755: solitons.

756: 

757: \section*{Acknowledgments}

758: 

759: We would like to thank D.\ Gross, N.\ Moeller, J.\ Polchinski, A.\ Sen

760: and B.\ Zwiebach for helpful discussions in the course of this work.

761: Particular thanks to A.\ Sen and B.\ Zwiebach for constructive

762: comments on an early version of this manuscript.

763: WT would like to thank the Institute for Theoretical Physics in Santa

764: Barbara for hospitality during the latter part of this work.  The work

765: of IE was supported in part by a National Science Foundation Graduate

766: Fellowship and in part by the DOE through contract

767: \#DE-FC02-94ER40818.  The work of WT was supported in part by the A.\

768: P.\ Sloan Foundation and in part by the DOE through contract

769: \#DE-FC02-94ER40818.

770: 

771: 

772: 

773: 

774: 

775: \bibliographystyle{plain}

776: %\bibliography{papers}

777: \begin{thebibliography}{10}

778: 

779: 

780: \bibitem{ks-open}

781: V.\ A.\ Kostelecky and S.\ Samuel, ``On a nonperturbative vacuum for the open

782:   bosonic string,'' \NP {\bf B336} (1990) 263-296.

783: 

784: \bibitem{Bardakci-Halpern-tachyon}

785: K.\ Bardakci and M.\ B.\ Halpern, ``Explicit spontaneous breakdown in

786: a dual model,'' \PR {\bf  D10} (1974) 4230.

787: 

788: \bibitem{Bardakci-tachyon}

789: K.\ Bardakci, ``Spontaneous symmetry breaking in the standard dual string

790:   model,'' \NP {\bf B133} (1978) 297.

791: 

792: \bibitem{Sen-universality}

793: % lookup 9911116

794: A.~Sen,

795: ``Universality of the tachyon potential,''

796: JHEP{\bf 9912}, 027 (1999);

797: {\tt hep-th/9911116}.

798: % end

799: 

800: \bibitem{Witten-SFT}

801: E.\ Witten, ``Non-commutative geometry and string field theory,'' \NP {\bf

802:   B268} (1986) 253.

803: 

804: \bibitem{Sen-Zwiebach}

805: % lookup 9912249

806: A.~Sen and B.~Zwiebach,

807: ``Tachyon condensation in string field theory,''

808: JHEP{\bf 0003}, 002 (2000);

809: {\tt hep-th/9912249}.

810: % end

811: 

812: \bibitem{Moeller-Taylor}

813: % lookup 0002237

814: N.~Moeller and W.~Taylor,

815: ``Level truncation and the tachyon in open bosonic string field theory,''

816: {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf B583}, 105 (2000);

817: {\tt hep-th/0002237}.

818: % end

819: 

820: \bibitem{Gerasimov-Shatashvili} 

821: % lookup 0009103

822: A.~A.~Gerasimov and S.~L.~Shatashvili,

823: ``On exact tachyon potential in open string field theory,''

824: JHEP{\bf 0010}, 034 (2000);

825: {\tt hep-th/0009103}.

826: % end

827: 

828: \bibitem{kmm}

829: % lookup 0009148

830: D.~Kutasov, M.~Marino and G.~Moore,

831: ``Some exact results on tachyon condensation in string field theory,''

832: JHEP{\bf 0010}, 045 (2000);

833: {\tt hep-th/0009148}.

834: % end

835: 

836: \bibitem{Ghoshal-Sen}

837: % lookup 0009191

838: D.~Ghoshal and A.~Sen,

839: ``Normalisation of the background independent open string field theory  action,''

840: JHEP{\bf 0011}, 021 (2000);

841: {\tt hep-th/0009191}.

842: % end

843: 

844: \bibitem{Harvey-Komaba}

845: % lookup 0102076

846: J.~A.~Harvey,

847: ``Komaba lectures on noncommutative solitons and D-branes,''

848: {\tt hep-th/0102076}.

849: % end

850: 

851: \bibitem{lpp}

852: A.\ Leclair, M.\ E.\ Peskin and C.\ R.\ Preitschopf, ``String field theory on

853:   the conformal plane (I)'' \NP {\bf B317} (1989) 411-463.

854: 

855: \bibitem{Gaberdiel-Zwiebach}

856: M.\ R.\ Gaberdiel and B.\ Zwiebach, ``Tensor constructions of open string

857:   theories 1., 2.,'' \NP {\bf B505} (1997) 569, {\tt hep-th/9705038}; \PL {\bf

858:   B410} (1997) 151, {\tt hep-th/9707051}.

859: 

860: \bibitem{Gross-Jevicki-12}

861: D.\ J.\ Gross and A.\ Jevicki, ``Operator formulation of interacting string

862:   field theory (I), (II),'' \NP {\bf B283} (1987) 1; \NP {\bf B287} (1987) 225.

863: 

864: \bibitem{cst}

865: E.\ Cremmer, A.\ Schwimmer and C.\ Thorn, ``The vertex function in Witten's

866:   formulation of string field theory'' \PL {\bf B179} (1986) 57.

867: 

868: \bibitem{Samuel}

869: S.\ Samuel, ``The physical and ghost vertices in Witten's string field

870:   theory,'' \PL {\bf B181} (1986) 255.

871: 

872: \bibitem{WT-SFT}

873: W.~Taylor,

874: ``D-brane effective field theory from string field theory,''

875: {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf B585}, 171 (2000);

876: {\tt hep-th/0001201}.

877: 

878: \bibitem{Hata-Shinohara}

879: % lookup 0009105

880: H.~Hata and S.~Shinohara,

881: ``BRST invariance of the non-perturbative vacuum in bosonic open string  field theory,''

882: JHEP{\bf 0009}, 035 (2000);

883: {\tt hep-th/0009105}.

884: % end

885: 

886: 

887: \bibitem{Hata-Teraguchi}

888: % lookup 0101162

889: H.~Hata and S.~Teraguchi,

890: ``Test of the absence of kinetic terms around the tachyon vacuum in cubic  string field theory,''

891: {\tt hep-th/0101162}.

892: % end

893: 

894: 

895: \bibitem{Yi-membranes}

896: % lookup 9901159

897: P.~Yi,

898: ``Membranes from five-branes and fundamental strings from Dp branes,''

899: {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf B550}, 214 (1999);

900: {\tt hep-th/9901159}.

901: % end

902: 

903: \bibitem{bhy}

904: % lookup 0002223

905: O.~Bergman, K.~Hori and P.~Yi,

906: ``Confinement on the brane,''

907: {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf B580}, 289 (2000);

908: {\tt hep-th/0002223}.

909: % end

910: 

911: \bibitem{WT-mass}

912: % lookup 0008033

913: W.~Taylor,

914: ``Mass generation from tachyon condensation for vector fields on  D-branes,''

915: JHEP{\bf 0008}, 038 (2000);

916: {\tt hep-th/0008033}.

917: % end

918: 

919: \bibitem{Sen-fundamental}

920: % lookup 0010240

921: A.~Sen,

922: ``Fundamental strings in open string theory at the tachyonic vacuum,''

923: {\tt hep-th/0010240}.

924: % end

925: 

926: \bibitem{Gerasimov-Shatashvili-2}

927: A.~A.~Gerasimov and S.~L.~Shatashvili,

928: ``Stringy Higgs mechanism and the fate of open strings,''

929: JHEP{\bf 0101}, 019 (2001);

930: {\tt hep-th/0011009}.

931: 

932: \bibitem{kls}

933: % lookup 0012081

934: M.~Kleban, A.~E.~Lawrence and S.~Shenker,

935: ``Closed strings from nothing,''

936: {\tt hep-th/0012081}.

937: % end

938: 

939: \bibitem{Chalmers}

940: G.\ Chalmers,

941: ``Open string decoupling and tachyon condensation,''

942: {\tt hep-th/0103056}

943: 

944: \bibitem{rss}

945: % lookup 0012251

946: L.~Rastelli, A.~Sen and B.~Zwiebach,

947: ``String field theory around the tachyon vacuum,''

948: {\tt hep-th/0012251}.

949: % end

950: 

951: \bibitem{rss2}

952: % lookup 0102112

953: L.~Rastelli, A.~Sen and B.~Zwiebach,

954: ``Classical solutions in string field theory around the tachyon vacuum,''

955: {\tt hep-th/0102112}.

956: % end

957: 

958: 

959: \end{thebibliography}

960: 

961: \end{document}

962: \end

963:  

964: 

965: 

966: