1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

2: \input epsf

3: %\usepackage{showkeys}

4: \usepackage{graphicx}

5: \usepackage{bm}% bold math

6: \usepackage{latexsym}

7: 

8: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.3}

9: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}

10: 

11: \topmargin -.5cm

12: \textheight 22cm

13: \oddsidemargin .125cm

14: \textwidth 16cm

15: 

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

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

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

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

20: \newcommand{\pa}{\partial}

21: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber \\}

22: \newcommand{\e}{\epsilon}

23: \newcommand{\ve}{\varepsilon}

24: \newcommand{\w}{\omega}

25: \newcommand{\Tr}{\mbox{Tr}}

26: \newcommand{\tr}{\mbox{tr}}

27: \newcommand{\hH}{\hat{H}}

28: \newcommand{\hPhi}{\hat{\Phi}}

29: \newcommand{\hPi}{\hat{\Pi}}

30: \newcommand{\tPhi}{\tilde{\Phi}}

31: \newcommand{\tD}{\tilde{D}} 

32: 

33: \makeatletter

34: \renewcommand{\theequation}{%

35: \thesection.\arabic{equation}}

36: \@addtoreset{equation}{section}

37: \makeatother

38: 

39: \def\href#1#2{#2}

40: 

41: %opening

42: 

43: \begin{document}

44: 

45: \begin{titlepage}

46: \vspace*{30mm}

47: 

48: \begin{center}

49: {\LARGE \sl Confined Phase In The Real Time Formalism And \vspace{8mm}\\ 

50: The Fate Of The World Behind The Horizon}\\

51: \vspace*{15mm}

52: {\sl FURUUCHI \ Kazuyuki}\\

53: \vspace*{3mm}

54: {\sl Harish-Chandra Research Institute}\\

55: {\sl Chhatnag Road, Jhusi, Allahabad 211 019, India}\\

56: {\tt furuuchi@mri.ernet.in}

57: \vspace*{4mm}

58: \begin{abstract}

59: In the real time formulation 

60: of finite temperature field theories,

61: one introduces an additional set of fields (type-2 fields)

62: associated to each

63: field in the original theory 

64: (type-1 field).

65: In \cite{Maldacena:2001kr},

66: in the context of the AdS-CFT correspondence,

67: Maldacena interpreted type-2 fields as

68: living on a boundary 

69: behind the black hole horizon.

70: However,

71: below the Hawking-Page transition temperature,

72: the thermodynamically preferred configuration is

73: the thermal 

74: AdS without a black hole, and hence

75: there are no horizon and boundary behind it.

76: This means that when the dual gauge theory is

77: in confined phase, the type-2 fields cannot be

78: associated with the degrees of freedom behind the

79: black hole horizon.

80: I argue that in this case 

81: the role of the type-2 fields 

82: is to make up

83: {\it bulk} type-2 fields of

84: classical closed string field theory

85: on AdS at finite temperature in

86: the real time formalism.

87: \end{abstract}

88: \end{center}

89: 

90: \setcounter{footnote}{0}

91: \end{titlepage}       

92: 

93: \tableofcontents

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

95: \section{Introduction}

96: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

97: 

98: The AdS-CFT correspondence \cite{Maldacena:1997re}

99: has provided us with powerful tools to

100: tackle the puzzles surrounding black holes 

101: in asymptotically 

102: Anti-de Sitter (AdS) spaces.

103: Strong evidences for correspondence between

104: deconfinement phase transition

105: in gauge theory and Hawking-Page transition

106: to black hole geometry \cite{Hawking:1982dh}

107: have been given in 

108: \cite{Witten:1998qj,Witten:1998zw}

109: in the Euclidean path integral

110: formulation of finite temperature field theory

111: \cite{Matsubara:1955ws,Gibbons:1976ue}

112: (also referred to as imaginary time formalism).

113: Again in the imaginary time formalism,

114: the author recently showed

115: how the expectation value of the Polyakov loop,

116: the order parameter of confinement-deconfinement

117: transition,

118: encodes the dual bulk geometry  

119: in correlation functions of

120: gauge invariant operators 

121: \cite{Furuuchi:2005qm}.\footnote{%

122: See also 

123: \cite{Brigante:2005bq} for further 

124: investigation

125: on some aspects of the confined phase in

126: large $N$ gauge theories in

127: the imaginary time formalism, and 

128: \cite{Furuuchi:2005eu} for

129: its relation to the large $N$ reductions.}

130: However, the real problems

131: about black holes,

132: such as

133: the information loss paradox,

134: dynamical formation and evaporation

135: of black holes, causal structure and 

136: singularities,

137: can only be studied

138: in the Lorentzian signature.

139: 

140: In the real time formulation of

141: finite temperature field theories

142: \cite{%

143: Takahasi:1974zn,Umezawa:1982nv,Semenoff:1982ev,%

144: Niemi:1983nf,Niemi:1983ea},\footnote{%

145: See \cite{Niemi:1983nf} 

146: and a review \cite{Landsman:1986uw}

147: for the real time formulation of

148: finite temperature field theories

149: relevant for this article.}

150: it seems unavoidable

151: to introduce 

152: an additional set of fields besides

153: the original ones

154: (those in the zero-temperature theory). 

155: Each of the newly introduced field

156: is associated with a field in the original theory.

157: (In this article I will call newly introduced

158: fields as type-2 fields, as opposed 

159: to the original fields

160: which I will call type-1 fields.)

161: On the other hand, the

162: extended Carter-Penrose diagram

163: of the AdS-Schwarzshild black hole geometry

164: has a boundary behind the horizon

165: (Fig.\ref{AdSBH} boundary 2),

166: in addition to the usual 

167: boundary of the AdS space at spatial

168: infinity outside the horizon 

169: (Fig.\ref{AdSBH} boundary 1).

170: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

171: \begin{figure}

172: \begin{center}

173:  \leavevmode

174:  \epsfxsize=100mm

175:  \epsfbox{AdSBH.eps}\\

176: \end{center}

177: \caption{The extended Carter-Penrose diagram

178: of the AdS-Schwarzshild black hole geometry.

179: Spherical directions are suppressed in the figure.

180: Besides the usual boundary of the AdS space

181: at spatial infinity (boundary 1, see also Fig.\ref{AdS}),

182: there is a second boundary behind the horizon (boundary 2).

183: For a more detail, see e.g. \cite{Fidkowski:2003nf}.}

184: \label{AdSBH}

185: \end{figure}

186: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

187: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

188: \begin{figure}

189: \begin{center}

190:  \leavevmode

191:  \epsfxsize=30mm

192:  \epsfbox{AdS.eps}\\

193: \end{center}

194: \caption{A Carter-Penrose diagram

195: of the AdS geometry.}

196: \label{AdS}

197: \end{figure}

198: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

199: In \cite{Maldacena:2001kr},

200: in the context of the AdS-CFT correspondence,

201: Maldacena identified the

202: type-2 fields

203: as living\footnote{The word ``living" here is used

204: metaphorically, and

205: the role of type-2 fields in

206: the dual bulk geometry 

207: should be made more precise by

208: further study. 

209: This is one of the purposes of

210: this paper.

211: See also \cite{Herzog:2002pc} for a related study.}

212: on the boundary

213: behind the black hole horizon.\footnote{%

214: That the eternal black hole in AdS space 

215: is related to an entangled state

216: in the CFT was observed in

217: \cite{Balasubramanian:1998de,Horowitz:1998xk}.}

218: This gives a nice explanation

219: for the necessity of the introduction 

220: of type-2 fields

221: in the real time formulation 

222: of the finite temperature field theory.%

223: \footnote{A description of 

224: the thermodynamical nature of

225: black holes by thermo field dynamics

226: was studied in \cite{Israel:1976ur} in early days.

227: For further investigations after 

228: \cite{Maldacena:2001kr}

229: see \cite{Kraus:2002iv,Fidkowski:2003nf}.

230: For recent studies 

231: with more emphasis

232: on the real time formalism,

233: which is closer to the interest of this article,

234: see \cite{%

235: Herzog:2002pc,%

236: Hartnoll:2005ju}.}

237: 

238: However, there is a small puzzle here:

239: Below the Hawking-Page transition temperature,

240: the thermodynamically preferred configuration 

241: in canonical ensemble is 

242: the thermal AdS without a black hole

243: \cite{Hawking:1982dh}.

244: Since it is a finite temperature system,

245: the dual gauge theory

246: should still be described by

247: the real time formulation for the finite temperature.

248: Thus one must conclude that

249: below the Hawking-Page transition temperature,

250: the type-2 fields in the dual gauge theory

251: cannot correspond to the

252: degrees of freedom behind the black hole horizon,

253: since there is no black hole at all.

254: But then, what is the dual bulk description

255: for the type-2 fields in this case?

256: Since the AdS geometry corresponds to

257: the confined phase in gauge theory side,

258: confinement should change

259: the role of the type-2 fields in the bulk.

260: In this article,

261: I will show that this is indeed the case.

262: In the confined phase, the role of type-2 fields

263: in the gauge theory

264: is to make up {\em bulk} type-2 fields of 

265: closed string field theory

266: on AdS at finite temperature

267: in the real time formalism.

268: Since the bulk is also

269: at finite temperature,

270: it is very natural that

271: the bulk theory 

272: also has type-2 fields of its own.

273: The discussions will be

274: in the leading order in the $1/N$ expansion,

275: which corresponds to

276: the classical theory in the bulk.

277: Since the Carter-Penrose diagram

278: is based on classical gravity,%

279: \footnote{In this article the term 

280: ``gravity" will be used with

281: possible $\alpha'$ corrections in mind.

282: In other words, I assume that gravity

283: has its origin in closed string theory.

284: I also expect, as in

285: \cite{Aharony:2003sx,Aharony:2005bq},

286: that the Hawking-Page transition

287: observed in the

288: Einstein-Hilbert action

289: (the lowest order in the $\alpha'$ expansion)

290: continuously extends to its

291: $\alpha'$ corrected version all down

292: to the string scale curvature regime,

293: which is dual to the weakly coupled gauge theory.}

294: this is sufficient

295: to explain 

296: the non-existence of the world

297: behind the horizon in this case. 

298: 

299: An outline of the organization of 

300: this article is as follows:

301: In section \ref{Pert}, I review

302: the derivation of Feynman rules 

303: in the real time formulation 

304: of field theories

305: at finite temperature.

306: Then, I give a crucial prescription

307: for incorporating

308: the effect of confined phase background

309: in this formalism.

310: In section \ref{Anal}, I study

311: Feynman diagrams in large $N$ gauge theories

312: in the confined phase and show a large class

313: of them vanish.

314: To illustrate the mechanism which selects

315: the non-vanishing diagrams,

316: a simple example is given

317: in Appendix \ref{A}.

318: In section \ref{Surv}, I argue that

319: the surviving Feynman diagrams

320: can be interpreted as

321: tree diagrams of

322: closed string field theory on AdS

323: at finite temperature in the real time formalism.

324: Section \ref{Summ} is devoted to

325: summary and discussions.

326: 

327: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

328: \section{Perturbative method in confined phase 

329: in the real time formalism}\label{Pert}

330: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

331: 

332: \subsection{Perturbative method in the real time formalism}

333: 

334: In this section, I will review 

335: the perturbative method\footnote{One may

336: feel it slightly odd to study 

337: the confined phase 

338: by perturbative method, but as mentioned above,

339: the expectation here is that,

340: as in \cite{Aharony:2003sx,Aharony:2005bq},

341: the deconfinement

342: phase transition observed at weak coupling

343: persists continuously up to strong coupling.}

344: in

345: the real time formulation of finite temperature

346: field theories coupled to a gauge field.

347: A concrete example 

348: in mind

349: is the ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills

350: theory with $SU(N)$ gauge group on $S^3$

351: in the 't Hooft limit

352: \cite{Witten:1998qj,Witten:1998zw,%

353: Sundborg:1999ue,Polyakov:2001af,Aharony:2003sx},

354: but the method itself is applicable to 

355: general gauge theories in the 't Hooft limit.

356: %

357: To illustrate the point,

358: I take a real

359: scalar field $\Phi_{ab}(t)$

360: in the adjoint representation

361: of $SU(N)$ as an example.

362: Here, $a,b$ are $SU(N)$ gauge indices.

363: It is straightforward to include several

364: scalar fields, 

365: fermions or dynamical gauge fields.

366: Since I am interested in

367: the low temperature confined phase,

368: it is sufficient 

369: to study

370: quantum mechanics

371: obtained by dimensional

372: reduction 

373: of spatial coordinates on $S^3$.

374: (This approximation is valid 

375: when the inverse temperature $\beta$

376: and the length scale of interest

377: are much larger than the radius of the $S^3$.)

378: It is not difficult

379: to

380: generalize the discussion to more

381: general spatial manifolds, not necessarily

382: with dimensional reductions,

383: by replacing 

384: the mass in the discussions below to

385: the eigenvalues of the spatial Laplacian.

386: The quantities of interest 

387: are

388: thermal Green's functions

389: $G_{\beta}(t_1,\cdots,t_n)$

390: of the time-ordered products% 

391: \footnote{Presisely speaking, these are 

392: the so-called

393: T$^*$-products since I

394: will eventually be interested

395: in the quantities obtained by path integral.}

396: of operators

397: $\hPhi(t)$ in Heisenberg picture:

398: \bea

399:  \label{TG}

400: G_{\beta}(t_1,\cdots,t_n)

401: =

402: \frac{1}{\Tr\, e^{-\beta \hH}}

403: \Tr

404: \left\{ e^{-\beta \hH}

405: T[\hPhi(t_1) \cdots \hPhi(t_n)]

406: \right\},

407: \eea

408: where ``$\Tr$" is the trace over 

409: {\em physical} 

410: states

411: satisfying the Gauss' law constraints:

412: \bea

413:  \label{phys}

414: \hat{\rho}_{ab}\, |phys \rangle = 0.

415: \eea

416: Here

417: $\hat{\rho}_{ab} = 

418: i ([\hPhi,\hPi_\Phi])_{ab}$ 

419: is the generator of

420: the gauge transformation, where

421: $\hPi_{\Phi ab}$ is the conjugate momentum

422: of $\hPhi_{ab}$.

423: $T[\cdots]$ denotes the time ordering

424: and $\beta$ is the inverse temperature.

425: The Hamiltonian $\hH$ is given by

426: \bea

427:  \hH =

428: \tr 

429: \left\{

430: \frac{g^2}{2}\hPi_{\Phi}\hPi_{\Phi}

431: + \frac{\w^2}{2g^2} \hPhi^2 + \frac{1}{g^2} V[\hPhi]

432: \right\},

433: \eea

434: where 

435: $g$ is a gauge coupling constant,

436: ``$\tr$" is a trace over the $SU(N)$ 

437: gauge group indices and

438: $V[\hPhi]$ is a potential term.

439: The mass $\w$ is proportional to 

440: the inverse radius of $S^3$ in the case when

441: the quantum mechanics

442: is obtained from the compactification 

443: of four dimensional conformal field theory 

444: on $S^3$.

445: In order to evaluate

446: the thermal Green's functions

447: by the path integral method,

448: the support of the field variables

449: should be extended

450: to the whole complex $t$-plane as in

451: \cite{Niemi:1983nf}:

452: \bea

453: \hPhi(t) = e^{i \hH t} \hPhi(0) e^{- i \hH t}.

454: \eea

455: One would like to have a 

456: functional representation for

457: the generating functional $Z[J]$ such that:

458: \bea

459: G_{\beta}(t_1,\cdots,t_n)

460: =

461: \frac{1}{Z(0)}

462: \frac{1}{i^n}

463: \frac{\delta}{\delta J(t_n)} \cdots

464: \frac{\delta}{\delta J(t_1)}

465: Z[J] \Biggr{|}_{J=0}  .

466: \eea

467: The functional

468: \bea

469: \Tr

470: \left\{

471: e^{-\beta \hH}

472: T[e^{i \int_{-T}^{T} dt J(t)\hPhi(t)}]

473: \right\}

474: \eea

475: has this property when $-T < t_i < T$.

476: But in order to calculate the thermal 

477: Green's function perturbatively, 

478: one should extend the $t$ integration

479: to a contour $C$ on the complex plane:

480: \bea

481: Z[J] 

482: = 

483: \Tr 

484: \left\{ 

485: e^{-\beta \hH}

486: T_C[e^{i \int_C dt J(t)\hPhi(t)}]

487: \right\}

488: \eea

489: where the contour $C$ is depicted in 

490: Fig.\ref{contour}.

491: $T_C[\cdots]$ denotes time-ordering

492: along the contour $C$.

493: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

494: \begin{figure}

495: \begin{center}

496:  \leavevmode

497:  \epsfxsize=100mm

498:  \epsfbox{contour.eps}\\

499: \end{center}

500: \caption{The contour $C$}

501: \label{contour}

502: \end{figure}

503: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

504: By inserting a complete set of physical states

505: satisfying (\ref{phys}),

506: one arrives at the path integral representation

507: of the generating functional $Z[J]$:

508: \bea

509:  \label{PI}

510: Z[J] 

511: = 

512: \int [{\cal D}_C \Phi] \, 

513: e^{i \int_C dt 

514: \left\{

515: {\cal L}[\Phi] + J(t)\Phi(t)

516: \right\}},

517: \eea

518: where ${\cal L}[\Phi]$ is the Lagrangian%

519: \bea

520: {\cal L}[\Phi] = 

521: \frac{1}{g^2}

522: \tr 

523: \left\{ 

524: \frac{1}{2}D_t \Phi D_t \Phi

525: -\frac{\w^2}{2} \Phi^2 - V[\Phi]

526: \right\} .

527: \eea

528: The covariant derivative is given by

529: \bea

530: (D_t \Phi )_{ab} 

531: = 

532: \pa_t \Phi_{ab}

533: - i [A_0,\Phi]_{ab}.

534: \eea

535: The gauge field $A_0$ is introduced

536: while imposing the Gauss' law constraints

537: as delta function.

538: The path integral is over the fields

539: which satisfy the boundary conditions

540: \bea

541:  \label{bc}

542: \Phi_{ab}(-T-i\beta)

543: =

544: \Phi_{ab}(-T)  ,

545: \eea

546: following from the trace over 

547: the Hilbert space in (\ref{TG}).

548: One can rewrite (\ref{PI}) as

549: \bea

550:  \label{ZJ}

551: Z[J] 

552: = 

553: \exp

554: \left\{

555: {-i \int_C dt 

556: V\left[\frac{1}{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta J}\right]}

557: \right\}

558: \exp

559: \left\{

560: {-\frac{i}{2} g^2 \int_C dt \int_C dt' 

561: J_{ab}(t) D^C_{ab,cd}(t-t') J_{cd}(t')}

562: \right\},\nn

563: \eea

564: where the thermal propagator

565: $D^C_{ab,cd}(t-t')$

566: is a Green's function on the contour

567: \bea

568:  \label{green}

569: (- \pa_t^2 - \w^2) D^C_{ab,cd} (t-t')

570: =

571: \delta_C (t-t') \delta_{ad} \delta_{bc}

572: \eea

573: subject to the boundary condition

574: following from (\ref{bc}).

575: Here $\delta_C (t-t')$ is the delta function

576: defined on the contour \cite{Niemi:1983nf}:

577: \bea

578: \int_C dt \delta_C (t-t') f (t) = f(t').

579: \eea

580: The boundary time $T$  

581: is eventually taken to infinity.

582: By taking $J \rightarrow 0$ as $T \rightarrow \infty$,

583: the generating functional factorizes as

584: \bea

585:  \label{facto}

586: Z[J] = Z_{12}[J] Z_{34}[J] ,

587: \eea

588: where $Z_{12}[J]$ (respectively 

589: $Z_{34}[J]$) denotes the contribution

590: from the path $C_1$ and $C_2$ ($C_3$ and $C_4$).

591: The effect of finite temperature enters

592: in the propagators through the

593: boundary condition (\ref{bc}).

594: Although the generating functional can be

595: seen to factorize, $Z_{34}[J]$ part plays a role

596: for modifying the boundary conditions on

597: the Green's function, as I will explain below.

598: 

599: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

600: % confinement %

601: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

602: \subsection{Incorporating the effect of confined phase

603:  background}

604: 

605: In this subsection I present a prescription 

606: for reading off

607: the dual bulk description corresponding 

608: to the confined phase 

609: in the real time formalism.

610: When there are no external operator insertions,

611: one can take the Matsubara contour, i.e.

612: the line straight down from $-T$ to $-T-i\beta$.

613: Then the calculation reduces to that in the imaginary

614: time formalism,

615: where the confined phase is characterized 

616: by the vanishing

617: of the expectation value of the Polyakov loop.

618: The large $N$ saddle point value of the temporal

619: gauge field $A_0$ is given by

620: \bea

621:  \label{A0}

622: A_{0ab} 

623: = 

624: \delta_{ab} 

625: \frac{2\pi}{\beta N}

626: \left( a-\frac{N+1}{2} \right)

627: \qquad (constant)

628: \eea

629: in an appropriate gauge.\footnote{%

630: For weakly coupled 

631: gauge theories on $S^3$,

632: the low temperature phase

633: ($\beta \gg \w^{-1}$)

634: is the confined phase 

635: \cite{Sundborg:1999ue,Polyakov:2001af,%

636: Aharony:2003sx,Aharony:2005bq}.

637: Above, I

638: wrote down

639: an action for a single scalar field

640: for which

641: there is no deconfinement transition

642: at zero 't Hooft coupling.

643: However, it is straightforward to

644: include several scalar fields

645: to have finite deconfinement temperature.

646: The saddle point (\ref{A0}) is evaluated

647: from the effective action

648: for $A_0$ obtained by integrating out

649: other massive fields,

650: which is justified in the

651: low temperature regime

652: \cite{%Sundborg:1999ue,Polyakov:2001af,%

653: Aharony:2003sx,Aharony:2005bq}.}

654: This gives an appropriate expansion point

655: for perturbation theory

656: on the vertical parts of the contour.

657: In the imaginary time formalism, 

658: it was essential to

659: expand around the saddle point of $A_0$

660: (\ref{A0})

661: to read off the dual bulk geometry in the confined phase

662: \cite{Furuuchi:2005qm}.

663: I claim that

664: {\em also in the real time formalism,

665: the correct prescription

666: for reading off the dual bulk description

667: corresponding to the confined phase

668: is to include the saddle point value (\ref{A0})

669: of $A_0$ 

670: into the Green's function 

671: on the vertical parts of the contour}. 

672: Thus, instead of (\ref{green}),

673: I use Green's function which satisfies

674: \bea

675:  \label{boxA}

676: (-D_t^2 - \w^2) D^C_{ab,cd} (t-t')

677: =

678: \delta_C (t-t') \delta_{ad} \delta_{bc} \quad ,

679: \eea

680: where on the vertical parts of the contour

681: I have included the saddle point value of 

682: $A_0$ (\ref{A0}) 

683: in the covariant derivative $D_t$.\footnote{%

684: On the horizontal parts of the contour

685: one can choose $A_0 = 0$ gauge.}

686: Since I am including

687: the effect of the $A_0$ configuration (\ref{A0})

688: on the vertical parts of the contour, 

689: it is convenient to

690: define the field\footnote{%

691: The reason {Im} $t$, rather than

692: $-i t$ which is familiar from the case with

693: chemical potential, appears here is that

694: $A_0$ has non-zero expectation value

695: only on the vertical parts of the contour.}

696: \bea

697:  \label{redf}

698: \tilde{\Phi}_{ab}(t)

699: =

700: e^{-2\pi i\frac{a-b}{\beta N} (\mbox{\footnotesize Im}\, t)}

701: \Phi_{ab}(t)

702: \eea

703: so that the differential equation for the

704: Green's function $\tilde{D}^C(t-t')$ for $\tPhi(t)$

705: takes the form of the ordinary one (\ref{green}):

706: \bea

707:  \label{tbox}

708: (-\pa_t^2 - \w^2) \tilde{D}^C_{ab,cd} (t-t')

709: =

710: \delta_C (t-t') \delta_{ad} \delta_{bc}  \quad .

711: \eea

712: However, the field redefinition (\ref{redf})

713: modifies the boundary condition (\ref{bc}) to

714: \bea 

715:  \label{tbd}

716: \tilde{\Phi}_{ab}(-T-i\beta)

717: =

718: e^{2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}}

719: \tilde{\Phi}_{ab}(-T) .

720: \eea

721: %

722: One can solve (\ref{green}) with the ansatz

723: \bea

724: \tilde{D}^C_{ab,cd} (t-t')=

725: \theta_C(t-t') \tilde{D}^>_{ab,cd} (t-t')

726: +

727: \theta_C(t'-t) \tilde{D}^<_{ab,cd} (t-t') ,

728: \eea

729: where $\theta_C(t-t')$ is the step function

730: defined on the contour \cite{Niemi:1983nf}:

731: \bea

732: \theta_C(t-t') 

733: = \int_C^t dt'' \delta_C(t''-t').

734: \eea

735: Since from

736: (\ref{PI}) to (\ref{ZJ})

737: the change of variable

738: \bea

739: \tPhi_{ab}(t) \rightarrow

740: \tPhi_{ab}(t) + \int_C dt' \tD_{ab,cd}(t-t') J_{cd}(t'),

741: \eea

742: has been made,

743: the boundary condition (\ref{tbd}) implies

744: \bea

745:  \label{bcD}

746: \tilde{D}^>_{ab,cd} (t-t'-i\beta)

747: =

748: e^{2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}} \tilde{D}^<_{ab,cd} (t-t') .

749: \eea

750: The unique solution to (\ref{tbox}) 

751: with the boundary condition (\ref{bcD}) is

752: \bea

753:  \label{DABCD}

754: &&\tilde{D}^C(t-t')_{ab,cd}

755: =

756: \frac{-i}{2\w} 

757: \left[

758: (A e^{-i\w t} + B e^{i\w t}) \theta_C(t-t')

759: +

760: (C e^{-i\w t} + D e^{i\w t}) \theta_C(t'-t)

761: \right] \nn

762: \eea

763: with

764: \bea

765:  \label{ABCD}

766: A =

767: \frac{1}{1 - e^{-\beta \w - 2\pi i \frac{a-b}{N}}} ,

768: &&

769: B =

770: \frac{e^{-\beta \w + 2\pi i \frac{a-b}{N}}}%

771: {1 -  e^{-\beta \w + 2\pi i \frac{a-b}{N}}} , \nn

772: C =

773: \frac{e^{-\beta \w - 2\pi i \frac{a-b}{N}}}%

774: {1 -  e^{-\beta \w - 2\pi i \frac{a-b}{N}}}  ,

775: &&

776: D =

777: \frac{1}{1 - e^{-\beta \w + 2\pi i \frac{a-b}{N}}} .

778: \eea

779: The Green's function

780: (\ref{DABCD}) can be rewritten in the

781: spectral representation:

782: \bea

783:  \label{tDC}

784: i \tilde{D}^{C}_{ab,cd} (t-t')

785: =

786: \int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{dk_0}{2\pi} 

787: e^{-i k_0 (t-t')}

788: \rho (k_0) 

789: [\theta_C(t-t')+N(k_0,a-b)]\delta_{ad} \delta_{bc}

790: \quad ,

791: \eea

792: where

793: \bea

794: \rho (k_0) = 2\pi \ve(k_0) \delta(k_0^2 -\w^2)

795: , \quad \ve(k_0) = \theta(k_0) - \theta(- k_0)

796: \eea

797: and

798: \bea

799: \label{Nk}

800: N(k_0,a-b) 

801: = \frac{1}{e^{\beta k_0 + 2\pi i \frac{a-b}{N}} - 1}.

802: \eea

803: As in (\ref{facto}), 

804: the partition function %still 

805: factorizes.

806: Therefore, only 

807: the propagators between the fields 

808: on the contours $C_1$ or $C_2$

809: need to be considered. 

810: The propagators for general $\sigma$

811: ($0< \sigma < 1$, where 

812: $\sigma$ is given in Fig.\ref{contour})

813: are obtained as

814: \bea

815: \tD^{(11)}_{ab,cd}(t-t') 

816: &=& \tD^C_{ab,cd}(t-t'), \label{D11}\\

817: \tD^{(22)}_{ab,cd}(t-t')

818: &=& \tD^C_{ab,cd}((t-i\sigma\beta)-(t'-i\sigma\beta)), \label{D22}\\

819: \tD^{(12)}_{ab,cd}(t-t') 

820: &=& \tD^<_{ab,cd}(t-(t'-i\sigma\beta)), \label{D12}\\

821: \tD^{(21)}_{ab,cd}(t-t') 

822: &=& \tD^>_{ab,cd}((t-i\sigma\beta)-t')\label{D21}.

823: \eea

824: Notice that the propagator takes the form of

825: a $2\times 2$ matrix.

826: This means that the degrees of freedom 

827: are doubled compared with the original theory

828: (the theory at zero temperature)

829: \cite{Niemi:1983nf}.

830: The doubling of the degrees of freedom

831: originates from the two parts of the 

832: contour $C_1$ and $C_2$

833: in Fig.\ref{contour}.

834: $\tD^{(11)}$ (respectively $\tD^{(22)}$) is a propagator between 

835: type-1 (type-2) fields, and

836: $\tD^{(12)}$ and $\tD^{(21)}$ are mixed 

837: propagators

838: between type-1 and type-2 fields.

839: 

840: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

841: 

842: By taking $\sigma = \frac{1}{2}$

843: as in \cite{Niemi:1983nf,Niemi:1983ea},

844: one arrives at the most symmetric expression.

845: It is convenient to split the

846: propagator into a temperature dependent part 

847: and an independent part. 

848: Also, at this point it is convenient

849: to undo the field redefinition

850: (\ref{redf}) 

851: to obtain a symmetric expression 

852: for the propagators.\footnote{The 

853: phase appears symmetrically

854: in (1-2) and (2-1) components

855: of the propagator (\ref{Db}).}

856: In momentum space,

857: they are given by

858: \bea

859:  \label{dvD}

860: i D^{(rs)}_{ab,cd}

861: =

862: i D^{(rs)}_{0 ab,cd}  +

863: i D^{(rs)}_{\beta ab,cd}

864: \quad (r,s = 1,2),

865: \eea

866: %

867: \bea

868:  \label{D0}

869: i D_{0 ab,cd} =

870: \delta_{ad}\delta_{bc}

871: \left(

872: \begin{array}{cc}

873:  \frac{i}{k_0^2-\w^2+i\e} & 0 \\

874:  0 & \frac{-i}{k_0^2-\w^2-i\e}

875: \end{array}

876: \right) ,

877: \eea

878: %

879: \bea

880:  \label{Db}

881: i D_{\beta ab,cd} &=&

882: \delta_{ad}\delta_{bc}

883: \pi \delta(k_{0}^2- \w^2) \nn

884: &&

885: \times

886: \frac{1}{e^{{|\beta k_0+2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}}|_R}-1} 

887: \left(

888: \begin{array}{cc}

889:  1 & e^{\frac{1}{2}|\beta k_{0}+2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}|_R} \\

890: e^{\frac{1}{2}|\beta k_{0}+2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}|_R} & 1

891: \end{array}

892: \right) .

893: \eea

894: In the above, $|\cdots |_R$ is defined as

895: \bea

896:  \label{||R}

897: |z|_R = 

898: \left\{

899: \begin{array}{c}

900: z \quad (\mbox{Re}\, z > 0)\\

901: -z \quad (\mbox{Re}\, z < 0)

902: \end{array}

903: \right.  , \quad (\mbox{Re}\, z \ne 0).

904: \eea

905: Eq.(\ref{||R}) is not defined for

906: $\mbox{Re}\, z = 0$, but 

907: because

908: of the on-shell delta function in

909: (\ref{Db}) one does not need to consider

910: that case as long as $\w \ne 0$.\footnote{In the case

911: which the quantum mechanics 

912: is obtained from the compactification

913: of four dimensional conformal field theory 

914: on $S^3$,

915: $\w$ is proportional to 

916: the inverse radius of $S^3$ and non-zero.}

917: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

918: \begin{figure}

919: \begin{center}

920:  \leavevmode

921:  \epsfxsize=100mm

922:  \epsfbox{Feyn.eps}\\

923: \end{center}

924: \caption{Feynman rules for the real time formulation of

925: large $N$ gauge theories at finite temperature:

926: (1) is the temperature independent part

927: of the propagator (\ref{D0}), while

928: (2) is the temperature dependent part

929: (\ref{Db}).

930: %%%

931: The index flow indicated by the arrow

932: is directed from 

933: the first matrix index to the second matrix index

934: of adjoint fields.

935: %%%

936: The temperature dependent part

937: of the propagator (2) is drawn with

938: a ``cut" line (the vertical line in the figure).

939: The interaction vertices (3),(4) are drawn

940: schematically, just to show the index flow structure.

941: One can assign a more detailed structure

942: to the interaction vertices

943: according to the action of one's interest.

944: The interaction vertices do not mix the type-1 fields

945: with the type-2 fields.}

946: \label{Feyn}

947: \end{figure}

948: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

949: 

950: Perturbative Feynman rules can be obtained 

951: just as in the conventional field theories

952: and are sketched in Fig.\ref{Feyn}.

953: I have adopted the 't Hooft's double-line

954: notation \cite{'tHooft:1973jz}.

955: (1) represents the temperature independent

956: part of the propagator $iD^{(rs)}_{0 ab,cd}$

957: and (2) 

958: the temperature

959: dependent part 

960: $iD^{(rs)}_{\beta ab,cd}$.

961: The temperature dependent part

962: of the propagator is drawn with

963: the ``cut" line in Fig.\ref{Feyn} (2).

964: {\em This cut is one of the most important 

965: tools I will use repeatedly 

966: in the following discussions.}

967: Type-1 fields and type-2 fields

968: are coupled only through the propagators:

969: The interaction vertices do not mix

970: type-1 and type-2 fields.

971: The interaction vertices of type-2 fields

972: are given by the complex conjugate

973: of those of type-1 fields:

974: \bea

975:  \label{rp}

976: i\, \tr V_2[\Phi_{(2)}] 

977: = 

978: \left.(i\, \tr V_1[\Phi_{(1)}])^*

979: \right|_{\Phi_{(1)}\rightarrow \Phi_{(2)}}.

980: \eea

981: I have assumed that the potential is real.

982: 

983: 

984: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

985: \section{Analysis of Feynman 

986: diagrams in the confined phase}\label{Anal}

987: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

988: 

989: In this section,

990: with the prescription for incorporating

991: the effect of 

992: the confined phase background (\ref{A0})

993: discussed in the previous section,

994: I will show that

995: contributions from a large class of 

996: Feynman diagrams vanish.

997: In Appendix \ref{A}, a simple example

998: of the following discussions is provided.

999: The reader may find it helpful 

1000: to read them in parallel.

1001: 

1002: The quantities of interest 

1003: in this article

1004: are the correlation functions

1005: of gauge invariant 

1006: single trace local operators,

1007: which correspond to closed string states

1008: in the AdS-CFT correspondence.

1009: Throughout this article I will work

1010: in the planar limit $g \rightarrow 0$,

1011: $N \rightarrow \infty$ with

1012: the 't Hooft coupling $g^2 N$ fixed.

1013: In the planar limit,

1014: one can always associate

1015: a loop momentum to an index loop

1016: \cite{Furuuchi:2005qm,Furuuchi:2005eu}, 

1017: as will be explained below.%

1018: \footnote{There are $\ell + 1$ index loops for

1019: $\ell$ (momentum) loop planar diagrams

1020: of a correlation function of

1021: gauge invariant operators,

1022: but one summation over gauge indices

1023: decouples since the gauge indices always

1024: appear as a difference of two indices

1025: \cite{Furuuchi:2005qm,Furuuchi:2005eu}.}

1026: For a given 't Hooft-Feynman diagram,

1027: I draw

1028: a tree sub-diagram 

1029: which connects the external legs,

1030: to show the flow of the external momentum

1031: (Fig.\ref{vanish}), between the double lines.

1032: The total momentum on a propagator

1033: is a sum of two momenta

1034: associated with the index lines

1035: (taking into account the sign indicated by the arrows),

1036: and an external momentum flow

1037: if there is any.

1038: By a shift of loop momenta, which are 

1039: integration variables,

1040: one can choose any tree sub-diagram

1041: connecting the external legs

1042: to express the external momentum flow.

1043: But once it is chosen,

1044: the integrations over loop momenta

1045: should be done

1046: with

1047: that fixed external momentum flow.

1048: 

1049: 

1050: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1051: \subsection{Diagrams which have an index loop 

1052: with only one cut -- vanish}

1053: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1054: 

1055: I first consider Feynman diagrams which have

1056: at least one index loop containing

1057: only one cut (which is denoted as $a_i$ below).

1058: In this case the cut must be either

1059: 1-1 or 2-2 cut.\footnote{When there is a 1-2 cut

1060: on an index loop, there must be a 2-1 cut

1061: on that index loop. See the explanation

1062: at the end of subsection \ref{somesurvive}}

1063: From (\ref{Db}),

1064: the diagram with the 1-1 or 2-2 cut

1065: is proportional to a factor

1066: \bea

1067:  \label{phase}

1068: \sum_{a_i=1}^N 

1069: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta(p_{0i}-p_{0j})

1070: +2\pi i \frac{a_i-a_j}{N}|_R}-1}.

1071: \eea

1072: Here, $i,j$ label the index-momentum loops.

1073: As mentioned earlier, 

1074: the loop momentum $p_{0i}$

1075: is ``associated" with the gauge index $a_i$,

1076: that means, they always appear

1077: in the combination 

1078: $\beta p_{0i}

1079: +2\pi i \frac{a_i}{N}$.

1080: The origin of this combination 

1081: is the covariant derivative for 

1082: adjoint fields.

1083: Therefore, by taking the background gauge

1084: around the field configuration (\ref{A0}),

1085: even when there are derivative couplings

1086: the loop momentum and the associated index

1087: also appear in the same combination.

1088: Such derivative couplings give rise

1089: to a multiplicative factor 

1090: which is polynomial in 

1091: $\beta p_{0i}+2\pi i \frac{a_i}{N}$.

1092: Those just require a minor modification

1093: in the following discussions

1094: and do not change the conclusion about

1095: whether a diagram vanishes or not.

1096: Therefore, to keep the essential points clear 

1097: in the presentation,

1098: I will only write down the formula 

1099: for the case in which such

1100: derivative couplings are not involved.

1101: Since I am working in the strict $N \rightarrow \infty$

1102: limit, 

1103: the sum over 

1104: the gauge indices

1105: $a_i$ can be replaced by integral:

1106: $\frac{a_i}{N} \rightarrow \theta_i$,

1107: $\sum_{a_i=1}^N \rightarrow N \int_0^1 d\theta_i$.

1108: (To avoid repetition,

1109: this replacement will be

1110: implicit in what follows.)

1111: Then, one can Fourier expand

1112: the integrand as

1113: \bea

1114: \label{vmec}

1115: \int_0^1 d\theta_i 

1116: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta(p_{0i}-p_{0j})

1117: +2\pi i (\theta_i-\theta_j)|_R}-1}

1118: &=&

1119: \int_0^1 d\theta_i 

1120: \sum_{n=1}^\infty 

1121: e^{-n |\beta (p_{0i}-p_{0j})

1122: +2\pi i (\theta_i-\theta_j)|_R} \nn

1123: &=& 0 .

1124: \eea

1125: From the definition (\ref{||R}), 

1126: this kind of diagram

1127: has either {all} negative (when $p_{0i}>p_{0j}$)

1128: or {all} positive (when $p_{0i}<p_{0j}$)

1129: powers of $e^{2\pi i \theta_i}$.

1130: In either case,

1131: (\ref{vmec}) vanishes.\footnote{%

1132: One does not need to worry about the case where

1133: $n$ is a multiple of $N$ in 

1134: (\ref{vmec})

1135: in the strict

1136: $N \rightarrow \infty$ limit.

1137: Since the $N \rightarrow \infty$ limit is taken

1138: before the Fourier expansion.

1139: I thank S. Kalyana Rama and A. Sen for

1140: questions and comments on this point.}

1141: {\em Eq.(\ref{vmec}) is the basic equation

1142: relevant for 

1143: selecting non-vanishing Feynman diagrams

1144: in the confined phase,

1145: and will repeatedly appear in the following}.

1146: 

1147: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1148: \subsection{The case in which

1149: a cut-out loop divides

1150: a diagram into two disconnected pieces,

1151: one of which does

1152: not contain the external legs 

1153: -- still vanish}\label{stillvanish}

1154: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1155: 

1156: In the previous subsection,

1157: I have shown that

1158: the diagrams which have an index loop

1159: with only one cut vanish.

1160: Therefore, below 

1161: I will consider the cases

1162: in which all the index

1163: loops either contain no cut or more than

1164: one cut.

1165: In these cases,

1166: if there is a cut on an index loop,

1167: there must be at least one more cut

1168: on this index loop.

1169: Since 

1170: the sequence of cuts

1171: cannot end on an index loop,

1172: they make up a closed circuit

1173: (when one connects the end points of the cuts

1174: which are inside the same index loop)

1175: which

1176: cut the diagram into disconnected pieces.

1177: In this subsection,

1178: I study the case in which

1179: a sequence of the cuts make up a loop,

1180: and this ``cut-out loop"

1181: divides a diagram

1182: into two disconnected pieces,

1183: one of which does not contain

1184: the external legs (Fig.\ref{vanish}).

1185: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1186: \begin{figure}

1187: \begin{center}

1188:  \leavevmode

1189:  \epsfxsize=70mm

1190:  \epsfbox{vanish.eps}\\

1191: \end{center}

1192: \caption{A diagram in which

1193: the sequence of the bold arrows surrounds

1194: a region without the external legs.

1195: The starting

1196: and the end points of the

1197: bold arrows are connected

1198: when they are inside of the same index loop.

1199: The bold arrows on the cuts are directed from

1200: the smaller

1201: to the larger momenta, 

1202: following the rule given in Fig.\ref{boldarrow}.

1203: In this case, there are 

1204: a maximum and a minimum loop momenta

1205: among the momenta flowing through the cuts.

1206: The maximum momentum loop

1207: is the one where all the bold arrows come in,

1208: and the minimum momentum loop

1209: is the one where all those go out.

1210: Such diagrams vanish

1211: after the summation over the gauge 

1212: index $a_{max}$ or $a_{min}$.}

1213: \label{vanish}

1214: \end{figure}

1215: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1216: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1217: \begin{figure}

1218: \begin{center}

1219:  \leavevmode

1220:  \epsfxsize=70mm

1221:  \epsfbox{cutout.eps}\\

1222: \end{center}

1223: \caption{%

1224: In this figure, 

1225: the starting and the end points

1226: of the sequence of the bold arrows is

1227: connected, since

1228: they are inside 

1229: of the same index loop (planar

1230: diagrams can be thought of 

1231: as drawn on a sphere), 

1232: as indicated

1233: by the dashed line.

1234: Thus the sequence of the bold arrows

1235: make up a cut-out loop.

1236: In non-vanishing diagrams,

1237: all cut-out loops divide 

1238: the diagram into two disconnected pieces,

1239: both containing 

1240: the external legs. 

1241: In the above figure,

1242: the region containing

1243: the external leg with momentum $k_{01}$

1244: is separated from the region 

1245: containing the external legs

1246: with momentum $k_{02}$ and $k_{03}$

1247: by the cut-out loop.}

1248: \label{cutout}

1249: \end{figure}

1250: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1251: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1252: \begin{figure}

1253: \begin{center}

1254:  \leavevmode

1255:  \epsfxsize=80mm

1256:  \epsfbox{boldarrow.eps}\\

1257: \end{center}

1258: \caption{A bold arrow is put on the cut

1259: (temperature dependent part of the propagator,

1260: see Fig.\ref{Feyn}) to indicate

1261: which of the momenta associated

1262: with the index lines is larger. 

1263: The direction is from the smaller

1264: to the larger momenta, and

1265: the sign of the loop 

1266: momenta are determined referring to the

1267: direction of the associated index lines.

1268: When there is an external momentum 

1269: flowing into a propagator 

1270: ($k_0$ in the right),

1271: it is added to the momentum with the same direction.

1272: In other words, the direction of the bold arrow

1273: is determined according to the 

1274: direction of the total momentum flowing on

1275: the propagator.}

1276: \label{boldarrow}

1277: \end{figure}

1278: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1279: In this case,

1280: one can put the external momentum flow

1281: avoiding the region cut out by the cut-out loop.

1282: Without loss of generality,

1283: one can assume that there are no further

1284: cut-out loops inside\footnote{%

1285: For a loop on a sphere topology,

1286: inside and outside

1287: is a relative notion,

1288: but one may call one side inside

1289: and the other outside.

1290: Here I called the region

1291: of the Feynman diagram

1292: which does not contain the

1293: external legs as inside.}

1294: the one under consideration.

1295: Then, since the type-1 and type-2 fields

1296: only mix through 1-2 or 2-1 cut propagators,

1297: the cut out region consists of 

1298: either entirely

1299: type-1 or entirely type-2 propagators and vertices.

1300: I first study the case in which

1301: the cut-out loop is either

1302: made of entirely 1-1 cuts or entirely 2-2 cuts.

1303: Other cases can be treated similarly.

1304: The correlation function is proportional to

1305: a product of the factors

1306: coming from the 1-1 or 2-2 cuts on

1307: this cut-out loop (see (\ref{Db})):

1308: \bea

1309:  \label{expand}

1310: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta (p_{0i}-p_{0j})

1311: +2\pi i \frac{a_i-a_j}{N}|_R}-1}

1312: =

1313: \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}

1314: e^{-n  |\beta(p_{0i}-p_{0j})+

1315: 2\pi i\frac{a_i-a_j}{N}|_R}  .

1316: \eea

1317: Contrary to the previous case, since

1318: $|\beta (p_{0i}-p_{0j})+2\pi i\frac{a_i-a_j}{N}|_R$

1319: may have different

1320: signs for different combinations of

1321: $(i,j)$,

1322: the phases may cancel 

1323: in the product.

1324: Then the summation over these

1325: gauge indices

1326: can have a non-zero value.

1327: However, 

1328: there is always a maximum loop momentum, 

1329: $p_{0max}$,

1330: and a minimum

1331: loop momentum, $p_{0min}$,

1332: among

1333: the loop momenta which cross the cuts

1334: on the cut-out loop.

1335: I denote the associated gauge indices

1336: $a_{max}$ and $a_{min}$, respectively.

1337: Then, from the definition (\ref{||R}), 

1338: \bea

1339:  \label{|max|R}

1340: \left|\beta(p_{0max}-p_{0i})+2\pi i\frac{a_{max}-a_i}{N}\right|_R

1341: = \beta(p_{0max}-p_{0i})+2\pi i\frac{a_{max}-a_i}{N}

1342: \eea

1343: and

1344: \bea

1345:  \label{|min|R}

1346: \left|\beta(p_{0min}-p_{0i})+2\pi i\frac{a_{min}-a_i}{N}\right|_R

1347: = 

1348: - \left(

1349: \beta(p_{0min}-p_{0i})+2\pi i\frac{a_{min}-a_i}{N}

1350: \right),

1351: \eea

1352: i.e., they

1353: have a definite sign 

1354: in any combination with other $p_{0i}$.

1355: (Recall that because of the on-shell delta function

1356: in (\ref{Db}),

1357: the difference between two momentum flows 

1358: in a cut-propagator is always non-zero: 

1359: $|p_{0i}-p_{0j}|= \w$.)

1360: This means that

1361: in the Fourier expansion (\ref{expand}),

1362: the sign of the phase in

1363: $e^{2\pi i\frac{a_{max}}{N}}$ 

1364: {\em always} 

1365: appears negative 

1366: while that of 

1367: $e^{2\pi i\frac{a_{min}}{N}}$ 

1368: {\em always}

1369: positive,

1370: and hence do not cancel.

1371: After summing over the index $a_{max}$ 

1372: (or $a_{min}$),

1373: the contribution from such diagrams

1374: vanish, as in (\ref{vmec}).

1375: %

1376: In Fig.\ref{vanish}

1377: the cut is drawn with a bold arrow 

1378: which is directed 

1379: from the smaller 

1380: to the larger loop momenta,

1381: following the rule given in Fig.\ref{boldarrow}.

1382: The maximum loop momentum

1383: $p_{0max}$ 

1384: (among the loop momenta which cross

1385: the cut-out loop)

1386: is the loop

1387: to which those bold arrows 

1388: all come in,

1389: and the minimum 

1390: $p_{0min}$ is 

1391: from which all those bold arrows flow out.

1392: 

1393: Essentially the same arguments

1394: hold for 1-2 (2-1) cuts. 

1395: In this case, for $p_{0max}$,

1396: for example,

1397: there is an extra overall factor

1398: $e^{\frac{1}{2}(\beta(p_{0max}-p_{0i})

1399: +2\pi i \frac{a_{max}-a_i}{N})}$

1400: compared with the 1-1 or 2-2 cuts.

1401: Since type-1 and type-2 fields

1402: mix only through 1-2 or 2-1 cut propagators,

1403: and there are no further cuts inside

1404: the cut-out loop,

1405: the cut out region is made of either

1406: entirely type-1 fields or entirely type-2 fields.

1407: Then, an index line

1408: which enters from the type-1 region to the 

1409: type-2 region must come out again.\footnote{%

1410: Recall that every index loop has either 

1411: zero or more than

1412: one cut in order for a diagram not to vanish.}

1413: Therefore, there are always an even number of 

1414: the extra phase factors coming from the 1-2 (2-1) cuts

1415: for each index loop, and they multiply up to

1416: integer powers of 

1417: $e^{\beta p_{0max} + 2\pi i \frac{a_{max}}{N}}$.

1418: It partially cancels the relevant phase coming from

1419: the Fourier expansion

1420: of 

1421: $1/(e^{ (\beta (p_{0max}-p_{0i})

1422: +2\pi i\frac{a_{max}-a_i}{N})}-1)$,

1423: but

1424: it does not completely cancel

1425: the phase factors. (This is 

1426: basically because originally 

1427: each

1428: of these was just 

1429: half of the relevant phase).

1430: 

1431: 

1432: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1433: \subsection{The case in which 

1434: every 

1435: cut-out loop divides a diagram

1436: into two disconnected pieces

1437: both containing the external legs 

1438: -- some diagrams survive}\label{somesurvive}

1439: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1440: 

1441: From the discussions in the

1442: previous subsections, 

1443: the non-vanishing contributions

1444: arise only from diagrams

1445: in which 

1446: every cut-out loop

1447: divides the diagram into two disconnected pieces

1448: both 

1449: containing the external legs

1450: (Fig.\ref{cutout}).

1451: Here, the closed circuits made of cuts

1452: are interpreted as overlapping 

1453: cut-out loops,

1454: as will be explained in more detail

1455: in the next subsection.

1456: In this case,

1457: the tree sub-diagram expressing

1458: the external momentum flow

1459: must cross the cut:

1460: Since the diagram is completely

1461: disconnected by the

1462: cut-out loop, there is no way to 

1463: connect the separated external legs

1464: avoiding the cuts.

1465: For this kind of diagrams, the earlier

1466: argument does not hold, because

1467: an additional external momentum

1468: comes into the argument:

1469: Now it is possible to have

1470: $p_{0max} < p_{0i} + k_0$

1471: or

1472: $p_{0min} + k_0 > p_{0i}$

1473: for some $i$,

1474: where $k_0$ is an external momentum

1475: flowing into the cut propagator

1476: with index lines $a_{max}$ and $i$,

1477: or $a_{min}$ and $i$, respectively.

1478: From the definition (\ref{||R}),

1479: this means

1480: \bea

1481: \left|\beta(p_{0max}-(p_{0i}+ k_0))+2\pi i\frac{a_{max}-a_i}{N}\right|_R

1482: = - \left(\beta(p_{0max}-(p_{0i}+ k_0))+2\pi i\frac{a_{max}-a_i}{N}\right) 

1483: \eea

1484: for some $i$, or

1485: \bea

1486: \left|\beta(p_{0min}+ k_0-p_{0i})+2\pi i\frac{a_{min}-a_i}{N}\right|_R

1487: = \beta(p_{0min}+ k_0-p_{0i})+2\pi i\frac{a_{min}-a_i}{N}

1488: \eea

1489: for some $i$. Compare these

1490: with the previous cases

1491: (\ref{|max|R}) and (\ref{|min|R}).

1492: Still, in order for a diagram not to vanish,

1493: there must not be an index loop

1494: where bold arrows are all coming in

1495: (as in the index loop associated with $p_{0max}$

1496: in the previous case),

1497: or all going out 

1498: (as in that associated with $p_{0min}$

1499: in the previous case).

1500: In other words,

1501: when there is a bold arrow

1502: coming into an index loop,

1503: there must be at least one 

1504: bold arrow which comes out of it.

1505: Thus the {\em directed} sequences of bold arrows

1506: make up closed circuits.

1507: Note that this can only happen

1508: when the sequence of the bold arrows

1509: crosses the external momentum flow,

1510: otherwise it is inconsistent with

1511: the definition of the bold arrows

1512: (i.e., the directed sequence of bold arrows should 

1513: be along an increasing sequence of momenta,

1514: see Fig.\ref{boldarrow}).

1515: In the next section,

1516: these non-vanishing diagrams will be

1517: studied in more detail.

1518: 

1519: 

1520: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1521: \section{Surviving diagrams

1522: as closed string tree diagrams

1523: in the real time formulation in the bulk}\label{Surv}

1524: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1525: 

1526: Now I will argue that the 

1527: non-vanishing Feynman diagrams

1528: in the confined phase

1529: can be interpreted

1530: as tree diagrams

1531: of the real time formulation of 

1532: closed string field theory on AdS

1533: at finite temperature.%

1534: \footnote{%

1535: The reason I am using the phrase

1536: closed string {\em field} theory here is

1537: just to indicate that there will 

1538: be propagators

1539: and interaction vertices for

1540: the type-2 {\em fields} in the bulk.

1541: The discussions remain within

1542: perturbation theory.

1543: Non-perturbative studies

1544: using the field theory will be interesting

1545: but beyond the scope of this article.}

1546: Here, the word ``closed string theory" is used

1547: in a loose sense, in that I regard

1548: random surfaces

1549: obtained from the Feynman diagrams of

1550: the large $N$ gauge theories

1551: as closed string worldsheets \cite{'tHooft:1973jz},

1552: hoping more precise description

1553: as a closed string theory will emerge from the

1554: conjectured duality between closed string theories on

1555: AdS 

1556: and large $N$ gauge theories 

1557: \cite{Maldacena:1997re}.%

1558: \footnote{See 

1559: \cite{Gopakumar:2003ns,Gopakumar:2004qb,%

1560: Gopakumar:2005fx,Gopakumar:2004ys,Furuuchi:2005qm} 

1561: for a recent attempt to

1562: describe precisely how the large $N$ gauge theory

1563: correlation functions organize themselves

1564: into closed string amplitudes.}

1565: 

1566: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1567: \subsection{Cut-out loops as cuts of closed 

1568: string propagators}

1569: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1570: 

1571: First,

1572: I argue that 

1573: the cut-out loops

1574: can be identified with 

1575: the cuts of the temperature dependent parts

1576: of the closed string propagators.

1577: In closed string field theory,

1578: there is a freedom in

1579: separating the propagator and

1580: the interaction vertices 

1581: (see e.g. \cite{Hata:1993gf}).

1582: However, it

1583: must be constructed

1584: in a way that it reproduces

1585: the correct perturbative diagrams.

1586: Therefore, in the following

1587: I do not

1588: specify

1589: how to divide the worldsheet into

1590: the propagators

1591: and interaction vertices,

1592: but the cut-out loop must be within 

1593: the propagator part.

1594: 

1595: I will show that those cut-out loops

1596: give the correct

1597: energy dependence

1598: as the temperature dependent parts

1599: of closed string propagators

1600: in the real time formalism.

1601: I will discuss this in the free field limit, i.e.

1602: zero 't Hooft coupling limit.

1603: I expect that the discussions 

1604: can be extended to

1605: finite 't Hooft coupling

1606: if the full propagators

1607: in the gauge theory

1608: instead of the free propagators are used.%

1609: \footnote{%

1610: I thank R. Gopakumar for reminding me

1611: that the following discussions

1612: on the energy dependence

1613: are for free field theory,

1614: and suggesting 

1615: how the generalization to

1616: the finite 't Hooft coupling will be.}

1617: 

1618: 

1619: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1620: \subsubsection{An isolated cut-out loop}

1621: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1622: 

1623: I start with

1624: the case when

1625: the cut-out loop is isolated,

1626: i.e.

1627: all the index loops crossed

1628: by the cut-out loop 

1629: have one incoming and one out going

1630: bold arrow.

1631: The case for more general closed circuits

1632: will be explained shortly.

1633: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1634: Notice first that the cut-out loop

1635: is proportional to $\delta (k_0^2 - (J\w)^2 )$,

1636: where $k_0$ is the momentum

1637: flowing into the cut-out loop

1638: and $J$ is 

1639: the

1640: number of the gauge theory propagators

1641: cut by the cut-out loop (Fig.\ref{cut}).

1642: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1643: \begin{figure}

1644: \begin{center}

1645:  \leavevmode

1646:  \epsfxsize=85mm

1647:  \epsfbox{cut.eps}\\

1648: \end{center}

1649: \caption{A 1-1 cut-out loop

1650: (the starting and the end points of

1651: the sequence of the bold arrows

1652: should be regarded as the same point,

1653: as indicated by the dashed line).

1654: The bold arrows are all in the same direction

1655: on the cut-out loop

1656: in order for the diagram not to vanish.

1657: The figure can be regarded as the case

1658: $k_0 = J\w= 4\w$, which is enforced

1659: by the on-shell delta functions of the cuts

1660: on the cut-out loop.

1661: ``(1)" in the above

1662: refers to the type-1 region.}

1663: \label{cut}

1664: \end{figure}

1665: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1666: This is due to the fact that 

1667: on the cut-out loop,

1668: the bold arrows must be directed in the

1669: same direction,

1670: in order for

1671: the diagram not to vanish,

1672: as described in the previous section.

1673: This means that

1674: the momenta flowing through those 

1675: cuts are either all $\w$

1676: or all $-\w$.

1677: These give a factor

1678: $\delta(k_0-J\w)$ or

1679: $\delta(k_0 + J\w)$, respectively.

1680: Up to these delta functions,

1681: both contributions are the same

1682: and one obtains $\delta (k_0^2 - (J\w)^2 )$.

1683: $J\w$ corresponds

1684: to the external momentum flow on

1685: an edge of the tree sub-diagram

1686: which the cut-out loop crosses,

1687: and thus the cut-out loop

1688: can be assigned to

1689: a cut on an edge of the closed string tree

1690: diagram, i.e., a closed string propagator

1691: (Fig.\ref{tree}).

1692: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1693: \begin{figure}

1694: \begin{center}

1695:  \leavevmode

1696:  \epsfxsize=70mm

1697:  \epsfbox{tree.eps}\\

1698: \end{center}

1699: \caption{A `t Hooft Feynman diagram

1700: identified with a closed string worldsheet.

1701: The cut-out loop must cross the tree sub-diagram

1702: where the external momentum flows.

1703: Thus the cut-out loop can be identified

1704: with the cut on a closed string propagator.}

1705: \label{tree}

1706: \end{figure}

1707: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1708: In the free field limit,

1709: $J\w$ can be identified with 

1710: the energy of a closed string state

1711: corresponding to

1712: $\tr \Phi^J$ 

1713: \cite{Witten:1998qj,Gubser:1998bc}.\footnote{%

1714: The concrete example in mind

1715: is ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills theory

1716: compactified on $S^3$,

1717: and $\w$ is proportional to the 

1718: inverse radius of the $S^3$.

1719: Since  

1720: this theory

1721: is conformal, after a suitable rescaling 

1722: only the ratio

1723: of the two scales $\beta \w$

1724: is physically relevant.}

1725: Therefore, this is the correct 

1726: on-shell delta function which should appear in

1727: the temperature dependent part of 

1728: the propagators in the real time formalism:

1729: The temperature dependent

1730: part of the propagator in the real time formalism

1731: in general has a form of (\ref{Db})

1732: without the gauge index dependent phase factors

1733: specific to the gauge theory in the confined phase.

1734: (Recall the derivation of (\ref{Db})

1735: or see \cite{Landsman:1986uw,Leblanc:1987zj}.)

1736: 

1737: Furthermore,

1738: the 1-1 and 2-2 cut-out loops

1739: give rise to a following

1740: gauge index summation:

1741: \bea

1742:  \label{cc11}

1743: \sum_{a_1=1}^N \cdots \sum_{a_J=1}^N

1744: \prod_{i=1}^{J}

1745: \frac{1}%

1746: {e^{\beta \w \pm 2\pi i \frac{a_i-a_{i+1}}{N}} -1}

1747: &=&

1748: \sum_{a_1=1}^N \cdots \sum_{a_J=1}^N

1749: \prod_{i=1}^{J}

1750: \sum_{n_i=1}^\infty

1751: e^{-n_i(\beta \w \pm 2\pi i \frac{a_i-a_{i+1}}{N})} \nn

1752: &=&

1753: \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} e^{- n\beta \w J}\nn

1754: &=&

1755: \frac{1}{e^{\beta \w J} -1}  .

1756: \eea

1757: Here, $a_{J+1} = a_1$.

1758: Recall that the total momentum of the cuts

1759: on the cut-out loop are either all $\w$

1760: or all $-\w$, and 

1761: $\pm$ respectively

1762: correspond to each case:

1763: The contribution from

1764: $\delta(p_{0i}-p_{0j}(+k_0) \mp \w)$,

1765: where $p_{0i}$ and $p_{0j}$ are loop

1766: momenta associated with the index 

1767: $a_i$ and $a_j$,

1768: and $k_0$ is a possible external momentum flow

1769: (on one of the cuts).

1770: Notice that 

1771: from the first line to the second line, 

1772: the sum over the gauge indices 

1773: only picked up the

1774: $n_1 = n_2 = \cdots = n_J \equiv n$ contributions,

1775: since the phases must cancel to give a

1776: non-zero result.

1777: Similarly,

1778: the 1-2 and 2-1 cut-out loops give rise to a factor

1779: \bea

1780:  \label{cc12}

1781: \sum_{a_1=1}^N \cdots \sum_{a_J=1}^N

1782: \prod_{i=1}^{J} 

1783: \frac{%

1784: e^{ \frac{1}{2}(\beta \w + 2\pi i %

1785: \frac{a_i-a_{i+1}}{N})} }%

1786: {e^{\beta \w \pm 2\pi i \frac{a_i-a_{i+1}}{N}} -1}

1787: &=&

1788: e^{\frac{\beta}{2}\w J}

1789: \sum_{a_1=1}^N \cdots \sum_{a_J=1}^N

1790: \prod_{i=1}^{J}

1791: \sum_{n_i=1}^{\infty}

1792: e^{- n_i (\beta \w \pm 2\pi i \frac{a_i-a_{i+1}}{N})} \nn

1793: &=&

1794: e^{\frac{\beta}{2}\w J}

1795: \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} e^{- n \beta \w J}\nn

1796: &=&

1797: \frac{e^{\frac{\beta}{2}\w J}}{e^{\beta \w J} -1}.

1798: \eea

1799: Again, the factors

1800: (\ref{cc11}) and (\ref{cc12})

1801: are the expected ones for 

1802: the 

1803: temperature dependent parts of the

1804: propagators

1805: in the real time formalism.

1806: All together, these give

1807: the correct energy dependent 

1808: factors to be interpreted

1809: as the temperature dependent part of

1810: the propagators

1811: in the real time formulation of

1812: closed string field theory at finite temperature.

1813: 

1814: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1815: \subsubsection{Closed circuits as 

1816: overlapping cut-out loops}

1817: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1818: 

1819: So far, I have studied the case

1820: in which cut-out loops are isolated.

1821: In general, 

1822: bold arrows make up closed circuits:

1823: More than two bold arrows can come

1824: in and go out at one index-momentum loop 

1825: (Fig.\ref{circuit})

1826: to give a non-vanishing contribution. 

1827: This case can be treated as an overlap

1828: of single cut-out loops.

1829: To see this, it

1830: may be useful to draw an

1831: analogy between 

1832: the bold arrow circuits

1833: with Feynman diagrams:\footnote{%

1834: The analogy here is with general Feyman diagrams,

1835: not with the specific large $N$ 

1836: Feynman diagrams which have been studied

1837: in this article.}

1838: The bold arrows can be put on

1839: the edges of the dual graph of

1840: a 't Hooft-Feynman diagram.

1841: The dual graph can be obtained

1842: by replacing the faces of the 

1843: original graph by dual vertices,

1844: the edges by orthogonal dual edges and

1845: the vertices by dual faces

1846: (Fig.\ref{circuit}).

1847: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1848: \begin{figure}

1849: \begin{center}

1850:  \leavevmode

1851:  \epsfxsize=70mm

1852:  \epsfbox{circuit.eps}\\

1853: \end{center}

1854: \caption{A part of a planar 

1855: 't Hooft-Feynman diagram (the double lines)

1856: and its dual graph (the dashed lines).

1857: The cut-out lines (bold arrows)

1858: make up a closed circuit

1859: on the dual graph.

1860: Each sub-loop of the closed circuits 

1861: must 

1862: surround a region with

1863: the external leg, 

1864: and there must be

1865: at least one external leg on the other side,

1866: as described in section \ref{somesurvive}.}

1867: \label{circuit}

1868: \end{figure}

1869: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1870: The bold arrows

1871: make up closed circuits

1872: on the dual graph of the 

1873: planar Feynman diagram.

1874: When one 

1875: Fourier expands the correlation

1876: function in terms of the gauge 

1877: index dependent factor

1878: $e^{-2\pi i \frac{a_i}{N}}$,

1879: the bold arrow

1880: tells whether

1881: the phase $2\pi i \frac{a_i}{N}$ 

1882: from the propagator

1883: which it crosses

1884: appears with positive sign

1885: or negative sign.

1886: In the limit $N \rightarrow \infty$,

1887: $\frac{a_i}{N} \rightarrow \theta_i$,

1888: which was implicit in the above,

1889: one can regard the Fourier mode 

1890: as an analogue of discrete ``momentum".

1891: Then, each index sum 

1892: picks up a term

1893: in which all of the phases cancel.

1894: This is an analogue of the

1895: momentum conservation

1896: at each vertex on Feynman diagrams.

1897: One can solve the ``momentum conservations"

1898: to end up with ``loop momenta" for

1899: sub-loops of the circuit, see

1900: Fig.\ref{circuit1}-\ref{circuit3}.

1901: Note that I have specified the

1902: direction of the bold arrows,

1903: so the ``momentum"

1904: should be always positive, i.e.

1905: either

1906: positive incoming 

1907: or positive outgoing.

1908: The circuits with

1909: the same topology but with different

1910: directions of arrows

1911: should be regarded as different circuits.

1912: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1913: \begin{figure}

1914: \begin{center}

1915:  \leavevmode

1916:  \epsfxsize=70mm

1917:  \epsfbox{circuit1.eps}\\

1918: \end{center}

1919: \caption{A closed circuit

1920: with the ``momentum conservation" at

1921: each vertex.

1922: The ``momentum conservations"

1923: can be solved by assigning ``loop momenta"

1924: to the sub-loops in the circuit.}

1925: \label{circuit1}

1926: \end{figure}

1927: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1928: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1929: \begin{figure}

1930: \begin{center}

1931:  \leavevmode

1932:  \epsfxsize=70mm

1933:  \epsfbox{circuit2.eps}\\

1934: \end{center}

1935: \caption{}

1936: \label{circuit2}

1937: \end{figure}

1938: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1939: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1940: \begin{figure}

1941: \begin{center}

1942:  \leavevmode

1943:  \epsfxsize=70mm

1944:  \epsfbox{circuit3.eps}\\

1945: \end{center}

1946: \caption{}

1947: \label{circuit3}

1948: \end{figure}

1949: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1950: Each sub-loop on the cut-out circuit

1951: has a 

1952: direction inherited from the

1953: direction of the

1954: bold arrows of the cut-out circuit, 

1955: in particular

1956: must cross an edge of the tree sub-diagram

1957: which expresses the external momentum flow,

1958: as in the case of the single 

1959: cut-out loop.

1960: Thus as before it can be associated with

1961: an edge of a closed string tree diagram.

1962: The energy dependent factor

1963: of each sub-loop 

1964: is the same

1965: as that of a single cut-out loop.

1966: Therefore, one can interpret such

1967: a sub-loop as a single cut-out loop:

1968: Closed circuits

1969: are interpreted as made of

1970: overlapping cut-out loops

1971: (Fig.\ref{t1}-\ref{t3}).

1972: 

1973: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1974: \begin{figure}

1975: \begin{center}

1976:  \leavevmode

1977:  \epsfxsize=40mm

1978:  \epsfbox{t1.eps}\\

1979: \end{center}

1980: \caption{An example of

1981: a closed string tree diagram

1982: in which the circuit of the type

1983: Fig.\ref{circuit1} appears.

1984: If one draws a corresponding gauge theory

1985: Feynman diagram 

1986: on a plane (view the above 

1987: worldsheet from the right),

1988: the cut-out loops look as depicted 

1989: in the righthand side of Fig.\ref{circuit1}.

1990: The closed circuit in the lefthand side of

1991: Fig.\ref{circuit1}

1992: can be interpreted as 

1993: a limit where

1994: two cut-out loops 

1995: (partially) overlap.}

1996: \label{t1}

1997: \end{figure}

1998: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1999: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2000: \begin{figure}

2001: \begin{center}

2002:  \leavevmode

2003:  \epsfxsize=40mm

2004:  \epsfbox{t2.eps}\\

2005: \end{center}

2006: \caption{An example of a 

2007: closed string tree diagram

2008: in which the circuit of the type

2009: Fig.\ref{circuit2} appears.}

2010: \label{t2}

2011: \end{figure}

2012: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2013: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2014: \begin{figure}

2015: \begin{center}

2016:  \leavevmode

2017:  \epsfxsize=40mm

2018:  \epsfbox{t3.eps}\\

2019: \end{center}

2020: \caption{An example of a 

2021: closed string tree diagram

2022: in which the circuit of the type

2023: Fig.\ref{circuit3} appears.}

2024: \label{t3}

2025: \end{figure}

2026: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2027: 

2028: As an example, below

2029: I

2030: study the case where

2031: two cut-out loops

2032: overlap at one index loop (Fig.\ref{circuit}),

2033: again in the free limit.

2034: The external momenta

2035: entering into cut-out loops are

2036: $k_{01}$ and $k_{02}$.

2037: I assume that both of the

2038: cut-out loops are 1-1 cut out loops,

2039: other cases can be treated similarly.

2040: These two cut-out loops give a contribution 

2041: proportional to the factor

2042: \bea

2043:  \label{2cc11}

2044: &&

2045: \sum_{a_1=1}^N \cdots \sum_{a_J=1}^N

2046: \sum_{b_1=1}^N \cdots \sum_{b_J=1}^N

2047: \prod_{i=1}^{J_1}

2048: \prod_{j=1}^{J_2}

2049: \delta_{a_1b_1}

2050: \frac{1}%

2051: {e^{\beta \w + 2\pi i \frac{a_i-a_{i+1}}{N}} -1}

2052: \cdot

2053: \frac{1}%

2054: {e^{\beta \w + 2\pi i \frac{b_j-b_{j+1}}{N}} -1}\nn

2055: &=&

2056: \sum_{a_1=1}^N \cdots \sum_{a_J=1}^N

2057: \sum_{b_1=1}^N \cdots \sum_{b_J=1}^N

2058: \prod_{i=1}^{J_1}

2059: \prod_{j=1}^{J_2}

2060: \delta_{a_1b_1}

2061: \sum_{n_i=1}^\infty

2062: \sum_{m_j=1}^\infty

2063: e^{-n_i(\beta \w + 2\pi i \frac{a_i-a_{i+1}}{N})}

2064: e^{-m_j(\beta \w + 2\pi i \frac{b_j-b_{j+1}}{N})}\nn

2065: &=&

2066: \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} e^{- n\beta \w J_1} \cdot

2067: \sum_{m=1}^{\infty} e^{- m\beta \w J_2}

2068: \nn

2069: &=&

2070: \frac{1}{e^{\beta \w J_1} -1}

2071: \cdot

2072: \frac{1}{e^{\beta \w J_2} -1}  .

2073: \eea

2074: Here, $J_1$ and $J_2$ 

2075: are the numbers of the bold arrows

2076: on the cut-out loops and

2077: $a_1=b_1$ is the index of

2078: the index loop

2079: where two cut-out loops overlap.

2080: From the second line to the third line

2081: of (\ref{2cc11}), the 

2082: ``momentum conservation" 

2083: was explicitely solved

2084: by using the ``loop momenta"

2085: $n$ and $m$.

2086: Eq.(\ref{2cc11}) is the correct factor

2087: for the contributions from two cuts

2088: in the real time formulation of closed string

2089: field theory at finite temperature.

2090: One can also obtain the on-shell

2091: delta functions 

2092: $\delta(k_{01}^2-(J_1\w)^2)$ and

2093: $\delta(k_{02}^2-(J_2\w)^2)$,

2094: as in the case of a single cut-out loop.

2095: 

2096: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2097: \subsection{Closed string interaction vertices}

2098: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2099: 

2100: Next, I argue that 

2101: the interaction vertices

2102: for the closed string field theory

2103: arising from the gauge theory 

2104: Feynman diagrams

2105: also have the desired property

2106: as required by the real time formalism.

2107: Recall that each cut out

2108: region  are either 

2109: made of entirely type-1 or entirely type-2

2110: propagators and vertices.

2111: Also recall that the 2-2 propagator is the complex conjugate

2112: of the 1-1 propagator (see (\ref{D0})):

2113: \bea

2114: i D^{(22)}_0 (k_0) = (i D^{(11)}_0(k_0))^{*} .

2115: \eea

2116: Similarly, for the 

2117: type-1 and 

2118: type-2 interaction vertices (\ref{rp}):

2119: \bea

2120: i\, \tr V_2[\Phi_{(2)}] 

2121: = 

2122: \left.(i\, \tr V_1[\Phi_{(1)}])^{*}

2123: \right|_{\Phi_{(1)}\rightarrow \Phi_{(2)}}.

2124: \eea

2125: For a given diagram with

2126: a cut-out type-2 region,

2127: there is a corresponding diagram

2128: which is obtained by

2129: replacing all

2130: the type-2 propagators 

2131: and vertices in the region

2132: by those of type-1 (Fig.\ref{closedv},\ref{clvreal}).

2133: Then, the contribution

2134: of the type-2 region

2135: is the complex conjugate

2136: of the corresponding type-1 region.

2137: This means that

2138: the type-2 vertices

2139: of the closed string field theory 

2140: obtained from the gauge theory 

2141: are the 

2142: complex conjugate of 

2143: the corresponding type-1 vertices.

2144: This is 

2145: the property of the interaction vertices

2146: in the real time formulation of 

2147: finite temperature field theories.

2148: 

2149: %%%

2150: Finally, recall that in each cut-out region

2151: there are no further cuts, i.e. no

2152: further temperature dependent piece.

2153: This means that these cut-out regions

2154: probe the zero-temperature geometry

2155: of the bulk, i.e. AdS$_5$ for

2156: the four dimensional ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills

2157: theory on $S^3$.\footnote{%

2158: Since I have been studying a quantum mechanics

2159: dimensionally reduced from four dimensions,

2160: strictly speaking I have only considered

2161: the s-wave for the $S^3$ part of 

2162: the coordinates on AdS$_5$.

2163: But generalization to include excited modes

2164: on the $S^3$ will be straightforward.}

2165: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2166: \begin{figure}

2167: \begin{center}

2168:  \leavevmode

2169:  \epsfxsize=110mm

2170:  \epsfbox{closedv.eps}\\

2171: \end{center}

2172: \caption{Feynman diagrams divided

2173: into type-1 regions and type-2 regions

2174: by the cut-out loops.

2175: The type-2 region in the diagram on the right

2176: is complex conjugate to the corresponding

2177: type-1 region in the diagram on the left.}

2178: \label{closedv}

2179: \end{figure}

2180: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2181: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2182: \begin{figure}

2183: \begin{center}

2184:  \leavevmode

2185:  \epsfxsize=100mm

2186:  \epsfbox{clvreal.eps}\\

2187: \end{center}

2188: \caption{The diagrams in Fig.\ref{closedv} drawn

2189: so that they look as diagrams in the

2190: real time formulation of

2191: finite temperature field theories.}

2192: \label{clvreal}

2193: \end{figure}

2194: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2195: 

2196: Thus altogether, the real time formulation

2197: of the gauge theory at finite temperature

2198: in the confined phase describes the

2199: real time formulation of 

2200: classical closed string field theory on AdS

2201: at finite temperature.

2202: 

2203: 

2204: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2205: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2206: \section{Summary and Discussions}\label{Summ}

2207: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2208: 

2209: \subsection*{\it Summary}

2210: 

2211: Successful tests of the AdS-CFT conjecture

2212: encourage our hope that

2213: it has the answers to all the puzzles

2214: surrounding black holes,

2215: at least in asymptotically AdS spaces.

2216: However, to extract such answers,

2217: one needs to understand 

2218: how to translate closed string descriptions

2219: to gauge theory descriptions

2220: and vice versa, 

2221: in particular

2222: what distinguishes 

2223: between the geometries with and without a black hole

2224: in the gauge theory descriptions.

2225: And to solve real puzzles about black holes,

2226: one must work with the Lorentzian signature.

2227: 

2228: In this article,

2229: I have given a prescription

2230: for extracting the 

2231: dual bulk description

2232: corresponding to the confined phase

2233: in the real time formulation of

2234: gauge theories at finite temperature.

2235: With this prescription,

2236: I have shown 

2237: how the difference between the phases,

2238: namely the confined and the deconfined phases,

2239: changes the relevant Feynman diagrams

2240: in the planar limit.

2241: In the confined phase,

2242: the Feynman diagrams of the gauge theory 

2243: organize themselves into tree diagrams of

2244: closed string field theory 

2245: on AdS at finite temperature

2246: in the real time formalism.

2247: 

2248: \subsection*{\it Study from the closed 

2249: string side}

2250: 

2251: In this article, I have 

2252: compared the gauge theory results 

2253: with the quite 

2254: general proparties of

2255: the real time formulation of the 

2256: closed string field theory.

2257: It is certainly interesting to re-examine

2258: the real time formulation

2259: of closed string field theory

2260: at finite temperature

2261: \cite{Leblanc:1987zj} in more detail,

2262: in comparison with the analysis of the

2263: large $N$ Feynman diagrams in this article.%

2264: \footnote{In the BMN

2265: plane wave limit \cite{Berenstein:2002jq},

2266: the real time formulation of light-cone 

2267: string field theory

2268: was recently studied in \cite{Abdalla:2005qs}.

2269: However, note that the BMN limit is a 

2270: different limit from the 't Hooft limit.}

2271: Since what one directly obtains from

2272: the 't Hooft-Feynman diagrams are closed string

2273: worldsheets rather than the

2274: string field theory, it may also be useful

2275: to investigate the worldsheet formulation

2276: of the real time formalism \cite{Mathur:1993tp}.

2277: In particular, it will be nice

2278: if one can characterize the cut-out loop

2279: in terms of the closed string worldsheet language,

2280: and see the parallel between the results in this article.%

2281: \footnote{In the case of a worldsheet with a torus topology, 

2282: the cut-out loop (in my terminology)

2283: was characterized by a boundary condition 

2284: \cite{Abdalla:2004dg}.}

2285: 

2286: \subsection*{\it Deconfinement, Hawking-Page and the

2287: Kosterlitz-Thouless transition}

2288: 

2289: In the deconfined phase,

2290: a different type of Feynman diagram,

2291: namely a diagram with

2292: unrestricted cuts, 

2293: becomes relevant.

2294: This difference

2295: should be reflecting the distinction between

2296: the geometry with and without a black hole,

2297: as long as the identification

2298: of confinement-deconfinement phase transition

2299: with the Hawking-Page transition

2300: is correct.

2301: This may be regarded as a Lorentzian

2302: signature counterpart of the

2303: Kosterlitz-Thouless phase transition

2304: on the string worldsheet

2305: \cite{Sathiapalan:1986db,Kogan:1987jd,Atick:1988si}.

2306: There the condensation of the winding modes

2307: makes the string worldsheet interpretation

2308: difficult.

2309: The mechanism

2310: that is supposed to be

2311: corresponding to 

2312: the Kosterlitz-Thouless phase transition

2313: in the large $N$ Feynman diagrams

2314: was discussed in \cite{Furuuchi:2005qm} 

2315: (see also

2316: \cite{Kazakov:2000pm}).

2317: It has long been anticipated 

2318: that the Kosterlitz-Thouless phase transition

2319: on the string worldsheet

2320: is analogous to the deconfinement phase

2321: transition where underlying

2322: degrees of freedom manifests itself.

2323: It is intriguing that 

2324: in the AdS-CFT correspondence this is

2325: not just an analogue 

2326: but exactly the same thing (the equivalent dual description). 

2327: The endpoint of the phase transition

2328: may still admit a worldsheet interpretation

2329: in a {\em different} geometry

2330: \cite{Furuuchi:2005qm,KalyanaRama:1998cb,%

2331: Barbon:2001di,Barbon:2002nw,%

2332: McGreevy:2005ci},

2333: however, this point needs further study.\footnote{%

2334: Historically, string theory started as a description

2335: of confinment. 

2336: From this point of view, the correspondence

2337: between the deconfined phase and the black hole geometry

2338: makes it highly non-trivial if

2339: the black hole geometry still allows a string description.

2340: It might be the case that such a description is possible

2341: only for a specific class of observers (coordinate frames),

2342: as suggested by the black hole complementarity

2343: \cite{Susskind:1993if}.}

2344: Note that the Euclidean case

2345: studied in the references mentioned above

2346: is somewhat

2347: simplified situation compared with

2348: the original Lorentzian problem,

2349: since the former only contains

2350: the region outside the black hole horizon.

2351: 

2352: \subsection*{\it The role of the imaginary time formalism}

2353: 

2354: The prescription

2355: I have given for

2356: reading off the dual description of 

2357: the confined phase

2358: uses  

2359: the Matsubara contour

2360: to determine the boundary conditions for

2361: the thermal Green's function.

2362: In this sense,

2363: the real time formalism is not completely

2364: different from the imaginary time

2365: formalism but rather it contains

2366: the latter in the imaginary direction of the contour.

2367: The relevance of the Matsubara contour

2368: for determining the boundary condition

2369: reminds us of the role of the

2370: Euclidean path integral in

2371: the models of gravitational physics

2372: \cite{Hartle:1976tp,Gibbons:1976ue,Hartle:1983ai}

2373: (see also

2374: \cite{Maldacena:2001kr}).

2375: 

2376: In the gauge theory context,

2377: the relevance of the Matsubara contour

2378: indicates that

2379: the methods which are useful in

2380: the imaginary time formalism

2381: may have direct relevance

2382: also in the real time formalism.

2383: In particular,

2384: the crucial role played by

2385: the temporal component of the

2386: gauge field in this article seems

2387: to suggest that 

2388: the 

2389: Polyakov's criterion for confinement

2390: \cite{Polyakov:1978vu}

2391: has some simple extension

2392: to the real time formalism.

2393: Note that 

2394: the boundary

2395: condition is not just a simple consequence

2396: of the projection onto the gauge singlet sector,

2397: but also includes the saddle point calculation.

2398: It is important to further investigate

2399: this role of the imaginary time

2400: formalism in the real time formalism.

2401: 

2402: \subsection*{\it On dynamical formation of black holes}

2403: 

2404: How a black hole is formed 

2405: from ordinary matter

2406: is an important question,

2407: which is

2408: also relevant for

2409: the information loss paradox \cite{Hawking:1976ra}.

2410: I would like to point out that 

2411: to describe such a process,

2412: the

2413: initial geometry 

2414: without the black hole

2415: should be probed

2416: by the prescription I have given,

2417: namely by taking into account the 

2418: configuration of the temporal component $A_0$

2419: of the gauge field,

2420: characteristic of the confined phase,

2421: on the vertical parts of the contour.

2422: Moreover the final state,

2423: the large black hole in AdS space,\footnote{%

2424: Large here means the larger of

2425: the two Schwarzshild-AdS

2426: solutions in \cite{Hawking:1982dh}.}

2427: should correspond to

2428: the gauge theory in

2429: the deconfined phase.

2430: 

2431: Formation of a black hole

2432: is a dynamical process,

2433: and it may be worth mentioning 

2434: that

2435: the real time formalism

2436: has a close relation with the

2437: Schwinger-Keldish technique

2438: for describing non-equilibrium systems

2439: \cite{Schwinger:1960qe,Keldysh:1964ud}.

2440: The techniques

2441: developed in this article

2442: may also find application in the study of

2443: non-equilibrium processes in

2444: large $N$ gauge theories.

2445: It will be interesting to apply the

2446: Schwinger-Keldish technique

2447: to the 

2448: large $N$ gauge theories

2449: to study the

2450: dynamical formation of a black hole

2451: via the AdS-CFT correspondence.

2452: 

2453: \subsection*{\it Statistical average and horizon}

2454: 

2455: In this article I have argued that

2456: the real time formulation of

2457: gauge theories at finite temperature

2458: can describe the dual closed string field

2459: theory on

2460: AdS at finite temperature.

2461: Together with 

2462: the results in

2463: the black hole phase \cite{Maldacena:2001kr},

2464: the success in describing

2465: {\em both} the black hole 

2466: and the non-black hole phase

2467: by the real time formulation

2468: of gauge theory at finite temperature 

2469: is an encouraging evidence for the 

2470: AdS-CFT correspondence

2471: in Lorentzian signature.

2472: On the other hand, 

2473: the real time formulation introduces

2474: the doubled degrees of freedom

2475: to describe the thermal ensemble

2476: by entanglement.\footnote{%

2477: This statement may be more 

2478: appropriate for

2479: the thermo field dynamics.

2480: The Feynman rules derived 

2481: from the thermo field dynamics 

2482: are the same 

2483: \cite{Semenoff:1982ev}

2484: as those of

2485: the real time formulation of

2486: Ref.\cite{Niemi:1983nf}.}

2487: The reason one usually

2488: uses a statistical

2489: average is that

2490: one does not need to know

2491: the state one is precisely in,

2492: to describe the thermodynamical 

2493: property of the system.

2494: However, one expects that

2495: there is actually a single pure state

2496: at a given moment,

2497: and

2498: unitarity

2499: may be understood more straightforwardly

2500: without taking the statistical ensemble,

2501: even though the real time formulation

2502: of field theory at finite temperature is

2503: unitary.

2504: It should be interesting to 

2505: understand more

2506: precisely what actually the

2507: statistical average in the gauge theory side

2508: introduces in the bulk geometry.

2509: This question may be related to 

2510: the recent proposal of \cite{Mathur:2003hj}.

2511: See also \cite{Maldacena:2001kr}.

2512: 

2513: \subsection*{\it $1/N$ effects}

2514: 

2515: In this article I worked in the

2516: leading order in the $1/N$ expansion.

2517: This corresponds to the classical

2518: closed string theory in the bulk.

2519: This was sufficient

2520: since the argument from the

2521: Carter-Penrose diagram is 

2522: based on

2523: classical gravity.

2524: However, it is also important

2525: to study

2526: how the $1/N$ corrections, which

2527: corresponds to quantum 

2528: corrections in the bulk, 

2529: modify the above classical view.%

2530: \footnote{The role of the $1/N$ corrections 

2531: in a related context was

2532: stressed in \cite{Festuccia:2005pi}.

2533: The sum over contributions

2534: from both the AdS-Schwarzshild black hole

2535: geometry and the AdS geometry

2536: discussed in \cite{Maldacena:2001kr}

2537: is a non-perturbative effect in $1/N$.

2538: Note that even though the contributions 

2539: must be summed over,

2540: each saddle point in the gauge theory

2541: should have a dual bulk interpretation,

2542: at least at large $N$.

2543: The objective of this article has been to

2544: read off, or ultimately

2545: {\em derive}, the bulk geometry

2546: from the gauge theory.}

2547: Also,

2548: the information paradox arose from the

2549: discovery of

2550: Hawking radiation \cite{Hawking:1974sw}

2551: which is a quantum effect.

2552: The method developed in \cite{Brigante:2005bq}

2553: may be useful for the investigation in

2554: this direction.

2555: 

2556: \subsection*{\it More puzzles 

2557: than have been solved?}

2558: 

2559: In the confined phase, the

2560: two-point Green's function between

2561: a type-1 and a type-2 operator

2562: should be identified 

2563: with 1-2 propagator in closed string field theory.

2564: This is quite natural

2565: as a dual description of the confined phase

2566: still at finite temperature.

2567: In contrast,

2568: despite some

2569: successes in the comparisons 

2570: between gauge theories in deconfined phase 

2571: and black hole geometry in literature,

2572: it is still not clear precisely

2573: {\em how} correlation functions in

2574: the large $N$ gauge theory 

2575: describe the dual theory on

2576: the black hole geometry.

2577: This raises a question 

2578: as to how 

2579: the dual of deconfined phase

2580: is encoded in the gauge theory

2581: correlation functions.

2582: In the spirit followed

2583: in this article for the confined phase,

2584: one should also be able to describe

2585: from the gauge theory

2586: how

2587: the type-2 fields are

2588: organized in the deconfined phase

2589: into the

2590: degrees of freedom behind the

2591: horizon.

2592: Thus the answer to the question

2593: raised in the introduction:

2594: ``How does confinement change the role of

2595: type-2 fields in the bulk?"

2596: now comes back as a question to

2597: the original interpretation:

2598: {\em Precisely how does deconfinement

2599: change the role of

2600: the type-2 fields in the bulk?} \footnote{%

2601: I thank J. R. David for raising this question.}

2602: 

2603: \vspace*{6mm}

2604: \begin{center}

2605: {\bf Acknowledgments}

2606: \end{center}

2607: \vspace*{-1mm}

2608: It is my pleasure to 

2609: express my thanks to 

2610: D. Astefanesei,

2611: J. R. David,

2612: D. Ghoshal,

2613: R. Gopakumar,

2614: D. P. Jatkar,

2615: S. Naik,

2616: A. Sen,

2617: K. Sengupta

2618: and K. P. Yogendran

2619: for useful discussions and valuable comments

2620: which substantially improved

2621: the quality of this article.

2622: I am also grateful to D. Ghoshal, N. Mahajan and 

2623: K. P. Yogendran for careful

2624: reading of the manuscript and 

2625: various useful suggestions. 

2626: I sincerely appreciate

2627: liberal support for our research

2628: from the people in India.

2629: 

2630: %%%%%%%%%%

2631: \appendix

2632: %%%%%%%%%%

2633: 

2634: \section*{Appendix}

2635: 

2636: \section{A sample calculation}\label{A}

2637: 

2638: In this appendix, I provide a simple example 

2639: to 

2640: illustrate how the mechanism

2641: which selects the surviving

2642: Feynman diagrams in the confined phase works.

2643: I calculate

2644: the two-point function

2645: $\langle \tr \Phi^2_{(1)}(k_0) 

2646: \tr \Phi^2_{(1)}(-k_0) \rangle$

2647: (the total momentum conservation

2648: delta function has been dropped),

2649: where $\Phi_{(1)}$ is the type-1

2650: adjoint scalar field,

2651: in the free limit of the $SU(N)$ 

2652: gauge 

2653: quantum mechanics.

2654: The case for the

2655: correlation functions

2656: with type-2 fields are similar.

2657: The calculation follows the

2658: explanation in the main text,

2659: and should be compared with the 

2660: general arguments there.

2661: This simple example still

2662: captures the essential points

2663: of the mechanism which selects the

2664: non-vanishing diagrams in the confined phase.

2665: %

2666: In the following,

2667: all the 

2668: overall constants are omitted since they are

2669: not important for the present purpose. 

2670: %

2671: Since I am studying the free theory

2672: in this example,

2673: I only need to recall

2674: the propagators (\ref{D0}) and (\ref{Db}).

2675: These are depicted in Fig.\ref{AppFeyn}.

2676: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2677: \begin{figure}

2678: \begin{center}

2679:  \leavevmode

2680:  \epsfxsize=90mm

2681:  \epsfbox{AppFeyn.eps}\\

2682: \end{center}

2683: \caption{Feynman propagators. $a,c$ 

2684: refer to the

2685: first gauge index of the adjoint field

2686: $\Phi_{(r)ab}$, and 

2687: $b,d$ refer to the second.

2688: $r,s=1,2$ refer to type-1 and type-2.}

2689: \label{AppFeyn}

2690: \end{figure}

2691: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2692: The first  

2693: corresponds to the temperature independent part

2694: \bea

2695: i D_{0 ab,cd} =

2696: \delta_{ad}\delta_{bc}

2697: \left(

2698: \begin{array}{cc}

2699:  \frac{i}{k_0^2-\w^2+i\e} & 0 \\

2700:  0 & \frac{-i}{k_0^2-\w^2-i\e}

2701: \end{array}

2702: \right).

2703: \eea

2704: The matrix structure 

2705: of the propagator

2706: originates

2707: from the fact that one needs to

2708: include two types of fields,

2709: type-1 and type-2, for describing

2710: the real time formulation of 

2711: the finite temperature

2712: field theory.

2713: The (1-1) matrix component corresponds to

2714: the type-1-type-1 propagator, and so on.

2715: The second in Fig.\ref{AppFeyn}

2716: corresponds to the temperature dependent part

2717: of the propagator

2718: \bea

2719: i D_{\beta ab,cd} &=&

2720: \delta_{ad}\delta_{bc}

2721: \pi \delta(k_{0}^2- \w^2) \nn

2722: &&

2723: \frac{1}{e^{{|\beta k_0+2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}}|_R}-1}

2724: \left(

2725: \begin{array}{cc}

2726:  1 & e^{\frac{1}{2}|\beta k_{0}+2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}|_R} \\

2727: e^{\frac{1}{2}|\beta k_{0}+2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}|_R} & 1

2728: \end{array}

2729: \right) .

2730: \eea

2731: The temperature

2732: dependent part of the propagator

2733: is drawn with the ``cut",

2734: i.e. the vertical line in the 

2735: Fig.\ref{AppFeyn} (2).

2736: This cut is one of the main tools

2737: in the following discussions.

2738: The relevant Feynman diagrams are

2739: depicted in Fig.\ref{samp}-\ref{samp2}.

2740: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2741: \begin{figure}

2742: \begin{center}

2743:  \leavevmode

2744:  \epsfxsize=80mm

2745:  \epsfbox{samp.eps}\\

2746: \end{center}

2747: \caption{A Feynman diagram with no cut contributing to

2748: $\langle \tr \Phi^2_{(1)}(k_0) 

2749: \tr \Phi^2_{(1)}(-k_0) \rangle$.}

2750: \label{samp}

2751: \end{figure}

2752: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2753: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2754: \begin{figure}

2755: \begin{center}

2756:  \leavevmode

2757:  \epsfxsize=80mm

2758:  \epsfbox{samp1.eps}\\

2759: \end{center}

2760: \caption{The one-cut contribution to 

2761: $\langle \tr \Phi^2_{(1)}(k_0) 

2762: \tr \Phi^2_{(1)}(-k_0) \rangle$.}

2763: \label{samp1}

2764: \end{figure}

2765: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2766: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2767: \begin{figure}

2768: \begin{center}

2769:  \leavevmode

2770:  \epsfxsize=80mm

2771:  \epsfbox{samp2.eps}\\

2772: \end{center}

2773: \caption{The

2774: two-cut (cut-out) contribution to 

2775: $\langle \tr \Phi^2_{(1)}(k_0) 

2776: \tr \Phi^2_{(1)}(-k_0) \rangle$.}

2777: \label{samp2}

2778: \end{figure}

2779: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2780: The total momentum flowing

2781: on a propagator

2782: is a sum of momenta on

2783: its two index lines

2784: (taking into account the

2785: signs indicated by the arrows), 

2786: and

2787: external momentum 

2788: ($k_0$ in this case)

2789: flowing

2790: between the double lines 

2791: if there is any.

2792: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2793: % 1-cut

2794: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2795: Fig.\ref{samp} 

2796: is the temperature

2797: independent contribution

2798: and probes the zero-temperature

2799: bulk geometry.

2800: The calculation is standard so

2801: I omit the explanation of this case,

2802: see e.g. 

2803: \cite{Gopakumar:2003ns,Gopakumar:2004qb,%

2804: Gopakumar:2005fx,Gopakumar:2004ys,%

2805: Furuuchi:2005qm}.\footnote{%

2806: And see \cite{Son:2002sd}

2807: for a prescription for the Lorentzian signature.}

2808: 

2809: \subsection{Only one cut on an index loop}

2810: 

2811: Fig.\ref{samp1}

2812: has one cut, that is, the

2813: temperature dependent part.

2814: In this case, 

2815: one can parameterize the loop integration variable

2816: $p_0$ so that the external momentum

2817: flows through the propagator

2818: without the cut, as shown in  Fig.\ref{samp1}.

2819: This Feynman diagram gives

2820: \bea

2821: \sum_{a=1}^N

2822: \sum_{b=1}^N

2823: \int dp_0

2824: \frac{i}{p_0^2-\omega^2+i\e}

2825: \delta((p_0+k_0)^2-\w^2)

2826: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta(p_0+k_0)+2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}|_R}-1}.

2827: \eea

2828: In a planar diagram,

2829: one can associate each loop momentum

2830: to an index loop:

2831: The number of the index loop is one more

2832: than the number of the loop momentum,

2833: but one index sum can be factored out.

2834: Here, the sum over the index $b$ can be factored out 

2835: by the shift $a \rightarrow a+b$ (mod $N$).

2836: The rest of the indices are ``associated"

2837: to the loop momentum,

2838: in this case $a$ to $p_0$:

2839: The gauge index and 

2840: the loop momentum appear

2841: in a specific combination

2842: $\beta p_0 + 2\pi i \frac{a}{N}$.

2843: %

2844: After performing the $p_0$ integration

2845: using the delta function,

2846: one obtains (the overall factor $N$ 

2847: coming from the sum over the index 

2848: $b$ has been dropped)

2849: \bea

2850: &&

2851: \frac{1}{2\w}

2852: \sum_{a=1}^N

2853: \frac{i}{(\w-k_0)^2-\omega^2+i\e}

2854: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta\w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1} \nn

2855: &+&

2856: \frac{1}{2\w}

2857: \sum_{a=1}^N

2858: \frac{i}{(\w+k_0)^2-\omega^2+i\e}

2859: \frac{1}{e^{|-\beta\w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1}.

2860: \label{1cutdiagram}

2861: \eea

2862: The first term in 

2863: (\ref{1cutdiagram})

2864: contains a factor

2865: \bea

2866:  \label{avanish}

2867: \sum_{a=1}^N

2868: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta\w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1}

2869: =

2870: \sum_{a=1}^N

2871: \sum_{n=1}^\infty

2872: e^{-n|\beta\w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}

2873: =0

2874: \eea

2875: and vanishes.

2876: Recall that 

2877: $|\cdots |_R$ was defined in (\ref{||R}) as

2878: \bea

2879:  \label{a||R}

2880: |z|_R =

2881: \left\{

2882: \begin{array}{c}

2883: z \quad (\mbox{Re}\, z > 0)\\

2884: -z \quad (\mbox{Re}\, z < 0)

2885: \end{array}

2886: \right.   , \quad (\mbox{Re}\, z \ne 0).

2887: \eea

2888: More precisely,

2889: I took $N$ to be strictly infinite

2890: so that

2891: the sum $\sum_{a=1}^N$

2892: can be replaced with

2893: the integral $N \int_0^1 d\theta$.

2894: This picks out the constant mode

2895: in the Fourier expansion

2896: on the left hand side of (\ref{avanish}),

2897: which is zero.

2898: As explained in the main text,

2899: (\ref{avanish}) is the basic

2900: equation

2901: which is relevant for the vanishing of 

2902: a large class of Feynman diagrams

2903: in the confined phase. 

2904: The second term 

2905: in (\ref{1cutdiagram})

2906: also vanishes in 

2907: the same way.

2908: 

2909: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2910: % 2-cut

2911: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2912: 

2913: \subsection{The case in which 

2914: a cut-out loop divides

2915: the diagram into two pieces 

2916: both containing an external leg}

2917: 

2918: Now let us turn to the

2919: calculation of Fig.\ref{samp2}.

2920: In Fig.\ref{samp2},

2921: the two cuts %(make up a cut-out loop)

2922: divide the diagrams to two disconnected

2923: pieces both containing an external leg.

2924: If one connects the end points of the cuts

2925: inside the same index loop, the cuts

2926: make up a cut-out loop (Fig.\ref{sphere}).

2927: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2928: \begin{figure}

2929: \begin{center}

2930:  \leavevmode

2931:  \epsfxsize=65mm

2932:  \epsfbox{sphere.eps}\\

2933: \end{center}

2934: \caption{The Feynman diagram 

2935: in Fig.\ref{samp2}

2936: drawn on a sphere.

2937: The end points of the cuts are connected

2938: if they are inside the same index loop, 

2939: to make up a cut-out loop.

2940: The cut-out loop divide the sphere into two regions

2941: both containing an external leg.}

2942: \label{sphere}

2943: \end{figure}

2944: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2945: The point is that in this case, 

2946: the external momentum

2947: flow %of $k_0$

2948: must cross the cut, in contrast to

2949: the previous case.

2950: Since two regions 

2951: of the diagram

2952: are disconnected by

2953: the cuts, one cannot avoid the

2954: cut by a shift of loop integration variable $p_0$.

2955: The Feynman diagram is calculated to be

2956: \bea

2957: \sum_{a=1}^N

2958: \sum_{b=1}^N

2959: \int dp_0

2960: \delta(p_0^2-\w^2)

2961: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta p_0+2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}|_R}-1}

2962: \delta((p_0+k_0)^2-\w^2)

2963: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta(p_0+k_0)+2\pi i\frac{a-b}{N}|_R}-1}.

2964: \eea

2965: As in the previous case, one summation

2966: over gauge indices factors out.

2967: After performing the loop integral

2968: one obtains

2969: \bea

2970: &&\sum_{a=1}^N

2971: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta \w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1}

2972: \delta((\w+k_0)^2-\w^2)

2973: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta(\w+k_0)+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1}

2974: \label{p=w}

2975: \\

2976: &+&

2977: \sum_{a=1}^N

2978: \frac{1}{e^{|-\beta \w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1}

2979: \delta((-\w+k_0)^2-\w^2)

2980: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta(-\w+k_0)+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1}

2981: \label{p=-w}.

2982: \eea

2983: 

2984: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2985: \subsubsection{The vanishing case}

2986: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2987: The first line (\ref{p=w}),

2988: a contribution from $p_0 = \w$ case,

2989: can be divided into two cases:

2990: $k_0 =0$ and $k_0 = -2\w$.

2991: Fig.\ref{sampv} corresponds to the

2992: $k_0 =0$ case.

2993: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2994: \begin{figure}

2995: \begin{center}

2996:  \leavevmode

2997:  \epsfxsize=75mm

2998:  \epsfbox{boldarrow.eps}\\

2999: \end{center}

3000: \caption{A bold arrow 

3001: put on a cut

3002: indicates

3003: which of the momenta associated

3004: with the index is larger.

3005: When there is an external momentum

3006: flowing into a propagator

3007: ($k_0$ in the right),

3008: it is added to the momentum with the same direction.}

3009: \label{appboldarrow}

3010: \end{figure}

3011: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3012: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3013: \begin{figure}

3014: \begin{center}

3015:  \leavevmode

3016:  \epsfxsize=80mm

3017:  \epsfbox{sampv.eps}\\

3018: \end{center}

3019: \caption{The vanishing cut-out diagram.}

3020: \label{sampv}

3021: \end{figure}

3022: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3023: Following the rule given in

3024: Fig.\ref{appboldarrow},

3025: I put bold arrows on the cuts

3026: to indicate which of the directed 

3027: momenta

3028: is larger. 

3029: The external momentum flow

3030: is added to the loop momentum

3031: in the same direction.

3032: In other words,

3033: the direction of the

3034: bold arrow is determined

3035: according to the direction

3036: of the total momentum

3037: flowing on a propagator.

3038: The momentum associated with

3039: the factored out index

3040: is regarded as zero.

3041: In Fig.\ref{sampv},

3042: the bold arrows are always directed from the 

3043: $b$-index line to $a$-index line.

3044: This means that the momenta on the

3045: $a$-index line is always bigger

3046: than that of the $b$-index line

3047: (which is regarded as zero, as 

3048: mentioned above).

3049: Therefore, 

3050: Fig.\ref{sampv} is a contribution to 

3051: Fig.\ref{samp2}

3052: in the following situation:

3053: \bea

3054: &&

3055: \left|\beta p_0+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}\right|_R

3056: = \beta p_0+2\pi i\frac{a}{N} \label{plus1}\\

3057: &&

3058: \left|\beta(p_0+k_0) +2\pi i\frac{a}{N}\right|_R

3059: =\beta(p_0+k_0)+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}, \label{plus2}

3060: \eea

3061: where $|\cdots |_R$ was defined in (\ref{a||R}).

3062: Thus I obtain

3063: \bea

3064: &&

3065: \frac{1}{2\w}

3066: \sum_{a=1}^N

3067: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta \w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1}

3068: \delta(k_0)

3069: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta \w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1} \nn

3070: &=&

3071: \frac{1}{2\w}

3072: \delta(k_0) 

3073: \sum_{a=1}^N

3074: \sum_{n_1=1}^\infty

3075: e^{-n_1 (\beta \w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N})}

3076: \sum_{n_2=1}^\infty

3077: e^{-n_2 (\beta \w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N})}

3078: =0.

3079: \eea

3080: The point is that

3081: the sign of the phase $2\pi i\frac{a}{N}$

3082: in the Fourier expansion is always  

3083: the same.

3084: This is a consequence of

3085: (\ref{plus1}) and (\ref{plus2}),

3086: which are indicated by the bold arrows

3087: in Fig.\ref{sampv}.

3088: There are no cancellations

3089: of the $a$-dependent phases

3090: and hence it vanishes

3091: upon summation over gauge index $a$,

3092: like in the previous case (\ref{avanish}).

3093: 

3094: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3095: \subsubsection{The non-vanishing case}

3096: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3097: Now let us turn to the $k_0= -2\w$ case

3098: in (\ref{p=w}).

3099: This corresponds to Fig.\ref{sampnv}.

3100: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3101: \begin{figure}

3102: \begin{center}

3103:  \leavevmode

3104:  \epsfxsize=80mm

3105:  \epsfbox{sampnv.eps}\\

3106: \end{center}

3107: \caption{The non-vanishing cut-out diagram.}

3108: \label{sampnv}

3109: \end{figure}

3110: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3111: In this case,

3112: in the upper propagator

3113: the bold arrow is directed

3114: from the $b$-index line to

3115: $a$-index line,

3116: whereas in the lower

3117: propagator

3118: the direction is reversed.

3119: This means that the momentum in

3120: the direction of

3121: $a$-index line is bigger

3122: than that in the direction of the $b$-index line

3123: in the upper propagator,

3124: and smaller

3125: in the lower one (Fig.{\ref{appboldarrow}}).

3126: Therefore, 

3127: Fig.\ref{sampnv} is a contribution to

3128: Fig.\ref{samp2} in the following situation:

3129: \bea

3130: &&

3131: \left|\beta p_0+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}\right|_R

3132: = \beta p_0+2\pi i\frac{a}{N} \\

3133: &&

3134: \left|\beta(p_0+k_0) +2\pi i\frac{a}{N}\right|_R

3135: =

3136: - \left(

3137: \beta(p_0+k_0)+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}

3138: \right).

3139: \eea

3140: Notice the difference from the previous case,

3141: (\ref{plus1}) and (\ref{plus2}).

3142: Then, (\ref{p=w}) results in a non-zero factor

3143: \bea

3144: &&

3145: \frac{1}{2\w}

3146: \sum_{a=1}^N

3147: \frac{1}{e^{|\beta \w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1}

3148: \delta(k_0+2\w)

3149: \frac{1}{e^{|-\beta \w+2\pi i\frac{a}{N}|_R}-1} \nn

3150: &=&

3151: \frac{1}{2\w}

3152: \delta(k_0+2\w) 

3153: \sum_{a=1}^N

3154: \sum_{n_1=1}^\infty

3155: e^{-n_1(\beta \w + 2\pi i\frac{a}{N})}

3156: \sum_{n_2=1}^\infty

3157: e^{-n_2(\beta \w - 2\pi i\frac{a}{N})}\nn

3158: &=&

3159: \frac{1}{2\w}

3160: \delta(k_0+2\w) 

3161: \sum_{n=1}^\infty

3162: e^{-2n\beta \w}\nn

3163: &=&

3164: \frac{1}{2\w}

3165: \delta(k_0+2\w) 

3166: \frac{1}{e^{\beta (2\w)}-1}

3167: \label{closedcut}.

3168: \eea

3169: The $a$-dependent

3170: phase factors cancelled

3171: when $n_1=n_2$ and

3172: this gave the non-vanishing contribution.

3173: The contribution

3174: from the $p_0 = -\w$ case (\ref{p=-w})

3175: can be calculated in the same way

3176: and gives

3177: $\frac{1}{2\w}\delta(k_0-2\w) 

3178: \frac{1}{e^{\beta (2\w)}-1}$.

3179: Together with (\ref{closedcut}),

3180: this gives the factor

3181: $\delta(k_0^2-(2\w)^2) \frac{1}{e^{\beta (2\w)}-1}$.

3182: According to the AdS-CFT

3183: dictionary,

3184: the scaling dimension two of the operator 

3185: $\tr \Phi_{(1)}^2$

3186: corresponds

3187: to a mass of the closed 

3188: string state in units

3189: of the inverse radius of the AdS,

3190: which is $\w$ \cite{Witten:1998qj}.

3191: Therefore,

3192: this is the correct factor

3193: for the temperature dependent

3194: part of 

3195: the type-1-type-1 propagator

3196: of the {\em bulk}

3197: closed string field theory

3198: in the real time formalism.

3199: 

3200: 

3201: \bibliography{crb}

3202: \bibliographystyle{kazu} 

3203: 

3204: \end{document}