1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \newcommand{\mD}{\mathcal{D}}
3: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
4: \usepackage{graphicx}
5: %\usepackage{showkeys}
6: \usepackage{cite}
7: %\usepackage{pdfsync}
8: \def\baselinestretch{1.2}
9: \parskip=6pt
10: \marginparwidth 0pt
11: \oddsidemargin -20pt
12: \evensidemargin -20pt
13: \marginparsep 0pt
14: \topmargin -0.5in
15: \textwidth 7.0in
16: \textheight 9.3 in
17:
18: \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
19:
20: \DeclareMathOperator{\Tr}{Tr}
21:
22: \newcommand{\pd}{{\partial}}
23: \newcommand{\ket}[1]{| #1 \rangle}
24: \newcommand{\cL}{{\mathcal{L}}}
25: \newcommand{\cA}{{\mathcal{A}}}
26:
27: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
28: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
29: \newcommand{\ba}{\begin{eqnarray}}
30: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{eqnarray}}
31: %\newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
32: \newcommand{\rrangle}{\rangle\!\rangle}
33: \newcommand{\cW}{{\mathcal{W}}}
34: \newcommand{\cH}{{\mathcal{H}}}
35: \newcommand{\cO}{{\mathcal{O}}}
36: \newcommand{\cQ}{{\mathcal{Q}}}
37: \newcommand{\cC}{{\mathcal{C}}}
38: \newcommand{\cD}{{\mathcal{D}}}
39: \newcommand{\bA}{{\bar A}}
40: \newcommand{\bZ}{{\bar Z}}
41: \newcommand{\hW}{{\widehat{\mathcal{W}}}}
42: \newcommand{\no}[1]{{:\!#1\!:}}
43:
44: \begin{document}
45:
46: \begin{titlepage}
47: \thispagestyle{empty}
48: \begin{flushleft}
49: %\hfill hep-th/0607052 \\
50: UT-06-13\hfill July, 2006 \\
51: \end{flushleft}
52:
53: \vskip 1.5 cm
54: \bigskip
55: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
56:
57: \begin{center}
58: \noindent{\LARGE Symmetry and Integrability of}
59: \\
60: {\LARGE Non-Singlet Sectors in Matrix Quantum Mechanics}
61:
62: %\vfill
63: \vskip 2cm
64: {\large
65: Yasuyuki Hatsuda\footnote{e-mail address: hatsuda@hep-th.phys.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp}
66: and
67: Yutaka~Matsuo\footnote{e-mail address:
68: matsuo@phys.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp}
69: }
70: \\
71: {\it
72: Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Tokyo \\
73: Hongo 7-3-1, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan\\
74: \noindent{ \smallskip }\\
75: }
76: %\vfill
77: \vskip 20mm
78: \bigskip
79: \end{center}
80:
81: \begin{abstract}
82: We study the non-singlet sectors of matrix quantum
83: mechanics (MQM) through an operator algebra
84: which generates the spectrum. The algebra is a
85: nonlinear extension of the $\cW_\infty$ algebra where
86: the nonlinearity comes from the angular part of the matrix
87: which can not be neglected in the non-singlet sector.
88: The algebra contains an infinite set of commuting generators which
89: can be regarded as the conserved currents of MQM.
90: %When we represent the wave functions as the multi-trace operators
91: %acting on the vacuum,
92: %the commuting operators describe the splitting and joining of the multi-trace
93: %operators as the interaction in the matrix string theory.
94: %This observation enables us to write the explicit form of
95: %their eigenfunctions for any non-singlet representations.
96: We derive the spectrum and the eigenfunctions of these conserved
97: quantities by a group theoretical method.
98: An interesting feature of the spectrum of these charges
99: in the non-singlet sectors is that they are
100: identical to those of the singlet sector except for the multiplicities.
101: %
102: We also derive the explicit form of
103: these commuting charges in terms of the eigenvalues of the matrix and show
104: that the interaction terms which are typical in Calogero-Sutherland system
105: appear.
106: Finally we discuss the bosonization
107: and rewrite the commuting charges
108: in terms of a free boson together with a finite number of
109: extra degrees of freedom for the non-singlet sectors.
110: \end{abstract}
111: \end{titlepage}\vfill\setcounter{footnote}{0}
112: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\arabic{footnote}}
113:
114: \newpage
115:
116: \section{Introduction}
117:
118: Matrix quantum mechanics (MQM) \cite{r:MQM} is described by
119: an $N\times N$ hermitian matrix $X$
120: as a dynamical degree of freedom
121: with the upside-down potential,
122: \begin{equation}
123: L=\frac{1}{2}\mbox{Tr}\,\left(\dot X^2\right)+
124: \frac{1}{2}\mbox{Tr}\,\left(X^2\right)\,.
125: \end{equation}
126: It is well-established that this model describes
127: the quantum gravity coupled with $c=1$ matter field.
128: This system has global $U(N)$ symmetry,
129: \begin{equation}
130: X\rightarrow UXU^\dagger\,,
131: \end{equation}
132: and the quantum states are classified according to
133: the representation of the $U(N)$ symmetry.
134: In order to describe short strings,
135: only the singlet sector is relevant.
136: It is known that the dynamics in this sector is reduced to free fermions
137: moving in the upside-down potential. The system
138: is trivially solvable because it is a free theory.
139:
140: In order to incorporate the complete physical content of
141: the $c=1$ matter system such as the vortices in Kosterlitz-Thouless
142: phase transition,
143: the non-singlet sectors can not be neglected \cite{r:GK,r:BK}.
144: It was then revealed by Kazakov, Kostov and Kutasov
145: \cite{r:K3} that 2d blackholes are described by MQM,
146: and the non-singlet sectors play an important role because
147: the dual string theory, which is described by the sine-Liouville
148: theory, has vortex-antivortex (winding) interactions.
149: In the recent works \cite{r:Mal,r:Fid}, the non-singlet sectors
150: are again shown to be essential in describing
151: %the blackhole physics and also
152: the behavior of the long open string solution of $c=1$ matter field.
153:
154: Compared with the singlet sector which is described as
155: a free theory, the non-singlet sector is technically
156: more difficult since one can not neglect interactions.
157: For instance, after reducing the dynamical degree of
158: freedom to the eigenvalues, the Hamiltonian of the system becomes
159: \cite{r:OM,r:BK},
160: \ba
161: && \frac{1}{2}
162: \left(-\sum_{i=1}^N \frac{\partial^2 }{\partial x_i^2}
163: +\sum_{i\neq j}
164: \frac{\rho(E_{ij})\rho(E_{ji})}{(x_i-x_j)^2}
165: -\sum_{i=1}^N x_i^2 \right)\psi^{(c)}(x)
166: =E\psi^{(c)}(x)\,,
167: \label{cano}
168: \ea
169: where $x_i$ is the eigenvalue of $X$, $\rho$ is the representation
170: of the states and $E_{ij}$ is an element of $u(N)$ with
171: $(E_{ij})_{kl}=\delta_{ki}\delta_{lj}$. Calogero-type interaction
172: is induced when the representation is restricted to the
173: non-singlet representation $\rho$.
174: Recently the Calogero-type interaction also apears in the AdS/CFT context \cite{r:AP}.
175:
176: The main purpose of this paper is to provide exact microscopic descriptions
177: of the non-singlet sectors.
178: % which include the explicit construction
179: %of the wave functions which are diagonal with respect to
180: %the infinite number of conserved charges.
181: While the system is integrable, it is not a free theory.
182: It makes the rigorous treatment of the upside-down
183: case rather tricky at least at this moment.
184: Therefore, we will focus on mathematically well-defined
185: system with ``upside-up'' potential,
186: \begin{equation}
187: L=\frac{1}{2}\mbox{Tr}\,\left(\dot X^2\right)
188: -\frac{1}{2}\mbox{Tr}\,\left(X^2\right)\,.
189: \end{equation}
190: This is easier because it is a
191: collection of $N^2$ harmonic oscillators and the Hilbert space
192: is generated by applying a finite number of creation operators to the
193: vacuum. Since the interaction by the restriction of the representation
194: remains the same, it will provide a good hint to understand
195: the system with the ``upside-down'' potential.
196:
197: Our strategy in this paper is to focus on the algebra
198: which generates the spectrum of the system.
199: As we wrote, the symmetry of
200: the system is $U(N)$ and the Hilbert space is classified
201: according to the representation of this symmetry.
202: There are an infinite set of operators which are invariant
203: under $U(N)$. Let us introduce the creation
204: and annihilation operator as
205: \begin{equation}
206: A=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X+iP)\,,\quad
207: \bar A=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(X-iP)\,,
208: \end{equation}
209: where $P=\dot X$ is the momentum associated with $X$.
210: They satisfy commutation relations,
211: \begin{align}
212: \left[ X_{ij}, P_{kl} \right] = i \delta_{il} \delta_{jk}\,, \quad
213: \left[A_{ij},\bar A_{kl}\right]=\delta_{il}\delta_{jk}\,.
214: \end{align}
215: It is easy to see that operators of the form,
216: \be\label{gOpm}
217: \cO^{(\epsilon_1\cdots\epsilon_n)}=\mathrm{Tr}(
218: A^{\epsilon_1}\cdots A^{\epsilon_n})\,,\quad
219: (\epsilon_i=\pm, A^+:=\bar A, A^-:=A)
220: \ee
221: are invariant under $U(N)$.
222: The multiplication of such operators to a state
223: does not change the representation of the state.
224: Thus they can be used to generate the spectrum with a specific representation.
225: For the singlet sector, the algebra generated by
226: these operators is reduced to the $\cW_\infty$ algebra
227: \cite{r:Winf,r:Winfother,r:Kac,r:AFMO}
228: whose generators are essentially the higher derivative operators
229: $\oint \bar\psi(z) z^n\partial_z^{m}\psi(z)$.
230: This simplification occurs because the dynamical degrees of freedom of the matrix
231: are reduced to those of its eigenvalues and the system becomes
232: free fermion system. In particular the ordering of the matrix multiplication
233: in (\ref{gOpm}) becomes irrelevant.
234: On the other hand, for the non-singlet sector, the off-diagonal
235: components become relevant and one can not change
236: the ordering in the above sense. Consequently the number of
237: independent generators are much larger than the usual $\cW_\infty$
238: algebra. It will be also shown that the algebra becomes nonlinear
239: and the structure of the algebra is considerably different from the
240: $\cW_\infty $ algebra.
241: We will denote this nonlinear extension as $\hW_\infty$ algebra.
242: In a sense, the difficulty of the non-singlet sectors
243: is materialized in the complication of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra.
244: We will nevertheless show that the
245: difficulty is manageable and we can derive the complete
246: sets of eigenfunctions for the infinite set of commuting
247: operators in the $\hW_\infty$ algebra. We note that
248: these operators are the conserved charges of MQM
249: and their existence implies the integrability of MQM.
250:
251: There are a few methods to analyze the Hamiltonian dynamics
252: with the Calogero-type interaction (\ref{cano}). A standard approach
253: is to reduce the dynamical degree of freedom to the eigenvalues
254: as in (\ref{cano}). For the analysis of the
255: relatively simpler generators in $\hW_\infty$
256: such as the Hamiltonian itself, their representations remain relatively compact
257: and we have a merit of using much fewer dynamical degree of freedom.
258: The second approach is to apply the
259: bosonization technique where the power sums of the
260: eigenvalues are identified with the free boson oscillators.
261: For the singlet sector, it has a definite merit that one can
262: represent the free fermion directly through the boson-fermion correspondence.
263: Even in the presence of the Calogero type interaction, it is still
264: possible to use the bosonization as discussed in \cite{r:AMOS}.
265: There appear a finite number of additional degrees of freedom
266: from the non-triviality of the representations. In \cite{r:Mal},
267: such degrees of freedom are physically identified
268: as the ``tips'' of the folded long open string.
269: By following this reference, we will refer the additional degree of freedom
270: that arises from the nontriviality of the representation as
271: the degree of freedom of the tips.
272: These two approaches (Calogero and bozonization)
273: share a merit that it has a direct interpretation
274: by the conformal field theory. On the other hand,
275: in the analysis of the higher conserved quantities in $\hW_\infty$,
276: the representation in terms of the eigenvalues
277: is getting more and more complicated.
278: For a systematic study of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra, the representation
279: in terms of the original matrix becomes much simpler. Indeed we obtain
280: the explicit forms of the eigenfunctions by this approach.
281: We will use a representation of generic elements in the Hilbert space
282: as the multi-trace operators applied to the vacuum.
283: Suppose we identify each trace as a loop operator, the commuting charges
284: of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra describe splitting and joining of these operators.
285: This action resembles the interaction of
286: the matrix string theory \cite{r:MatStr}
287: and the commuting charges can be represented as the
288: action of the permutation group $S_n$. This observation enables us to
289: find the exact eigenstates by applying the group theory.
290:
291: We organize this paper as follows.
292: In \S \ref{sec:Winf}, after a brief review of the
293: basic material of MQM, we present some properties of
294: the $\hW_\infty$ algebra and construct a few of their highest
295: weight states in the content of MQM.
296: Since $\hW_\infty$ and $U(N)$ commutes,
297: the highest weight states of $\hW_\infty$ can be
298: decomposed into the irreducible representations of
299: $U(N)$. It provide an efficient way to derive the explicit form
300: of wave functions in each specific representation.
301: In \S \ref{sec:eigen}, we discuss the reduction of the algebra
302: in terms of eigenvalues of $\bar A$.
303: The off-diagonal components of $A,\bar A$ provide
304: extra contributions to the generators of $\hW_\infty$.
305: The second conserved charge, for example, has
306: interaction terms which look like the Calogero-Sutherland
307: interactions. In \S \ref{sec:boson}, we rewrite the
308: conserved charges by the bosonization technique and
309: present their spectrum. We emphasize that the spectrum
310: has an important feature that every sector share the
311: same spectrum for the infinite set of charges up to
312: the multiplicity. Finally in \S \ref{sec:eig}, we come back
313: to the analysis of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra in the matrix form.
314: After presenting the analogy with the matrix string theory,
315: we derive the analytic expression of the exact eigenstates for
316: any type of the representation by using Young symmetrizer.
317: We also discuss the relation between the eigenstates
318: thus derived with those from the bosonization technique
319: but it is so far successful only for the part of the eigenstates.
320: %In particular, it reproduces all the eigenstates.
321: %which are numerically obtained in section \ref{sec:boson}.
322: %The readers who are not interested in the eigenvalue dynamics
323: %(and Calogero-Sutherland interaction) and the CFT technique
324: %may skip \S \ref{sec:eigen} and \S\ref{sec:boson}
325: %and go directly to \S \ref{sec:eig}.
326: In \S \ref{sec:summary}, we give a short summary and present
327: a few future issues.
328: In the appendix \S\ref{a:o3}, we describe an $O(3)$ harmonic oscillator system.
329: It gives an elementary toy model where key features of MQM can be
330: seen. In particular, the role of $U(N)$ and $\hW_\infty$ is replaced
331: by much simpler algebras $O(3)$ and $SL(2,R)$. It is helpful
332: to understand the basic strategy of this paper. In appendix \ref{a:lower},
333: we present the explicit forms of the eigenstates which are construced in
334: \S\ref{sec:eig}. It illuminates the correspondence between CFT and the
335: group theoretical construction of the MQM eigentstates.
336: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
337: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
338:
339: \section{Non-singlet sectors in MQM and $\hW_\infty$ algebra}\label{sec:Winf}
340: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
341: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
342: \subsection{Basic structure of MQM}
343: We first present the basis material
344: of MQM to fix the notation.
345: The Hamiltonian of the system is written as,
346: %\footnote{
347: %Trace does not have the cyclicity since matrix elements of $A$ and $\bA$ does not commute.},
348: \begin{equation}
349: \cH=\frac{1}{2}\mbox{Tr}\,\left(P^2\right)+
350: \frac{1}{2}\mbox{Tr}\,\left(X^2\right)=
351: \frac{1}{2}\mbox{Tr}\left(A\bA+\bA A\right)=
352: \mbox{Tr}(\bar A A)+\frac{N^2}{2}\,.
353: \end{equation}
354: The ket vacuum $|0\rangle$ (resp. the bra vacuum $\langle 0|$) is
355: specified by $A_{ij}|0\rangle=0$ (resp. $\langle 0|\bar A_{ij}=0$).
356: In this paper we will mainly work in this creation and annihilation basis
357: instead of working with the coordinate ($X$) representation.
358: The translation between the two basis can be made by
359: replacing $A^\mp_{ij}\rightarrow \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(
360: X_{ij}\pm \frac{\partial}{\partial X_{ij}}\right)$
361: and $|0\rangle \rightarrow \frac{1}{(\pi)^{N^2/4}}e^{-\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{Tr}(X^2)}$.
362: Equivalently, it can be represented by the integral transformation,
363: \begin{equation}\label{trcc}
364: \Psi^{(c)}(X)=\int \frac{dZd\bZ}{(2\pi)^{N^2}}
365: e^{-\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{Tr}X^2+\sqrt{2}\mathrm{Tr}XZ-\frac{1}{2}
366: \mathrm{Tr} Z^2-\mathrm{Tr}Z\bZ}\Psi(\bZ)
367: \end{equation}
368: where we represent the Fock state by the coherent
369: state representation,
370: $\Psi(\bar Z)=\langle 0|e^{\mathrm{Tr}(\bar Z A)}|\Psi\rangle$.
371:
372: The Hilbert space of MQM is constructed by applying
373: the creation operators $\bar A_{ij}$ to the vacuum.
374: The eigenvalue of $\cH_0\equiv \cH-N^2/2$ is simply the
375: number of the creation operators which are applied to the vacuum\footnote{
376: In the following we will refer the eigenvalue of $\cH_0$
377: as the level of the state.},
378: \begin{equation}
379: \cH_0 \bar A_{i_1 j_1}\cdots \bar A_{i_n j_n}|0\rangle
380: = n \bar A_{i_1 j_1}\cdots \bar A_{i_n j_n}|0\rangle\,.
381: \end{equation}
382: In this sense, the diagonalization of the Hamiltonian $\cH$
383: is trivial.
384: Consequently the partition function
385: is simply given as $Z(q)=\mbox{Tr}q^{\cH_0}=(1-q)^{-N^2}$.
386: Nontrivial structures appear only after we impose the
387: restriction on representation of $U(N)$.
388: We also note that the wave function in terms of the
389: eigenvalues of $X$ are much more complicated.
390: The complication comes in when we change the
391: Fock space basis to the canonical wave function of
392: the eigenvalues of $X$.
393: %An explicit integral
394: %transformation from the Fock basis to
395: %the eigenvalues of $X$ is discussed in \cite{r:KM}.
396:
397:
398: The generators of $U(N)$ algebra are written as,
399: \begin{eqnarray}
400: J_\Lambda=i\Tr \left(
401: \Lambda\left[X,P\right]
402: \right)=-\Tr \Lambda\left[A,\bar A\right]\,.
403: \end{eqnarray}
404: They satisfy commutation relations,
405: $
406: \left[J_\Lambda,\cQ_{ij}\right]= \sum_k(\Lambda_{ik}\cQ_{kj}-\cQ_{ik}\Lambda_{kj})\,,
407: $
408: for $\cQ=X,P,A,\bar A$.
409: Since they commute with the Hamiltonian
410: $\left[J_\Lambda,\cH\right]=0$,
411: the quantum Hilbert space can be classified according to
412: the irreducible representation $\rho$ with respect to $U(N)$,
413: \begin{equation}
414: J_\Lambda |\Psi\rangle_a=\sum_{b=1}^{\dim \rho}\rho(\Lambda)_{ab}|\Psi\rangle_b\,,
415: \;\;(a=1,\cdots,\dim \rho)\,.
416: \end{equation}
417:
418: Since the wave function is constructed by combining $\bar A$
419: with the adjoint representation, the admissible representations $\rho$
420: are restricted. The possible ones are those which correspond to
421: the Young diagram with the same number of boxes and anti-boxes \cite{r:BK}.
422: These representations are produced by
423: direct products of the adjoint representations.
424: For example, by a direct product of two adjoint operators,
425: \begin{align}
426: A_1 \otimes A_1 =S \oplus 2A_1 \oplus A_2 \oplus A_2^* \oplus B_2 \oplus C_2\,,
427: \end{align}
428: where $S$ is the singlet (trivial), $A_1$ is the adjoint,
429: and $A_2, B_2, C_2$ (in the notation of \cite{r:BK})
430: are the representations with two boxes
431: and two anti-boxes (fig.\,\ref{fig:young}).
432: The simplest representation is the singlet %($S$ for short notation)
433: $\rho(\Lambda)=0$.
434: The next simplest one is the adjoint,
435: \be
436: J_\Lambda|\Psi\rangle_{ij}=\sum_k (\Lambda_{ik}|\Psi\rangle_{kj}
437: -\Lambda_{kj}|\Psi\rangle_{ik})\,.
438: \ee
439: %The representations with two boxes
440: %and two antiboxes are denoted as $A_2, B_2, C_2$ in the literature.
441: %(See the figure.)
442: We note that since the integration kernel in (\ref{trcc}) is
443: invariant under $U(N)$, the states in a specific representation
444: $\rho$ in the creation/annihilation operators is mapped to
445: the wave function $\Psi^{(c)}(X)$ with the same representation $\rho$.
446:
447: \begin{figure}[tbp]
448: \begin{center}
449: \includegraphics[width=12cm]{rep.eps}
450: \end{center}
451: \caption{Simpler representations allowed in MQM.}
452: \label{fig:young}
453: \end{figure}
454:
455: The partition function becomes nontrivial after
456: the restriction of the representation%
457: \footnote{
458: We observe
459: in appendix \ref{a:o3} that
460: there is a close analogy with $O(3)$ harmonic oscillator
461: system. In that case, the symmetry of the system is $O(3)$
462: whereas the spectrum generating algebra is given by $sl(2,R)$.
463: The partition function of the three harmonic oscillators
464: has a similar decomposition (\ref{so3tot}).
465: },
466: \be\label{decm}
467: Z(q)=\sum_{R}d_R Z^{(R)}(q)\,,
468: \ee
469: where the summation over $R$ is for the admissible representation
470: of $U(N)$, $d_R$ is the dimension of the representation
471: and $Z^{(R)}(q)$ is the generating function of the multiplicity of the representation
472: at level $n$ as the coefficient of $q^n$.
473: For simpler representations, they are explicitly written as \cite{r:BK},
474: %\begin{eqnarray}
475: %& Z^{(S)}(q)=\prod_{n=1}^N \frac{1}{(1-q^n)}\,,\quad
476: %Z^{(R)}(q)=P^{(R)}(q)Z^{(S)}(q)&\label{part1}\\
477: %&P^{(A_1)}=\frac{q-q^N}{1-q}\,,\quad
478: %P^{(B_2)}=P^{(C_2)}=\frac{q^2}{(1-q)(1-q^2)},\quad
479: %P^{(A_2)}=\frac{q^3}{(1-q)(1-q^2)}&\label{part2}\\
480: %&d_{B_2}=\frac{N^2(N+3)(N-1)}{4},
481: %\quad
482: %d_{C_2}=\frac{N^2(N-3)(N+1)}{4}\,,\quad
483: %d_{A_2}=\frac{(N^2-1)(N^2-4)}{4}\,.&\label{part3}
484: %\end{eqnarray}
485: \begin{align}
486: Z^{(S)}(q)&=\prod_{n=1}^N \frac{1}{(1-q^n)}\,,\quad
487: Z^{(R)}(q)=P^{(R)}(q)Z^{(S)}(q)\label{part1}\,,\\
488: P^{(A_1)}=\frac{q-q^N}{1-q}\,,\quad
489: &P^{(B_2)}=\frac{q^2(1-q^{N-1})(1-q^N)}{(1-q)(1-q^2)},\quad
490: P^{(C_2)}=\frac{q^2(1-q^{N-3})(1-q^N)}{(1-q)(1-q^2)},
491: \nn\\
492: &
493: P^{(A_2)}=\frac{q^3(1-q^{N-2})(1-q^{N-1})}{(1-q)(1-q^2)}\,,\label{part2}\\
494: d_{B_2}=\frac{N^2(N+3)(N-1)}{4}&,\quad
495: d_{C_2}=\frac{N^2(N-3)(N+1)}{4}\,,\quad
496: d_{A_2}=\frac{(N^2-1)(N^2-4)}{4}\,.\label{part3}
497: \end{align}
498: %At this point, it becomes clearer why the restriction of
499: %the representation is important in MQM. When we need to
500: %apply MQM to physical system, we have to take large $N$
501: %limit at some point. The naive Hilbert space without
502: %interaction becomes meaningless since the number of states
503: %at each level becomes infinite. On the other hand,
504: %after the restriction of the representation, the partition
505: %functions $Z^{(R)}(q)$ become finite at each level%
506: %\footnote{Similar restriction of the representation appeared
507: %in $\cW_\infty$ algebra and called as
508: %``quasi-finite'' representation.}
509: %and the structure of the Hilbert space can be analyzed
510: %without ambiguity.
511:
512: At this point, it is possible to write the strategy of
513: our study more precisely.
514: \begin{enumerate}
515: \item We give a systematic derivation of the MQM Hilbert space
516: with specific irreducible representations of $U(N)$.
517: Our strategy is to find the states with the specific
518: representation $\rho$ of $U(N)$ with the lowest $\cH_0$
519: eigenvalue as the highest weight state\footnote{\label{f1}
520: We keep the terminology of ``highest weight representation''
521: while the state indeed has the lowest weight. It is for keeping the convention
522: of CFT. The definition of the degree of the operator in the following has
523: also the different sign compared with the usual CFT convention.}
524: of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra.
525: The generic states with the representation $\rho$ can be generated
526: from this set of states by applying the $\hW_\infty$ operators.
527: It explains the decomposition (\ref{decm}) where $Z^{(R)}(q)$
528: are regarded as ``characters'' of the representations of
529: $\hW_\infty$.
530: \item As we noted, the diagonalization of the Hamiltonian
531: is trivial in the creation/annihilation basis
532: since it just counts the number of creation operators.
533: These states are, however, not convenient for many purposes
534: since they are not diagonal with respect to the inner product.
535: As we will see, the $\hW_\infty$ algebra contains the infinite
536: set of commuting charges which include $\cH_0$ as the simplest
537: charge. These operators are also important since their existence supports
538: the integrability of MQM in the non-singlet sectors.
539: We will construct the basis of the Hilbert space
540: which are the eigenvectors of these infinite set of charges.
541: \end{enumerate}
542: %In a sense, we study the interaction caused by
543: %the restriction of the representation as the the nontrivial
544: %structure of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra.
545:
546:
547: \subsection{$\hW_\infty$ algebra}
548:
549: %\paragraph{General properties}
550: As we have defined in the introduction,
551: the $\hW_\infty$ algebra %
552: %\footnote{
553: %Strictly speaking, the operators of the form
554: %$\cO^{(\epsilon_1,\cdots,\epsilon_n)}$ are not independent
555: %when $N$ is finite and $n>N$.
556: %Sometimes, it gives complicated effects on the commutation
557: %relations and bosonization rule which we will discuss.
558: %In the following, we try to present the formula
559: %}
560: is generated by the operators of the form
561: (\ref{gOpm}) which commute with $U(N)$ generators,
562: \begin{equation}\label{commu}
563: \left[J_\Lambda,\cO^{(\epsilon_1\cdots \epsilon_n)}\right]=0\,.
564: \end{equation}
565:
566: Before we study some detail of the algebra, it is
567: useful to summarize our nomenclature on this algebra.
568: We first note that operators of the form (\ref{gOpm})
569: are eigenstates of $\cH_0$,
570: $
571: \left[\cH_0,\cO^{(\epsilon_1\cdots \epsilon_n)}\right]
572: = m \cO^{(\epsilon_1\cdots \epsilon_n)}\,,
573: $
574: where $m$ is the number of $\bar A$ minus the number of $A$.
575: We call this eigenvalue of $\cO^{(\epsilon_1\cdots \epsilon_n)}$
576: as the {\em degree} of this operator.
577: Obviously by applying degree $n$ operator to level $m$
578: state produces a level $n+m$ state.
579: %
580: Suppose we have a set of states $\{|a\rangle\}$ at level $n$
581: with some representation $\rho$ under $U(N)$ {\it i.e.}
582: $J_\Lambda|a\rangle = \sum_{a}\rho_{ab}|b\rangle$.
583: The commutativity (\ref{commu}) between $J_\Lambda$
584: and the $\hW_\infty$ generator implies that
585: $\cO^{(\epsilon_1\cdots \epsilon_n)}|a\rangle$ belongs
586: to the same representation at level $n+m$ where
587: $m$ is the degree of $\cO^{(\epsilon_1\cdots \epsilon_n)}$.
588: Since the level is bounded from below, there must be
589: a set of states $|R\rrangle_a$ ($a=1,\cdots,\mathrm{dim}(R)$)
590: which are annihilated by all the operators in $\hW_\infty$
591: with negative degree. We call such set of states
592: as the {\em highest weight state} (see footnote \ref{f1}) of
593: the $\hW_\infty$ algebra
594: for the representation $R$.
595:
596: Here we should not confuse the highest
597: weight conditions for $U(N)$ and $\hW_\infty$.
598: The former picks up one state in each set of states $\{|a\rangle\}$
599: which spans basis of the irreducible representation $\rho$.
600: Such states exist at various levels. Partition functions which count
601: such states are given as $Z^{(R)}(q)$. On the other hand,
602: the latter condition picks up the representation space
603: of $R$ with $d_R$ states at the lowest level.
604:
605: It is also convenient to introduce
606: the {\em normal ordering} prescription.
607: As in the quantum field theory, we define
608: the normal ordered operator
609: $\no{\cO}$ by putting all the annihilation operator $A$ on
610: the right of creation operators $\bar A$. For example,
611: \begin{equation}
612: \no{\cO^{+-+-}}=\no{\mbox{Tr}(\bar A A\bar A A)}
613: =\sum_{i,j,k,l}\bar A_{ij}\bar A_{kl}
614: A_{jk}A_{li}\,.
615: \end{equation}
616: We note that the ordering of the matrix multiplication is
617: not changed. By using normal ordered operator, one
618: can avoid the unnecessary factors of order $N$ (and higher)
619: in the operator algebra.
620: It also makes it possible to recover the cyclicity
621: in the trace, $\no{\mbox{Tr}(\cO_1\cO_2)}=\no{\mbox{Tr}(\cO_2\cO_1)}$.
622:
623: The algebra between the $\hW_\infty$ generators are far more
624: complicated than the usual $\cW_\infty$ algebra
625: and it seems not possible to write the whole algebra
626: in a closed compact form. The complication comes in from
627: the order dependence of operators and the inclusion
628: of higher order differential operators.
629: Instead of trying to write the whole algebra,
630: we just present the algebra between
631: a few simpler operators which contains a few $A$.
632: It is enough to show some nontrivial features of the algebra.
633: We define $J_n=\mbox{Tr}(\bar A^n)$,
634: $L_{n}=\mbox{Tr}(\bar A^{n+1}A)$
635: and $V_{n,m}=\no{\mbox{Tr}({\bar A^{n+1}A\bar A^{m+1}A})}$.
636: The commutation relations between these operators become,
637: \begin{eqnarray}
638: && [J_n,J_m]=0\,,\quad
639: [J_n,L_m]=-n J_{n+m}\,,\quad
640: [L_n,L_m]=(m-n)L_{n+m}\,,\label{com1}\\
641: && \left[V_{n,m}, J_r\right]=r\sum_{s=1}^{r-1}
642: J_{n+s}J_{m+r-s}
643: +2r L_{n+m+r}\,,\label{com2}\\
644: &&[V_{n,m},L_r]=2\sum_{s=0}^r V_{n+s,m+r-s}
645: +\sum_{s=1}^{r}(r-s+1)(J_{m+s}L_{n+r-s}+J_{n+s}L_{m+r-s}) \notag \\
646: &&\hspace{62pt}-(m+1)V_{n,m+r}-(n+1)V_{n+r,m}\label{com3}\,.
647: \end{eqnarray}
648: The algebra in the first line is identical with
649: the usual $U(1)$ current algebra and Virasoro algebra
650: without the central extension.
651: It implies that we can keep some features of CFT even for the non-singlet
652: sectors. The nonlinearity is a characteristic feature of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra
653: and it shows up in the algebra of $V_{n,m}$
654: in (\ref{com2},\ref{com3}).
655: In general, the $\hW_\infty$ generators induce
656: splitting and joining of the multi-trace operators
657: as we will see in section \ref{sec:eig}.
658: The above nonlinearities are simple examples of such
659: property.
660:
661: Finally, among the degree zero operators in $\hW_\infty$,
662: there are the infinite set of generators which
663: commute with each other (the elements of
664: Cartan sualgebra). We define\footnote{
665: It coincides with the definition of the conserved charges in
666: \cite{r:Poly_rev}.},
667: \begin{equation}
668: {H}_n=\no{\mbox{Tr }(\mathcal{L}^n)}\,,\qquad
669: \mathcal{L}={\bar A A}\,,\quad
670: n=1,2,3,\cdots\,.
671: \end{equation}
672: In order to prove that they commute with each other,
673: we use the commutation relation,
674: $\left[\cL_{rs},\cL_{tu}\right]=\cL_{ru}\delta_{st}-\cL_{ts}\delta_{ru}$.
675: Commutation relations $\left[\cL_{rs}, H_n\right]=0$ and
676: $\left[H_n, H_m\right]=0$ follow from this algebra immediately.
677: We note that this set of commuting generators contains the
678: Hamiltonian $\cH_0$ as the first generator $H_1$.
679: %
680: We also remark that there are many other operators with degree zero in $\hW_\infty$
681: such as $\mbox{Tr}(\bar A^2 A^2)$. These operators, however, do not
682: commute with $H_n$ and can not be taken as elements of Cartan subalgebra.
683:
684: \subsection{Construction of non-singlet states by the $\hW_\infty$ algebra}
685: In the following, we give a few explicit constructions
686: of the non-singlet sectors by using the $\hW_\infty$ algebra.
687: As we have explained, we first
688: find the highest weight state of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra
689: which provide the non-singlet states at the lowest level.
690: The generic non-singlet states can be generated from
691: this highest weight vectors by applying the $\hW_\infty$ generators
692: with positive degree.
693: In order to identify the irreducible set of states, it is convenient
694: to re-order the product by using commutation relations to
695: the following standard form,
696: \begin{equation}
697: \prod J_s \prod L_r\prod V_{n,m}\cdots |R\rrangle\,.
698: \end{equation}
699: Namely we reorder the operators which contains more $A$ to the right side
700: of the operators with less $A$.
701: In the following, we present the highest weight states
702: at level 0,1,2.
703:
704: \paragraph{Highest weight condition at level 0 and the singlet sector}
705: There is only one state (Fock vacuum $|0\rangle$)
706: and it automatically satisfies the
707: highest weight state condition.
708: Since $J_\Lambda|0\rangle=0$, this is the state
709: which belongs to the singlet representation.
710: Therefore, we write,
711: \begin{equation}
712: |S\rrangle=|0\rangle\,.
713: \end{equation}
714: It is clear that all the operators
715: which contains $A$ annihilate $|S\rrangle$.
716: Therefore the generators which give rise to new states
717: are limited to $J_n$ ($n=1,2,3,\cdots$). The general singlet state
718: takes the form $P(J_1,J_2,\cdots)|S\rrangle$
719: where $P$ is an arbitrary polynomial of $J_1,J_2,\cdots$.
720: This is the Fock space of a free boson field or equivalently a
721: free fermion field.
722: It is consistent with the
723: form of the partition function\footnote{The level $n$ states are written as
724: $J_{n_1}J_{n_2}\cdots |S\rrangle \;\;(n_1+n_2+\cdots=n;~n_1\geq n_2 \geq
725: \cdots \geq 0)$. The number of these states is given by the number of partitions of $n$, and $Z^{(S)}(q)$ is well-known
726: as the generating function of this partition number.}
727: $Z^{(S)}(q)$ in (\ref{part1}).
728: For the commuting charges $H_n$, the weights of
729: $|S\rrangle$ are
730: \begin{eqnarray}
731: {H_m} |S\rrangle=0\;\;\;\; (m=1,2,3,\cdots).
732: \end{eqnarray}
733:
734: \paragraph{Highest weight state at level 1 and the adjoint sector}
735: At this level, there are $N^2$ states $\bar A_{ij}|0\rangle$.
736: The only nontrivial highest weight condition
737: is $\mbox{Tr}(A)|\mbox{state}\rangle=\cO^{(-)}|\mbox{state}\rangle=0$.
738: The solutions to this condition are $N^2-1$ states,
739: \begin{eqnarray}\label{adjoint1}
740: |A_1\rrangle_{ij}=(\bar{A}_{ij}-\frac{1}{N}\delta_{ij}
741: \mbox{Tr}\bar A)|0\rangle\,,\quad
742: (i,j=1,\cdots,N)\,.
743: \end{eqnarray}
744: It is easy to see that $|A_1\rrangle$ transforms as the
745: adjoint representation,
746: \begin{equation}
747: J_\Lambda|A_1\rrangle_{ij}=
748: \sum_k\left(\Lambda_{ik}|A_1\rrangle_{kj}
749: -\Lambda_{kj}|A_1\rrangle_{ik}\right)\,.
750: \end{equation}
751: %It picks up $N^2-1$ states out of $N^2$.
752: The remaining one state at level $1$ is a singlet state
753: generated from $|S\rrangle$.
754: As we expected, the highest weight condition
755: of $\hW_\infty$ automatically picks up an
756: irreducible representation of $U(N)$.
757:
758: It is easy to see the operators which contain more than one
759: $A$ annihilate $|A_1\rrangle$. On the other hand applying
760: $L_n$ generates a new state,
761: \begin{eqnarray}
762: L_n\left(\bar{A}_{ij}
763: -\frac{1}{N}\delta_{ij}\mbox{Tr}(\bar A)\right)|0\rangle=
764: \left((\bar{A}^{n+1})_{ij}
765: -\frac{1}{N}\delta_{ij}\mbox{Tr}(\bar A^{n+1})\right)|0\rangle\,.
766: \end{eqnarray}
767: Applying $L_{n'}$ further produces the state of the same form
768: with different $n$. Then we apply $J_n$ to generate new states.
769: The general states which belongs to the adjoint
770: representation thus takes the form,
771: \begin{equation}
772: \left((\bar{A}^n)_{ij}
773: -\frac{1}{N}\delta_{ij}\mbox{Tr}(\bar A^n)\right)
774: P(J_1,J_2,\cdots)|0\rangle
775: \label{eq:adj_ex}
776: \end{equation}
777: with $n=1,2,\cdots$. It coincides with the claim of \cite{r:OM}.
778: The number of states generated by \eqref{eq:adj_ex} is given by the generating function
779: \begin{align}
780: \left(\sum_{n=1}^\infty q^n \right) \prod_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{1-q^n}
781: =\frac{q}{1-q}\prod_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{1-q^n}\,.
782: \end{align}
783: This is just the character in the adjoint
784: sector\footnote{Here we take a limit $N \to \infty$
785: in the character. At finite $N$, $\bar A^N$ can be
786: written in terms of $\bar A,\cdots,\bar A^{N-1}$
787: and we recover the finite $N$ character
788: \eqref{part1} and \eqref{part2}.}.
789: We note that all states which belong to
790: the adjoint representation are created by the action of the $\cW_\infty$
791: operators with the positive degree on the highest weight state (\ref{adjoint1}).
792: The eigenvalues of the highest weight states for $H_n$ are,
793: \begin{eqnarray}
794: && {H_1}|A_1\rrangle=|A_1\rrangle\,,\quad
795: {H_n}|A_1\rrangle=0\,,(n>1)\,.
796: \end{eqnarray}
797:
798: \paragraph{Highest weight state at level 2 and $B_2$ and $C_2$ sectors}
799: Level 2 highest weight state is given by
800: combining $\bar A_{ij}\bar A_{kl}$ with other terms
801: where we take contractions of indices of this expression.
802: Nontrivial constraints come from $\cO^{(-)}$, $\cO^{(+--)}$
803: and $\cO^{(--)}$. Actually the third one does not
804: produce independent constraint
805: since $\left[\cO^{(-)},\cO^{(+--)}\right]=\cO^{(--)}$.
806: We use,
807: \begin{eqnarray}
808: \cO^{(-)}\bar A_{ij}\bar A_{kl}|0\rangle&=&\delta_{ij}\bar A_{kl}|0\rangle
809: +\delta_{kl}\bar A_{ij}|0\rangle\,,\\
810: \cO^{(+--)}\bar A_{ij}\bar A_{kl}|0\rangle&=&\delta_{il}\bar A_{kj}|0\rangle
811: +\delta_{kj}\bar A_{il}|0\rangle\,.
812: \end{eqnarray}
813: After some computation, we found combinations
814: %\begin{eqnarray}
815: % |ij,kl\rrangle&=& \left[\bar A_{ij}\bar A_{kl}\right.
816: %\nonumber\\
817: %&&-\frac{N}{N^2-4}
818: %\left(\delta_{ij}\mathrm{Tr}(\bar A)\bar A_{kl}
819: %+\delta_{kl}\mathrm{Tr}(\bar A)\bar A_{ij}+\delta_{il}
820: %(\bar A^2)_{kj}+\delta_{kj}(\bar A^2)_{il}\right)\nonumber\\
821: %&&+\frac{2}{N^2-4}
822: %\left(\delta_{il}\mathrm{Tr}(\bar A)\bar A_{kj}
823: %+\delta_{kj}\mathrm{Tr}(\bar A)\bar A_{il}+\delta_{ij}
824: %(\bar A^2)_{kl}+\delta_{kl}(\bar A^2)_{ij}\right)
825: %\nonumber\\
826: %&& +\frac{N^2+2}{(N^2-1)(N^2-4)}\left(
827: %\delta_{ij}\delta_{kl}(\mathrm{Tr}\bar A)^2
828: %+\delta_{il}\delta_{kj}\mathrm{Tr}(\bar A^2)
829: %\right)\nonumber\\
830: %&&\left. -\frac{3N}{(N^2-1)(N^2-4)}
831: %\left(
832: %\delta_{il}\delta_{kj}(\mathrm{Tr}\bar A)^2
833: %+\delta_{ij}\delta_{kl}\mathrm{Tr}(\bar A^2)
834: %\right)\right]|0\rangle
835: %\end{eqnarray}
836: %satisfies the highest weight conditions .
837: %At level 2, we expect to have $B_2$ and $C_2$ representation.
838: %They states associated with those irreducible representations are,
839: %\begin{equation}
840: % |B_2\rrangle_{ijkl}=|ij,kl\rrangle+|il,kj\rrangle\,,\quad
841: % |C_2\rrangle_{ijkl}=|ij,kl\rrangle-|il,kj\rrangle\,.
842: %\end{equation}
843: %More explicitly,
844: \begin{eqnarray}
845: |B_2\rrangle_{ijkl} &=&
846: \left[\bar A_{ij}\bar A_{kl}+\bar A_{il}\bar A_{kj}\right.\nonumber\\
847: &&-\frac{1}{N+2}(\mathrm{Tr}\bar A)\left(
848: \delta_{ij}\bar A_{kl}+\delta_{kl}\bar A_{ij}
849: +\delta_{il}\bar A_{kj}+\delta_{kj}\bar A_{il}
850: \right)\nonumber\\
851: &&-\frac{1}{N+2}\left(
852: \delta_{ij}\bar A^2_{kl}+\delta_{kl}\bar A^2_{ij}
853: +\delta_{il}\bar A^2_{kj}+\delta_{kj}\bar A^2_{il}
854: \right)\nonumber\\
855: &&\left.+\frac{\delta_{ij}\delta_{kl}
856: +\delta_{il}\delta_{kj}}{(N+1)(N+2)}\left((\mathrm{Tr}(\bar A))^2
857: +(\mathrm{Tr}(\bar A^2))\right)\right]|0\rangle,\\
858: |C_2\rrangle_{ijkl} &=&
859: \left[\bar A_{ij}\bar A_{kl}-\bar A_{il}\bar A_{kj}\right.\nonumber\\
860: &&-\frac{1}{N+2}(\mathrm{Tr}\bar A)\left(
861: \delta_{ij}\bar A_{kl}+\delta_{kl}\bar A_{ij}
862: -\delta_{il}\bar A_{kj}-\delta_{kj}\bar A_{il}
863: \right)\nonumber\\
864: &&+\frac{1}{N+2}\left(
865: \delta_{ij}\bar A^2_{kl}+\delta_{kl}\bar A^2_{ij}
866: -\delta_{il}\bar A^2_{kj}-\delta_{kj}\bar A^2_{il}
867: \right)\nonumber\\
868: &&\left.+\frac{\delta_{ij}\delta_{kl}
869: -\delta_{il}\delta_{kj}}{(N+1)(N+2)}\left((\mathrm{Tr}(\bar A))^2
870: -(\mathrm{Tr}(\bar A^2))\right)\right]|0\rangle\,,
871: \end{eqnarray}
872: satisfy the highest weight condition.
873: The eigenvalues of $H_n$ for these states are,
874: \ba
875: && H_1|B_2,C_2\rrangle=2|B_2,C_2\rrangle\,,\quad
876: H_2|B_2\rrangle=2|B_2\rrangle\,,\quad
877: H_2|C_2\rrangle=-2|C_2\rrangle\,,\nn\\
878: &&H_m|B_2,C_2\rrangle=0\,,\quad(m>2)\,.
879: \ea
880: We note that $H_2$ eigenvalue distinguishes $|B_2\rrangle$
881: and $|C_2\rrangle$ which could not be separated
882: by $\cO^{(-)}$ and $\cO^{(+--)}$ conditions alone.
883:
884: For these states the application of $V_{n,m}$ becomes
885: nontrivial. It produces the states of the form,
886: \begin{eqnarray}
887: \left( (\bar A^n)_{ij}(\bar A^m)_{kl}+
888: (\bar A^m)_{ij}(\bar A^n)_{kl}\pm
889: (\bar A^n)_{il}(\bar A^m)_{kj}\pm
890: (\bar A^n)_{kj}(\bar A^m)_{il}+\cdots\right)|0\rangle
891: \label{b2c2g}
892: \end{eqnarray}
893: for $B_2$ (resp. $C_2$) representations.
894: It is easy to check that applying $V_{n',m'}$ further,
895: or $L_{n'}$ does not produce new type of states.
896: Since they are
897: symmetric under $n\leftrightarrow m$, the number of the state
898: which is generated from the first factor is given as,
899: \begin{equation}
900: \sum_{1\leq n\leq m}q^{n+m}=\frac{q^2}{(1-q)(1-q^2)}\,.
901: \end{equation}
902: This is exactly the prefactor $P^{(B_2,C_2)}(q)$ in (\ref{part2})
903: in the large $N$ limit.
904: Finally we can multiply the state with any polynomials of $J_n$
905: as the singlet and the adjoint sectors. So the most general form of
906: $B_2$ and $C_2$ representation sector has the form (\ref{b2c2g})
907: multiplied by $P(J_1,J_2,\cdots)$.
908:
909: We note that at level two, there are extra states,
910: $2$ singlet states ($J_1^2|S\rrangle$
911: and $J_2|S\rrangle$),
912: $2(N^2-1)$ states with adjoint representation
913: ($J_1|A_1\rrangle$ and $L_1 |A_1\rrangle$), and $d_{B_2}, d_{C_2}$ states with $B_2$ and $C_2$ representation respectively.
914: These span precisely the $N^2(N^2+1)/2$ dimensional
915: level two states.
916:
917: We have seen that the highest weight conditions of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra
918: are useful to obtain the explicit form of the wave functions in the non-singlet sectors.
919: It is also clear that the number of the state at each level is given by the
920: character of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra. We do not have, however, the complete classification
921: of the irreducible representations of $\hW_\infty$ which should be classified
922: according to the eigenvalues of $H_n$. This issue remains as an important open problem
923: which should be solved as the $\cW_\infty$ algebra \cite{r:Kac,r:AFMO}.
924:
925: \section{Calogero(-Sutherland)-type interaction in $\hW_\infty$ generators}
926: \label{sec:eigen}
927: In the following chapters, we derive the exact spectrum of
928: the commuting charges $H_n$ of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra
929: and their eigenstates. Usually, this problem is approached
930: by reducing the dynamical degree of freedom to the eigenvalues
931: of matrices $X$ and solve the Hamiltonian problem
932: with the Calogero-type interaction (\ref{cano}).
933: As we noted in the previous section,
934: in the creation and annihilation basis, to find
935: eigenfunction of the Hamiltonian is trivial since
936: the Hamiltonian just counts the number of creation operators
937: applied to the vacuum. Therefore a nontrivial issue is
938: how to diagonalize higher charges $H_n$ ($n=2,3,4,\cdots$).
939: In this section, we derive the explicit form
940: of $H_2$ in terms of the eigenvalues of $\bar A$
941: and derive the interaction term which is similar
942: to the Calogero-Sutherland interaction.
943: We will solve the eigenvalue problem (for the adjoint sector)
944: in the next section by applying the bosonization technique.
945: The procedure in these sections illuminates
946: the direct correspondence between the solvable system and
947: CFT which generalizes the free fermion in the singlet sector.
948:
949: Since $A$ and $\bar A$ are $q$-numbers, it will be more convenient
950: to introduce $c$-number matrix $\bar Z$ as the eigenvalue
951: of $\bar A$ in the coherent state basis,
952: \begin{equation}
953: \langle 0|e^{\mathrm{Tr}(A \bar Z)}|\Psi\rangle=\Psi(\bar Z)\,\,,
954: \quad \bar A_{ij}|\Psi\rangle\rightarrow \bar Z_{ij}\Psi(\bar Z)\,,\quad
955: A_{ij}|\Psi\rangle \rightarrow
956: \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{Z}_{ji}}\Psi(\bar Z)\,.
957: \end{equation}
958:
959: We diagonalize $\bar Z$ as $\bar Z=e^K \bar z e^{-K}$
960: where $\bar z$ is a diagonal matrix and $e^K$ ($K:$ anti-hermitian) is a unitary
961: transformation which is needed for the diagonalization.
962: We expand $\bar Z$ in terms of $K$,
963: \begin{equation}
964: \bar Z_{ij}=\bar z_{i}\delta_{ij}+(\bar z_j-\bar z_i)K_{ij}+\frac{1}{2}
965: \sum_k(\bar z_i+\bar z_j -2\bar z_k)K_{ik}K_{kj}+\mathcal{O}(K^3)\,.
966: \end{equation}
967: $K$ will be put to be zero at the end of the computation.
968: However, in order to express the differentiation with respect to the
969: matrix $\bar Z$, we need to keep it for a while.
970:
971: We determine the differentiation with respect to $\bar A$
972: by the requirement,
973: \begin{equation}\label{matdiff}
974: \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar Z_{ij}}
975: \bar Z_{kl}=\delta_{ik}\delta_{jl}\,.
976: \end{equation}
977: We write
978: \begin{equation}
979: \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar Z_{ij}}=
980: \sum_{r}\mathcal{A}_{ij,r}\partial_r
981: +\sum_{r,s}\mathcal{B}_{ij,rs}\frac{\partial}{\partial K_{sr}}
982: \end{equation}
983: (with $\partial_r=\frac{\partial}{\partial \bar z_r}$)
984: and expand the coefficients as
985: \begin{equation}
986: \mathcal{A}_{ij,r}= \mathcal{A}^{(0)}_{ij,r}+ \mathcal{A}_{ij,r}^{(1)}
987: + \mathcal{A}_{ij,r}^{(2)}\cdots\,,\quad
988: \mathcal{B}_{ij,r}= \mathcal{B}^{(0)}_{ij,rs}+ \mathcal{B}_{ij,rs}^{(1)}
989: + \mathcal{B}_{ij,rs}^{(2)}\cdots\,,
990: \end{equation}
991: where $\mathcal{A}^{(n)}$ and $\mathcal{B}^{(n)}$ are
992: $\mathcal{O}(K^n)$.
993: We can fix these coefficients order by order
994: by requiring (\ref{matdiff}). For example,
995: the coefficients for $\cO(1)$ and $\cO(K)$ are,
996: \begin{eqnarray}
997: && \mathcal{A}^{(0)}_{ij,k}=\delta_{ij}\delta_{jk}\,,\\
998: && \mathcal{B}^{(0)}_{ij,rs}=
999: \frac{\delta_{ir}\delta_{js}(1-\delta_{rs})}{\bar z_r-\bar z_s}\,,\\
1000: && \mathcal{A}^{(1)}_{ij,k}=K_{ij}(\delta_{jk}-\delta_{ik})\,,\\
1001: && \mathcal{B}^{(1)}_{ij,lk}=\left(
1002: \frac{1-\delta_{kl}}{\bar z_l-\bar z_k}-\frac{1}{2}
1003: \frac{1-\delta_{ik}}{\bar z_i-\bar z_k}
1004: \right)\delta_{jk}K_{il}-
1005: \left(
1006: \frac{1-\delta_{kl}}{\bar z_l-\bar z_k}-\frac{1}{2}
1007: \frac{1-\delta_{ij}}{\bar z_i-\bar z_j}
1008: \right)\delta_{il}K_{kj}
1009: \end{eqnarray}
1010: It is equivalent to the expression,
1011: \begin{eqnarray}
1012: \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar Z_{ij}}&=&\delta_{ij}\partial_j
1013: +\frac{1-\delta_{ij}}{\bar z_i-\bar z_j}
1014: \partial_{K_{ji}}+ K_{ij}(\partial_j-\partial_i)
1015: +\sum_l\left(\frac{1-\delta_{jl}}{\bar z_l-\bar z_j}-\frac{1}{2}
1016: \frac{1-\delta_{ij}}{\bar z_i-\bar z_j}\right)K_{il}\partial_{K_{lj}}
1017: \nonumber\\
1018: &&-\sum_l\left(\frac{1-\delta_{il}}{\bar z_i-\bar z_l}-\frac{1}{2}
1019: \frac{1-\delta_{ij}}{\bar z_i-\bar z_j}\right)K_{lj}\partial_{K_{li}}
1020: +\mathcal{O}(K^2)\,.
1021: \end{eqnarray}
1022: These operators can be applied to the wave function with
1023: the representation $\rho$ through the $K$ dependence in
1024: $\Psi^{(\rho)}_a(\bar Z)=\rho(e^K)_{ab}\Psi^{(\rho)}_b(\bar z)$.
1025: In order to see it more explicitly, we consider the adjoint representation
1026: in the following. The wave function becomes,
1027: \begin{eqnarray}
1028: \Psi(\bar Z)_{ij}&=&\left(e^K \Psi(\bar z)e^{-K}\right)_{ij}\nonumber\\
1029: & =&\psi_i\delta_{ij}+(\psi_{j}-\psi_i)K_{ij}
1030: + \frac{1}{2}\sum_k(\psi_i+\psi_j-2\psi_k)K_{ik}K_{kj}+\cdots
1031: \end{eqnarray}
1032: where we denote the diagonal component of $\Psi(\bar z)$
1033: as $\psi_i(\bar z)$.
1034: The expression for the higher charges in terms of the eigenvalues
1035: are given by writing the action of
1036: $\mbox{Tr }(\bar Z\frac\partial{\partial \bar Z})^n$
1037: to $\Psi(\bar Z)$ and putting $K=0$ at the end.
1038: We note that in the course of the computation we need higher
1039: $K$ dependent terms since we have differentiation with respect to $K$.
1040:
1041:
1042: Since we have an explicit expression only to the first order in
1043: $K$, we can obtain only ${H}_1$ and $H_2$.
1044: The first one $H_1$ is trivial,
1045: \begin{equation}
1046: (H^{(A_1)}_1\cdot\psi)_k=\sum_i {\bar z_i\partial_i}\psi_k\,.
1047: \end{equation}
1048: We put a suffix $A_1$ in order to specify that this is the expression for the
1049: adjoint sector.
1050: The second one becomes,
1051: \begin{eqnarray}
1052: &&(H^{(A_1)}_2\cdot\psi)_k=\sum_i(\bar z_i\partial_i)^2 \psi_k
1053: -2\sum_{i(\neq k)}\frac{\bar z_i\bar z_k}{(\bar z_k-\bar z_i)^2}
1054: (\psi_k-\psi_i)\nonumber\\
1055: &&~~~-\sum_{i}(\bar z_i\partial_i) \psi_k
1056: +\sum_{i\neq j}\left(
1057: \bar z_i\bar z_j\frac{1-\delta_{ij}}{\bar z_i-\bar z_j}
1058: (\partial_i-\partial_j)
1059: \right)\psi_k
1060: \label{h2}
1061: \end{eqnarray}
1062: The first two terms give the Calogero-Sutherland Hamiltonian.
1063: The third term is proportional to $H_1$ and not relevant for
1064: the diagonalization. The fourth term is somewhat new.
1065: If we rewrite $\bar z_i=e^{\theta_i}$,
1066: the action of $H_2$ can be written as Calogero-Sutherland \cite{r:CS}
1067: like form,
1068: \begin{eqnarray}
1069: (H^{(A_1)}_2\psi)_i&=&\sum_i\frac{\partial^2 \psi_k}{\partial\theta_i^2}
1070: -\sum_i\frac{\partial\psi_k}{\partial \theta_i}
1071: -\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i(\neq k)}
1072: \frac{\psi_k-\psi_i}{\mathrm{sinh}^2(\theta_{ik}/2)}
1073: \nonumber\\
1074: &&+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i\neq j}\frac{1}{\sinh (\theta_{ij}/2)}
1075: \left(e^{-\theta_{ij}/2}\partial_{\theta_i}
1076: -e^{\theta_{ij}/2}\partial_{\theta_j}\right)\psi_k,
1077: \label{h2s}
1078: \end{eqnarray}
1079: where $\theta_{ij}=\theta_i-\theta_j$.
1080:
1081: For the usual Calogero-Sutherland model, there have been
1082: a large number of references where Hamiltonian
1083: system analogous to (\ref{h2}) or (\ref{h2s}) is solved
1084: directly in terms of $\bar z$ variables \cite{r:Poly}.
1085: %
1086: Here, rather than moving to this direction,
1087: we rewrite this Hamiltonian by bosonization technique and
1088: solve it from this approach \cite{r:AMOS}.
1089:
1090: \section{Bosonization}
1091: \label{sec:boson}
1092: In order to describe the non-singlet sectors in a way similar to
1093: the singlet sector, it is natural to introduce free boson variables,
1094: \begin{equation}
1095: p_r=\mbox{Tr }\bar Z^r=\sum_{i}\bar z^r_i\,,
1096: \end{equation}
1097: (which is
1098: called ``collective coordinate'' or ``power sum''
1099: in the literature)
1100: and rewrite the $\hW_\infty$ operators in terms of $p_r$
1101: and the degree of freedom associated with the tips.
1102: Free boson oscillators are usually defined as
1103: $\alpha_n=n\partial_{p_n}$, $\alpha^\dagger_{n}=p_n$
1104: for $n>0$. They satisfy standard commutation relations,
1105: \begin{equation}
1106: \left[\alpha_n,\alpha^\dagger_m\right]=n\delta_{n,m}\,.
1107: \end{equation}
1108:
1109: In the following we focus on writing the explicit forms of
1110: the quantities $H_1$, $H_2$, $H_3$ when they are applied to
1111: specific (non-)singlet sectors. For simplicity
1112: we consider the singlet $(S)$, the adjoint $(A_1)$,
1113: and $B_2$, $C_2$ representations.
1114: For each case, by the results of \S\ref{sec:Winf},
1115: the wave functions are written as the linear combinations
1116: of
1117: \begin{eqnarray}
1118: {S}&:& f(p_1,p_2,\cdots)\quad \Rightarrow \quad f(p)\nonumber\,,\\
1119: {A_1}&:& ((\bar Z^n)_{ij}+\cdots) f(p_1,p_2,\cdots)
1120: \quad \Rightarrow \quad f(p)|n\rangle\,,\nn\\
1121: {B_2}&:&\left( (\bar Z^n)_{ij}(\bar Z^m)_{kl}+
1122: (\bar Z^m)_{ij}(\bar Z^n)_{kl}+
1123: (\bar Z^n)_{il}(\bar Z^m)_{kj}+
1124: (\bar Z^n)_{kj}(\bar Z^m)_{il}+\cdots\right)f(p_1,p_2,\cdots)\nn\\
1125: && \quad \Rightarrow \quad f(p)|n,m;+\rangle\,,\nn\\
1126: {C_2}&:&\left( (\bar Z^n)_{ij}(\bar Z^m)_{kl}+
1127: (\bar Z^m)_{ij}(\bar Z^n)_{kl}-
1128: (\bar Z^n)_{il}(\bar Z^m)_{kj}-
1129: (\bar Z^n)_{kj}(\bar Z^m)_{il}+\cdots\right)f(p_1,p_2,\cdots)\nn\\
1130: && \quad \Rightarrow \quad f(p)|n,m;-\rangle\,.
1131: \label{states}
1132: \end{eqnarray}
1133: Here we have skipped writing the subleading order terms
1134: since they are not relevant in the following computation.
1135: In order to keep the formulae as simple as possible,
1136: we will use short
1137: hand notations which are written after the arrow $\Rightarrow$.
1138: The states $|n\rangle$, $|n,m;\pm\rangle$ represent the
1139: degrees of the freedom associated with the tips.
1140: For $B_2$ and $C_2$, they are
1141: symmetric $|n,m;\pm\rangle=|m,n;\pm\rangle$.
1142:
1143: There are two different paths to obtain a
1144: bosonic representation of $H_n$. One is to use the expressions
1145: in terms of the eigenvalues which are obtained
1146: in the previous section. This approach has a benefit
1147: in showing the explicit relation between the Calogero-Sutherland
1148: type interactions and their bosonized representations.
1149: Another approach is to work directly with the matrix variables.
1150: Both approaches give, of course, the same answer.
1151: Since the expressions in terms of the eigenvalues
1152: are getting more and more complicated for the
1153: higher charges and the higher representations,
1154: we will basically use the latter approach.
1155:
1156: The computation itself is straightfoward. We apply
1157: $\bar Z$ representation of $H_n$
1158: \begin{eqnarray}
1159: H_1&=&\sum_{i,j} \bar Z_{ij} \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar Z_{ij}}\,,
1160: \quad H_2=\sum_{i,j,k,l} \bar Z_{ij} \bar Z_{kl}
1161: \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar Z_{kj}}
1162: \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar Z_{il}}\,,\nonumber\\
1163: H_3&=&\sum_{i,j,k,l,n,m} \bar Z_{ij} \bar Z_{kl}\bar Z_{nm}
1164: \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar Z_{kj}}
1165: \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar Z_{nl}}
1166: \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar Z_{im}}\,,
1167: \end{eqnarray}
1168: to the states (\ref{states}) and rewrite the
1169: results by using the multiplications and the derivations
1170: of $p_r$. The useful formulae are, for example,
1171: \begin{eqnarray}
1172: && \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \bar
1173: Z_{ji}},(\bZ^n)_{kl}\right]=\sum_{m=1}^{n}
1174: (\bZ^{m-1})_{kj} (\bZ^{n-m})_{il}\,,\nn\\
1175: && \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \bar
1176: Z_{ji}},(p_k)^n\right] =n k (\bZ^{k-1})_{ij}(p_k)^{n-1}, \quad
1177: \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \bar
1178: Z_{ji}}, f(p)\right]=\sum_{r=1}^N
1179: r (\bZ^{r-1})_{ij} \pd_{p_r}f(p)\,.
1180: \end{eqnarray}
1181: After some computation, we arrive at the bosonized formulae
1182: for $H_{1}$,$H_{2}$, $H_{3}$.
1183:
1184: The expressions for $H_1$ (Hamiltonian) are trivial as usual,
1185: \begin{eqnarray}
1186: H^{(S)}_1 f(p) & = & \left(
1187: \sum_r rp_r\partial_{p_r}\right)f(p) \,,\\
1188: H^{(A_1)}_1 f(p)|n\rangle & = & \left(
1189: n+\sum_r rp_r\partial_{p_r}\right)f(p)|n\rangle \,,\label{eq:H1act}\\
1190: H^{(B_2,C_2)}_1 f(p)|n,m;\pm\rangle & = & \left(
1191: n+m+\sum_r rp_r\partial_{p_r}\right)f(p)|n,m;\pm\rangle \,.
1192: \end{eqnarray}
1193: Here and in the following,
1194: we use the upper sign for $B_2$ and the lower sign for $C_2$.
1195:
1196: In the expressions for $H_2$, there appear various cross terms
1197: among the free bosons and the tips,
1198: \begin{eqnarray}
1199: {H^{(S)}_2} f(p) & = &
1200: \left(
1201: \sum_{r,s=1}^Nrs p_{r+s}\partial_{p_r}\partial_{p_s}
1202: +\sum_{l=1}^N\sum_{r=1}^{l-1}lp_rp_{l-r}\partial_{p_{l}}
1203: \right)f(p) \,,\\
1204: {H^{(A_1)}_2} f(p)|n\rangle & = &
1205: 2n\sum_{r=1}^N r\partial_{p_r} f(p)|n+r\rangle
1206: +2\sum_{s=1}^{n-1} (n-s)p_s f(p)|n-s\rangle\,,\nn\\
1207: &&+ H_2^{(S)}f(p) |n\rangle\,,
1208: \label{eq:H2act}\\
1209: {H^{(B_2,C_2)}_2} f(p)|n,m;\pm\rangle & = &
1210: 2n\sum_{r=1}^N r\partial_{p_r} f(p)|n+r,m;\pm\rangle
1211: +2m\sum_{r=1}^N r\partial_{p_r} f(p)|n,m+r;\pm\rangle\nn\\
1212: &&+2\sum_{s=1}^{n-1} (n-s)p_s f(p)|n-s,m;\pm\rangle
1213: +2\sum_{s=1}^{m-1} (m-s)p_s f(p)|n,m-s;\pm\rangle
1214: \nonumber\\
1215: &&
1216: \pm 2 \sum_{r=1}^n\sum_{s=1}^m f(p)
1217: |n-r+s,m+r-s;\pm\rangle
1218: + H_2^{(S)}f(p)|n,m;\pm\rangle\,.
1219: \end{eqnarray}
1220: Obviously $H_2^{(S)}$ describes the mixing among
1221: the free bosons. In the free fermion language, it reduces to
1222: $\oint\bar\psi(z)(z\partial_z)^2\psi(z)$.
1223: This part is common in every sector.
1224: The first two terms in $H_2^{(A_1)}$
1225: and the first four terms in $H_2^{(B_2,C_2)}$
1226: describe the mixing between the tip and the free boson.
1227: They have again the similar form in both $A_1$ and $B_{2}, C_{2}$.
1228: Finally the fifth term in $H_2^{(B_2,C_2)}$ describes the
1229: mixing among the tips. We note the sign difference
1230: between $B_2$ and $C_2$.
1231: It is not difficult to confirm that these interactions take
1232: the similar forms for even higher representations.
1233:
1234: These expressions can be written without the reference
1235: to the wave functions
1236: if we introduce the shift operators $\hat E_p$ as
1237: (for the adjoint sector)
1238: \begin{equation}
1239: \hat E_{p}|n\rangle=\left\{
1240: \begin{array}{c l}
1241: (n-p)|n-p\rangle
1242: & p<n\\
1243: 0 & p\geq n
1244: \end{array}
1245: \right.
1246: \,,\quad
1247: \hat E_0|n\rangle = n | n\rangle\,,\quad
1248: \hat E_{-p}|n\rangle=n|n+p\rangle\,.
1249: \end{equation}
1250: Together with the free boson oscillator,
1251: the conserved charges are written as
1252: %The expression for conserved charges,
1253: \begin{eqnarray}
1254: H^{(A_1)}_1 =
1255: \hat E_0+H_1^{(S)}\,,\quad
1256: {H^{(A_1)}_2} =
1257: 2\sum_{r=1}^N \hat E_{-r}\alpha_{r}
1258: +2\sum_{s=1}^{N}\hat E_{s}\alpha^\dagger_s
1259: + H_2^{(S)}
1260: \,,
1261: \end{eqnarray}
1262: where
1263: \ba
1264: &&H^{(S)}_1=\sum_{r=1}^N \alpha^\dagger_r\alpha_r\,,\quad
1265: H_2^{(S)}=\sum_{r,s=1}^N\alpha^\dagger_{r+s}\alpha_{r}\alpha_s
1266: +\sum_{l=1}^N\sum_{r=1}^{l-1}\alpha^\dagger_r\alpha^\dagger_{l-r}\alpha_l\,.
1267: \ea
1268: Writing a similar formula for $B_2$ and $C_2$ is straightfoward.
1269:
1270:
1271: The expression for $H_3$ becomes more complicated
1272: and we present only the expressions for the singlet and the
1273: adjoint sectors.
1274: The strategy of the computation is the same as before.
1275: The final result is, for the singlet sector,
1276: \begin{equation}
1277: \begin{split}
1278: &{H_3}^{(S)}f(p)=
1279: \sum_{r,s,t}rst p_{r+s+t}\pd_{p_r}\pd_{p_s}\pd_{p_t}f
1280: -\sum_{r,s}rs p_r p_s \pd_{p_r} \pd_{p_s} f \\
1281: &~~~~~+\sum_{r,s}\left( \sum_{l=1}^{r+s-1}+\sum_{l=1}^{r-1} \right) rs p_l p_{r+s-l}\pd_{p_r}\pd_{p_s}f
1282: +\sum_r \sum_{l=1}^{r-1}\sum_{m=1}^{r-l-1} r p_l p_m p_{r-l-m} \pd_{p_r} f \\
1283: &~~~~~+\frac{1}{2}\sum_r r(r-1)(r-2) p_r \pd_{p_r} f
1284: +\frac{1}{2} n(n-1)(n-2)f \,.
1285: % +2N \Biggl[ \sum_{r,s}rs p_{r+s}\pd_{p_r}\pd_{p_s}
1286: %f \ket{n}+2n \sum_r r \pd_{p_r} f \ket{n+r} \\
1287: % +&\sum_{r}\sum_{l=1}^{r-1} r p_l p_{r-l}
1288: % \pd_{p_r} f \ket{n}+2\sum_{l=1}^{n-1}(n-l)p_l f\ket{n-l} \Biggr] \\
1289: % +&N^2 \left[ \sum_r r p_r \pd_{p_r} f \ket{n}+n f \ket{n} \right].
1290: \end{split}
1291: % \label{eq:H3_act}
1292: \end{equation}
1293: The expression for the adjoint sector involves extra terms
1294: which describe the mixing between the bosons and the tip,
1295: \begin{equation}
1296: \begin{split}
1297: &{H_3}^{(A_1)}f(p)\ket{n}=(H_3^{(S)}f(p))\ket{n}\\
1298: &~~~~~+3n \sum_{r,s}rs \pd_{p_r}\pd_{p_s}f \ket{n+r+s}
1299: +3n\sum_r \sum_{l=1}^{r-1}r p_l\pd_{p_r} f \ket{n+r-l} \\
1300: &~~~~~+3\sum_r \sum_{l=1}^{r-1}r (n-l)p_l \pd_{p_r} f \ket{n+r-l}
1301: +3\sum_r \sum_{l=1}^{n-1} r(n-l)p_{r+l}\pd_{p_r} f \ket{n-l} \\
1302: &~~~~~+\sum_{l=1}^{n-1}\sum_{m=1}^{l-1} (n-l)p_m p_{l-m} f \ket{n-l}
1303: +\sum_{l=1}^n \sum_{m=1}^{l-1} \left( \sum_{k=1}^{l-m-1}
1304: +\sum_{k=1}^{n-l} \right) p_m p_k f \ket{n-m-k}\,.
1305: % +&\,.
1306: % +2N \Biggl[ \sum_{r,s}rs p_{r+s}\pd_{p_r}\pd_{p_s}
1307: %f \ket{n}+2n \sum_r r \pd_{p_r} f \ket{n+r} \\
1308: % +&\sum_{r}\sum_{l=1}^{r-1} r p_l p_{r-l}
1309: % \pd_{p_r} f \ket{n}+2\sum_{l=1}^{n-1}(n-l)p_l f\ket{n-l} \Biggr] \\
1310: % +&N^2 \left[ \sum_r r p_r \pd_{p_r} f \ket{n}+n f \ket{n} \right].
1311: \end{split}
1312: \label{eq:H3_act}
1313: \end{equation}
1314: %where the singlet part $H_3^{(S)}$ is written as follows:
1315:
1316:
1317:
1318: \paragraph{Numerical evaluation of the spectrum of $H_2$ and $H_3$}
1319: One of the important questions in this paper is to determine
1320: the spectrum of $H_n$ ($n=1,2,3,\cdots$) for the various sectors.
1321: For the singlet sector, the problem is already solved
1322: since it is the free fermion system.
1323: The eigenstate is labelled by Young diagram $Y$ which represents
1324: the spectrum of fermionic system through Maya diagram
1325: correspondence \cite{r:fermion}.
1326: We write the fermionic state that corresponds to $Y$ as $|Y\rangle$.
1327: %
1328: The eigenstate in terms of $p$
1329: is written by using the boson-fermion correspondence
1330: \be
1331: \langle 0|e^{\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{\alpha_n}{n}p_n}|Y\rangle=s_Y(p)
1332: \ee
1333: where $s_Y(p)$ is Schur polynomial in terms of the power sum.
1334: The eigenvalues of $H_{1,2}$ is given as,
1335: \begin{eqnarray}
1336: && h_1(Y) =\sum_i \mu_i=|Y|\,,\qquad
1337: h_2(Y)=\sum_{i=1}^l \mu_i(\mu_i-2i+1)
1338: \label{h2Y}
1339: \end{eqnarray}
1340: where $\mu_i$ is the number of boxes in $i$-th raw in $Y$%, and we label Young diagram by $[\mu_1,\cdots,\mu_l]$
1341: ($\mu_1\geq \mu_2\geq\cdots\geq \mu_l>0$).
1342: %Because of the fermionic nature, the multiplicity of each
1343: %state is precisely one.
1344: The eigenvalues of $H_2^{(S)}$ and their multiplicity are
1345: summarized in the following table. In the table, ``level''
1346: means the eigenvalue of $H_1$.
1347: One can see that the most of the degeneracy of the spectrum
1348: at the level of the Hamiltonian ($H_1$) is resolved by considering
1349: $H_2$.
1350: Some eigenvalues have the multiplicity larger than one since
1351: different Young tableaux have the same values of $h_2$ accidentally.
1352: These degeneracies are resolved
1353: by considering $H_3$ and so on.
1354: %
1355: \begin{center}
1356: \begin{tabular}{|c||l|}\hline
1357: level & ${H^{(S)}_2}$ eigenvalues {\em (exponent is multiplicity)}\\ \hline\hline
1358: 0 & 0\\ \hline
1359: 1 & 0\\ \hline
1360: 2 & $\pm 2$\\ \hline
1361: 3 & $\pm 6$, $0$\\ \hline
1362: 4 & $\pm 12$, $\pm 4$, $0$ \\ \hline
1363: 5 & $\pm 20$, $\pm 10$, $\pm 4$, $0$\\ \hline
1364: 6 & $\pm 30$, $\pm 18$, $\pm 10$, $\pm 6^2$, $0$\\ \hline
1365: 7 & $\pm 42$, $\pm 28$, $\pm 18$, $\pm 14$,
1366: $\pm 12$, $\pm 6$, $\pm 2$, $0$\\ \hline
1367: 8 & $\pm 56$, $\pm 40$, $\pm 28$, $\pm 24$,
1368: $\pm 20$, $\pm 16$, $\pm 14$, $\pm 8^2$, $\pm 4$, $0^2$\\
1369: \hline
1370: \end{tabular}
1371: \end{center}
1372:
1373: For the adjoint sector (and also $B_2$ and
1374: $C_2$ sectors), it is still difficult for us to evaluate
1375: the spectrum in terms of the bosonization language.
1376: We will determine it from the different viewpoint
1377: in the next section. Here we present the result
1378: in advance to explain the important feature of
1379: the spectrum of the non-singlet sector.
1380: It is, of course, possible to perform a direct computer
1381: calcuation based on
1382: \eqref{eq:H1act} and \eqref{eq:H2act}
1383: (actually this is what we did before we found the analytic solution).
1384: These analysis are, of course, consistent with each other.
1385:
1386: The spectrum of $H_2^{(A_1)}$ is shown by the following table.
1387: %The eigenvalues of $H_2^{(A_1)}$ and their multiplicity are
1388: %summarized in the following table. In the table, ``level" means the
1389: %eigenvalue of $H_1$.
1390: %
1391: \begin{center}
1392: \begin{tabular}{|c||l|}\hline
1393: level & ${H^{(A_1)}_2}$ eigenvalues {\em (exponent is multiplicity)}\\ \hline\hline
1394: 1 & 0\\ \hline
1395: 2 & $\pm 2$\\ \hline
1396: 3 & $\pm 6$, $0^2$\\ \hline
1397: 4 & $\pm 12$, $\pm 4^2$, $0$ \\ \hline
1398: 5 & $\pm 20$, $\pm 10^2$, $\pm 4^2$, $0^2$\\ \hline
1399: 6 & $\pm 30$, $\pm 18^2$, $\pm 10^2$, $\pm 6^3$, $0^3$\\ \hline
1400: 7 & $\pm 42$, $\pm 28^2$, $\pm 18^2$, $\pm 14^2$,
1401: $\pm 12^2$, $\pm 6^3$, $\pm 2^2$, $0^2$\\ \hline
1402: 8 & $\pm 56$, $\pm 40^2$, $\pm 28^2$, $\pm 24^2$,
1403: $\pm 20^2$, $\pm 16$, $\pm 14^3$, $\pm 8^5$, $\pm 4^2$, $0^5$\\
1404: \hline
1405: \end{tabular}
1406: \end{center}
1407: Interestingly, the eigenvalues are precisely
1408: identical with the singlet sector (\ref{h2Y}) up to the multiplicity!
1409: It is surprising that the extra terms in $H^{(A_1)}_2$ associated
1410: with the ``tip'' does not change the spectrum.
1411: %We note that,
1412: %however, the multiplicity of states for each eigenvalue is different.
1413: %In the next section, we will give an analytic proof
1414: %that the eigenvalues of $H_2^{(A_1)}$ are indeed
1415: %given by \eqref{h2Y}.
1416:
1417: It may be a natural guess that the degeneracy appearing
1418: $H_2$ in the adjoint sector can be removed if
1419: we consider higher conserved charges
1420: such as $H_3,H_4\ldots$. However this is not the case.
1421: The following table shows the eigenvalues of $H_3^{(A_1)}$
1422: and their multiplicity computed from \eqref{eq:H3_act}.
1423: \begin{center}
1424: \begin{tabular}{|c||l|}\hline
1425: level & ${H^{(A_1)}_3}$ eigenvalues {\em (exponent is multiplicity)}\\ \hline\hline
1426: 1 & $0$\\ \hline
1427: 2 & $0^2$\\ \hline
1428: 3 & $6^2$, $-3^2$\\ \hline
1429: 4 & $24^2$, $0^4$, $-12$ \\ \hline
1430: 5 & $60^2$, $15^4$, $0^2$, $-12^4$\\ \hline
1431: 6 & $120^2$, $48^4$, $12^4$, $0^4$, $-15^3$, $-24^2$\\ \hline
1432: 7 & $210^2$, $105^2$, $42^4$, $30^4$,
1433: $21^2$, $-6^6$, $-15^4$, $-30^4$\\ \hline
1434: 8 & $336^2$, $192^4$, $96^4$, $84^4$,
1435: $48^4$, $21^6$, $12^4$, $0^3$, $-24^{12}$, $-48^2$\\
1436: \hline
1437: \end{tabular}
1438: \end{center}
1439: These eigenvalues are identical to the exact spectrum $h_3(Y)$ which
1440: we derive later \eqref{eq:H3_eigenvalue}.
1441: We note that the multiplicity is even larger than that of $H_2^{(A_1)}$
1442: because the eigenvalues $h_3(Y)$ have additional
1443: degeneracy for the states associated with different Young diagrams.
1444: %
1445: %This is because $H_3$ is defined as normal ordered product.
1446: %This causes the fact that $h_3$ for different Young diagrams
1447: %may be the same value even if $h_2$ for them
1448: %is the different values.
1449: %If we consider $\mbox{Tr} (\cL^3)$, not normal ordered,
1450: %the multiplicity of this eigenvalues is equal to or a little less than that of
1451: %$H_2^{A_1}$.
1452: %The eigenvalues of $\mbox{Tr} (\cL^3)$ are always different if those of $H_2^{A_1}$ are different, and
1453: %those of $\mbox{Tr} (\cL^3)$ may be different even if those of $H_2^{A_1}$ are the same.
1454: It resolves, however, some accidental degeneracy in $H_2$.
1455: %For example, the eigenvalues of $H_2^{A_1}$ and $H_3^{A_1}$ with
1456: For example, the Young diagrams $[4,1,1]$ and $[3,3]$ have the same
1457: $h_2(Y)$ but different $h_3(Y)$,
1458: \begin{align}
1459: h_2([4,1,1])=h_2([3,3])=6,\;\;
1460: h_3([4,1,1])=12,\;\; h_3([3,3])=-24.
1461: \end{align}
1462: %therefore the degeneracy is resolved by $H_3$.
1463: The most important degeneracy due to the location of
1464: the ``tip'' remain.
1465:
1466:
1467:
1468:
1469:
1470:
1471: \section{Group theoretical construction of eigenstates of $H_n$}
1472: \label{sec:eig}
1473: \subsection{Analogy with matrix string theory}
1474: In the previous section, we have seen that the spectrum of
1475: $H_2$ (and also $H_3$) for the adjoint sector
1476: is identical to that for the singlet sector.
1477: This feature actually remains the same for any non-singlet
1478: sectors. We will show this fact by explicit construction of
1479: their eigenstates. It turns out that the problem can be solved by
1480: an application of the group theory at the relatively elementary level.
1481:
1482: We first develop a compact notation to represent
1483: generic states in the MQM Hilbert space.
1484: We note that a state of the form
1485: $\bar A_{i_1 j_1}\cdots \bar A_{i_n j_n}|0\rangle$
1486: can be written as a single trace operator acting on the Fock vacuum,
1487: $\Tr (\cC_1\bar A \cdots \cC_n \bar A)|0\rangle$
1488: with $(\cC_1)_{ij}=
1489: \delta_{ij_n}\delta_{ji_1}$, $(\cC_2)_{ij}=\delta_{ij_1}\delta_{ji_2}$
1490: and so on. It is clear that arbitrary states can be written
1491: as the sum of such single trace form with more general
1492: constant $\cC$.
1493: In order to describe more generic state,
1494: it is more useful to introduce the multi-trace operators,
1495: $
1496: \prod_{I=1}^P \mbox{Tr }(\cC^{(I)}_1 \bar A\cdots
1497: \cC^{(I)}_{n_I} \bar A)|0\rangle\,.
1498: $
1499: %where $\cC^{(I)}_n$ is a constant matrix.
1500:
1501: With this notation, the wave function in
1502: the singlet sector can be represented
1503: by a linear combination of such operator with $\cC=1$.
1504: To represent the adjoint state, we put one of $\cC$'s
1505: as a traceless tensor and other $\cC$ to be identity.
1506: For $B_2$ and $C_2$, we keep two of $\cC$'s arbitrary
1507: with the appropriate symmetry properties.
1508:
1509: We apply $H_2$ to such multi-trace operator state,
1510: the an interesting structure shows up,
1511: \begin{eqnarray}
1512: && \frac{1}{2}{H_2} \prod_{I=1}^P
1513: \mbox{Tr }(\cC^{(I)}_1 \bar A\cdots
1514: \cC^{(I)}_{n_I} \bar A)
1515: |0\rangle\nn\\
1516: &&~=\sum_{J=1}^P
1517: \left(\prod_{I(\neq J)}^P
1518: \mbox{Tr }(\cC^{(I)}_1 \bar A\cdots
1519: \cC^{(I)}_{n_I} \bar A)\right)\cdot\nn\\
1520: &&~~~\cdot
1521: \sum_{1\leq i< j\leq n_J}\mbox{Tr}\left(\cC^{(J)}_{i+1}\bar A\cdots
1522: \cC^{(J)}_j\bar A\right)\mbox{Tr }\left(\cC^{(J)}_1
1523: \bar A\cdots \cC^{(J)}_i \bar A
1524: \cC^{(J)}_{j+1}\bar A\cdots \cC^{(J)}_{n_J}\bar A\right)
1525: |0\rangle\nn\\
1526: &&~~~~+ \sum_{J<K}
1527: \left(\prod_{I(\neq J,K)}^P
1528: \mbox{Tr }(\cC^{(I)}_1 \bar A\cdots
1529: \cC^{(I)}_{n_I} \bar A)\right)\cdot\\
1530: &&~~~~\cdot\sum_{i,j}\mbox{Tr}
1531: \left(
1532: \cC^{(J)}_1\bar A\cdots\cC^{(J)}_i\bar A
1533: \cC^{(K)}_{j+1}\bar A\cdots \cC^{(K)}_{n_K}\bar A
1534: \cC^{(K)}_{1}\bar A\cdots \cC^{(K)}_{j}\bar A
1535: \cC^{(J)}_{i+1}\bar A\cdots\cC^{(J)}_{n_J}\bar A
1536: \right)|0\rangle\nn\,.
1537: \end{eqnarray}
1538: If we regard each single trace operator as a ``loop operator'',
1539: the action of $H_2$ represents splitting and joining
1540: of such operators (fig.\,\ref{fig:splitting-joining}).
1541:
1542: \begin{figure}[tbp]
1543: \begin{center}
1544: \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{splitting-joining.eps}
1545: \end{center}
1546: \caption{Splitting and joining rules of $H_2$. Each loop represents a single trace operator.}
1547: \label{fig:splitting-joining}
1548: \end{figure}
1549:
1550: This is an intriguing feature of $H_2$ which have an
1551: interpretation in terms of the string field theory.
1552: For example in the matrix string theory, such a splitting
1553: and joining interaction among the long strings
1554: is triggered by the permutation
1555: of the short strings.
1556: %In our case, the short string is given by the matrix $\cC\bar A$
1557: %and the long string replaced by the single trace operator.
1558: In our case, the long string is given by the matrix $\cC\bar A$
1559: and the short string replaced by the single trace operator.
1560: This analogy gives us a hope that the action of
1561: $H_2$ may have similar structure as the matrix string theory\cite{r:MatStr}.
1562: This is indeed the case.
1563:
1564: We have a similar representation for $H_3$.
1565: %The next simplest operator is $H_3$. Let us start from
1566: %considering the action of the higher conserved charge $H_3$ to
1567: %the multi-trace operators,
1568: %and show that the eigenstates \eqref{eigenstate} of $H_2$ are
1569: %also eigenstates of $H_3$.
1570: In order to simplify the notation, we introduce
1571: \be
1572: \cA_{ij}=
1573: \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
1574: \cC_{i}\bA \cC_{i+1}\bA \cdots \cC_{j}\bA\quad &\mbox{for } i<j\\
1575: \cC_{i}\bA \cdots \cC_{n}\bA \cC_{1}\bA \cdots \cC_{j}\bA
1576: \quad &\mbox{for } i>j\,.
1577: \end{array}\right.
1578: \ee
1579: which describe a portion of the
1580: trace operator $\mbox{Tr}(\cC_{1}\bA \cdots \cC_{n}\bA)$.
1581: The action of $H_3$ is written as
1582: \begin{equation}
1583: \begin{split}
1584: &\frac{1}{3}H_3\prod_{I=1}^P \mbox{Tr} (\cA_{1n_I}^{(I)})\ket{0} =\\
1585: &\sum_{J=1}^P \left( \prod_{I(\ne J)} \mbox{Tr} (\cA_{1n_I}^{(I)} ) \right)
1586: \sum_{1\leq i<j<k \leq n_J} \Bigl[ \mbox{Tr} ( \cA_{i+1,j}^{(J)} \cA_{k+1,i}^{(J)}\cA_{j+1,k}^{(J)} )
1587: +\mbox{Tr}(\cA_{i+1,j}^{(J)})\mbox{Tr}(\cA_{j+1,k}^{(J)})\mbox{Tr}(\cA_{k+1,i}^{(J)}) \Bigr]\ket{0} \\
1588: +&\sum_{J<K} \left( \prod_{I(\ne J,K)} \mbox{Tr} (\cA_{1n_I}^{(I)} ) \right)
1589: \sum_{\substack{1 \leq i<j \leq n_J \\ 1\leq k \leq n_K}}
1590: \Bigl[ \mbox{Tr}(\cA_{i+1,j}^{(J)}\cA_{k+1,k}^{(K)}) \mbox{Tr}(\cA_{j+1,i}^{(J)})
1591: +\mbox{Tr}(\cA_{j+1,i}^{(J)}\cA_{k+1,k}^{(K)}) \mbox{Tr}(\cA_{i+1,j}^{(J)}) \Bigr] \ket{0} \\
1592: +&2\sum_{J<K<L} \left( \prod_{I(\ne J,K,L)} \mbox{Tr} (\cA_{1n_I}^{(I)} ) \right)
1593: \sum_{\substack{1\leq i \leq n_J \\ 1\leq j \leq n_K \\ 1\leq k \leq n_L}}
1594: \mbox{Tr} (\cA_{i+1,i}^{(J)}\cA_{j+1,j}^{(K)}\cA_{k+1,k}^{(L)})\ket{0}.
1595: \end{split}
1596: \end{equation}
1597: It describes splitting and joining processes of $3\rightarrow 1$,
1598: $2\rightarrow 2$, $1\rightarrow 3$ between the loops.
1599: %For example, the action to level 3 operators are
1600: %\begin{align}
1601: % H_3 \mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bA \cC_2 \bA \cC_3 \bA)\ket{0}
1602: % &=3[\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bA\cC_1 \bA\cC_3 \bA)+
1603: % \mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bA) \mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bA) \mbox{Tr}(\cC_3 \bA)] \ket{0} ,\\
1604: % H_3 \mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bA \cC_2 \bA ) \mbox{Tr}(\cC_3 \bA)\ket{0}
1605: % &=3[\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bA\cC_3 \bA)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bA)
1606: % +\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bA\cC_3 \bA)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bA)]\ket{0} ,\\
1607: % H_3 \mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bA ) \mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bA) \mbox{Tr}(\cC_3 \bA)\ket{0}
1608: % &=6 \mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bA \cC_2 \bA \cC_3 \bA) \ket{0}.
1609: %\end{align}
1610: Clearly one can continue to carry out this type of the computation
1611: for higher $H_n$.
1612:
1613: \subsection{Exact eigenstates in terms of Young symmetrizer}
1614: In the matrix string theory, the interaction between the loops
1615: can be given by the permutation of the connection
1616: between the string bits. In the following we will see that
1617: exactly the same type of the representation exists for $H_n$
1618: and it enables us to construct the exact eigenstate by using a
1619: group theoretical method.
1620:
1621: For this purpose, we introduce an economical notation of the multi-trace
1622: operators by using the action of the permutation group $S_n$,
1623: \begin{equation}\label{psisigma}
1624: \Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\sigma)=\sum_{a_1,\cdots,a_n}
1625: (\cC_1\bar A)_{a_1 a_{\sigma(1)}}\cdots(\cC_n\bar A)_{a_n a_{\sigma(n)}}
1626: |0\rangle\,.
1627: \end{equation}
1628: Here $\sigma$ is an element of $S_n$.
1629: We note that a similar representation for the singlet state
1630: apeared in \cite{r:CJR}.
1631: The structure of the multi-trace operator comes from the
1632: decomposition of $\sigma\in S_n$ as a product of cycles,
1633: \begin{equation}
1634: \sigma=(a_1a_2\cdots a_{\mu_{1}})(b_1b_2\cdots b_{\mu_2})\cdots\,,
1635: \end{equation}
1636: where $(a_1 a_2 \cdots a_{\mu_1})$ represents a cyclic permutation, {\it i.e.}
1637: $\sigma(a_1)=a_2,\cdots, \sigma(a_{\mu_1})=a_1$.
1638: The corresponding $\Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\sigma)$ is written as
1639: the product of the loop operators,
1640: \begin{equation}
1641: \Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\sigma)=\mbox{Tr}(\cC_{a_1}\bar A\cdots \cC_{a_{\mu_1}}\bar A)
1642: \mbox{Tr}(\cC_{b_1}\bar A\cdots \cC_{b_{\mu_2}}\bar A)\cdots|0\rangle.
1643: \end{equation}
1644: A direct computation shows that the operator $H_2$
1645: can be represented as the sum of permutation operators,
1646: %in exactly the same fashion as matrix string theory,
1647: \begin{equation}
1648: {H_2}\Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\sigma)=\sum_{i\neq j}\Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};{\sigma(ij)})\,.
1649: \end{equation}
1650: %Here $(i,j)$ is transposition of $i\leftrightarrow j$.
1651: %and
1652: %Here $\cdot$ is the product in $S_n$.
1653: As we claimed, this is the interaction of the matrix
1654: string theory \cite{r:MatStr} where the string bits are
1655: replaced by the matrices $\cC_i \bar A$.
1656: More generally it is not difficult to show that the action of $H_m$ takes a
1657: similar form,
1658: \begin{equation}
1659: {H_m}\Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\sigma)=\sum_{i_1,\cdots,i_m\, (i_a\neq i_b)}
1660: \Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};{\sigma(i_1i_2\cdots i_m)})\,,
1661: \end{equation}
1662: where the summation is taken for the set of mutually different integers $i_1,\cdots,i_m$.
1663: At this point, it becomes straightfoward to construct eigenvectors
1664: of $H_m$ by means of the group theory.
1665: Let us define the action of $\tau\in S_n$ on $\Psi(\sigma)$ as
1666: the left multiplication,
1667: \begin{equation}
1668: \rho(\tau)\Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\sigma)=\Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\tau\sigma)\,.
1669: \end{equation}
1670: Then it is clear that this action commute with $H_m$,
1671: \begin{equation}
1672: \rho(\tau){H_m}\Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\sigma)={H_m}\rho(\tau)\Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\sigma)
1673: =\sum_{i_1\cdots i_m}\Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\tau\sigma(i_1\cdots i_m))\,.
1674: \end{equation}
1675: It is then possible to use Young symmetrizer \cite{r:YounSym}
1676: associated with
1677: a board\footnote{
1678: A board $B_Y$ associated with a Young diagram $Y$ is the combination of $Y$ with
1679: the numbers, $1,2,\cdots,|Y|$ distributed in the boxes of $Y$
1680: without overlap. Obviously there are $|Y|!$ boards for
1681: each Young diagram $Y$.
1682: } $B_Y$ of a Young diagram $Y$ to obtain an eigenstate.
1683: The Young symmetrizer in general is written as,
1684: \begin{equation}
1685: e_{B_Y}=\frac{d_Y}{n!}a_{B_Y} b_{B_Y},
1686: \end{equation}
1687: where
1688: \begin{equation}
1689: a_{B_Y}=\sum_{\sigma \in H_{B_Y}}\rho(\sigma)\,,\quad
1690: b_{B_Y}=\sum_{\sigma \in R_{B_Y}}(-1)^\sigma \rho(\sigma)\,.
1691: \end{equation}
1692: Here $d_Y$ is the dimension of the irreducible representation of
1693: $S_n$ associated with diagram $Y$ and $H_{B_Y}$ (resp. $R_{B_Y}$) is the
1694: horizontal (resp. vertical) permutation associated with the board
1695: $B_Y$. Since $e_{B_Y}$ is a projector ($e_{B_Y}^2 =e_{B_Y}$), it defines
1696: a projection of Hilbert space into
1697: lower dimensional subspace. We claim that the states after this projection
1698: \begin{equation}\label{eigenstate}
1699: \Psi^{[B_Y]}=e_{B_Y}\Psi(\left\{\cC\right\};\sigma)\,,\quad(\sigma\in S_n)
1700: \end{equation}
1701: become the eigenfunctions for $H_1$, $H_2$ and $H_3$,
1702: \begin{equation}\label{eigenH2}
1703: H_1\Psi^{[B_Y]}=h_1(Y)\Psi^{[B_Y]}\,,\quad
1704: H_2\Psi^{[B_Y]}=h_2(Y)\Psi^{[B_Y]}\,,\quad
1705: H_3\Psi^{[B_Y]}=h_3(Y)\Psi^{[B_Y]}\,,
1706: \end{equation}
1707: where $h_1(Y)$ and $h_2(Y)$ are defined in (\ref{h2Y}) and $h_3(Y)$ will be given in
1708: (\ref{eq:H3_eigenvalue}).
1709: A proof of this statement is given in the next subsection
1710: and it seems natural to conjecture that one may straightforwardly
1711: generalize
1712: %the argument in such a way that $\Psi^{[B_Y]}$ is the eigenstate
1713: it for all $H_n$.
1714:
1715: The simplicity of the form of the exact eigenstate (\ref{eigenstate}) is remarkable.
1716: We will refer the eigenstate constructed in this way as Young symmetrizer
1717: state (YSS).
1718:
1719: %is the independent eigenstate of $H_2$ where $1$ is the identity
1720: %element in $S_n$.
1721: We note that there are some freedom in YSS
1722: (\ref{eigenstate}), namely the choice of the constant matrices
1723: $\cC$, the choice of the board $B_Y$ for each Young diagram $Y$
1724: and the choice of $\sigma$. It explains the origin of the degeneracy of
1725: the spectrum in the non-singlet sectors.
1726: We note that the eigenvalue depends only on the Young diagram $Y$.
1727:
1728: Of course, the different choices does not always
1729: produce independent states. For example,
1730: the choice of the board can be absorbed
1731: in the choice of the constant matrices $\cC$ assigned in each box in $Y$.
1732: Furthermore, the different assignments of $\cC$ sometimes
1733: produce an identical state as we see later in the adjoint sector.
1734: The locations of the matrices $\cC \, (\neq 1)$ should be interpreted as
1735: the locations of the ``tips'' in the spectrum of the background fermion.
1736:
1737: \subsection{Calculation of the eigenvalues}
1738: In this subsection, we give a detailed proof of (\ref{eigenH2})
1739: for $H_2$ and $H_3$. Proof for $H_1$ is trivial.
1740: \paragraph{$H_2$:}
1741: We compute the action of $H_2$ on YSS as,
1742: \begin{equation}
1743: H_2\Psi^{[B_Y]}=\frac{d_Y}{n!}\sum_{i\neq j}
1744: \Psi(a_{B_Y} b_{B_Y} \sigma (ij))
1745: =\frac{d_Y}{n!}\sum_{i\neq j}
1746: \Psi(a_{B_Y}(ij) b_{B_Y} \sigma )\,.
1747: \end{equation}
1748: We can evaluate the action of transposition $(ij)$
1749: according to the following rule.
1750: \begin{itemize}
1751: \item When the boxes $i$ and $j$ belong to the same row,
1752: $a_{B_Y} (ij)=a_{B_Y}$. Therefore it has eigenvalue $+1$.
1753: There are $\sum_{i}\mu_i (\mu_i-1)$ such pairs
1754: where $\mu_i$ is the length of $i$-th row.
1755: \item When the boxes $i$ and $j$ belong to the same column,
1756: $ (ij) b_{B_Y}=-b_{B_Y}$. Therefore it has eigenvalue $-1$.
1757: There are $\sum_{i}\mu'_i (\mu'_i-1)$ such pairs
1758: where $\mu'_i$ is the length of $i$-th column.
1759: \item When the boxes $i$ and $j$ do not meet with above two
1760: conditions, $a_{B_Y} (ij) b_{B_Y}=0$. It can be shown as follows.
1761: Let $k$ be the box which belongs to the same row with
1762: $i$ and the same column with $j$ (or vice versa),
1763: \begin{equation}
1764: a_{B_Y} (ij) b_{B_Y}= a_{B_Y} \frac{1+(ik)}{2} (ij)
1765: \frac{1-(jk)}{2} b_{B_Y}=0\,.
1766: \end{equation}
1767: \end{itemize}
1768: The eigenvalue of $H_2$ becomes
1769: \begin{eqnarray}
1770: &&
1771: \sum_i \mu_i(\mu_i-1)-\sum_i\mu'_i(\mu'_i-1)
1772: =\left(\sum_i\mu_i (\mu_i-2i+1)\right)=\mu_2(Y)\,.
1773: \end{eqnarray}
1774:
1775: %\subsection{The eigenvalues of $H_3$ in terms of Young symmetrizer}
1776: %\label{sec:higher}
1777: \paragraph{$H_3$:}
1778: As $H_2$, we use the representation of $H_3$ as the sum of permutation operators:
1779: \begin{align}
1780: H_3 \Psi(\sigma) = \sum_{i \ne j\ne k \ne i} \Psi(\sigma (ijk))\,.
1781: \end{align}
1782: The action of $H_3$ on YSS \eqref{eigenstate} becomes
1783: \begin{align}
1784: H_3 \Psi^{[B]}=\frac{d_Y}{n!}\sum_{i\ne j\ne k \ne i} \Psi(a_B b_B \sigma (ijk))
1785: =\frac{d_Y}{n!} \sum_{i\ne j\ne k \ne i} \Psi(a_B (ijk) b_B \sigma)\,.
1786: \label{eq:H3_action}
1787: \end{align}
1788: The non-vanishing contributions to the eigenvalue come from the following three cases:
1789: \begin{itemize}
1790: \item The boxes $i,j,$ and $k$ belong to the same row. In this case, since $a_B (ijk) =a_B$, the contribution
1791: is $\sum_i \mu_i (\mu_i-1) (\mu_i-2) \Psi^{[B]}$.
1792: \item The boxes $i,j,$ and $k$ belong to the same column. In this case, since $(ijk) b_B=b_B$, the contribution
1793: is $\sum_i \mu_i' (\mu_i'-1) (\mu_i'-2) \Psi^{[B]}$.
1794: \item Two boxes (e.g. $i$ and $j$) belong to the same row, and two boxes (e.g. $j$ and $k$) belong to the same column.
1795: In this case, since $(ijk)=(ij) (jk),\, a_B (ij) =a_B$ and $(jk) b_B =-b_B$,
1796: the contribution is $-3\sum_{i,j} (\mu_i-1) (\mu_j'-1) \Psi^{[B]}$.
1797: \end{itemize}
1798: Except for above three cases, the contribution
1799: of $(ijk)$ to the eigenvalue vanishes.
1800: The reason is as follows.
1801: Three boxes do not belong to the same row nor the same column, so we can choose two boxes that belong to
1802: different rows and columns.
1803: We call these two boxes $i$ and $j$.
1804: Let $l$ be the box which belongs to the same row with $j$ and the same column with $i$.
1805: $l$ is not $k$ otherwise it becomes above third case.
1806: Therefore
1807: \be
1808: a_B (ijk) b_B = a_B\frac{1+(jl)}{2} (ji) (jk)\frac{1-(il)}{2} b_B
1809: =a_B \frac{1+(jl)}{2} (ji)\frac{1-(il)}{2} (jk) b_B
1810: =0\,.
1811: \ee
1812: Finally \eqref{eq:H3_action} becomes
1813: \begin{align}
1814: H_3 \Psi^{[B]} = h_3(Y) \Psi^{[B]}\,,
1815: \label{eq:H3_eigenstate}
1816: \end{align}
1817: where
1818: \begin{align}
1819: h_3(Y)=\sum_i \mu_i (\mu_i-1) (\mu_i-2) +\sum_i \mu_i' (\mu_i'-1) (\mu_i'-2)
1820: -3\sum_{i,j} (\mu_i-1) (\mu_j'-1).
1821: \label{eq:H3_eigenvalue}
1822: \end{align}
1823: It seems to be natural to conjecture that
1824: generalizations of this type of the proof are possible and
1825: YSS is the eigenstate for higher $H_n$ ($n=4,5,\cdots$).
1826:
1827:
1828: \subsection{Explicit forms of the exact eigenstates in terms of free boson}
1829: The expression of the eigenfunctions (\ref{eigenstate}) as YSS is simple,
1830: explicit and exact. However, in order to compare it with
1831: the result of CFT, it is not the most convenient form.
1832: In the following, we present our partial result
1833: to express YSS in the singlet and the adjoint sector
1834: in terms of the free boson (or fermion) oscillator
1835: and the degree of freedom associated with the tip.
1836:
1837: In order to extract
1838: the eigenstate for a specific representation,
1839: we restrict the matrices $\cC$ to a specific form.
1840: For example in order to obtain the
1841: singlet state, we put all $\cC$ to be identity.
1842: To obtain the adjoint state, we put one of
1843: $\cC$ to be a generic traceless matrix and
1844: all the other to be identity.
1845: In the appendix \ref{a:lower},
1846: we present the explicit form of the wave function
1847: by the Young symmetrizer (\ref{eigenstate})
1848: for the lower levels.
1849: It will be useful to understand the basic feature of YSS
1850: and the discussion in this subsection.
1851:
1852:
1853: \paragraph{The singlet sector}
1854: For the singlet sector, it is not difficult to
1855: prove that YSS
1856: is identical to the Schur polynomial. To see that,
1857: we first observe that the wave function $\Psi^{[B_Y]}$
1858: is unique for each Young diagram since we need to
1859: put all $\cC$ to be $1$. Since $\Psi^{[B_Y]}$ and the Schur polynomial
1860: $s_Y(J_n)|0\rangle$ are both the eigenstates of the
1861: conserved charges $H_1,H_2,\cdots$ with the same eigenvalue
1862: and the multiplicity , it implies
1863: $\Psi^{[B_Y]}\propto s_Y(J_n)|0\rangle$.
1864: The normalization is fixed by comparing the coefficient
1865: of one particular term, for example, $J_1^n|0\rangle$.
1866: In $\Psi^{[B_Y]}$, it comes from the term which is proportional
1867: to $e$ in the symmetrizer and is identical to $d_Y/n!$.
1868: On the other hand in the Schur polynomial, it is known to be
1869: $d_Y/n!$ again (from the Murnaghan-Nakayama rule)
1870: \cite{r:Stan}. We conclude,
1871: \begin{equation}
1872: \Psi^{[B_Y]}|_{\cC=1}= s_Y(J_n)|0\rangle\,. \label{eq:sing-Schur}
1873: \end{equation}
1874: This is an interesting relation between
1875: the Schur polynomial and the Young symmetrizer.
1876: One can understand this fact by reminding that
1877: the Young symmetrizer is the projection
1878: to the irreducible representation when it acts on the tensor product
1879: of the fundamental representations \cite{r:FH}.
1880: In our case, since the state $\Psi^{[B_Y]}|_{\cC=1}$ is
1881: given as the trace of the representation space
1882: associated with $Y$, it equals to the Schur polynomial, which is the character of $U(N)$.
1883: %We suspect that this should be already known in the mathematical
1884: %literature although we could not find it so far.
1885:
1886:
1887: \paragraph{The adjoint sector}
1888: In this case, the wave function $\Psi^{[B_Y]}$ depends
1889: only the location of the box in the Young diagram $Y$
1890: where the associated matrix $\cC$ is not $1$.
1891: There are naively $|Y|$ choices of such boxes.
1892: However, the number of the independent states are fewer than that.
1893: %we have observed at the end of section \ref{sec:boson}.
1894: %The argument implies that only $\Psi^{[B_Y]}$'s whose
1895: %$\cC\neq 1$ box is located at the right-bottom corner
1896: %of the rectangles (of which $Y$ is composed)
1897: %are linearly independent.
1898: The multiplicity of eigenstates of $H_2$
1899: for each Young diagram in the adjoint sector can
1900: reproduced by the following rule.
1901: We represent the Young diagram $Y$ in
1902: the form
1903: $[\mu_1^{r_1},\mu_2^{r_2},\cdots,\mu_s^{r_s}]$
1904: ($\mu_1>\mu_2>\cdots>\mu_s>0$).
1905: Namely $Y$ is constructed by piling
1906: $s$ rectangles with size $\mu_i\times r_i$ vertically.
1907: The multiplicity for this Young diagram is
1908: the same as the number of the rectangles, namely $s$.
1909: It is identical to the number of the special boxes
1910: in $Y$ where $Y$ becomes another Young diagram $Y'$ after one
1911: removes one of these boxes.
1912: Such boxes are located at the right-bottom corner
1913: of each rectangle (fig.\,\ref{fig:young1}).
1914: %This rule is the same as the tensor product of the representations,
1915: %$R_Y\otimes R_{[1]}$ where $R_{[1]}$ corresponds to the tip.
1916:
1917: \begin{figure}[tbp]
1918: \begin{center}
1919: \includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{young.eps}
1920: \end{center}
1921: \caption{The multiplicity for each Young diagram in the adjoint sector equals to the number of boxes
1922: at the right-bottom corner of each rectangle.}
1923: \label{fig:young1}
1924: \end{figure}
1925:
1926: This rule is also consitent with the partition function.
1927: For the singlet states, it is written
1928: as (one state for each Young diagram)
1929: \begin{equation}
1930: \sum_{r_1,r_2,\cdots =0}^\infty q^{\sum_{s=1} ^\infty s r_s
1931: }=\prod_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{1-q^n}=Z^{(S)}(q)\,.
1932: \end{equation}
1933: Here each set of integers $r_n$ represents a Young diagram
1934: which consists of the rectangles with sizes $n\times r_n$.
1935: In order to count the number of the adjoint state in the above
1936: rule, we multiply the number of rectangles
1937: $m([r])=\sum_{n=1}^\infty (1-\delta_{r_n,0})$
1938: in the summation over $r_1,r_2\cdots$.
1939: It is then straightforward to show that
1940: \begin{equation}
1941: \sum_{r_1,r_2,\cdots =0}^\infty m([r]) q^{\sum_{s=1} ^\infty s r_s
1942: }=(q+q^2+q^3+\cdots)\prod_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{1-q^n}=
1943: \frac{q}{1-q}\prod_{n=1}^\infty\frac{1}{1-q^n}
1944: \end{equation}
1945: which is exactly the partition function for the adjoint representation
1946: $Z^{(A_1)}(q)$.
1947: %This ``rectangle rule'' can be proved rigorouly in the next section.
1948: Physically our observation here implies that the tips in the non-singlet
1949: sector do not affect the spectrum for any $H_n$ but only change
1950: the multiplicity through the freedom in their locations in the Young diagram.
1951: %This rule will be discussed further in the next section.
1952:
1953:
1954: %This observation is supported by the explicit form of the eigenstates
1955: %which are constructed in the conserved charges in the bosonized form.
1956: %We have computed the eigenstates up to level 13 and can confirm the
1957: %independent degree of freedom is given as above.
1958: %Another argument which partially support the observation is the following.
1959: %As before, we represent the Young diagram as the vertical
1960: %collections of rectangles as
1961: %$[\mu_1^{r_1},\mu_2^{r_2},\cdots,\mu_s^{r_s}]$
1962: %($\mu_1>\mu_2>\cdots>\mu_s>0$).
1963: %We pick up one rectangle (say $\mu_i^{r_i}$) among them
1964: %and suppose the $\cC(\neq 1)$ is located at the location
1965: %$(x,y)$ in the rectangle ($1\leq x \leq \mu_i$, $1\leq y\leq r_i$).
1966: %Then it is possible to show that the YSS
1967: %where $\cC$ is located at $(x,y')$ ($1\leq y'\leq r_i$)
1968: %is equal to the original state up to the sign.
1969: %It can be proved by using an element of the permutation
1970: %$\sigma = \prod_{i=1}^{r_i} (p_i q_i)$ where $(p_1,\cdots, p_{r_i})$
1971: %and $(q_1,\cdots,q_{r_i})$ are the numbers written on the
1972: %$y$ and $y'$-th rows on the rectangle.
1973: %This $\sigma$ (anti-) commutes with $a_{B_Y}$ and $b_{B_Y}$
1974: %and change the location of $\cC$ from $(x,y)$ to $(x,y')$.
1975: %We can define the another move within a rectangle
1976: %by considering the division of $Y$ as the collection of
1977: %rectangles piled in the horizontal direction. We can then
1978: %move $\cC$ located at $(x,y)$ to $(x',y)$ while keeping the
1979: %value of $\Phi^{[B_Y]}$. By combining these two moves, the number
1980: %of independent $\Phi^{[B_Y]}$ is reduced to $s(s+1)/2$ where
1981: %$s$ is the number of the rectangles.
1982: %We will need further
1983: %equivalence relation in order to prove the number of the independent
1984: %basis is $s$. So far, this remains an unsolved issue.
1985: %An example which supports this equivalence appears for $Y=[m,1^{n-1}]$
1986: %case (\ref{triag}).
1987:
1988: From the explicit computation of the eigenfunction by the computer,
1989: it seems rather reasonable to conjecture that
1990: all the adjoint eigenstates can be written by the combinations of
1991: the (skew) Schur polynomials
1992: and the degree of freedom associated with the tip.
1993: So far it seems difficult to write them in compact forms.
1994: %\footnote{One difficulty is that the YSS
1995: %(putting all $\cC=1$) for the skew Young diagram does not necessarily equal to the skew Schur polynomial unlike the case of
1996: %ordinary Young diagrams (\ref{eq:sing-Schur}). Consider the case of $Y=[3,2]/[1]$ for instance.}
1997: %of the adjoint eigenstate in terms of the Schur polynomial
1998: Therefore, we instead present the explicit forms of eigenstates
1999: for the Young diagrams with the limited shape.
2000:
2001: For the diagrams $Y=[n],[1^n]$ the wave functions are simply given by
2002: \begin{align}
2003: \Psi^{[n]}=\frac{1}{n} \sum_{r=0}^{n-1} \mbox{Tr}(\cC\bA^{n-r})s_{[r]}(J)\ket{0}\,,
2004: \quad
2005: \Psi^{[1^n]}=\frac{1}{n} \sum_{r=0}^{n-1} (-1)^{n-r-1}\mbox{Tr}(\cC\bA^{n-r})s_{[1^r]}(J)\ket{0}
2006: \,.
2007: \end{align}
2008: This is a situation where only one fermion (or hole) is excited
2009: and it is coupled with the tip.
2010:
2011: Next we give the wave functions corresponding to $Y=[m,1^{n-1}]$.
2012: Naively, there are three independent boards but as we argued only
2013: two of them are independent.
2014: %These two states correspond to the two
2015: %independent boards shown in fig.\,\ref{fig:board}.
2016: %and setting to $(\cC_1,\cC_2)=(\cC,1)$.
2017: Considering the board shown in fig.\,\ref{fig:board} and putting $\cC_1=\cC$, we obtain
2018: \begin{align}
2019: \Psi^{[m,1^{n-1}]}_1
2020: &=\frac{d_{[m,1^{n-1}]}}{(m+n-1)!} \sum_{\substack{0\leq r \leq m-1\\0\leq s \leq n-1}}(-1)^s \Tr (\cC \bA^{r+s+1})
2021: \frac{(m-1)!}{(m-r-1)!}\frac{(n-1)!}{(n-s-1)!} \notag \\
2022: &\hspace{120pt}\cdot (m-r-1)!s_{[m-r-1]} \cdot (n-s-1)! s_{[1^{n-s-1}]} \ket{0} \notag \\
2023: &=\frac{1}{m+n-1}\sum_{\substack{0\leq r \leq m-1\\0\leq s \leq n-1}}(-1)^s \Tr (\cC \bA^{r+s+1})
2024: s_{[m-r-1]}s_{[1^{n-s-1}]} \ket{0}.
2025: \end{align}
2026: The coefficient of $\Tr (\cC \bA^{r+s+1})$ comes from the number to choose $r$ boxes (considered their order)
2027: from $2,\dots,m$ and
2028: $s$ boxes from $m+1,\dots,m+n-1$ and from the product of the singlet
2029: states with remaining $Y=[m-r-1]$ and $[1^{n-s-1}]$.
2030: Other two states are similarly given by
2031: \begin{align}
2032: \Psi^{[m,1^{n-1}]}_2=\frac{1}{(m+n-1)(m-1)}&\biggl[ \sum_{0\leq r \leq m-2}(m+n-r-2)\Tr(\cC\bA^{r+1})
2033: s_{[m-r-1,1^{n-1}]} \notag \\
2034: & +\sum_{\substack{0\leq r \leq m-2\\0\leq s \leq n-1}}(-1)^s (r+1) \Tr (\cC \bA^{r+s+2})s_{[m-r-2]}s_{[1^{n-s-1}]}
2035: \biggr] \ket{0} \,, \label{eq:Psi_2}\\
2036: \Psi^{[m,1^{n-1}]}_3=\frac{1}{(m+n-1)(n-1)}&\biggl[ \sum_{0\leq s \leq n-2}(-1)^s (m+n-s-2)\Tr(\cC\bA^{s+1})
2037: s_{[m,1^{n-s-2}]} \notag \\
2038: & +\sum_{\substack{0\leq r \leq m-1\\0\leq s \leq n-2}}(-1)^{s+1} (s+1)
2039: \Tr (\cC \bA^{r+s+2})s_{[m-r-1]}s_{[1^{n-s-2}]}
2040: \biggr] \ket{0}\,,
2041: \end{align}
2042: where $\Psi^{[m,1^{n-1}]}_2$ is the state corresponding to $\cC_m=\cC$ and $\Psi^{[m,1^{n-1}]}_2$
2043: is that corresponding to $\cC_{m+n-1}=\cC$.
2044: In (\ref{eq:Psi_2}) the first term comes from the case that the boxes 1 and $m$ are not in the same cyclic
2045: permutation, and the second term comes from the case that both are in the same one.
2046: The relation among these three states is as follows:
2047: \begin{align}\label{triag}
2048: (m+n-2)\Psi^{[m,1^{n-1}]}_1-(m-1)\Psi^{[m,1^{n-1}]}_2-(n-1)\Psi^{[m,1^{n-1}]}_3=0\,.
2049: \end{align}
2050:
2051: \begin{figure}[tbp]
2052: \begin{center}
2053: \includegraphics[height=3.5cm]{board.eps}
2054: \end{center}
2055: \caption{One board with the Young tableau $[m,1^{n-1}]$.}
2056: \label{fig:board}
2057: \end{figure}
2058:
2059: \section{Summary and future issues}
2060: \label{sec:summary}
2061: In this paper, we have studied the spectrum of MQM from the
2062: viewpoint of its spectrum generating algebra ---
2063: the $\hW_\infty$ algebra. While the
2064: usual $\cW_\infty$ algebra is essentially described
2065: by free fermion systems \cite{r:Kac,r:AFMO},
2066: $\hW_\infty$ describes systems with Calogero(-Sutherland)
2067: type interaction which comes from the angular part
2068: of the matrix degree of freedom.
2069: The action of the $\hW_\infty$ generators has an interpretation of
2070: the splitting and the joining of ``loop operators'' and through
2071: this interpretation it is possible to derive the explicit for of the
2072: eigenvectors for arbitrary non-singlet states.
2073: It is remarkable that the eigenfunctions
2074: of the commuting charges are still classified by the Young diagram
2075: and have the same spectrum as the free fermion system.
2076: The only difference is the degeneracy of the spectrum
2077: whose origin is the arbitrariness of the location of the tips.
2078:
2079: There are a few questions which should be answered before
2080: we can study the issues of the non-singlet sectors of $c=1$ gravity.
2081: One important aspect is how to take large $N$ limit.
2082: While the representation in terms of the free boson and the
2083: degree of the freedom of the tip is a good framework to take
2084: the large $N$ analysis, our exact wave functions are defined
2085: through the Young symmetrizer and the translation between
2086: the two languages seems not complete in the non-singlet
2087: sector.
2088:
2089: Another issue is how to solve the upside-down (UD) case.
2090: This is in a sense obtained from the upside-up (UU) case by
2091: a sort of Wick rotation. For instance, the wave function for
2092: the singlet sector is the Slater determinant of the free wave functions
2093: $x^{i\epsilon-1/2}$ (for UD case) instead of $x^n$ (for UU case).
2094: In order to consider the matrix generalization, we need to introduce
2095: the pure imaginary powers for the matrix $X$.
2096: We note that the basic tools of our analysis, the $\hW_\infty$ generators,
2097: the Young symmetrizer and the free boson variables
2098: are defined in terms of the integer power of $X$.
2099: It is clear that we need extra ideas to modify our arguments
2100: to UD case. We hope that the basic observation of our analysis,
2101: the structure of the spectrum and the multiplicity
2102: will remain the same since it is a demonstration of the fact that
2103: the spectrum remains the same when we change the locations
2104: of the tips.
2105:
2106: In the mathematical side, one important question is the
2107: study of the representation of the $\hW_\infty$ algebra.
2108: While we discuss some simple irreducible representations
2109: which appear in the context of MQM, it should be far from
2110: the complete classification of the irreducible
2111: representations.
2112: The fact that the action of the generators takes the form of
2113: splitting and joining of loop operators implies that
2114: this algebra will be also essential to understand
2115: string theory beyond $c=1$.
2116:
2117: \vskip 10mm
2118:
2119: \noindent{\bf Acknowledgement:}
2120: This work was started as a joint project with I. Kostov.
2121: We are deeply grateful to him for the illuminating discussions
2122: and for his hospitality when Y.M. was invited to Saclay.
2123: %
2124: Y.M. is supported in part by
2125: Grant-in-Aid (\#16540232) from the Japan
2126: Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports,
2127: Science and Technology.
2128:
2129: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2130: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2131: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2132: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2133: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2134: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2135:
2136:
2137: \appendix
2138: \section{Analogy with 3D harmonic oscillator}
2139: \label{a:o3}
2140: MQM in the nontrivial representation has many characters which
2141: are analogous to 3D harmonic oscillator with the Hamiltonian,
2142: \be
2143: \mathcal{H}=-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^3 \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x_i^2}
2144: +\frac{1}{2}\sum_i x_i^2=\sum_{i=1}^3
2145: a_i^\dagger a_i+\frac{3}{2}
2146: \ee
2147: with
2148: \be
2149: a_i=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x_i+ip_i)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x_i+\partial_i)\,,\quad
2150: a^\dagger_i=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x_i-ip_i)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(x_i-\partial_i)\,.
2151: \ee
2152: In the polar coordinate, the Hamiltonian is rewritten as,
2153: \be
2154: \mathcal{H}=-\frac{1}{2}\left(
2155: \frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial r^2}r+\frac{1}{r^2}\hat\Omega
2156: \right)+\frac{1}{2}r^2\,,\quad
2157: \hat\Omega=\frac{1}{\sin\theta}\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}
2158: \left(\sin\theta\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}\right)
2159: +\frac{1}{\sin^2\theta}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial\phi^2}\,.
2160: \ee
2161: If we write the wave function as $\psi=R(r)Y_{lm}(\theta,\phi)$,
2162: the Schr\"odinger equation for $R(r)$ becomes,
2163: \be
2164: -\frac{1}{2}\left(
2165: \frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial^2(rR)}{\partial r^2}
2166: \right)+\frac{1}{2}\left(
2167: r^2+\frac{l(l+1)}{r^2}
2168: \right)R(r)=ER(r)
2169: \ee
2170: The correspondence between MQM and 3D harmonic oscillator are,
2171: $A^\pm \leftrightarrow a_i, a_i^\dagger$,
2172: the eigenvalues of $X\leftrightarrow r$,
2173: $U(N)$ rotation $\leftrightarrow SO(3)$,
2174: representation of $U(N)$ $\leftrightarrow$ total angular momentum $l$,
2175: $\sum_{i,j}\frac{\rho(E_{ij})\rho(E_{ji})}{(x_i-x_j)^2}
2176: \leftrightarrow \frac{l(l+1)}{r^2}$
2177: and so on.
2178:
2179: The symmetry of the system is $SO(3)$ rotation generated by
2180: \begin{eqnarray}
2181: L_i=i\epsilon_{ijk}x_j\partial_k=i\epsilon_{ijk}a^\dagger_i a_j
2182: \end{eqnarray}
2183: which commutes with the Hamiltonian. There is another $SL(2)$ algebra
2184: which commutes with $L_i$,
2185: \begin{eqnarray}
2186: Q^-=\frac{1}{2}\sum_i (a_i^\dagger)^2,\quad
2187: Q^0=\frac{1}{2}(\sum_i a_i^\dagger a_i+\frac{3}{2})=\frac{1}{2}
2188: \mathcal{H},\quad
2189: Q^+=\frac{1}{2}\sum_i (a_i)^2.
2190: \end{eqnarray}
2191: which satisfy the $sl(2,R)$ algebra,
2192: \begin{equation}
2193: \left[Q^+,Q^-\right]=2Q^0,\quad
2194: \left[Q^0,Q^\pm\right]=\mp Q^\pm\,.
2195: \end{equation}
2196: This is an analogue of $\hW_\infty$.
2197: There is a relation between Casimir operator of $so(3)$ and
2198: $sl(2,R)$ generators,
2199: \begin{eqnarray}
2200: \sum_{i=1}^3 L_i^2=-4Q^-Q^++(2Q^0-\frac{3}{2})(2Q^0-\frac{1}{2})
2201: =-4Q^-Q^++(\mathcal{H}-\frac{3}{2})(\mathcal{H}-\frac{1}{2})
2202: \end{eqnarray}
2203: The shift appearing in $Q^0$ is due to the ground state energy
2204: of the harmonic oscillators.
2205: An analogue of this relation should exist for MQM
2206: which describes the correspondence between the representations
2207: of $U(N)$ and $\hW_\infty$. So far, since we do not
2208: have a full understanding of the representation of $\hW_\infty$,
2209: it is difficult to guess such relation.
2210:
2211: The Hilbert space of the system is generated
2212: by the direct product of the irreducible representations
2213: of $so(3)$ ($L_i$) and $sl(2,R)$ ($Q^\pm, Q^0$).
2214: For the $so(3)$ algebra, we have spin $l$ representation,
2215: $|l,m\rangle$ ($m=-l,-l+1,\cdots,l-1,l$).
2216: From this state, we generate irrep of
2217: $sl(2,R)$ algebra as
2218: \begin{equation}\label{so3state}
2219: |n,l,m\rrangle\propto (Q^-)^n |l,m\rrangle\,,
2220: \quad Q^+|l,m\rrangle=0\,,\quad
2221: Q^0|l,m\rrangle=\frac{1}{2}(l+\frac{3}{2})|l,m\rrangle\,.
2222: \end{equation}
2223: We have changed notation $|l,m\rangle\rightarrow |l,m\rrangle$
2224: since they are the ground state of $sl(2,R)$.
2225: The assignment of the weight is necessary since
2226: we have to impose,
2227: \begin{eqnarray}
2228: L^2|l,m\rrangle=l(l+1)|l,m\rrangle
2229: =(2Q^0-\frac{3}{2})(2Q^0-\frac{1}{2})|l,m\rrangle\,.
2230: \end{eqnarray}
2231: The state $|n,l,m\rrangle$ ($n=0,1,2,\cdots$, $l=0,1,2\cdots$,
2232: $m=-l,\cdots,l$) span the Hilbert space of the system.
2233:
2234: For example, the lower states are given as follows,
2235: \begin{eqnarray}
2236: \mbox{level $0$}&: &|0\rangle\leftrightarrow|0,0\rrangle\,,\nn\\
2237: \mbox{level $1$}&: &a_i^\dagger|0\rangle\leftrightarrow
2238: |1,m\rrangle\,,\nn\\
2239: \mbox{level $2$} &: & a_i^\dagger a_j^\dagger|0\rangle
2240: \leftrightarrow |2,m\rrangle\,,\, Q^-|0,0\rrangle\nn\\
2241: \mbox{level $3$} &: & a_i^\dagger a_j^\dagger a_k^\dagger|0\rangle
2242: \leftrightarrow |3,m\rrangle\,,\, Q^-|1,m\rrangle
2243: \end{eqnarray}
2244: The partition function associated with spin $l$ have the form,
2245: $(2l+1)q^{l+3/2}\frac{1}{1-q^2}$ where $(2l+1)$ is the number of state
2246: of spin $l$ representation, $l+3/2$ is the ``ground state energy''
2247: for spin $l$ and $\frac{1}{1-q^2}$ is the partition function of
2248: $sl(2,R)$ representation. The total partition function is
2249: \begin{eqnarray}\label{so3tot}
2250: \mbox{Tr}q^{\mathcal{H}-3/2}=\sum_{l=0}^\infty
2251: (2l+1)q^{l}\frac{1}{1-q^2}=\frac{1}{(1-q)^3}\,.
2252: \end{eqnarray}
2253: The right hand side is the partition function of three harmonic
2254: oscillators.
2255:
2256: %\section{Calculation of Higher conserved charges}
2257: %\label{ap:higher}
2258: %In this appendix, we present the explicit form of $H_3^{(A_1)}$
2259: %and %$H_4^{(A_1)}$ and
2260: %study some of their properties.
2261: %
2262:
2263:
2264:
2265: \section{Explicit form of the states constructed from Young symmetrizer at the lower levels}
2266: \label{a:lower}
2267: In order to see the relation between the states constructed from
2268: the Young symmetrizer and free boson (fermion) states,
2269: we present the explicit forms of the former at the lower levels.
2270:
2271: \paragraph{Level 2}
2272: When $n=2$, the Young symmetrizers are,
2273: $e_{[2]}=\frac{1}{2}(1+(12))$, $e_{[1,1]}=\frac{1}{2}(1-(12))$
2274: and the states that corresponds to them are
2275: \begin{eqnarray}
2276: && \Psi^{[2],[1^2]}
2277: =\frac{1}{2}\left(\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A)
2278: \pm \mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A\cC_2 \bar A)\right)|0\rangle\,.
2279: \end{eqnarray}
2280: The eigenvalue of $H_2$ is $\pm 2$ for $\Psi^{[2]}$ ($\Psi^{[1^2]}$).
2281: By restricting $\cC_1=\cC_2=1$, $\Psi^{[Y]}$ reduces
2282: to Schur polynomial,
2283: \begin{align}
2284: \Psi^{[2]} &\rightarrow \frac{1}{2}(J_1^2+J_2)|0\rangle =
2285: s_{[2]}(J)\ket{0}\,, \quad
2286: \Psi^{[1^2]} \rightarrow \frac{1}{2}(J_1^2-J_2)|0\rangle =
2287: s_{[1^2]}(J)\ket{0}\,.
2288: \end{align}
2289: As for the restriction to the adjoint sector, with traceless
2290: matrix $\cC$,
2291: \begin{equation}
2292: \Psi^{[2]}\rightarrow \frac{1}{2}(J_1\mbox{Tr}(\cC \bar A)+
2293: \mbox{Tr}(\cC\bar A^2))|0\rangle\,,\qquad
2294: \Psi^{[1^2]}\rightarrow \frac{1}{2}(J_1\mbox{Tr}(\cC \bar A)-
2295: \mbox{Tr}(\cC\bar A^2))|0\rangle
2296: \end{equation}
2297: %
2298: \paragraph{Level 3}
2299: Young symmetrizers are,
2300: \begin{eqnarray}
2301: &&e_{[3]}=\frac{1}{3!}(1+(123)+(213)+(12)+(13)+(23))\,,\\
2302: &&e_{[1^3]}=\frac{1}{3!}(1+(123)+(213)-(12)-(13)-(23))\,,\\
2303: && e_{[2,1]}=\frac{1}{3}(1+(12)-(13)-(123))\,.
2304: \end{eqnarray}
2305: There are several independent boards associated with $Y=[2,1]$.
2306: Here we pick up the following one:
2307:
2308: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%Young tableau%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2309: \begin{center}
2310: \unitlength 0.1in
2311: \begin{picture}( 4, 4)( 30,-20)
2312: % STR 2 0 3 0
2313: % 3 3110 1610 3110 1710 5 0
2314: % 1
2315: \put(31,-17){\makebox(0,0){1}}%
2316: % BOX 2 0 3 0
2317: % 2 3000 1600 3200 1800
2318: %
2319: \special{pn 8}%
2320: \special{pa 3000 1600}%
2321: \special{pa 3200 1600}%
2322: \special{pa 3200 1800}%
2323: \special{pa 3000 1800}%
2324: \special{pa 3000 1600}%
2325: \special{fp}%
2326: % BOX 2 0 3 0
2327: % 2 3000 1800 3200 2000
2328: %
2329: \special{pn 8}%
2330: \special{pa 3000 1800}%
2331: \special{pa 3200 1800}%
2332: \special{pa 3200 2000}%
2333: \special{pa 3000 2000}%
2334: \special{pa 3000 1800}%
2335: \special{fp}%
2336: % BOX 2 0 3 0
2337: % 2 3200 1600 3400 1800
2338: %
2339: \special{pn 8}%
2340: \special{pa 3200 1600}%
2341: \special{pa 3400 1600}%
2342: \special{pa 3400 1800}%
2343: \special{pa 3200 1800}%
2344: \special{pa 3200 1600}%
2345: \special{fp}%
2346: % STR 2 0 3 0
2347: % 3 3300 1600 3300 1700 5 0
2348: % 1
2349: \put(33,-17){\makebox(0,0){2}}%
2350: % STR 2 0 3 0
2351: % 3 3110 1810 3110 1910 5 0
2352: % 1
2353: \put(31,-19){\makebox(0,0){3}}%
2354: \end{picture}
2355: \end{center}
2356: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2357: \vspace{-12pt}
2358: From these projectors, one obtains the eigenstates of $H_2$ as,
2359: \begin{eqnarray}
2360: && \Psi^{[3]}=\frac{1}{3!}\left(
2361: \mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_3 \bar A)
2362: +\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A\cC_2 \bar A\cC_3\bar A)
2363: +\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A\cC_1 \bar A\cC_3\bar A)\right.\nn\\
2364: &&~~~\left.
2365: +\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A\cC_2 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_3 \bar A)
2366: +\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A\cC_3 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A)
2367: +\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A\cC_3 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A)
2368: \right)|0\rangle\,,\nn\\
2369: && \Psi^{[1^3]}=\frac{1}{3!}\left(
2370: \mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_3 \bar A)
2371: +\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A\cC_2 \bar A\cC_3\bar A)
2372: +\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A\cC_1 \bar A\cC_3\bar A)\right.\nn\\
2373: &&~~~\left.
2374: -\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A\cC_2 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_3 \bar A)
2375: -\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A\cC_3 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A)
2376: -\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A\cC_3 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A)
2377: \right)|0\rangle\,,\nn\\
2378: &&\Psi^{[2,1]}=\frac{1}{3}\left(
2379: \mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_3 \bar A)
2380: +\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A\cC_2 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_3 \bar A)\right.\nn\\
2381: &&~~~\left.
2382: -\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A\cC_3 \bar A)\mbox{Tr}(\cC_2 \bar A)
2383: -\mbox{Tr}(\cC_1 \bar A\cC_2 \bar A\cC_3\bar A)
2384: \right)|0\rangle\,,
2385: \end{eqnarray}
2386: with
2387: \begin{equation}
2388: H_2 \Psi^{[3]}=6\Psi^{[3]}\,,\quad
2389: H_2 \Psi^{[1^3]}=-6\Psi^{[1^3]}\,,\quad
2390: H_2 \Psi^{[2,1]}=0\,.
2391: \end{equation}
2392: As before, the restriction to the singlet gives
2393: the corresponding Schur polynomials.
2394: The restriction to the adjoint is also similar.
2395: One important lesson here is that there are two
2396: independent states %\footnote{This corresponds to considering two independent board.}
2397: which can be derived from
2398: $\Psi^{[2,1]}$. By putting
2399: $(\cC_1,\cC_2,\cC_3)=(\cC,1,1)$
2400: and
2401: $(\cC_1,\cC_2,\cC_3)=(1,\cC,1)$
2402: \begin{equation}
2403: \frac{1}{3}\left(
2404: \mbox{Tr}(\cC\bar A)J_1^2-\mbox{Tr}(\cC \bar A^3)
2405: \right)|0\rangle
2406: \,,\quad
2407: \frac{1}{3}\left(
2408: \mbox{Tr}(\cC\bar A)J_1^2
2409: +\mbox{Tr}(\cC\bar A^2)J_1
2410: -\mbox{Tr}(\cC\bar A)J_2
2411: -\mbox{Tr}(\cC \bar A^3)\right)|0\rangle\,.
2412: \end{equation}
2413: It explains the degeneracy 2 of the adjoint sector
2414: for $Y=[2,1]$.
2415:
2416:
2417: %\section{Inner product between eigenstates}
2418: %The inner product between the eigenstate will be useful
2419: %for the future application. We first
2420: %note that $\bar A_{ij}^\dagger=A_{ji}$. It implies that
2421: %\begin{equation}
2422: % \left(
2423: %\prod_{i=1}^n (\cC_i\bar A)_{a(i) a(\sigma(i))}|0\rangle
2424: %\right)^\dagger
2425: %=\langle 0|\prod_{i=1}^n(A\cC_i^\dagger)_{a(\sigma(i))a(i)}
2426: %\end{equation}
2427: %The inner product between the state
2428: %can be evaluated as
2429: %\begin{eqnarray}
2430: % \langle 0|(\Psi^{\cD}(\sigma))^\dagger
2431: %\bar\Psi^{\cC}(\sigma')|0\rangle
2432: %= \sum_{\tau\in S_n}\cQ(\tau,\sigma'\tau\sigma^{-1}\tau^{-1})
2433: %\,,\quad
2434: %\cQ(\tau,\lambda)=\sum_{b_1,\cdots,b_n}
2435: %\prod_{i=1}^n (\cC_i\cD^\dagger_{\tau^{-1}(i)})%
2436: %_{b(i)b(\lambda(i))}\,.
2437: %\end{eqnarray}
2438: %Suppose we write the Young symmetrizer associated with
2439: %board $B$ as,
2440: %\begin{equation}
2441: % e_B=\sum_{\sigma\in S_n}c(\sigma,B)\,\sigma
2442: %\end{equation}
2443: %where $c(\sigma,B)$ is a real numbers,
2444: %the inner product between the
2445: %two states with boards $B,B'$ becomes
2446: %\begin{equation}
2447: % \langle 0|(\Psi^{[B]})^\dagger \Psi^{[B']}|0\rangle
2448: % = \sum_{\tau,\sigma,\sigma'} c(\sigma,B^\tau) c(\sigma', B')
2449: %\cQ(\tau,\sigma'\sigma^{-1})
2450: %\end{equation}
2451: %where $B^\tau$ is a board whose entry on each box
2452: %is shuffled by $\tau$.
2453: %The quantity on the right hand side can be obtained by
2454: %multiplying two Young symmetrizers
2455: %\begin{equation}
2456: % e_{B^\tau}'=\sum_{\sigma\in S_n} c(\sigma, B)\tau\sigma^{-1}\tau^{-1}
2457: %=\sum_{\sigma\in S_n} c(\sigma, B^\tau)\sigma^{-1}
2458: %\,,
2459: %\end{equation}
2460: %and $e_{B'}$ as $e_{B'}\cdot e_{B^\tau}'$
2461: %and replace $\sigma$ which appear in
2462: %the product by $\cQ(\tau,\sigma)$.
2463: %By the property of the Young symmetrizer, this vanishes
2464: %if the Young tables $Y,Y'$ associated with $B,B'$
2465: %are different.
2466:
2467:
2468:
2469: %We define $\no{H_3} \equiv H_3-2N H_2 +N^2 H_1=H_3-2N \no{H_2} -N^2 H_1$.
2470: %For the level 3 states, the action of $H_3'$ is
2471: %\begin{align}
2472: % {H_3} \left(
2473: % \begin{array}{c}
2474: % \ket{3} \\ p_1 \ket{2} \\ p_2\ket{1}\\p_1^2\ket{1}
2475: % \end{array}
2476: % \right)=
2477: % \left(
2478: % \begin{array}{c c c c}
2479: % 9 & 0 & 0 & 3\\
2480: % 0 & 9 & 3 & 0\\
2481: % 0 & 6 & 6 & 0\\
2482: % 6 & 0 & 0 & 6
2483: % \end{array}
2484: % \right)
2485: % \left(
2486: % \begin{array}{c}
2487: % \ket{3} \\ p_1 \ket{2} \\ p_2\ket{1}\\p_1^2\ket{1}
2488: % \end{array}
2489: % \right).
2490: %\end{align}
2491: %The eigenvectors of $H_3$ are
2492: %\begin{equation}
2493: % \ket{3}-p_1^2\ket{1},\;\; p_1 \ket{2}-p_2 \ket{1}
2494: %\end{equation}
2495: %with eigenvalues $3(N^2+1)$ and
2496: %\begin{equation}
2497: % 2\ket{3}\pm 2p_1\ket{2}\pm p_2\ket{1}+p_1^2\ket{1}
2498: %\end{equation}
2499: %with eigenvalues $3(N\pm 2)^2$.
2500: %Therefore there is still degeneracy.
2501:
2502: %\paragraph{The action of $H_4$}
2503: %We also calculated the action of $H_4$.
2504: %The result has a lot of terms, so we do not write it here.
2505: %Alternatively we denote the action of
2506: %${H_4} $ for the level 3 states,
2507: %\begin{align}
2508: % {H_4} \left(
2509: % \begin{array}{c}
2510: % \ket{3} \\ p_1 \ket{2} \\ p_2\ket{1}\\p_1^2\ket{1}
2511: % \end{array}
2512: % \right)=
2513: % \left(
2514: % \begin{array}{c c c c}
2515: % 0 & 16 & 8 & 0\\
2516: % 16 & 0 & 0 & 8\\
2517: % 16 & 0 & 0 & 8\\
2518: % 0 & 16 & 8 & 0
2519: % \end{array}
2520: % \right)
2521: % \left(
2522: % \begin{array}{c}
2523: % \ket{3} \\ p_1 \ket{2} \\ p_2\ket{1}\\p_1^2\ket{1}
2524: % \end{array}
2525: % \right).
2526: %\end{align}
2527: %Since this is the same action of $\no{H_2}$ up to the constant factor,
2528: %we can not also resolve the degeneracy in this case.
2529:
2530: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
2531: \bibitem{r:MQM}
2532: V.~A.~Kazakov and A.~A.~Migdal,
2533: %``Recent Progress In The Theory Of Noncritical Strings,''
2534: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 311}, 171 (1988);\\
2535: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B311,171;%%
2536: %
2537: For the double scaling limit of $c=1$ theory,\\
2538: E.~Brezin, V.~A.~Kazakov and A.~B.~Zamolodchikov,
2539: %``Scaling Violation In A Field Theory Of Closed Strings In One Physical
2540: %Dimension,''
2541: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 338}, 673 (1990);\\
2542: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B338,673;%%
2543: G.~Parisi,
2544: %``ON THE ONE-DIMENSIONAL DISCRETIZED STRING,''
2545: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 238}, 209 (1990);\\
2546: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B238,209;%%
2547: D.~J.~Gross and N.~Miljkovic,
2548: %``A NONPERTURBATIVE SOLUTION OF D = 1 STRING THEORY,''
2549: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 238}, 217 (1990);\\
2550: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B238,217;%;
2551: P.~H.~Ginsparg and J.~Zinn-Justin,
2552: %``2-d GRAVITY + 1-d MATTER,''
2553: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 240}, 333 (1990);\\
2554: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B240,333;%%
2555: For the recent developments, for example,\\
2556: S.~Y.~Alexandrov, V.~A.~Kazakov and I.~K.~Kostov,
2557: %``Time-dependent backgrounds of 2D string theory,''
2558: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 640}, 119 (2002)
2559: [arXiv:hep-th/0205079];\
2560: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0205079;%%
2561: % S.~Y.~Alexandrov, V.~A.~Kazakov and I.~K.~Kostov,
2562: %``2D string theory as normal matrix model,''
2563: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 667}, 90 (2003)
2564: [arXiv:hep-th/0302106].
2565: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0302106;%%
2566: %
2567: \bibitem{r:GK}
2568: D.~J.~Gross and I.~Klebanov,
2569: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 344}, 475 (1990);
2570: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 354}, 459 (1991).
2571:
2572: \bibitem{r:BK}
2573: D.~Boulatov and V.~Kazakov,
2574: %``One-dimensional string theory with vortices as the upside down matrix
2575: %oscillator,''
2576: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 8}, 809 (1993)
2577: [arXiv:hep-th/0012228].
2578: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0012228;%%
2579: %
2580: \bibitem{r:K3}
2581: V.~Kazakov, I.~K.~Kostov and D.~Kutasov,
2582: %``A matrix model for the two-dimensional black hole,''
2583: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 622}, 141 (2002)
2584: [arXiv:hep-th/0101011].
2585: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0101011;%%
2586: %
2587: \bibitem{r:Mal}
2588: J.~M.~Maldacena,
2589: %``Long strings in two dimensional string theory and non-singlets in the
2590: %matrix model,''
2591: JHEP {\bf 0509}, 078 (2005)
2592: [Int.\ J.\ Geom.\ Meth.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ {\bf 3}, 1 (2006)]
2593: [arXiv:hep-th/0503112];
2594: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0503112;%%
2595: see also
2596: D.~Gaiotto,
2597: %``Long strings condensation and FZZT branes,''
2598: arXiv:hep-th/0503215;
2599: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0503215;%%
2600: J.~M.~Maldacena and N.~Seiberg,
2601: %``Flux-vacua in two dimensional string theory,''
2602: JHEP {\bf 0509}, 077 (2005)
2603: [arXiv:hep-th/0506141].
2604: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0506141;%%
2605: %
2606: \bibitem{r:Fid}
2607: L.~Fidkowski,
2608: %``Solving the eigenvalue problem arising from the adjoint sector of the c = 1
2609: %matrix model,''
2610: arXiv:hep-th/0506132.
2611: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0506132;%%
2612: %
2613: \bibitem{r:OM}
2614: G.~Marchesini and E.~Onofri,
2615: %``Planar Limit For SU(N) Symmetric Quantum Dynamical Systems,''
2616: J.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 21}, 1103 (1980).
2617: %%CITATION = JMAPA,21,1103;%%
2618: %
2619: \bibitem{r:AP}
2620: A.~Agarwal and A.~P.~Polychronakos,
2621: arXiv:hep-th/0602049%; see also a recent review,
2622: %
2623: \bibitem{r:Poly_rev}
2624: A.~P.~Polychronakos,
2625: % ``Physics and Mathematics of Calogero particles,''
2626: %
2627: arXiv:hep-th/0607033.
2628: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0607033;%%
2629: %
2630: \bibitem{r:Winf}
2631: E.~Witten,
2632: %``Ground ring of two-dimensional string theory,''
2633: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 373}, 187 (1992)
2634: [arXiv:hep-th/9108004];\\
2635: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9108004;%%
2636: J.~Avan and A.~Jevicki,
2637: %``String field actions from W(infinity),''
2638: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 7}, 357 (1992)
2639: [arXiv:hep-th/9111028];\\
2640: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9111028;%%
2641: %
2642: H.~Itoyama and Y.~Matsuo,
2643: %``W(1+infinity) type constraints in matrix models at finite N,''
2644: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 262}, 233 (1991);\\
2645: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B262,233;%%
2646: %
2647: A.~Mironov and A.~Morozov,
2648: % ``On the origin of Virasoro constraints in matrix models: Lagrangian
2649: %approach,''
2650: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 252}, 47 (1990).
2651: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B252,47;%%
2652: %
2653: \bibitem{r:Winfother}
2654: For the other works related to the $\cW_\infty$ algebra, see for example,\\
2655: D.~B.~Fairlie and C.~K.~Zachos,
2656: %``Infinite Dimensional Algebras, Sine Brackets And SU(Infinity),''
2657: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 224}, 101 (1989);\\
2658: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B224,101;%%
2659: I.~Bakas,
2660: %``The Structure Of The W(Infinity) Algebra,''
2661: Commun.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 134}, 487 (1990);\\
2662: %%CITATION = CMPHA,134,487;%%
2663: A.~Cappelli, C.~A.~Trugenberger and G.~R.~Zemba,
2664: %``Stable hierarchical quantum hall fluids as W(1+infinity) minimal models,''
2665: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 448}, 470 (1995)
2666: [arXiv:hep-th/9502021].
2667: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9502021;%%
2668:
2669: \bibitem{r:Kac}
2670: V.~Kac and A.~Radul,
2671: %``Quasifinite highest weight modules over the Lie algebra of differential
2672: %operators on the circle,''
2673: Commun.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 157}, 429 (1993)
2674: [arXiv:hep-th/9308153];\\
2675: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9308153;%%
2676: E.~Frenkel, V.~Kac, A.~Radul and W.~Q.~Wang,
2677: %``W(1+infinity) and W(gl(N)) with central charge N,''
2678: Commun.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 170}, 337 (1995)
2679: [arXiv:hep-th/9405121].
2680: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9405121;%%
2681: %
2682: \bibitem{r:AFMO}
2683: H.~Awata, M.~Fukuma, Y.~Matsuo and S.~Odake,
2684: %``Character and determinant formulae of quasifinite representation of the
2685: %W(1+infinity) algebra,''
2686: Commun.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 172}, 377 (1995)
2687: [arXiv:hep-th/9405093];
2688: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9405093;%%
2689: % H.~Awata, M.~Fukuma, Y.~Matsuo and S.~Odake,
2690: %``Representation theory of the W(1+infinity) algebra,''
2691: Prog.\ Theor.\ Phys.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 118}, 343 (1995)
2692: [arXiv:hep-th/9408158].
2693: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9408158;%%
2694: \bibitem{r:AMOS}
2695: H.~Awata, Y.~Matsuo, S.~Odake and J.~Shiraishi,
2696: %``Collective field theory, Calogero-Sutherland model and generalized matrix
2697: %models,''
2698: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 347}, 49 (1995)
2699: [arXiv:hep-th/9411053];
2700: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9411053;%%
2701: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 449}, 347 (1995)
2702: [arXiv:hep-th/9503043].
2703: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9503043;%%
2704: \bibitem{r:MatStr}
2705: R.~Dijkgraaf, E.~P.~Verlinde and H.~L.~Verlinde,
2706: %``Matrix string theory,''
2707: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 500}, 43 (1997)
2708: [arXiv:hep-th/9703030].
2709: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9703030;%%
2710: %
2711: %\bibitem{r:KM}
2712: %I. Kostov and Y. Matsuo in preparation.
2713: \bibitem{r:CS}
2714: F.~Calogero,
2715: %``Ground State Of One-Dimensional N Body System,''
2716: J.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 10}, 2197 (1969);\\
2717: %%CITATION = JMAPA,10,2197;%%
2718: B.~Sutherland,
2719: %``Quantum Many Body Problem In One-Dimension,''
2720: J.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 12}, 251 (1971).
2721: %%CITATION = JMAPA,12,251;%%
2722: %
2723: \bibitem{r:Poly}
2724: J.~A.~Minahan and A.~P.~Polychronakos,
2725: %``Integrable systems for particles with internal degrees of freedom,''
2726: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 302}, 265 (1993)
2727: [arXiv:hep-th/9206046];
2728: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9206046;%%
2729: A.~P.~Polychronakos,
2730: %``Exact spectrum of SU(n) spin chain with inverse square exchange,''
2731: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 419}, 553 (1994)
2732: [arXiv:hep-th/9310095].
2733: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9310095;%%
2734: %
2735: \bibitem{r:fermion}
2736: See for example E.~Date, M.~Jimbo, M.~Kashiwara and T.~Miwa,
2737: ``Transformation Groups For Soliton Equations,''
2738: preprint RIMS-394, published in Proc. RIMS Symp. on Nonlinear Integrable System
2739: (Kyoto, 1981), eds. M. Jimbo and T. Miwa (World Scientific, Singapore, 1983);
2740: %\href{http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?r=rims-394}{SPIRES entry}
2741: see also the appendix in the second reference of \cite{r:AFMO}.
2742: %
2743: \bibitem{r:CJR}
2744: S.~Corley, A.~Jevicki and S.~Ramgoolam,
2745: %``Exact correlators of giant gravitons from dual N = 4 SYM theory,''
2746: Adv.\ Theor.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 5}, 809 (2002)
2747: [arXiv:hep-th/0111222].
2748: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0111222;%%
2749: \bibitem{r:YounSym} For example, H. Weyl, ``The Classical Groups:
2750: Their Invariants and Representations,'' (Princeton 1939) chap. 4.
2751: %
2752: \bibitem{r:Stan} For example, R. P. Stanley, ``Enumerative
2753: Combinatorics,'' (Vol.2) (Cambridge 1999) chap. 7.
2754: \bibitem{r:FH}
2755: For example, W.~Fulton and J.~Harris, ``Representation Theory,'' (Springer-Verlag).
2756: \end{thebibliography}
2757:
2758: \end{document}