text:
# Dilepton decays of baryon resonances

## 1 Introduction

The aim of relativistic heavy ion collision experiments is to study the properties of the hot and dense nuclear matter created in the collisions. These properties have to be reconstructed using the information encoded in the particles detected in the final stage of the collision. The best probes for this investigation are dileptons (in the few GeV per nucleon bombarding energy range dielectrons), which leave the hot and dense zone unaffected by final state interactions.

Theoretical studies predict a modification of hadron properties (masses and decay widths) in hot and dense nuclear matter. These medium effects can most easily be studied in the case of vector mesons, which decay directly to dileptons and their masses are measured through the invariant mass of the resulting dilepton.

Dielectron production in heavy ion collisions with a few GeV per nucleon energy has been studied experimentally by the DLS collaboration at BEVALAC and will be studied by the HADES at GSI. In order to obtain a reliable model of heavy ion collisions first one has to check the elementary reaction channels used in the model. For this purpose dilepton production in nucleon-nucleon collisions has to be investigated both experimentally and theoretically.

Particle production in nucleon-nucleon collisions is usually described using the resonance model, i.e., the final state particles are produced via the creation and subsequent decay of baryon resonances. This multistep process is factorized so that initial and final state particles of the individual steps are handled as on-shell particles and in case of resonances their masses are generated according to a Breit-Wigner distribution. Different factorizations result in different models with different elementary channels.

In models of dielectron production in $`pp`$ collisions usually the following elementary channels are included: direct dileptonic decay of $`\rho ^0`$, $`\omega `$ and $`\varphi `$ vector mesons, Dalitz decay of mesons $`\pi ^0\gamma e^+e^{}`$, $`\eta \gamma e^+e^{}`$, $`\omega \pi ^0e^+e^{}`$ and Dalitz decay of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$ resonance, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Ne^+e^{}`$. Such models (e.g. ) can reasonably well reproduce the experimental dilepton invariant mass spectra in the $`E_b`$ = 1 – 2 GeV bombarding energy range . In models of heavy ion collisions the additional channels of pion annihilation and $`pn`$ bremsstrahlung appear.

With increasing beam energy creation of higher mass baryon resonances becomes more and more relevant. In heavy ion collisions kinetic energy of colliding particles can be accumulated in multiple scattering processes, therefore higher mass resonances appear at lower beam energies. These resonances may contribute to the dilepton spectrum through their Dalitz decay similarly to the $`\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$. This contribution may especially be relevant in the higher dilepton mass range where the $`\rho ^0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$ channels are already negligible. This dilepton mass range coincides with the range of the $`\varphi `$ meson mass.

Recently, production of $`\varphi `$ mesons in subthreshold heavy ion collisions has received some attention both experimentally  and theoretically . $`\varphi `$ mesons are being studied by the FOPI group at GSI via their kaon decay channel, $`\varphi K^+K^{}`$, but the dileptonic decay channel will also be accessible by the HADES detector. In the latter case an important source of background may come from the Dalitz decay of higher mass resonances.

In this paper we derive expressions for the differential Dalitz decay width of baryon resonances with arbitrary spin-parities. We discuss in detail the Dalitz decay of resonances with spin$``$5/2. Our paper is organized as follows: in Sec. 2 we derive expressions for the electromagnetic transition matrix elements of baryon resonances with arbitrary spin-parity and give expressions for the Dalitz decay width. In Sec. 3 we give a detailed discussion of the numerical results. We compare contributions of the various terms in the transition matrix element and discuss the relevance of spin-parity and the resonance mass. In the Appendix we cite the spin projectors used in the calculations and the explicite expressions for the polarization averaged squared transition matrix elements of the baryon resonance Dalitz decays.

## 2 Dalitz-decay of a spin-$`J`$ resonance

### 2.1 Matrix elements of the electromagnetic current

To study the electromagnetic decays of a spin-$`J`$ baryon resonance one has to determine the matrix element of the electromagnetic current operator $`J_\mu `$ between the nucleon ($`N`$) and the spin-$`J`$ baryon ($`R`$) state $`N|J_\mu |R`$. Let $`p_{}`$, $`m_{}`$, and $`\lambda _{}`$ denote the four-momentum, mass, and helicity of the $`R`$ resonance, respectively, and $`p`$, $`m`$, and $`\lambda `$ the corresponding quantities for the nucleon. Let us introduce the notations $`q=p_{}p`$ and $`P=(p_{}+p)/2`$.

For $`J3/2`$ the spin-$`J`$ fermion can be described by a generalized Rarita-Schwinger spinor-tensor field $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n}`$ ($`n=J1/2`$), therefore the momentum-space wavefunction of the particle is the spinor-tensor amplitude $`u^{\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n}(p_{},\lambda _{})`$. This quantity in general contains some additional lower spin components. The spin-$`J`$ content of $`u^{\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n}(p_{},\lambda _{})`$ can be selected by prescribing the generalized Rarita-Schwinger relations:

$`u^{\mathrm{}\rho _i\mathrm{}\rho _k\mathrm{}}(p_{},\lambda _{})`$ $`=`$ $`u^{\mathrm{}\rho _k\mathrm{}\rho _i\mathrm{}}(p_{},\lambda _{}),`$
$`u_{}^{\mathrm{}\sigma \mathrm{}}{}_{\sigma }{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}(p_{},\lambda _{})`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`u^\mathrm{}\sigma \mathrm{}(p_{},\lambda _{})p_\sigma `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`u^\mathrm{}\sigma \mathrm{}(p_{},\lambda _{})\gamma _\sigma `$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (1)
The matrix element of the electromagnetic current can be written generally as

$$N|J_\mu |R=\overline{u}(p,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n}u^{\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n}(p_{},\lambda _{}),$$
(2)
where the form of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n}`$ is restricted by the conservation of electric charge, $`q^\mu N|J_\mu |R=0`$. The relations (1) and the Dirac equations $`\overline{u}(p,\lambda )(p/m)=0`$ and $`(p/_{}m_{})u^{\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n}(p_{},\lambda _{})=0`$ reduce further the number of independent terms in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n}`$ to three, which can be chosen of the form

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}f_i(q^2)\chi _{\mu \rho _1}^ip_{\rho _2}\mathrm{}p_{\rho _n}G,$$
(3)
with

$`\chi _{\mu \rho }^1`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma _\mu q_\rho q/g_{\mu \rho },`$
$`\chi _{\mu \rho }^2`$ $`=`$ $`P_\mu q_\rho (Pq)g_{\mu \rho },`$
$`\chi _{\mu \rho }^3`$ $`=`$ $`q_\mu q_\rho q^2g_{\mu \rho },`$ (4)
and $`G=1`$ or $`\gamma _5`$ for resonances with positive or negative normalities, respectively. The normality of a spin-$`J`$ baryon is defined by $`P(1)^{J1/2}`$ with $`P`$ the intrinsic parity. $`f_i(q^2)`$, $`i=1,2,3`$ are three independent form factors.

In the spin-1/2 case the general form of the matrix element of the electromagnetic current is

$$N|J_\mu |R=\overline{u}(p,\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu u(p_{},\lambda _{}),$$
(5)
and there are two independent terms in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu `$:

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu =\underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}f_i(q^2)\chi _\mu ^iG,$$
(6)
with

$`\chi _\mu ^1`$ $`=`$ $`(Pq)\gamma _\mu q/P_\mu ,`$
$`\chi _\mu ^2`$ $`=`$ $`q^2\gamma _\mu q/q_\mu .`$ (7)
$`G`$ is again 1 or $`\gamma _5`$ depending on the normality of the resonance.

### 2.2 The Dalitz-decay width

The differential width of the Dalitz-decay of a particle is related to its photonic decay width to a virtual photon, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{RN\gamma }(M)`$, by

$$\frac{d\mathrm{\Gamma }_{RNe^+e^{}}}{dM^2}=\frac{\alpha }{3\pi }\frac{1}{M^2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{RN\gamma }(M).$$
(8)
Here the notation $`M^2(=q^2)`$ is used for the square of the dilepton invariant mass (= mass of the virtual photon). $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{RN\gamma }(M)`$ can be expressed in terms of the photonic decay matrix element $`N\gamma |T|R`$ as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{RN\gamma }(M)=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda (m_{}^2,m^2,M^2)}}{16\pi m_{}^3}\frac{1}{n_{pol,R}}\underset{pol}{}|N\gamma |T|R|^2,$$
(9)
where the transition matrix element is related to the electromagnetic current matrix element by

$$N\gamma |T|R=ϵ^\mu N|J_\mu |R,$$
(10)
with $`ϵ^\mu `$ the photon polarization vector. In (9) $`n_{pol,R}`$ is the number of polarization states of the $`R`$ resonance and $`\lambda (a,b,c)=a^2+b^2+c^22(ab+bc+ac)`$ is the usual kinematical factor.

The polarization sum in (9) runs over all physical polarization states of the incoming and outgoing particles, that is, in the case of the spin-$`J`$ resonance only over those states that belong to the spin-$`J`$ content of $`u^{\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n}(p_{},\lambda _{})`$. As a result, the spin-$`J`$ projector appears in (9) after substituting (2). The projectors for spin-3/2 and 5/2 are given in Appendix A.

If the differential cross section of the production of the resonance R in an elementary reaction, $`d\sigma _R/dm_{}`$, is known Eq. (8) can be used to obtain the cross section of dilepton production through the Dalitz decay of $`R`$ in the same reaction. This differential cross section is given by

$$\frac{d\sigma _{e^+e^{},R_{Dalitz}}}{dM}=𝑑m_{}\frac{d\sigma _R}{dm_{}}\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{tot}^R(m_{})}\frac{d\mathrm{\Gamma }_{RNe^+e^{}}(m_{})}{dM}.$$
(11)
### 2.3 Form factors and coupling constants

A possibility to determine the functional form of the form factors $`f_i(M^2)`$ is the application of the vector dominance model (VDM) . However, we aim at a model that handles the theoretically more interesting vector meson direct dilepton decays separately from the baryon resonance Dalitz decays serving as a background. Applying the VDM to the baryon resonance Dalitz decay channels simultaneously with the inclusion of the vector meson direct decays would give rise to a double counting if – following the usual treatment – the model incorporates vector mesons originating from decays of baryon resonances. The authors of  use a sophisticated method to avoid this double counting. In the present paper we do not apply the VDM and keep the form factors $`f_i(q^2)`$ constant.

We introduce the dimensionless coupling constants $`g_i`$ via the equation $`f_i=eg_i/m^{k_i}`$, where $`e`$ is the elementary charge related to the fine structure constant by $`e^2=4\pi \alpha `$. The exponent $`k_i`$ of the nucleon mass is determined by the requirement that the couplings $`g_i`$ are dimensionless. The values of $`g_i`$ are obtained using the real photonic decay width of the resonances.

## 3 Discussion of the results

We first compare the contributions of the various terms in the matrix elements (2) and (5) to the dilepton invariant mass spectrum. For this purpose we have set the dimensionless couplings $`g_i`$ to unity and calculated the contributions of the individual terms and the interference terms to the differential Dalitz decay width. We carried out these calculations for spin$``$5/2 resonances and chose a resonance mass of 1.5 GeV. The resulting plots are shown in Fig. 1

We notice that the contribution of terms containing $`g_2`$ in the spin-1/2 case and terms containing $`g_3`$ in the spin$``$3/2 case is free from singularities at $`M^2=0`$. The real photonic width of the resonance $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{RN\gamma }(M=0)`$ obtained from these terms is zero in accordance with Eq. (8), consequently, the real photonic decay width cannot be used to fix the coupling constants of these terms. The Dalitz decay width calculated from these terms is significantly smaller than the other contributions throughout the spectrum (with the exception of the 1/2$``$ case at large dilepton masses), therefore they would need a much larger coupling constant to give a comparable contribution. There seems to be no natural explanation for such a huge difference of the coupling constants. In the following we discard the terms discussed above and make the assumption that in the spin-1/2 case only the $`g_1`$ term and in the spin$``$3/2 case only the $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$ terms contribute to the Dalitz decay width.

In Fig. 2 the differential Dalitz decay width of hypothetical resonances with Breit-Wigner mass $`m_{}^{BW}`$ = 1.5 GeV, full width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{tot}`$ = 0.12 GeV and a photonic branching ratio of 5% is shown for various spin-parities (spin$``$3/2). The two linestyles refer to the results obtained assuming that only the $`g_1`$ or $`g_2`$ term contributes ($`g_20`$ or $`g_10`$). We also show the results for resonances with considerably larger and smaller mass, specifically, $`m_{}=m_{}^{BW}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{tot}`$ and $`m_{}=m_{}^{BW}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{tot}`$. The real photonic width was used to fix the coupling constants in the $`m_{}=m_{}^{BW}`$ case and the same coupling constants have been used in the $`m_{}=m_{}^{BW}\pm \mathrm{\Gamma }_{tot}`$ cases.

For $`m_{}=m_{}^{BW}`$ the $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$ curves nearly coincide showing that these contributions are practically indistinguishable in the dilepton invariant mass spectrum if the mass of the decaying resonance is close to the Breit-Wigner mass. However, in the spin-parity 3/2+ and 5/2$``$ cases the difference between the $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$ contributions is sizable if the resonance mass is well above the Breit-Wigner mass. Since in transport models masses of resonances are usually not far from the Breit-Wigner mass, transition from one of the $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$ terms to the other or to a linear combination will not have a substantial effect on the predictions for the dilepton invariant mass spectrum. In the following we make the assumption that only the $`g_1`$ term contributes to the Dalitz decay width of baryon resonances. The explicite expressions for the polarization averaged squared transition matrix elements calculated from the $`g_1`$ terms are given in Appendix B.

To demonstrate the significance of spin and parity we show in Fig. 3 the differential Dalitz decay width of hypothetical resonances with mass $`m_{}`$ = 1.5 GeV, photonic decay width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{RN\gamma }`$ = 0.006 GeV and with various spin-parities. The invariant mass spectra show large differences in the large dilepton mass range. The largest contribution comes from spin-parity 1/2+ and 3/2$``$ resonances.

The differential Dalitz decay width of real baryon resonances is shown in Fig. 4. We included all spin$``$5/2 nucleon and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonances below 2 GeV listed in the Review of Particle Physics  with at least \*** status. We assumed that $`g_2=g_3=0`$ and fitted the $`g_1`$ coupling constants to the $`R^+p\gamma `$ decay width, the numerical values of which we obtained using the Breit-Wigner full width and the $`p\gamma `$ branching ratio of the resonances given in . For the branching ratio, which is poorly known in many cases, we used the average of the lower and upper bounds. In the case of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonances, where the $`p\gamma `$ and $`n\gamma `$ branching ratios are not listed separately, we used the $`N\gamma `$ partial width to fix the coupling constants. Note that the $`p\gamma `$ and$`n\gamma `$ branching ratios may differ significantly.

In Table 1 we give the resulting coupling constants together with the values of the full width and the photonic branching ratio used in the fit. In the case of nucleon resonances we also give the $`n\gamma `$ couplings.

## 4 Conclusion

In this paper we studied the Dalitz decay of baryon resonances. We have given expressions for the differential Dalitz decay width of resonances with spin$``$5/2. The number of independent terms in the electromagnetic transition matrix element is 2 in the spin-1/2 case and 3 in the spin$``$3/2 case. One of these terms does not contribute to the real photonic decay of the resonances, which is used to fix the coupling constants. We have shown that the remaining two matrix elements in the spin$``$3/2 case provide very similar contributions to the dilepton invariant mass spectrum. On the other hand, expressions for different spin-parities give very different dilepton spectra in the large dilepton mass region. Our results can be used in models of dielectron production in elementary hadronic reactions or heavy ion collisions.

## Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Fund for Scientific Research of Hungary, grant Nos. OTKA T30171, T30855 and T32038.

## Appendix A

We give here the spin projectors needed to calculate the square of the transition matrix elements. Throughout the paper we use the conventions of  for relativistic quantities and Dirac matrices and spinors. Specifically, we use the normalization $`\overline{u}(p,s)u(p,s)=2m`$ for Dirac spinors ($`p^2=m^2`$), therefore

$$\underset{s}{}u(p,s)\overline{u}(p,s)=p/+m.$$
(12)
The spin-3/2 projector:

$$\underset{s}{}u^\mu (p,s)\overline{u}^\nu (p,s)=(p/+m)[g^{\mu \nu }\frac{\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu }{3}\frac{2}{3}\frac{p^\mu p^\nu }{m^2}+\frac{p^\mu \gamma ^\nu p^\nu \gamma ^\mu }{3m}].$$
(13)
The spin-5/2 projector:

$`{\displaystyle \underset{s}{}}u^{\mu \nu }(p,s)\overline{u}^{\rho \sigma }(p,s)=(p/+m)`$ (14)
$`\times [{\displaystyle \frac{3}{10}}(G^{\mu \rho }G^{\nu \sigma }+G^{\mu \sigma }G^{\nu \rho }){\displaystyle \frac{1}{5}}G^{\mu \nu }G^{\rho \sigma }`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{10}}(T^{\mu \rho }G^{\nu \sigma }+T^{\nu \sigma }G^{\mu \rho }+T^{\mu \sigma }G^{\nu \rho }+T^{\nu \rho }G^{\mu \sigma })],`$
with

$$G^{\mu \nu }=g^{\mu \nu }+\frac{p^\mu p^\nu }{m^2},$$
(15)
and

$$T^{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}(\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu \gamma ^\nu \gamma ^\mu )+\frac{p^\mu (p/\gamma ^\nu \gamma ^\nu p/)}{2m^2}\frac{p^\nu (p/\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\mu p/)}{2m^2}.$$
(16)
## Appendix B

In Eq. (9) the squared transition matrix element averaged over initial and summed over final polarization states can be written as

$$\frac{1}{n_{pol,R}}\underset{pol}{}|N\gamma |T|R|^2=\left(g^{\mu \nu }+\frac{q^\mu q^\nu }{q^2}\right)_{\mu \nu },$$
(17)
where the notation

$$_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{n_{pol,R}}\underset{pol_{N,R}}{}N|J_\mu |RR|J_\nu |N$$
(18)
was used. Following  we introduce the notations

$`L_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`(p_{}q)q_\mu q^2p_\mu ,`$
$`L_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L_\mu L_\nu }{L^2}},`$
$`T_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`g_{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{q^\mu q^\nu }{q^2}}L_{\mu \nu }.`$ (19)
$`_{\mu \nu }`$ can be decomposed in terms of transverse and longitudinal parts, $`_T`$ and $`_L`$, in the form

$$_{\mu \nu }=_TT_{\mu \nu }_LL_{\mu \nu }.$$
(20)
In terms of $`_T`$ and $`_L`$ the polarization averaged squared transition matrix element is expressed as

$$\frac{1}{n_{pol,R}}\underset{pol}{}|N\gamma |T|R|^2=2_T+_L.$$
(21)
Here we give the contributions of the $`g_1^2`$ terms to $`_T`$ and $`_L`$ for the various spin-parity cases:

$`_T^{1/2+}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m^4}}\left(m_{}^2m^2\right)^2\left[(m_{}+m)^2M^2\right],`$ (22)
$`_L^{1/2+}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{M^2}{2m^4}}(m_{}+m)^2\left[(m_{}+m)^2M^2\right],`$ (23)
$`_T^{1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m^4}}\left(m_{}^2m^2\right)^2\left[(m_{}m)^2M^2\right],`$ (24)
$`_L^{1/2}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{M^2}{2m^4}}(m_{}m)^2\left[(m_{}m)^2M^2\right],`$ (25)
$`_T^{3/2+}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12m_{}^2m^2}}\left[(m_{}m)^2M^2\right]`$ (26)
$`\times (3m_{}^4+6m_{}^3m+4m_{}^2m^2+2m_{}m^3+m^4`$
$`2m_{}mM^22m^2M^2+M^4),`$
$`_L^{3/2+}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{M^2}{3m^2}}\left[(m_{}m)^2M^2\right],`$ (27)
$`_T^{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12m_{}^2m^2}}\left[(m_{}+m)^2M^2\right]`$ (28)
$`\times (3m_{}^46m_{}^3m+4m_{}^2m^22m_{}m^3+m^4`$
$`+2m_{}mM^22m^2M^2+M^4),`$
$`_L^{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{M^2}{3m^2}}\left[(m_{}+m)^2M^2\right],`$ (29)
$`_T^{5/2+}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{480m_{}^4m^4}}\left[(m_{}m)^2M^2\right]\left[(m_{}+m)^2M^2\right]^2`$ (30)
$`\times (2m_{}^44m_{}^3m+3m_{}^2m^22m_{}m^3+m^4`$
$`+2m_{}mM^22m^2M^2+M^4),`$
$`_L^{5/2+}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{M^2}{120m_{}^2m^4}}\left[(m_{}m)^2M^2\right]\left[(m_{}+m)^2M^2\right]^2,`$ (31)
$`_T^{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{480m_{}^4m^4}}\left[(m_{}m)^2M^2\right]^2\left[(m_{}+m)^2M^2\right]`$ (32)
$`\times (2m_{}^4+4m_{}^3m+3m_{}^2m^2+2m_{}m^3+m^4`$
$`2m_{}mM^22m^2M^2+M^4),`$
$`_L^{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi \alpha g_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{M^2}{120m_{}^2m^4}}\left[(m_{}m)^2M^2\right]^2\left[(m_{}+m)^2M^2\right].`$ (33)


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

CALT-68-2373, CITUSC/02-006 hep-th/0202157

Penrose Limit of $`𝒩=1`$ Gauge Theories

Jaume Gomis and Hirosi Ooguri

California Institute of Technology 452-48, Pasadena, CA 91125

We find a Penrose limit of $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ which gives the pp-wave geometry identical to the one that appears in the Penrose limit of $`AdS_5\times S^5`$. This leads us to conjecture that there is a subsector of the corresponding $`𝒩=1`$ gauge theory which has enhanced $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry. We identify operators in the $`𝒩=1`$ gauge theory with stringy excitations in the pp-wave geometry and discuss how the gauge theory operators fall into $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry multiplets. We find similar enhancement of symmetry in some other models, but there are also examples in which there is no supersymmetry enhancement in the Penrose limit.

1. Introduction

The AdS/CFT correspondence \[1,,2,,3\] relates a conformal field theory in $`(p+1)`$-dimensions to string theory in $`AdS_{p+2}\times X`$, where $`X`$ is a compact Einstein space. In the last few years, we have learned much about nonperturbative aspects of string theory and conformal field theories using this correspondence . One of the major obstructions in making further progress in this direction has been our lack of understanding of the worldsheet dynamics describing string theory in $`AdS`$ and related backgrounds. Understanding this problem is essential, for example, to finding quantitative results from string theory for the large $`N`$ limit of gauge theories with finite ’t Hooft coupling. Although much progress has been made for string theory in $`AdS_3`$ with an NS-NS background , worldsheet dynamics in higher dimensional $`AdS`$ spaces and/or with R-R field strengths remains a mystery. Thus far, most of the results obtained from string theory in $`AdS`$ have relied on the supergravity approximation.

Recently, it was shown in  that the worldsheet theory of the Type IIB string on the maximally supersymmetric pp-wave geometry :

$$ds^2=4dx^+dx^{}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{8}{}}\left(dr^idr^ir^ir^idx^+dx^+\right),$$

with constant R-R 5-form flux,

$$F_{+1234}=F_{+5678}=\text{const},$$

is exactly soluble in the light-cone Green-Schwarz formalism \[8,,9\]. Moreover, in a recent interesting paper , it was pointed out that Type IIB string theory on this pp-wave background is dual to the large $`N`$ limit of a certain subsector of four dimensional $`𝒩=4`$ $`SU(N)`$ supersymmetric gauge theory. The subsector is characterized by choosing a $`U(1)_R`$ subgroup of the $`SU(4)_R`$ R-symmetry of the gauge theory and by considering states with conformal weight $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`U(1)_R`$ charge $`R`$ which scale as $`\mathrm{\Delta },R\sqrt{N}`$ and whose difference $`(\mathrm{\Delta }R)`$ is finite in the large $`N`$ limit. The claim is that, in the $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit with the string coupling $`g_s=g_{YM}^2`$ finite, the subspace of the gauge theory Hilbert space and the operator algebra preserving these conditions are described by string theory in the pp-wave geometry. This duality was derived in  by starting with the familiar correspondence between $`𝒩=4`$ $`SU(N)`$ supersymmetric gauge theory and Type IIB string theory in $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ and considering a scaling limit of the geometry near a null geodesic in $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ carrying large angular momentum with respect to the $`U(1)_R`$ isometry of $`S^5`$. This corresponds to truncating to the appropriate subsector of the gauge theory in the scaling limit. The string theory background that one obtains in the scaling limit is the pp-wave geometry with a constant R-R flux which can then be quantized in the light-cone gauge . The scaling limit is a special example of the Penrose limit which transforms any solution of supergravity to a plane wave geometry \[11,,12,,13,,14\].

In , it was shown that operators in the appropriate subsector of $`𝒩=4`$ $`SU(N)`$ gauge theory can be identified with $`\mathrm{𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑦}`$ oscillators in the pp-wave background. This matching makes quantitative predictions about the spectrum of the gauge theory beyond the supergravity approximation, and some of them were checked in  using gauge theory computation of planar Feynman diagrams.

In this paper we consider a similar duality that exists between a certain four-dimensional $`𝒩=1`$ gauge theory and Type IIB string theory in a pp-wave background. We derive this duality by taking a scaling limit of the duality  between Type IIB string theory on $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ and the four-dimensional superconformal field theory which consists of an $`𝒩=1`$ $`SU(N)\times SU(N)`$ super Yang-Mills multiplet with a pair of bifundamental chiral multiplets $`A_i`$ and $`B_i`$ transforming in the $`(N,\overline{N})`$ and $`(\overline{N},N)`$ representation of the gauge group. The gauge theory is flown to the IR fixed point and deformed by an $`SU(2)_1\times SU(2)_2`$ invariant superpotential

$$W=\frac{\lambda }{2}ϵ^{ij}ϵ^{i^{}j^{}}\mathrm{Tr}A_iB_i^{}A_jB_j^{},$$

which is exactly marginal at the fixed point. This gives the theory of  that lives1 The details of the gauge theory will appear in section $`3`$. on $`N`$ D3-branes sitting at the conifold singularity of a Calabi-Yau three-fold. The scaling limit is obtained by considering the geometry near a null geodesic carrying large angular momentum in the $`U(1)_R`$ isometry of the $`T^{1,1}`$ space which is dual to the $`U(1)_R`$ R-symmetry in the $`𝒩=1`$ superconformal field theory.

The scaling limit around this null geodesic in $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ results in a pp-wave geometry. We identify the light-cone Hamiltonian, longitudinal momentum and angular momentum of string theory in the pp-wave geometry with linear combinations of the conformal weight $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`U(1)_R`$ charge $`R`$ and $`U(1)_1\times U(1)_2`$ global charges $`Q_1`$ and $`Q_2`$ of operators in the dual $`𝒩=1`$ gauge theory. The appropriate scaling limit requires truncating the gauge theory Hilbert space to those operators whose conformal weight $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, R-charge $`R`$ and global charges $`Q_1`$ and $`Q_2`$ scaling like

$$\mathrm{\Delta },R,Q_1,Q_2\sqrt{N},$$

with

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R,Q_1\frac{1}{2}R,\mathrm{and}Q_2\frac{1}{2}R:\mathrm{finite},$$

in the large $`N`$ limit.

Remarkably, the pp-wave geometry that one obtains in the scaling limit can be transformed into the maximally supersymmetric background of (1.1) and (1.1) after a suitable change of coordinates. Therefore, in this limit supersymmetry is enhanced. This implies that the subsector of the Hilbert space of the $`𝒩=1`$ gauge theory of  obeying the conditions (1.1) and (1.1) has a hidden $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry. We believe that this is a very interesting prediction of our duality that deserves further study.

We find that the change of coordinates induces twisting of the light-cone Hamiltonian of the string theory by

$$p^{}=p_{S^5}^{}+J_1+J_2,$$

where $`p_{S^5}^{}`$ is the Hamiltonian of the maximally supersymmetric wave found in  and $`J_1`$, $`J_2`$ correspond to rotation charges under an $`𝐑^2\times 𝐑^2`$ subspace of the transverse space of the pp-wave geometry. From the gauge theory point of view, the light-cone Hamiltonian $`p^{}`$ before the twisting is $`\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R`$ and the rotational charges are given by $`J_a=Q_a\frac{1}{2}R`$ ($`a=1,2`$). Note that they remain finite in the limit (1.1). After the twisting, the light-cone Hamiltonian is identified with $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝒩=4}R_{𝒩=4}`$, in terms of the conformal weight and the R charge for the $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry algebra. Thus we find the following relation

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Delta }_{𝒩=4}R_{𝒩=4}& =\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}RJ_1J_2\hfill \\ & =\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{1}{2}RQ_1Q_2.\hfill \end{array}$$

The spectrum of stringy excitations in the $`𝒩=4`$ theory studied in  can then be turned into that of the $`𝒩=1`$ theory by this twisting. The twisted string spectrum is highly degenerate, and we show that it matches with gauge theory expectations.

The Penrose limit focuses on geometry near a null geodesic. When we have a gauge theory whose supersymmetry is reduced by placing branes on a curved space, the Penrose limit may flatten out the space and restore supersymmetry. We have found other examples where similar enhancement of symmetry takes place. Those include the $`𝒩=1`$ pure super Yang-Mills theory (with Kaluza-Klein tower of fields) studied in  and gauge theories realized on branes on a $`C^3/Z_3`$ orbifold singularity. The limit of the former is a variation of the Nappi-Witten geometry  with 16 supercharges, and that of the latter is the maximally supersymmetric pp-wave. On the other hand, there are cases in which such enhancement does not happen, such as gauge theories on branes at a $`C^2/Z_2`$ orbifold singularity.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we consider the scaling limit around a null geodesic in $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ and show that one obtains a pp-wave background. We identify the subsector of the Hilbert space of the dual superconformal field theory that is dual to string theory in the pp-wave geometry. We show that there is a coordinate transformation which brings the pp-wave background to the one which has maximal supersymmetry (1.1). The Hamiltonian of the pp-wave is then obtained by twisting the Hamiltonian of the Type IIB string in that background by angular momentum charges $`J_1`$ and $`J_2`$ that the strings carry in the maximally supersymmetric pp-wave background. In section $`3`$, we describe ingredients of the $`𝒩=1`$ theory of  that are required to compare the gauge theory and the string theory. Precise matching is obtained by identifying in a specific way string theory excitations with gauge theory operators. In section 4, we discuss other examples in which similar enhancement of symmetry takes place and show an example where symmetry enhancement does not occur. We conclude with a discussion. In the appendix we explicitly solve for the worldsheet theory of the pp-wave background that we obtain in the limit. Explicit diagonalization of the Hamiltonian shows that it is related to that of the maximally supersymmetric wave by twisting.

Note added:

After posting this paper on the e-Print arXiv, we have received \[18,,19\], where the Penrose limit of $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ is studied and the supersymmetry enhancement is also noted. We also received , where the Penrose limit of backgrounds with NS-NS 3 form field and its relation to a generalization of the Nappi-Witten model are also discussed.

2. Penrose limit of $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$

We start by considering the supergravity solution dual to the $`𝒩=1`$ superconformal field theory of  that we describe in the next section. The background of interest is $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$, where $`T^{1,1}=(SU(2)\times SU(2))/U(1)`$, with the $`U(1)`$ diagonally embedded in the two $`SU(2)`$’s. The Einstein metric on $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ is given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ds_{Ads}^2& =L^2\left(dt^2\text{cosh}^2\rho +d\rho ^2+\text{sinh}^2\rho d\mathrm{\Omega }_3\right)\hfill \\ \hfill ds_{T^{1,1}}^2& =L^2(\frac{1}{9}(d\psi +\text{cos}\theta _1d\varphi _1+\text{cos}\theta _2d\varphi _2)^2\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{6}(d\theta _1^2+\text{sin}^2\theta _1d\varphi _1^2+d\theta _2^2+\text{sin}^2\theta _2d\varphi _2^2)),\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`d\mathrm{\Omega }_3`$ is the volume form of a unit $`S^3`$ and the curvature radius $`L`$ of $`AdS_5`$ is given by $`L^4=4\pi g_sN\alpha _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}27/16`$. Topologically, $`T^{1,1}`$ is a $`U(1)`$ bundle over $`𝐒^2\times 𝐒^2`$. The base is parametrized by coordinates $`(\theta _1,\varphi _1)`$ and $`(\theta _2,\varphi _2)`$ respectively and the Hopf fiber coordinate $`\psi `$ has period $`4\pi `$. The $`SU(2)_1\times SU(2)_2\times U(1)_R`$ isometry group of $`T^{1,1}`$ is identified with the $`SU(2)_1\times SU(2)_2`$ global symmetry and $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry of the dual superconformal field theory of . In addition, the solution has a constant dilaton and a R-R five-form flux

$$F=L^4(\text{vol}_{AdS}+\text{vol}_{T^{1,1}}),$$

where $`\text{vol}_{AdS},\text{vol}_{T^{1,1}}`$ are the volume forms of $`AdS_5`$ and $`T^{1,1}`$.

We now perform a scaling limit around a null geodesic in $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ which rotates along the $`\psi `$ coordinate of $`T^{1,1}`$, whose shift symmetry corresponds to the $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry of the dual superconformal field theory2 Shifts along the angles $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ generate an $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ subgroup of the $`SU(2)_1\times SU(2)_2`$ isometries and correspond in the gauge theory side to the abelian charges $`Q_1`$ and $`Q_2`$, which are the Cartan generators of the $`SU(2)_1\times SU(2)_2`$ global symmetry group of the gauge theory.. We introduce coordinates which label the geodesic

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill x^+& =\frac{1}{2}\left(t+\frac{1}{3}(\psi +\varphi _1+\varphi _2)\right)\hfill \\ \hfill x^{}& =\frac{L^2}{2}\left(t\frac{1}{3}(\psi +\varphi _1+\varphi _2)\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

and consider a scaling limit around $`\rho =\theta _1=\theta _2=0`$ in the geometry (2.1). We take $`L\mathrm{}`$ while rescaling the coordinates

$$\rho =\frac{r}{L}\theta _1=\frac{\sqrt{6}}{L}\xi _1\theta _2=\frac{\sqrt{6}}{L}\xi _2.$$

The metric one obtains in the limit is

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ds^2=& 4dx^+dx^{}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}\left(dr^idr^ir^ir^idx^+dx^+\right)\hfill \\ & +\underset{a=1,2}{}\left(d\xi _a^2+\xi _a^2d\varphi _a^22\xi _a^2d\varphi _adx^+\right)\hfill \\ \hfill =& 4dx^+dx^{}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}\left(dr^idr^ir^ir^idx^+dx^+\right)\hfill \\ & +\underset{a=1,2}{}\left[dz_ad\overline{z}_a+i(\overline{z}_adz_az_ad\overline{z}_a)dx^+\right].\hfill \end{array}$$

In the last line, we introduced complex Cartesian coordinates $`z_a`$ in lieu of $`(\xi _a,\varphi _a)`$. The metric has a covariantly constant null Killing vector $`/x^{}`$ so that it is a pp-wave metric. The pp-wave has a natural decomposition of the $`𝐑^8`$ transverse space into $`𝐑^4\times 𝐑^2\times 𝐑^2`$, where $`𝐑^4`$ is parametrized by $`r^i`$ and $`𝐑^2\times 𝐑^2`$ by $`z_a`$. The geometry is supported by a null, covariantly constant flux of the R-R field,

$$F_{+1234}=F_{+5678}=\text{const}.$$

The obvious symmetries of this background are the $`SO(4)`$ rotations in $`𝐑^4`$ and a $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ symmetry3 In fact, the metric and the flux is invariant under a larger symmetry as we shall see below. rotating $`𝐑^2\times 𝐑^2`$. In the gauge theory side, the $`SO(4)`$ symmetry corresponds to the subgroup of the $`SO(2,4)`$ conformal symmetry ($`i.e.`$ the rotations of $`S^3`$ in the field theory space $`𝐑\times S^3`$) and the $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ rotation charges $`J_1`$ and $`J_2`$ with the $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ symmetry $`Q_1\frac{1}{2}R`$ and $`Q_2\frac{1}{2}R`$ respectively, where $`R`$ is the $`U(1)_R`$ charge of the gauge theory and $`Q_1`$, $`Q_2`$ are the Cartan generators of the $`SU(2)_1\times SU(2)_2`$ global symmetry of the dual superconformal field theory.

In order to compare string theory in the pp-wave geometry (2.1) with the appropriate subsector of the dual field theory determined by the limit, (2.1) and (2.1), we need to establish the correspondence between conserved charges in string theory and in gauge theory. In string theory, the light-cone momenta can be identified with combinations of the conformal weight $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and the $`U(1)_R`$ charge $`R`$ of the dual superconformal field theory by noting that4 The factor of two in the normalization of $`R`$ is due to the $`4\pi `$ periodicity of the $`\psi `$ coordinate.

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 2p^{}& =i_{x^+}=i(_t+3_\psi )=\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R\hfill \\ \hfill 2p^+& =\frac{i}{L^2}_x^{}=\frac{i}{L^2}(_t3_\psi )=\frac{1}{L^2}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }+\frac{3}{2}R\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

The $`J_1`$ and $`J_2`$ rotation charges of the string can be identified with

$$J_a=i\frac{}{\varphi _a}_{|x^\pm }=i\frac{}{\varphi _a}_{|t,\psi }+i\frac{}{\psi }_{|t,\varphi _i}=Q_a\frac{1}{2}Ra=1,2$$

such that the states of the dual gauge theory are also labeled by these global symmetry charges.

Therefore, it follows from the identification (2.1) and the $`L\mathrm{}`$ limit, (2.1) and (2.1), that string theory in the pp-wave background (2.1) with finite $`p^{},p^+`$ and $`J_i`$ is dual to the $`𝒩=1`$ gauge theory of  in a subsector of the Hilbert space where $`\mathrm{\Delta },R,Q_aL^2\sqrt{N}`$ with finite $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$ and $`Q_a\frac{1}{2}R`$ in the large $`N`$ limit. In particular the duality with string theory predicts that there is a set of non-chiral primary operators, which satisfy $`\mathrm{\Delta }>\frac{3}{2}R`$, whose dimension and R-charge grow without bound but such that the deviation from the BPS bound is finite in the large $`N`$ limit. In the next section we will make a proposal for which operators of the gauge theory obey this peculiar scaling behavior.

Remarkably, the pp-wave geometry (2.1) that we have obtained in the scaling limit reduces to the maximally supersymmetric pp-wave solution (1.1) after performing a coordinate dependent $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ rotation in the $`𝐑^2\times 𝐑^2`$ plane as

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill z_a& =e^{ix^+}w_a\hfill \\ \hfill \overline{z}_a& =e^{ix^+}\overline{w}_a.\hfill \end{array}$$

This means that the symmetry and supersymmetry of the original $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ background is maximally enhanced in the Penrose limit, (2.1) and (2.1). We interpret this as saying that the corresponding subsector of the dual $`𝒩=1`$ superconformal field theory has hidden $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry.

The coordinate transformation (2.1) mapping the solution (2.1) to the maximally supersymmetric solution (1.1) allows us to write down the string Hamiltonian $`p^{}`$ in (2.1) in terms of the Hamiltonian $`p_{S^5}^{}`$ of the maximally symmetric solution already computed in . Using the coordinate transformation (2.1) and the relation (2.1) between the isometry and the gauge theory charges, we find that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R& =2p^{}\hfill \\ & =i\frac{}{x^+}_{|z_a}\hfill \\ & =i\frac{}{x^+}_{|w_a}+\underset{a}{}\left(w_a\frac{}{w_a}\overline{w}_a\frac{}{\overline{w}_a}\right)\hfill \\ & =2p_{S^5}^{}+J_1+J_2,\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`J_1`$ and $`J_2`$ are the U(1) rotation charges around an $`𝐑^2\times 𝐑^2`$ subspace of the maximally supersymmetric pp-wave $`𝐑^8`$ transverse space5 The $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ rotation charges when changing from $`z`$ to $`w`$ coordinates remain identical., and

$$2p_{S^5}^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝒩=4}R_{𝒩=4}.$$

We now briefly recall the string spectrum $`p_{S^5}^{}`$ found in . The spectrum consists of a set of eight bosonic harmonic oscillators $`a_n^i`$ and eight fermionic harmonic oscillators $`S_n^\alpha `$ with $`i,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{}8`$. The increase in light-cone energy due to one oscillator is given by

$$2\delta p_{S^5}^{}=\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2},$$

so that in particular the zero modes $`a_0^i`$ and $`S_0^a`$ increase $`p_{S^5}^{}`$ by one. To obtain the spectrum of $`p^{}`$ we use the twisting formula (2.1). In order to find the spectrum we need to know the charges of $`a_n^i`$ and $`S_n^\alpha `$ under the $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ subgroup of the $`SO(8)`$ rotation group.

The charges of the bosonic oscillators follow from decomposing the bosonic oscillators, which transform under the $`\mathrm{𝟖}_v`$ representation of the $`SO(8)`$ rotation group under $`SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)\times U(1)`$, such that the $`𝐑^8`$ space on which $`SO(8)`$ acts splits as $`𝐑^4\times 𝐑^2\times 𝐑^2`$, and $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ rotates $`𝐑^2\times 𝐑^2`$. We organize the oscillators as

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill a_n^i& J_1=J_2=0i=1,2,3,4\hfill \\ \hfill w_n^1& J_1=1,J_2=0\hfill \\ \hfill \overline{w}_n^1& J_1=1,J_2=0\hfill \\ \hfill w_n^2& J_1=0,J_2=1\hfill \\ \hfill \overline{w}_n^2& J_1=0,J_2=1.\hfill \end{array}$$

Therefore, the contribution to $`p^{}`$ of each of the bosonic oscillators is

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill a_n^i& 2\delta p^{}=\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}\hfill \\ \hfill w_n^1& 2\delta p^{}=\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}+1\hfill \\ \hfill \overline{w}_n^1& 2\delta p^{}=\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}1\hfill \\ \hfill w_n^2& 2\delta p^{}=\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}+1\hfill \\ \hfill \overline{w}_n^2& 2\delta p^{}=\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}1.\hfill \end{array}$$

The fermionic oscillator contribution to $`p^{}`$ follows by looking at the $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ charges carried by the $`SO(8)`$ spinor $`\mathrm{𝟖}_s`$ under $`SU(2)\times SU(2)\times U(1)\times U(1)`$. The oscillators split as

$$\mathrm{𝟖}_s(\mathrm{𝟐},\mathrm{𝟏})_{(1/2,1/2)}(\mathrm{𝟐},\mathrm{𝟏})_{(1/2,1/2)}(\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟐})_{(1/2,1/2)}(\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟐})_{(1/2,1/2)},$$

where the charges in the subscript correspond to $`(J_1,J_2)`$ charges. Therefore, their contribution to the light-cone Hamiltonian (2.1) is

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill S_n^{\alpha ++}& 2\delta p^{}=\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}+1\hfill \\ \hfill S_n^\alpha & 2\delta p^{}=\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}1\hfill \\ \hfill S_n^{\dot{\alpha }+}& 2\delta p^{}=\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}\hfill \\ \hfill S_n^{\dot{\alpha }+}& 2\delta p^{}=\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Thus we see that the spectrum of bosonic oscillators and fermionic oscillators are identical.

We note that the light-cone energy is not increased by the action of the bosonic zero mode oscillators $`\overline{w}_0^1`$ and $`\overline{w}_0^2`$ nor by the action of their supersymmetric fermionic zero mode partners $`S_0^\alpha `$. Therefore, the system has an infinitely degenerate spectrum labeled by the number of times the vacuum state is acted on by the zero modes. In the original coordinates of the pp-wave in (2.1), the degeneracy of the spectrum can be easily understood by considering the zero-mode sector ($`i.e.`$, the point particle limit) of string theory. In the zero mode sector, the Hamiltonian contains, on top of four free harmonic oscillators, two decoupled Landau Hamiltonians describing an electron in a magnetic field in the planes $`z_1`$ and $`z_2`$. The degeneracy in these coordinates corresponds to the well known Landau level degeneracy of states of the electron where the degeneracy is labeled by the angular momentum of the electron. In the appendix, we extend this to stringy excitations, quantizing the bosonic string Hamiltonian in these coordinates. We show that indeed the spectrum is twisted by $`(J_1+J_2)`$ as in (2.1) with respect to the maximally supersymmetric case of .

In the next section we give a precise prescription of how to realize the infinite degeneracy of states in string theory, which corresponds in the dual superconformal field theory to having an infinite degeneracy of operators with a given conformal dimension, and identify the operators dual to the insertion of the string theory oscillators.

3. Gauge theory spectrum

Type IIB superstring theory in $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ is dual to the $`𝒩=1`$ gauge theory with gauge group $`SU(N)\times SU(N)`$ with two chiral multiplets $`A_i`$ ($`i=1,2`$) transforming in the $`(N,\overline{N})`$ representation of the gauge group and two chiral multiplets $`B_i^{}`$ ($`i^{}=1,2`$) in the $`(\overline{N},N)`$ representation. The theory is flown to the IR fixed point. We then turn on the superpotential (1.1) involving the chiral superfields $`A_i`$ and $`B_i^{}`$. At the fixed point, these chiral superfields have conformal weight $`3/4`$ and R-charge $`1/2`$. They transform as $`(\mathrm{𝟐},\mathrm{𝟏})`$ and $`(\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟐})`$ under the $`SU(2)_1\times SU(2)_2`$ global symmetry.

Now we are ready to compare states in the string theory with operators in the gauge theory. We will mainly focus only on the bosonic excitations of the theory, denoted by $`w_n^a`$ and $`\overline{w}_n^a`$ in (2.1). Let us begin with the zero mode sector of string theory, which is generated by $`\overline{w}_0^1`$ and $`\overline{w}_0^2`$. Since we are dealing with the zero mode of the string, they are supergravity modes in $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$. The correspondence between supergravity modes and gauge theory operators has been discussed extensively in \[21,,22\]. It is useful to rephrase it in the stringy terminology of the last section. We will find some special feature of the supergravity spectrum in the Penrose limit. Since the light-cone Hamiltonian $`2p^{}`$ is equal to $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$, the lowest energy states of the string theory are chiral primary states. The basic ones are of the form $`\mathrm{Tr}(AB)^R`$. Among them, we can identity the ground state $`|0`$ of the $`\overline{w}_0^a`$ oscillators with the gauge theory operator,

$$|0\mathrm{Tr}\left[(A_1B_1)^R\right].$$

Here and in the following, we ignore normalization factors in gauge theory operators which may depend on $`N`$ and $`R`$. We have chosen $`A_i`$ and $`B_i^{}`$ so that $`A_1`$ and $`A_2`$ carries $`Q_1`$ charge $`+\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`B_1`$ and $`B_2`$ carries $`Q_2`$ charge $`+\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}`$ respectively. Their $`(J_1,J_2)`$ charges defined by $`J_a=Q_a\frac{1}{2}R`$ are therefore $`(\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{4})`$ and $`(\frac{3}{4},\frac{1}{4})`$ for $`A_1`$ and $`A_2`$, and $`(\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{4})`$ and $`(\frac{1}{4},\frac{3}{4})`$ for $`B_1`$ and $`B_2`$. Thus the operator $`\mathrm{Tr}\left[(A_1B_1)^R\right]`$ in (3.1) carries $`J_1=J_2=0`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R=\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝒩=4}R_{𝒩=4}=0`$. Namely it saturates the BPS bounds for both $`𝒩=1`$ and $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry algebras.

The operators $`\overline{w}_0^a`$ then act on it as

$$\overline{w}_0^1:A_1A_2,\overline{w}_0^2:B_1B_2.$$

In order for these to map the chiral primary state (3.1) into another chiral primary state, their action has to be symmetrized along all $`A_1`$’s and $`B_1`$’s in the trace . Since the $`\overline{w}_0^a`$ oscillators are absent in the worldsheet Hamiltonian, their action does not increase $`2p^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R`$. This is consistent with the fact that the action of the $`\overline{w}_0^a`$’s in the gauge theory gives rise to chiral primary states saturating the BPS bound of the $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetry. On the other hand, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝒩=4}R_{𝒩=4}=\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}RJ_1J_2`$ is increased by $`1`$ every time we act with $`\overline{w}_0`$ since $`J_1+J_2=0`$ for $`A_1`$ and $`B_1`$ while it is $`1`$ for $`A_2`$ and $`B_2`$. Note that $`(J_1+J_2)`$ is not positive for any of the operators. Therefore these operators satisfy the BPS bounds for both the $`𝒩=1`$ and the $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry algebras. This gives an important consistency check of our conjecture about the supersymmetry enhancement.

From the way they act on $`A_i`$ and $`B_i^{}`$, it is clear that $`\overline{w}_0^1,\overline{w}_0^2`$ and their conjugates are identified as the raising and lowering operators of the $`SU(2)_1\times SU(2)_2`$ global symmetry of the gauge theory. On the string worldsheet, they act as harmonic oscillators. On the other hand, when acting on the gauge theory operators $`\mathrm{Tr}\left[(A_1B_1)^R\right]`$, they obey the constraints $`(\overline{w}_0^1)^{R+1}=0,(\overline{w}_0^2)^{R+1}=0`$. This does not contradict with the correspondence between string theory and gauge theory. Since $`J_a=Q_a\frac{1}{2}R`$ ($`a=1,2`$) has to remain finite in the limit $`R\mathrm{}`$, only a finite number of $`\overline{w}_0`$’s can act on this operator and these constraints become irrelevant.

The oscillators $`w_0^a`$’s in (2.1) are more interesting. They change $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$ by $`2`$, thus their action does not generate chiral primary states. Nevertheless the resulting states should be in the supergravity sector. Candidates for such states can be found in the list of operators given in , where they are called semi-conserved superfields. Although they are not chiral primaries, their conformal dimensions are protected. The ones we are interested in here take the following form,

$$\mathrm{Tr}\left[\left(Ae^V\overline{A}e^V\right)^{n_1}\left(e^V\overline{B}e^VB\right)^{n_2}(AB)^R\right],$$

where $`V`$ is the vector multiplet for the gauge group $`SU(N)\times SU(N)`$. There is one important subtlety in making the identification. It was pointed out in  that, in order for the corresponding supergravity mode to have a rational conformal dimension, the integers $`n_1`$ and $`n_2`$ must satisfy the Diophantine equation,

$$n_1^2+n_2^24n_1n_2n_1n_2=0.$$

This is true if we are studying states with finite $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`R`$. Since we are studying the scaling limit $`\mathrm{\Delta },R\sqrt{N}\mathrm{}`$, it is worth revisiting its origin. The constraint comes from the fact that the eigenvalue $`E`$ of the Laplacian on $`T^{1,1}`$ for the corresponding supergravity mode takes the form

$$E=6n_1^2+6n_2^2+8n_1n_2+(6R+8)(n_1+n_2)+\frac{3}{2}R\left(\frac{3}{2}R+4\right).$$

One can then show that the conformal weight $`\mathrm{\Delta }=2+\sqrt{4+E}`$ of the mode becomes rational if (3.1) is satisfied. However, this condition is relaxed in the limit $`R\mathrm{}`$. In this limit, the meaningful quantity is $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$, and it is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R=2n_1+2n_2+O\left(\frac{1}{R}\right).$$

The right-hand side of this equation is clearly rational. In fact, they are even integers. Therefore the Diophantine constraint (3.1) is irrelevant in the subsector of the Hilbert space we are looking. Moreover the formula is exactly what we need to identify the action of $`w_0^a`$. Since each of these operators is supposed to increase $`2p^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R`$ by $`2`$ and they carry the $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ quantum numbers $`(1,0)`$ and $`(0,1)`$, the natural identification is

$$w_0^1:\mathrm{insertion}\mathrm{of}A_1e^V\overline{A}_2e^V,w_0^2:\mathrm{insertion}\mathrm{of}e^V\overline{B}_2e^VB_1.$$

Of course the insertion must be symmetrized along the trace so that $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$ is minimized.

As we discussed in the last section, string theory in $`AdS_5\times T^{1,1}`$ acquires enhanced $`𝒩=4`$ superconformal symmetry in the Penrose limit. This means that the spectrum of the gauge theory operators in this subsector must fall into $`𝒩=4`$ multiplets. Since the oscillators $`w_0^a`$ and $`\overline{w}_0^a`$ are part of the $`𝒩=4`$ superconformal generators ($`P^I`$ and $`J^{+I}`$ in the notation of , see also ), we conjecture that the chiral primary fields of the form $`\mathrm{Tr}(AB)^R`$ and the semi-conserved multiplets of the form (3.1) combine to make $`𝒩=4`$ multiplets in the limit.6 The decomposition of $`𝒩=4`$ chiral multiplets into $`𝒩=1`$ multiplets has been discussed in , whose results should be useful in proving this conjecture. There, the R-symmetry acting on $`𝒩=1`$ multiplets is chosen to be the commutant of $`SU(3)`$ in the $`SU(4)`$ R-symmetry of the $`𝒩=4`$ theory. On the other hand, the R-symmetry of the $`𝒩=1`$ theory of  is the commutant of $`SU(2)\times SU(2)`$ in the $`SU(4)`$ R-symmetry of the enhanced $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry.  Note that this can happen only in the limit. For finite $`R`$, the semi-conserved multiplets have to obey the Diophantine constraint (3.1) in order for them to have rational conformal weights.

Now let us turn to the stringy excitations. The string-bit interpretation suggests that a worldsheet operator with non-zero Fourier mode $`n`$ acts on a gauge theory operator just as its $`n=0`$ counter-part, but the action is summed over the trace with a position dependent phase proportional to $`n`$. This point of view was adopted in  to identify operators in in the $`𝒩=4`$ gauge theory corresponding to stringy excitations. We extend their proposal to the $`𝒩=1`$ theory we are studying.

Consider the oscillators $`\overline{w}_n^a`$. When $`n=0`$, it is defined as the replacement $`A_1A_2`$ for $`a=1`$ and $`B_1B_2`$ for $`a=2`$, averaged over the trace. It is then natural to identify

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \overline{w}_n^1|0& \underset{k=0}{\overset{R1}{}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[(A_1B_1)^kA_2B_1(A_1B_1)^{R1k}\right]e^{\frac{2\pi ink}{R}}\hfill \\ \hfill \overline{w}_n^2|0& \underset{k=0}{\overset{R1}{}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[(A_1B_1)^kA_1B_2(A_1B_1)^{R1k}\right]e^{\frac{2\pi ink}{R}}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Of course, the operators on the right-hand side vanish due to the cyclicity of the trace. This corresponds to the string theory fact that the left-hand side does not satisfy the level matching momentum constraint, as explained in . The idea is to use an analogous definition for $`\overline{w}_{n_1}^1\mathrm{}\overline{w}_{n_s}^1\overline{w}_{m_1}^2\mathrm{}\overline{w}_{m_t}^2|0`$ such that $`n_i+m_i^{}=0`$. For example,

$$\overline{w}_n^1\overline{w}_n^2|0\underset{k=0}{\overset{R1}{}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[A_2(B_1A_1)^kB_2(A_1B_1)^{R1k}\right]e^{\frac{2\pi ink}{R}}.$$

Operators of this type are not chiral primaries. As pointed out in , these operators vanish if we use the constraint due to the superpotential (1.1),

$$A_1B_i^{}A_2=A_2B_i^{}A_1,B_1A_iB_2=B_2A_iB_1.$$

Since they are defined against the potential wall, they gain additional conformal weights beyond their naive values, and therefore $`\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R>0`$. The string theory computation in section 3 predicts that the action of $`\overline{w}_n`$ changes $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$ by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \delta \left(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R\right)_n=& \sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}1\hfill \\ \hfill =& \sqrt{1+3\pi g_sn^2\frac{N}{R^2}}1.\hfill \end{array}$$

We are taking the large $`N`$ limit so that $`N/R^2`$ remains finite. When $`g_s>0`$, the right-hand side is indeed strictly positive. One of the interesting features of this formula is that $`\delta (\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)_n`$ vanishes at $`g_s=0`$ even for $`n0`$, giving rise to further degeneracy of the spectrum. In the large $`N`$ limit, the only parameter of the string theory is $`g_s`$ while that of the gauge theory is $`\lambda `$, the coefficient of the superpotential. Since the superpotential must increase the conformal weights of these operators, one explanation of what happens at $`g_s=0`$ is that $`\lambda `$ vanishes in the gauge theory side. To our knowledge, a map between these parameters has not been worked out, and this observation may give us some hint about the correspondence between the gauge theory moduli and the string theory moduli. At $`g_s=0`$, the string theory Hilbert space becomes the Fock space of first quantized strings, whose spectrum is integral. It would be interesting to see whether such a structure emerges in this subsector of the gauge theory at $`\lambda =0`$.

The other set of operators $`w_n^a`$ are similarly interpreted in the gauge theory side. These operators insert $`Ae^V\overline{A}e^V`$ and $`e^V\overline{B}e^VB`$ in the trace and sum over insertion points along the trace with position dependent phases. The string theory computation predicts that the amount of change of $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$ is given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \delta \left(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R\right)_n=& \sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}+1\hfill \\ \hfill =& \sqrt{1+3\pi g_sn^2\frac{N}{R^2}}+1.\hfill \end{array}$$

One can also consider operators corresponding to stringy excitations in the $`r^i`$ directions. In , these are interpreted as taking derivative of operators with respect to spatial coordinates in the gauge theory. In our case, one may be puzzled by the fact that there seem to be two types of derivatives, those acting on $`A`$’s and those acting on $`B`$’s. Clearly only particular combinations of them correspond to stringy excitations of the $`r^i`$ directions. In general, there are many gauge invariant observables one can write down, and only some of them correspond to string states. We expect that the others become infinitely heavy, $`i.e.`$ $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$ becomes infinitely large, in the large $`N`$ limit.

4. Other examples

The Penrose limit focuses on the geometry near a null geodesic. When we have a gauge theory whose supersymmetry is reduced by placing branes on a curved space, the Penrose limit may flatten out the space near the branes and restore supersymmetry. Thus we expect that enhancement of symmetry takes place in a large class of theories which have gravity duals.

Let us consider the supergravity solution found in  which is dual to pure $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory (with Kaluza-Klein tower of fields). We will show that it has a Penrose limit which is identical to that of a collection of five-branes in flat space. Thus, in this case, symmetry is again enhanced in the corresponding subsector of $`𝒩=1`$ super Yang-Mills. To exhibit this we write the metric of NS-NS five-branes in flat space

$$ds^2=ds^2(R^{1,5})+L^2\left(d\rho ^2+\frac{1}{4}(d\psi +\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi )^2+\frac{1}{4}d\theta ^2+\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2\right),$$

where $`L^2=\alpha ^{}N`$. We introduce the following null coordinates

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill x^+& =\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{t}{L}+\frac{1}{2}(\psi +\varphi )\right)\hfill \\ \hfill x^{}& =\frac{L^2}{2}\left(\frac{t}{L}\frac{1}{2}(\psi +\varphi )\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

and consider the limit around $`\rho =\theta =0`$. We take the limit $`L\mathrm{}`$ while rescaling the coordinates

$$\rho =\frac{r}{L}\theta =\frac{2y}{L}.$$

The metric that one obtains in this limit is

$$ds^2=4dx^+dx^{}2y^2d\varphi dx^++ds^2(𝐑^8),$$

which by using the coordinate transformation in (2.1) reduces to the pp-wave metric

$$ds^2=4dx^+dx^{}w\overline{w}dx^+dx^++dwd\overline{w}+ds^2(𝐑^6),$$

where $`w`$ is a complex coordinate on an $`𝐑^2`$ plane in $`𝐑^8`$. Moreover, in the limit (4.1) the dilaton becomes constant and the NS-NS three-form flux $`H_{+12}=\text{const}`$ becomes null. The worldsheet theory describing the coordinates $`(x^+,x^{},w,\overline{w})`$ can be identified with the WZW model based on the non-semi-simple group which is the central extension of the two-dimensional Poincare group, found by Nappi and Witten .

One can also show that the Penrose limit of the Maldacena-Nuñez solution  in the region near $`\rho =0`$ gives rise to a generalization of the Nappi-Witten geometry with 16 supercharges and again the supersymmetry is enhanced.7 In the earlier version of this paper, we claimed that the Penrose limit of the Maldacena-Nuñez solution is identical to the Nappi-Witten geometry (4.1). We thank Juan Maldacena and Horatiu Nastase for pointing out an error in our argument. Our observation about the enhancement of supersymmetry in this case still remains true. It would be interesting to explore the consequences of this symmetry enhancement for the gauge theory.

Another interesting example is to consider the Penrose limit of the dual pair obtained by placing $`N`$ D3-branes at a $`C^3/Z_3`$ orbifold singularity. The gauge theory living on the D3-branes is an $`𝒩=1`$ four-dimensional quiver gauge theory  and the gravity dual is $`AdS_5\times S^5/Z_3`$ , where the $`S^5`$ is described by the complex coordinates $`z_i`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$) constrained by

$$|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2+|z_3|^2=1$$

and the $`Z_3`$ generator $`g`$ acts by

$$gz_i=\alpha z_ii=1,2,3\alpha ^3=1,$$

so that $`Z_3`$ acts freely on the sphere. The $`U(1)_R`$ symmetry of the gauge theory can be identified with shifts along the Hopf fiber coordinate $`\psi `$ when $`S^5/Z_3`$ is described as a $`U(1)`$ bundle over $`CP^2`$

$$ds^2=(d\psi +\mathrm{sin}^2\mu \sigma _3)^2+d\mu ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\mu \left(\sigma _1^2+\sigma _2^2+\mathrm{cos}^2\mu \sigma _3^2\right),$$

where $`\sigma _i`$ are a set of left-invariant $`SU(2)`$ one forms satisfying $`d\sigma _i=ϵ_{ijk}\sigma _j\sigma _k`$. The $`Z_3`$ orbifold group acts by restricting the range of the $`\psi `$ coordinate to $`1/3`$ of the usual value for $`S^5`$ while leaving all other coordinates intact. We introduce null coordinates

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill x^+& =\frac{1}{2}\left(t+\psi \right)\hfill \\ \hfill x^{}& =\frac{L^2}{2}\left(t\psi \right)\hfill \end{array}$$

taking the $`L\mathrm{}`$ near $`\mu =\rho =0`$ with8 The $`\rho `$ coordinate comes the $`AdS_5`$ part of the metric.

$$\rho =\frac{r}{L}\mu =\frac{y}{L}.$$

In the limit one gets

$$ds^2=4dx^+dx^{}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}(dr^idr^ir^ir^idx^+dx^++dy^idy^i)+2y^2dx^+\sigma _3,$$

where $`y_i`$ are Cartesian coordinates in $`𝐑^4`$. By introducing a pair of complex coordinates $`z_a`$ for $`𝐑^4`$ one can show that (4.1) can be rewritten as

$$ds^2=4dx^+dx^{}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}(dr^idr^ir^ir^idx^+dx^+)+\underset{a}{}\left(dz_ad\overline{z}_a+i(z_ad\overline{z}_a\overline{z}_adz_a)dx^+\right),$$

which we have already shown is the same as the maximally supersymmetric pp-wave metric (1.1). So we have another example in which a subsector of a four dimensional $`𝒩=1`$ gauge theory is enhanced to $`𝒩=4`$. It would be interesting to match the string oscillators in this background with operators in the quiver gauge theory.

We should note, however, that the Penrose limit does not always enhance supersymmetry. For example, we can consider the dual pair generated by placing a collection of D3-branes at a $`C^2/Z_2`$ orbifold singularity. The gauge theory is a four dimensional $`𝒩=2`$ gauge theory  and the gravity dual is $`AdS_5\times S^5/Z_2`$ , where the $`S^5`$ is described by (4.1) and the $`Z_2`$ generator $`g`$ acts by

$$gz_1=z_1gz_2=z_2.$$

Thus the $`Z_2`$ action has as fixed locus an $`S^1`$ described by $`|z_3|^2=1`$ at $`z_1=z_2=0`$. The coordinate parametrizing the fixed $`S^1`$ can be identified with the $`\psi `$ coordinate considered in the Penrose limit of $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ . Therefore, the corresponding pp-wave limit is given by the $`Z_2`$ orbifold of the maximally supersymmetric pp-wave (1.1), where $`Z_2`$ acts on an $`𝐑^4`$ subspace of the transverse $`𝐑^8`$ space. The main difference between this and the previous orbifold is that $`\psi `$ is not acted by $`Z_2`$ while the other angles on the $`S^5`$ have $`Z_2`$ identifications. This is related to the fact that the $`S^5`$ has a fixed circle in this case.

To find the amount of supesymmetry left unbroken by the orbifold, one must find which components of the Killing spinors of the pp-wave geometry (1.1) are left invariant under the $`Z_2`$ action. The Killing spinors of (1.1) were found  and take the form

$$ϵ(x,y,x^+)=f(x,y,x^+)ϵ_0,$$

where $`x`$ and $`y`$ are the transverse $`𝐑^4\times 𝐑^4`$ coordinates, $`f`$ is a function which can be found in  and $`ϵ_0`$ is a constant $`SO(8)`$ spinor. The amount of unbroken supersymmetry is the number of Killing spinors (4.1) left invariant under the $`Z_2`$ action. Therefore, the unbroken supersymmetries satisfy

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ϵ(x,y,x^+)=& gϵ(x,y,x^+)\hfill \\ \hfill =& \gamma ^{5678}ϵ(x,y,x^+)\hfill \\ \hfill =& f(x,y,x^+)\gamma ^{5678}ϵ_0,\hfill \end{array}$$

namely,

$$\gamma ^{5678}ϵ_0=ϵ_0.$$

Therefore the orbifold preserves 1/2 of the supersymmetry which is generated by Killing spinors satisfying this condition.

5. Discussion

In this paper we have given an explicit example of an $`𝒩=1`$ superconformal field theory which, in the large $`N`$ limit, has a subsector of the Hilbert space with enhanced $`𝒩=4`$ superconformal symmetry. We have arrived at this perhaps unexpected conclusion by taking the corresponding limit in the string theory side and by showing that it becomes identical to the theory with higher supersymmetry. The subsector of the gauge theory that should exhibit this symmetry enhancement is dictated by the Penrose limit which restricts the space of states of the gauge theory to those whose conformal dimension and R-charge diverge in the large $`N`$ limit but which nevertheless have finite $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$.

The light-cone Hamiltonian for the background that one obtains in the limit can be found from the Hamiltonian of  for the maximally supersymmetric case by twisting it with $`U(1)`$ charges. In this way we get a prediction for the spectrum of $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$ of the $`𝒩=1`$ superconformal field theory. We proposed how stringy excitations are related to gauge theory operators and made predictions about the gauge theory spectrum. Perhaps the most striking one is that the various $`𝒩=1`$ multiplets should turn into multiplets of $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetry. In particular, the chiral multiplets and the semi-conserved multiplets of $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetry should combine into $`𝒩=4`$ chiral multiplets. It would be interesting to explore this prediction further. The duality also predicts values of $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{3}{2}R)`$ for certain operators in this strongly coupled gauge theory.

We have shown that the enhancement of symmetry in the Penrose limit is a fairly generic phenomenon in theories which have gravity duals. One can intuitively understand this as due to the fact that the limit flattens out parts of spacetime by focusing on a region near a null geodesic. For example, we found that the Penrose limit of a collection of flat NS-NS five-branes is the Nappi-Witten geometry. The limit of the Maldacena-Nuñez geometry is its variation and also has 16 supercharges. This is an interesting case since we can quantize the worldsheet theory without taking the light-cone gauge, and we can compute correlation functions and other observables using the standard techniques of conformal field theory . On the other hand, we also found cases in which the Penrose limit does not lead to symmetry enhancement. It would be interesting to explore further the consequences of this enhancement of symmetries for QCD-like theories and see which lessons this might teach us for the familiar questions about strongly coupled dynamics of these gauge theories.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Andreas Brandhuber, Sergio Ferrara, Juan Maldacena, Sunil Mukhi, Horatiu Nastase, and John Schwarz for useful discussion. This research was supported in part by DOE grant DE-FG03-92-ER40701 and by Caltech Discovery Fund.

Appendix A. String spectrum in the original coordinates

It may be instructive to show how we can quantize string theory using the metric (2.1) before we make the coordinate transformation to its manifestly symmetric form (1.1). We can read off the bosonic part of the light-cone action from the metric (2.1) as

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill S=& \frac{1}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}d\tau _0^{2\pi \alpha ^{}p^+}d\sigma [\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}(\dot{r}_i^2r_i^2)\hfill \\ & +\underset{a=1,2}{}(\frac{1}{2}(\dot{x}_a^2+\dot{y}_a^2x_a^2y_a^2)x_a\dot{y}_a+y_a\dot{x}_a)],\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`\dot{}=_\tau `$ and $`{}_{}{}^{}=_\sigma `$.

The spectrum of the $`r_i`$ part of the light-cone Hamiltonian is

$$H_{rpart}=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}N_n^{(r)}\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2},$$

as in the case of the $`𝒩=4`$ theory in , where $`n`$ is the label of the Fourier mode around the $`\sigma `$ direction and $`N_n^{(r)}`$ is the number of excitations of that mode.

Let us examine the $`(x_a,y_a)`$ part of the Hamiltonian. In the following, we will ignore the index $`a`$ with the assumption that we are referring to either $`a=1`$ or $`2`$. Accordingly the manifest global symmetry is $`U(1)SU(2)`$. In the Fourier expansion,

$$x=\frac{1}{\sqrt{p^+}}\underset{n}{}x_ne^{i\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\sigma },y=\frac{1}{\sqrt{p^+}}\underset{n}{}y_ne^{i\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\sigma },$$

the Hamiltonian becomes

$$H_{xypart}=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}H_n,$$

where

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill H_{n0}=& \left(p_{x_n}y_n\right)\left(p_{x_n}y_n\right)+\left(p_{y_n}+x_n\right)\left(p_{y_n}+x_n\right)\hfill \\ & +\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2\left(x_nx_n+y_ny_n\right),\hfill \end{array}$$

and

$$H_0=\frac{1}{2}\left(p_{x_0}y_0\right)^2+\frac{1}{2}\left(p_{y_0}+x_0\right)^2,$$

where

$$p_{x_n}=i\frac{}{x_n},p_{y_n}=i\frac{}{y_n}.$$

To compare with the gauge theory spectrum, it is useful to use the complex coordinates, $`z_n=x_n+iy_n`$ and $`\overline{z}_n=x_niy_n`$, so that the $`U(1)`$ part of the global $`SU(2)`$ symmetry is manifest. The Hamiltonians for the Fourier modes then become

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill H_{n0}=& \left(p_{\overline{z}_n}+\frac{i}{2}z_n\right)\left(p_{z_n}\frac{i}{2}\overline{z}_n\right)+\left(p_{\overline{z}_n}\frac{i}{2}z_n\right)\left(p_{z_n}+\frac{i}{2}\overline{z}_n\right)\hfill \\ & +\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2\left(z_n\overline{z}_n+z_n\overline{z}_n\right),\hfill \end{array}$$

and

$$H_0=\left(p_{\overline{z}_0}+\frac{i}{2}z_0\right)\left(p_{z_0}\frac{i}{2}\overline{z}_0\right).$$

Let us diagonalize them.

(a) Zero mode

The Hamiltonian $`H_0`$ for the zero mode is nothing but the one for a charged particle in two dimensions in a constant magnetic field. It has the Landau spectrum with infinite degeneracy at each level. To compare with the gauge theory spectrum, it is useful to introduce the following set of oscillators,

$$\begin{array}{cc}& a_0=\frac{1}{2}\overline{z}_0+\frac{}{z_0},a_0^{}=\frac{1}{2}z_0\frac{}{\overline{z}_0},\hfill \\ & b_0=\frac{1}{2}z_0+\frac{}{\overline{z}_0},b_0^{}=\frac{1}{2}\overline{z}_0\frac{}{z_0}.\hfill \end{array}$$

They obey the commutation relations

$$[a_0,a_0^{}]=1,[b_0,b_0^{}]=1,(\mathrm{others})=0.$$

Under the $`U(1)`$ subgroup of the $`SU(2)`$ global symmetry, the operators $`a_0,b_0^{}`$ carry charge $`1`$ and $`a_0^{},b_0`$ carry charge $`+1`$

In terms of the oscillators, the Hamiltonian (A.1) is expressed as

$$H_0=2a_0^{}a_0+1.$$

In particular, it commutes with the oscillators $`b_0,b_0^{}`$. The lowest energy states are annihilated by $`a_0`$ and thus have the form $`(b_0^{})^k\mathrm{exp}(\frac{1}{2}z_0\overline{z}_0)`$ where $`k`$ is any non-negative integer. The complete energy eigenstates are given by

$$\psi _{m,k}^{(0)}=(a_0^{})^m(b_0^{})^k\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{1}{2}z_0\overline{z}_0\right),$$

with $`m,k0`$. The energy of the state is $`2m`$ and the $`U(1)`$ global charge is $`(km)`$.

(b) Non-zero modes

As in the case of the zero mode, we introduce the following set of oscillators,

$$\begin{array}{cc}& a_n=\frac{1}{2}\overline{z}_n+\frac{}{z_n},a_n^{}=\frac{1}{2}z_n\frac{}{\overline{z}_n},\hfill \\ & b_n=\frac{1}{2}z_n+\frac{}{\overline{z}_n},b_n^{}=\frac{1}{2}\overline{z}_n\frac{}{z_n},\hfill \end{array}$$

obeying the commutation relations,

$$[a_n,a_n^{}]=1,[b_n,b_n^{}]=1,(\mathrm{others})=0.$$

In the limit $`n^2/\alpha ^{}p^+0`$, the Hamiltonian $`H_n`$ takes the same form as in the case of the zero mode,

$$H_n=2a_n^{}a_n+2a_n^{}a_n+2.$$

In particular, each energy level has infinite degeneracy generated by the oscillators $`b_{\pm n}^{}`$.

For finite $`n^2/\alpha ^{}p^+`$, the Hamiltonian $`H_n`$ contains terms mixing the two oscillators,

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill H_n=& 2a_n^{}a_n+\frac{1}{2}\omega ^2(a_n^{}+b_n)(a_n+b_n^{})\hfill \\ & +(nn)+2,\hfill \end{array}$$

where we introduced $`\omega =n/\alpha ^{}p^+`$ to simply the following equations. The Hamiltonian can be diagonalized by introducing a new set of oscillators $`\alpha _n`$ and $`\beta _n`$ defined by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill a_n& =\mathrm{cosh}\theta \alpha _n+\mathrm{sinh}\theta \beta _n^{},a_n^{}=\mathrm{cosh}\theta \alpha _n^{}+\mathrm{sinh}\theta \beta _n,\hfill \\ \hfill b_n& =\mathrm{cosh}\theta \beta _n+\mathrm{sinh}\theta \alpha _n^{},b_n^{}=\mathrm{cosh}\theta \beta _n^{}+\mathrm{sinh}\theta \alpha _n.\hfill \end{array}$$

They obey the commutation relations

$$[\alpha _n,\alpha _n^{}]=1,[\beta _n,\beta _n^{}]=1,(\mathrm{others})=0.$$

The vacuum state for $`\alpha ,\beta `$ is related to the one for $`a,b`$ by the Bogolubov transformation. Substituting these into (A.1) and requiring that the cross terms of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ to vanish, we find

$$e^{4\theta }=1+\omega ^2.$$

In terms of the new set of oscillators, the Hamiltonian $`H_n`$ is then expressed as

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill H_n=& \left(\sqrt{1+\omega ^2}+1\right)\alpha _n^{}\alpha _n+\left(\sqrt{1+\omega ^2}1\right)\beta _n^{}\beta _n\hfill \\ & +(nn)+2\sqrt{1+\omega ^2}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Here we have chosen a solution so that, in the limit $`\omega 0`$, the oscillators become $`\alpha _na_n`$ and $`\beta _nb_n`$. Energy eigenstates of $`H_n`$ are then given by $`(\alpha _n^{})^m(\alpha _n^{})^m^{}(\beta _n^{})^k(\beta _n^{})^k^{}|0,`$ where $`|0`$ is the vacuum state for the $`\alpha ,\beta `$ oscillators. The state carries the energy,

$$E_{m,m^{},k,k^{}}=(m+m^{})\left(\sqrt{1+\omega ^2}+1\right)+(k+k^{})\left(\sqrt{1+\omega ^2}1\right),$$

and the global U(1) charge $`(k+k^{}mm^{})`$.

Combining this with the result for the zero mode, the complete spectrum for the $`(x,y)`$ part of the light-cone Hamiltonian is given by

$$H_{xypart}=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left[N_n^{(\alpha )}\left(\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}+1\right)+N_n^{(\beta )}\left(\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{n}{\alpha ^{}p^+}\right)^2}1\right)\right].$$

This result agrees with the one we obtained in section 2, with the identification:

$$\alpha _n=\overline{w}_n,\beta _n=w_n$$

in (2.1).

References

relax J. Maldacena, “The large $`N`$ limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 231, arXiv:hep-th/9711200. relax S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov and A. M. Polyakov, “Gauge theory correlators from non-critical string theory,” Phys. Lett. B 428(1998) 105, arXiv:hep-th/9802109. relax E. Witten, “Anti-de Sitter space and holography,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 253, arXiv:hep-th/9802150. relax O. Aharony, S. S. Gubser, J. Maldacena, H. Ooguri and Y. Oz, “Large N field theories, string theory and gravity,” Phys. Rept. 323 (2000) 183, arXiv:hep-th/9905111. relax J. Maldacena and H. Ooguri, “Strings in $`AdS_3`$ and $`SL(2,R)`$ WZW model. Part 1: The Spectrum,” J. Math. Phys. 42 (2001) 2929, arXiv:hep-th/0001053; J. Maldacena, H. Ooguri and J. Son, “Strings in $`AdS_3`$ and the $`SL(2,R)`$ WZW model. Part 2: Euclidean black hole,” J. Math. Phys. 42 (2001) 2961 arXiv:hep-th/0005183; J. Maldacena and H. Ooguri, “Strings in $`AdS_3`$ and the $`SL(2,R)`$ WZW model. Part 3: Correlation functions,” arXiv:hep-th/0111180; and references therein. relax R. R. Metsaev, “Type IIB Green-Schwarz superstring in plane wave Ramond-Ramond background,” arXiv:hep-th/0112044. relax M. Blau, J. Figueroa-O’Farrill, C. Hull and G. Papadopoulos, “A new maximally supersymmetric background of IIB superstring theory,” JHEP 0201, 047 (2002), arXiv:hep-th/0110242. relax M. B. Green and J. H. Schwarz, “Covariant description of superstrings,” Phys. Lett. B 136 (1984) 367. relax M. B. Green and J. H. Schwarz, “Properties of the covariant formulation of superstring theories,” Nucl. Phys. B 243 (1984) 285. relax D. Berenstein, J. Maldacena and H. Nastase, “Strings in flat space and pp waves from $`𝒩`$ = 4 super Yang Mills,” arXiv:hep-th/0202021. relax R. Penrose, “Any space-time has a plane wave as a limit,” in Differential geometry and relativity, pp. 271-275, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1976. relax R. Güven, “Plane wave limits and T-duality,” Phys. Lett. B482 (2000) 255, arXiv: hep-th/0005061. relax M. Blau, J. Figueroa-O’Farrill, C. Hull and G. Papadopoulos, “Penrose limits and maximal supersymmetry,” arXiv:hep-th/0201081. relax M. Blau, J.Figueroa-O’Farrill, and G.Papadopoulos, “Penrose limits, supergravity and brane dynamics,” arXiv: hep-th/0202111. relax I. R. Klebanov and E. Witten, “Superconformal field theory on three-branes at a Calabi-Yau singularity,” Nucl. Phys. B 536 (1998) 199, arXiv:hep-th/9807080. relax J. M. Maldacena and C. Nuñez, “Towards the large $`N`$ limit of pure $`𝒩`$ = 1 super Yang Mills,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 588 (2001), arXiv:hep-th/0008001. relax C. R. Nappi and E. Witten, “A WZW model based on a nonsemisimple group,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3751 (1993), arXiv:hep-th/9310112. relax N. Itzhaki, I. R. Klebanov and S. Mukhi, “PP wave limit and enhanced supersymmetry in gauge theories,” arXiv:hep-th/0202153. relax L. A. Zayas and J. Sonnenschein, “On Penrose limits and gauge theories,” arXiv:hep-th/0202186. relax J. G. Russo and A. A. Tseytlin, “On solvable models of type IIB superstring in NS-NS and R-R plane wave backgrounds,” arXiv:hep-th/0202179. relax S. S. Gubser, “Einstein manifolds and conformal field theories,” Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 025006, arXiv:hep-th/9807164. relax A. Ceresole, G. Dall’Agata, R. D’Auria and S. Ferrara, “Spectrum of type IIB supergravity on $`AdS_5\times T^{11}`$: Predictions on $`𝒩`$ = 1 SCFT’s,” Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000) 066001, arXiv:hep-th/9905226. relax R. R. Metsaev and A. A. Tseytlin, “Exactly solvable model of superstring in Ramond-Ramond plane wave background,” arXiv:hep-th/0202109. relax S. Ferrara, M. A. Lledo and A. Zaffaroni, “Born-Infeld corrections to D3 brane action in $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ and $`𝒩`$ = 4, $`d`$ = 4 primary superfields,” Phys. Rev. D 58, 105029 (1998) \[arXiv:hep-th/9805082\].

relax M. R. Douglas and G. W. Moore, “D-branes, quivers, and ALE instantons,” arXiv:hep-th/9603167. relax S. Kachru and E. Silverstein, “4d conformal theories and strings on orbifolds,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4855 (1998), arXiv:hep-th/9802183. relax J. Gomis, H. Ooguri, and E. Witten, unpublished.