text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Anomalies play a fundamental role in particle physics . In field theory, local anomalies signal an inconsistency of the theory and are therefore considered as ‘bad’. Global anomalies are ‘good’ since they allow decay processes, such as $`\pi ^02\gamma `$, which are classically forbidden but observed in nature. Through anomaly matching conditions, global anomalies restrict microscopic and effective descriptions  which was important in establishing Seiberg duality . In a consistent string theory, all (local) anomalies must cancel. The manifestation of the consistency in the low energy effective theory is, however, subtle, as it might involve a cancellation between a tree level diagram and a one loop diagram. This is the Green-Schwarz mechanism .

Recently, there has been much interest in noncommutative field theories, see  for reviews. The issue of anomalies in the framework of noncommutative chiral gauge theories was already discussed by several authors . There are two types of possible anomalies: planar and nonplanar. Planar anomalies are well understood. They result from graphs that ‘behave’ exactly as in the commutative theory apart from an overall phase factor which depends only on external momenta , and therefore automatically obey the usual anomaly equations, such as e.g. eq.(6) below.

The issue of nonplanar anomalies is subtle. Nonplanar graphs are UV finite at one loop and therefore it was suggested that these anomalies automatically vanish . However, Ardalan and Sadooghi pointed out  that due to UV/IR mixing , the nonplanar anomaly does not vanish (see also ). 111It is interesting to note that a similar phenomenon of vanishing anomaly exists for the lattice version of the noncommutative theory . It is, however, not clear whether it survives the continuum limit.

The goal of this work is to clarify the issue of nonplanar anomalies. On one hand, if one views noncommutativity as a (gauge invariant) regulator, it is hard to believe that one can introduce a regulator that leads to a conservation of the axial charge (noncommutativity is, however, not a good regulator in the sense that the limit $`\theta 0`$ is not smooth). Another argument against the vanishing of the anomaly arises from $`𝒩=2`$ SYM . In this theory the $`U(1)_{}`$ anomaly belongs to the same multiplet of the conformal anomaly (the $`\beta `$-function). Since the $`\beta `$ function, generically, does not vanish, it would be surprising if the $`U(1)_{}`$ anomaly vanishes. On the other hand the paradox raised in  seems to suggest the vanishing of the nonplanar anomaly as a unique resolution.

The paradox is the following: consider a $`U(N)`$ chiral theory which can be realized by a brane configuration in string theory. Suppose that the $`U(1)`$ is potentially anomalous, due to an excess of left handed fermions over right handed fermions. In the ordinary theory, that would lead to an anomaly, which can be resolved in string theory by giving an infinite mass to the $`U(1)`$, leaving at low energies an $`SU(N)`$ theory and a global $`U(1)`$. In those non-commutative gauge theories which have been obtained as effective low-energy field theories of string theory one always obtains $`U(N)`$ gauge groups, rather than $`SU(N)`$. In these theories the noncommutativity mixes the $`U(1)`$ and the $`SU(N)`$ parts and the above scenario cannot occur . A way out, which was proposed in  is that actually there is no anomaly, though the matter content is left-right asymmetric, due to the finiteness of the associated nonplanar graph.

We would like to present a different solution: the nonplanar anomaly graph is indeed finite and actually vanishes, for any non-zero noncommutative external momentum. However, the graph is not regulated for exactly zero external noncommutative momentum - which leads to the integrated anomaly equation

$$d^2x_{NC}_\mu j_A^\mu =\frac{g^2}{8\pi ^2}d^2x_{NC}F_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{F}^{\mu \nu }.$$
(1)
In this expression, the integration is restricted to the noncommutative plane222A similarly needed integration over the noncommutative plane was pointed out  in relation with renormalization scale independence of composite operators.. In particular the anomaly does not vanish. As we shall see, despite of the anomaly, string theory avoids the inconsistency via a subtle Green-Schwarz mechanism, which involves closed strings with exactly zero noncommutative momentum. The resulting low-energy theory would be $`U(N)`$ (with $`U(N)`$ gauge invariance !), with the $`U(1)`$ being massive only if it carries zero noncommutative momentum.

We will also discuss global anomalies. Here we claim that due to (1) the global anomaly does not vanish. In particular the $`\pi ^0`$ decays. In addition, if one considers anomaly matching conditions, nonplanar anomalies should be taken into account as well.

The organization of the manuscript is as follows: in section 2 we describe the ambiguity (or freedom) in the definition of currents in the noncommutative theory and the relevance of non-planar anomalies. In section 3 we review the arguments, using perturbation theory, in favor of the vanishing of the anomaly for any $`\theta q0`$ and we show that the behavior at $`\theta q=0`$ leads to an integral anomaly equation. In section 4 we show that the point splitting definition of the non-planar current gives rise to the same integrated anomaly equation. We carry the analysis both for two and four dimensions. In section 5 we discuss, briefly, mixed anomalies. Section 6 is devoted to a discussion and a resolution of the above mentioned paradox in field theory and in string theory. Finally, in section 7 we discuss the consequences of our findings on global anomalies.

We use the following conventions throughout the manuscript. $`[x^\mu ,x^\nu ]_{}=i\theta ^{\mu \nu }`$ and $`\theta q`$ stands for $`\theta ^{\mu \nu }q_\nu `$. In 4d we consider only theories with space-space noncommutativity and in 2d we assume an Euclidean signature. Frequently we will use the notation $`F(q)=f(q)|_{\theta q=0}`$. By this we mean that $`F(q)=f(q)`$ only if $`q`$ has a zero component along the noncommutative directions, otherwise $`F(q)=0`$.

## 2 Anomalies in Noncommutative Gauge Theories

We will consider a non-commutative gauge theory with group $`U(1)`$ and a massless Dirac fermion transforming in the fundamental representation. The fermionic action is

$$S=id^dx\overline{\psi }\overline{)D}\psi ,$$
(2)
where $`D_\mu \psi =_\mu \psi +igA_\mu \psi `$. This action is invariant under global axial transformations

$$\delta _\alpha \psi (x)=i\alpha \gamma ^5\psi (x).$$
(3)
In trying to derive the axial associated current we are faced with a problem . If we define the axial current following the Noether procedure, we have to decide if the lagrangian is given by i) $`=i\overline{\psi }\overline{)D}\psi `$ or instead ii) $`^{}=i(\overline{)D}\psi )^t\overline{\psi }^t`$ 333Of course one can imagine an intermediate definition interpolating among the two previous possibilities.. The two lagrangians lead to the same action since under integration the $``$-product satisfies cyclic symmetry. Equivalently, in order to derive the axial current we can formally promote $`\alpha \alpha (x)`$. Then we should choose $`\alpha (x)`$ to multiply $`\psi (x)`$ on i) the right or ii) the left. The axial currents associated to these two choices are

$$i)j_A^\mu =\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5\psi ,ii)j^\mu _A=\psi ^t(\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5)^t\overline{\psi }^t.$$
(4)
The conservation properties of these two currents have been extensively studied, giving different results for $`j_A`$ and $`j_A^{}`$ . This apparently puzzling conclusion has the following origin. Although the lagrangians $``$ and $`^{}`$ are just related by a total derivative, there is a crucial difference between them. While $``$ is gauge invariant, $`^{}`$ behaves under gauge transformations as an operator in the adjoint representation. These transformation properties are inherited by $`j_A`$ and $`j_A^{}`$. At the classical level these currents are conserved and covariantly conserved respectively

$$i)_\mu j_A^\mu =0,ii)D_\mu j^\mu _A=_\mu j^\mu _A+ig[A_\mu ,j_A^\mu ]_{}=0.$$
(5)
At the quantum level, $`j_A^{}`$ has been shown to satisfy the non-commutative counterpart of the ordinary anomaly equation . In four dimensions

$$D_\mu j_A^\mu =\frac{g^2}{16\pi ^2}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }F_{\mu \nu }F_{\rho \sigma }.$$
(6)
The current $`j_A`$ cannot satisfy a similar equation, since $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ is not gauge invariant. One could think a priori of two possibilities. The divergence of $`j_A`$ is equal to some gauge invariant completion of $`FF`$ involving Wilson line operators. This however would imply that there is an infinite number of Feynman graphs contributing to the anomaly equation, in contrast to the ordinary case and to (6). The second possibility is that the divergence of $`j_A`$ remains zero at the quantum level. Explicit calculations have shown that this is indeed the case , except for a subtlety. The previous argument does not constrain those components of the divergence with zero momentum along the non-commutative directions, since $`FF|_{\theta q=0}`$ is gauge invariant. Indeed, we will show that $`j_A`$ satisfies

$$d^2x_{NC}_\mu j_A^\mu =\frac{g^2}{16\pi ^2}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }d^2x_{NC}F_{\mu \nu }F_{\rho \sigma }.$$
(7)
The subindex NC implies integration along the non-commutative plane. The existence of a restricted anomaly affecting the current $`j_A`$ was first pointed out in .

Although we have treated the simple case of the axial symmetry, the previous considerations apply to any global symmetry and to a $`U(N)`$ gauge group. Let us analyze the implications of equation (7). We consider the case that $`\theta ^{0i}=0`$, i.e. non-commutativity restricted to space coordinates. If the cyclic symmetry of the $``$-product under integration holds, both currents define the same gauge invariant charge

$$Q=\mathrm{𝐝𝐱}j_A^0=\mathrm{𝐝𝐱}j_A^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}.$$
(8)
The anomaly equation (6) implies that $`Q`$ is not conserved in the presence of non-zero instanton number. If at the same time the divergence of $`j_A`$ did vanish, we would encounter a contradiction. This problem does not arise when $`j_A`$ satisfies instead (7). Then, independently of which current we use, we will arrive at the same conclusion about the variation of the axial charge.

## 3 Perturbative Non-Planar Anomaly Calculation

### 3.1 Two dimensions

We want to derive the anomaly equation satisfied by the gauge invariant axial current $`j_A`$ in two-dimensions. We work in Euclidean space, since noncommutativity in the time coordinate leads to a non-unitary theory . We need to evaluate $`j^\mu (q)j_A^\nu (q)`$, where $`j^\mu `$ denotes the vector current, i.e. $`j^\mu =\psi ^t\gamma _{}^{\mu }{}_{}{}^{t}\overline{\psi }^t`$ for a $`U(1)`$ theory. It is convenient to use the relation $`\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5=iϵ^{\mu \nu }\gamma _\nu `$, valid in two dimensions. This allows us to concentrate on the correlator $`j^\mu (q)j^\nu (q)`$, with $`j^\mu =\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu \psi `$. A straightforward and simple calculation gives

$$j^\mu (q)j^\nu (q)=\frac{d^2l}{(2\pi )^2}\mathrm{tr}\{\gamma ^\mu \frac{\overline{)l}}{l^2}\gamma ^\nu \frac{(\overline{)l}+\overline{)q})}{(l+q)^2}e^{il\theta q}\}$$
(9)
where the only difference compared to the commutative case is the appearance of the momentum-dependent phase factor. Due to the different order of the fields with respect to the $``$-product in $`j`$ and $`j^{}`$, the correlator of this two operators gives rise to a non-planar graph (see fig. 1).

Performing the traces, changing variables and using dimensional regularization in (9), one obtains

$`j^\mu (q)j^\nu (q)=`$ (10)
$`=2{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{d^dl}{(2\pi )^d}\frac{2l^\mu l^\nu \delta ^{\mu \nu }l^22x(1x)q^\mu q^\nu +\delta ^{\mu \nu }x(1x)q^2}{(l^2+x(1x)q^2)^2}e^{il\theta q}}`$
For non-vanishing non-commutative momentum $`(\theta q)^2`$, the loop-momentum dependent phase factor renders the integral UV finite and dimensional regularization is, in fact, not necessary. The integral can be expressed in terms of Bessel functions which add up to zero. Thus, for any non-zero $`\theta q`$, the rhs of the previous equation is zero. However, at $`(\theta q)^2=0`$, 444In two-dimensional Euclidean space, $`(\theta q)^2=0`$ implies $`q=0`$. the non-commutativity parameter does not act as a regulator and we have to use dimensional regularization. The result for the integral is the same as in the commutative theory at zero momentum.

We conclude that $`j_A`$ is conserved at all non-vanishing $`\theta q`$, i.e. $`q_\mu j_A^\mu =0`$, and the non-conservation at $`\theta q=0`$ can be expressed in the form

$$d^2x_\mu j_A^\mu (x)=i\frac{g}{2\pi }d^2xϵ^{\mu \nu }F_{\mu \nu }(x).$$
(11)
This is an integral equation for the 2d anomaly. Thus we learn that the anomaly exists and that it is concentrated in the zero momentum component of the current.

### 3.2 Four dimensions

We now repeat the previous argument for $`d=4`$. Contrary to the $`d=2`$ case, we will consider only space non-commutativity. We need to evaluate the triangle graph with one insertion of the axial current $`j_A`$. As before, the resulting diagram is non-planar (see fig. 2).

In  the anomalies in a $`U(N_1)\times U(N_2)`$ non-commutative gauge theory with a chiral fermion in the bifundamental representation were treated in great detail. Their results imply that if the axial current is coupled through the non-planar vertex, then for any non-zero non-commutative momentum $`\theta q`$ it satisfies $`q_\mu j_A^\mu (q)=0`$. The reason is that for any $`\theta q0`$, due to loop momentum dependent phase factors, the integral no longer diverges linearly and the momentum variable can be shifted. In particular, the phase factors in the integrals which one gets from the two contributing Feynman diagrams coincide after the momentum shift and one obtains exact cancellation.

Again, as in the two-dimensional case, this argument breaks down for zero external non-commutative momentum, since in this case the dependence on $`\theta `$ vanishes and the integrals are not regulated by non-commutativity. The shift in the integral now yields a surface term which gives the anomaly. We then get the known result for the triangle anomaly for the commutative theory. In summary, the relation (7) holds independent of whether the axial current is coupled via the planar or non-planar vertex.

In spite of this, it could have seemed tempting to define the value of the non-planar anomaly diagrams at zero $`\theta q`$ as the limit from $`\theta q`$ non-zero. This point of view was followed in , which led to the conclusion that non-planar anomalies cancel. We have argued that this way of defining correlators leads to inconsistencies, which are resolved if a non-planar anomaly survives at zero non-commutative momentum. This is a surprising conclusion from the perspective of ordinary quantum field theories, since it implies that the non-planar anomaly graphs radically violate the usual analyticity properties of Green functions. These properties are derived from the requirement that commutators of fields vanish for space-like separations. However in the non-commutative case this does not need to hold along the non-local, non-commutative directions. In particular, it has been shown that superluminal propagation is possible along the non-commutative directions . Therefore, there are no a priori requirements on the behaviour of quantum correlators as a function of the variable $`\theta q`$. On the contrary we should expect an ordinary behaviour on the variable $`q_{com}^2=q_0^2q_1^2`$ . Notice that we are considering space non-commutativity: $`[x^2,x^3]=i\theta `$.

It has been known since  that the limit $`\theta 0`$ of non-commutative Green functions is not smooth. A clear example of this is the existence of a non-zero, $`\theta `$ independent, beta-function for pure non-commutative $`U(1)`$ . In this paper we are encountering similar discontinuities of correlators as functions of the non-commutative momentum. This could have been expected from the fact that $`\theta `$ only enters the Feymann integrals in the combination $`\theta q`$.

Without restricting to the particular case studied here, one might wonder what is the correct way to define the value of generic correlators at zero non-commutative momentum. It would be important to carefully study the consequences of a loss of analyticity. Another interesting question is the behaviour, with respect to this issue, of non-commutative field theories derived from string theory. Following this line of ideas, we will discuss in section 6 the non-commutative Green-Schwarz mechanism.

## 4 Non-Planar Anomaly via Point Splitting

The point splitting method provides an alternative and neat derivation of the non-planar anomaly. Composite operators containing product of fields evaluated at the same point are generically singular. A proper definition involves a regularization procedure, which can break some of the symmetries existing at the classical level. The current $`j_A`$, regulated by point splitting, is

$$j_A^\mu (x)=\mathrm{lim}_{ϵ0}\overline{\psi }(x+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5𝒰(x+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}},x{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})\psi (x{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}}),$$
(12)
where a Wilson line has been introduced to preserve the gauge invariance of the regularized expression,

$$𝒰(x,y)=e^{ig_x^y𝑑lA(l)}.$$
(13)
The divergence of $`j_A^\mu `$ can be derived by expanding the Wilson line in (12) at linear order in $`ϵ`$ and using the equations of motion of the fermionic fields

$$_\mu j_A^\mu (x)=ig\mathrm{lim}_{ϵ0}ϵ^\nu \overline{\psi }(x+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5F_{\mu \nu }(x)\psi (x{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}}).$$
(14)
The rhs of this equation, although proportional to $`ϵ`$, may give a finite result since the correlator of the fermion fields can become singular as the regulator, $`ϵ`$, is removed. Namely, in Fourier space we will have

$`iq_\mu j_A^\mu (q)`$ $`=ig\mathrm{lim}_{ϵ0}ϵ^\nu {\displaystyle \frac{d^dl}{(2\pi )^d}\frac{d^dp}{(2\pi )^d}e^{\frac{i}{2}(lp)ϵ}e^{\frac{i}{2}(l\theta q+q\theta p+p\theta l)}}`$ (15)
$`\overline{\psi }(l)\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5\psi (p)F_{\mu \nu }(qlp),`$
with $`d`$ the space-time dimension. We will treat first the two-dimensional case 555Here we also assume an Euclidean space.. Substituting the tree level fermion correlator and performing the $`p`$ integration we obtain

$`iq_\mu j_A^\mu (q)`$ $`=`$ $`ig\mathrm{lim}_{ϵ0}ϵ^\nu F_{\mu \nu }(q)\mathrm{tr}(\gamma ^\rho \gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5){\displaystyle \frac{d^2l}{(2\pi )^2}\frac{l_\rho }{l^2}e^{il(ϵ\theta q)}}`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\pi }}\mathrm{lim}_{ϵ0}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^\nu (ϵ\theta q)_\rho }{(ϵ\theta q)^2}}ϵ^{\mu \rho }F_{\mu \nu }(q).`$
When $`\theta q0`$, the rhs of this expression tends to zero. We recover thus the result that non-planar anomalies cancel. The order in which the fermion fields and the field strength are multiplied in (14) is at the origin of this cancellation. It causes that, even after sending $`ϵ`$ to zero, the fermion fields are effectively separated by a distance $`\theta q`$, being $`q`$ the momentum carried by the field strength. Therefore their correlator does not become singular. This makes clear why the cancellation is not operative at $`\theta q=0`$. Indeed, at this value (16) gives a non-zero result, as it is the case for ordinary theories. In dimension $`d`$ we have $`\mathrm{lim}_{ϵ0}\frac{ϵ^\nu ϵ_\rho }{ϵ^2}=\frac{\delta _\rho ^\nu }{d}`$. Substituting this in (16) we obtain that the current $`j_A^\mu `$ satisfies the integrated form of the standard anomaly, equation (11). This fact is implicit in the analysis of .

The anomaly of the non-gauge invariant axial current $`j_A^{}`$ in (4) can be studied in the same way. The regularized version of the current is in this case

$$j_{}^{}{}_{A}{}^{\mu }(x)=𝒰(x,x+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})\psi ^t(x+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})(\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5)^t\overline{\psi }^t(x{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})𝒰(x{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}},x).$$
(17)
The Wilson lines have been introduced in order that the point splitting regularization does not alter the behavior of the current under gauge transformations. The divergence of $`j_{}^{}{}_{A}{}^{\mu }`$ is

$`_\mu j_{}^{}{}_{A}{}^{\mu }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ig}{2}}\mathrm{lim}_{ϵ0}ϵ^\nu [F_{\mu \nu }(x)\psi ^t(x+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})(\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5)^t\overline{\psi }^t(x{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})+`$ (18)
$`+\psi ^t(x+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})(\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5)^t\overline{\psi }^t(x{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ϵ}{2}})F_{\mu \nu }(x)]`$
It is by now well known that the current $`j_A^{}`$ satisfies the non-commutative counterpart of the usual anomaly equation of gauge theories . We can easily see how this result arises in the point splitting approach. The crucial difference between the equations for the divergence of $`j_A`$ and $`j_A^{}`$ is the order in which the field strength and the fermionic fields are multiplied. In (17) the field strength does not separate $`\psi `$ and $`\overline{\psi }`$ and the effective regularization of the current due to the star-product does not take place. Namely, the divergence of $`j_A^{}`$ is given by equation (16) with the argument of the $`l`$-integration being just $`ϵ`$ instead of $`ϵ\theta q`$.

We will evaluate now the divergence of the non-planar current $`j_A`$ in four dimensions using the same approach. The main difference with the two-dimensional case is that the relevant contributions to the fermion correlator in (15) come from first and second order in perturbation theory. The contribution from tree level cancels since $`\mathrm{tr}\left(\gamma ^\rho \gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5\right)=0`$ in $`d>2`$. At first order in perturbation theory we have

$$ig\overline{\psi }(l)\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^5\psi (p)d^4x\overline{\psi }\overline{)A}\psi =4gϵ^{\mu \rho \alpha \beta }\frac{l_\rho p_\alpha }{l^2p^2}A_\beta (p+l)e^{\frac{i}{2}p\theta l},$$
(19)
where we have used that in four dimension $`\mathrm{tr}\left(\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\rho \gamma ^\alpha \gamma ^\beta \gamma ^5\right)=4iϵ^{\mu \rho \alpha \beta }`$. Defining $`k=p+l`$ and substituting the previous equation in (15), we obtain

$`iq_\mu j_A^\mu (q)=`$ (20)
$`=4ig^2\mathrm{lim}_{ϵ0}ϵ^\nu ϵ^{\mu \rho \alpha \beta }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{d^4l}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{l_\rho e^{il(ϵ\theta q)}}{l^2(kl)^2}F_{\mu \nu }(qk)k_\alpha A_\beta (k)e^{\frac{i}{2}q\theta k}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{2\pi ^2}}\mathrm{lim}_{ϵ0}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^\nu (ϵ\theta q)_\rho }{(ϵ\theta q)^2}}ϵ^{\mu \rho \alpha \beta }{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}f(k,|ϵ\theta q|)F_{\mu \nu }(qk)ik_\alpha A_\beta (k)e^{\frac{i}{2}q\theta k}}.`$
The $`l`$-integration in this case produces, in addition to $`(ϵ\theta q)_\rho /(ϵ\theta q)^2`$, the function $`f(k,|ϵ\theta q|)`$. $`f`$ can be expressed in terms of Bessel functions, it is always finite and tends to $`1`$ as $`|ϵ\theta q|`$ tends to zero. Thus the rhs of (20) vanishes for $`\theta q0`$, as it happens in the two-dimensional case. For $`\theta q=0`$ it gives clearly a non-zero result. It is straightforward to analyze the contribution to the anomaly equation from evaluating the fermion correlator at second order in perturbation theory. We will not do it explicitly, since the pattern is as before. At $`\theta q0`$ the anomaly cancels. The result at $`\theta q=0`$ is non-zero, combining with (20) to promote $`i(k_\alpha A_\beta (k)k_\beta A_\alpha (k))F_{\alpha \beta }(k)`$. Restricted to $`\theta q=0`$, (20) reduces to

$$iq_\mu j_A^\mu (q)=\frac{g^2}{16\pi ^2}\frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}ϵ^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }F_{\mu \nu }(qk)F_{\alpha \beta }(k),$$
(21)
which reproduces the integrated anomaly equation (7).

## 5 Mixed Anomalies

Similar arguments apply to the local anomalies of chiral gauge theories. Consider a simple case among those treated in , a $`U(1)\times U(1)`$ gauge theory with a chiral fermion in the bifundamental representation. In the case of a right handed fermion, the vector currents associated to the groups $`U(1)_1`$ and $`U(1)_2`$ are

$$j_1^\mu =\psi ^t(\gamma ^\mu P_+)^t\overline{\psi }^t,j_2^\mu =\overline{\psi }(\gamma ^\mu P_+)\psi ,$$
(22)
with $`P_+=\frac{1}{2}(1+\gamma ^5)`$. These two currents are in one to one correspondence with those in (4). Thus the analysis of previous sections applies straightforwardly to local mixed anomalies. We will reduce now to the four dimensional case and only spatial non-commutativity. Equation (7) implies the existence of a mixed $`U(1)_iU(1)_j^2`$ anomaly restricted to $`\theta q=0`$. Suppose that we add the necessary chiral matter to cancel $`U(1)^3`$ anomalies, leaving the mixes anomalies untouched. Then we have

$$𝑑x_{NC}_\mu j_{(i)}^\mu =\frac{1}{32\pi ^2}ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }𝑑x_{NC}F_{\mu \nu }^{(j)}F_{\rho \sigma }^{(j)},$$
(23)
for $`ij`$. The variation of the action induced by a gauge transformation $`\lambda ^{(i)}`$ due to the anomaly (23) is given in Fourier space by

$$\delta _{\lambda ^{(i)}}S=\frac{1}{16\pi ^2}d^4q\lambda ^{(i)}(q)F\stackrel{~}{F}^{(j)}(q)|_{\theta q=0}.$$
(24)
The variation (24) vanishes unless the gauge parameter is a delta function $`\lambda (q)\delta (\theta q)`$. In coordinate space the action (24) takes the form

$$\delta _{\lambda ^{(i)}}S=\frac{1}{16\pi ^2V_{NC}}d^2x\left(d^2x_{NC}\lambda ^{(i)}\right)\left(d^2x_{NC}F\stackrel{~}{F}^{(j)}\right),$$
(25)
where $`V_{NC}`$ represents the (infinite) volume of the non-commutative directions, and $`x`$ and $`x_{NC}`$ denote respectively the ordinary and non-commutative directions. The variation of the action is non-zero only if the integration of $`\lambda `$ along the non-commutative directions would cancel the volume factor in the denominator of (25).

## 6 The Noncommutative Green-Schwarz Mechanism

In this section we address the paradox of the $`^3/_3`$ orbifold, which was mentioned in the introduction and which was raised in . Consider a collection of $`N`$ D3 branes, placed on a $`^3/_3`$ orbifold singularity in a background of a constant NS-NS 2 form. The resulting noncommutative field theory is a $`U(N)^3`$ field theory with three generations of bi-fundamental chiral multiplets. The matter spectrum is summarized in table 1.

Since the theory is chiral there are potential anomalies. The $`U_i(N)^3`$ anomalies cancel, since there are $`3N`$ fundamental and $`3N`$ anti-fundamental fermions charged under each of the gauge groups factors. There is, however, a potential $`U_i(N)^2U_j(1)`$ anomaly. For example, the first row in table 1 describes the matter content which is charged under both $`U_1(N)`$ and $`U_2(N)`$. Only these fermions circulate in a triangle diagram with two external legs in $`U_1(N)`$ and one leg in $`U_2(N)`$. One can choose a regularization scheme in which the local $`U_2(1)`$ gauge symmetry is anomalous. Hence, the field theory is sick (to be more precise, only two combinations out of the three $`U(1)`$’s are anomalous). Since this theory arises from a string theory setup, it should be consistent - probably even in the decoupling limit $`\alpha ^{}0`$

Let us review first the string theory solution to this problem in the commutative case . The type IIB closed string spectrum contains two massless 0-forms fields in the twisted sectors which are localized at the orbifold singularity. Their coupling to the brane can be written in a convenient way in terms of three fields $`C^{(i)}`$. They transform under gauge transformations $`\delta (\mathrm{tr}A_\mu ^{(i)})=_\mu ϵ^{(i)}`$ and $`\delta C^{(i)}=ϵ^{(i)}`$. The $`C^{(i)}`$ are constraint to sum to zero in a gauge invariant way. The action is

$`S{\displaystyle }d^4x\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha ^{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}((\mathrm{tr}A_\mu ^{(i)}+_\mu C^{(i)})^2+\lambda (^2C^{(i)}+\mathrm{tr}A^{(i)}))`$
$`+(C^{(1)}(\mathrm{tr}F_{\mu \nu }^{(2)}\stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }^{(2)}\mathrm{tr}F_{\mu \nu }^{(3)}\stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }^{(3)})+\mathrm{cyclic}\mathrm{perm}.)\}.`$ (26)
Upon integration over the three twisted RR-fields and the Lagrange multiplier $`\lambda `$ we get the effective action

$$S_{eff}=\frac{3}{16\pi ^2}d^4x\{(\mathrm{tr}A^{(1)})\frac{1}{^2}(\mathrm{tr}F\stackrel{~}{F}^{(2)}\mathrm{tr}F\stackrel{~}{F}^{(3)})+\mathrm{cyclic}\mathrm{perm}.\}.$$
(27)
In addition there is a rank two mass matrix for the three $`A_\mu ^{(i)}`$’s and also $`(F\stackrel{~}{F})^2`$ terms. The full partition function is gauge invariant. Under a $`U_i(1)`$ gauge rotation, the anomaly is compensated by the gauge transformation of (27). In a diagrammatic language it is described by fig. 3.

The triangle diagram (fig. 3a) is cancelled by a tree level diagram which involves an exchange of closed RR field (fig. 3b), in a generalized Green-Schwarz mechanism. The diagram, fig. 3b, can be understood as due to an annulus diagram, with two $`U(N)`$ insertions on one boundary and one $`U(1)`$ insertion at the second boundary (see fig. 4).

Thus, in the commutative case gauge invariance is restored by an axion like field (twisted RR field) that cancels the gauge anomaly and gives a gauge invariant mass $`M^2\frac{1}{\alpha ^{}}`$ to the two anomalous $`U(1)`$’s. The third $`U(1)`$ remains massless. The low energy theory, in the commutative case, would therefore be an $`SU(N)^3\times U(1)`$ gauge theory. The two apparently anomalous local $`U(1)`$’s became global and decoupled, yielding a consistent low-energy theory.

Let us now return to the more complicated non-commutative case. We will consider again the case where the non-commutativity affects only (two) space directions. Notice that the $`^3/_3`$ orbifold gauge theory has $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetry. Thus it is free from the dangerous quadratic infrared divergences due to UV/IR mixing effects, which could render the theory unstable . However, we would like to stress that the triangle anomaly does not vanish, due to the contribution from zero non-commutative momentum flowing into the triangle diagram at the non-planar vertex. This is exactly the non-planar anomaly which was described in the previous sections. Moreover, the problem is more severe in the noncommutative case, since $`U(1)`$ couples to the rest of the $`SU(N)`$ theory due to non-commutative gauge invariance  and therefore the problem cannot be solved by making the $`U(1)`$ global (massive).

Furthermore, the action (26) now presents some immediate problems. We will assume that if a Green-Schwarz mechanism exists in the non-commutative case, it must be possible to formulate it naturally in terms of the non-commutative gauge field $`A_\mu `$. The reason for this is that the non-planar anomaly has a simple expression in terms of $`A_\mu `$, instead of involving arbitrary powers of this field. However, the first term in (26) would not be gauge invariant under non-commutative gauge transformations. Second the non-planar anomaly, diagram 3a, exits only for zero non-commutative momentum $`\theta q=0`$. However the diagram 3b mediated by the action (26) seems to exist also for non-zero $`\theta q`$.

In spite of these problems, it is easy to propose an action similar to (27) whose variation under gauge transformations would cancel the non-planar anomaly

$$S_{eff}=\frac{3}{16\pi ^2V_{NC}}d^2x\{(\mathrm{tr}A^{(1)})_0\frac{1}{^2}(\mathrm{tr}F\stackrel{~}{F}^{(2)}\mathrm{tr}F\stackrel{~}{F}^{(3)})_0+\mathrm{cyclic}\mathrm{perm}.\},$$
(28)
where, as in section 5, $`V_{NC}`$ is the volume of and the subscript “0” denotes integration along the non-commutative plane. The coordinates $`x`$ as well as the derivatives in (28) are restricted to the two commutative directions. It is immediate that the gauge variation of the previous expression can cancel the variation of the action due to the non-planar anomaly, eq. (25). The action (28) is well defined under noncommutative gauge transformation since each trace operator is separately integrated along the non-commutative plane. If we interpret (28) as derived from a diagram as in fig 3b, it would correspond to restricting the closed string exchange to $`\theta q=0`$. Notice that only RR fields from the twisted sectors can participate in the Green-Schwarz mechanism. In the $`^3/_3`$ orbifold there are only two twisted massless 0-form RR fields, which should couple to a combination of $`U(1)`$’s as in the ordinary case. Although a sum of two $`U(1)`$’s is not a noncommutative $`U(1)`$, one is allowed to consider linear combinations at $`\theta q=0`$, where the non-commutative structure trivializes.

We now indicate how the action (28) results from string theory. Consider the annulus diagram, fig. 4. The calculation of this diagram for the noncommutative theory, based on the expression for the ordinary theory , was carried out in

$$A^{\mu \nu }ϵ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }p_\rho k_\sigma \underset{M\mathrm{}}{lim}M^2_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑te^{M^2t}e^{\frac{\pi }{2t}(\theta q)^2}_0^1𝑑\nu _{1,2}e^{\frac{i}{2}p\theta k(2\nu _{12}+ϵ(\nu _{12}))},$$
(29)
where $`M`$ is a regulator, $`ϵ`$ is the step function and $`\nu _{12}=\nu _1\nu _2`$. For any non-zero $`\theta q`$ the integral near $`t=0`$ (the UV) is exponentially suppressed and yields a zero anomaly. However, for $`\theta q=0`$ this is no longer true and we have an anomaly. The interpretation is that for $`\theta q=0`$ we have an anomaly in field theory (non-vanishing triangle diagram) and it is compensated in a Green-Schwarz mechanism by an exchange of a massless RR field. The mechanism for $`\theta q=0`$ is exactly the same as in the commutative theory.

For $`\theta q0`$ the scenario is different. The amplitude (29) vanishes in this case, indicating that there is no anomaly in the field theory. The crucial difference with respect to the previous case is that, in considering a closed string exchange as in fig. 3b, we cannot discard the massive string modes . The on-shell condition for twisted closed string modes is $`g^{\mu \nu }q_\mu q_\nu +\frac{N}{\alpha ^{}}=0`$, with $`g`$ denoting the closed string metric. The open and closed string metrics are related via

$$g^1=G^1\frac{\theta G\theta }{(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2},$$
(30)
and thus the on-shell condition is

$$q^2+\frac{(\theta q)^2}{(2\pi \alpha ^{})^2}=\frac{N}{\alpha ^{}}.$$
(31)
In the $`\alpha ^{}0`$ limit, the oscillator mass becomes a subleading effect with respect to the momentum along the non-commutative directions. Assuming that the massive RR string modes have similar couplings to the field theory operators as the massless one, it is clear that all of them will contribute to diagram 3b when $`\theta q0`$. Such an exchange is then more adequately interpreted directly in field theory terms. Its effect is to introduce the non-commutative damping factor $`e^{\frac{\pi }{2t}(\theta q)^2}`$ that leads to the cancellation of (29). Notice that in the $`\alpha ^{}0`$ limit, modes with $`\theta q0`$ are never on-shell because the kinetic term is suppressed by two powers of $`\alpha ^{}`$ with respect to the momentum in the non-commutative directions. Contrary, when $`\theta q=0`$ the oscillator mass is the dominant effect in (31). This selects the massless closed string mode, bringing us back to the ordinary Green-Schwarz mechanism.

The Green-Schwarz mechanism has its origin in the fact that non-planar string annulus diagrams are generically finite. The absence of divergences in the non-planar annulus can be understood in terms of the closed string modes using channel duality. Consequently, closed string modes play a fundamental role in the Green-Schwarz mechanism . The (partial) cancellation of the non-planar anomaly in non-commutative gauge theories occurs because of the regularization of the associated triangle graph by non-commutative effects. This regularization of otherwise divergent Feymann graphs gives rise to one of the most remarkable characteristics of non-commutative field theories: UV/IR mixing . In  the similarity between the non-planar graphs in non-commutative field theories and in string theory was stressed. Following these ideas,  showned that the infrared divergences associated with UV/IR mixing effects in gauge theories can be reproduced in terms of closed string exchange, where the whole tower of closed string modes contributes. We propose that a similar pattern applies to the cancellation of non-planar anomalies (see also  for a related discussion about flavour anomalies). In this sense, it can be interpreted as an automatic Green-Schwarz mechanism .

Since at $`\theta q=0`$ we have argued that an ordinary Green-Schwarz mechanism takes place, we propose the following Lagrangian for the ‘mass term’ of the $`U(1)`$ in the noncommutative theory

$$\frac{1}{\alpha ^{}}(\mathrm{tr}A_\mu +_\mu C)(q)G^{\mu \nu }(\mathrm{tr}A_\nu +_\nu C)(q)|_{\theta q=0}.$$
(32)
The Lagrangian (32) is gauge invariant with respect to noncommutative gauge transformations. Now, we add to the action the ’axion’ term $`CF\stackrel{~}{F}`$ and we integrate over the RR field. The resulting action is (28).

There is a subtle issue that should be discussed. The WZ couplings in the noncommutative theory are more involved than in the ordinary case, see details at . However, we assume that the existence of a similar piece at zero noncommutative momentum is enough for the anomaly cancellation.

We have argued that the non-commutative gauge theory on the $`^3/_3`$ orbifold has non-vanishing mixed anomalies. However they only affect $`U(1)`$ modes with zero non-commutative momentum. For these modes both the non-commutative and the non-abelian structure trivialize, i.e. they do not mix with the rest under gauge transformations. In (32) we have proposed that due to the interaction with the RR field, the $`\theta q=0`$ components of two of the three $`U(1)`$’s become massive. A linear combination of $`U(1)`$’s remains anomaly free as in the ordinary case. Thus the non-commutative $`U(N)^3`$ structure is preserved, since this only requires that the $`U(1)`$ excitations with non-zero noncommutative momentum remain coupled. The excitations with zero noncommutative momentum become massive and decouple. It is interesting that this splitting, which of course violates Lorentz symmetry, preserves the full gauge symmetry.

## 7 Global Anomalies

In this section we address the issue of global anomalies. As we have already mentioned in the introduction, there are two different kinds of anomalies in noncommutative theories: planar and nonplanar. In particular there are two kinds of global anomalies. Since planar global anomalies are as in the commutative situation, we will only consider nonplanar anomalies.

Consider a fermion that transforms in the bifundamental representation of a product group $`G\times H`$, where $`H`$ is a global symmetry and $`G`$ is either local or global. Both cases have interesting applications in particle physics.

The prime example of mixed global and local symmetries is the $`\pi ^02\gamma `$ process. In this case the global symmetry is $`U(1)_A`$ and the local is $`U(1)`$ (Maxwell). According to the analysis in the previous sections the axial charge is not conserved. Thus, though we cannot write a local anomaly equation, we see that no conservation of charge forbids the pion decay, in contrast to .

The second important case is when both $`G`$ and $`H`$ are global. Here the global anomaly restricts the microscopic structure of the theory (or the description in terms of a dual theory, as in ). According to ’t Hooft , the anomaly, which is nothing but the number of fermions species circulating in the triangle loop, should be the same in the two descriptions (see also). This condition imposes stringent restrictions on a possible dual description.

Had the nonplanar anomaly vanished, this restriction could have been removed. However, we claim that the same anomaly matching conditions as in the commutative theory should be imposed. To see that, we can repeat the reasoning of ’t Hooft. One can gauge the global symmetry with a very weak coupling 666We assume here a global symmetry that has a natural realization in terms of a $`U(N)`$ group. Also, in order to have any potential local anomaly we must work in more than two dimensions with some commutative directions. and add chiral matter to cancel the anomaly. The same ’hidden’ chiral sector should guarantee an anomaly free gauge theory in the two descriptions. Therefore the global anomaly should be the same. For this kind of reasoning in favor of the anomaly matching conditions it is enough that an integral version of the anomaly exist, since even an integral version of the anomaly renders the local theory inconsistent. Thus, the noncommutative theory is not less restrictive than the commutative one.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank L. Alvarez-Gaume, C. Angelantonj, F. Ardalan, O. Bergman, S. Elitzur, A. Font, Y. Frishman, K. Landsteiner, C. Martin, R. Minasian, R. Rabadan, C. Scrucca, S. Silva, M. Vazquez-Mozo, Y. Oz, A. Uranga and F. Zamora for discussions. We would like to thank A. Schwimmer for his comments on the first version of the paper. They led to the additional discussion at the end of sect. 3.2. S.T. would like to thank the Isaac-Newton-Institute for Mathematical Sciences for hospitality during the final stages of this work. A.A. thanks the Albert-Einstein-Institut for the warm hospitality where part of this work was done. This work was partially supported by GIF, the German-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research.


format: text

text:
# Contents

## 1 Introduction

Much work has been devoted to the study of tachyon potential and various classical solutions in string field theory on an unstable D-brane system. However most of the solutions studied so far have been time independent solutions representing either the tachyon vacuum or static D-branes of lower dimension. Recently Gutperle and Strominger considered the process of production and decay of unstable branes, and proposed that the corresponding solution can be described as a space-like D-brane. For earlier attempt at studying the dynamics of tachyon on brane-antibrane system, see .

There are many issues associated with the decay of unstable branes in string theory. We shall study the classical decay process, namely, what happens if we displace the tachyon a little bit away from its maximum and let it roll according to its equations of motion. Although this is a natural question in any scalar field theory around the maximum of the potential, it is not obvious if this is a sensible question in string field theory. The string field theory action contains infinite number of time derivatives, and hence a priori the initial value problem is not well-defined. Nevertheless, we shall show that it is possible to construct a family of classical solutions of the string field theory equations of motion characterized by the initial position and velocity of the tachyon field. The construction is similar in spirit to that of  in that we get it by Wick rotation of a known solution, but the details are very different.

Another issue in the study of tachyon condensation is the nature of the time evolved configuration. In studying the classical decay of an unstable soliton in a field theory (e.g. domain wall in $`\varphi ^3`$ theory), one can displace the field configuration from its original value and let it evolve in time. For simplicity we can restrict to deformations which do not depend on the coordinates along the brane, – in terms of fields living on the brane this corresponds to constant field configuration. Typically in such a case the tachyonic field on the brane couples to various other fields, including those which are not localised on the brane and hence describes bulk modes. As a result even if the initial configuration contains only tachyonic deformation, with the energy density stored fully inside the tachyon field, as the system evolves in time the energy gets distributed among all the modes, including the infinite number of fields on the brane describing the bulk modes. In a generic case, if we wait long enough then eventually most of the energy is transfered to the bulk modes, and we can interprete this process as the result of the decay of the unstable brane into classical radiation.

In open string field theory, this issue is much more complicated. Unlike in an ordinary field theory, in this case we do not expect any conventional bulk modes, since there are no physical open string modes away from the original D-brane. Nevertheless one might expect that there are non-Fock space excitations of open string field configuration describing closed string excitations, and that the decay process transfers the energy of the original brane to these closed string excitations. We shall argue that this is not what happens in classical open string field theory. Instead, during the classical time evolution of the open string field describing the decay, the energy density resides in the plane of the original brane. This situation is similar to that in the case of toy models of tachyon condensation where again there are no bulk modes and the energy density does not dissipate. We also find that the energy momentum tensor of the system evolves smoothly towards an asymptotic configuration instead of undergoing oscillation about the minimum of some effective potential. It is not clear how to reconcile this with the result from boundary string field theory that the minimum of the tachyon potential is at a finite distance away from the maximum.

One of the results that follows from the general analysis of this paper is that for D-branes in bosonic string theory, there is a qualitative difference between pushing the tachyon on the side of the maximum where there is a local minimum and the side where the potential is unbounded from below. In the boundary conformal field theory description, the former corresponds to adding a positive definite boundary term to the world-sheet action whereas the latter corresponds to adding a negative definite term. In the boundary state description, the former corresponds to a boundary state with smooth time evolution, while the latter hits a singularity at a finite time.

The rest of the paper is organised as follows. In section 2 we show the existence of a two parameter family of time dependent solutions, labelled by the initial position and velocity of the tachyon field, describing the rolling of the tachyon field on an unstable D-brane. In section 3 we construct the action of the boundary conformal field theory (BCFT) describing these solutions and in section 4 we explore the nature of the corresponding boundary states. In section 5 we study the decay process using an effective field theory. We conclude in section 6 with a few additional comments.

## 2 Time Dependent Solutions of Open String Field Equations

In order to find a time dependent solution of the open string field equations, we can make a consistent truncation of the equations of motion restricting the fields to a universal subspace as follows. We shall assume that the original D-brane configuration is described by a unitary matter BCFT of central charge 25, together with a free scalar field representing the time coordinate $`X^0`$, and the ghost BCFT. Following the arguments of  it is easy to show that if we restrict the open string field to the subspace of the full BCFT created from the vacuum by various operators associated with the scalar field $`X^0`$, the Virasoro generators of the $`c=25`$ BCFT, and the ghost oscillators, then the equations of motion of the fields outside the subspace are automatically satisfied. Thus this provides a consistent truncation of the string field theory equations of motion, and we can look for the classical solutions describing time evolution of the brane within this subspace. Furthermore the action restricted to this subspace is universal, independent of the choice of the $`c=25`$ BCFT. This shows that the solution describing the decay of an unstable D-brane is universal, independent of which D-brane or spatial background we begin with.

Let us first consider the linearized equations of motion of string field theory where we ignore the coupling between various fields. In this case we can treat the tachyon as an ordinary scalar field of negative mass2. For definiteness let us focus on the bosonic string theory, where in $`\alpha ^{}=1`$ unit the tachyon has mass$`{}_{}{}^{2}=1`$. In this case, for small deformations the solution for the tachyon field will have the form

$$T(x^0)=Ae^{x^0}+Be^{x^0},$$
(2.1)
where $`A`$ and $`B`$ are constants determined by the initial condition:

$$T(0)=\lambda ,\frac{T}{x^0}|_{x^0=0}=u.$$
(2.2)
We shall for simplicity take $`u=0`$. Also, we shall take $`\lambda >0`$, so that $`T`$ rolls towards the extremum of the action representing the tachyon vacuum, which is at a positive value of $`T`$. This gives

$$A=B=\frac{1}{2}\lambda .$$
(2.3)
Hence

$$T(x^0)=\lambda \mathrm{cosh}(x^0).$$
(2.4)
As long as $`\lambda `$ is small and $`x^0`$ is not too large, we expect the linearized approximation to be valid, and the above represents the expected evolution of the tachyon field. The question now is: can we modify the above solution in a systematic manner to take into account the effect of the interaction? We can begin by trying to construct a solution of the equations of motion:

$$Q_B|\mathrm{\Psi }+|\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }=0,$$
(2.5)
as an expansion in $`\lambda `$:

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }=\underset{n}{}\lambda ^n|\chi ^{(n)}.$$
(2.6)
The leading term is given by:

$$|\chi ^{(1)}=c_1|0_g\mathrm{cosh}(X^0(0))|0_m.$$
(2.7)
The subscripts $`g`$ and $`m`$ refer to ghost and matter sectors respectively. We can construct the higher order terms in the solution in Siegel gauge

$$b_0|\mathrm{\Psi }=0,$$
(2.8)
by choosing:

$$|\chi ^{(n)}=\frac{b_0}{L_0}\underset{m=1}{\overset{n1}{}}|\chi ^{(m)}\chi ^{(nm)}.$$
(2.9)
This gives a way to construct the $`n`$th order term in terms of lower order terms. However this procedure breaks down if $`b_0_{m=1}^{n1}|\chi ^{(m)}\chi ^{(nm)}`$ contains a state with zero $`L_0`$ eigenvalue. This is related to the question of whether the matter sector vertex operator $`\mathrm{cosh}(X^0)`$ is exactly marginal. In this case, however, the marginality of this operator follows from the result in the Wick rotated theory where we replace $`X^0`$ by $`iX`$. $`X`$ is now a free scalar field describing a unitary conformal field theory of $`c=1`$. Under this rotation $`\mathrm{cosh}(X^0)`$ gets transformed to $`\mathrm{cos}(X)`$, and this is known to represent an exactly marginal deformation in this Wick rotated theory. This shows that the original operator $`\mathrm{cosh}(X^0)`$ is also exactly marginal, and we do not encounter any obstruction in solving eq.(2.9) in a power series expansion in the parameter $`\lambda `$. (If the coordinate $`x`$ were compactified on a circle of critical radius $`R=1`$, the perturbation by $`\mathrm{cos}(X)`$ would create a single codimension 1 D-brane on the circle. However since the direction $`x`$ is non-compact, this perturbation creates an array of codimension 1 D-branes in the Wick rotated theory, seperated by an interval of $`2\pi `$.)

More explicitly we can proceed as follows. In the Wick rotated theory, the solution of the string field theory equations of motion for different values of the parameter $`\lambda `$ can be constructed explicitly using level truncation. We can simply take this solution and make an inverse Wick rotation $`XiX^0`$ to generate a time dependent solution. One must of course make sure that Wick rotation of the solution preserves the reality condition, but this can be seen to be true as follows.111See  for a detailed discussion on reality condition on string field. The solution of ref. is invariant under the twist transformation (under which a string field component picks up a phase of $`(1)^l`$ where $`l`$ denotes the level of the oscillators used to create the associated state from the zero momentum tachyon state $`c_1|0`$) as well as the transformation $`XX`$. Thus it can be expressed as linear combination of states, each of which only involves even total powers of the oscillator $`\alpha _n`$ of $`X`$ and momentum $`k`$ along the $`X`$ direction, and hence remains real under the inverse Wick rotation $`kik_0`$, $`\alpha i\alpha ^0`$. Thus a real field configuration remains real after the inverse Wick rotation.

This shows the existence of a one parameter family of time dependent solutions, characterized by the marginal deformation parameter $`\lambda `$. A more general solution, labelled by two parameters, can be constructed by simply time-translating the original solution, and the two parameters can be interpreted as the initial position and velocity of the tachyon field. Thus we see that despite the non-locality of the string field theory action, it does admit time dependent solutions labelled by initial position and velocity of the tachyon field, as expected of an ordinary field theory with two derivative actions. However, since for all these solutions the tachyon comes to rest near the maximum of the potential at a certain instant of time, the total energy of each of these solutions is less than that of the unstable D-brane. Solutions for which the total energy is larger than that of the unstable D-brane can be constructed by beginning with $`T(x^0)=u\mathrm{sinh}x^0`$ and then iterating this using eq.(2.9). The marginality of the operator $`\mathrm{sinh}(X^0)`$ again follows from the marginality of the operator $`\mathrm{sin}(X)`$ in the Wick rotated theory. Since under Wick rotation $`u\mathrm{sinh}x^0`$ becomes $`iu\mathrm{sin}x`$, and hence $`T`$ becomes imaginary, the time dependent solution is not related to any physical solution in the Wick rotated theory. But the marginality of the operator $`\mathrm{sin}(X)`$  would guarantee the existence of a complex solution in the Wick rotated theory whose leading term involves $`T(x)=iu\mathrm{sin}(x)`$. Under inverse Wick rotation this gives a real solution in the original theory as a formal power series expansion in $`u`$.

Of course it is quite likely that all these solutions break down at sufficiently large $`x^0`$, since the higher order terms in the expansion proportional to $`\mathrm{cosh}(nx^0)`$ or $`\mathrm{sinh}(nx^0)`$ grow with $`x^0`$. What we can hope for is that the solution exists at least for a finite range of values of $`x^0`$ during which we can use it to follow the time evolution of the string field. Since the expansion of the solution is in powers of $`\lambda \mathrm{cosh}x^0`$ (or $`u\mathrm{sinh}x^0`$), a rough estimate of the region of convergence for small $`\lambda `$ is $`x^0<\mathrm{ln}(1/|\lambda |)`$ (or $`x^0<\mathrm{ln}(1/|u|)`$). Beyond this limit we need to use other methods for studying the system, as will be discussed in sections 3 and 4. In this context we also note that even for $`x^0=0`$, the solution of  can be constructed only for a limited range of $`\lambda `$: $`|\lambda |\overline{\lambda }`$ with $`\overline{\lambda }.45`$. This amounts to a restriction on the initial displacement of the tachyon field from its equilibrium value.

Before we leave this topic let us remark that the solution obtained this way for a generic $`\lambda `$ is not the inverse Wick rotated version of a codimension one lump solution representing a lower dimensional D-brane. The codimension one lump representing a lower dimensional D-brane appears for a specific value $`\lambda _c`$ of the deformation parameter $`\lambda `$.222The relation between $`\lambda _c`$ and $`\overline{\lambda }`$ has not beeen conclusively determined. We shall argue in section 4 that this critical value $`\lambda _c`$ corresponds to placing the tachyon at the minimum of its potential in the Wick rotated theory. For other values of $`\lambda `$, – notably for small $`\lambda `$, – the resulting conformal field theory is solvable, but cannot be interpreted as a D-brane of one lower dimension. This in turn shows that the time dependent solution for a generic $`\lambda `$ should not be thought of as an inverse Wick rotated version of a lower dimensional D-brane. Furthermore, even for $`\lambda =\lambda _c`$, the lump solution should be thought to be located not at $`x=0`$, but at $`x=\pi `$ where $`\lambda \mathrm{cos}(x)`$ reaches its minimum. Thus the origin of the $`x^0`$ coordinate, where the tachyon begins rolling, does not map under Wick rotation to the location of the lump solution.

We could repeat this construction for describing the decay of an unstable brane or a brane anti-brane pair in type II string theory. The arguments follow a similar line with the tachyon now having a mass2 of $`1/2`$ in the $`\alpha ^{}=1`$ unit, and hence represented by a solution of the form

$$T(x^0)=\lambda \mathrm{cosh}(x^0/\sqrt{2}),$$
(2.10)
to first order in $`\lambda `$. In the Wick rotated theory the corresponding vertex operator is exactly marginal, which guarantees the existence of a solution in string field theory. The complete solution whose first order term is given by (2.10) has the property that the $`_0T`$ vanishes at $`x^0=0`$. This reflects the fact that at $`x^0=0`$, the tachyon field has zero velocity. On the other hand the Wick rotated version of the solution, for which $`T(x)\lambda \mathrm{cos}(x/\sqrt{2})`$ for small $`\lambda `$, should be thought of as an anti-kink located at $`x=\pi /\sqrt{2}`$, and a kink located at $`x=3\pi /\sqrt{2}`$, i.e. at the points on the circle where the tachyon field itself vanishes. In particular if we increase $`\lambda `$, then for an appropriate value $`\lambda _c`$ of $`\lambda `$, it is at these points where the lower dimensional D-branes are created. Thus we see again that Wick rotation $`x^0ix`$ does not map the origin of the $`x^0`$ coordinate, where the tachyon begins rolling, to the location of the soliton solution.

Finally we note that both in the case of bosonic string theory and the superstring theory, we could get other solutions by inverse Wick rotation of the solutions describing lump / kink solutions on a circle of radius other than the critical radius where the deformation is marginal. The interpretation of these solutions is not entirely clear to us; however since at the critical radius they seem to represent the tachyon placed at its minimum, this may be the case for other radii as well.

## 3 Conformal Field Theory Description

As pointed out already, the procedure outlined in the last section gives us a way to construct time dependent solution of the equations of motion for sufficiently small $`x^0`$, describing the initial stage of the brane decay, but does not really allow us to follow the time evolution for large $`x^0`$. Thus we need to invoke other methods to analyze the system for large $`x^0`$.

One such method would be the techniques of two dimensional conformal field theory. As discussed already, the Wick rotated solution can be described by a solvable boundary conformal field theory, and hence one might try to describe the physics of the solution describing the rolling of the tachyon by analysing the inverse Wick rotation of this solvable conformal field theory. This is described by the world-sheet action:

$$\frac{1}{2\pi }d^2z_zX^0_{\overline{z}}X^0+\stackrel{~}{\lambda }𝑑t\mathrm{cosh}X^0(t),$$
(3.1)
where $`t`$ parametrizes the boundary of the world-sheet, and the deformation parameter $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ of conformal field theory is related to the parameter $`\lambda `$ appearing in string field theory solution via some functional relation. For small $`\lambda `$, $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\lambda `$. We note from eq.(3.1) that for small positive $`\lambda `$ (and hence positive $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$) the boundary term gives a positive contribution to the action. In contrast if we had chosen $`\lambda `$ to be negative, the boundary term will be negative, and could destabilize the theory. According to eq.(2.2) this corresponds to pushing the tachyon to the wrong side, where it can roll down all the way to $`\mathrm{}`$. Presumably this is the instability that is seen in the conformal field theory description.333This qualitative difference between positive and negative values of $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ is not visible in the Wick rotated theory. For solutions with total energy larger than the brane tension, the $`\mathrm{cosh}(X^0(t))`$ term in (3.1) is replaced by $`\mathrm{sinh}(X^0(t))`$ and we see an instability for either sign of $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ since $`\mathrm{sinh}(X^0(t))`$ is unbounded from above and below. This is presumably related to the fact that in this case either in the past or in the future the tachyon rolls to the wrong side of the maximum where the potential is unbounded from below.

In contrast, for an unstable D-brane in superstring theory the solution describing the rolling of the tachyon is described by a boundary perturbation of the form:

$$\stackrel{~}{\lambda }𝑑t\sigma _1\psi ^0(t)\mathrm{sinh}X^0(t),$$
(3.2)
where $`\sigma _1`$ is the Chan-Paton factor and $`\psi ^0`$ is the superpartner of $`X^0`$. Thus both signs of $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ are allowed in this case.

We shall not analyze these theories here, but note that since the Wick rotated version of these theories are solvable, these theories are likely to be solvable as well. We also note the following point. Since the $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$-deformation of the original conformal field theory involves only the coordinate $`X^0`$, the part of the boundary conformal field theory involving the space-like coordinates remains unchanged under this deformation. In particular the coordinates transverse to the original brane, carrying Dirichlet boundary condition, will continue to carry Dirichlet boundary condition. Thus we would expect that as the configuration evolves in time, the energy density of the system is confined to the plane of the original brane. This can be seen in particular by probing the system by closed string vertex operators; if we take a closed string vertex operator carrying a factor of $`e^{ik_{}.X_{}}`$, and compute its one point function on the disk with the boundary perturbation appropriate to the rolling solution, the answer is independent of $`k_{}`$ due to the Dirichlet boundary condition on the coordinates $`X_{}`$, or at most a polynomial in $`k_{}`$ if the closed string vertex operator involves additional explicit factors of $`k_{}`$ and/or $`X_{}`$. In position space this implies that the coupling of the closed strings to the system is proportional to $`\delta (x_{})`$ or its derivative, indicating that the time dependent configuration is still firmly localized on the surface $`x_{}=0`$. This is in contrast to the generic decay of a soliton in a quantum field theory, where the initial energy of the lump soliton is eventually transfered to the bulk modes which carry the energy away from the brane.

## 4 Boundary State

We shall now analyze the boundary state associated with the rolling tachyon solution to determine what kind of source it produces for closed strings. We shall restrict our analysis in this section to bosonic string theory.

We consider the rolling tachyon solution in open bosonic string theory associated with the world-sheet action (3.1). As usual we shall attempt to determine the associated boundary state by beginning with the boundary state in the Wick rotated theory and then making an inverse Wick rotation. The boundary state in the Wick rotated theory, described by a free non-compact scalar $`X`$ with boundary perturbation $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }𝑑t\mathrm{cos}(X(t))`$ was analysed in . It is given by:

$$|\underset{j}{}\underset{m=j}{\overset{j}{}}D_{m,m}^j(R)|j;m,m,$$
(4.1)
where the sum over $`j`$ runs over $`0,1/2,1,\mathrm{}`$, $`R`$ is the SU(2) rotation matrix:

$$R=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}(\pi \stackrel{~}{\lambda })& i\mathrm{sin}(\pi \stackrel{~}{\lambda })\\ i\mathrm{sin}(\pi \stackrel{~}{\lambda })& \mathrm{cos}(\pi \stackrel{~}{\lambda })\end{array}\right),$$
(4.2)
$`D_{m,m}^j(R)`$ is the spin $`j`$ representation matrix of this rotation in the $`J_z`$ eigenbasis, and $`|j;m,m`$ is the Virasoro Ishibashi state built over the primary $`|j;m,m`$ in the $`c=1`$ CFT with momentum $`2m`$ and conformal weight $`(j^2,j^2)`$. This primary can be expressed in the form:

$$|j;m,m=e^{i\epsilon (j,m)}𝒪_{j,m}e^{2imX(0)}|0_c,$$
(4.3)
where $`e^{i\epsilon (j,m)}`$ is a phase factor, $`𝒪_{j,m}`$ is a combination of oscillators of total level $`j^2m^2`$ both in the holomorphic and the anti-holomorphic sector, and $`|0_c`$ is the SL(2,C) invariant Fock vacuum for the closed string.

Since the expression is somewhat complicated, we shall focus on the part of the boundary state that does not involve any $`X`$ oscillators. This requires picking up only the primary states $`|j;j,j`$ and $`|j;j,j`$ in eq.(4.1), whose expressions, according to eq.(4.3), does not involve any oscillators since $`j^2m^2`$ vanishes. Since

$$D_{j,j}^j=D_{j,j}^j=(i\mathrm{sin}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi ))^{2j},$$
(4.4)
according to the convention of , the oscillator free part of the boundary state is given by:

$$|_0\left[1+\underset{j0}{}(i\mathrm{sin}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi ))^{2j}\left(e^{i\epsilon (j,j)}e^{2ijX(0)}+e^{i\epsilon (j,j)}e^{2ijX(0)}\right)\right]|0_c.$$
(4.5)
It remains to determine the phase factors $`e^{i\epsilon (j,\pm j)}`$. These can be determined by using the result that at the special value of $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=\frac{1}{2}`$, the system becomes a periodic array of D-branes with Dirichlet boundary condition on $`X`$, placed at $`x=(2n+1)\pi `$. Alternatively, at $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=\frac{1}{2}`$ the system again becomes a periodic array of D-branes, but now placed at $`x=2n\pi `$. (In both cases the D-branes are situated at the minimum of the potential $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\mathrm{cos}(X)`$.) Thus for these values of $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ the boundary state $`|`$ must match the known boundary state of the corresponding D-brane system. This gives

$$e^{i\epsilon (j,\pm j)}=(i)^{2j},$$
(4.6)
and hence, writing $`j=n/2`$, we get

$$|_0\left[1+2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(\mathrm{sin}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi ))^n\mathrm{cos}(nX(0))\right]|0_c.$$
(4.7)
This shows that the source for the closed string tachyon (and other fields involving arbitrary excitations in the rest of the $`c=25`$ CFT and the ghost CFT but no oscillator excitation in the $`c=1`$ CFT) is proportional to

$$1+2\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(\mathrm{sin}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi ))^n\mathrm{cos}(nx).$$
(4.8)
We can now make an inverse Wick rotation $`xix^0`$ to get the source for the closed string tachyon field (and other fields involving excitations in the $`c=25`$ and ghost CFT) for the rolling open string tachyon solution. This is proportional to:

$$f(x^0)1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(\mathrm{sin}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi ))^n(e^{nx^0}+e^{nx^0}).$$
(4.9)
This sum can be performed explicitly and gives:

$$f(x^0)=\frac{1}{1+e^{x^0}\mathrm{sin}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi )}+\frac{1}{1+e^{x^0}\mathrm{sin}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi )}1.$$
(4.10)
Note that for positive $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ (which corresponds to beginning on the side on which the potential has a local minimum) the function $`f(x^0)`$ is finite for all $`x^0`$ and in fact goes to 0 as $`x^0\mathrm{}`$. On the other hand if $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ is negative, i.e. we begin on the side where the potential is unbounded from below, the function $`f(x^0)`$ hits a singularity at $`x^0=\mathrm{ln}(1/\mathrm{sin}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi ))`$.

Another interesting quantity is the (Fourier transform of the) coefficient of the state $`\alpha _1^0\overline{\alpha }_1^0|k^0`$ in $`|`$, where $`\alpha _n^0`$ and $`\overline{\alpha }_n^0`$ represent the oscillators associated with the right and the left-moving components of $`X^0`$. In the Wick rotated picture, this receives contribution from two sources: a constant term proportional to $`D_{0,0}^1`$ from the primary state $`|1;0,0`$, and the secondary states $`\frac{1}{2j^2}L_1\overline{L}_1|j;\pm j,\pm j`$ in $`|j;\pm j,\pm j`$. These contributions can be evaluated in a straightforward manner, and after inverse Wick rotation add up to a term proportional to

$$g(x^0)=\mathrm{cos}(2\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi )+1f(x^0),$$
(4.11)
with $`f(x^0)`$ defined as in eq.(4.10). Like $`f(x^0)`$, $`g(x^0)`$ represents the $`x^0`$ dependence of the source for many closed string fields, involving excitation by $`\alpha _1^0\overline{\alpha }_1^0`$ in the $`X^0`$ CFT, and arbitrary excitations in the $`c=25`$ CFT and the ghost CFT. In particular the source for different components of the graviton and dilaton fields are given by appropriate linear combinations of $`f(x^0)`$ and $`g(x^0)`$.

Since

$$f(x^0)+g(x^0)=\mathrm{cos}(2\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi )+1,$$
(4.12)
is conserved, it is natural to interprete it as the conserved energy density on the D-brane up to an overall normalization. This interpretation can also be supported by the following observation. For small $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$, we have

$$f(x^0)+g(x^0)2(1\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^2\pi ^2).$$
(4.13)
This should be compared with the initial total energy of the D-brane system when the tachyon field is displaced by a small amount $`\lambda \stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ from its maximum. The tension of the D-brane is given by $`1/(2\pi ^2g^2)`$ where $`g`$ is the open string coupling constant. On the other hand, from the string field theory action we find that for small displacement $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ of the tachyon field, the tachyon potential energy is $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^2/(2g^2)`$. Thus the total initial energy is given by:

$$\frac{1}{2\pi ^2g^2}(1\stackrel{~}{\lambda }^2\pi ^2).$$
(4.14)
This is precisely the same as the right hand side of (4.13) up to a constant of proportionality. This in turn shows that it is correct to interprete $`f(x^0)+g(x^0)=1+\mathrm{cos}(2\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi )`$ as the total energy density of the D-brane system.

We end this section with the following observations:

1. For $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=\frac{1}{2}`$, total energy vanishes. Also from eq.(4.10) we see that $`f(x^0)`$ vanishes, indicating that the system does not evolve. This corresponds to placing the tachyon at the minimum of its potential. We also note that at this point the Wick rotated theory represents a periodic array of D-branes with Dirichlet boundary condition on the $`X`$ coordinate, placed at $`x=(2n+1)\pi `$.
2. For $`0<\stackrel{~}{\lambda }<\frac{1}{2}`$ the system evolves, but instead of oscillating about the minimum of the potential, its energy momentum tensor asymptotically approaches the configuration $`f(x^0)0`$ and $`g(x^0)(1+\mathrm{cos}(2\pi \stackrel{~}{\lambda }))`$. It is not clear how to reconcile this result with the result in boundary string field theory that the minimum of the tachyon potential is a finite distance away from the maximum.
3. For $`\frac{1}{2}<\stackrel{~}{\lambda }<0`$, the system evolves towards a singularity. As $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ approaches $`\frac{1}{2}`$, the time at which the system hits the singularity goes to zero.
4. The set of inequivalent solutions are obtained by taking $`\frac{1}{2}<\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\frac{1}{2}`$. In particular $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=\frac{1}{2}+ϵ`$ gives the same solution as $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }=\frac{1}{2}ϵ`$.
5. We have so far analyzed only part of the boundary state. In order to get a complete picture we should also analyze the time evolution of the rest of the boundary state involving higher level states in the $`X^0`$ CFT.
6. The analysis can be easily repeated for perturbation by $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\mathrm{sinh}(X^0)`$. In fact this is related to perturbation by $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\mathrm{cosh}(X^0)`$ by a replacement $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }i\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$, $`X^0X^0+i\pi /2`$. Making these replacements in eqs.(4.10), (4.11) we get

$$f(x^0)=\frac{1}{1+e^{x^0}\mathrm{sinh}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi )}+\frac{1}{1e^{x^0}\mathrm{sinh}(\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi )}1,$$
(4.15)
and

$$g(x^0)=\mathrm{cosh}(2\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi )+1f(x^0).$$
(4.16)
Thus the system hits a singularity at positive (negative) value of $`x^0`$ for small negative (positive) $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$. The total energy of the system is now proportional to $`1+\mathrm{cosh}(2\stackrel{~}{\lambda }\pi )`$. These results are consistent with the interpretation that $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }`$ represents the time derivative of the tachyon field at the top of the potential.

## 5 Effective Field Theory Analysis

In this section we shall use an effective field theory to explore the decay of an unstable brane. The idea behind this analysis is as follows. As pointed out in refs., the effective field theory describing the coupling of the tachyon to the Born-Infeld lagrangian admits electric flux tube solutions whose dynamics is identical to that of fundamental strings. Thus if we begin with a D-brane with a constant electric field switched on along one of its tangential directions, and then allow the tachyon field to roll down, then we would expect that the end product of the decay process will contain fundamental strings lying along the plane of the original brane, together with other decay products. If the other decay products reside in the degrees of freedom far away from the plane of the brane, we would expect that the hamiltonian describing the dynamics of the electric flux tubes will decouple from the hamiltonian describing the rest of the decay products. On the other hand if the other decay products reside in the plane of the brane, then there will not be any such decoupling.

We shall now show that the decoupling of this type does not occur within the analysis based on an effective field theory, leading to the conclusion that the decay products reside in the plane of the brane. We shall begin with a general effective action on the world-volume of the unstable D-brane, involving a set of scalar fields $`\stackrel{}{T}`$, and a U(1) gauge field $`A_\mu `$. The scalar fields $`\stackrel{}{T}`$ include the tachyon, and could also include other scalars like the transverse coordinates of the D-brane. We shall restrict to field configurations which are translationally invariant on the brane, work in the $`A_0=0`$ gauge, and allow only $`A_1`$ to be non-zero, thereby allowing a (time dependent) uniform electric field $`E`$ along the 1 direction given by

$$E=_0A_1.$$
(5.1)
We shall also make the simplifying assumption that the Lagrangian density depends only on the fields $`\stackrel{}{T}`$, $`A_\mu `$ and their first time derivatives. From the general result of  it follows that the theory in the presence of the electric field can be related to the theory in the absence of electric field by rescaling the 00 and the 11 components of the metric, changing the overall normalization of the action, and replacing the ordinary products by Moyal product involving the coordinates $`x^0`$ and $`x^1`$. Since our field configurations are independent of $`x^1`$, the Moyal product is the same as the ordinary product, and we only need to take into account the rescaling of the metric and change in the overall normalization of the action. This gives the general form of the lagrangian density for space-independent field configurations to be:

$$=\sqrt{1E^2}f(\frac{1}{\sqrt{1E^2}}_0\stackrel{}{T},\stackrel{}{T}),$$
(5.2)
where $`f(_0\stackrel{}{T},\stackrel{}{T})`$ denotes the lagrangian density in the absence of the electric field. If we define,

$$f_i(_0\stackrel{}{T},\stackrel{}{T})=\frac{f(_0\stackrel{}{T},\stackrel{}{T})}{(_0T_i)},$$
(5.3)
then the momenta $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ conjugate to $`A_1`$ and the momenta $`P_i`$ conjugate to $`T_i`$ are given by, respectively,

$`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{E}}={\displaystyle \frac{E}{\sqrt{1E^2}}}f({\displaystyle \frac{_0\stackrel{}{T}}{\sqrt{1E^2}}},\stackrel{}{T})+{\displaystyle \frac{E}{1E^2}}_0T_if_i({\displaystyle \frac{_0\stackrel{}{T}}{\sqrt{1E^2}}},\stackrel{}{T})`$
$`P_i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{(_0T_i)}}=f_i({\displaystyle \frac{_0\stackrel{}{T}}{\sqrt{1E^2}}},\stackrel{}{T}).`$ (5.4)
From this we get

$$_0T_i=\sqrt{1E^2}g_i(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T}),$$
(5.5)
where $`\stackrel{}{g}`$ is the inverse function of $`\stackrel{}{f}`$, i.e.

$$g_i(\stackrel{}{f}(_0\stackrel{}{T},\stackrel{}{T}),\stackrel{}{T})=_0T_i.$$
(5.6)
Using eq.(5.5), we can eliminate $`_0T_i`$ in terms of $`P_i`$ in the first of eq.(5) and get

$$\mathrm{\Pi }=\frac{E}{\sqrt{1E^2}}h(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T}),$$
(5.7)
where

$$h(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T})=\left(f(\stackrel{}{g}(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T}),\stackrel{}{T})+\stackrel{}{P}\stackrel{}{g}(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T})\right).$$
(5.8)
This gives

$$E=\frac{\mathrm{\Pi }}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }^2+(h(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T}))^2}}.$$
(5.9)
Let us now turn to the construction of the hamiltonian density. This is given by:

$$(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T})=\mathrm{\Pi }E+\stackrel{}{P}_0\stackrel{}{T}=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }^2+(h(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T}))^2}.$$
(5.10)
This shows that $`h(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T})`$ represents the hamiltonian density of the system for $`E=0`$. $``$ is conserved as a result of time translation invariance of the system, and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is conserved as a result of gauge invariance. Thus from (5.10) we see that $`h(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T})`$ is also conserved, and eq.(5.9) then shows that $`E`$ is conserved as well. We note from eq.(5.10) that due to separate conservation of $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ and $`h`$, the dynamics of $`\stackrel{}{P}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{T}`$ in the background of electric flux is related to the dynamics in the absence of the flux by a simple time dilation factor of $`h/\sqrt{\mathrm{\Pi }^2+h^2}`$.

$`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ can be interpreted as the energy stored in the electric flux tube; indeed if during the evolution of the D-brane the excess energy leaves the plane of the brane leaving behind static electric flux tubes in the tachyon vacuum, then the energy stored in the flux tube will be exactly $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. In this case we would expect the hamiltonian describing the dynamics of the flux tube to be nearly decoupled from the Hamiltonian describing the dynamics of the ‘bulk modes’. As seen from (5.10) however, this is not the case; the hamiltonian $`h(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T})`$ containing the excess energy of the brane couples strongly to $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. To see this more explicitly, we can compare two situations. First consider the situation where we have an initial condition $`h(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T})=0`$. This represents a system with electric flux at the minimum of the tachyon potential. In the other case we begin with a system with the same amount of electric flux near the top of the potential well and let it roll down towards the minimum, so that the initial condition sets $`h`$ to a fixed non-zero constant required to give the correct tension of the brane. If the excess energy of the brane is carried away from the brane during the decay leaving behind static electric flux tubes, then after a sufficiently long time, the dynamics of the flux tube in the two cases should be described effectively by the same hamiltonian. To see if this is the case, we now compare the response of these two systems to small fluctuation of the scalar fields $`X^i`$ describing transverse coordinates of the brane. This can be done by deforming $`h`$ from its given value by switching on small amount of momenta $`P_i`$ conjugate to $`X^i`$. Physically, around the tachyon vacuum solution, $`P_i`$ represents the momentum carried by the flux tube in directions transverse to the original brane. Since $`h(\stackrel{}{P},\stackrel{}{T})`$ is conserved, irrespective of how long we wait, the dependence of $``$ on $`P_i`$ will be different in the two cases, since we are Taylor expanding a function around two different points. Thus the dynamics of the flux tube continues to depend on the initial energy of the system irrespective of how long we wait. From this we conclude that the excess energy does not get carried away by radiation, but resides in the plane of the brane where it couples strongly to the electric flux tubes.

## 6 Conclusion

In this paper we have explored some aspects of time dependent solution in string field theory on an unstable D-brane describing the tachyon rolling away from the maximum of its potential. Due to the presence of higher derivative terms in the string field theory action it is not a priori clear how to construct such solutions. We have shown that it is indeed possible to construct a family of solutions of the string field theory equations of motion labelled by the initial position and velocity of the tachyon field. Furthermore, one can also explicitly write down the boundary conformal field theory action and the boundary state associated with these solutions.

Unlike in the case of decay of an unstable lump solution in a generic field theory, where under a small perturbation the energy of the lump gets converted to the classical radiation moving away from the original position of the lump, in the case of classical decay of a D-brane, the energy is stored in the plane of the original brane. This can be traced to the fact that there are no open string degrees of freedom away from the plane of the D-brane, and hence no classical mode of the string can carry away the energy.

The analysis of the boundary state shows that for D-branes in bosonic string theory, if we push the system towards the minimum of the tachyon potential, its energy momentum tensor evolves smoothly towards an asymptotic configuration. Instead, if we push the system in the other direction in which the potential is unbounded from below, the energy momentum tensor quickly hits a singularity.

Clearly there are many avenues left open for exploration. This includes a detailed study of the boundary states describing the rolling of the tachyon field on unstable D-branes in superstring theories. In the Wick rotated theory this was studied in ref., but since it was expressed in terms of a different set of variables than the Wick rotated coordinate $`X`$, it is difficult to use it directly for the present analysis. Another possible approach would be construction of the time dependent solutions in vacuum string field theory along the line of . These studies may turn out to be useful in uncovering the role of tachyon condensation in cosmology.

Acknowledgement: I would like to thank B. Zwiebach for useful discussions. This work was supported in part by a grant from the Eberly College of Science of the Penn State University.