tuw-03-21 - arxiv · arxiv:hep-th/0306217v3 23 feb 2004 tuw-03-21 hep-th/0306217 the complete...
TRANSCRIPT
arX
ivh
ep-t
h03
0621
7v3
23
Feb
2004
TUW-03-21hep-th0306217
THE COMPLETE SOLUTION OF2D SUPERFIELD SUPERGRAVITY
FROM GRADED POISSON-SIGMA MODELSAND THE SUPER POINTPARTICLE
L Bergaminlowast and W Kummerdagger
Institute for Theoretical Physics Vienna University of TechnologyWiedner Hauptstraszlige 8-10 A-1040 Vienna Austria
Abstract
Recently an alternative description of 2d supergravities in terms of gradedPoisson-Sigma models (gPSM) has been given As pointed out previously bythe present authors a certain subset of gPSMs can be interpreted as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravity fulfilling the well-known limits of supergravity albeit deformed bythe dilaton field In our present paper we show that precisely that class of gPSMscorresponds one-to-one to the known dilaton supergravity superfield theories pre-sented a long time ago by Park and Strominger Therefore the unique advantagesof the gPSM approach can be exploited for the latter We are able to providethe first complete classical solution for any such theory On the other handthe straightforward superfield formulation of the point particle in a supergravitybackground can be translated back into the gPSM frame where ldquosupergeodesicsrdquocan be discussed in terms of a minimal set of supergravity field degrees of freedomFurther possible applications like the (almost) trivial quantization are mentioned
lowastbergamintphtuwienacatdaggerwkummertphtuwienacat
1 Introduction
Theories of gravity in 1+1 dimensions naturally emerge from the generalization of(eg spherically) reduced Einstein gravity in arbitrary dimensions Decisive progressin the treatment of their classical and quantum properties were the consequence ofthe discovery in the early 90-s that a Cartan formulation in a specific light-like gauge[1] which is equivalent to an Eddington-Finkelstein gauge for the metric not onlysimplifies enormously the evaluation of the classical theory but even allowed an exact(trivial) nonperturbative quantization [2ndash5] After the application to a particular modelwith curvature and torsion [6] it was realized that not only all 2d gravity modelsbut an even larger class of theories may be covered by the concept of Poisson-Sigmamodels (PSMs) [7ndash11] There a set of target space coordinates (auxiliary fields onthe 2d world sheet) exists besides the gauge-degrees of freedom In this frameworkthe simplicity of 2d classical and quantum gravity becomes manifest PSM modelsgeneralized naturally to the graded case (gPSM) when they are supplemented by anti-commuting fields [1213] The resulting models exhibit the typical gauge transformationof supergravity theories However the fermionic extensions are highly ambiguous Inaddition they may introduce new singularities andor obstructions as compared to thebosonic theory for which they have been derived This result was obtained for theN = (1 1) superextension but should hold also for higher N
Recently the present authors realized [14] that a subset of those gPSMs can be iden-tified which fulfills a constraint algebra whose structure is very close to the algebra ofldquogenuinerdquo supergravity In this algebra the modifications by the presence of the dilatonfield (and its single fermionic partner for N = (1 1)) are in a sense minimal Theonly gPSMs allowed by that algebra correspond to a unique class of (dilaton deformed)N = (1 1) supergravity theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS1 in the fol-lowing) in which ndash somewhat miraculously ndash even all singularities and obstructions inthe generic fermionic extensions disappear The bosonic part of physically interestingtheories (spherically reduced gravity [15ndash18] string inspired black hole [19] simpli-fied models [20ndash24] bosonic potential of supergravity from superspace [25]) are specialcases thereof This is also a non-trivial result because the ldquopotentialrdquo of those bosonictheories must be derivable from a prepotential
Already in the purely bosonic case where the PSM is equivalent [26 27] to a gen-eral 2d dilaton theory (GDT) with vanishing torsion but dynamical dilaton the corre-sponding PSM works with non-vanishing bosonic torsion If this PSM action shall beextended directly to its supersymmetrized version using the superspace formalism thegeneralization of the usual conventional constraints valid solely for vanishing bosonictorsion is an imperative step In consequence a new solution of Bianchi identities etc
1Already at this point the authors apologize for the introduction of quite a number of specialacronyms It seems that only in terms of those a reasonably compact formulation of the strategy ispossible (cf also fig 1 below)
2
has to be considered which turned out to be a highly non-trivial task [28] Withinthe gPSM approach this problem is avoided altogether and it suffices to solve a gradedJacobi-type identity (vanishing Nijenhuis tensor) [13]
Therefore the question arises whether and in what sense the equivalence of thebosonic PSM and GDT theories can be extended to supergravity To this end it mustbe investigated whether a gPSM based MFS has any relation to a genuine dilatonsuperfield theory expressed in terms of superspace coordinates for a dynamical super-dilaton field An indication that this may work comes from the known result [1328ndash31]that a gPSM model with vanishing bosonic torsion [31] is ndashup to elimination of auxiliaryfieldsndash equivalent to a dilaton superfield theory [32] with non-dynamical dilaton Byfurther elimination of an auxiliary spinor (ldquodilatinordquo) this simpler model can be relatedquite generally to the supergravity model of Howe [25] as well
One of the main motivations to establish such a relation in the general case is the factthat in the (g)PSM approach the complete exact classical solution can be found for allsuch models Also for bosonic PSMs the quantization is (almost) trivial [1ndash4]2 as longas no matter interactions are included But even with matter a meaningful quantumperturbation theory can be developed [34ndash36] leading to an improved understandingof phenomena like the virtual black hole [37 38] Most of these results should extendstraightforwardly to the gPSM [39] which would allow substantial progress in theunderstanding of generalized supergravity in two dimensions
In our present paper we are able to report that indeed a detailed equivalenceexists between the class of gPSM-supergravities of reference [14] (MFS models) andthe well-known dilaton superfield supergravities proposed sometime ago by Park andStrominger [32] (dubbed ldquosuperfield dilaton supergravitiesrdquo SFDS) The equivalenceproceeds through different steps which should be transparent in the schematic repre-sentation of fig 1 an explanation thereof is given first
bull The two left hand columns of the figure cover the purely bosonic theories theones on the rhs include their fermionic extensions The two columns in themiddle contain theories with dynamical dilaton while the two columns at theborders are reserved for the restricted class of models with non-dynamical dilatonrespectively
bull As indicated by arrows at the top of the figure different theories displayed ina row are related to each other by means of supersymmetric extension or byrestriction to non-dynamical dilaton
Two fermionic extensions (MFDS and SFDS) correspond to GDT which is indi-cated by the large bracket
2For a comprehensive review we suggest [33]
3
bull Relations between different models are described by arrows Double-headed ar-rows are used if the corresponding relation indicates complete equivalence or atleast holds for the most important class of the connected theories Simple arrowspoint from the more general theories towards the restricted ones
bull Labels with a tilde indicate that this relation is a straightforward generalizationof the corresponding relation among bosonic theories (eg A harr A) Relationsamong different arrows within the same part of the figure (bosonic part or super-symmetric part resp) are indicated by primes (eg Aharr Aprime)
The equivalence A between PSM and GDT (resp Aprime for non-dynamical dilaton) inthe bosonic case is well-known [262733] so that A amounts to a trivial generalizationof A when anti-commuting fields are included [13] It connects MFS to minimal fielddilaton supergravity (MFDS) the fermionic extension of GDT (the same is true forAprime)
The proof of the quite non-trivial equivalence D provides the basis of our presentpaper We first establish it between the NDMFS and the SFNDS theory both withoutdynamical dilaton following the path Dprime in fig 1 In a second step SFNDS and SFDSare found to be connected by a (super-)conformal transformation (Bprimeprime backwards)which in the gPSM frame possesses a counterpart in a special target space diffeomor-phism (path B backwards) between MFS0 and MFS That latter transformation turnsout to be a generalization of the conformal transformation linking GDT and NDDTin the pure bosonic case (path B) We have found that in this way the more compli-cated direct relation of the general models (path D) is sufficiently transparent Thisstrategy is especially important also for keeping track of the proper way the symmetrytransformations are mapped upon each other following those successive steps
Another equivalence is established between theories with non-dynamical dilaton(MFS0 and SFNDS resp) and the model of Howe [25] For the restricted class ofactions with invertible (pre-)potential this may be obtained by the elimination of asuperfield (path C) or alternatively by the path Dprime rarr E This last equivalence alsoallows to relate MFS0 directly (ie without using Dprime but instead Aprime rarr E) to Howersquossupergravity [25]
On the basis of those relations the technical advantages of gPSM supergravity canbe exploited in full detail for the SFDS theories of ref [32] Proceeding ldquotop downrdquofrom the box MFS in fig 1 (A rarr D) and using the known general solution for theMFS0 [13] together with (the inverted arrow) B we are able to give the completeanalytic solution for the general superfield dilaton supergravity of ref [32] includingall fermionic contributions
Another example where the opposite way the ldquobottom uprdquo sequence (D rarr A) isto be chosen is important for the determination of the supergravity generalization ofthe geodesic within the gPSM formulation because the supersymmetric line element or
4
non-dynamicaldilaton
fermionic extension
ampdynamicaldilaton
restrictionks fermionicextension
+3dynamicaldilaton ampdilatino
restriction +3non-dynamical
dilaton ampdilatino
general gPSM2d models
[13]
supergravity restriction
PSM0
2d bosonicgravity
torsion zero
oo B
OO
Aprime
PSM2d bosonicgravityOO
A
MFSminimal fieldsupergravity
[14]
B
OO
A
MFS0minimal fieldsupergravitybos torsionzero [1331]
OO
Aprime
MFDS
minimal fielddilaton
supergravityOO
D
Bprime
NDMFSnon-dyn dilminimal fieldsupergravityOO
Dprime
EDoo
BC
E
oo
NDDTnon-dyn
dilaton theory
C
oo Bprime
GDTgeneral
dilaton theory
SFDSsuperfielddilaton
supergravity[32]
Bprimeprime
SFNDSsuperfieldnon-dyndilaton
supergravity
C
pure 2dgeometry
pure 2dsuper-
geometry[25]
Figure 1 Relation between different formulations of 2d gravity and 2d supergravityExplanations are given in the text
5
the super-pointparticle can be defined straightforwardly in the superfield formulationonly
The paper is organized as follows In Section 2 at first (Sect 21) the basic featuresof gPSMs are reviewed shortly Then (Sect 22) the subset MFS of ldquogenuinerdquo super-gravities is described as determined in ref [14] and the corresponding MFDS (Sect23) which obtains after elimination of certain auxiliary3 fields They include the partof the spin-connection which at the PSM level depends on the bosonic torsion andthe target-space coordinates except the dilaton and the dilatino
Section 3 is devoted to the superfield approach of 2d supergravity where it sufficesto consider the standard case with vanishing bosonic torsion The important role of(super-)conformal transformations is explained in Section 4 which prepares the groundfor the equivalence proof of minimal field supergravity as deduced from gPSMs withdilaton superfield supergravity The proof is presented in Section 5 All exact classicalsolutions of 2d superfield supergravity [32] are obtained in Section 6 Another applica-tion (Section 7) is the formulation of a supergeodesic defined as the motion of a testparticle in the background of minimal field supergravity Here only some very simplespecial cases are discussed as eg the null-directions and the consequences for thesupergravity background generating the Schwarzschild solution In the Appendices wecollect details of our notation and some lengthy formulas
2 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field
Supergravity
21 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
A general gPSM consists of scalar fields XI(x) which are itself coordinates of a gradedPoisson manifold with Poisson tensor P IJ(X) = (minus1)IJ+1P JI(X) The index I in thegeneric case includes commuting as well as anti-commuting fields4 In addition oneintroduces the gauge potential A = dXIAI = dXIAmI(x) dx
m a one form with respectto the Poisson structure as well as with respect to the 2d worldsheet coordinates ThegPSM action reads5
SgPSM =
int
M
dXI and AI +1
2P IJAJ and AI
=
int
e(
part0XIA1I minus part1X
IA0I + P IJA0JA1I
)
d2x
(21)
3These ldquoauxiliaryrdquo fields in the (g)PSM approach should not be confused with auxiliary fields in asuperfield formulation
4The usage of different indices as well as other features of our notation are explained in AppendixA1 For further details one should consult ref [13 28]
5If the multiplication of forms is evident in what follows the wedge symbol will be omitted
6
The Poisson tensor P IJ must have vanishing Nijenhuis tensor (obey a Jacobi-typeidentity with respect to the Schouten bracket related as XI XJ = P IJ to the Poissontensor)
P ILpartLPJK + g-perm (IJK) = 0 (22)
where the sum runs over the graded permutations Due to (22) the action (21) isinvariant under the symmetry transformations
δXI = P IJεJ δAI = minusdεI minus(
partIPJK
)
εK AJ (23)
where the term dǫI in the second of these equations provides the justification for callingAI ldquogauge fieldsrdquo
For a generic (g)PSM the commutator of two transformations (23) is a symmetrymodulo the equations of motion (eom-s) Only for P IJ linear in XI a closed (andlinear) Lie algebra is obtained and (22) reduces to the Jacobi identity for the structureconstants of a Lie group If the Poisson tensor is singular ndashthe actual situation in anyapplication to 2d (super-)gravity due to the odd dimension of the bosonic part of thetensorndash there exist (one or more) Casimir functions C(X) obeying
XI C = P IJ partC
partXJ= 0 (24)
which when determined by the field equations of motion are constants of motion Thevariation of AI and XI in (21) yields the gPSM field equations
dXI + P IJAJ = 0 (25)
dAI +1
2(partIP
JK)AKAJ = 0 (26)
In the application to two dimensional N = (1 1) supergravity6 the gauge potentialscomprise the spin connection ωab = ωǫab the zweibein and the gravitino
AI = (Aφ Aa Aα) = (ω ea ψα) XI = (Xφ Xa Xα) = (φXa χα) (27)
The fermionic components ψα (ldquogravitinordquo) and χα (ldquodilatinordquo) are Majorana spinorsLocal Lorentz invariance determines the φ-components of the Poisson tensor
P aφ = Xbǫba P αφ = minus1
2χβγ3β
α (28)
and the supersymmetry transformation is encoded in P αβ In a purely bosonic theorythe only arbitrary component of the Poisson tensor is P ab = vǫab where the locallyLorentz invariant ldquopotentialrdquo v = v (φ Y ) describes different models ( Y = XaXa2 )
6More complicated identifications of the 2d Cartan variables with AI are conceivable [40]
7
Evaluating (21) with that P ab and P aφ from (28) the action (ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea is the
volume form Dea = dea + ωǫabeb)
SPSM =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + ǫv)
(29)
is obtained The physically most interesting models are described by potentials quadraticin Xa
v = Y Z (φ) + V (φ) (210)
They include spherically reduced Einstein gravity [15ndash18] the string inspired blackhole [19] the simplified model with Z = 0 and linear V (φ) [20ndash24] the bosonic partof the Howe model [25] etc
Potentials of type (210) allow the integration of the (single) Casimir function C in(24)
C = eQ(φ)Y +W (φ) Q(φ) =
int φ
φ1
dϕZ(ϕ) W (φ) =
int φ
φ0
dϕeQ(ϕ)V (ϕ) (211)
where eg in spherically reduced gravity C on-shell is proportional to the ADM-massin the Schwarzschild solution
The auxiliary variables Xa and the torsion-dependent part of the spin connection ωcan be eliminated by algebraic equations of motion (path A in fig 1) Then the actionreduces to the familiar generalized dilaton theory in terms of the dilaton field φ andthe metric
SGDT =
int
d2x e(1
2Rφminus 1
2Zpartmφpartmφ+ V (φ)
)
(212)
Both formulations are equivalent at the classical [26 27] as well as at the quantumlevel [34ndash36]
For theories with non-dynamical dilaton (Z = 0 in (210)) a further elimination ofφ is possible if the potential V (φ) is invertible In this way one arrives at a theorysolely formulated in terms of the zweibein eam (path C in fig 1)
22 Minimal Field Supergravity
For N = (1 1) supergravity (cf (27)) a generic fermionic extension of the action(29) is obtained by making general Lorentz invariant ansatze for P aα P αβ togetherwith the fermionic extension of P ab = ǫab(v + χ2v2) of the bosonic case (χ2 = χαχα)Then the Jacobi identity (22) is solved Here (28) and the bosonic potential v are agiven input This leads to an algebraic albeit highly ambiguous solution with severalarbitrary functions [13] In addition the fermionic extensions generically exhibit newsingular terms Also not all bosonic models permit such an extension for the wholerange of their bosonic fields sometimes even no extension is allowed
8
As shown by the present authors [14] it is nevertheless possible to select ldquogenuinerdquosupergravity from this huge set of theories This is possible by a generalization ofthe standard requirements for a ldquotruerdquo supergravity [41ndash45] to the situation wheredeformations from the dilaton field φ are present To this end the non-linear symmetry(23) which is closed on-shell only is ndashin a first stepndash related to a more convenient(off-shell closed) algebra of Hamiltonian constraints GI = part1X
I + P IJ(X)A1I TheHamiltonian obtained from (21) in terms of these constraints takes the form [21446]
H =
int
dx1 GIA0I (213)
In a second step a certain linear combination of the GI suggested by the ADMparametrization [144748] maps the GI algebra upon a deformed version of the super-conformal algebra (deformed Neuveu-Schwarz resp Ramond algebra) This algebrais appropriate to impose restrictions which represent a natural generalization of therequirements from supergravity to theories deformed by the dilaton field It turnedout that the subset of models allowed by these restrictions uniquely leads to the gPSMsupergravity class of theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS in our presentpaper) with the Poisson tensor7
P ab =
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
ǫab (214)
P αb =Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bγ3)α+iV
u(χγb)α (215)
P αβ = minus2iXcγαβc +(
u+Z
8χ2
)
γ3αβ (216)
where the three functions V Z and the ldquoprepotentialrdquo u depend on the dilaton fieldφ only Besides the fixed components of P IJ according to (28) supergravity requiresthe existence of supersymmetry transformations which are generated by the first termin (216) It has been a central result of ref [14] that P αβ must be of the form (216)ie the generator of supersymmetry transformations is not allowed to receive any de-formations with respect to its form from rigid supersymmetry Furthermore in orderto satisfy the condition (22) V Z and u must be related by (uprime = dudφ)
V (φ) = minus1
8
(
(u2)prime + u2Z (φ))
(217)
Thus starting from a certain bosonic model with potential (210) in (214) the onlyrestriction remains that it must be expressible in terms of a prepotential u by (217)
7The constant u0 in ref [14] has been fixed as u0 = minus2 This is in agreement with standardsupersymmetry conventions
9
This happens to be the case for most physically interesting theories [15ndash25] Insertingthe Poisson tensor (28) (214)-(216) into equation (21) the ensuing action becomes(the covariant derivatives are defined in (A7))
SMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα + ǫ
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
+Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bebγ3ψ) +
iV
u(χγaeaψ)
+ iXa(ψγaψ)minus1
2
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(ψγ3ψ))
(218)
For later reference we also define the simpler model with Z = 0 (MFS0) where thefields are denoted by (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα)
SMFS0(φ Xa χα ω ea ψα) = SMFS
∣
∣
Z=0 fieldsrarrfields (219)
In terms of (28) and (214)-(216) the supersymmetry transformations of the MFSmodel according to (23) read
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (220)
δXa = minusZ4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)minus iV
u(χγaε) (221)
δχα = 2iXc(εγc)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (222)
δω =Z prime
4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)ea + i(V
u
)prime(χγaε)ea +
(
uprime +Z prime
8χ2
)
(εγ3ψ) (223)
δea =Z
4(χγaγ
bγ3ε)eb minus 2i(εγaψ) (224)
δψα = minus(Dε)α +Z
4Xa(γaγ
bγ3ε)αeb +iV
u(γbε)αeb +
Z
4χα(εγ
3ψ) (225)
We list neither here nor below transformations with the three bosonic parameters εiThe symmetry transformation generated by (28) corresponds to the local Lorentztransformations the other two by the field-dependent choice of the symmetry param-eter εa = ξmAma describe 2d diffeomorphisms ξm [49] Clearly the invariance withrespect to the latter three transformations is also evident from the explicit form of theaction (218)
23 Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
The PSM form of the action (218) represents a theory with non-vanishing bosonictorsion This can be seen easily from the eom obtained by variation of Xa Never-
10
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
1 Introduction
Theories of gravity in 1+1 dimensions naturally emerge from the generalization of(eg spherically) reduced Einstein gravity in arbitrary dimensions Decisive progressin the treatment of their classical and quantum properties were the consequence ofthe discovery in the early 90-s that a Cartan formulation in a specific light-like gauge[1] which is equivalent to an Eddington-Finkelstein gauge for the metric not onlysimplifies enormously the evaluation of the classical theory but even allowed an exact(trivial) nonperturbative quantization [2ndash5] After the application to a particular modelwith curvature and torsion [6] it was realized that not only all 2d gravity modelsbut an even larger class of theories may be covered by the concept of Poisson-Sigmamodels (PSMs) [7ndash11] There a set of target space coordinates (auxiliary fields onthe 2d world sheet) exists besides the gauge-degrees of freedom In this frameworkthe simplicity of 2d classical and quantum gravity becomes manifest PSM modelsgeneralized naturally to the graded case (gPSM) when they are supplemented by anti-commuting fields [1213] The resulting models exhibit the typical gauge transformationof supergravity theories However the fermionic extensions are highly ambiguous Inaddition they may introduce new singularities andor obstructions as compared to thebosonic theory for which they have been derived This result was obtained for theN = (1 1) superextension but should hold also for higher N
Recently the present authors realized [14] that a subset of those gPSMs can be iden-tified which fulfills a constraint algebra whose structure is very close to the algebra ofldquogenuinerdquo supergravity In this algebra the modifications by the presence of the dilatonfield (and its single fermionic partner for N = (1 1)) are in a sense minimal Theonly gPSMs allowed by that algebra correspond to a unique class of (dilaton deformed)N = (1 1) supergravity theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS1 in the fol-lowing) in which ndash somewhat miraculously ndash even all singularities and obstructions inthe generic fermionic extensions disappear The bosonic part of physically interestingtheories (spherically reduced gravity [15ndash18] string inspired black hole [19] simpli-fied models [20ndash24] bosonic potential of supergravity from superspace [25]) are specialcases thereof This is also a non-trivial result because the ldquopotentialrdquo of those bosonictheories must be derivable from a prepotential
Already in the purely bosonic case where the PSM is equivalent [26 27] to a gen-eral 2d dilaton theory (GDT) with vanishing torsion but dynamical dilaton the corre-sponding PSM works with non-vanishing bosonic torsion If this PSM action shall beextended directly to its supersymmetrized version using the superspace formalism thegeneralization of the usual conventional constraints valid solely for vanishing bosonictorsion is an imperative step In consequence a new solution of Bianchi identities etc
1Already at this point the authors apologize for the introduction of quite a number of specialacronyms It seems that only in terms of those a reasonably compact formulation of the strategy ispossible (cf also fig 1 below)
2
has to be considered which turned out to be a highly non-trivial task [28] Withinthe gPSM approach this problem is avoided altogether and it suffices to solve a gradedJacobi-type identity (vanishing Nijenhuis tensor) [13]
Therefore the question arises whether and in what sense the equivalence of thebosonic PSM and GDT theories can be extended to supergravity To this end it mustbe investigated whether a gPSM based MFS has any relation to a genuine dilatonsuperfield theory expressed in terms of superspace coordinates for a dynamical super-dilaton field An indication that this may work comes from the known result [1328ndash31]that a gPSM model with vanishing bosonic torsion [31] is ndashup to elimination of auxiliaryfieldsndash equivalent to a dilaton superfield theory [32] with non-dynamical dilaton Byfurther elimination of an auxiliary spinor (ldquodilatinordquo) this simpler model can be relatedquite generally to the supergravity model of Howe [25] as well
One of the main motivations to establish such a relation in the general case is the factthat in the (g)PSM approach the complete exact classical solution can be found for allsuch models Also for bosonic PSMs the quantization is (almost) trivial [1ndash4]2 as longas no matter interactions are included But even with matter a meaningful quantumperturbation theory can be developed [34ndash36] leading to an improved understandingof phenomena like the virtual black hole [37 38] Most of these results should extendstraightforwardly to the gPSM [39] which would allow substantial progress in theunderstanding of generalized supergravity in two dimensions
In our present paper we are able to report that indeed a detailed equivalenceexists between the class of gPSM-supergravities of reference [14] (MFS models) andthe well-known dilaton superfield supergravities proposed sometime ago by Park andStrominger [32] (dubbed ldquosuperfield dilaton supergravitiesrdquo SFDS) The equivalenceproceeds through different steps which should be transparent in the schematic repre-sentation of fig 1 an explanation thereof is given first
bull The two left hand columns of the figure cover the purely bosonic theories theones on the rhs include their fermionic extensions The two columns in themiddle contain theories with dynamical dilaton while the two columns at theborders are reserved for the restricted class of models with non-dynamical dilatonrespectively
bull As indicated by arrows at the top of the figure different theories displayed ina row are related to each other by means of supersymmetric extension or byrestriction to non-dynamical dilaton
Two fermionic extensions (MFDS and SFDS) correspond to GDT which is indi-cated by the large bracket
2For a comprehensive review we suggest [33]
3
bull Relations between different models are described by arrows Double-headed ar-rows are used if the corresponding relation indicates complete equivalence or atleast holds for the most important class of the connected theories Simple arrowspoint from the more general theories towards the restricted ones
bull Labels with a tilde indicate that this relation is a straightforward generalizationof the corresponding relation among bosonic theories (eg A harr A) Relationsamong different arrows within the same part of the figure (bosonic part or super-symmetric part resp) are indicated by primes (eg Aharr Aprime)
The equivalence A between PSM and GDT (resp Aprime for non-dynamical dilaton) inthe bosonic case is well-known [262733] so that A amounts to a trivial generalizationof A when anti-commuting fields are included [13] It connects MFS to minimal fielddilaton supergravity (MFDS) the fermionic extension of GDT (the same is true forAprime)
The proof of the quite non-trivial equivalence D provides the basis of our presentpaper We first establish it between the NDMFS and the SFNDS theory both withoutdynamical dilaton following the path Dprime in fig 1 In a second step SFNDS and SFDSare found to be connected by a (super-)conformal transformation (Bprimeprime backwards)which in the gPSM frame possesses a counterpart in a special target space diffeomor-phism (path B backwards) between MFS0 and MFS That latter transformation turnsout to be a generalization of the conformal transformation linking GDT and NDDTin the pure bosonic case (path B) We have found that in this way the more compli-cated direct relation of the general models (path D) is sufficiently transparent Thisstrategy is especially important also for keeping track of the proper way the symmetrytransformations are mapped upon each other following those successive steps
Another equivalence is established between theories with non-dynamical dilaton(MFS0 and SFNDS resp) and the model of Howe [25] For the restricted class ofactions with invertible (pre-)potential this may be obtained by the elimination of asuperfield (path C) or alternatively by the path Dprime rarr E This last equivalence alsoallows to relate MFS0 directly (ie without using Dprime but instead Aprime rarr E) to Howersquossupergravity [25]
On the basis of those relations the technical advantages of gPSM supergravity canbe exploited in full detail for the SFDS theories of ref [32] Proceeding ldquotop downrdquofrom the box MFS in fig 1 (A rarr D) and using the known general solution for theMFS0 [13] together with (the inverted arrow) B we are able to give the completeanalytic solution for the general superfield dilaton supergravity of ref [32] includingall fermionic contributions
Another example where the opposite way the ldquobottom uprdquo sequence (D rarr A) isto be chosen is important for the determination of the supergravity generalization ofthe geodesic within the gPSM formulation because the supersymmetric line element or
4
non-dynamicaldilaton
fermionic extension
ampdynamicaldilaton
restrictionks fermionicextension
+3dynamicaldilaton ampdilatino
restriction +3non-dynamical
dilaton ampdilatino
general gPSM2d models
[13]
supergravity restriction
PSM0
2d bosonicgravity
torsion zero
oo B
OO
Aprime
PSM2d bosonicgravityOO
A
MFSminimal fieldsupergravity
[14]
B
OO
A
MFS0minimal fieldsupergravitybos torsionzero [1331]
OO
Aprime
MFDS
minimal fielddilaton
supergravityOO
D
Bprime
NDMFSnon-dyn dilminimal fieldsupergravityOO
Dprime
EDoo
BC
E
oo
NDDTnon-dyn
dilaton theory
C
oo Bprime
GDTgeneral
dilaton theory
SFDSsuperfielddilaton
supergravity[32]
Bprimeprime
SFNDSsuperfieldnon-dyndilaton
supergravity
C
pure 2dgeometry
pure 2dsuper-
geometry[25]
Figure 1 Relation between different formulations of 2d gravity and 2d supergravityExplanations are given in the text
5
the super-pointparticle can be defined straightforwardly in the superfield formulationonly
The paper is organized as follows In Section 2 at first (Sect 21) the basic featuresof gPSMs are reviewed shortly Then (Sect 22) the subset MFS of ldquogenuinerdquo super-gravities is described as determined in ref [14] and the corresponding MFDS (Sect23) which obtains after elimination of certain auxiliary3 fields They include the partof the spin-connection which at the PSM level depends on the bosonic torsion andthe target-space coordinates except the dilaton and the dilatino
Section 3 is devoted to the superfield approach of 2d supergravity where it sufficesto consider the standard case with vanishing bosonic torsion The important role of(super-)conformal transformations is explained in Section 4 which prepares the groundfor the equivalence proof of minimal field supergravity as deduced from gPSMs withdilaton superfield supergravity The proof is presented in Section 5 All exact classicalsolutions of 2d superfield supergravity [32] are obtained in Section 6 Another applica-tion (Section 7) is the formulation of a supergeodesic defined as the motion of a testparticle in the background of minimal field supergravity Here only some very simplespecial cases are discussed as eg the null-directions and the consequences for thesupergravity background generating the Schwarzschild solution In the Appendices wecollect details of our notation and some lengthy formulas
2 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field
Supergravity
21 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
A general gPSM consists of scalar fields XI(x) which are itself coordinates of a gradedPoisson manifold with Poisson tensor P IJ(X) = (minus1)IJ+1P JI(X) The index I in thegeneric case includes commuting as well as anti-commuting fields4 In addition oneintroduces the gauge potential A = dXIAI = dXIAmI(x) dx
m a one form with respectto the Poisson structure as well as with respect to the 2d worldsheet coordinates ThegPSM action reads5
SgPSM =
int
M
dXI and AI +1
2P IJAJ and AI
=
int
e(
part0XIA1I minus part1X
IA0I + P IJA0JA1I
)
d2x
(21)
3These ldquoauxiliaryrdquo fields in the (g)PSM approach should not be confused with auxiliary fields in asuperfield formulation
4The usage of different indices as well as other features of our notation are explained in AppendixA1 For further details one should consult ref [13 28]
5If the multiplication of forms is evident in what follows the wedge symbol will be omitted
6
The Poisson tensor P IJ must have vanishing Nijenhuis tensor (obey a Jacobi-typeidentity with respect to the Schouten bracket related as XI XJ = P IJ to the Poissontensor)
P ILpartLPJK + g-perm (IJK) = 0 (22)
where the sum runs over the graded permutations Due to (22) the action (21) isinvariant under the symmetry transformations
δXI = P IJεJ δAI = minusdεI minus(
partIPJK
)
εK AJ (23)
where the term dǫI in the second of these equations provides the justification for callingAI ldquogauge fieldsrdquo
For a generic (g)PSM the commutator of two transformations (23) is a symmetrymodulo the equations of motion (eom-s) Only for P IJ linear in XI a closed (andlinear) Lie algebra is obtained and (22) reduces to the Jacobi identity for the structureconstants of a Lie group If the Poisson tensor is singular ndashthe actual situation in anyapplication to 2d (super-)gravity due to the odd dimension of the bosonic part of thetensorndash there exist (one or more) Casimir functions C(X) obeying
XI C = P IJ partC
partXJ= 0 (24)
which when determined by the field equations of motion are constants of motion Thevariation of AI and XI in (21) yields the gPSM field equations
dXI + P IJAJ = 0 (25)
dAI +1
2(partIP
JK)AKAJ = 0 (26)
In the application to two dimensional N = (1 1) supergravity6 the gauge potentialscomprise the spin connection ωab = ωǫab the zweibein and the gravitino
AI = (Aφ Aa Aα) = (ω ea ψα) XI = (Xφ Xa Xα) = (φXa χα) (27)
The fermionic components ψα (ldquogravitinordquo) and χα (ldquodilatinordquo) are Majorana spinorsLocal Lorentz invariance determines the φ-components of the Poisson tensor
P aφ = Xbǫba P αφ = minus1
2χβγ3β
α (28)
and the supersymmetry transformation is encoded in P αβ In a purely bosonic theorythe only arbitrary component of the Poisson tensor is P ab = vǫab where the locallyLorentz invariant ldquopotentialrdquo v = v (φ Y ) describes different models ( Y = XaXa2 )
6More complicated identifications of the 2d Cartan variables with AI are conceivable [40]
7
Evaluating (21) with that P ab and P aφ from (28) the action (ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea is the
volume form Dea = dea + ωǫabeb)
SPSM =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + ǫv)
(29)
is obtained The physically most interesting models are described by potentials quadraticin Xa
v = Y Z (φ) + V (φ) (210)
They include spherically reduced Einstein gravity [15ndash18] the string inspired blackhole [19] the simplified model with Z = 0 and linear V (φ) [20ndash24] the bosonic partof the Howe model [25] etc
Potentials of type (210) allow the integration of the (single) Casimir function C in(24)
C = eQ(φ)Y +W (φ) Q(φ) =
int φ
φ1
dϕZ(ϕ) W (φ) =
int φ
φ0
dϕeQ(ϕ)V (ϕ) (211)
where eg in spherically reduced gravity C on-shell is proportional to the ADM-massin the Schwarzschild solution
The auxiliary variables Xa and the torsion-dependent part of the spin connection ωcan be eliminated by algebraic equations of motion (path A in fig 1) Then the actionreduces to the familiar generalized dilaton theory in terms of the dilaton field φ andthe metric
SGDT =
int
d2x e(1
2Rφminus 1
2Zpartmφpartmφ+ V (φ)
)
(212)
Both formulations are equivalent at the classical [26 27] as well as at the quantumlevel [34ndash36]
For theories with non-dynamical dilaton (Z = 0 in (210)) a further elimination ofφ is possible if the potential V (φ) is invertible In this way one arrives at a theorysolely formulated in terms of the zweibein eam (path C in fig 1)
22 Minimal Field Supergravity
For N = (1 1) supergravity (cf (27)) a generic fermionic extension of the action(29) is obtained by making general Lorentz invariant ansatze for P aα P αβ togetherwith the fermionic extension of P ab = ǫab(v + χ2v2) of the bosonic case (χ2 = χαχα)Then the Jacobi identity (22) is solved Here (28) and the bosonic potential v are agiven input This leads to an algebraic albeit highly ambiguous solution with severalarbitrary functions [13] In addition the fermionic extensions generically exhibit newsingular terms Also not all bosonic models permit such an extension for the wholerange of their bosonic fields sometimes even no extension is allowed
8
As shown by the present authors [14] it is nevertheless possible to select ldquogenuinerdquosupergravity from this huge set of theories This is possible by a generalization ofthe standard requirements for a ldquotruerdquo supergravity [41ndash45] to the situation wheredeformations from the dilaton field φ are present To this end the non-linear symmetry(23) which is closed on-shell only is ndashin a first stepndash related to a more convenient(off-shell closed) algebra of Hamiltonian constraints GI = part1X
I + P IJ(X)A1I TheHamiltonian obtained from (21) in terms of these constraints takes the form [21446]
H =
int
dx1 GIA0I (213)
In a second step a certain linear combination of the GI suggested by the ADMparametrization [144748] maps the GI algebra upon a deformed version of the super-conformal algebra (deformed Neuveu-Schwarz resp Ramond algebra) This algebrais appropriate to impose restrictions which represent a natural generalization of therequirements from supergravity to theories deformed by the dilaton field It turnedout that the subset of models allowed by these restrictions uniquely leads to the gPSMsupergravity class of theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS in our presentpaper) with the Poisson tensor7
P ab =
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
ǫab (214)
P αb =Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bγ3)α+iV
u(χγb)α (215)
P αβ = minus2iXcγαβc +(
u+Z
8χ2
)
γ3αβ (216)
where the three functions V Z and the ldquoprepotentialrdquo u depend on the dilaton fieldφ only Besides the fixed components of P IJ according to (28) supergravity requiresthe existence of supersymmetry transformations which are generated by the first termin (216) It has been a central result of ref [14] that P αβ must be of the form (216)ie the generator of supersymmetry transformations is not allowed to receive any de-formations with respect to its form from rigid supersymmetry Furthermore in orderto satisfy the condition (22) V Z and u must be related by (uprime = dudφ)
V (φ) = minus1
8
(
(u2)prime + u2Z (φ))
(217)
Thus starting from a certain bosonic model with potential (210) in (214) the onlyrestriction remains that it must be expressible in terms of a prepotential u by (217)
7The constant u0 in ref [14] has been fixed as u0 = minus2 This is in agreement with standardsupersymmetry conventions
9
This happens to be the case for most physically interesting theories [15ndash25] Insertingthe Poisson tensor (28) (214)-(216) into equation (21) the ensuing action becomes(the covariant derivatives are defined in (A7))
SMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα + ǫ
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
+Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bebγ3ψ) +
iV
u(χγaeaψ)
+ iXa(ψγaψ)minus1
2
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(ψγ3ψ))
(218)
For later reference we also define the simpler model with Z = 0 (MFS0) where thefields are denoted by (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα)
SMFS0(φ Xa χα ω ea ψα) = SMFS
∣
∣
Z=0 fieldsrarrfields (219)
In terms of (28) and (214)-(216) the supersymmetry transformations of the MFSmodel according to (23) read
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (220)
δXa = minusZ4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)minus iV
u(χγaε) (221)
δχα = 2iXc(εγc)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (222)
δω =Z prime
4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)ea + i(V
u
)prime(χγaε)ea +
(
uprime +Z prime
8χ2
)
(εγ3ψ) (223)
δea =Z
4(χγaγ
bγ3ε)eb minus 2i(εγaψ) (224)
δψα = minus(Dε)α +Z
4Xa(γaγ
bγ3ε)αeb +iV
u(γbε)αeb +
Z
4χα(εγ
3ψ) (225)
We list neither here nor below transformations with the three bosonic parameters εiThe symmetry transformation generated by (28) corresponds to the local Lorentztransformations the other two by the field-dependent choice of the symmetry param-eter εa = ξmAma describe 2d diffeomorphisms ξm [49] Clearly the invariance withrespect to the latter three transformations is also evident from the explicit form of theaction (218)
23 Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
The PSM form of the action (218) represents a theory with non-vanishing bosonictorsion This can be seen easily from the eom obtained by variation of Xa Never-
10
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
has to be considered which turned out to be a highly non-trivial task [28] Withinthe gPSM approach this problem is avoided altogether and it suffices to solve a gradedJacobi-type identity (vanishing Nijenhuis tensor) [13]
Therefore the question arises whether and in what sense the equivalence of thebosonic PSM and GDT theories can be extended to supergravity To this end it mustbe investigated whether a gPSM based MFS has any relation to a genuine dilatonsuperfield theory expressed in terms of superspace coordinates for a dynamical super-dilaton field An indication that this may work comes from the known result [1328ndash31]that a gPSM model with vanishing bosonic torsion [31] is ndashup to elimination of auxiliaryfieldsndash equivalent to a dilaton superfield theory [32] with non-dynamical dilaton Byfurther elimination of an auxiliary spinor (ldquodilatinordquo) this simpler model can be relatedquite generally to the supergravity model of Howe [25] as well
One of the main motivations to establish such a relation in the general case is the factthat in the (g)PSM approach the complete exact classical solution can be found for allsuch models Also for bosonic PSMs the quantization is (almost) trivial [1ndash4]2 as longas no matter interactions are included But even with matter a meaningful quantumperturbation theory can be developed [34ndash36] leading to an improved understandingof phenomena like the virtual black hole [37 38] Most of these results should extendstraightforwardly to the gPSM [39] which would allow substantial progress in theunderstanding of generalized supergravity in two dimensions
In our present paper we are able to report that indeed a detailed equivalenceexists between the class of gPSM-supergravities of reference [14] (MFS models) andthe well-known dilaton superfield supergravities proposed sometime ago by Park andStrominger [32] (dubbed ldquosuperfield dilaton supergravitiesrdquo SFDS) The equivalenceproceeds through different steps which should be transparent in the schematic repre-sentation of fig 1 an explanation thereof is given first
bull The two left hand columns of the figure cover the purely bosonic theories theones on the rhs include their fermionic extensions The two columns in themiddle contain theories with dynamical dilaton while the two columns at theborders are reserved for the restricted class of models with non-dynamical dilatonrespectively
bull As indicated by arrows at the top of the figure different theories displayed ina row are related to each other by means of supersymmetric extension or byrestriction to non-dynamical dilaton
Two fermionic extensions (MFDS and SFDS) correspond to GDT which is indi-cated by the large bracket
2For a comprehensive review we suggest [33]
3
bull Relations between different models are described by arrows Double-headed ar-rows are used if the corresponding relation indicates complete equivalence or atleast holds for the most important class of the connected theories Simple arrowspoint from the more general theories towards the restricted ones
bull Labels with a tilde indicate that this relation is a straightforward generalizationof the corresponding relation among bosonic theories (eg A harr A) Relationsamong different arrows within the same part of the figure (bosonic part or super-symmetric part resp) are indicated by primes (eg Aharr Aprime)
The equivalence A between PSM and GDT (resp Aprime for non-dynamical dilaton) inthe bosonic case is well-known [262733] so that A amounts to a trivial generalizationof A when anti-commuting fields are included [13] It connects MFS to minimal fielddilaton supergravity (MFDS) the fermionic extension of GDT (the same is true forAprime)
The proof of the quite non-trivial equivalence D provides the basis of our presentpaper We first establish it between the NDMFS and the SFNDS theory both withoutdynamical dilaton following the path Dprime in fig 1 In a second step SFNDS and SFDSare found to be connected by a (super-)conformal transformation (Bprimeprime backwards)which in the gPSM frame possesses a counterpart in a special target space diffeomor-phism (path B backwards) between MFS0 and MFS That latter transformation turnsout to be a generalization of the conformal transformation linking GDT and NDDTin the pure bosonic case (path B) We have found that in this way the more compli-cated direct relation of the general models (path D) is sufficiently transparent Thisstrategy is especially important also for keeping track of the proper way the symmetrytransformations are mapped upon each other following those successive steps
Another equivalence is established between theories with non-dynamical dilaton(MFS0 and SFNDS resp) and the model of Howe [25] For the restricted class ofactions with invertible (pre-)potential this may be obtained by the elimination of asuperfield (path C) or alternatively by the path Dprime rarr E This last equivalence alsoallows to relate MFS0 directly (ie without using Dprime but instead Aprime rarr E) to Howersquossupergravity [25]
On the basis of those relations the technical advantages of gPSM supergravity canbe exploited in full detail for the SFDS theories of ref [32] Proceeding ldquotop downrdquofrom the box MFS in fig 1 (A rarr D) and using the known general solution for theMFS0 [13] together with (the inverted arrow) B we are able to give the completeanalytic solution for the general superfield dilaton supergravity of ref [32] includingall fermionic contributions
Another example where the opposite way the ldquobottom uprdquo sequence (D rarr A) isto be chosen is important for the determination of the supergravity generalization ofthe geodesic within the gPSM formulation because the supersymmetric line element or
4
non-dynamicaldilaton
fermionic extension
ampdynamicaldilaton
restrictionks fermionicextension
+3dynamicaldilaton ampdilatino
restriction +3non-dynamical
dilaton ampdilatino
general gPSM2d models
[13]
supergravity restriction
PSM0
2d bosonicgravity
torsion zero
oo B
OO
Aprime
PSM2d bosonicgravityOO
A
MFSminimal fieldsupergravity
[14]
B
OO
A
MFS0minimal fieldsupergravitybos torsionzero [1331]
OO
Aprime
MFDS
minimal fielddilaton
supergravityOO
D
Bprime
NDMFSnon-dyn dilminimal fieldsupergravityOO
Dprime
EDoo
BC
E
oo
NDDTnon-dyn
dilaton theory
C
oo Bprime
GDTgeneral
dilaton theory
SFDSsuperfielddilaton
supergravity[32]
Bprimeprime
SFNDSsuperfieldnon-dyndilaton
supergravity
C
pure 2dgeometry
pure 2dsuper-
geometry[25]
Figure 1 Relation between different formulations of 2d gravity and 2d supergravityExplanations are given in the text
5
the super-pointparticle can be defined straightforwardly in the superfield formulationonly
The paper is organized as follows In Section 2 at first (Sect 21) the basic featuresof gPSMs are reviewed shortly Then (Sect 22) the subset MFS of ldquogenuinerdquo super-gravities is described as determined in ref [14] and the corresponding MFDS (Sect23) which obtains after elimination of certain auxiliary3 fields They include the partof the spin-connection which at the PSM level depends on the bosonic torsion andthe target-space coordinates except the dilaton and the dilatino
Section 3 is devoted to the superfield approach of 2d supergravity where it sufficesto consider the standard case with vanishing bosonic torsion The important role of(super-)conformal transformations is explained in Section 4 which prepares the groundfor the equivalence proof of minimal field supergravity as deduced from gPSMs withdilaton superfield supergravity The proof is presented in Section 5 All exact classicalsolutions of 2d superfield supergravity [32] are obtained in Section 6 Another applica-tion (Section 7) is the formulation of a supergeodesic defined as the motion of a testparticle in the background of minimal field supergravity Here only some very simplespecial cases are discussed as eg the null-directions and the consequences for thesupergravity background generating the Schwarzschild solution In the Appendices wecollect details of our notation and some lengthy formulas
2 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field
Supergravity
21 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
A general gPSM consists of scalar fields XI(x) which are itself coordinates of a gradedPoisson manifold with Poisson tensor P IJ(X) = (minus1)IJ+1P JI(X) The index I in thegeneric case includes commuting as well as anti-commuting fields4 In addition oneintroduces the gauge potential A = dXIAI = dXIAmI(x) dx
m a one form with respectto the Poisson structure as well as with respect to the 2d worldsheet coordinates ThegPSM action reads5
SgPSM =
int
M
dXI and AI +1
2P IJAJ and AI
=
int
e(
part0XIA1I minus part1X
IA0I + P IJA0JA1I
)
d2x
(21)
3These ldquoauxiliaryrdquo fields in the (g)PSM approach should not be confused with auxiliary fields in asuperfield formulation
4The usage of different indices as well as other features of our notation are explained in AppendixA1 For further details one should consult ref [13 28]
5If the multiplication of forms is evident in what follows the wedge symbol will be omitted
6
The Poisson tensor P IJ must have vanishing Nijenhuis tensor (obey a Jacobi-typeidentity with respect to the Schouten bracket related as XI XJ = P IJ to the Poissontensor)
P ILpartLPJK + g-perm (IJK) = 0 (22)
where the sum runs over the graded permutations Due to (22) the action (21) isinvariant under the symmetry transformations
δXI = P IJεJ δAI = minusdεI minus(
partIPJK
)
εK AJ (23)
where the term dǫI in the second of these equations provides the justification for callingAI ldquogauge fieldsrdquo
For a generic (g)PSM the commutator of two transformations (23) is a symmetrymodulo the equations of motion (eom-s) Only for P IJ linear in XI a closed (andlinear) Lie algebra is obtained and (22) reduces to the Jacobi identity for the structureconstants of a Lie group If the Poisson tensor is singular ndashthe actual situation in anyapplication to 2d (super-)gravity due to the odd dimension of the bosonic part of thetensorndash there exist (one or more) Casimir functions C(X) obeying
XI C = P IJ partC
partXJ= 0 (24)
which when determined by the field equations of motion are constants of motion Thevariation of AI and XI in (21) yields the gPSM field equations
dXI + P IJAJ = 0 (25)
dAI +1
2(partIP
JK)AKAJ = 0 (26)
In the application to two dimensional N = (1 1) supergravity6 the gauge potentialscomprise the spin connection ωab = ωǫab the zweibein and the gravitino
AI = (Aφ Aa Aα) = (ω ea ψα) XI = (Xφ Xa Xα) = (φXa χα) (27)
The fermionic components ψα (ldquogravitinordquo) and χα (ldquodilatinordquo) are Majorana spinorsLocal Lorentz invariance determines the φ-components of the Poisson tensor
P aφ = Xbǫba P αφ = minus1
2χβγ3β
α (28)
and the supersymmetry transformation is encoded in P αβ In a purely bosonic theorythe only arbitrary component of the Poisson tensor is P ab = vǫab where the locallyLorentz invariant ldquopotentialrdquo v = v (φ Y ) describes different models ( Y = XaXa2 )
6More complicated identifications of the 2d Cartan variables with AI are conceivable [40]
7
Evaluating (21) with that P ab and P aφ from (28) the action (ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea is the
volume form Dea = dea + ωǫabeb)
SPSM =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + ǫv)
(29)
is obtained The physically most interesting models are described by potentials quadraticin Xa
v = Y Z (φ) + V (φ) (210)
They include spherically reduced Einstein gravity [15ndash18] the string inspired blackhole [19] the simplified model with Z = 0 and linear V (φ) [20ndash24] the bosonic partof the Howe model [25] etc
Potentials of type (210) allow the integration of the (single) Casimir function C in(24)
C = eQ(φ)Y +W (φ) Q(φ) =
int φ
φ1
dϕZ(ϕ) W (φ) =
int φ
φ0
dϕeQ(ϕ)V (ϕ) (211)
where eg in spherically reduced gravity C on-shell is proportional to the ADM-massin the Schwarzschild solution
The auxiliary variables Xa and the torsion-dependent part of the spin connection ωcan be eliminated by algebraic equations of motion (path A in fig 1) Then the actionreduces to the familiar generalized dilaton theory in terms of the dilaton field φ andthe metric
SGDT =
int
d2x e(1
2Rφminus 1
2Zpartmφpartmφ+ V (φ)
)
(212)
Both formulations are equivalent at the classical [26 27] as well as at the quantumlevel [34ndash36]
For theories with non-dynamical dilaton (Z = 0 in (210)) a further elimination ofφ is possible if the potential V (φ) is invertible In this way one arrives at a theorysolely formulated in terms of the zweibein eam (path C in fig 1)
22 Minimal Field Supergravity
For N = (1 1) supergravity (cf (27)) a generic fermionic extension of the action(29) is obtained by making general Lorentz invariant ansatze for P aα P αβ togetherwith the fermionic extension of P ab = ǫab(v + χ2v2) of the bosonic case (χ2 = χαχα)Then the Jacobi identity (22) is solved Here (28) and the bosonic potential v are agiven input This leads to an algebraic albeit highly ambiguous solution with severalarbitrary functions [13] In addition the fermionic extensions generically exhibit newsingular terms Also not all bosonic models permit such an extension for the wholerange of their bosonic fields sometimes even no extension is allowed
8
As shown by the present authors [14] it is nevertheless possible to select ldquogenuinerdquosupergravity from this huge set of theories This is possible by a generalization ofthe standard requirements for a ldquotruerdquo supergravity [41ndash45] to the situation wheredeformations from the dilaton field φ are present To this end the non-linear symmetry(23) which is closed on-shell only is ndashin a first stepndash related to a more convenient(off-shell closed) algebra of Hamiltonian constraints GI = part1X
I + P IJ(X)A1I TheHamiltonian obtained from (21) in terms of these constraints takes the form [21446]
H =
int
dx1 GIA0I (213)
In a second step a certain linear combination of the GI suggested by the ADMparametrization [144748] maps the GI algebra upon a deformed version of the super-conformal algebra (deformed Neuveu-Schwarz resp Ramond algebra) This algebrais appropriate to impose restrictions which represent a natural generalization of therequirements from supergravity to theories deformed by the dilaton field It turnedout that the subset of models allowed by these restrictions uniquely leads to the gPSMsupergravity class of theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS in our presentpaper) with the Poisson tensor7
P ab =
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
ǫab (214)
P αb =Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bγ3)α+iV
u(χγb)α (215)
P αβ = minus2iXcγαβc +(
u+Z
8χ2
)
γ3αβ (216)
where the three functions V Z and the ldquoprepotentialrdquo u depend on the dilaton fieldφ only Besides the fixed components of P IJ according to (28) supergravity requiresthe existence of supersymmetry transformations which are generated by the first termin (216) It has been a central result of ref [14] that P αβ must be of the form (216)ie the generator of supersymmetry transformations is not allowed to receive any de-formations with respect to its form from rigid supersymmetry Furthermore in orderto satisfy the condition (22) V Z and u must be related by (uprime = dudφ)
V (φ) = minus1
8
(
(u2)prime + u2Z (φ))
(217)
Thus starting from a certain bosonic model with potential (210) in (214) the onlyrestriction remains that it must be expressible in terms of a prepotential u by (217)
7The constant u0 in ref [14] has been fixed as u0 = minus2 This is in agreement with standardsupersymmetry conventions
9
This happens to be the case for most physically interesting theories [15ndash25] Insertingthe Poisson tensor (28) (214)-(216) into equation (21) the ensuing action becomes(the covariant derivatives are defined in (A7))
SMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα + ǫ
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
+Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bebγ3ψ) +
iV
u(χγaeaψ)
+ iXa(ψγaψ)minus1
2
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(ψγ3ψ))
(218)
For later reference we also define the simpler model with Z = 0 (MFS0) where thefields are denoted by (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα)
SMFS0(φ Xa χα ω ea ψα) = SMFS
∣
∣
Z=0 fieldsrarrfields (219)
In terms of (28) and (214)-(216) the supersymmetry transformations of the MFSmodel according to (23) read
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (220)
δXa = minusZ4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)minus iV
u(χγaε) (221)
δχα = 2iXc(εγc)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (222)
δω =Z prime
4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)ea + i(V
u
)prime(χγaε)ea +
(
uprime +Z prime
8χ2
)
(εγ3ψ) (223)
δea =Z
4(χγaγ
bγ3ε)eb minus 2i(εγaψ) (224)
δψα = minus(Dε)α +Z
4Xa(γaγ
bγ3ε)αeb +iV
u(γbε)αeb +
Z
4χα(εγ
3ψ) (225)
We list neither here nor below transformations with the three bosonic parameters εiThe symmetry transformation generated by (28) corresponds to the local Lorentztransformations the other two by the field-dependent choice of the symmetry param-eter εa = ξmAma describe 2d diffeomorphisms ξm [49] Clearly the invariance withrespect to the latter three transformations is also evident from the explicit form of theaction (218)
23 Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
The PSM form of the action (218) represents a theory with non-vanishing bosonictorsion This can be seen easily from the eom obtained by variation of Xa Never-
10
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
bull Relations between different models are described by arrows Double-headed ar-rows are used if the corresponding relation indicates complete equivalence or atleast holds for the most important class of the connected theories Simple arrowspoint from the more general theories towards the restricted ones
bull Labels with a tilde indicate that this relation is a straightforward generalizationof the corresponding relation among bosonic theories (eg A harr A) Relationsamong different arrows within the same part of the figure (bosonic part or super-symmetric part resp) are indicated by primes (eg Aharr Aprime)
The equivalence A between PSM and GDT (resp Aprime for non-dynamical dilaton) inthe bosonic case is well-known [262733] so that A amounts to a trivial generalizationof A when anti-commuting fields are included [13] It connects MFS to minimal fielddilaton supergravity (MFDS) the fermionic extension of GDT (the same is true forAprime)
The proof of the quite non-trivial equivalence D provides the basis of our presentpaper We first establish it between the NDMFS and the SFNDS theory both withoutdynamical dilaton following the path Dprime in fig 1 In a second step SFNDS and SFDSare found to be connected by a (super-)conformal transformation (Bprimeprime backwards)which in the gPSM frame possesses a counterpart in a special target space diffeomor-phism (path B backwards) between MFS0 and MFS That latter transformation turnsout to be a generalization of the conformal transformation linking GDT and NDDTin the pure bosonic case (path B) We have found that in this way the more compli-cated direct relation of the general models (path D) is sufficiently transparent Thisstrategy is especially important also for keeping track of the proper way the symmetrytransformations are mapped upon each other following those successive steps
Another equivalence is established between theories with non-dynamical dilaton(MFS0 and SFNDS resp) and the model of Howe [25] For the restricted class ofactions with invertible (pre-)potential this may be obtained by the elimination of asuperfield (path C) or alternatively by the path Dprime rarr E This last equivalence alsoallows to relate MFS0 directly (ie without using Dprime but instead Aprime rarr E) to Howersquossupergravity [25]
On the basis of those relations the technical advantages of gPSM supergravity canbe exploited in full detail for the SFDS theories of ref [32] Proceeding ldquotop downrdquofrom the box MFS in fig 1 (A rarr D) and using the known general solution for theMFS0 [13] together with (the inverted arrow) B we are able to give the completeanalytic solution for the general superfield dilaton supergravity of ref [32] includingall fermionic contributions
Another example where the opposite way the ldquobottom uprdquo sequence (D rarr A) isto be chosen is important for the determination of the supergravity generalization ofthe geodesic within the gPSM formulation because the supersymmetric line element or
4
non-dynamicaldilaton
fermionic extension
ampdynamicaldilaton
restrictionks fermionicextension
+3dynamicaldilaton ampdilatino
restriction +3non-dynamical
dilaton ampdilatino
general gPSM2d models
[13]
supergravity restriction
PSM0
2d bosonicgravity
torsion zero
oo B
OO
Aprime
PSM2d bosonicgravityOO
A
MFSminimal fieldsupergravity
[14]
B
OO
A
MFS0minimal fieldsupergravitybos torsionzero [1331]
OO
Aprime
MFDS
minimal fielddilaton
supergravityOO
D
Bprime
NDMFSnon-dyn dilminimal fieldsupergravityOO
Dprime
EDoo
BC
E
oo
NDDTnon-dyn
dilaton theory
C
oo Bprime
GDTgeneral
dilaton theory
SFDSsuperfielddilaton
supergravity[32]
Bprimeprime
SFNDSsuperfieldnon-dyndilaton
supergravity
C
pure 2dgeometry
pure 2dsuper-
geometry[25]
Figure 1 Relation between different formulations of 2d gravity and 2d supergravityExplanations are given in the text
5
the super-pointparticle can be defined straightforwardly in the superfield formulationonly
The paper is organized as follows In Section 2 at first (Sect 21) the basic featuresof gPSMs are reviewed shortly Then (Sect 22) the subset MFS of ldquogenuinerdquo super-gravities is described as determined in ref [14] and the corresponding MFDS (Sect23) which obtains after elimination of certain auxiliary3 fields They include the partof the spin-connection which at the PSM level depends on the bosonic torsion andthe target-space coordinates except the dilaton and the dilatino
Section 3 is devoted to the superfield approach of 2d supergravity where it sufficesto consider the standard case with vanishing bosonic torsion The important role of(super-)conformal transformations is explained in Section 4 which prepares the groundfor the equivalence proof of minimal field supergravity as deduced from gPSMs withdilaton superfield supergravity The proof is presented in Section 5 All exact classicalsolutions of 2d superfield supergravity [32] are obtained in Section 6 Another applica-tion (Section 7) is the formulation of a supergeodesic defined as the motion of a testparticle in the background of minimal field supergravity Here only some very simplespecial cases are discussed as eg the null-directions and the consequences for thesupergravity background generating the Schwarzschild solution In the Appendices wecollect details of our notation and some lengthy formulas
2 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field
Supergravity
21 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
A general gPSM consists of scalar fields XI(x) which are itself coordinates of a gradedPoisson manifold with Poisson tensor P IJ(X) = (minus1)IJ+1P JI(X) The index I in thegeneric case includes commuting as well as anti-commuting fields4 In addition oneintroduces the gauge potential A = dXIAI = dXIAmI(x) dx
m a one form with respectto the Poisson structure as well as with respect to the 2d worldsheet coordinates ThegPSM action reads5
SgPSM =
int
M
dXI and AI +1
2P IJAJ and AI
=
int
e(
part0XIA1I minus part1X
IA0I + P IJA0JA1I
)
d2x
(21)
3These ldquoauxiliaryrdquo fields in the (g)PSM approach should not be confused with auxiliary fields in asuperfield formulation
4The usage of different indices as well as other features of our notation are explained in AppendixA1 For further details one should consult ref [13 28]
5If the multiplication of forms is evident in what follows the wedge symbol will be omitted
6
The Poisson tensor P IJ must have vanishing Nijenhuis tensor (obey a Jacobi-typeidentity with respect to the Schouten bracket related as XI XJ = P IJ to the Poissontensor)
P ILpartLPJK + g-perm (IJK) = 0 (22)
where the sum runs over the graded permutations Due to (22) the action (21) isinvariant under the symmetry transformations
δXI = P IJεJ δAI = minusdεI minus(
partIPJK
)
εK AJ (23)
where the term dǫI in the second of these equations provides the justification for callingAI ldquogauge fieldsrdquo
For a generic (g)PSM the commutator of two transformations (23) is a symmetrymodulo the equations of motion (eom-s) Only for P IJ linear in XI a closed (andlinear) Lie algebra is obtained and (22) reduces to the Jacobi identity for the structureconstants of a Lie group If the Poisson tensor is singular ndashthe actual situation in anyapplication to 2d (super-)gravity due to the odd dimension of the bosonic part of thetensorndash there exist (one or more) Casimir functions C(X) obeying
XI C = P IJ partC
partXJ= 0 (24)
which when determined by the field equations of motion are constants of motion Thevariation of AI and XI in (21) yields the gPSM field equations
dXI + P IJAJ = 0 (25)
dAI +1
2(partIP
JK)AKAJ = 0 (26)
In the application to two dimensional N = (1 1) supergravity6 the gauge potentialscomprise the spin connection ωab = ωǫab the zweibein and the gravitino
AI = (Aφ Aa Aα) = (ω ea ψα) XI = (Xφ Xa Xα) = (φXa χα) (27)
The fermionic components ψα (ldquogravitinordquo) and χα (ldquodilatinordquo) are Majorana spinorsLocal Lorentz invariance determines the φ-components of the Poisson tensor
P aφ = Xbǫba P αφ = minus1
2χβγ3β
α (28)
and the supersymmetry transformation is encoded in P αβ In a purely bosonic theorythe only arbitrary component of the Poisson tensor is P ab = vǫab where the locallyLorentz invariant ldquopotentialrdquo v = v (φ Y ) describes different models ( Y = XaXa2 )
6More complicated identifications of the 2d Cartan variables with AI are conceivable [40]
7
Evaluating (21) with that P ab and P aφ from (28) the action (ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea is the
volume form Dea = dea + ωǫabeb)
SPSM =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + ǫv)
(29)
is obtained The physically most interesting models are described by potentials quadraticin Xa
v = Y Z (φ) + V (φ) (210)
They include spherically reduced Einstein gravity [15ndash18] the string inspired blackhole [19] the simplified model with Z = 0 and linear V (φ) [20ndash24] the bosonic partof the Howe model [25] etc
Potentials of type (210) allow the integration of the (single) Casimir function C in(24)
C = eQ(φ)Y +W (φ) Q(φ) =
int φ
φ1
dϕZ(ϕ) W (φ) =
int φ
φ0
dϕeQ(ϕ)V (ϕ) (211)
where eg in spherically reduced gravity C on-shell is proportional to the ADM-massin the Schwarzschild solution
The auxiliary variables Xa and the torsion-dependent part of the spin connection ωcan be eliminated by algebraic equations of motion (path A in fig 1) Then the actionreduces to the familiar generalized dilaton theory in terms of the dilaton field φ andthe metric
SGDT =
int
d2x e(1
2Rφminus 1
2Zpartmφpartmφ+ V (φ)
)
(212)
Both formulations are equivalent at the classical [26 27] as well as at the quantumlevel [34ndash36]
For theories with non-dynamical dilaton (Z = 0 in (210)) a further elimination ofφ is possible if the potential V (φ) is invertible In this way one arrives at a theorysolely formulated in terms of the zweibein eam (path C in fig 1)
22 Minimal Field Supergravity
For N = (1 1) supergravity (cf (27)) a generic fermionic extension of the action(29) is obtained by making general Lorentz invariant ansatze for P aα P αβ togetherwith the fermionic extension of P ab = ǫab(v + χ2v2) of the bosonic case (χ2 = χαχα)Then the Jacobi identity (22) is solved Here (28) and the bosonic potential v are agiven input This leads to an algebraic albeit highly ambiguous solution with severalarbitrary functions [13] In addition the fermionic extensions generically exhibit newsingular terms Also not all bosonic models permit such an extension for the wholerange of their bosonic fields sometimes even no extension is allowed
8
As shown by the present authors [14] it is nevertheless possible to select ldquogenuinerdquosupergravity from this huge set of theories This is possible by a generalization ofthe standard requirements for a ldquotruerdquo supergravity [41ndash45] to the situation wheredeformations from the dilaton field φ are present To this end the non-linear symmetry(23) which is closed on-shell only is ndashin a first stepndash related to a more convenient(off-shell closed) algebra of Hamiltonian constraints GI = part1X
I + P IJ(X)A1I TheHamiltonian obtained from (21) in terms of these constraints takes the form [21446]
H =
int
dx1 GIA0I (213)
In a second step a certain linear combination of the GI suggested by the ADMparametrization [144748] maps the GI algebra upon a deformed version of the super-conformal algebra (deformed Neuveu-Schwarz resp Ramond algebra) This algebrais appropriate to impose restrictions which represent a natural generalization of therequirements from supergravity to theories deformed by the dilaton field It turnedout that the subset of models allowed by these restrictions uniquely leads to the gPSMsupergravity class of theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS in our presentpaper) with the Poisson tensor7
P ab =
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
ǫab (214)
P αb =Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bγ3)α+iV
u(χγb)α (215)
P αβ = minus2iXcγαβc +(
u+Z
8χ2
)
γ3αβ (216)
where the three functions V Z and the ldquoprepotentialrdquo u depend on the dilaton fieldφ only Besides the fixed components of P IJ according to (28) supergravity requiresthe existence of supersymmetry transformations which are generated by the first termin (216) It has been a central result of ref [14] that P αβ must be of the form (216)ie the generator of supersymmetry transformations is not allowed to receive any de-formations with respect to its form from rigid supersymmetry Furthermore in orderto satisfy the condition (22) V Z and u must be related by (uprime = dudφ)
V (φ) = minus1
8
(
(u2)prime + u2Z (φ))
(217)
Thus starting from a certain bosonic model with potential (210) in (214) the onlyrestriction remains that it must be expressible in terms of a prepotential u by (217)
7The constant u0 in ref [14] has been fixed as u0 = minus2 This is in agreement with standardsupersymmetry conventions
9
This happens to be the case for most physically interesting theories [15ndash25] Insertingthe Poisson tensor (28) (214)-(216) into equation (21) the ensuing action becomes(the covariant derivatives are defined in (A7))
SMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα + ǫ
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
+Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bebγ3ψ) +
iV
u(χγaeaψ)
+ iXa(ψγaψ)minus1
2
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(ψγ3ψ))
(218)
For later reference we also define the simpler model with Z = 0 (MFS0) where thefields are denoted by (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα)
SMFS0(φ Xa χα ω ea ψα) = SMFS
∣
∣
Z=0 fieldsrarrfields (219)
In terms of (28) and (214)-(216) the supersymmetry transformations of the MFSmodel according to (23) read
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (220)
δXa = minusZ4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)minus iV
u(χγaε) (221)
δχα = 2iXc(εγc)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (222)
δω =Z prime
4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)ea + i(V
u
)prime(χγaε)ea +
(
uprime +Z prime
8χ2
)
(εγ3ψ) (223)
δea =Z
4(χγaγ
bγ3ε)eb minus 2i(εγaψ) (224)
δψα = minus(Dε)α +Z
4Xa(γaγ
bγ3ε)αeb +iV
u(γbε)αeb +
Z
4χα(εγ
3ψ) (225)
We list neither here nor below transformations with the three bosonic parameters εiThe symmetry transformation generated by (28) corresponds to the local Lorentztransformations the other two by the field-dependent choice of the symmetry param-eter εa = ξmAma describe 2d diffeomorphisms ξm [49] Clearly the invariance withrespect to the latter three transformations is also evident from the explicit form of theaction (218)
23 Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
The PSM form of the action (218) represents a theory with non-vanishing bosonictorsion This can be seen easily from the eom obtained by variation of Xa Never-
10
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
non-dynamicaldilaton
fermionic extension
ampdynamicaldilaton
restrictionks fermionicextension
+3dynamicaldilaton ampdilatino
restriction +3non-dynamical
dilaton ampdilatino
general gPSM2d models
[13]
supergravity restriction
PSM0
2d bosonicgravity
torsion zero
oo B
OO
Aprime
PSM2d bosonicgravityOO
A
MFSminimal fieldsupergravity
[14]
B
OO
A
MFS0minimal fieldsupergravitybos torsionzero [1331]
OO
Aprime
MFDS
minimal fielddilaton
supergravityOO
D
Bprime
NDMFSnon-dyn dilminimal fieldsupergravityOO
Dprime
EDoo
BC
E
oo
NDDTnon-dyn
dilaton theory
C
oo Bprime
GDTgeneral
dilaton theory
SFDSsuperfielddilaton
supergravity[32]
Bprimeprime
SFNDSsuperfieldnon-dyndilaton
supergravity
C
pure 2dgeometry
pure 2dsuper-
geometry[25]
Figure 1 Relation between different formulations of 2d gravity and 2d supergravityExplanations are given in the text
5
the super-pointparticle can be defined straightforwardly in the superfield formulationonly
The paper is organized as follows In Section 2 at first (Sect 21) the basic featuresof gPSMs are reviewed shortly Then (Sect 22) the subset MFS of ldquogenuinerdquo super-gravities is described as determined in ref [14] and the corresponding MFDS (Sect23) which obtains after elimination of certain auxiliary3 fields They include the partof the spin-connection which at the PSM level depends on the bosonic torsion andthe target-space coordinates except the dilaton and the dilatino
Section 3 is devoted to the superfield approach of 2d supergravity where it sufficesto consider the standard case with vanishing bosonic torsion The important role of(super-)conformal transformations is explained in Section 4 which prepares the groundfor the equivalence proof of minimal field supergravity as deduced from gPSMs withdilaton superfield supergravity The proof is presented in Section 5 All exact classicalsolutions of 2d superfield supergravity [32] are obtained in Section 6 Another applica-tion (Section 7) is the formulation of a supergeodesic defined as the motion of a testparticle in the background of minimal field supergravity Here only some very simplespecial cases are discussed as eg the null-directions and the consequences for thesupergravity background generating the Schwarzschild solution In the Appendices wecollect details of our notation and some lengthy formulas
2 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field
Supergravity
21 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
A general gPSM consists of scalar fields XI(x) which are itself coordinates of a gradedPoisson manifold with Poisson tensor P IJ(X) = (minus1)IJ+1P JI(X) The index I in thegeneric case includes commuting as well as anti-commuting fields4 In addition oneintroduces the gauge potential A = dXIAI = dXIAmI(x) dx
m a one form with respectto the Poisson structure as well as with respect to the 2d worldsheet coordinates ThegPSM action reads5
SgPSM =
int
M
dXI and AI +1
2P IJAJ and AI
=
int
e(
part0XIA1I minus part1X
IA0I + P IJA0JA1I
)
d2x
(21)
3These ldquoauxiliaryrdquo fields in the (g)PSM approach should not be confused with auxiliary fields in asuperfield formulation
4The usage of different indices as well as other features of our notation are explained in AppendixA1 For further details one should consult ref [13 28]
5If the multiplication of forms is evident in what follows the wedge symbol will be omitted
6
The Poisson tensor P IJ must have vanishing Nijenhuis tensor (obey a Jacobi-typeidentity with respect to the Schouten bracket related as XI XJ = P IJ to the Poissontensor)
P ILpartLPJK + g-perm (IJK) = 0 (22)
where the sum runs over the graded permutations Due to (22) the action (21) isinvariant under the symmetry transformations
δXI = P IJεJ δAI = minusdεI minus(
partIPJK
)
εK AJ (23)
where the term dǫI in the second of these equations provides the justification for callingAI ldquogauge fieldsrdquo
For a generic (g)PSM the commutator of two transformations (23) is a symmetrymodulo the equations of motion (eom-s) Only for P IJ linear in XI a closed (andlinear) Lie algebra is obtained and (22) reduces to the Jacobi identity for the structureconstants of a Lie group If the Poisson tensor is singular ndashthe actual situation in anyapplication to 2d (super-)gravity due to the odd dimension of the bosonic part of thetensorndash there exist (one or more) Casimir functions C(X) obeying
XI C = P IJ partC
partXJ= 0 (24)
which when determined by the field equations of motion are constants of motion Thevariation of AI and XI in (21) yields the gPSM field equations
dXI + P IJAJ = 0 (25)
dAI +1
2(partIP
JK)AKAJ = 0 (26)
In the application to two dimensional N = (1 1) supergravity6 the gauge potentialscomprise the spin connection ωab = ωǫab the zweibein and the gravitino
AI = (Aφ Aa Aα) = (ω ea ψα) XI = (Xφ Xa Xα) = (φXa χα) (27)
The fermionic components ψα (ldquogravitinordquo) and χα (ldquodilatinordquo) are Majorana spinorsLocal Lorentz invariance determines the φ-components of the Poisson tensor
P aφ = Xbǫba P αφ = minus1
2χβγ3β
α (28)
and the supersymmetry transformation is encoded in P αβ In a purely bosonic theorythe only arbitrary component of the Poisson tensor is P ab = vǫab where the locallyLorentz invariant ldquopotentialrdquo v = v (φ Y ) describes different models ( Y = XaXa2 )
6More complicated identifications of the 2d Cartan variables with AI are conceivable [40]
7
Evaluating (21) with that P ab and P aφ from (28) the action (ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea is the
volume form Dea = dea + ωǫabeb)
SPSM =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + ǫv)
(29)
is obtained The physically most interesting models are described by potentials quadraticin Xa
v = Y Z (φ) + V (φ) (210)
They include spherically reduced Einstein gravity [15ndash18] the string inspired blackhole [19] the simplified model with Z = 0 and linear V (φ) [20ndash24] the bosonic partof the Howe model [25] etc
Potentials of type (210) allow the integration of the (single) Casimir function C in(24)
C = eQ(φ)Y +W (φ) Q(φ) =
int φ
φ1
dϕZ(ϕ) W (φ) =
int φ
φ0
dϕeQ(ϕ)V (ϕ) (211)
where eg in spherically reduced gravity C on-shell is proportional to the ADM-massin the Schwarzschild solution
The auxiliary variables Xa and the torsion-dependent part of the spin connection ωcan be eliminated by algebraic equations of motion (path A in fig 1) Then the actionreduces to the familiar generalized dilaton theory in terms of the dilaton field φ andthe metric
SGDT =
int
d2x e(1
2Rφminus 1
2Zpartmφpartmφ+ V (φ)
)
(212)
Both formulations are equivalent at the classical [26 27] as well as at the quantumlevel [34ndash36]
For theories with non-dynamical dilaton (Z = 0 in (210)) a further elimination ofφ is possible if the potential V (φ) is invertible In this way one arrives at a theorysolely formulated in terms of the zweibein eam (path C in fig 1)
22 Minimal Field Supergravity
For N = (1 1) supergravity (cf (27)) a generic fermionic extension of the action(29) is obtained by making general Lorentz invariant ansatze for P aα P αβ togetherwith the fermionic extension of P ab = ǫab(v + χ2v2) of the bosonic case (χ2 = χαχα)Then the Jacobi identity (22) is solved Here (28) and the bosonic potential v are agiven input This leads to an algebraic albeit highly ambiguous solution with severalarbitrary functions [13] In addition the fermionic extensions generically exhibit newsingular terms Also not all bosonic models permit such an extension for the wholerange of their bosonic fields sometimes even no extension is allowed
8
As shown by the present authors [14] it is nevertheless possible to select ldquogenuinerdquosupergravity from this huge set of theories This is possible by a generalization ofthe standard requirements for a ldquotruerdquo supergravity [41ndash45] to the situation wheredeformations from the dilaton field φ are present To this end the non-linear symmetry(23) which is closed on-shell only is ndashin a first stepndash related to a more convenient(off-shell closed) algebra of Hamiltonian constraints GI = part1X
I + P IJ(X)A1I TheHamiltonian obtained from (21) in terms of these constraints takes the form [21446]
H =
int
dx1 GIA0I (213)
In a second step a certain linear combination of the GI suggested by the ADMparametrization [144748] maps the GI algebra upon a deformed version of the super-conformal algebra (deformed Neuveu-Schwarz resp Ramond algebra) This algebrais appropriate to impose restrictions which represent a natural generalization of therequirements from supergravity to theories deformed by the dilaton field It turnedout that the subset of models allowed by these restrictions uniquely leads to the gPSMsupergravity class of theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS in our presentpaper) with the Poisson tensor7
P ab =
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
ǫab (214)
P αb =Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bγ3)α+iV
u(χγb)α (215)
P αβ = minus2iXcγαβc +(
u+Z
8χ2
)
γ3αβ (216)
where the three functions V Z and the ldquoprepotentialrdquo u depend on the dilaton fieldφ only Besides the fixed components of P IJ according to (28) supergravity requiresthe existence of supersymmetry transformations which are generated by the first termin (216) It has been a central result of ref [14] that P αβ must be of the form (216)ie the generator of supersymmetry transformations is not allowed to receive any de-formations with respect to its form from rigid supersymmetry Furthermore in orderto satisfy the condition (22) V Z and u must be related by (uprime = dudφ)
V (φ) = minus1
8
(
(u2)prime + u2Z (φ))
(217)
Thus starting from a certain bosonic model with potential (210) in (214) the onlyrestriction remains that it must be expressible in terms of a prepotential u by (217)
7The constant u0 in ref [14] has been fixed as u0 = minus2 This is in agreement with standardsupersymmetry conventions
9
This happens to be the case for most physically interesting theories [15ndash25] Insertingthe Poisson tensor (28) (214)-(216) into equation (21) the ensuing action becomes(the covariant derivatives are defined in (A7))
SMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα + ǫ
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
+Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bebγ3ψ) +
iV
u(χγaeaψ)
+ iXa(ψγaψ)minus1
2
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(ψγ3ψ))
(218)
For later reference we also define the simpler model with Z = 0 (MFS0) where thefields are denoted by (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα)
SMFS0(φ Xa χα ω ea ψα) = SMFS
∣
∣
Z=0 fieldsrarrfields (219)
In terms of (28) and (214)-(216) the supersymmetry transformations of the MFSmodel according to (23) read
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (220)
δXa = minusZ4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)minus iV
u(χγaε) (221)
δχα = 2iXc(εγc)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (222)
δω =Z prime
4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)ea + i(V
u
)prime(χγaε)ea +
(
uprime +Z prime
8χ2
)
(εγ3ψ) (223)
δea =Z
4(χγaγ
bγ3ε)eb minus 2i(εγaψ) (224)
δψα = minus(Dε)α +Z
4Xa(γaγ
bγ3ε)αeb +iV
u(γbε)αeb +
Z
4χα(εγ
3ψ) (225)
We list neither here nor below transformations with the three bosonic parameters εiThe symmetry transformation generated by (28) corresponds to the local Lorentztransformations the other two by the field-dependent choice of the symmetry param-eter εa = ξmAma describe 2d diffeomorphisms ξm [49] Clearly the invariance withrespect to the latter three transformations is also evident from the explicit form of theaction (218)
23 Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
The PSM form of the action (218) represents a theory with non-vanishing bosonictorsion This can be seen easily from the eom obtained by variation of Xa Never-
10
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
the super-pointparticle can be defined straightforwardly in the superfield formulationonly
The paper is organized as follows In Section 2 at first (Sect 21) the basic featuresof gPSMs are reviewed shortly Then (Sect 22) the subset MFS of ldquogenuinerdquo super-gravities is described as determined in ref [14] and the corresponding MFDS (Sect23) which obtains after elimination of certain auxiliary3 fields They include the partof the spin-connection which at the PSM level depends on the bosonic torsion andthe target-space coordinates except the dilaton and the dilatino
Section 3 is devoted to the superfield approach of 2d supergravity where it sufficesto consider the standard case with vanishing bosonic torsion The important role of(super-)conformal transformations is explained in Section 4 which prepares the groundfor the equivalence proof of minimal field supergravity as deduced from gPSMs withdilaton superfield supergravity The proof is presented in Section 5 All exact classicalsolutions of 2d superfield supergravity [32] are obtained in Section 6 Another applica-tion (Section 7) is the formulation of a supergeodesic defined as the motion of a testparticle in the background of minimal field supergravity Here only some very simplespecial cases are discussed as eg the null-directions and the consequences for thesupergravity background generating the Schwarzschild solution In the Appendices wecollect details of our notation and some lengthy formulas
2 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field
Supergravity
21 Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
A general gPSM consists of scalar fields XI(x) which are itself coordinates of a gradedPoisson manifold with Poisson tensor P IJ(X) = (minus1)IJ+1P JI(X) The index I in thegeneric case includes commuting as well as anti-commuting fields4 In addition oneintroduces the gauge potential A = dXIAI = dXIAmI(x) dx
m a one form with respectto the Poisson structure as well as with respect to the 2d worldsheet coordinates ThegPSM action reads5
SgPSM =
int
M
dXI and AI +1
2P IJAJ and AI
=
int
e(
part0XIA1I minus part1X
IA0I + P IJA0JA1I
)
d2x
(21)
3These ldquoauxiliaryrdquo fields in the (g)PSM approach should not be confused with auxiliary fields in asuperfield formulation
4The usage of different indices as well as other features of our notation are explained in AppendixA1 For further details one should consult ref [13 28]
5If the multiplication of forms is evident in what follows the wedge symbol will be omitted
6
The Poisson tensor P IJ must have vanishing Nijenhuis tensor (obey a Jacobi-typeidentity with respect to the Schouten bracket related as XI XJ = P IJ to the Poissontensor)
P ILpartLPJK + g-perm (IJK) = 0 (22)
where the sum runs over the graded permutations Due to (22) the action (21) isinvariant under the symmetry transformations
δXI = P IJεJ δAI = minusdεI minus(
partIPJK
)
εK AJ (23)
where the term dǫI in the second of these equations provides the justification for callingAI ldquogauge fieldsrdquo
For a generic (g)PSM the commutator of two transformations (23) is a symmetrymodulo the equations of motion (eom-s) Only for P IJ linear in XI a closed (andlinear) Lie algebra is obtained and (22) reduces to the Jacobi identity for the structureconstants of a Lie group If the Poisson tensor is singular ndashthe actual situation in anyapplication to 2d (super-)gravity due to the odd dimension of the bosonic part of thetensorndash there exist (one or more) Casimir functions C(X) obeying
XI C = P IJ partC
partXJ= 0 (24)
which when determined by the field equations of motion are constants of motion Thevariation of AI and XI in (21) yields the gPSM field equations
dXI + P IJAJ = 0 (25)
dAI +1
2(partIP
JK)AKAJ = 0 (26)
In the application to two dimensional N = (1 1) supergravity6 the gauge potentialscomprise the spin connection ωab = ωǫab the zweibein and the gravitino
AI = (Aφ Aa Aα) = (ω ea ψα) XI = (Xφ Xa Xα) = (φXa χα) (27)
The fermionic components ψα (ldquogravitinordquo) and χα (ldquodilatinordquo) are Majorana spinorsLocal Lorentz invariance determines the φ-components of the Poisson tensor
P aφ = Xbǫba P αφ = minus1
2χβγ3β
α (28)
and the supersymmetry transformation is encoded in P αβ In a purely bosonic theorythe only arbitrary component of the Poisson tensor is P ab = vǫab where the locallyLorentz invariant ldquopotentialrdquo v = v (φ Y ) describes different models ( Y = XaXa2 )
6More complicated identifications of the 2d Cartan variables with AI are conceivable [40]
7
Evaluating (21) with that P ab and P aφ from (28) the action (ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea is the
volume form Dea = dea + ωǫabeb)
SPSM =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + ǫv)
(29)
is obtained The physically most interesting models are described by potentials quadraticin Xa
v = Y Z (φ) + V (φ) (210)
They include spherically reduced Einstein gravity [15ndash18] the string inspired blackhole [19] the simplified model with Z = 0 and linear V (φ) [20ndash24] the bosonic partof the Howe model [25] etc
Potentials of type (210) allow the integration of the (single) Casimir function C in(24)
C = eQ(φ)Y +W (φ) Q(φ) =
int φ
φ1
dϕZ(ϕ) W (φ) =
int φ
φ0
dϕeQ(ϕ)V (ϕ) (211)
where eg in spherically reduced gravity C on-shell is proportional to the ADM-massin the Schwarzschild solution
The auxiliary variables Xa and the torsion-dependent part of the spin connection ωcan be eliminated by algebraic equations of motion (path A in fig 1) Then the actionreduces to the familiar generalized dilaton theory in terms of the dilaton field φ andthe metric
SGDT =
int
d2x e(1
2Rφminus 1
2Zpartmφpartmφ+ V (φ)
)
(212)
Both formulations are equivalent at the classical [26 27] as well as at the quantumlevel [34ndash36]
For theories with non-dynamical dilaton (Z = 0 in (210)) a further elimination ofφ is possible if the potential V (φ) is invertible In this way one arrives at a theorysolely formulated in terms of the zweibein eam (path C in fig 1)
22 Minimal Field Supergravity
For N = (1 1) supergravity (cf (27)) a generic fermionic extension of the action(29) is obtained by making general Lorentz invariant ansatze for P aα P αβ togetherwith the fermionic extension of P ab = ǫab(v + χ2v2) of the bosonic case (χ2 = χαχα)Then the Jacobi identity (22) is solved Here (28) and the bosonic potential v are agiven input This leads to an algebraic albeit highly ambiguous solution with severalarbitrary functions [13] In addition the fermionic extensions generically exhibit newsingular terms Also not all bosonic models permit such an extension for the wholerange of their bosonic fields sometimes even no extension is allowed
8
As shown by the present authors [14] it is nevertheless possible to select ldquogenuinerdquosupergravity from this huge set of theories This is possible by a generalization ofthe standard requirements for a ldquotruerdquo supergravity [41ndash45] to the situation wheredeformations from the dilaton field φ are present To this end the non-linear symmetry(23) which is closed on-shell only is ndashin a first stepndash related to a more convenient(off-shell closed) algebra of Hamiltonian constraints GI = part1X
I + P IJ(X)A1I TheHamiltonian obtained from (21) in terms of these constraints takes the form [21446]
H =
int
dx1 GIA0I (213)
In a second step a certain linear combination of the GI suggested by the ADMparametrization [144748] maps the GI algebra upon a deformed version of the super-conformal algebra (deformed Neuveu-Schwarz resp Ramond algebra) This algebrais appropriate to impose restrictions which represent a natural generalization of therequirements from supergravity to theories deformed by the dilaton field It turnedout that the subset of models allowed by these restrictions uniquely leads to the gPSMsupergravity class of theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS in our presentpaper) with the Poisson tensor7
P ab =
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
ǫab (214)
P αb =Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bγ3)α+iV
u(χγb)α (215)
P αβ = minus2iXcγαβc +(
u+Z
8χ2
)
γ3αβ (216)
where the three functions V Z and the ldquoprepotentialrdquo u depend on the dilaton fieldφ only Besides the fixed components of P IJ according to (28) supergravity requiresthe existence of supersymmetry transformations which are generated by the first termin (216) It has been a central result of ref [14] that P αβ must be of the form (216)ie the generator of supersymmetry transformations is not allowed to receive any de-formations with respect to its form from rigid supersymmetry Furthermore in orderto satisfy the condition (22) V Z and u must be related by (uprime = dudφ)
V (φ) = minus1
8
(
(u2)prime + u2Z (φ))
(217)
Thus starting from a certain bosonic model with potential (210) in (214) the onlyrestriction remains that it must be expressible in terms of a prepotential u by (217)
7The constant u0 in ref [14] has been fixed as u0 = minus2 This is in agreement with standardsupersymmetry conventions
9
This happens to be the case for most physically interesting theories [15ndash25] Insertingthe Poisson tensor (28) (214)-(216) into equation (21) the ensuing action becomes(the covariant derivatives are defined in (A7))
SMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα + ǫ
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
+Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bebγ3ψ) +
iV
u(χγaeaψ)
+ iXa(ψγaψ)minus1
2
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(ψγ3ψ))
(218)
For later reference we also define the simpler model with Z = 0 (MFS0) where thefields are denoted by (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα)
SMFS0(φ Xa χα ω ea ψα) = SMFS
∣
∣
Z=0 fieldsrarrfields (219)
In terms of (28) and (214)-(216) the supersymmetry transformations of the MFSmodel according to (23) read
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (220)
δXa = minusZ4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)minus iV
u(χγaε) (221)
δχα = 2iXc(εγc)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (222)
δω =Z prime
4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)ea + i(V
u
)prime(χγaε)ea +
(
uprime +Z prime
8χ2
)
(εγ3ψ) (223)
δea =Z
4(χγaγ
bγ3ε)eb minus 2i(εγaψ) (224)
δψα = minus(Dε)α +Z
4Xa(γaγ
bγ3ε)αeb +iV
u(γbε)αeb +
Z
4χα(εγ
3ψ) (225)
We list neither here nor below transformations with the three bosonic parameters εiThe symmetry transformation generated by (28) corresponds to the local Lorentztransformations the other two by the field-dependent choice of the symmetry param-eter εa = ξmAma describe 2d diffeomorphisms ξm [49] Clearly the invariance withrespect to the latter three transformations is also evident from the explicit form of theaction (218)
23 Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
The PSM form of the action (218) represents a theory with non-vanishing bosonictorsion This can be seen easily from the eom obtained by variation of Xa Never-
10
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
The Poisson tensor P IJ must have vanishing Nijenhuis tensor (obey a Jacobi-typeidentity with respect to the Schouten bracket related as XI XJ = P IJ to the Poissontensor)
P ILpartLPJK + g-perm (IJK) = 0 (22)
where the sum runs over the graded permutations Due to (22) the action (21) isinvariant under the symmetry transformations
δXI = P IJεJ δAI = minusdεI minus(
partIPJK
)
εK AJ (23)
where the term dǫI in the second of these equations provides the justification for callingAI ldquogauge fieldsrdquo
For a generic (g)PSM the commutator of two transformations (23) is a symmetrymodulo the equations of motion (eom-s) Only for P IJ linear in XI a closed (andlinear) Lie algebra is obtained and (22) reduces to the Jacobi identity for the structureconstants of a Lie group If the Poisson tensor is singular ndashthe actual situation in anyapplication to 2d (super-)gravity due to the odd dimension of the bosonic part of thetensorndash there exist (one or more) Casimir functions C(X) obeying
XI C = P IJ partC
partXJ= 0 (24)
which when determined by the field equations of motion are constants of motion Thevariation of AI and XI in (21) yields the gPSM field equations
dXI + P IJAJ = 0 (25)
dAI +1
2(partIP
JK)AKAJ = 0 (26)
In the application to two dimensional N = (1 1) supergravity6 the gauge potentialscomprise the spin connection ωab = ωǫab the zweibein and the gravitino
AI = (Aφ Aa Aα) = (ω ea ψα) XI = (Xφ Xa Xα) = (φXa χα) (27)
The fermionic components ψα (ldquogravitinordquo) and χα (ldquodilatinordquo) are Majorana spinorsLocal Lorentz invariance determines the φ-components of the Poisson tensor
P aφ = Xbǫba P αφ = minus1
2χβγ3β
α (28)
and the supersymmetry transformation is encoded in P αβ In a purely bosonic theorythe only arbitrary component of the Poisson tensor is P ab = vǫab where the locallyLorentz invariant ldquopotentialrdquo v = v (φ Y ) describes different models ( Y = XaXa2 )
6More complicated identifications of the 2d Cartan variables with AI are conceivable [40]
7
Evaluating (21) with that P ab and P aφ from (28) the action (ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea is the
volume form Dea = dea + ωǫabeb)
SPSM =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + ǫv)
(29)
is obtained The physically most interesting models are described by potentials quadraticin Xa
v = Y Z (φ) + V (φ) (210)
They include spherically reduced Einstein gravity [15ndash18] the string inspired blackhole [19] the simplified model with Z = 0 and linear V (φ) [20ndash24] the bosonic partof the Howe model [25] etc
Potentials of type (210) allow the integration of the (single) Casimir function C in(24)
C = eQ(φ)Y +W (φ) Q(φ) =
int φ
φ1
dϕZ(ϕ) W (φ) =
int φ
φ0
dϕeQ(ϕ)V (ϕ) (211)
where eg in spherically reduced gravity C on-shell is proportional to the ADM-massin the Schwarzschild solution
The auxiliary variables Xa and the torsion-dependent part of the spin connection ωcan be eliminated by algebraic equations of motion (path A in fig 1) Then the actionreduces to the familiar generalized dilaton theory in terms of the dilaton field φ andthe metric
SGDT =
int
d2x e(1
2Rφminus 1
2Zpartmφpartmφ+ V (φ)
)
(212)
Both formulations are equivalent at the classical [26 27] as well as at the quantumlevel [34ndash36]
For theories with non-dynamical dilaton (Z = 0 in (210)) a further elimination ofφ is possible if the potential V (φ) is invertible In this way one arrives at a theorysolely formulated in terms of the zweibein eam (path C in fig 1)
22 Minimal Field Supergravity
For N = (1 1) supergravity (cf (27)) a generic fermionic extension of the action(29) is obtained by making general Lorentz invariant ansatze for P aα P αβ togetherwith the fermionic extension of P ab = ǫab(v + χ2v2) of the bosonic case (χ2 = χαχα)Then the Jacobi identity (22) is solved Here (28) and the bosonic potential v are agiven input This leads to an algebraic albeit highly ambiguous solution with severalarbitrary functions [13] In addition the fermionic extensions generically exhibit newsingular terms Also not all bosonic models permit such an extension for the wholerange of their bosonic fields sometimes even no extension is allowed
8
As shown by the present authors [14] it is nevertheless possible to select ldquogenuinerdquosupergravity from this huge set of theories This is possible by a generalization ofthe standard requirements for a ldquotruerdquo supergravity [41ndash45] to the situation wheredeformations from the dilaton field φ are present To this end the non-linear symmetry(23) which is closed on-shell only is ndashin a first stepndash related to a more convenient(off-shell closed) algebra of Hamiltonian constraints GI = part1X
I + P IJ(X)A1I TheHamiltonian obtained from (21) in terms of these constraints takes the form [21446]
H =
int
dx1 GIA0I (213)
In a second step a certain linear combination of the GI suggested by the ADMparametrization [144748] maps the GI algebra upon a deformed version of the super-conformal algebra (deformed Neuveu-Schwarz resp Ramond algebra) This algebrais appropriate to impose restrictions which represent a natural generalization of therequirements from supergravity to theories deformed by the dilaton field It turnedout that the subset of models allowed by these restrictions uniquely leads to the gPSMsupergravity class of theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS in our presentpaper) with the Poisson tensor7
P ab =
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
ǫab (214)
P αb =Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bγ3)α+iV
u(χγb)α (215)
P αβ = minus2iXcγαβc +(
u+Z
8χ2
)
γ3αβ (216)
where the three functions V Z and the ldquoprepotentialrdquo u depend on the dilaton fieldφ only Besides the fixed components of P IJ according to (28) supergravity requiresthe existence of supersymmetry transformations which are generated by the first termin (216) It has been a central result of ref [14] that P αβ must be of the form (216)ie the generator of supersymmetry transformations is not allowed to receive any de-formations with respect to its form from rigid supersymmetry Furthermore in orderto satisfy the condition (22) V Z and u must be related by (uprime = dudφ)
V (φ) = minus1
8
(
(u2)prime + u2Z (φ))
(217)
Thus starting from a certain bosonic model with potential (210) in (214) the onlyrestriction remains that it must be expressible in terms of a prepotential u by (217)
7The constant u0 in ref [14] has been fixed as u0 = minus2 This is in agreement with standardsupersymmetry conventions
9
This happens to be the case for most physically interesting theories [15ndash25] Insertingthe Poisson tensor (28) (214)-(216) into equation (21) the ensuing action becomes(the covariant derivatives are defined in (A7))
SMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα + ǫ
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
+Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bebγ3ψ) +
iV
u(χγaeaψ)
+ iXa(ψγaψ)minus1
2
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(ψγ3ψ))
(218)
For later reference we also define the simpler model with Z = 0 (MFS0) where thefields are denoted by (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα)
SMFS0(φ Xa χα ω ea ψα) = SMFS
∣
∣
Z=0 fieldsrarrfields (219)
In terms of (28) and (214)-(216) the supersymmetry transformations of the MFSmodel according to (23) read
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (220)
δXa = minusZ4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)minus iV
u(χγaε) (221)
δχα = 2iXc(εγc)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (222)
δω =Z prime
4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)ea + i(V
u
)prime(χγaε)ea +
(
uprime +Z prime
8χ2
)
(εγ3ψ) (223)
δea =Z
4(χγaγ
bγ3ε)eb minus 2i(εγaψ) (224)
δψα = minus(Dε)α +Z
4Xa(γaγ
bγ3ε)αeb +iV
u(γbε)αeb +
Z
4χα(εγ
3ψ) (225)
We list neither here nor below transformations with the three bosonic parameters εiThe symmetry transformation generated by (28) corresponds to the local Lorentztransformations the other two by the field-dependent choice of the symmetry param-eter εa = ξmAma describe 2d diffeomorphisms ξm [49] Clearly the invariance withrespect to the latter three transformations is also evident from the explicit form of theaction (218)
23 Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
The PSM form of the action (218) represents a theory with non-vanishing bosonictorsion This can be seen easily from the eom obtained by variation of Xa Never-
10
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
Evaluating (21) with that P ab and P aφ from (28) the action (ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea is the
volume form Dea = dea + ωǫabeb)
SPSM =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + ǫv)
(29)
is obtained The physically most interesting models are described by potentials quadraticin Xa
v = Y Z (φ) + V (φ) (210)
They include spherically reduced Einstein gravity [15ndash18] the string inspired blackhole [19] the simplified model with Z = 0 and linear V (φ) [20ndash24] the bosonic partof the Howe model [25] etc
Potentials of type (210) allow the integration of the (single) Casimir function C in(24)
C = eQ(φ)Y +W (φ) Q(φ) =
int φ
φ1
dϕZ(ϕ) W (φ) =
int φ
φ0
dϕeQ(ϕ)V (ϕ) (211)
where eg in spherically reduced gravity C on-shell is proportional to the ADM-massin the Schwarzschild solution
The auxiliary variables Xa and the torsion-dependent part of the spin connection ωcan be eliminated by algebraic equations of motion (path A in fig 1) Then the actionreduces to the familiar generalized dilaton theory in terms of the dilaton field φ andthe metric
SGDT =
int
d2x e(1
2Rφminus 1
2Zpartmφpartmφ+ V (φ)
)
(212)
Both formulations are equivalent at the classical [26 27] as well as at the quantumlevel [34ndash36]
For theories with non-dynamical dilaton (Z = 0 in (210)) a further elimination ofφ is possible if the potential V (φ) is invertible In this way one arrives at a theorysolely formulated in terms of the zweibein eam (path C in fig 1)
22 Minimal Field Supergravity
For N = (1 1) supergravity (cf (27)) a generic fermionic extension of the action(29) is obtained by making general Lorentz invariant ansatze for P aα P αβ togetherwith the fermionic extension of P ab = ǫab(v + χ2v2) of the bosonic case (χ2 = χαχα)Then the Jacobi identity (22) is solved Here (28) and the bosonic potential v are agiven input This leads to an algebraic albeit highly ambiguous solution with severalarbitrary functions [13] In addition the fermionic extensions generically exhibit newsingular terms Also not all bosonic models permit such an extension for the wholerange of their bosonic fields sometimes even no extension is allowed
8
As shown by the present authors [14] it is nevertheless possible to select ldquogenuinerdquosupergravity from this huge set of theories This is possible by a generalization ofthe standard requirements for a ldquotruerdquo supergravity [41ndash45] to the situation wheredeformations from the dilaton field φ are present To this end the non-linear symmetry(23) which is closed on-shell only is ndashin a first stepndash related to a more convenient(off-shell closed) algebra of Hamiltonian constraints GI = part1X
I + P IJ(X)A1I TheHamiltonian obtained from (21) in terms of these constraints takes the form [21446]
H =
int
dx1 GIA0I (213)
In a second step a certain linear combination of the GI suggested by the ADMparametrization [144748] maps the GI algebra upon a deformed version of the super-conformal algebra (deformed Neuveu-Schwarz resp Ramond algebra) This algebrais appropriate to impose restrictions which represent a natural generalization of therequirements from supergravity to theories deformed by the dilaton field It turnedout that the subset of models allowed by these restrictions uniquely leads to the gPSMsupergravity class of theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS in our presentpaper) with the Poisson tensor7
P ab =
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
ǫab (214)
P αb =Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bγ3)α+iV
u(χγb)α (215)
P αβ = minus2iXcγαβc +(
u+Z
8χ2
)
γ3αβ (216)
where the three functions V Z and the ldquoprepotentialrdquo u depend on the dilaton fieldφ only Besides the fixed components of P IJ according to (28) supergravity requiresthe existence of supersymmetry transformations which are generated by the first termin (216) It has been a central result of ref [14] that P αβ must be of the form (216)ie the generator of supersymmetry transformations is not allowed to receive any de-formations with respect to its form from rigid supersymmetry Furthermore in orderto satisfy the condition (22) V Z and u must be related by (uprime = dudφ)
V (φ) = minus1
8
(
(u2)prime + u2Z (φ))
(217)
Thus starting from a certain bosonic model with potential (210) in (214) the onlyrestriction remains that it must be expressible in terms of a prepotential u by (217)
7The constant u0 in ref [14] has been fixed as u0 = minus2 This is in agreement with standardsupersymmetry conventions
9
This happens to be the case for most physically interesting theories [15ndash25] Insertingthe Poisson tensor (28) (214)-(216) into equation (21) the ensuing action becomes(the covariant derivatives are defined in (A7))
SMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα + ǫ
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
+Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bebγ3ψ) +
iV
u(χγaeaψ)
+ iXa(ψγaψ)minus1
2
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(ψγ3ψ))
(218)
For later reference we also define the simpler model with Z = 0 (MFS0) where thefields are denoted by (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα)
SMFS0(φ Xa χα ω ea ψα) = SMFS
∣
∣
Z=0 fieldsrarrfields (219)
In terms of (28) and (214)-(216) the supersymmetry transformations of the MFSmodel according to (23) read
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (220)
δXa = minusZ4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)minus iV
u(χγaε) (221)
δχα = 2iXc(εγc)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (222)
δω =Z prime
4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)ea + i(V
u
)prime(χγaε)ea +
(
uprime +Z prime
8χ2
)
(εγ3ψ) (223)
δea =Z
4(χγaγ
bγ3ε)eb minus 2i(εγaψ) (224)
δψα = minus(Dε)α +Z
4Xa(γaγ
bγ3ε)αeb +iV
u(γbε)αeb +
Z
4χα(εγ
3ψ) (225)
We list neither here nor below transformations with the three bosonic parameters εiThe symmetry transformation generated by (28) corresponds to the local Lorentztransformations the other two by the field-dependent choice of the symmetry param-eter εa = ξmAma describe 2d diffeomorphisms ξm [49] Clearly the invariance withrespect to the latter three transformations is also evident from the explicit form of theaction (218)
23 Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
The PSM form of the action (218) represents a theory with non-vanishing bosonictorsion This can be seen easily from the eom obtained by variation of Xa Never-
10
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
As shown by the present authors [14] it is nevertheless possible to select ldquogenuinerdquosupergravity from this huge set of theories This is possible by a generalization ofthe standard requirements for a ldquotruerdquo supergravity [41ndash45] to the situation wheredeformations from the dilaton field φ are present To this end the non-linear symmetry(23) which is closed on-shell only is ndashin a first stepndash related to a more convenient(off-shell closed) algebra of Hamiltonian constraints GI = part1X
I + P IJ(X)A1I TheHamiltonian obtained from (21) in terms of these constraints takes the form [21446]
H =
int
dx1 GIA0I (213)
In a second step a certain linear combination of the GI suggested by the ADMparametrization [144748] maps the GI algebra upon a deformed version of the super-conformal algebra (deformed Neuveu-Schwarz resp Ramond algebra) This algebrais appropriate to impose restrictions which represent a natural generalization of therequirements from supergravity to theories deformed by the dilaton field It turnedout that the subset of models allowed by these restrictions uniquely leads to the gPSMsupergravity class of theories (called ldquominimal field supergravityrdquo MFS in our presentpaper) with the Poisson tensor7
P ab =
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
ǫab (214)
P αb =Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bγ3)α+iV
u(χγb)α (215)
P αβ = minus2iXcγαβc +(
u+Z
8χ2
)
γ3αβ (216)
where the three functions V Z and the ldquoprepotentialrdquo u depend on the dilaton fieldφ only Besides the fixed components of P IJ according to (28) supergravity requiresthe existence of supersymmetry transformations which are generated by the first termin (216) It has been a central result of ref [14] that P αβ must be of the form (216)ie the generator of supersymmetry transformations is not allowed to receive any de-formations with respect to its form from rigid supersymmetry Furthermore in orderto satisfy the condition (22) V Z and u must be related by (uprime = dudφ)
V (φ) = minus1
8
(
(u2)prime + u2Z (φ))
(217)
Thus starting from a certain bosonic model with potential (210) in (214) the onlyrestriction remains that it must be expressible in terms of a prepotential u by (217)
7The constant u0 in ref [14] has been fixed as u0 = minus2 This is in agreement with standardsupersymmetry conventions
9
This happens to be the case for most physically interesting theories [15ndash25] Insertingthe Poisson tensor (28) (214)-(216) into equation (21) the ensuing action becomes(the covariant derivatives are defined in (A7))
SMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα + ǫ
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
+Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bebγ3ψ) +
iV
u(χγaeaψ)
+ iXa(ψγaψ)minus1
2
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(ψγ3ψ))
(218)
For later reference we also define the simpler model with Z = 0 (MFS0) where thefields are denoted by (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα)
SMFS0(φ Xa χα ω ea ψα) = SMFS
∣
∣
Z=0 fieldsrarrfields (219)
In terms of (28) and (214)-(216) the supersymmetry transformations of the MFSmodel according to (23) read
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (220)
δXa = minusZ4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)minus iV
u(χγaε) (221)
δχα = 2iXc(εγc)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (222)
δω =Z prime
4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)ea + i(V
u
)prime(χγaε)ea +
(
uprime +Z prime
8χ2
)
(εγ3ψ) (223)
δea =Z
4(χγaγ
bγ3ε)eb minus 2i(εγaψ) (224)
δψα = minus(Dε)α +Z
4Xa(γaγ
bγ3ε)αeb +iV
u(γbε)αeb +
Z
4χα(εγ
3ψ) (225)
We list neither here nor below transformations with the three bosonic parameters εiThe symmetry transformation generated by (28) corresponds to the local Lorentztransformations the other two by the field-dependent choice of the symmetry param-eter εa = ξmAma describe 2d diffeomorphisms ξm [49] Clearly the invariance withrespect to the latter three transformations is also evident from the explicit form of theaction (218)
23 Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
The PSM form of the action (218) represents a theory with non-vanishing bosonictorsion This can be seen easily from the eom obtained by variation of Xa Never-
10
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
This happens to be the case for most physically interesting theories [15ndash25] Insertingthe Poisson tensor (28) (214)-(216) into equation (21) the ensuing action becomes(the covariant derivatives are defined in (A7))
SMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα + ǫ
(
V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
)
+Z
4Xa(χγaγ
bebγ3ψ) +
iV
u(χγaeaψ)
+ iXa(ψγaψ)minus1
2
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(ψγ3ψ))
(218)
For later reference we also define the simpler model with Z = 0 (MFS0) where thefields are denoted by (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα)
SMFS0(φ Xa χα ω ea ψα) = SMFS
∣
∣
Z=0 fieldsrarrfields (219)
In terms of (28) and (214)-(216) the supersymmetry transformations of the MFSmodel according to (23) read
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (220)
δXa = minusZ4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)minus iV
u(χγaε) (221)
δχα = 2iXc(εγc)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (222)
δω =Z prime
4Xb(χγbγ
aγ3ε)ea + i(V
u
)prime(χγaε)ea +
(
uprime +Z prime
8χ2
)
(εγ3ψ) (223)
δea =Z
4(χγaγ
bγ3ε)eb minus 2i(εγaψ) (224)
δψα = minus(Dε)α +Z
4Xa(γaγ
bγ3ε)αeb +iV
u(γbε)αeb +
Z
4χα(εγ
3ψ) (225)
We list neither here nor below transformations with the three bosonic parameters εiThe symmetry transformation generated by (28) corresponds to the local Lorentztransformations the other two by the field-dependent choice of the symmetry param-eter εa = ξmAma describe 2d diffeomorphisms ξm [49] Clearly the invariance withrespect to the latter three transformations is also evident from the explicit form of theaction (218)
23 Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
The PSM form of the action (218) represents a theory with non-vanishing bosonictorsion This can be seen easily from the eom obtained by variation of Xa Never-
10
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
theless it is (locally and globally) equivalent to a theory with dynamical dilaton fieldand vanishing bosonic torsion We recall the basic steps of this relation (path A in fig1) as applied already to the gPSM in [13] For this purpose the action (218) is mostconveniently abbreviated as
LMFS =
int
M
(
φdω +XaDea + χαDψα +1
2PABeBeA
)
(226)
where now A = (a α) only includes the zweibein ea and the gravitino eα = ψα com-ponents (cf Appendix A1) Varying (226) with respect to Xa leads to the torsionequation
Dea +1
2(partaP
AB)eBeA = 0 (227)
which can be used to substitute the independent spin connection ω by the dependent8
supersymmetry covariant connection ω and by the torsion τ
ωa = ema ωm = ωa minus τa (228)
ωa = ǫmnpartnema minus iǫmn(ψnγaψm) (229)
τa = minus1
2(partaP
AB)ǫmneBneAm (230)
PAB = PAB + 2iδAα δBβ X
cγαβc (231)
By partially integrating the torsion dependent part of (226) some derivatives are movedonto the dilaton field φ and the action reads (up to total derivatives)
SMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PABǫmneBneAm
+(
Xa + eamǫmn(partnφ) +
1
2eamǫ
mn(χγ3ψn))
τa
)
(232)
The curvature scalar
R = 2 lowast dω = 2ǫmnpartnωm (233)
through (229) depends on the torsion free spin connection ω which in turn may beexpressed as well by the metric gmn = eamena In addition the fermionic partner of thecurvature scalar has been introduced which is defined as
σα = lowast(Dψ)α = ǫmn(
partnψmα +1
2ωn(γ
3ψm)α)
(234)
8Here and also in the superfield approach below supersymmetry covariant quantities acquire a tildewhen they denote dependent variables
11
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
Varying again with respect to Xa finally allows to eliminate this field as well
Xa = minuseamǫmn(
(partnφ) +1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(235)
Inspecting the original action (226) one realizes that this is the eom of the indepen-dent spin connection ω It is important to notice that the structure of (235) does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor but is determined solely by the conditionof local Lorentz invariance Equations (228) and (235) are algebraic and even linearin the variables to be eliminated Therefore they may be reinserted into the action(232)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ)minus 1
2PAB
∣
∣
∣
XaǫmneBneAm
)
(236)
Here Xa indicates that this field should be replaced by (235)Because in the MFS the Poisson tensor P ab depends quadratically onXa (cf (214))
according to (235) the usual quadratic dynamical term for the dilaton field φ is pro-duced Thus reinserting the Poisson tensor (214)-(216) with (235) into (236) yieldsthe minimal field dilaton supergravity (MFDS)
SMFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V Z + V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus 1
2Z(
partmφpartmφ+1
2(χγ3ψm)partmφ+
1
2ǫmnpartnφ(χψm)
)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(237)
This action describes dilaton supergravity theories with minimal field content andvanishing bosonic torsion The bosonic variable eam appears explicitly but it also iscontained in the dependent spin connection ω according to (229) Beside the dilatonfield φ the fermionic dilatino χα remains Clearly for Z = 0 (NDMFS in fig 1) thedynamical terms for the dilaton field disappear (V = V (φ) etc)
SNDMFS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ) + V minus 1
4uχ2
(
V prime + 4V 2
u2)
minus iV
uǫmn(χγnψm) +
u
2ǫmn(ψnγ
3ψm)
)
(238)
While a further elimination of the dilatino is possible for quite general NDMFS models(discussed in section 51) one can get rid of φ in certain very special (simple) cases of(238) only namely for invertible potential terms V resp u (cf (217))
12
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
The supersymmetry transformations of the MFDS model follow by eliminating Xa
and ω in (220) (222) (224) and (225) Except for (225) the new transformationrules are immediate by substituting Xa by (235) In eq (225) we use the explicitformula of the covariant torsion (cf (230) with (214)-(216))
τa = minusZ(
Xa +1
4(χγaγ
bψn)enb
)
(239)
After some algebra the result
δφ =1
2(χγ3ε) (240)
δχα = minus2iǫmn(
partnφ+1
2(χγ3ψn)
)
(εγm)α minus
(
u+Z
8χ2
)
(εγ3)α (241)
δema =
Z
4(χγaγbγ3ε)emb minus 2i(εγaψm) (242)
δψmα = minus(Dε)α +iV
u(γmε)α +
Z
4
(
partnφ(γmγnε)α +1
2(ψmγ
nχ)(γnγ3ε)α
)
(243)
is obtained
The action (237) with its symmetry transformations (240)-(243) is most conve-nient for a comparison with a superfield formulation of 2d supergravity because in(237) the bosonic torsion vanishes and it is precisely this case for which the standardsupergravity has been developed
3 Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
Any formulation of dilaton supergravity in superspace is embedded in the background ofpure 2d super-geometry The simplest non-trivial superfield extension of the topologicalbosonic 2d action
int
d2x eR is obtained by promoting the determinant e =radicminusg to the
superdeterminant E and the curvature R to a component of a real superfield S whichappears in a function F(S) At the same time the integration is extended to an integralover N = (1 1) superspace (zM = (xm θmicro))
SHowe =
int
d2xd2θ EF(S) (31)
In the following (31) will be referred to as the ldquoHowe-actionrdquo because the analysisof 2d supergravity in terms of superfields goes back to the seminal paper [25] of thisauthor In the notation and conventions of the Appendix (cf also ref [13] and the
13
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
superspace conventions of [28]) the respective θ-expansions read
E = e(
1minus 2i(θζ) +1
2θ2(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)
)
(32)
S = A+ 2(θγ3σ) + 2iA(θζ) +1
2θ2(
ǫmnpartnωm minusA(A+ 2ζ2 + λ2)minus 4i(ζγ3σ))
(33)
For reasons that will become clear in section 52 superfield components are consistentlyexpressed by underlined letters except eam ζ
αand λaα are the components of the
Lorentz covariant decomposition of the gravitino ψα
a= ema ψ
α
maccording to eq (A18)
The dependent variables ω R and σ are defined by the eqs (229) (233) and (234)when substituting all variables therein by underlined ones
The independent variables in the Howe-action (31) are the components of thezweibein ea of its fermionic partner ψa and an auxiliary field A Inserting the decom-position (A18) of ψ and integrating out superspace eq (31) reduces to (cf (A12)derivatives with respect to A are indicated by a dot)
SHowe =
int
d2x e
(
1
2FRminus A(AF minus F) + 2F σ2 minus 2iAF(ψaγaγ
3σ)
minus 1
2A2F(ψmψ
m) +
(1
2A2F minus (AF minus F)
)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m)
)
(34)
Here F(A) is F(S)∣
∣
θ=0 the body of the function F(S) in (31) The action (34)
remains invariant under the supergravity transformations9 (as in the notation for thefields ε is used to distinguish that transformation parameter from ε in (240)-(243))
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (35)
δψm
α = minus(
(Dε)α +i
2A(εγm)
α)
(36)
δA = minus2(
(εγ3σ)minus i
2Aema(εγ
aψm))
(37)
As it stands (34) cannot be equivalent to a more general supergravity like SMFDS in(237) Only for (219) the special case of a non-dynamical dilaton a relation willbe worked out in section 51 but (34) is clearly insufficient to represent the generaltheory with dynamical dilaton field
In order to describe the superfield generalization of all bosonic GDT with dynamicaldilaton (as exemplified by (212)) φ is promoted to a superfield as well and one arrives
9In agreement with our systematic notation eg the covariant derivative D refers to the dependentspin connection (229) for the underlined components of the superfield
14
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
at the general superfield dilaton supergravities (SFDS cf fig 1) of Park and Strominger[32]
SSFDS =
int
d2xd2θ E(
J(Φ)S +K(Φ)DαΦDαΦ+ L(Φ))
(38)
The general dilaton supergravity model of this type is described by three functionsJ(Φ) K(Φ) and L(Φ) of the dilaton superfield
Φ = φ+1
2θγ3χ+
1
2θ2F (39)
In (39) a scalar dilaton field φ appears as the lowest component From superspacegeometry the standard transformation rules [25 28]
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (310)
δχα= minus2(γ3ε)αF + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (311)
δF = minus2i(εζ)F minus i
2
(
εγmγ3(Dmχ))
+ (ελm)(
(ψmγ3χ)minus 2partmφ
)
(312)
are an immediate consequence Integrating out superspace and elimination of theauxiliary fields F and A by their (algebraic) eom-s is straightforward but leads torather lengthy expressions We therefore relegate some relevant formulas to appendixA2 Furthermore we assume in the following that the reparametrization J (Φ) rarr Φis possible so that only K and L remain as two free functions This agrees with theappearance of only Z and V and with the simple factor φ in front of R in the bosonicpart of SMFDS in (237)10
Then (38) becomes (L(
φ)
and K(φ) are the body of L(Φ) and K(Φ) derivativesthereof are taken with respect to φ)
SSFDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2Rφ+ (χσ) + 2K
(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχminus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+ 2KL2 minus LLprime + Lǫmn(ψnγ3ψ
m) + iLprime(ζγ3χ)
+1
4
(1
2Lprimeprime minusK primeL+K(ψ
nγmγnψ
m))
χ2
)
(313)
with the corresponding symmetry transformations
δema = minus2i(εγaψ
m) δema = 2i(εγmψ
a) (314)
10For models of the form (38) that do not allow a global reparametrization of this type the equiv-alence to a gPSM discussed below holds patch-wise only
15
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
δψm
α = minus(Dε)α minus i
2
(
4KLminus Lprime minus 1
4K primeχ2
)
(εγm)α (315)
δφ = minus1
2εγ3χ (316)
δχα= 2L(γ3ε)α + i(γ3γbε)α(ψb
γ3χ)minus 2i(γ3γmε)αpartmφ (317)
We shall need below also the special case K = 0 of the action (313) called SFNDS infig 1
SSFNDS =
int
d2x e
(
1
2˜Rφ+ (χ˜σ)minus LLprime+ Lǫmn(ψ
nγ3ψ
m)+ iLprime(ψγ3χ) +
1
8Lprimeprimeχ2
)
(318)
It is written in terms of barred variables variables φ χ eam and ψ in analogy to thenotation of NDMFS eq (238)
The basic task (path D in fig 1) of Section 5 is to show the equivalence of SMFDS in(237) with SSFDS (313) together with a correct translation of the transformation laws(240)-(243) into (314)-(317) In view of the quite different structures this clearly hasno obvious answer although the number of fields and their type ((e φ ψ χ) for MFDSresp (e φ ψ χ) for SFDS) coincide Therefore first the transformations connectingtheories ldquohorizontallyrdquo in fig 1 must be discussed
4 Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal
Transformations
Transformations of fields in a certain action generically lead to new theories when thosetransformations contain singularities A famous case is the string inspired black holemodel [19] which even in interaction with minimally coupled matter by a dilatonfield dependent (singular) conformal transformation can be brought to flat space Infact this is the basic reason for being able to find the classical solution in that modelThe black hole singularity disappears in flat space and thus the global geometricproperties of the theory experience a profound change Nevertheless as long as sucha transformation is performed only locally in function space and if at the end of theday for the physical interpretation one returns to the variables of the original theorythis detour can be a very valuable mathematical tool
41 Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
Different gPSMs can be mapped upon each other by the target space diffeomorphism
XI =rArr XI = XI(X) (41)
16
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
It is straightforward to check that the action (21) is form-invariant under this diffeo-morphism when the gauge potentials and the Poisson tensor are transformed accordingto
AI =partXJ
partXIAJ (42)
P IJ =(
XIlarrpartK
)
PKL(rarrpartL X
J)
(43)
Hererarrpart I (cf (A10)) is the usual derivative acting to the right and
larrpart I acts as
flarrpart I= (minus1)I(f+1)
rarrpart I f (44)
We emphasize again at this point that (41) need not hold globally and thus physicsmay be different in two models connected by such a transformation when eg in thecase of gravity theories the AI are identified with the Cartan variables associated tothe new gauge field coordinates
The two models from P IJ and P IJ clearly obey two different sets of symmetrytransformations cf (23) The relation among them can be written as
δXI = δXI(X) (45)
δAI = δAI(AX) + eom-s (46)
εI =partXJ
partXIεJ (47)
The necessity for the appearance of the eom-s in (46) is easily seen when insertingthe transformed ε in the characteristic derivative term of (23)
δAI(AX) = minuspartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJεK
)
+ = minus dεI minus (minus1)KpartXJ
partXId(partXK
partXJ
)
εK + (48)
Obviously this produces terms of the form dX which are absent in the rest of thetransformation This indicates that each dXI has to be removed by the eom-s (25)to arrive at the transformation law as given in (23) for ε(εX) Finally we note thatthe eom-s (25) transform into the same ones for X and A while the eom-s (26)transform into eom-s of both types (25) and (26) in terms of X and A
It is worth mentioning a specialty of the gPSM structure at this point In an actionbased on linear symmetry transformations new related actions are usually obtained bya rearrangement of invariant functions ndash eg the rearrangement of superfields to obtainthe general Park-Strominger model from the special case with K = 0 as discussedbelow On the other hand the gPSM action is not constructed by the composition ofinvariant functions and supergravity invariant derivatives but the invariant is alwaysthe whole action Thus modifying a gPSM action necessarily implies the modificationof the symmetry transformations (cf (47))
17
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
42 Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
In gPSM-theories conformal transformations are a special type of target space dif-feomorphisms They in particular may be used to connect (path B in fig 1) theMFS models (218) to MFS0 models (219) with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0)or equivalently the MFDS models (237) to related models without dynamical dilaton(NDMFS path Bprime in fig 1) The MFS0 action (219) is mapped upon (218) of MFSby (cf ref [13] eqs (542) (548))
φ = φ Xa = eminus12Q(φ)Xa χα = eminus
14Q(φ)χα (49)
ω = ω +Z
2
(
Xbeb +1
2χβψβ
)
ea = e12Q(φ)ea ψα = e
14Q(φ)ψα (410)
with Q defined in (211) After the fields Xa and the part of ω dependent on bosonictorsion have been eliminated the ensuing NDMFS action (238) is connected with thegeneral MFDS action (237) by the same transformation rules for φ χ ea and ψ asgiven in (49) and (410) The prepotential u transforms according to
u = eminus12Q(φ)u (411)
which leads to a canonical transformation of V (φ) = minus14uuprime into (217) such that the
combination eV = eV remains invariantThe symmetry transformations of the MFS models (220)-(225) with respect to the
variables with and without bar resp are equivalent up to equations of motion of ω (orjust as well ω) In contrast applying (49)-(410) to the symmetry transformations ofthe MFDS model ((240)-(243)) with Z = 0 reproduces the the ones for Z 6= 0 withoutrecourse to the eom-s of ω Indeed the latter have been used explicitely therein toeliminate the independent part of the spin connection
In the NDMFS action (238) also the dilatino no longer represents a dynamical fieldVariation with respect to χα leads to
χα = minus 8
uprimeprime+ 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeǫm
n(γmψn)α (412)
and (provided uprimeprime 6= 0) the dilatino may be eliminated altogether The resulting action
in terms of ea ψ and φ ( ˜R and ˜σ are dependent variables as in (233) (234) but withZ = 0)
S(2)NDMFS =
int
d2x
(
1
2˜Rφminus 4
uprimeprime˜σ2 minus 1
8(u2)prime minus 2i
uprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3 ˜σ)
+( u
2minus 1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime)
ǫmn(ψnγ3ψm) +
1
4
(uprime)2
uprimeprime(ψmψm)
)
(413)
18
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
is invariant under the symmetry transformations
δeam = minus2i(εγaψm) (414)
δψαm = minus( ˜Dε)α +
iuprime
4(εγm)
α (415)
δφ = minus 4
uprimeprime(˜σγ3ε)minus iuprime
uprimeprimeema (ψmγ
aγ3ε) (416)
43 Conformal Transformation in Superspace
A similar conformal transformation connecting the general dilaton superfield actionSFDS (38) to a model with non-dynamical dilaton field (NDMFS K = 0 in (38)) isalso known in superspace [32] (path Bprimeprime in fig 1)11 It must contain a multiplication ofthe superzweibein EA
M with a factor Λ(Φ) depending on the full superspace multipletΦ The resulting action is again an integral over superspace One consequence thereofis the fact that a kinetic term for φ necessarily implies a kinetic term for χ It is knownthat a super-Weyl transformation preserving the constraints on the supertorsion (withvanishing bosonic torsion) has the form [25]
EMa = ΛE a
M EMα = Λ
12 E α
M minus iE aM γαβa DβΛ
12 (417)
In our case we are interested in the consequence of that transformation on the action(318) of SFNDS Choosing in (417)
Λ = exp[
σ(Φ)]
σprime = minus2K (418)
in the action (318) produces the general SFDS action (313) The different componentsare related by
φ = φ χ = eminusσ2 χ eam = eσeam (419)
ψα
m= e
σ2 ψ
α
mminus i
2Ke
σ2 eam(χγaγ
3)α (420)
where for σ resp K the body σ(φ) resp K(φ) is understood
11We re-emphasize that at the level of dilaton theories with vanishing bosonic torsion all knownresults [25 32] from 2d supergravity can be taken over
19
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
5 Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton
Supergravity
51 Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
Inspection of the SFNDS superfield action (318) without dynamical dilaton and of theaction SNDMFS in (238) which originated from the gPSM formulation of supergravityshows that in this special case the two theories are the same identifying
ψ = ψ χ = χ φ = φ L(φ) =u(φ)
2 (51)
It can be checked straightforwardly that the equivalence holds as well at the level ofthe symmetry transformations when ε and ε are identified (cf eqs (240)-(243) withZ = 0 and (314)-(317) with K = 0) Indeed this relation of the Park-Stromingermodel with K = 0 to a gPSM (interpreted as model with nonlinear super-Poincarealgebra) had been observed already before [30 50] In the gPSM-based formalism theidentification corresponds to the sequence of paths Aprime rarr Dprime in fig 1 [13 31]
For a non-dynamical dilaton φ we observe yet another identification between SNDMFS
of eq (238) and SHowe of (34) when the dilatino in the former case has been eliminatedas in eq (413) Indeed eqs (413) and (34) as well as the corresponding symmetrytransformations (414)-(416) and (35)-(37) are identical for
ψ = ψ A = minus uprime
2 F(A) =
1
2
(
u(
φ(A))
minus φ(A)uprime(
φ(A))
)
(52)
In equation (412) we had to assume that uprimeprime 6= 0 and thus the invertibility of the firstequation of (52) is guaranteed
The equivalence (52) corresponds to the steps Aprime rarr E in figure 1 Alternativelythe path E establishes a relation Dprime rarr E between two superspace actions namelysuperfield dilaton supergravity with non-dynamical dilaton (SFNDS eq (318)) andthe model of Howe (34) Dprime rarr E and C are not identical Relation C can entirely beformulated in superspace and holds (as its bosonic counterpart C cf comment below(212)) in very special cases only (invertible potentials or prepotentials resp) On theother hand the path Dprime rarr E does not correspond to the elimination of a superfieldInstead the two superfields in the version of (38) with12 K = 0 Ea = (ea ψ
a A) and
Φ = (φ χ F ) are related to the superfield in the model of Howe Ea = (ea ψa A) by
12This action corresponds to the sum of (A19) and (A21)
20
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
the steps
SFNDS(ea ψ
a A)
(φ χ F )elimination of A and Fminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarr
Dprime
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
NDMFS(ea ψ
a)
(φ χ)
elimination of χ
reinterpretation φ rarr AminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusminusrarrE
Howe (ea ψa A)
Obviously this equivalence combines components of different superfields in (38) intothe components of the superfield S of (31) Whenever the last equation in (52) canbe solved explicitly for A Dprime rarr E is equivalent to C However C is meaningful if andonly if such a solution exists while eq (413) ndash the result of Dprime rarr E ndash does not dependon the latter
52 Dynamical Dilaton
One may think that by means of (super-)conformal transformations proceeding alongthe paths B resp Bprimeprime also in the general case the identification (path D) can be estab-lished in a straightforward manner However with a dynamical dilaton the problemremains how to relate the fields (ψ χ) resp (ψ χ) because no obvious identificationthereof is apparent Also the relation between the symmetry transformations is farfrom trivial Indeed comparison of (237) and (240)-(243) with (313) and (314)-(317) immediately leads to the two important observations
bull While the SFDS action (313) includes standard kinetic terms for both the dilatonfield φ and its supersymmetric partner χ in the MFDS formulation for φ such aterm is generated too but not for the dilatino
bull The transformations of the zweibeine (314) in the SFDS action and (242) inthe MFDS action are different But in any comparison of the two models we hadto assume that the zweibeine should be the same Thus the gravitini ψ and ψappearing on the rhs of these transformations must be different
In contrast to the super-Weyl transformation in superspace (path Bprimeprime in fig 1) theconformal transformation leading from MFS0 (219) with Z = 0 to the MFS (237)(Z 6= 0 path B in fig 1) depends on the dilaton field φ alone (cf (49) and (410))One could of course try to introduce more complicated transformations including alsoa dependence on the dilatino χ It turns out that this is neither necessary nor possibleas pointed out above the relation (235) leading to the kinetic term for φ does notdepend on the details of the Poisson tensor and hence not on a pecularity of some specialclass of models In fact any gPSM with local Lorentz invariance after elimination ofXa and ω exhibits at best a kinetic term in φ but never in χ A similar conclusionholds for the symmetry transformations (cf the comment at the end of section 41)
21
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
On the other hand the missing kinetic term for χ in MFDS could be generated byan appropriate mixing of ψ and χ in ψ It is not difficult to find the correct relationWhen the SFNDS model (318) is transformed according to (419) one could try toreplace (420) by the simpler rule
ψ = eσ2 ψ (53)
This implies a new definition of the gravitino ψ On the other hand in this way aconnection with the MFDS action (237) the one following from the gPSM approachcan be established Namely identifying the gravitino ψ in (53) with the gravitino ofthat action produces all terms there provided
φ = φ χ = χ K(φ) = minus1
4Z(φ) L(φ) =
u
2 (54)
Now all terms on the lhs of (54) refer to superfield supergravity whereas on the rhswe find quantities defined in the gPSM-based MFDS approach This is not surprisingas the transformation rules (419) together with (53) of SFDS by taking into accountK = minus1
4Z are equivalent13 to the transformations of φ e χ and ψ in (49) and (410)
So far we followed the paths Dprime rarr Bprime in fig 1 In order to establish the relation Dbetween SFDS and MFDS the main goal of this section the ansatz
ψα
m= ψα
m minus i
8Z(φ)eamǫab(χγ
b)α (55)
together with (54) suggests itself by comparison of (53) with (420) It follows whenthe conformal factors in the two terms on the rhs of (420) are absorbed first in aredefinition of ψ then the conformal transformations (49) and (410) for χα ea andψα are taken into account Not surprisingly all contributions to (237) linear in Z arereproduced But also terms proportional Z2 are found to cancel
There seems to remain a difference in the symmetry transformations Assumingε = ε one obtains (∆ = δMFDS minus δSFDS)
∆φ = 0 ∆χα =Z
8χ2(γ3ε)α ∆eam =
Z
2ǫabχεemb ∆ψmα = minusZ
4χε(γ3ψm)α
(56)
However this is nothing else but a local Lorentz transformation (cf eq (A7)) withfield dependent parameter εφ = Z
2χε An analogous transformation emerges as well in
the gPSM based formalism the application of (47) leads to (ε denotes the symmetryparameter of the MFS0 model with Z = 0)
εφ = εφ +Z
2
(
Xbεb +1
2χβεβ
)
εa = e12Q(φ)εa εα = e
14Q(φ)εα (57)
13Notice the similarity between (211) and (418)
22
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
The superspace parameters ε obey a similar relation but with the opposite sign infront of Z2 in the first equation Thus a supersymmetry transformation εα = εαin MFS0 resp SFNDS under the conformal transformations (49) (410) and (419)becomes (ε = (εφ εa εα))
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (Z
4χε 0 εα) (58)
ε = (0 0 εα) minusrarr ε = (minusZ4χε 0 εα) (59)
Adding the two contributions to εφ and εφ resp yields the result found in (56)
εφ = Z2χε This terminates the proof that the minimal field supergravity in the sense
of ref [14] is ndash up to elimination of auxiliary fields ndash equivalent to SFDS the superfielddilaton gravity of Park and Strominger The symmetry transformations are mappedcorrectly upon each other modulo a local field-dependent Lorentz transformation
It may be useful to conclude this section with a compilation of the relevant formulaswhich in agreement with the corresponding sequence of steps in fig 1 relate minimalfield supergravity with the superfield dilaton theory of ref [32]
Actions Seven different actions that describe in some sense 2d supergravity have beenpresented These are
1 the gPSM based MFS of eq (218) and the special version MFS0 thereofwith vanishing bosonic torsion (219)
2 general dilaton supergravity MFDS in (237) with its special version withnon-dynamical dilaton (238) (NDMFS)
3 SFDS of eq (313) and SFNDS of eq (318) which both originate from thegeneral dilaton superfield theory by Park and Strominger (38)
4 the model of Howe in eqs (31) and (34) which when derived from NDMFS(238) by elimination of the dilatino takes the form (413)
Transformations The dilaton field φ and the zweibeine eam coincide for all models
path A The MFS fields (φ Xa χα) and (ω ea ψα) are reduced to the set (φχα ea ψα) of MFDS by (228)-(230) and (233)-(235)
paths B Bprime Bprimeprime At each level (MFS MFDS and SFDS) a special target spacetransformation connects the models with non-dynamical dilaton (barredvariables MFS0 MFNDS SFNDS) to the general ones For MFS this re-lation turns out to be the conformal transformation of eqs (49) and (410)which when restricted to the fields (φ χα ea ψα) also holds for MFDS vsNDMFS For SFDS the super-Weyl transformations (417) and (419) (420)are applied
23
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
path D After elimination of the auxiliary fields in SFDS (eqs (A22) and (A23))this theory is equivalent to MFDS the identification of the remaining fieldsand (pre-)potentials is contained in eqs (54) and (55) the supersymmetrytransformations are equivalent up to a local Lorentz transformation (56)
path E The NDMFS action allows the elimination of the dilatino (eq (412))leading to a theory that may be identified with the model of Howe (eq(52)) Only in certain cases path E is equivalent to the superfield relationC Therefore a combination of the paths E rarr C cannot be used as analternative to Dprime
6 Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity
Model
The close relation between the general gPSM describing MFS supergravity and thegeneral superfield supergravity (38) can be used to combine the advantages of bothapproaches We first use the fact that in MFS as a gPSM it is manifestly simpler toarrive at the complete (classical and quantum) solution of a 2d gravity system Usingthe list of formulas described in the last paragraph of the preceding section it can bemapped directly into the complete exact solution of the Park-Strominger supergravity(38) where we assume that a redefinition of Φ by the replacement J(Φ) rarr Φ is possibleeverywhere
As supergravity in two dimensions without matter has no propagating degrees offreedom the physical content of the system is encoded in the Casimir functions (24)Every gPSM gravity possesses at least one Casimir function as the bosonic part of thetensor has odd dimension (cf (211)) For the MFS0 model ((218) with Z = 0) thisfunction can be chosen as [13]
C = Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2uprime (61)
Because the on-shell Casimir function is a constant it must be conformally invariantThus a simple change of variables according to (49) and (410) leads to
C = eQ(
Y minus 1
8u2 +
1
16χ2Cχ
)
(62)
Cχ = uprime +1
2uZ (63)
Eliminating the auxiliary field Xa by (235) the Casimir function of the MFDS modelof eq (237) becomes (the special case of NDMFS (238) is found by setting Q = Z = 0)
24
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
CMFDS = eQ(
minus1
2partnφpartnφminus 1
8u2 minus 1
2partnφ(χγ3ψn) +
1
16χ2(uprime +
1
2uZ minus ψnψn)
)
(64)
For explicit calculations the expressions are written more conveniently in terms oflight-cone coordinates (cf Appendix A1) Assuming X++ 6= 0 one can introduce theLorentz-scalars
ρ(+) =χ+
radic
|X++| ρ(minus) =
radic
|X++|χminus (65)
The solution of the MFS0 model (219) has been derived already in ref [13] sect8 the conformal transformation (49) (410) of which yields the general solutionof MFS (218) The strategy to obtain in a straightforward way the general so-lution for a (g)PSM model consists in following the steps set out in ref [51] (cf[33]) The final result is best parametrized in terms of (almost-)Casimir-Darbouxcoordinates which can be identified a posteriori Indeed introducing new gauge-potentials AI = (AC Aφ A++ A(+) A(minus)) that correspond to the target space variablesX I = (C φX++ ρ(+) ρ(minus)) (cf (41) and (42)) all AI can be expressed in terms ofthe X I by the solution of their eom-s except for AC The eom of AC simply reads
dC = 0 (66)
and therefore we introduce a new integration function F
dC = 0 =rArr dAC = 0 =rArr AC = minus dF (67)
Thus the solution is parametrized in terms of the target space variables X I and thefree function F Denoting by V the component of P ab = Vǫab (cf (214))
V = V + Y Z minus 1
2χ2
(V Z + V prime
2u+
2V 2
u3
)
(68)
the general analytic solution on a patch with X++ 6= 0 and C = const 6= 0 can be
25
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
written as
ω =dX++
X++minus eQVAΥ minus eQ
8CCχρ
(+) dΥ
minus Z
4eQ
(uZ
8Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ+
1
4Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF minus σradic2C
ρ(minus) dΥ)
(69)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++XminusminusAΥ minus eQu
16Cρ(minus)ρ(+) dφ
+σ
4radic2
(eQ
C(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) dΥminus ρ(+) dρ(+)
)
(610)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQAΥ (611)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus)AΥ +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) minus eQuσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +1
2ZΥdφ
)
)
(612)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+)AΥ + eQσ
2radic2C
(
dΥ +Z
2Υdφ
)
(613)
Beside the abbreviation Cχ in (63) a new variable and its gauge potential namely(σ = signX++)
Υ = ρ(minus) minus σu
2radic2ρ(+) AΥ = dF + eQ
σ
4radic2C2
ΥdΥ (614)
have been introduced It should be noticed that in (612) and (613) half of the termsproduced by Υ in AΥ vanish due to the Grassmann property (ρ(+))2 = (ρ(minus))2 = 0
In (69)-(613) Xminusminus and Υ are dependent variables according to eqs (62) withY = X++Xminusminus at C = const 6= 0 and (615) Further arbitrary functions are φ dFand the fermionic ρ(+) ρ(minus)
It is straightforward to check that the spinor c defined as (σ = signX++)
c = e12QΥ (615)
commutes14 with everything but with itself From the Schouten bracket
c c = minus2radic2σeQC (616)
it follows that for C equiv 0 an additional fermionic Casimir function c arises On a patchwith X++ = 0 but Xminusminus 6= 0 we can define an analogous quantity c with ρ(minus) and
14All commutators refer to its definition below (21)
26
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
ρ(+) interchanged c = const relates ρ(+) and ρ(minus) (cf (615)) Its associated gaugepotential is (cf (67)) A = minus df The general solution reads
ω =dX++
X++minus eQV dF + e
12Q σ
2radic2Cχρ
(+) df
minus Z
2e
12Q(
ρ(minus) df + e12Q1
8Cχρ
(minus)ρ(+) dF)
(617)
X++e++ = minus dφminus eQX++Xminusminus dF
minus 1
2
( σ
2radic2ρ(+) dρ(+) + e
12Q(ρ(minus) +
σu
2radic2ρ(+)) df
)
(618)
eminusminusX++
= minuseQ dF (619)
radic
|X++|ψ+ =eQ
8Cχρ
(minus) dF +σ
2radic2
(
dρ(+) + e12Qu df
)
(620)
ψminusradic
|X++|= minuse
Q
8Cχρ
(+) dF minus e12Q df (621)
Beside the anti-commuting constant c the free functions of this solution are dF df φX++ and ρ(+) Xminusminus and ρ(minus) are dependent variables according to (62) with C = 0and (615) with c = const
For certain potentials (210) also solutions withX++ = Xminusminus = 0 may appear whichcan describe a ldquosupersymmetric ground-staterdquo [32] Then χ = 0 and the discussionreduces to the pure bosonic case (cf eg ref [52] for a situation where such a solutionappears)
7 Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in
Minimal Field Supergravity
To find the proper invariant coupling of a test-particle to supergravity seems to bea hopeless task when one stays within the gPSM related MFS model On the otherhand in order to study global properties for any of the solutions obtained above aldquosuper-geodesicrdquo is needed For a problem of this type where a simple access to aninvariant expression is needed the superfield approach is the method of choice Thepath of a super-particle is described by the map τ rarr zM (τ) with coordinates15
zM = (xm θmicro) (71)
15xm = x
m(τ) and θmicro = θ
micro(τ) are taken in this section without explicitly indicating the differenceto the free variables x and θ in the preceding sections
27
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
Holonomic indices are transformed into anholonomic ones according to
xa = eamxm θα = δαmicroθ
micro (72)
Due to the second equation (72) no separate notation (cf (A8)) for the componentsof θmicro is needed and θmicro = (θ+ θminus)
The action of a super-particle with mass m moving along the curve zM (τ) may bewritten as [53ndash57]
SPP =
int
dτ(
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus)+m2
2g minusmzMEM
AΓA
)
(73)
It exhibits the well-known additional fermionic κ symmetry [55]
δκzMEM
a = 0
δκzMEM
+ = minus(
mκ+ +radic2κminus
gzMEM
++)
δκzMEM
minus = minus(
mκminus +radic2κ+
gzMEM
minusminus)
δκg = minus4zM(
EM+κminus + EM
minusκ+)
(74)
The action (73) is a condensed expression which includes both the massless and themassive case The limit m rarr 0 of (73) leads to the standard action of the masslesspointparticle while the formula for the massive particle to be found in most of theliterature is recovered by rescaling g = minusmg and κplusmn = minusmκplusmn
In contrast to bosonic gravity the action (73) does not contain the full super-lineelement
(ds)2 = dzM otimes dxNGNM = 2dzMEM++ otimes dzNEN
minusminus + 2dzMEM+ otimes dzNEN
minus (75)
The standard super-particle (73) with m = 0 only considers the first part of (75)including bosonic anholonomic indices to be summed over [53ndash55] which by itself isinvariant under supergravity transformations We do not provide a detailed comparisonof the consequences of the two approaches (73) and (75) within this work But it isimportant to notice that even the case m = 0 in (73) leads to different equations ofmotion in the supersymmetry sector than the ones following from (75)16
16What is meant by ldquoglobalrdquo properties of a solution is well-known to depend on the ldquodevicerdquo bywhich (super-)geodesics are defined Already in the purely bosonic case with non-vanishing torsionthe use of ldquogeodesicsrdquo (depending on Christoffel symbols only) or ldquoautoparallelsrdquo (depending also onthe contorsion) may lead to different global properties
28
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
In the standard gauge (A14)-(A17) the connection ΓA reduces to the result in flatsuperspace with the only non-vanishing components
Γ+ = θminus Γminus = θ+ (76)
To explore the global structure of two-dimensional supergravity with this super-particlethe solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) must be inserted in (73) To this end theθ-expansion of (73) must be calculated explicitly After some super-algebra the firstterm of (73) (relevant for the massless super-particle) takes the form
gminus1(
zMEM++zNEN
minusminus) = gminus1(
xme++m +
radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+ + θminusθ+Axme++
m
)
(
xneminusminusn +radic2θminusθminus + 2
radic2xnψminus
nθminus + θminusθ+Axneminusminusn
)
(77)
while the Wess-Zumino contribution becomes
zMEMAΓA = θ+θminus + θminusθ+ + xmψ+
mθminus + xmψminus
mθ+ + xmωmθ
minusθ+ (78)
When inserting the classical solution for A (eq (A23)) and the explicit expression forthe dependent spin-connection ω (cf eq (229)) in (77) and (78) the action of thesupersymmetric test-particle (73) is parametrized in terms of the zweibein em thegravitino ψ
m the dilaton field φ and the dilatino χ By means of the identification
(54) and (55) the action (73) turns into a function of em ψm φ and χ
SPP =
int
dτ
gminus1A++Aminusminus +m2
2g minusm(B+minus +Bminus+)
(79)
A++ = xme++m
(
1 +1
2Zχminusθ+ minus 1
2θ2(1
2uZ +
1
2uprime minus 1
16Z primeχ2
)
)
+radic2θ+θ+ + 2
radic2xmψ+
mθ+
(710)
B+minus = θ+θminus +1
4θ2xmωm + xmψ+
mθminus +
Z
4radic2xme++
m χminusθminus (711)
Here Aminusminus and Bminus+ are defined through (710) and (711) by the interchange of allexplicit anholonomic indices + rarr minus minus rarr +
71 Gauge Choice
When the supersymmetric test-particle moves on the supergravity background thezweibein and the gravitino in (79) are replaced by their classical solutions (610)-(613) or (618)-(621) resp In principle ldquosuper-geodesicsrdquo could then be obtainedfrom variation of (73) or (79) respectively This task simplifies considerably when anappropriate gauge-fixing is used
29
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
1 The solutions from MFS depend among others on the variable X++ which isnot present in superspace The supersymmetric test-particle being manifestlyinvariant under local Lorentz transformations we can eliminate this dependenceby a (finite) local Lorentz transformation Thus on any patch with X++ 6= 0 wecan fix its value to X++ = 1 or X++ = minus1 depending on the sign of the originalconfiguration For X++ = 0 we have to parametrize the solution analogously interms of Xminusminus (cf section 6)
2 κ-symmetry can be used to gauge one of the fermionic variables to a constant [58]It turns out that θminus equiv 0 is the preferable choice for X++ 6= 0
3 It has been argued in ref [12] that the classical solution (69)-(613) is equivalentto the corresponding solution of the purely bosonic model up to local supersym-metry transformations Thus locally all fermionic target-space degrees of freedomcould be gauged away ρ(+) equiv 0 ρ(minus) equiv 0 and consequently ψplusmn equiv 0 One mightask whether this zero fermion (ZF) gauge is accessible and allowed
Concerning the question whether the ZF gauge is allowed one should consultthe situation in the purely bosonic case There the line element after elimina-tion of Y = X++Xminusminus by means of the Casimir constant is determined by twoarbitrary functions F and φ The ldquogaugerdquo dF = 0 is forbidden by the require-ment of non-singular gravity namely that the determinant of the metric shouldbe different from zero It would be natural although not strictly necessary totransfer these arguments directly to supergravity ie demanding a non-singularsuper-determinant However as can be seen from (32) the vanishing of thatdeterminant is controlled by its bosonic contributions Thus within this line ofarguments the ZF gauge is allowed
Typically the accessibility of a gauge is more difficult to answer than the questionwhether it is allowed Beside the mere mathematical challenge to describe finitegauge transformations accessibility involves subtle physical questions as wellFor MFS the mathematical aspect found a definite answer [12] By means of afinite gPSM gauge transformation any solution can be brought to ZF gauge17
The physical aspect is more involved Indeed under a finite transformation notonly the the specific solution of the field equations itself but also the ldquodevicerdquodefining the (super-)geodesics (eg the super-pointparticle action) must be trans-formed This last step can be omitted if and only if the new solution togetherwith the old device turns out to have the same physics as the new solution withsome ldquoinvariantrdquo device18 This does not necessarily imply that the solution does
17The explicit proof had been performed in ref [12] for MFS0 only but it generalizes straightfor-wardly to MFS by the use of the conformal transformations (49) and (410)
18A simple example is a wave packet solution in classical field theory Clearly the solution breaks
30
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
not transform at all but solely that the two systems are physically (albeit notmathematically) equivalent This is often the case for broken bosonic symmetrieswhere states (field configurations) exhibit such a degeneracy On the other handsome well-known symmetries do not allow the simplification of using the old de-vice The conformal transformation discussed in section 4 is a bosonic examplefor that In the present context it is important that broken supersymmetry doesnot allow the above shortcut as well Indeed breaking of supersymmetry neverleads to an equivalent class of states with the same physical properties19 Butas may be checked easily by inserting any of the solutions of Section 6 includingthe one considered in ref [12] into the supersymmetry transformations (222)and (225) many of them break at least half of the supersymmetries (cf ref [32]and the systematic study of supersymmetric solutions in ref [59]) Thereforewith respect to the transformation proposed in ref [12] the device must be trans-formed as well Thus we expect that in the generic case the global propertiesof the solutions of Section 6 do depend on fermionic background fields if thesefields cannot be transformed away by means of unbroken supersymmetries
Despite the problems of physical accessibility of the ZF gauge we will for sim-plicity restrict our analysis below to this specific class of solutions This choicealso correlates with the observation that classical field equations usually possesssolutions with vanishing fermion fields20 Inserting it into the super-determinant(32) yields a non-trivial result namely
E = e(
1minus 1
2θminusθ+(uZ + uprime)
)
(712)
For non-singular gauges ndashin the usual sensendash the superdeterminant is non-vanishingand does not reduce to the purely bosonic result although the dilatino and thegravitino of the background have been gauged away because the fermionic part-ner θ+(τ) of the bosonic geodesic xm(τ) survives
Besides the drastic simplification of the pointparticle action this gauge is veryconvenient also from the technical point of view as it permits an easy applicationfor both solutions (69)-(613) and (617)-(621) derived in the previous sectionIt should be kept in mind though that the ZF gauge is problematic Neverthe-
(global) rotation symmetry as the wave packet moves in a certain direction In an ldquoinvariantrdquo systemof detectors the latter are (or can be) arranged in a rotationally symmetric way Then physics(measurement of the wave packet) remains the same
19In contrast to the example in footnote 18 broken supersymmetry acting on a bosonic wave packetproduces fermions Then it is obviously relevant whether the detector has been transformed too Ifthis is the case it would still register ldquobosonsrdquo although it would receive fermionic contributions aswell
20There are of course counter-examples eg the solution (617)-(621) for c 6= 0 in (615)
31
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
less for a first cursory exploration of super-geodesics derived from (79)-(711) itcertainly is a convenient starting point
4 In the bosonic sector an Eddington-Finkelstein like gauge is the most convenientone [33] To this end the world-sheet coordinates xm are chosen such that theremaining target space variables F (x) and φ(x) describe the trivial embedding
F (x) equiv x0(τ) = F (τ) φ(x) equiv x1(τ) = φ(τ) (713)
These will be our bosonic coordinates in the following
The pointparticle action (79) with the solution (69)-(613) in the gauge choice asproposed in paragraphs 1-4 above together with (713) simplifies to
SPP =
int
dτ(
Sbosonic
PP + SSUSY
PP +m2
2g)
(714)
Sbosonic
PP = gminus1eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
(715)
SSUSY
PP = gminus1[
θminusθ+micro(φ) middot eQF(
φ+ ξ(φ)F)
minusradic2θ+θ+(φ+ ξF )
]
minusm[
θminusθ+ + θminusθ+(
F(
Z middot ξ(φ) + ξprime(φ))
+ Z middot φ)
]
(716)
The dependence on the dilaton φ occurs in the coefficient of bosonic torsion Z and intwo functions ξ(φ) and micro(φ) defined as
ξ(φ) = C +1
8eQu2 micro(φ) = minusu middot Z minus uprime (717)
72 Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
To explore the global structure of a certain gravitational background the equations ofmotion from (714)-(716) have to be derived To this end the variation with respectto the super-coordinates zM = F φ θ+ has to be calculated It is convenient tore-parametrize the curve zM(τ) in such a way that g equiv 0 Then the variations can be
32
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
written as
g middot δFSPP =part
partτ
minuseQ(φ+ 2ξF )(1 + θminusθ+micro) +radic2θ+θ+ξ
+mgθminusθ+(Zξ + ξprime)
(718)
g middot δφSPP = eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)(
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F)
+ eQθminusθ+microprimeξF 2 minus eQθminusθ+microF
minusradic2θ+θ+ξprimeF +
radic2θ+θ+ minusmg
(
θminusθ+F (Z primeξ + Zξprime + ξprimeprime)minus θminusθ+Z)
(719)
g middot δθ+SPP = minuseQθminusmicroF (φ+ ξF ) +radic2θ+(φ+ ξprimeφF + ξF ) + 2
radic2θ+(φ+ ξF )
+mgθminus(
F (Zξ + ξprime) + φZ)
(720)
Equation (718) is a total derivative as partpartF
is a Killing field The expression in the curlybrackets corresponds to the related constant of motion To solve (719) and (720) withthe constant of motion (718) in full generality is a daunting task which we do notattempt in the present work For illustrative purposes we find it sufficient to considerspecial cases with some physical relevance The massless particle (m = 0) togetherwith its supersymmetric orbit θ+(τ) already allows the discussion of different physicallyinteresting analytic solutions In the cases to be treated below further restrictions willbe made
1 ldquoMinkowski ground state modelsrdquo Within bosonic theories of gravity a specialsubset is determined by the condition that at C = 0 in (211) the metric of thesetheories reduces to the one of Minkowski space [26 33] This implies a relationbetween the functions Z(φ) and V (φ) in (210) which for supergravity becomesjust the condition micro = 0 ie the relation
uprime
u= minusZ (721)
between the prepotential and the function which determines non-vanishing bosonictorsion Spherically reduced gravity from d = 4 belongs to this class with (l is anarbitrary constant)
ZSRG = minus(2φ)minus1 uSRG = minuslradic
φ (722)
but also more general models which are asymptotically flat if u(infin) rarr infin
2 The (bosonic) light-like directions SbosonicPP = 0 correspond to especially simple
solutions They are characterized by
(2a) F = 0
(2b) φ+ ξF = 0
33
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
721 Minkowski Ground-State Models
The solution of the purely bosonic model with micro = 0 is regarded as a given input inthis subsection Actually the interesting cases will be covered by solutions of the type(2a) and (2b) above
For micro = 0 and m = 0 the variation (720) vanishes if
partτ (φ+ ξF )θ+ + 2(φ+ ξF )θ+ = 0 (723)
holds The solutions can be classified as follows
(A) φ + ξF = 0 This is the special case micro = 0 of (2b) above and will be discussedtogether with the generic solutions of this type below
(B) θ+ = 12partτ log(φ+ ξF )θ+
The general solution of (B) is
θ+ =1
radic
|φ+ ξF |λ (724)
where λ is an arbitrary constant spinor The space of anti-commuting variables of thisclass of solutions can be parametrized by the two constant spinors λ and θminus In abosonic superfunction A with body AB and soul AS therefore the decomposition
A(τ) = AB(τ) + AS(τ) = AB(τ) + θminusλa(τ) (725)
can be introduced Here AB(τ) and a(τ) are ordinary bosonic functionsAs (724) does not depend on θminus any τ -derivative of θ+ is again proportional to θ+
(or zero) which especially means that θ+(τ) has no simple zeros The singularity in(724) corresponds to a light-like direction (A) of the bosonic line element
Evaluating the variations (718) and (719) with the solution (724) they simplifyto
partτ(
eQ(φ+ 2ξF ))
= 0 (726)
(ξprime + Zξ)F 2 minus F = 0 (727)
which are the relations from the purely bosonic model The motion of θ+ is determinedup to the initial value according to (723) ie up to the numerical value of λ in (724)Due to absence of the θrsquos in (726) and (727) the evolution of φ and F will notdepend on the fermionic variables But as all bosonic quantities must be regarded as(commuting) superfunctions resp supernumbers a soul can still be introduced in themby an appropriate choice of the initial values for these fields An example of this typeis evaluated below
34
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
722 Light-like Solution (2a) with micro 6= 0
The vanishing of (720) relates the motion in the direction θ+ to φ and φ
θ+ = minus1
2
φ
φθ+ (728)
Again the evolution of θ+(τ) does not depend on θminus and the general solution
θ+(τ) = (φ)minus12λ (729)
with an arbitrary constant spinor λ is an immediate consequence The space of anti-commuting coordinates is again two-dimensional and may be parametrized by (θminus λ)
As a consequence of (729) the term prop θ+θ+ in the action (716) vanishes Thusthe complete action (714) is identically zero for F = 0 and these orbits are not onlynull directions of the bosonic part of the action but of the whole super-particle action(714)
In terms of the solution (729) eq (719) vanishes identically whereas the constantof motion (718) can be brought into the form
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ = k (730)
Here k is some constant super-number After some straightforward super-algebra theτ derivative of (730) is found as
φ = minusφ2(Z +1
2θminusθ+microZ + θminusθ+microprime) (731)
The body of this equation is seen to yield the correct light-like geodesic φ = minusZφ2Inserting this relation into (728) (the terms prop micro in (731) vanish due to (θ+)2 = 0)leads to
θ+ =1
2Zθ+φ (732)
As Z = dQdφ (cf (211)) eq (732) can be transformed into a total derivative andthe general solution for θ+ (729) can be expressed alternatively as
θ+(τ) = eQ2 λ (733)
The constant spinor λ appearing in this solution is the same as the one in (729)To solve equation (730) a decomposition according to (725) is necessary Using
the relations
k = kB + kS partτkB = partτkS = 0 (734)
eQ(φ) = eQ(φB)(1 + Z(φB)φS) (735)
35
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
body and soul of equation (730) become
eQ(φB)φB = kB (736)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) = kS (737)
where in eq (737) φB has been eliminated by means of (736) The latter equation isequivalent to the one of the bosonic model but the value of the complete φ(τ) receivescontributions from φS as well With the souls φS = θminusλϕ(τ) and kS = θminusλk for φ andk eq (737) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBeQ(φB)
2 micro(φB) = k (738)
For a complete set of initial values for super-coordinates zM(τ = 0) and for the constantof motion k eqs (733) (736) and (738) uniquely determine the evolution of the twodynamical variables φ and θ+ Certainly eqs (736) and (738) cannot be solved ingeneral In certain cases however a simple solution can be obtained
bull Due to (732) the purely bosonic solution corresponds to a special choice of initialvalues namely θ+ = 0 Indeed if θ+ = 0 for any τ = τ0 all τ -derivatives onθ+(τ0) vanish as well and consequently θ+ is zero everywhere In this case theconstant of motion has vanishing soul as well
bull Models with vanishing bosonic torsion (Z = 0) possess a simple solution withnon-trivial fermionic sector As both θ+ and θminus are constant in this case eq(730) becomes a total derivative (cf eq (717))
part
partτ(φminus θminusθ+u) = k rArr φminus θminusθ+uminus c = kτ (739)
Both k and c are supernumbers where c is determined by the initial value of φas
c = φ0 minus θminusθ+u(φ0) (740)
The explicit solution is
φB = kBτ + φ0 (741)
φS = θminusθ+(
u(φB)minus u(φ0))
+ kSτ (742)
where it has been assumed that the initial value of φ is bosonic φ0 = φB0 Thisclass of solutions is especially interesting as it determines the null-directions of amassless super pointparticle on a background described by the model of Howe [25]
36
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
bull As an example with non-vanishing bosonic torsion we consider spherically reducedgravity from four dimensions ie a combination of (2a) with micro = 0 and (722)As φ + ξF 6= 0 here the situation is given by (B) above Inserting (722) into(736) and (733) and after integration of the former relation one finds after asimple redefinition of (12)(kBτ + cB) rarr τ
φB = τ 2 θ+(τ) =λ
τ (743)
The determination of the soul of φ simplifies in this special case as micro(φ) equiv 0The integrating factor of the differential equation (738) is given by
ρ(τ) =1
2τ (744)
which yields the last dynamical quantity as
φS = θminusλτ(cS + k2τ minus cBkB
) (745)
Obviously the value of φS(τ) does not depend on the evolution of θ+(τ) in (743)This is a consequence of micro = 0 and as already discussed above holds in anyMinkowski ground-state theory Therefore with the special choice cS = k = 0the soul of φ vanishes for all τ but of course one is not forced to choose theintegration constants like that Nevertheless a non-trivial coupling of the bosonicvariable φ to the θ variables is somehow artificial On the other hand θ+(τ) doesdepend on the behavior of φB and thus even in this simple example the bosonicand the fermionic part of the pointparticle do not decouple from each other Theevolution of θ+(τ) shows a singularity at τ = 0 a point where with our choice ofτ the singularity of the Schwarzschild black hole at φ = 0 is encountered
723 Light-like Solution (2b) with micro 6= 0
Eq (720) vanishes trivially in this case while eqs (718) and (719) (except for ξ = 0)are related by
(718) = ξ middot (719) (746)
The remaining only differential equation reads
eQ(1 + θminusθ+micro)φ+radic2ξθ+θ+ = k (747)
If we had still θ+ prop θ+ eq (747) does reduce to (730) which of course is expected tohold for the body of the two equations Thus the solution (728) is one of the solutionsfor (747) with the same φ(τ) as derived in the previous section (notice however thedifferent behavior of F )
37
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
Nevertheless (747) allows solutions with θ+ not proportional to θ+ This does notlead to a non-vanishing action (714) as the latter is proportional to φ+ξF Again oneobserves that any bosonic null-direction is a null-direction of the whole super-particle
To discuss the general solution the split into soul and body is made again
eQ(φB)φB = kB (748)
eQ(φB)φS + kBZ(φB)φS + kBθminusθ+micro(φB) +
radic2ξ(φB)θ
+θ+ = kS (749)
By introducing the general decomposition for θ+
θ+(τ) = f(τ)eQ2 λ+ g(τ)θminus f(0) = 1 g(0) = 0 (750)
and using again φS(τ) = θminusλϕ(τ) (749) becomes
eQ(φB)ϕ+ kBZ(φB)ϕ+ kBe12Q(φB)micro(φB)f(τ)
+radic2ξ(φB)(e
12Q(φB)(g(τ)f(τ)minus f(τ)g(τ))minus eminus
12Q(φB)1
2kBZf(τ)g(τ)) = k (751)
Obviously the system is underdetermined because three free functions ϕ f and gobey one single first order differential equation The special situation of micro = 0 followsstraightforwardly by setting this function to zero in all equations of this subsection
8 Conclusion and Outlook
The formulation of supergravity as a superfield (dilaton) theory is well-known since theseminal works of Howe [25] and Park Strominger [32] This approach uses the secondorder formalism with vanishing bosonic torsion Unless the dilaton superfield is non-dynamical this field appears in a second order action which applies to most modelswith a bosonic potential of direct physical relevance like Einstein gravity sphericallyreduced from D dimensions Also the string inspired CGHS model [19] (the formallimit Drarr infin) belongs to this class
The complicated structure of the equations of motion in a second order formalismtogether with the large number of (auxiliary) field variables in superfield supergravityprobably has been the main reason why to this day no full solution of generic 2dsupergravity with dynamical dilaton [32] has been published21
Our present work closes this lacuna Also for the first time ndash we believe ndash a manage-able treatment is provided for ldquosupergeodesicsrdquo the motion of a super-point particlein a very general supergravity background solution which nonetheless is described bya minimal set of fields
21Cf the comment below eq (50) in [32]
38
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
In order to achieve these results ndash which by far do not exhaust the list of furtherapplications ndash one relies heavily upon the knowledge gained in first order 2d bosonicgravity [1 2] and the more general concept of Poisson-sigma models [7 8]
Within this approach not only in bosonic gravity many (without interaction withmatter essentially all) classical and quantum problems have found a complete solu-tion [33] but the graded extension of Poisson-sigma models also opens the door towardsa similar treatment of supergravity-like theories [13] A subset of those graded Poisson-sigma models (MFS in fig 1) already identified by the present authors as ldquogenuinerdquosupergravities from their algebra of Hamiltonian constraints [14] is equivalent to a sec-ond order superdilaton theory (MFDS) The latter in a more round-about way (pathBprime rarr Dprime rarr Bprimeprime in fig 1) is shown here to be identical to the superfield dilaton theoryof ref [32] (SFDS in fig 1) when different auxiliary fields in the latter are eliminatedwhen certain conformal transformations are made and when the gravitino field is re-defined appropriately We also were able to prove that during these procedures thecorresponding supersymmetric transformations are mapped exactly upon each otherndash with a local Lorentz transformation mixed in only The chain of formulas whichprovides the identification of superfield dilaton supergravity [32] with the correspond-ing class of supergravity theories derived from the graded Poisson-sigma approach iscompiled at the end of Section 5 These formulas should be consulted together with aflow diagram of fig 1 and the corresponding list of actions
Of course once this identification is established the general solution of MFS ob-tained after a conformal transformation (target space diffeomorphism in gPSM par-lance) from the solution published already in ref [13] represents the general solutionof superfield supergravity of ref [32] (cf Section 6) Our only technical restriction hasbeen that a further arbitrary function of the dilaton superfield Φ (J(Φ) in the actionof ref [32] resp our (38)) has been assumed to be invertible so that the replacementJ(Φ) rarr Φ is possible This restriction is not serious as on the one hand all physicallyinteresting theories (spherically reduced gravity etc) are of this form anyhow On theother hand this inversion is permitted locally in function space so that the only fur-ther complication can be that the general solution is valid only in a certain patch inthis case
This general solution of superfield supergravity (after a suitable choice of gauge-fixings among the bosonic symmetries) depends on a bosonic constant Casimir functionC and on two bosonic functions dF and φ which may be interpreted as the coordinatesof the world sheet For C 6= 0 the anti-commuting space is parametrized by two freefermionic functions at C equiv 0 one of them is replaced by an anti-commuting constantCasimir function and an anti-commuting df
As argued in ref [12] the two fermionic gauge-degrees of freedom of N = (1 1)supergravity could be used locally to put those functions to zero (zero fermion gaugeZF gauge) so that the bosonic solution survives after all as the only ldquonon-trivialrdquo oneas long as no interactions with matter are considered Indeed by only demanding a
39
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
non-singular determinant of the supermetric ndash generalizing the non-singularity restric-tion of bosonic gravity ndash this ZF gauge would be permitted and in this philosophypure supergravity would become ldquotrivialrdquo because the gravitino can be ldquogauged awayrdquoHowever whether such a gauge is ldquophysicallyrdquo accessible depends on the way a ldquomea-suring devicerdquo (eg super-geodesic) is transformed in this process Only for a veryrestricted class of solutions an ldquoinvariantrdquo device can be constructed namely whensuch a solution does not break supersymmetry In the generic case our solution aswell as the bosonic one of ref [32] show explicit supersymmetry breaking The generalsolution provided in the present work covers all cases but in the applications presentedin our present paper ndash for simplicity ndash backgrounds in the ZF gauge are consideredonly
The formulation of the massive super-point particle moving along a ldquosuper-geodesicrdquois straightforward in the superfield formalism but so far ndash for lack of a general solu-tion of the supergravity background ndash has been very difficult to work with in practiceMapping the action of that particle into the gPSM-based formalism by means of theidentification found in our present work leads to a system of supergeodesic equations(Section 7) which describes the motion in a background solution Interestingly enougheven in the ZF gauge (with gravitino set to zero identically) the bosonic geodesics(the ldquobodyrdquo) are accompanied by an orbit in the superpartner (ldquosoulrdquo) of the bosoniccoordinates This opens an interesting field of detailed investigations of such systemswhere body and soul may mutually influence each other in the quest for a globallycomplete solution (described by a ldquosuper-Penrose diagramrdquo) We only present somesimple examples here with massless (light-like) movement and especially concentratealso on theories with Minkowski ground state models in their bosonic sector Suchbackgrounds become flat for C = 0 They include eg the Schwarzschild solution butalso other models which are not asymptotically flat
Clearly the range of further studies made possible by our present work is very broadbecause the (g)PSM technology is extremely powerful not only at the classical but inparticular also at the quantum level [1ndash4 33ndash36 60] On the other hand superspacetechniques allow to couple matter fields in a straightforward way to MDFS and NDMFS(cf fig 1) Therefore a path integral quantization of MFS coupled to matter fields be-comes manageable [39] Also questions like the one concerning a fermionic counterpartof the (bosonic) virtual Black Hole [3738] can be expected to find an answer - as wellas a plethora of further research directions eg the inclusion of Yang-Mills fields justto name one of them [51 52 61]
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to D Grumiller for numerous stimulating discussions Theythank T Strobl and P van Nieuwenhuizen for illuminating comments The work hasbeen supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Austrian
40
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
Science Foundation (FWF) Project 14650-TPH and P-16030-N08
A Appendix
A1 Notations and Conventions
These conventions are identical to [1328] where additional explanations can be found
Generic indices (used in the context of gPSMrsquos) are chosen from the middle of thealphabet
bull I J K include both commuting and anti-commuting objects Generalizedcommutation relations are written in the standard way
vIwJ = (minus1)IJwJvI (A1)
where the indices in the exponent take values 0 (commuting object) or 1 (anti-commuting object)
bull i j k are generic commuting indices
To label holonomic coordinates letters from the middle of the alphabet are used
bull M N L can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull m n l are commuting
bull micro ν ρ are anti-commuting
Anholonomic coordinates are labeled by letters from the beginning of the alphabet
bull A B C can be both commuting and anti-commuting
bull a b c are commuting
bull α β γ are anti-commuting
The index φ is used to indicate the dilaton component of the gPSM fields
Xφ = φ Aφ = ω (A2)
The summation convention is always NW rarr SE especially for a fermion χ χ2 =χαχα Our conventions are arranged in such a way that almost every bosonic expressionis transformed trivially to the graded case when using this summation convention and
41
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
replacing commuting indices by general ones This is possible together with exteriorderivatives acting from the right only Thus the graded Leibniz rule is given by
d (AB) = AdB + (minus1)B (dA)B (A3)
In terms of anholonomic indices the metric and the symplectic 2 times 2 tensor aredefined as
ηab = ηab =
(
1 00 minus1
)
ǫab = minusǫab =(
0 1minus1 0
)
ǫαβ = ǫαβ =
(
0 1minus1 0
)
(A4)
The metric in terms of holonomic indices is obtained by gmn = ebneamηab and for the
determinant the standard expression e = det eam =radicminus det gmn is used The volume
form reads ǫ = 12ǫabeb and ea
The γ-matrices are used in a chiral representation
γ0αβ=
(
0 11 0
)
γ1αβ=
(
0 1minus1 0
)
γ3αβ= (γ1γ0)α
β=
(
1 00 minus1
)
(A5)
The matrices (γa)αβ = ǫαδγaδβ and (γ3)αβ are symmetric in α β The most important
relations among the γ-matrices are
γaγb = ηab1+ ǫabγ3 γaγ3 = γbǫba (A6)
Covariant derivatives of anholonomic indices with respect to the geometric variablesea = dxmeam and ψα = dxmψαm include the two-dimensional spin-connection one formωab = ωǫab When acting on lower indices the explicit expressions read (1
2γ3 is the
generator of Lorentz transformations in spinor space)
(De)a = dea + ωǫabeb (Dψ)α = dψα minus 1
2ωγ3α
βψβ (A7)
Finally light-cone components are introduced As we work with spinors in a chiralrepresentation we can use
χα = (χ+ χminus) χα =
(
χ+
χminus
)
(A8)
For Majorana spinors upper and lower chiral components are related by χ+ = χminusχminus = minusχ+ χ
2 = χαχα = 2χminusχ+ Vectors in light-cone coordinates are given by
v++ =iradic2(v0 + v1) vminusminus =
minusiradic2(v0 minus v1) (A9)
42
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
Derivatives with respect to these components are written compactly as
partK =part
partXK= (partφ part++ partminusminus part+ partminus) (A10)
The additional factor i in (A9) permits a direct identification of the light-cone com-ponents with the components of the spin-tensor vαβ = iradic
2vcγαβc This implies that
η++|minusminus = 1 and ǫminusminus|++ = minusǫ++|minusminus = 1 The γ-matrices in light-cone coordinatesbecome
(γ++)αβ=
radic2i
(
0 10 0
)
(γminusminus)αβ= minus
radic2i
(
0 01 0
)
(A11)
A2 Superspace Integration
As for fermionic fields the square of the superspace variables is abbreviated by θ2 =θαθα Superspace is integrated out by
1
2
int
dθ2 θ2 = 1 (A12)
Our covariant derivative with respect to anholonomic indices is
Dα = partα + i(γaθ)αparta (A13)
With these conventions and the particular choice of gauge used in this work the com-ponents22 of the super-zweibein read [13]
Ema = em
a + 2i(θγaψm) +
1
2θ2Aem
a (A14)
Emα = ψ
m
α minus 1
2ωm(θγ
3)α +i
2A(θγm)
α minus 1
2θ2(3
2Aψ
m
α + i(σγmγ3)α minus A(ζγm)
α)
(A15)
Emicroa = i(θγa)micro (A16)
Emicroα = δmicro
α(
1minus 1
4θ2A
)
(A17)
where ω and σ are defined as in (229) and (234) respectively however expressed interms of underlined fields In superspace it is often useful to introduce the Lorentzcovariant decomposition of the gravitino field
ψa
α= (ζγa)α + λaα ζ
α=
1
2(ψaγa)α λaα =
1
2(ψbγaγb)α (A18)
22Field components in a superfield are denoted by underlined symbols throughout
43
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
Finally we provide the relevant superspace integrations in the general dilaton model ofref [32] According to eq (38) the following integrations have to be performed
int
d2θ EJ(Φ)S = e
(
1
2RJ + J prime(χσ) + J primeFA+
1
8J primeprimeAχ2
)
(A19)
int
d2θ EK(Φ)DαΦDαΦ =
= e
(
2K(
partmφpartmφminus i
4χγmpartmχ+ F 2 minus (ψ
nγmγnγ3χ)partmφ
)
+1
4Kχ2(ψ
nγmγnψ
m) +
1
4K primeχ2F
)
(A20)
int
d2θ EL(Φ) = e
(
(
A + 2ζ2 + λ2)
L+ Lprime(
F + i(ζγ3χ))
+1
8Lprimeprime(χχ)
)
(A21)
Evaluating (38) with (A19)-(A21) the variation of the action with respect to theauxiliary fields A and F yields the elimination conditions for those fields
F = minus 1
J prime(
L+1
8J primeprimeχ2
)
(A22)
A = 4KL
(J prime)2minus Lprime
J prime+( KJ primeprime
2(J prime)2minus 1
4
K prime
J prime)
χ2 (A23)
References
[1] W Kummer and D J Schwarz Renormalization of R2 gravity with dynamicaltorsion in d = 2 Nucl Phys B382 (1992) 171ndash186
[2] F Haider and W Kummer Quantum functional integration of nonEinsteiniangravity in d = 2 Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 207ndash220
[3] P Schaller and T Strobl Quantization of field theories generalizing gravityYang- Mills systems on the cylinder in Integrable models and stringspp 98ndash122 1994 gr-qc9406027 Helsinki 1993
[4] P Schaller and T Strobl Canonical quantization of non-Einsteinian gravity andthe problem of time Class Quant Grav 11 (1994) 331ndash346[arXivhep-th9211054]
44
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
[5] D Louis-Martinez J Gegenberg and G Kunstatter Exact Dirac quantizationof all 2-d dilaton gravity theories Phys Lett B321 (1994) 193ndash198[gr-qc9309018]
[6] M O Katanaev and I V Volovich Two-dimensional gravity with dynamicaltorsion and strings Ann Phys 197 (1990) 1
[7] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson sigma models A generalization of 2-d gravityYang- Mills systems in Finite dimensional integrable systems pp 181ndash190 1994hep-th9411163 Dubna
[8] P Schaller and T Strobl Poisson structure induced (topological) field theoriesMod Phys Lett A9 (1994) 3129ndash3136[httparXivorgabshep-th9405110]
[9] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in (1+1)-dimensionsPart 1 A unifying approach Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 965ndash984[arXivgr-qc9508020]
[10] T Klosch and T Strobl Classical and quantum gravity in 1+1 dimensions partII The universal coverings Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 2395ndash2422[arXivgr-qc9511081]
[11] T Klosch and T Strobl Explicit global coordinates for Schwarzschild andReissner-Nordstrom solutions Class Quant Grav 13 (1996) 1191ndash1200[arXivgr-qc9507011]
[12] T Strobl Target-superspace in 2d dilatonic supergravity Phys Lett B460(1999) 87ndash93 [arXivhep-th9906230]
[13] M Ertl W Kummer and T Strobl General two-dimensional supergravity fromPoisson superalgebras JHEP 01 (2001) 042 [arXivhep-th0012219]
[14] L Bergamin and W Kummer Graded poisson sigma models anddilaton-deformed 2d supergravity algebra JHEP 05 (2003) 074[hep-th0209209]
[15] P Thomi B Isaak and P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields andblack holes 1 Definition and properties of apparent horizon Phys Rev D30(1984) 1168
[16] P Hajicek Spherically symmetric systems of fields and black holes 2 Apparenthorizon in canonical formalism Phys Rev D30 (1984) 1178
45
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
[17] H-J Schmidt A new proof of birkhoffrsquos theorem Grav Cosmol 3 (1997) 185[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9709071]
[18] H-J Schmidt A two-dimensional representation of four-dimensionalgravitational waves Int J Mod Phys D7 (1998) 215ndash224[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9712034]
[19] C G Callan Jr S B Giddings J A Harvey and A Strominger Evanescentblack holes Phys Rev D45 (1992) 1005ndash1009 [hep-th9111056]
[20] B M Barbashov V V Nesterenko and A M Chervyakov The solitons insome geometrical field theories Theor Math Phys 40 (1979) 572ndash581 TeorMat Fiz 40 (1979) 15ndash27 J Phys A13 (1980) 301ndash312
[21] C Teitelboim Gravitation and Hamiltonian structure in two space-timedimensions Phys Lett B126 (1983) 41
[22] C Teitelboim The hamiltonian structure of two-dimensional space-time and itsrelation with the conformal anomaly in Quantum theory of gravity essays inhonor of the 60th birthday of Bryce SDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol)pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[23] R Jackiw Liouville field theory a two-dimensional model for gravity inQuantum theory of gravity essays in honor of the 60th birthday of BryceSDeWitt (S Christensen ed) (Bristol) pp 327ndash344 Hilger 1984
[24] R Jackiw Lower dimensional gravity Nucl Phys B252 (1985) 343ndash356
[25] P S Howe Super Weyl transformations in two-dimensions J Phys A12 (1979)393ndash402
[26] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl Geometric Interpretation andClassification of Global Solutions in Generalized Dilaton Gravity Phys RevD53 (1996) 5609ndash5618 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc9511009]
[27] M O Katanaev W Kummer and H Liebl On the completeness of the blackhole singularity in 2d dilaton theories Nucl Phys B486 (1997) 353ndash370[gr-qc9602040]
[28] M Ertl Supergravity in two spacetime dimensions PhD thesis TechnischeUniversitat Wien 2001 arXivhep-th0102140
[29] N Ikeda and K I Izawa General form of dilaton gravity and nonlinear gaugetheory Prog Theor Phys 90 (1993) 237ndash246 [hep-th9304012]
46
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
[30] N Ikeda Two-dimensional gravity and nonlinear gauge theory Ann Phys 235(1994) 435ndash464 [arXivhep-th9312059]
[31] J M Izquierdo Free differential algebras and generic 2d dilatonic(super)gravities Phys Rev D59 (1999) 084017 [arXivhep-th9807007]
[32] Y-C Park and A Strominger Supersymmetry and positive energy in classicaland quantum two-dimensional dilaton gravity Phys Rev D47 (1993) 1569ndash1575[arXivhep-th9210017]
[33] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Dilaton gravity in twodimensions Phys Rept 369 (2002) 327[httparXivorgabshep-th0204253]
[34] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Exact path integral quantization ofgeneric 2-d dilaton gravity Nucl Phys B493 (1997) 491ndash502[httparXivorgabsgr-qc9612012]
[35] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Non-perturbative path integral of2d dilaton gravity and two-loop effects from scalar matter Nucl Phys B513(1998) 723ndash734 [httparXivorgabshep-th9707115]
[36] W Kummer H Liebl and D V Vassilevich Integrating geometry in general 2ddilaton gravity with matter Nucl Phys B544 (1999) 403ndash431[hep-th9809168]
[37] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich The virtual black hole in 2dquantum gravity Nucl Phys B580 (2000) 438ndash456 [gr-qc0001038]
[38] D Grumiller W Kummer and D V Vassilevich Virtual black holes ingeneralized dilaton theories and their special role in string gravityhep-th0208052
[39] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer in preparation
[40] T Strobl Gravity from lie algebra morphisms Commun Math Phys (2003) inpress
[41] D Z Freedman P van Nieuwenhuizen and S Ferrara Progress toward a theoryof supergravity Phys Rev D13 (1976) 3214ndash3218
[42] D Z Freedman and P van Nieuwenhuizen Properties of supergravity theoryPhys Rev D14 (1976) 912
[43] S Deser and B Zumino Consistent supergravity Phys Lett B62 (1976) 335
47
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
[44] S Deser and B Zumino A complete action for the spinning string Phys LettB65 (1976) 369ndash373
[45] R Grimm J Wess and B Zumino Consistency checks on the superspaceformulation of supergravity Phys Lett B73 (1978) 415
[46] H Grosse W Kummer P Presnajder and D J Schwarz Novel symmetry ofnonEinsteinian gravity in two- dimensions J Math Phys 33 (1992) 3892ndash3900[hep-th9205071]
[47] M O Katanaev Canonical quantization of the string with dynamical geometryand anomaly free nontrivial string in two- dimensions Nucl Phys B416 (1994)563ndash605 [httparXivorgabshep-th0101168]
[48] M O Katanaev Effective action for scalar fields in two-dimensional gravityAnnals Phys 296 (2002) 1ndash50 [httparXivorgabsgr-qc0101033]
[49] T Strobl Gravity in two spacetime dimensions hep-th0011240 Habilitationthesis
[50] N Ikeda Gauge theory based on nonlinear Lie superalgebras and structure of 2-ddilaton supergravity Int J Mod Phys A9 (1994) 1137ndash1152
[51] W Kummer and P Widerin Conserved quasilocal quantities and generalcovariant theories in two-dimensions Phys Rev D52 (1995) 6965ndash6975[arXivgr-qc9502031]
[52] D Grumiller and W Kummer The classical solutions of the dimensionallyreduced gravitational chern-simons theory hep-th0306036
[53] R Casalbuoni Relativity and supersymmetries Phys Lett B62 (1976) 49
[54] L Brink and J H Schwarz Quantum superspace Phys Lett B100 (1981)310ndash312
[55] W Siegel Hidden local supersymmetry in the supersymmetric particle actionPhys Lett B128 (1983) 397
[56] A V Galajinsky and A A Deriglazov Algebraic structure of local symmetriesfor two-dimensional superparticles on a curved external background TheorMath Phys 106 (1996) 84ndash98
[57] M E Knutt-Wehlau and R B Mann Supergravity from a massive superparticleand the simplest super black hole Nucl Phys B514 (1998) 355ndash378[hep-th9708126]
48
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-
[58] U Lindstrom M Rocek W Siegel P van Nieuwenhuizen and A E van de VenLorentz covariant quantization of the superparticle Phys Lett B224 (1989) 285
[59] L Bergamin D Grumiller and W Kummer Supersymmetric black holes areextremal and bald in 2d dilaton supergravity hep-th0310006
[60] T Strobl Dirac quantization of gravity Yang-Mills systems in (1+1)-dimensions Phys Rev D50 (1994) 7346ndash7350[httparXivorgabshep-th9403121]
[61] G Guralnik A Iorio R Jackiw and S Y Pi Dimensionally reducedgravitational chern-simons term and its kink hep-th0305117
49
- Introduction
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model and Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Graded Poisson-Sigma Model
- Minimal Field Supergravity
- Minimal Field Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
- Target Space Diffeomorphisms and Conformal Transformations
-
- Target Space Diffeomorphism in gPSMs
- Conformal Transformation for MFS and MFDS
- Conformal Transformation in Superspace
-
- Equivalence of gPSM and Superfield Dilaton Supergravity
-
- Equivalence for Non-Dynamical Dilaton
- Dynamical Dilaton
-
- Solution of the General Dilaton Supergravity Model
- Coupling of Supersymmetric Test-Particle in Minimal Field Supergravity
-
- Gauge Choice
- Orbits of the Massless Pointparticle
-
- Minkowski Ground-State Models
- Light-like Solution (2a) with =0
- Light-like Solution (2b) with =0
-
- Conclusion and Outlook
- Appendix
-
- Notations and Conventions
- Superspace Integration
-