hep-th/0009246

CTP-MIT-3027
UUITP-09/00
arXiv:hep-th/0009246 v1 29 Sep 2000

Effective Tachyon Dynamics in Superstring Theory

Joseph A. Minahan1
Department of Theoretical Physics
Box 803, SE-751 08 Uppsala, Sweden

and

Barton Zwiebach2
Center for Theoretical Physics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, MA 02139, USA

Abstract

A recently proposed ℓ = ∞ field theory model of tachyon dynamics for unstable

bosonic D-branes has been shown to arise as the two-derivative truncation of (boundary)-
string field theory. Using an ℓ → ∞ limit appropriate to stable kinks we obtain a model for
the tachyon dynamics on unstable D-branes or D-brane anti-D-brane pairs of superstring
theory. The tachyon potential is a positive definite even function of the tachyon, and at
the stable global minima there is no on-shell dynamics. The kink solution mimics nicely
the properties of stable D-branes: the spectrum of the kink consists of infinite levels
starting at zero mass, with spacing double the value of the tachyon mass-squared. It is
natural to expect that this model will arise in (boundary) superstring field theory.
1
E-mail: [email protected]
2
E-mail: [email protected]

1
 Field theory models of tachyon dynamics have been a useful tool to understand the
realization of Sen’s conjectures on tachyon condensation and D-brane annihilation [1].
The p-adic string models [2], defined with a choice of prime number, describe tachyon
dynamics with infinitely many spacetime derivatives and correctly show the dissappear-
ance of on-shell dynamics at the stable vacuum. Lumps of any codimension can be found
exactly. An ℓ = 3 model [3] is a solvable model with lump solutions whose worldvol-
ume theory can be calculated exactly, and where tachyon condensation proceeds in a way
mathematically similar to the case in open string field theory. The lump spectrum con-
tains a continuous sector, somewhat reminiscent of the closed string sector. An ℓ = ∞
model [4] combines solvability with strikingly stringy properties. The spectrum of the
lump solutions representing unstable D-branes contains a tachyon of the correct mass,
and equally spaced infinite levels. There is no continuous spectrum, and nothing survives
after tachyon condensation. This ℓ = ∞ model can also be obtained as the p → 1 limit in
p-adic string theory [5]. In addition, the ℓ = ∞ model can be supplemented with gauge
field dynamics also showing stringy properties [4].
It was recently pointed out [5, 6] that the ℓ = ∞ model arises as a two-derivative
reduction of (boundary) string field theory (B-SFT). In particular, the tachyon potential
in the model is the exact potential. B-SFT is a formally background independent approach
to string field theory proposed in [7] and developed in [8, 9, 10]. As opposed to cubic string
field theory [11], B-SFT is not precisely defined in general, but can be defined concretely
for particular families of backgrounds, notably along a set of backgrounds related by
relevant tachyonic deformations [9].3 Indeed, the works of [5, 6], supplemented with the
normalization calculation of [13], provide an exact verification of the energetics aspect
of the tachyon conjectures. While strong evidence for the conjectures has been obtained
using cubic string field theory [14] (and superstring field theory [15] for the analogous
superstring conjectures) exact verification in this approach appears to require further
understanding of the properties of the star algebra of open strings [16].
In this paper, following [4], we will produce a (two-derivative) field theory model for
tachyon dynamics in superstring theory. Again, we will be guided by the requirements
of solvability of the model, absence of dynamics on the spatially homogeneous stable
vacuum, and the demand that the (stable) kink arising from the model, representing a
stable D-brane, should have a string like spectrum on its worldvolume. The resulting
3
For related computations in boundary CFT see [12].

2
model is Z
1 −2T 2 1 2

S = −8T dt dp x
e ∂µ T ∂ µ T + e−2T . (1)
2 8
Here we are considering the tachyon field theory on the world volume of a non-BPS
Dp-brane of superstring theory. It is then natural to extend this action to a coincident
Dp-brane and anti-Dp-brane pair, each separately BPS. Since the tachyon field on the
Dp-brane anti-Dp-brane pair is complex, in this case one must replace T 2 → T T ∗ and
(∂T )2 → ∂T ∗ ∂T . The tension T must be adjusted accordingly. The following points
should be noted:

• The unstable vacuum is T = 0, where the tachyon mass squared is MT2 = −1/2, in
units where α′ = 1.

• The potential is positive definite and an even function of T .

• The stable minima are at T = ±∞. At these points the effective mass squared of
the tachyon is infinite.

• The non-BPS tachyon dynamics of (1) admits a kink (and anti-kink) solution de-
scribing a codimension one stable D-brane localized along an x coordinate. The
profile is given simply by T = ±x/2.

• The spectrum on the kink will be shown to consist of equally spaced mass levels
M 2 = 0, 1, 2, · · ·. Notice that the spacing is twice the value of |MT2 |, as in string
theory.
√
2 Tkink √2
• The tension Tkink satisfies the relation 2π T
= π
≃ 1.128. In string theory this
ratio takes the value of unity.

The fact that (1) satisfies the above properties leads us to conjecture that it will arise as
the two derivative reduction of the yet to be analyzed (boundary) superstring field theory.
In particular, the potential should be the exact one.

Constructing the model. Recall how the various ℓ models were constructed [17, 4]. The
idea was finding a field theory admiting a stationary solution whose spectrum is governed
by the Schroedinger problem with reflectionless potential4 Uℓ (x) = −ℓ(ℓ + 1)sech2 x. For
unstable lumps the ground state of the Schroedinger problem gives rise to the tachyon on
4
For a pedagogical review on these and other solvable Hamiltonians with references to the early
literature see [18]. Applications of reflectionless systems to fermions can be found in [19].

3
the lump. The next level is associated with the translation mode of the lump, namely it
equals the derivative of the profile. Once the profile is known one can readily reconstruct
the potential that gives rise to it. This time, since we want a stable lump, we must
identify the derivative of the profile with the ground state wavefunction. Indeed, this
familiar procedure leads to the sine-Gordon soliton and the φ4 kink solution for the cases
ℓ = 1 and ℓ = 2 respectively[20]. For higher values of ℓ direct application of this procedure
leads to complicated field theory potentials [20, 21]. We will focus here on the special
case of interest ℓ → ∞, and will see that with the help of a field redefinition the action
can be given in simple form. The general aspects of this field redefinition, which could be
used for arbitrary ℓ will be noted afterwords.
We are looking for a model taking the form
Z 1 
S∼− dtdp x ∂µ φ ∂ µ φ + V (φ) . (2)
2
In the ℓ → ∞ limit of [4] the ground state wavefunction becomes a gaussian ∼ exp(−x2 /4).
We therefore identify this wavefunction with the spatial derivative of the profile φ(x) of
the stable lump solution of the model to be found. Thus, we set
′ 1  x2 
φ (x) = √ exp − , (3)
π 4
where the constants have been chosen for convenience. It follows by integration that
x 2 Z x −u2
φ(x) = erf , erf(x) ≡ √ e du , (4)
2 π 0
where ‘erf’ is the familiar error function. A plot of this profile is shown in Fig. 1. It is a
kink.
From the equation of motion for the soliton
1 ′
(φ (x))2 = V (φ(x)) , (5)
2
and from equations (3) and (4) it follows that
1  x2  1  
V (φ(x)) = exp − = exp −2[ erf−1 (φ)]2 . (6)
2π 2 2π
In the above erf−1 denotes the inverse function to erf. While the above expression is
implicit, it can be used, for example, to find an expansion for small φ:
1 1 π
V (φ) = − φ2 + φ4 + · · · . (7)
2π 4 48

4
 phi
1

0.5

x
-6 -4 -2 2 4 6

-0.5

-1

Figure 1: The profile φ(x) = erf(x/2) of the stable kink representing a D-brane. In the field
variable T used in (1) we have T (x) = x/2.

The mass squared of the tachyon field in the field theory model is readily recognized
to be MT2 = −1/2. The fluctuation spectrum is also easily obtained. Recall that the
Schroedinger potential for the fluctuations is V ′′ (φ(x)) and that V ′ (φ(x)) satisfies
′′
φ (x) = V ′ (φ(x)). (8)

Taking a derivative on each side of (8), we have

′′′ ′
φ (x) = V ′′ (φ(x))φ (x). (9)
′
But by construction, φ (x) is the ground state solution to the harmonic oscillator equation.
Thus we have
1 x2
V ′′ (φ(x)) = − + . (10)
2 4
Note that this also gives us an easy way of computing V ′′ (0), and hence the mass of the
tachyon in the open string vacuum, without actually having to invert the error function.
Thus we have obtained (once more) the potential for the simple harmonic oscillator.
The Schroedinger equation determining the masses m2 of the modes living on the kink is

!
d2 1 x2
− 2 ψ(x) + − + ψ(x) = m2 ψ(x) , (11)
dx 2 4

5
and the masses of the fields are therefore

m2 = n , n ≥ 0. (12)

Thus, we get a massless field and equally spaced massive fields. The spacing between
adjacent mass levels is twice the value of |MT2 |. Note also that when φ → ±1, x → ±∞,
and V ′′ (φ) → +∞. This is the statement that the tachyon acquires infinite mass on the
vacuum φ = ±1.
The nature of the model is better appreciated after a field redefinition. Let
2 2
φ = erf (T ) → ∂φ = √ e−T ∂T . (13)
π

Since erf−1 (φ) = T we also have from (6) that

1 −2T 2
V (T ) = e . (14)
2π
The kinetic term in the T variable reads
4 −2T 2
e (∂T )2 . (15)
π
We have therefore recovered the action given in (1). Finally, since T =erf−1 (φ), the profile
T (x) for the kink follows directly from (4) and is given as
x
T (x) = . (16)
2
Evaluation of the kink energy using the action (1) gives
Z
p−1
 1 −2T 2 1 −2T 2  √ Z 
E = 8T d ydx e ∂x T ∂x T + e = 2 2π T dp−1y , (17)
2 8
√
giving Tkink = 2 2π T . We therefore have
√
2 Tkink 2
= √ ≃ 1.128 . (18)
2π T π

In string theory this ratio takes the value of unity5 .

The results found for (boundary) bosonic SFT [5, 6], together with the above results
suggest that in (boundary) superstring field theory one may use tachyonic backgrounds
5
√
Recall that the tension for a non-BPS Type IIA Dp brane has an extra factor of 2 as compared to
the tension for a Type IIB BPS Dp brane.

6
of the type T (X) = a + uX. The vacuum with no brane would be at (a, u) = (∞, 0) and
the kink solution would correspond to (a, u) = (0, ∞). For the effective model, the kink
is obtained with finite u, namely u = 1/2. It is therefore pleasing to see that the tension
of the kink, as estimated in the model, is larger than the correct value in string theory,
though, happily, not by much. It is also satisfying to see that the ratio in (18) would have
√
been less than 1, were it not for the extra factor of 2 arising from the non-BPS brane
tension.

Reconstructing Potentials from Profiles. As one can see from the above discussion, the
reconstruction of the field theory from the kink profile is aided by a field redefinition.
This field redefinition makes the kinetic term more complicated but allows a closed form
solution. In general, assume one is given a kink profile

φ(x) = P(x), (19)

where P(x) is either a monotonically increasing or a monotonically decreasing function

of the coordinate x ∈ [−∞, ∞], as appropriate for a kink solution. It then follows that
1
V (φ(x)) = (P ′ (x))2 . (20)
2
Introduce now a new field T via

φ = P(T ) → T = P −1 (φ) . (21)

With this field variable the profile of the kink is just T (x) = x. The monotonicity of P
ensures that the relation between φ and T is single valued, with T defined on the full real
line. Then
1 2 1 2
V (φ(x)) = P ′ ( P −1 [ φ ] ) = P ′ (T ) , (22)
2 2
showing that the potential is simple in terms of the new field variable. Since ∂φ = P ′ (T )∂T
the final model is just
1 1
Z  2 
S=− dtdx P ′ (T ) (∂T )2 + . (23)
2 2

Acknowledgments: B. Z. is happy to thank H. Verlinde for a stimulating discussion

that rekindled his interest in this problem. We thank J. Goldstone, R. Jackiw, and A.
Sen for discussions. We are particularly indebted to R. Jaffe for his useful input and
insight. This work was supported in part by DOE contract #DE-FC02-94ER40818.

7
References
[1] A. Sen, “Descent relations among bosonic D-branes,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A14, 4061
(1999) [hep-th/9902105]; “Stable non-BPS bound states of BPS D-branes,” JHEP
9808, 010 (1998) [hep-th/9805019]; “Tachyon condensation on the brane antibrane
system,” JHEP 9808, 012 (1998) [hep-th/9805170]; “SO(32) spinors of type I and
other solitons on brane-antibrane pair,” JHEP 9809, 023 (1998) [hep-th/9808141].

[2] D. Ghoshal and A. Sen, “Tachyon condensation and brane descent relations in p-adic
string theory”, Nucl. Phys. B584, 300 (2000) [hep-th/0003278].

[3] B. Zwiebach, “A solvable toy model for tachyon condensation in string field theory”,
JHEP 0009, 028 (2000) [hep-th/0008227].

[4] J.A. Minahan and B. Zwiebach, “Field theory models for tachyon and gauge field
string dynamics”, JHEP 0009, 029 (2000) [hep-th/0008231].

[5] A.A. Gerasimov and S.L. Shatashvili, “On exact tachyon potential in open string
field theory”, hep-th/0009103.

[6] D. Kutasov, M. Marino and G. Moore, “Some exact results on tachyon condensation
in string field theory”, hep-th/0009148.

[7] E. Witten, “On background independent open string field theory”, Phys. Rev. D46,
5467 (1992) [hep-th/9208027].

[8] E. Witten, “Some computations in background independent off-shell string theory”,

Phys. Rev. D47, 3405 (1993) [hep-th/9210065].

[9] K. Li and E. Witten, “Role of short distance behavior in off-shell open string field
theory”, Phys. Rev. D48, 853 (1993) [hep-th/9303067].

[10] S.L. Shatashvili, “Comment on the background independent open string theory”,
Phys. Lett. B311, 83 (1993) [hep-th/9303143]; “On the problems with background
independence in string theory”, hep-th/9311177.

[11] E. Witten, “Noncommutative Geometry And String Field Theory,” Nucl. Phys.
B268, 253 (1986).

8
[12] A. Recknagel and V. Schomerus, “Boundary deformation theory and moduli spaces
of D-branes”, Nucl. Phys. B545, 233 (1999) [hep-th/9811237];
C.G. Callan, I.R. Klebanov, A.W. Ludwig and J.M. Maldacena, “Exact solution of a
boundary conformal field theory”, Nucl. Phys. B422, 417 (1994) [hep-th/9402113];
J. Polchinski and L. Thorlacius, “Free fermion representation of a boundary confor-
mal field theory”, Phys. Rev. D50, 622 (1994) [hep-th/9404008];
P. Fendley, H. Saleur and N.P. Warner, “Exact solution of a massless scalar field with
a relevant boundary interaction”, Nucl. Phys. B430, 577 (1994) [hep-th/9406125];
J. Harvey, D. Kutasov and E.J. Martinec, “On the relevance of tachyons”, [hep-
th/0003101].

[13] D. Ghoshal and A. Sen, “Normalization of the background independent open string
field theory action”, hep-th/0009191.

[14] V. A. Kostelecky and S. Samuel, “On A Nonperturbative Vacuum For The Open
Bosonic String,” Nucl. Phys. B336, 263 (1990);
A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, “Tachyon condensation in string field theory,” JHEP 0003,
002 (2000) [hep-th/9912249].
W. Taylor, “D-brane effective field theory from string field theory”, hep-th/0001201.
N. Moeller and W. Taylor, “Level truncation and the tachyon in open bosonic string
field theory”, hep-th/0002237.
J.A. Harvey and P. Kraus, “D-Branes as unstable lumps in bosonic open string field
theory”, hep-th/0002117.
R. de Mello Koch, A. Jevicki, M. Mihailescu and R. Tatar, “Lumps and p-branes in
open string field theory”, hep-th/0003031.
N. Moeller, A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, “D-branes as tachyon lumps in string field the-
ory,” hep-th/0005036.
R. de Mello Koch and J. P. Rodrigues, “Lumps in level truncated open string field
theory,” hep-th/0008053.
N. Moeller, “Codimension two lump solutions in string field theory and tachyonic
theories,” hep-th/0008101.
A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, “Large marginal deformations in string field theory,” hep-
th/0007153.
W. Taylor, “Mass generation from tachyon condensation for vector fields on D-
branes,” hep-th/0008033.

9
[15] N. Berkovits, “The Tachyon Potential in Open Neveu-Schwarz String Field Theory,”
[hep-th/0001084];
N. Berkovits, A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, “Tachyon condensation in superstring field
theory”, hep-th/0002211;
P. De Smet and J. Raeymaekers, “Level four approximation to the tachyon potential
in superstring field theory”, hep-th/0003220;
A. Iqbal and A. Naqvi, “Tachyon condensation on a non-BPS D-brane,” hep-
th/0004015; “On marginal deformations in superstring field theory,” hep-th/0008127.

[16] A. Sen, “Universality of the tachyon potential,” JHEP 9912, 027 (1999) [hep-
th/9911116];
L. Rastelli and B. Zwiebach, “Tachyon potentials, star products and universality,”
hep-th/0006240.
V. A. Kostelecky and R. Potting, “Analytical construction of a nonperturbative vac-
uum for the open bosonic string,” hep-th/0008252.
H. Hata and S. Shinohara, “BRST invariance of the non-perturbative vacuum in
bosonic open string field theory,” hep-th/0009105.

[17] J. Goldstone and R. Jaffe, unpublished.

[18] F. Cooper, A. Khare and U. Sukhatme, “Supersymmetry and quantum mechanics,”

Phys. Rept. 251, 267 (1995) [hep-th/9405029].

[19] J. Feinberg, “On kinks in the Gross-Neveu model,” Phys. Rev. D51, 4503 (1995)
[hep-th/9408120];
J. Feinberg and A. Zee, “Dynamical Generation of Extended Objects in a 1+1 Dimen-
sional Chiral Field Theory: Non-Perturbative Dirac Operator Resolvent Analysis,”
Phys. Rev. D56, 5050 (1997) [cond-mat/9603173].

[20] N. H. Christ and T. D. Lee, “Quantum expansion of soliton solutions”, Phys. Rev.
D12, 1606 (1975).

[21] J. Goldstone and R. Jackiw, unpublished.

10