Not signed in (Sign In)

Start a new discussion

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-categories 2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry beauty bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science connection constructive constructive-mathematics cosmology definitions deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry differential-topology digraphs duality education elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory infinity integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic manifolds mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology multicategories noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pasting philosophy physics planar pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string-theory subobject superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 16th 2010

    started a stub for the B-model

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJun 16th 2010

    I made few corrections.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 16th 2010

    Zoran,

    the B-model is not a supersymmetric theory. It is obtained from a supersymmetric theory by “twisting” that, such that what used to be supercharges become BRST-like operators. The supersymmetry disappears and gives rise to topological invariance.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJun 16th 2010
    • (edited Jun 16th 2010)

    Take for exmaple Cox-Katz standard textbook, page 421:

    These (topologically twisted, Z.Š.) models are still supersymmetric (but now have only N = 1 supersymmetry). Furthermore, if V and V are a mirror pair, then the A-model derived from a Calabi-Yau manifold V is mirror symmetric to the B-model derived from its mirror manifold V (for corresponding choices of the complex structure of V and Kahler structure on V).

    Also, 421-422

    the remaning terms can be compactly written in terms of a certain fermionic operator, the BRST operator Q. This operator is the supersymmetry transformation which survives the reduction in supersymmetry from the original N=2 symmetry to the twisted N=1 theory.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 16th 2010

    Hm, I am not sure I buy into this. The N=1 susy sigma model is something else, namely the heterotic string on the Calabi-Yau. Not every graded symmetry should be called a “supersymmetry”.

    But in any case it seems we agree that the A- and B-model are not N=2 supersymmetric, as you write. So can we at least say N=1 in the entry, instead of N=2?

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJun 16th 2010

    Right, I changed it to N=1 (though I still remember that Vafa claimed it is N=2 still but the second one is not physical, because of nonobservable U(1) operator).

    Not every graded symmetry should be called a “supersymmetry”.

    The question is if there is a supersymmetry algebra combined with CFT operators. Do we have just Virasoro or super Virasoro. It does not matter if it is at BRST level or anything as long as formal algebra relations are satisfied (“survive”).

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 16th 2010

    Do we have just Virasoro or super Virasoro.

    Well, we have neither. The odd generator now squares to 0, instead of to a nontrivial translation generator. This is of course the hallmark of the fact that the twisted theory is “topological” and not “conformal” anymore.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJun 16th 2010

    The N=1 susy sigma model is something else, namely the heterotic string on the Calabi-Yau.

    Did I quote anything contradicting this assertion ? By twisting N=2 supersymmetric nonlinear sigma model you get N=1 supersymmetric theory, not a N=1 supersymmetric sigma model.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJun 16th 2010

    This is of course the hallmark of the fact that the twisted theory is “topological” and not “conformal” anymore.

    Independence from conformal structure does not break necessary the conformal invariance ins’t it ?; it just associates no dynamics to that part. First examples of TQFTs are in Riemannian setting. A common way is to vary over all such structures to get independence.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorKevin Lin
    • CommentTimeJun 25th 2010
    • (edited Jun 25th 2010)
    I added a few words regarding the B-model of a Landau-Ginzburg model.

    I hope that someone can also add/say something about BCOV.
    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 13th 2013

    added to B-model pointers to its “second quantization” to “Kodeira-Spencer gravity”, “BCOV theory”.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeJun 17th 2013

    Kodaira – corrected at B-model.

Add your comments
  • Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
  • To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

  • (Help)