Not signed in (Sign In)

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

Discussion Tag Cloud

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).

Atrium > Mathematics, Physics & Philosophy: Deligne's theorem on tensor categories -- relevance for SUSY section

Bottom of Page

1 to 2 of 2

  1.  
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorsgarush
    • CommentTimeNov 2nd 2017
    • (edited Nov 2nd 2017)

    I’ve been reading the “relevance for supersymmetry” of the nlab article on Deligne’s theorem, and had a few niggling doubts: doesn’t this only apply to finite-dimensional vector spaces?

    More specifically: Hilbert spaces don’t categorify well, and I’m not aware of any ‘reasonable’ category built on them which abelian. Thus, I can’t see any natural way in which representations on them form a tensor category.

    Since everything works out nicely in finite dimensions, what I can see is that Deligne’s theorem implies that the most general symmetries of a finite-dimensional quantum system are given by algebraic super-groups. (Well, almost – one also has to admit antilinear representations by Wigner/Bargmann, so even this doesn’t seem exactly true.)

    So here is my question: am I missing something?

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 2nd 2017

    doesn’t this only apply to finite-dimensional vector spaces?

    Yes, to have a complete argument, one needs to mention Wigner’s “little group method” (the “Mackey machine”) and apply Deligne’s theorem to that little group.

1 to 2 of 2

  1.