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 bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory 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 elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration finite foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry goodwillie-calculus 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 history homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology multicategories noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pasting philosophy physics 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 superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topological 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.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 23rd 2018

    I came across mention of homogeneous spaces for supergroups, and since we don’t have an entry for this I’ve started one.

    The quotients for those two superspheres are cited in the literature, but I haven’t checked them.

    v1, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 23rd 2018

    Thanks!

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 23rd 2018

    Almost all work here seems to be by physicists for particular applications rather than a pure mathematical account, so perhaps only worth adding if the physics is interesting. E.g., how about

    • Jaume Gomis, Dmitri Sorokin, Linus Wulff, The complete AdS(4) x CP(3) superspace for the type IIA superstring and D-branes, (arXiv:0811.1566)

    which deals with superspaces like the type IIA superspace OSp(8|4)/SO(7)×SO(1,3)OSp(8|4)/SO(7) \times SO(1,3)?

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 23rd 2018
    • (edited Apr 23rd 2018)

    References like this are about super anti de Sitter spacetime (we should cross-link!). There are very many of such references, since this is what enters the AdS-CFT correspondence.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 23rd 2018

    made explicit how super-Minkowski is a super-group quotient, and similarly for super anti de Sitter spacetime

    diff, v2, current

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2019

    Gave the general result for cosets of orthosymplectic groups being superspheres.

    diff, v4, current

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2019
    • (edited Apr 30th 2019)

    Tiny formatting change, OSp(8/4)OSp(8|4)OSp(8/4) \mapsto OSp(8\vert 4) etc. One needs to use \vert not |.

    diff, v5, current

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2019

    Thanks. Let’s add reference for that. And there ought to be an entry supersphere

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2019

    Added a reference.

    diff, v6, current

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2019

    In case you’re wondering, I was just idly contemplating whether there might be a super-cohomotopy.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2019

    Sure. I have been wondering myself, and maybe we have talked about it before. One can certainly define it. Whether it’s the right thing to use in M-theory I still don’t see, either way.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2019

    There’s a note (p. 13) of arXiv:hep-th/0409257 that only some super cosets should considered superspaces. I’ll add in that reference.

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2019

    Re #11, perhaps if framings of supermanifolds are needed.

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2019

    Right, I guess what you have in mind is part of the general statement that when passing to supergeometry, it is natural to do so throughout (systyematic internalization) instead of only for part of the data.

    And it is, which makes it very suggestive that the super-spheres should appear. It’s just that beyond this general abstract suggestion, I have not yet any more concrete insight into it.

    Incidentally, this same general suggestion also means that it would be more surprising than not if there were no supersymmetry in physics: This is because the phase space of any field theory with fermions is a supermanifold, so that it is more natural than not that also the symmetry group acting on the phase space is a supergroup, instead of a plain group.

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)