Thread: The Superstring "Landscape" View Single Post


Urs Schreiber wrote in message news: > > > P. Grassi & L. Tamassia > > Vertex Operators for Closed Superstrings > > http://www.arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0405072 Hi Urs, the only important work I must get done over the next few weeks is with advising an MIT engineer about math and economics. This means that I will have some time to think about your questions. For a newsgroup named "sci.physics.strings" there seems to be few string theorists posting here. Perhaps you might want to consider emailing the string theory community to let them know about this newsgroup, or have you already scared them away as they run for cover from all the flying intellectual bullets that are your questions ?-) > Fine. What I don't see yet is how precisely this is related > to the usual RNS $and/or GS$ formalism. Can the pure spinor > formalism be derived somehow from either one o of these? Yes, and for more clarification also see the earlier paper (http://www.arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0405007). > Can one for instance re-express the pure spinor ghosts > in terms of the usual reparemeterization super ghosts? I am not sure I understand what you are asking. In the Berkovits approach there are pure spinors as ghosts but there are no worldsheet (super)diffeomorphism ghosts. You may also want to look at some of the techniques that have been used for Type strings because these strings are described by N=1 susy worldsheet theories (http://www.arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0308123 and 0309028).