Urs bid for amazing loop understanding?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ranyart
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Loop
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of the Virasoro Algebra in the context of string theory, particularly as introduced in a recent paper by Urs Schreiber. Participants reference various related papers and explore the connections and relevance of these works to the loop-space formulation of string theory.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Urs Schreiber's paper discusses the implications of Virasoro constraints on the loop-space formulation of string theory.
  • Some participants express skepticism regarding the relevance of Puthoff's paper to Urs' work, with one participant asking for clarification on this connection.
  • Another participant mentions reading multiple papers, including those by Dorothea Bahns and others, suggesting a broader context for understanding the implications of canonical quantization in string theory.
  • There is a reference to a proof by Bahns that argues against the use of canonical quantization for the Nambu-Goto action, which is contested in relation to Thiemann's work.
  • Participants share links to various papers that they believe contribute to the discussion, indicating a collaborative effort to understand the topic better.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus on the relevance of certain papers to Urs' work, indicating that multiple competing views remain regarding the connections between these different theoretical approaches.

Contextual Notes

There are references to specific formalism and methodologies, such as the Levi-Civita formalism and canonical quantization, which may depend on particular definitions and assumptions that are not fully explored in the discussion.

Physics news on Phys.org
Sorry, I don't see how Puthoff's paper has any bearing at all on Urs' paper which works out the implication of the Virasoro constraints on the loop-space formulation of string theory. Could you enlighten me?
 
Originally posted by selfAdjoint
Sorry, I don't see how Puthoff's paper has any bearing at all on Urs' paper which works out the implication of the Virasoro constraints on the loop-space formulation of string theory. Could you enlighten me?

Dick, I 'm sure I had seen a relevence?..not to all of Urs paper, I was reading up on a number of papers before Urs paper. Dorothea Bahns?..Canonical Quantization (think I posted a link somewhere?), and the PV representation of Putoff and Maccone, sent me reading up on Levi-Citiva formalism?

You are more qualified than most here to pass judgement, I did see a little of Urs paper refers to a specific line of action,(I have only read Urs paper once, and once is enough!) Just Kidding

I will try and go back through the motions of how this came to be.

Feel feel to delete links as you find fit, I am now moving into Parametrics (downconversions) and the interesting 'side-effects'.

Thanks for taking the time to show how the Constriants of Visaroro have no baring on Levi-Citiva effects.
 
Ranyart, you mention Dorothy Bahns' paper, http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0403108 . This one came up in the discussion of Thiemann's quantization over on the String Coffee Table. She proves you can't use Canonical Quantization (sensa strictu) to quantize the basic Nambu-Goto action of string theory. Thiemann called his quantization canonical, but it wasn't, so her proof does not affect his paper.

While we're on this topic, Urs sent me by PM the urls for the Meusberger-Reherens paper on quantization of the bosonic string, http://arxiv.org/abs/math-ph?0202041. This was another paper referenced at the Coffee Table, and Rehrens was actually briefly drawn into the discussion.

So now the peanut gallery is fully stocked with programs, and we can hope to tell the players apart.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
7K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
11K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K