Is supersymmetry a part of string theory

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the relationship between supersymmetry and string theory, examining whether supersymmetry is an integral part of string theory or if it has relevance within the standard model of particle physics. Participants delve into the origins of supersymmetry, its incorporation into string theory, and the implications of detecting supersymmetry in experiments like those conducted at the LHC.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that supersymmetry can be combined with string theory to form superstring theory, while others note that string theory can exist without supersymmetry.
  • It is mentioned that the standard model does not include supersymmetry, although the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model incorporates it minimally.
  • One participant questions whether a detection of supersymmetry at the LHC would support string theory, arguing that supersymmetry exists in theories independent of string theory.
  • Another participant asserts that string theory is unstable without supersymmetry, although it is possible to write down models that do not require it, such as bosonic string theory, which has an unstable vacuum.
  • Historical context is provided, indicating that supersymmetry originated outside of string theory but was later embraced by the string community due to its benefits in addressing theoretical issues.
  • References to specific papers and historical milestones in the development of supersymmetry and string theory are shared to support various claims.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of supersymmetry for string theory and the implications of its detection in experiments. There is no consensus on whether supersymmetry is fundamentally linked to string theory or if it can stand alone in other theoretical frameworks.

Contextual Notes

Some claims regarding the stability of string theory models and the historical development of supersymmetry may depend on specific definitions and interpretations, which remain unresolved in the discussion.

wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,411
Reaction score
551
Is supersymmetry part of string theory or does it have a place in the standard model
 
Space news on Phys.org
wolram said:
Is supersymmetry part of string theory

You can combine string theory with supersymmetry to get superstring theory, but there is also string theory without supersymmetry, and there are supersymmetric theories that are not based on string theory.

wolram said:
does it have a place in the standard model

No. There is a theory called the "Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model", which basically takes the standard model and adds supersymmetry, but to the minimum extent possible. But the actual standard model itself does not include supersymmetry.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: wolram
So if the LHC detects supersymmetry it will be a notch for sting theorists?
 
wolram said:
So if the LHC detects supersymmetry it will be a notch for sting theorists?

Did you read the part of my post where I said there are supersymmetric theories that are not based on string theory? Detecting supersymmetry is not equivalent to detecting evidence for string theory.
 
Supersymmetry originated outside of string theory, but, was rapidly embraced by the string community because it suppresses the infinities and other embarrassments, like imaginary energy, that keep popping up in theory. Naturally, stringophiles wasted little time claiming supersymmetry was actually predicted on the back of one or more of their 10500 envelopes. For a discussion of supersymmetry, see https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0002232, Supersymmetry Phenomenology.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis
PeterDonis said:
You can combine string theory with supersymmetry to get superstring theory, but there is also string theory without supersymmetry, and there are supersymmetric theories that are not based on string theory.
I don't think this is accurate. String theory is unstable without supersymmetry. While you can write down on paper a string theory model which doesn't require supersymmetry (bosonic string theory), that model has an unstable vacuum.

Chronos said:
Supersymmetry originated outside of string theory, but, was rapidly embraced by the string community because it suppresses the infinities and other embarrassments, like imaginary energy, that keep popping up in theory. Naturally, stringophiles wasted little time claiming supersymmetry was actually predicted on the back of one or more of their 10500 envelopes. For a discussion of supersymmetry, see https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0002232, Supersymmetry Phenomenology.
There was somebody who presented the idea a few years before, but it was never really investigated in full. The first time that supersymmetry became widely-discussed in the physics community was in the context of string theory. It is possible to come up with supersymmetric theories which make no reference to string theory, of course, but the primary motivation for its development was string theory.
 
Chalnoth said:
While you can write down on paper a string theory model which doesn't require supersymmetry (bosonic string theory), that model has an unstable vacuum.

Yes, agreed. All I was saying was that you can write down string theory models without supersymmetry.
 
The first recognized string paper was by Veneziano appeared in Nuovo Cimento, in 1968: re - http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1986/A1986A161800001.pdf. The field that came to be known as supersymmetry originated about the same time by soviet physicists and first appeared in print in 1971 as noted here; https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0101209, Around SuSy 1970. It was quickly incorporated into string theory as noted here; https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0011078, String Theory Origins of Supersymmetry. The two fields obviously share a common ancestory.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K