What Are the Key Differences Between Space-time Supersymmetry and Supergravity?

wam_mi
Messages
78
Reaction score
1
Hi there,

What is the difference between Space-time Supersymmetry and Supersymmetry?
Is Space-time Supersymmetry the same thing as Supergravity? What is Supergravity...

All these terms make me very confused...

Thanks a lot!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi,

I think this distinction comes in the context of string theory.

In string theory one has a string (duh), and on this string you define oscillator modes. The simplest string theories are just bosonic. You can also add fermionic degrees of freedom to your string in order to be able to describe fermions. However, these are degrees of freedom on your worldsheet. So you need to distinguish between supersymmetry on your worldsheet (turning bosonic degrees of freedom into fermionic ones) and supersymmetry in spacetime! Ofcourse, it turns out that fermionic and bosonic degrees of freedom on the worldsheet can be interpreted as bosons and fermions in spacetime, but this is not trivial! These particles are in a representation of the Poincaré group and it's not trivial that your worldsheet degrees of freedom neatly fit into these Poincare representations.

Now, space-time supersymmetry is the ordinary supersymmetry you encounter when you don't talk about strings. This is not the same as supergravity! Space-time supersymmetry is a global symmetry; the transformation parameters don't depend on coordinates. However, if you gauge this space-time symmetry, you can show that you introduce diffeomorphism invariance in the theory. A gauge theory with diffeomorphism invariance necessarily contains a dynamical metric, a graviton and hence describes gravity: Supergravity! (I believe this has to do with the fact that as soon as you start to quantize a spin-2 gauge theory you need diffeomorphism invariance to avoid negative-norm states, and the other way around can also be shown).

Hope this helps, but I'm not an expert on this, so maybe I say things which are not entirely true :P
 
Typically in QM and in QFT for each symmetry you have a set of generators. Angular momentum operators generate rotations, for example. They are a subset of the Poincare algebra which consists of rotations, boosts and translations (space- and timelike).

These generators are conserved quantities due to the Noether theorem:
Lagrangian with symmetry (*) => conserved charge dQ/dt=0 => charge operator => qm generator of the symmetry (*)

Now you have such conserved charges which act as generators of SUSY. These charges do not transform as Lorentz-scalars but as Lorentz spinors! And the commutators of these charges are generators of the well-known Poincare algebra.
 
tom.stoer said:
Typically in QM and in QFT for each symmetry you have a set of generators. Angular momentum operators generate rotations, for example. They are a subset of the Poincare algebra which consists of rotations, boosts and translations (space- and timelike).

These generators are conserved quantities due to the Noether theorem:
Lagrangian with symmetry (*) => conserved charge dQ/dt=0 => charge operator => qm generator of the symmetry (*)

Now you have such conserved charges which act as generators of SUSY. These charges do not transform as Lorentz-scalars but as Lorentz spinors! And the commutators of these charges are generators of the well-known Poincare algebra.

Hi there,

Where can I find some review articles about space-time supersymmetry?

Cheers!
 
The notes by Aitchison or Bilal are very nice, I think :)
 
This is an alert about a claim regarding the standard model, that got a burst of attention in the past two weeks. The original paper came out last year: "The electroweak η_W meson" by Gia Dvali, Archil Kobakhidze, Otari Sakhelashvili (2024) The recent follow-up and other responses are "η_W-meson from topological properties of the electroweak vacuum" by Dvali et al "Hiding in Plain Sight, the electroweak η_W" by Giacomo Cacciapaglia, Francesco Sannino, Jessica Turner "Astrophysical...
In LQG and LQC there are solutions called "black to white transition". I'll add some references: (Rovelli)https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.07251 (Rovelli)https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.03872 (Rovelli)https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.06330 (Rovelli)https://arxiv.org/pdf/1802.04264 (Rovelli)https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.12823 https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.02691 https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.07589 https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.01788 https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.12646 https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.03027...
Hello everyone, I am seeking to better understand the conceptual foundations and potential consequences of "Two-Time Physics" (2T-physics), as developed by Itzhak Bars and others. My interest was sparked by a recent paper that attempts to explain anomalous results in particle physics (apparent superluminal propagation of virtual photons) within the framework of 2T-physics: Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.02696 Key quote from the abstract: *"...the problem... can be solved naturally...
Back
Top