• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

124 submissions , 105 unreviewed
3,647 questions , 1,242 unanswered
4,638 answers , 19,680 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
437 active unimported users
More ...

$N=4$ supersymmetric yang-mills theory and S-duality

+ 6 like - 0 dislike

[Question suggested by @Lawrence B. Crowell's answer to the question on T-duality]

There are three parts to my question:

A. What is the action for $N=4$ SUSY Yang-Mills and what is the physics of the various terms in the action?

B. Give a simple explanation for the origin of Montonen-Olive duality in this theory. This duality maps the physics at gauge coupling $g$ to the physics at $1/g$, i.e. this is a duality between the strong and weak coupling regimes of the theory.

C. Auxiliary Question: Explain how one can decompose a SUSY gauge field into its bosonic and fermionic parts.

[Background: I am familiar with non-abelian gauge theory and have had a class on SUSY some years back. So I pick up on the jargon but am missing a fuller picture.]

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user user346

asked Feb 4, 2011 in Theoretical Physics by Deepak Vaid (1,975 points) [ revision history ]
edited Apr 19, 2014 by dimension10
For A. do you really have trouble looking this up in the literature? The simple way to derive it yourself is via dimensional reduction of N=1 SYM in d=10. B. seems more like a demand than a question. Same for C.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user pho
@Jeff if it seemed so simple to me I wouldn't be asking a question about it.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user user346

1 Answer

+ 6 like - 0 dislike

A. The action of $N=4$ SYM (Super Yang-Mills theory) in $d=4$ is the simple dimensional reduction of the 9+1-dimensional SYM, the maximal dimensional SYM that exists. The latter is $$S = \int d^{10} x\mbox{ Tr } \left( -\frac{1}{4} F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu \nu} + \overline{\psi}D_\mu \gamma^\mu \psi \right)$$ where $D$ is the covariant derivative and $\psi$ is a real chiral spinor in 9+1 dimensions which has 16 real components, leading to 8 fermionic on-shell degrees of freedom. The dimensional reduction reduces $d^{10}x$ to $d^4 x$ but it also renames 6 "compactified" spatial components $A_\mu$ as six scalars $\Phi_I$ in $d=4$. The derivatives in the corresponding 6 directions are set to zero.

If one looks what fields and interactions we get in $d=4$ - it's straightforward to write the action - it's one gauge field; four Weyl fermions; six real scalars. All those fields transform as adjoint of the gauge group - the most popular ones are $SU(N)$. They have the standard kinetic terms; standard cubic couplings of the gauge field to all the other fields; the usual quartic Yang-Mills self-interaction of the gauge field; quartic interaction of the gauge field and the scalars; Yukawa cubic couplings for the 6 scalars that arise from the gauge interactions of the fermions in 9+1 dimensions; quartic potential for the scalars which is equal to the squared commutator. Everything has to be traced over the gauge group. All these interactions are related and determined by supersymmetry - by 16 real supercharges. The individual vertices of Feynman diagrams are self-evident but the true physics behind all of them is related by symmetries.

B. The simplest explanation of the S-duality is to represent the gauge theory as the low-energy limit of the dynamics of a stack of D3-branes in type IIB string theory. The S-duality group - actually it's an $SL(2,Z)$ group because it may also act on the $\theta$-angle (RR-axion) - is directly inherited from the same S-duality group of type IIB string theory. In particular, the $g\to 1/g$ may be interpreted in the F-theory description of type IIB as the exchange of the 11th and 12th (infinitesimal) dimension of F-theory. One may also get the gauge theory as the compactification of the $d=6$ (2,0) superconformal field theory on a tiny two-torus, and $SL(2,Z)$ acts in the obvious way - again, the exchange of the two radii is the $g\to 1/g$ map. It's a non-perturbative duality so there's no simple perturbative "field redefinition" that would prove it at the classical level. However, one may make many consistency checks that the duality seems viable - e.g. one may found the magnetic monopole solutions that turn to light elementary excitations at the strong coupling.

C. The $N=4$ $d=4$ vector multiplet contains all the physical fields in the theory and I have already written what they are: a vector field with 2 physical polarizations, 6 real scalars, and 8 fermionic degrees of freedom from 4 Weyl fermions, carrying the $SU(4) \approx SO(6)$ R-symmetry group. It's not too helpful to use superspace for $N=4$ theories, unless one wants to break it to $N=1$ or $N=2$. Too big supersymmetry.

I agree with Jeff that those things can be found in first (SUSY) chapters of any modern introductory textbook or other literature on advanced quantum field theory or string theory so in this sense, this question is a theft of the time of other users of this server.

By the way, I also want to mention that the $N=4$ theory is arguably the "most important" or "simplest" $d=4$ non-gravitational theory, by the modern criteria, and the action above is far from the only one - and maybe even from the most elementary - way to describe this theory. This theory, by the AdS/CFT correspondence, is also dual i.e. exactly equivalent to type IIB string theory on $AdS_5\times S^5$. The $N=4$ SYM also has the "dual superconformal symmetry" that, together with the original superconformal symmetry, generates an infinite-dimensional "Yangian symmetry". Twistor techniques are particularly useful for the computation of scattering amplitudes in this $N=4$ SYM and many of the twistor researchers think that the twistor formulae are more fundamental and elementary ways to describe physics of the SYM than the perturbative action above.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user Luboš Motl
answered Feb 4, 2011 by Luboš Motl (10,178 points) [ no revision ]
Most voted comments show all comments
Thanks @Lubos. Is this route of dimensional reduction the only way to get to N=4,D=4 SUSY?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user user346
No, but it is the best way. ;)

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user pho
No, but it is the smoothest way pedagogically, at least now. ;-)

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user Luboš Motl
@Lubos - Ok, another question. This is a model with global susy, right? How much more complicated is it to write down something with local susy? In field theory when we think of local gauge groups we think of parallel transport and holonomies. For a global susy, obviously susy this is not relevant. In local susy can one give a meaning to "supersymmetric" parallel transport?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user user346
Dear @space_cadet, it's somewhat to "much" more complicated. Supersymmetries' anticommutator is proportional to the energy-momentum vector, among other possible terms, so it's inevitable that if you make supersymmetry local, you inevitably make the generators of translations (energy-momentum) i.e. diffeomorphisms local, too. Any theory with local supersymmetry inevitably includes gravity and is known as a supergravity (SUGRA) theory. The moral "simplest" example is actually the maximally supersymmetric N=8 d=4 SUGRA, obtained as a reduction of d=11 SUGRA to d=4.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user Luboš Motl
What are the holonomies in the gauged supersymmetry is an interesting question and I don't realize that it would be discussed in this way - but it's very likely that the holonomy around a small loop in the (bosonic) space will be given by a combination of the gravitino fields etc. - that measure how much the "bundle" fails to be parallelizable, in the same way as curvature for Yang-Mills fields or the metric. It seems as a good question to me - you should try to answer it.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user Luboš Motl
I want to mention that the maximum supergravity has 32 supercharges which is exactly 2 times what the N=4 d=4 maximal gauge theory has. In many sense, the N=8 SUGRA is the "square" of the N=4 gauge theory discussed here. This is particularly explicit if they're constructed as limits of type II string theory - then the "squared" relationship reduces to the isomorphism between closed strings and "squared open strings" (left-moving and right-moving nonzero modes' sectors of a closed string are "almost isomorphic" to the modes of an open string). However, in spacetime, SUGRA is hard.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-04-01 16:48 (UCT), posted by SE-user Luboš Motl

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights