Quantcast
  • 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.

News

New features!

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

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

123 submissions , 104 unreviewed
3,547 questions , 1,198 unanswered
4,549 answers , 19,357 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
410 active unimported users
More ...

Why isn't there a Heterotic string theory which tensors the fermionic state with the Type II state?

+ 0 like - 0 dislike
124 views

The Heterotic (HO and HE) string is found by tensoring the left movers of the bosonic string theory state and the right movers of the Type II string theory state: $$|\psi_{\operatorname{H}}\rangle=|\psi_{\operatorname{B}}\rangle\otimes|\psi_{\operatorname {II}}\rangle$$

The bosonic state is of course based on the Polyakov Action. Now, what if we had another state (I'll call it the k-heterotic state) which is formed by tensoring the fermionic string theory state and the type II state. $$|\psi_{\operatorname{H}}\rangle=|\psi_{\operatorname{F}}\rangle\otimes|\psi_{\operatorname {II}}\rangle$$ The fermionic string theory state is based on the Dirac Action: $$S_F=S_{RNS}-S_B$$ Why is this theory not consistent? Whether the bosonic state is chosen or the fermionic state, how does that matter? Is it because the Dirac Action is imaginary (since it has an i outside the integral if one expands out the Dirac matrix fermionic field product)? Does it have anything to do with that?

asked May 26, 2013 in Theoretical Physics by dimension10 (1,950 points) [ revision history ]
retagged May 11, 2014 by dimension10
If you only consider the right-movers, the "fermonic string" and the "type II string" is the same thing! The word "fermionic" doesn't mean that it only has fermions; it means that it also has fermions. Taking only fermions from type II strings would have a wrong central charge i.e. conformal anomaly! Your difference of the two actions is completely incomprehensible to me; perhaps you thought that the fermionic string should only have fermions but that's not the case. And which imaginary action? In the Minkowski space, all actions are always real, they have to be real due to unitarity.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 09:13 (UCT), posted by SE-user Luboš Motl
I thought there was the Fermionic String Action (Dirac Action) given by:$$S = \frac{{iT}}{{{c_0}}}\int_{}^{} {\sqrt { - \det {h_{\alpha \beta }}} {h_{\alpha \beta }}\psi _ - ^\mu \left( {\frac{{\partial \psi _ + ^\nu }}{{\partial \tau }} - \frac{{\partial \psi _ + ^\nu }}{{\partial \sigma }}} \right){g_{\mu \nu }}{\rm{d}}\sigma {\rm{ d}}\tau } $$

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 09:13 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dimensio1n0
The indices $\alpha,\beta$ above aren't even correctly contracted. And again, no, "fermionic string" is an obsolete name for type I/II D=10 string that was used up to the mid 1980s and it contains both bosons and fermions. Moreover, you're using "Dirac action" in a strange way - the Dirac action is primarily the action for any spin-1/2 field, especially in d=4.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 09:13 (UCT), posted by SE-user Luboš Motl

1 Answer

+ 0 like - 0 dislike

I guess Lubos Motl's comment really refers to the terminology used in my post.

If I try to insist on what I meant by "fermionic string", the string formed by $S=S_{RNS}-S_P$, the massless free Dirac Action $S=\iint\limits_{S} i\hbar\gamma^\mu\partial_\mu\psi \mbox{ d}^2\xi$ , then I guess it would simply mean that the theory is inconsistent. The only way I can see that this is so, is that the "fermionic string" again is an inconsistent string theory. I think I get why this is so.

If there are no fields $X^\mu$ in the action, then the string worldsheet can't get embedded into spacetime at all (!). This theory would then not exist.

So the answer boils down to "The (purely) fermionic string is not studied because it's not even a consistent theory, since the string worldsheet wouldn't be embedded into spacetime."

answered Sep 28, 2013 by dimension10 (1,950 points) [ revision history ]
edited Apr 25, 2014 by dimension10

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:
p$\hbar$y$\varnothing$icsOverflow
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
...