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

Please welcome our new moderators!

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

122 submissions , 103 unreviewed
3,497 questions , 1,172 unanswered
4,543 answers , 19,337 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
407 active unimported users
More ...

Type I' String theory as M-theory compactified on a line segment?

+ 1 like - 0 dislike
38 views

I was considering the S-dual of the Type I' String theory (the solitonic Type I string theory).

That is the same as the S-dual of the T-Dual of Type I String theory. Then, that means both length scales and coupling constant are inverted. So, since inverting the length scale of the theory before inverting the coupling constant is the same as inverting the coupling constant before the length scale, I think the S-dual of the T-dual of the Type I String theory is the same as the T-dual of the S-dual of the Type I String theory. The S-dual of the Type I string theory is the Type HO String theory. The T-dual of the Type HO string theory is the Type HE String theory.

Therefore, the S-dual of the Type I' String theory is the Type HE String theory. But the Type HE String theory is S-dual to M-theory compactified on a line segment.

So does this mean that the Type I' String theory is M-theory compactified on a line segment?

Thanks!

asked May 25, 2013 in Theoretical Physics by dimension10 (1,950 points) [ revision history ]
retagged May 21, 2014 by dimension10

1 Answer

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

Type I' string theory is equivalent to M-theory compactified on a line segment times a circle, i.e. M-theory on a cylinder.

M-theory on a line segment only is the Hořava-Witten M-theory, a dual description of the $E_8\times E_8$ heterotic string, because every 9+1-dimensional boundary in M-theory has to carry the $E_8$ gauge supermultiplet. The extra compactified circle is needed to break the $E_8\times E_8$ gauge group to a smaller one; and to get the right number of large spacetime dimensions, among other things.

Type I' string theory has D8-branes that come from the end-of-the-world branes in M-theory on spaces with boundaries; it also possesses orientifold O8-planes. Interestingly enough, the relative position of O8-planes and D8-branes in type I' string theory may be adjusted. This freedom goes away in the M-theory limit; the D8-branes have to be stuck at the orientifold planes, those that become the end-of-the-world domain walls of M-theory, and this obligation is explained by the observation that an O8-plane with a wrong number of D8-branes on it is a source of the dilaton that runs. In the M-theory limit, the running of the dilaton becomes arbitrarily fast which sends the maximum tolerable distance between the O8-plane and D8-branes to zero.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 09:13 (UCT), posted by SE-user Luboš Motl
answered May 25, 2013 by Luboš Motl (10,178 points) [ no revision ]
Thanks a lot for the answer but I have 1 more question: M-theory compactified on a cylinder definitely isn't equivalent to M-theory compactified on a line segment. So, there must be some fallacy with my reasoning. Do the T- and S- Dualities not commute? Or is the S-dual of Type HE String theory not M-theory compactified on a line segment (but instead a cylinder)? Thanks!

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 09:13 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dimensio1n0
There are various fallacies - you use the dualities in a bizarre way. The equivalence of the heterotic strings to M-theory with boundary isn't really a normal S-duality, it's a strong coupling limit and a general equivalence. Even more importantly, the mistake is in the first S-duality between type I' and HE. Type I' is a 9-dimensional theory (counting large dimensions only) so it can't be equivalent to a 10-dimensional one. It can't be hard to trace the number of large dimensions of spacetime and avoid simple mistakes of the sort, can it?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 09:13 (UCT), posted by SE-user Luboš Motl
Thanks. So does that mean that The Type I' String theory is only T-dual to Type I string theory compactified on a circle, rather than Type I string theory itself? If so what is the T-dual of the actual 10 dimensional string theory called?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 09:13 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dimensio1n0
Dear @dimension10, T-duality always requires some dimensions to be compactified on a circle or for type I', on line segment. For 10D string theories, T-duality relates two theories with a circular dimension (of inverse radii) and 8+1 large dimensions. It is nonsense to ask what is the T-dual of a 10-dimensional vacuum. At most, you may understand it as the infinite $R$ limit of some vacua; the T-dual is formally a singular $R=0$ compactification. Let me also mention that the infinite $R$ limit of type I' = type IA looks like type IIA string theory everywhere away from the orientifold planes.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-09 09:13 (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:
p$\hbar$ysicsOv$\varnothing$rflow
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
...