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 ...

How can two time theories be compactified to 3+1 without any Kaluza-Klein remnants

+ 7 like - 0 dislike
51 views

I have recently been looking into the two-time theories and the implied concepts.

For me this seems slightly hard to grasp.

How can I see the basic concept in this theory in a fundamental way based on its implied interaction with normal 3+1 dimension?

I am interested specifically in how gauge symmetries that effectively reduce 2T-physics in 4+2 dimensions to 1T-physics in 3+1 dimensions without any Kaluza-Klein remnants.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Argus
asked Dec 9, 2012 in Theoretical Physics by Argus (40 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Apr 19, 2014 by dimension10
Most voted comments show all comments
Possible duplicates: physics.stackexchange.com/q/43322/2451 and links therein.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Qmechanic
@Qmechanic I think this question is a bit different and more specific than the other one, at least the last paragraph. And it seems to be asking about technical details.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dilaton
This article here possibly says something about it, in particular the papers explained therein. But I have just detected and not yet read it.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dilaton
Here is another reference.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Dilaton
"slightly hard to grasp." My friend, if you have understood one time dimension, you are already a king among physicists.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user kηives
Most recent comments show all comments
@jerry next time, use the comments area for stuff which doesn't answer the question.. :)

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Manishearth
Dear @Nemo: not that it matters now, but for the record: the question(v2) was a duplicate. OP later included his main question(v3). See the edit history.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-17 04:24 (UCT), posted by SE-user Qmechanic

1 Answer

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

In this blog post, a paper that derives by dimensional reduction well known super Yang-Mills (SYM) theories, such as N=1 SYM in 9+1 dimensions and N=4 SYM in 3+1 dimensions among other things using a SYM theory in 10+2 dimensions as a common more fundamental underlying theory.

As can be seen from looking at figure 1 of that paper

enter image description here

As stated below equation (3.1), if applying the method of deriving shadows of two time physics to obtain lower dimensional theories, Kaluza-Klein are avoided.

answered Jun 29, 2013 by Dilaton (4,175 points) [ revision history ]

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$\hbar$ysicsOve$\varnothing$flow
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
...