• 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.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

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

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,064 questions , 2,215 unanswered
5,347 answers , 22,734 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  D-brane wrapping in the geometric transition for type-IIB on a Calabi-Yau manifold

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

In Stefan Metzger's thesis (https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0512285) on page 9, the following statement appears in connection with the compactifications type-IIB string theory on two Calabi-Yau manifolds that are related by a geometric transition. [The geometric transition is described on the previous page in the thesis.]

It is now interesting to see what happens if we compactify Type IIB string theory on two Calabi-Yau manifolds that are related by such a transition. Since one is interested in $\mathcal{N} = 1$ effective theories it is suitable to add either fluxes or branes in order to further break supersymmetry. It is then very natural to introduced D5-branes wrapping the two-spheres in the case of the small resolution of the singularity (Edit: small resolution refers to blowing up the singularity using an $S^2$). The manifold with a deformed singularity (Edit: deformed singularity refers to blowing up the singularity using an $S^3$) has no suitable cycles around which D-branes might wrap, so we are forced to switch on flux in order to break supersymmety.

So first of all, when can we wrap a D$p$-brane around a $k$-cycle (i.e. for what $p$ and $k$)? I thought $p \geq k$ is all we needed?

More specifically, what are the internal cycles of an $S^2$ and an $S^3$ and why can't these D-branes be wrapped around them? Is the reasoning obvious?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2016-11-13 14:36 (UTC), posted by SE-user leastaction

asked Nov 8, 2016 in Theoretical Physics by leastaction (425 points) [ revision history ]
edited Nov 13, 2016 by Dilaton

1 Answer

+ 5 like - 0 dislike

In the context of the question, the 10-dimensional spacetime is $\mathbb{R}^{1,3} \times X$ where $X$ is a Calabi-Yau 3-fold. Considering type IIB string theory on this geometry, without branes and with no fluxes turned on, gives rise to an effective theory on $\mathbb{R}^{1,3}$ with $\mathcal{N}=2$ supersymmetry. If one wants to go from $\mathcal{N}=2$ to $\mathcal{N}=1$ supersymmetry on $\mathbb{R}^{1,3}$, one can try to add D-branes. If one wants to preserve Poincaré invariance of $\mathbb{R}^{1,3}$, the D-brane has to fill in entirely $\mathbb{R}^{1,3}$ (it is interesting to consider cases where one does not preserve Poincaré invariance of $\mathbb{R}^{1,3}$ but I don't think that it is the context of the question). So the only possibilities, given that $Dp$-branes in IIB string theory have $p$ odd, are $D3$-branes wrapping 0-cycles in $X$, $D5$-branes wrapping 2-cycles in $X$ and $D7$-branes wrapping 4-cycles in $X$. In particular, there is nothing to wrap around a non-trivial 3-cycle.

Starting with $D5$-branes wrapping some non-trivial 2-cycle $S^2$ in $X$ and realizing the geometric transition consisting in shrinking $S^2$ and growing up some $S^3$, one can ask what happens to the theory: the $D5$ branes disappear, so how is it possible to still have $\mathcal{N}=1$ (and not $\mathcal{N}=2$)? The answer is that now there is a non-zero flux through $S^3$ (it is a field strength flux for the 2-form gauge field present in the Ramond-Ramond sector of IIB. Remark that the $D5$-branes are magnetic sources for this 2-form gauge field  and the idea is that during the geometric transition, the $D5$-branes disappear but the corresponding magnetic field remains).

answered Nov 13, 2016 by 40227 (5,140 points) [ revision history ]

In your first sentence, the dimensions don't sum to 10.

@ArnoldNeumaier $\mathbb{R}^{1,3}$ has 4 dimensions $\times X$ which has 6 real dimensions is 10 dimensions, no?

So X is the real 6-fold from a complex 3-fold. OK. (wikipedia talks here about a Calabi-Yau 6-fold.)

@40227, thanks for the explanation! Why do you have 0-cycles, 2-cycles and 4-cycles in X? Also, what is the justification for the magnetic field remaining when it's source (the D5-brane) has disappeared?

First, to be precise, when I write "cycle", I mean topologically non-trivial cycle. Topologically non-trivial $k$-cycles in $X$ up to topologically trivial cycles are classified by homology groups $H_k(X,\mathbb{Z})$. So the question, why do we have 0-cycles, 2-cycles, 4-cycles in $X$ is equivalent to why do we have $H_0(X,\mathbb{Z})$, $H_2(X,\mathbb{Z})$ and $H_4(X,\mathbb{Z})$ non-zero. It is easy for $k=0$: we always have points in $X$ as topologically non-trivial 0-cycles. For $k=2$, it is less obvious: there exists manifolds with $H_2=0$ but for a compact Calabi-Yau manifold (in the usual sense, in particular Kähler), it is a mathematical fact that there are always non-trivial 2-cycles (for example an compact submanifold of real dimension 2 which is holomorphic) and similarly a compact Calabi-Yau manifold has always non-trivial 4-cycles (for example a compact submanifold of real dimension 4 which is holomorphic).

About the magnetic field: a gauge field configuration can be produced by a source or can exist by itself if it has a non-zero flux through a topologically non-trivial cycle. The geometric transition exchanges these two possibilities: in the first geometry, there is no appropriate cycle to support a flux but there is a D-brane sourcing the field, whereas in the second geometry, there is no longer D-branes but there is now a cycle able to support a flux. This possibility for a dynamical object like a D-brane to transform in a topologically non-trivial configuration with fluxes is one of the characteristic feature of string theory (AdS/CFT is another example of this: you can start with $N$ D3 branes in IIB on flat $\mathbb{R}^{1,9}$ and in some appropriate (near horizon) limit this becomes IIB, without branes, on curved and topologically non-trivial $AdS_5 \times S^5$ with $N$ units of flux through $S^5$).

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).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

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

Your rights