• 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.


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

203 submissions , 161 unreviewed
5,006 questions , 2,162 unanswered
5,341 answers , 22,655 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
815 active unimported users
More ...

  Usefulness of the functor of points approach to supermanifolds to supersymmetric calculations in physics?

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

In the Notes on Supersymmetry of Deligne and Morgan it is claimed at the beginning of chapters 2.8-2.9  about the functor of points approach to supermanifolds on page 28 that this is closest to the way physicists make computations (in supersymmetric theories). 

But to be honest I have never ever encountered any functors of points in physics texts about supersymmetry so far ...

So can somebody explain to me why the functor of points approach to supermanifolds is indeed the most useful point of view for calculations in supersymmetric physics and at best also give an example such that I can see how it actually works?

asked Jun 1, 2017 in Mathematics by Dilaton (6,240 points) [ revision history ]
edited Jun 5, 2017 by Arnold Neumaier

1 Answer

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

The functor of points approach (see around remark 2.3 in geometry of physics -- supergeometry) says that we understand a supermanifold \(X\) (or any other richer or more general kind of super-space) by remembering (in particular)

1. for each superpoint \(\mathbb{R}^{0\vert q}\)the set of maps  \(Hom(\mathbb{R}^{0|q}, X)\) from \(\mathbb{R}^{0|q}\) to \(X\)

2. for each map of superpoints \(f : \mathbb{R}^{0|q} \to \mathbb{R}^{0|q'}\)  the corresponding restriction map  \(f^\ast : Hom(\mathbb{R}^{0|q'},X) \to Hom(\mathbb{R}^{0|q},X)\) given by precomposing any \(\mathbb{R}^{0|q} \to X\)  with the given \(f\).

Now such maps of supermanifolds \(\mathbb{R}^{0|q} \to X\) are dually homomorphisms of their super-algebras of functions

\(C^\infty(X) \to C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^{0\vert q})\).

But the algebra of super-functions on the superpoint R^0|q, that is just the Grassmann algebra \(\wedge^\bullet \langle \theta_1, \cdots, \theta_q\rangle\) on q odd generators theta.

Hence such an algebra homomorphism is schematically of the form

\(f_0 \mapsto f_0(x) + \theta_1 \theta_2 f'_0(x) + \cdots\)

\(f_1 \mapsto \theta_1 f_1(x) + \theta_1 \theta_2 \theta_3 f'_1(x) + \cdots\)

where \(f_0\) is of even degree in \(C^\infty(X)\) and \(f_1\) of odd degree.

In other words, this is just the expansion of super-fields in terms of auxiliary Grassmann variables. This is indeed effectively the only way that supergeometry is presented in physics texts.

You see, the point is really to give a supply of Grassmann coordinates. In some texts on supergravity, there is a comment at the beginning saying something like "we fix once and for all an infinite-dimensional Grassmann algebra and assume that we may draw elements theta form it as need be". But there are pitfalls to this approach via "one single fixed infinite Grassmann algebra". These problems are discussed in 

Christoph Sachse, "A Categorical Formulation of Superalgebra and Supergeometry" (arXiv:0802.4067)

The functor of points picture fixes this: instead of postulating one single infinite-Grassmann algebra, it says "your formulas need to make sense for Grassmann variables drawn from any finite Grassmann algebra" but (that's the functoriality) your formulas must be covariant under changing the chosen Grassmann algebra, i.e. under "Grassmann coordinate transformations".

In mathematical terms this: "work on all finite dimensional Grassmann algebras such that all your formulas are covariant under change of Grassmann coordinates", that just says that all the mathemaitcal objects you are dealing with are functors on the category of super-points.

answered Jun 8, 2017 by Urs Schreiber (6,095 points) [ revision history ]
edited Jun 8, 2017 by Urs Schreiber

Many thanks Urs!

Will study your reply (and the Sachse paper) in detail and come up with follow up questions if needed ...

I have added a more to-the-point discussion of what you probably like to see: the equivalence between the concept of "superfields" and the functor of points. This is now example 3.7 in the notes.

There would be more to say. I am busy otherwise, but if you give me feedback on which particulars you like to see expanded on further, I'll try to look into it.

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