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 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

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

174 submissions , 137 unreviewed
4,308 questions , 1,640 unanswered
5,089 answers , 21,602 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
635 active unimported users
More ...

  String landscape in different dimensions

+ 4 like - 0 dislike
19 views

For D = 11 large (uncompactified) spacetime dimensions, the only "string theory" vacuum is M-theory

For D = 10, there are 5 vacua. Or maybe it's more correct to say 4, since type I is S-dual to $Spin(32)/\mathbb{Z}_2$ heterotic?

For D = 4 there is a monstrous number of vacua and there's no full classification

For which values of D a full classification exists, and what is it?

My guess is that the classification exists for $D \geq D_{min}$ but what is the value of $D_{min}$?

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
asked Jan 6, 2012 in Theoretical Physics by Squark (1,725 points) [ no revision ]
Maybe a more efficient organizing principle is number of supersymmetries, for generic string vacua the number of dimensions is not a sharp question.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
@Moshe, I think the number of large (uncompactified) dimensions is well-defined since the large-scale limit is a QFT with a well-defined spacetime dimension

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Yeah, you are right of course, the qualifier "uncompactified" makes all the difference.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Dear @Squark, but even if the number of noncompact dimensions is well-defined, it's still sensible to subclassify the options according to the number of supercharges. For low number of noncompact dimensions, the number of supercharges may be very small and not too constraining. So only for high dimensions such as $D=9$, the classification is potentially manageable. In $D=9$, one gets various M-theories on Klein Bottle, Mobius strip, and similar funny extra choices aside from the circular compactifications. There are also papers on the $D=6$ landscape etc.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
A good example of the richness of the vacua even in 7 large dimensions and above. See Triples, Fluxes, and Strings: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0103170 - various disconnected components of commuting Wilson lines, dualities between these vacua etc. I think it's a great paper by 7 authors, a substantially undervalued one (with 100 cits or so).

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)

Please log in or register to answer this question.





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

Your rights
...