The Birth of String Theory
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Particles-Versus-Strings.Pdf
Particles vs. strings http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/vs.html In light of the huge amount of propaganda and confusion regarding string theory, it might be useful to consider the relative merits of the descriptions of the fundamental constituents of matter as particles or strings. (More-skeptical reviews can be found in my physics parodies.A more technical analysis can be found at "Warren Siegel's research".) Predictability The main problem in high energy theoretical physics today is predictions, especially for quantum gravity and confinement. An important part of predictability is calculability. There are various levels of calculations possible: 1. Existence: proofs of theorems, answers to yes/no questions 2. Qualitative: "hand-waving" results, answers to multiple choice questions 3. Order of magnitude: dimensional analysis arguments, 10? (but beware hidden numbers, like powers of 4π) 4. Constants: generally low-energy results, like ground-state energies 5. Functions: complete results, like scattering probabilities in terms of energy and angle Any but the last level eventually leads to rejection of the theory, although previous levels are acceptable at early stages, as long as progress is encouraging. It is easy to write down the most general theory consistent with special (and for gravity, general) relativity, quantum mechanics, and field theory, but it is too general: The spectrum of particles must be specified, and more coupling constants and varieties of interaction become available as energy increases. The solutions to this problem go by various names -- "unification", "renormalizability", "finiteness", "universality", etc. -- but they are all just different ways to realize the same goal of predictability. -
Supergravity and Its Legacy Prelude and the Play
Supergravity and its Legacy Prelude and the Play Sergio FERRARA (CERN – LNF INFN) Celebrating Supegravity at 40 CERN, June 24 2016 S. Ferrara - CERN, 2016 1 Supergravity as carved on the Iconic Wall at the «Simons Center for Geometry and Physics», Stony Brook S. Ferrara - CERN, 2016 2 Prelude S. Ferrara - CERN, 2016 3 In the early 1970s I was a staff member at the Frascati National Laboratories of CNEN (then the National Nuclear Energy Agency), and with my colleagues Aurelio Grillo and Giorgio Parisi we were investigating, under the leadership of Raoul Gatto (later Professor at the University of Geneva) the consequences of the application of “Conformal Invariance” to Quantum Field Theory (QFT), stimulated by the ongoing Experiments at SLAC where an unexpected Bjorken Scaling was observed in inclusive electron- proton Cross sections, which was suggesting a larger space-time symmetry in processes dominated by short distance physics. In parallel with Alexander Polyakov, at the time in the Soviet Union, we formulated in those days Conformal invariant Operator Product Expansions (OPE) and proposed the “Conformal Bootstrap” as a non-perturbative approach to QFT. S. Ferrara - CERN, 2016 4 Conformal Invariance, OPEs and Conformal Bootstrap has become again a fashionable subject in recent times, because of the introduction of efficient new methods to solve the “Bootstrap Equations” (Riccardo Rattazzi, Slava Rychkov, Erik Tonni, Alessandro Vichi), and mostly because of their role in the AdS/CFT correspondence. The latter, pioneered by Juan Maldacena, Edward Witten, Steve Gubser, Igor Klebanov and Polyakov, can be regarded, to some extent, as one of the great legacies of higher dimensional Supergravity. -
Spacetime Geometry from Graviton Condensation: a New Perspective on Black Holes
Spacetime Geometry from Graviton Condensation: A new Perspective on Black Holes Sophia Zielinski née Müller München 2015 Spacetime Geometry from Graviton Condensation: A new Perspective on Black Holes Sophia Zielinski née Müller Dissertation an der Fakultät für Physik der Ludwig–Maximilians–Universität München vorgelegt von Sophia Zielinski geb. Müller aus Stuttgart München, den 18. Dezember 2015 Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr. Stefan Hofmann Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Georgi Dvali Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 13. April 2016 Contents Zusammenfassung ix Abstract xi Introduction 1 Naturalness problems . .1 The hierarchy problem . .1 The strong CP problem . .2 The cosmological constant problem . .3 Problems of gravity ... .3 ... in the UV . .4 ... in the IR and in general . .5 Outline . .7 I The classical description of spacetime geometry 9 1 The problem of singularities 11 1.1 Singularities in GR vs. other gauge theories . 11 1.2 Defining spacetime singularities . 12 1.3 On the singularity theorems . 13 1.3.1 Energy conditions and the Raychaudhuri equation . 13 1.3.2 Causality conditions . 15 1.3.3 Initial and boundary conditions . 16 1.3.4 Outlining the proof of the Hawking-Penrose theorem . 16 1.3.5 Discussion on the Hawking-Penrose theorem . 17 1.4 Limitations of singularity forecasts . 17 2 Towards a quantum theoretical probing of classical black holes 19 2.1 Defining quantum mechanical singularities . 19 2.1.1 Checking for quantum mechanical singularities in an example spacetime . 21 2.2 Extending the singularity analysis to quantum field theory . 22 2.2.1 Schrödinger representation of quantum field theory . 23 2.2.2 Quantum field probes of black hole singularities . -
Florida Physics News University of Florida - Department of Physics Annual Alumni Newsletter 2005
Florida Physics News University of Florida - Department of Physics Annual Alumni Newsletter 2005 University of Florida - Department of Physics 1 Contents Chair’s Corner 2 Chair’s Corner UF Teacher/Scholar Award 3 American Physical Society - Three New Fellows 5 APS Keithley Award 5 November 2005 marks the third anniversary of Professors Earn Positions in National Societies 6 my term as department chair, and I can say that the Columbia Shuttle Accident Investigation 7 Student Government Award 8 past year has been the most exciting one (“exciting” Academy Induction 8 in the sense of the ancient Chinese curse, “May you Faculty Promotions 8 Post-Doc Awarded Fellowship from L’Oreal Corporation 8 live in exciting times”). Two significant events come to Research Scholar Award 8 mind: the record 2004 hurricane season, and the July Travel Awards 9 Undergraduate Physics Newsletter - In Review 10 2004 implementation of the new Enterprise Resource Albert Einstein Institut Rewards Two Students 12 Planning so�ware from PeopleSo�, designed to Physics Teacher of the Year 12 manage UF’s financial, payroll, and human resources 25th Brandt-Ritchie Workshop 12 TannerFest 12 activities. As you know, Florida was hammered 45th Sanibel Symposium 13 by four hurricanes during last year’s season, and Faculty Retirement 13 Faculty Selected Publications 14 Hurricanes Frances and Jeanne directly hit Gainesville Davis Productivity Award 16 in September 2004. Although ultimately the damage to Staff Retirement 16 Employee Excellence Awardees 16 UF was minimal, with downed trees, power outages, Undergraduate Honors 16 and minor flooding, it was nonetheless a stressful time Outreach Program 17 Celebrating New PhD’s 18 for the many faculty, staff, and students who were Awards Made Possible By Alumni Donations 18 affected by the storms. -
The Anthropic Principle and Multiple Universe Hypotheses Oren Kreps
The Anthropic Principle and Multiple Universe Hypotheses Oren Kreps Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Section 1: The Fine-Tuning Argument and the Anthropic Principle .............................................. 3 The Improbability of a Life-Sustaining Universe ....................................................................... 3 Does God Explain Fine-Tuning? ................................................................................................ 4 The Anthropic Principle .............................................................................................................. 7 The Multiverse Premise ............................................................................................................ 10 Three Classes of Coincidence ................................................................................................... 13 Can The Existence of Sapient Life Justify the Multiverse? ...................................................... 16 How unlikely is fine-tuning? .................................................................................................... 17 Section 2: Multiverse Theories ..................................................................................................... 18 Many universes or all possible -
Curriculum Vitæ
Curriculum Vitæ Nome : Laura Maria Andrianopoli Nazionalit`a: Italiana Data e luogo di nascita : 8 Gennaio 1969, Torino (Italia) Lingue parlate : Italiano, Inglese, Francese Posizione attuale : dal 01/11/2007 Ricercatrice Universitaria presso il Dipartimento di Fisica del Politecnico di Torino Indirizzo: C.so Duca degli Abruzzi, 24 I-10129 Torino, Italia Indirizzo e-mail : [email protected] Formazione accademica • 1994 - 1997: corso di Dottorato in Fisica presso l'Universit`adi Genova. Rela- tore: Prof. C. Imbimbo; Co-relatore: Prof. R. D'Auria Titolo della Tesi di Dottorato: \U-duality in supergravity theories and extremal black holes", discussa a Roma il giorno 8 Maggio 1998 • Luglio 1994: Laurea in Fisica Teorica presso l'Universit`adi Torino con votazione finale di 110/110 e Lode. Relatore: Prof. Ferdinando Gliozzi; Co-relatore: Prof. Riccardo D'Auria Titolo della Tesi : \Una nuova rappresentazione per l'accoppiamento dei campi scalari alla supergravit`a Attivit`adi Ricerca Borse Post-Dottorato: • 1 Novembre 2004 - 31 Ottobre 2007: Grant da parte del Museo Storico della Fisica e Centro Studi e Ricerche Enrico Fermi, per svolgere ricerche presso la Di- visione Teorica del CERN di Ginevra e il Dipartimento di Fisica del Politecnico di Torino. • 1 Novembre 2002 - 31 Ottobre 2004: Posizione di Fellow presso la Divisione Teorica del CERN, Ginevra • 1 Settembre 2000 - 31 Ottobre 2002: Posizione di Assegnista di Ricerca presso il Dipartimento di Fisica del Politecnico di Torino • 1 Ottobre 1998 - 31 Agosto 2000: Posizione di Post-Dottorato presso la Divi- sione Teorica dell'Universit`aK.U.Leuven, in Belgio, nell'ambito del progetto: TMR ERBFMRXCT96-0045 • 15 Febbraio 1998 - 30 Settembre 1998: Posizione di borsista presso la Divisione Teorica del CERN, Ginevra grazie al contributo della borsa Angelo Della Riccia • Conferimento della prima posizione nella graduatoria di merito del Concorso INFN a n. -
David Olive: His Life and Work
David Olive his life and work Edward Corrigan Department of Mathematics, University of York, YO10 5DD, UK Peter Goddard Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA St John's College, Cambridge, CB2 1TP, UK Abstract David Olive, who died in Barton, Cambridgeshire, on 7 November 2012, aged 75, was a theoretical physicist who made seminal contributions to the development of string theory and to our understanding of the structure of quantum field theory. In early work on S-matrix theory, he helped to provide the conceptual framework within which string theory was initially formulated. His work, with Gliozzi and Scherk, on supersymmetry in string theory made possible the whole idea of superstrings, now understood as the natural framework for string theory. Olive's pioneering insights about the duality between electric and magnetic objects in gauge theories were way ahead of their time; it took two decades before his bold and courageous duality conjectures began to be understood. Although somewhat quiet and reserved, he took delight in the company of others, generously sharing his emerging understanding of new ideas with students and colleagues. He was widely influential, not only through the depth and vision of his original work, but also because the clarity, simplicity and elegance of his expositions of new and difficult ideas and theories provided routes into emerging areas of research, both for students and for the theoretical physics community more generally. arXiv:2009.05849v1 [physics.hist-ph] 12 Sep 2020 [A version of section I Biography is to be published in the Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society.] I Biography Childhood David Olive was born on 16 April, 1937, somewhat prematurely, in a nursing home in Staines, near the family home in Scotts Avenue, Sunbury-on-Thames, Surrey. -
Prospects from Strings and Branes
Prospects from strings and branes Alexander Sevrin Vrije Universiteit Brussel and The International Solvay Institutes for Physics and Chemistry http://tena4.vub.ac.be/ Moriond 2004 Strings and branes… Moriond, March 24, 2004 1 References Not-too-technical review paper, including numerous references: Strings, Gravity and Particle Physics by Augusto Sagnotti and AS In the proceedings of 37th Rencontres de Moriond on Electroweak Interactions and Unified Theories, 2002. e-Print Archive: hep-ex/0209011 Strings and branes… Moriond, March 24, 2004 2 Contents • Dirichlet-branes • D-branes and gauge theories - Worldvolume point of view -AdS/CFT • D-branes and black holes •Cosmology • Some conclusions Strings and branes… Moriond, March 24, 2004 3 Branes Solitons: solutions of the equations of motion with a finite energy(-density) and a mass inversely proportional to the coupling constant. E.g. Scalar field in d = 1 + 1: kink. 12m3 mass = λ Other example in d = 3 + 1: magnetic monopole: 1 mass ∝ 2 gYM Strings and branes… Moriond, March 24, 2004 4 Solitons in string theory: Dirichlet branes Besides the “conventional” fields, such as e.g., gµν (x)=gνµ(x): metric = graviton Φ(x): dilaton, one has RR- potentials as well. E.g. vector potential, A µ : Fµν = ∂µAν − ∂ν Aµ, Aµ → Aµ − ∂µf, Fµν → Fµν . Couples to particles: µ S = q dτ x˙ (τ)Aµ(x(τ)). Z Strings and branes… Moriond, March 24, 2004 5 E.g. 2-form potential, A µ ν = − A ν µ : Fµνρ = ∂µAνρ + ∂ν Aρµ + ∂ρAµν , Aµν → Aµν − ∂µfν + ∂ν fµ,Fµνρ → Fµνρ. Couples to strings: µ ν S = q dτdσ x˙(τ, σ) x0(τ, σ) Aµν (x(τ, σ)). -
Hep-Th/0011078V1 9 Nov 2000 1 Okspotdi Atb H ..Dp.O Nryudrgrant Under Energy of Dept
CALT-68-2300 CITUSC/00-060 hep-th/0011078 String Theory Origins of Supersymmetry1 John H. Schwarz California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA and Caltech-USC Center for Theoretical Physics University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA Abstract The string theory introduced in early 1971 by Ramond, Neveu, and myself has two-dimensional world-sheet supersymmetry. This theory, developed at about the same time that Golfand and Likhtman constructed the four-dimensional super-Poincar´ealgebra, motivated Wess and Zumino to construct supersymmet- ric field theories in four dimensions. Gliozzi, Scherk, and Olive conjectured the arXiv:hep-th/0011078v1 9 Nov 2000 spacetime supersymmetry of the string theory in 1976, a fact that was proved five years later by Green and myself. Presented at the Conference 30 Years of Supersymmetry 1Work supported in part by the U.S. Dept. of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG03-92-ER40701. 1 S-Matrix Theory, Duality, and the Bootstrap In the late 1960s there were two parallel trends in particle physics. On the one hand, many hadron resonances were discovered, making it quite clear that hadrons are not elementary particles. In fact, they were found, to good approximation, to lie on linear parallel Regge trajectories, which supported the notion that they are composite. Moreover, high energy scattering data displayed Regge asymptotic behavior that could be explained by the extrap- olation of the same Regge trajectories, as well as one with vacuum quantum numbers called the Pomeron. This set of developments was the focus of the S-Matrix Theory community of theorists. -
Curriculum Vitae
CURRICULUM VITAE Raman Sundrum July 26, 2019 CONTACT INFORMATION Physical Sciences Complex, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 Office - (301) 405-6012 Email: [email protected] CAREER John S. Toll Chair, Director of the Maryland Center for Fundamental Physics, 2012 - present. Distinguished University Professor, University of Maryland, 2011-present. Elkins Chair, Professor of Physics, University of Maryland, 2010-2012. Alumni Centennial Chair, Johns Hopkins University, 2006- 2010. Full Professor at the Department of Physics and Astronomy, The Johns Hopkins University, 2001- 2010. Associate Professor at the Department of Physics and Astronomy, The Johns Hop- kins University, 2000- 2001. Research Associate at the Department of Physics, Stanford University, 1999- 2000. Advisor { Prof. Savas Dimopoulos. 1 Postdoctoral Fellow at the Department of Physics, Boston University. 1996- 1999. Postdoc advisor { Prof. Sekhar Chivukula. Postdoctoral Fellow in Theoretical Physics at Harvard University, 1993-1996. Post- doc advisor { Prof. Howard Georgi. Postdoctoral Fellow in Theoretical Physics at the University of California at Berke- ley, 1990-1993. Postdoc advisor { Prof. Stanley Mandelstam. EDUCATION Yale University, New-Haven, Connecticut Ph.D. in Elementary Particle Theory, May 1990 Thesis Title: `Theoretical and Phenomenological Aspects of Effective Gauge Theo- ries' Thesis advisor: Prof. Lawrence Krauss Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island Participant in the 1988 Theoretical Advanced Summer Institute University of Sydney, Australia B.Sc with First Class Honours in Mathematics and Physics, Dec. 1984 AWARDS, DISTINCTIONS J. J. Sakurai Prize in Theoretical Particle Physics, American Physical Society, 2019. Distinguished Visiting Research Chair, Perimeter Institute, 2012 - present. 2 Moore Fellow, Cal Tech, 2015. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Fellow, 2011. -
Stanley Mandelstam
I knew very early of Stanley Mandelstam I started physics as a t Prisoner of the s u Mandelstam Triangle I escaped from the Mandelstam Triangle only to be ensnared in Light-Cone Superspace A Note of Personal Gratitude 1971 NAL Visit SuperConformal Theories P. Ramond (with S. Ananth, D. Belyaev, L. Brink and S.-S. Kim) Light-Cone Superspaces N=4 Super Yang-Mills N=8 SuperConformal N=8 SuperGravity and E7(7) N=16 SuperGravity and E8(8) N=8 Light-Cone Superspace houses D=11: N=1 SuperGravity SO(9); F4/SO(9) D=4: N=8 SuperGravity SO(2)x E7(7) D=3: N=16 SuperGravity E8(8) D=2: N=16 Theory E9(9) N=4 Light-Cone Superspace habitat for D=10: N=1 Super Yang-Mills SO(8) D=4: N=4 Super Yang-Mills PSU(2,2|4) D=3: N=8 Super Conformal OSp(2,2|8) 1 i 1 ϕ (y) = 1 A (y) + i θm θn C (y) + 1θm θn θp θq $ ∂+ A¯ (y) + m n mn m n p mnpqq + ¯ ϕ (y) = +∂A (y) + √2θ θ Cmn (y) +12 θ θ θ θ $mnpq ∂ A (y) ∂ √2 √ 12 1 i 1 i m 2 m n p q m n m n p q + i+ +¯ θ χ¯m(y) + √2θ θ θ $mnpq χ (y) ϕ (y) = + A (y) + θ θ Cmn (y) + θ θ θ θ $mnpq ∂ ∂Am(y) 6 m n p q ∂ √2 12 + θ χ¯m(y) + θ θ θ $mnpq χ (y) 1 i m n 1 m n p ∂q+ + ¯ 6 ϕ (y) = A (y) + √θ θ C L(C2y) + Fθorθ maθ θ $lmnpqism∂ A (y) ∂+i m √ 2 m nmnp q12 + θ χ¯m(y) +2 θ θ θ $mnpq χ (y) 1 0 3 ∂+ 6 x± = (x x ) i √2 √ m m n p q 12 0± 3 + + θ χ¯m(y) + θ θ θ $mnpq χ (y) x± = (x x ) ∂ 6 √2 ± Light-Cone Co1ordina0 3tes: 1 0 3 x± = (x x ) ∂± = ( ∂ ∂ ) √2 ± √2 − ± 1 0 3 1 0 3 x± = (x x ) ∂± = ( ∂ ∂ ) 1 0√ 3 ± 1 1 2√2 − ±1 1 2 ∂± = ( ∂ 2∂ ) x = (x + ix ) x = (x ix ) √2 − ± √2 √2 − m m + 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 q+ , q¯+ n =1 i√2δ n ∂ x = 1(x + ix -
Strings, Boundary Fermions and Coincident D-Branes
Strings, boundary fermions and coincident D-branes Linus Wulff Department of Physics Stockholm University Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theoretical Physics Department of Physics, Stockholm University Sweden c Linus Wulff, Stockholm 2007 ISBN 91-7155-371-1 pp 1-85 Printed in Sweden by Universitetsservice US-AB, Stockholm 2007 Abstract The appearance in string theory of higher-dimensional objects known as D- branes has been a source of much of the interesting developements in the subject during the past ten years. A very interesting phenomenon occurs when several of these D-branes are made to coincide: The abelian gauge theory liv- ing on each brane is enhanced to a non-abelian gauge theory living on the stack of coincident branes. This gives rise to interesting effects like the natural ap- pearance of non-commutative geometry. The theory governing the dynamics of these coincident branes is still poorly understood however and only hints of the underlying structure have been seen. This thesis focuses on an attempt to better this understanding by writing down actions for coincident branes using so-called boundary fermions, orig- inating in considerations of open strings, instead of matrices to describe the non-abelian fields. It is shown that by gauge-fixing and by suitably quantiz- ing these boundary fermions the non-abelian action that is known, the Myers action, can be reproduced. Furthermore it is shown that under natural assump- tions, unlike the Myers action, the action formulated using boundary fermions also posseses kappa-symmetry, the criterion for being the correct supersym- metric action for coincident D-branes.