Arxiv:2103.07709V2 [Math.GT] 18 Mar 2021 Mty Ue Ikok Emty Rhsmlci Group

arXiv:2103.07709v2 [math.GT] 18 Mar 2021 mty ue ikok emty rhsmlci group. Orthosymplectic geometry, Minkwoski Super ometry, oAtnZilna ela o ale nuto notewrdo ue m super of world the into induction earlier for as well as Zeitlin Anton to ihi h eps opeeso fteetr edwa reflecte as meadow entire brin the blossom. nevertheless of lone that comprehension one communion deepest the natural cu gra it and nothing and with fancy, reality, humble Nothing a profound deep it. rather its the with but bloom, ascertain intimacy single can preternatural quite a one a something tivate flowers, of is of structure way field and A’Campo a beauty the appreciate that everything ponder To learned and abstracting have special: examples I from explicit between. mathematics, computing in to do machinery to huge ways ously many are correct. There was w he certain com and was our sympatico, Athanase by be Papadopoulos. another would Athanase one We friend to cele- approximately lifelong birthday. introduced life, volume mon enthusiastically his 80th this of mine, his quarter in of of one participate third roughly occasion to for the friends honor been on an have A’Campo and and Norbert pleasure brating a is It e od n phrases. and words Key 2010 Date hnst hbutDmu n grFeklfrhlflcomments helpful for Frenkel Igor and Damour Thibault to Thanks UE YEBLCLWO OIE:SAME COSINES: OF LAW HYPERBOLIC SUPER ac 9 2021. 19, March : ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics h as rdc fqartcforms. quadratic o ele of analogue of product prospective su- Gauss a aspects the to parallel describe leading common two theory, briefly unique supernumber that we mentary a show and admit to supergeodesic, ultraparallel not results orthogonal clas are these the which to apply pergeodesics analogy we further case, In sical corrections. includ involving which fermionic remarkably functions, substantial but trigonometric the case, for classical expressions the different the find to and formulae supergeometry Minkowski identical using plane hyperbolic per Abstract. OML IHDFEETCONTENT DIFFERENT WITH FORMULA edrv h aso oie n ie ntesu- the in Sines and Cosines of Laws the derive We ue yeblclwo oie,Sprhproi ge- hyperbolic Super cosines, of law hyperbolic Super OETPENNER ROBERT Introduction 1 rmr 70,Scnay30F35. Secondary 57M05, Primary n likewise and athematics. e - - f in d one nd, gs er l- e - - 2 ROBERT PENNER

In a more mathematical rendition, Athanase paraphrases the great Lobachevsky as follows: In order to understand a geometry, both locally and globally, it is enough to understand its triangles. This informs the basic purview of my birthday present here to Norbert, to answer the question: What are the Laws of Cosines and Sines for triangles in hyperbolic superspace? In order to explain, let K K 0 K 1 be the Z/2-graded algebra over the field K R or C˚ with“ ˚ oner sb central˚r s generator 1 K K 0 of degree zero and“ countably infinitely many anti-commutingP Ď generato˚r s rs in K 1 of degree one. a# is called the body of the supernumber a K , and ˚ariss said to be even or odd, respectively, if it lies in K 0 or KP 1˚. ˚r s ˚r s One can define Riemannian supermanifolds and super Riemann surfaces in the natural way modeled on affine spaces constructed from K , as in [2] and see also [10] in general, and as in [1, 9, 12] for Rie- mann˚ surfaces in particular. This is discussed in the next section in detail sufficient for our purposes here. While no particular mathematical justification for such formalism is necessary, for one can study a flower simply for its own reward especially according to the A’Campo way, it is worth pointing out that supermanifolds are part and parcel of the Standard Model of high energy physics, roughly with odd variables corresponding to the fermions comprising matter, and even variables to the bosons formalizing interactions between them. A fundamental example from physics is the super upper half plane [1]

1 1 1 U z, θ C | : Im z z z¯ 0 , ˚ “ tp q P “ 2p ´ qą u where the overline denotes complex conjugation, with its supermetric 1 1 ds Im z θθ¯ ´ dz θdθ invariant under the action “p ` 2 q | ` | az b γz δ z ` θ ` ÞÑ cz d ` cz d 2 ` p ` q γz d θ 1 1 δγ θ ` p ` 2 q ÞÑ cz d ` cz d ` ` of the so-called M¨obius supergroup SPL 2, R , where a,b,c,d are even satisfying ad bc 1, and γ, δ are odd.p In particular,q elements of the M¨obius supergroup´ “ have three even and two odd degrees of freedom. SUPERHYPERBOLICLAWOFCOSINES 3

The body of SPL 2, R ý U is evidently the classical action of the Möbius group onp the standardq ˚ upper half plane model for the hyperbolic plane, with its superabsolute the “one-superpoint compactifica- 1 1 1 1 tion” S | of the real superaxis R | , but this is not the model for the action of orientation-preserving isometries of the super hyperbolic plane that we shall adopt here. Rather, we shall work with the orthosymplectic group OSp 1 2 SPL 2, R [4], recalled in §2, acting on super p 2|,1 q«2 p q Minkowski space R | , and in particular on its upper sheet IH of the unit hyperboloid of two sheets, as explained in §1, which gives our equivariantly isometric model OSp 1 2 ý IH for SPL 2, R ý U . p | q p q ˚ 2,1 1 2,1 The body of OSp 1 2 ý R | is the usual action SO 2, 1 ý R on Minkowski 3-space,p | withq its quadratic form z2 x2 y`2pin theq standard coordinates, under the component SO 2, 1 of´ the´ identity in SO 2, 1 . Classically, the upper sheet of the hyperboloid`p q of two sheets inheritp sq a Riemannian metric from the ambient quadratic form, giving a model for the hyperbolic plane. Moreover, the unit hyperboloid of one sheet parametrizes the oriented hyperbolic geodesics, and the open positive light-cone of isotropic vectors at positive height parametrizes the space of all horocycles; cf. [8]. There are analogously defined respective conics H and L` in Minkowski superspace. There are numerous reasons for working in the super Minkowski model. First of all, hyperbolic supergeometry is the same but different from the usual hyperbolic geometry, and some of these differences are more readily manifest in the Minkowski model. As is well-known [5] and clear in either model, orientation-preserving isometries do not act transitively on triples of ideal points, and orbits of such triples have a single odd modulus, which is the genesis of the odd coordinates on super Te- ichmüller space [9], whose analysis is based on the Minkowski model and follows the general approach of decorated Teichmüller theory [8]. A less well-known difference, again from [9], is that OSp 1 2 does not act transitively on the super positive light-cone; therep is| q again one odd modulus, and the OSp 1 2 -orbit corresponding to the vanishing p | q of this modulus is the so-called special light-cone L0 L` of [9]. It is Ď the action OSp 1 2 ý L0 whose body captures the usual action of the Möbius supergroupp | q on the hyperbolic absolute in the sense that there is an equivariant map from the former to the superabsolute, as for the bodies in the classical case. One of the most stark differences is that not every supergeodesic ray in U is asymptotic to a point in the superabsolute! In fact, super- ˚ geodesic rays in IH are always asymptotic to a ray in L`, but in U are ˚ 4 ROBERT PENNER only asymptotic to a point in the superabsolute if the corresponding supergeodesic ray in IH is asymptotic to a ray in the super positive light-cone L` that happens to lie in the special light-cone L0. It is still true, however, that two distinct points in the superabsolute determine a unique so-called special supergeodesic which is asymptotic to them, but supergeodesics are generically not special. The assertions of this paragraph can be derived from results in [9] together with those of this paper, but these matters, together with the further fact that special supergeodesics are precisely those that are dual to points in the super hyperboloid H of one sheet, will be taken up elsewhere.

Having thus sketched some of the ways in which classical intuition can be misleading in hyperbolic supergeometry, we turn finally to the scope of this paper. The first basic question that has motivated this work is what relations hold between the angles and pairwise distances for a triple of non-collinar points in IH. Of course, the preliminary issues of what are the natures of collinearity, studied in §4, angles and distances in hyperbolic superspace must be addressed first. The answer in §5, in a sense disappointing, is that the exact same formulae for the classical hyperbolic Laws of Cosines and Sines hold in hyperbolic superspace.

However, the possible disappointment fades upon realizing that the cosine and sine of an angle in hyperbolic superspace are wildly diﬀer- ent from their classical counterparts, as proved in §6, with substantial odd contributions, called fermionic corrections as motivated by physics. Thus, the same formulae relate wildly diﬀerent quantities, and this is quite remarkable.

These formulae are our main takeaways, but we also employ these results in §6 to include another super analogue of a classical result: two parallel supergeodesics which are not ultraparallel, in the sense that they do not share asymptotes in L`, admit a unique common orthogonal supergeodesic. Moreover along the way in §3, we brieﬂy consider elementary supernumber theory, and in particular an abelian group structure analogous to the Gauss groups of quadratic forms.

The reader may correctly gather that the results of this paper are just a beginning, one flower in the field of supergeometry, hyperbolic and otherwise. It is finally worth mentioning that much of this paper applies to supergeodesics and supertriangles in hyperbolic superspace of arbitrary dimension. SUPERHYPERBOLICLAWOFCOSINES 5

1. Super Minkowski space and its conics Let K K 0 K 1 be the Z/2-graded module over the field K R or C ˚with“ one˚r sb central˚r s generator 1 K K 0 of degree zero“ and P Ď ˚r s countably infinitely many anti-commuting generators e1, e2,... K 1 of degree one, so that an arbitrary a K can be written uniquelyP ˚ asr s P ˚ a a# aiei aijeiej aijkeiejek , “ ` i ` i j `` i j k ¨ ¨ ¨ ÿ ÿă ăÿă where a#, ai, aij, aijk ... K. a# is called the body of the supernumber a K . One allowsP only finitely many anti-commuting factors in any productP ˚ and only finitely many summands in any supernumber, a constraint we shall call regularity. (The reason for taking infinitely many anti-commuting variables is that in the full theory one wants the graded version d fg df g f dg of the usual Leibnitz rule to hold, and this would bep confoundedq“p q ´ byp takingq f to be the finite product of all the anti-communting variables and g to be any of them.)

Regularity implies that a a# is always nilpotent, i.e., for each a K , ´ n P ˚ there is some n Z 0 with a a# 0. It follows that if a# 0, then we may writeP ě p ´ q “ ‰ 1 1 1 1 a a# a “ a# a a# “ a# 1 ´ `p ´ q ` a# 2 n 1 1 a a# a a# a a# ´ 1 ´ ´ ´ , “ a# ´ a# ` a# ´¨¨¨˘ a# „ ˆ ˙ ˆ ˙  and hence a K is invertible if and only if a# 0. It similarly follows from regularityP ˚ that the zero divisors in K ‰are given by the ideal generated by K 1 . ˚ ˚r s One analogously extends real-analytic functions on K to K with Taylor series under appropriate restrictions on the body. For instance˚ for later application, we have the elementary Lemma 1.1. Suppose that λ3 0. If a has nonzero body, then “ 1 1 λ λ2 , a λ “ a ´ a ´ a2 ` and if a has positive body, then 1 λ 1 λ2 ?a λ ?a 1 . ` “ ` 2 a ´ 8 a2 ˆ ˙ If a K 0 , then it is said to be an even supernumber or boson, while if a P K˚r1s, then it is said to be an odd supernumber or fermion. An P ˚r s 6 ROBERT PENNER order relation on K induces one on a, b K , where a b if and only ď P ˚ ď if a# b#. ď Affine K superspace is defined to be n m n m K | x1, x2,...,xn θ1, θ2,...,θm K ` : xi K 0 , θj K 1 . “ tp | q P ˚ P ˚r s P ˚r su One can define n m supermanifolds with charts based on affine super- n m | space K | in the usual way, and a (Riemannian) supermetric on an n m supermanifold is defined to be a positive definite boson-valued | n m quadratic form on each tangent space K | as usual. n m A tuple of points xi K | is said to be linearly independent (in the P super sense) if there is no relation 0 i aixi where all the ai K “ P ˚ have non-zero body. In particular for n 2, x1 and x2 are said to be ř“ parallel if there is some a K with non-zero body so that x1 ax2. P ˚ “ The principal example for us here is (real) super Minkowski 2,1 2 space | 2,1 2 5 R | x1, x2,y φ, ψ R : x1, x2,y R 0 and φ, ψ R 1 , “ tp | q P ˚ P r s P r su which supports the boson-valued symmetric bilinear pairing 1 x1, x2,y φ, ψ , x1 , x1 ,y1 φ1, ψ1 x1x1 x1 x2 yy1 φψ1 φ1ψ xp | q p 1 2 | qy “ 2p 2 ` 1 q´ ` ` 2 with associated quadratic form x1x2 y 2φψ. ´ ` 2,1 2 The body of R | with this inner product is evidently the classical Minkowski space R2,1 with its (negative) definite restriction to 2,1 IH1 x x1, x2,y R : x, x 1 and x1 x2 0 “ t “p q P x y“ ` ą u providing a model of the hyperbolic plane, and we analogously define the super hyperbolic plane to be 2,1 2 IH x x1, x2,y φ, ψ R | : x, x 1 and x1 x2 0 IH1 “ t “p | q P x y“ ` ą uĚ with its metric likewise induced from the inner product. Continuing by analogy, let 2,1 H1 h R : h, h 1 “ t P x y“´ u denote the hyperboloid of one sheet and 2,1 2 H h R | : h, h 1 H1 “ t P x y“´ uĚ its super analogue. Let L denote the collection of isotropic vectors in R2,1 with

L` u u1,u2, v L : u1 u2 0 “ t “p q P ` ą u SUPERHYPERBOLICLAWOFCOSINES 7 the (open) positive light cone (whose points are aﬃne duals to horocycles in IH1, as in [8]), and let L denote the collection of isotropic vectors 2,1 2 in R | with

L` u u1,u2, v ξ, η L : u1 u2 0 . “ t “p | q P ` ą u Though we shall not require it here, the special light-cone discussed in the Introduction is deﬁned by

L0 u u1,u2, v φ, ψ L` : u1ψ vφ ; “ t “p | q P “ u note the equivalence of the conditions u1ψ vφ and u2φ vψ on L. “ “

2. The orthosymplectic group OSp(1 2) | Here we provide basic information concerning the orthosymplectic group, which is the simplest Lie supergroup, whose body is the classical special linear group SL 2, R . We refer the interested reader to [4, 5] for further details aboutp generalq Lie superalgebras and supergroups and to [9] for details about OSp(1 2) SPL(2,R). | « Given a Lie algebra g, consider the Lie superalgebra g S S g for some Grassmann algebra S with its decomposition Sp q“S 0 b S 1 into even and odd elements. It follows that g S is both“ ar rights‘ andr s s T p q left S-module, i.e., s T 1 | || | 1 T s 1 if s S and T g are homogeneous elementsb “ p´ ofq respectivep b degreesqp b q s andP T . ThisP provides a representation of the corresponding Lie superalgebra| | | | g S m n m n p q in the space S R | from a given representation of g in R | , and then a representationb of the corresponding Lie supergroup G S by m n p q exponentiating pure even elements from g S in S R | . p q b In particular to be entirely explicit about the signs when writing a super matrix representing the action of SL 2, R S or sl2 S as elements of m n m n p qp q p q S End R | on S R | , the product of two supermatrices from OSp(1b 2)p is givenq by1 ˆ |

a1 b1 α1 a2 b2 α2 a1a2 b1c2 α1γ2 a1b2 b1d2 α1δ2 a1α2 b1β2 α1f2 ` ´ ` ´ ` ` c1 d1 β1 c2 d2 β2 c1a2 d1c2 β1γ2 c1b2 d1d2 β1δ2 c1α2 d1β2 β1f2 . ` ´ ` ´ ` ` γ1 δ1 f1 γ2 δ2 f2 “ γ1a2 δ1c2 δ1γ2 γ1b2 δ1d2 f1δ2 γ1α2 δ1β2 f1f2 ˆ ˙ˆ ˙ ˆ ` ` ` ` ´ ´ ` ˙ 1The usual (super)matrix multiplication (without the minus signs above) is re- covered upon replacing the odd entries in the third row by their negatives. This diﬀerence in sign arises from the fact that one typically considers the action of m n group elements on Sr0s ˆ Sr1s , which can be identiﬁed with the space of even elements in S b Rm|n, and the extra minus sign comes from that isomorphism. 8 ROBERT PENNER

a b α The superdeterminant or Berezinian of g c dβ OSp 1 2 is given “ γδf P p | q by ´ ¯ 1 a b 1 αγ αδ sdet g f ´ det f ´ “ c d ` βγ βδ „ˆ ˙ ˆ ˙ provided f is invertible. The analogue of the classical determinant, the Berezinian [4, 5, 10] is characterized by being a multiplicative homo- morphism satisfying sdet exp g = exp a d f , i.e., the exponential of the supertrace of g, but unlike thep classical` ´ determinant,q it is only deﬁned for invertible supermatrices. The supergroup OSp 1 2 can be faithfully realized as 2 1 2 1 supermatrices g withp sdet| q equal to unity obeying the relationp | qˆp | q gstJg J, “ where 01 0 J 10 0 “ ¨ ´0 0 1 ˛ ´ and where the supertranspose˝ gst of g is given‚ by a b α a cγ g c d β implies gst b d δ . “ ¨ γ δ f ˛ “ ¨ α β f ˛ ´ ´ This provides˝ a simple‚ formula ˝ ‚ d b δ 1 1 st ´ g´ J ´ g J c a γ “ “ ¨ ´β α´ f ˛ ´ for inversion in OSp 1 2 as well as˝ leading to the system‚ p | q α bγ aδ, β dγ cδ, f 1 αβ, “ ´ “ ´ 1 “ ` γ aβ cα, δ bβ dα, f ´ ad bc “ ´ “ ´ “ ´ of constraints on the entries of g, which, together with the demand that sdet g 1, completely characterize elements of OSp(1 2). “ | There is a canonical inclusion SL 2, R OSp 1 2 , which extends to p a bq ă a bp0 | q SL 2, R 0 OSp 1 2 , given by c d c d 0 . It is worth empha- p ˚r sq ă p | q p q ÞÑ p 0 0 1 q sizing that it is not the M¨obius group, but rather the full special linear group that appears here, so that a suitable representation of a Fuchsian group into OSp 1 2 provides, upon taking the body, a representation in SL 2, R , or equivalentlyp | q a spin structure on the underlying Riemann surface,p cf.q [6, 9]. SUPERHYPERBOLICLAWOFCOSINES 9

It is not diﬃcult to prove the following useful Lemma 2.1. Any element of OSp(1 2) can be written uniquely in the form |

a b 0 1 αβ 0 α 1 αβ 0 aα bβ a b 0 ´ 2 ´ 2 ` c d 0 0 1 αβ β 0 1 αβ cα dβ c d 0 , ´ 2 ´ 2 ` ¨ ˛ ˜ β α 1 αβ ¸ “ ˜ β α 1 αβ ¸ ¨ ˛ 0 0 1 ´ ` ´ ` 0 0 1 for˝ appropriate‚ fermions α, β and bosons a,b,c,d with ad˝ bc ‚1. ´ “ As a point of notation for later utility, for any two fermions α, β, let

1 αβ 0 α ´ 2 u α, β 0 1 αβ β OSp 1 2 . ´ 2 p q“ ˜ β α 1 αβ ¸ P p | q ´ `

3. Hyperbolic supergeometry and supernumber theory Minowski three space R2,1 R3, as the space of binary quadratic forms or binary symmetric bilinear« forms, is naturally coordinatized by

z x y x1 y 2 1 A ` R | , “ y z x “ y x2 P ˆ ´ ˙ ˆ ˙ u 2 2 where the quadratic form is u, v u v A v x1u 2yuv x2v , and g SO 1, 2 acts via isometryp q ÞÑ on p Aq Rp 2,q“1 as change` of basis` via the adjointP `p q P g : A gtAg. ÞÑ This action of SO 1, 2 PSL 2, R as the group of isometries of the `p q« p q hyperbolic plane IH1 is a fundamental link between hyperbolic geometry and elementary number theory. 2,1 2 3 2 Likewise, R | R | , as a space of quadratic superforms, is naturally coordinatized by«

x1 y φ 2,1 2 A y x2 ψ R | , “ ¨ φ ψ 0˛ P ´ ´ ˝ ‚ u 2 2 where u,v,θ u,v, θ A v x1u 2yuv x2v takes the same p q ÞÑ p ´ q θ “ ` ` values as before but with u,´ v ¯arbitrary bosons, and g OSp 1 2 acts on A as change of basis again via the adjoint P p | q g : A gstAg. ÞÑ 10 ROBERT PENNER

One checks using Lemma 2.1 that this action is again isometric and hence restricts to an action on IH itself. In fact according to Theorem 1.2 of [9], the mapping i y iφψ ψ z ´ ´ and θ 1 iy iφ “ x2 “ x2 p ` q´ establishes an equivariant isometry IH U which conjugates the action OSp 1 2 ý IH to the action SPL(2,ÑR) ˚ ý U , just as in the classical case [8]. p | q ˚ The body of this action of OSp 1 2 on IH is the classical action of orientation-preserving isometriesp on| theq hyperbolic plane, and this ex- tension is our analogous action of this Lie supergroup on the super hyperbolic plane. This is the main point of this section, the rest of which can be skipped for the sequel. Before turning attention to hyperbolic supergeometry, let us take a moment to ponder elementary supernumber theory. Consider the ring Z , defined as in the first sentence of Section 1 for the ring K Z rather˚ than for a field. Take the usual definition of divisibility, which“ is complicated by the plethora of divisors of unity and zero in Z , in order to define the least common multiple and greatest common˚ divisor. These must constitute subsets rather than elements of Z , since the ordering on Z induced from Z is not even a partial ordering,˚ let alone a linear ordering.˚ Two supernumbers are relatively prime if their only common divisors are divisors of unity. a b 2 As above, g SL 2, Z acts by change of basis on b 2 {c , whose P p q { corresponding quadratic form ax2 bxy cy2 is called´ primitive¯ provided a, b, c are pairwise relatively` prime.` This action evidently leaves invariant the discriminant D b2 4ac and turns out also to preserve primitivity. Gauss defined an“ abelian´ product on the finite collection G D of SL 2, Z -orbits of primitive forms of discriminant D, which is p q p q essentially the ideal class group of Q ?D . In fact, the Gauss product extends to an abelian semigroup structurep q on G D , where the union is over all discriminants with common square-freeY p kernel,q a condition interpreted geometrically in [7]. It is natural to wonder whether these considerations might extend to supernumbers and supergeometry. The sub supergroup OSp 1 2, Z OSp 1 2 whose entries lie in Z acts as above by change ofp | basis˚qă on ap b |2 φq ˚ b 2 {c ψ , where a, b, c Z 0 are pairwise relatively prime and φ{ ψ 0 P ˚r s ˆ ´ ˙ φ, ψ Z 1 , and it leaves invariant the discriminant D b2 4ac 8φψ, P ˚r s “ ´ ` SUPER HYPERBOLIC LAW OF COSINES 11 which differs from the bosonic case even though the quadratic forms agree. It is natural to conjecture that there is an abelian semigroup structure on the analogously defined G D with geometric underpin- nings similar to [7]. Y p q This putative super version of the Gauss product might be uninterest- ing, or it might shed light on ideal class numbers. In any case, the idea of studying supernumber theory seems to warrant further thought.

4. Supergeodesics To begin, we recall from [3] that hyperbolic supergeodesics have the same general parametric form as relativistic geodesics. Theorem 4.1 (Theorem 1.2 of [3]). Geodesics on the super hyperboloid of two sheets are described by the equation x u cosh t v sinh t, “ ` where u IH, v H and u, v 0. The asymptotes of the corre- spondingP supergeodesicP are givenx y by “ the rays containing the vectors

e u v, f u v L` “ ` “ ´ P Conversely, points e, f L` with e, f 2 uniquely define a geodesic, where e, f give rise to uP 1 e fx IHy“and v 1 e f H. “ 2 p ` q P “ 2 p ´ q P Proof. The result follows directly from the variational principle applied to the functional x9 , x9 λ x, x 1 dt, |x y| ` px y´ q ż where the dot stands´ fora the derivative with respect¯ to the parameter t along the curve, with corresponding Euler-Lagrange equations x: 2λx, x, x 1 “ x y“ with t is chosen so that x9 , x9 1. Differentiating two times the second equation and combining|x y| with “ the first equation we find the expression x9 , x9 λ x y. “´ 2 One shows that the λ 1 2 solution can be ruled out, and in the case of λ 1 2, it is expressed“ ´ { in terms of hyperbolic functions “ { x u cosh t v sinh t. “ ` Applying the conditions x9 , x9 x, x 1, we find that u, v satisfy the conditions of the theorem.´x y“x y“ 12 ROBERT PENNER

For any u IH and v H with u, v 0, we shall let P P x y“ Lu,v cosh t u sinh t v : t R “ t ` P u denote the supergeodesic determined in accordance with Theorem 4.1.

Remark 4.2. The relationship between the bodies u IH1, v H1 in P P the classical case and the usual dual h H1 to the geodesic is as follows. The vectors e u v, f u v determineP d R2,1 so that d, d 0 and d, e d“, f ` 2. This“ ´ follows directly fromP considerationsx ofy“ the signaturex y“x of the restrictiony“ of the inner product to the subspace spanned by e, f, and indeed there are two such choices for d with d, e, f providing 3 0 a basis for R | , one on either side of the hyperplane determined by e 1 and f. One easily computes that h 2´ 2 e f d H1 in this basis, so that h, u h, v 0. In effect,“ thep geodesic` ´ whichq P is the dual of x y“x y“ h H1 is the geodesic which is perpendicular to the dual of v H1 that P P contains u IH1. This h is especially significant in the classical setting P since given two geodesics L, L1 with respective h, h1 H1, their square 2 P inner product h, h1 has geometric significance; see §6 for details and for contrast withx they super case.

Corollary 4.3. For any two points x1, x2 IH, there is a unique super- P geodesic between them, and the distance d x1, x2 between them satisﬁes p q cosh d x1, x2 x1, x2 . p q“x y Proof. The system of equations

x1 cosh p u1 sinh p u2, “ ` x2 cosh q u1 sinh q u2 “ ` is tantamount to the linear system A B x x 1 1 , CD x2 “ x2 ˆ ˙ ˆ ˙ ˆ ˙ where A, B, C, D are the 5-by-5 diagonal matrices with respective diagonal entries cosh p, sinh p, cosh q, sinh q, which is readily solved. The two conditions u1, u2 H are equivalent to P 2 2 cosh p cosh q 2 x1, x2 cosh p cosh q ` ´ x y 2 2 sinh p sinh q 2 x1, x2 cosh p cosh q “ ` ´ x y cosh p sinh q 5 cosh p sinh q 5 2. “ ´rp q ´p q s The ﬁrst equality gives cosh p q x1, x2 , proving the claim re- garding distance, and togetherp ´ withq“x the secondy equality provides the asserted unique solution. SUPER HYPERBOLIC LAW OF COSINES 13

Corollary 4.4. Let L Lu,v and set e u v, f u v L`. Then we have “ “ ` “ ´ P L P H : P, e P, f 1 , “ t P x y x y “ u 1 xe yf : x, y 0 . “ 2?xy p ` q ą " * Proof. For the inclusion of L in the ﬁrst equality, write P cosh p u sinh p v , “ ` so that P, u v cosh p sinh p, so x ˘ y“ ¯ P, e P, f cosh2p sinh2p 1. x y x y“ ´ “ For the reverse inclusion, suppose that 1 P, e P, f “x y x y P, u 2 P, v 2 “x y ´x y and deﬁne Q P, u u P, v v, whence “x y ´x y Q, Q P, u u P, v v , P, u u P, v v x y“ x y ´x y x y ´x y B F P, u 2 P, v 2 “x y ´x y 1, “ so Q IH. Moreover by the previous corollary, the cosh of the distance betweenP P and Q is given by

P, Q P, P, u u P, v v x y“ x y ´x y B F P, u 2 P, v 2, “x y ´x y so the distance between P and Q is zero, whence P Q, proving the ﬁrst identity. “

For the second equality, suppose Q xe yf, for x, y 0, so “ ` ą Q, e Q, f 4xy Q, Q x y x y “ “x y 1 since e, f 2. The ﬁrst equality shows that Q Lu,v and the x y “ 2?xy P second that 1 Q IH as required. 2?xy P The signiﬁcant computational importance of this result is that a supergeodesic is the projectivization to lie in IH of the convex linear span of vectors lying in its asymptotes in L`. 14 ROBERT PENNER

Proposition 4.5. Let ei, fi L` with ei, fi 2 and deﬁne P x y“ ei fi ei fi ui ` , vi ´ , for i 1, 2. “ 2 “ 2 “

Then Lu ,v Lu ,v as oriented supergeodesics if and only if e1,e2 (and 1 1 “ 2 2 f1,f2, respectively) are proportional. Moreover in this case e2 ln a e1, 1 “ for a 1, implies f2 f1, and ě “ ln a cosh p u1 sinh p v1 cosh p a u2 sinh p a v2, for all s. ` “ p ´ q ` p ´ q

In other words, scaling u v and u v by reciprocal amounts merely ` ´ shifts the origin of the parametrization of Lu,v, and interchanging them reverses the orientation. We shall refer to the point u Lu,v arising from vanishing parameter as the origin of the parametrization,P so u, v determines not only the line but also an origin within it.

Proof. In case Lu1,v1 Lu2,v2 , the claimed proportionality follows easily from the second part“ of the previous result. For the converse with b ln a, e2 be1 and f2 cf1 implies “ “ “

2 e2, f2 be1,cf1 2bc, “x y“x y“ whence bc 1. Thus, we ﬁnd “ b b´1 b b´1 u2 ` u1 ´ v1 cosh a u1 sinh a v1, “ 2 ` 2 “ ` b b´1 b b´1 v2 ´ u1 ` v1 sinh a u1 cosh a v1, “ 2 ` 2 “ ` and so

cosh p u1 sinh p v1 cosh q cosh a u1 sinh a v1 ` “ r ` s sinh q sinh a u1 cosh a v1 ` r ` s follows from cosh p cosh a cosh q sinh a sinh q cosh a q , “ ` “ p ` q sinh p sinh a cosh q cosh a sinh q sinh a q , “ ` “ p ` q upon taking respective inner products with u1, v1, whence cosh p sinh p cosh a q sinh a q sinh 2p p ` q p ` q sinh 2 a q , “ 2 “ 2 “ p ` q and so p a q. “ ` SUPER HYPERBOLIC LAW OF COSINES 15

5. Law of Cosines It follows from Corollary 4.3 that any three points of IH not lying on a common supergeodesic determine a supertriangle, namely, three geodesic segments with disjoint interiors meeting pairwise at the given points. We adopt the usual terminology of sides and opposite angles from their bodies, and have Corollary 5.1. The usual hyperbolic laws of cosines and sines hold for supertriangles, that is given a supertriangle with sides of edge lengths A,B,C and opposite angles a, b, c, then we have cosh A cosh B cosh C sinh B sinh C cos a, “ ´ cos a cos b cos c sin b sin c cosh A, “´ ` sin a sin b sin c . sinh A “ sinh B “ sinh C Proof. According to Theorem 4.1, the supergeodesic from X IH to Y IH may be parametrized P P Y X X, Y X cosh t ´ x y sinh t, for t R, ` X, Y 2 1 P x y ´ where the unit tangent vectora at X to the line from X to Y is given Y X X,Y by ´ x y . Letting X denote the vertex opposite the side of length ? X,Y 2 1 x y ´ X, for X A,B,C and taking the inner product of the unit tangent vectors at“A to the supergeodesics through A and B, C thus gives B A A, B C A A, C cos a ´ x y, ´ x y , “ A, B 2 1 A, C 2 1 B x y ´ x y ´ F and so a a cos a sinh B sinh C B, C A, B cosh B A, C cosh C “x y´x y ´x y A, A cosh B cosh C `x y cosh A cosh C cosh B cosh B cosh C “ ´ ´ cosh B cosh C ` cosh A cosh B cosh C, “ ´ proving the ﬁrst identity. It is a well-known and easy exercise to derive the second and third identities purely algebraically from this using just cos2x sin2x 1 cosh2X sinh2X. ` “ “ ´ Corollary 5.2. Given a supergeodesic L and a point P L, there R exists a unique supergeodesic L1 through P perpendicular to L. 16 ROBERT PENNER

Proof. Suppose that L Lu,v, and let d d p 0 denote the distance from P to the point cosh“ p u sinh p v“ pL.qą According to Corollary 4.3, we have ` P cosh d P, cosh p u sinh p v “x ` y cosh p P, u sinh p P, u . “ x y` x y The unique critical point d cosh d 0 occurs for dp “ P, u tanh p x y, “´ P, v 2 x y which is a minimum since d cosh d cosh d 0. Uniqueness follows dp2 “ ą from convexity of cosh for positive argument, and the Law of Cosines easily implies that this minimizer is perpendicular to L. The point u p v P, u cosh p u sinh p v ` , for tanh p x y ` “ p2 1 “´ P, v ` x y P, v u P, u v xa y ´ x y “ P, u 2 P, v 2 x y `x y is the orthogonal projection of Paon Lu,v.

6. Pairs of supergeodesics We begin with a technical lemma. Lemma 6.1. Assume that a1d b1e c1f 0, 0, 0 α1, β1 a2d b2e c2f 0, 0, 0 α2, β2 , ` ` `p | q“ ` ` `p | q where d , , 0, 0 , e , , φ, 0 , f , , 0, ψ L “ p˚ ˚ ˚ | q “ p˚ ˚ ˚ | q “ p˚ ˚ ˚ | q P with d, e e, f f, d 2. Then a1 a2, b1 b2,c1 c2 and x y“x y“x y “ “ “ “ α1 α2, β1 β2. “ “ Proof. The respective inner products of the assumed equality with d, e, a2 a2 0 0 1 1 f yield M b2 M b2 φ β1 β2 , where M 1 0 1 , so that c c p ´ q 2 “ 2 ` α1 α2 ψ “ 1 1 0 ´ ¯ ´ ¯ ˆ p ´ q ˙ ´ ¯ a2 a1 1 1 1 0 1 ´ b2 b1 1 1 1 φ β1 β2 ¨ ˛ “ ¨ ˛ ` 2 ¨ ´ ˛ ¨ p ´ q˛ c2 c1 1 1 1 α1 α2 ψ ´ p ´ q and with ˝0, 0‚, 0 φ,˝0 ‚and 0˝, 0, 0 0, ψ yield‚˝ ‚ p | q p | q α1 α2 ψ b2 b1 φψ, p ´ q “p ´ q φ β1 β2 c2 c1 φψ. p ´ q“p ´ q SUPER HYPERBOLIC LAW OF COSINES 17

It follows that 1 a2 a1 b2 b1 c2 c1 φψ, “ ` 2rp ´ q`p ´ qs 1 b2 b1 b2 b1 c2 c1 φψ, ´ “ 2rp ´ q´p ´ qs 1 c2 c1 c2 c1 b2 b1 φψ, ´ “ 2rp ´ q´p ´ qs whence a1 a2, and likewise for b1 b2, c1 c2, from which it ﬁnally “ “ “ follows that α1 α2, β1 β2. “ “ Theorem 6.2. Consider the supergeodesic L Lu,v determined by “ φ ψ u , , , IH, “ p˚ ˚ ˚ | 2 ` 2 q P φ ψ v , , , H . “ p˚ ˚ ˚ | 2 ´ 2 q P Let

e u v , , φ, 0 , f u v , , 0, ψ L`, “ ` “ p˚ ˚ ˚ | q “ ´ “ p˚ ˚ ˚ | q P and choose

d , , 0, 0 L`, so that d, e e, f f, e 2. “ p˚ ˚ ˚ | q P x y“x y“x y“ Suppose that L1 Lu1,v1 is another supergeodesic and write “ u1 ad be cf 0, 0, 0 2α, 2β , “ ` ` `p | q v1 xd ye zf 0, 0, 0 2ξ, 2η . “ ` ` `p | q Deﬁne A u, u1 , B v, u1 , “x y “x y C u, v1 ,D v, v1 , “x y “x y and set 2 2 1 αβ 4 φψ I A B 1 2 1 p ` q , “r ´ ´ s ` A2 B2 1 „ ´ ´  2 2 1 ξη 4 φψ J C D 1 2 1 p ` q . “r ´ ` s ` C2 D2 1 „ ´ `  Then L and L1 intersect if and only if the following conditions hold: (6.2.1) C2 D2 1 A2 B2 1 0, ´ ` ě ´ ´ ě (6.2.2) AC BD IJ ηα βξ 4 φψ , ´ ` “p ` qp ` q (6.2.3) 2IJ AC BD J 2 A2 B2 1 I2 C2 D2 1 , ´ p ´ q“ p ´ ´ q` p ´ ` q 18 ROBERT PENNER

(6.2.4) 4 Jα Iξ A B J C D I φ, p ` q“rp ´ q `p ´ q s (6.2.5) 4 Jβ Iη A B J C D I ψ. p ` q“rp ` q `p ` q s Moreover, under these conditions, the unique point of intersection is given by

Ju1 Iv1 AJ CI u BJ DI v L L1 ` 1 p ` q `p 1 ` q . X “ J 2 I2 2 “ J 2 I2 2 r ´ s r ´ s Proof. It follows from the deﬁnitions that A 2a b c αψ φβ, B c b αψ φβ, “ ` ` ` ` “ ´ ´ ` C 2x y z ξψ φη, D z y ξψ φη, “ ` ` ` ` “ ´ ´ ` whence A B A B b a ´ αψ, c a ` φβ, “´ ` 2 ´ “´ ` 2 ´ C D C D y x ´ ξψ, z x ` φη. “´ ` 2 ´ “´ ` 2 ´ Moreover, we have

1 u1, u1 4 ab bc ca 4 bφβ cαψ 2αβ , (1) “ x y“ p ` ` q` p ` ` q 1 v1, v1 4 xy yz zx 4 yφη zξψ 2ξη , (2) ´ “ x y“ p ` ` q` p ` ` q 0 u1, v1 2 a y z b x z c x y (3) “ x y“ r p ` q` p ` q` p ` qs 2 cξψ bφη zαψ yφβ 4 αη ξβ . ` p ` ` ` q` p ` q Now writing eqn (1) in terms of a alone gives the quadratic 0 4a2 4a αψ φβ A2 B2 1 4αβ 2 φψ , “´ ´ p ` q`r ´ ´ ` p ` qs from which it follows that 1 a αψ φβ I , “´2p ` ˘ q where I is defined in the statement of the theorem. The analogous computation using eqn (2) gives 1 x ξψ φη J , “´2p ` ˘ q yielding first of all the two constraints A2 B2 1 0 C2 D2 1 which form part of condition (6.2.1) in the´ theorem.´ ě Moreover,ď ´ a and` x must have opposite signs in order for L to intersect L1, and the sign of I in a must be positive in order that u1 IH. We therefore find P 1 1 a αψ φβ I and x ξψ φη J . “´2p ` ´ q “´2p ` ` q SUPER HYPERBOLIC LAW OF COSINES 19

Writing eqn (3) in terms of a and x gives AC BD 4 αη ξβ 2φψ αη ξβ ´ ` p ` q` p ` q 4ax 2a φη ξψ 2x αψ φβ , “ ` p ` q` p ` q and ﬁnally plugging in the values of a and x yields condition (6.2.2) of the theorem. Now take the respective inner products of

cosh p u1 sinh p v1 cosh q u sinh q v (4) ` “ ` with d, e, f to get the linear system a x 2cosh q 0 MX b MY y cosh q sinh q 2 φβ cosh p φη sinh p , ¨c˛` ¨z˛ “ ¨cosh q ´ sinh q˛´ ¨αψ cosh p ` ξψ sinh p˛ ` ` where˝X‚and Y ˝are‚ 3-by-3˝ diagonal matrices‚ with˝ respective diagonal‚ entries cosh s and sinh s with 0 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 ´ M 2 0 2 so that M ´ 1 1 1 . “ ¨2 2 0˛ “ 4 ¨ 1´ 1 1˛ ´ It follows that˝ ‚ ˝ ‚ 2 acosh p xsinh p αψ φβ cosh p ξψ φη sinh p, (5) p ` q “ p ` q `p ` q 2 bcosh p ysinh p φβ αψ cosh p φη ξψ sinh p p ` q “ p ´ q `p ´ q cosh q sinh q, (6) ` ` 2 ccosh p zsinh p αψ φβ cosh p ξψ φη sinh p p ` q “ p ´ q `p ´ q cosh q sinh q. (7) ` ´ Eqn (5) gives sinh p I tanh p , “ cosh p “ J whence J I cosh p 1 and sinh p 1 , “ J 2 I2 2 “ J 2 I2 2 r ´ s r ´ s taking the parameter p 0. Eqn (5) therefore furthermore implies the inequality C2 D2 1ě A2 B2 1, thus completing the proof of necessity of condition´ ` (6.2ě.1) of´ the theorem.´ Meanwhile, the sum of eqn (6) and eqn (7) provides cosh q b c cosh p y z sinh p “p ` q `p ` q A I cosh p C J sinh p, “p ´ q `p ` q 20 ROBERT PENNER while their difference yields sinh q b c αψ φβ cosh p y z ξψ φη sinh p “r ´ `p ´ qs `r ´ `p ´ qs Bcosh p Dsinh p. “´ ´ Computation shows that the constraint 1 cosh2 q sinh2 q is equivalent to condition (6.2.3) of the theorem. “ ´ The final two fermionic constraints (6.2.4) and (6.2.5) arise by equat- ing the last two coordinate entries of eqn (4). The stated necessary conditions are clearly sufficient, and the formula for L L1 then follows immediately from eqn (4). X

Remark 6.3. For any e, f L` with e, f 2, it is an easy matter to ﬁnd g OSp 1 2 so thatP g.e and g.xf satisfyy “ the conditions of the P p | q previous theorem. Indeed for e x1, x2,y ξ, η , f u1,u2, v µ, ν , x1ν“pvξ yν u2ξ| q “p | q we may simply take g u ´ , ´ in the generic case that yv x1u2 yv x1u2 “ ´ ´ yv x1u2, which can itself also be easily arranged by explicit pertur- ‰ ` ˘ bation. Since g L L1 g L g L1 , for any two supergeodesics p X q “ p qX p q L, L1 and g OSp 1 2 , the previous result in fact gives conditions and formulae forP intersectionsp | q in the general case.

Corollary 6.4. Consider supergeodesics L Lu,v and L1 Lu1,v1 in the notation of Theorem 4.1 and set X A2 “B2 1,Y C“2 D2 1 “ ´ ´ “ ´ ` with Z Y X 2 AB CD BD AC . If L and L1 intersect at the “ ` ` p ` qp ´ q point P IH, then the cosine of the angle at P from L to L1 is given by P Z 2 4 φψ αβ ξη AB CD ηα βξ p ` q p ` q`p ` qp ` q . Y X Y X Z αβ ξη 16Zαβξη ` pY ´X q Y X 2 ´ ´ „ ` ´ ` p ´ q  More interesting than the particular form of the second summand is Z the substantial fermionic correction to the bosonic term Y X that it represents. This puts into focus the Super Law of Cosines Corollar´ y 5.1, where the familiar purely bosonic formula rather remarkably concisely includes this and other fermionic corrections.

Proof. From the formulae for P L L1 in Theorem 4.1, the cosine of “ X the angle at P from L to L1 is given by

Jv1 Iu1, AJ CI v BJ DI u x ` p ` q `p ` q y J 2 I2 ´ AD BC J 2 I2 2 AB CD IJ p ` qp ` q` p ` q . “ J 2 I2 ´ SUPER HYPERBOLIC LAW OF COSINES 21

Plugging in the constraint IJ BD AC ηα βξ 4 φψ from (6.2.2) gives the asserted formula“ after´ a bit`p of computation` qp ` usingq constraints (6.2.3) and (6.2.4) to conclude that αβξηφψ 0. “

A pair of supergeodesics Li Lu ,v , for i 1, 2, in the bosonic case “ i i “ are determined by a pair ui IH1 and vi H1 with ui, vi 0, or P P x y “ equivalently by a pair hi H, where hi, ui hi, vi 0, and in this case [11] we have P x y“x y“

2 cosh d, if L1 L2 and are not ultraparallel, X “ H 2 where d is the distance between L1 and L2; 1 2 $ h , h 2 x y “ ’cos α, if L1 L2 , &’ X ‰ H where α is the angle between L1 and L2, ’ where two geodesics%’ or two supergeodesics are parallel provided they do not intersect and are furthermore ultraparallel if they share an asymptotic ray in L`.

Moreover in the ﬁrst case that L1 and L2 are parallel and not ultraparallel, then they admit a unique common perpendicular. The sequel is dedicated to the analogue in hyperbolic superspace. Theorem 6.5. Two supegeodesics that are parallel and not ultraparallel admit a unique common perpendicular.

Proof. Denote the two supergeodesics Li Lui,vi , for i 1, 2, and deﬁne “ “ a u1, u2 , b v1, u2 , “x y “x y c u1, v2 , b v1, v2 . “x y “x y First note that the condition u1 v1 u2 v2 that L1 and t ˘ u X t ˘ u “ H L2 are not ultraparallel thus implies positivity of each of the four linear combinations a b c d , a b c d , a b c d , a b c d , p ´ ´ ` q p ´ ` ´ q p ` ´ ´ q p ` ` ` q since the inner product of any two points in L` which lie in diﬀerent 2,1 2 rays from the origin in R | is positive. In particular, the various pairwise sums of these inequalities imply that a max b, c, d , whence a2 max b2,c2,d2 . ą t˘ ˘ ˘ u ą t u

Distinct points uicosh ti visinh ti Li, for i 1, 2, determine a unique supergeodesic L containing` themP according“ to Corollary 4.3, 22 ROBERT PENNER and furthermore the cosh of the length d of the segment between L L1 X and L L2 is given by X cosh d u1cosh p1 v1sinh p1, u2cosh p2 v2sinh p2 “x ` ` y a cosh p1 cosh p2 b sinh p1 cosh p2 “ ` c cosh p1 sinh p2 d sinh p1 sinh p2, ` ` whence cosh d B sinh p1 a cosh p2 c sinh p2 p1 “ t ` u B cosh p1 b cosh p2 d sinh p2 , ` t ` u

cosh d B sinh p2 a cosh p1 b sinh p1 p2 “ t ` u B cosh p2 c cosh p1 d sinh p1 , ` t ` u and it follows that at a critical point

d tanh p2 b tanh p1 ` , ´ “ c tanh p2 a ` (8)

d tanh p1 c tanh p2 ` . ´ “ b tanh p1 a ` Plugging the latter equation into the former gives the quadratic 2 2 2 2 2 0 p ab cd p1 a b c d ab cd “ 1p ´ q` p ` ´ ´ q`p ´ q with discriminant ∆ a2 b2 c2 d2 2 4 ab cd 2 “p ` ´ ´ q ´ p ´ q a b c d a b c d a b c d a b c d “p ´ ´ ` qp ´ ` ´ qp ` ´ ´ qp ` ` ` q 0 ą since each factor is positive, as noted above since L1 and L2 are not ultraparallel. To see that this critical point is in fact a minimizer, we apply the second derivative test for a function of two independent variables. To this end, we have 2cosh d 2cosh d B B cosh d 0, p2 “ p2 “ ą B 1 B 2

2cosh d B sinh p2 b cosh p1 a sinh p1 p1 p2 “ t ` u B B cosh p2 d cosh p1 c sinh p1 , ` t ` u SUPER HYPERBOLIC LAW OF COSINES 23 whence

2cosh d 2cosh d 2cosh d 2 B 2 B 2 B p p ´ p1 p2 ˆ B 1 ˙ˆ B 2 ˙ ˆ B B ˙

cosh p1 a cosh p2 c sinh p2 sinh p1 b cosh p2 d sinh p2 “ p ` q ` p ` q „  2

sinhh p2 b cosh p1 a sinh p1 cosh p2 d cosh p1 c sinh p1 ´ p ` q ` p ` q „ 

cosh p1 a d cosh p2 b c sinh p2 “ pp ` q ` p ` q q „

sinh p1 b c cosh p2 a d sinh p2 ` pp ` q ` p ` q q 

cosh p1 a d cosh p2 b c sinh p2 ˆ pp ´ q ´ p ´ q q „

sinh p1 b c cosh p2 a d sinh p2 ` pp ´ q ´ p ´ q q 

a d cosh p1 p2 b c sinh p1 p2 “ p ` q p ` q`p ` q p ` q „ 

a d cosh p1 p2 b c sinh p1 p2 ˆ p ´ q p ´ q`p ´ q p ´ q „  cosh p1 p2 cosh p1 p2 “ p ` q p ´ q b2 c2 2 a d a d a2 d2 p ´ q b c 2 ´ b c 2 ` ˆ p ´ q` a2 d2 ´p ` q a d ´p ´ q a d „ ´ ` ´  cosh p1 p2 cosh p1 p2 p ` q p ´ q ∆ “ a2 d2 0, ´ ą since ∆ 0 and a2 d2 by the remarks that began this proof, where ą ą b c we have used the equalities (8) to write sinh p1 p2 a˘d cosh p1 p2 . p ˘ q“ ˘ p ˘ q This completes the proof that the critical point is a minimizer, and since cosh d is convex for d 0, this guarantees a unique minimizer. It follows without diﬃculty fromą the Super Law of Cosines Corollary 5.1 that this minimizer is indeed orthogonal to L1 and L2. The proof provides a formula for the distance between the two geodesics, which is omitted and is far more complicated than the the classical 24 ROBERT PENNER

case of two parallel non-ultraparallel geodesics. Just as for the Law of Cosines, the same result encodes substantial fermionic corrections. References [1] L. Crane and J. Rabin, Super Riemann Surfaces: Uniformization and Te- ichmüller theory, Communications in Mathematical Physics 113 (1988), 601–623. 2 [2] B. DeWitt, Supermanifolds, 2nd ed., Cambridge Monographs on Mathe- matical Physics, Cambridge University Press (2011). 2 [3] Y. Huang, R. Penner, A. Zeitlin, Super McShane Identity, preprint (2019); arXiv:1907.09978. 11 [4] V. Kac, Lie superagebras, Advances in Mathematics, 26 (1977), 8–96. 3, 7, 8 [5] Yu. I. Manin, Topics in noncommutative geometry, Princeton University Press, Princeton N.J. (1991). 3, 7, 8 [6] S. M. Natanzon, Moduli of Riemann surfaces, real algebraic curves and their super analogues, Russian Mathematical Surveys 54 (1999), 61–117. 8 [7] R. Penner, The geometry of the Gauss product, Algebraic Geometry 4, Journal of Mathematical Science 81 (1996) (Festschrift for Yuri Manin), 2700–2718. 10, 11 [8] —, Decorated Teichmüller theory, QGM Masters Class Series, volume 1, European Mathematical Society, Berlin (2012). 3, 7, 10 [9] R. Penner and A. Zeitlin, Decorated super-Teichmüller space, Journal of Differential Geometry 111 (2019), 527–566. 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10 [10] A. Rogers, Supermanifolds: theory and applications, World Scientific, Sin- gapore (2007). 2, 8 [11] W. Thurston, The Geometry and Topology of Three-Manifolds, (1980) http://library.msri.org/books/gt3m/. 21 [12] E. Witten, Notes on super Riemann surfaces and their moduli, Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly 15(1) (2019), 57–211. 2

Institut des Hautes Etudes´ Scientifiques, 35 route des Chartres, Le Bois Marie, 91440 Bures-sur-Yvette, France, and Mathematics Department, UCLA, Los Angeles, Ca 90095, USa Email address: [email protected]