Superconformal Quantum Mechanics from M2-Branes Arxiv:1503.03906
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CALT-TH-2015-011 OU-HET 852 Superconformal Quantum Mechanics from M2-branes Tadashi Okazaki1 Walter Burke Institute for Theoretical Physics California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA 91125, USA and Department of Physics, Graduate School of Science Osaka University 1-1 Machikaneyama-cho Toyonaka, Osaka 560-0043, Japan arXiv:1503.03906v1 [hep-th] 12 Mar 2015 [email protected] Abstract We discuss the superconformal quantum mechanics arising from the M2-branes. We begin with a comprehensive review on the superconformal quantum mechanics and emphasize that conformal symmetry and supersymmetry in quantum mechanics con- tain a number of exotic and enlightening properties which do not occur in higher dimensional field theories. We see that superfield and superspace formalism is avail- able for N ≤ 8 superconformal mechanical models. We then discuss the M2-branes with a focus on the world-volume descriptions of the multiple M2-branes which are su- perconformal three-dimensional Chern-Simons matter theories. Finally we argue that the two topics are connected in M-theoretical construction by considering the multiple M2-branes wrapped around a compact Riemann surface and study the emerging IR quantum mechanics. We establish that the resulting quantum mechanics realizes a set of novel N ≥ 8 superconformal quantum mechanical models which have not been reached so far. Also we discuss possible applications of the superconformal quantum mechanics to mathematical physics. Contents 1 Introduction and Overview 6 1.1 Historical background . 6 1.2 What I did . 13 I Superconformal Mechanics 15 2 Conformal Mechanics 16 2.1 SL(2; R) conformal symmetry . 16 2.2 Spectrum . 20 2.3 Time evolution . 30 2.4 Operator . 35 2.5 Gauged conformal mechanics . 40 2.6 Black hole . 46 2.7 Non-linear realization . 51 2.8 Multi-particle conformal mechanics . 56 2.9 Calogero model . 58 3 Superconformal Mechanics 61 3.1 Superalgebra and supergroup . 61 3.1.1 Lie superalgebra . 62 3.1.2 Lie supergroup . 63 3.1.3 Superconformal algebra . 65 3.2 One-dimensional supersymmetry . 69 3.2.1 Supermultiplet . 69 3.2.2 Automorphic duality . 72 3.3 N = 1 Superconformal mechanics . 74 3.3.1 One particle free action . 74 3.3.2 Multi-particle model . 76 3.3.3 Gauged superconformal mechanics . 78 1 3.4 N = 2 Superconformal mechanics . 81 3.4.1 One particle model . 81 3.4.2 Multi-particle model . 90 3.4.3 Freedman-Mende model . 93 3.4.4 Gauged superconformal mechanics . 94 3.5 N = 4 Superconformal mechanics . 97 3.5.1 (4; 4; 0) supermultiplet . 102 3.5.2 (3; 4; 1) supermultiplet . 104 3.5.3 (2; 4; 2) supermultiplet . 106 3.5.4 (1; 4; 3) supermultiplet . 107 3.5.5 (0; 4; 4) supermultiplet . 109 3.5.6 Multi-particle model . 110 3.5.7 Gauged superconformal mechanics . 117 3.6 N = 8 Superconformal mechanics . 120 N 3.6.1 On-shell SU(1; 1j 2 ) action . 121 3.6.2 Superspace and supermultiplet . 121 3.6.3 Multi-particle model . 135 II M2-branes 136 4 BLG-model 137 4.1 Construction . 137 4.1.1 Lie 3-algebra . 139 4.1.2 Lagrangian . 141 4.1.3 Gauge transformation . 142 4.1.4 Supersymmetry transformation . 143 4.1.5 M2-brane algebra . 144 4.2 A4 BLG-theory . 147 4.2.1 Quiver gauge structure . 148 4.2.2 Superconformal symmetry . 150 4.2.3 Parity invariance . 150 4.2.4 Moduli space . 150 5 ABJM-model 155 5.1 Construction . 155 5.1.1 Lagrangian . 156 5.1.2 Supersymmetry transformation . 157 5.2 Moduli space . 157 2 5.3 Duality between BLG and ABJ(M) . 158 III SCQM from M2-branes 160 6 N = 16 Superconformal Mechanics 161 6.1 N = 16 gauged quantum mechanics . 161 6.2 Reduction . 165 6.3 OSp(16j2) superconformal mechanics . 170 7 N = 12 Superconformal Mechanics 174 7.1 N = 12 gauged quantum mechanics . 174 7.2 Reduction . 177 7.3 SU(1; 1j6) superconformal mechanics . 180 8 Curved Branes and Topological Twisting 184 8.1 Topological twisting . 184 8.1.1 d = 4, N = 2 SYM theories . 184 8.1.2 d = 4, N = 2 SCFT on C × Σ . 187 8.1.3 d = 4, N = 4 SYM theories . 195 8.1.4 d = 4, N = 4 SYM theories on C × Σ . 204 8.1.5 d = 3, N = 4 SYM theories . 205 8.1.6 d = 3, N = 8 SYM theories . 207 8.1.7 d = 3, N = 8 SYM theories on R × Σ . 209 8.1.8 d = 2, N = 8 SYM theories . 210 8.1.9 d = 3, N = 4 Chern-Simons matter theories . 213 8.1.10 d = 3, N = 5 Chern-Simons matter theories . 218 8.1.11 d = 3, N = 6 Chern-Simons matter theories . 219 8.1.12 d = 3, N = 8 Chern-Simons matter theories . 219 8.1.13 d = 2, N = (2; 2) non-linear sigma-model . 223 8.2 Curved branes and twisted theories . 227 8.2.1 D3-branes and twisted d = 4, N = 4 SYM theories . 229 8.2.2 D2-branes and twisted d = 3, N = 8 SYM theories . 231 8.2.3 D2-branes and twisted d = 3, N = 8 SYM theories on R × Σ . 231 8.2.4 Relationship between d = 4 and d = 3 twists . 233 8.2.5 D1-branes and twisted d = 2, N = 8 SYM theories . 234 8.2.6 M2-branes and twisted BLG theory . 236 3 9 Curved M2-branes and Topological Twisting 237 9.1 M2-branes wrapping a holomorphic curve . 237 9.2 Supersymmetry in Calabi-Yau space . 238 9.3 Calibration and supersymmetric cycle . 240 9.4 Topological twisting . 244 10 SCQM from M2-branes in a K3 surface 247 10.1 K3 twisting . 247 10.2 Twisted theory . 251 10.3 Derivation of quantum mechanics . 254 11 Conclusion and Discussion 260 11.1 Conclusion . 260 11.2 Future directions . 262 11.2.1 AdS2=CFT1 correspondence . 262 11.2.2 Indices and the reduced Gromov-Witten invariants . 263 11.2.3 1d-2d relation . 264 4 Acknowledgments I would like to acknowledge kind support and help with deep appreciation and grat- itude to many people. I owe a debt of appreciation to Hirosi Ooguri for continuous guidance during my days at Caltech over the past two and a half years. It goes without saying that my study and experiences at Caltech would not be possible if were not for his arrangement. Moreover this thesis would not have been completed without his suggestion and assistance. I cannot thank him enough for all that he has done for me. I was really happy to study at Caltech guided by whom I respect. I would like to express my gratitude to Yutaka Hosotani for always helping me to study at Caltech and consulting me when I am in trouble. His advice was always a useful resource for me. I am profoundly grateful to Satoshi Yamaguchi for continuing encouragement and innumerable discussions. Over the past five years, particularly in the first two and a half years I could learn many things through collaboration works and countless times of long hours of discussions with him. I am glad that I was able to start my study of string theory with him at Osaka University. It was my indelible memory to talk about physics and life with brilliant members and alumni at Caltech including, Hee-Joong Chung, Abhijit Gadde, Siqi He, Koji Ishiwata, Hyungrok Kim, Kazunobu Maruyoshi, Elena Murchikova, Yu Nakayama, Chan Youn Park, Ke Ye, Du Pei, Pavel Putrov and Wenbin Yan. I extend my attitude to my colleagues at Osaka University including Tetsuya Enomoto, Tomohiro Horita, Takuya Shimotani, Akinori Tanaka, Akio Tomiya. The study meeting continuing for a long stretch of time with them is a good memory now. I wish to thank Greg Marlowe, the house owner for sharing with me a nice place to live at Pasadena and for always encouraging me. I was often relaxed myself by talking with him. I would like to thank Carol Silberstein, the secretary at Caltech and Kumiko Nakayama, Keiko Takeda, the secretaries at Osaka University for arranging a lot of procedures so that I could do my research at Caltech. They are always kind and I was helped many times. Finally I am grateful to my parents for giving constant support to me. 5 Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview 1.1 Historical background The pursue of Theory of Everything that describes our nature and achieves unification of all fundamental interactions, i.e. electroweak, strong and gravitational interactions has been a mission agitating theoretical physicists. Historically much of significant developments in theoretical physics were achieved by overcoming the inconsistency between existing concepts. The special relativity was established from the crisis be- tween classical mechanics and electrodynamics, the general relativity was proposed by reconciling the special relativity and Newtonian gravity and quantum field theory was acquired by combining quantum mechanics and the special relativity. However, we are now confronting another contradiction between quantum field theory and the general relativity. Although a quantum field theory as the standard model success- fully describes and predicts almost all phenomena controlled by electroweak and strong forces, the general relativity describing the gravity that is the remaining fundamen- tal interaction seriously disagrees with the quantum field theory. This indicates that quantum field theory cannot lead to the correct quantization of gravity. Therefore it is expected that the standard model is regarded as the low-energy effective theory of a more fundamental theory. String theory has been proposed as the promising candidate for such a fundamental theory since it can naturally describe all fundamental interactions.