Why should N=8 Supergravity be finite?

Why should N=8 Supergravity be finite?

I would like to attempt to explain here why adding N=8 supersymmetry to General Relativity should have the chance of making the theory finite.

Firstly, it is known that the only renormalizable theories are those of spin 0, spin 1/2 and spin 1 particles.  General Relativity, however, is quantized by spin 2 particles - gravitons. (Adding simple N=1 supersymmetry to GR also adds spin 3/2 particles - gravitinos).

If we add N=8 supersymmetry we have a single super-particle whose components compose of spin 2, 3/2, 1, 1/2, 0 , -1/2, -3/2, -2 particles. We can think of this as some kind of super-vector. There are (1,8,28,56,72,56,28,8,1) of each of these types of particles respectively.

What we would like to do is get rid of these spin 2 and spin 3/2 components (18 of them) because they are non-renormalizable. So, we should like to be able to rotate this super-vector in such a way that these components become zero. We also, need to rotate this super-vector a different amount at every point in space-time. i.e. it needs to be a local transformation.

But, N=8 Supergravity has this very capacity in that it is invariant under local supersymmetry transformations! The question is, is there enough freedom to always set 18 components of the super-vector to zero? Also, in any Feynman diagram can we rotate the virtual propagators so that they don't depend on these 18 non-renormalizable components? These are very tricky details, and it has not been proved that this is possible, but we see that N=8 supersymmetry can definitely help making GR behave better.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Vortex Solution to Navier Stokes Equations

Image
This is a solution I found to the Navier Stokes equations . It uses the flow lines of the Hopf Fibration (which is basically just a way of covering the entire 3D space in circles). The flow lines can be seen in this image below: You can see my paper here. Solution to Navier-Stokes equation . Unfortunately I won't get a million pounds for winning the Clay Millennium prize because this is a compressible not incompressible solution. :( Oh, well. Nice try! I think it's pretty nice anyway. :) Also it uses the nice identity: which paramaterizes the Pythagorean quadruples!
Read more

Solving two polynomials in two variables

Solving two polynomials in two variables I had an algorithm for solving two polynomials in 2 variables by converting it into an equation in 1 variable. I'll see if I can remember it. Let us start with 2 polynomials. (solution: x=2 y=3). We try to eliminate x. (1) x 2 +4xy+2y 2 +3x+4y - 64 = 0 (2) 3x 2  -xy + y 2 +5x-y -22 = 0 First eliminate x 2 (3) =- (2) +3 (1) :  13xy +5y 2  +4x +13y  -170 = 0 or (13y+4)x + (5y 2 +13y  -170) = 0 Next use this equation to eliminate x 2  again from (1) . (1) .(13y+4) :  (13y+4)x 2 + (52y 2 +55y+12)x + (13y+4)(2y 2 +4y - 64) = 0 - (3) .x:             (13y+4)x 2  + (5y 2 +13y  -170)x = 0 =(4) : (47y 2 +42y+182)x + (13y+4)(2y 2 +4y - 64) = 0 Now use these two linear equations to eliminate x: (13y+4) (4) -  (47y 2 +42y+182) (3)  :   (13y+4)(13y+4)(2y 2 +4y - 64) - (47y 2 +42y+182)(5y 2 +13y  -170) =0 or  (y-3) ...
Read more

Sphere Packing in Distance Geometry

Sphere Packing in Distance Geometry In distance geometry the only condition we have is that any (n+1)-simplex made from (n+2) points is zero in n dimensions. Let R_nm be the squared distance between point n and point m. The kissing number problem is then stated as: R 0n = 1 R nm > 1 Then we ask is there a solution in terms of R such that the above holds and also the Cayley-Menger determinants are all zero? In 2 dimensions with 7 circles this gives us R 0n = 1 R nm > 1 VolumeOfTetrahedron ( R_ab,R_ac,R_ad,R_bc,R_bd,R_cd) = 0 Which gives cubic equalities for the R. We could set: R nm = 1+(S nm )^2 This gives us a set of 6th degree polynomials in S. Then we should be able to use the resultant to see if they all have a simultaneous solution! But the resultant does not distinguish between real and imaginary solutions. :( e.g. ( x ^2+1)( x -3)=0 ( x ^2+1)( x -4)=0 Share an imaginary solution! (Only possible if share common factor?) What we need...
Read more