my phd thesis irl

@ooolb more like icelandic origins

Why are Calabi-Yau manifolds so important for string theory anyway

What makes them seem like they'd be closer to the standard model

It's not that they're closer to the SM, it's that compactifications on them are somewhat easier to understand because they preserve supersymmetry.

Also, many seem convinced that SUSY has to be broken at a scale lower than the compactification scale, but I never quite understood why

Oh

ok ACM

tell me

Is there any manifold that reproduces like at least one feature of the standard model, btw

I have an operator called the conformal Laplacian

should I call functions in its kernel conformally harmonic or not

Is it $\Delta + R/6$

@Slereah Well, I believe there are manifolds that reproduce the MSSM, at least almost

@Slereah wrong sign and a different number

@0celo7 I think it's like 6 or 12 in 3 dimensions

I forget

@0celo7 ¯_(ツ)_/¯

12 in 3 dimensions

er

Yeah

20?

20 dimensions?

Quite a lot

it's $4(n+2)/(n-2)$

oh no it's not

I literally gave a talk from memory on this 2 days ago

whatever

@ACuriousMind which one would that me

$4(n-1)/(n-2)$ there we go

That would be a pretty good argument for string theory

yeah 6 is right

6 in 4 dimensions

but you want the sign of the Laplacian and the scalar curvature to be different

Makes sense yeah

@Slereah mhm

(That was partly what my thesis was on)

well, something similar, anyway

There were conformal laplacians involved

@Slereah Uh, not sure there's a particularly nice description. See e.g. arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0512177

I'm writing a nontrivial appendix on the kernel of it

I need a good name for those functions

"Specifically, the observable sector is N=1 supersymmetric with gauge group SU(3)_C x SU(2)_L x U(1)_Y x U(1)_{B-L}, three families of quarks and leptons, each family with a right-handed neutrino, and one Higgs-Higgs conjugate pair."

Why don't people mention this more

Also what's $U(1)_{B-L}$

"Baryon minus Lepton", the axial symmetry

Is that a symmetry that exists?

Broken by the axial/Adler-Bardeen anomaly

Damn you anomaly!

Still, that's pretty close to the standard model

You'd think string theorists would never stop mentionning that result

is there too much space between the big parentheses and "on"? i.gyazo.com/ce6a45526e48518df1301e1fe3f31ca0.png

could be less yeah

@Slereah I think there's a weird tendency where string theorists are often not actually interested in "realistic models"? It's weird and I often don't quite understand why they study the models they do

Well maybe they should if they want to stop the rumors about how they're all quacks!

I knew there was a 10 second derivation of a general lorentz transform somewhere, finally... $\Lambda x = [\cosh(\theta) t + \sinh(\theta) \mathbf{n} \cdot \mathbf{x} \ , \ \mathbf{x} + (\cosh(\theta) - 1) \mathbf{n} (\mathbf{n} \cdot \mathbf{x}) + \sinh(\theta) \mathbf{n} t ]^T$

Incredibly terrifying when you see it just stated in Jackson

@Slereah I found a proof that used 33 separate constants

they had $C_{33}$ in the final inequality

Quite bad

'a phenomenological string theory was proposed based on qualitative topology and hypercomplex numbers. The current presentation takes this further by delving into the ancient Chinese origin of phenomenological string theory'

Seems legit

Maybe that article is a Sokal

Well I found it on Academia.edu

which is basically a fancier Vixra

Is it really vixra like

I see crazy articles on it, but arxiv has crazy articles in the general sections

(Obligatory E8 reference)

It's fairly rare to find really crazy articles on arxiv

I've seen a few but they're far and few between

@ACuriousMind help

I've gone back to writing $ds$

$\mathrm ds$ just doesn't look right to me any more

Then you are beyond my ability to help

Your soul is forfeit

wtf

@ACuriousMind I mean

$$\int_\gamma ds$$

the $d$ goes at the same angle as the integral

it's very aesthetic

to within an error $\ll 1$

we use it morally