Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-h4f6x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-21T06:45:23.093Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the notion of compactness in supergeometry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 April 2009

Ugo Bruzzo  and
Vladimir Pestov
Ugo Bruzzo
Affiliation:
Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati (SISSA), Via Beirut 4, 34014 Trieste, Italy, Dipartimento di Matematica, Università degli Studi di Genova, Via Dodecaneso 35, 16146 Genova, Italy, e-mail: bruzzo@sissa.it
Vladimir Pestov
Affiliation:
School of Mathematical and Computing Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington, P.O. Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand, e-mail: vova@mcs.vuw.ac.nz
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We discuss the problem of finding an analogue of the concept of topological space in supergeometry, motivated by the search for a procedure to compactify supermanifolds along odd coordinates. In particular, we examine the topologies arising naturally on the sets of points of locally ringed superspaces, and show that in the presence of a nontrivial odd sector such topologies are never compact. The main outcome of our discussion is the following new observation: not only the usual framework of supergeometry (the theory of locally ringed spaces), but the more general approach of the functor of points, need to be further enlarged.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society , Volume 61 , Issue 3 , June 2000 , pp. 473 - 488
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Mathematical Society 2000

References

REFERENCES

[1]Baranov, M.A., Manin, Yu.I., Frolov, I.V. and Schwarz, A.S., ‘A superanalog of the Selberg trace formula and multiloop contributions for fermionic strings, Comm. Math. Phys. 111 (1987), 373–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Bartocci, C., Bruzzo, U., and Ruipérez, D. Hernández, The Geometry of Supermanifolds (Kluwer Academic Publ., Dordrecht, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Bartocci, C., Bruzzo, U., Ruipérez, D. Hernández and Pestov, V.G., ‘Supermanifold theory: towards a unifying approach’, in Proc. 4th Fall Workshop on Differential Geometry and its Applications, (Salgado, M. and Vázquez, E., Editors), Anales de Física, Monografías 3 (CIEMAT, Madrid, 1996), pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
[4]Berezin, F.A., Introduction to superanalysis, (Kirillov, A.A., Editor) (D. Reidel Publ. Co, Dordrecht, Boston MA, 1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Berezin, F.A. and Leĭtes, D.A., ‘Supermanifolds, Soviet Math. Dokl. 16 (1975), 1218–1222.Google Scholar
[6]Bernstein, J. and Leĭtes, D.A., ‘Lie superalgebras and supergroups, Report Dept. Math. Univ. Stockholm 14 (1988), 132–260.Google Scholar
[7]Bruzzo, U. and Pestov, V., ‘On the structure of DeWitt supermanifolds, J. Geom. Phys. 30 (1999), 169–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Demazure, M. and Gabriel, P., Introduction to algebraic geometry and algebraic groups (North-Holland, Amsterdam, New York, Oxford, 1980).Google Scholar
[9]DeWitt, B.S., Supermanifolds (Cambridge University Press, London, 1984).Google Scholar
[10]Godement, R., Théorie des faisceaux (Hermann, Paris, 1964).Google Scholar
[11]Jadczyk, A. and Pilch, K., ‘Superspaces and supersymmetries, Comm. Math. Phys. 78 (1981), 373–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Kostant, B., ‘Graded manifolds, graded Lie theory, and prequantization’, in Differential Geometric Methods in Mathematical Physics, Lecture Notes Math. 570 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1977), pp. 177–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Leĭtes, D.A., ‘Introduction to the theory of supermanifolds, Russian Math. Surveys 35 (1980), 1–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Leĭtes, D.A., The theory of supermanifolds, (in Russian) (Karelian Branch Acad. Sciences U.S.S.R., Petrozavodsk, 1983).Google Scholar
[15]Leĭtes, D.A., ‘Selected problems of supermanifold theory, Duke Math. J. 54 (1987), 649–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Manin, Yu.I., ‘New directions in geometry, Russian Math. Surveys 39 (1984), 47–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Manin, Yu.I., Gauge field theory and complex geometry, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften 289 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1988).Google Scholar
[18]Penkov, I.B., ‘Classical Lie supergroups and their superalgebras and their representations’, Ann. Inst. Fourier 117 (1988).Google Scholar
[19]Pestov, V.G., ‘A contribution to nonstandard superanalysis, J. Math. Phys. 33 (1992), 3263–3273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20]Pestov, V.G., ‘On even collective effects in purely odd superspaces’, in Proc. XXIInd Int. Conf. on Differential Geometric Methods in Theoretical Physics, Adv. Appl. Clifford Alg. (Proc. Suppl.) 4, 1994, pp. 157–164.Google Scholar
[21]Rogers, A., ‘A global theory of supermanifolds, J. Math. Phys. 21 (1980), 1352–1365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[22]Schwarz, A.S., ‘Supergravity, complex geometry and G-structures’, Commun. Math. Phys. 87 (1982/1983), 37–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[23]Schwarz, A.S., ‘On the definition of superspace, Theor. Math. Phys. 60 (1984), 657–660.Google Scholar
[24]Schmitt, T., ‘Supergeometry and quantum field theory, or: What is a classical configuration, Rev. Math. Phys. 9 (1997), 993–1052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[25]Voronov, A.A., ‘Mappings of supermanifolds, Theor. Math. Phys. 60 (1984), 660–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[26]Wiȩsław, W., Topological fields, Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and Applied Mathematics 119 (Marcel Dekker, New York, 1988).Google Scholar