Usually, a supersymmetry transformation is carried out on bosonic and fermionic fields which are functions of the coordinates (or on a superfield which is a function of real and fermionic coordinates). But, is it possible to interpret supersymmetry transformations as coordinate transformations on the set of coordinates $(x^0,\ldots,x^N,\theta_1,\ldots,\theta_M)$?

The problem I see is that the coordinates would transform something like $x^\mu\rightarrow x^\mu+\theta\sigma\bar{\theta}$ which is no longer a real (or complex) number, but a commuting Grassmann number. Can one make sens of a coordinate position no longer being a real number?

Edit: To clarify, this is NOT about confusion in what happens when adding real numbers with commuting grassmann numbers in general. That the lagrangian in QFT for example is not a real number, but a commuting grassmann number, is fine. What I am confused about is really how to make sense of coordinates that are grassmannian. Coordinates are supposed to describe a position in spacetime/on a manifold, and it seems to me that it is essential that a position is a standard real number.

  • $\begingroup$ what kind of mathematical object is the sum of a real/complex number and a grassmannian? It is obviously closed under sum, and apparently under multiplication, but probably not a full fledged field, since no inverse $\endgroup$
    – lurscher
    Jan 5, 2015 at 15:11
  • $\begingroup$ Essentially a duplicate of this Phys.SE post. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Jan 5, 2015 at 15:15
  • $\begingroup$ @Qmechanic: No it is not a duplicate of this (but it is essentially the same as the unanswered comment in the first reply). I have edited my post to clarify! $\endgroup$ Jan 5, 2015 at 15:23

1 Answer 1


Comments to the question (v3):

  1. Recall that a supernumber $z=z_B+z_S$ consists of a body $z_B$ (which always belongs to $\mathbb{C}$) and a soul $z_S$ (which only belongs to $\mathbb{C}$ if it is zero), cf. e.g. this Phys.SE post.

  2. An observable/measurable quantity can only consist of ordinary numbers (belonging to $\mathbb{C}$). It does not make sense to measure a soul-valued output in an actual experiment.

  3. Souls are indeterminates that appear in intermediate formulars, but are integrated (or differentiated) out in the final result.

  4. In a superspace formulation of a field theory, a Grasmann-even spacetime coordinates $x^{\mu}$ in superspace is promoted to a supernumber, and is not necessarily an ordinary number.

  5. A supersymmetry-translation of a Grasmann-even spacetime coordinate $x^{\mu}$ only changes the soul (but not the body) of $x^{\mu}$.

  6. Note that in the mathematical definition of a supermanifold, the focus of the theory is not on spacetime coordinates per se, but (very loosely speaking) rather on certain algebras of functions of spacetime. See also e.g. Refs. 1-3 for details.


  1. Pierre Deligne and John W. Morgan, Notes on Supersymmetry (following Joseph Bernstein). In Quantum Fields and Strings: A Course for Mathematicians, Vol. 1, American Mathematical Society (1999) 41–97.

  2. V.S. Varadarajan, Supersymmetry for Mathematicians: An Introduction, Courant Lecture Notes 11, 2004.

  3. C. Sachse, A Categorical Formulation of Superalgebra and Supergeometry, arXiv:0802.4067.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.