Question: Can there be a consistent non-supersymmetric pure-bosonic string theory in some curved spacetimes?

Reason: Since fields with certain amount of negative mass can exist in curved spacetime (cf. the Breitenlohner-Freedman bound in AdS) and since avoiding ground-state tachyons of pure-bosonic strings in flat spacetime seems to be the main motivation (besides phenomenological reasons) for superstrings in flat spacetime.

Extending this, are there examples of consistent AdS/CFT dualities involving pure-bosonic fields in the bulk?

  • $\begingroup$ I deleted a few off-topic comments. Remember that comments are not the place to hold discussions; do that in Physics Chat. $\endgroup$ – David Z Sep 9 '15 at 14:28
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @DavidZ Thanks for that tip, but there was a comment (archived at physicsoverflow.org/33243 ) from Lubos Motl where he gave a arXiv reference to a related paper that might have a partial answer. Can you please get it back?? (and once that is done, you can deleted this comment of mine and yours). $\endgroup$ – GuSuku Sep 11 '15 at 23:40
  • $\begingroup$ It was "For some examples of non-SUSY AdS/CFT examples that rely on the validity of the BF bound, try e.g. arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0105047 - a problem is that the paper is in 'SUGRA' only. The critical dimensions aren't imposed in general and the CFTs are only described rather vaguely by some operators and properties." Let me know when you've seen it. In the future, remember to save any important information in comments (possibly by editing it into the post, or turning it into an answer) while the comments are still fresh. $\endgroup$ – David Z Sep 12 '15 at 5:26
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @DavidZ Thanks. But I (and others) can follow the archived copy at the physicsoverflow link and see Lubos Motl message. But my point was, why would anyone have to delete such a comment in the first place?! Do you have the power to un-delete that comment by Motl? If you can bring it back, we can delete all of these unreleated conversations between us! $\endgroup$ – GuSuku Sep 14 '15 at 14:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DavidZ I have been on SEs (not just physics, but few others too) long enough to know what you are saying is not true. SE comments exist for a reason. What Motl wrote was not a full answer, and rightly deserves to stay a comment. And neither is it mine to incorporate it in my question itself (why would anyone even do that, even if its theirs is beyond me!). $\endgroup$ – GuSuku Sep 16 '15 at 6:36

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.