5
$\begingroup$

I am reading David Tong's lectures on string theory and on the page 180 in chapter 7 of his lecture notes http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/string.html : he claims that D-branes are something in between the fundamental strings, which tension is independent of $g_s$, and solitonic branes, whose tension scales as $1/g_s^2$. And he says then, that there is some analogue to D-brane in field theory, despite not so frequently mentioned. What does he actually mean?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Are you referring to the domain walls in ordinary QFTs or have I misunderstood the question? Tong has done some work on it. See for example arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0512192 $\endgroup$ May 11 '20 at 15:29
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! Now it sounds like and obvious canditate, nevertheless, thank you for the reference $\endgroup$ May 11 '20 at 16:22
  • $\begingroup$ Glad I was able to help :-) $\endgroup$ May 11 '20 at 17:40
3
$\begingroup$

Absolutely! Even if someone rejects string theory, D-branes are still a very useful and geometrical ways to construct (and predict!) a plethora of new objects in QFT. Everthing from perturbativate states like fermions, mesons, baryons to everthing non-perturbative like instantons, monopoles, dyons, votices, kinks, textures, condensates, cosmic strings, brane worlds, superconductors, non-trivial phases of matter, domain walls (and all its noncommutative counterparts) etc. can be engeeniered from brane configurations. In string theory, every object is a soliton (perhaps by changing the duality frame).

Almost any kind of solition you can immagine is analogous to a D-brane configuration (even gravitational ones!). I recommend you to read Tong's lectures: https://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/tasi/tasi.pdf

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

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

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