2 typos

Here's a hep-th

This physics (bear with me for a while) paper that seems to say something about Gal \bar Q/Q:

 Children's Drawings From Seiberg-Witten Curves, hep-th/061108. Let me say Let's begin with my limited understanding of what they say. They start with some SUSY QFT ("pure U(N) gauge theory - the most well studied case"). There's a big moduli space of those (you're classifying the vacua of theories here), but then, given some numbers (g_i), you consider a deformation problem and because of some algebra on page 3 you have just isolated points as vacua. Now if you also fine-tune your parameters (g_i), the connected trees (dessins d'enfants) appear in the moduli space, while, on the other hand, we always had a curve called Seiberg-Witten curve, for a given (g_i) (I think this curve relates to dessin by Belyi map but not sure). Interestingly, they find a physical counterpart to the statement that each tree parametrizes exactly one Galois orbit (page 16). It gets hard for me to read further, and probably won't make much sense to continue my imperfect retelling, but I'd like to hear , (especially from people who know read about this aretopic), the following Question: is there a new mathematical content described in the article? Is there a mathematical understanding of what they're doing? Or is this direction not interesting? 
 
 
 
1

# Children's drawings and Seiberg-Witten curves

Here's a hep-th (bear with me for a while) paper that seems to say something about Gal \bar Q/Q:

Let me say with my limited understanding of what they say. They start with some SUSY QFT ("pure U(N) gauge theory - the most well studied case"). There's a big moduli space of those (you're classifying the vacua of theories here), but then, given some numbers (g_i), you consider a deformation problem and because of some algebra on page 3 you have just isolated points as vacua.

Now if you also fine-tune your parameters (g_i), the connected trees (dessins d'enfants) appear in the moduli space, while, on the other hand, we always had a curve called Seiberg-Witten curve, for a given (g_i) (I think this curve relates to dessin but not sure).

Interestingly, they find a physical counterpart to the statement that each tree parametrizes exactly one Galois orbit (page 16). It gets hard for me to read further, but I'd like to hear, especially from people who know about this are, the following

Question: is there a new mathematical content described in the article? Is there a mathematical understanding of what they're doing? Or is this direction not interesting?