Timeline for CohFT: Witten vs. Kontsevich and Manin
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2, 2018 at 20:11 | comment | added | Gorbz | Of course. To the best of my knowledge examples which in some cases refer to as CohFTs are not quite topological. E.g. the topologically twisted (Donaldson twist) $\mathcal{N}=2$ theory with $N_f=4$ flavors is not quite topological since the path integral (or some correlators) can develop smooth metric dependence. | |
| Sep 2, 2018 at 11:56 | comment | added | user40276 | The obvious is the formalism that I already mentioned, which fits pretty much any field theory from the Heisenberg point of view. I have no idea what QFT would not be a CohFT in your setting. Do you have an example in mind? Are you calling anything that gives invariants with values in the cohomology of a moduli space a CohFT? | |
| Sep 2, 2018 at 10:36 | comment | added | Gorbz | What is the obvious? To me it is not obvious at all when a theory (in physics) is a CohFT. | |
| Sep 1, 2018 at 21:24 | comment | added | user40276 | I'm having some difficult in understanding what you call CohFT. I can't see anything in common besides the obvious. | |
| Aug 31, 2018 at 21:12 | comment | added | Gorbz | Indeed, but unlike GW theory, Donaldson theory or Vafa-Witten theory do not fall under the same CohFT definition as the GW theory. Of course they live in different dimensions. But my question remains. Is there an umbrella definition for any CohFT for any dimension? | |
| Aug 31, 2018 at 20:38 | comment | added | user40276 | Btw, I think that Witten defined Gromov-Witten cohomologically before Kontsevich-Manin in intlpress.com/site/pub/files/_fulltext/journals/sdg/1990/0001/… | |
| Aug 31, 2018 at 20:33 | comment | added | user40276 | I'm not the best person here to talk about factorisation algebras. For topological twists, you may want to look at arxiv.org/pdf/1805.10806.pdf . The point is that anything constructed from a BRST-BV like formalism will fit into this formalism too. But you want something less general I suppose. | |
| Aug 30, 2018 at 7:26 | comment | added | Gorbz | Can you please provide details? | |
| Aug 29, 2018 at 21:07 | comment | added | user40276 | Are you ok with factorisation algebras? You can translate everything to this language. | |
| Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 | history | asked | Gorbz | CC BY-SA 4.0 |