Supersymmetry breaking by fluxes

By S. Sethi. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2017

145 citations recorded by the source corpus.

A bstractType II string theory and M-theory admit flux configurations that break supersymmetry below the Kaluza-Klein scale. These backgrounds play a central role in most models of the string landscape. I argue that the behavior of such backgrounds at weak coupling is generically a rolling solution, not a static space-time. Quantum corrections to the space-time potential are computed around this classical time-dependent background. This is particularly important for non-perturbative corrections. This change in perspective offers an explanation for why there appear to be many effective field theory models that seemingly evade the known no-go theorems forbidding de Sitter space-times. This has interesting implications for type IIB string landscape models.

Subfields: Nuclear and High Energy Physics, Political Science and International Relations

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/036ca21276ef0952ce134975bd5e1ea94df2197d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

1. Eran Palti
2. Anshuman Maharana
3. M. Graña
4. M. Cicoli
5. F. Quevedo
6. T. Riet
7. U. Danielsson
8. I. Bena

In Political Science and International Relations

1. Eran Palti
2. C. Vafa
3. Sumit K. Garg
4. Chethan Krishnan
5. U. Danielsson
6. T. Riet
7. T. Weigand

Citations in the corpus

• Uplifting Runaways (2018, background): “The details of this mechanism are not relevant here, and some problems with it have been highlighted in [31], but we will show that even if the KKLT Kähler moduli stabilization mechanism still works, it will not help in avoiding the problem we found.”
• The Swampland: Introduction and Review (2019, background): “um of KKLT [233], or possibly the Large Volume scenario [234], where some 63For some recent general discussions regarding the computation of the necessary non-perturbative eects in such settings see [504,505]. 156 positive energy contribution is added to the potential. This is often termed an uplift”
• De Sitter vs Quintessence in String Theory (2018, background): “[19] pointed out that this can be rigorously done only in the specific case where only (2,1) background fluxes are turned on as considered in [46].”
• Bounds on slow roll and the de Sitter Swampland (2018, background): “One particularly damning criticism (if true) is perhaps the claim by Sethi [4] that IIB non-supersymmetric AdS flux vacua of [5] are not reliable starting points for uplift to de Sitter.1 1Let us give a mini-summary of the situation here for the general population.”
• What if string theory has no de Sitter vacua? (2018, background): “ane backreaction on the 4D moduli, which was found recently by Moritz, Retolaza, and Westphal [131] and 3) issues with very basic assumptions of the modulistabilisation scenario as discussed by Sethi [132]. 3.3.1 Anti-brane backreaction inside extra dimensions Since 2009, with the work of [119] (and”
• The String Landscape, the Swampland, and the Missing Corner (2017, background): “e the EFT for dSand quintessence, however it seems that all known examples from string theory which are computationally under control are of the quintessence type. For a recent discussion of this see [87]. It is possible therefore that { 30 { quintessence models are the only ones allowed in string t”