arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1504.03049

Lectures on Super Analysis -- Why necessary and What's that?

Atsushi Inoue
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Roughly speaking, RA(=real analysis) means to study properties of (smooth) functions defined on real space, and CA(=complex analysis) stands for studying properties of (holomorphic) functions defined on spaces with complex structure. But to treat boson and fermion on equal footing, we need to prepare as a "ground ring", Fr\'echet-Grassmann algebra having countably many Grassmann generators and we define so-called superspace over such algebra. On such superspaces, we introduce spaces of super-smooth functions and develop elementary differential and integral calculus. With a slight preparation of functional analysis, we explain the Efetov's method in RMT(=random matrix theory). The free Weyl equation is treated to answer the problem posed by Feynman in their famous book. Simple examples of SUSYQM(=supersymmetric quantum mechanics) are calculated from this point of view. In the final chapter, we give a precise proof of Berezin's formula for changing variables under integral sign, brief introduction of real analysis on superspace, another construction of fundamental solution of Qi's weakly hyperbolic equation, Bernardi's question for a system version of Egorov's theorem, etc. A little discussion of Funtional Derivative Equations which are candidates of new branch of mathematics, is given. And finally, we construct a Hamilton flow corresponding to the Weyl equation with external electro-magnetic potentials, where we need the countably infinite Grassmann generators and weak topology! I mention many open problems at least for me (alias ATLOM=a tiny little old mathematician).

Explore related subjects

math-phmath.MP

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Atsushi Inoue. 2015-04-13. Lectures on Super Analysis -- Why necessary and What's that?. https://arxiv.org/abs/1504.03049

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Why we should condition denoising diffusion generative models on windows of past observations

Data assimilation (DA) is, traditionally, a cycling process that relies on time-dependent priors to propagate information from past observations to future cycles. Using denoising diffusion generative modeling for DA is challenging because standard approaches use a fixed training data set, which in turn leads to a static prior that ignores information from past observations. Because past observations are ignored, DA systems with static priors lead to larger posterior errors than cycling DA systems. Incorporating time-dependent priors into generative models, however, requires expensive and frequent retraining. Motivated by linear systems theory - where the dependence of a prediction of a Kalman filter on past observations decays exponentially - we condition diffusion models on short windows of past observations. Specifically, we describe training procedures for two frameworks: a diffusion DA system predicting the current state given a set of past observations, and a diffusion ``direct observation prediction'' (DOP) system, predicting future observations given a set of past observations. Using a canonical linear system, we show that both systems can achieve the minimal posterior error characteristic of a fully-cycled DA/DOP system, without re-training, provided the time windows are long enough. The linear setup ensures analytical tractability, avoids confounding neural network training errors, and confirms that conditioning on windows of past observations is required for efficient and accurate diffusion-based DA or DOP.

math-ph↗
arXiv2026

The kinematic structures and the inertial geometry of a moving charge

We ask how much of the geometry a charged particle moves in is fixed by its motion, and how much a particle must bring. We ask of a symplectic structure only that it relate velocity to momentum as Hamilton's equations do, and we ask it of every energy at once. In particular, we show that the structures meeting that demand are the canonical one and its twists by a closed two-form of the base. A field provides the two-form, a particle the multiplier before it, which we identify constitutively with its charge. Thus, a single energy governs a family of structures, and each particle takes the one its charge fixes. We then ask what a particle must bring to be given a momentum, and we show that the degree of that map settles the degree at which a field enters Newton's Second Law. An antisymmetric bilinear form returns no Lorentz force, whilst a Randers metric returns one --- a length whose difference from a Riemannian one is linear in the velocity. Moreover, we find that metric already within the twisted structure, as its primitive over a level of the free energy, and its law of transport to be nonlinear, no affine connection being known to serve. Under an indefinite signature the length parts from the dynamics, and the extremals turn from shortest to longest. On the round sphere a monopole flux leaves no such metric, whilst the transport remains and prequantisation, given a unit of action, restricts the charge to a lattice. In this manner, we conclude that each charge-to-mass ratio receives a geometry of its own, so that by a functionalist criterion none of them is the spacetime of a charged particle.

math-ph↗