Skip to the Main Content

Note:These pages make extensive use of the latest XHTML and CSS Standards. They ought to look great in any standards-compliant modern browser. Unfortunately, they will probably look horrible in older browsers, like Netscape 4.x and IE 4.x. Moreover, many posts use MathML, which is, currently only supported in Mozilla. My best suggestion (and you will thank me when surfing an ever-increasing number of sites on the web which have been crafted to use the new standards) is to upgrade to the latest version of your browser. If that's not possible, consider moving to the Standards-compliant and open-source Mozilla browser.

November 3, 2006

A 3-Category of Twisted Bimodules

Posted by Urs Schreiber

Those readers not yet bored to death by my posts might recall the following:

I was arguing that the 3-group controlling Chern-Simons theory (and maybe also the gauge structure of the Green-Schwarz mechanism #) is a sub-3-group of the inner automorphism 3-group #

(1)INN(String G)AUT(String G), \mathrm{INN}(\mathrm{String}_G) \subset \mathrm{AUT}(\mathrm{String}_G) \,,

of the String 2-group - for GG an ordinary Lie group (here assumed to be compact, simple and simply connected).

Part of the evidence (I, II) I presented was the observation that the canonical 2-representation # of String G\mathrm{String}_G on

(2)Bim(Hilb) HilbMod \mathrm{Bim}(\mathrm{Hilb}) \stackrel{\subset}{\to} {}_\mathrm{Hilb}\mathrm{Mod}

apparently extends to a representation of INN(String G)\mathrm{INN}(\mathrm{String}_G) on “twisted” bimodules, and that this representation seems to exhibit the expected structures #.

Like Bim(C)\mathrm{Bim}(C) can be thought of as coming from lax functors into Σ(C)\Sigma(C), for CC a 2-monoid (an abelian monoidal category), twisted bimodules

(3)TwBim(C) \mathrm{TwBim}(C)

can be thought of as coming from lax functors into the endormorphism 3-monoid

(4)END(C) \mathrm{END}(C)

of CC - in a way that is analogous to the step from the 2-group String G\mathrm{String}_G to its automorphism 3-group AUT(String G)\mathrm{AUT}(\mathrm{String}_G).

3-morphisms in TwBim(C)\mathrm{TwBim}(C) look a little like the fundamental disk correlator with one bulk insertion in rational CFT #: a disk, bounded by bimodules, with a ribbon colored in CC running perpendicular through the disk’s center. (And this is not supposed to be a coincidence #.)

This picture suggests an obvious 3-category structure. That however is slightly oversimplified. On the other hand, the description in terms of lax functors into END(C)\mathrm{END}(C) is a little too unwieldy.

Hence my goal here is to write down precisely and explicitly what TwBim(C)\mathrm{TwBim}(C) looks like and how compositions are defined. Diagrams can be found in these notes:

\;\;\;a 3-category of twisted bimodules

The hard part is to check coherent weak properties, like the exchange law. I have checked what looked nontrivial - and am hoping that I haven’t overlooked anything. But if anyone has seen before anything like the 3-category TwBim(C)\mathrm{TwBim}(C) that I am trying to describe here, please drop me a note.

A crucial point in all these constructions is the restriction to inner automorphisms and inner endomorphisms.

Analogous to the restriction to inner automorphisms of the structure 2-group

(1)INN(G 2)AUT(G 2), \mathrm{INN}(G_2) \subset \mathrm{AUT}(G_2) \,,

the endomorphisms of CC that are used to obtain TwBim(C)\mathrm{TwBim}(C) are all “inner”.

Recall how this can be motivated # by applying Schreier theory to the Atiyah groupoid sequence.

An ordinary principal G-bundle

(2)P X \array{ P \\ \downarrow \\ X }

gives rise to the Atiyah sequence of groupoids (the “exponentiated Atiyah sequence” #)

(3)AdP Trans(P) P 1(X) = = = P× GG P× GP X×X. \array{ \mathrm{Ad} P &\to& \mathrm{Trans}(P) &\to& P_1(X) \\ = & & = & & = \\ P \times_G G &\to& P \times_G P &\to& X \times X } \,.

Crucially, the GG action on GG itself used in forming P× GGP \times_G G is the adjoint action by GG on itself. This is where the inner automorphisms enter the game.

Schreier theory then suggests (as emphasized by Danny Stevenson # ) that a connection on PP is a pseudofunctor

(4)(tra,curv tra):X×XAUT(P× GG), (\mathrm{tra},\mathrm{curv}_\mathrm{tra}) : X \times X \to \mathrm{AUT}(P \times_G G) \,,

where the target is the 2-groupoid whose objects are points in XX, whose morphisms are fiber isomorphisms

(5)(P× GG) x(P× GG) y (P \times_G G)_x \to (P \times_G G)_y

and whose 2-morphisms are natural isomorphisms of these (where we regard the fibers - which are groups - as categories with a single object).

But this implies that an ordinary connection

(6)tra:P 1(X)Trans(X), \mathrm{tra} : P_1(X) \to \mathrm{Trans}(X) \,,

acting by isomorphisms of fibers of PP, will act by inner automorphisms on the × GG\times_G G factor.

More precisely, if we locally trivialize the pseudofunctor (tra,curv tra)(\mathrm{tra},\mathrm{curv}_\mathrm{tra}), it indeed takes values in

(7)Σ(INN(G)) \Sigma(\mathrm{INN}(G))

instead of in all of

(8)Σ(AUT(G)). \Sigma(\mathrm{AUT}(G)) \,.

Similar comments apply to the categorified setup, where PP is replaced by a principal 2-bundle and GG by a 2-group.

The 3-category of twisted bimodules that I am talking about # is supposed to be relevant for the associated 2-vector description of this principal setup.

Posted at November 3, 2006 12:41 PM UTC

TrackBack URL for this Entry:   http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/cgi-bin/MT-3.0/dxy-tb.fcgi/1018

0 Comments & 4 Trackbacks

Read the post The 1-Dimensional 3-Vector Space
Weblog: The n-Category Café
Excerpt: Alg(C) as the 3-category of canonical 1-dimensional 3-vector spaces.
Tracked: November 23, 2006 4:05 PM
Read the post FFRS on Uniqueness of CFT: Morphisms into Transport Functors
Weblog: The n-Category Café
Excerpt: On morphisms into functors and states and sections in the FFRS description of conformal field theory.
Tracked: January 3, 2007 9:43 PM
Read the post Extended QFT and Cohomology II: Sections, States, Twists and Holography
Weblog: The n-Category Café
Excerpt: How transformations of extended d-dimensional quantum field theories are related to (d-1)-dimensional quantum field theories. How this is known either as twisting or as, in fact, holography.
Tracked: June 11, 2007 1:15 PM
Read the post QFT of Charged n-Particle: Towards 2-Functorial CFT
Weblog: The n-Category Café
Excerpt: Towards a 2-functorial description of 2-dimensional conformal field theory. A project description.
Tracked: August 6, 2007 11:52 PM

Post a New Comment