Comments on the dual-BRST symmetry
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:6KCN5ASFrecord.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
In view of a raging controversy on the topic of dual-Becchi-Rouet-Stora-Tyutin (dual-BRST/co-BRST) and anti-co-BRST symmetry transformations in the context of four (3+1)-dimensional (4D) Abelian 2-form and 2D (non-)Abelian 1-form gauge theories, we attempt, in our present short note, to settle the dust by taking the help of mathematics of differential geometry, connected with the Hodge theory, which was the original motivation for the nomenclature of "dual-BRST symmetry" in our earlier set of works. It has been claimed, in a recent set of papers, that the co-BRST symmetries are not independent of the BRST symmetries. We show that the BRST and co-BRST symmetries are independent symmetries in the same fashion as the exterior and co-exterior derivatives are independent entities belonging to the set of de Rham cohomological operators of differential geometry.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.