Non-supersymmetric D-branes

Timm Wrase

StringPheno, CERN June 25th, 2019

 Outline
• Introduction and motivation

• D-branes and non-linear SUSY

• D-branes in flux compactifications

• Conclusion
 Outline
• Introduction and motivation

• D-branes and non-linear SUSY

• D-branes in flux compactifications

• Conclusion
 No SUSY discovery
• The LHC has done a spectacular job at
confirming the SM of particle physics

• Unfortunately no discovery of supersymmetry

 No SUSY discovery
• The LHC has done a spectacular job at
confirming the SM of particle physics

• Unfortunately no discovery of supersymmetry

• We are now faced with two problems:

1. The cosmological constant problem
2. The hierarchy problem

SUSY cannot really explain either

 Non SUSY string theories
• Without SUSY things are
substantially more
complicated

• However, it appears that we

need to understand the non-
SUSY landscape vs.
swampland in order to
describe our universe swampland
landscape
 Non SUSY string theories
• There are non supersymmetric string theories
• One can compactify the superstrings on spaces that
do not preserve supersymmetry
Acharya 1906.06886
 Non SUSY string theories
• There are non supersymmetric string theories
• One can compactify the superstrings on spaces that
do not preserve supersymmetry
Acharya 1906.06886

• One can study supersymmetric flux

compactifications and search for SUSY breaking
vacua
1. Non-SUSY minima in standard linear SUGRA
2. Non-supersymmetric branes break SUSY
Non SUSY string theory solutions
1. Non-SUSY minima in standard linear SUGRA
We can consider string compactifications with
ingredients that all preserve some supersymmetry,
e.g. standard CY flux compactifications that give
rise to 4𝑑, 𝑁 = 1 SUGRA theories
Non SUSY string theory solutions
1. Non-SUSY minima in standard linear SUGRA
We can consider string compactifications with
ingredients that all preserve some supersymmetry,
e.g. standard CY flux compactifications that give
rise to 4𝑑, 𝑁 = 1 SUGRA theories

2. Non-supersymmetric branes break SUSY

We can use stringy ingredients that break
supersymmetry, like anti-Dp-branes, e.g. the above
plus anti-D3-brane uplift a la KKLT and LVS
 Outline
• Introduction and motivation

• D-branes and non-linear SUSY

• D-branes in flux compactifications

• Conclusion
 The Volkov-Akulov model
• Consider a theory with a single massless fermion 𝜆
𝑆𝑉𝐴 = −∫ 𝑑4 𝑥(1 + 𝜆𝛾 ҧ 𝜇 𝜕𝜇 𝜆 + ⋯ )

• For appropriately higher order terms, the above

action is invariant under a fermionic symmetry:
ҧ 𝜇 𝜖 𝜕𝜇 𝜆
𝛿𝜖 𝜆 = 𝜖 + 𝜆𝛾
 The Volkov-Akulov model
• Consider a theory with a single massless fermion 𝜆
𝑆𝑉𝐴 = −∫ 𝑑4 𝑥(1 + 𝜆𝛾 ҧ 𝜇 𝜕𝜇 𝜆 + ⋯ )

• For appropriately higher order terms, the above

action is invariant under a fermionic symmetry:
ҧ 𝜇 𝜖 𝜕𝜇 𝜆
𝛿𝜖 𝜆 = 𝜖 + 𝜆𝛾

• The above symmetry is supersymmetry!

𝛿𝜖1 , 𝛿𝜖2 𝜆 = 𝜖1ҧ 𝛾 𝜇 𝜖2 + 𝜖2ҧ 𝛾 𝜇 𝜖1 𝜕𝜇 𝜆
 The Volkov-Akulov model
• Consider a theory with a single massless fermion 𝜆
𝑆𝑉𝐴 = −∫ 𝑑4 𝑥(1 + 𝜆𝛾 ҧ 𝜇 𝜕𝜇 𝜆 + ⋯ )

• For appropriately higher order terms, the above

action is invariant under a fermionic symmetry:
ҧ 𝜇 𝜖 𝜕𝜇 𝜆
𝛿𝜖 𝜆 = 𝜖 + 𝜆𝛾

• We have a supersymmetric theory with a single

fermion!
 The Volkov-Akulov model
• Consider a theory with a single massless fermion 𝜆
𝑆𝑉𝐴 = −∫ 𝑑4 𝑥(1 + 𝜆𝛾 ҧ 𝜇 𝜕𝜇 𝜆 + ⋯ )

• For appropriately higher order terms, the above

action is invariant under a fermionic symmetry:
ҧ 𝜇 𝜖 𝜕𝜇 𝜆
𝛿𝜖 𝜆 = 𝜖 + 𝜆𝛾

• In any standard theory with spontaneously broken

SUSY we have a Goldstino and all other fields are
generically massive, so at low energies we have the
above
 The Volkov-Akulov model
• Consider a theory with a single massless fermion 𝜆
𝑆𝑉𝐴 = −∫ 𝑑4 𝑥(1 + 𝜆𝛾 ҧ 𝜇 𝜕𝜇 𝜆 + ⋯ )

• For appropriately higher order terms, the above

action is invariant under a fermionic symmetry:
ҧ 𝜇 𝜖 𝜕𝜇 𝜆
𝛿𝜖 𝜆 = 𝜖 + 𝜆𝛾

• Note, however, that SUSY is non-linear realized and

mismatch between bosons and fermions
D-branes in string theory
 D-branes in string theory
Let us recall some facts about D-branes in flat space:
• The D-brane breaks half of the supersymmetry
spontaneously and the other half is linearly realized
• Example: a D3-brane (or an anti-D3-brane)
 D-branes in string theory
Let us recall some facts about D-branes in flat space:
• The D-brane breaks half of the supersymmetry
spontaneously and the other half is linearly realized
• Example: a D3-brane (or an anti-D3-brane)

• It preserve 16 linearly realized

supercharges, i.e. 𝑁 = 4 in 4d

• The worldvolume fields

𝐴𝜇 , 𝜆0 , 𝜙 𝑖 , 𝜆𝑖 , 𝑖 = 1, 2, 3 can be
package into an 𝑁 = 4 multiplet
 D-branes in string theory
Let us recall some facts about D-branes in flat space:
• The D-brane breaks half of the supersymmetry
spontaneously and the other half is linearly realized
• Example: a D3-brane (or an anti-D3-brane)

• 16 supercharges are spontaneously

broken at the string scale 𝒪(𝛼 ′ )

• The Goldstone fermions aka

Goldstinos are 𝜆0 and 𝜆𝑖 , 𝑖 = 1, 2, 3
 D-branes in string theory
Let us recall some facts about D-branes in flat space:
• The D-brane breaks half of the supersymmetry
spontaneously and the other half is linearly realized
• Example: An anti-D3-brane on top of an O3
Kallosh, Wrase 1411.1121

𝑂3 projection
𝐴𝜇 , 𝜆0 , 𝜙 𝑖 , 𝜆𝑖 𝜆0 , 𝜆𝑖
 D-branes in string theory
Let us recall some facts about D-branes in flat space:
• The D-brane breaks half of the supersymmetry
spontaneously and the other half is linearly realized
• Example: An anti-D3-brane on top of an O3
Kallosh, Wrase 1411.1121

𝑂3 projection
𝐴𝜇 , 𝜆0 , 𝜙 𝑖 , 𝜆𝑖 𝜆0 , 𝜆𝑖
𝑆 = −𝑑 4 𝑥 ∫ 1 + 𝜆ҧ𝐴 𝛾 𝜇 𝜕𝜇 𝜆𝐴 + ⋯ , 𝐴, 𝐵 = 0,1,2,3

𝛿𝜖𝐴 𝜆𝐵 = 𝜖 𝐴 𝛿𝐴 𝐵 + 𝜆ҧ𝐴 𝛾 𝜇 𝜖 𝐴 𝜕𝜇 𝜆𝐵
 D-branes in string theory
Let us recall some facts about D-branes in flat space:
• The D-brane breaks half of the supersymmetry
spontaneously and the other half is linearly realized
• Example: An anti-D3-brane on top of an O3
Kallosh, Wrase 1411.1121

𝑂3 projection
𝐴𝜇 , 𝜆0 , 𝜙 𝑖 , 𝜆𝑖 𝜆0 , 𝜆𝑖
𝑆 = −𝑑 4 𝑥 ∫ 1 + 𝜆ҧ𝐴 𝛾 𝜇 𝜕𝜇 𝜆𝐴 + ⋯ , 𝐴, 𝐵 = 0,1,2,3

𝛿𝜖𝐴 𝜆𝐵 = 𝜖 𝐴 𝛿𝐴 𝐵 + 𝜆ҧ𝐴 𝛾 𝜇 𝜖 𝐴 𝜕𝜇 𝜆𝐵

Exactly as Volkov-Akulov above!

 D-brane SUSY breaking
• Consider a standard 4d 𝑁 = 1 SUGRA theory:
1. All fields come in standard 𝑁 = 1 multiplets, i.e.
boson-fermion pairs
2. We can break SUSY via D-terms or F-terms but the
theory still is invariant under linear SUSY

SUSY breaking via branes is different!

 D-brane SUSY breaking
• Consider a standard 4d 𝑁 = 1 SUGRA theory
• Add a SUSY breaking brane that is not exactly but
almost calibrated
• For small angles 𝜃 SUSY breaking is small 𝜃
 D-brane SUSY breaking
• Consider a standard 4d 𝑁 = 1 SUGRA theory
• Add a SUSY breaking brane that is not exactly but
almost calibrated
• For small angles 𝜃 SUSY breaking is small 𝜃

• We can write the action in terms of a

standard F-term and a D-term, schematically
𝑉 = 𝑉𝐹 + 𝑉𝐷 ∙ (1 + sin 𝜃)

• For 𝜃 ≪ 1 this looks like standard SUGRA

 D-brane SUSY breaking
• Consider a standard 4d 𝑁 = 1 SUGRA theory
𝑉 = 𝑉𝐹 + 𝑉𝐷 ∙ (1 + sin 𝜃)
Cribiori, Roupec, Tourney, Van Proeyen, Wrase 19xx.xxxx

• For 𝜃 ≪ 1 this looks like standard SUGRA 𝜃

 D-brane SUSY breaking
• Consider a standard 4d 𝑁 = 1 SUGRA theory
𝑉 = 𝑉𝐹 + 𝑉𝐷 ∙ (1 + sin 𝜃)
Cribiori, Roupec, Tourney, Van Proeyen, Wrase 19xx.xxxx

• For 𝜃 = 0 this looks like standard SUGRA 𝜃

but otherwise it does not

 D-brane SUSY breaking
• Consider a standard 4d 𝑁 = 1 SUGRA theory
𝑉 = 𝑉𝐹 + 𝑉𝐷 ∙ (1 + sin 𝜃)
Cribiori, Roupec, Tourney, Van Proeyen, Wrase 19xx.xxxx

• For 𝜃 = 0 this looks like standard SUGRA 𝜃

but otherwise it does not

• One can show that there is no field redefinition
that leads to standard linear SUSY
• Trivial for 𝜃 = 𝜋, i.e. brane-anti-brane or
anti-brane on top of O-plane
 D-brane SUSY breaking
• Consider a standard 4d 𝑁 = 1 SUGRA theory
𝑉 = 𝑉𝐹 + 𝑉𝐷 ∙ (1 + sin 𝜃)
Cribiori, Roupec, Tourney, Van Proeyen, Wrase 19xx.xxxx

• For 𝜃 = 0 this looks like standard SUGRA 𝜃

but otherwise it does not

• This setup and all others can be written using
standard SUSY with constrained multiplets
• Non-linear SUSY is constraining, and there exist
non-renormalization theorems
 Outline
• Introduction and motivation

• D-branes and non-linear SUSY

• D-branes in flux compactifications

• Conclusion
 dS vacua in string theory
• The first dS vacua in string theory were constructed over a
decade ago
Kachru, Kallosh, Linde, Trivedi hep-th/0301240
Balasubramanian, Berglund, Conlon, Quevedo hep-th/0502058
Conlon, Quevedo, Suruliz hep-th/0505076
• They were obtained via a two step procedure:
Adding an
anti-D3-
brane “uplift”

AdS vacuum dS vacuum

 dS vacua in string theory
• The uplifting term seems to explicitly break
supersymmetry
𝜇4
𝑉 = 𝑒 𝐾 𝐾𝐼𝐽 ҧ𝐷𝐼 𝑊𝐷𝐽 𝑊 − 3 𝑊 2 +
𝑇 + 𝑇ത 2

𝐾 = −3 log 𝑇 + 𝑇ത
𝑊 = 𝑊0 − 𝐴 𝑒 −𝑎𝑇
 dS vacua in string theory
• The uplifting term seems to explicitly break
supersymmetry
𝜇4
𝑉 = 𝑒 𝐾 𝐾𝐼𝐽 ҧ𝐷𝐼 𝑊𝐷𝐽 𝑊 − 3 𝑊 2 +
𝑇 + 𝑇ത 2

𝐾 = −3 log 𝑇 + 𝑇ത
𝑊 = 𝑊0 − 𝐴 𝑒 −𝑎𝑇

• Can we package the uplift term into 𝐾, 𝑊 or D?

 dS vacua in string theory
• The uplifting term seems to explicitly break
supersymmetry
𝜇4
𝑉 = 𝑒 𝐾 𝐾𝐼𝐽 ҧ𝐷𝐼 𝑊𝐷𝐽 𝑊 − 3 𝑊 2 +
𝑇 + 𝑇ത 2

𝐾 = −3 log 𝑇 + 𝑇ത
𝑊 = 𝑊0 − 𝐴 𝑒 −𝑎𝑇

• Can we package the uplift term into 𝐾, 𝑊 or D? YES

Talk by Niccolo Cribiori: Full SUGRA description of anti-D3-brane

 Classical dS vacua in type IIA
• Stable dS vacua have been searched for but only
critical points have been found (until recently)
Flauger, Robbins, Paban, TW 0812.3886
Caviezel, Koerber, Körs, Lüst, TW, Zagermann 0812.3551
Danielsson, Haque, Shiu, Van Riet 0907.2041
Caviezel, TW, Zagermann 0912.3287
Danielsson, Koerber, Van Riet 1003.3590
 Classical dS vacua in type IIA
• Stable dS vacua have been searched for but only
critical points have been found (until recently)
Flauger, Robbins, Paban, TW 0812.3886
Caviezel, Koerber, Körs, Lüst, TW, Zagermann 0812.3551
Danielsson, Haque, Shiu, Van Riet 0907.2041
Caviezel, TW, Zagermann 0912.3287
Danielsson, Koerber, Van Riet 1003.3590

• The above is a standard 4d 𝑁 = 1 SUGRA where it is

notoriously difficult to stabilize the sGoldstino
Covi, Gomez-Reino, Gross, Louis, Palma, Scrucca 0804.1073
Jungshans 1603.08939
Junghans, Zagermann 1612.06847
 Classical dS vacua in type IIA
• Tachyon always along 3-cycle moduli
• These 3-cycles can be wrapped by anti-D6-branes
Kallosh, Wrase 1808.09427
𝑁𝐷6
𝑉𝑑𝑆 = −𝑚2 𝐼𝑚 𝑍 − 1 2 +
𝐼𝑚 𝑍 3
 Classical dS vacua in type IIA

• Checked explicitly in the simplest example 𝑆 3 × 𝑆 3 /𝑍2 × 𝑍2

• The one tachyonic direction is now stable
 Classical dS vacua in type IIA

• Checked explicitly in the simplest example 𝑆 3 × 𝑆 3 /𝑍2 × 𝑍2

• The one tachyonic direction is now stable
• dS solutions at slightly shifted values, do not seem to be
trustworthy in this example (small volume, large coupling)
Kallosh, Wrase 1808.09427
 Classical dS vacua in type IIA

• Checked explicitly in the simplest example 𝑆 3 × 𝑆 3 /𝑍2 × 𝑍2

• The one tachyonic direction is now stable
• dS solutions at slightly shifted values, do not seem to be
trustworthy in this example (small volume, large coupling)
Kallosh, Wrase 1808.09427
Talk by Christoph Roupec Banlaki, Chowdhury, Roupec, Wrase 1811.07880
 Anti-branes instabilites
• Brane with anti-branes can lead to instabilities
• Anti-D3-brane at the bottom of KS throat can annihilate
against fluxes, but no problem
Michel, Mintun, Polchinski, Puhm, Saad 1412.5702
C.-Maldonado, Diaz, VR, Vercnocke 1507.01022
C.-Maldonado, Diaz, Gautason 1603.05678
 Anti-branes instabilites
• Brane with anti-branes can lead to instabilities
• Anti-D3-brane at the bottom of KS throat can annihilate
against fluxes, but no problem
Michel, Mintun, Polchinski, Puhm, Saad 1412.5702
C.-Maldonado, Diaz, VR, Vercnocke 1507.01022
C.-Maldonado, Diaz, Gautason 1603.05678
• Anti-D6-brane in type IIA not necessarily problematic
Danielsson, Gautason, Van Riet 1609.06529
Van Riet et al. 19xx.xxxxx
• Bifid throats for axion monodromy inflation
Retolaza, Uranga, Westphal 1504.02103
 SUSY breaking
• We break supersymmetry at the string scale:
𝑚4𝑑 ≪ 𝑚𝐾𝐾 ≪ 𝑚𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 𝑚𝑆𝑈𝑆𝑌 ≪ 𝑚𝑃𝑙

• In KKLT or LVS we reduce these scales via warping

𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑝𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑝𝑒𝑑
𝑚4𝑑 ≪ 𝑚𝐾𝐾 ≪ 𝑚𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 𝑚𝑆𝑈𝑆𝑌 ≪ 𝑚𝑃𝑙
 SUSY breaking
• We break supersymmetry at the string scale:
𝑚4𝑑 ≪ 𝑚𝐾𝐾 ≪ 𝑚𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 𝑚𝑆𝑈𝑆𝑌 ≪ 𝑚𝑃𝑙

• In KKLT or LVS we reduce these scales via warping

𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑝𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑝𝑒𝑑
𝑚4𝑑 ≪ 𝑚𝐾𝐾 ≪ 𝑚𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 𝑚𝑆𝑈𝑆𝑌 ≪ 𝑚𝑃𝑙

Does it make sense to use or do we even have

4d 𝑁 = 1 supergravity theory?
 SUSY breaking
• Yes, the SUSY action correctly describes the physics
for 𝐸 ≪ 𝑚𝐾𝐾
• SUSY makes life simple and constrains the action
 SUSY breaking
• Yes, the SUSY action correctly describes the physics
for 𝐸 ≪ 𝑚𝐾𝐾
• SUSY makes life simple and constrains the action
• We want almost vanishing cosmological constant
4
𝑉𝐹 = 𝑚𝑆𝑈𝑆𝑌 − 3𝑚32 𝑚𝑃𝑙
2
≈0
2
2
𝑚𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔
𝑚3 ~ ≪ 𝑚𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔
2 𝑚𝑃𝑙
• So we can have a 4d SUSY theory with gravitino
 Conclusion
• Non-supersymmetric branes lead to conceptually
different low energy SUGRA theories

• Non-linear SUSY plus stringy insights lead still to

fairly constrained and controlled actions
 Conclusion
• Non-supersymmetric branes lead to conceptually
different low energy SUGRA theories

• Non-linear SUSY plus stringy insights lead still to

fairly constrained and controlled actions

• These models might give insights into non-SUSY

landscape vs. swampland, in particular dS vacua but
hopefully much more
 Conclusion
• Non-supersymmetric branes lead to conceptually
different low energy SUGRA theories

• Non-linear SUSY plus stringy insights lead still to

fairly constrained and controlled actions

• These models might give insights into non-SUSY

landscape vs. swampland, in particular dS vacua but
hopefully much more

THANK YOU!