Quantisation of twistor theory by cocycle twist (Q1006306)

The authors aim to ``quantize'' classic extended objects in twistor theory by applying a proceeding that associates to the coordinate algebras of these objects ``quantum algebras'' by means of a functorial cocycle twist. The paper, after a detailed Introduction, splits in to seven more sections. 2. Twistor space and correspondence space. 3. \(SL_4\) and unitary versions. 4. The quantum conformal group. 5. Quantum differential calculi on \({\mathbb C}_F[GL_4]\), \({\mathbb C}_F[\widetilde{{\mathbb C}{\mathbb M}^{\sharp}}]\) and \({\mathbb C}_F[\widetilde{T}]\). 6. Quantization by cotwists in the \(SU_n\) \(*\)-algebra version. 7. The Penrose-Ward transform. 8. The ADHM construction. The first part of the paper (Section 2 and Section 3) is devoted to write space-time and twistor space in homogeneous spaces in the language of coordinate functions, in order to apply the standard theory of quantization by means of a cocycle twist. These subjects constitute the central part of the paper. (Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6.) In the last part of the paper, they prove that this quantization method is compatible with the Penrose-Ward transform and the ADHM construction, respectively. (Section 7 and Section 8.) Remark. This paper is surely a beautiful application of the mathematical quantization by means of functorial cocycle twists. This approach has recently obtained a large consideration in works on quantization of mathematical structures. The principal motivation for this is that it gives a general criterion to interpret in noncommutative way classical geometric objects. Unfortunately the word ``quantization'', there used, it is seen also as a password to allow to such ``quantized objects'' to virtually live inside the quantum physical world. (``One of the motivations here is from the effective theory of the ends of open strings in a fixed D-brane [\textit{N. Seiberg} and \textit{E. Witten}, String theory and non-commutative geometry, J. High Energy Phys. 1999, No. 9, Paper No. 32, 93 p., electronic only (1999; Zbl 0957.81085)] and in this context a lot of attention has been drawn to the existence of noncommutative instantons and other non-trivial noncommutative geometry that emerges, see [\textit{N. Nekrasov} and \textit{A. Schwarz}, Commun. Math. Phys. 198, 689--703 (1998; Zbl 0923.58062)] and references therein to a large amount of literature. One also has the \(\theta\)-versions of \(S^4\) coming out of considerations of cyclic cohomology in noncommutative geometry (used to characterize what a noncommutative four-sphere should be), see notably [\textit{A. Connes} and \textit{G. Landi}, Commun. Math. Phys. 221, No. 1, 141--159 (2001; Zbl 0997.81045); \textit{G. Landi} and \textit{W. van Suijlekom}, Commun. Math. Phys. 260, No.~1, 203--225 (2005; Zbl 1093.58004)].'') But this is not true! Really quantization is a dynamical process that, in general, cannot be reduced to a rigid scheme, completely uprooted from any classic PDE. In other words quantization is a ``chapter'' of the geometric theory of PDE's. Therefore, quantize string theory or quantize field theory means to quantize PDE's. Then quantum D-branes can be considered suitable as solutions of such quantized PDE's. It may be useful also to underline that, since nowadays there exists a well developed geometric theory of noncommutative PDE's (quantum (super) PDE's), it is more advantageous in order to describe quantum phenomena, to directly encode such systems with quantum PDE's. Then one can see that the process of quantization of corresponding classic analogs is only an approximation of what one can see by starting with a completely noncommutative framework (i.e., PDE). (This criticism is the same just expressed for a similar work by \textit{G. Landi} [see Aspects of Mathematics E 37, 217--234 (2006; Zbl 1103.58002)]).