Twistor/ambitwistor strings and null-superstrings in spacetime of D=4, 10 and 11 dimensions

Abstract

We show that, at the classical level, the recently proposed 'ambitwistor string' model is equivalent to the spinor moving frame formulation of null-supersting, which in its turn is equivalent to Siegel's formulation of closed twistor string or to its higher dimensional generalizations. Although the null-(super)string is usually considered as describing the tensionless limit of (super)string, we show that its action can be derived from the spinor moving frame formulation of superstring also in the infinite tension limit. This observation, supplemented by some indirect arguments, allows us to conjecture the absence of critical dimensions, i.e. that the (ambi)twistor string based technique(s) to calculate field theory amplitudes can be developed not only in D=10 or 26, but also in D=11 and other dimensions. The D=11 and D=10 twistor strings are described in some details.

On soft theorems and form factors in N = 4 $$ \mathcal{N}=4 $$ SYM theory

“…and is also interesting in connection with different twistor string theories formulations proposed recently [43][44][45][46][47]. Besides, it allows study of scattering amplitudes with the use of powerful tools from combinatorics and algebraic geometry [40].…”

Einstein-Yang-Mills scattering amplitudes from scattering equations

“…However, the purely gluonic single-trace amplitudes in the heterotic theory give rise to correct CHY formulas. For other interesting developments related to ambitwistor formulations specializing to four dimensions, see [18,19]. While these constructions are based on the analog of the RNS formalism for strings, a version based on pure spinors was constructed by Berkovits [20] and further studied in [21].…”

On polarized scattering equations for superamplitudes of 11D supergravity and ambitwistor superstring

“…Furthermore, then it is convenient to introduce a spinor frame field v − αq (σ) [45] and a (purely gauge or Stückelberg) density ρ # (σ) and to use this to write the general solution of the constraints (3.6) in the form…”