### Are Euclidian regions of preferred extremals quaternion-Kähler manifolds?

In blog comments Anonymous gave a link to an article about construction of 4-D quaternion-Kähler metrics with an isometry: they are determined by so called SU(∞) Toda equation. I tried to see whether quaternion-Kähler manifolds could be relevant for TGD.

From Wikipedia one can learn that QK is characterized by its holonomy, which is a subgroup of Sp(n)×Sp(1): Sp(n) acts as linear symplectic transformations of 2n-dimensional space (now real). In 4-D case tangent space contains 3-D sub-manifold identifiable as imaginary quaternions. CP2 is one example of QK manifold for which the subgroup in question is SU(2)× U(1) and which has non-vanishing constant curvature: the components of Weyl tensor represent the quaternionic imaginary units. QKs are Einstein manifolds: Einstein tensor is proportional to metric.

What is really interesting from TGD point of view is that twistorial considerations show that one can assign to QK a special kind of twistor space (twistor space in the mildest sense requires only orientability). Wiki tells that if Ricci curvature is positive, this (6-D) twistor space is what is known as projective Fano manifold with a holomorphic contact structure. Fano variety has the nice property that as (complex) line bundle it has enough sections to define the imbedding of its base space to a projective variety. Fano variety is also complete: this is algebraic geometric analogy of topological property known as compactness.

QK manifolds and twistorial formulation of TGD

How the QKs could relate to the twistorial formulation of TGD?

1. In the twistor formulation of TGD the space-time surfaces are 4-D base spaces of 6-D twistor spaces in the Cartesian product of 6-D twistor spaces of M4 and CP2 - the only twistor spaces with Kähler structure. In TGD framework space-time regions can have either Euclidian or Minkowskian signature of induced metric. The lines of generalized Feynman diagrams have Euclidian signature.
2. Could the twistor spaces associated with the lines of generalized Feynman diagrams be projective Fano manifolds? Could QK structure characterize Euclidian regions of preferred extremals of Kähler action. Could a generalization to Minkowskian regions exist. I have proposed that so called Hamilton-Jacobi structure characterizes preferred extremals in Minkowskian regions. It could be the natural Minkowskian counterpart for the quaternion Kähler structure, which involves only imaginary quaternions and could make sense also in Minkowski signature. Note that unit sphere of imaginary quaternions defines the sphere serving as fiber of the twistor bundle.
3. Why it would be natural to have QK that is corresponding twistor space which is projective contact Fano manifold?
1. Fano property implies that the 4-D Euclidian space-time region representing line of the Feynman diagram can be imbedded as a sub-manifold to complex projective space CPn. This would allow to use the powerful machinery of projective geometry in TGD framework. This could also be a space-time correlate for the fact that CPns emerge in twistor Grassmann approach expected to generalize to TGD framework.
2. CP2 allows both projective (trivially) and contact (even symplectic) structures. δ M4+ × CP2 allows contact structure - I call it loosely symplectic structure. Also 3-D light-like orbits of partonic 2-surfaces allow contact structure. Therefore holomorphic contact structure for the twistor space is natural.
3. Both the holomorphic contact structure and projectivity of CP2 would be inherited if QK property is true. Contact structures at orbits of partonic 2-surfaces would extend to holomorphic contact structures in the Euclidian regions of space-time surface representing lines of generalized Feynman diagrams. Projectivity of Fano space would be also inherited from CP2 or its twistor space SU(3)/U(1)× U(1) (flag manifold identifiable as the space of choices for quantization axes of color isospin and hypercharge).
4. Could the isometry (or possibly isometries) for QK be seen as a remnant of color symmetry or rotational symmetries of M4 factor of imbedding space? The only remnant of color symmetry at the level of imbedding space spinors is anomalous color hyper charge (color is like orbital angular momentum and associated with spinor harmonic in CP2 center of mass degrees of freedom). Could the isometry correspond to anomalous hypercharge?
How to choose the quaternionic imaginary units for the space-time surface?

Parallellizability is a very special property of 3-manifolds allowing to choose quaternionic imaginary units: global choice of one of them gives rise to twistor structure.

1. The selection of time coordinate defines a slicing of space-time surface by 3-surfaces. GCI would suggest that a generic slicing gives rise to 3 quaternionic units at each point each 3-surface? The parallelizability of 3-manifolds - a unique property of 3-manifolds - means the possibility to select global coordinate frame as section of the frame bundle: one has 3 sections of tangent bundle whose inner products give rose to the components of the metric (now induced metric) guarantees this. The tri-bein or its dual defined by two-forms obtained by contracting tri-bein vectors with permutation tensor gives the quanternionic imaginary units. The construction depends on 3-metric only and could be carried out also in GRT context. Note however that topology change for 3-manifold might cause some non-trivialities. The metric 2-dimensionality at the light-like orbits of partonic 2-surfaces should not be a problem for a slicing by space-like 3-surfaces. The construction makes sense also for the regions of Minkowskian signature.
2. In zero energy ontology (ZEO)- a purely TGD based feature - there are very natural special slicings. The first one is by linear time-like Minkowski coordinate defined by the direction of the line connecting the tips of the causal diamond (CD). Second one is defined by the light-cone proper time associated with either light-cone in the intersection of future and past directed light-cones defining CD. Neither slicing is global as it is easy to see.

The relationship to quaternionicity conjecture and M8-H duality

One of the basic conjectures of TGD is that preferred extremals consist of quaternionic/ co-quaternionic (associative/co-associative) regions (see this). Second closely related conjecture is M8-H duality allowing to map quaternionic/co-quaternionic surfaces of M8 to those of M4× CP2. Are these conjectures consistent with QK in Euclidian regions and Hamilton-Jacobi property in Minkowskian regions? Consider first the definition of quaternionic and co-quaternionic space-time regions.

1. Quaternionic/associative space-time region (with Minkowskian signature) is defined in terms of induced octonion structure obtained by projecting octonion units defined by vielbein of H= M4× CP2 to space-time surface and demanding that the 4 projections generate quaternionic sub-algebra at each point of space-time.

If there is also unique complex sub-algebra associated with each point of space-time, one obtains one can assign to the tangent space-of space-time surface a point of CP2. This allows to realize M8-H duality (see this) as the number theoretic analog of spontaneous compactification (but involving no compactification) by assigning to a point of M4=M4× CP2 a point of M4× CP2. If the image surface is also quaternionic, this assignment makes sense also for space-time surfaces in H so that M8-H duality generalizes to H-H duality allowing to assign to given preferred extremal a hierarchy of extremals by iterating this assignment. One obtains a category with morphisms identifiable as these duality maps.

2. Co-quaternionic/co-associative structure is conjectured for space-time regions of Euclidian signature and 4-D CP2 projection. In this case normal space of space-time surface is quaternionic/associative. A multiplication of the basis by preferred unit of basis gives rise to a quaternionic tangent space basis so that one can speak of quaternionic structure also in this case.
3. Quaternionicity in this sense requires unique identification of a preferred time coordinate as imbedding space coordinate and corresponding slicing by 3-surfaces and is possible only in TGD context. The preferred time direction would correspond to real quaternionic unit. Preferred time coordinate implies that quaternionic structure in TGD sense is more specific than the QK structure in Euclidian regions.
4. The basis of induced octonionic imaginary unit allows to identify quaternionic imaginary units linearly related to the corresponding units defined by tri-bein vectors. Note that the multiplication of octonionic units is replaced with multiplication of antisymetric tensors representing them when one assigns to the quaternionic structure potential QK structure. Quaternionic structure does not require Kähler structure and makes sense for both signatures of the induced metric. Hence a consistency with QK and its possible analog in Minkowskian regions is possible.
5. The selection of the preferred imaginary quaternion unit is necessary for M8-H correspondence. This selection would also define the twistor structure. For quaternion-Kähler manifold this unit would be covariantly constant and define Kähler form - maybe as the induced Kähler form.
6. Also in Minkowskian regions twistor structure requires a selection of a preferred imaginary quaternion unit. Could the induced Kähler form define the preferred imaginary unit also now? Is the Hamilton-Jacobi structure consistent with this?

Hamilton-Jacobi structure involves a selection of 2-D complex plane at each point of space-time surface. Could induced Kähler magnetic form for each 3-slice define this plane? It is not necessary to require that 3-D Kähler form is covariantly constant for Minkowskian regions. Indeed, massless extremals representing analogs of photons are characterized by local polarization and momentum direction and carry time-dependent Kähler-electric and -magnetic fields. One can however ask whether monopole flux tubes carry covariantly constant Kähler magnetic field: they are indeed deformations of what I call cosmic strings (see this) for which this condition holds true?

See the chapter Classical part of the twistor story or the article Classical part of the twistor story.