Spinors

(It would require new field physics (dark spinors, I think they are called) to explain this possibility.) ❋ Unknown (2010)

The pair of spinors or the twistor constructs a manifold according to its projective structure, which defines light cones and so forth. ❋ Unknown (2009)

A twistor is a pair of spinors well what's a spinor? ❋ Unknown (2009)

The ellipsis involves derivatives of the other spinors and delta functions etc. ❋ Julianne (2008)

Since bivectors give you Lie algebras, you get gauge-group-type things, and you might think of spinors as fermions, and think of the vector space as spacetime, and even try to put such things together to form Lagrangians … and see where Einstein-type faith might lead. ❋ Mark (2007)

One way to see this is that a supersymmetric extension of Yang-Mills theory must have two component spinors, valued in one of these algebras. ❋ Sean (2006)

Another way to see this is that the supersymmetry charge is fermionic and this is generated by two component spinors that transform under a representation of SL (2, A). ❋ Sean (2006)

This point of view puts connections, spinors and the Dirac operator in central roles in modern geometry, and I happen to think it is a very deep and amazing fact that the same constructs are among the fundamental constructs of the standard model. ❋ Sean (2005)

{Q, Q} = 2H and the existence of Killing vectors coming from Killing spinors is the same. ❋ Mark (2005)

The rotational symmetry of a theory including spinors heavily depends on the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics. ❋ Unknown (2010)

Quite on the contrary, Lorentz vectors, tensors, spinors, and spintensors are possible, too - as long as they properly transform and the equations constraining them are Lorentz-covariant. ❋ Unknown (2010)

Élie Cartan discovered the theory of spinors (complex vectors) in 1913, but the electron spin to which they relate was only discovered in the mid 1920s. ❋ Unknown (2009)

In some sense spin geometry is the most fundamental, since you can build arbitrary sorts of tensors out of spinors, while you can’t construct spinors out of tensors. ❋ Sean (2005)

Dirac mass terms, assuming that Nature completes the neutrinos into electron-like 4-component spinors by additional right-handed neutrinos), it can still be understood why it is a good zeroth approximation to assume that the higgsino is massless. ❋ Unknown (2010)