1st Reading

October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

1 International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics

Vol. 4, No. 8 (2007) 1–19
3
c World Scientific Publishing Company

5 A CHERN–SIMONS E8 GAUGE THEORY OF GRAVITY IN

D = 15, GRAND UNIFICATION AND GENERALIZED
7 GRAVITY IN CLIFFORD SPACES

CARLOS CASTRO
9 Center for Theoretical Studies of Physical Systems
Clark Atlanta University, Atlanta, GA 30314, USA
11 castro@ctsps.cau.edu

Received 22 March 2007

13 Accepted 13 July 2007

A novel Chern–Simons E8 gauge theory of gravity in D = 15 based on an octic E8

15 invariant expression in D = 16 (recently constructed by Cederwall and Palmkvist) is
developed. A grand unification model of gravity with the other forces is very plausible
17 within the framework of a supersymmetric extension (to incorporate spacetime fermions)
of this Chern–Simons E8 gauge theory. We review the construction showing why the
19 ordinary 11D Chern–Simons gravity theory (based on the Anti de Sitter group) can
be embedded into a Clifford-algebra valued gauge theory and that an E8 Yang–Mills
21 field theory is a small sector of a Clifford (16) algebra gauge theory. An E8 gauge
bundle formulation was instrumental in understanding the topological part of the 11-
23 dim M-theory partition function. The nature of this 11-dim E8 gauge theory remains
unknown. We hope that the Chern–Simons E8 gauge theory of gravity in D = 15
25 advanced in this work may shed some light into solving this problem after a dimensional
reduction.

27 Keywords:

1. Introduction
29 Exceptional, Jordan, Division and Clifford algebras are deeply related and essen-
tial tools in many aspects of Physics [3, 5, 8, 9, 14–20]. Ever since the discovery
31 [1] that 11D supergravity, when dimensionally reduced to an n-dim torus led to
maximal supergravity theories with hidden exceptional symmetries En for n ≤ 8, it
33 has prompted intensive research to explain the higher dimensional origins of these
hidden exceptional En symmetries [2, 6]. More recently, there has been a lot of
35 interest in the infinite-dim hyperbolic Kac–Moody E10 and nonlinearly realized
E11 algebras arising in the asymptotic chaotic oscillatory solutions of supergravity
37 fields close to cosmological singularities [1, 2].
The classification of symmetric spaces associated with the scalars of N extended
39 supergravity theories, emerging from compactifications of 11D supergravity to lower
dimensions, and the construction of the U -duality groups as spectrum-generating

1
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

2 C. Castro

1 symmetries for four-dimensional BPS black holes [6] also involved exceptional sym-
metries associated with the exceptional magic Jordan algebras J3 [R, C, H, O]. The
3 discovery of the anomaly free 10-dim heterotic string for the algebra E8 × E8 was
another hallmark of the importance of exceptional Lie groups in Physics.
5 The E8 group was proposed long ago [24] as a candidate for a grand unification
model building in D = 4. An extensive review of the E6 grand unified models may
7 be found in [26]. The supersymmetric E8 model has more recently been studied as a
fermion family and grand unification model [25] under the assumption that there is
9 a vacuum gluino condensate but this condensate is not accompanied by a dynamical
generation of a mass gap in the pure E8 gauge sector. A study of the interplay among
11 exceptional groups, del Pezzo surfaces and the extra massless particles arising from
rational double point singularities can be found in [38]. Clifford algebras and E8 are
13 key ingredients in Smith’s D4 − D5 − E6 − E7 − E8 grand unified model in D = 8 [6].
An E8 gauge bundle was instrumental in the understanding the topological
15 part of the M-theory partition function [27, 32]. A mysterious E8 bundle which
restricts from 12-dim to the 11-dim bulk of M theory can be compatible with 11-dim
17 supersymmetry. The nature of this 11-dim E8 gauge theory remains unknown. We
hope that the Chern–Simons E8 gauge theory of gravity in D = 15 advanced in
19 this work may shed some light into solving this question.
E8 Yang–Mills theory can naturally be embedded into a Cl(16) algebra gauge
21 theory [33] and the 11D Chern–Simons (super) gravity [4] is a very small sector of
a more fundamental polyvector-valued gauge theory in Clifford spaces. Polyvector-
23 valued supersymmetries [11] in Clifford-spaces [3] turned out to be more fundamen-
tal than the supersymmetries associated with M, F theory superalgebras [7, 10]. For
25 this reason, we believe that Clifford structures may shed some light into the origins
behind the hidden E8 symmetry of 11D supergravity and reveal more important
27 features underlying M, F theory.
The main purpose of this work is to develop a Chern–Simons E8 gauge theory
29 of gravity in D = 15 based on an octic E8 invariant expression in D = 16 recently
constructed by [23], and to propose a grand unification of gravity with all the
31 other forces within the framework of a supersymmetric extension (to incorporate
spacetime fermions) of the Chern–Simons E8 gauge theory. Our octic E8 invariant
33 action has 37 terms and contains: (i) the Lanczos–Lovelock gravitational action
associated with the 15-dim boundary ∂M16 of the 16-dim manifold; (ii) five terms
35 with the same structure as the Pontryagin p4 (F IJ ) 16-form associated with the
SO(16) spin connection ΩIJ µ where the indices I, J run from 1, 2, . . . , 16; (iii) the
37 fourth power of the standard quadratic E8 invariant [I2 ]4 ; (iv) plus 30 additional
IJ α
terms involving powers of the E8 -valued Fµν and Fµν field-strength (two-forms).
39 In the final section, we explain how a Clifford algebra gauge theory (that
includes the Chern–Simons gravity action) can itself be embedded into a more
41 fundamental polyvector-valued gauge theory in Clifford spaces involving ten-
sorial coordinates xµ1 µ2 , xµ1 µ2 µ3 , . . . in addition to antisymmetric tensor gauge
fields Aµ1 µ2 , Aµ1 µ2 µ3 , . . . . The polyvector–valued supersymmetric extension of this
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

A Chern–Simons E8 Gauge Theory of Gravity 3

1 polyvector valued bosonic gauge theory in Clifford spaces may reveal more impor-
tant features of a Clifford-algebraic structure underlying M, F, S theory in D =
3 11, 12, 13 dimensions. An overview of the basic features of the extended relativity
in Clifford spaces can be found in [3] and a polyvector-valued generalized super-
5 symmetry algebra in Clifford spaces was presented in [11].

2. A Chern–Simons E8 Gauge Theory of Gravity

7 2.1. E8 Yang–Mills in D = 4 and Clifford-algebra-valued
gauge theories
9 It is well known among the experts that the E8 algebra admits the SO(16) decom-
position 248 → 120 ⊕ 128. The E8 admits also a SL(8, R) decomposition [6]. Due
11 to the triality property, the SO(8) admits the vector 8v and spinor representa-
tions 8s , 8c . After a triality rotation, the SO(16) vector and spinor representations
13 decompose as [6]
16 → 8s ⊕ 8c . (2.1a)
15 128s → 8v ⊕ 56v ⊕ 1 ⊕ 28 ⊕ 35v . (2.1b)
128c → 8s ⊕ 56s ⊕ 8c ⊕ 56c . (2.1c)
17 To connect with (real) Clifford algebras [8], i.e. how to fit E8 into a Clifford struc-
ture, start with the 248-dim fundamental representation E8 that admits a SO(16)
19 decomposition given by the 120-dim bivector representation plus the 128-dim chiral-
spinor representations of SO(16). From the modulo eight periodicity of Clifford alge-
21 bras over the reals one has Cl(16) = Cl(2 × 8) = Cl(8) ⊗ Cl(8), meaning, roughly,
that the 216 = 256 × 256 Cl(16)-algebra matrices can be obtained effectively by
23 replacing each one of the entries of the 28 = 256 = 16 × 16 Cl(8)-algebra matri-
ces by the 16 × 16 matrices of the second copy of the Cl(8) algebra. In particular,
25 120 = 1 × 28 + 8 × 8 + 28 × 1 and 128 = 8 + 56 + 8 + 56, hence the 248-dim E8 algebra
decomposes into a 120 + 128 dim structure such that E8 can be represented indeed
27 within a tensor product of Cl(8) algebras.
At the E8 Lie algebra level, the E8 gauge connection decomposes into the SO(16)
vector I, J = 1, 2, . . . , 16 and (chiral) spinor A = 1, 2, . . . , 128 indices as follows
Aµ = AIJ
µ XIJ + Aµ YA ,
A
XIJ = −XJI ,
(2.2)
I, J = 1, 2, 3, . . . , 16, A = 1, 2, . . . , 128,
where XIJ , YA are the E8 generators. The Clifford algebra (Cl(8) ⊗ Cl(8)) structure
29 behind the SO(16) decomposition of the E8 gauge field AIJ µ XIJ + Aµ YA can be
A

deduced from the expansion of the generators XIJ , YA in terms of the Cl(16) algebra
31 generators. The Cl(16) bivector basis admits the decomposition

ij (γij ⊗ 1) + bij (1 ⊗ γij ) + cij (γi ⊗ γj ),

X IJ = aIJ IJ IJ
(2.3)
33 where γi , are the Clifford algebra generators of the Cl(8) algebra present in Cl(16) =
Cl(8) ⊗ Cl(8); 1 is the unit Cl(8) algebra element that can be represented by a unit
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

4 C. Castro

1 16×16 diagonal matrix. The tensor products ⊗ of the 16×16 Cl(8)-algebra matrices,
like γi ⊗ 1, γi ⊗ γj , . . . furnish a 256 × 256 Cl(16)-algebra matrix, as expected.
3 Therefore, the decomposition in (2.3) yields the 28 + 28 + 8 × 8 = 56 + 64 = 120-dim
bivector representation of SO(16); i.e. for each fixed values of IJ there are 120 terms
5 in the right-hand side of (2.3), that match the number of independent components
of the E8 generators X IJ = −X JI , given by 12 (16 × 15) = 120. The decomposition
7 of YA is more subtle. A spinor Ψ in 16D has 28 = 256 components and can be
decomposed into a 128 component left-handed spinor ΨA and a 128 component
9 right-handed spinor ΨȦ ; the 256 spinor indices are α = A, Ȧ; β = B, Ḃ, . . . with
A, B = 1, 2, . . . , 128 and Ȧ · Ḃ = 1, 2, . . . , 128, respectively.
11 Spinors are elements of right (left) ideals of the Cl(16) algebra and admit the
expansion Ψ = Ψα ξ α in a 256-dim spinor basis ξ α which in turn can be expanded as
13 sums of Clifford polyvectors of mixed grade; i.e. into a sum of scalars, vectors, bivec-
tors, trivectors, . . . Minimal left/right ideals elements of Clifford algebras may be
15 systematically constructed by means of idempotents e2 = e such that the geometric
product of Cl(p, q)e generates the ideal [22].
The commutation relations of E8 are [6]
[X IJ , X KL ] = 4(δ IK X LJ − δ IL X KJ + δ JK X IL − δ JL X IK ),
1 1 αβ IJ (2.4)
[XIJ , Y α ] = − Γαβ Y β ; [Y α
, Y β
] = Γ X , Γ αβ
= [Γ I , Γ J ]αβ
.
2 IJ 4 IJ IJ

The combined E8 indices are denoted by A ≡ [IJ], α (120 + 128 = 248 indices in
total) that yield the Killing metric and the structure constants
1 1 A BCD
η AB = T rT A T B = − fCD f , (2.5a)
60 60
1
f IJ,KL,MN = −8δ IK δMN
LJ
+ permutations; IJ
fαβ = − ΓIJ ; (2.5b)
2 αβ
1 IJ KL,CD
η IJKL = −
f f .
60 CD
We shall proceed with the Cl(16) gauge theory that encodes the exceptional Lie
algebra E8 symmetry from the start. The E8 gauge theory in D = 4 is based on
the E8 -valued field strengths
IJ
Fµν XIJ = (∂µ AIJ
ν − ∂ν Aµ )XIJ + Aµ Aν
IJ KL MN
[XKL , XMN ] + Aα
µ Aν [Yα , Yβ ], (2.6)
β

A
Fµν Yα = (∂µ Aα
ν − ∂ν Aµ )Yα + Aµ Aν [Yα , XIJ ].
α α IJ
(2.7)
The E8 actions are



4 1 A B µνρτ A B
STopological [E8 ] = d x T r[Fµν Fρτ TA TB ] = d4 xFµν Fρτ ηAB µνρτ
60


= d4 x[Fµν
IJ KL
Fρτ ηIJKL + Fµνα β
Fρτ IJ β
ηαβ + 2Fµν Fρτ ηIJβ ]µνρτ ,

(2.8)
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

A Chern–Simons E8 Gauge Theory of Gravity 5

where µνρτ is the covariantized permutation symbol and

√ 1 A B √ A B
SY M [E8 ] = d4 x g T r[Fµν Fρτ TA TB ]g µρ g ντ = d4 x gFµν Fρτ ηAB g µρ g ντ
60


√
= d4 x g[Fµν IJ KL
Fρτ ηIJKL + Fµν α
Fρτβ IJ β
ηαβ + 2Fµν Fρτ ηIJβ ]g µρ g ντ . (2.9)

The above E8 actions (are part of) can be embedded onto more general Cl(16)
actions with a much larger number of terms given by


M N
STopological [Cl(16)] = d4 xFµν Fρτ ΓM ΓN µνρτ


M N
= d4 xFµν Fρτ GMN µνρτ , (2.10)

and


√ M N
SY M [Cl(16)] = d4 x gFµν Fρτ ΓM ΓN g µρ g ντ


√ M N
= d4 x gFµν Fρτ GMN g µρ g ντ , (2.11)

where ΓM ΓN  = GMN 1 denotes the scalar part of the Clifford geometric product
of the gammas. Notice that there are a total of 65536 terms in

M N I I I1 I2 I1 I2
Fµν Fρτ GMN = Fµν Fρτ + Fµν Fρτ + Fµν Fρτ
+ · · · + Fµν
I1 I2 ...I16 I1 I2 ...I16
Fρτ , (2.12)

where the indices run as I = 1, 2, . . . , 16. The Clifford algebra Cl(16) has the graded
structure (scalars, bivectors, trivectors, . . . , pseudoscalar) given by

1 16 120 560 1820 4368 8008 11440 12870

, (2.13)
11440 8008 4368 1820 560 120 16 1

1 consistent with the dimension of the Cl(16) algebra 216 = 256 × 256 = 65536.
The possibility that one can accommodate another copy of the E8 algebra
within the Cl(16) algebraic structure warrants further investigation by working
with the duals of the bivectors XIJ and recurring to the remaining YȦ genera-
tors. The motivation is to understand the full symmetry of the E8 × E8 heterotic
string from this Clifford algebraic perspective. A clear embedding is, of course,
the following

E8 × E8 ⊂ Cl(8) ⊗ Cl(8) ⊗ Cl(8) ⊗ Cl(8) ⊂ Cl(16) ⊗ Cl(16) = Cl(32), (2.14)

 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

6 C. Castro

1 where SO(32) ⊂ Cl(32) and SO(32) is also an anomaly free group of the heterotic
string that has the same dimension and rank as E8 × E8 .

3 2.2. An E8 gauge theory of gravity based on an octic invariant

The action that defines a Chern–Simons E8 gauge theory of gravity in 15-dim is


S= F F . . . F E8
M16


= (F M1 ∧ F M2 ∧ · · · ∧ F M8 )ΥM1 M2 M3 ···M8
M16


(15)
= LCS (A, F). (2.15)
∂M16

The E8 Lie-algebra-valued 16-form F 8  is closed : d(F M1 TM1 ∧ F M2 TM2 ∧ · · · ∧

5 F M8 TM8 ) = 0 and locally can always be written as an exact form in terms of
(15)
an E8 -valued Chern–Simons 15-form as I16 = dLCS (A, F). For instance, when
7 M16 = S 16 the 15-dim boundary integral (2.15) is evaluated in the two coordinate
patches of the equator S 15 = ∂M16 of S 16 leading to the integral of tr(g−1 dg)15 (up
9 to numerical factors) when the gauge potential A is written locally as A = g−1 dg
and g belongs to the E8 Lie-algebra. The integral is characterized by the elements of
11 the homotopy group π15 (E8 ). S 16 can also be represented in terms of quaternionic
and octonionic projectives spaces as HP 4 , OP 2 , respectively.
13 In order to evaluate the operation · · ·E8 in the action it involves the exis-
tence of an octic E8 group invariant tensor ΥM1 M2 ...M8 that was recently con-
15 structed by Cederwall and Palmkvist [23] using the Mathematica package GAMMA
based on the full machinery of the Fierz identities. The entire octic E8 invari-
17 ant contains powers of the SO(16) bivector X IJ and spinorial Y α generators
X 8 , X 6 Y 2 , X 4 Y 4 , X 2 Y 6 , Y 8 . The corresponding number of terms is 6, 11, 12, 5, 2,
19 respectively, giving a total of 36 terms for the octic E8 invariant involving 36
numerical coefficients multiplying the corresponding powers of the E8 generators.
21 There is an extra term (giving a total of 37 terms) with an arbitrary constant
multiplying the fourth power of the quadratic invariant I2 = − 21 tr[(Fµν IJ
XJ )2 +
23 α
(Fµν Yα )2 ].
The Euler-density in 16D corresponds to the Pfaffian associated with the 16×16
antisymmetric matrix F IJ where the components F IJ can be read from Eq. (2.6).
The Euler (Born–Infled) action density is
√
Pfaffian(F) ≡ det F = LEuler = F I1 J1 F I2 J2 F I3 J3 . . . F I8 J8 I1 J1 I2 J2 ...I8 J8 ,
(2.16)
such that the exterior derivative of the gravitational 15-dim Lanczos–Lovelock
(15)
(LL) action LLL corresponding to the 15-dim boundary Σ = ∂M16 yields
the Euler-density 16-form dLLL = LEuler . Upon inserting the spacetime indices
µ1 , µ2 , . . . , µ16 , the Euler characteristic class invariant e(T M) of the SO(16)
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

A Chern–Simons E8 Gauge Theory of Gravity 7

tangent bundle associated with M16 is given by

SEuler = µ1 µ2 ...µ16 FµI11 µJ12 FµI32 µJ24 . . . FµI15
8 J8
µ16 I1 J1 I2 J2 ...I8 J8
M16


(15)
= dLLL
M16


(15)
= LLL (2.17)
Σ∂M16

Despite the higher powers of the curvature (after eliminating the spin connection
(15)
ωµab in terms of the eaµ field) the LLovelock furnishes equations of motion for the eaµ
field containing at most derivatives of second order, and not higher, due to the
Topological property of the Lovelock terms
   
(15) a1 a2 ea1 ea2 a13 a14 ea13 ea14
d(LLovelock ) = a1 a2 ...a16 R + ... R + T a15
l2 l2
= Euler density in 16D. (2.18)
The exterior derivative of the Lovelock terms can be rewritten compactly as
d(L15
Lovelock ) = I1 I2 ...I16 F
I1 I2
. . . F I15 I16 , (2.19)
where F I1 I2 is the curvature field strength associated with the SO(14, 2) connection
ΩIµ1 I2 in 16D and which can be decomposed in terms of the fields eaµ , ωµab , a, b =
1, 2, . . . , 15 by identifying ΩaD µ = 1l eaµ and Ωab ab
µ = ωµ so that the Torsion and
Lorenz curvature two-forms are
1
T a (ω, e) = F aD = dΩaD + Ωab ∧ ΩbD = (dea − ωba ∧ eb ),
l
1
F ab = (dΩab + Ωac ∧ Ωcb ) + (ΩaD ∧ ΩDb ) = Rab (ω) + 2 ea ∧ eb , (2.20)
l
Rab (ω) = dω ab + ωca ∧ ω cb ,
1 where a length parameter l must be introduced to match dimensions since the
connection has units of 1/l. This l parameter is related to the cosmological constant.
Another invariant is the L15 IJ
CS (Ωµ ) Chern–Simons 15-form associated with the
SO(16) spin connection whose exterior derivative
I1 I2 I7 I8
d(LCS )(ΩIJ
µ ) = FI2 FI3 . . . FI8 FI1


⇒ (LCS )(ΩIJ µ )
∂M16


= FII21 FII32 . . . FII87 FII18 (2.21)
M16

3 is one of the five terms contained in the definition of the Pontryagin p4 (F IJ ) invari-
ant 16-form (up to numerical factors) for the SO(14, 2) gauge connection in 16D.
5 As mentioned above, the SO(14, 2) connection ΩIJ a
µ can be broken into the eµ field
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

8 C. Castro

1 which gauges translations along the 15-dim boundary ∂M 16 and the SO(14, 1)
spin connection ωµab which gauges the Lorentz group SO(14, 1) associated with the
3 tangent space of the 15-dim boundary ∂M16 and such that the net number of
components is 15 + 12 (15 × 14) = 120 = 12 (16 × 15).
The relevant five terms contained in the octic E8 invariant found by [23] and
related to the five terms comprising the Pontryagin p4 (F IJ ) invariant 16-form (but
with different numerical factors) are of the form

tr[(F IJ XIJ )8 ] ⇒ µ1 µ2 ...µ16 FµI11 Iµ22 FµI32 Iµ34 FµI53 Iµ46 FµI74 Iµ58 FµI95 Iµ610 FµI11
6 I7 I7 I8 I8 I1
µ12 Fµ13 µ14 Fµ15 µ16 ,

(2.22)

which is the same term as (2.21), plus the other terms of the Pontryagin p4 (F IJ )
invariant 16-form given by
  
tr[(F IJ XIJ )2 ]4 ⇒ µ1 µ2 ...µ16 FµI11 µI22 FµI32 µI14 FµJ51µJ62 FµJ72µJ81
  L1 L2 L2 L1 
× FµK91µK 10
2
FµK112 K 1
µ12 Fµ13 µ14 Fµ15 µ16 , (2.23)
 I1 I2 I2 I3 I3 I4 I4 I1 
tr[(F XIJ ) ] ⇒ 
IJ 4 2 µ1 µ2 ...µ16
Fµ1 µ2 Fµ3 µ4 Fµ5 µ6 Fµ7 µ8
 J1 J2 J2 J3 
× Fµ9 µ10 Fµ11 µ12 FµJ13 3 J4 J4 J1
µ14 Fµ15 µ16 , (2.24)

5 and similar expressions for the remaining two terms

tr[(F IJ XIJ )6 ]tr[(F IJ XIJ )2 ], tr[(F IJ XIJ )4 ]tr[(F IJ XIJ )2 ]2 .

α α
The terms involving the fermionic generators Fµν (where the components Fµν
are given by Eq. (2.7)) in the octic E8 invariant are
 
tr[(F α Yα )8 ] ⇒ µ1 µ2 ...µ16 I1 I2 ...I16 Fµα11µ2 Γα 1 β1 β1
I1 I2 I3 I4 Fµ3 µ4
 
. . . Fµα134 µ14 Γα 4 β4 β4
I13 I14 I15 I16 Fµ15 µ16 , (2.25)
   
tr[(F α Yα )2 ]4 ⇒ µ1 µ2 ...µ16 Fµα11µ2 Fµα31µ4 . . . Fµα134 µ14 Fµα154 µ16 , . . . (2.26)

The terms involving both fermionic and bivector generators in the octic E8 invari-
ant are
 
tr[(F IJ XIJ )6 (F α Yα )2 ] ⇒ µ1 µ2 ...µ16 FµI11 Jµ12 FµI32 Jµ24 . . . FµI11
6 J6
µ12
 
× Fµα13 µ14 Γαβ β
I1 J1 I2 J2 ...I6 J6 Fµ15 µ16 . (2.27)
 
tr[(F IJ XIJ )4 (F α Yα )4 ] ⇒ µ1 µ2 ...µ16 FµI11 Jµ12 FµI32 Jµ24 FµI53 Jµ46 FµI74 µJ48
  α2 
× Fµα91µ10 Γα 1 β1 β1 α2 β2 β2
I1 J1 I2 J2 Fµ11 µ12 Fµ13 µ14 ΓI3 J3 I4 J4 Fµ15 µ16 ;
(2.28)
µ1 µ2 ...µ16
 I1 J1 I2 J2 I3 J4 I4 J4 
 Fµ1 µ2 Fµ3 µ4 Fµ5 µ6 Fµ7 µ8
 α1  α2 
Fµ9 µ10 Γα1 β1 β1 α2
I1 J1 I2 J2 I3 J3 I4 J4 Fµ11 µ12 Fµ13 µ14 Fµ15 µ16 ; . . . (2.29)
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

A Chern–Simons E8 Gauge Theory of Gravity 9

 
tr[(F IJ XIJ )6 ]tr[(F α Yα )2 ] ⇒ µ1 µ2 ...µ16 FµI11 µI22 FµI32 µI34 FµI53 µI46 FµI74 µI58 FµI95 µI610 FµI11
6 I1
µ12
 
× Fµα131 µ14 Fµα151 µ16 . (2.30)
 
tr[(F IJ XIJ )4 ]tr[(F α Yα )4 ] ⇒ µ1 µ2 ...µ16 FµI11 Iµ22 FµI32 Iµ34 FµI53 µI46 FµI74 µI18
  α2 
× Fµα91µ10 Γα 1 β1 β1 α2 β2
J1 J2 J3 J4 Fµ11 µ12 Fµ13 µ14 ΓJ3 J4 J1 J2 Fµ15 µ16 .
β2

(2.31)
  
tr[(F IJ XIJ )2 ]tr[(F α Yα )6 ] ⇒ µ1 µ2 ...µ16 FµI11 µI22 FµI32 µI14 Fµα51µ6 Γα1 β1 β1
J1 J2 J3 J4 Fµ7 µ8
 α2 
× Fµ9 µ10 Γα 2 β2 β2
J3 J4 J5 J6 Fµ11 µ12
 
× Fµα133 µ14 Γα 3 β3 β3
J5 J6 J1 J2 Fµ15 µ16 . . . (2.32)
1 Therefore, the E8 invariant octic action in 16D given by Eq. (2.15) with 36 +
1 = 37 terms contains: (i) the Lanczos–Lovelock gravitational action (2.17), (2.18)
3 associated with the 15-dim boundary ∂M16 ; (ii) five terms with the same structure
as the Pontryagin p4 (F IJ ) 16-form associated with the SO(16) spin connection ΩIJ µ ;
5 (iii) the fourth power of the quadratic invariant [I2 ]4 ; (iv) plus 30 additional terms
IJ α
involving powers of the E8 -valued Fµν and Fµν field-strength (two-forms) as shown
7 in Eqs. (2.22)–(2.32).
The impending project is the supersymmetric version of the octic E8 invariant
9 action (2.15). A vector supermultiplet [24, 25] involves Am µ ,λ
m
with 248 spacetime
fermions λm in the fundamental 248-dim representation of E8 (m = 1, 2, . . . , 248)
11 and 248 spacetime vectors (gluons) Am µ in the 248-dim adjoint representation. The
fermions are the gluinos in this very special case because the 248-dim fundamen-
13 tal and 248-dim adjoint representations of the exceptional E8 group coincide. The
exceptional group E8 is unique in this respect. In ordinary supersymmetric Yang–
15 Mills the superpartners of the fermions are scalars, however, in the supersymmet-
ric E8 Yang–Mills case, the fermions λm (gluinos) and the vectors Am µ (gluons)
17 comprise the vector supermultiplet. For a thorough discussion of the unique phe-
nomenological features of the E8 group as a candidate for a (supersymmetric) grand
19 unification model of all fermion families in D = 4 see [24, 25]. An extensive review
of the E6 grand unified models may be found in [26].
21 A generalized Yang–Mills action in D = 16 involving the E8 -valued two-form
field strength F = F IJ XIJ + F α Yα is


SGY M (E8 ) = tr[(F ∧ F ∧ F ∧ F) ∧∗ (F ∧ F ∧ F ∧ F)]. (2.33)
23 M16
The analog of a theta term in D = 16 is


Stheta (E8 ) = tr[F8 ]. (2.34)
25 M16
Self dual configurations, E8 instantons in D = 16 obey G(8) =∗ G(8) and turn
27 the action (2.33) into (2.34) when the self dual eight-form is defined by G(8) =
F ∧ F ∧ F ∧ F.
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

10 C. Castro

1 Related to the construction of instantons in higher dimensions, a SO(8) ×

SO(7) ⊂ SO(16) invariant self-duality equation for a three-form in D = 16 was
3 studied by [29] who built Topological QFT on 8-dim manifolds with holonomy
group smaller than or equal to Spin(7) after a dimensional reduction from D = 16
5 to D = 8. A further dimensonal reduction to D = 4 furnished new supersymmetric
theories in D = 4. The inclusion of gravitational interactions in D = 8 allowed the
7 construction of a D = 8 topological gravity and its correspondence with supergrav-
ity via an octonionic self duality equation for the spin connection [29].
9 A topologically nontrivial gauging of N = 16 supergravity in D = 3 based on
an N = 16 supersymmetric 3-dim nonlinear sigma model valued on the exceptional
11 coset E8 /SO(16) (128-dimensional) including a combination of a BF and Chern–
Simons term for an SO(16) gauge field was provided by [30]. It remains an open
13 problem to see if the supersymmetric version of the octic E8 invariant action (2.15)
upon dimensional reduction to D = 3 bears a relationship to the topological gaug-
15 ing of N = 16 supergravity in D = 3. The 128 scalars parametrizing the coset
E8 /SO(16) fit into 16 copies of 128 scalars resulting from the decomposition of the
17 E8 -valued gauge field Aα µ Yα , µ = 1, 2, . . . , 16 and α = 1, 2, . . . , 128 where Yα are
the the SO(16) chiral spinorial generators of the E8 algebra.
19 Another dimensional reduction that is warranted to study is from D = 16 to
D = 11 because D = 11 supergravity with a local SO(16) invariance permits the
21 bosonic fields to be assigned to a representation of E8 [31]. The D = 11 supergravity
four-form determines an E8 gauge bundle which was instrumental in understand-
23 ing the topological part of the M-theory partition function [27, 32]. A mysterious
E8 bundle which restricts from 12-dim to 11-dim bulk of M-theory can be com-
25 patible with 11-dim supersymmetry. When M-theory is compactified on a man-
ifold with boundary the anomalies caused by the chiral gauginos and gravitinos
27 on each 10-dim boundary component cancels the anomalies in the 11-dim bulk if
each 10-dim boundary component supports 248 vector multiplets transforming in
29 the adjoint representation of E8 . The Casimir effect between the M-theory ana-
log of a D-brane/anti-D-brane system exhibiting an E8 × E8 symmetry living at
31 the 10-dim boundaries of the 11-dim bulk has been studied by [28]. The nature
of this bulk 11-dim E8 gauge theory remains unknown. We hope that the Chern–
33 Simons E8 gauge theory of gravity in D = 15 advanced in this work may shed
some light into solving this question. Another interpretation is to view the 10-dim
35 boundary component of the 11-dim bulk of M-theory as a topological defect in
12-dimensions.
37 The action for D = 4 Einstein gravity has been attained from a generalized
dimensional reduction of a Chern–Simons gravity action in higher D = 2n + 1
39 dimensions by Nastase [34]. This occurs after imposing a very strong constraint
which in the Schwarzschild space time case is tantamount of setting the ADM mass
41 to zero [37]. Hence, we may follow such generalized dimensional reduction of our
D = 15 Lanczos–Lovelock gravitational action (2.17), (2.18) to lower dimensions.
For example, the reduction of the D = 6 action (integral of the Euler density
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

A Chern–Simons E8 Gauge Theory of Gravity 11

1 in D = 6)


  
(5) ea1 ea2 ea3 ea4
d(LLovelock ) = a1 a2 ...a6 Ra1 a2 + Ra3 a4 + T a5 , (2.35)
M6 M6 l2 l2
3 to D = 4 leads to the standard action for Einstein gravity with the cosmological
constant (1/l2 ) plus the Gauss–Bonnet topological invariant in D = 4 that coincides
5 with the MacDowell–Mansouri–Chamseddine–West (anti de Sitter group) SO(3, 2)
gauge formulation of gravity:

  
a1 a2 ea1 ea2 a3 a4 ea3 ea4
a1 a2 a3 a4 R + R + . (2.36)
7 M4 l2 l2
The so-called Born–Infield gravity in Eq. (2.41) is not invariant under SO(3, 2)
9 unless one imposes the torsionless condition (the action is not off-shell invari-
ant) [37].
11 D = 4 Einstein gravity was shown by [35] to arise from a 6-dim gauge the-
ory of the conformal group SO(4, 2) where the 4-dim spacetime was interpreted
13 as a 4-dim topological defect in D = 6 and obtained from a topological dimen-
sional reduction of the Euler density in D = 6. In view of these latest findings of
15 how to perform generalized and topological dimensional reductions [34, 35], it is
no longer implausible to propose a grand unification of gravity with all the other
17 forces within the framework of a supersymmetric extension (to incorporate the 248
spacetime fermions λm ) of our Chern–Simons E8 gauge theory in D = 15 based on
19 the octic E8 invariant action (2.15) after a judicious dimensional reduction. Work-
ing in particular with S 16 and whose equator is S 15 is very appealing since it allows
21 to accommodate quaternions and octonions into the picture HP 4 ∼ OP 2 ∼ S 16 ;
HP 2 ∼ OP 1 ∼ S 8 and HP 1 ∼ S 4 . The four nonassociative (not Lie) supercon-
23 formal algebras with N = 5, 6, 7, 8 supersymmetries all share interesting properties
with the Cayley (octonions), covariant derivation of spinors on round and squashed
25 S 7 and torsion on supercoset manifolds [36].
To finalize this section, we simply recall that in odd dimensions D = 2n − 1, the
Lanczos–Lovelock gravitational Lagrangian is

n−1
(±1)p+1 l2p−D n−1
LD
Lovelock = ap Lp (D), ap = κ Cp , p = 1, 2, . . . , n − 1
p=0
(D − 2p)
(2.37)
Cpn−1 is the binomial coefficient. The constants κ, l are related to the Newton’s
27 constant G and to the cosmological constant Λ through κ−1 = 2(D − 2)ΩD−2 G
where ΩD−2 is the area of the D − 2-dim unit sphere and Λ = ±(D − 1)(D − 2)/2l2
29 for de Sitter (anti de Sitter) spaces [4].
The terms inside the summand of (2.42) are
31 Lp (D) = a1 a2 ...aD Ra1 a2 Ra3 a4 . . . Ra2p−1 a2p ea2p+1 . . . eaD , (2.38)
where we have omitted the space-time indices µ1 , µ2 , . . . . Despite the higher pow-
ers of the curvature (after eliminating the spin connection ωµab in terms of the
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

12 C. Castro

eaµ field) the LD a

Lovelock furnishes equations of motion for the eµ field containing at
most derivatives of second order, and not higher, due to the topological property
of the Lovelock terms
 
ea1 ea2
d(L2n−1
Lovelock ) =  a1 a2 ...a2n R a1 a2
+
l2
 
ea2n−3 ea2n−2
. . . Ra2n−3 a2n−2 + T a2n−1
l2
= Euler density. (2.39)

1 Therefore, the exterior derivative of the Lovelock terms can be rewritten com-
pactly as

3 d(L2n−1
Lovelock ) = I1 I2 ...I2n F
I1 I2
. . . F I2n−1 I2n , (2.40)

where F I1 I2 is the curvature field strength associated with the SO(2n − 2, 2) con-
5 nection ΩIµ1 I2 in 2n-dim and which can be decomposed in terms of the fields
eaµ , ωµab , a, b = 1, 2, . . . , 2n − 1 as shown in Eqs. (2.19), (2.20). Gauge theories based
7 on the Anti de Sitter group allowed us to derive the vacuum energy density of Anti
de Sitter space (de Sitter) as the geometric mean between an upper and lower scale
9 [17] based on a BF–Chern–Simons–Higgs theory. Upon setting the lower scale to
the Planck scale LP and the upper scale to the Hubble radius (today) RH , it yields
11 the observed value of the cosmological constant ρ = L−2 −2 −4
P RH = LP (LP /RH ) ∼
2

10−120 MPlanck4
.

13 3. On Chern–Simons–Clifford Gravity
We end this work by reviewing Chern–Simons gravitational actions in Clifford
spaces [33] in order to point its relevance to future research related to E8 gauge
theories of gravity. The 11D Chern–Simons supergravity action is based on the
smallest Anti de Sitter OSp(32|1) superalgebra. The Anti de Sitter group SO(10, 2)
must be embedded into a larger group Sp(32, R) to accommodate the fermionic
degrees of freedom associated with the superalgebra OSp(32|1). The bosonic sector
involves the connection [4]:

Aµ = Aaµ Γa + Aab a1 a2 ...a5

µ Γab + Aµ Γa1 a2 ...a5 = eaµ Γa + ωµab Γab + Aaµ1 a2 ...a5 Γa1 a2 ...a5
(3.1)

with 11 + 55 + 462 = 528 generators. A Hermitian complex 32 × 32 matrix has a

total of 32 + 2( 32×31 2
2 ) = 992 + 32 = 1024 = 32 = 2
10
independent real components
(parameters), the same number as the real parameters of the anti-symmetric and
symmetric real 32 × 32 matrices, respectively, 496 + 528 = 1024. The dimension
of Sp(32) = (1/2)(32 × 33) = 528. Notice that 210 = 1024 is also the number of
independent generators of the Cl(11) algebra since out of the 211 generators, only
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

A Chern–Simons E8 Gauge Theory of Gravity 13

half of them 210 , are truly independent due to the duality conditions valid in odd
dimensions only:

a1 a2 ...a2n+1 Γa1 ∧ Γa2 ∧ · · · ∧ Γap ∼ Γap+1 ∧ Γap+2 ∧ · · · ∧ Γa2n+1 . (3.2)

This counting of components is the underlying reason why the Cl(11) algebra
appears in this section. The generators of the Cl(11) algebra {Γa , Γb } = 2η ab 1
and the unit element 1 generate the Clifford polyvectors (including a scalar, pseu-
doscalar) of different grading

ΓA = 1, Γa , Γa1 ∧ Γa2 , Γa1 ∧ Γa2 ∧ Γa3 , . . . , Γa1 ∧ Γa2 ∧ · · · ∧ Γa11 . (3.3)

obeying the conditions (3.2). The commutation relations (see Eq. (3.4) below)
involving the generators Γa , Γab , Γa1 a2 ...a5 do in fact close due to the duality condi-
tions (3.2). The Cl(11) algebra commutators, up to numerical factors, are

[Γa , Γb ] = Γab , [Γa , Γbc ] = 2η ab Γc − 2η ac Γb , (3.4a)

[Γ a1 a2
,Γ b1 b2
] = −η a1 b1
Γ a2 b2
+η a1 b2
Γ a2 b1
− ···, (3.4b)
[Γ a1 a2 a3
,Γ b1 b2 b3
]=Γ a1 a2 a3 b1 b2 b3
− (η a1 b1 a2 b2
Γ a3 b3
+ · · ·), (3.4c)
[Γ a1 a2 a3 a4
,Γ b1 b2 b3 b4
] = −(η a1 b1
Γ a2 a3 a4 b2 b3 b4
+ · · ·) − (η a1 b1 a2 b2 a3 b3
Γ a4 b4
+ · · ·),
(3.4d)
[Γ a1 a2
,Γ b1 b2 b3 b4
] = −η a1 b1
Γ a2 b2 b3 b4
+ ···, (3.4e)
a1
[Γ , Γ b1 b2 b3
]=Γ a1 b1 b2 b3
, [Γ a1 a2
,Γ b1 b2 b3
] = −2η a1 b1
Γ a2 b2 b3
+ ···, (3.4f)
a1
[Γ , Γ b1 b2 b3 b4
] = −η a1 b1
Γ b2 b3 b4
+ ···, (3.4g)
[Γa1 a2 ...a5 , Γb1 b2 ...b5 ] = Γa1 a2 ...a5 b1 b2 ...b5 + (η a1 b1 a2 b2 Γa3 a4 a5 b3 b4 b5 + · · ·)
+ (η a1 b1 a2 b2 a3 b3 a4 b4 Γa5 b5 + · · ·)
= a1 a2 ...a5 b1 b2 ...b5 c Γc
+ (η a1 b1 a2 b2 a3 a4 a5 b3 b4 b5 c1 c2 ...c5 Γc1 c2 ...c5 + · · ·)
+ (η a1 b1 a2 b2 a3 b3 a4 b4 Γa5 b5 + · · ·), etc (3.4h)

with

ηa1 b1 a2 b2 = ηa1 b1 ηa2 b2 − ηa2 b1 ηa1 b2 , (3.5a)

ηa1 b1 a2 b2 a3 b3 = ηa1 b1 ηa2 b2 ηa3 b3 − ηa1 b2 ηa2 b1 ηa3 b3 + · · · , (3.5b)
1
ηa1 b1 a2 b2 ...an bn = i i ...i j j ...j ηa b ηa b . . . ηain bjn . (3.5c)
n! 1 2 n 1 2 n i1 j1 i2 j2
The Cl(11) algebra gauge field is

Aµ = AA
µ = Aµ 1 + Aµ Γa + Aµ
a a1 a2
Γa1 a2 + Aaµ1 a2 a3 Γa1 a2 a3
+ · · · + Aaµ1 a2 ...a11 Γa1 a2 ...a11 . (3.6)
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

14 C. Castro

and the Cl(11)-algebra-valued field strength

Fµν
A
ΓA = ∂[µ Aν] 1 + [∂[µ Aaν] + Ab[µ2 Abν]1 a ηb1 b2 + · · ·]Γa + [∂[µ Aab
ν]

+ Aa[µ Abν] − Aa[µ1 a Abν]1 b ηa1 b1 − A[µ

a1 a2 a b1 b2 b
Aν] ηa1 b1 a2 b2
− A[µ
a1 a2 a3 a a1 b2 b3 b
Aν] ηa1 b1 a2 b2 a3 b3 + · · ·]Γab + [∂[µ Aabc
ν]

+ A[µ Aν] ηa1 b1 + · · ·]Γabc + [∂[µ Aabcd

a1 a b1 bc
ν]

− A[µ Aν] ηa1 b1 + · · ·]Γabcd + · · · [∂[µ Aaν]1 a2 ...a5 b1 b2 ...b5

a1 a b1 bcd

+ Aa[µ1 a2 ...a5 Abν]1 b2 ...b5 + · · ·]Γa1 a2 ...a5 b1 b2 ...b5 + · · · (3.7)

1 The Chern–Simons actions corresponding to the Clifford group rely on Stokes
theorem



d(LClifford ) = (LClifford ), (3.8)
3 M 12 ∂M 12 =Σ11
which in our case reads
5 d(LClifford ) = F ∧ F ∧ · · · ∧ F  = F A1 ∧ F A2 ∧ · · · ∧ F A6 ΓA1 ΓA2 . . . ΓA6 , (3.9)
where the bracket · · · means taking the scalar part of the Clifford geometric
7 product among the gammas. It involves products of the dABC , fABC structure
constants corresponding to the (anti) commutators {ΓA , ΓB } = dABC ΓC and
9 [ΓA , ΓB ] = fABC ΓC .
One of the main results of [33] was that the Cl(11) algebra-based action (3.9)
11 contains a vast number of terms among which is the Chern–Simons action of [4]
L11
CS (e, ω, A5 )

13 LClifford (AA
µ ΓA ) = LCS (ω, e, A5 ) + Extra Terms.
11
(3.10)



SCS (ω, e, A5 ) = LCS =
11
L11
CS . (3.11)
∂M 12 Σ11

15 The Cl(11) algebra-based action (3.9), (3.10) can in turn be embedded into a
more general expression in C-space (Clifford space) which is a generalized tenso-
17 rial spacetime of coordinates X = σ, xµ , xµν , xµνρ , . . . [3] involving a scalar Φ(X)
and antisymmetric tensor gauge fields Aµ (X), Aµν (X), Aµνρ (X), . . . of higher rank
19 (higher spin theories) [13]. The most general action onto which the action (3.9),
(3.10) itself can be embedded requires a tensorial gauge field theory [13] (general-
21 ized Yang–Mills theories) and an integration with respect to all the Clifford-valued
coordinates X = X M ΓM corresponding to the 2D -dim C-space associated with the
23 underlying Cl(2n)-algebra in D = 2n dimensions


n n
S = [d2 X](F ∧ F ∧ · · · ∧ F), [d2 X] = (dσ)(dxµ )(dxµν )(dxµνρ ) . . . . (3.12)

A different sort of generalized Yang–Mills theories have been studied by [12] without
the Clifford algebraic structure. Given a Lie algebra G like E8 with generators Ta for
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

A Chern–Simons E8 Gauge Theory of Gravity 15

c
a = 1, 2, 3, . . . , dim G, it has for commutators [Ta , Tb ] = fab Tc and whose structure
constants fabc are fully antisymmetric in their indices. The Lie-algebra-valued one-
form is A = (AaM (X)Ta )dX M and its generalized Lie-algebra valued field strength
c
F = [FMN (X)Tc ]dX M ∧ dX N
= [∂[M AcN ] (X)Tc + gAaM (X)AbN (X)fab
c
Tc ]dX M ∧ dX N (3.13)

has for components

c
F[[µ1 µ2 ...µm ][ν1 ν2 ...νn ]]
= ∂x[µ1 µ2 ...µm ] Ac[ν1 ν2 ...νn ] − ∂x[ν1 ν2 ...νn ] Ac[µ1 µ2 ...µm ]

+ gAa[µ1 µ2 ...µm ] Ab[ν1 ν2 ...νn ] fab

c
. (3.14)

The remaining components are of the form

] = F[0[ν1 ν2 ...νn ]] = ∂σ A[ν1 ν2 ...νn ] − ∂x[ν1 ν2 ...νn ] A0 + gA0 A[ν1 ν2 ...νn ] fab .
c c c c a b c
F[0N
(3.15)

1 where Ac0 is the Clifford-scalar part Φ(X) of the Lie-algebra-valued Clifford-

polyvector, and in general, we must consider the m = n and m = n cases resulting
3 from the mixing of different grades (ranks). The antisymmetry with respect the
collective indices M N is explicit.
5 In order to raise, lower and contract polyvector indices in C-space it requires a
generalized metric GMN . In flat C-space it is defined by the components:

7 Gµν = η µν , Gµ1 µ2 ν1 ν2 = η µ1 ν1 η µ2 ν2 − η µ1 ν2 η µ2 ν1 etc., (3.16a)

in addition to the scalar–scalar component Gσσ = 1. It can be recast as

1
Gµ1 µ2 ...µm ν1 ν2 ...νm = det GµI νJ = i i ...i j j ...j η µi1 νj1 η µi2 νj2 . . . η µim νjm ,
m! 1 2 m 1 2 m
(3.16b)

where GµI νJ is an m×m matrix whose entries are η µi νj for i, j = 1, 2, 3, . . . , m ≤ D

9 and µ, ν = 1, 2, 3, . . . , D.
As a result of the expression for the flat C-space metric, given by sums of
antisymmetrized products of η µν , the Clifford-space generalized Yang–Mills action
is of the form


1
SY M = − [DX] a
trace[F[[µ1 µ2 ...µm ][ν1 ν2 ...νm ]]
F [[µ1 µ2 ...µm ][ν1 ν2 ....νm ]]b Ta Tb ]
2


1
− [DX] a
trace[F[0[ν 1 ν2 ...νm ]]
F [[0[ν1 ν2 ...νm ]]b Ta Tb ], (3.17)
2
where the C-space 2D -dim measure associated with a Clifford algebra in D-dim is

11 [DX] = [dσ][Πdxµ ][Πdxµ1 µ2 ][Πdxµ1 µ2 µ3 ] . . . [dxµ1 µ2 ...µd ] (3.18)

and the indices are ordered as µ1 < µ2 < µ3 · · · < µm , etc.

 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

16 C. Castro

The action (3.17) is invariant under the infinitesimal gauge transformations

δξ AcM = ∂M ξ c + gfab
c
AaM ξ b ; δξ Acµ1 µ2 ...µn = ∂xµ1 µ2 ...µn ξ c + gfab
c
Aaµ1 µ2 ...µn ξ b .
(3.19)
1 associated with a Lie-algebra-valued Clifford-scalar parameter ξ(X) = ξ a (X)Ta .
In [3] it was explained why another alternative to define the transformations in
3 C-space was by writing the generators of polyrotations as R = exp(ΩAB [EA , EB ])
C
where the commutator [EA , EB ] = FAB EC is the C-space analog of the i[γµ , γν ]
5 commutator which is the generator of the Lorentz algebra, and the parameters ΩAB
are the C-space analogs of the rotation/boots parameters. This last alternative
7 seems to be more physical because a polyrotation should map the EA direction
into the EB direction in C-spaces, hence the meaning of the generator [EA , EB ]
9 which is the generalization of the ordinary i[γµ , γν ]Lorentz generator.
Therefore, when we recast the generators of polyrotations as JAB = [ΓA , ΓB ],
an action of the form


A1 B1 A2 B2 A B2d−1
S(Cspace ) = [DX]FM F
1 N1 M2 N2
. . . FM2d−1
d−1 N d−12 2

× A1 B1 A2 B2 ...A2d−1 B2d−1 M1 N1 M2 N2 ...M2d−1 N2d−1 (3.20)

is the natural generalization of the Euler density types of the D-dim (D = 2n)
actions in C-space. In particular, when D = 16, the action (3.20) is the C-space
generalization of the action (2.22). This action S(Cspace ) (3.20) is more general
than the action SClifford (AA
µ ΓA ) of Eq. (3.10), and which in turn, is more general
than the Chern–Simons gravitational action SCS (ω, e, A5 ) given in [4]. Therefore,
we have the inclusions
SCS (ω, e, A5 ) ⊂ SCl(11) [AA µ
µ (x )ΓA ]

⊂ S(Cspace )[AAB µ
M (σ, x , x
µ1 µ2
, xµ1 µ2 µ3 , . . .)JAB ] (3.21)
and similarly one would expect the Cl(16) algebra gauge theory case in C-spaces
to includes the E8 Chern–Simons gauge theory formulated in the previous section
SCS (A, F) ⊂ SCl(16) [AA µ
µ (x )ΓA ]

⊂ S(Cspace )[AAB µ
M (σ, x , x
µ1 µ2
, xµ1 µ2 µ3 , . . .)JAB ], (3.22)
which should be very relevant in future developments of M, F theory upon the intro-
11 duction of polyvector-valued supersymmetries in C-spaces [11]. These generalized
supersymmetries deserve to be investigated further since they are more fundamen-
13 tal than the supersymmetries associated with M, F theory superalgebras and also
span well beyond the N -extended supersymmetric field theories involving super-
15 algebras, like OSp(32|N ) for example, which are related to a SO(N ) gauge theory
coupled to matter fermions (besides the gravitinos). It is these polyvector-valued
17 supersymmetries in C-spaces [11] that will permit the supersymmetrization of the
most general action in C-spaces S(Cspace ) given by (3.20).
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

A Chern–Simons E8 Gauge Theory of Gravity 17

1 Finally, the results of this work may shed some light into the origins behind
the hidden E8 symmetry of 11D supergravity, the hyperbolic Kac–Moody algebra
3 E10 and the nonlinearly realized E11 algebra related to chaos in M theory and
oscillatory solutions close to cosmological singularities [1, 2, 6].

5 Acknowledgments
The authors are indebted to Frank (Tony) Smith for numerous discussions, to
7 Andres Abalon for important remarks and to M. Bowers for her hospitality.

References
9 [1] E. Cremmer, B. Julia and J. Scherk, Phys. Lett. B 76 (1978) 409; T. Damour,
A. Kleinschmidt and H. Nicolai, Hidden symmetries and the Fermionic sector of
11 11-dim supergravity, hep-th/0512163; K. Koepsell, H. Nicolai and H. Samtleben,
An exceptional geometry for D = 11 supergravity? hep-th/0006034; H. Nicolai and
13 H. Samtleben, Compact and noncompact gauged maximal supergravities in three
dimensions.
15 [2] S. de Buyl, M. Henneaux and L. Paulot, Extended E8 invariance of 11-dim super-
gravity, hep-th/0512292; P. West, Class. Quan. Grav. 18 (2001) 4443; V. A. Belinksy,
17 I. M. Khalatnikov and E. M. Lifshitz, Adv. Phys. 19 (1970) 525.
[3] C. Castro and M. Pavsic, Prog. Phys. 1 (2005) 31; Phys. Lett. B 559 (2003) 74; Int.
19 J. Theor. Phys. 42 (2003) 1693; C. Castro, Found. Phys. 35(6) (2005) 971; C. Castro,
Prog. Phys. 1 (2005) 20.
21 [4] J. Zanelli, Lectures notes on Chern–Simons (super) gravities, hep-th/0502193; R.
Troncoso and J. Zanelli, Gauge supergravities for all odd dimensions, hep-th/9807029;
23 M. Hassaine, R. Troncoso and J. Zanelli, Poincare invariant gravity with local super-
symmetry as a gauge theory for the M algebra, hep-th/0306258; F. Izaurieta, E.
25 Rodriguez and P. Salgado, Euler Chern Simons gravity from Lovelock Born-Infeld
gravity, hep-th/0402208.
27 [5] M. Pavsic, The Landscape of Theoretical Physics: A Global View (Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht-Boston-London, 2001); J. Schray and C. Manogue, Found.
29 Phys. 26 (1996) 17.
[6] M. Gunaydin, K. Koepsell and H. Nicolai, The minimal unitary representation of
31 E8(8) , hep-th/0109005; M. Gunaydin, Unitary realizations of U-duality groups as
conformal and quasi conformal groups and extremal black holes of supergravity the-
33 ories, hep-th/0502235; M. Gunaydin and O. Pavlyk, Generalized spacetimes defined
by cubic forms and the minimal unitary realzations of their quasi-conformal groups,
35 hep-th/0506010; M. Gunaydin, K. Koepsell and H. Nicolai, Comm. Math. Phys. 221
(2001) 57; Adv. Teor. Math. Phys. 5 (2002) 923; M. Gunaydin, A. Neitzke, B. Pioline
37 and A. Waldron, BPS black holes, Quantum attractor flows and automorphic forms,
hep-th/0512296.
39 [7] F. Toppan, Hermitian versus Holomorphic complex and quaternionic generalized
supersymmetries of M theory, a classification, hep-th/0406022.
41 [8] F. D. Smith Jr, E6 , strings, branes and the standard model [CERN CDS EXT-2004-
031], Int. J. Theor. Phys. 24 (1985) 155; Int. J. Theor. Phys. 25 (1985) 355; From
43 sets to quarks, hep-ph/9708379; The D4 − D5 − E6 − E7 − E8 model [CERN CDS
EXT-2003-087].
45 [9] G. Trayling, A geometric approach to the standard model, hep-th/9912231.
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

18 C. Castro

1 [10] D. Alekseevsky, V. Cortes, C. Devchand and A. Van Proeyen, Polyvector super-

poincare algebras, hep-th/0311107; I. Rudychev and E. Sezgin, Superparticles, p-form
3 coordinates and the BPS condition, hep-th/9711128; I. Bars and C. Kounnas, A new
supersymmetry, hep-th/9612119; I. Bandos and J. Lukierski, Generalized supercon-
5 formal symmetries and supertwistor dynamics, hep-th/9912264.
[11] C. Castro, Polyvector super poincare algebras, M, F theory algebras and generalized
7 supersymmetry in Clifford spaces, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 21(10) (2006) 2149.
[12] G. Saviddy, Generalizations of Yang–Mills Theory, hep-th/0505033.
9 [13] C. Castro, On generalized Yang–Mills and extensions of the standard model in
Clifford (Tensorial) spaces, Ann. Phys. 321(4) (2006) 813; Mod. Phys. Lett. A 19
11 (2004) 14.
[14] F. Gursey, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 3 (1988) 115; F. Gursey, Proc. Conf. Group Theor.
13 Methods in Phys. (1978).
[15] J. Adams, Lectures on Exceptional Lie Groups (Chicago Lectures in Mathematics,
15 University of Chicago Press, 1996).
[16] C. H. Tze and F. Gursey, On the Role of Divison, Jordan and Related Algebras in Par-
17 ticle Physics (World Scientific, Singapore, 1996); S. Okubo, Introduction to Octonion
and other Nonassociative Algebras in Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2005);
19 R. Schafer, An Introduction to Nonassociative Algebras (Academic Press, New York,
1966); G. Dixon, Division Algebras, Octonions, Quaternions, Complex Numbers, and
21 the Algebraic Design of Physics (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1994); G. Dixon, J. Math. Phys
45(10) (2004) 3678; P. Ramond, Exceptional groups and physics, hep-th/0301050;
23 J. Baez, Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 39(2) (2002) 145.
[17] C. Castro, Mod. Phys. A 17 (2002) 2095.
25 [18] Y. Ohwashi, E6 Matrix Model, hep-th/0110106; Sp(4, H)/Z2 Pair Universe in E6
matrix models, hep-th/0510252; L. Smolin, The exceptional Jordan Algebra and the
27 matrix string, hep-th/0104050; M. Rios, The Geometry of Jordan matrix models,
hep-th/0503015.
29 [19] C. Castro, The large N limit of exceptional Jordan matrix models and M, F theory,
J. Geometry Phys. 57 (2007) 1941.
31 [20] P. Jordan, J. von Neumann and E. Wigner, Ann. Math 35 (1934) 2964; K. MacCrim-
mon, A Taste of Jordan Algebras (Springer Verlag, New York, 2003); H. Freudenthal,
33 Nederl. Akad. Wetensch. Proc. Ser. A 57 (1954) 218; J. Tits, Nederl. Akad. Weten-
sch. Proc. Ser A 65 (1962) 530; T. Springer, Nederl. Akad. Wetensch. Proc. Ser. A
35 65 (1962) 259.
[21] A. Aurilia, A. Smailagic and E. Spallucci, Phys. Rev D 47 (1993) 2536; A. Aurilia
37 and E. Spallucci, Class. Quant. Gravity 10 (1993) 1217.
[22] I. R. Porteous, Clifford Algebras and Classical Groups (Cambridge University Press,
39 1995).
[23] M. Cederwall and J. Palmkvist, The octic E8 invariant, hep-th/0702024.
41 [24] S. Adler, Further thoughts on supersymmetric E8 as family and grand unification
theory, hep-ph/0401212.
43 [25] N. Baaklini, Phys. Lett. B 91 (1980) 376; I. Bars and M. Gunaydin, Phys. Rev. Lett.
45 (1980) 859; S. Konshtein and E. Fradkin, Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz 42 (1980)
45 575; M. Koca, Phys. Lett. B 107 (1981) 73; R. Slansky, Phys. Rep. 79 (1981) 1.
[26] J. Hewett and T. Rizzo, Phys. Rep. 183 (1989) 193.
47 [27] P. Horava abd E. Witten, 11-dim supergravity on a manifold with boundary, Nucl.
Phys. B 475 (1996) 94, hep-th/9603142; E. Witten, On flux quantization in M-
49 theory and the effective action, J. Geom. Phys. 22 (1997) 1; E. Diaconescu, G.
Moore and E. Witten, E8 gauge theory and a derivation of K theory from M-theory,
51 hep-th/0005090.
 1st Reading
October 26, 2007 18:56 WSPC/IJGMMP-J043 00254

A Chern–Simons E8 Gauge Theory of Gravity 19

1 [28] M. Fabinger and P. Horava, Casimir effect between world-branes in heterotic

M-theory, hep-th/0002073.
3 [29] L. Baulieu, Going down from a 3-form in 16 dimensions, hep-th/0207184; L. Baulieu,
M. Bellon and A. Tanzini, Eight-dimensional topological gravity and its correspon-
5 dence with supergravity, hep-th/0207020; L. Baulieu, H. Kannao and I. M. Singer,
Special quantum feld theories in D = 8 and other dimensions, hep-th/9704167.
7 [30] H. Nishino and S. Rajpoot, Topological gauging of N = 16 supergravity in three
dimensions, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 025009, hep-th/0209106.
9 [31] H. Nicolai, Phys. Lett. B 187 (1987) 316.
[32] J. Evslin, From E8 to F theory via T-duality, hep-th/0311235; J. Evslin and H. Sati,
11 SUSY vs E8 gauge theory in 11 dimensions, hep-th/0210090.
[33] C. Castro, On Chern–Simons (super) gravity, E8 Yang–Mills and polyvector-valued
13 gauge theories in Clifford Spaces, J. Math. Phys. 47(1) (2006) 112301.
[34] H. Nastase, D = 4 Einstein Gravity from higher dimensional Chern–Simons Born–
15 Infeld gravity and an alternative to dimensional reduction, hep-th/0703034.
[35] A. Anabalon, S. Wilson and J. Zanelli, The Universe as a topological defect, hep-
17 th/0702192.
[36] Z. Hasiewicz, F. Defever and W. Troost, J. Math. Phys. 32(9) (1991) 2285.
19 [37] A. Abalon, Private communication.
[38] R. Friedman and J. Morgan, Exceptional groups and del Pezzo surfaces, math.AG/
21 0009155.