Quantcast
  • Register
Adv. Query
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Most popular tags

Related questions

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,082 questions , 2,232 unanswered
5,353 answers , 22,789 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
820 active unimported users
More ...

  Excitations & Pentagon axiom in algebraic theory for anyons

+ 1 like - 0 dislike
657 views

I have been reading the anyon theory by Kitaev and Wang. I have two possibly related questions:

  1. Why is the Pentagon equation/axiom sufficient for characterizing associative relations?
  2. Are there anyon theories with more than two (or three) elementary (non-composite) excitations?

My impression has been that there is no anyon theory with more than two non-composite elementary excitations. This seems to be the reason that the Pentagon equation (together with braiding structures, of course) is sufficient in describing anyon theories. Is this naive intuition correct? Could someone enlighten me on this subject?

cross-posted on SE.

asked Feb 4, 2021 in Theoretical Physics by Waterfall (30 points) [ revision history ]
edited Feb 5, 2021 by Waterfall

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysicsO$\varnothing$erflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification
 | OverSnow Theme by polarkernel and dimension10, based on Snow Theme by Q2A Market
Powered by Question2Answer




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...