Communications in Mathematical Physics

, Volume 146, Issue 2, pp 277–309 | Cite as

Monstrous Moonshine from orbifolds

  • Michael P. Tuite


We consider the Monster Module of Frenkel, Lepowsky, and Meurman as aZ2 orbifold of a bosonic string compactified by the Leech lattice. We show that the main Conway and Norton Monstrous Moonshine properties, stating that the Thompson series for each Monster group conjugacy class has a modular invariance group of genus zero, follow from an orbifold construction based on an orbifold group composed of Monster group elements. it is shown that a conjectured vacuum structure for the orbifold twisted sectors is sufficient to specify the modular group and the genus zero property for each Thompson series. It is also shown that the Power Map formula of Conway and Norton follows from the same vacuum structure. Finally, we demonstrate the validity of the vacuum conjectures for sectors twisted by Leech lattice automorphisms in many cases.


Quantum Computing Conjugacy Class Group Element Invariance Group Modular Group 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Frenkel, I., Lepowsky, J., Meurman, A.: A moonshine module for the monster. In: Lepowsky, J. et al. (eds.). Vertex operators in mathematics and physics, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer 1985; Vertex operator algebras and the Monster. New York: Academic Press 1988Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Griess, R.: The friendly giant. Invent. Math.69, 1 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Conway, J.H., Norton, S.P.: Monstrous moonshine. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc.11, 308 (1979)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Borcherds, R.E.: University of Cambridge DPMMS preprint, 1989Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Borcherds, R.E.: Generlized Kac-Moody algebras. J. Algebra115, 501 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dixon, L., Harvey, J.A., Vafa, C., Witten, E.: Strings on orbifolds. Nucl. Phys. B261, 678 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dixon, L., Harvey, J.A., Vafa, C., Witten, E.: Strings on orbifolds II. Nucl. Phys. B274, 285 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dixon, L., Ginsparg, P., Harvey, J.: Beauty and the beast: Superconformal symmetry in a Monster Module. Commun. Math. Phys.119, 285 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Narain, K.S.: New heterotic string theories in uncompactified dimensions <10. Phys. Lett.169 B, 41 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Conway, J.H., Sloane, N.J.A.: Sphere packings, lattices and groups. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer 1988Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goddard, P., Olive, D.: Algebras, lattices and strings. In: Lepowsky, J. et al. (eds.). Vertex operators in mathematics and physics. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer 1985Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Serre, J-P.: A course in arithmetic. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer 1970Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Goddard, P.: Meromorphic conformal field theory. In: Proceedings of the CIRM-Luminy Conference, 1988. Singapore: World Scientific 1989Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vafa, C.: Modular invariance and discrete torsion on orbifolds. Nucl. Phys.B273, 592 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Narain, K.S., Sarmadi, M.H., Vafa, C.: Asymmetric orbifolds. Nucl. Phys.B288, 551 (1987)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thompson, J.G.: Finite groups and modular functions. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc.11, 347 (1979)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gunning, R.C.: Lectures on modular forms. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press 1962Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moore, G.: Atkin-Lehner symmetry. Nucl. Phys.B293, 139 (1987); Erratum. Nucl. Phys.B299, 847 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Balog, J., Tuite, M.P.: The failure of Atkin-Lehner symmetry for lattice compactified strings. Nucl. Phys.B 319, 387 (1989)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mason, G. (with an appendix by Norton, S.P.): Finite groups and modular functions. Proc. Symp. Pure Math.47, 181 (1987)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Apostol, T.M.: Modular functions and Dirichlet series in number theory. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer 1976Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ogg, A.P.: Hyperelliptic modular curves. Bull. Soc. Math. France102, 449 (1974)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Conway, J.H., Curtis, R.T., Norton, S.P., Parker, R.A., Wilson, R.A.: An atlas of finite groups. Oxford: Clarendon Press 1985Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tits, J.: Normalisateurs de tores I. Groups de Coxeter étendus. J. Algebra4, 16 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dolan, L., Goddard, P., Montague, P.: Conformal field theory, triality and the Monster group. Preprint RU89/b1/45, DAMTP 89-29 (1989)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sorba, P., Torresani, B.: Twisted vertex operators and string theory. Int. J. Mod. Phys.3, 1451 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Corrigan, E., Holowood, T.H.: Comments on the algebra of straight, twisted and intertwining vertex operators. Nucl. Phys.B304, 77 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tuite, M.P.: To appear. DIAS preprint, 1990Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shimura, G.: Introduction to the arithmetic theory of automorphic functions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press 1971Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael P. Tuite
    • 1
  1. 1.Dublin Institute for Advanced StudiesDublin 4Ireland

Personalised recommendations