Talk:Penrose transform

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

‹See TfM›

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Incorporating material from Berkovits

There was recently a suggestion at User talk:R.e.b. made from an anonymous IP address to incorporate some material from the paper "Higher-dimensional twistor transforms using pure spinors" by Nathan Berkovits (see here for the discussion). This seems to be a reasonable suggestion. At the very least, an explicit formula should be given in the case of compactified Minkowski space, and Berkovits's treatment is probably as good as any.

However, I have to quibble with the suggestion made in the thread referred to above that Berkovits was the first to discover how to generalize the Penrose transform to higher dimensions. This is already clear in the book of Baston and Eastwood (referenced in this article) from the early 1990s, which predates Berkovits' entry to the field by a few years, and there was already a substantial body of other research focusing on the higher-dimensional cases (notably, I suppose, Helga Baum and others). But that's ok. The Berkovits reference seems to be particularly lucid and accessible. So as long as it isn't given undue weight as a piece of original research, I think that it would make a worthy addition to the article. Sławomir Biały (talk) 12:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]