\documentclass{amsart}
\usepackage{amscd}
\usepackage{amssymb} 
\DeclareFontFamily{OMS}{cmsy}{%
\fontdimen16\font=3pt
\fontdimen17\font=3pt}
\setlength{\headheight}{1.5\baselineskip}
\def\dj{d\kern-.30em\raise1.25ex\vbox{\hrule width .3em height .03em}}
\def\Dj{D\rlap{\kern-.70em\raise0.75ex
\vbox{\hrule width .3em height .03em}}}
\newenvironment{pf}{\proof[\proofname]}{\endproof}
\makeatletter
\renewcommand{\subsection}{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
{\baselineskip}{0.5\baselineskip}{\bfseries}} 
\makeatother
\def\A{\mathcal{A}} 
\def\cal{\mathcal}
\def\Bbb{\mathbb}
\newcommand{\grten}{\mathbin{\widehat{\otimes}}}
\newcommand{\Sum}{\displaystyle{\sum}}
\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}} 
\def\bla#1{$(${\it #1\/{}}$)$} 
\newcommand{\im}{\mathrm{im}}
\def\Der{\mathrm{Der}}
\renewcommand{\thepage}{\ifnum\value{page}=1 \else\arabic{page}\fi}
\parskip=3pt plus3pt
\addtolength{\textheight}{0.8\baselineskip}

\begin{document} 
 
\title[A Brief Introduction to Quantum Geometry]{Quantum Geometry and New Concept of
Space}

\author{micho {\Dj}UR{\Dj}EVICH}

\address{
Instituto de Matematicas, UNAM, 
Area de la Investigacion Cientifica, 
Circuito Exterior, Ciudad Universitaria,
M\'exico DF, CP 04510, MEXICO
}
\email{ micho@matem.unam.mx\newline\indent\indent http://www.matem.unam.mx/{\~\/}micho}
\maketitle

\section{Introduction}
 
Quantum geometry is a new branch of mathematics. It introduces a completely new 
concept of space, by unifying methods of classical geometry with non-commutative 
C*-algebras and functional 
analysis, and incoprorating into geometry various ideas from quantum physics. 

Every geometry deals with
some kind of {\it spaces}. Quantum geometry deals with                      
{\it quantum spaces}, including the classical concept of space as a very                        
special case. In classical geometry spaces are always                           
understandable as {\it  collections of points } equipped with the                          
appropriate additional structure (as for example a topological structure                    
given by the collection of open sets, or a smooth structure given by                        
the atlas). In contrast to classical geometry, 
quantum spaces are not interpretable in this way. In general,                   
quantum spaces have no points at all! They exhibit non-trivial `quantum 
fluctuations' of geometry at all scales.                                                                        
                                                                                            
A very interesting potential application of quantum geometry in physics
is to provide a mathematically coherent description of the physical space-time, 
at all scales---in particular at the level of ultra-small distances, characterized
by the {\it Planck lenght}. This lenght is a universal physical constant, defined
as a unique combination of gravitational constant $\gamma$, Planck's constant $\hbar$ 
and the velocity of light $c$. Explicitly, 
$$
l=\sqrt{\frac{\gamma \hbar}{c^3}}.
$$ 

As we can see, it is an exorbitantly small number! There are many reasons to believe
that Planck's lenght marks a boundary for the applicability of classical concepts
of space and time in physics. 

Indeed, the assumption that the underlying 
space-time is a smooth manifold is contained in the roots of various mathematical {\it inconsistency 
problems} appearing in quantum field theory. The same assumption is in the roots 
of the failure of many attempts to unify gravity and quantum theory. The difficulties 
with such classical concepts about space and time appear at the very small 
distances, precisely of the order of magnitude of the Planck lenght. 
 
Quantum geometry introduces much more flexibility in the game, allowing us to
express the idea that the space-time exhibits certain quantum fluctuations of the 
structure which are neglectable at the macroscopic level, 
but which become essential at the level 
of the Planck scale. In particular, the very concept of a space-time 
point is loosing the sense at the quantum level. The same applies to 
the space-time coordinates. 

The formalism of quantum geometry is a symbiosis of global methods from classical 
diffferential geometry, with non-commutative algebras and functional analysis. 
Quantum spaces are described by certain non-commutative complex *-algebras.                                
The elements of these algebras are intuitively interpreted as the appropriate functions 
(continuous or smooth for example) over the associated quantum spaces. 
The mentioned *-algebras are always associated, in the appropriate sense, to certain 
C*-algebras representing the quantum spaces at the topological level. 

When the algebras are commutative, we are back in the classical geometry. In other                            
words, classical geometry is understandable as the {\it  commutative sector }                  
of quantum geometry. Quantum geometry is also called {\it non-commutative 
geometry}. 

Non-commutative geometry has a great conceptual value for the study of classical spaces. 
In many situations, the proofs of the theorems of classical geometry become more elegant 
and transparent if performed at the quantum level. The language of local coordinates, open 
sets and points, characteristic for classical geometry, sometimes hides the true geometrical 
structure. On the other hand, in non-commutative geometry we are a priory forced to work
with the global entities inherently connected with the existing geometrical structure. 
 
In generalizing classical geometry to the non-commutative level, there are two important
conceptual steps: Translation of geometry into commutative algebra language, and 
non-commutative generalizations. 

\smallskip

The first step consists in re-expressing a geometrical 
structure existing on a classical space $X$ in terms of the algebraic structure
of the associated (commutative) *-algebra of the appropriate 
complex-valued functions on $X$. The definition of this algebra depends on the 
geometrical level of our considerations. For example:
\begin{gather*}
\mbox{Measure Theory } \leftrightarrow \mbox{ Measurable Functions}\\
\mbox{Topology } \leftrightarrow \mbox{ Continuous}\\
\mbox{Algebraic Geometry }\leftrightarrow \mbox{ Polynomial}\\
\mbox{Differential Geometry }\leftrightarrow \mbox{ Smooth Functions} 
\end{gather*}  
It turns out that the geometrical structure on $X$ is always {\it  completely expressible} 
at the language of the associated *-algebra. The second step consists in the 
appropriate noncommutative generalization of such algebraically-reformulated geometry. 
The idea is to replace the function algebras by more general non-commutative *-algebras, 
and enlarge in such a way the concept of space--by introducing quantum spaces. 
 
In what follows we shall explain both conceptual steps in more details. 
Then we shall discuss some concrete examples of quantum spaces. 


\section{Reformulating Basic Geometrical Concepts}

We shall now explain how some of the most important geometrical 
concepts are translated into the language of algebra.
 

\subsection{Points}

Let us assume that $X$ is a compact topological space, and let $A$ be the *-algebra of continuous
complex-valued functions on $X$. The algebraic operations in $A$ are 
the standard multiplication and addition of functions. The *-operation is 
the standard complex conjugation. 

Every element $x\in X$ naturally gives rise to a linear functional
$\kappa=\kappa_x:A\rightarrow \Bbb{C}$ defined by $\kappa(f)=f(x)$. This map is 
{\it multiplicative} in the sense that $\kappa(fg)=\kappa(f)\kappa(g)$ for each $f,g\in A$, 
and hermitian in the sense that $\kappa(f^*)=\kappa(f)^*$. It is also non-trivial 
($\kappa\neq 0$). In other words $\kappa$ is a {\it  character } on $A$. 

Conversely, let us consider an arbitrary character $\kappa:A\rightarrow \Bbb{C}$. Then it can be
shown that there exists a unique point $x\in X$ such that $\kappa=\kappa_x$. In other words, 
we have a natural bijection between points of $X$ and characters of $A$. It is worth noticing that
this characterization of points remains valid at the smooth level, too. In this case $X$ is a compact 
smooth manifold and the associated *-algebra consists of smooth functions on $X$.

\subsection{Gelfand-Naimark Theorem}

The algebra $A=\mathrm{C}(X)$ of complex-valued continuos functions on a compact 
topological space $X$, equipped with the {\it maximum norm}
$$
|f|=\max_{x\in X}|f(x)|
$$
is a commutative C*-algebra. 
The classical theorem of Gelfand and Naimark characterizes the
algebras of the form $A=\mathrm{C}(X)$, as commutative unital C*-algebras. In other words, 
for every commutative unital C*-algebra $A$ there exists (up to the homeomorphisms)
a unique compact topological space $X$ such that $A\cong \mathrm{C}(X)$.

As we have just mentioned, the points of the space $X$ are recovered as 
characters of the associated 
algebra $A$. In terms of this identification,  the topology on $X$ coincides with the *-weak 
topology, induced from the dual space $A^*$, consisting of
continuous linear functionals on $A$. It turns out that 
homomorphisms between C*-algebras are
automatically continuous, in particular characters are continuous linear 
functionals.  

The theory of compact
topological spaces is the same as the theory of commutative unital C*-algebras.
If we relax the unitality assumption (dealing with arbitrary commutative C*-algebras), 
then the category of corresponding spaces is enlarged to the level of 
locally-compact spaces. If $X$ is non-compact then $A$ is consisting of continuous functions on 
$X$ that vanish at infinity.  

If $X$ is a measurable space (without any extra structure) then the relevant *-algebra
is consisting of all essentially bounded measurable functions on $X$. 
It becomes a (commutative) von Neumann algebra, if equipped with the essential supremum norm.
It can be shown that every commutative von Neumann algebra is of this form. The entire 
measure theory is essentially the same as the theory of commutative von Neumann algebras. 

\subsection{Continuous Maps and Direct Products}

Now let us consider two compact topological spaces $X$ and $Y$, and 
let us denote by $A$ and $B$ the *-algebras of
continuous functions over $X$ and $Y$ respectively. Let $F:X\rightarrow Y$
be an arbitrary continuous map between $X$ and $Y$. To this map, we can associate 
another map $\Phi=\Phi_F:B\rightarrow A$, defined via the composition
$\Phi(g)=Fg.$ 
It is easy to see that the map $\Phi$ is a unital *-homomorphism between $B$ and $A$. 

Conversely, let us consider an arbitrary unital *-homomorphism $\Phi:B\rightarrow A$. Then it
can be shown that $\Phi$ is always of the form $\Phi=\Phi_F$, for a uniquely determined 
continuous map $F:X\rightarrow Y$. In other words we have a natural bijection between 
continuous maps from $X$ to $Y$, and unital *-homomorphisms from $B$ to $A$. The same algebraic
characterization holds at the smooth level, too (smooth maps between compact 
smooth manifolds are in a one-to-one correspondence with unital *-homomorphisms between
the associated algebras of smooth functions). 

Properties of the map $F$ are reflected as properties of $\Phi_F$ and vice versa. For 
example, $F$ is surjective if and only if $\Phi_F$ is injective, and $F$ will be injective
if and only of $\Phi_F$ is surjective. If $C$ is the C*-algebra of continuous functions on the
direct product $X\times Y$, then the following natural identification holds:
$$
C\leftrightarrow A\otimes B, 
$$
where the product $\otimes$ here is a C*-algebraic tensor product. 

\subsection{Symmetry}

Symmetry transformations of the space $X$ can be understood as certain 
homeomorphisms of $X$. In accordance with the previous paragraph, homeomorphisms
of $X$ are in one-to-one correspondence with automorphisms of $A$. The same holds at
the smooth level: If $X$ is a smooth manifold then diffeomorphisms of $X$ are in a natural 
bijection with automorphisms of the corresponding algebra of smooth functions. 

\subsection{Probability Measures}

Let us assume that $X$ is a metrizable compact topological space
(metrizability of $X$ is equivalent to the separability of $A=\mathrm{C}(X)$ in its uniform norm). Let us 
consider a probability measure $\mu$ defined on the $\sigma$-field $\mathrm{B}(X)$ of Borel subsets 
of $X$. Let $\rho=\rho_\mu:A\rightarrow \Bbb{C}$ be a linear functional defined as the Lebesgue
intergral
$$\rho(f)=\int_X f(x)d\mu(x).$$ 
The map $\rho$ is linear, 
normalized ($\rho:1\mapsto 1$) and positive (if $f\geq 0$ then $\rho(f)\geq 0$) 
functional on $A$. 

Conversely, if $\rho:A\rightarrow \Bbb{C}$ is an arbitrary positive and normalized linear
functional on $A$, then there exists a unique probability 
measure $\mu:\mathrm{B}(X)\rightarrow [0,1]$
such that $\rho=\rho_\mu$. This is the classical Riesz representation theorem, 
establishing a natural correspondence between probability measures on $X$ and positive 
normalized functionals on $A$. 

The theorem remains true in the non-metrizable case, however Borel sets should be replaced 
by Baire sets. 

\subsection{Compact Topological Groups}

Let $X$ be a compact topological group. This means that $X$ is a compact 
topological space equiped with a group structure, such that the
product map $\circ:X\times X\rightarrow X$ is
continuous (it can be shown that in the compact case continuity of the product implies 
continuity of the inverse map). At the dual level, the product map is represented by a
*-homomorphism $\phi:A\rightarrow A\otimes A$. The associativity property
of the product is equivalent to the coassociativity property
$$
(\phi\otimes \id)\phi=(\id\otimes\phi)\phi.
$$ 
It can be shown that the 
remaining two group axioms (the existence of the neutral element and
the existence of the inverse elements) are equivalent to a single assumption 
that the elements of the form $a\phi(b)$ as well as of the form $\phi(b)a$, 
where $a,b\in A$, span two everywhere dense linear subspaces of $A\otimes A$. 

\subsection{Vector Bundles}

Let us now assume that $X$ is a compact smooth manifold, and let $\mathcal{E}$ be a smooth 
complex vector bundle over $X$. 
Let $\Gamma=\Gamma(\mathcal{E})$ be the space of smooth sections of 
$\mathcal{E}$. This space is a finite and 
projective module over the *-algebra $\A=\mathrm{C}^\infty(X)$ of smooth functions on $X$. 

Conversely, if $\Gamma$ is an arbitrary
finite and projective module over $\A$, then there exists a unique (up to the isomorphisms) 
smooth vector bundle $\mathcal{E}$ over $X$ such that $\Gamma=\Gamma(\mathcal{E})$.

\subsection{Vector Fields}

Let $\xi$ be a smooth vector field on $X$ and let $D=D_\xi:\A\rightarrow \A$ be the corresponding
Lie derivative (the derivation along $\xi$). The map $D$ satisfies the Leibniz rule 
$$D(fg)=D(f)g+fD(g)\qquad \forall f,g\in\A,$$ 
in other words it is a derivation on $\A$. Moreover, $D$ is hermitian in the sense that 
$D*=*D$, as long as $\xi$ is a real vector field. 

Conversely, if $D:\A\rightarrow \A$ is an arbitrary hermitian derivation on $\A$ then there 
exists a unique (real) vector field $\xi$ on $X$ such that $D=D_\xi$. In other words, there exists a 
natural bijection between vector fields on $X$ and hermitian derivations on $\A$. If we relax 
the hermicity assumption, then we obtain a correspondence between all derivations on $\A$ and
complex vector fields on $X$. 

\subsection{Differential Forms}

The algebra $\Omega(X)$ of smooth differential forms over a compact smooth 
manifold $X$ can be constructed as follows. 
 
Let us first consider the Lie algebra $\Xi=\Der(\A)$ of all derivations of $\A$ (vector fields, 
in accordance with the previous paragraph). This algebra is naturally acting in $\A$, so we 
can construct the Chevalley complex $C(\Xi,\A)$. This space possesses a natural 
graded-differential *-algebra structure. By definition, the elements of $C(\Xi,\A)^k$ are all possible 
$k$-linear antisymmetric maps
$$
\omega:\overbrace{\Xi\times\ldots\times \Xi}^k\rightarrow \A. 
$$ 
The product, differential and the *-structure in $C(\Xi,\A)$ are given by
\begin{align*}
d\omega(\xi_1,\ldots,\xi_{k+1})&=\sum_{i=1}^k(-1)^{i-1}\xi_i\omega(\xi_1,\ldots,
\widehat{\xi_i},\ldots,\xi_{k+1})\\
{}&+\sum_{i < j}(-1)^{i+j}\omega([\xi_i,\xi_j],\ldots,\widehat{\xi_i},\ldots,
\widehat{\xi_j},\ldots,\xi_{k+1})\\
\omega^*(\xi_1\ldots,\xi_k)&=\omega(\xi_1^*,\ldots,\xi_k^*)^*\\
(\omega\eta)(\xi_1,\ldots,\xi_{k+l})&=\sum_{\pi\in S_{kl}}(-1)^{\partial\pi}
\omega(\xi_{\pi(1)},\ldots,\xi_{\pi(k)})\eta(\xi_{\pi(k+1)},\ldots,\xi_{\pi(k+l)})
\end{align*}
where $\eta\in C(\Xi,\A)^l$ and $S_{kl}$ is a subset cosisting of all $(k+l)$-permutations
preserving the orders of the first $k$ and the last $l$ elements. 

By definition, we put $C(\Xi,\A)^0=\A$. 
The algebra of differential forms $\Omega(X)$ can be viewed as a differential subalgebra
of $C(\Xi,\A)$ generated by $\A$. In other words, the spaces
$\Omega(X)^k$ are linearly spanned by the elements of the form 
$$w=a_0d(a_1)\ldots d(a_k),$$
where $a_i\in \A$. 

We can summarize our discussion so far in the following table, which is a kind of 
a mini {\it  dictionary } between geometry and algebra:

\begin{tabular}{| p{2.2in} | p{2.2in}|}\hline
Compact topological spaces $X$ &
Unital commutative C*-algebras $A$ \\ \hline
$X$=compact topological space & $A=\mathrm{C}(X)=\{$complex 
continuous functions on $X\}$\\  \hline
Points $x \in X$ & Characters $\kappa=\kappa_x$ of $A$\\ \hline
Continuous maps between compacts $X$ and $Y\leftrightarrow B$ & Unital *-homomorphisms from
$B$ to $A$\\ \hline
The direct product $X\times Y$ & The C*-tensor product $A\otimes B$\\ \hline
Symmetries of $X$ & Automorphisms of $A$\\ \hline
Group structure on $X$ & Coproduct map $\phi:A\rightarrow A\otimes A$  \\ \hline
Probabilty measures  on a metrizable compact $X$ &
Positive normalized linear functionals on $A$ \\  \hline
Locally-compact noncompact topological spaces $X$ &
Non-unital commutative C*-algebras $A$\\ \hline
Measure theory & Commutative von Neumann algebras\\
\hline 
$X$=compact smooth manifold & $\A=\mathrm{C}^\infty(X)=\{$complex smooth functions on $X\}$\\ \hline
Vector bundles over $X$ & Finite projective modules over $\A$\\ \hline
Vector fields on $X$ & Hermitian derivations on $\A$ \\ \hline
Differential forms on $X$ & Graded-differential algebra 
$\Omega(X)\subset C(\Xi,\A)$ generated by $\A$  \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\newline
\centerline{\bfseries Elementary Geometry-Algebra Dictionary}

\section{Noncommutative Generalizations}

The second main conceptual step consists in generalizing the re-formulated 
classical geometry, by relaxing the assumption of commutativity of the algebras 
$\A=\mathrm{C}^\infty(X)$ and $A=\mathrm{C}(X)$,
and allowing them to be the appropriately chosen {\it non-commutative } *-algebras. 
In such a way we arive to
{\it quantum spaces,} the main objects of study in quantum geometry. 
The elements of these non-commutative *-algebras are intuitively interpreted 
as smooth functions (or continuous, measurable--depending on the context) over 
quantum spaces. However, in contrast to classical geometry, 
the `existence' of quantum spaces is implicit, as they generally appear in the
formalism exclusively via the corresponding *-algebras. 

For example, in accordance with this philosophy and the classical Gelfand-Naimark theory, 
we may say that C*-algebras generalize 
classical topology of compact (and locally-compact) topological spaces. Such a new class
of quantum topological spaces was introduced by Woronowicz in \cite{W1} and developed in 
\cite{W3}--\cite{W6} mainly in the context of quantum groups.  In the case of 
non-compact structures, we meet an essentially new situation consisting in the existence 
of various different 
types of `continuous functions'---the analogs of functions with a compact support, functions
vanishing at infinity, bounded functions, unbounded functions. The counterparts of these 
functions play a very 
important role in the theory of non-compact quantum spaces and groups 
\cite{PW, W2}, and accordingly we have to play with various types of algebras.
In particular, 
besides the `vanishing-at-infinity functions' 
$A\sim\mathrm{C}_0(X)$, it is necessary to introduce the 
multiplier C*-algebra $\mathrm{M}(A)$ representing the bounded functions. 
 
In accordance with the above mentioned Riesz representation theorem, we can say 
that probability measures on the quantum space $X$ are given by positive normalized
linear functionals $\rho:A\rightarrow\mathbb{C}$. Such functionals are called {\it states}. 
In the general C*-algebraic context, 
positive elements are defined as those satisfying $a=b^*b$ for some $b\in A$. The set 
$A_+$ of all positive elements is a closed strict conus in $A$. A linear functional
is positive if it takes positive values on positive elements. Positive functionals are 
automatically continuous. The set $S(A)$ of all states of $A$ is convex, and compact
in the  *-weak topology of the dual space $A^*$. According to the Krein-Millman theorem, 
$S(A)$ coincides with the *-weak closure of the convex hull over its extremal elements. 
The extremal elements of $S(A)$ are called pure states. 

There exists a deep connection between C*-algebra representations, and states. Let us 
consider an arbitrary unital C*-algebra $A$ and let 
$D:A\rightarrow \mathrm{B}(H)$ be a representation of $A$ in a Hilbert space $H$. 
Every unit vector $\psi\in H$ gives rise to a state $\rho:A\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$, via the
formula
$$
\rho(a)=\langle\psi,D(a)\psi\rangle. 
$$
If the vector $\psi$ is cyclic for the representation $D$, then the representation $D$ is 
{\it completely determined} by the associated state $\rho$. More precisely, the above formula 
establishes a natural bijection between the states in $A$ and the (isomorphism classes of)
triples $(H,D,\psi)$ consisting of a Hilbert space $H$, representation $D$ of $A$ in $H$
with a cyclic unit vector $\psi\in H$. This 
is the idea of the GNS-construction, which is one of the most important tools in the study of C*-algebras. 
In terms of the GNS-construction, irreducible representations of $A$ are characterized as those
associated to the pure states.

Going back to the classical (=commutative) context---we have $A=\mathrm{C}(X)$ and 
the GNS-representation $D$ associated to
a state $\rho$ is acting in the Hilbert space $H=L^2(X,\mu_\rho)$. The cyclic vector $\psi$ 
is represented by the unit function, and the operators 
$D(a)$ are given by the left multiplication. 
Irreducible representations are 1-dimensional and given by characters 
of $A$, in other words the points of the associated space $X$. The pure states are also given by
characters of $A$. The associated probability measures are simply $\delta$-measures 
concentrated in points of $X$. 

The theory of von Neumann algebras can be viewed as a quantum generalization of
classical measure theory. Commutative von Neumann algebras
describe classical measurable spaces, and non-commutative von Neumann algebras
represent {\it  quantum measure spaces.} The roots of quantum geometry are present
in the foundational papers by Murray and von Neumann \cite{MvN1,MvN2,MvN4}. 

Various fundamental topics of 
non-commutative differential geometry, including cyclic cohomogy as topological invariants of 
quantum spaces, their incorporation into algebraic $K$-theory, quantum elliptic operators and 
non-commutative index theory, are developed in the works by Connes \cite{C1,C2} \cite{K1,K2}.

Before passing to some concrete examples of quantum spaces, let us observe that 
one and the same concept of classical geometry may have several very 
different generalizations in quantum geometry. This is because the procedure of 
generalizing objects of commutative algebra into the objects of non-commutative algebras 
is not at all unique and straightforward. 

Perhaps one of the best examples of this
phenomena is the quantum differential calculus. In accordance to what we have 
mentioned above, one natural way of introducing the concept of differential
forms in quantum geometry would be to start from an apropriate non-commutative 
*-algebra $\A$ (representing smooth functions) and define differential forms as the elements of 
the $\A$-generated graded-differential
*-subalgebra $\Omega(X)$ of the Chevalley complex $C[\Xi=\Der(\A),\A]$ associated to
the Lie algebra of derivations and its natural representation in $\A$. The product, differential
and the *-structure are given by the same formulas as in the classical case (with the
difference that in the classical case $C(\Xi,\A)$ is a graded-commutative algebra, in 
general case $C(\Xi,\A)$ will be highly non-commutative). 

This idea was sistematically followed in \cite{Dub-V}--\cite{DKM2}. On the other hand, 
the mentioned construction is not appropriate in considerations 
involving quantum groups and differential structures over them, when we must take
care of the quantum group symmetry of the calculus. In the quantum group context, 
a very different construction looks more natural \cite{W5}. This construction
incorporates from the very beginning
the idea of a quantum group covariance. Both constructions include the classical 
situation (classical differential calculus over classical Lie groups) as a very special case. 

The same remark applies to the very concept of symmetry---one possible way 
to introduce symmetries
in quantum geometry is to consider automorphisms of the corresponding noncommutative 
algebras. An essentially different way is to play with quantum groups, and define the
action of quantum groups on quantum spaces, generalizing the classical concept of 
a group action. 

\section{Examples of Quantum Spaces}

\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
\subsection{Spaces with Indistinguishable Points}

Non-commutative geometry provides
a set of tools for the study of certain `strange-behaving' spaces that naturally
appear in classical geometry. 

{\bf Example 1---Foliated Manifolds}\par 
These are the spaces of leaves of foliations of smooth manifolds. As a rule, such spaces 
behave very irregularly, from the classical point of view. A general phenomena is that it 
is not possible to introduce a smooth manifold structure or a reasonable topological 
structure on them.
 
As an extreme case, let us mention {\it ergodic foliations}, and in particular
the spaces of orbits of ergodic dynamical systems. 
 
In the ergodic case, it is not possible to introduce a reasonable concept of 
measurability into the leaf space. The reason for this is in the {\it  effective
indistinguishability } of points of the spaces of leaves of ergodic foliations. 
And if there are no non-trivial measurable sets, there is no
geometry in the standard sense and all the tools of standard analysis loose their
validity. 

However,  it turns out that all the above
mentioned spaces can be naturally treated associating to them certain
non-commutative *-algebras. One can then speak about 
differential and integral calculus, cohomological invariants and 
geometric structures over such spaces. Actually, all basic constructions of classical 
geometry can be generalized at the quantum level. 

{\bf Example 2---Spectrums of Discrete Groups}\par
As a similar type of `quantum' spaces, we can mention
the space of equivalence classes of irreducible unitary representations
of certain discrete groups $\Gamma$. 

If the von Neumann algebra 
$A$ generated by the left-regular representation $\lambda\colon
\Gamma\rightarrow B[l^2(\Gamma)]$ of $\Gamma$ is a non-type-I factor, then the spectrum
of $\Gamma$ exhibits a similar undistingushibility-of-points property. It is worth 
mentioning that $A$ is hyperfinite iff $\Gamma$ is amenable. 
A group $\Gamma$ is called
amenable if there exists a left-invariant state on the
C*-algebra $l^\infty(\Gamma)$ of all bounded continuous functions on $\Gamma$. Every
finitely generated discrete group $\Gamma$ is viewable as the fundamental group 
of a compact smooth 4-dimensional manifold. 

{\bf Example 3---Penrose Tilings}\par
The space of equivalence classes of certain tilings of the Euclidean 
plane, such as the Penrose tilings \cite{C2}. 

This space is defined as follows. 
Let us consider two triangles $T_1$ and $T_2$ of the Euclidean plane, 
defined by the lengths of edges---$(1,\tau,\tau)$ for the first triangle, and $(\tau,1,1)$ 
for the second. Here $$\tau=\frac{1+\sqrt{5}}{2}$$ is the golden ratio number.
Both triangles are naturally coming from a regular pentagon. 

Let us also assume that edges of both triangles are oriented, in the sense
$(+,+,-)$ and $(-,-,+)$ respectively (say, relative to counterclockwise 
orientation). Let $\mathcal{X}$ be the set of all tilings of the Euclidean
plane that can be obtained using the above two triangles, and the rules:

\bla{i} It is allowed to perform reflections of triangles;  

\smallskip
\bla{ii} The oriented edges are paired so that their orientation is the same. 

Such tilings exist. The 3-parameter group $E(2)$ of isometric motions of 
the Euclidean plane is naturally acting on the space $\mathcal{X}$. Let $X$ be the corresponding
orbit space. It can be shown that $X$ possesses (uncountably) infinitely many points. 
However the points of $X$ are effectively indistinguishable, because of the following 
remarkable property: 

Let $T_1,T_2\in\mathcal{X}$ be arbitrary two non-equivalent tilings. Then for
every finite portion (consisting of finitely many triangles) of $T_1$ there exists the same (modulo
$E(2)$ portion of $T_2$. 

\smallskip
It is important to mention that there exist two different interpretations of the relations 
between quantum spaces and the associated *-algebras. The first one is already explained---it 
assumes that spaces determine algebras and algebras determine spaces. The second interpretation
(originally proposed by Connes) assumes that geometry is determined by the class of 
Morita-equivalent C*-algebras. In other words non-isomorphic but 
Morita equivalent C*-algebras describe 
the same quantum space. By definition, two C*-algebras $A$ and $B$ are Morita-equivalent if 
$$A\otimes \mathcal{K}_\infty\cong B\otimes \mathcal{K}_\infty,$$
where $\mathcal{K}_\infty$ is the ideal of compact operators of a separable Hilbert space. 
Morita-equivalent algebras have the same cyclic cohomology and $K$-groups. 

The second approach is more suitable for constructions involving the factor-spaces, 
as for example the structures mentioned in this subsection. However, it is not appropriate
for considerations involving quantum groups and quantum bundles, where passing to a 
Morita-equivalent algebras destroys the entire geometrical structure. 

\subsection{Quantum Groups and Quantum Bundles}

A very important class of examples of quantum spaces is given by          
{\it  quantum groups}. These are, by definition, quantum spaces         
equipped with a `group structure'. Here we shall outline how 
the concept of a compact group can be incorporated at the quantum level. 

In accordance with our basic dictionary, it is natural to assume that 
the group structure on a quantum space
$G$ is described by a *-homomorhism $\phi:A\rightarrow A\otimes A$ such that the 
diagram 
\begin{equation*}
\begin{CD}
A @>{\mbox{$\phi$}}>> A\otimes A\\
@V{\mbox{$\phi$}}VV @VV{\mbox{$\id\otimes \phi$}}V\\
A\otimes A @>>{\mbox{$\phi\otimes \id$}}>
A\otimes A\otimes A
\end{CD}
\end{equation*} 
is commutative, and such that 
\begin{align*}
A\otimes A&=\overline{\Bigl\{\sum a\phi(b)\Bigm\vert a,b\in A\Bigr\}}\\
A\otimes A&=\overline{\Bigl\{\sum \phi(b)a\Bigm\vert a,b\in A\Bigr\}}.
\end{align*} 
In such a way we arrive to {\it  compact quantum groups }. 

As a very important special
class of compact quantum groups, let us mention {\it matrix} groups. These structures
are specified by a C*-algebra $A$, together with a *-homomorphism 
$\phi\colon A\rightarrow A\otimes A$ and a matrix $u\in M_n(A)$  such that 
the *-algebra $\mathcal{A}$ generated by the entries $u_{ij}$ is everywhere dense in $A$, and
such that 
$$
\phi(u_{ij})=\sum_k u_{ik}\otimes u_{kj}. 
$$
It is also assumed that both $u$ and its conjugate $\bar{u}$ are {\it invertible} matrices. 
It follows that 
$$\phi(\mathcal{A})\subseteq\mathcal{A}\otimes_{\mathrm{alg}}\mathcal{A}$$
and that the above mentioned coassociativity and density properties are 
satisfied automatically. Matrix groups generalize the idea of a compact Lie group. 
The algebra $\mathcal{A}$ plays the role of polynomial functions over $G$. The matrix
$u$ correspond to the fundamental representation of the group $G$. 
The theory of compact 
quantum groups was systematically developed in \cite{W4,W6}. 

As a basic example of 
a compact matrix quantum group, let us mention a quantum version of the $SU(2)$ group \cite{W3}. 
By definition the corresponding C*-algebra $A$
is generated by elements $\alpha$ and $\gamma$, and relations
\begin{gather*}
\alpha\alpha^*+\mu^2\gamma\gamma^*=1\quad\quad\alpha^*\alpha+\gamma^*\gamma=1\\
\qquad\gamma\gamma^*=\gamma^*\gamma\\
\alpha\gamma=\mu\gamma\alpha\quad\quad\alpha\gamma^*=\mu\gamma^*\alpha\quad\quad
\alpha^*\gamma=\frac{1}{\mu}\gamma\alpha^*\quad\quad\alpha^*\gamma^*=
\frac{1}{\mu}\gamma^*\alpha^*
\end{gather*}
where $\mu\in [-1,1]\setminus\{0\}$. The coproduct is specified by the above 
mentioned matrix rule
$$
\phi(u_{ij})=\sum_k u_{ik}\otimes u_{kj},
$$
where the elements $u_{ij}$ are the entries of a $2\times 2$ $A$-matrix
\begin{equation*}
u=\begin{pmatrix}
\alpha&-\mu\gamma^*\\
\gamma&\alpha^*
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
The defining relations for $A$ are actually equivalent to the {\it unitarity}
of the above matrix. 

Quantum groups provide a conceptual framework for generalizing the classical 
{\it  concept of symmetry}. 
Indeed, in classical geometry symmetries of the space $X$ are interpretable as 
automotphisms of the associated algebra $A$. This is straghtforwardly generalizable
to the quantum level---we can define symmetries of a quantum space as (appropriate) 
automorphisms of the associated non-commutative algebra $A$. So symmetries
always form a subgroup of the automorphism group $\mathrm{Aut}(A)$. 
Another way of incorporating
the idea of symmetry is to generalize the concept of the {\it  group action} rather than
the one of the individual symmetries. In such a way we arrive to the concept of
{\it an action of a quantum group on a quantum space}.
 
A fundamental class of quantum           
spaces possessing a built-in quantum group symmetry is 
given by {\it  quantum principal bundles.} These objects are quantum counterparts 
of classical principal bundles.                                                                        
Quantum groups play the role of structure groups and general              
quantum spaces play the role of the base manifolds. The main geometrical idea 
is the same as in the classical theory---that of a fibered space on which the
structure group acts freely on the right, so that the fibers are the orbits of
this action. 
 
If the quantum principal bundle and the structure group are  
represented by C*-algebras $B$ and $A$ respectively, then the right action of $G$ on $P$ is 
represented by a *-homomorphism $F:B\rightarrow B\otimes A$, such that the diagram 
\begin{equation*}
\begin{CD}
B @>{\mbox{$F$}}>>B\otimes A\\
@V{\mbox{$F$}}VV @VV{\mbox{$\id\otimes \phi$}}V\\
B\otimes A @>>{\mbox{$F\otimes \id$}}>
B\otimes A\otimes A
\end{CD}
\end{equation*}
is commutative. The classical condition that the structure group is acting freely on the bundle
is expressed as a density condition 
$$
B\otimes A=\overline{\Bigl\{\sum bF(q)\Bigm\vert b,q\in B\Bigr\}}.
$$

The above diagram corresponds to the requirement that the structure group is really `acting' on the
bundle. 

The base manifold $M$ is described by the $F$-fixed point subalgebra of $B$. 
Geometrically, this means that the functions on the base are just the functions on 
the bundle, constant along the action orbits. 

As a quantum object, the structure group $G$ is not understandable as a collection of 
elements. Therefore the action $F$ is not reducible to a collection of single symmetry 
transformations. In other words the action of the whole quantum group is considered as 
a quantum symmetry (in the commutative case, $F$ contains the information about
all possible transformations of $P$ induced by the elements of $G$). 

A general theory of 
quantum principal bundles has been developed in \cite{D1,D2}. All basic topics of the 
classical theory (including a differential calculus, the formalism of connections, the theory of 
characteristic classes, classifying spaces and frame bundles geometry) 
can be naturally generalized and incorporated in the non-commutative context. 
A natural and potentially interesting application of quantum principal bundles in theoretical 
physics is to develop Yang-Mills theories over a quantum space-time, with a quantum local 
symmetry group. 

\subsection{Quantum Tori and Finite Quantum Spaces}

A large array of purely quantum phenomenas can be illustrated 
on two very interesting `completely pointless' quantum spaces---quantum 
2-tori, and `finite' quantum spaces based on matrix algebras. 

By definition, 
a quantum 2-torus is based on the C*-algebra generated by the elements $U$ and $V$ and
relations
$$ U^{-1}=U^* \qquad  V^*=V^{-1} \qquad VU=zUV,$$ 
where $z$ is a fixed unit complex number. The algebra $A_z$ will be 
commutative if and only if $z=1$, and in this case it describes the classical 2-torus. 
If $z\neq 1$ then $A_z$ describes a purely quantum object. This space is called {\it  a quantum
torus.} It has no points at all. Quantum torus has the same $U(1)\times U(1)$ symmetry
of the classical torus, because the group $U(1)\times U(1)$ acts by automorphisms on $A_z$, as in 
the classical case--by phase shifts of generators $U$ and $V$. 
It is worth noticing that if $z$ is not a root of unity, then (and only then) 
the algebra $A_z$ is simple. If $z$ is a root od unity, then $A_z$ is Morita-equivalent  to the
classical 2-torus algebra. 

The quantum torus can be naturally viewed as a {\it quantum principal $U(1)$-bundle} over 
the base $M=U(1)$. This is a nice example of a quantum principal bundle, with the classical 
base and the classical structure group. The existence of such bundles have a deep impact 
to the classification problematics of bundles in non-commutative geometry. For example, the
classifying space for $U(1)$ is still a quantum object. 

Let us now consider algebras of the form $A=M_n(\mathbb{C})$. By definition, it means that
$A$ is consisting of complex $n\times n$-matrices. The algebraic operations are the
standard addition and multiplication of matrices, and the *-structure is given 
by the adjoint operation. All matrix algebras are Morita-equivalent to complex numbers. 

Quantum spaces based on such 
algebras are finite, because the algebras are finite-dimensional (and a classical space
is finite iff its function algebra is finite-dimensional, and in this case the dimension of the
algebra is the same as the number of points of the space). The space $X$ has no points at 
all (because matrix algebras are always simple, and so do not admit characters). A purely
quantum phenomena is that finite quantum spaces possess nontrivial {\it continuous 
symmetries}. In the
case of $X$, all automorphisms of $A$ are inner---given by the similarity transformations by 
unitary matrices. So the group of symmetries of $X$ is $\mathrm{Aut}(A)=U(n)/U(1)$. 
Another purely
quantum phenomena consists in {\it a topological non-triviality } of such spaces, 
and the nontriviality of differential structures over them. For example, the calculus based
on derivations as explained above. The matrix spaces can be viewed as quantum counterparts
of a 2-sphere, where the classical sphere is replaced by a quantum object consisting of $n$ 
elementary quantum `cells' in such a way that the classical $SO(3)$ symmetry is 
preserved. A detailed analysis of such quantum spaces can be found in \cite{DKM1,Mad}. 

A very interesting possible application of these examples
in physics is in formulating a Kaluza-Klein type theory \cite{DKM2,Mad}, 
where the internal space-time 
manifold is one of the quantum spaces based on matrix algebras. One of
new purely quantum phenomenas appearing in such Kaluza-Klein theories is a possibility to interpret
Higgs fields as parts of Yang-Mills multiplets. 

A similar philosophy is applied in the Connes
geometric model \cite{C2} of electroweak interactions, where the internal space-time manifold 
is described
by a finite quantum space $\Lambda$ of a more elaborated geometrical nature. 
The pure electrodynamics on the total space-time is reduced to the standard 
Wein\-berg-Sa\-lam model of electrodynamics and weak interactions, when viewed in terms of 
the classical 4-dimensional space-time. 

\subsection{Supergeometry}

Supergeometry generalizes classical geometry by introducing
the appropriate graded-commutative extensions of the algebras of smooth functions:
$$
0\longrightarrow \mathcal{K}\longrightarrow \mathrm{S}(M)\longrightarrow 
\mathrm{C}^\infty(M)\longrightarrow 0
$$
where $M$ is a smooth manifold and $\mathcal{K}$ is an ideal posessing the nilpotency property 
$$\mathcal{K}^k=\{0\}.  $$
for some $k\geq 2$. Supergeometry deals with supermanifolds, which are formally defined 
as dual objects to the extensions $\A=\mathrm{S}(M)$. 


From the sheaf-theoretic point of view, a supermanifold is defined as a ringed space $(M,\mathcal{F})$
consisting of a smooth manifold $M$ and a sheaf of $\mathbb{Z}/2$-graded algebras 
$\mathcal{F}$, which is locally isomorphic to the coordinate sheaf 
$\mathcal{F}_{m,M}=C_M^\infty\otimes [\mathbb{C}^m]^\wedge$, where $C_M^\infty$ is the 
standard sheaf of smooth functions and $m+1=k$. The algebra $\A=S(M)$ consists 
of global sections of the sheaf. 

In terms of `local coordinates' supermanifolds are described by local coordinate systems
containing, besides standard local coordinates $\{x_1,\ldots,x_n\}$ for $M$ also some mutually 
anticommuting coordinates $\{\theta_1,\ldots,\theta_m\}$. It is assumed that 
coordinates $x_i$ and $\theta_j$ commute.

From the theoretical physics prospective, supergeometry plays a central role in the 
foundations of {\it  supersymmetry}. A principal goal of supersymmetry was to 
provide a unifying view of bosonic and fermionic fields, and to establish a framework for
a mathematically consistent formulation of quantum theory of gravity. The space-time is
viewed as a supermanifold, and the symmetry is described by {\it supergroups}, which are
the supergeometric counterparts of Lie groups. Elementary particles are grouped into
supermultiplets, that generally contain both bosons and fermions. 

For more informations about supergeometry, we refer to \cite{SV1,SV2,R}. 

Many constructions of supergeometry are naturally generalizable to the level of 
{\it braided structures}. In this context, the *-algebra $\A$ is equipped with an additional
structure, given by the appropriate operators $\sigma:\A\otimes\A\rightarrow\A\otimes\A$
satisfying the braid equation

$$ (\sigma\otimes\id)(\id\otimes\sigma)(\sigma\otimes\id)=
(\id\otimes\sigma)(\sigma\otimes\id) (\id\otimes\sigma).$$

The operator $\sigma$ replaces the standard transposition, and is generally 
not involutive.
In the context  $\mathbb{Z}/2$-graded supercommutative algebras $\A$ (used in supergeometry)
the braiding reduces to the involution
$$\sigma:a\otimes b\mapsto (-1)^{\partial a\partial b}b\otimes a. $$
In classical geometry, all the braidings are the standard transpositions. In quantum geometry, 
an interesting phenomena appears. It turns out that quantum objects with a sufficiently 
`rich' geometrical structure (as quantum groups
and quantum bundles) are always intrinsically braided, in the sense that the geometrical 
structure allows us to construct very interesting braid operators. 

\subsection{Deformation Quantization of Symplectic Manifolds}

A very interesting class of examples of noncommutative *-algebras 
can be obtained by deforming the 
algebras of smooth functions over a symplectic manifold $M$, so that a {\it  quantum 
correspondence principle} holds. This requirement is actually 
a central problem in the
deformation quantization of symplectic manifolds. More precisely, let $\A$ be the
(commutative) algebra of smooth functions on a symplectic manifold $M$. 
Let $\A[\nu]$ be the associated algebra
of formal power series over a formal parameter $\nu$. We say that a  new associative 
product $\star$ introduced in the space $\A[\nu]$ satisfies the correspondence 
principle iff $$
f\star g=fg+\frac{\nu}{2i}\{f,g\}+\nu^2r(f,g), 
$$
where $\{,\}$ are Poisson brackets associated to $M$. The motivating 
idea behind this definition is that $M$ plays the role of the 
phase space of a classical mechanical system. We assume that this classical system has 
a quantum couterpart,
described by a noncommutative algebra, which is in fact $\A[\nu]$ equipped with 
the new product $\star$. 
The parameter $\nu$ plays the role of the Planck constant. The correspondence principle tells
us that quantum commutator $i/\nu[*,*]$ coincides with the classical Poisson bracket, modulo
terms of the order of $\nu$. 

There exists an intrinsically geometrical construction \cite{F} of a noncommutative product $\star$ 
of the described type, for every symplectic manifold $M$. The following is a very brief sketch of
this construction. We start from the formal Weyl algebra bundle $W[M]$ associated to 
$(M,\nu,\omega)$, where $\omega$ is the initial symplectic form
on $M$. In other words, the fibers of $W[M]$ are the Weyl algebras associated to the tangent
spaces $T_x(M), x\in M$, equipped with the symplectic scalar product $\nu\omega_x$. 
Let $\mathcal{W}$ be the algebra of formal power series with coefficients in the 
smooth sections of $W[M]$. It turns out that every symplectic torsion-free connection $\nabla$ 
on $M$ induces an injective map $j_\nabla:\A[\nu]\rightarrow\mathcal{W}$ with 
the following properties: 

\bla{i} The image of $j_\nabla$ is a subalgebra of $\mathcal{W}$. In fact this image coincides with
the kernel of a naturally associated differential $D$, acting in the algebra 
$\Omega(M,W[M])$. 

\bla{ii} A new product $\star$ in $\A[\nu]$ defined by 
$$f\star g=j^{-1}_\nabla[j_\nabla(f)j_\nabla(g)]$$
satisfies the above mentioned correspondence principle. 

The final and crucial (from the physical viewpoint) step in the 
quantization of the considered system is to incorporate the construction in the conceptual 
framework of C*-algebraic physics \cite{BR}. This is done by constructing 
a C*-algebra $\widehat{A}$, by completing the appropriate *-subalgebra 
of $\A[\nu]$, and considering irreducible representations and superselection 
sectors of the completed algebra $\widehat{A}$. 
 
\subsection{C*-algebraic extensions and BDF-Theory}

Let us consider a metrizable compact topological space $\Omega$, and let us consider
the classification problem for all possible short exact sequences of C*-algebras 
of the form 
\begin{equation*}
0\longrightarrow \mathcal{K}_\infty\longrightarrow A\longrightarrow 
\mathrm{C}(\Omega)\longrightarrow 0
\end{equation*} 
where $\mathcal{K}_\infty$ is the ideal of compact operators in a separable Hilbert space. It coincides with 
the commutant of $A$, in other words $\Omega$ is the space of characters of $A$. It can be shown
\cite{BDF} that homotopy classes of such extensions 
are in one-to-one correspondence with the elements
of the first $K$-homology group of $\Omega$. In other words, described non-commutative 
extensions reflect the topology of $\Omega$. It is also possible to
consider more general situations, where $\mathcal{K}_\infty$ is replaced by a 
different C*-algebra. For a general introduction to C*-algebraic extensions 
we refer to \cite{We}. 

As a paradigmic example of a non-trivial extension of the described type, let us mention
the extension generated by the shift operator $T$ acting in $H=l^2(\mathbb{N})$. By definition, 
this operator is defined by
$$Te_n=e_{n+1}\qquad \forall n\in\mathbb{N}$$ 
where the vectors $e_n$ form the canonical orthonormal basis in $H$. 
The algebra $A$ is defined as 
the C*-algebra generated by $T$. We have $\Omega=U(1)$, as characters of $A$ are
completely determined by their values on $T$, and the values cover the whole unit 
circle $U(1)$. This extension plays a central role in a very elegant proof \cite{We} of 
the Bott periodicity for general C*-algebras. 

It is worth mentioning that extensions of the described type naturally appear  
in a C*-algebraic foundation of a causal {\it subquantum mechanics} \cite{D-subq} where 
$A$ plays the role of the algebra of subquantum variables and $\Omega$ is 
the subquantum space of a given physical system. 
\begin{thebibliography}{44} 
\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
\bibitem{BR} Brateli O, Robinson D: {\it  Operator 
Algebras and Quantum Statistical Mechanics,} Volumes 1/2, Springer-Verlag (1979)                                                                          
\bibitem{BDF} Brown L G, Douglas R G, Filmore 
P G: {\it  Extensions of C*-algebras
and K-Homology, } Ann Math, 105 265--324 (1977) 
\bibitem{C1} Connes A: {\it Non-commutative differential geometry,}
Extrait des Publications Mathematiques--IHES 62 (1986) 
\bibitem{C2} Connes A: {\it Noncommutative Geometry,} Academic Press (1994) 
\bibitem{Dx} Dixmier J: {\it Les algebres d'operateurs dans l'espace Hilbertien, }
Gauthier-Villars (1957) 
\bibitem{Dub-V} Dubois-Violette: {\it D\'erivations et calcul diff\'erentiel 
non-commutatif,} CR Acad Sci Paris 307 (1988) 
\bibitem{DKM1} Dubois-Violette, R Kerner, J Madore: {\it Noncommutative
Differential Geometry of Matrix Algebras,} J Math Phys 31 316--322 (1990)
\bibitem{DKM2} Dubois-Violette, R Kerner, J Madore: {\it Noncommutative 
Differential Geometry and New Models of Gauge Theory,} J Math Phys 31 
323--335 (1990)
\bibitem{D1} {\Dj}ur{\dj}evich M: {\it  Geometry of Quantum Principal Bundles I,} 
Commun Math Phys 175 (3) 457--521 (1996)                                                                                                                  
\bibitem{D2} {\Dj}ur{\dj}evich M: {\it  Geometry of Quantum Principal Bundles II,} Rev Math Phys 9 
(5) 531--607 (1997) 
\bibitem{D-subq} {\Dj}ur{\dj}evich  M: {\it  Algebro-Geometric Constructions of Subquantum Theories, }
Doctoral Thesis, Faculty of Physics, University of Belgrade, Serbia ({\it in Serbian} :) ) (1993) 
\bibitem{F} Fedosov B: {\it  Deformation Quantization and Index Theory, } Akademie Verlag 
GmbH, Berlin (1996) 
\bibitem{K1} Kastler D: {\it Cyclic Cohomology Within Differential Envelope,} Hermann, Paris (1988) 
\bibitem{K2} Kastler D: {\it Introduction to Alain Connes' Non-Commutative Differential Geometry,}
Karpacz Lectures (1986)
\bibitem{Mad} Madore J: {\it An Introduction to Noncommutative 
Differential Geometry and Its Physical Applications,} Book--Second 
Edition (1998)
\bibitem{MvN1} Murray F J, von Neumann J: {\it  On Rings of Operators,} Ann
Math {\bf 37} 116--229 (1936)
\bibitem{MvN2} Murray F J, von Neumann J: {\it  On Rings of Operators 2,} Trans Amer 
Math Soc {\bf 41} 208--248 (1937)
\bibitem{MvN4} Murray F J, von Neumann J: {\it  On Rings of Operators 4,} Ann Math {\bf 44}
716--808 (1943)
\bibitem{P} Podle\'s P: {\it  Quantum Spheres, } Lett Math Phys 14 193--202 
(1987)  
\bibitem{PW} Podle\'s P, Woronowicz S L: {\it Quantum Deformation of 
Lorentz Group,} Commun Math Phys 130 381--431 (1990)
\bibitem{SV1} Sanchez-Valenzuela O A:  {\it On Supergeometric Structures,} Ph.~D.~Thesis, 
Harvard University, Cambridge (1986)
\bibitem{SV2} Sanchez-Valenzuela O A: {\it Differential-Geometric Approach to Supervector Bundles,}
Preprint, CIMAT, Guanajuato, M\'exico (1996)
\bibitem{R} Rothstein M: {\it The Axioms of Supermanifolds and a New Structure Arising From Them,}
Trans Amer Math Soc {\bf 297} 159--180 (1986)
\bibitem{We} Wegge-Olsen N E: {\it  K-Theory and C*-Algebras,} Oxford Science Publications (1993)  
\bibitem{W1} Woronowicz S L: {\it Pseudospaces, Pseudogroups and Pontryagin duality,} 
Lecture Notes in Physics {\bf 116}, Proceedings                       
of the International Conference on Mathematical Physics, Lausanne (1979) 
\bibitem{W2} Woronowicz S L: {\it $C^*$-algebras Generated by Unbounded
Elements,} Rev Math Phys, 7 (3) 481--521 (1995) 
\bibitem{W3} Woronowicz S L: {\it  Twisted $SU(2)$ group: An example of                                    
a noncommutative differential calculus,} RIMS, Kyoto University 23,                                       
117--181 (1987) 
\bibitem{W4} Woronowicz S L: {\it  Compact Matrix Pseudogroups,} Commun Math Phys            
111, 613--665 (1987) 
\bibitem{W5} Woronowicz S L: {\it Differential Calculus on Compact Matrix                                              
Pseudogroups (Quantum Groups),} Commun Math Phys 122, 125--170 (1989)  
\bibitem{W6} Woronowicz S L: {\it  Tannaka-Krein Duality for Compact Matrix                                             
Pseudogroups; Twisted SU(n) groups, } Invent Math 93, 35--76 (1988)  
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}

