The Portal Wiki

Bundles: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Bundles (edit)

Revision as of 20:54, 5 January 2026

2,913 bytes added ,  5 January
→‎2022
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 115: Line 115:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I would say the one who awes me most is...CN Yang. I don’t understand why I never hear his name as candidate. He has at least 3 of the greatest achievements: chirality for the weak force (w/ Lee), non-Abelian maxwell theory (w/ Mills), and the bundle revolution (w/ Simons/Wu).
|content=I would say the one who awes me most is...[[CN Yang]]. I don’t understand why I never hear his name as candidate. He has at least 3 of the greatest achievements: chirality for the weak force (w/ Lee), non-Abelian maxwell theory (w/ Mills), and the bundle revolution (w/ Simons/Wu).
|thread=
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 667: Line 667:
|content=Huh. Let’s see…
|content=Huh. Let’s see…


Standard Model: Fiber Bundle
[[Standard Model]]: [[Bundles|Fiber Bundle]]


General Relativity: Fiber Bundle
[[General Relativity]]: [[Bundles|Fiber Bundle]]


Our universe: Derived from  SM+GR
Our universe: Derived from  SM+GR
Line 676: Line 676:


Weird flex, but it checked out.
Weird flex, but it checked out.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=joe_r_Odonnell-profile-q8PSQM7u.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/joe_r_Odonnell/status/1477836258906759171
|name=Joe — e/adgbe 🎸
|usernameurl=https://x.com/joe_r_Odonnell
|username=joe_r_Odonnell
|content=When all you’ve got is gauge theory, everything looks like a fiber bundle
|timestamp=2:56 AM · Jan 3, 2022
}}
|timestamp=1:02 AM · Jan 7, 2022
|timestamp=1:02 AM · Jan 7, 2022
}}
}}
Line 710: Line 720:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=@sluitel34 @FrankWilczek This should be in any book that discusses the standard model via groups, representations, bundles, etc.
|content=@sluitel34 @FrankWilczek This should be in any book that discusses the [[Standard Model|standard model]] via groups, representations, [[Bundles|bundles]], etc.
|thread=
|thread=
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 1,146: Line 1,156:
|content=[Note for Curt: This is the whole point of [[Theory of Geometric Unity|Geometric Unity]]. They are three geometries. Which are all one geometry, and that is only possible in the rarest of circumstances. Which we are in oddly.  
|content=[Note for Curt: This is the whole point of [[Theory of Geometric Unity|Geometric Unity]]. They are three geometries. Which are all one geometry, and that is only possible in the rarest of circumstances. Which we are in oddly.  


Metric Geometry: General Relativity GR
Metric Geometry: [[General Relativity|General Relativity GR]]
Fiber Geometry:  Standard Model SM
[[Bundles|Fiber Geometry]]:  [[Standard Model|Standard Model SM]]
Symplectic Geometry: Hamiltonian Quantization of the SM. ]
Symplectic Geometry: Hamiltonian Quantization of the SM. ]
|thread=
|thread=
Line 1,165: Line 1,175:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=He is correctly anticipating the Simons-Yang discovery of the “Wu Yang dictionary”.  
|content=He is correctly anticipating the Simons-Yang discovery of the [[Wu-Yang Dictionary|“Wu Yang dictionary”]].  


Maxwell became Yang Mills
Maxwell became Yang Mills</br>
Yang Mills became Simons Yang.
Yang Mills became Simons Yang.</br>
Simons Yang became the Wu Yang Dictionary.  
Simons Yang became the Wu Yang Dictionary.</br>
Wu Yang was (except for one entry) was [[Bundles|Ehressmann fiber bundle geometry]].  
[[Wu-Yang Dictionary|Wu Yang]] was (except for one entry) was [[Bundles|Ehressmann fiber bundle geometry]].  


Think of metric geometry, fiber geometry and symplectic geometry as the geometry of symmetric metric 2-tensors, [[Bundles|fiber bundle connections]] and anti-symmetric 2 tensors respectively.
Think of metric geometry, fiber geometry and symplectic geometry as the geometry of symmetric metric 2-tensors, [[Bundles|fiber bundle connections]] and anti-symmetric 2 tensors respectively.
Line 1,207: Line 1,217:
Peter Woit</br>
Peter Woit</br>
John Baez</br>
John Baez</br>
Ed Witten</br>
[[Ed Witten]]</br>
Luis Alvarez Gaume</br>
Luis Alvarez Gaume</br>
Dan Freed</br>
[[Dan Freed]]</br>
Jose Figueroa O’Farril
Jose Figueroa O’Farril


Line 1,279: Line 1,289:
The quantum is real. It’s mysterious. It’s mind blowing. And as a result it provides jobs and something to talk about when the classical theory is stagnant. But the dream of quantum theories that are born quantum never materialized. We still quantize classical theories, for all our posturing about needing to take classical limits of quantum theories.
The quantum is real. It’s mysterious. It’s mind blowing. And as a result it provides jobs and something to talk about when the classical theory is stagnant. But the dream of quantum theories that are born quantum never materialized. We still quantize classical theories, for all our posturing about needing to take classical limits of quantum theories.


Witten in particular popularized the notion that the incompatiblity between General Relativity and the Standard Model is a Classical vs Quantum problem. He’s wrong.  
[[Ed Witten|Witten]] in particular popularized the notion that the incompatiblity between General Relativity and the Standard Model is a Classical vs Quantum problem. He’s wrong.  


The Classical GR theory is already incompatible with the Classical Standard Model. The incompatibility is already classical: NOT Quantum.
The Classical GR theory is already incompatible with the Classical Standard Model. The incompatibility is already classical: NOT Quantum.
Line 1,392: Line 1,402:
|content=Hi Matt.  
|content=Hi Matt.  


Sam regularly portrays himself as outraged about 'angry' or 'dissatisfied' or otherwise 'upset' voices and insinuates that they are turning to sensationalism. I furnished two (of very many) cases that folks like Sam would find absolutely outrageous if the real concern was damaging science with sensationalism, and which cause *far* more harm to fundamental physics than independent voices like Sabine Hossenfelder.
Sam regularly portrays himself as outraged about 'angry' or 'dissatisfied' or otherwise 'upset' voices and insinuates that they are turning to sensationalism. I furnished two (of very many) cases that folks like Sam would find absolutely outrageous if the real concern was damaging science with sensationalism, and which cause *far* more harm to fundamental physics than independent voices like [[Sabine Hossenfelder]].


SG is a brand on line. A guy who tries to make the establishment seem 'edgy'...often by targeting people who are raising the real issues with the institutions.
SG is a brand on line. A guy who tries to make the establishment seem 'edgy'...often by targeting people who are raising the real issues with the institutions.
Line 1,460: Line 1,470:
|content=Gave a talk at Hebrew University Physics Department today on the geometric basis for Dark Energy.  
|content=Gave a talk at Hebrew University Physics Department today on the geometric basis for Dark Energy.  


Since it is April 1, April fools day as it were, I wanted to leave this formula here. For the future. I predict this formula will be the replacement for the cosmological constant. https://t.co/lBcQLhbgHK
Since it is April 1, April fools day as it were, I wanted to leave this formula here. For the future. I predict this formula will be the replacement for the cosmological constant.
|timestamp=8:57 PM · Apr 1, 2025
|timestamp=8:57 PM · Apr 1, 2025
|media1=Gnel_Y_XQAAjRPF.jpg
|media1=ERW-X-post-1907175481851412790-Gnel_Y_XQAAjRPF.jpg
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 1,481: Line 1,491:
exploring this with you in depth.
exploring this with you in depth.
|timestamp=9:11 PM · Apr 1, 2025
|timestamp=9:11 PM · Apr 1, 2025
|media1=GnepTEmXgAAdVOI.jpg
|media1=ERW-X-post-1907179119659356409-GnepTEmXgAAdVOI.jpg
}}
}}
|timestamp=9:29 PM · Apr 1, 2025
|timestamp=9:29 PM · Apr 1, 2025
Line 1,523: Line 1,533:




{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1928095740926251169
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Ah. It has two features that general Ehressmanian geometry generally lacks:
I) A distinguished Choice of Connection (The Levi Civita connection and the connections induced from it on associated bundles).
II) Tensor Decomposition coming from the lack of structure groups auxiliary to those of the tangent bundles.
So actually the specific sub geometry of (pseudo)-Riemannian geometry is an exchange of Gauge Symmetry and field content freedom for these two attributes.
Except in totally exotic cases. Like the one in which we oddly happen to live…but I digress.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=HeathHimself-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/HeathHimself/status/1926519377404285084
|name=Heath
|usernameurl=https://x.com/HeathHimself
|username=HeathHimself
|content=@EricRWeinstein Caught your debate with Sean Carroll on Piers. Why do you think he was spouting off so much misinformation about GU? "There's no Lagrangian!" I'm looking at the paper right now. There's literally 3 pages worth of Lagrangians like wtf.
|timestamp=6:03 AM · May 25, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Neon__Genesis_-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/Neon__Genesis_/status/1927831447164928207
|name=Neon
|usernameurl=https://x.com/Neon__Genesis_
|username=Neon__Genesis_
|content=The whole debate was very odd, Carroll didn't offer a single criticism of any substance, not a single concept or equation. We need to remember Sean at heart is a philosophy and astronomy major, not a mathematician or physicist despite their self-styling
|timestamp=8:56 PM · May 28, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
Line 1,533: Line 1,577:
Let me put them in the language of GU.  
Let me put them in the language of GU.  


“The Chern-Simons Lagrangian has been studied previously in (2+1)-dimensional spacetime, where it is both gauge and Lorentz invariant. We the authors believe that outside of this special dimension, there is a fundamental trade off where we must either violate Ehresmannian Bundle Geometry (Gauge Theory of Particle Theory) or the pointwise Lorentz Invariance of Riemannian Geometry (Einstein’s General theory of  Relativity). It appears to the authors that the right way to construct an analogous term in 3+1 dimensions is to create a Chern Simons-like term which couples the dual electromagnetic tensor to an artificial external four-vector which has no supporting evidence or motivation and violates both Einstein’s Special and General theories of Relativity. If we take this four-vector to be fixed, the term is gauge invariant but not Lorentz invariant throwing out one of the two pillars of modern physics. We do it anyway, because we believe the above mentioned tradeoff precludes any other approach.”
“The Chern-Simons Lagrangian has been studied previously in (2+1)-dimensional spacetime, where it is both gauge and Lorentz invariant. We the authors believe that outside of this special dimension, there is a fundamental trade off where we must either violate [[Bundles|Ehresmannian Bundle Geometry (Gauge Theory of Particle Theory)]] or the pointwise Lorentz Invariance of Riemannian Geometry (Einstein’s General theory of  Relativity). It appears to the authors that the right way to construct an analogous term in 3+1 dimensions is to create a Chern Simons-like term which couples the dual electromagnetic tensor to an artificial external four-vector which has no supporting evidence or motivation and violates both Einstein’s Special and General theories of Relativity. If we take this four-vector to be fixed, the term is gauge invariant but not Lorentz invariant throwing out one of the two pillars of modern physics. We do it anyway, because we believe the above mentioned tradeoff precludes any other approach.”


I personally knew Sean’s co-author Roman Jackiw decently well on this topic as he was at MIT. This was his perspective.
I personally knew Sean’s co-author Roman Jackiw decently well on this topic as he was at MIT. This was his perspective.
Line 1,540: Line 1,584:


Sean’s work is the DIRECT competitor of this GU theory. And GU sacrificed neither.
Sean’s work is the DIRECT competitor of this GU theory. And GU sacrificed neither.
|media1=ERW-X-post-1928085868054729136-GsHv4ISaUAcvL0z.jpg
|timestamp=1:47 PM · May 29, 2025
|timestamp=1:47 PM · May 29, 2025
|media1=GsHv4ISaUAcvL0z.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=uniservent-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/uniservent/status/1928093271336665134
|name=UniServEnt
|usernameurl=https://x.com/uniservent
|username=uniservent
|content=Given info on this link, why do you need Riemannian  geometry in the first place if it is a subset of Ehressman?
 
https://chatgpt.com/share/68386b13-93e0-8013-a47d-75b2769f464d
|timestamp=2:17 PM · May 29, 2025
}}
|timestamp=2:27 PM · May 29, 2025
}}
}}


Line 1,981: Line 2,038:
|timestamp=5:02 PM · Oct 15, 2025
|timestamp=5:02 PM · Oct 15, 2025
}}
}}


== Related Pages ==
== Related Pages ==
Line 1,987: Line 2,043:
* [[String Theory]]
* [[String Theory]]
* [[Theory of Geometric Unity]]
* [[Theory of Geometric Unity]]
* [[An Extension of Intertemporal Ordinal Welfare To Changing Tastes: Economics As Gauge Theory (Content)]]


[[Category:Economics]]
[[Category:Economics]]
Retrieved from "https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/23856...25246"