Gauge Theory

This article is a stub. You can help us by editing this page and expanding it.

On X

2009

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

Me: Marginal economics is a gauge theory.
Economist X: Do the experts agree?
Me: What experts? How do you live like that?

1:53 PM · Nov 13, 2009

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

Lee Smolin: Eric Weinstein and Pia Malaney say Economics is a Gauge theory.
Economist Y: Lee Smolin says Economics is a gauge theory.

1:59 PM · Nov 13, 2009

2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

Gauge Theory: A version of the differential calculus in which the Rise in “Rise over Run” is measured from a reference level that must be determined endogenously within the theory.

And yet, supposedly, I am super confusing?

Ok. Compare anyone else’s definition. I’ll wait.

3:56 PM · Mar 13, 2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

CPI is broken. Why?

Think of CPI as a gauge like a thermometer. You can’t have politically motivated folks making your thermometers or they can change the design to cover up climate change. Likewise you can’t have economists changing the gauge to disguise the effect of printing.

6:52 AM · Jun 15, 2021

sam.frax

@samkazemian

A crypto native CPI governed on the blockchain to create a decentralized stablecoin people can rely on to keep their standard of living the same across time. A true alternative to fiat rather than a speculative investment asset like most other coins.

6:52 AM · Jun 15, 2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

The economists can’t yet compute a dynamic Cost-Of-Living-Adjustment or COLA or “Chained Changing Preference Ordinal Welfare Konus Index” to be perfectly pedantic. Not because it doesn’t exist. But because they don’t have the math and don’t want to lose their finger on the scale.

6:52 AM · Jun 15, 2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

We must take CPI away from those who wish to back out a political agenda of printing money, raising our taxes by indexed tax brackets and slashing our indexed social security & Medicare.

Economics can’t construct dynamic economic gauges like CPI/GDP until it learns gauge thy.

6:52 AM · Jun 15, 2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

But more importantly, we have a culture that economics literally trumpets (and I swear I am not making this up) “Economic Imperialism”. It is “we know math and you don’t”-culture.

No. They don’t know their own math. I will debate any high ranking economist on this point.

6:52 AM · Jun 15, 2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

It’s time to reveal that economics, far from embracing math or having physics envy, is deliberately avoiding solutions to old problems so that it can make up new gauges for CPI/GDP at will while telling the rest of the soft sciences “We know your field better because we do math.”

6:52 AM · Jun 15, 2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

No. Economics is an avoiding gauge theory, connections, Lie Groups, etc so it can retain its political relevance as an expert consultancy. I’m with the crypto folks on this. Our economy must be protected from Seigniorage (printing money) and CPI tampering (e.g. Boskin Commission).

6:52 AM · Jun 15, 2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

CPI should not…MUST NOT…be adjustable to disguise inflation. It needs to be protected from the FED diluting the power of money and the BLS being free to disguise the effects by changing the method of construction.

6:52 AM · Jun 15, 2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

End the forced wealth transfers of central bankers covering up their own failures with “Relief”, “Easing”, “Stimulous”, “Rescues”, “Toxic Asset Purchases”, and other bailouts of our incompetent financial overlords.

We must protect CPI from economists disguising wealth dilution.

6:52 AM · Jun 15, 2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

P.S. before you remind me how arrogant this sounds, keep in mind, that I am willing to debate this publicly with any leading economist eager to defend the central bankers and triumphalist theorists openly bragging about their math. Read this, and be sick:

https://nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w7300/w7300.pdf

6:52 AM · Jun 15, 2021

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

Moral: Gauge Theory fixes this intellectual corruption problem of economic imperialism, and #btc, blockchains and Crytpo can help.

6:59 AM · Jun 15, 2021

2024

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

This is what is blocking progress in my opinion for physics to go beyond Einstein and General Relativity.

40 years ago, the leaders of physics started claiming that gravity had to be quantized to be compatible with the Standard Model.

But the incompatibility is *not* Quantum vs Classical field theory. The *classical* field theory of the Standard Model is already not compatible with classical General Relativity.

General Relativity, at least as it is now, simply cannot be gauged so as to make it a true gauge theory, because Gauge transformation does *not* commute with the Ricci Contractions used in the field equations, and within the Einstein Hilbert action.

8:58 PM · Sep 13, 2024

Jonathan Oppenheim

@postquantum

I wish I deserved the heretic moniker, but isn’t asking whether spacetime is quantum or classical just common sense? After all, general relativity (GR) - our theory of gravity and spacetime - is special. It isn’t a gauge theory, and gravity isn’t a force. 1/

10:57 AM · Sep 12, 2024

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

For some reasons that have never been explained or justified leaders in physics started making the claim that GR *was* also a gauge theory. This was done by claiming that general coordinate invariance in the form of the diffeomorphism group is a kind of Gauge Transformation. Which it clearly is not.

This is absurd. Gauge transformations move the fibers and are defined not to move space time where as diffeomorphisms move space time directly.

So: why claim that GR is a kind of gauge theory? The only payoff I see is that this allows us to pretend that the SM vs GR incompatibility is classical vs quantum where it is staring us in the face that it is instead contraction-based (GR) vs Gauge Transformed (SM).

The only reason this is at all controversial is that the people saying it were thought to be the leaders 40 years ago.

That didn’t work out. We have 40 years lost as a result.

But the truth is anyone can see the incompatibility between gravity and gauge theory if they are not being told that gravity is a special kind of gauge theory. Which it absolutely is not as formulated by Grossman, Einstein and Hilbert.

Moral: The problem holding us back from a Theory of everything is **Classical**, and not Quantum. The quantum comes as desert after classical compatibility. It’s not the main issue. A red hearing that throws us off following the scent. It’s a distraction that should have fooled almost no one who was thinking for his or her self.

9:14 PM · Sep 13, 2024

2025

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

There is a tell when listening to physics folks as to whether they’re captured by the 1984 Quantum Gravity virus.

They either say:

A) “General Relativity has to be reconciled with the Standard Model.”

or

B) “General Relativity has to be reconciled with Quantum Theory.”

1:06 PM · Oct 30, 2025

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

So, what is the difference?

In the latter case of B), the diagnosis has already been definitively made. The problem is thus at the level of frameworks, not the level of theoretical models of the actual world. The issue has been made into “*THE* problem is that the classical theory of Gravity must be quantized.” That is, the classical framework of gravity must be dragged into our general quantum framework as the top priority. Seen this way, it is more of a technical math problem rather than something hyperspecific about our two theories of our physical world.

OPINION: There is absolutely no basis for this B) being an absolute whatsoever. This is a madness which started appearing as a String Theory mantra around 1984 and has led to a crisis.

In the case of A) that definitive diagnosis has *not* been made. The case is still Open. The issue is thus that “We have two specific physical theories that don’t quite fit together for multiple reasons. We need to figure out a physical framework to accommodate them both. That may be a third framework that harmonizes them rather than forcing one into the framework of the other. We need to consider all clues before reaching a definitive diagnosis.”

OPINION: It made absolutely no sense to have closed the case in 1984…and after 40 years of continuous failure, the issue is the leadership of the field. Opening the case and saying “GR and the SM have multiple issues. Not just quantization. Why are we not considering that the strong leadership forced THE WRONG DIAGNOSIS on the entire community??”

This is like saying “Maybe COVID came from NIAID/NIH/DTRA/EcoHealth/Daszak/Fauci/Collins/Baric…can we consider that??”

And the answer is “No”.

But that is why we are stuck in my opinion. We are stuck because we can’t question physics leadership without being thrown out of the community.

The dogmatic zealous leadership of physics totally failed. That is what happened. That cost us 41 years.

We can’t get to COVID origins for the same reason we can’t get to String Theory origins as “the only game in town.”

The imposed absolutist central narrative is simply a lie.

One man’s opinion.

1:06 PM · Oct 30, 2025

Matt Seaton

@TheMattSeaton

I don't see the difference. Seems to me one could interpret B the same way you are interpreting A.

1:13 PM · Oct 30, 2025

Eric Weinstein

@EricRWeinstein

“The top priority is that the Standard Model has Internal Symmetry while General Relativity does not.”

“The top priority is that the Standard Model is a full Gauge Theory while General Relativity has no gauge invariance.”

“The top priority is that GR allows contraction across the tensor product of bundles while the Standard Model does not.”

“The top priority is that GR has well defined Contorsion tensors while the Standard Model does not.”

Those are all possibile research programs within A. Not within B.

1:22 PM · Oct 30, 2025

Related Pages

• What is Gauge Theory (intuitively)?