Gauge Theory: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{stub}} | {{stub}} | ||
== On X == | |||
=== 2009 === | |||
{{Tweet | {{Tweet | ||
| Line 25: | Line 28: | ||
}} | }} | ||
=== 2021 === | |||
{{Tweet | {{Tweet | ||
| Line 155: | Line 159: | ||
}} | }} | ||
|timestamp=6:59 AM ¡ Jun 15, 2021 | |timestamp=6:59 AM ¡ Jun 15, 2021 | ||
}} | |||
=== 2024 === | |||
{{Tweet | |||
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg | |||
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1834702103211917754 | |||
|name=Eric Weinstein | |||
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein | |||
|username=EricRWeinstein | |||
|content=For some reasons that have never been explained or justified leaders in physics started making the claim that [[General Relativity|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 [[Standard Model|SM]] vs [[General Relativity|GR]] incompatibility is classical vs quantum where it is staring us in the face that it is instead contraction-based ([[General Relativity|GR]]) vs Gauge Transformed ([[Standard Model|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 didnât work out. We have 40 years lost as a result. | |||
But the truth is anyone can see the incompatibility between gravity and [[Gauge Theory|gauge theory]] if they are not being told that gravity is a special kind of [[Gauge Theory|gauge theory]]. Which it absolutely is not as formulated by Grossman, Einstein and Hilbert. | |||
[[Morals|Moral]]: The problem holding us back from a Theory of everything is **Classical**, and not Quantum. The quantum comes as desert after classical compatibility. Itâs not the main issue. A red hearing that throws us off following the scent. Itâs a distraction that should have fooled almost no one who was thinking for his or her self. | |||
|thread= | |||
{{Tweet | |||
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg | |||
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1834698277356527999 | |||
|name=Eric Weinstein | |||
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein | |||
|username=EricRWeinstein | |||
|content=This is what is blocking progress in my opinion for physics to go beyond [[Albert Einstein|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. | |||
|quote= | |||
{{Tweet | |||
|image=postquantum-profile-CoJxMwrT.jpg | |||
|nameurl=https://x.com/postquantum/status/1834184677860491584 | |||
|name=Jonathan Oppenheim | |||
|usernameurl=https://x.com/postquantum | |||
|username=postquantum | |||
|content=I wish I deserved the heretic moniker, but isnât asking whether spacetime is quantum or classical just common sense? After all, general relativity (GR) - our theory of gravity and spacetime - is special. It isnât a gauge theory, and gravity isnât a force. 1/ | |||
|timestamp=10:57 AM ¡ Sep 12, 2024 | |||
}} | |||
|timestamp=8:58 PM ¡ Sep 13, 2024 | |||
}} | |||
|timestamp=9:14 PM ¡ Sep 13, 2024 | |||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 21:26, 13 December 2025
This article is a stub. You can help us by editing this page and expanding it.On X
2009
Me: Marginal economics is a gauge theory.
Economist X: Do the experts agree?
Me: What experts? How do you live like that?
Lee Smolin: Eric Weinstein and Pia Malaney say Economics is a Gauge theory.
Economist Y: Lee Smolin says Economics is a gauge theory.
2021
Gauge Theory: A version of the differential calculus in which the Rise in âRise over Runâ is measured from a reference level that must be determined endogenously within the theory.
And yet, supposedly, I am super confusing?
Ok. Compare anyone elseâs definition. Iâll wait.
CPI is broken. Why?
Think of CPI as a gauge like a thermometer. You canât have politically motivated folks making your thermometers or they can change the design to cover up climate change. Likewise you canât have economists changing the gauge to disguise the effect of printing.
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.
The economists canât yet compute a dynamic Cost-Of-Living-Adjustment or COLA or âChained Changing Preference Ordinal Welfare Konus Indexâ to be perfectly pedantic. Not because it doesnât exist. But because they donât have the math and donât want to lose their finger on the scale.
But more importantly, we have a culture that economics literally trumpets (and I swear I am not making this up) âEconomic Imperialismâ. It is âwe know math and you donâtâ-culture.
No. They donât know their own math. I will debate any high ranking economist on this point.
Itâs 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 âWe know your field better because we do math.â
No. Economics is an avoiding gauge theory, connections, Lie Groups, etc so it can retain its political relevance as an expert consultancy. Iâm with the crypto folks on this. Our economy must be protected from Seigniorage (printing money) and CPI tampering (e.g. Boskin Commission).
CPI should notâŚMUST NOTâŚbe 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.
End the forced wealth transfers of central bankers covering up their own failures with âReliefâ, âEasingâ, âStimulousâ, âRescuesâ, âToxic Asset Purchasesâ, and other bailouts of our incompetent financial overlords.
We must protect CPI from economists disguising wealth dilution.
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
Moral: Gauge Theory fixes this intellectual corruption problem of economic imperialism, and #btc, blockchains and Crytpo can help.
2024
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.
I wish I deserved the heretic moniker, but isnât asking whether spacetime is quantum or classical just common sense? After all, general relativity (GR) - our theory of gravity and spacetime - is special. It isnât a gauge theory, and gravity isnât a force. 1/
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 didnât 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. Itâs not the main issue. A red hearing that throws us off following the scent. Itâs a distraction that should have fooled almost no one who was thinking for his or her self.