170
edits
Theory of Geometric Unity: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
* From Yang-Mills-Maxwell-Anderson-Higgs theory of gauge fields, we take the adjoint exterior derivative coupled to a connection $$d^\star_A F_A$$ | * From Yang-Mills-Maxwell-Anderson-Higgs theory of gauge fields, we take the adjoint exterior derivative coupled to a connection $$d^\star_A F_A$$ | ||
=== Problem Nr. 1: Einstein's Theory of General Relativity is not a proper Gauge Theory === | === Problem Nr. 1: Einstein's Theory of General Relativity is not a proper Gauge Theory === | ||
| Line 84: | Line 83: | ||
''This would be a program for some kind of unification of Dirac's type, but in the force sector. The question is, "does this really make any sense? Are there any possibilities to do any such thing?"'' | ''This would be a program for some kind of unification of Dirac's type, but in the force sector. The question is, "does this really make any sense? Are there any possibilities to do any such thing?"'' | ||
| Line 100: | Line 97: | ||
''Geometric Unity is the search for some way to break down the walls between these four boxes.'' | ''Geometric Unity is the search for some way to break down the walls between these four boxes.'' | ||
What we'd like to come up with is some theory that is intrinsic, but allows us to play some of the games that exist in other boxes. How can we fit? How can we try to have our cake and eat it too? And use all the full suite of techniques that are available to us? | |||
Our perspective is that the quantum that may be the comparatively easy part and that the unification of the geometry, which has not occurred, may be what we're being asked to do. | |||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||