170
edits
Theory of Geometric Unity: Difference between revisions
→Proposed Solution
| Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
[[File:GU proposal2.png|right|500px|right]] | [[File:GU proposal2.png|right|500px|right]] | ||
We may have to generalize all three vertices before we can make progress. That's daunting because in each case, it would appear that we can make an argument that the three vertices are already the simplest possible theories that could live at these vertices. | |||
* We know, for example, the Dirac operator is the most fundamental of all the elliptic operators and Euclidean signature generating all of the Atiyah-Singer theory. | * We know, for example, the Dirac operator is the most fundamental of all the elliptic operators and Euclidean signature generating all of the Atiyah-Singer theory. | ||
| Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
So, let's imagine the following: we replaced the standard model with a true second-order theory. We imagine the general relativity is replaced by a true first-order theory. And then we find that the true second-order theory admits of a square root and can be linked with the true first order theory. | So, let's imagine the following: we replaced the standard model with a true second-order theory. We imagine the general relativity is replaced by a true first-order theory. And then we find that the true second-order theory admits of a square root and can be linked with the true first order theory. | ||
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?"'' | ||
</blockquote> | |||
== Layman Explanations == | == Layman Explanations == | ||