Recent content by arivero

Well I guess a mathematician could do a better formulation of the question, such as a verbose expansion of "what axioms grant that the most stable baryon has the same electric charge that the charged leptons".

The most common explanation I know is that anomaly cancelation implies the sum of electric charges of each particle must cancel generation-wise, so 3 Q(Up) + 3 Q(Down) + Q(electron) = 0, and electroweak doublets imply Q(Up) - Q(Down) = Q(neutrino) - Q(electron), so with Q(neutrino) = 0 it solves...

I am still thinking on it :-D In any case it should be not in "beyond the standard model"

The main question in this thread is "what is the role of De Witt in the formulation of non abelian kaliza Klein theories and how does this formulation differs of Witten's 'realistic kaluza Klein' models." Wait for the next ChatGPT update to see if it gets some sensical answer.

https://cerncourier.com/a/who-ordered-all-of-that/

"Why are atoms neutral?" I wonder if we could run a thread on it, or revive some old one. I always had thought that it was just anomaly cancelation, but I do not remember now any discussion including alternatives (say bosons on SU(N) instead of SU(4), more that two types of quarks in the same...

I like to call it the Motl-Lenz formula, because Lubos claimed it in his blog as an independent discovery when he was playing with a calculator in secondary school.

Hmm I am intrigued by the initial " Here's your text with the changes you requested:" Does it mean that the IA had all this info? Usually KK non abelian refers to a short burst of research between 1981 and 1986; the research in the sixties was more about quantised fields on curved spaces.

I see, this is the third edition, that already uses Dirac notation: Is it the same in the 1932 edition?

Going to check, thanks. It makes sense because Feynman claims to have got is insight from Dirac, I think from some work on contact transformations. But also [I believe to remember that he told...] that he was unable to agree with Dirac on the significance.

I think that the lore on the need of having probability interference in quantum mechanics and then a complex probability originates in Feynman interpretation of space-time paths, whose probability is weighed with a complex exponential that approaches a dirac delta. But I can not pinpoint a...

What I recall in the 80's the hope was 7+4=11, from supergravity and the point that 11D formulations of gravity had a lot of mechanics of tensor decomposition and dualities, favouring objects with a foot in the 7 and other in the 4. Time itself is a different thing. The best lore is to guess...

The best known continuation of this idea is a paper from Wilczek - Zee, where they try to get one mass from the other via some electromagnetic loop, so the alpha is justified. Then for the mass of electron alone you have an argument in the first book of Polchinski, where he remarks that the...

Speaking of awareness, I took a time to try to understand why diquark research is not finding the same diquarks that here. It seems my preprints use the "worse spin zero diquarks" in the nomenclature of Jaffe's Exotica. And using 5 flavours it is really the ##(15, \bar 3)##. That means, as it...

note that textbooks tag is misleading and a lot of interesting graduate level material is just "books"...