Is There an Equivalence Between Fundamental Forces and Spacetime Geometry?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the potential equivalence between fundamental forces, specifically gravity and electromagnetism, and the geometry of spacetime. It delves into theoretical frameworks, mathematical formulations, and conceptual implications, without reaching definitive conclusions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose an equivalence between inertial mass and gravitational mass as a precursor to a broader equivalence between fundamental forces and spacetime geometry.
  • Participants outline classical forces using specific mathematical notations, including electric, magnetic, gravitational, and inertial forces.
  • There is a suggestion that the equivalence between gravitational and inertial forces can be extended to establish relationships between gravitational and electromagnetic forces.
  • Two distinct relationships involving gravitational, electric, and magnetic forces are presented, indicating their geometrical structures in spacetime.
  • Some argue that the geometry of spacetime may appear hyperbolic due to the relationships between electric and magnetic forces.
  • A unique geometric structure is proposed, likening spacetime to a doubly twisted Moebius strip, which introduces the concept of directional invariance.
  • Participants discuss the implications of dominant forces in the vacuum and how they affect gravitational forces.
  • Mathematical formulations for the square of energy are presented, exploring different configurations of forces and distances.
  • There is a discussion about the conditions under which the equivalence of force and spacetime occurs, specifically focusing on orthogonality conditions.
  • Some participants introduce the concept of Hadamard matrices to describe the geometrical structure of electricity and mass ratios.
  • Quantum mechanics and quantum gravity are mentioned as domains that may provide justifications for the proposed conditions of equivalence.
  • Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is referenced, with a suggestion that the square of uncertainty may yield more certain results under certain conditions.
  • Questions are raised regarding the physical meaning of time and its potential vector nature, including implications for spacetime intervals.
  • Participants speculate on the relationship between vacuum energy and time, suggesting that negative time and energy could influence experimental values.
  • There is a proposal that the magnetic and electric forces of the vacuum can be viewed as timelike and spacelike forces, respectively, and their separation may relate to symmetry breaking.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a variety of viewpoints, with no clear consensus on the equivalence of forces and spacetime geometry. Multiple competing models and interpretations are presented, indicating ongoing debate and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes complex mathematical formulations and assumptions that may not be universally accepted or fully resolved, particularly regarding the nature of spacetime and the relationships between forces.

Antonio Lao
Messages
1,436
Reaction score
1
The Principle of Equivalence between inertial mass and gravitational mass used by Einstein to formulate his general theory of relativity is a prelude to another equivalence principle.

This is the equivalence between a fundamental force and the geometry of spacetime.

The forces used in this discussion will only be the classical forces of gravity and electromagnetism. The weak and strong force will not be discussed at this time.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
The following classical forces are denoted by their respective symbols. [itex]F_E[/itex] for the electric force. Magnetic force is denoted by [itex]F_B[/itex], The gravitational force is [itex]F_G[/itex], the inertial force is [itex]F_I[/itex].

[tex]\vec{F_E} = q \vec{E}[/tex]

[tex]\vec{F_B} = q \vec{v} \times \vec{B}[/tex]

[tex]F_G = G \frac {m_1 m_2}{r^2}[/tex]

[tex]\vec{F_I} = m \vec{a}[/tex]
 
The equivalence between [itex]F_I[/itex] and [itex]F_G[/itex] is what Einstein did. But it can shown that it is also possible to establish the equivalence between [itex]F_G[/itex] and [itex]F_E[/itex] with [itex]F_B[/itex].
 
There are two distinct relationships that are equally important and must be taken for the study of their geometrical structures in spacetime. These can be done without the use of the calculus of tensor.

[tex]F^{-}_G = F_E - F_B[/tex]

and

[tex]F^{+}_G = F_B - F_E[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Because of the minus sign between the electric force and magnetic force, the spacetime geometry can appear to be hyperbolic in contrast to Euclidean, spherical or elliptic geometry. But the true geometry is none of the above.
 
The spacetime geometry is that of a doubly twisted Moebius strip and split or tear thru the middle creating two loops that are linked together. With the principle of directional invariance, two distinct strips can be created that are not topologically equivalent. That is to say they cannot be transformed into each other.
 
If we are restricted to just one dimensionality of these Moebius strips, we can form two types of Hopf links that are not topologically transformable into each other. One of these two Hopf links can be the seat of the force of gravity, [itex]F^{-}_G[/itex] and the other the force of antigravity, [itex]F^{+}_G[/itex].
 
If the electric force dominates the magnetic force of the vacuum then

[tex]F^{-}_G = F_E - F_B[/tex]

if the magentic force dominates the electric force of the vacuum then

[tex]F^{+}_G = F_B - F_E[/tex]
 
If infinitesimal lengths of r's are introduced together with the forces of electricity and magnetism of the pure vacuum, the true quantum of square of energy, E can be formulated.

[tex]E^2 = r_E \times F_E \cdot r_B \times F_B[/tex]
 
  • #10
By switching the position of r and F in one of the two outer products, it is also valid for the square of energy to be given by:

[tex]E^2 = F_E \times r_E \cdot r_B \times F_B[/tex]

When these are expanded by Lagrange's identity the following squares of E are valid.

[tex]E^2 = (r_E \cdot r_B)(F_E \cdot F_B) - (r_E \cdot F_B)(r_B \cdot F_E)[/tex]

and

[tex]E^2 = (r_E \cdot F_B)(r_B \cdot F_E) - (r_E \cdot r_B)(F_E \cdot F_B)[/tex]

No matter how many switches of the positions of r and F, these are the only two possible forms of the square of E. One represents positive (real) polarity of energy and the other represents negative (imaginary) polarity of energy depending on whether

[tex](r_E \cdot r_B)(F_E \cdot F_B) = 0[/tex]
 
  • #11
If r is four dimensional then [itex]r_E \cdot r_B[/itex] can be interpreted as the spacetime interval.

if the electric force and the magnetic force are orthogonal then [itex]F_E \cdot F_B[/itex] vanishes.

Although [itex]r_E[/itex] and [itex]F_E[/itex] must always be orthogonal (same thing with the B's), the angle between [itex]r_E[/itex] and [itex]F_B[/itex] varies from 0 to 360 degrees.
 
  • #12
Conclusion:

The equivalence of force and spacetime occurs at either of two independent conditions:

1. When [itex]r_E \cdot r_B = 0[/itex].

2. When [itex]F_E \cdot F_B = 0[/itex].

or both.
 
  • #13
The two true quanta of square of energy will now be denoted by:

[itex]H^{+}[/itex] and [itex]H^{-}[/itex]. These are symbols for two types of Hadamard matrices. With these matrices and their generalization to higher order, the geometrical structure of positive and negative electricity can be described. And the experimental values of the mass can also be described. This description and by the use of abstract algebraic rings and the Abelian group of matrix addition operator and semigroup of matrix multiplication, makes a Theory of Quantization for one dimensional Space (TQS). This theory, TQS, at the least, can removed the mystery behind the mass ratio of an electron to that of the mass of the proton as determined by experiments to be 1836. TQS predicts a value 0f 1832 which error is less than 1 percent of the experimental number.
 
  • #14
The central domain of Einstein's special and general theories of relativity is to give the justification to why

[tex]r_E \cdot r_B = 0[/tex]

The central domain of quantum mechanics is to give the justification to why

[tex]F_E \cdot F_B = 0[/tex]

And finally the task of quantum gravity is to justify both conditions.
 
  • #15
When both conditions are satisfied then the r's are equivalence to the wave functions of quantum mechanics and the F's are equivalence to the linear momenta and the square of energy is given by:

[tex]E^2 = \psi_i \times \phi_i \cdot \psi_j \times \phi_j[/tex]
 
  • #16
The question now is to ask: "can some certainties be recovered" from the square of energy? Or becoming even more uncertain?

Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is given by the products of conjugate variables of position and momentum or energy and time.

[tex]\Delta \psi_i \Delta \phi_i \geq \frac{h}{2 \pi}[/tex]

[tex]\Delta E \Delta t \geq \frac{h}{2 \pi}[/tex]
 
  • #17
But the square of the uncertainty should become more certain.

[tex]\Delta E^2 \Delta t^2 \leq \frac {h}{2 \pi}[/tex]
 
  • #18
The physical meaning of the difference of the square of time must now be clarified.

What is [itex]\Delta t^2[/itex] ?

Does this implies there are two directions of time?
 
  • #19
If [itex]\Delta E^2 = \Delta F^2 \Delta \psi^2[/itex] then [itex]\Delta \psi^2 \Delta t^2[/itex] is the spacetime interval.
 
  • #20
This shows that the physical meaning [itex]\Delta t^2[/itex] is equivalent to the square of the linear momentum, [itex]\Delta \phi^2[/itex] when mass is still not clearly defined.
 
  • #21
When time is a vector, then [itex]t^2 = t \cdot t[/itex]. This vanishes when the two time directions are orthogonal. The scalar (inner) product of t is given [itex]t \cdot t = |t||t|cos \theta[/itex].
 
Last edited:
  • #22
Also the vector (outer) product of t is given by [itex]t \times t = |t||t|sin \theta[/itex]. if [itex]\theta[/itex] is 90 degrees then [itex]t \times t = t^2[/itex].
 
Last edited:
  • #23
I wonder if the vacuum energy of 10^120 Joules/m^3 could be made nearer the experimental value of 10^ - 9 J/m^3 if negative time and energy could be associated with Heisenberg's relation e x t.
 
  • #24
Sorry, I still have not reach a point where I can plug-in numbers to do any calculation. But except for the Hadamard matrices for calculation of mass-ratios and electric charge after the facts which is not really predictions.
 
  • #25
When time is a vector, its directionality can be determined by its scalar and vector product.

If time has only one direction, its scalar (inner) product is always [itex]t^2[/itex].
 
  • #26
The magnetic force of the vacuum is equivalent to a timelike force and the elctric force of the vacuum is equivalent to a spacelike force. These two forces are interlocked and manifested only as electromagnetic force of the vacuum. But in the existence of matter, these forces can be separated. This separation is the same as symmetry breaking.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
8K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
28K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
7K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K