- #1

BiGyElLoWhAt

Gold Member

- 1,570

- 116

## Main Question or Discussion Point

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaluza–Klein_theory

##http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01390677 (original german paper, Ich kan nicht Deutsche)

http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_21_3_beichler.pdf [Broken] (this author makes some interesting arguments)

Also, a lot (if not all extensions) of this seems to stem back to the work of a physicist/mathematician that I'd never heard of until a few days ago, when I lifted up the rug to see what was hiding underneath.

and a more rigerous derivation:

http://iopscience.iop.org/1751-8121/40/32/F03/pdf/1751-8121_40_32_F03.pdf

So, long story short, I'm a little perturbed... First off, I'm not sure I've heard a whisper of the name "Clifford", let alone a mention of his work. This would be insignificant if I felt his work was. Contrarily, would Einstein have been able to fromulate GR without the work of clifford? GR and cliffords union of space and EM seem analagous (if not identical in form).

Point number 2: With the Kaluza-Klein-Einstein collaboration (as well as Einstein's "independant" work), we see the union of space and time, as well as EM and time, and apparently somewhere in these papers theres the argument for mass being united (I missed the direct point, and only saw references). Why can I not find this union for the strong force? I honestly feel like if I keep following the bread crumbs (assuming I can find the next one) that I'll end up at some (obscure?) form of string theory. I don't really know what the dimensions in string theory actually represent, though... but I degress...

Can anyone provide some insight as to whether or not this is something that has been done? I really like the formulation of both GR (+temporal dimension - gravity) and I'm not sure who or what to credit it to (+scalar potential dimension - EM).

What's really surprising is the success (again, apparently, as the resources I've found are limited) this potential dimension had in being able to not only predict EM, but derive Maxwell's equations... and then we hang it up on the fridge until the kids go to bed, and pitch it when they're not looking.

On second thought, it might be 5D spacetime (kaluza/klein) that predicted EM and successfully derived maxwell's eq.'s.

Any word on why I'm struggling to find more?

##http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01390677 (original german paper, Ich kan nicht Deutsche)

http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_21_3_beichler.pdf [Broken] (this author makes some interesting arguments)

Also, a lot (if not all extensions) of this seems to stem back to the work of a physicist/mathematician that I'd never heard of until a few days ago, when I lifted up the rug to see what was hiding underneath.

__http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Kingdon_Clifford__and a more rigerous derivation:

http://iopscience.iop.org/1751-8121/40/32/F03/pdf/1751-8121_40_32_F03.pdf

So, long story short, I'm a little perturbed... First off, I'm not sure I've heard a whisper of the name "Clifford", let alone a mention of his work. This would be insignificant if I felt his work was. Contrarily, would Einstein have been able to fromulate GR without the work of clifford? GR and cliffords union of space and EM seem analagous (if not identical in form).

Point number 2: With the Kaluza-Klein-Einstein collaboration (as well as Einstein's "independant" work), we see the union of space and time, as well as EM and time, and apparently somewhere in these papers theres the argument for mass being united (I missed the direct point, and only saw references). Why can I not find this union for the strong force? I honestly feel like if I keep following the bread crumbs (assuming I can find the next one) that I'll end up at some (obscure?) form of string theory. I don't really know what the dimensions in string theory actually represent, though... but I degress...

Can anyone provide some insight as to whether or not this is something that has been done? I really like the formulation of both GR (+temporal dimension - gravity) and I'm not sure who or what to credit it to (+scalar potential dimension - EM).

What's really surprising is the success (again, apparently, as the resources I've found are limited) this potential dimension had in being able to not only predict EM, but derive Maxwell's equations... and then we hang it up on the fridge until the kids go to bed, and pitch it when they're not looking.

On second thought, it might be 5D spacetime (kaluza/klein) that predicted EM and successfully derived maxwell's eq.'s.

Any word on why I'm struggling to find more?

Last edited by a moderator: