Classical Unified Field Theory

In summary, the conversation is discussing the potential for the Einstein-Maxwell equations to serve as a Classical Unified Field Theory, and the limitations of this approach due to its inability to include the strong and weak forces. The idea of a CUFT is considered incomplete and largely unnecessary, but it could potentially aid in understanding the final unified theory. However, the possibility of achieving a classical unification of EM and gravity is questioned, as it is believed that this process is fundamentally quantum. The derivation of coupling constants for these theories is also mentioned, with the suggestion that they may come from gauge symmetries.
  • #1
Schreiberdk
93
0
Hi there PF.

I have recently been working on the Classical Unified Field Theory, and i want to ask, why the Einstein-Maxwell equations does not candidate for a Classical Unified Field Theory, since it incorporates both general relativity and electromagnetism, into a single formalism?

I have seen that people, after the discovery of general relativity, have pursued the dream of a unified field theory, in this case in the classical sense. So why ain't this the truth about the Einstein-Maxwell equation?

Also, when this is not true for the EME, could one do unification, in the same way used to discover the Grand Unified Theory in the 1970s, by using groups symmetries at very high temperatures?

\Schreiber
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The Einstein-Maxwell equations are only applicable to finding the metric from electromagnetic energy explicitly (e.g. Maxwell's EM energy tensor, instead of the stress energy tensor). And thus does not include EM effects. Further, even if E&M and gravity were fully united in such a way, it still wouldn't include the strong or the weak forces.

The very idea of a CUFT is strange, as it would clearly be incomplete... and thus largely superfluous.
 
  • #3
Yes, know it would be incomplete and an highly odd theory, but rather, it could help us understand the final unified field theory, as a classical limit to it. So in my understanding, it would be to some help to finding "The unified field theory" :)
 
  • #4
That's excellent reasoning. Personally, I don't think its possible: our ability to unify EM with the weak interaction, and later with the strong is fundamentally quantum. I don't think there's any reason to believe that it could be done (informatively) classically. But hey, it would be pretty cool if it could be!
 
  • #5
Now my question is, how does on derive the coupling constants for the electromagnetic field and theory of general relativity. Does these coupling constants come from gauge symmetries of the theories?
 

1. What is Classical Unified Field Theory?

Classical Unified Field Theory is a proposed theory in physics that aims to unify the fundamental forces of nature, specifically the strong and weak nuclear forces, electromagnetism, and gravity, into a single theoretical framework. It is also known as the Theory of Everything.

2. How does Classical Unified Field Theory differ from other theories of physics?

Unlike other theories, Classical Unified Field Theory attempts to explain all fundamental interactions in nature using a single set of equations. It also attempts to reconcile the discrepancies between quantum mechanics and general relativity.

3. Is there any evidence to support Classical Unified Field Theory?

Currently, there is no experimental evidence to support Classical Unified Field Theory. It remains a theoretical concept and has not been proven through experimentation.

4. What are the challenges in developing a successful Classical Unified Field Theory?

One of the biggest challenges is finding a way to incorporate gravity into the theory, as it has proven difficult to reconcile with the other fundamental forces. Additionally, there is a lack of experimental evidence and data to guide the development of the theory.

5. How does Classical Unified Field Theory impact our understanding of the universe?

If proven to be accurate, Classical Unified Field Theory would provide a complete and elegant description of the fundamental laws of nature. It would also offer insight into the origins and evolution of the universe, as well as potentially leading to new technological advancements.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
823
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
26
Views
428
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top