Clifford vector valued 1-form and gravity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Octonion
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity Vector
Octonion
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I am currently trying to read through Garret Lisi's paper, An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything, and am having trouble understanding what it means for the gravitational fields to be described by a spin connection that is a Clifford bivector valued 1-form \begin{equation} \omega \in so(3,1) = Cl^2(3,1). \end{equation} I understand how the electroweak and strong are described by the special unitary group but I'm not sure what to make of gravity.

Additionally, how exactly does the frame defined by a Clifford vector valued 1-form \begin{equation}e \in Cl^1(3,1)\end{equation} combine with "a multiplet of Higgs scalar fields" in order to give fermions masses.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I haven't read Garrett's paper in detail, but I can guess what I think he means here. Typically the spin connection is \mathfrak{so}(3,1)-valued and is written

\omega^a{}_b

where {a,b} are tangent space indices. The metric-compatibility condition requires that the spin connection be \eta-antisymmetric; that is

\eta_{ac} \omega^c{}_b = - \eta_{bc} \omega^c{}_a

To get a Clifford-bivector-valued form, just contract with some gamma matrices:

\eta_{ac} \omega^c{}_b \gamma^a \gamma^b = \eta_{ac} \omega^c{}_b \gamma^{[a} \gamma^{b]} = \eta_{ac} \omega^c{}_b \gamma^{ab}

due to antisymmetry. It's the same idea with the frame fields; contract their tangent-space index with a gamma matrix. As for how they describe gravity, one can rewrite the Einstein-Hilbert action in terms of \{e^a, \omega^a{}_b\} as fundamental variables. The result is called the Palatini action.

As for how the frame interacts with the Higgs scalars to give the fermions masses, I can't help you there. However, Garrett Lisi does read this board and tends to show up when people ask about his paper.
 
I seem to notice a buildup of papers like this: Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing. (OK, old one.) Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion Is this akin to “we’re soon gonna put string theory to the test”, or are these legit? Mind, I’m not expecting anyone to read the papers and explain them to me, but if one of you educated people already have an opinion I’d like to hear it. If not please ignore me. EDIT: I strongly suspect it’s bunk but...
Back
Top