Early history of gauge theory-a science history paper

[marcus]

Early history of gauge theory---a science history paper

one way to enrich one's understanding of scientific theories is to
learn about the people who discovered them and what they were thinking about at the time, and how other scientists reacted etc.

gauge theory apparently got started in 1918 - 1929 by Hermann Weyl
he corresponded with Einstein and Pauli about it and got some interesting reactions

it gradually became a prevalent style in theoretical physics. I guess the main theories from 1950 onwards are gauge theories, the ones that have proven useful----and some of the one's that haven't yet too.

maybe you could call the gauge way of doing things a 20th century paradigm or a "mental habit" among theorists---one that has had great success.

So what about the HISTORY of this invention?

I am not an expert about this so I would like to ask what other people think about this RECENT PAPER on gauge history.

http://arxiv.org/hep-ph/0509116
Gauge principle and QED
Norbert Straumann
Invited talk at PHOTON2005, 31.8-04.09, 2005, Warsaw, 19 pages

"One of the major developments of twentieth century physics has been the gradual recognition that a common feature of the known fundamental interactions is their gauge structure. In this talk the early history of gauge theory is reviewed, emphasizing especially Weyl's seminal contributions of 1918 and 1929."

SAMPLE PARAGRAPH:
"The history of gauge theories begins with GR,which can be regarded as a nonAbelian gauge theory of as pecial type. To a large extent the other gauge theories emerged in a slow and complicated process gradually from GR. Their common geometrical structure–best expressed in terms of connections of fiber bundles – is now widely recognized..."

Is this a good History of Science paper? Can one learn anything new, or get to understand the gauge way of doing business any better, by reading it?

 

[selfAdjoint]

You can get good physical insight by going back and considering previously known theories like EM and GR as gauge theories, which indeed they are. I remember comments when I was young - pre Yang-Mills - that large scale solutions of GR were not available because the structure of the diffeomorphism group restricted to spacetime was not understood, which shows that the gauge nature of GR was not completely latent. But I think that scientists have a tendency to write techologically Whig history, reading today's categories back into the past, which makes real historians smile. Did Einstein or Hilbert (or anybody but Weyl) think of GR in 1916 in a gauge way? I don't think so. So a legitimate question would be, who first stated in a journal or book that Weyl's gauge principle applied to GR?

Note that Weyl's gauge theory was not GR, it was a conformal generalization of GR in which (since it was conformal) length was just a local concept and then Weyl had to "Fix a gauge", in just the sense a railroad engineer would use the phrase, in order to have local GR-like equations.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

This paper is definitely a valuable contribution to the history of gauge theory. It provides a clear and concise overview of the early development of gauge theory, with a focus on Weyl's contributions. The author also makes connections between gauge theory and other important theories, such as general relativity, which helps to contextualize the significance of gauge theory in the larger picture of theoretical physics.

One of the strengths of this paper is its emphasis on the gradual and complex nature of the development of gauge theory. It highlights the contributions of multiple scientists and their interactions with each other, showing how the theory evolved over time. This adds depth and nuance to our understanding of gauge theory, rather than simply presenting it as a singular, revolutionary idea.

Furthermore, the paper does a good job of explaining the geometrical structure of gauge theory, which can be quite complex and difficult to grasp. By providing clear explanations and examples, the author helps the reader to understand the underlying principles of gauge theory and how it differs from other theories.

However, one potential limitation of this paper is its focus on the early history of gauge theory. While it provides a solid foundation for understanding the origins of the theory, it may not provide much new information for those already familiar with the topic. Additionally, the paper does not delve into the more recent developments and applications of gauge theory, which could also be of interest to readers.

Overall, this paper is a valuable resource for anyone interested in the history of gauge theory. It presents a clear and comprehensive overview of its early development and provides valuable insights into the mindset and interactions of the scientists involved. While it may not offer much new information for experts in the field, it is a well-written and informative piece that can enhance our understanding of this important scientific theory.