Is Louis Crane's New Paper on Neutrino Models and Symmetry a Visionary Work?

[mitchell porter]

http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0525

Strange enough to deserve its own thread... The A4 discrete symmetry often used in neutrino models is dual to the E6 continuous symmetry often used in grand unification! This extension of the EPRL model is also a string field theory where the strings move on a discrete space! Is it a visionary work, or just a crazy one?

 

[MTd2]

I send this paper to Marni. It is way too similar to her theories.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0525

Strange enough to deserve its own thread... The A4 discrete symmetry often used in neutrino models is dual to the E6 continuous symmetry often used in grand unification! This extension of the EPRL model is also a string field theory where the strings move on a discrete space! Is it a visionary work, or just a crazy one?

Visionary always sounds crazy at first, not every crazy idea is visionary.

Or as someone once said, "your idea is crazy but is it crazy enough?".

 

[mitchell porter]

I send this paper to Marni. It is way too similar to her theories.

Well, she and Crane coauthored a categorical state-sum model once. But she has the extra layers of twistors and braids in her current work. She has blogged about A4 from that perspective.

Here's a link to Marcus's thread on this paper, for cross-reference and in case this one disappears.

 

[MTd2]

Yesterday, Marni posted ( http://pseudomonad.blogspot.com/2012/01/quick-neutrino-review.html ) about a 2009 post with also a similar content in relation to that paper http://kea-monad.blogspot.com/2008/06/m-theory-lesson-197.html .

If they worked together, couldn't he at least have moral obligation to acknowledge her even a little bit more?