Were there any valid classical unified field theories ?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of classical unified field theories that emerged in the early 20th century, particularly in relation to their ability to account for quantized phenomena and their potential utility as purely classical theories. Participants explore the implications of these theories in the context of unifying General Relativity and electromagnetism, as well as their limitations when addressing quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether classical unified field theories were abandoned solely due to their inability to account for quantized phenomena, suggesting they may still hold validity as classical theories.
  • Another participant references Maxwell's unification of electricity and magnetism as a successful classical theory, contrasting it with Kaluza's approach, which encountered issues related to higher dimensions.
  • Some participants note that while higher-dimensional theories like Kaluza's and string theory propose unification, they face challenges such as the stabilization of extra dimensions.
  • A later reply raises a question about the mathematical properties of four-dimensional manifolds and their implications for theories requiring more than four dimensions, citing Simon Donaldson's work.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relevance and validity of classical unified field theories, with no consensus reached on their potential utility or the implications of higher-dimensional theories.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations related to the assumptions of dimensionality in unified field theories and the mathematical complexities of manifolds, particularly in four dimensions versus higher dimensions.

Rohan
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Amongst what seems like a plethora of classical Unified Field Theories; that seemed to exist in the first half of the 20th century;
were they all abandoned because of failure to account for quantised phenomena, as matter consisting of discrete particles and fields;
as opposed to observational failure in the classical realm ?
1/ Amongst what seems like the plethora of classical Unified Field Theories; that seemed to exist in the first half of the 20th century; see for example https://link.springer.com/article/10.12942/lrr-2014-5
[caution 50MB download]
were they all abandoned just because of failure to account for quantised phenomena, as matter consisting of discrete particles and fields; as opposed to observational failure in the classical realm ?

2/ Is it possible that any of them, whilst incomplete in this way never-the-less are valid as purely classical theories ? here I have in mind that Maxwell's Electro-Magnetism, fails utterly in the quantum realm, yet retains great utility in the classical !

Contextually many of these theories , (eg Einstein seemed to have considered several ) ; seemed to have been not just attempting to unify General Relativity and Maxwell's Electro-Magnetism but also attempting to offer an alternative to Quantum Mechanics. Thus it seems the possibility of an "incomplete" Classical Unified Field Theory
may have been overlooked ! I suppose the hope which such a theory seems to represent to me is the possibility of (in Wheeler's terminology) :
-electro-geometrodynamic phenomena ...strange electrical 'forcefield' effects; at everyday energies !
General Relativity and Maxwell's Electro-Magnetism don't seem to predict such interactions;
until the mass/ energies approximate the mass of stars and then only as an electromagnetic contribution to the gravitational field !
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There's Maxwell, that unified electricity and magnetism. Then there's Kaluza, which immediately ran into the problem that we don't live ina 5-D world.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
There's Maxwell, that unified electricity and magnetism. Then there's Kaluza, which immediately ran into the problem that we don't live ina 5-D world.

We don't live in a 10, 11, or 26D world either but that doesn't stop some people.

Cheers
 
Vanadium 50 said:
There's Maxwell, that unified electricity and magnetism. Then there's Kaluza, which immediately ran into the problem that we don't live ina 5-D world.
That's not the real problem. The problem was to stabilize this extra "small dimension". GR dictates that if you start out small spatially, it doesn't need to stay that way.

String theory exhibits the same problem. It's solution is called "moduli stabilization" (where the "modulus" is roughly the radius of the small circle in this case).
 
As an addendum to my query above; I wonder whether the peculiar mathematical properties of 4 dimensional manifolds; (apparently they unlike higher dimensional manifolds " don't have a unique differentiation structure"..Simon Donaldson 1982 Oxford Uni.); places any constraints on these theories, some of which required more than 4 dimensions ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K