A Were there any valid classical unified field theories ?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the validity of classical unified field theories from the early 20th century, questioning whether their abandonment was due solely to their inability to account for quantum phenomena rather than observational failures. It suggests that some of these theories, while incomplete, may still hold value as classical theories, similar to Maxwell's electromagnetism, which remains useful despite its quantum limitations. The conversation highlights the attempts of theorists like Einstein to unify general relativity with electromagnetism and to provide alternatives to quantum mechanics. Additionally, it addresses the challenges posed by higher-dimensional theories, such as Kaluza's, particularly the issue of stabilizing extra dimensions. The potential constraints imposed by the unique properties of four-dimensional manifolds on these theories are also considered.
Rohan
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
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 ?
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...

Similar threads

Back
Top