Finitary, Causal and Quantal Vacuum Einstein Gravity 3

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Finitary, Causal and Quantal Vacuum Einstein Gravity 3 Finitary, Causal and Quantal Vacuum Einstein Gravity Anastasios Mallios∗and Ioannis Raptis† Abstract We continue recent work [74, 75] and formulate the gravitational vacuum Einstein equations over a locally finite spacetime by using the basic axiomatics, techniques, ideas and working philosophy of Abstract Differential Geometry. The main kinematical structure involved, originally introduced and explored in [74], is a curved principal finitary spacetime sheaf of incidence algebras, which have been interpreted as quantum causal sets, together with a non-trivial locally finite spin-Loretzian connection on it which lays the structural founda- tion for the formulation of a covariant dynamics of quantum causality in terms of sheaf morphisms. Our scheme is innately algebraic and it supports a categorical version of the principle of general covariance that is manifestly independent of a background C∞-smooth spacetime manifold M. Thus, we entertain the possibility of developing a ‘fully covariant’ path integral-type of quantum dynamical scenario for these connections that avoids ab initio various problems that such a dynamics encounters in other current quantization schemes for gravity—either canonical (Hamiltonian), or covariant (Lagrangian)—involving an exter- nal, base differential spacetime manifold, namely, the choice of a diffeomorphism-invariant measure on the moduli space of gauge-equivalent (self-dual) gravitational spin-Lorentzian connections and the (Hilbert space) inner product that could in principle be constructed relative to that measure in the quantum theory—the so-called ‘inner product problem’, as arXiv:gr-qc/0209048v6 19 Oct 2002 well as the ‘problem of time’ that also involves the Diff(M) ‘structure group’ of the classi- cal C∞-smooth spacetime continuum of general relativity. Hence, by using the inherently algebraico-sheaf-theoretic and calculus-free ideas of Abstract Differential Geometry, we are able to draw preliminary, albeit suggestive, connections between certain non-perturbative (canonical or covariant) approaches to quantum general relativity (eg, Ashtekar’s new vari- ables and the loop formalism that has been developed along with them) and Sorkin et al.’s causal set program—as it were, we ‘noncommutatively algebraize’, ‘differential geometrize’ and, as a result, dynamically vary causal sets. At the end, we anticipate various conse- quences that such a scenario for a locally finite, causal and quantal vacuum Einstein gravity might have for the obstinate from the viewpoint of the smooth continuum problem of C∞- smooth spacetime singularities, thus we prepare the ground for a forthcoming paper [76]. PACS numbers: 04.60.-m, 04.20.Gz, 04.20.-q Key words: quantum gravity, causal sets, differential incidence algebras of locally finite partially ordered sets, abstract differential geometry, sheaf theory, sheaf cohomology, category theory ∗Algebra and Geometry Section, Department of Mathematics, University of Athens, Panepistimioupolis Zo- grafou 157 84, Athens, Greece; e-mail: [email protected] †Theoretical Physics Group, Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, Prince Consort Road, South Kensington, London SW7 2BZ, UK; e-mail: [email protected] 1 2 Anastasios Mallios and Ioannis Raptis “...the theory that space is continuous is wrong, because we get...infinities [viz. ‘singulari- ties’] and other similar difficulties ...[while] the simple ideas of geometry, extended down to infinitely small, are wrong...” [39] .................................. “...at the Planck-length scale, classical differential geometry is simply incompatible with quantum theory...[so that] one will not be able to use differential geometry in the true quantum-gravity theory...” [52] 1 Prologue cum Physical Motivation In the last century, the path that we have followed to unite quantum mechanics with general relativity into a coherent, both technically and conceptually, quantum theory of gravity has been a long and arduous one, full of unexpected twists and turns, surprising detours, branchings and loops—even disheartening setbacks and impasses, as well as hopes, disappointments or even dis- illusionments at times. Certainly though, the whole enterprize has been supported and nurtured by impressive technical ingenuity, and creative imagination coming from physicists and mathe- maticians alike. All in all, it has been a trip of adventure, discovery and intellectual reward for all who have been privileged to be involved in this formidable quest. Arguably then, the attempt to arrive at a conceptually sound and ‘calculationally’ finite quantum gravity must be regarded and hailed as one of the most challenging and inspired endeavors in theoretical physics research that must be carried over and be zestfully continued in the new millenium. Admittedly, however, a cogent theoretical scenario for quantum gravity has proved to be stubbornly elusive not least because there is no unanimous agreement about what ought to qualify as the ‘proper’ approach to a quantum theoresis of spacetime and gravity. Generally speaking, most of the approaches fall into the following three categories:1 1. ‘General relativity conservative’: The general aim of the approaches falling into this category is to quantize classical gravity somehow. Thus, the mathematical theory on which general relativity—in fact, any field theory whether classical or quantum—is based, namely, the differential geometry of C∞-manifolds (ie, the usual differential calculus on manifolds), is essentially retained2 and it is used to treat the gravitational field quantum field-theoretically. Both the non-perturbative canonical and covariant (ie, path integral or ‘action-weighed sum-over-histories’) approaches to ‘quantum general relativity’, topological quantum field theories, as well as, to a large extent, higher dimensional (or extended objects’) theories like (super)string and membrane schemes arguably belong to this category. 1These categories should by no means be regarded as being mutually exclusive or exhaustive, and they certainly reflect only these authors’ subjective criteria and personal perspective on the general characteristics of various approaches to quantum gravity. This coarse classification will be useful for the informal description of our finitary and causal approach to Lorentzian vacuum quantum gravity to be discussed shortly. 2That is, in general relativity spacetime is modelled after a C∞-smooth manifold. Purely mathematically speaking, approaches in this category could also be called ‘C∞-smoothness or differential manifold conservative’. Finitary, Causal and Quantal Vacuum Einstein Gravity 3 2. ‘Quantum mechanics conservative’: The general spirit here is to start from general quantum principles such as algebraic operationality, noncommutativity and finitism (‘discreteness’) about the structure of spacetime and its dynamics, and then try to derive somehow general relativistic attributes, as it were, from within the quantum framework. Such approaches assume up-front that quantum theory is primary and fundamental, while the classical ge- ometrical smooth spacetime continuum and its dynamics secondary and derivative (emer- gent) from the deeper quantum dynamical realm. For instance, Connes’ noncommutative geometry [24, 57] and, perhaps more notably, Finkelstein’s quantum relativity [45, 106]3 may be classified here. 3. ‘Independent’: Approaches in this category assume neither quantum mechanics nor general relativity as a fundamental, ‘fixed’ background theory relative to which the other must be modified to suit. Rather, they start independently from principles that are neither quantum mechanical nor general relativistic per se, and proceed to construct a theory and a suitable mathematical formalism to accompany it that later may be interpreted as a coherent amalgamation (or perhaps even extension) of both. It is inevitable with such ‘iconoclastic’ schemes that in the end both general relativity and quantum mechanics may appear to be modified to some extent. One could assign to this category Penrose’s combinatorial spin-networks [83, 101] and its current relativistic spin-foam descendants [13, 15, 84], Regge’s homological spacetime triangulations and simplicial gravity [94], as well as Sorkin et al.’s causal sets [18, 115, 116, 95, 117]. It goes without saying that this is no place for us to review in any detail the approaches mentioned above.4 Rather, we wish to continue a finitary, causal and quantal sheaf-theoretic approach to spacetime and vacuum Lorentzian gravity that we have already started to develop in [74, 75]. This approach, as we will argue subsequently, combines characteristics from all three categories above and, in particular, the mathematical backbone which supports it, Abstract Differential Geometry (ADG) [67, 68, 70, 71, 73], was originally conceived in order to evade the C∞-smooth spacetime manifold M (and consequently its diffeomorphism group Diff(M)) underlying (and creating numerous problems for) the various approaches in 1. For, it must be emphasized up- front, ADG is an axiomatic formulation of differential geometry which does not use any C∞-notion from the usual differential calculus—the classical differential geometry of smooth manifolds. To summarize briefly what we have already accomplished in this direction,5 in [74] we com- 3In fact, Finkelstein maintains that “all is quantum. Anything that appears to be classical has not yet been resolved into its quantum elements” (David Finkelstein in private communication). 4For reviews of and different perspectives on
Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:Physics/0608067V1 [Physics.Hist-Ph] 7 Aug 2006 N I Olbrtr Ntepro Rm14 O1951
    Peter Bergmann and the invention of constrained Hamiltonian dynamics D. C. Salisbury Department of Physics, Austin College, Sherman, Texas 75090-4440, USA E-mail: [email protected] (Dated: July 23, 2006) Abstract Peter Bergmann was a co-inventor of the algorithm for converting singular Lagrangian models into a constrained Hamiltonian dynamical formalism. This talk focuses on the work of Bergmann and his collaborators in the period from 1949 to 1951. arXiv:physics/0608067v1 [physics.hist-ph] 7 Aug 2006 1 INTRODUCTION It has always been the practice of those of us associated with the Syracuse “school” to identify the algorithm for constructing a canonical phase space description of singular La- grangian systems as the Dirac-Bergmann procedure. I learned the procedure as a student of Peter Bergmann - and I should point out that he never employed that terminology. Yet it was clear from the published record at the time in the 1970’s that his contribution was essential. Constrained Hamiltonian dynamics constitutes the route to canonical quantiza- tion of all local gauge theories, including not only conventional general relativity, but also grand unified theories of elementary particle interaction, superstrings and branes. Given its importance and my suspicion that Bergmann has never received adequate recognition from the wider community for his role in the development of the technique, I have long intended to explore this history in depth. The following is merely a tentative first step in which I will focus principally on the work of Peter Bergmann and his collaborators in the late 1940’s and early 1950’s, indicating where appropriate the relation of this work to later developments.
    [Show full text]
  • Einstein's Legacy
    EINSTEIN’S LEGACY - EINSTEINS ERBE Yehuda Elkana Opening lecture for Germany’s Einstein Year, on 19 January 2005, 7 p.m. at the Deutsches Historisches Museum, Berlin, under the patronage of Chancellor Schröder. THESES Germany has chosen to dedicate this year, 2005, to Albert Einstein on the 100th anniversary of his ‘annus mirabilis’. It is dedicated to the man Einstein, a German and a Jew who had to leave Germany because of the Nazis, never to return – a sheer accident that he did not perish in the Holocaust ; it is also dedicated to his scientific oeuvre, and to his humanistic, political and science-political legacy. It is a courageous and noble decision in which Wissenschaft, Kultur und Wirtschaft participate. It is courageous because Einstein was a very independent critical spirit, who claimed not to belong to any nation or culture, although he was very consciously a Jew. Thus, this is a major opportunity and not less so also a major challenge. Einstein looms large on the horizon of many a laborer in the combined areas of science, technology, industry, the media, but also in the humanistic departments of Academe. Out of the myriad of themes one could choose for discussion – all of which would contribute to admiration, to a love of science and research, to a dedication to freedom, democracy, international cooperation and an unprejudiced egalitarianism towards all and everybody in the whole world, I have decided to choose one central theme - that of 1 Befreiung - and to follow in a brief survey the implications of this attitude in many walks of life, from science to politics.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Introduction
    Beichler (1) Preliminary paper for Vigier IX Conference June 2014 MODERN FYSICS PHALLACIES: THE BEST WAY NOT TO UNIFY PHYSICS JAMES E. BEICHLER Research Institute for Paraphysics, Retired P.O. Box 624, Belpre, Ohio 45714 USA [email protected] Too many physicists believe the ‘phallacy’ that the quantum is more fundamental than relativity without any valid supporting evidence, so the earliest attempts to unify physics based on the continuity of relativity have been all but abandoned. This belief is probably due to the wealth of pro-quantum propaganda and general ‘phallacies in fysics’ that were spread during the second quarter of the twentieth century, although serious ‘phallacies’ exist throughout physics on both sides of the debate. Yet both approaches are basically flawed because both relativity and the quantum theory are incomplete and grossly misunderstood as they now stand. Had either side of the quantum versus relativity controversy sought common ground between the two worldviews, total unification would have been accomplished long ago. The point is, literally, that the discrete quantum, continuous relativity, basic physical geometry, theoretical mathematics and classical physics all share one common characteristic that has never been fully explored or explained – a paradoxical duality between a dimensionless point (discrete) and an extended length (continuity) in any dimension – and if the problem of unification is approached from an understanding of how this paradox relates to each paradigm, all of physics and indeed all of science could be unified under a single new theoretical paradigm. Keywords: unification, single field theory, unified field theory, quantized space-time, five-dimensional space-time, quantum, relativity, hidden variables, Einstein, Kaluza, Klein, Clifford 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Observables and Hamilton-Jacobi Approaches to General Relativity. I
    Observables and Hamilton-Jacobi approaches to general relativity. I. The Earlier History Donald Salisbury1,2 1Austin College, 900 North Grand Ave, Sherman, Texas 75090, USA 2Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Boltzmannstrasse 22, 14195 Berlin, Germany Abstract The main focus is on the Hamilton-Jacobi techniques in classical general relativity that were pursued by Peter Bergmann and Arthur Komar in the 1960’s and 1970’s. They placed special emphasis on the ability to construct the factor group of canonical transformations, where the four-dimensional diffeomorphism phase space transformations were factored out. Equivalence classes were identified by a set of phase space functions that were invari- ant under the action of the four-dimensional diffeomorphism group. This is contrasted and compared with approaches of Paul Weiss, Julian Schwinger, Richard Arnowitt, Stanley Deser, Charles Misner, Karel Kuchar – and es- pecially the geometrodynamical program of John Wheeler and Bryce DeWitt where diffeomorphism symmetry is replaced by a notion of multifingered time. The origins of all of these approaches are traced to Elie Cartan’s invariant in- tegral formulation of classical dynamics. A related correspondence concerning the thin sandwich dispute is also documented. 1 Introduction Given that the classical Hamilton-Jacobi theory played such a prominent role in the formulation of Schrødinger quantum wave mechanics, it is remarkable that gen- eral relativists did not make a serious effort in applying the technique until the early 1960’s. The origins of this attempt in flat spacetime field theory can be arXiv:2106.11894v1 [physics.hist-ph] 22 Jun 2021 traced to Dirac’s groundbreaking 1933 paper, The Lagrangian in quantum mechan- ics [Dirac, 1933], where he established the link, for systems with a finite number of degrees of freedom, between initial and final classical action configuration vari- ables, Hamilton principal functions, and quantum transition amplitudes.
    [Show full text]
  • “YOU MUST REMEMBER THIS” Abraham (“Abe”) Edel
    MATERIAL FOR “YOU MUST REMEMBER THIS” Abraham (“Abe”) Edel (6 December 1908 – 22 June 2007) “Twenty-Seven Uses of Science in Ethics,” 7/2/67 Abraham Edel, In Memoriam, by Peter Hare and Guy Stroh Abraham Edel, 1908-2007 Abraham Edel was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on December 6, 1908. Raised in Yorkton, Canada with his older brother Leon who would become a biographer of Henry James, Edel studied Classics and Philosophy at McGill University, earning a BA in 1927 and an MA in 1928. He continued his education at Oxford where, as he recalled, “W.D. Ross and H.A. Prichard were lecturing in ethics, H.W.B. Joseph on Plato, and the influence of G. E. Moore and Bertrand Russell extended from Cambridge. Controversy on moral theory was high. The same was true of epistemology, where Prichard posed realistic epistemology against Harold Joachim who was defending Bradley and Bosanquet against the metaphysical realism of Cook Wilson.” He received a BA in Litterae Humaniores from Oxford in 1930. In that year he moved to New York City for doctoral studies at Columbia University, and in 1931 began teaching at City College, first as an assistant to Morris Raphael Cohen. F.J.E. Woodbridge directed his Columbia dissertation, Aristotle’s Theory of the Infinite (1934). This monograph and two subsequent books on Aristotle were influenced by Woodbridge’s interpretation of Aristotle as a philosophical naturalist. Although his dissertation concerned ancient Greek philosophy, he was much impressed by research in the social sciences at Columbia, and the teaching of Cohen at City College showed him how philosophical issues lay at the root of the disciplines of psychology, sociology, history, as well as the natural sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • 15 Stachel 1573
    2005 MASTER-MIND LECTURE Einstein JOHN STACHEL Boston University Henrietta Hertz and the Master-Mind Lectures MISS HENRIETTE HERTZ, the Maecenas of these lectures, died in 1913.1 She bequeathed the Palazzo Zuccari in Rome, which she had recon- structed, to the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gesellschaft2 in Berlin: ‘With the aim that, in accord with its tradition, it shall serve the lasting cultivation of art and science.’3 In that same year, Albert Einstein was offered a position as a Permanent Member of the Prussian Akademie der Wissenschaften, with the promise of heading the Physics Institute of the Kaiser-Wilhelm- Gesellschaft. He moved to Berlin in 1914 and, had Miss Hertz lived, it is not improbable that the two would have met there. Earlier, Miss Hertz had provided for the endowment at the British Academy of three lecture series.4 One of these is the Master-Mind lectures, in each of which: Read at the Academy 19 July 2005. 1 For her biography, see Julia Laura Rischbieter, Henriette Hertz Mäzenin und Gründerin der Bibliotheca Hertziana in Rom (Stuttgart, 2004). 2 In 1948, it was re-founded as the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. 3 ‘In der Absicht, daß dieselben ihrer Tradition gemäß dauernd der Pflege von Kunst und Wissenschaft dienen sollen’. See ibid., p. 169. Her will adds: ‘Zu diesem Zweck ist in den unteren Räumen, die von Federico Zaccari selbst ausgemahlt wurden, eine kunst-historische Bibliothek eingerichtet worden, die unter den Namen “Bibliotheca Hertziana” dort für immer ihre Heimstätte finden soll.’ [For this purpose, in the rooms of the lower floor, decorated by Federico Zaccari himself, a Library of Art History shall be installed, which, under the name Bibliotheca Herziana, shall find its home there in perpetuity.] 4 See Rischbieter, Henrietta Hertz, p.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gravitational Constant: Generalized Gravitational Theories and Experiments NATO Science Series
    The Gravitational Constant: Generalized Gravitational Theories and Experiments NATO Science Series A Series presenting the results of scientific meetings supported under the NATO Science Programme. The Series is published by lOS Press, Amsterdam, and Kluwer Academic Publishers in conjunction with the NATO Scientific Affairs Division Sub-Series I. Life and Behavioural Sciences lOS Press II. Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry Kluwer Academic Publishers III. Computer and Systems Science lOS Press IV. Earth and Environmental Sciences Kluwer Academic Publishers V. Science and Technology Policy lOS Press The NATO Science Series continues the series of books published formerly as the NATO ASI Series. The NATO Science Programme offers support for collaboration in civil science between scientists of countries of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. The types of scientific meeting generally sl)pported are "Advanced Study Institutes" and "Advanced Research Workshops", although other types of meeting are supported from time to time. The NATO Science Series collects together the results of these meetings. The meetings are co-organized bij scientists from NATO countries and scientists from NATO's Partner countries - countries of the CIS and Central and Eastern Europe. Advanced Study Institutes are high-level tutorial courses offering in-depth study of latest advances in a field. Advanced Research Workshops are expert meetings aimed at critical assessment of a field, and identification of directions for future action. As a consequence of the restructuring of the NATO Science Programme in 1999, the NATO Science Series has been re-organised and there are currently Five Sub-series as noted above. Please consult the following web sites for information on previous volumes published in the Series, as well as details of earlier Sub-series.
    [Show full text]
  • [Of Peter Bergmann]? DS: Well I Have a Coup
    J.E.: So your purpose is: you would like to write some kind of general biography [of Peter Bergmann]? D.S.: Well I have a couple of objectives. One of them is of a more scientific nature. I am actually been looking up a couple of years on a more detailed history of constrained Hamiltonian dynamics. J.E.: Oh Yes. D.S.: And in fact I started with Peter’s work in 1948 and then discovered that I needed to go back further in history to Leon Rosenfeld. So I have been concentrating recently on his early work in 1930 to 1932. J.E.: It starts that early? D.S.: Yes it starts that early. It is very surprising. Perhaps later we can talk a little bit more about that. But then I discovered in researching Peter’s life that his father was a very important biochemist. a founder of modern biochemistry. I didn’t know that. And I discovered in talking to many of his friends and collaborators that they also did not know that. And then I learned more about his aunt and his mother who were instrumental in founding the Montessori movement here in Germany. So, many things and I so finally decided that I would also attempt to do a longer term project, to do some scientific social intellectual history that would center on the Bergmann family So I am beginning at the end of the 19th century. So it has turned out to be a very exciting project. JE.: Very many sided D.S.: But that’s going to be a longer term.
    [Show full text]
  • Causality and Chance, Letters to Three Women Chris Talbot Editor
    Chris Talbot Editor David Bohm Causality and Chance, Letters to Three Women David Bohm: Causality and Chance, Letters to Three Women Chris Talbot Editor David Bohm: Causality and Chance, Letters to Three Women 123 Editor Chris Talbot Oxford UK Birkbeck Library is acknowledged for the kind permission to publish transcriptions of the letters of David Bohm, whose originals are held in its archive ISBN 978-3-319-55491-4 ISBN 978-3-319-55492-1 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-55492-1 Library of Congress Control Number: 2017936037 © Springer International Publishing AG 2017 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1909.05412V2 [Physics.Hist-Ph] 24 Dec 2020 Toward a Quantum Theory of Gravity: Syracuse 1949-1962
    Toward a quantum theory of gravity: Syracuse 1949-1962 Donald Salisbury1,2 1Austin College, 900 North Grand Ave, Sherman, Texas 75090, USA 2Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Boltzmannstrasse 22, 14195 Berlin, Germany December 25, 2020 Abstract Peter Bergmann and his students embarked in 1949 on a mainly canonical quantization program whose aim was to take into account the underlying four- dimensional diffeomorphism symmetry in the transition from a Lagrangian to a Hamiltonian formulation of Einstein’s theory. Along the way they devel- oped techniques for dealing in phase space with the arbitrariness that arises in classical solutions given data at a given coordinate time. They argued that even though one seemed to destroy the full covariance through the focus on a temporal foliation of spacetime, this loss was illusory. In work undertaken with Anderson and I. Goldberg in the early 1950’s they constructed explicit expressions for both the generator of transformations between solutions which could be physically distinct, i.e., did not necessarily correspond to changes in spacetime coordinates, and invariant transformations that did correspond to four-dimensional diffeomorphisms. They argued that the resulting factor al- gebra represented diffeomorphism invariants that were the correct candidates for promotion to quantum operators. Early on they convinced themselves that only the corresponding construction of classical invariants could ade- quately reflect the fully relativistic absence of physical meaning of spacetime coordinates. Efforts were made by Bergmann students Newman and Janis to construct these classical invariants. Then in the late 1950’s Bergmann and Komar proposed a comprehensive program in which classical invariants could arXiv:1909.05412v2 [physics.hist-ph] 24 Dec 2020 be constructed using the spacetime geometry itself to fix intrinsic spacetime landmarks.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward a Quantum Theory of Gravity: Syracuse 1949-1962
    Toward a quantum theory of gravity: Syracuse 1949-1962 Donald Salisbury1,2 1Austin College, 900 North Grand Ave, Sherman, Texas 75090, USA 2Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Boltzmannstrasse 22, 14195 Berlin, Germany August 8, 2019 Abstract Peter Bergmann and his students embarked in 1949 on a mainly canonical quantization program whose aim was to take into account the underlying four- dimensional diffeomorphism symmetry in the transition from a Lagrangian to a Hamiltonian formulation of Einstein’s theory. Along the way they devel- oped techniques for dealing in phase space with the arbitrariness that arises in classical solutions given data at a given coordinate time. They argued that even though one seemed to destroy the full covariance through the focus on a temporal foliation of spacetime, this loss was illusory. In work undertaken with Anderson and I. Goldberg in the early 1950’s they constructed explicit expressions for both the generator of transformations between solutions which could be physically distinct, i.e., did not necessarily correspond to changes in spacetime coordinates, and invariant transformations that did correspond to four-dimensional diffeomorphisms. They argued that the resulting factor al- gebra represented diffeomorphism invariants that were the correct candidates for promotion to quantum operators. Early on they convinced themselves that only the corresponding construction of classical invariants could ade- quately reflect the fully relativistic absence of physical meaning of spacetime coordinates. Efforts were made by Bergmann students Newman and Janis to construct these classical invariants. Then in the late 1950’s Bergmann and Komar proposed a comprehensive program in which classical invariants could arXiv:1909.05412v1 [physics.hist-ph] 12 Sep 2019 be constructed using the spacetime geometry itself to fix intrinsic spacetime landmarks.
    [Show full text]
  • Alice Freifeld Curriculum Vitae
    1 CURRICULUM VITAE ALICE FREIFELD Director, Center for European Studies Associate Professor of History Affiliated faculty in European Studies and Jewish Studies Center for European Studies 3324 Turlington Hall Department of History University of Florida P.O. Box 117342 Gainesville, FL University of Florida 32611-7342 Gainesville, FL 352- 32611-5500 352-294-7148 352-273-3374 fax: 352-392-8966 [email protected] EDUCATION Ph.D. and M.A.: History, University of California, Berkeley, May 1992 Dissertation: "The Chastened Crowd in Habsburg Hungary" Studied Russian at the Defense Language Institute, Monterey, CA., 1976 B.A.: History, University of California, Berkeley, 1975 Attended Eötvös Lóránd University, Budapest, Fall, 1972 TEACHING APPOINTMENTS University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, Associate Professor, Summer 2004- Assistant Professor, Fall 1994-2004 Also taught at: Wheaton College, Norton, MA, fall 1992 University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, 1991/92 University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, fall 1988-Spring 1990 University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, spring 1988 Transylvania University, Lexington, KY, 1986-87 University of California, Berkeley, History, 1982-1984, Division of Special Programs, 1981 AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION: Modern European history; Central and Eastern Europe; Hungary; Habsburg monarchy; Crowd Politics; European Jewry after the Holocaust; Migration in Modern Europe; Cold War PUBLICATIONS Books 2 • Nationalism and the Crowd in Liberal Hungary, 1848-1914 (Baltimore and Washington, D.C.: Johns Hopkins University Press and Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2000) • BARBARA JELAVICH BOOK PRIZE WINNER, 2001 (American Slavic Studies Association prize for Habsburg, Ottoman, Eastern European and history of non-Russian peoples of the former Soviet Union) • Book Prize, 2001, Hungarian Studies Association and University of Indiana University, Bloomington East Europe Reads Nietzsche, coedited with Peter Bergmann and Bernice Rosenthal, East European Quarterly Monograph Series, no.
    [Show full text]