DOCSLIB.ORG

Selected Papers on Teleparallelism Ii

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

SELECTED PAPERS ON TELEPARALLELISM Edited and translated by D. H. Delphenich Table of contents Page Introduction ……………………………………………………………………… 1 1. The unification of gravitation and electromagnetism 1 2. The geometry of parallelizable manifold 7 3. The field equations 20 4. The topology of parallelizability 24 5. Teleparallelism and the Dirac equation 28 6. Singular teleparallelism 29 References ……………………………………………………………………….. 33 Translations and time line 1928: A. Einstein, “Riemannian geometry, while maintaining the notion of teleparallelism ,” Sitzber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 17 (1928), 217- 221………………………………………………………………………………. 35 (Received on June 7) A. Einstein, “A new possibility for a unified field theory of gravitation and electromagnetism” Sitzber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 17 (1928), 224-227………… 42 (Received on June 14) R. Weitzenböck, “Differential invariants in EINSTEIN’s theory of teleparallelism,” Sitzber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 17 (1928), 466-474……………… 46 (Received on Oct 18) 1929: E. Bortolotti , “ Stars of congruences and absolute parallelism: Geometric basis for a recent theory of Einstein ,” Rend. Reale Acc. dei Lincei 9 (1929), 530- 538...…………………………………………………………………………….. 56 R. Zaycoff, “On the foundations of a new field theory of A. Einstein,” Zeit. Phys. 53 (1929), 719-728…………………………………………………............ 64 (Received on January 13) Hans Reichenbach, “On the classification of the new Einstein Ansatz on gravitation and electricity,” Zeit. Phys. 53 (1929), 683-689…………………….. 76 (Received on January 22) Selected papers on teleparallelism ii A. Einstein, “On unified field theory,” Sitzber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 18 (1929), 2-7……………………………………………………………………………….. 82 (Received on Jan 30) R. Zaycoff, “On the foundations of a new field theory of A. Einstein; (Second part),” Zeit. Phys. 54 (1929), 590-593…………………………………………… 89 (Received on March 4) R. Zaycoff, “On the foundations of a new field theory of A. Einstein (Third part),” Zeit. Phys. 54 (1929), 738-740…………………………………………… 94 (Received on March 11) R. Zaycoff, “On the most recent formulation of Einstein’s unified field theory,” Zeit. Phys. 56 (1929), 717-726…………………………………………………... 97 (Received on June 6) R. Zaycoff, “Derivation of the Dirac-Whittaker wave equations from Einstein’s unified field theory,” Zeit. Phys. 56 (1929), 862-864……………………………. 108 (Received on June 21) A. Einstein, “Unified field theory and HAMILTON’s principle,” Sitzber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 18 (1929), 156-159……………………………………… 112 A. Einstein, “On the unified field theory that is based upon the Riemann metric and absolute parallelism,” Math. Ann. 102 (1929), 685-697…………………… 117 (Received on Aug 19) E. Cartan, “Historical survey of the notion of absolute parallelism,” Math. Ann. 102 (1929), 698-706…………………………………………………………… 130 R. Zaycoff, “Teleparallelism and wave mechanics. I,” Zeit. Phys. 58 (1929), 833-840…………………………………………………………………………... 138 (Received on October 21) R. Zaycoff, “Teleparallelism and wave mechanics. II,” Zeit. Phys. 59 (1929), 110-113…………………………………………………………………………... 145 (Received on November 4) A. Einstein, “Unitary theory of the physical field,” Ann. de l’Inst. Henri. Poincaré 1 (1930), 1-24…………………………………………………………. 150 (talk given November) A. Einstein, “The compatibility of the field equations in unified field theory,” Sitzber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 19 (1930), 18-23…………………….……………. 170 (Received on December 12) iii Table of Contents 1930 : A. Einstein and W. Mayer, “Two rigorous static solutions to the field equations of unified field theory,” Sitzber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 19 (1930), 110-120…….. 177 (Received on March 11) G. C. McVittie, “Solutions with axial symmetry of Einstein’s equations of teleparallelism,” Edinburgh Math. Soc. Proc. (2) 2 (1930), 140-150……………. 189 (Received on June 9) A. Einstein, “On the theory of spaces with a RIEMANN metric and teleparallelism,” Sitzber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 19 (1930), 401-402…………….... 200 Post-Einstein era: E. Cartan, “Absolute parallelism and unitary field theory,” Rev. Metaphys. Morale, 38 (1931), 13–28. Oeuvres Complètes, tome III/2, pp. 1167–1185……. 202 E. Stiefel, “Direction fields and teleparallelism in n-dimensional manifolds,” Comm. Math. Helv. 25 (1935) 305 – 353………………………………………... 212 Introduction 1. The unification of gravitation and electromagnetism. One of the articles of faith for many scientists (or at least the ones who regard science as a natural philosophy) is what one might call the principle of “maximal elegance.” That is, if natural law is truly worthy of reverence then that would be because in its purest form it must admit a truly elegant statement. Whenever scientists are confronted with a disorganized set of natural phenomena, their natural instinct it to organize them, and ideally one hopes to find some classification scheme that begins with the smallest number of first principles. For instance, consider the ongoing quest to understand the nature of matter. One of the earliest postulates about matter was the atomic hypothesis of Democritus, who felt that the reduction of matter to smaller pieces had to terminate after a finite number of steps. To him, the ultimate irreducible constituents would be “atoms,” which would then essentially “generate” the more complex states of matter by some process of combination. Of course, this concept eventually led to the periodic table of the elements, which once more initially appeared to be a complex and disorganized set of rules for atoms until quantum mechanics managed to find a more fundamental first principle that made things simple again. Similarly, there was once a time when electricity and magnetism seemed to be as distinct as lightning and lodestones. However, between the efforts of mostly Michael Faraday and James Clerk Maxwell, not only was it shown that electricity and magnetism were only two facets of a more general concept – viz., the electromagnetic field – but that one could also account for optical phenomena in the process by attributing electromagnetic waves to light. Since there are many other examples of how progress in science has often been associated with reducing the complexity of first principles by unifying disparate natural phenomena, once Einstein had formulated his theory of gravitation as a manifestation of spacetime geometry, he became convinced that the story did not stop there. His final – albeit, unsuccessful − quest in theoretical physics was to unify his theory of gravitation with Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism by finding some more general – most likely, geometric – field on the spacetime manifold and a set of field equations for it that would subsume both the Einstein equations for gravitation and the Maxwell equations for electromagnetism in some limiting approximation. This problem is what we are calling the Einstein-Maxwell unification problem. Here, one must clearly distinguish between the unification of two field theories and their mere concatenation . In the latter case, all that one has really accomplished is to construct essentially a Cartesian product of the two theories, and in particular, the resulting field equations for the fields that are to be unified say nothing new about either. What one hopes for in a unification of field theories is a general set of field equations for the unified field that contains some sort of coupling between the two fields that was not present in the individual field theories. The best example of this situation is the fact that in Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism, in addition to containing the equations of electrostatics and magnetostatics as special cases, the full set of Maxwell equations contains the far-reaching coupling of the electric and magnetic fields by electromagnetic induction. Consequently, one hopes that if gravitation and electromagnetism are unified 2 Selected papers on teleparallelism in a similar manner then perhaps there might be some sort of induction process whereby electromagnetism (under some unspecified circumstances) might induce a gravitational field and vice versa. The fact that none of the attempts at solving the Einstein-Maxwell unification problem contained such a mechanism was always regarded as a symptom that the unification was still just a glorified concatenation. Of course, one must objectively accept that there is nothing to say that a unification of two field theories exists, or at least in the form that one is expecting. Thus, one must treat the existence of unification as basically a conjecture that one is testing, and as such, a conjecture that might prove incorrect. Einstein made many attempts to solve the Einstein-Maxwell unification problem, but one of the common features that they had was the belief that first one had to increase the degrees of freedom in the unified field to something that equaled at least the sum of the other two degrees of freedom. Now, the spacetime metric tensor field g has components gµν that are symmetric 4 ×4 real matrices, and therefore represents ten degrees of freedom. By comparison, the electromagnetic field strength 2-form F has components Fµν that are anti-symmetric 4 ×4 matrices, and therefore represent six degrees of freedom. Thus, the unified field should probably include at least sixteen degrees of freedom. Since the vector space M(4; R) of 4 ×4 real matrices is itself sixteen-dimensional, one obvious first place to look for unification would be in the most general elements of M(4; R), or since the components of g are invertible, perhaps just the invertible elements, which then define GL (n). In fact, Einstein considered both possibilities,
Recommended publications
  • Kaluza-Klein Gravity, Concentrating on the General Rel- Ativity, Rather Than Particle Physics Side of the Subject

    Kaluza-Klein Gravity, Concentrating on the General Rel- Ativity, Rather Than Particle Physics Side of the Subject

    Kaluza-Klein Gravity J. M. Overduin Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, P.O. Box 3055, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, V8W 3P6 and P. S. Wesson Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1 and Gravity Probe-B, Hansen Physics Laboratories, Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A. 94305 Abstract We review higher-dimensional unified theories from the general relativity, rather than the particle physics side. Three distinct approaches to the subject are identi- fied and contrasted: compactified, projective and noncompactified. We discuss the cosmological and astrophysical implications of extra dimensions, and conclude that none of the three approaches can be ruled out on observational grounds at the present time. arXiv:gr-qc/9805018v1 7 May 1998 Preprint submitted to Elsevier Preprint 3 February 2008 1 Introduction Kaluza’s [1] achievement was to show that five-dimensional general relativity contains both Einstein’s four-dimensional theory of gravity and Maxwell’s the- ory of electromagnetism. He however imposed a somewhat artificial restriction (the cylinder condition) on the coordinates, essentially barring the fifth one a priori from making a direct appearance in the laws of physics. Klein’s [2] con- tribution was to make this restriction less artificial by suggesting a plausible physical basis for it in compactification of the fifth dimension. This idea was enthusiastically received by unified-field theorists, and when the time came to include the strong and weak forces by extending Kaluza’s mechanism to higher dimensions, it was assumed that these too would be compact. This line of thinking has led through eleven-dimensional supergravity theories in the 1980s to the current favorite contenders for a possible “theory of everything,” ten-dimensional superstrings.
  • Laplacians in Geometric Analysis

    Laplacians in Geometric Analysis

    LAPLACIANS IN GEOMETRIC ANALYSIS Syafiq Johar syafi[email protected] Contents 1 Trace Laplacian 1 1.1 Connections on Vector Bundles . .1 1.2 Local and Explicit Expressions . .2 1.3 Second Covariant Derivative . .3 1.4 Curvatures on Vector Bundles . .4 1.5 Trace Laplacian . .5 2 Harmonic Functions 6 2.1 Gradient and Divergence Operators . .7 2.2 Laplace-Beltrami Operator . .7 2.3 Harmonic Functions . .8 2.4 Harmonic Maps . .8 3 Hodge Laplacian 9 3.1 Exterior Derivatives . .9 3.2 Hodge Duals . 10 3.3 Hodge Laplacian . 12 4 Hodge Decomposition 13 4.1 De Rham Cohomology . 13 4.2 Hodge Decomposition Theorem . 14 5 Weitzenb¨ock and B¨ochner Formulas 15 5.1 Weitzenb¨ock Formula . 15 5.1.1 0-forms . 15 5.1.2 k-forms . 15 5.2 B¨ochner Formula . 17 1 Trace Laplacian In this section, we are going to present a notion of Laplacian that is regularly used in differential geometry, namely the trace Laplacian (also called the rough Laplacian or connection Laplacian). We recall the definition of connection on vector bundles which allows us to take the directional derivative of vector bundles. 1.1 Connections on Vector Bundles Definition 1.1 (Connection). Let M be a differentiable manifold and E a vector bundle over M. A connection or covariant derivative at a point p 2 M is a map D : Γ(E) ! Γ(T ∗M ⊗ E) 1 with the properties for any V; W 2 TpM; σ; τ 2 Γ(E) and f 2 C (M), we have that DV σ 2 Ep with the following properties: 1.
  • Misner/Wheeler Correct About Einstein's Unified Field Theory Being Successful Author

    Misner/Wheeler Correct About Einstein's Unified Field Theory Being Successful Author

    Title – Misner/Wheeler correct about Einstein's Unified Field Theory being successful Author – Rodney Bartlett Abstract – In 1957, Charles Misner and John Wheeler, in the “Annals of Physics”, claimed Albert Einstein’s latest equations demonstrated the unified field theory. It has been argued that the gravitational fields, if known everywhere but only for a limited time, do not contain enough information about their electromagnetism to allow the future to be determined, so Einstein's unified theory fails. Physicists also argue that a unified "theory of everything" must now include not just gravity and electromagnetism, but also the weak and strong nuclear forces plus dark matter and dark energy. This article claims Misner and Wheeler were correct, and addresses all modern objections. Content - It is my belief that Charles Misner and John Wheeler were correct in 1957 when they said Einstein was successful in proving his Unified Field Theory. Einstein successfully proved the Unified Field Theory, combining gravitational and electromagnetic equations. Despite what modern science mistakenly thinks, this means everything (electromagnetism, time, space, matter, dark matter, dark energy and the nuclear forces within atoms) has no separate existence from gravitation. In the 19th century, Scottish mathematician and physicist James Clerk Maxwell unified electricity and magnetism into electromagnetism. Albert Einstein's equations say that in a universe possessing only gravitation and electromagnetism, the gravitational fields carry enough information about electromagnetism to allow the equations of Maxwell to be restated in terms of these gravitational fields. This was discovered by the mathematical physicist George Yuri Rainich (1886 -1968). England’s Professor Penrose has argued that the gravitational fields, if known everywhere but only for a limited time, do not contain enough information about their electromagnetism to allow the future to be determined, so Einstein's unified theory fails.
  • Curvature Tensors in a 4D Riemann–Cartan Space: Irreducible Decompositions and Superenergy

    Curvature Tensors in a 4D Riemann–Cartan Space: Irreducible Decompositions and Superenergy

    Curvature tensors in a 4D Riemann–Cartan space: Irreducible decompositions and superenergy Jens Boos and Friedrich W. Hehl [email protected] [email protected]"oeln.de University of Alberta University of Cologne & University of Missouri (uesday, %ugust 29, 17:0. Geometric Foundations of /ravity in (artu Institute of 0hysics, University of (artu) Estonia Geometric Foundations of /ravity Geometric Foundations of /auge Theory Geometric Foundations of /auge Theory ↔ Gravity The ingredients o$ gauge theory: the e2ample o$ electrodynamics ,3,. The ingredients o$ gauge theory: the e2ample o$ electrodynamics 0henomenological Ma24ell: redundancy conserved e2ternal current 5 ,3,. The ingredients o$ gauge theory: the e2ample o$ electrodynamics 0henomenological Ma24ell: Complex spinor 6eld: redundancy invariance conserved e2ternal current 5 conserved #7,8 current ,3,. The ingredients o$ gauge theory: the e2ample o$ electrodynamics 0henomenological Ma24ell: Complex spinor 6eld: redundancy invariance conserved e2ternal current 5 conserved #7,8 current Complete, gauge-theoretical description: 9 local #7,) invariance ,3,. The ingredients o$ gauge theory: the e2ample o$ electrodynamics 0henomenological Ma24ell: iers Complex spinor 6eld: rce carr ry of fo mic theo rrent rosco rnal cu m pic en exte att desc gredundancyiv er; N ript oet ion o conserved e2ternal current 5 invariance her f curr conserved #7,8 current e n t s Complete, gauge-theoretical description: gauge theory = complete description of matter and 9 local #7,) invariance how it interacts via gauge bosons ,3,. Curvature tensors electrodynamics :ang–Mills theory /eneral Relativity 0oincaré gauge theory *3,. Curvature tensors electrodynamics :ang–Mills theory /eneral Relativity 0oincaré gauge theory *3,. Curvature tensors electrodynamics :ang–Mills theory /eneral Relativity 0oincar; gauge theory *3,.
  • Chasing the Light Einsteinʼs Most Famous Thought Experiment 1

    Chasing the Light Einsteinʼs Most Famous Thought Experiment 1

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by PhilSci Archive November 14, 17, 2010; May 7, 2011 Chasing the Light Einsteinʼs Most Famous Thought Experiment John D. Norton Department of History and Philosophy of Science Center for Philosophy of Science University of Pittsburgh http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton Prepared for Thought Experiments in Philosophy, Science and the Arts, eds., James Robert Brown, Mélanie Frappier and Letitia Meynell, Routledge. At the age of sixteen, Einstein imagined chasing after a beam of light. He later recalled that the thought experiment had played a memorable role in his development of special relativity. Famous as it is, it has proven difficult to understand just how the thought experiment delivers its results. It fails to generate problems for an ether-based electrodynamics. I propose that Einstein’s canonical statement of the thought experiment from his 1946 “Autobiographical Notes,” makes most sense not as an argument against ether-based electrodynamics, but as an argument against “emission” theories of light. 1. Introduction How could we be anything but charmed by the delightful story Einstein tells in his “Autobiographical Notes” of a striking thought he had at the age of sixteen? While recounting the efforts that led to the special theory of relativity, he recalled (Einstein, 1949, pp. 52-53/ pp. 49-50): 1 ...a paradox upon which I had already hit at the age of sixteen: If I pursue a beam of light with the velocity c (velocity of light in a vacuum), I should observe such a beam of light as an electromagnetic field at rest though spatially oscillating.
  • Exotic Spheres That Bound Parallelizable Manifolds

    Exotic Spheres That Bound Parallelizable Manifolds

    MATH 465, LECTURE 22: EXOTIC SPHERES THAT BOUND PARALLELIZABLE MANIFOLDS J. FRANCIS, NOTES BY H. TANAKA Our goal is to understand Θn, the group of exotic n-spheres. The group operation is connect sum, where clearly the connect sum of two topological spheres is again a topological sphere. We'll write this by M]M 0. There is a cobordism M]M 0 to M ` M 0, given by the surgery we perform on M and M 0 to obtain the connect sum. This is because 0 a 0 1 M]M = @1(M M × [0; 1] + φ ): We've shown that any exotic sphere is stably parallelizable, in that we can always direct sum a trivial line bundle to the tangent bundle to obtain a trivial vector bundle. fr If we consider the set of framed exotic n-spheres, Θn , we can consider the Pontrjagin construction fr fr Θn ! Ωn but this is going to factor through the set of framed exotic spheres modlo those which are boundaries fr of framed n+1-manifolds, bPn+1. In fact this map is a gorup homomorphism becasue disjoint union is cobordant to connect sum! Θfr / Ωfr n M 7 n MMM ppp MMM ppp MMM ppp MM& ppp fr fr Θn =bPn+1 0 Θn=bPn+1 / πnS /πn(O) 0 The map from Θn=bPn+1 to πnS /πn(O) is an injection, and this latter set is the ckernel of the fr 0 Jn homomorphism. We also have a map from Ωn to πnS /πnO by Pontrjagin-Thom. fr fr fr (Note also that the map Θn =bPn+1 ! Ωn is injective.) bPn+1 / Θn / Θn=bPn+1 ⊂ Coker(Jn) We know from stable homotopy theory the following homotopy groups 8 >Z n = 0 > > =2 n = 1 >Z > >Z=2 n = 2 > 0 <Z=24 n = 3 πnS = >0 n = 4 > >0 n = 5 > > >Z=2 n = 6 > :Z=240 n = 7 2 0 For example the Hopf map is the generator of π3S and it surjects onto π1S = Z=2.
  • Book of Abstracts Ii Contents

    Book of Abstracts Ii Contents

    Spring workshop on gravity and cosmology Monday, 25 May 2020 - Friday, 29 May 2020 Jagiellonian University Book of Abstracts ii Contents Stochastic gravitational waves from inflaton decays ..................... 1 Approximate Killing symmetries in non-perturbative quantum gravity .......... 1 Disformal transformations in modified teleparallelism .................... 1 Quantum fate of the BKL scenario ............................... 2 Ongoing Efforts to Constrain Lorentz Symmetry Violation in Gravity ........... 2 Proof of the quantum null energy condition for free fermionic field theories . 2 Cosmic Fibers and the parametrization of time in CDT quantum gravity . 3 Stable Cosmology in Generalised Massive Gravity ...................... 3 Constraining the inflationary field content .......................... 3 The (glorious) past, (exciting) present and (foreseeable) future of gravitational wave detec- tors. ............................................. 4 reception ............................................. 4 Testing Inflation with Primordial Messengers ........................ 4 Gravitational waves from inflation ............................... 4 CDT, a theory of quantum geometry. ............................. 4 Cosmic Fibers and the parametrization of time in CDT quantum gravity . 5 Loop-based observables in 4D CDT .............................. 5 Spectral Analysis of Causal Dynamical Triangulations via Finite Element Methods . 5 A consistent theory of D -> 4 Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity ................ 5 Quantum Ostrogradsky theorem
  • Alternative Gravitational Theories in Four Dimensions

    Alternative Gravitational Theories in Four Dimensions

    Alternative Gravitational Theories in Four Dimensionsa Friedrich W. Hehl Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Cologne, D-50923 K¨oln, Germany email: [email protected] We argue that from the point of view of gauge theory and of an appropriate interpretation of the interferometer experiments with matter waves in a gravitational field, the Einstein- Cartan theory is the best theory of gravity available. Alternative viable theories are general relativity and a certain teleparallelism model. Objections of Ohanian & Ruffini against the Einstein-Cartan theory are discussed. Subsequently we list the papers which were read at the ‘Alternative 4D Session’ and try to order them, at least partially, in the light of the structures discussed. 1 The best alternative theory? I would call general relativity theory8 GR the best available alternative gravitational 21,14 theory and the next best one its teleparallel equivalent GR||. Because of these two theories, at least, it is good to have this alternative session during the Marcel Grossmann Meeting. Let me try to explain why I grant to GR the distinction of being the best alternative theory. After finally having set up special relativity theory in 1905, Einstein subse- quently addressed the question of how to generalize Newton’s gravitational theory as to make it consistent with special relativity, that is, how to reformulate it in a Poincar´ecovariant way. Newton’s theory was a battle tested theory in the realm of our planetary system and under normal laboratory conditions. It has predictive power as it had been shown by the prediction of the existence of the planet Neptune in the last century.
  • Deformed Weitzenböck Connections, Teleparallel Gravity and Double

    Deformed Weitzenböck Connections, Teleparallel Gravity and Double

    Deformed Weitzenböck Connections and Double Field Theory Victor A. Penas1 1 G. Física CAB-CNEA and CONICET, Centro Atómico Bariloche, Av. Bustillo 9500, Bariloche, Argentina [email protected] ABSTRACT We revisit the generalized connection of Double Field Theory. We implement a procedure that allow us to re-write the Double Field Theory equations of motion in terms of geometric quantities (like generalized torsion and non-metricity tensors) based on other connections rather than the usual generalized Levi-Civita connection and the generalized Riemann curvature. We define a generalized contorsion tensor and obtain, as a particular case, the Teleparallel equivalent of Double Field Theory. To do this, we first need to revisit generic connections in standard geometry written in terms of first-order derivatives of the vielbein in order to obtain equivalent theories to Einstein Gravity (like for instance the Teleparallel gravity case). The results are then easily extrapolated to DFT. arXiv:1807.01144v2 [hep-th] 20 Mar 2019 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Connections in General Relativity 4 2.1 Equationsforcoefficients. ........ 6 2.2 Metric-Compatiblecase . ....... 7 2.3 Non-metricitycase ............................... ...... 9 2.4 Gauge redundancy and deformed Weitzenböck connections .............. 9 2.5 EquationsofMotion ............................... ..... 11 2.5.1 Weitzenböckcase............................... ... 11 2.5.2 Genericcase ................................... 12 3 Connections in Double Field Theory 15 3.1 Tensors Q and Q¯ ...................................... 17 3.2 Components from (1) ................................... 17 3.3 Components from T e−2d .................................. 18 3.4 Thefullconnection...............................∇ ...... 19 3.5 GeneralizedRiemanntensor. ........ 20 3.6 EquationsofMotion ............................... ..... 23 3.7 Determination of undetermined parts of the Connection . ............... 25 3.8 TeleparallelDoubleFieldTheory .
  • Teleparallelism Arxiv:1506.03654V1 [Physics.Pop-Ph] 11 Jun 2015

    Teleparallelism Arxiv:1506.03654V1 [Physics.Pop-Ph] 11 Jun 2015

    Teleparallelism A New Way to Think the Gravitational Interactiony At the time it celebrates one century of existence, general relativity | Einstein's theory for gravitation | is given a companion theory: the so-called teleparallel gravity, or teleparallelism for short. This new theory is fully equivalent to general relativity in what concerns physical results, but is deeply different from the con- ceptual point of view. Its characteristics make of teleparallel gravity an appealing theory, which provides an entirely new way to think the gravitational interaction. R. Aldrovandi and J. G. Pereira Instituto de F´ısica Te´orica Universidade Estadual Paulista S~aoPaulo, Brazil arXiv:1506.03654v1 [physics.pop-ph] 11 Jun 2015 y English translation of the Portuguese version published in Ci^enciaHoje 55 (326), 32 (2015). 1 Gravitation is universal One of the most intriguing properties of the gravitational interaction is its universality. This hallmark states that all particles of nature feel gravity the same, independently of their masses and of the matter they are constituted. If the initial conditions of a motion are the same, all particles will follow the same trajectory when submitted to a gravitational field. The origin of universality is related to the concept of mass. In principle, there should exist two different kinds of mass: the inertial mass mi and the gravitational mass mg. The inertial mass would describe the resistance a particle shows whenever one attempts to change its state of motion, whereas the gravitational mass would describe how a particle reacts to the presence of a gravitational field. Particles with different relations mg=mi, therefore, should feel gravity differently when submitted to a given gravitational field.
  • Miniaturized Single Particle Dissolution Testing

    Miniaturized Single Particle Dissolution Testing

    MINIATURIZED SINGLE PARTICLE DISSOLUTION TESTING Sami Svanbäck University of Helsinki Faculty of Pharmacy Division of Pharmaceutical Technology September 2013 Contents LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1 2 DISSOLUTION.............................................................................................................1 2.1 Three physical models of dissolution....................................................................3 2.2 Three single particle models of dissolution, and beyond.......................................6 2.3 The intrinsic dissolution rate..................................................................................9 3 SOLUBILITY .............................................................................................................10 4 FACTORS AFFECTING THE DISSOLUTION RATE AND SOLUBILITY IN AQUEOUS MEDIA – IN VITRO AND IN VIVO.........................................................13 4.1 Sink conditions.....................................................................................................14 4.2 The effect of pH...................................................................................................14 4.3 Particle size, shape and agitation.........................................................................16 4.4 Solid state properties............................................................................................18
  • Complex Analytic Geometry of Complex Parallelizable Manifolds Mémoires De La S

    Complex Analytic Geometry of Complex Parallelizable Manifolds Mémoires De La S

    MÉMOIRES DE LA S. M. F. JÖRG WINKELMANN Complex analytic geometry of complex parallelizable manifolds Mémoires de la S. M. F. 2e série, tome 72-73 (1998) <http://www.numdam.org/item?id=MSMF_1998_2_72-73__R1_0> © Mémoires de la S. M. F., 1998, tous droits réservés. L’accès aux archives de la revue « Mémoires de la S. M. F. » (http://smf. emath.fr/Publications/Memoires/Presentation.html) implique l’accord avec les conditions générales d’utilisation (http://www.numdam.org/conditions). Toute utilisation commerciale ou impression systématique est constitutive d’une infraction pénale. Toute copie ou impression de ce fichier doit contenir la présente mention de copyright. Article numérisé dans le cadre du programme Numérisation de documents anciens mathématiques http://www.numdam.org/ COMPLEX ANALYTIC GEOMETRY OF COMPLEX PARALLELIZABLE MANIFOLDS Jorg Winkelmann Abstract. — We investigate complex parallelizable manifolds, i.e., complex man- ifolds arising as quotients of complex Lie groups by discrete subgroups. Special em- phasis is put on quotients by discrete subgroups which are cocompact or at least of finite covolume. These quotient manifolds are studied from a complex-analytic point of view. Topics considered include submanifolds, vector bundles, cohomology, deformations, maps and functions. Furthermore arithmeticity results for compact complex nilmanifolds are deduced. An exposition of basic results on lattices in complex Lie groups is also included, in order to improve accessibility. Resume (Geometric analytique complexe et varietes complexes parallelisables) On etudie les varietes complexes parallelisables, c'est-a-dire les varietes quotients des groupes de Lie complexes par des sous-groupes discrets. On s'mteresse tout par- ticulierement aux quotients par des sous-groupes discrets cocompacts ou de covolume fini.