# Guage theory is a coping mechanism

It really is that simple

1. 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

Ah yes, another "Gauge theory deboonked" thread. It's all so tiresome.
A gauge field is just a connection term in the covariant derivatives of your EQM, this guarantees your theory to be gauge invariant. The choice of gauge is like the choice of coordinate system, it's completely arbitrary.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

Nice fancy way of saying im just going to axe part of the equations for no other reason than the maths get too complicated

If your going to make a simplifying assumption, state it at the start of the theory, dont sneak it in half way through thsn obsure it in mountains of jargon

Im betting a nickel that finding that there is a unique solution toe A and psi when you allow permeability and permitivity to vary instead of holding them constant inside C

And behold Hiveleys EED allows epsilon and rho to evolve in time, id also take spatial laplacians

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

I have no idea what you're talking about, gauge invariance is baked into QED from the start by mandating local U(1) symmetry. Alas, they probably don't teach these concepts in the pathetic engineering courses I'd presume u do.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

See they teach guage theory as gospel, same way they teach that the A field is just a mathematical conveinence, stay guaged, ill seek the root of the knowledge and follow yakir Aharonov

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

>ill seek the root of the knowledge
Good. The significance of the A-field becomes relevant in QED which is where all this 'gauge invariance' comes from, it's the underlying theory which will clear up your confusion.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

If you bothered to look into who hivelys resume youd know who his network is and this thread is for post docs and schizos only

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

>geometric algebra
based
https://arxiv.org/abs/1411.5002
only true LULZzos will see the real value of this
>the paper considers "magnetic charge" yet ungauging the potential fields is unthinkable
lol

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

the "gauge" fields are physically real albeitever

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

Explain the Aharonov–Bohm effect, potential unbeliever.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

A total fucking nothingburger, like everything that Marxist Bohm spews.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

>The price for the gauge invariant formulation is that we must give up locality – the AB-phase for the particle will arise from the change in the action for the B field in the region inaccessible to the particle.
In the following paper we discover that water is wet. This is the same cope as the classical Maxwell-Lodge effect (despite the paper saying that it is a purely quantum effect).

The lengths people will go to defend the unphysicality of gauge fields.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

All the Aharonov-Bohm effect demonstrates is the primacy of gauge. The specific value of the A-field is relative to gauge transformations, but in this case, the differences are not, hence the phase shift. A full realization of this would require a microscopic description via QED which itself is gauge-invariant.

2. 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

Maxwell equations and all that is bullshit. It is already proven in Electromagnetism by Grant and Philips 2nd ed. 1990 that magnetism is just a relativistic extra phenomen of coulomb force.

You can see this even from maxwell laws itself. Divergence of B field is zero. No magnetic charges. Also, the force is ~vw/C^2 times E
where w is the velocity of charges and v is the velocity of the test particle

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

When you're talking about classical EM, the A-field becomes irrelevant as everything can be described in terms of EM fields (which, as you have correctly observed, change under boosts, however the Lorentz force is invariant). Ofc, the primacy of the A-field has been demonstrated in the Aharonov-Bohm effect, but the choice of gauge is still arbitrary in a fully microscopic description.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

A field, B fields what ever fields. They still all raise from Coulomb field E. Also, this effect seems to be just mathematical bullshit by lying academia. Even if the effect was real, it would be just relativistic effect of Coulomb force.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

>They still all raise from Coulomb field E.
No they all arise from boosting the A-field, you're the one who just said you "follow yakir Aharanov".

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

No I am different fag.

The A field is just as bullcrap as B field. The force is just Coulomb. It just does tricks as there is finite speed of the force carrier (light, c).

If physicist just were better in 3d dynamics this would be no problem. But one knows people just passes course by nothing. Mony physicist cannot do dynamics or do more than 2 dimensions.

• 3 weeks ago
Barkun

BETTAH not

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

>The A field is just as bullcrap as B field. The force is just Coulomb. It just does tricks as there is finite speed of the force carrier (light, c)
Yes, and kinetic energy doesn't exist because you can always choose an a reference frame where the object is still.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

Energy is an integral. There is always a constant it offs to something. Only differences in energy are meaningful. Abdolute energy is as meaningful to say x^2 is the only integral of function g(x)=x. But how about h(x)=x^2+7?

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

Im the fag that follows Aharonov and OP. Only the potentials matter, fields are second class citizens, the speed of light is a terrible thing to add in EM since it obsurces permitivity and permeability- which are properties of the medium. The impedence of space is more fundemental than the 'speed' of light.

When i get the moment ill grad and dt these and prove or disprove the hypothesis that A is not arbitrary but its exact character should be the focus in any emag experiment

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

>and prove or disprove the hypothesis that A is not arbitrary
Nobody said it isn't, but the choice of gauge is.
See:

All the Aharonov-Bohm effect demonstrates is the primacy of gauge. The specific value of the A-field is relative to gauge transformations, but in this case, the differences are not, hence the phase shift. A full realization of this would require a microscopic description via QED which itself is gauge-invariant.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

Guage was introduced because its trivial to construct an any number of A fields to describe E and B, that is backwards

I will attempt to show, that by allowing permeability and permitivity to vary in space and time, thar unique As can be inferred

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

>and prove or disprove the hypothesis that A is not arbitrary
Nobody said it isn't, but the choice of gauge is.
See: [...]

Nvm it actually doesn't, I'm fucking retarded. The gauge is arbitrary bcus of the gradient theorem, so the line-integral around the 2 paths for any additional gauge term will be zero, and hence contribute nothing to the phase.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

>if I account for dynamical effects by distorting times and lengths then I can attribute them to kinematics
no

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous
• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

yeah lorentz transformation accurately accounts for dynamical effects of motion no objection there

3. 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

Dude, are you guys fucking retarded? Any additional gauge term to the A-field in the Aharonov-Bohm setup would still yield the same fucking phase shift.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

AB proves that the A-field actually exists because it makes things happen in regions where the B-field is zero. It's more than just an accounting tool for B-field calculations.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

>AB proves that the A-field actually exists because it makes things happen in regions where the B-field is zero. It's more than just an accounting tool for B-field calculations.
I agree, this doesn't contradict gauge invariance tho, we've already have a fundamental description via QED.

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

That's true. A landscape is still real even though you can set your height datum anywhere you want.

4. 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

>guage

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

gague*

• 3 weeks ago
Anonymous

on deez nuts