home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!agate!agate!matt
- From: matt@physics.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
- Newsgroups: sci.physics
- Subject: Re: What do we know about choice of groups?
- Date: 10 Sep 92 23:13:27
- Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
- Lines: 28
- Message-ID: <MATT.92Sep10231327@physics.berkeley.edu>
- References: <1992Sep11.021551.1744@nuscc.nus.sg>
- Reply-To: matt@physics.berkeley.edu
- NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.berkeley.edu
- In-reply-to: matmcinn@nuscc.nus.sg's message of 11 Sep 92 02:15:51 GMT
-
- In article <1992Sep11.021551.1744@nuscc.nus.sg> matmcinn@nuscc.nus.sg (Mcinnes B T (Dr)) writes:
-
- > Suppose that the standard theory is right, and that the gauge group of
- > the world is "SU3xSU2xU1" [actually S[ U2xU3 ] of course]. Then we will
- > have to understand why this particular group was chosen from infinitely
- > many others. The same problem arises, albeit less urgently, if GUTs are
- > correct: why SO[10] [actually Spin[10] of course] rather than SO[110]
- > ?
- > What ideas have been proposed to solve this problem?
-
- Well, one constraint that most theorists believe in is that a gauge
- theory has to be anomaly-free. I really don't feel like explaining
- what that means just now; for the moment, let's just say that it is a
- technical property which is necessary for the theory to be
- renormalizable. This excludes most possible gauge groups---still
- leaving an infinite number, but a much smaller infinity than without
- that constraint.
-
- We can hope that by imposing other physical principles, we might be
- left with fewer possibilites---ideally, only one. String theorists
- have some optimism along those lines.
-
-
- --
- Matthew Austern Just keep yelling until you attract a
- (510) 644-2618 crowd, then a constituency, a movement, a
- austern@lbl.bitnet faction, an army! If you don't have any
- matt@physics.berkeley.edu solutions, become a part of the problem!
-