home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.physics
- Path: sparky!uunet!enterpoop.mit.edu!galois!riesz!jbaez
- From: jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez)
- Subject: Re: Magnetic monopoles?
- Message-ID: <1993Jan27.055742.24399@galois.mit.edu>
- Sender: news@galois.mit.edu
- Nntp-Posting-Host: riesz
- Organization: MIT Department of Mathematics, Cambridge, MA
- References: <1993Jan20.025101.9082@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> <25404@galaxy.ucr.edu> <MERRITT.93Jan25150507@macro.bu.edu>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 05:57:42 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <MERRITT.93Jan25150507@macro.bu.edu> merritt@macro.bu.edu (Sean Merritt) writes:
- >The precipitating factor for the new searches was more due to the fact
- >that theorist found that monopoles "appeared" in GUT's. I think it
- >was in 1974, (for example see G. t'Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B, 79, 276 (1974))
- >that the subject heated up again.
-
- You're right.
-
- >I still think that the fact that they would add symmetry to Maxwell's
- >equations is a valid reason for the searches.
-
- Hmm, I don't. First, while naive monopoles change dF = 0, *d*F = J to the
- nicer-looking dF = K, *d*F = J (where F is the field strength, J the
- electric current, and K is the magnetic current), this destroys the
- gauge symmetry of the equations! Why trade a hefty infinite-dimensional
- symmetry group for a measly U(1)? (Of course, one could argue that the
- infinite-dimensional group, being "gauge" symmetries, is nonphysical and
- worth less than the puniest group of "physical" symmetries. But gauge
- theories have considerable charms.) Second, and more importantly, in
- the context of GUTs one is not actually toying with Maxwell's equations
- by putting in magnetic currents as above: one is going to a wholly more
- complicated theory in which the Higgs field determines which gauge field
- counts as the "electromagnetic" one by means of spontaneous symmetry
- breaking, and monopoles are due to regions of space that can't make up
- their minds (so to speak).
-