I'm no big city physicist but whenever I see something like this I just wonder if it's not simply another expression of a fundamental group structure. There's also a whole branch of mathematics to express group structure as matrices (ie representation theory).
I'm sure there are physicists out there going "duh" and maybe the point here is simply a visual representation of that group structure, which is fine.
Here's the sad part for me. I'm really beginning to wonder if describing the fundamental group structure of physics is the best we can do. What I mean by that is we may never know what something really is. We'll just be able to describe the group structure. There's a group structure to describe electromagnetism and the nuclear forces, for example.
Take something like particle generations. What is a "generation"? Why are there precisely 3 of them? As best as I can tell, nobody knows and maybe nobody will ever know. We'll simply be able to describe their structure.
We'll never figure it out until somebody figures it out, and then we'll move onto the next thing we'll probably never figure out. Or, to put it another way, everything is an obscure mystery, until it isn't.
The "fundamental group structure" is known as "equivariant cohomology". (21st C. version of rep theory?) In other words, knowledge-building isn't always discontinuous as is sometimes assumed.
I'm no big city physicist but whenever I see something like this I just wonder if it's not simply another expression of a fundamental group structure. There's also a whole branch of mathematics to express group structure as matrices (ie representation theory).
I'm sure there are physicists out there going "duh" and maybe the point here is simply a visual representation of that group structure, which is fine.
Here's the sad part for me. I'm really beginning to wonder if describing the fundamental group structure of physics is the best we can do. What I mean by that is we may never know what something really is. We'll just be able to describe the group structure. There's a group structure to describe electromagnetism and the nuclear forces, for example.
Take something like particle generations. What is a "generation"? Why are there precisely 3 of them? As best as I can tell, nobody knows and maybe nobody will ever know. We'll simply be able to describe their structure.
And that makes me sad in a way.
We'll never figure it out until somebody figures it out, and then we'll move onto the next thing we'll probably never figure out. Or, to put it another way, everything is an obscure mystery, until it isn't.
The "fundamental group structure" is known as "equivariant cohomology". (21st C. version of rep theory?) In other words, knowledge-building isn't always discontinuous as is sometimes assumed.
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/263411/equivariant-cohomo...
(No accepted answer)
Btw, are you familiar with CrasyDiracSchwinger?