geometry

"Like Moses, André Weil caught sight of the Promised Land, but unlike Moses, he was unable to cross the Red Sea on dry land, nor did he have an adequate vessel. For his own work, he had already reconstructed algebraic geometry on a purely algebraic basis, in which the notion of a “field” is predominant. To create the required arithmetic geometry, it is necessary to replace the algebraic notion of a field by that of a commutative ring, and above all to invent an adaptation of homological algebra able to tame the problems of arithmetic geometry. André Weil himself was not ignorant of these techniques nor of these problems, and his contributions are numerous and important (adeles, the so-called Tamagawa number, class field theory, deformation of discrete subgroups of symmetries). But André Weil was suspicious of “big machinery” and never learned to feel familiar with sheaves, homological algebra or categories, contrarily to Grothendieck, who embraced them wholeheartedly."

"String topology has been used to study closed geodesics on Riemannian manifolds through Morse theory on the energy functional ..."

"If our geometry is to resemble differential geometry we must adjoin some uniqueness properties. Now in those geometries the geodesics, and more generally the externals in the calculus of variations, are given by differential equations of the second order, and under the hypotheses usually made in those fields, there is just one solution through a given line element. Thus a geodesics has a unique prolongation, though the shortest geodesic are joining two points even on simple surfaces such as the sphere, need not be unique."

"A geodesic that is not a null geodesic has the property that ∫ds, taken along a section of the track with the end points P and Q, is stationary if one makes a small variation of the track keeping the end points fixed."

"The idea of a parallel displacement along some given curve in a two-dimensional surface can be given an intuitive interpretation. Suppose the surface is developable. Then we can unroll it on to a plane and parallel-displace vectors in the plane. The surface is then rolled back and we have the required parallel-transported vector. If a given surface is not developable, we must first select a path for parallel transport, then erect a tangent plane at each point of the path. These tangent planes will envelope a developable surface. This new developable surface can then be unrolled and the operations of parallel transport and rerolling carried out. If the curve along which the parallel displacement is to be carried out happens to be a geodesic, it becomes a straight line when unrolled on to a plane. It is then clear that the angle between a geodesic and a vector remains unchanged in a parallel displacement."

"We begin by recalling that geodesics can be obtained as solutions of the Euler-Lagrange equation of a Lagrangian given by the kinetic energy. We define symplectic and contact manifolds and we set up the basic geometry of the tangent bundle; we introduce the connection map, horizontal and vertical subbundles, the Sasaki metric, the symplectic form and the contact form. We describe the main properties of these objects and we show that the geodesic flow is a Hamiltonian flow. Also, when we restrict the geodesic flow to the unit sphere bundle of the manifold, we obtain a contact flow. The contact form naturally induces a probability measure that is invariant under the geodesic flow and is called the Liouville measure."

"Hecke transformations are one of the most important ingredients in geometric Langlands. What they mean in terms of physics had bothered me for a long time and eventually had been the last major stumbling block in interpreting geometric Langlands in terms of physics and gauge theory. Finally, while on an airplane flying home from Seattle, it struck me that a Hecke transformation in the context of geometric Langlands is simply an algebraic geometer’s way to describe the effects of a “’t Hooft operator” of quantum gauge theory. I had never worked with ’t Hooft operators, but they were familiar to me, as they had been introduced in the late 1970s as a tool in understanding quantum gauge theory. The basics of how to work with ’t Hooft operators and what happens to them under electric-magnetic duality were well known, so once I could reinterpret Hecke transformations in terms of ’t Hooft operators, many things were clearer to me."

"Gaitsgory gives an informal introduction to the geometric Langlands program. This is a new and very active area of research which grew out of the theory of automorphic forms and is closely related to it. Roughly speaking, in this theory we everywhere replace functions—like automorphic forms—by sheaves on algebraic varieties; this allows us to use powerful methods of algebraic geometry in order to construcut "automorphic sheaves.""

"Langlands outlined the first version of the programme in 1967, when he was a young mathematician visiting the IAS. His starting point was the theory of algebraic equations (such as the quadratic, or second-degree, equations that children learn in school). In the 1800s, French mathematician Évariste Galois discovered that, in general, equations of higher degree can be solved only partially. ... Inspired by subsequent developments in Galois’s theory, Langlands’ approach allowed researchers to translate algebra problems into the ‘language’ of harmonic analysis, the branch of mathematics that breaks complex waveforms down into simpler, sinusoidal building blocks. In the 1980s, Vladimir Drinfel’d, a Ukrainian-born mathematician now at the University of Chicago in Illinois, and others proposed a similar connection between geometry and harmonic analysis. Although this idea seemed to be only loosely inspired by the Langlands programme, mathematicians subsequently found stronger evidence that the two fields are connected. (Drinfel’d received a Fields Medal in 1990.)"

"The use of noncommutative geometry (NCG) as a tool for constructing particle physics models originated in the 1990s ... The main idea can be heuristically regarded as similar to the idea of "extra dimensions" in String Theory, except for the fact that the nature and scope of these extra dimensions is quite different. In the NGC model one considers an "almost commutative geometry", which is a product (or locally a product in a more refined and more recent version ...) of a four-dimensional spacetime manifold and a space of inner degrees of freedom, which is a "finite" noncommutative space, whose ring of functions is a sum of matrix algebras. According to the choice of this finite geometry, one obtains different possible particle contents for the resulting physics model. The physical content is expressed through an action functional, the spectral action ..., which is defined for more general noncommutative spaces, in terms of the spectrum of a Dirac operator."

"The theory ... noncommutative geometry ... rests on two essential points:"

"De Sitter proposed three types of nonstatic universes: the oscillating universes and the expanding universes of the first or second kiind. The main characteristic of the expanding "family" of the first kiind is that the radius is continually increasing from a definite initial time when it had the value zero. The universe becomes infinitely large after an infinite time. In the second kind... the radius possesses at the initial time a definite minimum value... in the Einstein model... the cosmological constant is supposed to be equal to the reciprocal of R2, whereas de Sitter computed for his interpretation the constant to be equal to 3/R2. Whitrow correctly points out the significant fact that in special relativity the cosmological constant is omitted..."

"It is quite easy to include a weight for empty space in the equations of gravity. Einstein did so in 1917, introducing what came to be known as the cosmological constant into his equations. His motivation was to construct a static model of the universe. To achieve this, he had to introduce a negative mass density for empty space, which just canceled the average positive density due to matter. With zero total density, gravitational forces can be in static equilibrium. Hubble's subsequent discovery of the expansion of the universe, of course, made Einstein's static model universe obsolete. ...The fact is that to this day we do not understand in a deep way why the vacuum doesn't weigh, or (to say the same thing in another way) why the cosmological constant vanishes, or (to say it in yet another way) why Einstein's greatest blunder was a mistake."

"The cosmological constant['s]... most important consequence: the repulsive force, acting at cosmological distances, causes space to expand exponentially. There is nothing new about the universe expanding, but without a cosmological constant, the rate of expansion would gradually slow down. Indeed, it could even reverse itself and begin to contract, eventually imploding in a giant cosmic crunch. Instead, as a consequence of the cosmological constant, the universe appears to be doubling in size about every fifteen billion years, and all indications are that it will do so indefinitely."

"There is no direct observational evidence for the curvature [of space], the only directly observed data being the mean density and the expansion, which latter proves that the actual universe corresponds to the non-statical case. It is therefore clear that from the direct data of observation we can derive neither the sign nor that value of the curvature, and the question arises whether it is possible to represent the observed facts without introducing the curvature at all. Historically the term containing the 'cosmological constant λ' was introduced into the field equations in order to enable us to account theoretically for the existence of a finite mean density in a static universe. It now appears that in the dynamical case this end can be reached without the introduction of λ."

"The most far-reaching implication of general relativity... is that the universe is not static, as in the orthodox view, but is dynamic, either contracting or expanding. Einstein, as visionary as he was, balked at the idea... One reason... was that, if the universe is currently expanding, then... it must have started from a single point. All space and time would have to be bound up in that "point," an infinitely dense, infinitely small "singularity." ...this struck Einstein as absurd. He therefore tried to sidestep the logic of his equations, and modified them by adding... a "cosmological constant." The term represented a force, of unknown nature, that would counteract the gravitational attraction of the mass of the universe. That is, the two forces would cancel... it is the kind of rabbit-out-of-the-hat idea that most scientists would label ad-hoc. ...Ironically, Einstein's approach contained a foolishly simple mistake: His universe would not be stable... like a pencil balanced on its point."

"The models of Einstein and de Sitter are static solutions of Einstein's modified gravitational equations for a world-wide homogeneous system. They both involve a positive cosmological constant λ, determining the curvature of space. If this constant is zero, we obtain a third model in classical infinite Euclidean space. This model is empty, the space-time being that of Special Relativity. It has been shown that these are the only possible static world models based on Einstein's theory. In 1922, Friedmann... broke new ground by investigating non-static solutions to Einstein's field equations, in which the radius of curvature of space varies with time. This Possibility had already been envisaged, in a general sense, by Clifford in the eighties."

"Even today, our picture of a world woven together by a gravitational force, and electromagnetic force, a strong force, and a weak force may be incomplete. Astronomers are gathering evidence that an additional fundamental interaction, a repulsive effect opposite to gravity, may be at work over vast distances and possibly changing with time."

"After putting the finishing touches on general relativity in 1915, Einstein applied his new equations for gravity to a variety of problems. ... Despite the mounting successes of general relativity, for years after he first applied his theory to the most immense of all challenges—understanding the entire universe—Einstein absolutely refused to accept the answer that emerged from the mathematics. Before the work of Friedmann and Lemaître... Einstein, too, had realized that the equations of general relativity showed that the universe could not be static; the fabric of space could stretch or it could shrink, but it could not maintain a fixed size. This suggested that the universe might have had a definite beginning, when the fabric was maximally compressed, and might even have a definite end. Einstein stubbornly balked at this... because he and everyone else "knew" that the universe was eternal and, on the largest scales, fixed and unchanging. Thus, notwithstanding the beauty and successes of general relativity, Einstein reopened his notebook and sought a modification of the equations... It didn't take him long. In 1917 he achieved the goal by introducing a new term... the cosmological constant."

"In Einstein's scheme there was no end, no outside. Shoot an arrow or a light beam infinitely far in any direction and it would come back and hit you in the butt. ...But there was a problem with the curved-back universe. Such a configuration was unstable, it would fly apart or collapse. Einstein didn't know about galaxies. He thought, and was reassured as much by the best astronomers of the time, that the universe was a static cloud of stars. To explain why his curved universe didn't collapse like a struck tent, therefore, he fudged his equations with a term he called the cosmological constant, which produced a long-range repulsive force to counteract cosmic gravity. It made the equations ugly and he never really liked it. That was in 1917, twelve years before Hubble showed that the universe was full of galaxies rushing away from each other."

"Much later, when I was discussing cosmological problems with Einstein, he remarked that the introduction of the cosmological term was the biggest blunder he ever made in his life."

"In 1917 de Sitter showed that Einstein's field equations could be solved by a model that was completely empty apart from the cosmological constant—i.e. a model with no matter whatsoever, just dark energy. This was the first model of an expanding universe. although this was unclear at the time. The whole principle of general relativity was to write equations for physics that were valid for all observers, independently of the coordinates used. But this means that the same solution can be written in various different ways... Thus de Sitter viewed his solution as static, but with a tendency for the rate of ticking clocks to depend on position. This phenomenon was already familiar in the form of gravitational time dilation... so it is understandable that the de Sitter effect was viewed in the same way. It took a while before it was proved (by Weyl, in 1923) that the prediction was of a redshifting of spectral lines that increased linearly with distance (i.e. Hubble's law). ..."

"It's a term that Einstein recognized as allowed by his theory — he threw it in and then, in disgust, threw it out again ... It's back!"

"String theory seems to be incompatible with a world in which a cosmological constant has a positive sign, which is what the observations indicate."

"Our particular laws are not at all unique. ...they could change from place to place and from time to time. The Laws of Physics are much like the weather... controlled by invisible influences in space almost the same way as that temperature, humidity, air pressure, and wind velocity control how rain and snow and hail form. ...The Landscape... is the space of possibilities... all the possible environments permitted by the theory. ...[T]heoretical physicists ...have always believed that the laws of nature are the unique, inevitable consequence of some elegant mathematical principle. ...the empirical evidence points much more convincingly to the opposite conclusion. The universe has more in common with a Rube Goldberg machine than with a unique consequence of mathematical symmetry. ...Two key discoveries are driving the paradigm shift—the success of inflationary cosmology and the existence of a small cosmological constant."

"At about the time of Malcadena's discovery, physicists started to become convinced (by cosmologists) that we live in a world with a nonvanishing cosmological constant [footnote: 10-23 in Planck units...[t]he incredible smallness... had fooled almost all physicists into believing that it didn't exist.], smaller by far than any other physical constant... the main determinant of the future history of the universe... also known as ... a thorn in the side of physicists for almost a century. ...If \Lambda is positive, the cosomological term creates a repulsive force that increases with distance; if it is negative, the new force is attractive; if \Lambda is zero, there is no new force and we can ignore it."

"[Einstein's cosmological constant] is a name without any meaning. ...We have, in fact, not the slightest inkling of what it's real significance is. It is put in the equations in order to give the greatest possible degree of mathematical generality."

"The theoretical view of the actual universe, if it is in correspondence to our reasoning, is the following. The curvature of space is variable in time and place, according to the distribution of matter, but we may roughly approximate it by means of a spherical space. ...this view is logically consistent, and from the standpoint of the general theory of relativity lies nearest at hand [i.e. is most obvious]; whether, from the standpoint of present astronomical knowledge, it is tenable, will not be discussed here. In order to arrive at this consistent view, we admittedly had to introduce an extension of the field equations of gravitation, which is not justified by our actual knowledge of gravitation. It is to be emphasized, however, that a positive curvature of space is given by our results, even if the supplementary term [] is not introduced. The term is necessary only for the purpose of making possible a quasi-static distribution of matter, as required by the fact of the small velocity of the stars."

"The miracle of physics that I'm talking about here is something that was actually known since the time of Einstein's general relativity; that gravity is not always attractive. Gravity can act repulsively. Einstein introduced this in 1916... in the form of the cosmological constant, and the original motivation of modifying the equations of general relativity to allow this was because Einstein thought that the universe was static, and he realized that ordinary gravity would cause the universe to collapse if it was static. ...The fact that general relativity can support this gravitational repulsion, still being consistent with all the principles that general relativity incorporates, is the important thing which Einstein himself did discover.."

"... The way in which string theory addresses the cosmological constant problem can be summarized as follows: • Fundamentally, space is nine-dimensional. There are many distinct ways (perhaps 10500) of turning nine-dimensional space into three-dimensional space by compactifying six dimensions. ... • Distinct compactifications correspond to different three-dimensional metastable vacua with different amounts of vacuum energy. In a small fraction of vacua, the cosmological constant will be accidentally small. • All vacua are dynamically produced as large, widely separated regions in space-time. • Regions with Λ 1 contain at most a few bits of information and thus no complex structures of any kind. Therefore, observers find themselves in regions with Λ ≪ 1."

"When the Higgs field froze and symmetry broke, Tye and Guth knew, energy had to be released... Under normal circumstance this energy went into beefing up the masses of particles like the weak force bosons that had been massless before. If the universe supercooled, however, all this energy would remain unreleased... according to Einstein, it was the density of matter and energy in the universe that determined the dynamics of space-time. ...The issue of vacuum energy had been a tricky problem for physics ever since Einstein. According to quantum theory, even the ordinary "true" vacuum should be boiling with energy—infinite energy... due to the the so-called s that produced the transient dense dance of s. This energy... could exert a repulsive force on the cosmos just like the infamous cosmological constant... quantum theories had reinvented it in the form of vacuum fluctuations. The orderly measured pace of the expansion of the universe suggested strongly that the cosmological constant was zero, yet quantum theory suggested it was infinite. Not even Hawking claimed to understand the cosmological constant problem... a trapdoor deep at the heart of physics."

"It was early 1932, when Einstein and I both were at the California Institute of Technology in Pasedena, and we just decided to look for a simple relativistic model that agreed reasonably well with the known observational data, namely, the Hubble recession rate and the mean density of matter in the universe. So we took the space curvature to be zero and also the cosmological constant and the pressure term to be zero, and then it follows straightforwardly that the density is proportional to the square of the Hubble constant. It gives a value for the density that is high, but not impossibly high. That's about all there was to it. It was not an important paper, although Einstein apparently thought that it was. He was pleased to have a simple model with no cosmological constant. That's it."

"Most constants are adjusted with a deviation of one percent, which means that if the value differs by one percent everything collapses. Physicists can certainly claim that this is a fluke, but it must be acknowledged that this cosmological constant is adjusted to an accuracy of 1/10120. No one thinks that this is solely a fluke. It is the most extreme example of hyperfine regulation... (Leonard Susskind)"

"The introduction of the digit 0 or the group concept was general nonsense too, and mathematics was more or less stagnating for thousands of years because nobody was around to take such childish steps...-Alexander Grothendieck"

"Differential geometry originally sneaked into theoretical physics through Einstein's theory of general relativity."

"現代幾何学においても、特性類の重要性は減ずるどころかますます大きくなっている。しかも単なるコホモロジー類としてだけでではなく、それを表わす微分形式自 身の詳細な解析がなされるなど、より深い役割を果たすようになってきている。たとえば、de RhamコホモロジーとRiemann計量の関わりを記述する理論である調和積 分論を、ずっと大きな枠組みのなかで一般化するという、壮大な試みが進行中である。そしてこれらの新しい展開のなかで、微分形式は、たとえてみれば生物にとっ ての水や空気のような役割を果たしているといっても過言ではないだろう。"

"Group theory is the mathematical expression of symmetry, providing appropriate mathematical tools for the implementation of symmetry considerations in theoretical physics."

"Symplectic geometry originates with Hamilton's formulation of optical laws."

"Howard P. Robertson"

"Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky"

"Carl Friedrich Gauss"

"Mathematics"

"Edwin Abbott Abbott"

"Even the mathematicians of the late nineteenth century did not take non-Euclidean geometry seriously for physical applications, though they derived a great deal of pleasure from the new concepts and relating them to other domains of mathematics. The scientific world did not awaken to the reality on non-Euclidean geometry until the creation of the special theory of relativity in 1905."

"Euclid’s Elements"

"History of mathematics"

"Unlike those of science, the conclusions of mathematics had always regarded as deduced from basic truths. ...the very reason that mathematicians persisted for so many centuries in attempting to find simple equivalents for Euclid's parallel axiom, instead of entertaining contradictory possibilities, is that they could not conceive of geometry being anything else than the true geometry of physical space."

"Non-Euclidean geometry was the most weighty intellectual creation of the nineteenth century, or, at worst, might have to share honors with the theory of evolution."

"The creation of non-Euclidean geometry showed... that mathematics could no longer be regarded as a body of unquestionable truths. ...Mathematics retained its deductive method of establishing its conclusions, but it was soon appreciated that mathematics offers only certainty of proof on the basis of uncertain axioms."

"It is no wonder that no contradiction was found under the hypothesis of the acute angle, for... the geometry developed from a collection of axioms comprising a basic set plus the acute angle hypothesis is as consistent as the Euclidean geometry developed from the same basic set plus the hypothesis of the right angle; that is, the parallel postulate is independent of the remaining postulates and therefore cannot be deduced from them."