Theories are increasingly theoretical - sci.physics.strings

Message from discussion Theories are increasingly theoretical
Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.tufts.edu!news.fas.harvard.edu!feynman!sps
From: Kea <m.sheppe...@phys.canterbury.ac.nz>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.strings
Subject: Re: Theories are increasingly theoretical
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 04:50:22 -0500
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Lines: 21
Approved: SPS moderator LM <s...@feynman.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <Kea.1jqt45-100000@physicsforums.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.31.0412272001490.11307@feynman.harvard.edu> <Kea.1j0t8n-100000@physicsforums.com> <Pine.LNX.4.31.0501201319500.3505@feynman.harvard.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: feynman.harvard.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
X-Trace: us23.unix.fas.harvard.edu 1107251422 11780 140.247.123.226 (1 Feb 2005 09:50:22 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.fas.harvard.edu
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 09:50:22 +0000 (UTC)
X-X-Sender:  <s...@feynman.harvard.edu>

>>What is your physical interpretation of T-duality?
>It exchanges momentum with winding.

What? This is a derived result in the maths of strings. I do not
believe this is physics. It refers to naive internal degrees of
freedom. Even if one wants to believe the maths is physics, the
picture has to be more sophisticated than this.....see for instance

reference:
A MAD DAY’S WORK: FROM GROTHENDIECK TO CONNES AND
KONTSEVICH THE EVOLUTION OF CONCEPTS OF SPACE AND SYMMETRY, P.
Cartier, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 38, 4 (2001) 389-408
http://modular.fas.harvard.edu/sga/from_grothendieck.pdf

------------------------------------------------------------------------
This post submitted through the LaTeX-enabled physicsforums.com
To view this post with LaTeX images:
   http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=57939#post437495