Dark magnetism

I have been been waiting with fear in my heart the moment when some-one boldly and independently represents the idea about dark matter as phases with large Planck constant at magnetic flux tubes as a basic structure of Universe - or something picking up suitable pieces of this vision. Tom Banks, the teacher of Lubos has independently represented two key ideas of TGD as his own (hypefinite factors and causal diamonds): it is amazing how miserable web skills a prominent theoretician can have;-). Susskind as veteran has understandably rather poor web skills and has proposed p-adic physics as his own discovery to the problems of multiverse.

In TGD framework dark energy corresponds to Kähler magnetic energy and primordial cosmology corresponds to magnetic flux tubes, which are exactly string like objects having 1-D M⁴ projection. Later the flux tube projection of thickens and magnetic fields get weaker although the fluxes are conserved. The model leads to a fractal model of Universe explaining the formation of galaxies and even the formation stars and planetary systems and of course - the generation of cosmic magnetic fields, which is a mystery in the standard approach. It also replaces inflationary scenario with a new one in which no exponential inflation takes place: negative pressure corresponds to magnetic tension and thus has completely natural physical interpretation. Inflaton field is replaced with magnetic field and the transformation of magnetic energy identified as dark energy to particles generates ordinary matter and dark matter. The path of inflationary theories has been full of tortures but now inflation is in especially grave difficulties because the experimental evidence for the absence of a spherical distribution of galactic dark matter is accumulating. This I told in previous posting.


In recent New Scientist the notion of dark magnetism appeared and the obvious question was whether the notion was finally "independently discovered". Unfortunately, I do not have access to New Scientist article . Maybe some-one has and could kindly send it to me. I found however an article of Jimenez and Maroto about the topic from web and a paper by Martinez et al summarizing the development of the concept. Bacry has proposed the notion around 1993. At that time I had understood the role of cosmic strings but had not discovered the hierarchy of Planck constant and the vision about dark matter. In Bacry's model the apparent number of particles in the magnetic field would be larger than the actual one so that in this sense one can speak about apparently existing dark matter. This is hopelessly tricky and has nothing do with the TGD based notion of dark magnetism.


Mark Williams kindly told how to get the dark magnetism article from New Scientist web page. I read the article discussing the work of Beltran and Maroto.

1. The authors propose a modification of Maxwellian electrodynamics by giving up gauge invariance realized in terms of Lorentz gauge condition, and interpreting the scalar component of the gauge potential as a dynamical degree of freedom and giving rise to an effective cosmological constant in energy momentum tensor. Inflation is assumed be responsible for the generation of the scalar modes. Giving up gauge invariance at the level of Maxwell equation - even in long length scales- looks very ad hoc and very bad to me.
   
   
2. The modified scalar modes are claimed to generate also magnetic fields and it is a well-known fact that cosmos is full of magnetic fields with un-known origin. This looks good.
   
   
3. I could have made a bet that the accelerating expansion would have been explained in terms magnetic tension giving rise to "negative pressure" and vacuum energy identified as magnetic energy but if I understood correctly this was not done. Of course, this is only one description among many provided by TGD. In shorter length scales one has critical cosmologies predicting negative pressure automatically from imbeddability. The counterparts of black-holes in GRT limit correspond to regions of space-time with Euclidian signature and correspond to non-vanishing cosmological constant which can give via averaging rise to the observed small value of cosmological constant.
   

It is interesting to compare this with TGD based view about the situation. In particular, the issues of gauge invariance is interesting.

1. In TGD gauge invariance is trivially true and also gauge fixing is trivial for classical gauge fields. One can assign to K\"ahler gauge potential U(1) gauge transformations but this degree of freedom is trivially eliminated because of the geometrization of the gauge fields.
   
   
2. The symplectic transformations of CP₂ induce to Kähler gauge potential effective U(1) gauge transformations. These transformations are not gauge symmetries nor even symmetries of the Kähler action (they are however isometries of "world of classical worlds") since also the induced metric describing classical gravitation changes and extremal property is not preserved.
   
   
3. There is is a huge number of vacuum extrema: any space-time surface with CP₂ a Lagrangian manifold - is vacuum extremal and symplectic transformations give new vacuum extremals. Small deformations of these represent non-vacuum states classically. Symplectic transformation means a concrete deformation of the space-time surface so that a gauge symmetry is not in question. The transformation is approximate symmetry of action associated with 4-D spin glass degeneracy broken only by classical gravity.
   
   
4. The simplest scenario in zero energy ontology is that all particles, including photon, have at least a small mass and the size scale of causal diamond containing the photon defines the mass scale of photon. In TGD framework this need not mean loss of gauge invariance since basic quanta, which are fermions at the throats of wormhole contacts, are exactly massless. Mass is associated with many-fermion states purely kinematically because the massless building bricks do not have parallel four-momenta.
   
   
5. Authors talk about scalar potential (voltage) and currents in cosmological scales. This is actually natural in the fractal Universe of TGD too. Magnetic flux tubes can carry longitudinal electric fields and one has kind of electric circuitry in all scales. The applications of this picture to biology are of special interest and I have discussed them
   in recent postings.
   
   
6. The physicality of third polarization means usually massivation. The simplest TGD based scenario predicts that also photons have very small mass.
   

Despite the apparent resemblances, there are deep differences. TGD actually predicts much more radical modification of gauge field concept as the proposed theory breaking explicitly gauge invariance, which looks to me rather ugly. Here I agree with Sean Carroll. Second problem is that authors try to keep in the wagon all the heavy load (such as inflation), which has accumulated during last four decades following the acceptance of GUT paradigm and all what followed from it. The modification of Maxwell's theory provided by TGD does not break gauge invariance.

1. At classical level both electroweak and color gauge fields are geometrized in terms of CP₂ spinor connection and Killing vector fields. The basic objection is that the implied huge reduction in degrees of freedom is unphysical. This objection is circumvented in many-sheeted space-time: superposition for classical fields is replaced with the superposition for their effects. Particles can condense on several space-time sheets simultaneously and the fields of separate space-time sheets effectively sum up.
   
   
2. Field quanta, or rather Feynman diagrams, are replaced with generalized Feynman diagrams consisting of regions of space-time with Euclidian signature of the induced metric. In ZEO also virtual lines consist of on mass shell massless wormhole throats giving extremely powerful kinematical constraints on loops and guarateeing finiteness.
   

To sum up, there is still long way to the discovery of the geometrization of classical fields in terms of sub-manifold gravity and from this to the discovery that quantum theory can be reduced to the (spinor) geometry of world of classical worlds! The basic question is how to communicate this idea to colleagues who read only respected journals? I try to stay patient!;-).