Unification of spins and charges in Grassmann space and in space of differential forms

Polynomials in Grassmann space can be used to describe all the internal degrees of freedom of spinors, scalars and vectors, that is their spins and charges. It was shown that K\"ahler spinors, which are polynomials of differential forms, can be generalized to describe not only spins of spinors but also spins of vectors as well as spins and charges of scalars, vectors and spinors. If the space (ordinary and noncommutative) has 14 dimensions or more, the appropriate spontaneous break of symmetry leads gravity in $d$ dimensions to manifest in four dimensional subspace as ordinary gravity and all needed gauge fields as well as the Yukawa couplings. Both approaches, the K\"ahler's one (if generalized) and our, manifest four generations of massless fermions, which are left handed SU(2) doublets and right handed SU(2) singlets. In this talk a possible way of spontaneously broken symmetries is pointed out on the level of canonical momentum.Comment: 26 pages, no figure

Fermionization, Number of Families

We investigate bosonization/fermionization for free massless fermions being equivalent to free massless bosons with the purpose of checking and correcting the old rule by Aratyn and one of us (H.B.F.N.) for the number of boson species relative to the number of fermion species which is required to have bosonization possible. An important application of such a counting of degrees of freedom relation would be to invoke restrictions on the number of families that could be possible under the assumption, that all the fermions in nature are the result of fermionizing a system of boson species. Since a theory of fundamental fermions can be accused for not being properly local because of having anticommutativity at space like distances rather than commutation as is more physically reasonable to require, it is in fact called for to have all fermions arising from fermionization of bosons. To make a realistic scenario with the fermions all coming from fermionizing some bosons we should still have at least some not fermionized bosons and we are driven towards that being a gravitational field, that is not fermionized. Essentially we reach the spin-charge-families theory by one of us (N.S.M.B.) with the detail that the number of fermion components and therefore of families get determined from what possibilities for fermionization will finally turn out to exist. The spin-charge-family theory has long been plagued by predicting 4 families rather than the phenomenologically more favoured 3. Unfortunately we do not yet understand well enough the unphysical negative norm square components in the system of bosons that can fermionize in higher dimensions because we have no working high dimensional case of fermionization. But suspecting they involve gauge fields with complicated unphysical state systems the corrections from such states could putatively improve the family number prediction.Comment: 30 pages, H.B. Nielsen presented the talk at $20^{\rm{th}}$ Workshop "What Comes Beyond the Standard Models", Bled, 09-17 of July, 201

Why Nature has made a choice of one time and three space coordinates?

We propose a possible answer to one of the most exciting open questions in physics and cosmology, that is the question why we seem to experience four- dimensional space-time with three ordinary and one time dimensions. We have known for more than 70 years that (elementary) particles have spin degrees of freedom, we also know that besides spin they also have charge degrees of freedom, both degrees of freedom in addition to the position and momentum degrees of freedom. We may call these ''internal degrees of freedom '' the ''internal space'' and we can think of all the different particles, like quarks and leptons, as being different internal states of the same particle. The question then naturally arises: Is the choice of the Minkowski metric and the four-dimensional space-time influenced by the ''internal space''? Making assumptions (such as particles being in first approximation massless) about the equations of motion, we argue for restrictions on the number of space and time dimensions. (Actually the Standard model predicts and experiments confirm that elementary particles are massless until interactions switch on masses.) Accepting our explanation of the space-time signature and the number of dimensions would be a point supporting (further) the importance of the ''internal space''.Comment: 13 pages, LaTe

The Majorana particles and the Majorana sea

Can one make a Majorana field theory for fermions starting from the zero mass Weyl theory, then adding a mass term as an interaction? The answer to this question is: yes we can. We can proceed similarly to the case of the Dirac massive field theory. In both cases one can start from the zero mass Weyl theory and then add a mass term as an interacting term of massless particles with a constant (external) field. In both cases the interaction gives rise to a field theory for a free massive fermion field. We present the procedure for the creation of a mass term in the case of the Dirac and the Majorana field and we look for a massive field as a superposition of massless fields.Comment: 11 pages, no figure

Transonic Elastic Model for Wiggly Goto-Nambu String

The hitherto controversial proposition that a ``wiggly" Goto-Nambu cosmic string can be effectively represented by an elastic string model of exactly transonic type (with energy density $U$ inversely proportional to its tension $T$) is shown to have a firm mathematical basis.Comment: 8 pages, plain TeX, no figure