Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1109.2202

Spinor Structure of P-Oriented Space, Kustaanheimo-Stifel and Hopf Bundle - Connection between Formalisms

V. M. Red'kov
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In the work some relations between three techniques, Hopf's bundle, Kustaanheimo-Stiefel's bundle, 3-space with spinor structure have been examined. The spinor space is viewed as a real space that is minimally (twice as much) extended in comparison with an ordinary vector 3-space: at this instead of 2\pi-rotation now only 4\pi-rotation is taken to be the identity transformation in the geometrical space. With respect to a given P-orientation of an initial unextended manyfold, vector or pseudovector one, there may be constructed two different spatial spinors, $\xi$ and $\eta$, respectively. By definition, those spinors provide us with points of the extended space odels, each spinor is in the correspondence $2 \longrightarrow 1 with points of a vector space. For both models an explicit parametrization of the spinors \xi and \eta by spherical and parabolic coordinates is given, the parabolic system turns out to be the most convenient for simple defining spacial spinors. Fours of real-valued coordinates by Kustaanheimo-Stiefel, U_{a} and V_{a}, real and imaginary parts of complex spinors \xi and \eta respectively, obey two quadratic constraints. So that in both cases, there exists a Hopf's mapping from the part of 3-sphere S_{3} into the entire 2-sphere S_{2}. Relation between two spacial spinor is found: \eta = (\xi - i\sigma ^{2}\xi ^{*})/\sqrt{2}, in terms of Kustaanheimo-Stiefel variables U_{a} and V_{a} it is a linear transformation from SO(4.R), which does not enter its sub-group generated by SU(2)-rotation over spinors.

Explore related subjects

math-phmath.MP

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

V. M. Red'kov. 2011-09-10. Spinor Structure of P-Oriented Space, Kustaanheimo-Stifel and Hopf Bundle - Connection between Formalisms. https://arxiv.org/abs/1109.2202

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Why we should condition denoising diffusion generative models on windows of past observations

Data assimilation (DA) is, traditionally, a cycling process that relies on time-dependent priors to propagate information from past observations to future cycles. Using denoising diffusion generative modeling for DA is challenging because standard approaches use a fixed training data set, which in turn leads to a static prior that ignores information from past observations. Because past observations are ignored, DA systems with static priors lead to larger posterior errors than cycling DA systems. Incorporating time-dependent priors into generative models, however, requires expensive and frequent retraining. Motivated by linear systems theory - where the dependence of a prediction of a Kalman filter on past observations decays exponentially - we condition diffusion models on short windows of past observations. Specifically, we describe training procedures for two frameworks: a diffusion DA system predicting the current state given a set of past observations, and a diffusion ``direct observation prediction'' (DOP) system, predicting future observations given a set of past observations. Using a canonical linear system, we show that both systems can achieve the minimal posterior error characteristic of a fully-cycled DA/DOP system, without re-training, provided the time windows are long enough. The linear setup ensures analytical tractability, avoids confounding neural network training errors, and confirms that conditioning on windows of past observations is required for efficient and accurate diffusion-based DA or DOP.

math-ph↗
arXiv2026

The kinematic structures and the inertial geometry of a moving charge

We ask how much of the geometry a charged particle moves in is fixed by its motion, and how much a particle must bring. We ask of a symplectic structure only that it relate velocity to momentum as Hamilton's equations do, and we ask it of every energy at once. In particular, we show that the structures meeting that demand are the canonical one and its twists by a closed two-form of the base. A field provides the two-form, a particle the multiplier before it, which we identify constitutively with its charge. Thus, a single energy governs a family of structures, and each particle takes the one its charge fixes. We then ask what a particle must bring to be given a momentum, and we show that the degree of that map settles the degree at which a field enters Newton's Second Law. An antisymmetric bilinear form returns no Lorentz force, whilst a Randers metric returns one --- a length whose difference from a Riemannian one is linear in the velocity. Moreover, we find that metric already within the twisted structure, as its primitive over a level of the free energy, and its law of transport to be nonlinear, no affine connection being known to serve. Under an indefinite signature the length parts from the dynamics, and the extremals turn from shortest to longest. On the round sphere a monopole flux leaves no such metric, whilst the transport remains and prequantisation, given a unit of action, restricts the charge to a lattice. In this manner, we conclude that each charge-to-mass ratio receives a geometry of its own, so that by a functionalist criterion none of them is the spacetime of a charged particle.

math-ph↗