Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2312.16301

Field Theory via Higher Geometry I: Smooth Sets of Fields

Grigorios Giotopoulos·Hisham Sati
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Most modern theoretical considerations of the physical world suggest that nature is: (1) field-theoretic, (2) smooth, (3) local, (4) gauged, (5) containing fermions, and (6) non-perturbative. Tautologous as this may sound to experts, it is remarkable that the mathematical notion of geometry which reflects all of these aspects - namely, ``supergeometric homotopy theory'' - has received little attention. Elaborate algebraic machinery is known for perturbative field theories both at the classical and quantum level, but to tackle the deep open questions of the subject, these will need to be lifted to a global geometry of physics. Our aim in this series is to introduce inclined physicists to this theory, to fill mathematical gaps in the existing literature, and to rigorously develop the full power of supergeometric homotopy theory and apply it to the analysis of fermionic (not necessarily super-symmetric) field theories. Secondarily, this will also lead to a streamlined and rigorous perspective we hope would also be desirable to mathematicians. In this first part, we explain how classical bosonic Lagrangian field theory (variational Euler-Lagrange theory) finds a natural home in the ``topos of smooth sets'', thereby neatly setting the scene for the higher supergeometry discussed in later parts of the series. This introductory material will be largely known to a few experts but has never been comprehensively laid out before. A key technical point we make is to regard jet bundle geometry systematically in smooth sets instead of just its subcategories of diffeological spaces or even Fr{\'e}chet manifolds -- or worse simply as a formal object. Besides being more transparent and powerful, it is only on this backdrop that a reasonable supergeometric jet geometry exists, needed for satisfactory discussion of any field theory with fermions.

Explore related subjects

math-phhep-thmath.DGmath.MP

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Grigorios Giotopoulos, Hisham Sati. 2023-12-26. Field Theory via Higher Geometry I: Smooth Sets of Fields. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomphys.2025.105462

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↗