arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1508.06382

Pre-String Theory

Paul H. Frampton
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In this note, I recollect a two-week period in September 1968 when I factorized the Veneziano model using string variables in Chicago. Professor Yoichiro Nambu went on to calculate the N-particle dual resonance model and then to factorize it on an exponential degeneracy of states. That was in 1968 and the following year 1969 he discovered the string action. I also include some other reminiscences of Nambu who passed away on July 5, 2105.

Explore related subjects

physics.hist-ph

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Paul H. Frampton. 2015-08-31. Pre-String Theory. https://doi.org/10.1142/s0217732316300123

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Niels Bohr in North America (1923) and his Meeting with Robert Frost

During the autumn of 1923, Niels Bohr stayed for about three months in Canada and the United States where he gave a series of lectures on atomic and quantum theory. This paper provides details about his many meetings and lectures. It deals in particular with his stay at Amherst College, where he had a long conversation with the celebrated poet Robert Frost. Based on new archival sources, the paper includes a more fine-grained and better documented version of the episode than the one offered by literary critics and scholars. It concludes, perhaps somewhat disappointingly, that the Bohr-Frost meeting was of no great importance to either the physicist or the poet.

physics.hist-ph↗
arXiv2026

Gauge Matters More Than Curvature

Recent orthodoxy, which we call Curvature Fundamentalism, posits that the field strength $F$ on spacetime exhausts the physically significant content of electromagnetism, at least on prosaic (contractible) spacetimes. We argue that it is gauge invariance that constrains physical significance. As a result, there are physically significant quantities that $F$ does not capture, even on contractible spacetimes. We show that this result is robust: in the presence of charged matter fields, there are interference experiments whose outcome cannot be predicted by $F$ or any other point-local gauge invariant quantities on the basis of initial Cauchy data. We prove this using the example of relative phase of a Klein-Gordon-Maxwell field, and use it to identify a context in which the widely-claimed equivalence between the Maxwell-Faraday formulation $EM_1$ and the gauge formulation $EM_2$ of electromagnetism is untenable, and that new strategies may be needed for the reductionist project.

physics.hist-ph↗
arXiv2026

Lorenz vs Lorentz. The controversy examined from the original texts

The attribution of the condition div A + (1/c^2) dPhi/dt = 0 has been under discussion since 1938 as a question of priority between Ludvig Lorenz and Hendrik Lorentz. This work argues that the problem is of a different nature, and that the discussion does not close because it has never been specified what is being attributed. Drawing on the three versions of the 1867 paper and on six further primary sources, it is documented that three separable acts have been designated under a single name: the obtaining of the relation between potentials, its imposition as a restriction on the admissible potentials, and its denomination as a gauge. It is further documented that in none of the three versions of the 1867 paper does the word potential appear, that the magnetic field does not figure in it as a quantity of the theory, and that the vocabulary in which that paper is described today enters the literature after it was written. It is concluded that the disjunction between the two denominations, posed without specifying which of the three acts is being attributed, is ill formed.

physics.hist-ph↗