### For Children

Two interesting new papers on the arxiv:

Frenkel on Langlands' and a Unified Theory of Maths

math.QA/0611294

and

Children's Drawings From Seiberg-Witten Curves

Authors: Sujay K. Ashok, Freddy Cachazo, Eleonora Dell'Aquila

hep-th/0611082

I haven't had a chance to look at this one, but the Children's Drawings are those nice ribbon pictures that we've been talking about. From page 7: The Grothendieck correspondence is a bijection between classes of dessins and special classes of maps on punctured Riemann surfaces called Belyi maps. At first sight this might seem far removed from gauge theory physics...

You don't say!

Frenkel on Langlands' and a Unified Theory of Maths

math.QA/0611294

and

Children's Drawings From Seiberg-Witten Curves

Authors: Sujay K. Ashok, Freddy Cachazo, Eleonora Dell'Aquila

hep-th/0611082

I haven't had a chance to look at this one, but the Children's Drawings are those nice ribbon pictures that we've been talking about. From page 7: The Grothendieck correspondence is a bijection between classes of dessins and special classes of maps on punctured Riemann surfaces called Belyi maps. At first sight this might seem far removed from gauge theory physics...

You don't say!

## 4 Comments:

HI Kea: A science based upon ribbons is something a lot of children will find attractive. I am sure that our children will know more about the Universe than today's PhD's. Have you seen the video KIWI on Youtube?

11 14 06

Absolutely interesting stuff!

Kea since you invoke the beauties of category theory from time to time, check out this latest post and feel free to correct any conceptual errors I may have. I was just thinking about a set theoretic way to view the nucleotides in DNA and RNA and came up with these notions...

Have a nice day!

It might be that children will enjoy it, but after quickly glancing through the paper I am left with the memory of a slogan from the US hamburger ad wars of some years ago. "Where's the beef?"

I don't think that getting physics so it looks like it was drawn by children is a sign that it is likely to be correct. I think it was Feynman who said that if you truly understand something, you should be able to explain it to a high school student. But if not, at least you should be able to calculate something.

Along that line, I'm now in the "Force" chapter on my book deriving the standard model from first principles. And I've implemented the first set of corrections from a reader, thanks to Johnathan Scott.

Hi All...Carl,

There's not much beef there, but that's because they're not taking the Chiildren's Drawings seriously enough. The proper Grothendieck ribbons are very much about calculating things using Number Theory.

Post a Comment

<< Home