1 Symmetry 2013, 5, 1-x (manuscript): doi:10.

3390/sym50x000x
2 OPEN ACCESS

3 Symmetry
4 ISSN 2073-8994
5 www.mdpi.com/journal/symmetry
6 Review

7 Synthetic Physical Theory. Gauge Generalized Principle in

8 Quantum Geometry and Gravity
9 Germano Resconi 1,*, Ignazio Licata 2,*
1
10 Catholic University , via Trieste 17 Brescia, Italy
2
11 ISEM, Inst. For Scientific Methodology, PA, Italy

12 * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-mails: resconi@numerica.it;

13 Ignazio.licata@ejtp.info

14 Received: / Accepted: / Published:

15

16 Abstract: In this work we take into consideration a generalization of Gauge Theories

17 based on the analysis of the structural characteristics of Maxwell theory, which can be
18 considered as the prototype of such kind of theories (Maxwell-like). Such class of theories
19 is based on few principles related to different orders of commutators between covariant
20 derivatives. Their physical meaning is very simple, and lies in stating that the local
21 transformations of a suitable substratum (the space-time or a particular phase space) and
22 the imposed constraints define a “compensative mechanism” or the “interaction” we want
23 to characterize. After introducing the essential mathematics and the recent “modified
24 gravity” developments, we apply the theory to Quantum Physics. Quantum phenomena can
25 be described in a Fisher metric in a non-classical entropy manifold. We also show that
26 minimum Fisher information in the first approximation gives the quantum potential. Now
27 the quantum field obtained by the commutator of the covariant derivative in the first
28 approximation is equal to zero. At a deeper approximation we can detect the quantum
29 fluctuation that gives a quantum field different from zero. All the work is based on a purely
30 geometric description of the physical forces as in Einstein Philosophy of General
31 Relativity.

32 Keywords: Generalized Gauge Principles; Maxwell Scheme; Morphogenetic Systems;

33 triple jacobian commutator; Non conservative Gravity; Gravity with torsion; Quantum
34 Potential; Fisher-Bohm Gauge; Quantum Fluctuations; Geometrodynamics
35

36
 Symmetry 2013, 5 2

1 1. Introduction

2 Symmetry and its physic implications on conservation principles have a long history in Physics.
3 The same importance, if not higher, is showed by the concepts of symmetry breaking and local gauge
4 as the constructive principle to characterize interactions as a “compensation mechanism”. In particular,
5 all that made possible a unified geometrical vision of fundamental interactions [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 39].
6 It is in such context, at the crossroad of Theoretical Physics, Cybernetics, Category and Group Theory
7 and Logical System Theory that the constructive approach here introduced has been developed.
8 [8].The title of this review explicitly makes reference to the Synthetic Biology that is used to design
9 biological solution, and stresses the mathematical aspects which make this approach a “theory to build
10 geometric-based unified Theories”.
11 The conceptual core of the procedure can be expressed in a five point nutshell:
12 a) The description of a suitable substratum and its global and local properties on invariance;
13 b) The field potentials are compensative fields defined by a gauge covariant derivative. They
14 share the global invariance properties with the substratum;
15 c) The calculation of the commutators of the covariant derivatives in (b) provides the relations
16 between the field strength and the field potentials;
17 d) The Jacobi identity applied to commutators provides the dynamic equations satisfied by the
18 field strength and the field potentials;
19 e) The commutator between the covariant derivatives (b) and the commutator (c) (triple Jacobian
20 commutator) fixes the relations between field strength and field currents.
21 The possibility to define new “interactions” and, more in general – in the field of complex systems
22 – the emerging of new “forms” goes under the name of “Morphic Computing” [9, 10]. In this work, in
23 the §1 and §2 paragraphs we introduce the mathematical aspects; in §3 and §4 we recall the Maxwell
24 Scheme generalization and its applying to non-conservative gravity theory, and then in §5 and §6 we
25 show how such approach makes possible both a new definition of quantum entropy and non-locality as
26 Bohm-Fisher gauge [11] and a geometric description of quantum fluctuations.

27 1.1. Two Math Step in Morphogenetic System:Transformations, Jacobians and projection operators

28 The background of the calculus on morphogenetic systems is essentially an extension of the

29 classical tensor calculus. But its generalization can lead to quite complicated expressions so that it is
30 necessary to have recourse the diagrams of the category theory. We will not refer there to such
31 complicated and yet elegant formal developments, and we will use traditional tools. The program
32 follows the philosophy of Einstein and Weyl on the deep connections between physics and
33 geometry [12].
34 Given the transformation

 y1  y1 ( x1 , x2 ,......, xn )
 y  y ( x , x ,......, xn )
35  2 1 1... 2

 yn  yn ( x1 , x2 ,......, xn )
 Symmetry 2013, 5 3

1
2 Where y are the orthogonal Cartesian coordinates and x a set of general coordinates. For the
3 previous transformation we have the Jacobian
 y1 y2 yn 
 ... 
 x1 x1 x1 
 y1 y2 yn 
 ... 
4 J   x2 x2 x2   
 ... ... ... ... 
 
 y1 y2 yn 
...
 xn xn xn 

5 And
 y1 y2 yn 
 ... 
x x1 x1 
 dx1   1  dy1 
   y y2 yn   
 dx2   1 ...   dy2  T
6 dx   x x2 x2    dy
k  ...   2  ...  h
   ... ... ... ...   
 dxn   y y2
  dy 
yn   n 
 1 ...
 xn xn xn 

7 Now we have
 y1 y2 yn   y1 y1 y1 
 
xn 
... ...
 x1 x1 x1   x1 x2
 y y2 yn   y2 y2 y2 
 1 i
y
xn    yi
T ... ...
8     x2 x2 x2   x1 x2 a
   i xh x h, k
 ... ... ... ...   ... ... ... ...  k

 y1 y2 yn   yn yn yn 
... ...
 xn xn xn   x1 x2 xn 
9 And
 y1 y2 yn   y1 y1 y1 
 
xn 
... ...
 x1 x1 x1   x1 x2
 y y2 yn   y2 y2 y2 
T 1  1
xn  ) 1 
... ...
( )  (  x2 x2 x2   x1 x2
  
 ... ... ... ...   ... ... ... ... 

 y1 y2 yn   yn yn yn 
... ...
 xn xn xn   x1 x2 xn 
10
 y1
1 1
y1 y1   y1 y2 yn 

xn   x1 
... ...
 x1 x2 x1 x1 
 y y2 y2   y1 y2 yn 
 2 ... ...
 x1 x2 xn   x2 x2 x2 
   
 ... ... ... ...   ... ... ... ... 

 yn yn yn  
 y1 y2 yn 
... ...
 x1 x2 xn   xn xn xn 
 Symmetry 2013, 5 4

1 Now for the property of the Jacobian for which

 y1
1
y1 y1   x1 x1 x1 

xn  
yn 
... ...
 x1 x2  y1 y2
 y y2 y2   x x2 x2 
2  2
1  x x2
...
xn 
...
  1   y1 y2 yn 
   
 ... ... ... ...   ... ... ... ... 

 yn yn yn  
 xn xn xn 
... ...
 x1 x2 xn   y1 y2 yn 
2
1 T
 y1 y2 yn   x1 x1 x1 
  
yn 
... ...
 x1 x1 x1   y1 y2
 y y2 yn   x x2 x2 
1 2
T 1  x ... 1 T  ...
( )  2 x2 x2   ( )   y1 y2 yn 
   
 ... ... ... ...   ... ... ... ... 

 y1 y2 yn  
 xn xn xn 
... ...
 xn xn xn   y1 y2 yn 
3 So we have
T 1 1 T 1
( )   [() ] 
 x1 y2 yn   x1 x1 x1 
 ... 
yn   y1 y1 
...
 y1 y2 y1
 y y2 yn   x1 x2 x2 
4  1 h x h
y2    x
... ... h, k
(  y1 y2 yn   y2 y2 a
j

 ... ... ...

...   ... ... ...

...  j y j y
 
 y1 y2 yn   xn xn xn 
... ...
 y1 y2 yn   yn yn yn 
5 Now we remark that
 1 0 ... 0 
 
T 1 T 0 1 ... 0 
6 (   ) (   )   a h, k a  I
h, k ... ... ... ...
h, k  
 0 0 ... 1 
7 With the previous computation we have that
T 1 T 1 T 1 T 1
( )  dy   a h, k dx   ( )  dy   dy 
k h k k
h
 x1 x1 x1 

yn 
...
 y1 y2
 dy1 
8  x x2 x2   
 2 ... dy2  x
 y1 y2 yn     k dy  dx
k
 
  j y j
... j
 ... ... ... ...   
  dy 
 xn xn xn   n 
...
 y1 y2 yn 
 Symmetry 2013, 5 5

1 Given the Cartesian component Yk of the vector V we built the covariant component with the
2 expression
 y1 y2 yn 
 ... 
 x1 x1 x1 
 Y1 
 y1 y2 yn   
  Y2 y j
x2      Y  
... T
3 V   x2 x2 Yj
 ... 
k
 ... ... ... ...    j xk
  Y 
 y1 y2 yn   n 
...
 xn xn xn 

4 Now we show the covariant property of the components Vk when we move from the general
5 coordinate x in this way

 y1  y1 ( x1 , x2 ,......, xn )
 y  y ( x , x ,......, xn )
6  2 2 1... 2

 yn  yn ( x1 , x2 ,......, xn )
7 To a new general coordinates

 z1  z1( y1, y2 ,......, yn )


 z2  z2 ( y1, y2 ,......, yn )
8 
 ...
 z  z ( y1, y2 ,......, yn )
n n
9 So we have the transformation
T y j
V ( x )  ( x) Y   Yj
k j xk
10
T y j
V ( z )  ( z ) Y   Yj
k j zk

11 The projection operators are

T 1 T T 1 k
Q ( x )Y  ( x )( ( x ) ( x )) ( x ) Y  ( x )( ( x ) ( x )) V  ( x )V  Y
j k j
12
T 1 T T 1 k
Q ( z )Y  ( z )( ( z ) ( z ))  ( z ) Y   ( z )( ( z )  ( z )) V   ( z )V  Y
j k j

13 Where
k T 1 T 1 T 1 T 1 x k
V ( x )  (  ( x ) ( x )) ( x ) Y  ( x ) ( ( x ) ) ( x ) Y  ( x ) Y   Y j
j j j y j
14
k T 1 T 1 T 1 T 1 z k
V ( z )  (  ( z )  ( z ))  ( z ) Y   ( z ) (  ( z ) ) ( z ) Y   ( z ) Y   Y j
j j j y j
 Symmetry 2013, 5 6

1 With the operator (x) from the contravariant components Yj or Vk we can rebuild the original
2 Cartesian components in this way
k
3 Y  ( x )V Y
j j

4 In the differential form the projection operator Q(z) can be written in this way

T y j xh
5 V ( z )  ( z ) Y   Y j 
k j h xh zk

6 When the reference is changed in this way

T y j xh T
7 ( z )    U ( x )

h h zk
x

8 So we have the projection operator

T T T 1 T
Q ( z )Y  (( x )U )(U ( x ) ( x )U ) U ( x ) Y 
j
T T T 1 T T 1
(( x )U )(U ( x ) ( x )U ) UV  (( x )U )( ( x )U ) Y 
k j
T T 1 1 T T 1 k
(( x )U )(U ) ( x ) Y  (( x )U )(U ) V 
j
k
T x h z
9 (( x )U )  Y j   Yj
j h y j xh
where
V ( z )  UV ( x )
k k
k T 1
V ( z )  (U ) V ( x )
k
10 For the previous computation we have
k T T 1 k T
D  (V ( z )) V ( z )  ((U ) V ( x )) UV ( x )
k k
11
k T 1 k T
V ( x ) U UV ( x )  V ( x ) V ( x )  D
k k

12 With covariant and controvariant components of the Cartesian components Yj we can create
13 invariant as D for any change of the reference U.
14 Because

k xi xk i,k

15 V ( x)   Vk  G V
j , k y j y j k

16 We have that the same invariant D can be written in this way

 Symmetry 2013, 5 7

k T h, k T T h, k T
D  V ( x ) V ( x )  (G V ( x )) V ( x )  V ( x )) (G ) V ( x)
k h k h k
but
h, k T h, k
(G ) G

1 and
T h, k T T h, k T h, k
V ( x )) (G ) V ( x )  V ( x )) G V ( x )  V ( z )) G V (z)  D
h k h k h k
and
h T k h T k
V ( x )) G )V ( x )  V ( z )) G )V ( z )  D
h, k h, k

2 1.2. Two Math Steps in Morphogenetic Systems: Covariantes and Contravariant derivatives

3 Given the derivatives

Y j
4 Y 
/ k x
k
5 The covariant components are

T Y j Y j y j
6 ( x )  D Y
xk j xk xh
k j

7 Now we have

Vk  T ( x )T T Y j ( x )T

 ( x ) Y  Y  ( x )  Y D Y 
xk xk j xk j xk xk j k j
8
 y j Y j y j 2 y j ( x )T
Y   Y j D Y Y
xk j j xh j xk xh j xhxk k xk j

9 The relation between covariant components of the derivative of Y and the derivate of the covariant
10 components is

Vk ( x )T
D Y   Y
k j xk xk j
11
Y j y j  y j 2 y j
  Y j  Y j
x
j k h x x k j xh j xh xk

12 And the contravariant components are

Y j Y j xk
k 1
13 D Y ( x )  ( x ) 
j x
h j xh y j

14 Now because
 Symmetry 2013, 5 8

V k  1 ( x )1 1 Y j ( x ) 1 h

 ( x ) Y  Y  ( x )  Y D Y 
xh xh j xh j xh xh j j
1
x Y j x 2 1

Y j k   k   Y  xk  D Y  ( x ) Y
xh j y j j x y xk
j xh y j
k j
j h j

2 The relation between controvariant components of the derivative of Y and the derivative of the
3 controvariant components is

h V k ( x )1
D Y   Y
j xh xh j
4
Y j x  xk  2 xk
 k   j
Y   j
Y
j xh y j xh j y j j xh y j

5 Remark
6
7 Given the Cartesian coordinates Yj we compute the covariant components, so we have
T
8 V  Y
k j
9 After we make the derivatives of the covariant components
Vk  T
10  ( Y )
xh xh j

11 Now we can make the derivative on the Cartesian components in this way
Y j
12 Y 
j/h xh

13 Then we compute the covariant components of the derivatives so we obtain

T 1 Y j Y j y j
14  Y   D Y
j/h xh x
j h k x h j

15 Now we have
T
T Y j Vk T Y j  Y j T   T
     (   )Y 
xh xh xh xh xh xh j
16
T  2 y j
[ , ]Y 
xh j xhxk

17 The Lie product of the reference operator T and the derivative is the second derivative of the
18 Cartesian components yj with respect to the general coordinates xk .
19 For the contravariant components we have
 Symmetry 2013, 5 9

1
1 Y j V 1 Y j  Y j
k
1   1
     (   )Y 
xh xh xh xh xh xh j
1
1   2 xk
[ , ]Y 
xh j xh y j

2 The L defined in this way

T
L  J GJ   ( E  GJ )
3 where

k T 1 T Y j T 1 T Y j
J  D Y  ( )   ( ) 
j xk xk

4 for
T T
5 L = J G J + λ (E - G J)

6 The minimum condition is:

dL
7 = 2G J - λG = 0
dJ
J
8 The solution is λ = when we substitute it in L we have:
2
T 1 T 1 T 1 T
9 L = J G J + J (E - GJ) = J G J + J E
2 2 2
10 Now for the definition of E and J we have
1 T 1 T 1 T 1 T T T h
11 L= J G J + J E = J G J + J G J=J G J = J E V V
2 2 2 2 h
T
12 So for invariant L = J G J , one assumes the minimum value under the constraint
T Y j
13 E=GJ = D Y .
xk k j

14 The definition of the covariant derivatives minimizes the Lagrangian L.

15 We know that there exist n order tensors which covariant components are
j
yi y y k
 Y  (T  T  .....  T )Y
m,n,...., p j i, j ,.....,k x x
16 V .....
m n x p

17 where  is the tensor product. For example given i = 1,2 and j=1,2 we have
 Symmetry 2013, 5 10

 V1,1   1 Y 
   y y 2   y1 y 2   1,1 
  
 V   x  x x   Y1,2 
1 1
x
 1,2    1  
1 
 
 V   y1 y 2   y1 y  Y2,1 
2 
 2,1      
V   x2 x2   x2 x  Y 
 2,2  2   2,2 
  y1 y 2   y1 y 2  
    
 y1  x1 x1  y 2  x1 x  
1
      Y 
 x1  y1 y 2  x1  y1 y 2    1,1 
  x 
x   x x    Y1,2 
  2 2  2 2  
  
  y1 y 2   y1 y 2    Y2,1 
 1  x 
  
x   Y 
 y  1
x
1  y  x1
2
1   2,2 
 x  1  
2  x  y1

 2  y y 2 y 2  
  x x    x x  
 
 2 2  2 2 
 y1 y1 y1 y 2 y 2 y1 y 2 y 2 
 
 x1 x1 x1 x1 x x
1 1
x x 
1 1
 Y 
 y1 y1 y1 y 2 y 2 y1 y 2 y 2   1,1 
 x x x x   Y1,2 
 1 2 x1 x2 x x
1 2 1 2  
 1 1  Y 
 y y y1 y 2 y 2 y1 2 2
y y  2,1
 
 x x x x x x x x  Y 
1  2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1   2,2 
 y1 y1 y1 y 2 y 2 y1 y 2 y 2 

 x x x x x x x x 
 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2 The covariant components of a tensor of the second order are
j
yi y
3 Vm,n   Y  (T  T )Y  T Y 
j i, j xm xn
4 The controvariant components are
 Symmetry 2013, 5 11

xm xn
V m,n   Y 
j i, j yi y j

1 [(T  T )(  )]1(T  T )Y 

[(T  T )(  )]1(T  T )Y  ( 1   1)Y
2 We can have also mixed situation in this way

yi xn
3
n
Vm   Y  (T  1)Y
j i, j xm y j
4 Now we have the necessary mathematics to develop the outlined program according to the five points
5 of the introduction.

6 2. The Maxwell Scheme

7 As we know, Maxwell Theory has been the first model of gauge theory, even if the awareness of its
8 geometric nature came quite later of its original formulation. In particular, Maxwell-like theories have
9 an easily physic interpretation as “system theory”, i.e. theories where the dynamic equations are one
10 with the characterization of its substratum [13]. It is also the case of General Relativity at a more
11 speculative level than the dreams of M-Theory where each interaction is a particular emergence of the
12 world of brane [14].
13 We know that the Maxwell equations in the tensor form are
F /   F /   F /   0

 F /   4J 
14 (1)
15 where
A A F
F  (  ) and F /    in the flat space-time
x  x  x 
16
17 and A is the electromagnetic potential. Using the covariant derivative notation defined by
D    ieA
18 (2)
19 we have the classic relation
[D , D ]  D D  D D  ieF
20 (3)
21 For the (3) we have
F  F
22
23 because
 Symmetry 2013, 5 12

F /   F01/10  F02 / 20  F03/ 30 

 F10/01  F12 / 21  F13/ 31 
 F20/02  F21/12  F23/ 32 
 F30/03  F31/13  F32 / 23  4( j0 / 0  j1/1  j2 / 2  j3/ 3 )  0
1
2 The divergence of the current is equal to zero. We know that for the tensor form of the Maxwell
3 equations, the Maxwell equations are invariant for every affine transformation. In particular the
4 Maxwell equations are invariant for the Lorenz transformations. We remember we can obtain a general
5 electromagnetic field from pure electrostatic field with a suitable Lorenz transformation. For more
6 general transformations, the Maxwell equations are not invariant. The aim of this paper is to rewrite
7 the Maxwell equations in a way to be invariant for any transformations of the space time.
8 To write the extension of the Maxwell equations, we must define the general commutators
[D , D ]  D D  D D  ieF
9 (6)
10 where F is the general form for any field generated by the transformation .
11 For the commutative property
[D ,[D , D ]]  [D ,[D , D ]]  [D ,[D , D ]]  0
12 (7)
13 the (7) can written in this way
[D , F ]  [D , F ]  [D , F ]  0
14 (8)
15 For the (11) we have the equation
[D ,[D , D ]]  [D , F ]  J  
16
17 In conclusion the Maxwell scheme for a general gauge transformation
[D , F ]  [D , F ]  [D , F ]  0

 [D  , F ]  J  
18 (13)
19 and J are the currents of the particles that generate the Gauge Field F. For the (13) the currents
20 has this conservation rule
J /   J /   J  /  0
21 (15)

22 3. Maxwell-like Gauge Approach in Gravity

23 The development of a Maxwellian program for Gravity has been done by Mignani-Pessa-Resconi
24 [15], and the recent developments about cosmological constant has drawn the attention of an
25 increasing number of researchers to this theory [see for ex. 16].In fact, the coupling of gravity to the
26 substratum – a minimal model of quantum physic vacuum - implies the non conservation of the
27 energy-momentum tensor, and allows a simple way to introduce the cosmological constant.
28 Given the affine transformation 

29 x  x   x  (x )
 Symmetry 2013, 5 13


x 
1 Given the field  (Scalar Field) and x  we have

  x  
    (x )
x x   x x x
2
3 For the previous gauge transformation  we have
 
Dk    k
x  x 
4
5 and
    
Dk 
  k   [,  k ]1    k   kj j
6 x x x x x
 kj
7 where are the Cristoffel symbols and
 
Fk,h  [Dk , Dh ]  R ihk
j

x i x j
8
j
9 where R ihk is the Riemann tensor . In this case the Maxwell scheme gives us the set of equations

[D  , R  ]  [D , R  ]  [D , R  ]  0


 [D  , R  ]  J  
10
11 that can be written in this way
 R abjk  R abhk  R abkj  0

 Dk R bjk  D jR bhk  Dh R bkj  0
a a a

D R a D   R a D D   J D 
12  a ijk  hjk a  hjk 

13 Where the first equation is the well known Riemann tensor symmetry, the second is the Bianchi
14 identity and the last is the equation for the Gravity Field. The current can be given by the form
1
Jijk  Di Tjk  D jTik  (g jk Di T  g ik D jT) for which Dk J ijk  0
15 2
16 and Tjk is the energy-momentum tensor. When D   0 the equation for the Gravity Field is
17 Dh R ih  Jij for the expression of the current we have

1
R ij  (Tij  gijT)
18 2
D 
19 that is the Einstein field equations. When is different from zero the field equation are
a
Dh R ijk Da   J hjk Da   R ahjk Da Da 
20
21 The new source of gravitational field
Da2 
22 hij = R a

Da 
hjk

23 is a negative source comparable with the cosmological constant.

 Symmetry 2013, 5 14

1 In the general coordinate the cosmological constant is proportional to the second derivative of the
2 quantum scalar field  and is proportional to the curvature of the space-time.
3 For the Klein-Gordon equation we have
   m2 and in the general coordiante  DD  m2
4
5 So the cosmological constant can be written in this way
m2
6 hij =  R a
hjk
  
(   )
x a x 
7 For week gravitational field and nearly static we have
G 1 g 44 G
R 44   2 and ,44 ( ) with g 44 1
8 c 2 x  c2
9 and
m 2 G m 2G SQSG
  2
G  c2 c
c2 
x  x 
10
11 Where G is the gravitational field, SQ = m2  is the source of the quantum waves and SG are the
12 sources of the scalar gravitational field.
13 Because
14 SG  GN  = 6.673 10-11 m3 kg-1s-2 3 10-22 kg m-3= 1.8 10 -32 , 1/c2  10-17 s2 m-2
15 Where  is the density of local halo , we have   10-49 [m2  ] that is comparable to the
16 experimental value of   2.853 10-51 h0 –2 m2, where h0  0.71
17 The cosmological constant is a physical effect of interaction between the gravitational field and the
18 scalar quantum field. In [15] it is shown that the derivative coupling with the vacuum introduces an
19 extra-mass term or black matter in the standard Schwarzschild metric. The application of such result to
20 perihelion shift and light deflection yields results comparable to those obtained in General relativity. It
21 is also shown that the non conservative theory of gravity implies a cosmological model with a locally
22 varying, non zero black matter and energy or cosmological “constant”.

23 4.1. Dynamic equations with torque in non- conservative Gravity by Generalized Gauge Approach

24 To introduce the new wave equation for gravity we remember that

25
26 Where the Riemann tensor is

27
28 With the double commutator we have the dynamic equation
 Symmetry 2013, 5 15

1
2 Where R is the Riemann Tensor ,  is the covariant derivative and K is the vacuum field. Now
k
3 we connect the commutator with the gravity current in this way

4
5 For the conservation of the current we have after contractions the equation

6
7 When  K  0 we have the Einstein equations.
k
8 Most applications of differential geometry, including general relativity, assume that the connection
9 is “torsion free”: that vectors do not rotate during parallel transport. Because some extensions of GR
10 (such as string theory) do include torsion, it is useful to see how torsion appears in standard
11 geometrical definitions and formulas in modern language. The torsion corresponds intuitively to the
12 condition that vectors not be rotated by parallel transport. Such a condition is natural to impose, and
13 the theory of general relativity itself includes this assumption. However, differential geometry is
14 equally well defined with torsion as well as without, and some extensions of general relativity include
15 torsion terms. The first of these was “Einstein-Cartan theory”, as introduced by Cartan in 1922. We
16 define the torsion tensor by the Christoffel symbols in this way
17 c   c  T c
ab ba ab
18 We now show in an explicit way that it is possible to present the previous dynamical equation by a
19 wave equation with particular source where the variables are symmetric and anti-symmetric Christoffel
20 symbols including torsion in one geometric picture. Now we define the new type of wave with an
21 explicit computation of the commutator and of the double commutator. So we have
V
22 DV   
 , V
x

23 We compute the first commutator

F ,   D , D  V  D D V  Dv DV
24 V V
 D (     V ) - Dv (   
 , V )
xv v ,  x

25 So we have
 Symmetry 2013, 5 16

B , B ,
F ,   D , D  V  (   
v, Bv,   , B , )  (  


,v B ,   ,v B , )
x xv
V
1 B ,  (  
v, V )
xv
V
B ,  (  
 , V )
x

2 And
 V T D V )
F ,   D , D  V  ( R v  v  
3 Where
 
 v,   ,
 (  
q q
Rv  (   ,q v,    , v,q )
x xv

4 And

5 Tv   
 ,v  v,
6 In conclusion we have

 
v,   ,
)  (    
  q q
 F ,    D , D  V  (   ,q v,    , v,q )V  (  ,v  v, ) DV
x xv
 G ,    ,
7 where

v, 
 ,
G ,  (  )V
x xv 

  ,  (   
q q
 ,q v,    , v,q )V  (  ,v  v, ) DV

8 Now we have that


 
v,  v,  x

9 where

 ( 
v, 
  ( 
 ,   
) )
x x v,  , 2 2
G ,  (  )V  (  )V    G ,
x xv  x xv  x xv x x

10 So we have that the field G is invariant for the change of the  . Now we impose the like- Lorenz
11 gauge condition in this way
 ,
12 0
x
13 Now we have
 Symmetry 2013, 5 17

  
G ,  G  G
x x  , x  ,

     
 v,   ,    ,   ,    ,  ,
  )V 
1
x
(
 x ( x  x )V  x ( x  x )V
 x xv      
     
 v,    ,    ,    ,    ,   ,
      0
x x x x x x x xv x x x x
   

2 The Lagrangian gravitational density is

L  F , F
 ,  (G  ,    , )
 ,   , )(G
3  ,    ,  2G  ,
 G , G  ,   , 
4 Where
 , and   ,  2G  ,
5 G , G  ,   , 
6 are the Lagrangian density for the free gravitational field and the reaction field of the vacuum. The
7 interaction term G ,  , connect the gravitation field with the field of the vacuum.
8 The dynamic equation for Non Conservative Gravity can be obtained in this way
D , D , D V  D D , D V  D , D  D V  D F  
                   ,   D , D  D V
9   D (G ,    , )   D , D  D V  J
   ,
D (G ,    , )   D , D  D V   J
   ,
and
D G ,  [ J  
  ,  D   , )   D , D  D V ]
where
G , j j j
D G ,   G j , 
 x   G j , v  G , j 
10 
so
G , j j j
 G j ,   
x   G j , v  G , j   [ J  ,  D   , )   D , D  D V ]

and
G , j j j
 (G j ,   
x   G j , v  G , j  )  ( J  ,  D   , )   D , D  D V )

G ,
11  j
x  ,

12 Now we have
 Symmetry 2013, 5 18

G ,    2 v,  2

 v,   ,  ,
 (  )V )  (  )V
x x x xv  x x x xv 
for x   x
we have
G ,  2 
v,  2 
 ,  2v,  2
 ,
(  )V  (  )V
x  2 x x xv   2 x x x 
1
but for the like Lorenz gauge we have
 2 
 ,

   ,
 ( )0
x x xv x
and
G ,  2 
v,  2 
v,  2 
v,
 V (  c2 )V  J
x 2
 x
 2
 x 2
 t


2 When the currents are equal to zero we have that
G ,  2 
v,  2v, 2  2v,
 V ( c )V  0
x 2 x
 2 x  2t


3
λ has a wave behaviour
the Christoffel variable Γv,α

4 Now we look at the currents.

j j j  
 G j ,   G j , 
 G , j  )  ( J
j
v,  v   ,  D   , )   D , D  D V
j j j
5  G j ,   G j,   G , j  )  D   , )   D , D  D V  J
 v     ,
R
 ,  J  ,

6 Where R is a reaction of a virtual matter or medium (vacuum) and J is the ordinary currents for the
7 ordinary matter represented by the energetic tensor. The non linear reaction of the self-coherent
8 system produces a current that justify the complexity of the gravitational field and non linear
9 properties of the gravitational waves.

 2 
v, 2  2v,
10 ( c )V  R  J
2 x  2t


11 In conclusion we show that the non conservative gravitational field is similar to a wave for 64
j
12 variables  in a non linear material where we have complex non linear phenomena inside the
v
13 virtual material that represent the vacuum. In the previous equations in the free field of the medium are
14 present the Proca terms   [34] , the Chern-Simons terms [35] (   )  and the Maxwell-like
15 terms (   ) (   ). So we have the mass terms, the topologic terms and the like electromagnetic
16 field terms. We can model the gravitational wave with torsion as particle in a non linear medium
 Symmetry 2013, 5 19

1 which gives the mass of the particle, in a way that can be compared to usual SSB processes of the
2 standard model [38]

3 5. Quantum Mechanics by Bohm-Fisher Gauge in information geometry

4 The debate on the foundations of Quantum Physics and the meaning of wave function seems quite
5 far from being concluded. In particular, there are many attempts to investigate Quantum Mechanics as
6 an “emergent phenomenology” [see for ex. 17, 18, 19].We follow here the proposal in [11; see also 32;
7 33] and in the next paragraph we extend it to quantum fluctuations. The mathematical idea is to impose
8 a gauge constraint on the particles’ momenta on a Boltzmannian Entropy Manifold. From a physical
9 viewpoint it corresponds to each point of the manifold , i.e. to each observer, to be in agreement with
10 the other ones in detecting non-locality and thus on the values of conditional probability for a deviation
11 from the classical expectations [20]. Such deviation can easily be obtained as the extremal value of
12 Fisher information and corresponds to the well-known quantum potential. Such approach provides a
13 vivid description of quantum potential as informational channel and, via Weizsaker chemical potential,
14 can find its application in many atomic and molecular physics [21, 22].
15 For the Bolzmann relation between Entropy S and probability  given by the well known relation
16 S  k log 
17 Where k is the Bolzmann constant, we define this change of reference

 log 1  1( y1,.., y p , x1, x2 ,......, xq )


log  2   2 ( y1,.., y p , x1, x2 ,......, xq )
18 
 ...
log    ( y ,.., y , x , x ,......, xq )
 n n 1 p 1 2
19 Where y and x are the variables and parameters of the probability distribution and the logarithm is
20 related to the entropy. The variable x are the coordinates of the information geometry [31] The local
21 change of the coordinates [31] is given by the Jacobian:
 1  2  n    log 1  log 2  log  n 
 ...   ... 
 x1 x1 x1   x1 x1 x1 
 1  2  n    log 1  log 2  log  n 
 ...   ...  T
22 J   x2 x2 x2    x2 x2 x2   
 ... ... ... ...   ... ... ... ... 
   
 1  2  n    log 1  log 2  log  n 
... ...
 xq xq xq   xq xq xq 

 Symmetry 2013, 5 20

  log 1  log  2  log  n    log 1  log 1  log 1 

 ...  ... 
 x1 x1 x1   x1 x2 xq 
  log 1  log  2  log  n    log  2  log  2  log  2 
T  ...  ... 
    x2 x2 x2   x1 x2 xq  
 ... ... ... ...   ... ... ... ...

  
  log 1  log  2  log  n    log   log  n  log  n 
... n
xq   x1 
 xq xq ...
  x2 xq 

1   log  j 2  log  j  log  j  log  j   log  j

  ( )  ( )( ) ...  ( ) 
)(
 j x1 j x1 x2 j x1 xq 
 
  log  j  log  j  log  j 2  log  j  log  j 
 ( )( )  ( ) ...  ( )( ) 
 j x2 x1 j x2 j x2 xq   Fj
 
 ... ... ... ... 
  log  j  log  j  log  j  log  j  log  j 2 
 ( )( )  ( )( ) ...  ( ) 
j xq x1 xq x2  xq 
 j j 
2 Where Fj is a Fisher matrix. Now we have
3 Gh,k  (T )1  

4 For  j   j ( x ,..., xn |  ,...,m ) we obtain

1 1
 n n n 
   j ( x1 ( y )  x1 )( x1 ( y )  x1 ) d y   j ( x1 ( y )  x1 )( x2 ( y )  x2 ) d y ...   j ( x1 ( y )  x1 )( xn ( y )  xn ) d y 
 n 
5 1    j ( x2 ( y )  x2 )( x1 ( y )  x1 ) d n y n
  j ( x2 ( y )  x2 )( x2 ( y )  x2 ) d y ...   j ( x2 ( y )  x2 )( xn ( y )  xn ) d y 
(F ) 
j  ... ... ... ...

 
  ( x ( y )  x )( x ( y )  x ) d n y n n y
 j n n 1 1   j ( xn ( y )  xn )( x2 ( y )  x2 ) d y ... 
 j n ( x ( y )  xn )( xn ( y )  xn ) d 

6 Now j are, for the Cramer Rao theorem, the best possible covariant matrix for the parameters as
7 random variables.
8 From the tensor calculus we have
 Symmetry 2013, 5 21

x x
vh   Yj h  Yj h
j y j y j
and
y j
Yj  v p
x p
So
Y j v p y j 2 y j
 v p

y h y h x p y k x p
and
Y j xi y h
1 T Y i
(  ) D Y  
y k h k
y y j x

v p y j x i y h  2 y j x i y h
v p

y h x p y j x k y h x p y j x k
v p y h x i y j  2 y j y h x i
1 v p

y h x k y j x p y h x p x k y j
v p x i y j  2 y j x i
v p

x k y j x p x k x p y j
v p  2 y j x i
v p

x k x k x p y j

v
p  2 xi
p j
v p  
x k k
x x j
2
 2
 j xi p
(  )v
x k x k x  j
p

3 Where
 Symmetry 2013, 5 22

 2 xi 1  2 1  2 
j j j j
  p x h 
k
x x
p    k
j x x
p  
j
k
j x x
j
xi xi x
h

1
 2 log 
j
p  log 
x k x j
 log   log  x h
j j
xi x h
2 Now we know that

 2 log   log   log 

j j j
3 
x k x
p xi x h

4 So when we does not consider the fluctuation around the average value we can write in the first
5 approximation
2
 log  j
2
  j xi k p  log  j  log  j
6   x x 
k p 
x x  log  j  log  j x
h
x
h
j
i h
x x
7 And the deformation of the derivative for the non Euclidean geometry is given by the expression
2
   j xi   log  j 
8
k

k p 

k
  k A
x x x j x x x h
h
9 Where Ah is like Weyl gauge potential [23, 24]
10 Now in the classical mechanics the equation of the motion can be written by the definition of the
11 action
S 1 S S n
12 S   [  i j  V ]dtd x
t 2m x x
13 For quantum mechanics we have a deformation of the momenta for the change of the geometry so we
14 have
 Symmetry 2013, 5 23

S 1 n
S   [  ( p  A )( p  A )  V ]dtd x 
t 2m i i j j
S 1 n
S   [  ( p p  A A )  V ]dtd x 
t 2m i j i j
1 S 1  log   log  n
S   [  (p p  )  V ]dtd x 
t 2m i j xi x j

S 1 n 1  log   log  n
 [  p p  V ) dtd x   )]dtd x
t 2m i j 2m xi x j

2 We say that the quantum mechanics is a constrain on the classical mechanics (momenta non-local
3 correlations) by the action as Fisher information. In other words, if we ideally “switch off” any
4 quantum effects, we will get classical physics [11, 37] Now with the Euler Lagrange minimum
5 condition we have that the Fisher information or quantum action assumes the minimum value when
S  0
For
S 1 n 1  log   log  n
6   [  p p  V ) dtd x    )]dtd x  0
t 2m i j 2m xi x j

so

S 1 1 1   2 2 S 1
 p p V  (  )  p p V  Q
t 2m i j 2m  2 xi x j  xi x j t 2m i j

7 Where Q is the Bohm quantum potential that is a consequence of the extremal condition of Fisher
8 information (minimum or maximum condition for the Fisher information). This is formally
9 comparable to the electrical circuit where the Kirchoff rules are obtained by the minimum power
10 dissipation. In the same way the minimum Fisher information (or maximum Shannon entropy or also
11 the maximum possible thermodynamic disorder) under the constrain on the classical mechanics gives
12 us the Bohm quantum potential and the Schrödinger equation.

13 6. Geometric interpretation of the quantum fluctuations

14 There are a great number of non-locality geometries which tried to incorporate quantum effects as
15 "deformations" of space-time, for example by using conformal geometries. For a general review see
16 [25] The current interest in quantum gravity has given a new impetus to this line of research [26, 27].
17 Returning to the entropic approach presented in the previous section is quite easy to get the quantum
18 fluctuations as an expression of the deep bond between non-commutativity and dissipation in QFT [28]
19 In the quantum potential we have the contravariant derivative
 Symmetry 2013, 5 24

2
 log  j
2
   j xi  k p  log  j
1 D     x x
k x k x k x p  x
k  log  j  log  j x
h
j
i h
x x
2 When we eliminate the fluctuation around the average values we have
2
 log  j
k p
3 x x 1
 log  j  log  j
i h
x x
4 And

  log  j
5 D  
k x k x
h

6 In this case the quantum field is equal to zero

  log  j   log  j   log  j   log  j

7 F  [D , D ]  (  )(  )(  )(  )0
k ,h k h k k k k k k k k
x x x x x x x x
8 But when we consider also the fluctuation we have
2
 log  j
k p
9 R x x
 log  j  log  j
i k
x x
10 And the force obtained by the commutator
11 [D , D ]  F
k h k ,h

12 can be compared to the Casimir force for quantum fluctuation and modulation of the universal
13 quantum geometry We can simplify the expression of R in this way
2
 log 
2
x  log 
14 R  k
k  log  2 xk
( )
x
k
15 So we have
 Symmetry 2013, 5 25

2 2
 log   log 
2 2
Rk Rh  x  log   x  log 
1 [D , D ]    ( k ) ( h )0
k h xh xk xh  log  2 xk xk  log  2 xh
( ) ( )
x x
k h
2 As in the gravitational space where the field is the Riemann Tensor we can write the wave equation for
3 the quantum phenomena by the multidimensional dynamical equation

4
5 Where the current is the traditional quantum current of the probability. In the multidimensional
6 information space of the parameters we can write the wave equation

 2 
v, 2  2v,
7 ( c )V  R  J
2 x  2t


8 That can be used to bypass the Schrödinger wave equations and give a pure probabilistic approach to
9 quantum mechanics [see 36]

10 7. Conclusions

11 We have reviewed a generalized approach to local Gauge theories, considered as a powerful

12 “machinery” to build unified theories in geometry and dynamics. The limit of this formulation is the
13 same as all the gauge theories, and a further principle in addition to the previous 5 ones could be
14 considered: geometry does not suffice sources and constant. In this sense, further extensions of the
15 theory are required so to explain why it works so well [29, 30, 31]. On the other hand, gauge theories
16 are quite far exhausting their potentialities. The generalization here proposed shows in particular the
17 possibility to be used also in fields where a hamiltonian representation cannot be used, such as in the
18 case of non potential and non-local interactions, and suggests new connections quantum and
19 gravitational phenomena.

20 References

21 [1]A. Duncan, The Conceptual Framework of Quantum Field Theory,Oxford Univ. Press. , 2012
22 [2]A. Manlios, Modern Differential Geometry in Gauge Theories (2. voll.), Birkhäuser,2009
23 [3]M. Blagojevic, F. W. Hehl (Eds), Gauge Theories of Gravitation: A Reader with Commentaries
24 (Classification of Gauge Theories of Gravity), Imperial College Press, 2013
25 [4]L. D. Faddev, A.A. Slavnov, Gauge Fields: Introduction to Quantum Theory, Benjamin-Cummings
26 Publ., 1981
27 [5] A. Prastaro, Gauge Geometrodynamics, La Riv. Nuovo Cim., 5, 4, 1-121 (1982)
28 [6] G. Savvidy, Non-Abelian tensor gauge fields: Generalization of Yang–Mills theory, Phys. B. Lett.,
29 Vol.625, No 3-4, 341–350 (2005)
30 [7] S. Capozziello, M. De Laurentis, Phys. Rep., Vol.509, No 4-5, 167–321 (2011)
 Symmetry 2013, 5 26

1 [8] R. Mignani, E. Pessa, G. Resconi, Electromagnetic-Like Generation of Unified-Gauge Theories, Phys.

2 Essays, 12, 1, 61-79 (1999)
3 [9] G.Resconi, M. Nikravesh, Morphic Computing: Concepts and foundation. In Forging the New
4 Frontiers: Fuzzy Pioneers I; Springer Series Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing; Nikravesh, M.,
5 Zadeh, L.A., Kacprzyk, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2007
6 [10] G, Resconi, M.Nikravesh, Morphic Computing: Quantum and field. In Forging the New
7 Frontiers: Fuzzy Pioneers II; Springer Series Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing;
8 Nikravesh, M., Zadeh, L.A., Kacprzyk, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2007
9 [11] G. Resconi, I. Licata, D. Fiscaletti, Unification of Quantum and Gravity by Non Classical
10 Information Entropy Space, Entropy, 15, 3602-3619 (2013)
11 [12] Chen Ning Yang, Einstein's impact on theoretical physics; Phys. Today, June, 1980
12 [13] E, Caianello, Quantum and Other Physics as Systems Theory, Riv. Nuovo Cim., 15, 4 (1992)
13 [14] N. Lambert, M-Theory and Maximally Supersymmetric Gauge Theories, Annual Review of Nuclear
14 and Particle Science, Vol. 62: 285-313 (2012)
15 [15]R.Mignani , E.Pessa , G.Resconi, Non-Conservative Gravitational Equation, General Relativity
16 and Gravitation, Vol.29, No.8, 1049-1073 (1997)
17 [16] M. Hamani Daouda, M. E. Rodrigues, M. J. S. Houndjo, New Black Holes Solutions in a
18 Modified Gravity, ISRN Astronomy and Astrophysics, Article ID 341919 (2011)
19 [17] G. t’Hooft, The Emergence of Quantum Mechanics, AIP Conf. Proc. 1446, 341 (2012)
20 [18] G. Grössing, Sub-Quantum Thermodynamics as a Basis of Emergent Quantum Mechanics,
21 Entropy, 12, 1975-2044 (2010)
22 [19] S. Adler, Quantum Theory as an Emergent Phenomenon: Foundations and Phenomenology, J.
23 Phys.: Conf. Ser. 361 (2012)
24 [20] L. del Rio, J. Åberg, R. Renner, O. Dahlsten,V. Vedral, The Thermodynamic Meaning of
25 Negative Entropy, Nature, 474,61–63 (2011)
26 [21] R. Tsekov, Dissipative Time Dependent Density Functional Theory, Int. J. Theor. Phys., 48, 9,
27 2660-2664 (2009)
28 [22]R. F. Nalewajski, Information Exploration of Chemical Bonds, SciTech J.of Science and Tech.,
29 Vol.1, 1, 105-130(2012)
30 [23] D.Fiscaletti, I.Licata, Weyl Geometries, Fisher Information and Quantum Entropy in Quantum
31 Mechanics. Int. J. Theor. Phys., 51, 3587–3595 (2012)
32 [24] C.Castro, J. Mahecha, On Nonlinear Quantum Mechanics, Brownian Motion,Weyl Geometry and
33 Fisher Information. Prog. Phys. 1, 38–45 (2006)
34 [25] R. Carroll, Fluctuation, Information, Gravity and the Quantum Potential, Springer (2006)
35 [26] C. J. Hogan, Measurement of Quantum Fluctuations in Geometry, Phys.Rev. D77 104031(2008)
36 [27] L. B. Crowell, Quantum Fluctuations of SpaceTime, World Scientific, 2005,l
37 [28]S. Sivasubramanian, Y. N.Srivastava, G. Vitiello, A.Widom, Quantum Dissipation Induced
38 Noncommutative Geometry, Phys. Lett. A 311, 97–105 (2003)
39 [29] H. Bech Nielsen, Random Dynamics and Relations Between the Number of Fermion Generations
40 and the Fine Structure Constants, Acta Phys.Polon. B20 427(1989)
41 [30] T. Toffoli, A Digital Perspective and the Quest for Substrate-Universal Behaviors, Int. J. Theor.
42 Phys., 42, 2, 147-151 (2003)
 Symmetry 2013, 5 27

1 [31] L. Chiatti, Choosing the Right Relativity for QFT, in Vision of Oneness, I. Licata & A. Sakaji
2 Eds., Aracne Publ. Rome 365-398 (2011)
3 [32] D,H Kim , S.A. Ali , C. Cafaro , S. Mancini, Information Geometry and quantum entangled
4 Gaussian Wave Packets, Physica A, Vol. 391, 19, p. 4517-4556 (2012)
5 [33] S. Amari and H. Nagaoka, Methods of Information Geometry, American Mathematical Society,
6 2007
7 [34] M. Gondran, The Proca equations derived from first principles, Am. J. Phys. 77, 925 (2009)
8 [35] S.S.Chern, S.-S., J. Simons, (1974). "Characteristic forms and geometric invariants". Annals of
9 Mathematics 99 (1): 48–69 (1974)
10 [36] E. T. Jaynes, Probability in Quantum Theory, in Complexity, Entropy, and the Physics of
11 Information, W. H. Zurek (ed.), Westview Press, 1990
12 [37] J.M. Lévy-Leblond, A Geometrical Quantum Phase Effect , Phys.Lett. A, Vol.125, 9, 441–442
13 (1987)
14 [38] S. Mukhi, Unravelling the novel Higgs mechanism in (2+1)d Chern-Simons theories, Jour. of
15 High Energy Phys., 83 (2011)
16 [39] R. Aldrovandi, J. G. Pereira, Teleparallel Gravity. An Introduction, Springer, 2013

17 © 2013 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article
18 distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license
19 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).