Skip to the Main Content

Note:These pages make extensive use of the latest XHTML and CSS Standards. They ought to look great in any standards-compliant modern browser. Unfortunately, they will probably look horrible in older browsers, like Netscape 4.x and IE 4.x. Moreover, many posts use MathML, which is, currently only supported in Mozilla. My best suggestion (and you will thank me when surfing an ever-increasing number of sites on the web which have been crafted to use the new standards) is to upgrade to the latest version of your browser. If that's not possible, consider moving to the Standards-compliant and open-source Mozilla browser.

November 30, 2025

Octonions and the Standard Model (Part 12)

Posted by John Baez

Having spent a lot of time pondering the octonionic projective plane and its possible role in the Standard Model of particle physics, I’m now getting interested in the ‘bioctonionic plane’, which is based on the bioctonions 𝕆\mathbb{C} \otimes \mathbb{O} rather than the octonions 𝕆\mathbb{O}.

The bioctonionic plane also has intriguing mathematically connections to the Standard Model. But it’s not a projective plane in the axiomatic sense — and it can’t be constructed by straightforwardly copying the way you build a projective plane over a division algebra, since unlike the octonions, the bioctonions are not a division algebra. Nonetheless we can define points and lines in the bioctonionic plane. The twist is that now some pairs of distinct lines intersect in more than one point — and dually, some pairs of distinct points lie on more than one line. It obeys some subtler axioms, so people call it a Hjelmslev plane.

I am not ready to give a really good explanation of the bioctonionic plane! Instead, I just want to lay out some basic facts about how it fits into mathematics — and possibly physics.

Posted at 5:27 PM UTC | Permalink | Post a Comment

November 22, 2025

Beyond the Geometry of Music

Posted by John Baez

Yesterday I had a great conversation with Dmitri Tymoczko about groupoids in music theory. But at this Higgs Centre Colloquium, he preferred to downplay groupoids and talk in a way physicists would enjoy more. Click here to watch his talk!

Posted at 4:05 PM UTC | Permalink | Followups (1)

November 5, 2025

The Inverse Cube Force Law

Posted by John Baez

Here’s a draft of my next column for the Notices of the American Mathematical Society. It’s about the inverse cube force law in classical mechanics.

Posted at 5:08 PM UTC | Permalink | Followups (4)

November 3, 2025

Second Quantization and the Kepler Problem

Posted by John Baez

The poet Blake wrote that you can see a world in a grain of sand. But even better, you can see a universe in an atom!

Bound states of hydrogen atom correspond to states of a massless quantum particle moving at the speed of light around the Einstein universe — a closed, static universe where space is a 3-sphere. We need to use a spin-½ particle to account for the spin of the electron. The states of the massless spin-½ particle where it forms a standing wave then correspond to the orbitals of the hydrogen atom. This explains the secret 4-dimensional rotation symmetry of the hydrogen atom.

In fact, you can develop this idea to the point of getting the periodic table of elements from a quantum field theory on the Einstein universe! I worked that out here:

but you can see a more gentle explanation in the following series of blog articles.

Posted at 8:51 AM UTC | Permalink | Followups (1)

November 2, 2025

Dynamics in Jordan Algebras

Posted by John Baez

In ordinary quantum mechanics, in the special case where observables are described as self-adjoint n×nn \times n complex matrices, we can describe time evolution of an observable O(t)O(t) using Heisenberg’s equation

ddtO(t)=i[H,O(t)] \frac{d}{d t} O(t) = -i [H, O(t)]

where HH is a fixed self-adjoint matrix called the Hamiltonian. This framework is great when we want to focus on observables rather than states. But Heisenberg’s equation doesn’t make sense in a general Jordan algebra. In this stripped-down framework, all we can do is raise observables to powers and take real linear combinations of them. This lets us define a ‘Jordan product’ of observables:

AB=12((A+B) 2A 2B 2)=12(AB+BA) A \circ B = \frac{1}{2} ((A + B)^2 - A^2 - B^2) = \frac{1}{2} (A B + B A)

but not commutators and not multiplication by ii. What do we do then?

Posted at 10:25 AM UTC | Permalink | Followups (7)