Advertisement

The Unexpected Resurgence of Weyl Geometry in late 20th-Century Physics

  • Erhard ScholzEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Einstein Studies book series (EINSTEIN, volume 14)

Abstract

Weyl’s original scale geometry of 1918 (“purely infinitesimal geometry”) was withdrawn by its author from physical theorizing in the early 1920s. It made a surprising comeback, however, in the last third of the 20th century in several different contexts: scalar-tensor theories of gravity, foundations of space-time theories, foundations of quantum mechanics, elementary particle physics, and cosmology. It seems that Weyl geometry continues to offer an open window for research on the foundations of physics even after the turn into the new millenium.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper owes its existence to David Rowe’s initiative in several respects. He encouraged me to present heterodox ideas on Weyl-geometric methods in cosmology at the conference and invited me to rethink the case after a cool reception of the talk by the other participants. That gave me the chance to place my views in the wider range of recent attempts to use Weyl-geometric methods in physics. After an interruption of several years, an earlier first draft of this paper (Scholz 2011b) had be to be rewritten completely for the final version of this book. The new version overlaps nicely with the wider ambit of the investigations of the interdisciplinary group Epistemology of the LHC with center at Wuppertal and supported generously by the DFG/FWF. This group offers the chance for a close communication between historians and philosophers of science and collegues from the elementary particle community. H. Cheng, F. Hehl, J. Miritzis, C. Romero, D. Rowe, A. Trautman, S. Walter gave helpful hints for the final version of the paper.

References

  1. Abraham, R., & Marsden, J. E. (1978). Foundations of classical mechanics. Redwood City: Addison Wesley. 5-th revised ed. 1985.Google Scholar
  2. Adler, S. (1982). Einstein gravity as a symmetry-breaking effect in quantum field theory. Reviews of Modern Physics, 54, 729–766.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Almeida, T. S., Pucheu, M. L., Romero, C., & Formiga, J. B. (2014). From Brans-Dicke gravity to a geometrical scalar-tensor theory. Physical Review D, 89, 064047. arXiv:1311.5459.Google Scholar
  4. Audretsch, J. (1983). Riemannian structure of space-time as a consequence of quantum mechanics. Physcial Review D, 27, 2872–2884.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Audretsch, J., Gähler, F., & Straumann, N. (1984). Wave fields in Weyl spaces and conditions for the existence of a preferred pseudo-riemannian structure. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 95, 41–51.Google Scholar
  6. Audretsch, J., Hehl, F. W., & Lämmerzahl, C. (1992). Matter wave interferometry and why quantum objects are fundamental for establishing a gravitational theory. In J. Ehlers & G. Schaefer (Eds.), Relativistic gravity research with emphasis on experiments and observations (vol. 410, pp. 369–407). Lecture notes in physics. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Audretsch, J., & Lämmerzahl, C. (1988). Constructive axiomatic approach to spacetime torsion. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 5, 1285–1295.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Audretsch, J., & Lämmerzahl, C. (1991). Establishing the Riemannian structure of space-time by means of light rays and free matter waves. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 32, 2099–2105.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Audretsch, J., & Lämmerzahl, C. (1994). A new constructive axiomatic scheme for the geometry of space-time. In U. Majer & H.-J. Schmidt (Eds.), Semantical Aspects of Spacetime Theories (pp. 21–40). Mannheim: BI-Verlag.Google Scholar
  10. Bacciagaluppi, G. (2005). A conceptual introduction to Nelson’s mechanics. In R. Buccheri, A. Elitzur, & M. Saniga (Eds.), Endophysics, time, quantum and the subjective (pp. 367–388). Singapore: World Scientific. Revised postprint in philsci-archive.pitt.edu/8853/1/Nelson-revised.pdf.Google Scholar
  11. Bacciagaluppi, G., & Valentini, A. (2009). Quantum theory at the crossroads. Reconsidering the 1927 solvay conference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bars, I., Steinhardt, P., & Turok, N. (2014). Local conformal symmetry in physics and cosmology. Physical Review D, 89, 043515. arXiv:1307.1848.Google Scholar
  13. Bekenstein, J. (2004). Relativistic gravitation theory for the modified Newtonian dynamics paradigm. Physical Review D, 70, 083509.Google Scholar
  14. Bekenstein, J., & Milgrom, M. (1984). Does the missing mass problem signal the breakdown of Newtonian gravity? Astrophysical Journal, 286, 7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bergmann, P. G. (1942). Introduction to the theory of relativity. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Reprint New York: Dover 1976.Google Scholar
  16. Blagojević, M. (2002). Gravitation and gauge symmetries. Bristol/Philadelphia: Institute of Physics Publishing.Google Scholar
  17. Blagojević, M., & Hehl, F. W. (2013). Gauge theories of gravitation. A reader with commentaries. London: Imperial College Press.Google Scholar
  18. Bohm, D. (1952a). A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of ‘hidden variables’ I. Physical Review, 85(1), 166–179.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bohm, D. (1952b). A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of ‘hidden variables’ II. Physical Review, 85(2), 180–193.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Borrelli, A. (2015). The story of the Higgs boson: the origin of mass in early particle physics. European Physical Journal H, 40(1), 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Bouvier, P., & Maeder, A. (1977). Consistency of Weyl’s geometry as a framework for gravitation. Astrophysics and Space Science, 54, 497–508.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Brans, C. (1961). Mach’s principle and a varying gravitational constant. PhD thesis, Physics Department, Princeton UniversityGoogle Scholar
  23. Brans, C. (1999). Gravity and the tenacious scalar field. In A. Harvey (Ed.), On Einstein’s path. Essays in honor of engelbert schücking (pp. 121–138). Berlin: Springer. arXiv:gr-qc/9705069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Brans, C. (2005). The roots of scalar-tensor theories: an approximate history. In International workshop on gravitation and cosmology, Contributions to the Cuba Workshop, Santa Clara 2004. arXiv:gr-qc/0506063.Google Scholar
  25. Brans, C. (2014). Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory. Scholarpedia, 9(4), 31358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Brans, C., & Dicke, R. H. (1961). Mach’s principle and a relativistic theory of gravitation. Physical Review, 124, 925–935.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Bregman, A. (1973). Weyl transformations and Poincaré gauge invariance. Progress of Theoretical Physics, 49, 667–6992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Cai, R.-G., & Wei, H. (2007). Cheng-Weyl vector field and its cosmological application. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 0709, 015. arXiv:astro-ph/0607064.Google Scholar
  29. Calderbank, D., & Pedersen, H. (1998). Einstein-Weyl geometry. Advances in Mathematics, 97, 74–109.Google Scholar
  30. Callan, C., Coleman, S., & Jackiw, R. (1970). A new improved energy-momentum tensor. Annals of Physics, 59, 42–73.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Canuto, V., Adams, P. J., Hsieh S.-H., & Tsiang, E. (1977). Scale covariant theory of gravitation and astrophysical application. Physical Review D, 16, 1643–1663.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Canuto, V., & Goldman, I. (1983). Astrophyiscal consequences of a violation of the strong equivalence principle. Nature, 304, 311–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Capozziello, S., & Faraoni, V. (2011). Beyond Einstein gravity. A survey of gravitational theories for cosmology and astrophysics. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Carroll, R. (2004). Gravity and the quantum potential. arXiv:gr-qc/0406004.Google Scholar
  35. Castro, C. (1992). On Weyl geometry, random processes, and geometric quantum mechanics. Foundations of Physics, 22, 569–615.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Castro, C. (2007). On dark energy, Weyl’s geometry, different derivations of the vacuum energy density and the Pioneer anomaly. Foundations of Physics, 37, 366–409.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Castro, C. (2009). The cosmological constant and Pioneer anomaly from Weyl geometry and Mach’s principle. Physics Letters B, 675, 226–230.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Charap, J. M., & Tait, W. (1974). A gauge theory of the Weyl group. Proceedings Royal Society London A, 340, 249–262.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Chen, P., & Kleinert, H. (2016). Deficiencies of Bohm trajectories in view of basic quantum principles. Electronic Journal of Theoretical Physics, 13(35), 1–12.Google Scholar
  40. Cheng, H. (1988). Possible existence of Weyl’s vector meson. Physical Review Letters, 61, 2182–2184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Clifton, T., Ferreira, P., Padilla, A., & Skordis, C. (2012). Modified gravity and cosmology. Physics Reports, 513, 1–189. arXiv:1106.2476.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Codello, A., D’Orodico, G., Pagani, C., & Percacci, R. (2013). The renormalization group and Weyl invariance. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 30, 115015. arXiv:1210.3284.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Coleman, R., & Korté, H. (1984). Constraints on the nature of inertial motion arising from the universality of free fall and the conformal causal structure of spacetime. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 25, 3513–3526.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Coleman, S., & Weinberg, E. (1973). Radiative corrections as the origin of sponteneous symmetry breaking. Physical Review D, 7, 1888–1910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Cotsakis, S., & Miritzis, J. (1999). Variational and conformal structure of nonlinear metric-connection gravitational Lagrangians. Journal of Mathematical Phyiscs, 40(6), 3063.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Curiel, E. (2017). A primer on energy conditions. In (Lehmkuhl et al. 2017, pp. 43–104).Google Scholar
  47. Dahia, F., Gomez, A. T., & Romero, C. (2008). On the embedding of space-time in five-dimensional Weyl spaces. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 49, 102501. arXiv:0711.2754.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Darrigol, O. (2014). Physics and necessity: Rationalist pursuits from the cartesian past to the quantum present. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. de Broglie, L. (1960). Non-linear wave mechanics. A causal interpretation. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Translated by A.J. Knodel and J.C. Miller.Google Scholar
  50. De Martini, F., & Santamato, E. (2014a). Interpretation of quantum-nonlocality by conformal geometrodynamics. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 53, 3308–3322. arXiv:1203:0033.Google Scholar
  51. De Martini, F., & Santamato, E. (2014b). Nonlocality, no-signalling, and Bell’s theorem investigated by Weyl conformal differential geometry. Physica Scripta, 2014, T163. arXiv:1406.2970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. De Martini, F., & Santamato, E. (2014c). The intrinsic helicity of elementary particles and the spin-statistic connection. International Journal of Quantum Information, 12, 1560004.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. De Martini, F., & Santamato, E. (2015). Proof of the spin-statistics theorem. Foundations of Physics, 45(7), 858–873.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. De Martini, F., & Santamato, E. (2016). Proof of the spin-statistics theorem in the relativistic regime by Weyl’s conformal quantum mechanics. International Journal of Quantum Information, 14(04), 1640011.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. de Oliveira, H. P., Salim, J. M., & Sautú, S. L. (1997). Non-singular inflationary cosmologies in Weyl integrable spacetime. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 14(10), 2833–2843.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Deser, S. (1970). Scale invariance and gravitational coupling. Annals of Physics, 59, 248–253.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Dicke, R. H. (1962). Mach’s principle and invariance under transformations of units. Physical Review, 125, 2163–2167.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Dirac, P. A. M. (1973). Long range forces and broken symmetries. Proceedings Royal Society London A, 333, 403–418.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Dirac, P. A. M. (1974). Cosmological models and the large number hypothesis. Proceedings Royal Society London A, 338, 439–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Drechsler, W. (1999). Mass generation by Weyl symmetry breaking. Foundations of Physics, 29, 1327–1369.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Drechsler, W., & Hartley, D. (1994). The role of the internal metric in generalized Kaluza-Klein theories. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 35, 3571–3585.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Drechsler, W., & Mayer, M. E. (1977). Fibre bundle techniques in gauge theories. Lectures in mathematical physics at the University of Austin (vol. 67) Lecture notes in physics. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  63. Drechsler, W., & Tann, H. (1999). Broken Weyl invariance and the origin of mass. Foundations of Physics, 29(7), 1023–1064. arXiv:gr-qc/98020.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Dürr, D., Goldstein, S., Tumulka, R., & Zanghi N. (2009). Bohmian mechanics. In D. Greenberger, K. Hentschel, & F. Weinert (Eds.), Compendium of quantum physics (pp. 47–55). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Eddington, A. S. (1923). The mathematical theory of relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Ehlers, J., Pirani, F., & Schild, A. (1972). The geometry of free fall and light propagation. In L. O’Raifertaigh (Ed.), General relativity, papers in honour of J.L. Synge (pp. 63–84). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  67. Einstein, A. (1916). Die Grundlagen der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie. Mathematische Annalen, 49, 769–822.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Einstein, A. (1949). Autobiographical notes (vol. 7) The library of living philosophers. La Salle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
  69. Einstein, A. (1998). The collected papers of Albert Einstein. Volume 8. The Berlin years: Correspondence, 1914–1918, Part B: 1918. R. Schulmann, A. J. Kox, M. Janssen, J. Illy, & K. von Meyenn (Eds.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Englert, F., Gunzig, E., Truffin, C., & Windey, P. (1975). Conformal invariant relativity with dynamical symmetry breakdown. Physics Letters, 57 B, 73–76.Google Scholar
  71. Englert, F., & Truffin, C. (1976). Conformal invariance in quantum gravity. Nuclear Physics B, 117, 407–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Faraoni, V., & Nadeau, S. (2007). (Pseudo)issue of the conformal frame revisited. Physical Review D, 75(2), 023501.Google Scholar
  73. Flato, M., & Raçka, R. (1988). A possible gravitational origin of the Higgs field in the standard model. Physics Letters B, 208, 110–114. Preprint, SISSA (Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzate), Trieste, 1987 107/87/EP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Flato, M., & Simon, J. (1972). Wightman formulation for the quantization of the gravitational field. Physical Review D, 5, 332–341.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Folland, G. B. (1970). Weyl manifolds. Journal of Differential Geometry, 4, 145–153.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Foot, R., & Kobakhidze, A. (2013). Electroweak scale invariant models with small cosmological constant. International Journal of Modern Physics A, 30(21), 1550126. arXiv:0709.2750.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Foot, R., Kobakhidze, A., McDonald, K., & Volkas, R. R. (2007a). Neutrino mass in radiatively-broken scale-invariant models. Physical Review D, 76, 075014. arXiv:0706.1829.Google Scholar
  78. Foot, R., Kobakhidze, A., McDonald, K., & Volkas, R. R. (2007b). A solution to the hierarchy problem from an almost decoupled hidden sector within a classically scale invariant theory. Physical Review D, 77, 035006. arXiv:0709.2750.Google Scholar
  79. Franklin, A. (2017). The missing piece of the puzzle: The discovery of the Higgs boson. Synthese, 194(2), 259–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-014-0550-y.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Fujii, Y., & Maeda, K.-C. (2003). The scalar-tensor theory of gravitation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Gauduchon, P. (1995). La 1-forme de torsion d’une variété hermitienne compacte. Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 469, 1–50.Google Scholar
  82. Gilkey, P., Nikcevic, S., & Simon, U. (2011). Geometric realizations, curvature decompositions, and Weyl manifolds. Journal of Geometry and Physics, 61, 270–275. arXiv:1002.5027.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Goenner, H. (2004). On the history of unified field theories. Living Reviews in Relativity, 7, 2. http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2004-2.
  84. Goenner, H. (2012). Some remarks on the genesis of scalar-tensor theories. General Relativity and Gravity, 44(8), 2077–2097. arXiv: 1204.3455.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Gray, J. (Ed.) (1999). The symbolic universe: Geometry and physics 1890–1930. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Hall, B. C. (2001). Quantum theory for mathematicians. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  87. Hayashi, K., & Kugo, T. (1979). Remarks on Weyl’s gauge field. Progress of Theoretical Physics, 61, 334–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Hehl, F. W. (1970). Spin und Torsion in der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie oder die Riemann-Cartansche Geometrie der Welt. Habilitationsschrift. Technische Universität Clausthal: Mimeograph.Google Scholar
  89. Hehl, F. W. (2017). Gauge theory of gravity and spacetime. In (Lehmkuhl et al. 2017, 145–170).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Hehl, F. W., Kerlick, G. D., & von der Heyde, P. (1976a). On a new metric affine theory of gravitation. Physcis Letters B, 63 (4), 443–448.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Hehl, F. W., McCrea, J. D., & Kopczyǹski, W. (1988a). The Weyl group and ist currents. Physics Letters A, 128, 313–318.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Hehl, F. W., McCrea, J. D., & Mielke, E. (1988b). Skaleninvarianz und Raumzeit-Struktur. In B. Geyer, H. Herwig, & H. Rechenberg (Eds.), Werner Heisenberg. Physiker und Philosoph (pp. 299–306). Berlin: Spektrum.Google Scholar
  93. Hehl, F. W., McCrea, J. D., Mielke, E., & Ne’eman, Y. (1989). Progress in metric-affine theories of gravity with local scale invariance. Foundations of Physics, 19, 1075–1100.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Hehl, F. W., McCrea, J. D., Mielke, E., & Ne’eman, Y. (1995). Metric-affine gauge theory of gravity: Field equations, noether identities, world spinors, and breaking of dilation invariance. Physics Reports, 258, 1–171.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Hehl, F. W., Mielke, E., & Tresguerres, R. (1988c). Weyl spacetimes, the dilation current, and creation of gravitating mass by symmetry breaking. In W. Deppert & K. Hübner (Eds.), Exact sciences and their philosophical foundations; exakte wissenschaften und ihre philosophische grundlegung (pp. 241–310). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  96. Hehl, F. W., Puntigam, R., & Tsantilis, E. (1996). A quadratic curvature Lagrangian of Pawlowski and Raczka: A finger exercise with MathTensor. In F. W. Hehl, R. Puntigam, & H. Ruder (Eds.), Relativity and scientific computing…. Berlin: Springer. [gr-qc/9601002].Google Scholar
  97. Hehl, F. W., von der Heyde, P., Kerlick, G. D., & Nester, J. M. (1976b). General relativity with spin and torsion: Foundations and prospects. Reviews of Modern Physics, 48, 393–416.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Higa, T. (1993). Weyl manifolds and Einstein-Weyl manifolds. Commentarii Mathematici Sancti Pauli, 42, 143–160.Google Scholar
  99. Israelit, M. (1996). Conformally coupled dark matter. Astrophysics and Space Science, 240(1), 331–344. arXiv:gr-qc/9608035.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Israelit, M. (1999a). Matter creation by geometry in an integrable Weyl– Dirac theory. Foundations of Physics, 29(8), 1303–1322.Google Scholar
  101. Israelit, M. (1999b). The Weyl-Dirac theory and our universe. New York: Nova Science.Google Scholar
  102. Israelit, M. (2002a). Primary matter creation in a Weyl-Dirac cosmological model. Foundation of Physics, 32, 295–321.Google Scholar
  103. Israelit, M. (2002b). Quintessence and dark matter created by Weyl-Dirac geometry. Foundation of Physics, 32, 945–961.Google Scholar
  104. Israelit, M. (2010). A Weyl-Dirac cosmological model with DM and DE. General Relativity and Gravitationi, 43, 751–775. arXiv:1008.0767.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Israelit, M. (2012). Nowadays cosmology with the Weyl-Dirac approach. Preprint arXiv:1212.2208. Slightly changed version of Israelit (2010).Google Scholar
  106. Israelit, M., & Rosen, N. (1992). Weyl-Dirac geometry and dark matter. Foundations of Physics, 22, 555–568.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Israelit, M., & Rosen, N. (1993). Weylian dark matter and cosmology. Foundations of Physics, 24, 901–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Israelit, M., & Rosen, N. (1995). Cosmic dark matter and Dirac gauge function. Foundations of Physics, 25, 763–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Jordan, P. (1952). Schwerkraft und weltall. Braunschweig: Vieweg. 2nd revised edtion 1955.Google Scholar
  110. Kaiser, D. (2006). Whose mass is it anyway? Particle cosmology and the objects of a theory. Social Studies of Science, 36(4), 533–564.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Kaiser, D. (2007). When fields collide. Scientific American, pp. 62–69.Google Scholar
  112. Karaca, K. (2013). The construction of the Higgs mechanism and the emergence of the electroweak theory. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 44, 1–16.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Kasuya, M. (1975). On the gauge theory in the Einstein-Cartan-Weyl space-time. Nuovo Cimento B, 28(1), 127–137.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Kibble, T. (1961). Lorentz invariance and the gravitational field. Journal for Mathematical Physics, 2, 212–221. In (Blagojević/Hehl 2013, chap. 4).MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Kleinert, H. (2008). Multivalued fields in condensed matter, electromagnetism, and gravitation. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
  116. Kosmann-Schwarzbach, Y. (2011). The noether theorems. invariance and conservation laws in the twentieth century. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  117. Kostant, B. (1970). Quantization and unitary representations. 1. Prequantisation (vol. 170) Lecture notes in mathematics. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  118. Kragh, H. (1999). Quantum generations: A history of physics in the twentieth century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  119. Kragh, H. (2006). Cosmologies with varying speed of light: A historical perspective. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 37, 726–737.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Kragh, H. (2009). Continual fascination: The oscillating universe in modern cosmology. Science in Context, 22(4), 587–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Kragh, H. (2016). Varying gravity. Dirac’s legacy in cosmology and geophyics. Science networks. Heidelberg: Springer-Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  122. Lämmerzahl, C. (1990). The geometry of matter fields. In V. de Sabbata & J. Audretsch (Eds.), Quantum mechanics in curved spacetime (pp. 23–48). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  123. Lehmkuhl, D. (2014). Why Einstein did not believe that general relativity geometrizes gravity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 46B, 316–326. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/9825/.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Lehmkuhl, D., Schiemann, G., & Scholz, E. (Eds.) (2017). Towards a theory of spacetime theories. Einstein studies. Berlin/Basel: Springer/Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  125. Lobo, I. I., Barreto, A. B., & Romero, C. (2015). Space-time singularities in Weyl manifolds. European Physics Journal C, 75 (9), 448. arXiv:1506.02180.Google Scholar
  126. Madelung, E. (1926). Quantentheorie in hydrodynamischer Form. Zeitschrift für Physik, 40(3–4), 322–326.Google Scholar
  127. Maeder, A. (1978a). Metrical connection in space-time, Newton’s and Hubble’s law. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 65, 337–343.Google Scholar
  128. Maeder, A. (1978b). Cosmology II: Metrical connection and clusters of galaxies. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 67, 81–86.Google Scholar
  129. Mannheim, P. (1994). Open questions in classical gravity. Foundations of Physics, 224, 487–511.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Mannheim, P. (2000). Attractive and repulsive gravity. Foundations of Physics, 22, 709–746.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Mannheim, P. (2012). Making the case for conformal gravity. Foundations of Physics, 42. arXiv:1101.2186.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Mannheim, P., & Kazanas, D. (1989). Exact vacuum solution to conformal Weyl gravity and galactic rotation curves. Astrophysical Journal, 342, 635–638.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Meissner, K., & Nicolai, H. (2009). Conformal symmetry and the standard model. Physics Letters B, 648, 312–317. arXiv:hep-th/0612165.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Miritzis, J. (2004). Isotropic cosmologies in Weyl geometry. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 21, 3043–3056. arXiv:gr-qc/0402039.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Miritzis, J. (2013a). Energy exchange in Weyl geometry. In Proceedings of the Greek Relativity Meeting NEB15, June 2012, Chania, Greece. Journal of physics: Conference series. arXiv:1301.5402.Google Scholar
  136. Miritzis, J. (2013b). Acceleration in Weyl integrable spacetime. International Journal of Modern Physics D, 22(5), 1350019. arXiv:1301.5696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Myvold, W. (2003). On some early objections to Bohm’s theory. International Studies in the Philsophy of Science, 17(1), 7–24.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Narlikar, J., & Padmanabhan, T. (1983). Quantum cosmology via path integrals. Physics Reports, 100, 151–200.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Nicolic, H. (2005). Relativistic quantum mechanics and the Bohmian interpretation. Foundations of Physics Letters, 18(6), 549–561.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Nieh, H.-T. (1982). A spontaneously broken conformal gauge theory of gravitation. Physics Letters A, 88, 388–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Nishino, H., & Rajpoot, S. (2004). Broken scale invariance in the standard model. arXiv:hep-th/0403039.Google Scholar
  142. Nishino, H., & Rajpoot, S. (2007). Broken scale invariance in the standard mode. AIP Conference Proceedings, 881, 82–93. arXiv:0805.0613 (with different title).Google Scholar
  143. Nishino, H., & Rajpoot, S. (2009). Implication of compensator field and local scale invariance in the standard model. Physical Review D, 79, 125025. arXiv:0906.4778.Google Scholar
  144. Nishino, H., & Rajpoot, S. (2011). Weyl’s scale invariance for standard model, renormalizability and zero cosmological constant. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 28, 145014.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Noether, E. (1918). Invariante variationsprobleme. Göttinger nachrichten pp. 235–257. In Gesammelte abhandlungen (vol. 1, pp. 770ff). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  146. Novello, M. (1969). Dirac’s equation in a Weyl space. Nuovo Cimento A, 94(4), 954–960.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Novello, M., & Heintzmann, H. (1983). Weyl integrable space-time: A model for the cosmos? Physics Letters A, 98(1), 10–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Novello, M., Oliveira, L. A. R., Salim, J. M., & Elbaz, E. (1992). Geometrized instantons and the creation of the universe. International Journal of Modern Physics D, 1, 641–677.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Obukhov, Y. (1982). Conformal invariance and space-time torsion. Physics Letters A, 90, 13–16.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Ohanian, H. (2016). Weyl gauge-vector and complex dilaton scalar for conformal symmetry and its breaking. General Relativity and Gravity, 48(25). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10714-016-2023-8. arXiv:1502.00020.
  151. Omote, M. (1971). Scale transformations of the second kind and the Weyl space-time. Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 2(2), 58–60.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Omote, M. (1974). Remarks on the local-scale-invariant gravitational theory. Lettere al Nuovo Cimento, 10(2), 33–37.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. O’Raifeartaigh, L. (1997). The dawning of gauge theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  154. Ornea, L. (2001). Weyl structures in quaternionic geomety. A state of the art. In E. Barletta (Ed)., Selected topics in geometry and mathematical physics (vol. 1, pp. 43–80). Potenza: University of degli Studi della Basilicata. arXiv:math/0105041.Google Scholar
  155. Padmanabhan, T. (1989). Quantum cosmology – the story so far. In B. R. Iyer, N. Mukunda, & C. V. Vishveshwara (Eds.), Gravitation, gauge theories and the early universe (pp. 373–404). Dordrecht: KluwerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Passon, O. (2004). Bohmsche Mechanik. Eine Einführung in die determinisitsche Interpretation der Quantenmechanik. Frankfurt/Main: Harri Deutsch.Google Scholar
  157. Passon, O. (2015). Nicht-Kollaps-Interpretationen der Quantentheorie. In C. Friebe, M. Kuhlmann, H. Lyre, P. M. Näger, O. Passon, & M. Stöckler (Eds.), Philosophie der quantenphysik (pp. 178–224). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  158. Pauli, W. (1921). Relativitätstheorie. In Encyklopädie der Mathematischen Wissenschaften (vol. 5, pp. 539–775). Leipzig: Teubner. Collected Papers I, 1–237. Reprint edited and commented by D. Giulini, Berlin etc. Springer 2000.Google Scholar
  159. Pauli, W. (1940). Über die Invarianz der Dirac’schen Wellengleichungen gegenüber Ähnlichkeitstransformationen des Linienelementes im Fall verschwindender Ruhmasse. Helvetia Physica Acta, 13, 204–208. In (Pauli 1964, II, 918–922).Google Scholar
  160. Pauli, W. (1964). Collected scientific papers, R. Kronig, V. F. Weisskopf (Eds.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  161. Pawłowski, M. (1990). Can gravity do what the Higgs does? Preprint IC/90/454.Google Scholar
  162. Pawłowski, M., & Ra̧czka, R. (1994a). Mass generation in the standard model without dynamical Higgs field. Preprint. hep-th/9403303.Google Scholar
  163. Pawłowski, M., & Ra̧czka, R. (1994b). A unified conformal model for fundamental interactions without dynamical Higgs field. Foundations of Physics, 24, 1305–1327. ILAS 4/94 hep-th/9407137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Pawłowski, M., & Ra̧czka, R. (1995a). A Higgs-free model for fundamental interactions and its implications. Preprint. ILAS/EP-1-1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Pawłowski, M., & Ra̧czka, R. (1995b). A Higgs-free model for fundamental interactions. Part I: Formulation of the model. In J. Bertrand, M. Flato, J.-P. Gazeau, M. Irac-Astaud, & D. Sternheimer (Eds.), Modern group theoretical methods in physics (pp. 221–232). Springer Science+Business Media: Dordrecht. Preprint ILAS/EP-3-1995, hep-ph/9503269.Google Scholar
  166. Penrose, R. (1965). Zero rest-mass fields including gravitation: asymptotic behaviour. Proceedings Royal Society London A, 284, 159–203.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Penrose, R. (2006). Before the big bang: An outrageous perspective and ist implications for partivle physics. In Proceedings of EPAC 2006, Edinburgh, Scotland. http://accelconf.web.cern.ch/accelconf/e06/PAPERS/THESPA01.PDF.
  168. Perlick, V. (1987). Characterization of standard clocks by means of light rays and freely falling particles’. General Relativity and Gravitation, 19, 1059–1073.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Perlick, V. (1989). Zur Kinematik Weylscher Raum-Zeit-Modelle. Dissertationsschrift TU Berlin.Google Scholar
  170. Perlick, V. (1991). Observer fields in Weylian spacetime models. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 8, 1369–1385.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Pfister, H. (2004). Newton’s first law revisited. Foundations of Physics Letters, 17, 49–64.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Pickering, A. (1988). Constructing quarks. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  173. Pucheu, M. L., Almeida, T. S., & Romero, C. (2014). A geometrical approach to Brans-Dicke theory. In C. M. Gonzales, J. E. M. Aguliar, & L. M. R. Barrera (Eds.), Accelerated Cosmic Expansion. Astrophysics and space science proceedings (vol. 38, pp. 33–41). Berlin: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  174. Pucheu, M. L., Alves, F. A. P., Barreto, A. B., & Romero, C. (2016). Cosmological models in Weyl geometric scalar tensor theory. Physical Review D, 6, 064010. arXiv:1602.06966.Google Scholar
  175. Quiros, I. (2000a). Dual geometries and spacetime singularities. Physical Review D, 61, 124026.Google Scholar
  176. Quiros, I. (2000b). Transformations of units and world’s geometry. Preprint. gr-qc/0004014.Google Scholar
  177. Quiros, I. (2013). Scale invariance and broken electroweak symmetry may coexist together. Preprint. arXiv:1312.1018.Google Scholar
  178. Quiros, I. (2014a). Scale invariance: fake appearances. Preprint. arXiv:1405.6668.Google Scholar
  179. Quiros, I. (2014b). Scale invariant theory of gravity and the standard model of particles. Preprint. arXiv:1401.2643.Google Scholar
  180. Quiros, I., Bonal, R., & Cardenas, R. (2000). Brans-Dicke-type theories and avoidance of the cosmological singularity. Physical Review D, 62, 044042.Google Scholar
  181. Quiros, I., Garcìa-Salcedo, R., Madriz Aguilar, J., & Matos, T. (2013). The conformal transformations’ controversy: what are we missing. General Relativity and Gravitation, 45, 489–518. arXiv:1108.5857.Google Scholar
  182. Ray, J. (1972). Lagrangian density for perfect fluids in general relativity. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 13(10), 1451–1453.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. Rievers, B., & Lämmerzahl, C. (2011). High precision thermal modeling of complex systems with application to the flyby and Pioneer anomaly. Annalen der Physik, 532(6), 439. arXiv:1104.3985.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  184. Rindler, W. (2006). Relativity. Special, General, and Cosmological. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2nd ed. 2007.Google Scholar
  185. Romero, C., Fonseca-Neto, J.B., & Pucheu, M. L. (2011). General relativity and Weyl frames. International Journal of Modern Physics A, 26(22), 3721–3729. arXiv:1106.5543.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  186. Romero, C., Fonseca-Neto, J. B., & Pucheu, M. L. (2012). General relativity and Weyl geometry. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 29 (15), 155015. arXiv:1201.1469.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. Rosen, N. (1982). Weyl’s geometry and physics. Foundations of Physics, 12, 213–248.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. Ruegg, H., & Ruiz-Altaba, M. (2003). The Stueckelberg field. Preprint. arXiv:hep-th/0304245.Google Scholar
  189. Ryckman, T. (2005). The reign of relativity. Philosophy in physics 1915–1925. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  190. Salim, J. M., & Sautú, S. L. (1996). Gravitational theory in Weyl integrable spacetime. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 13 (2), 363–360.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. Sanders, R. H. (2010). The dark matter problem. A historical perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  192. Santamato, E. (1984a). Geometric derivation of the Schrödinger equation from classical mechanics in curved Weyl spaces. Physical Review D, 29, 216–222.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  193. Santamato, E. (1984b). Statistical interpretation of the Klein-Gordon equation in terms of the spacetime Weyl curvature. Journal of Mathematical Physics 25(8), 2477–2480.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. Santamato, E. (1985). Gauge-invariant statistical mechanics and average action principle for the Klein-Gordon particle in geometric quantum mechanics. Physical Review D, 32(10), 2615–2621.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  195. Santamato, E., & De Martini, F. (2013). Derivation of the Dirac equation by conformal differential geometry. Foundations of Physics, 43(5), 631–641. arxiv:1107.3168.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  196. Schneider, M. (2011). Zwischen zwei Disziplinen. B.L. van der Waerden und die Entwicklung der Quantenmechanik. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  197. Scholz, E. (1999). Weyl and the theory of connections. In Gray (1999). pp. 260–284.Google Scholar
  198. Scholz, E. (Ed.) (2001). Hermann Weyl’s Raum - Zeit - Materie and a general introduction to his scientific work. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  199. Scholz, E. (2005a). Einstein-Weyl models of cosmology. In J. Renn (Ed.), Albert Einstein. 100 authors for Einstein (pp. 394–397). Weinheim: Wiley-VCH.Google Scholar
  200. Scholz, E. (2005b). On the geometry of cosmological model building. Preprint. arXiv:gr-qc/0511113.Google Scholar
  201. Scholz, E. (2009). Cosmological spacetimes balanced by a Weyl geometric scale covariant scalar field. Foundations of Physics, 39, 45–72. arXiv:0805.2557.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  202. Scholz, E. (2011a). Weyl geometric gravity and electroweak symmetry ‘breaking’. Annalen der Physik, 523, 507–530. arxiv.org/abs/1102.3478.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  203. Scholz, E. (2011b). Weyl’s scale gauge geometry in late 20th century physics. Preprint. arXiv:1111.3220.Google Scholar
  204. Scholz, E. (2016a). MOND-like acceleration in integrable Weyl geometric gravity. Foundations of Physics, 46, 176–208. arXiv:1412.0430.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  205. Scholz, E. (2016b). Clusters of galaxies in a Weyl geometric approach to gravity. Journal of Gravity, 46, 9706704. arXiv:1506.09138.Google Scholar
  206. Scholz, E. (2017). Paving the way for transitions – a case for Weyl geometry. In (Lehmkuhl et al. 2017, pp. 171–224). arXiv:1206.1559.Google Scholar
  207. Schouten, J. A. (1924). Der Ricci-Kalkl̈. Eine Einführung in die neueren Methoden und problem der mehrdimensionalen differentialgeometrie. Die grundlehren der mathematischen wisenschaften (vol. 10). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  208. Schouten, J. A. (1954). Ricci calculus (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  209. Sciama, D. W. (1962). On the analogy between charge and spin in general relativity. In Recent developments in general relativity Festschrift for L. Infeld (pp. 415–439). Oxford and Warsaw: Pergamon and PWN. In (Blagojević/Hehl 2013, chap. 4).Google Scholar
  210. Shaposhnikov, M., & Zenhäusern, D. (2009a). Quantum scale invariance, cosmological constant and hierarchy problem. Physics Letters B, 671, 162–166. arXiv:0809.3406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  211. Shaposhnikov, M., & Zenhäusern, D. (2009b). “Scale invariance, unimodular gravity and dark energy. Physics Letters B, 671, 187–192. arXiv:0809.3395.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  212. Sharpe, R. W. (1997). Differential geometry: Cartan’s generalization of Klein’s Erlangen program. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  213. Shojai, A. (2000). Quantum gravity and cosmology. International Journal of Modern Physics A, 15(2), 1757–1771.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  214. Shojai, F., & Golshani, M. (1998). On the geometrization of Bohmian quantum mechanics: A new approach to quantum gravity. International Journal of Modern Physics A, 13(4), 677–693.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  215. Shojai, A., & Shojai, F. (2000). Nonminimal scalar-tensor theories and quantum gravity. International Journal of Modern Physics A, 15(13), 1859–1868.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  216. Shojai, F., & Shojai, A. (2001). About some problems raised by the relativistic form of de-Broglie-Bohm theory of pilot wave. Physica Scripta, 54(5), 413–416. arXiv:gr-qc/0404102.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  217. Shojai, F., & Shojai, A. (2003). On the relation of Weyl geometry and Bohmian quantum mechanics. Gravitation and Cosmology, 9(3), 163ff. Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics, Preprint AEI-2002-060. arXiv:gr-qc/0306099.Google Scholar
  218. Shojai, F., & Shojai, A. (2004). Understanding quantum theory in terms of geometry. Preprint. arXiv:gr-qc/0404102.Google Scholar
  219. Shojai, F., Shojai, A., & Golshani, M. (1998a). Conformal transformations and quantum gravity. Modern Physics Letters A, 13 (34), 2725–2729.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  220. Shojai, F., Shojai, A., & Golshani, M. (1998b). Scalar tensor theories and quantum gravity. Modern Physics Letters A, 13(36), 1915–2922.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  221. Shojai, A., Shojai, F., & Golshani, M. (1998c). Nonlocal effects in quantum gravity. Modern Physics Letters A, 13(37), 2965–2969.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  222. Simms, D. (1978). On the Schrödinger equation given by geometric quantization. In K. Bleuler, H. R. Petry, & A. Reetz (Eds.), Differential geometrical methods in mathematical physics II (vol. 676, pp. 351–356) Lecture notes in mathematics. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  223. Smolin, L. (1979). Towards a theory of spacetime structure at very short distances. Nuclear Physics B, 160, 253–268.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  224. Śniatycki, J. (1980). Geometric quantization and quantum mechanics. Berlin: Springer.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  225. Souriau, J.-M. (1966). Quantification géométrique. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 1, 374–398.Google Scholar
  226. Souriau, J.-M. (1970). Structure des systèmes dynamiques. Paris: Duno. English as (Souriau 1997).Google Scholar
  227. Souriau, J.-M. (1997). Structure of dynamical systems. A symplectic view ofh physics. Berlin: Springer. Translated from (Souriau 1970) by C.-H. Cushman-de Vpassonries.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  228. Steinhardt, P., & Turok, N. (2002). Cosmic evolution in a cyclic universe. Physical Review D, 65(12), 126003. arXiv:hep-th/0111098.Google Scholar
  229. Stoeltzner, M. (2014). Higgs models and other stories about mass generation. Journal for the General Philosophy of Science, 45, 369–386.Google Scholar
  230. Tann, H. (1998). Einbettung der quantentheorie eines skalarfeldes in eine Weyl geometrie — Weyl symmetrie und ihre brechung. München: Utz.Google Scholar
  231. Tonnelat, M.-A. (1965). Les Théories unitaires de l’électromagnétisme et de la gravitation. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  232. Trautman, A. (1972). On the Einstein-Cartan equations I, II. Bulletin Academie Polonaise des Sciences, Série des sciences math., astr. et phys., 20, 185–191, 503.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  233. Trautman, A. (1973). On the structure of the Einstein-Cartan equations. Symposia Mathematica, 12, 139–162. Relativitá convegno del Febbraio del 1972.Google Scholar
  234. Trautman, A. (2006). Einstein-Cartan theory. In J.-P. Françoise, G. L. Naber, & S. T. Tsou (Eds.), Encyclopedia of mathematical physics (vol. 2, pp. 189–195). Oxford: Elsevier. In (Blagojević/Hehl 2013, chap. 4).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  235. Trautman, A. (2012). Editorial note to J. Ehlers, F. A. E. Pirani and A. Schild, The geometry of free fall and light propagation. General Relativty and Gravity, 441, 1581–1586.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  236. Utiyama, R. (1956). Invariant theoretical interpretation of interaction. Physical Review, 101(5), 1597–1607.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  237. Utiyama, R. (1973). On Weyl’s gauge field. Progress of Theoretical Physics, 50, 2028–2090.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  238. Utiyama, R. (1975a). On Weyl’s gauge field. General Relativity and Gravitation, 6, 41–47.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  239. Utiyama, R. (1975b). On Weyl’s gauge field II. Progress of Theoretical Physics, 53, 565–574.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  240. Vizgin, V. (1994). Unified Field Theories in the First Third of the 20th Century. Basel: Birkhäuser. Translated from the Russian by J. B. Barbour.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  241. Weinberg, S. (1972). Gravitation and cosmology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  242. Weyl, H. (1918a). Gravitation und Elektrizität. Sitzungsberichte der königlich preußischen akademie der wissenschaften zu Berlin (pp. 465–480). In (Weyl 1968, II, 29–42), English in (O’Raifeartaigh 1997, 24–37).Google Scholar
  243. Weyl, H. (1918b). Raum, - Zeit - Materie. vorlesungen über allgemeine relativitätstheorie. Berlin: Springer. Other editions: 21919, 31919, 41921, 51923, 61970, 71988, 81993. English and French translations from the 4th ed. in 1922.Google Scholar
  244. Weyl, H. (1918c). Reine Infinitesimalgeometrie. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 2, 384–411. In (Weyl 1968, II, 1–28).MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  245. Weyl, H. (1920). Letter H. Weyl to F. Klein, December 28, 1920. Nachlass F. Klein Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen Codex Ms Klein 12, 297.Google Scholar
  246. Weyl, H. (1921). Zur Infinitesimalgeometrie: Einordnung der projektiven und der konformen Auffassung. Nachrichten Göttinger gesellschaft der wissenschaften (pp. 99–112). In (Weyl 1968, II, 195–207).Google Scholar
  247. Weyl, H. (1922). Space – Time – Matter.Translated from the 4th German edition by H. Brose. London: Methuen. Reprint New York: Dover 1952.Google Scholar
  248. Weyl, H. (1949). Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 21950, 32009.Google Scholar
  249. Weyl, H. (1949/2016). Similarity and congruence: a chapter in the epistemology of science. ETH Bibliothek, Hs 91a:31. Published in (Weyl 1955, 3rd edition, 153–166).Google Scholar
  250. Weyl, H. (1955). Symmetrie. Ins Deutsche übersetzt von Lulu Bechtolsheim. Basel/Berlin: Birkhäuser/Springer. 21981, 3rd edition Ergänzt durch einen Text aus dem Nachlass ‘Symmetry and congruence’, ed. D. Giulini et al. 2016: Springer.Google Scholar
  251. Weyl, H. (1968). Gesammelte Abhandlungen.K. Chandrasekharan (Ed.), vol. 4. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  252. Wood, W. R., & Papini, G. (1992). Breaking Weyl invariance in the interior of a bubble. Physical Review D, 45, 3617–3627.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  253. Wood, W. R., & Papini, G. (1997). A geometric approach to the quantum mechanics of de Broglie and Vigier. In S. Jeffers, S. Roy, J.-P. Vigier, & G. Hunter (Eds.), The Present Status of the Quantum Theory of Light. Proceedings in the Honour of Jean-Pierre Vigier (pp. 247–258). Dordrecht: Kluwer. arXiv:gr-qc/9612042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  254. Woodhouse, N. M. J. (1991). Geometric quantization. Oxford: Clarendon.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  255. Wu, C.-L. (2004). Conformal scaling gauge symmetry and inflationary universe. International Jorunal of Modern Physics A, 20, 811ff. arXiv:astro-ph/0607064.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  256. Yang, C.-N. (1980). Einstein’s impact on theoretical physics. Physics Today, 33(6), 42–49. In (Yang 1983, 563–567).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  257. Yang, C. N. (1983). Selected papers 1945–1980. With commentary. San Francisco: Freeman.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  258. Yang, C. N., & Mills, R. (1954). Conservation of isotopic spin and isotopic gauge invariance. Physical Review, 96, 191–195. In (Yang 1983, 172–176)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  259. Yuan, F.-F., & Huang, Y.-C. (2013). A modified variational principle for gravity in Weyl geometry. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 30(19), 195008. arXiv:1301.1316.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  260. Zee, A. (1979). Broken-symmetric theory of gravity. Physical Review Letters, 42, 417–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  261. Zee, A. (1982). A theory of gravity based on the Weyl-Eddington action. Physics Letters B, 109, 183–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  262. Zee, A. (1983). Einstein gravity emerging from quantum Weyl gravity. Annals of Physics, 151, 431–443.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WuppertalDepartment C, Mathematics and Natural Sciences, and Interdisciplinary Center for Science and Technology StudiesWuppertalGermany

Personalised recommendations