The Nontriviality of Trivial General Covariance: How Electrons Restrict 'Time' Coordinates, Spinors (Almost) Fit into Tensor Calculus, and 7/16 of a Tetrad Is Surplus Structure
J. Brian Pitts

TL;DR
This paper revisits the construction of spinors in curved spacetime, showing they can be represented in coordinates without the tetrad formalism, revealing new insights into general covariance and gravitational energy localization.
Contribution
It demonstrates that Ogievetsky and Polubarinov's coordinate-based spinors are self-sufficient, avoiding surplus structures of tetrads, and clarifies their coordinate restrictions and geometric properties.
Findings
OP spinors admit any coordinates with time listed first
They form nonlinear geometric objects with the metric
OP spinors enable gauge-invariant localization of gravitational energy
Abstract
It is a commonplace that any theory can be written in any coordinates via tensor calculus. But it is claimed that spinors as such cannot be represented in coordinates in a curved space-time. What general covariance means for theories with fermions is thus unclear. In fact both commonplaces are wrong. Though it is not widely known, Ogievetsky and Polubarinov (OP) constructed spinors in coordinates in 1965, helping to spawn nonlinear group representations. Locally, these spinors resemble the orthonormal basis or "tetrad" formalism in the symmetric gauge, but they are conceptually self-sufficient. The tetrad formalism is de-Ockhamized, with 6 extra fields and 6 compensating gauge symmetries. OP spinors, as developed nonperturbatively by Bilyalov, admit any coordinates at a point, but "time" must be listed first: the product of the metric components and the matrix diag(-1,1,1,1) must have…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
