Demystifying Gauge Symmetry

TL;DR

This paper clarifies the conceptual nature of gauge symmetries, distinguishing their mathematical redundancy from their fundamental importance, and challenges common assumptions about their role in gauge theories.

Contribution

It provides a rigorous definition of gauge-related notions and argues that local gauge symmetry is not the defining feature of gauge theories, offering a new perspective on their conceptual foundations.

Findings

Gauge symmetries are mathematical redundancies, not fundamental features.

Any theory can be reformulated with local gauge invariance.

The 'gauge argument' is mainly a didactic tool.

Abstract

Gauge symmetries are often highlighted as a fundamental cornerstone of modern physics. But at the same time, it is commonly emphasized that gauge symmetries are not a fundamental feature of nature but merely redundancies in our description. We argue that this paradoxical situation can be resolved by a proper definition of the relevant notions like "local", "global", "symmetry" and "redundancy". After a short discussion of these notions in the context of a simple toy model, they are defined in general terms. Afterwards, we discuss how these definitions can help to understand how gauge symmetries can be at the same time fundamentally important and purely mathematical redundancies. In this context, we also argue that local gauge symmetry is not the defining feature of a gauge theory since every theory can be rewritten in locally invariant terms. We then discuss what really makes a gauge theory different and why the widespread "gauge argument" is, at most, a useful didactic tool. Finally, we also comment on the origin of gauge symmetries, the common "little group argument" and the notoriously confusing topic of spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking.