AG-2025.05-662·physics.hist-ph·cross-listed: gr-qchep-th
What Price Fiber Bundle Substantivalism? On How to Avoid Holes in Fibers
Authors
- Philipp Berghofer
- Jordan François
- Lucrezia Ravera
Abstract
On a mathematically foundational level, our most successful physical theories (gauge field theories and general-relativistic theories) are formulated in a framework based on the differential geometry of connections on principal bundles. After reviewing the essentials of this framework, we articulate the generalized hole and point-coincidence arguments, examining how they weight on a substantivalist position towards bundle spaces. This question, then, is considered in light of the Dressing Field Method, which allows a manifestly invariant reformulation of gauge field theories and general-relativistic theories, making their conceptual structure more transparent: it formally implements the point-coincidence argument and thus allows to define (dressed) fields and (dressed) bundle spaces immune to hole-type arguments.
Submitted
19 May 202511 months ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2505.12876
Summary
Physicists use fiber bundles to describe gauge theories and gravity, but this raises philosophical questions about whether space points are real. This paper shows how the Dressing Field Method reformulates these theories to sidestep these conceptual puzzles.
- Modern physics theories rely on 'fiber bundles'—mathematical structures where extra internal spaces are attached to spacetime points—but philosophers debate whether this represents something genuinely physical.
- The 'hole argument' challenges bundle-space substantivalism by showing that shifting what's attached at each point without changing physics seems to prove points aren't fundamental.
- The Dressing Field Method reformulates gauge theories to make them coordinate-independent in a new way, formally blocking hole-type arguments and making the theory's geometric structure more conceptually transparent.
curious · generated by claude-haiku-4-5
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.