sirpuddingfoot

Science solved? Or just a surfer physicist's acid trip?

UK Telegraph Article
His Paper PDF Warning!

Wondering if anyone with a better physics background than I have would care to dig in and comment (I had dalem in mind, for one ).

HistoricalDavid

Analysing this sort of stuff requires an extraordinary level of education. We will have to wait not only until its considered speculatively valid, but experimentally confirmed - possibly by the Large Hadron Collider.

PS I've seen this elsewhere and it's pretty retarded to see them glorifying this guy just because he's a somewhat unconventional surfer. They're trying to make it out as he's some counterculture hippy challenging the meanie science establishment - sorry, but he's got a doctorate from one of the most respected universities in the world, he just doesn't work in one at the moment.

__________________
HD Ready?

dalem

Cool. It would be neat if this turned out to be a good direction to go in. I've never liked String Theory, myself, so my bias wants it to be wrong.

-dale

Julie

Abstract: All fields of the standard model and gravity are unified as an E8 principal bundle connection. A non-compact real form of the E8 Lie algebra has G2 and F4 subalgebras which break down to strong su(3), electroweak su(2) x u(1), gravitational so(3,1), the frame-Higgs, and three generations of fermions related by triality. The interactions and dynamics of these
1-form and Grassmann valued parts of an E8 superconnection are described by the curvature and action over a four dimensional base manifold.

Dale?

What Lisi had realised was that he could find a way to place the various elementary particles and forces on E8's 248 points. What remained was 20 gaps which he filled with notional particles, for example those that some physicists predict to be associated with gravity.

The crucial test of Lisi's work will come only when he has made testable predictions. Lisi is now calculating the masses that the 20 new particles should have, in the hope that they may be spotted when the Large Hadron Collider starts up.

Maybe an extra dimension? You getting this Dale?

dalem

I'm flattered. What we really need is a professional, like a Broken, but I'll give it a shot.

The E8 is a mathematical construct that is stable and uniform across 4 dimensions. "All fields of the standard model " means the following forces:

Electromagnetic Force
Strong Nuclear Force
Weak Nuclear Force

and gravity is, well, the Gravitational Force.

The Absolute Numero Uno of Physics for the last 50 years has been an attempt to define a Grand Unified Theory, or GUT. The idea behind it is that all the 4 known forces above SHOULD be reducable to ONE force definable by ONE set of equations, kindof like the magnetic and electronic forces are related and subsumed under the force of Electromagnetism. It has already been shown that under conditions of sufficient temperature and pressure, the Electromagnetic and Weak Nuclear Forces are "the same". This has buttressed the idea that in the beginning of the Univers, under the incredible temperatures and pressures of the Big Bang, there was only one Force. As things cooled, the Force "split", i.e. different parts became relevant only under certain conditions.

If true, all forces should be related as above. The problem is gravity - no one really knows how it does what it does. Are there gravitons? Is it purely a field phenomenon? We know what gravity DOES, we just don't know HOW. String Theory is one contruct to attempt to arrive at a GUT that combines gravity with the other forces, Branes is another.

I doubt I could even recognize the symbols in the math he uses, but what it says is that Lisi has derived equations (linear? vector? tensor?) that clearly interrelate the 4 basic forces mentioned above.

This last part is describing the particles (electrons, protons, neutrons, etc.) and their interactions (electronic charge, spin, etc.) that are predicted by the equations.

In studying this E8 form Lisi was able to locate all known forces and particles in specific locations that "make sense" with respect to the relational equations translated into the E8's specific "points". Since there are a defined number of such "points" and they apparently have local relationships, it helps explain why only certain kinds of particles with certain values and properties exist (i.e. "quanta").



When he was done he had 20 "points" left over, and this is the important part, he will be able to therefore define the properties of specific particles that have not yet been discovered or observed but that his theory, if correct, "demands" be there. So unlike the other GUT theories, this one is eminently testable - if we never find those particular particles then it's incorrect. This is huge.

There, how's that?

-dale

Exarecr

Wow, you have to wonder sometimes if Humanity is destined to understand or even"go there",with respect to string theory and other Galactic concepts and mysterious occurrence,s One of the saddest days I experianced was when Carl Sagan passed away. He could explain to me and others(billions and billions and billions of times if necessary) everything related to space and make it really interesting. This notion of string,foams,dark matter and Galaxies danceing around pin-heads leaves most of us lost in space, which to borrow a phrase would be a waste of space I guess. However,how could you not find the "Big Bang" theory intrigueing.Cheers from spaced.

Julie

Utterly SUPERB.

dalem

Aww, shucks.

-dale

Canmoore

Sometimes I wonder... Humans may be able to understand, and explain the forces of existence.

But beyond paper and super computers what does it do for us as a species? I mean I am all for humans going where life was probably never meant to go.. but when humans become extinct will all of our great achievements just be lost to time and the cosmos?

One day, will super evolved insects dig up our bones, put our thumbs on our foreheads and describe how terrible and ruthless and dumb these past monsters where to frightened school insect-lings??

dalem

Well, if you're asking the philosophical question of "what is the meaning of life?", in my opinion there is no default meaning so we have to develop our own. For me, it's seeing the human race develop to its maximum potential.

That means we try to go everywhere and do everything.

-dale

Canmoore

Yeah that is true.

I guess what I am trying to get at is similar to the old metaphor: "if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound?"

Basically, if sight, sound, taste, smell and touch are nothing by electrical signals created by our brain to react with our surroundings. Than are we really alive? Or are we just a bunch reactions reacting to one another?

Humans can make all these extraordinary discoveries, and unravel the mystery that is life and why we are hear. But really what does that accomplish? When we are gone, all of our secrets about life will vanish with us.

So then it begs the question, did we really make these discoveries at all? Or was it all just another burp in the myriad of intangible and unintelligible reactions which make up the space and mind of everything and anything?

Is looking into the secret of everything as fruitful as looking into a pool of water, and coming to the conclusion that you are looking at a pool of water?

But hey, if life is all about making the most of it, than answering the secret of everything is in a way, is living life to its fullest maximum potential! to hell if in the grand scheme of things it means nothing!

dalem

Of course it makes a sound. Sound waves are generated and propagate through the air. That's sound, same as a flashlight creates light whether anyone sees it or not.

What is "alive"? It certainly entails reacting to electrical stimuli, so we are, of course, alive.

Philosophy, bah!

But that reminds me of my favorite comic book cover. An old issue of the Punisher, standing grimacing combat stance in the woods with two smoking pistol/gun things. The issue title was

"If a tree falls in the forest and no one is left alive to hear it...?"



-dale

ArmchairGeneral

Huh? You have to respond to electrical stimuli to be alive? Or anything that responds to electrical stimuli is alive?

__________________
"Apocalyptic thought is curiously pleasurable."
-Theodore Dalrymple

ArmchairGeneral

That is a false dichotomy, at least in the standard meaning of the word "alive." Life merely refers to any entity that meets the standards for being alive. Reproduction, response to stimuli, and homeostasis (self maintenance), for instance. IIRC, there's two or three others, but I don't feel like looking 'em up.

That being said, I do not think we (meaning humans) a merely a bunch of highly organized chemical structures reacting with each other and the environment. I find it difficult to explain the phenomenon of consciousness without the addition of something more. What that "more" is, I do not know for sure, but I don't see a way around it existing.

dalem

My posit is that we define what "alive" means by our characteristics. because we are, of course, alive.

-dale