[General] Physics in 100 years according to Wilczek

[David Mathes]

All, 
As I look at all these different models of the electron, we have all carefully grasped the elephant somewhere on the outside in an attempt to figure out what's on the inside. In our quest to determine the heart of the electron, we have compared present day notes in hopes of future results. So any description of the elephant called electron can be reduced to a series of experimental results that already exist and a limits can be placed to confine any model to reasonableness.
Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is the fairest...oh, forget that. What I want to know...what does the future hold for quantum and quanta and is there at least a roadmap in physics.
Specifically, what does the future hold in terms of photon models and photon-based electrons? 

That is a question open to interpretation but Wilczek at least provides a framework with a few directions in his paper published in March 2015.Summarized in a brief article on PBS website, Wilczek came out with a rather bold paper on musings and wishes available on Arxiv.
A quick article from PBS...fromHow Physics Will Change—and Change the World—in 100 Years — NOVA Next | PBS
The full paper....http://arxiv.org/pdf/1503.07735.pdf

The paper was a fun read in spite of the physics and mathematics involved. Here is one of my favorite quotes:
     "When Leon Cooper, on behalf of Brown University, asked me to contribute to their 250th anniversary by giving a talk about the next 250 yearsof physics, I of course accepted immediately. Then I thought about it. I soon realized that I’d taken on a task thatis way beyond me, or (I suspect) anyone else.  So as a first step I renormalized 250 → 100."    
"Here I indulge in wide-ranging speculations on the shape of physics, and technology closely related to physics, over the next one hundred years. Themes include the many faces of unification, the reimagining of quantum theory, and new forms of engineering on small, intermediate, and large scales."
My take is that given the rapid advances in quantum computing, and Kurzweil's pending Singularity, we should  consider the Wilczek paper a roadmap good for at least 20 years. We should also consider this paper somewhat as guidance to modeling photon and electron.
Before looking forward, Wilczek summarizes the history of physics and mathematics where there has been unification. In the computer industry including Apple, HP, IBM and Microsoft, unification is also called integration. And in finance, mergers and acquisitions. But I digress.
>From history, Wilczek provide a summary of unification in specific fields. I'm sure there are others but these will do.
"Names are attached not as credit but a shorthand for developments:
    – Unification of algebra and geometry (Descartes)
– Unification of celestial and terrestrial physics (Galileo, Newton)– Unification of mechanics and optics (Hamilton)
– Unification of electricity, magnetism, and optics (Maxwell)
– Unification of space and time (Einstein, Minkowski)
– Unification of wave and particle (Einstein, de Broglie)        – Unification of reasoning and calculation (Boole, Turing) 
end"
So he continues on the theme of unification with the Standard Model and eventually leads us into Supersymmetry (SUSY). 
"For reasons I’ve detailed in an Appendix, I think the most sensible procedure is to use “Standard Model” in its original sense, to mean the electroweak theory only. "
That's interesting since most of the electron models don't even mention electroweak and prefer classical or semi-classical form of EM. However, there are couple models that have the guts to go GUT and encompass the four basic forces (or five if one treats the B field separate from E) as well as declare there is a bottom, and it is spacetime. As background, note that the Standard Model can typically be summarized using symmetry groups as 
SU(3) × SU(2) × U(1) × SO(3,1)
Keep in mind that Barrett using the appropriate extensions to Maxwell's equations (Maxwell 20)  confines his "Topological Electromagnistim" to
EM only ... SU(3) × SU(2) × U(1)

Topological Foundations of Electromagnetism http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-26j/aflb26jp055.pdf

I have two noteworthy additions to the SM.  Electrons can be spin coupled, and there is the question of phat photons, So I've wondered if the proper investigative path might be
N^2 hv == SU(4) X SU(3) × SU(2) × U(1) × SO(3,1)
Any comment or correction on this view may be of help. And yes, I have seen the equations of the universe.
>From Sean CarrollThe World of Everyday Experience, In One Equation

|   |
|   |  |   |   |   |   |   |
| The World of Everyday Experience, In One EquationLongtime readers know I feel strongly that it should be more widely appreciated that the laws underlying the physics of everyday life are completely understood. (If... |
|  |
| View on www.preposterousuni... | Preview by Yahoo |
|  |
|   |


So as I look at the various models for this SPIE conference, I wonder what is the next unification?
Could Unification of the photon and electron be next?
Perhaps a topological description of inside the electron? Or could it be the unification of spacetime and waves that provides the key insight and breakthrough? 
Could it be we need to rethink how we think about things, and perhaps relearn a new way on how we learn how to learn? 

And what is inside the photon?

Best Regards,
David   
   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150702/6abc29fe/attachment.htm>