[General] Physics in 100 years according to Wilczek

Thu Jul 2 23:44:31 PDT 2015

I share John W’s sentiment. But I will add this: the Frank Wilczeks of this
world will fight tooth and nail to censor people like John W.

From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+johnduffield=btconnect.com at lists.natureoflightandpar
ticles.org] On Behalf Of John Williamson
Sent: 03 July 2015 05:48
To: David Mathes; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion;
Roychoudhuri, Chandra
Subject: Re: [General] Physics in 100 years according to Wilczek

Dear David, Richard, Chandra, Martin et al,

No need for despair. On the contrary, between us we are going to sort all
this out. Forget about the 100 year timescale .. lets just go for a couple
of months as a working target huh?

I remember attending lectures on SUSY back in 1980 or so at CERN. For me
then this seemed very exciting then, but the progress since then seems
minimal, the basic particle zoo, rather than being diminished or explained,
is larger than ever. Frank is brilliant and wonderful but seems to me at the
end of a long path lost in a forest of trees and grounded by the
impossibility of calculating pretty much anything at all - even with the
help of supercomputers and lattice QCD (I was at a talk on this yesterday
evening). This is super-cool, intricate mathematical modelling, but not
really properly grounded in experimental reality any more.

Not to worry: we are going to do better.

We ARE asking the right questions ... questions such as: How is space and
time wrapped into light and matter? How does it work? - where "it" is
charge, quantum spin, light, charge, the electron, other particles, gravity-
nuclear binding etc ..

What is needed is a new approach on the simple basis of the proper
properties of space and time and the way that "energy" moves around in it to
form those things we call light and matter. That is exactly what,
collectively, we are doing. Do not worry! Just get on with it!

I'm hoping to post some answers to Davids questions on this thread (children
permitting), later this morning.

Regards, John.

  _____

From: General
[general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticl
es.org] on behalf of David Mathes [davidmathes8 at yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2015 12:47 AM
To: Roychoudhuri, Chandra; Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion
Subject: Re: [General] Physics in 100 years according to Wilczek

"In the places I go, there are things that I see, That I never could spell
if I stopped with the Z."

On Beyond Zebra

Seuss 1955

Chandra and all

What can be salvaged from his paper?

Sure, Wilczek is an A-Z person...stuck on QCD even. When there is no new
information, Iook at the structure, framework and terminology seeing beyond
the horizon. On a limited budget in a limited spacetime, perhaps a good
remodeling will be good enough for now but in 10 or 100 years, what then?

GRT EPR  QM QCD QED SM SUSY cGh LASER ... CPR DOA

Going beyond alphabet-science is not an easy task.

Can we work within the mainstream, use it as a base to launch expeditions to
the beyond, or create a new universe. And perhaps, just perhaps we may find
the answers have been right in front of us all along, we simply have not
been asking the right questions.

Best

David

  _____

From: "Roychoudhuri, Chandra" <chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu>
To: David Mathes <davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>; Nature of Light and Particles -
General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2015 2:03 PM
Subject: RE: [General] Physics in 100 years according to Wilczek

Dear David Mathes and all:

My excitement has diminished significantly after reading Wilczek’ article
on 100 years’ prediction. He is essentially stuck on the foundational
postulates behind the current “success models”. Then he cannot come up
with a fundamentally new model of the universe; only a variation of the
current model allowed under the current postulates.

Chandra.

From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightan
dparticles.org] On Behalf Of David Mathes
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2015 1:38 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Subject: Re: [General] Physics in 100 years according to Wilczek

Richard et all

Yes, Wilczek takes a QCD approach in his SM treatment. While he appears
myopic, his pragmatism is basically...take the next step to electroweak,
strong force is different and gravity is a pain. And yet, he also takes the
approach that SUSY is the strongest path to a GUT feeling.

I consider rest mass to be a special case of energy in a specific frame of
reference yet influence by the mass-energy of the universe, a Machian view
that Einstein abandoned. For mass, scale factors can be used for
gravitational, inertia, and quantum mass as well as other types.

So,  what does the next 100 years hold? Here is a wish list...with good
intentions and specific to physics, but not as well thought out...not
necessarily directly related to the photon, but related as influencing a
massless particle traveling light-like velocity.

1. Model of the electron internals especially parametric, Model of the
photon internals especially parametric

2. Back reaction on pilot field understood

3. Model of the transluminal quanta and states thereof - change the
conditions while preserving the c of GR?

4. Model of proton and neutron - QCD

5. Quanta layer (below elementary particle layer) or

what's smaller than a photon but within GR?

6. Negative vacuum engineering of the region. What is between zero vacuum
and void. (define void)

7. CPT violations resolved especially asymmetric B-meson byproducts of e-e+

8.  Equations resolving particle-wave, perhaps a single equation

9. Gravity and QFT unified

10. SUSY predictions come true (Wilczek)

11. Mastering gravity physics like EM - field shielding, directional field
control, push gravity (repulsion, dark energy)

"Where is push gravity?" (see dark energy aka non-interactive with photons)

12. Spacetime control fundamentals - can be curved and rotated (Woodward)

13. Renormalization not necessary

14. Negative physics creates negative vacuum, mass, energy and time

15. Multiverse Medium - the spacetime between universes is explored and
explained

16. Discovery of additional fundamental forces (Bushman's eight?)

17. Phat, spin-controlled, conditioned, charged photons

18. Spooky action-at-a-distance explained

19. Scalable event horizon using fluid dynamic modeling (non-quantized)

20. Baryon asymmetry resolved

  _____

From: Richard Gauthier <richgauthier at gmail.com
<mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com> >
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
<general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
<mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> >
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2015 9:20 AM
Subject: Re: [General] Physics in 100 years according to Wilczek

David and all,

    Thanks for this. One unification that Wilczek surprisingly left out is
“Unification of matter and energy”, although he does talk about possible
future "Unification of force and substance”-the boson and fermion world-
and hopes that the SUSY hypothesis will provide this unification. This is
where photon models of the electron are relevant. Perhaps Wilczek thinks
that matter and energy have already been unified, or that this is covered by
“Unification of wave and particle: Einstein and de Broglie”. But de
Broglie admitted in his Ph.D. thesis that he didn’t know what the internal
frequency in his electron means except that it is associated with the
electron’s total energy. Quantum mechanics and QED also leave this question
(the internal frequency nature of material particles) unanswered. I prefer
to think that matter may be organized light-speed energy (or even
transluminal energy.) Wilczek claims that matter is understood -"The quantum
revolution gave this revelation: We’ve finally learned what matter is. The
Core Theory completes, for practical purposes, the analysis of matter." Here
Wilzcek may be fundamentally mistaken. Such hubris is unbecoming. Quoting a
famous dramatist: “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than
are dreamt of in your philosophy.”  Hamlet (1.5.167-8)

     Richard

On Jul 2, 2015, at 7:02 AM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra
<chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu <mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu> >
wrote:

Many thanks, David M., for further enlightening us with Wilczek’s article.
He is also my favorite physicist, especially, because he has been attempting
to “stick his neck inside the elephant’s tummy”. I mean, he has been
trying to visualize the invisible interaction processes as part of proper
physics beyond measurable data modeling.

Chandra.

From: General [
<mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightan
dparticles.org> mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.
natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of David Mathes
Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2015 8:59 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Subject: [General] Physics in 100 years according to Wilczek

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...from

 <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/physics/in-100-years/> How Physics Will
Change-and Change the World-in 100 Years - NOVA Next | PBS

The full paper....

 <http://arxiv.org/pdf/1503.07735.pdf> 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 years of physics, I of course accepted immediately. Then
I thought about it. I soon realized that

I’d taken on a task that is 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>
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 Carroll

<http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/01/04/the-world-of-everyday-e
xperience-in-one-equation/> The World of Everyday Experience, In One
Equation

<http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/01/04/the-world-of-everyday-e
xperience-in-one-equation/>

<http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/01/04/the-world-of-everyday-e
xperience-in-one-equation/> The World of Everyday Experience, In One
Equation

Longtime 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...

<http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/01/04/the-world-of-everyday-e
xperience-in-one-equation/> 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

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at  <mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com>
richgauthier at gmail.com
<a href="
<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflight
andparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at davidmathes8 at yahoo.com
<mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>
<a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureo
flightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1
<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150703/c5f84549/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 458 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150703/c5f84549/attachment-0001.jpeg>