A Jewel at the Heart of Quantum Physics

www.simonsfoundation.org...

Physicists have discovered a jewel-like geometric object that dramatically simplifies calculations of particle interactions and challenges the notion that space and time are fundamental components of reality.

“The degree of efficiency is mind-boggling,” said Jacob Bourjaily, a theoretical physicist at Harvard University and one of the researchers who developed the new idea. “You can easily do, on paper, computations that were infeasible even with a computer before.”

Beyond making calculations easier or possibly leading the way to quantum gravity, the discovery of the amplituhedron could cause an even more profound shift, Arkani-Hamed said. That is, giving up space and time as fundamental constituents of nature and figuring out how the Big Bang and cosmological evolution of the universe arose out of pure geometry.

reply to post by soulshn


So the vast majority of this is way over my head having not studied physics in quite a while. I would Love to get reactions from some of the more well-traveled physicists out there. Is the author using hyperbole or could this be the beginnings of a major shift in quantum physics?

SOULshn,

I loved reading the OP. I searched "quantum physics" and came across the father of the Big Bang
theory and hard to believe, I did not know, he turns out to be a Roman Catholic priest, professor and astronomer.

Father George Lemaitre

www.youtube.com...


God bless you,


colbe

reply to post by soulshn


How convenient.
A new Hyper-Dimensional Texas Instruments

Vast Array Calculator.

I just have to put that on my stocking list.

HooHaa!

reply to post by soulshn


S&F OP!
Synchronicity at work... again!
I am almost finished reading this book that is discussed in this video about quantum physics, and I get on ATS to find this thread.

If you want an in-depth explanation that is easy to understand, watch this video.

A lot of people seem to think David Wilcock is a quack, but here, he shows studies from other scientists in this field, so this isn't his work; he is just bringing it to us. Very interesting!

His book answered so many questions about things I have been searching for years to find an answer!
It was truly an "aha" moment!

He gets into the quantum physics topic at the 1:08 mark. Skip over, if you aren't interested in the first part.

ETA: Well, darn it! He doesn't discuss the quantum physics in the video like he does in the book. It is mind blowing! So, I suppose all I can do is suggest that everyone buy the book and read it. You won't be sorry!

That is, giving up space and time as fundamental constituents of nature and figuring out how the Big Bang and cosmological evolution of the universe arose out of pure geometry.

If you "give up space and time", than you automatically give up "the big bang" because that is a hypothesis about the "Past", which wouldn't exist in the new paradigm where we "give up space and time".

We are only left with "Now" in a "Perpetual Stasis".

Also the issue of "Locality", without "Space" there is no "Locality" other than "Right here".

This would imply that the entire universe is "Always" in "One Spot".
All "Spots" are the "Same Locality".

These types of paradoxes can aid us in developing technology like maybe teleportation machines.

Also the folks who invented this terminology "Jewel at the Heart of Quantum Physics" are actually sneaking in Eastern Mythology into their language.

That doesn't mean they are false or incorrect, it just means they are sneaky and clever.

For example Vishnu has the "Priceless Pearl" at his Chest.
This is the "Jewel at the Heart of God-Physics".

Because remember the language of the Universe/God is "math" and "geometry"?

If we met aliens from some other world, "Math and Geometry" are the primary way we would establish communication channels in early contact.

So basically this is the ancient earth religion in a fancy new format with sophisticated terminology.

muzzleflash


If you "give up space and time", than you automatically give up "the big bang" because that is a hypothesis about the "Past", which wouldn't exist in the new paradigm where we "give up space and time".

We are only left with "Now" in a "Perpetual Stasis".

Yeah I'm gonna have to argue with this statement.

Wouldn't that mean the 'Big Bang Happens Everywhere Constantly'??

What does this have to do with Atomic Decay? Radiation? Black Holes?

Google "Big Bang Happened Everywhere".

muzzleflash

muzzleflash


If you "give up space and time", than you automatically give up "the big bang" because that is a hypothesis about the "Past", which wouldn't exist in the new paradigm where we "give up space and time".

We are only left with "Now" in a "Perpetual Stasis".

Yeah I'm gonna have to argue with this statement.

Wouldn't that mean the 'Big Bang Happens Everywhere Constantly'??

What does this have to do with Atomic Decay? Radiation? Black Holes?

Google "Big Bang Happened Everywhere".

Let's say both of "these perspectives" are right at the same time.

The "Universal Paradox" - It IS and it IS NOT.
It is "Nothing" and it is "Something" at the same time.

You were given "Free Will", we have no choice in the matter we must be "Free".
Enslaved into Freedom?
It's Freedom from Enslavement through Enslavement into Freedom.

"Nothing" = Something still, a "Nothing".
Therefore 'Something' automatically arises from 'Nothing' because of the "Universal Paradox".

What does Michio Kaku think about all of this???

How can you create a universe from nothing? Well if you calculate the total matter of the universe it is positive. If you calculate the total energy of the universe it is negative because of gravity. Gravity has negative energy. When you add the two together what do you get? Zero, so it takes no energy to create a universe. Universes are for free. A universe is a free lunch.

Superstring dynamics and structure have been shown by theoretical physicist Stephen Phillips to be embodied in the sacred geometries of some of the world's religions, as well as in the five Platonic solids and the Catalan solid called the disdyakis triacontahedron. This has not attracted the attention of physicists or mathematicians (yet) because they are afraid to risk their reputations by taking seriously a major discovery that connects science and religion with the paranormal (remote viewing of subatomic particles). The philosophical implications of this work are profound, for they destroy the assumption that religion and science share no common ground, and many academics will be reluctant to accept even rigorous mathematical research because of these implications so disturbing to their world-view.

All the research is laid out at:
smphillips.8m.com...

The amplituhedron replaces the geometry of space-time and Feynman diagrams by the geometry of twistor space as a mathematical space that may simplify calculation of the probability amplitude of processes mediated by virtual particles. But it does NOT amount to a "Theory of everything", which is what physicists are seeking. Instead, it is a potential calculating technique that reduces the time needed to calculate higher-order Feynman diagrams. In other words, it may enable (if confirmed for the thoroughly studied case of QCD) calculations to decimal places that current techniques cannot reach. That's fine. But let's not get carried away by the hype. Does the amplituhedron include gravity? No.Will it tell you whether quarks and leptons are fundamental or composed of preons? No. The research at the above link DOES answer such questions. And much more......

I admit I was very skeptical of the article because science journalism is prone to quackery and sensationalism. But there are some important names standing behind this new finding, and it seems like it is indeed a big deal. Star and flag.

muzzleflash
If you "give up space and time", than you automatically give up "the big bang" because that is a hypothesis about the "Past", which wouldn't exist in the new paradigm where we "give up space and time".

We are only left with "Now" in a "Perpetual Stasis".

Also the issue of "Locality", without "Space" there is no "Locality" other than "Right here".

This would imply that the entire universe is "Always" in "One Spot".
All "Spots" are the "Same Locality".

They dont give up space and time, since obviously space and time exists in reality. As I understand it, they are saying that space-time, locality and unitarity, relativity and quantum mechanics, are all emergent in the new theory, not put in by hand.

muzzleflash

That is, giving up space and time as fundamental constituents of nature and figuring out how the Big Bang and cosmological evolution of the universe arose out of pure geometry.

If you "give up space and time", than you automatically give up "the big bang" because that is a hypothesis about the "Past", which wouldn't exist in the new paradigm where we "give up space and time".

We are only left with "Now" in a "Perpetual Stasis".

Also the issue of "Locality", without "Space" there is no "Locality" other than "Right here".

This would imply that the entire universe is "Always" in "One Spot".
All "Spots" are the "Same Locality".

No that's not how it works. The reasons for having locality and spacetime are experimentally obvious. The theoretical question regarding this formulation is whether they need to be built-in to the theory as axioms from the start or derived in some later computation or approximation. When the physicists say "space-time is an emergent property" they also mean that yes, it certainly does emerge, just as the notion of temperature emerges from underlying atomic statistical mechanics, and is very real and important for physics.

The point is that if locality and spacetime are emergent then the underlying formulation may aid in linking with general relativity which so far has been exceptionally difficult to reconcile with quantum mechanics at a fundamentally acceptable level. Even if this is the breakthrough, it still could take 40 years.

These types of paradoxes can aid us in developing technology like maybe teleportation machines.

No, not until after aerial swine acrobatics becomes commonplace.

micpsi
Superstring dynamics and structure have been shown by theoretical physicist Stephen Phillips to be embodied in the sacred geometries of some of the world's religions, as well as in the five Platonic solids and the Catalan solid called the disdyakis triacontahedron. This has not attracted the attention of physicists or mathematicians (yet) because they are afraid to risk their reputations by taking seriously a major discovery that connects science and religion with the paranormal (remote viewing of subatomic particles).

My guess that it hasn't attracted the attention of physicists or mathematicians is because there's no useful physics or mathematics there.

There's not much to say about this idea at a nontechnical level. There's a new very complicated, but sometimes slightly less complicated than usual, way to calculate some things in certain quantum field theories. It's not known for things like the Standard Model, because that's complicated. It's a big deal for theoretical physics, because it sheds some light on poorly-understood mathematical aspects of the theories.

mbkennel
No that's not how it works. The reasons for having locality and spacetime are experimentally obvious. The theoretical question regarding this formulation is whether they need to be built-in to the theory as axioms from the start or derived in some later computation or approximation.

That's not quite right. Given any system, the things you choose to be axioms and to be derived is largely arbitrary and their choice is usually up to picking the simplest things you can understand with a previously well understood model you can connect it to. For example, ordinary high school geometry you could take congurances of triangles, or the law of cosines as a replacement for some of the axioms, and use this to prove the previously-axioms. (This is why in practice, you usually aren't concerned with what is a theorem and what is an axiom in math or physics.)

The point is that sometimes writing things in a form that makes some other known feature central, sometimes makes some previously hard problems easier. In simple terms that's what's going on here.

The point is that if locality and spacetime are emergent then the underlying formulation may aid in linking with general relativity which so far has been exceptionally difficult to reconcile with quantum mechanics at a fundamentally acceptable level.

There's no difficulty in understanding general relativity together with quantum mechanics. This has been understood in some sense or another for at least 40 or so years. The issue of what specific model our universe satisfies is a different one.

Where's my dilithium crystals for the core of my warp drive?