Science
Related: About this forumA Jewel at the Heart of Quantum Physics
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.
This is completely new and very much simpler than anything that has been done before, said Andrew Hodges, a mathematical physicist at Oxford University who has been following the work.
The revelation that particle interactions, the most basic events in nature, may be consequences of geometry significantly advances a decades-long effort to reformulate quantum field theory, the body of laws describing elementary particles and their interactions. Interactions that were previously calculated with mathematical formulas thousands of terms long can now be described by computing the volume of the corresponding jewel-like amplituhedron, which yields an equivalent one-term expression.
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.
https://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20130917-a-jewel-at-the-heart-of-quantum-physics/
annabanana
(52,791 posts)degree of understanding.
Very very very cool
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)I got that from one my dance friends on FB. She's into such stuff.
I can partly grasp it it and that's all.
targetpractice
(4,919 posts)A Capella Science Bohemian Gravity...
The above video is really really worth watching.
annabanana
(52,791 posts)i luvs smart & funny
porkified
(24 posts)I knew there was a reason I took algebra in high-school!
longship
(40,416 posts)For shame!
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)that if Albert's theory of time travel exist then the the "Future" exist just like the "Past" exist. ?
longship
(40,416 posts)You know... Incomprehensibility.
I knew I should have gone beyond a BS in physics.
caraher
(6,278 posts)In all the hype about this thing, as far as I can tell what it really amounts to is a calculational tool for finding the amplitudes for certain processes that can be so much more efficient because you don't end up calculating a bunch of loops.
The time-cube like element is the assertion that the existence of this geometric construct implies that time and space are somehow just epiphenomena, or "mere" emergent properties. I'm always skeptical of imputing deep ontological significance to mathematical constructs...
longship
(40,416 posts)A physicist would call the universe an emergent behavior of quantum theory, but not an epiphenomenum.
The latter implies a lack of causality and I don't know any physicist who credibly believes that. Quantum is still causal in that the universe as it is observed is an emergent and causal outcome of processes which are at their base, non-causal.
We see the same process in biology. Although evolution is blind and random at its base, natural selection leverages the random variations into a very powerful model for how life in the universe operates.
I firmly believe that quantum theory provides the base on which the universe operates. It is non-causal at its base, but the emergent behavior is causal, just like biology.
I think that if one strays far from these principles, one may be wasting ones career. But one never knows.
I wish these people luck, just like I do the String Modelers. Both are long shots. But we all need lots of ideas on the table, even if they seem weird.
And this does have that Time Cube element to it.
thanks for your response.
snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(48,953 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(48,953 posts)jobendorfer
(508 posts)'It always bothers me that, according to the laws as we understand them today, it takes a computing machine an infinite number of logical operations to figure out what goes on in no matter how tiny a region of space, and no matter how tiny a region of time. How can all that be going on in that tiny space? Why should it take an infinite amount of logic to figure out what one tiny piece of spacetime is going to do? So I have often made the hypothesis that ultimately physics will not require a mathematical statement, that in the end the machinery will be revealed, and the laws will turn out to be simple, like the chequer board with all its apparent complexities.
- R. P. Feynman, The Character of Physical Law, November 1964 Cornell Lectures, broadcast and published in 1965 by BBC, pp. 57-8.
Sounds like somebody has made a major step in that direction ...